Scoop.co.nz Fahrenheit 9/11 Screening Fundraiser

Look, this is Chris Hitchens's tiresome, opportunistic tirade at work. "Bush had no part" indeed! So I suppose Clarke just had some inexplicable personal love for the Saud and Bin Laden families that motivated him to go off personally on a limb?! Give me a break!

Look, it may very well be that Clarke "gave the final ok" for this, but are we to believe that this occurred in some sort of a vacuum, and that Clarke wasn't operating under the same sort of pressure that the FBI was under for years (under not only Bush Jr, but also Clinton, and Bush pappy, etc etc) to coddle these rich Saudis who have such close business ties to elite US families like the Bushes? Of course the decision had EVERYTHING to do with Bush! And it's truly astounding that Hitchens has had to resort to such low, cockamamie nonsense in his frenzied efforts to remake himself into a "compassionate conservative," and get all the wellpaying gigs on the rightwing US tv talkshows.

Actually I'm not much impressed by Mike Moore as a journalist (check out Control Room for an excellent study of the biases and blinkers of the western media), but I'm suprised by the people who seem to delight in picking up his minor errors or biases, yet don't seem concerned about the lies told by the conservative media and US government.

Remember the phantom weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? The attempts to pin Saddam's use of chemical weapons on the Iranians? The MIGs the Nicaraguans were supposedly importing that vanished without a trace? The resistance in Iraq who were just a few Ba'ath party zealots who would quickly be dealt to? The democratic Iraq that is now being scrapped in favour of the restoration of the rule of former Ba'ath party members? The massive stockpiles of weapons in Grenada? etc. etc.

Wootle FF you're a sucker mate, you're not alone but you are a big sucker for sure.

Michael Moore has employed a bunch of high powered lawyer types to go over the facts in F911 with a fine toothed comb. The best anyone has ever been able to come up with against him is minor details. The single fact you mention is a good example. Even if Moore is wrong it doesn't change the fact that the Bushs and bin Laden's are deep in each others pockets

Read my article for a good example of how a NZ journalist fell into the same trap you just have. http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display_any/19208

Moore is going up against the US establishment so you better believe that there will be a lot of propaganda against him. Instead of believeing one or two websites check out the facts at other places on the web (try Z mag for starters), get informed and then start usng your judgement.

If the stuff in this movie becomes widespread public knowledge the entire US etablishment is in for a kicking as are the journalists and mainstream papers and TV. Long time coming too.

Leftnut don't be such a cynic, I've read and listened a lot to Michael Moore and he's the real deal. He's still human like everyone else but he is coming from a good place. Try reading some of the other reviews posted to this site for a perspective on where his real short comings are.

Here's the Scoop on the National Center for Public Policy Research, looks like they're added attacking Michael Moore to their impressive CV

http://www.odwyerpr.com/0506env.htm
The National Center for Public Policy Research, a right-wing think tank, has launched a new website, envirotruth.org, to attack what it calls the "jihad" that environmental activists are waging against corporations. The NCPPR, which was formed in the 1980s to support terrorism by the Contras in Nicaragua, now says it has a mission to combat "ecoterrorism." By the way, NCPPR also sells its services to the tobacco industry. (Now isn't that a surprise!)

The National Center for Public Policy Research is a free market think tank that issues publications on a wide variety of policy issues. NCPPR often acts as a bridge between the DC-based conservative think tanks and more grassroots anti-regulatory groups.

NCPPR's John P. McGovern M.D. Center for Environmental and Regulatory Affairs hosts the "Global Warming Information Center" (www.nationalcenter.org/Kyoto.html). The site features the writings NCPPR's climate change skeptics as well as outside skeptics like Willie Soon and S. Fred Singer. NCPPR President Amy Moritz Ridenour created the NCPPR-sponsored site Envirotruth.org, which has a section listing the "myths" of climate change. "Envirotruth" links to ActivistCash.com, a food and tobacco lobby front that bashes progressive and environmental groups, including Greenpeace. NCPPR is part of the Alliance for American network, the State Policy Network, and the Cooler Heads Coalition. (4/04) Though NCPPR often accuses environmentalists of basing policy decisions on emotion rather than science, Amy Ridenour of NCPPR once justified her organization's use of fundraising scare tactics: "It's just that you're competing with a lot of other organizations. People seem to respond better to emotion than they do with letters that have lots and lots of facts." (San Francisco Examiner, February 8, 1998)

KEY QUOTES
"There is no serious evidence that man-made global warming is taking place."
Source: NCPPR website 4/04

"There are many indications that carbon dioxide does not play a significant role in global warming."
Source: NCPPR website 4/04

DEEDS
NCPPR was profiled in "The Fear Merchants, " an article criticizing the organization's direct mail fundraising in the San Francisco Chronicle, February 8, 1998. Among other things, the article revealed that NCPPR spent more than 77 percent of the groups' $2.3 million raised in 1995. The Council of Better Business Bureaus standards say fund-raising costs should not exceed 35 percent of the contributions raised.
Source: "The Fear Merchants" San Fransisco Chronicle 02/08/98

FUNDING
National Center for Public Policy Research has received $170,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

The errors in F9/11 are not trivial, they are not nit-picky. Did you actually read anything from the sites I posted? The main points of MM's movie are:

1. Bush is the puppet of the Saudi government. (Though why the Saudi would have wanted or indeed have benefitted from the removal of Hussain is beyond me.)

