Fahrenheit 9/11

[da-hype]

Fahrenheit 9/11 is a hot topic now days. I personally have seen the documentary the 1st day it was released here in Utah. Even though i already new alot of the facts he had brought up, i thought he did a good job showing and documentating it. Even though he did leave out some things i thought he should have mentioned.

what are your opinion about it?

[chenchow]

I tried to see it on the first day too, but it was full, so I got the ticket for the 2nd day.

I think this movie would sway the fence-sitters or those who really don't read much newspaper.

I think he did a good job in achieving his target of portraying such an image on Bush, and I believe that this sway may eventually have some effects come election end of this year.

[theT]

I'm more interested with Fahrenheit 451 than Fahrenheit 9/11

[The_Observer]

Crap.

I think 'The Triumph of The Will' by Leni Riefenstahl (Nazi Germany 1936) is a better propaganda movie than that Democratic party advertisement produced by an obese SOB.
And, no...I am not defending Bush.

[kucingbiru]

democratic advertisement?

[digimushu]

man..wait till some of u come to US and see the mud slinging thats happening on american TV. Simply amusing...

[kucingbiru]

yeah, something that you'll never see on malaysian tv.

[windy_city]

Cannot even get the ticket for 3 day in a whole, the movie is so hot in Chicago(maybe it is because Chicago people is more liberal :D , or should I say more anti-bush)

[Randomphantom]

I heard its a-ok to get it off the net.

Unfahrenheit 9/11 (http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/)

Counter to Unfahrenheit 9/11 (http://www.hollywoodbitchslap.com/feature.php?feature=1150)

[__earth]

I went to watch Control Room in Ann Arbor just now.

When I was there, I saw this:

http://recom.homelinux.org:8000/~recom/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10493/07072004controlRoomWithSyaw.jpg

Fahrenheit 9/11 in a theater near me. And trust me, the line was much longer than shown in the picture; the line went on to at least another block.

p/s - if anybody wanna use this picture, go ahead but do tell me and do credit me.

[phantom]

it's not a documentary in the 1st place,just another Moore's uncreative work to sway people to follow his opinions.and plus,his ATM machine for the time being.

documenty should be justified.and this crap is not.hopefully,the senseful americans will never chose Kerry/Edward over Bush/pls-not-cheney-again as the most powerful men in da world just becoz of this crap.

[da-hype]

after all the lies, war crimes and stupid things bush has said... you're still a bush supporter???

[iQing]

wow... pls be careful whenever u talk to a pro-bush

they can be very narrow minded + fanatic.

I hv once meet some pro US people in another forum and they behave like wild animals in the forum when someone make anti US commends..

these people believe the USA should campur tangan with other people?s affair

and they believe UN is org jahat...

I dunno what to say..

however, I am sure to watch this movie..
hehe

phantom, no offence.. hehe

[el_empty]

it's not a documentary in the 1st place,just another Moore's uncreative work to sway people to follow his opinions.and plus,his ATM machine for the time being.

documenty should be justified.and this crap is not.hopefully,the senseful americans will never chose Kerry/Edward over Bush/pls-not-cheney-again as the most powerful men in da world just becoz of this crap.

phantom, you're a bush supporter?
hahhhaa.. how long have you been here in the states?

[kucingbiru]

it's not a documentary in the 1st place

why not?

[pandaboy]

Is this a movie or what? How come I didnt hear anything about this in Malaysia? It's not shown in the cinema..... I'm blur.... Malaysia banned this movie?

[onehaz]

What *isn't* banned in Malaysia ?
heh. seriously though, it doesn't really matter does it ?

You can always get a copy at your local pirated VCD/DVD vendor :wink:

Havent watched fahrenheit yet, but enjoyed bowling4columbine tremendously. Some ppl say his techniques are disgraceful and dirty (like the one where he bugs heston about the dead kid), but hey at least he stands up for what he believes in and he's not afraid to say 'em.

