Michael Moore (a.k.a. the anti-reality show) [Archive] - Police Forums & Law Enforcement Forums @ Officer.com

View Full Version : Michael Moore (a.k.a. the anti-reality show)

IPDBrad

03-24-2003, 06:09 PM

<a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110003233" target="_blank">http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110003233</a>

JOHN FUND'S POLITICAL DIARY

Unmoored From Reality
An ideological con artist is the favorite for an Oscar.

Friday, March 21, 2003 12:01 a.m. EST

With Hollywood in a fever pitch against the war in Iraq, Michael Moore is likely to win the Oscar for Best Documentary at Sunday's Academy Awards. "Bowling for Columbine," Mr. Moore's work of anti-American propaganda, has grossed over $15 million, an amazing sum for a film billed as a documentary. But the film, a merry dissection of America's "culture of fear" and love of guns, is filled with so many inaccuracies and distortions that it ought to be classed as a work of fiction.

Mr. Moore is naturally a big hit among the French. The jury at the Cannes Film Festival created a special, one-time only award to honor his film and then gave it a 13-minute standing ovation. "Not since Gore Vidal and Norman Mailer have we seen such a successful export of anti-Americanism," observes Andrew Sullivan in London's Sunday Times.

Mr. Moore plays into all of the worst stereotypes and distortions about America. "Bowling for Columbine" attempts to explain interventions by the U.S. military as rooted in an inherently violent domestic culture. "I agree with the National Rifle Association when they say, 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people,' " he told NBC's "Today" show. "Except I would alter that to say, 'Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people.' We're the only country that does this, and we do it on an personal level in our neighborhoods and within our families and our schools, and we do it on a global level. The American attitude is that we believe we have a right to just go in and bomb another country. This is where Bush is going right now, right?"
To make this strained connection, Mr. Moore tries to make us believe that the two mentally disturbed high school students who massacred their fellow students at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., grew up in a community that has a sinister connection to the military-industrial complex. A Lockheed Martin factory in Littleton manufactures "weapons of mass destruction," Mr. Moore claims. The factory actually makes rockets that carry TV satellites into space. And the very title of Mr. Moore's film is based on a deception. It refers to the bowling class that the Columbine killers supposedly took the morning they committed their murders. The only problem is that they actually cut the class.

Forbes reports that an early scene in "Bowling" in which Mr. Moore tries to demonstrate how easy it is to obtain guns in America was staged. He goes to a small bank in Traverse City, Mich., that offers various inducements to open an account and claims "I put $1,000 in a long-term account, they did the background check, and, within an hour, I walked out with my new Weatherby," a rifle.

But Jan Jacobson, the bank employee who worked with Mr. Moore on his account, says that only happened because Mr. Moore's film company had worked for a month to stage the scene. "What happened at the bank was a prearranged thing," she says. The gun was brought from a gun dealer in another city, where it would normally have to be picked up. "Typically, you're looking at a week to 10 days waiting period," she says. Ms. Jacobson feels used: "He just portrayed us as backward hicks."

Mr. Moore makes the preposterous claim that a Michigan program by which welfare recipients were required to work was responsible for an incident in which a six-year-old Flint boy shot a girl to death at school. Mr. Moore doesn't mention that the boy's mother had sent him to live in a crack house where her brother and a friend kept both drugs and guns--a frequently lethal combination.

Some of the fact-bending and omissions of "Bowling for Columbine" could charitably be chalked up to really sloppy research. (I called the chief archivist for Mr. Moore's film, Carl Deal, yesterday, but he hasn't called back.) Others show a willful aversion to the truth. Mr. Moore repeats the canard that the United States gave the Taliban $245 million in aid in 2000 and 2001, somehow implying we were in cahoots with them. But that money actually went to U.N.-affiliated humanitarian organizations that were completely independent of the Taliban.

David Hardy, a former Interior Department lawyer who delights in debunking government officials and pompous celebrities, has uncovered even more evidence of Mr. Moore's distortions. The film depicts NRA president Charlton Heston giving a speech near Columbine; he actually gave it a year later and 900 miles away. The speech he did give is edited to make conciliatory statements sound like rudeness. Another speech is described as being given immediately after the Flint shooting . In reality, it was made almost a year later. All of these and more inaccuracies can be found at Mr. Hardy's comprehensive Web site.

