At least bring common sense to the table
… the movie – 2004 – By Michael Moore
Published on May 4, 2011 By BoobzTwo In Politics

I must confess that I actually thought I hated this man and everything he was about until I started experiencing an overload of inaccurate and fictitious information the USG keeps pounding out and calling it the truth … so I decided to try an independent review of what I thought I knew and didn’t really. So I never watched or read anything Moore was involved with but I was more than willing to tell you how screwed up he was. So I rented the movie from Netflix and watched it … and I was amazed.

I have watched it twice now and I cannot find one shred of much information that is not factual or accurate. Beyond some idiosyncrasies in his sense of humor (they are funny); he presents very valid arguments and backs them up with documentation and interviews. He brings to light many of the things I have discovered in my own research into deceit, terrorism and the USG.

When I was a liberal (before I knew better) the only accurate information had to come from another liberal else it was a lie??? Later when I made my second mistake and became a conservative I learned the error of my ways … the truth could only be had from like ilk … so imagine my confusion when I called the neolibs and neocons for what they are and went independent. Suddenly, I have no source of valid information at all now (seemingly hehehe). I have had no success at all trying to walk the moderate tightrope between all the sharks without one side or the other dragging me down, go figure.

As far as Democrats/Republicans are concerned, their only care about the independent majority is how many they can acquire each election. But no matter which side is the best recruiter or who gets most independent votes … matters that concern the moderates will largely be ignored or sidelined and the neo-politicians will go their own course virtually unrestricted and completely unaccountable.


Comments (Page 23)
34 PagesFirst 21 22 23 24 25  Last
on Jun 02, 2011

myfist0
You at least have to be bright enough to fool the public into believing that you're the one in charge. Not hard obviously.

You obviously haven't followed the leader of the current administration, he's not fooling anyone that doesn't wish to be fooled. And that's with a large portion of the media cheering him on. When Bush was president the death count was blasted every night on the evening news, now nothing (one of many blatant examples). But hey! We can always invoke the evil names of Bush and Cheney!!!

BTW you didn't comment on the observation I made in comment #326. You didn't see the irony in that? Or does the mere mention of "Bush" shield one from introspection?

BT- your Bush/Obama observation is at least defensible, in my opinion, but sure to rattle some.

on Jun 02, 2011

Nitro Cruiser
BT- your Bush/Obama observation is at least defensible, in my opinion, but sure to rattle some.
No doubt ...

Name any one person 'smart enough' to have pulled it off. Hell, name any 400 people collectively smart enough to have pulled it off.
Hum, a good point but maybe a better question would be why? Osama bin Laden was not responsible for 9/11 and neither was al-Qaeda. And Saddam Husain had nothing to do with Osama bin Laden’ al-Qaeda or 9/11. 

 

on Jun 02, 2011

Another great vid BT 

@ Nito: The last part of 326 I had to read 3x and still could only barely make out what point you were trying to make. Bush and Obama are the same shit with a different flavor. Chocolate war criminal or vanilla war criminal. Go ahead and eat your fill.

I dont really get why you call that statement irony as you turn my statement into something else. The point is not whether the public perceives the president as dumb or smart, only that the public thinks that they have a say in who is in charge of strangling them.

on Jun 03, 2011

myfist0
o BT, it's these kinds of videos that really undermine the 911 truthers. If there was a CNN crew there would be a record. The rest is really high fetched propaganda that just makes people that ask legitimate questions look like "conspiracy nuts". If I were behind this plan and wanted to turn the peoples questions away from me this would be the perfect way and also turn the doubters into quacks.
I didn't understand at first, but have come to appreciate the warning.

The Independent, 1996 and 1997 - Bin Laden gave an interview to the Independent newspaper's Robert Fisk on December 6, 1996. This was the first he had ever given to a Western journalist.
 
Fisk again interviewed Bin Laden on March 20, 1997; Bin Laden said of his operations at the time "We are still at the beginning of our military action against the American forces."
 
CNN: 1997 - Peter Arnett of CNN interviewed bin Laden in March 1997.
 
ABC: 1998 - A recorded interview in May 1998, a little over two months before the U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, shows bin Laden answering questions posed by some of his followers at a mountaintop camp in southern Afghanistan. In the latter part of the interview, ABC reporter John Miller asks further questions.
 
Time: 1999 - Rahimullah Yusufzai, a journalist for Pakistan's The News, TIME, and ABC News, in 1999 secured a four-hour interview with bin Laden in Afghanistan's Helmand province. During Yusufzai's late-night conversation, bin Laden appeared to be in good health, though he admitted to a sore throat and a bad back. He continually sipped water from a cup, and Yusufzai caught him on videotape walking with the aid of a stick. This latter footage was erased by bin Laden's bodyguards. The interview appeared in the January 11, 1999 issue of Time Asia.
 