And you gotta admit, that movie (cum documentary) is quite funny :D

[el_empty]

hey if you guys enjoy f-911, you might enjoy this

http://www.guerrillanews.com/[/u]

[kucingbiru]

What *isn't* banned in Malaysia ?

surprise!!
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/ap/20040709/108940944000.html

[da-hype]

it's not a documentary in the 1st place,just another Moore's uncreative work to sway people to follow his opinions.and plus,his ATM machine for the time being.

documenty should be justified.and this crap is not.hopefully,the senseful americans will never chose Kerry/Edward over Bush/pls-not-cheney-again as the most powerful men in da world just becoz of this crap.



here's a list of war crimes Bush has done since he has been in office... thought i'd share it with you... there other sh*t he's done that i honestly am now a fan of.. but heres a few..

I personally don't like the fact that the US govern like to point fingers at others.. but it's ok for them to do bad things..

http://www.motherearth.org/bushwanted/laws.php
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/06/09/iraq8785.htm

note: this tread is not meant to offend anyone, but to educate each other about things that are going on in the world. enjoy :D
quote:

1. In December 2001, the United States officially withdrew from the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, gutting the landmark agreement-the first time in the nuclear era that the US renounced a major arms control accord.

2. 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention ratified by 144 nations including the United States. In July 2001 the US walked out of a London conference to discuss a 1994 protocol designed to strengthen the Convention by providing for on-site inspections. At Geneva in November 2001, US Undersecretary of State John Bolton stated that "the protocol is dead," at the same time accusing Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Sudan, and Syria of violating the Convention but offering no specific allegations or supporting evidence.

3. UN Agreement to Curb the International Flow of Illicit Small Arms, July 2001: the US was the only nation to oppose it.

4. April 2001, the US was not re-elected to the UN Human Rights Commission, after years of withholding dues to the UN (including current dues of $244 million)-and after having forced the UN to lower its share of the UN budget from 25 to 22 percent. (In the Human Rights Commission, the US stood virtually alone in opposing resolutions supporting lower-cost access to HIV/AIDS drugs, acknowledging a basic human right to adequate food, and calling for a moratorium on the death penalty.)

5. International Criminal Court (ICC) Treaty, to be set up in The Hague to try political leaders and military personnel charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. Signed in Rome in July 1998, the Treaty was approved by 120 countries, with 7 opposed (including the US). In October 2001 Great Britain became the 42nd nation to sign. In December 2001 the US Senate again added an amendment to a military appropriations bill that would keep US military personnel from obeying the jurisdiction of the proposed ICC.

6. Land Mine Treaty, banning land mines; signed in Ottawa in December 1997 by 122 nations. The United States refused to sign, along with Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, Egypt, and Turkey. President Clinton rejected the Treaty, claiming that mines were needed to protect South Korea against North Korea's "overwhelming military advantage." He stated that the US would "eventually" comply, in 2006; this was disavowed by President Bush in August 2001.

7. Kyoto Protocol of 1997, for controlling global warming: declared "dead" by President Bush in March 2001. In November 2001, the Bush administration shunned negotiations in Marrakech (Morocco) to revise the accord, mainly by watering it down in a vain attempt to gain US approval.

8. In May 2001, refused to meet with European Union nations to discuss, even at lower levels of government, economic espionage and electronic surveillance of phone calls, e-mail, and faxes (the US "Echelon" program),

9. Refused to participate in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)-sponsored talks in Paris, May 2001, on ways to crack down on off-shore and other tax and money-laundering havens.

10. Refused to join 123 nations pledged to ban the use and production of anti-personnel bombs and mines, February 2001

11. September 2001: withdrew from International Conference on Racism, bringing together 163 countries in Durban, South Africa

12. International Plan for Cleaner Energy: G-8 group of industrial nations (US, Canada, Japan, Russia, Germany, France, Italy, UK), July 2001: the US was the only one to oppose it.

13. Enforcing an illegal boycott of Cuba, now being made tighter. In the UN in October 2001, the General Assembly passed a resolution, for the tenth consecutive year, calling for an end to the US embargo, by a vote of 167 to 3 (the US, Israel, and the Marshall Islands in opposition).