2. The election in 200 was rigged.

3. There is no such thing as Islam, and no Jihad has been called down upon America.

The points that are made on the sites I have listed relate directly to these.

Aaron - " 99% opposed to their being there."
Come on, you cant just make things up.

Latest Moore lie exposed. http://moorewatch.com/index.php/C18/

It is shown here that MM has deliberately altered a newspaper headline. This is not something that can happen accidently, like getting a quote wrong or out of context, this is an act to deliberalty decieve. This is something where MM MUST have known he was doing something fraudulent.

Sam Buchanen - "Remember the phantom weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?" What? Are ricin and sarin gas irrelevant? Or are they just mass-destructiony enough for you? "The democratic Iraq that is now being scrapped in favour of the restoration of the rule of former Ba'ath party members?" Where the hell do you get this? Have I missed something? Have the Iraqi elections been permanently cancelled?

Aaron again -"Moore is going up against the US establishment so you better believe that there will be a lot of propaganda against him." Are you a true believer in the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy? The mass media is left leaning by the way. Why cant you see that which is so obvious to all? Aaron, there is a link there to 56 deceits in F911, you are more than welcome to refute each and every single one if you like but I dont see anything there that can be refuted as easily as F911.

ggg - "
So I suppose Clarke just had some inexplicable personal love for the Saud and Bin Laden families that motivated him to go off personally on a limb?" You would have to ask him. But it is interesting that people can simultaneously call Bush an idiot and a simpleton, yet claim that he has absolute control over every aspect of the war on terror.

""There are many indications that carbon dioxide does not play a significant role in global warming."
Source: NCPPR website 4/04"

Do they provide figures or maybe *gasp* scienctific research to back this up? Do you have any to refute it? Or are you simply falling into the habit of citing the opponents main proposition as evidence of their idiocy? Did you know that Exxon also gave $220,000 to Purdue University, does that mean anything? Are they now just the mouth-piece for a globalised corporation satan nazi hitler company?

As a matter of interest, do you have any idea what is the #1 green house gas in the atmosphere?

It is a chemical called dihydro-monoxide. It is the chenical responsible for thousands upon thousands of deaths every year and yet we hear nothing about it in the liberal media. Tragic.

"Are you a true believer in the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy? The mass media is left leaning by the way."

That's hilarious. Just how does the left induce the 5 media corporations that control (by ownership or lease) most of the broadcast spectrum and cable bandwidth to suportively promote left political views which go against the ideology and the short term economic interests of their owners, advertizers and specialist management?

MM is a moderate - a liberal leftwinger. He is rediculously soft on the democrat war machine and engages in personality politics by over-focusing on Dubya Bush instead of the shadier figures and institutions who have influence over his decision-making. But that doesn't change the fact he has assembled strong evidence against the Bush administration, more than enough to justify impeachments. More than a lie about a cigar anyway.

http://www.impeachbush.tv/

dk is wrong, here is my resume.

http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm

It seems to be taking out my comments and leaving in only the comments I am responding too, how bad can it get

WFF wrote:

""1. Bush is the puppet of the Saudi government. (Though why the Saudi would have wanted or indeed have benefitted from the removal of Hussain is beyond me.)""

I doubt that he claims that Bush is their puppet, because he's not, he's Cheney's puppet. WHat is true and is well known is that the Bushs and bin Laden's have been doing business together for years and that Bush has done his best to offer them protection and hamper investigations into them

""2. The election in 200 was rigged.""

Another accepted FACT that was reported on the BBC by a guy called Greg Palast, he has written a book called "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy". It's a catchy title and you should read it. If you can't be bothered then I suggest you go to gregpalast.com and start your education

""3. There is no such thing as Islam, and no Jihad has been called down upon America.""

I don't know what you mean by this and I don't see how discussing the issue will help us to explain why US agression in the middle-east wan't a major factor in 9-11

""Aaron - " 99% opposed to their being there."
Come on, you cant just make things up.""

OK you got me - it might be 98%.
I can't remember my source for that polling - it may actually have been that 1-2% of Iraqis like the US being there, which is slightly different. But I tell you what; you tell me how many Iraqi have to approve of their country being illegally occupied by a foreign power for it to be OK and then I'll find the relevant poll (although I can guarantee you that it a MASSIVE majority that want them out

""Latest Moore lie exposed. http://moorewatch.com/index.php/C18/

It is shown here that MM has deliberately altered a newspaper headline. This is not something that can happen accidently, like getting a quote wrong or out of context, this is an act to deliberalty decieve. This is something where MM MUST have known he was doing something fraudulent.""

Can't tell much from that - but can you explain what this means in terms of the movie. There are plenty of other people who came out with the same information way before F9-11 was released so I can't see that your little scoop changes the fact that the 2000 election was in fact a steal

""Sam Buchanen - "Remember the phantom weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?" What? Are ricin and sarin gas irrelevant? Or are they just mass-destructiony enough for you?""