Ben Fritz ofSpinsanity.org also notes that Mr. Moore has "apparently altered footage of an ad run by the Bush/Quayle campaign in 1988" to buttress his claim that racial symbolism is frequently misused in American politics. His leading example is the case of Willie Horton, a murderer who became a major issue in the 1988 presidential campaign. Mr. Moore shows the Bush ad that generically attacked a prison furlough program in Michael Dukakis's Massachusetts . Superimposed over the footage of prisoners entering and exiting a prison are the words "Willie Horton released. Then kills again." While the caption appears to be part of the original ad, Mr. Moore actually inserted it; the ad made no mention of Horton. (Another ad, sponsored by the National Security Political Action Committee, a conservative group independent of the Bush campaign, did mention Horton; it aired only briefly in a few cable markets.) The phony Moore caption also is inaccurate; Horton brutalized a Maryland couple and raped the wife, but didn't kill anybody while on furlough.

In print, too, Mr. Moore plays fast and loose with the facts. In his "Stupid White Men," his best-selling book, he blithely states that five-sixths of the U.S. defense budget in 2001 went toward the construction of a single type of plane and that two-thirds of the $190 million that President Bush raised in his 2000 campaign came from just over 700 individuals, a preposterous assertion given that the limit for individual contributions at the time was $1,000.
When CNN's Lou Dobbs asked Mr. Moore about his inaccuracies, he shrugged off the quesiton. "You know, look, this is a book of political humor. So, I mean, I don't respond to that sort of stuff, you know," he said.

"Glaring inaccuracies?" Mr. Dobbs said.

"No, I don't. Why should I? How can there be inaccuracy in comedy?"

Mr. Moore would deserve an Academy Award if there were an Oscar for Best Cinematic Con Job. If "Bowling for Columbine" is a comedy, most of its fans don't know it. They actually believe they're watching something that is in rough accord with reality.

Mike Tx

03-24-2003, 06:12 PM

Moore is a characature of all that is wrong with the left.

I personally feel that he may not be as stupid as he appears to be, that he may take his position for financial gain.

Niteshift

03-25-2003, 02:23 AM

Screw him, the horse he rode in on and all the lackeys following along behind it.

Count on the fact that not one dime of my money will go to support anything he ever produces.

n567

03-26-2003, 01:36 AM

He's always struck me as a man out for personal gain. Bowling for Columbine did make some points about some problems with America, but Moore's propensity to get the spotlight shining on his self always turned me off to the movie.

nickg

03-26-2003, 01:24 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by n567:
He's always struck me as a man out for personal gain. Bowling for Columbine did make some points about some problems with America, but Moore's propensity to get the spotlight shining on his self always turned me off to the movie.<hr /></blockquote>read this:
<a href="http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html" target="_blank">http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html</a>

and then tell me about any "points" he made in his so called "documentary"

i was reading today somewhere (i'll post the link if i can find it again) where some hollywood people are trying to get a petition together to rescind his oscar since the movie he made was in NO WAY a true documentary and shouldn't have been honored as such.

personally i hope they do.

as i've stated before, i wouldn't use fat *** moore to scoop up my dog's turds as it would be a disservice and insult to turds world wide.

THE BRONZE

03-26-2003, 09:48 PM

nickg, please tell us what you really think of that worthless piece of pond scum. :D

3/4s

03-27-2003, 05:15 AM

Gee, and I really liked him on his show "Leave It To Beaver". :D I guess Eddie Haskell drove him to madness. :p

shooter1201

03-27-2003, 09:41 AM

Ther's currently a RECALL move under way in Hollywood to have his Oscar win VOIDED. Critics cite the FACT that his 'documentary' DID NOT meet the list of requirements needed to be categorized as a documentary. :D

JRT6

03-27-2003, 09:59 AM

That would be sooo awesome! If Moore lost his award his huge ego would be crushed and he would spend the rest of his life living it down.

Now I know what I want for Christmas.

n567

03-31-2003, 01:01 AM

I wasn't referring to facts so much as the idea that guns aren't the cause of violence so much as our culture of fear creates the problems, not guns, not violent media, not lack of prayer in school, etc. Moore does make this point even if he's not trying to. Look at Cananda...