14. Comprehensive [Nuclear] Test Ban Treaty. Signed by 164 nations and ratified by 89 including France, Great Britain, and Russia; signed by President Clinton in 1996 but rejected by the Senate in 1999. The US is one of 13 nonratifiers among countries that have nuclear weapons or nuclear power programs. In November 2001, the US forced a vote in the UN Committee on Disarmament and Security to demonstrate its opposition to the Test Ban Treaty.

15. In 1986 the International Court of Justice (The Hague) ruled that the US was in violation of international law for "unlawful use of force" in Nicaragua, through its actions and those of its Contra proxy army. The US refused to recognize the Court's jurisdiction. A UN resolution calling for compliance with the Court's decision was approved 94-2 (US and Israel voting no).

16. In 1984 the US quit UNESCO (UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and ceased its payments for UNESCO's budget, over the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) project designed to lessen world media dependence on the "big four" wire agencies (AP, UPI, Agence France-Presse, Reuters). The US charged UNESCO with "curtailment of press freedom," as well as mismanagement and other faults, despite a 148-1 in vote in favor of NWICO in the UN. UNESCO terminated NWICO in 1989; the US nonetheless refused to rejoin. In 1995 the Clinton administration proposed rejoining; the move was blocked in Congress and Clinton did not press the issue. In February 2000 the US finally paid some of its arrears to the UN but excluded UNESCO, which the US has not rejoined.

17. Optional Protocol, 1989, to the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aimed at abolition of the death penalty and containing a provision banning the execution of those under 18. The US has neither signed nor ratified and specifically exempts itself from the latter provision, making it one of five countries that still execute juveniles (with Saudi Arabia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Nigeria). China abolished the practice in 1997, Pakistan in 2000.

18. 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The only countries that have signed but not ratified are the US, Afghanistan, Sao Tome and Principe.

19. The US has signed but not ratified the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which protects the economic and social rights of children. The only other country not to ratify is Somalia, which has no functioning government.

20. UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966, covering a wide range of rights and monitored by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The US signed in 1977 but has not ratified.

21. UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948. The US finally ratified in 1988, adding several "reservations" to the effect that the US Constitution and the "advice and consent" of the Senate are required to judge whether any "acts in the course of armed conflict" constitute genocide. The reservations are rejected by Britain, Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Greece, Mexico, Estonia, and others.

22. Is the status of "we're number one!" Rogue overcome by generous foreign aid to given less fortunate countries? The three best aid providers, measured by the foreign aid percentage of their gross domestic products, are Denmark (1.01%), Norway (0.91%), and the Netherlands (0.79), The three worst: USA (0.10%), UK (0.23%), Australia, Portugal, and Austria (all 0.26).

[phantom]

i am not a pro-bush or anti-bush.or pro-kerry or anti-kerry.i just want bush to win in the coming election.hopefully the ralph nader factor will allow bush to be in power.Go Bush Go!!i'll be there for you.

well,FYI,kerry too is a pro-israel.so in years to come,just like most malaysian,you'll will start chanting "darn-kerry".and since when malaysian start loving usa president per se?this i-hate-american-president's attitude will never vanish from most malaysian mindsets.

is ur political maturity and years you spent in usa correspond to each other?i dont count how many years i'm here.but i'm pretty sure i know what i am into.

i do listen to Kerry.and so do Bush.what Bush has done so far,after the 9/11 tragedy is laudable yet worth laughing at.

but he's still my fav candidate.

[el_empty]

but how are you not pro-bush if you want bush to win?

is ur political maturity and years you spent in usa correspond to each other?

hey i'm not trying to diss you. but i think it's important to understand what bush is doing in the contexts of domestic america, as well as international diplomacy. and he's screwing up both with plenty of reasons ubiquitously discussed.

as for isreal it's a completely different issue altogether. bush isn't any less pro-israel either, especially when he had ariel sharon over as guest at the whitehouse.

as for 911, well... you and i know as much as the media tells us.

[digimushu]

Back to the movie...