The so-called WMDs that they found made soldiers who stood CLOSE to them, a littel bit sick. I might be confused but I though the point of WMD was that you could be a long way from them and still die. In actual fact the stuff that has been found was left over from the Iran/Iraq war in the 80s which means it was probably supplied by the US in the first place - ironical really.

"" "The democratic Iraq that is now being scrapped in favour of the restoration of the rule of former Ba'ath party members?" Where the hell do you get this? Have I missed something? Have the Iraqi elections been permanently cancelled?""

I think 'permanently rigged' is the phrase you are looking for. If we look at the Iraqi local body elections we can see that the only candidates who were allowed to stand were approved by the US first. It's not a good omen really

""Aaron again -"Moore is going up against the US establishment so you better believe that there will be a lot of propaganda against him." Are you a true believer in the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?""

Their's no conspiracy you nut, it's just that the right wing owns the media, and the oil companies and the military equipment suppliers and..... Did anyone say "Halliburton"

""The mass media is left leaning by the way. Why cant you see that which is so obvious to all? ""

Nice use of facts to support your assertion. Please respond to Strypey's question regarding this issue. But note that Rupert Murdoch supports the War on Iraq and by remarkable coincidence so do all 30,000 (aprox) editors and journalists who work for him. Like I said it's not a conspiracy it's just how power works - how often do you do the exact opposite of what your boss says?

""Aaron, there is a link there to 56 deceits in F911, you are more than welcome to refute each and every single one if you like but I dont see anything there that can be refuted as easily as F911.""

In a previous postining of mine (in this thread) is a link to an article I wrote where I disprove 17 supposed 'deceits' in "Dude Where's My Country". Are you sure you want to challange me to do that again?

"" ""There are many indications that carbon dioxide does not play a significant role in global warming."
Source: NCPPR website 4/04"

Do they provide figures or maybe *gasp* scienctific research to back this up? Do you have any to refute it? Or are you simply falling into the habit of citing the opponents main proposition as evidence of their idiocy? ""

I'm not sure what you're driving at here. But can I suggest you go to Prwatch.org and do a search on NCPPR where you will find articles from a variety of sources as well as links to exact information about how much money they are given and from who. Surely you realise that these groups are set up to push the views of the corporates - it's no different to the Life SCiences Network here in NZ - or do you believe everything that they have to say too.

By the way - most of the info that I've read that refutes what you are saying is from a variety of sources, but if you want to hear it from the Horses mouth then go to http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/f911notes/ and check Moore's research yourself

""Did you know that Exxon also gave $220,000 to Purdue University, does that mean anything? ""

Only if they are doing research in any areas that are relevant to Exxon Mobil's business.

Did you know that research is 4 times more likely to have findings that support a companies viewpoint if that company funded that research than if it was funded independantly - Does that mean anything to you?

""Are they now just the mouth-piece for a globalised corporation satan nazi hitler company?""

You're starting to lose it man, why don't you go have a lie down

""As a matter of interest, do you have any idea what is the #1 green house gas in the atmosphere?

It is a chemical called dihydro-monoxide. It is the chenical responsible for thousands upon thousands of deaths every year and yet we hear nothing about it in the liberal media. Tragic.""

My God you do believe everything the LSN says.

That is a (very poor and incomplete) replication of a standard PR diversion tactic (which the LSN has used) and it has nothing to do with anything but is the sort of tactic that people have to resort to when they don't have the facts on their side.

cya

Oh FFS Aaron, do you really beleive all that shyte about the USA arming Saddam? The UN itself has released figures which show that almost all the arming of Saddam was done by those most opposed to the war in Iraq and those that benefitted the most from keeping the status quo. Russia, Germany and France, oh my! These are the guys who armed him. If you are refering to the biological material sent to Iraq by the CDC then you are just confused. The CDC sent the biological material to hospitals and universities in Iraq believing that it would be used for the same purpose as all the other biomat they exported, to study and help fight diseases in animals and humans. The US did provide four helicopters to Saddam though, or at least they were supplied to private buyers and then Saddam stole (violently appropriated) them. I think that pretty much accounts for the 2% America supplied. Lets look at the French, fire arms, tanks, nuclear "power" plants...lets just stop there, and make absolutley no mention of Oil for "Food", none.

Ricin requires physcial contact, but it doesnt need much. Sarin gas does decay, the fact that these soldiers felt a little bit ill by merely standing CLOSE to these cannisters doesnt mean they wouldnt have died if they got down on their knees and fully inhaled.

Your type of argument is typical leftist-goal-post-moving.

Leftie - there are no WMDs.
WMD's are then found.
Leftie - they were old, and besides, the USA supplied them.
We knew he HAD them, we wanted to make sure he didnt anymore.
Leftie - they arent M enough, they couldnt have killed anyone.
Did you want to wait to find out? Should we all have done nothing, awaited solid proof he had them? Which by the way means, wait until he used them?

I dont want to get into the WMD, Bush lied argument, because leftists keep moving the goal posts.

