I finally saw Fahreinheit 9/11 last night

[jennyanydots]

and the other scene that really got to me was when the mother whose son died in Iraq visited Washington. Lord help me, if I were her, I would have punched the witch who said "this is all staged..."

yes, the mother contacted Moore and agreed to allow him to film her visiting the streets of Washington, so yes, it was "staged", but that didn't negate her loss.

 

[MJames41]

Originally posted by ThreeCircles
I had no idea the pilgrims were running from England so that they could embrace capitalism!



And we're still waiting on that proof that MM hates his country...

So the pilgrims founded America? I was under the impression that the United States of America were founded by a group of 13 individual states, I guess I was ill informed by those history professors at college.

And, the roots of the American Revolution was very much about capitalism - remember "no taxation without representation"?

And, like I said, I think MM loves his country. In what other country would he be able to even make a living, much less make millions off of exploiting his fellow countrymen for his own purposes and make millions from it.

 

[faithinkarma]

And, like I said, I think MM loves his country. In what other country would he be able to even make a living, much less make millions off of exploiting his fellow countrymen for his own purposes and make millions from it.

If his goal was to make as much money as possible, why did he say he had no objection to people downloading the movie for free off the net right after the movie was released?

 

[goofygirl]

I agree with everything Jenny has said.

About the mother who lost her son, though it is tragic and he should not have died, it was HER IDEA for her children to join the military and "see the world, get experience, etc instead of college..", I would have liked to see her admit that it was a bad idea for her to encourage her kids to join the military. She had to have known that joining up poses some risks- like going to war and being killed, for example. Did she really think her children
were immortal or something? She seems to lay all the blame on Bush/Washington. I would have liked to see her say "It was a big mistake on my part to tell my kids to join up."

She also has a daughter in the service. She'll be lucky if she does not meet the same fate as her son.

other than that, I thought the film was well done.

 

[rcyannacci]

Originally posted by MJames41
So the pilgrims founded America? I was under the impression that the United States of America were founded by a group of 13 individual states, I guess I was ill informed by those history professors at college.

And, the roots of the American Revolution was very much about capitalism - remember "no taxation without representation"?

And, like I said, I think MM loves his country. In what other country would he be able to even make a living, much less make millions off of exploiting his fellow countrymen for his own purposes and make millions from it.

I think it's important to remember that American history and the "founding" of our nation is a complicated narrative, with pilgrims and founding fathers only a few of the populations included. And not all of these populations benefits from capitalism.

Native American populations, for example, did not fare well as a result of this system. The capitalist concept of owning land led to the destruction of many tribes.

African-American population were also victims of the system of capitalism, seeing as how they were bought and sold as commodities of the slave trade.

It would seem to me that if you are going to celebrate capitalism as a virtue of a solid American past, you also need to acknowledge the violence that has resulted as well.

"Taxiation without representation"- this is a concept that only applied to a limited population of white, male landowning citizens.

 

[MJames41]

rcyannacci, my post was only in response to the comment that the pilgrims founded America.

However, the comments that you made only reinforce the statement that America was founded on capitalism. This doesn't mean that I think it's all positive, I don't present it as a celebration, the Native Americans and the slaves as you point out do not fare well, but they were very much exploited by the capitalism system.

faithinkarma, are you going to tell me he isn't a millionaire? That he hasn't made millions? If he really isn't about the money, how much has he given to the poor? How much has he given to the Red Cross, to whatever charity he might wish? Allowing people to download it off the internet makes for good pr.

 

[faithinkarma]

faithinkarma, are you going to tell me he isn't a millionaire? That he hasn't made millions? If he really isn't about the money, how much has he given to the poor? How much has he given to the Red Cross, to whatever charity he might wish? Allowing people to download it off the internet makes for good pr.

Obviously the money was not his chief interest if he encouraged people to do somethng other producers are having fits about. As to how much money he donated, I do not know. But neither do you, so why presume? Are you somehow saying he is a bad person if he does not donate all his profits? BTW...if you want to see who is giving to which political parties, from Oprah to Martha Stewart to your dentist...check out http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/byzip_result.php?zip=12549

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by jennyanydots
and the other scene that really got to me was when the mother whose son died in Iraq visited Washington. Lord help me, if I were her, I would have punched the witch who said "this is all staged..."

yes, the mother contacted Moore and agreed to allow him to film her visiting the streets of Washington, so yes, it was "staged", but that didn't negate her loss.

That scene got a real reaction from me also. I was so impressed with the quiet dignity the mother showed in the face of this onslaught. It is fitting that that woman who was so incredibly insensitively aggressively rude has to live with all the viewers seeing her despicable bahavior.