2001: Ummat - The Daily Ummat is said to have interviewed Osama bin Laden weeks after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. In the interview bin Laden is said to deny his involvement in the attacks; the interviewer, however, has never been identified, so there is no proof of the interview's authenticity. I think this one was debunked (written questions and answers?)

on Jun 03, 2011

Of course, this kind of shit also explains a lot too...

 

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-10/01/content_7072875.htm

 

 

on Jun 03, 2011

Haha, you found it. I was looking for that. I wanted to post that where you asked about the relevance of the Queen in Canada. Nobody in the colonies has any idea of the amount of power the queen holds over them.

 

 Scrubbed the audio because Osama is not reading the white house press briefing.

on Jun 04, 2011

Myfist0, 5 years ago I was a happy-go-lucky neocon who thought things were clear. My first internal investigation was religion and you see where that placed me. I grew a real conscience when I came to the conclusion that there was no right of it and that the world was just a political and economic stage. Next I recapped the European expansionism across America and down through South America and South Africa. Religious and state domination and imperialism went hand in hand. Then I started looking back in American history and everything I had believed came apart. From there I revisited 9/11 by asking questions instead sucking up to the stupid official story.
 
I am permanently disabled with short term memory loss. Not to the extent of “50 First Dates” but similar. What this boils down to for me is that I need to spend a fair amount of research time and come to my conclusions. Most of the research filters away and I am left with my conclusions. This is one reason I have a difficult time when the subject branches way off topic. And since this abrupt change in reasoning, virtually everything I knew was going to have to be readdressed. I knew I was in trouble when I ran across Noam and anthropogenic global warming. Eventually, I will have to address all the main issues … and how daunting that looks to me. So if I drift back out to right (or left) field or fail to verify sources … well, just keep me honest. It is painful for me to revisit some of the stuff I had written in the past … so naturally, I stay clear when possible.

on Jul 13, 2011

We're Back 

  OMG Fox joined the 9/11 Truthers


Uploaded by  on May 20, 2011 

 

THIS IS THE REAL BUSH ADMINISTRATION IN ACTION - NBC News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3T76DXQDRo&NR=1 
Uploaded by  on Jul 11, 2011 

 

 

®"Oh For FOX Sake" -- Geraldo Rivera Courageously Changes His Mind  Fox News

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoF0tx2x1bw&NR=1  
Uploaded by  on Jul 12, 2011

 

In case anyone is not aware, Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch which now has the full weight of the English government on the attack. And people wonder why nobody in power speaks out.

on Jul 13, 2011

Holy crap the attack has stepped up to war against Rupert Murdoch

on Nov 29, 2011

Well, here are some things that should be considered that has little to do with conspiracies ... it has to do with empirical data (evidence) and a need to explain the impossible without knowing all the details. There is plenty of time to speculate later.

 

on Nov 29, 2011

I'm no engineer, mechanical or otherwise, but I think I understand why she was denied tenure.

on Nov 29, 2011

Ah the beauty of YouTube, anyone can throw anything on it and claim it as fact. Apparently, this woman has never seen footage of a nuclear detonation. She also seems convinced that the towers were solid structures and there should have been more debris. She should have watched the show on the History Channel that addressed all the conspiracy theories point for point. Hope she leaves this off her resume, otherwise her next job might be an Occupy Wall Street position.

on Nov 30, 2011

Daiwa, well I am an engineer so maybe you could expound a little more here for our benefit? Maybe you should listen more closely (to an engineer) instead of using the blanket credibility denial ploy you like to use.

Nitro Cruiser, YouTube is what it is ... but maybe you forgot the books she wrote and her academic achievements ... she is no 'Michael Moore' for sure ... but you treat her with just as little respect. This says a lot more about you than it does her. And what show was that where everything controversial was debunked because I must have missed it too??? I don't think she is concerned over her next job ... what a nice gut you are to be concerned for her though, hahaha. Who indeed would allow facts to get in the way of their beliefs?

 

on Nov 30, 2011

I watched the whole thing.  It was the content that led to my understanding, Boobz.  Not that it matters to you.

on Nov 30, 2011

The whole point of this clip was to provide food for thought to help correct some of the misinformation running amuck. Regardless of what any of us think happened on 911, the airplanes were not enough impetus on their own to cause events to unfold as they did as the government version states. And technically, we do not have the explosive technology to do it either as the worst conspiracy nuts think … so something else had to come into play to get us from pre-911 to post-911 … that’s what needs to be discovered and that is not going to happen until people get off their comfy couches and at least question the governmental status quo. Are any of you guys really comfortable explaining or justifying the events as set forth by the USG (our corrupt ass-wipe government that never lies) as it seems or are you just being contrary?

Daiwa, that was no answer and I wouldn't have asked if I didn't want a response. I asked why she didn’t deserve tenure and you said you watched the clip … so. Honestly though this is typical as we have discussed before. The clip was 48 minutes and I find it difficult to believe that there was nothing of merit therein. It is easier to dismiss everything with the wave of the hand ... than it is to even justify your own comments ... try harder. Were you interested enough to watch part 2?

34 PagesFirst 21 22 23 24 25  Last