The media IS liberal. Mr. Wilson is the perfect example but there are more. Bush said Saddam was trying to get Uranium from Africa. Mr Wilson came out and said that that was a Bald Faced LIE! Mr Wilson told us that Mr Wilson went to Africa to find out for the CIA if Saddam was trying to get Uranium. Mr Wilson said that Mr Wilson found no evidence of that. Mr Wilson went on every current affairs program, Mr Wilsons accusation was reported on every station and was front page on every newspaper. Turns out Mr Wilson was the one who lied. His report was even used by the CIA to support the case that Saddam was trying to get Uranium. Where do you hear this? Is it on the front page of every newspaper, does it lead the news hour? Does it fuck!!

Listen to the wording of news reports from the BBC. Read the stories written by Reuters, they refuse to use the word Terrorist because "one mans Terrorist is another mans freedom fighter,", like it matters. Mr Murdoch owns alot of newspapers, but he doesnt own every TV station, he doesnt own Reuters or Associated Press. He owns FOX and only Fox. People do not turn to newspapers for news anymore, they turn to TV. Fox is one news station, and you consider this proof of the VRWC?? But of course, all companies are the same, they are all run by rich old white men. Rich old white men all think the same dont they?

*cough* *Soros* *cough*

Businesses = Bad, if they have anything to do with money they will all act the same. Did you ever consider that the media doesnt rely on towing the Republican line to make money? F911 has made alot of money but thats different isnt it? MM's goal wasnt to make money was it? Oh MM COULD give away all his money that he has made with his not for profit movie in order to prove he wasnt just interested in profit, but he wont, would you? The media relies upon people paying money to use their services, not upon the benevolence of the Republican party and the President. Oh, but they are cowed into submission by the Presidents stand-over tactics, they darent print anything bad because they will incur the wrath of GWB! If you believe this you are a paranoid scizophrenic and I am coming to kill you!! BOO! P'leeeeaase.

The father of Michael Moore's agent was a Zionist terrorist. What is the real purpose of this movie? Is it some kind of smoke-screen?

I could cite every place I got my information, but in the end even that is futile.

I'll post my sources, you'll post yours. I think my posts supercede yours, you think yours would mine.

We can probably boil things down to a couple of questions.

1. Do you accept that there have been any half-truths or outright deception in F911? Or do you believe it is 100% accurate and fair?

2. If you do believe there has been atleast one half truth or deception, do you consider it detrimental to MMs case or his character? Or do you think it is OK to overlook it because he is anti Bush and shares your convictions?

3. If you do not believe there have been any half-truths or deceptions in F911, do you explain away any evidence presented as :

a) The workings of the vast-right-wing-conspiracy?
b) Just more right wing, neo-con, zionist, jew loving, white hate speech?
c) A CIA and FBI coverup ordered by GWB and DC and DR?

Either MM lied or he didnt. If he did, even if just once, we get to label him a liar, up until it is conclusively proven to be incorrect (even then it is up to our own discretion). Just like you guys did (and do) with GWB.

"If we get lost in the debate about the minute details in F9-11 we'll never learn anything useful."

This is my point, the only way you get anything out of the movie is if you suspend disbelief and accept it as truth. Because as soon as you start looking close into it you realise that its base is rotten.

"all you have shown me is a couple of pictures on a website and the word of someone who is an admitted Moore-hater"

All F911 has shown me is a couple of games of "seven degrees of Kevin Bacon (GWB)" and the word of alot of people following their own agenda. I can link MM to anybody in the world with (it is hypothesized) only seven connections. MM has implied that some dude from Afghanistan visisted GWB to discuss putting an oil pipeline through that country. But never goes all the way and says outright "GWB met with this person who gave him money and that is why he did this and that". MM would never put himself out there like that. He has a team of lawyers checking over every part of the film, but not to make sure everything is correct (ie would leave the audience with a correct view of actual events), they were there to make sure he didnt go too far and actually make accusations that could be seen as lies and slander. For example, he says in the film that Iraq never killed an American, never even threatened the kill an American. He is trying to portray Iraq as a benign, happy place that America invaded for NO OTHER reason than to make money. That is the impression left from seeing that scene. When asked in an interview about this statement and its relevance to the payments that Iraq publicly made to the families of suicide bombers who had killed Americans in Isreal, MM said that you had to look very carefully at what he said. On closer inspection you would notice that he said Iraq had never KILLED and American, so the support and incentive given to suicide bombers does not count. If you look very closely at what MM says then,yes , it is very difficult to say it is an outright lie (as the law would see it). But if you were to look at it from the average persons perspective, what he is implying and what actually exists are two completely different things. No implications and inferences are subjective and as such arent definitive, so MM may be able to say he didnt lie in fact, he did in spirit.

Do not complain that I present refutation from partisan sources when the intended goal of the movie in question, by the creators own admission, is to help get GWB out of the White House.

A lie is a lie only if you have the intention to mislead, if you unknowingly say something that is untrue that is simply a mistake. GWB was said to have lied about WMD and uranium from Africe. It is now clear that he was acting on incorrect information, he did not have the intention to lie. (As a result of liberal goal-post-moving, the argument then moved from "GWB lied" to "GWB put pressure on these poor civil servants to produce the information he wanted so as to be able to better serve his Saudi masters". MM on the other hand has deliberatly decieved. He wasnt acting on incorrect information, he has deliberately twisted events, excluded pertinent facts, and used fancy editing to present his case.