 

[rcyannacci]

Originally posted by MJames41
rcyannacci, my post was only in response to the comment that the pilgrims founded America.

However, the comments that you made only reinforce the statement that America was founded on capitalism. This doesn't mean that I think it's all positive, I don't present it as a celebration, the Native Americans and the slaves as you point out do not fare well, but they were very much exploited by the capitalism system.

MJames41- I'm sorry. Yes, you were not indicating a celebration of the system- my apoligies. I was thinking back to the earlier comment made by AirForceRocks:

"The United States was built on the capitalist system, and is extremely successful because of it. So yes, I believe that anyone that is trying to topple the capitalist system is against America."

 

[Efastpitch]

Originally posted by auntpolly
DD said she thought it was very patriotic. Did you think so?

For what country? The reports show it to be full of 90% lies.

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by jennyanydots
Usually you're better at supporting your opinions, Brenda. You haven't given us anything factual to support your opinions here.

Oh I don't know about that - I think I did a pretty good job of proving you didn't have a clue when it came to the Afghan pipeline.

As for my opinion of Michael Moore and his alleged love for this country, I stated from the beginning that it was my OPINION and I gave examples of why I have that opinion. I'm not sure what else you expect me to say. He has made a number of statements that make me question his love of this country.

You calim they're nothing but your misguided opinions after the fact because you provide no substantial proof to back them up.

You need to go re-read the thread TwistedInCircles. I said from the very beginning that it my opinion.

Obviously the money was not his chief interest if he encouraged people to do somethng other producers are having fits about.

I too doubt that making money was his chief interest. However, that doesn't change the fact that he has not problem profiting from the capitalist system that he spends so much time criticizing. Like I said, hypocritical.

 

[OceanAnnie]

Originally posted by kaekae
Right on AirforceRocks! I agree with all that you have said. Sometimes people are so bull headed they fail to see the correct answer even though it's there right in front of them, it's sad
but true.

Ditto. Supporting opinions A+, AFR.

Entertainment from TC, A+.

 

[rcyannacci]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks

I too doubt that making money was his chief interest. However, that doesn't change the fact that he has not problem profiting from the capitalist system that he spends so much time criticizing. Like I said, hypocritical.

Why must a person have to be either "for" capitalism or "against" it? Could it perhaps more complicated than hypocritical?

As my previous posts have suggested, I have issues with some of the social problems that capitalism has brought to this country? Does that mean if I make a public complaint that I shouldn't be able to participate in the American economy? That I can't earn a living, own a car or property, or shop at any number of stores? That's silly. MM, as far as I've heard (and I did see the movie in question), had not advocated the overthrow of the capitalist system. He is pointing to problems within the system that we need to address.

Now you can certainly disagree with his proposed solution and boycott his film. But I just don't see how this label of hypocrisy sticks.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by jennyanydots
You can love your country and hate the policies it has implemented. I truly think Moore loves this country, but hates the current administration.

Except for the war in Iraq. How is this adminstration any different that the last one? Why does he LOVE Clinton (who *actually* lied) and hate Bush?

IMO, MM loves only himself and all the money he makes from *his* half-baked/half truths/deceptions/and lies.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by acepepper
There are many people who refuse to see the film because there are so many truths in it that they cannot bring themselves to face up to.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by infobahn
I believe that to be true of G.W.Bush. I don't believe he cares about this country at all, except for what money he can make off of it - killing people along the way is just part of business as ususal to him.

My, that was pretty harsh.

So, when is the next anarchist meeting?

 

[jennyanydots]

uh, Brenda, did you even read anything I posted about the popeline. Unical denies that it's still interested inbuilding the pipeline, but there is considerable evidence to the contrary. othe rthan the denial on Unical's website, what have you got to contradict what I've cited?

just your own opinion.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by rcyannacci
Although I'm sure I'll regret this later, I'll take up the issue of MM and capitalism (and hope it won't be seen as too much of an intrusion).

I won't presume to read MM intentions in making F911, but I think it's worth considering that he's motivations might not have been about his own monetary gain (if anyone can provide information or a quote from MM that says he intended from the outset of the film to get rich, then I'll certainly back off).

We are so accustomed to thinking of film as a Hollywood product. Many (if not most) Hollywood movies are being made with the intent of making the maximum amount of money, so they employ well known performers, invent stories that appeal to broad demographics, etc. Everyone is shocked when an independent film succeeds at the box office, and then come up with reasons why it worked...those artists must have "sold out" in their search for a bigger paycheck. Original intentions become suspect as soon as an artist makes some money. Who's ever heard of a rich artist? If they're any good, their poor and starving.