I just watched it..and although I take it with a pinch of salt, i do find some facts disturbing in the movie...

I recommend anyone to watch it and judge for yourselves. Think of it as food for thought
:D

[da-hype]

i do listen to Kerry.and so do Bush.what Bush has done so far,after the 9/11 tragedy is laudable yet worth laughing at.


phantom,
i'm glad you think killing inocent people is funny. love your sence of humour.

also i'm not saying kerry is better than bush... i know both are pro israel.. but after what bush has done.. you never know what other sh*t he might do. why keep him in office for another 4 years?

[phantom]

well,if you think Bush screwed up big time,it's your opinion.just like 48% of american ( the % keep changing,depends to the poll you read),i think he has done a good job.

i am not a pro-bush becoz i dont agree with e'thing he has said,i'm not too "taksub" to nod to e'thing he has done or said.i disagree with some of his stands,which of coz again has something to do with his decisions to link the state and the church.

u can try to prove to me bush is a devil.i wont change my mind.bush is here to stay.at least that's what i want.

and pls tell me,is the movie balance?if you care to ask your visual art prof,he might explain to you what is documentary and what is not.

[kucingbiru]

dude, a documentary doesnt have to be so impartial. that's moore's point of view, of course some will disagree. whether you like the "facts" or not, you decide. whether or not it's a good film, i guess it is.


p/s: bush sucks. the war on iraq is his biggest mistake.

[Crazymalaysian]

p/s: bush sucks. the war on iraq is his biggest mistake.

Really? I would have thought allowing the events of 9/11 to happen to be the worse.

[kucingbiru]

p/s: bush sucks. the war on iraq is his biggest mistake.

Really? I would have thought allowing the events of 9/11 to happen to be the worse.

well, the failure of the system that allowed that tragedy to happen is still under investigation.

[deekay]

kucingbiru wrote:
p/s: bush sucks. the war on iraq is his biggest mistake.


Really? I would have thought allowing the events of 9/11 to happen to be the worse.

Actually, it was probably Bush's predecessor who should take the rap for 9/11 since the US intel community was being savagely down sized / right sized during the 90s.

This is similar to blaming Abdullah Badawi for the sins of his predecessor.

In the end, could Bush or even Al Gore (if he was elected) prevented 9/11 from occurring ? Remember, the planning for this happened much before that date, including some clandestine meetings in KL as well.

[Thirdshifter]

Its neither Clinton nor Bush fault. Its the terrorist. Point the fingers to them.

The failure of the international intelligence could be a factor but nonetheless the terrorist are not getting much of the credit they deserve. 9/11 is by far the most successful organized terrorist attack in history. It was something no one expected.

As much as i would like to blame Bush and co for it i can't. Its just the logic thing to do. They did what nobody had done before and many think it was imposible until it happened

Michael moore's 9/11 didn't gave us the answer about the tragedy and why it happened. All he did was talk about Bush and his friends and kinda giving an impression that bush let 9/11 happen for the sake of invading afganistan for the pipeline and getting even with Saddam because he wanted to kill his dad and ofcourse the oil. Which ofcourse is true :D

[__earth]

kucingbiru wrote:
p/s: bush sucks. the war on iraq is his biggest mistake.


Really? I would have thought allowing the events of 9/11 to happen to be the worse.

Actually, it was probably Bush's predecessor who should take the rap for 9/11 since the US intel community was being savagely down sized / right sized during the 90s.

This is similar to blaming Abdullah Badawi for the sins of his predecessor.

In the end, could Bush or even Al Gore (if he was elected) prevented 9/11 from occurring ? Remember, the planning for this happened much before that date, including some clandestine meetings in KL as well.

Why blame Clinton when there are reports that state that Bush and Condi pushed the "rumors" of terrorist attact aside?

CIA did brief Bush and Condi on it but they didnt take it seriously until 9/11 itself.

Shifting the blame does not help. Republicans and their supporters should learn that and actually do some work, like reducing the deficit or something.