I would like to hear what you think we should get out of this film. Put it in bullet points so it is easy to read.

From what I can see on my computer the next 3 paragraphs were left off my last posting so I'm reposting them:

In actual fact you've entirely missed the point, like the entire 'vast right-wing conspiracy' you've avoided the real issue by getting bogged down in an arguement about Michael Moore - Is he right or is he wrong? The real issue is whether the US adminsitration is corrupt. The answer is yes but will you find a right wing commentator discussing that? Hell no. It's much better to be distracted by a discussion about whether Micahel Moore is a liar or not.

But is he a liar? I hear you demand once again.
Yes, of course he is, we all are. We all lie at some time or other so let's just say he is a liar and be done with it. How does that help us? does it mean we can dismiss his whole movie? I would have thought it would be more accurate to dismiss the (supposed lies themselves and see what is left. I haven't seen you make any comments about the parts of the movie that aren't in dispute. I haven't seen you discuss Moore's comments on the appalling attack on US civil liberties that even one of your Moore-hating sites admits is right on the button. I think that fact alone tells us more about you than anything you have written. I'm not sure why but you reveal yourself to be working very hard to steer clear of discussing the fact that something is very wrong with US (and NZ) leadership and the really sad thing is that the more people there are like you who want to shoot the messenger the more likely we are to never escape from these creeps.

Remember it's Bush who has blood on his hands, not Moore

As for your more recents posts, I have to admit I'm losing interest in the discussion of what MM said and did and speculation as to why he did it. I've seen so much corroboration for what is in his movie from different sources over the last few years years that I'm starting to think the whole debate is a waste of time. In fact it's kind of placebo debate for right-wingers who want to avoid the real issues.

What should you get out of this film in bullet points?

Sorry man, what you've got out of the film is this debate, which is precisely what MM was intending - especially in the US where the debate has been sadly lacking. For that alone Moore should be congratulated. Getting this debate into mainstream media in the US is something that has never happened before, he's done it on the back of other better, minds but his ability to communicate to everyday people is pretty damn good

As for the comments about GWB's lying or not lying depending on how you view the 'intelligence he received. In his particular case he probably does believe everything that is written for him to say but the facts (as revealed by a number of White House memos leaked to mainstream newspapers) are that others in the US administration (and British too) decidede that they wanted to invade Iraq and then set about finding any evidence they could to give them an excuse - whilst at the same time ignoring any evidence to the contrary (and there was plenty). So it's possible to say GWB didn't lie but the regardless of that the facts are that thousands of people have died for a bit of empire building. There were no WMD and there are no WMD and we have the last 3 weapons inspectors in Iraq ALL testifying to that fact.

Let me begin by saying Fuck you Mike.

No fuck you

To Quote.."These gases, called "greenhouse gases" include carbon dioxide, water vapor, and methane. Without the greenhouse effect, the entire planet would be much colder, by about 63 degrees Fahrenheit (35 degrees Celsius), than it presently is."

There is a huge difference between a natural greenhouse effect and a human induced one moron.

"The prediction of climate change due to human activities began with a prediction made by the Swedish chemist, Svante Arrhenius, in 1896."

”Ok, so Svante has included water vapour in his list of greenhouse gases. And yet, Mike, you leave it out of yours. Nobody is arguing that CO2 and Methane arent greenhouse gases, what I am saying is that CO2 and methane makes up only about 3 percent of the atmospheric greenhouse gases, whereas H20 makes up over 90%.”

Well Sulphuric Acid is mainly made up of water, but it is that small amount of sulphur that makes it dangerous. If I threw some in your face, it will be a bit different than just water.

Lefties and greenies like to proclaim that they alone are capable of logical and rational thinking (how often do you see this written by a leftie, "Right wingers rely on rhetoric and diversion, and never like to discuss the facts!", look up psychological projection). But Mike you are ignoring common sense. A scientist in the nineteenth century asserts something, so it must be true, because no scientific theories from the nineteenth century have been proven wrong. None, not ever.

Well moron, he has been proven correct on this one.

You believe in global warming because you want to, there is no other reason.

No, I believe it because of all the evidence.

Whottle FF said:

".....Fuck........fuck........fuck......fuck!!!"

I guess we know what the Fs in your name stand for - but I guess that's all you're left with when you don't have the facts on your side. I also see you haven't taken up the challange to actually discuss the issues raised in F9-11 yet.

OK Wootle

G.W sat there and kept reading to the kids. You wud of thought that he wud of got up and done something.

Bush sat there and did nothing for seven minutes. So what? What should he have done? Rushed off and done the first thing that came to mind? Jumped up and immediatley implemented the "Planes crash into WTC" scenario action plan?

He sat there for seven minutes. When I see that I dont see the same thing as you. I see someone who thinks about what he must do.

He could have left the room, I mean, that would have been better for PR. But obviously his first thought wasnt "What should I do that looks good for that camera over there?" It was more than likely, "Well thats it, now we are at war."