[ 03-31-2003, 01:02 AM: Message edited by: n567 ]

Niteshift

03-31-2003, 06:52 AM

Why haven't you moved yet?

All I hear from you is how great Canada is, yet you live here. Why?

If I want to be Canadian, I'll move to Canada. But I damn sure have no intention of turning the US into Canada, nor do I think it's a prudent idea. They have problems, just like we do.

Instead of trying to remake one into the other, appreciate that there are two, pick one and start liking where you live.

Urban Jedi

03-31-2003, 01:45 PM

So, would anyone recommend reading his book 'Stupid White Men' which is top of the UK bestsellers list, or is it bleeding heart liberal nonsense?

nickg

03-31-2003, 02:34 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Urban Jedi:
So, would anyone recommend reading his book 'Stupid White Men' which is top of the UK bestsellers list, or is it bleeding heart liberal nonsense?<hr /></blockquote>if you're sitting on the toilet reading it it would probably make for good toilet paper if you run out. other than that i wouldn't look at it.

n567

03-31-2003, 03:54 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Niteshift:
Why haven't you moved yet?

All I hear from you is how great Canada is, yet you live here. Why?

If I want to be Canadian, I'll move to Canada. But I damn sure have no intention of turning the US into Canada, nor do I think it's a prudent idea. They have problems, just like we do.

Instead of trying to remake one into the other, appreciate that there are two, pick one and start liking where you live.<hr /></blockquote>Wait... I'm sorry, why is trying to find a solution to our propensity towards violence a bad thing? I don't quite agree with the idea that we should allow bad things to happen and just be okay with it because, gosh, it makes us unique!

[ 03-31-2003, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: n567 ]

FLLawdog

03-31-2003, 06:58 PM

If you want to find our propensity violence, start with the human mind and work out.

If you want to find out why Americans are more violent, look at our justice system compared to other countries with lower violence. Other countries actually hold people accountable instead of holding their hand.

Mike Tx

03-31-2003, 07:21 PM

I think one of the mistakes the liberal idiots of today have made, is that they think mankind has evolved past his basic instinct as a killer. They are dead wrong. The ones of us who can mostly control ourselves need to be equiped to handle those that will not or can not control themselves.

There will be violence as long as there are people who want what someone else has and will try to take it. It's really that simple.

n567

03-31-2003, 09:56 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by FLLawdog:
If you want to find our propensity violence, start with the human mind and work out.

If you want to find out why Americans are more violent, look at our justice system compared to other countries with lower violence. Other countries actually hold people accountable instead of holding their hand.<hr /></blockquote>Well alright then! But... according to Niteshift, that would make us more like Canada (I guess), and that's a bad thing.

SAMRA

03-31-2003, 10:25 PM

n567:

There was studying showing that we as Canadians are more violent per capita. While less crimes are committed with guns, there are more assualt's and other felonies than in the USA(per capita of course). There is a link at o.com that leads to the report.

Of course Moore failed to mention that.
And like someone stated, our justice system has a roll to play in that. Simply put, it is a joke.

n567

03-31-2003, 10:51 PM

Well alright then, we can emulate Greece! I mean really, they've got a fine lifestyle indeed, hmmmm, maybe I'll move there. Pity about the mandatory military duty though... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Niteshift

04-01-2003, 01:29 AM

"Wait... I'm sorry, why is trying to find a solution to our propensity towards violence a bad thing?"

Finding a solution? Wasn't too long ago, you wanted to FLEE to Canada if a draft were reinstated. That doesn't sound like trying to find a SOLUTION to me. How will you solve anything in the US if you are hiding in Canada?

Cloak it in whatever you want, it's clear you are enamored with Canada, so I can't figure out why you haven't moved.

Chief Wiggum

04-01-2003, 05:45 PM

"If you don't like it, get out of the country!"

The mantra of every ignorant redneck I've ever met. :rolleyes:

Mike Tx

04-01-2003, 07:19 PM

I wouldn't characterize Niteshift as an ignorant redneck. I'd be more inclined to characterize him as someone sick of the liberal, parroting cry babies who can't understand what's going on in this war, and who refuse to accept the reality of it. Kind of like most of us in here. If that makes us ignorant rednecks then yippee Ki yay */*.