[Crazymalaysian]

Perhaps i'm slightly biased after whatching the documentary, but it would seem like the bush administration was well aware of the threat of terrorism. And yet they did nothing.

I liked this bit from the movie, how during the first 8 months of his term in office, bush was on holiday for 42% of the time. :roll:

[phantom]

deekay wrote:

This is similar to blaming Abdullah Badawi for the sins of his predecessor.

hmm,but when it comes to the praise,the good things done,it belong solely to Mr. Badawi,aint that right?

when will ppl stop putting the blames on others?

In the end, could Bush or even Al Gore (if he was elected) prevented 9/11 from occurring ? Remember, the planning for this happened much before that date, including some clandestine meetings in KL as well.


they might,if they care to be honest when it came to their international relationship.ppl dont wake up one day and chose to die you see,it came a long way.

Bush might stopped it if he cared.but he kept siding to these terrorists' enemies and hence gave these loonies the robust justifications to ram into america.

[da-hype]

wait.. how the hell does attacking iraq for no reason the fault of bush's predecessor??? If you're refering to sept 11, i can see why. Also the CIA did know about plans to attack, but they ignoered it...

Busy hs broken many internation laws any treaties.. is that the fault of his predecessor?


Iraq never attacked the US or threatened an attack, so the US was not acting legally in self-defense, which is permitted under the UN Charter.

Iraq played no role in the September 11, 2001 attack on the US and never provided material support to any terrorist group that attacked the US, so even the non-legal Bush doctrine of pre-emptive attack did not apply.

At the time of the US attack, Iraq was nearing full compliance with UN Resolution 1441 and prior resolutions requiring disarmament, and the majority of the Security Council believed UN inspectors should be given more time, so the US was not enforcing UN resolutions, as it claims.

George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq in order to bring about a regime change, which was never authorized by a UN resolution, and violates the UN Charter.



George W. Bush ordered the bombing of civilian areas like Baghdad (with 5 million innocent civilians) and Basra. This resulted in the deaths of hundreds of non-combatants, in violation of Geneva Convention (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, August 12, 1949.



list oh bush crimes??


1. In December 2001, the United States officially withdrew from the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, gutting the landmark agreement-the first time in the nuclear era that the US renounced a major arms control accord.

2. 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention ratified by 144 nations including the United States. In July 2001 the US walked out of a London conference to discuss a 1994 protocol designed to strengthen the Convention by providing for on-site inspections. At Geneva in November 2001, US Undersecretary of State John Bolton stated that "the protocol is dead," at the same time accusing Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Sudan, and Syria of violating the Convention but offering no specific allegations or supporting evidence.

3. UN Agreement to Curb the International Flow of Illicit Small Arms, July 2001: the US was the only nation to oppose it.

4. April 2001, the US was not re-elected to the UN Human Rights Commission, after years of withholding dues to the UN (including current dues of $244 million)-and after having forced the UN to lower its share of the UN budget from 25 to 22 percent. (In the Human Rights Commission, the US stood virtually alone in opposing resolutions supporting lower-cost access to HIV/AIDS drugs, acknowledging a basic human right to adequate food, and calling for a moratorium on the death penalty.)

5. International Criminal Court (ICC) Treaty, to be set up in The Hague to try political leaders and military personnel charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. Signed in Rome in July 1998, the Treaty was approved by 120 countries, with 7 opposed (including the US). In October 2001 Great Britain became the 42nd nation to sign. In December 2001 the US Senate again added an amendment to a military appropriations bill that would keep US military personnel from obeying the jurisdiction of the proposed ICC.

6. Land Mine Treaty, banning land mines; signed in Ottawa in December 1997 by 122 nations. The United States refused to sign, along with Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, Egypt, and Turkey. President Clinton rejected the Treaty, claiming that mines were needed to protect South Korea against North Korea's "overwhelming military advantage." He stated that the US would "eventually" comply, in 2006; this was disavowed by President Bush in August 2001.

7. Kyoto Protocol of 1997, for controlling global warming: declared "dead" by President Bush in March 2001. In November 2001, the Bush administration shunned negotiations in Marrakech (Morocco) to revise the accord, mainly by watering it down in a vain attempt to gain US approval.