You see him sitting there and becuase you dont like him you envisage a thought bubble that says "Dum de doo, dum-dim-dum-dee-dooo". I see smoething else. I see someone who has just been told that thousands of people have just been killed (if you remember the orginal casualty numbers were up around 50-60,000). I see someone who immediatly started thinking about the ramifications of this event, possible reactions etc. Im sure Bill Clinton would have immediately thought about how he appears for the camera, and thats fair enough, that is what was important for him. It wasnt important for Bush so he didnt consider the need to APPEAR decisive. Truth is anyone who complains that this is evidence of Bush's indecisiveness, arent complaining about the reality, they are simply complaining about appearance. Very superficial.

NEXT

"please discuss why these laws seem more effective at repressing the local citizenry than stopping terrorism."

How many Terrorist acts have been committed since the laws came into force? Zero.

How many of the local citizenry aren't repressed? Heaps.

So logically, the goal of preventing terrorism has been achieved 100%, whereas the goal of repressing local citizens is less than 100% effective. Therefore, the laws appear more successful at preventing terrorism than repressing local citizenry. QED

Now you said "these laws seem more effective". Seem. What you are really saying is, why do I see things the way I do? Now, this isnt a question I can answer for you.

But seriously, what sort of question is that?

Discuss how the recent desecration of Jewish graves seems more likely to be the work of people who hate Isreal, than skinheads who hate asians and blacks.

"In your answer please also discuss the fact that one of the things that came out of WWII was that following German laws of the time was no defense for letting atrocities be committed."

Are you seriously comparing the Patriot Act to the Jewish Genocide? Please dont do that. It cheapens your whole argument and it reeks of Bush=Hitler. I think what you are trying to say, is that Natural Justice supercedes legal justice or legislature. I agree whole heartedly with that. Unfortunately, I dont think you are going to be as consistent as you think you are. Natural Justice would mean that sentecnes would be longer, the death penalty would would exist for murder (and it would be used) etc.

"As an indicator the GE movement is well aware that it's now possible for the pulling of GE crops to be classed as an act of terrorism."

I agree with this part. Pulling up of crops isnt an act of terrorism, but is is wilful distruction of property. As the true value of that proerty is any patents that arise from the research I would charge these people with a far more serious crime. Those potatos, as mere potatos, could have been bought for a couple hundred dollars. However, the patents and the money invested in them amount to thousands of dollars. These damned irresponsible, fascist hippies who pull up these crops should be treated the same as arsonists. They dont care about anyone other than themselves, they dont give a damn about anybody elses opinions, they think they are right and will enforce their beliefs on everyone else if given a chance. Dont believe the hype, the environmental movement is all about restriction of freedom, imposition of will, and control! It all about control. And unfortunately, environmentalism is now more like a religion than a considered stand on the issues. Just look at what happens whenever any scientist syas that global warming doesnt really exist. They get called fascists, corporate whores etc. The evironmentalist movement is a cult.

But anyway. I am not a lawyer or a legislator so the exact details of the Patriot Act evade me. But I think the problem arises from the attempt to define the term Terrorism. This definition is not a result of conservative machinations, rather it is an attempt by liberals to restrict the powers of any Intelligence agency. If they can define Terrorism they can say what is and isnt a terrorist act and in that way control what the intelligence agency can act upon. Unfortunately, defining something like terrorism is not easy and will lead to ambiguity. This is obvious to many but still seems to evade our local government. This is the government that puts terms like "good faith" into labour legislation. Those ambiguities can lead to different interpretations of the letter of the law, and confusion over the intent or spirit of the law.

Let me be clear here. The ambiguity in legislation is predominantly due to leftist influence. As a conservative I dont see the point in rigidly defining Terrorism (which ironically leads to the ambiguity). Rather, Intelligence agencies should have fewer restrictions to give them more flexibility, albeit with additional monitoring.

Wootle FF: a few responses and soures for your consideration.

My first cent - Global Warming: Take a look at http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/000825.html
This site has a link to a downloadable pdf of a article which appeared in Nature, a reputable scientific journal.

Here's a quote from the world changing site:
"A more troubling bit of information from the research concerns CO2 levels. There is a very strong correlation of CO2 concentrations and average air temperature. At the peak of the previous similar inter-glacial period, CO2 concentrations increased to around 275-280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), up from a minimum of 200 ppmv in the previous glacial era. Measurements of CO2 concentrations on Mauna Loa from 1958 to 1998 show a growth of CO2 levels from 316 ppmv to 369 ppmv (it's a bit higher now). While we've known for awhile now that current CO2 levels are much higher than in the pre-industrial period, this is the first time we've been able to measure CO2 concentrations for such an extended period of time, and directly compare them to the last long-period inter-glacial era."