Niteshift

04-01-2003, 07:52 PM

He can't be talking to me Mike........ that quote isn't from me. In fact, I can't see where the quote came from at all.

Of course, if Chief Wiggum would like to quote me directly (and correctly), then call me an ignorant redneck, I'd be more than happy to light his azz up.

ateamer

04-01-2003, 11:07 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by SAMRA:
There was studying showing that we as Canadians are more violent per capita. <hr /></blockquote>Oh yeah? Wanna fight about it? :D

Watchman

04-01-2003, 11:31 PM

If that makes us ignorant rednecks then yippee Ki yay */*.

Actually I prefere the Rebel Yell...

Yeeeeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !
{while twirling my 12 inch blade Bowie around and around ) :D

[ 04-01-2003, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: Watchman ]

n567

04-02-2003, 02:31 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Niteshift:
"Wait... I'm sorry, why is trying to find a solution to our propensity towards violence a bad thing?"

Finding a solution? Wasn't too long ago, you wanted to FLEE to Canada if a draft were reinstated. That doesn't sound like trying to find a SOLUTION to me. How will you solve anything in the US if you are hiding in Canada?

Cloak it in whatever you want, it's clear you are enamored with Canada, so I can't figure out why you haven't moved.<hr /></blockquote>Enamored? How'd you come up with that? Because I mentioned a recent study saying Canadians were the most happy blokes on earth? Or that maybe we could learn from Canada if we wanted to lower our crime rate?

It doesn't take much to become enamored these days, the word must have lost its meaning. Christ, enamored with Canada? I couldn't stand the weather...

Well, as I said earlier, in a potential draft, I'd be doing the United States a service by not killing in its name, in an imoral conflict.

Watchman

04-02-2003, 06:27 AM

Well, as I said earlier, in a potential draft, I'd be doing the United States a service by not killing in its name, in an imoral conflict.

Then sit your *** at the house and watch it all on TV. That way you wont get hurt. :rolleyes:

And remember that evil prevails when good men stand by and do nothing.

nickg

04-02-2003, 08:18 AM

wanna end the war real quick? drop moore's fat donuts filled big mac *** right in the middle of baghdad and kill 2 birds with one stone.

all in favor?????

Niteshift

04-02-2003, 10:40 AM

Typical n567 "defense"........ignore the point and throw out a lot of smoke about the use of the word enamor. :rolleyes:

It doesn't take much to become enamored these days, the word must have lost its meaning."

enamor: To inspire with love; captivate.

Now why is that such an extreme term? :rolleyes:
Or could it be that you thought the word meant more than it actually does?

Bill R

04-02-2003, 01:31 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by nickg:
wanna end the war real quick? drop moore's fat donuts filled big mac *** right in the middle of baghdad and kill 2 birds with one stone.

all in favor?????<hr /></blockquote>AYE

n567

04-02-2003, 03:20 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Niteshift:
Typical n567 "defense"........ignore the point and throw out a lot of smoke about the use of the word enamor. :rolleyes:

It doesn't take much to become enamored these days, the word must have lost its meaning."

enamor: To inspire with love; captivate.

Now why is that such an extreme term? :rolleyes:
Or could it be that you thought the word meant more than it actually does?<hr /></blockquote>No, I meant exactly what I said, I'm not captivated by Canada, nor am I in love with it. Typical Niteshift tactic, focus on a part of a post that you can actually formulate a response to, and ignore the rest.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Then sit your *** at the house and watch it all on TV. That way you wont get hurt.

And remember that evil prevails when good men stand by and do nothing.<hr /></blockquote>Now sitting around would be kind of hard if I was drafted, wouldn't it? And you miss the point entirely with your next sentence... What if the evil is the United States in our imaginary little war?

That Guy

04-02-2003, 03:22 PM

enamor: To inspire with love; captivate.

Is that French? :D

TGY

Niteshift

04-02-2003, 05:30 PM

"Typical Niteshift tactic, focus on a part of a post that you can actually formulate a response to, and ignore the rest."

The rest?

You spent two paragraphs whining about the use of the word enamored, then one long sentence about "immoral conflict".