8. In May 2001, refused to meet with European Union nations to discuss, even at lower levels of government, economic espionage and electronic surveillance of phone calls, e-mail, and faxes (the US "Echelon" program),

9. Refused to participate in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)-sponsored talks in Paris, May 2001, on ways to crack down on off-shore and other tax and money-laundering havens.

10. Refused to join 123 nations pledged to ban the use and production of anti-personnel bombs and mines, February 2001

11. September 2001: withdrew from International Conference on Racism, bringing together 163 countries in Durban, South Africa

12. International Plan for Cleaner Energy: G-8 group of industrial nations (US, Canada, Japan, Russia, Germany, France, Italy, UK), July 2001: the US was the only one to oppose it.

13. Enforcing an illegal boycott of Cuba, now being made tighter. In the UN in October 2001, the General Assembly passed a resolution, for the tenth consecutive year, calling for an end to the US embargo, by a vote of 167 to 3 (the US, Israel, and the Marshall Islands in opposition).

14. Comprehensive [Nuclear] Test Ban Treaty. Signed by 164 nations and ratified by 89 including France, Great Britain, and Russia; signed by President Clinton in 1996 but rejected by the Senate in 1999. The US is one of 13 nonratifiers among countries that have nuclear weapons or nuclear power programs. In November 2001, the US forced a vote in the UN Committee on Disarmament and Security to demonstrate its opposition to the Test Ban Treaty.

15. In 1986 the International Court of Justice (The Hague) ruled that the US was in violation of international law for "unlawful use of force" in Nicaragua, through its actions and those of its Contra proxy army. The US refused to recognize the Court's jurisdiction. A UN resolution calling for compliance with the Court's decision was approved 94-2 (US and Israel voting no).

16. In 1984 the US quit UNESCO (UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and ceased its payments for UNESCO's budget, over the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) project designed to lessen world media dependence on the "big four" wire agencies (AP, UPI, Agence France-Presse, Reuters). The US charged UNESCO with "curtailment of press freedom," as well as mismanagement and other faults, despite a 148-1 in vote in favor of NWICO in the UN. UNESCO terminated NWICO in 1989; the US nonetheless refused to rejoin. In 1995 the Clinton administration proposed rejoining; the move was blocked in Congress and Clinton did not press the issue. In February 2000 the US finally paid some of its arrears to the UN but excluded UNESCO, which the US has not rejoined.

17. Optional Protocol, 1989, to the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aimed at abolition of the death penalty and containing a provision banning the execution of those under 18. The US has neither signed nor ratified and specifically exempts itself from the latter provision, making it one of five countries that still execute juveniles (with Saudi Arabia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Nigeria). China abolished the practice in 1997, Pakistan in 2000.

18. 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The only countries that have signed but not ratified are the US, Afghanistan, Sao Tome and Principe.

19. The US has signed but not ratified the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which protects the economic and social rights of children. The only other country not to ratify is Somalia, which has no functioning government.

20. UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966, covering a wide range of rights and monitored by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The US signed in 1977 but has not ratified.

21. UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948. The US finally ratified in 1988, adding several "reservations" to the effect that the US Constitution and the "advice and consent" of the Senate are required to judge whether any "acts in the course of armed conflict" constitute genocide. The reservations are rejected by Britain, Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Greece, Mexico, Estonia, and others.

22. Is the status of "we're number one!" Rogue overcome by generous foreign aid to given less fortunate countries? The three best aid providers, measured by the foreign aid percentage of their gross domestic products, are Denmark (1.01%), Norway (0.91%), and the Netherlands (0.79), The three worst: USA (0.10%), UK (0.23%), Australia, Portugal, and Austria (all 0.26).



http://www.motherearth.org/bushwanted/laws.php#icj

[deekay]

To rebut da-hype, my remarks were only directed at the Sept 11 event and not on events subsequent to that. As such, attacking Iraq being the fault of Bush?s predecessors is a conjecture created by da-hype. I stand corrected if I actually linked both these separate events together.