My second cent- The war on Iraq: You may be interested in reading "Plan of Attack" by Bob Woodward. It is an account of how and why Bush choose to go to launch his pre-emptive attack on Suddam and occupy Iraq. The author has interviewed a bunch of people, including George W, and reports facts, without passing judegment. Here is an excerpt from the book

"In early January 2001, before George W. Bush was inaugurated Vice President-elect Dick Cheney passed a message to the outgoing secretary of defense William S. Cohen, a moderate Fepublican who served in the Democratic Clinton administration.
"We really need to get the president-elect briefed up on some things," Cheney said, adding that he wanted a serious "discussion about Iraq and different options." the president-elect should not be given the routing, canned, round-the-world tour normally given in-coming presidents. Topic A should be Iraq." (Chapter 1, Page 9)

I think we all should remember that Cheney was secretary of defense during George H. Bush's presidency. Also that following Desert Storm an attempt on George H's life in Saudi Arabia was foiled. At the time, rumor had it the attempt had been ordered and sponsored by Suddam

Re your comments regarding the last election: The 'rigged' election on Florida disenfranchised thousands of innocent (aka not felon) Black voters (who tend to vote Democrat) while allowing numbers of Hispanic felons (who tend to vote Republican) vote. How did this happen? The names, ages, dates of birth and race of registered voters was compared against the list of felons in Florida. While 'hispanic' is an available choice of race on the voter list, it does not appear on the felon list, thus the hispanics slipped through. The company who was hired to compute the data warned errors were likely, yet were instructed not to double check the results. Many here fear the same will happen again in the upcoming election. Florida has refused to replace the controversial touch screen voting machines, machines which allow no method of verifying peoples votes. A better system would be the use of optical readers which read 'bubble sheets' and leave a paper trail. It is a shame that a country which has billions of dollars to spend installing a democracy in another nation can't spare a couple of million to ensure an honest democracy on its own soil.

It is hard not to be suspicious of the fact that Jeb is George W's bro! One has to wonder if John Ellis, cousin of George and Jeb, knew the election was rigged ahead of time, thus could confidently pronounce his cousins 'victory'.

Defining Terrorism: Peter Ustinov is quoted as saying:
"Terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich".

I'm an expat Kiwi currently residing in the US.

Wootle FF: a few responses and soures for your consideration.

My first cent - Global Warming: Take a look at http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/000825.html
This site has a link to a downloadable pdf of a article which appeared in Nature, a reputable scientific journal.

Here's a quote from the world changing site:
"A more troubling bit of information from the research concerns CO2 levels. There is a very strong correlation of CO2 concentrations and average air temperature. At the peak of the previous similar inter-glacial period, CO2 concentrations increased to around 275-280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), up from a minimum of 200 ppmv in the previous glacial era. Measurements of CO2 concentrations on Mauna Loa from 1958 to 1998 show a growth of CO2 levels from 316 ppmv to 369 ppmv (it's a bit higher now). While we've known for awhile now that current CO2 levels are much higher than in the pre-industrial period, this is the first time we've been able to measure CO2 concentrations for such an extended period of time, and directly compare them to the last long-period inter-glacial era."

My second cent- The war on Iraq: You may be interested in reading "Plan of Attack" by Bob Woodward. It is an account of how and why Bush choose to go to launch his pre-emptive attack on Suddam and occupy Iraq. The author has interviewed a bunch of people, including George W, and reports facts, without passing judegment. Here is an excerpt from the book

"In early January 2001, before George W. Bush was inaugurated Vice President-elect Dick Cheney passed a message to the outgoing secretary of defense William S. Cohen, a moderate Fepublican who served in the Democratic Clinton administration.
"We really need to get the president-elect briefed up on some things," Cheney said, adding that he wanted a serious "discussion about Iraq and different options." the president-elect should not be given the routing, canned, round-the-world tour normally given in-coming presidents. Topic A should be Iraq." (Chapter 1, Page 9)

I think we all should remember that Cheney was secretary of defense during George H. Bush's presidency. Also that following Desert Storm an attempt on George H's life in Saudi Arabia was foiled. At the time, rumor had it the attempt had been ordered and sponsored by Suddam

Re your comments regarding the last election: The 'rigged' election on Florida disenfranchised thousands of innocent (aka not felon) Black voters (who tend to vote Democrat) while allowing numbers of Hispanic felons (who tend to vote Republican) vote. How did this happen? The names, ages, dates of birth and race of registered voters was compared against the list of felons in Florida. While 'hispanic' is an available choice of race on the voter list, it does not appear on the felon list, thus the hispanics slipped through. The company who was hired to compute the data warned errors were likely, yet were instructed not to double check the results. Many here fear the same will happen again in the upcoming election. Florida has refused to replace the controversial touch screen voting machines, machines which allow no method of verifying peoples votes. A better system would be the use of optical readers which read 'bubble sheets' and leave a paper trail. It is a shame that a country which has billions of dollars to spend installing a democracy in another nation can't spare a couple of million to ensure an honest democracy on its own soil.

It is hard not to be suspicious of the fact that Jeb is George W's bro! One has to wonder if John Ellis, cousin of George and Jeb, knew the election was rigged ahead of time, thus could confidently pronounce his cousins 'victory'.

Defining Terrorism: Peter Ustinov is quoted as saying:
"Terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich".

I'm an expat Kiwi currently residing in the US.

Really Bruiser? My that is very honest and courageous of you to admit. But come on, is you penis really that small?

it really is small it is so small i think that maybe i might be a girl, but i dont want to be a girl i want to be a big scary man. ROOOAAARR!!

Really?! You really really really think so? And will my penis get any bigger too?

Ah, puerile locker-room antics. My, my, that IS triumphant. So long, loser

"Are you a dole bludger with nothing better to do perhaps?" This statement is very offensive.