So, of the time you spent replying, over 2/3rds of it was bitching and whining about the use of the word enamored.

Now why would I ignore 2/3rds of your post?

Hemtt

04-02-2003, 06:47 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> And remember that evil prevails when good men stand by and do nothing.
<hr /></blockquote>I don't agree with him on a lot of things but I really can't see how this statement has anything to do with N567

Will Coy

I love Canada, it's almost like another country.

n567

04-02-2003, 08:44 PM

It may take up the most text, however it may not be the only point of my post. In fact, it wasn't really much of a point except that your view on my perception of Canada is quite wrong.

You said I was enamored, I am not. I think that was a little exaggeration on your part.

You want to know what I think of Canada? I think it's probably a pretty nice place... If the airport in Vancouver is any indication, at least.

Niteshift

04-02-2003, 08:57 PM

Whatever kid........ I know what the word enamored means. I know what I meant when I said it. What I said and what I meant to say do not conflict.

n567

04-02-2003, 09:54 PM

I don't deny that. What you said I think, and what I actually think are what conflict.

[ 04-02-2003, 09:55 PM: Message edited by: n567 ]

Niteshift

04-02-2003, 10:00 PM

That's the appearence you give me.

n567

04-02-2003, 11:24 PM

Well, that's that. *darts eyes* Until we next cross swords...

Watchman

04-03-2003, 12:17 AM

I don't agree with him on a lot of things but I really can't see how this statement has anything to do with N567

Good point Hemtt...my apologies.Perhaps I should rephrase it...

Evil prevails when chickens*its stand by and do nothing...
:D

n567

04-03-2003, 01:41 AM

My question still stands, what if the U.S is the "evil" nation in this case?

Monty Ealerman

04-03-2003, 03:07 AM

There are many who will embrace anything that disagrees with the American mainstream, even when that requires a complacent, noncritical, nonskeptical attitude about factuality.

Most of the academics who love Michael Moore's work are less dishonest than he is, but they are not honest enough to cast a jaundiced eye on any of his claims, no matter how outlandish they may be. Michael Moore knows this, and counts on it.

He knows that most academics are too honest to deliberately create their own lies, but that many are not honest enough to denounce even the obvious lies of persons who espouse positions with which they sympathize.

When questions are put to Michael Moore about his complete lack of factuality, he shrugs then off, saying that his work is mere comedy; but when he gets accolades as a serious reporter, he slurps them up. That's like a small-time card cheat: if you catch him, he was only joking; if you don't, he takes your money.

Moore wants to obscure the distinction between abject, snivelling cowardice, and rational response to genuine threat. Only the former deserves to be derided.

Does my having a fire extinguisher in my car indicate that I am too fearful? Of course not. If you're in a car fire, having no way to put it out sucks. Similarly, so does encountering armed bad guys without a weapon that could give a decent person a fighting chance.

Moore is himself unreasonably afraid of honest and decent armed Americans, who have not the slightest intention of harming him.

Moore says that the Europeans killed the native Americans with guns out of fear. Couldn't aquisitiveness have had something to do with it? And didn't disease do the vast majority of the killing?

Moore's positions don't even deserve to be called theses. He knows he's lying. He's simply pandering to the scornful sensibilities of people who want to feel superior to others.

When Moore documented the plight of the auto industry workers in Flint, Michigan, he had not yet fully realized that he didn't need to worry about factuality. Now, he understands.

I wonder if Moore still has that rifle he got from the bank. I suppose probably not. If he really cared about his personal safety, he would have listened to his physician about weight reduction a long time ago.

Regards,

Monty

[ 04-03-2003, 02:06 PM: Message edited by: Monty Ealerman ]

Watchman

04-03-2003, 06:43 AM

My question still stands, what if the U.S is the "evil" nation in this case?

Then YOU are as guilty as the rest of the Americans for being EVIL, you warmongering, babykilling capitalist.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

nickg

04-03-2003, 08:18 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by n567:
My question still stands, what if the U.S is the "evil" nation in this case?<hr /></blockquote>we ARE the evil capitalist imperialist nation, don't you know that. we are going to invade EVERY mid east country for it's oil. then we will TAKE OVER THE WORLD. muuhaaahaaahaahaaa!!!!!