In fact, I agree with da-hype that Iraq played no direct role in the Sept 11 attack. And I don?t think anyone (including the Bush administration) should connect Iraq with the Sept 11 attack. Iraq was linked with terrorist activity and the infamous WMD issue NOT Sept 11. Maybe the media may have made suggestions to spike up their stories but I think careful reading will show that even the current US administration did not link Iraq with the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York.

I will submit that out of the 22 points mentioned regarding the int?l laws / treaties, some of these go back quite a few years and I don?t see how it can be said to have been ?broken? by Bush, when his predecessors ? both Republican and Democrat, have either chosen to avoid them or reject them. All the US Presidents should be held accountable. I can only hypothesize that if Al Gore were the US President instead of Bush, he (Gore) would probably have done the same thing on these treaties and these same 22 points would be slagged against Gore instead of Bush.

Why the US continuously fails to ratify or oppose these international treaties is beyond the scope of my humble understanding other than to think that it involves accountability for a lot of US tax payers money or goes in contradiction to US policy (which is either determined by the President or the Senate or House of Representatives). I gladly plead ignorance on thee matters.

Going back to the issue of this thread i.e. the Michael Moore movie ? Fahrenheit 9/11, one must realize that it is a biased propaganda film and he makes no bones about that. The intentions are clear ? unseat Bush. Therefore, there is no balance but it is the director?s prerogative to present just one side of it.
Generally (please remember it is generally), the majority of people who go to see this already have a bias in their political leanings. Me, I was just curious.

And while watching, the thought occurred to me that anything similar in Malaysia would have meant spending some time in Sungai Buloh for thinking of actually depicting the leader of the country in a poor light simply by cutting and pasting various snippets to suit the message.

From a cinematographic point of view, I think Micheal Moore has done better. His previous works were excellent social commentaries but in this, he veers to the political. I suppose people were willing to buy the message.

[kucingbiru]

His previous works were excellent social commentaries but in this, he veers to the political.

so is it a bad idea to make a political film?

[__earth]

In fact, I agree with da-hype that Iraq played no direct role in the Sept 11 attack. And I don?t think anyone (including the Bush administration) should connect Iraq with the Sept 11 attack. Iraq was linked with terrorist activity and the infamous WMD issue NOT Sept 11. Maybe the media may have made suggestions to spike up their stories but I think careful reading will show that even the current US administration did not link Iraq with the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York.

Bush did actually make that connection explicitly. Below is the infamous Bush speech, quoted from http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/iraq/20030501-15.html

In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists, and the camps where they trained. We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals, and educate all of their children. Yet we also have dangerous work to complete. As I speak, a Special Operations task force, led by the 82nd Airborne, is on the trail of the terrorists and those who seek to undermine the free government of Afghanistan. America and our coalition will finish what we have begun. (Applause.)

From Pakistan to the Philippines to the Horn of Africa, we are hunting down al Qaeda killers. Nineteen months ago, I pledged that the terrorists would not escape the patient justice of the United States. And as of tonight, nearly one-half of al Qaeda's senior operatives have been captured or killed. (Applause.)

The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more. (Applause.)

There are a few other speeches that made that connection. He also had implied the same thing in his State of the Union speech in 2002 or was it 2003.

In the latest report on 9/11, the Senate Committee said that Iraq is not an ally of al-qaeda. There is no connection between Iraq and al-qaeda.

Only after overwhelming proofs against such claim arises does Bush say he didn't make that connection.

And while watching, the thought occurred to me that anything similar in Malaysia would have meant spending some time in Sungai Buloh for thinking of actually depicting the leader of the country in a poor light simply by cutting and pasting various snippets to suit the message.

That's the beauty of America - freedom of expression. That situation you have mentioned is irrelevent since Malaysia does not support free speech. Malaysia's political scene is outdated and different from the US.

From a cinematographic point of view, I think Micheal Moore has done better. His previous works were excellent social commentaries but in this, he veers to the political. I suppose people were willing to buy the message.