But filmmaking doesn't always have to be about capitalism. MM uses film as his medium of choice because he knows he will reach the maximum amount of people. Do I think MM is suspect of American capitalism? You bet. This is a film that examines the potential for corruption when government policy follows the lead of big business. Capitalism has a long history of inequality, of destroying the lives and landscapes of some to make way for the good of others. And Americans have benefited from this legacy.

Should MM then not work in a medium that has the potential or earning him money when he knows that it will be the best way to generate interest in his topic? That's actually a really complicated question- if you believe that he shouldn't, that money corrupts, then that in itself is a negative critique of capitalism. If money doesn't corrupt, then good for him.

Some will interpet this disconnect between his political beliefs and his medium of expression as a contradiction. But it could also be interpreted as fighting fire with fire, so to speak. To make an effective statement that points to the negative effects of capitalism he might just have to work within that system.

If he feels as passionate about the issues as you suggest and to avoid the stereotypical opinion that flims are produced to maximize profit he should have taken only enough money to covers his costs. Or better yet, donate the films his entire proceeds ffrom the film to a (worthy) charity.

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by jennyanydots
uh, Brenda, did you even read anything I posted about the popeline. Unical denies that it's still interested inbuilding the pipeline, but there is considerable evidence to the contrary. othe rthan the denial on Unical's website, what have you got to contradict what I've cited?

just your own opinion.

Yes, I did read what you posted. You posted this:

isn't there a natural gas pipeline being built in Afghanistan right now? by a company whose former employee is now Afghanistan's Prime Minister? and the Bush family has investments int hat company...

which is completely untrue. And then you posted a link from May, 2002 that said that Unocal had withdrawn from the project in 1999 and had no interest in pursuing it further. From your link:

The construction of the 850-kilometre pipeline had been previously discussed between Afghanistan's former Taliban regime, US oil company Unocal and Bridas of Argentina.

The project was abandoned after the US launched missile attacks on Afghanistan in 1999.

US company preferred

Mr Razim said US energy company Unocal was the "lead company" among those that would build the pipeline, which would bring 30bn cubic meters of Turkmen gas to market annually.

Unocal - which led a consortium of companies from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Japan and South Korea - has maintained the project is both economically and technically feasible once Afghan stability was secured.

"Unocal is not involved in any projects (including pipelines) in Afghanistan, nor do we have any plans to become involved, nor are we discussing any such projects," a spokesman told BBC News Online.

The US company formally withdrew from the consortium in 1998.

And then you posted another link, a timeline through 1999, that says that in December, 1998:

Citing low oil prices, concerns over Osama bin Laden, and pressure from women's groups, Unocal withdraws from Afghan pipeline consortium. Unocal also announces a 40 percent drop in capital spending for 1999 because of low oil prices.

The next link, from October, 2001 says:

Three days following the attack on the World Trade Centers in New York City, UNOCAL issued a statement reconfirming it had withdrawn from its project in Afghanistan, long before recent events. [www.unocal.com September 14, 2001 statement]

So while there is indeed evidence that Unocal was interested in building the pipeline prior to 1999, do you have ANYTHING that shows evidence that they are, contrary to their public statements, still interested in participating? Where is the "considerable evidence" that you speak of? I'd really love to see it. All you've provided so far is evidence that they were involved in the pipeline, which I've never disputed.

othe rthan the denial on Unical's website, what have you got to contradict what I've cited?

What you've cited was 2 year old information about Unocal's previous involvement. Do you have anything recent that shows that Unocal does have an interest in starting up the Afghan pipeline?

I've already shown you once, but I'll be happy to repost the information and the link. This is from the Department of Energy last month, just a bit more timely than the information you posted.

Given the obstacles to development of a natural gas pipeline across Afghanistan, it seems unlikely that such an idea will make any progress in the near future, and no major Western companies have expressed interest in reviving the project.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/afghan.html

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by grinningghost
I saw it last night for the first time. I consider myself to be moderately conservative and I enjoyed the film. It does make you think. In order to make informed decisions, you really need to listen to all sides.

Ok, think about what? Did you change your mind about some things that you already knew about? Did you see things that you didn't know? Did you believe any of it? Some of it? All of it? If there was something presented in the movie that you didn't know about, did you believe it immediately or did you try to research the topic and find "the other sides"?

Yes, it's true that you need to listen to all sides but only if each side can present facts to back up their assertions. MM has a track record of not being completely honest with his audiences.

Personally, I'd would trust the "opinion" of one so far to left as MM is. The same goes from someone too far to the right. Their opinion is too tainted by their ideology.