You keep going back to the leftist argument ender, "If you researched the facts you would see that I am right". Completely ignoring the fact that many if not most anti-GE protestors make absolutely no effort to research the facts, I dont think you ought to be throwing that particular stone.

And to answer your question, where do I find the time? Well, I use this forum as a place to practice my typing. I am up to 70 words per minute from 30 thanks to liberal obtusiveness.

I was sucked in by F911, btw. I really had a high opinion of MM. I loved Bowling for Columbine, I bought his book Stupid White Men. It was not until I tried to find additional sources of information that I discovered his myriad deceptions.

And I am right wing, I have discovered recently. I believe that every person is responsible for what they get out of life. I believe that the pursuit of happiness is the goal of all people, and that freedom and liberty are prerequisites for this. I am not christian but I respect other people choices and beliefs, so long as they arent detrimental to society and people I care about.

So essentially I believe in freedom, liberty and personal responsiblity. Previously I would have said that I was middle left in my political leanings, that is, until i realised what left wing meant.

PS Bruiser, I was merely trying to converse at your level so dont try to take the high ground. So long :-

"It is not because they think global warming is true or untrue," No, it is precisely because they think that man-made global warming doesnt exist.

The people labeled "deniers" are scientists who back their opinions up with current research, or at least a critique of the methods used in previous studies. And FYI the largest greenhouse gas is water vapour which is acountable for 97% of the earths atmospheric heat retention. The next largest contributor is plain old carbon dioxide, hardly a poison. But to answer your question, no I dont think companies should pump out toxins. But I also think that companies shouldnt be driven out of business through much higher costs simply to satisfy an anti-pollution law that is flawed and that will have little to no impact on a problem which is probably a natural phenomenon anyway.

1. The dole bludger comment was not offensive for the dole part but the bludger reference. Do you know what that word means?

"[T]here's nothing inherantly wrong with being on the dole as I'm sure you know." I'M not the one who called people on the dole bludgers. A bit of Freudian slip was it? Let your true feelings slip, did you? I should just leave it at that. But I wont.

2. Did you do any other research? Did you visit any sites that actually supported it? Did you visit any sites that countered antiGE claims? Dont tell me you did extensive research into the topic and then only cite one reference. Particularily when the credentials of that reference are wholy based in your political beliefs.

3. Funny, alot of the people I spoke to at the antiGE march didnt know fuck all about genetics. Maybe your sample size was too small?

4. My "investigation" of F911 and MMs work in general, did include pro MM cites as well as those above. You have to be careful when visiting these sorts of websites. Try to ignore the more abusive sections of the posts, and just take the verifiable facts out. But in saying that dont discount any example, in this case of MM's lies and deceptions, simply because the writer is emotive enough to call him a fucking wanker for it. It may be a hatefest to your eyes, but that is completely ignoring the possibility that MM might be someone worthy of your hate.

5. Alot of the points made in "56 Deciets" are trivial and the debate has not been enhanced by ther inclusion, nor will it be enhanced by your refutation. One I dont think you can pull apart however is the deliberate deception of creating a Newpaper front page that didnt exist. It is this example that many antiMoorists would cite as evidence of Mr Moores true character. As with those who say that Bush is a liar, those that direct the same charge to Moore only have to be right once to be vindicated. So unless you can eliminate ALL of the deceptions you efforts at debunking the anti Moore claims will be inconsequential. Besides I dislike anyone who bags their country while overseas and claims to be a patriot at home, it is two faced and just rubs me the wrong way.

6. I have been to ZMAG before. Check out the debate between Horowitz and Michael Albert. It is a quasi-socialist website, and alot of the time socialism, due to a lack of proven success, relies only simply being the 'only alternative to capitalism'.

7. Dont call me left anymore. I am not, and I doubt I ever really was. I am right wing BECAUSE I believe in liberty, freedom and personal responsibility. From my readings on this site and others these dont seem to be traits and values that many leftists hold dear. Leftists, particularily communists, are far to eager to restrict the freedoms of other, far to quick to remove personal choice from the government of peoples lives. Nothing is your own fault, there is always someone else to blame.

8. Your last paragraph is bordering on incoherent. Are you saying that certain sources of information are being supressed? Well then, they cant be THAT well suppressed if you have access to them. I agree that mainstream media isnt a great source of info, as they only show what they think people want to see. They only ask questions that they think people want the answers to. Unfortunately they seem to have a skewed and very low opinion of the public of NZ. (If I see that fucktard on 3News ask another actor from the States "what they think of NZ", ten fucking seconds after they get off the plane I am going to puke! I mean who gives a fuck what these guys think of our airport or our customs agents?? Really??!)

Anyway, if you think the mainstream media is so rightist, then ask yourself this. How many news stories were there covering Abu Griab, and how many news stories were ther covering the savage decapition of Nick Berg? In one, someone got violently and, Ill say it again, savagely murdered by those calling the free West their enemey and the enemy of their god. In the other we have prisoners not being treated as nicely as some think they should. No murders, no sawn off heads, no denouncing of all non muslims. Nick Bergs death should have been the end of the Abu Griab stories, it should have out in stark contrast the USA and those they are fighting against. But it didnt and it doesnt.