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

BrickCop

04-03-2003, 09:44 AM

Monty,

That was a brilliant post- you exposed that blow hard and his 'facts be damned' minded pals for what they are. :cool:

How did he become such an enlightened 'expert' anyway? This guy is the Milli Vanilli of documentary films and no one in Hollywood seems to care. Big suprise. :rolleyes:

Chief Wiggum

04-03-2003, 12:34 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Niteshift:
He can't be talking to me Mike........ that quote isn't from me. In fact, I can't see where the quote came from at all.

Of course, if Chief Wiggum would like to quote me directly (and correctly), then call me an ignorant redneck, I'd be more than happy to light his azz up.<hr /></blockquote>As it says in my post, the quote comes from every ignorant redneck I've ever met.

Your statement is just a new twist on it but the message is essentially the same:

Anyone who doesn't think like me please leave the country.

n567

04-03-2003, 02:01 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Watchman:
My question still stands, what if the U.S is the "evil" nation in this case?

Then YOU are as guilty as the rest of the Americans for being EVIL, you warmongering, babykilling capitalist.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>Even if I was as guilty, I might have the desire to repent. Your reasoning wouldn't excuse my joining the military to further the support of this fictional evil we speak of.

Niteshift

04-04-2003, 12:57 AM

"As it says in my post, the quote comes from every ignorant redneck I've ever met.

Your statement is just a new twist on it but the message is essentially the same:

Anyone who doesn't think like me please leave the country."

Then you lack some basic skills in reading comprehension. :rolleyes:

I didn't tell him to love it or leave it....... he has, in more than one thread, extolled the virtues of Canada specifically. So it is a perfectly logical question to ask why, if he thinks Canada is so great, he hasn't moved there. Perhaps if you read more threads instead of thinking up childish stereotypes, you'd have know that.

As for calling me an ignorant redneck........ I could warn you about personal attacks...... or I could sit here and laugh at your pathetic attempt to "cut me down to size".

However, since you've used it twice, I guess I'll warn you about your myopic stereotype instead of explaining why you're ignorant.

jarhead6073

04-04-2003, 01:51 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by n567:
[/qb]<hr /></blockquote>Even if I was as guilty,[/QB][/QUOTE]

Do you think that because you are against a particular policy that makes you any less guilty in the eyes of other nations and/or their residents? Or Osama bin Laden for that matter?

Niteshift

04-04-2003, 02:01 AM

"Do you think that because you are against a particular policy that makes you any less guilty in the eyes of other nations and/or their residents? Or Osama bin Laden for that matter?"

It clearly didn't matter to OBL. There were plenty of non-Americans in the WTC.

n567

04-04-2003, 02:42 AM

Do you think that because you are against a particular policy that makes you any less guilty in the eyes of other nations and/or their residents? Or Osama bin Laden for that matter?

As I've said before, if we were attacked/invaded, I'd be quite willing to take rational action. On the other hand, if we were suffering abroad from something we instigated, I'd be less willing to die for my country. Now, before you mention Iraq, I'd like to make it clear that I am not against Iraq because we're invading without justification. I'm primarily against this war because I'm concerned as to weather or not it will actually improve both the situation of innocent Iraqis, and Americans. Thankfully, things have been going well thus far, and if we're lucky, I'll be proven wrong.

Osama Bin Laden is obviously a man who has commited evils to for which he has no justification, he must be dealt with.

jarhead6073

04-04-2003, 02:51 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by n567:
Do you think that because you are against a particular policy that makes you any less guilty in the eyes of other nations and/or their residents? Or Osama bin Laden for that matter?

As I've said before, if we were attacked/invaded, I'd be quite willing to take rational action. On the other hand, if we were suffering abroad from something we instigated, I'd be less willing to die for my country. Now, before you mention Iraq, I'd like to make it clear that I am not against Iraq because we're invading without justification. I'm primarily against this war because I'm concerned as to weather or not it will actually improve both the situation of innocent Iraqis, and Americans. Thankfully, things have been going well thus far, and if we're lucky, I'll be proven wrong.

Osama Bin Laden is obviously a man who has commited evils to for which he has no justification, he must be dealt with.<hr /></blockquote>None of which answers the question. In reference to;
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Watchman:
My question still stands, what if the U.S is the "evil" nation in this case?