I wonder what is your opinion on Fox News. And kucingbiru made an excellent point - is it wrong making a political statement?

It might be in Malaysia but mind you, this is the US if you dont realize that.

[Crazymalaysian]

Yep, thats freedom of speech for you.

Its incredible as to how much they can do in the US.

I agree, there wasnt any intelligence linking al-qaeda and iraq, apart from the fact that they are both islamic in nature.

Hm..fox news thing? Lets all cry (http://www.nzaif.com/pentagon/pentagon911.html) conspiracy (http://www.utopiax.org/) now.

[kucingbiru]

I agree, there wasnt any intelligence linking al-qaeda and iraq, apart from the fact that they are both islamic in nature.

they both are sunnis, but Osama = fundamentalist, Saddam = secularist. they surely hate each other. in fact, Laden himself once said that Saddam is someone that should be killed.

i dont think the US wants Iraq to have transparent democracy. syiah is the majority in Iraq. if the elected leader is a syiah, he might restore the relationship between iraq and Iran. thus, Iraq would still be considered a member of bush's "Axis of Evil"

[phantom]

earth wrote:

I wonder what is your opinion on Fox News. And kucingbiru made an excellent point - is it wrong making a political statement?

It might be in Malaysia but mind you, this is the US if you dont realize that.


did you hear Whoopi Goldberg was just thrown out from being the Slim-Fast's spokeperson becoz...she made fun of Bush.

have you also heard about what happened to Dixie Chicks?

wonder why ppl always make america as the poster country for freedom of speech/expression.

for me,if Moore dare to say bush is this and that,he dare to be called names too.there is this one book bashing him.why dont it being promoted?beoz it doesnt make any controversy?

well,FOX is biased sometimes.but at least they dont idiotically idolized Laden .in this sense,i prefer CNN.

[__earth]

earth wrote:

I wonder what is your opinion on Fox News. And kucingbiru made an excellent point - is it wrong making a political statement?

It might be in Malaysia but mind you, this is the US if you dont realize that.


did you hear Whoopi Goldberg was just thrown out from being the Slim-Fast's spokeperson becoz...she made fun of Bush.

have you also heard about what happened to Dixie Chicks?

wonder why ppl always make america as the poster country for freedom of speech/expression.

for me,if Moore dare to say bush is this and that,he dare to be called names too.there is this one book bashing him.why dont it being promoted?beoz it doesnt make any controversy?

well,FOX is biased sometimes.but at least they dont idiotically idolized Laden .in this sense,i prefer CNN.

did you know that a private firm, not public firm, making a decision. its their choice and that's freedom too.

[phantom]

public or private,where the sense in that?there are still americans who believe in the american dreams.

[__earth]

a private firm is not constrainted by public opinion. they could be bias or not, that includes micheal moore and fox. But the govt needs to be impartial. This is what freedom is. Free to expression while free to make a decision.

in a free society, it is important to differentiate public and private entity because the existence of private property.

furthermore, notice that all this is happening only after bush comes into office. The last time things like this happen like a epidemic was under McCharty.

with Bush around, that freedom is eroding fast. Especially with Patriot Act and stuff going on.

but still, with dixie chicks, there was unofficial banning of them by republican stations because republican can't take the heat. there was nothing about the govt passing a legislation banning them.

The US is still about freedom. Bush is here to make that untrue.

[phantom]

so what?

so it's ok for american who are not linked to the gov to shut other ppl's mouths ?


if you think america is a country full of freedom,go ahead.

i disagree.as simple as that.

[__earth]

so what?

so it's ok for american who are not linked to the gov to shut other ppl's mouths ?


if you think america is a country full of freedom,go ahead.

i disagree.as simple as that.

well, its a private radio. none of us, not even the govt could do anything. boycotting is still apart of freedom of expression.

if you disagree fine. I disagree too about the unofficial banning but it was a private station. there is nothing we could do about it. not even the govt. that is just respecting private decision.

[kucingbiru]

michael moore manages to achieve his goal in this film; he gets people talking about it.