Then YOU are as guilty as the rest of the Americans for being EVIL, you warmongering, babykilling capitalist.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even if I was as guilty, I might have the desire to repent <hr /></blockquote>Do you think that in the eyes of the nations that you are worried about, Osama bin Laden, or Saddam Huessein, that you as an American, are any less guilty because you are against the war?

n567

04-04-2003, 04:56 AM

None of which answers the question. In reference to;

Ummm, this is just me being dense again, but the only question I see in that statement is the one I posed. I do believe my previous post deals with Watchman's comment too, however.

Do you think that in the eyes of the nations that you are worried about, Osama bin Laden, or Saddam Huessein, that you as an American, are any less guilty because you are against the war?

Well, as I said, Osama needs to be dealt with. So too does Saddam. My main grievance with this war is not us commiting an injustice. I'd like to point out that this "evil" committed by America doesn't exist, I'm putting forth a hypothetical situation, not the current war in Iraq, sorry if that's how it seemed.

jarhead6073

04-04-2003, 12:19 PM

I'm not asking if you would take action. I suppose my question is a little off topic. It's not so much about action as peception. Posed another way;

If America were, in the eyes of other nations/people/radicals, guilty of some injustice, do you think that they see you, as an American, less guilty for an act commited by the American government, just because you are opposed to whatever action they object to?

You can even insert the current Iraq situation. It actually fits quite nicely. Do you think that the French, Germans, Russians, Saddam, or Osama, see Americans who are against the war as less guilty of this "injustice" than those who approve of it.

This in response to your comment about even if I was as guilty. My contention is that in they eyes of others, all Americans are equally "guilty" regardless of your view of yourself. Well except for Peter Arnett maybe...

Chief Wiggum

04-04-2003, 03:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Niteshift:
"As it says in my post, the quote comes from every ignorant redneck I've ever met.

Your statement is just a new twist on it but the message is essentially the same:

Anyone who doesn't think like me please leave the country."

Then you lack some basic skills in reading comprehension. :rolleyes:

I didn't tell him to love it or leave it....... he has, in more than one thread, extolled the virtues of Canada specifically. So it is a perfectly logical question to ask why, if he thinks Canada is so great, he hasn't moved there. Perhaps if you read more threads instead of thinking up childish stereotypes, you'd have know that.

As for calling me an ignorant redneck........ I could warn you about personal attacks...... or I could sit here and laugh at your pathetic attempt to "cut me down to size".

However, since you've used it twice, I guess I'll warn you about your myopic stereotype instead of explaining why you're ignorant.<hr /></blockquote>Yea, OK. :rolleyes:

n567

04-04-2003, 04:27 PM

If America were, in the eyes of other nations/people/radicals, guilty of some injustice, do you think that they see you, as an American, less guilty for an act commited by the American government, just because you are opposed to whatever action they object to?

Most probably wouldn't. But I'd try not to let that influence my decision in most cases.

You can even insert the current Iraq situation. It actually fits quite nicely. Do you think that the French, Germans, Russians, Saddam, or Osama, see Americans who are against the war as less guilty of this "injustice" than those who approve of it.

Well, that's tricky, I think those in Europe may be more discerning. As for Osama Bin Laden and Saddam, I think they've both proved beyond a doubt that they're equal oppurtunities murderers.

This in response to your comment about even if I was as guilty. My contention is that in they eyes of others, all Americans are equally "guilty" regardless of your view of yourself. Well except for Peter Arnett maybe...

I understand, and as I said, I'd do my best not to allow that to influence my decision; I'd want to do what I percieve is best for the U.S regardless of what others think (to an extent).

I didn't tell him to love it or leave it....... he has, in more than one thread, extolled the virtues of Canada specifically. So it is a perfectly logical question to ask why, if he thinks Canada is so great, he hasn't moved there. Perhaps if you read more threads instead of thinking up childish stereotypes, you'd have know that.

Yes, I think I've extolled Canada's virtues in two threads, maybe... Niteshift doesn't seem to like the fact that I think the U.S might benefit from emulating Canada in certain ways.

[ 04-04-2003, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: n567 ]

Niteshift

04-04-2003, 04:39 PM

Yea, OK. :rolleyes:

Gee Chief Wiggum, do you have a problem with abiding by the TOS agreement for this website? If you do, let me know.

Otherwise, heed the warning and can the crap.

Yes, I think I've extolled Canada's virtues in two threads, maybe..."

Two threads DEFINATELY, possibly more.

"Niteshift doesn't seem to like the fact that I think the U.S might benefit from emulating Canada in certain ways."

I don't dislike that... I simply asked if you think it's so damn bad here and so great there, why you haven't made an address change?

n567

04-04-2003, 05:00 PM

I've never made out the U.S to be "so damn bad," or treated Canada as some sort of utopia. You've got that idea in your mind, and nothing I say (even what I actually think) will change your mind on the subject. So if you wish to continue with your incorrect, and preconcieved notion of what I think, enjoy.

Please, do a search on the forums, and see for yourself just how much I've said on the subject of Canada. I fear exageration is once again rearing its ugly head.

[ 04-04-2003, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: n567 ]

Niteshift

04-04-2003, 05:11 PM

"Once again, exageration rears its ugly head."

Yes, and it's in YOUR post.

"To say I have to love the U.S exactly the way it is, or leave it, is really just an asinine proposition."

Apparently you and Chief Wiggum skipped the same class on reading comprehension. I NEVER said "love it or leave it". I ASKED WHY YOU HAVEN'T.

So the exaggeration is yours and if anything is asinine, it's you insisting that I told you to leave the country.

n567

04-04-2003, 05:19 PM

Why haven't I left? Why should I? What reason do you have for me leaving the U.S?

I'm still waiting on that.

(oh, and sorry about the above post, I was editing it while you posted, searching the forums for my myriad of exultations on Canada - they never materialized)

Niteshift

04-04-2003, 05:27 PM

Please, do a search on the forums, and see for yourself just how much I've said on the subject of Canada. I fear exageration is once again rearing its ugly head.

I said 2 threads. Are you denying that? Is 2 an exageration? There is this thread and the one where you talked about how you dodged the draft. There might be more if I look, but I stated DEFINATELY 2.

Looks like it's you with the memory problem.

"Why haven't I left? Why should I? What reason do you have for me leaving the U.S?"

Are you always this slow to comprehend? Why would I have a list of reasons when I'm asking you WHY? If I were suggesting that you should, then you could expect me to list some reasons. Since I'm asking why you haven't, I can't see why I need to answer for you.

n567

04-04-2003, 06:05 PM

I said 2 threads. Are you denying that? Is 2 an exageration? There is this thread and the one where you talked about how you dodged the draft. There might be more if I look, but I stated DEFINATELY 2.

The exageration being, how much I love Canada, and how that's all you've heard me talk about. You've made it seem as though I think there's nothing greater in the world than Canada, and that I think the U.S is a ****hole.

Are you always this slow to comprehend? Why would I have a list of reasons when I'm asking you WHY? If I were suggesting that you should, then you could expect me to list some reasons. Since I'm asking why you haven't, I can't see why I need to answer for you.

I don't want to leave the U.S... I'm trying to figure out what compelled you to ever ask this question (well, I have a hunch the forementioned misconception of me may have something to do with it).

[ 04-04-2003, 09:33 PM: Message edited by: n567 ]

Niteshift

04-05-2003, 12:31 AM

The exageration being, how much I love Canada, and how that's all you've heard me talk about.

You already talked about that, then you addressed it again..and again. How many times will you keep referring to the same thing as "exageration rearing it's head"? :rolleyes:

I don't want to leave the U.S... I'm trying to figure out what compelled you to ever ask this question"

It could be when you said that if there was a draft, you'd choose to go to Canada.

n567

04-05-2003, 02:11 AM

You already talked about that, then you addressed it again..and again. How many times will you keep referring to the same thing as "exageration rearing it's head"?

Well, as long as exageration occurs, I'll keep pointing it out.

It could be when you said that if there was a draft, you'd choose to go to Canada.

How does that relate to my desire to leave the country right now? Which appears to be what you're asking me...

SGT Dave

04-05-2003, 05:33 AM

Wishful thinking...just wishful thinking.