Truth about Fahrenheit

Sander

This ghoul has seen it all
Staff member
Admin
Orderite
Source: NRC Handelsblad (Dutch high-quality newspaper)

The Truth about Fahrenheir 9/11
(Note that this has all been re-translated from Dutch to English, so the quotations from the movie may not be exact)

"Vice President Al Gore got the most votes with the 2000 elections":

This is true. However, the images of Al Gore with the "Victory" banner did not come from the elections, but from two days before election-day.
Gore did get more votes than Bush, but Bush got more states behind him. The Florida state was the key state, and there are contradictory messages about that one: USA Today and the Miami Heral reported in 2001 that Bush had won the state, while New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post claimed that Gore had won it.


"The conservative news station Fox News - where Bush's nephew was the news-advisor - first proclaimed Bush to be the winner of Florida"
Fox News was indeed the first news station to report Bush's victory on the 7th of November. However, he Voters News Service, to which Fox, ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and AP are also connected, had predicted Gore to be the winner based on polls. Most stations, based on these polls, claimed that Gore was the winner, some even before seven o'clock before the Florida votes were closed. Around ten o'clock in the evening this statement had to be retracted as it became clear that the vote was not clear. Fox News had, until then, only reported that that it looked good for Gore. When the Voter News Service predicted Bush to be the winner based on newer polls, Fox was the firt to report this. The other stations then followed, and Gore called Bush to congratulate him. When it turned into "too close to call" Gore withdrew his congratulations and the legal battle began.

"Bush was on vacation 42 percent of the time between the time of his starting as a president and the 11 of september"
Moore quotes the Washington Post, which had also counted weekends, offical holidays, such as the 4th of July, and travelling days besides "real" vacation days.
In a reaction to this article the White House responded that Bush spent his time on the Texas Ranch and the presidential country house Camp David working. He, for instance, received Blair there. The White House correspondent Mark Knoller, the unofficial record-keeper of Bush's travellings, said to press agency Knight Ridder that Bush had spent 50 days on his ranch, 40 days in Camp David and four days in the family holiday house in Maine. That's 39 percent of the time in 8 months. Knoller did not count the weekends and holidays such as the 4th of July.

"Bush continued with a photo-shoot when he heard about the 9/11 attacks"
The movie shows Bush in a kindergarten in Florida. While two planes crash into the Twin Towers, Bush is listening to the teacher reading from "My Pet Goat". His chiefe-of-staffs whispers "America is being attacked", the images slow down and Moore wonders what the president is thinking about.
The 9/11 commision thought that Bush did the right thing. He stayed calm and did not leave hastily, and this was the right decision according to vice-chairman Lee Hamilton, a Democrat to the press agency Knight Ridder.
The commision did come to the conclusion that between 5 past nine in the moring and half past nine, when Bush was in the school, all direction seemed to be gone from the nation's leadership.

"The family of Osama Bin Laden and other Saoudis were allowed to leave the USA after 9/11, despite the fact that flying was forbidden"
The leave happened on the request of the government in Riad, which feared for vengeance and the people's lives because 15 of the 19 hijackers had been Saoudis, according to the 9/11 commission. That same commission reports that the 142 leaving Saoudis, amongst whom most of the Bin Ladens, were thoroughly interrogated and researched about any possible terrorist connections. The FBI reports that the Bin Ladens had been given extremely detailed questions".
Press Agency AP concluded, based on their research, that the Saoudis left between the 14th and the 24th of september. Flying was allowed again from the 13th and onward. The so-called "Bin Laden flight" left on the 20th of september. Richard Clarke, the ex-terrorist specialist for the White House, authorised this, and there were no orders or decisions made pertaining to their leaving from higher-up, according to his testimony for the 9/11 commission.

"James Bath, a friend of Bush from his military days, invested on behalf of the Bin Lade family money in the USA. Bath invested in one of Bush's businesses"
The Center for Public Integrity, an independent researching group, "never encountered anything confirming this", said the CEO Bill Allison to the San Jose Mercury News in a reaction to Moore's movie. The center investigated Bush's years in Texas and concluded that Bath did invest money for Osama's brother Salem - one of Osama's many brothers - but that there is no proof that this money was invested in one of Bush's businesses.

"The Bush and Bin Laden families both have an interest in the Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group invests in the weapons industry. The weapons industry made a profit after 9/11."
The Carlyle group is a private investment-bank controlling worldwide over 14 billion dollars. The group invests, amongst other things, in the weapons industry, air and spacetravel and telecommmunications. Bush Sr. advised the Carlyle group, and his minister of Domestic Affairs, Hames Baker, was his partner. However, high-ranking democrats were also involved in the the Carlyle, including the founder David Rubenstein, advisor to President Carter. Besides the Bin Ladens (who invested 2 million dollars), philantropist George Soros also has an interest in the bank, just like 600 other people from 55 different countries. A representative of the bank reported to Newsweek that Moore had concluded that they were good investors.
 
<a href=http://www.larryelder.com/911/debunking911.html>This is another exellent rebuttal of Moore's propoganda film</a>
 
Actually, that one sucks:

The movie opens with the 2000 election. I was baffled to hear Moore claim that “numerous investigations said that Gore won Florida.” Which numerous investigations were these? The New York Times1, the Washington Post,2 and USA Today,3 reported the same consensus after both recounts: George W. Bush won. I’m willing to accept the fact that, nationally, Gore won the popular vote. That is accurate. However, we have something called the “electoral college.” But to claim that “numerous investigations said that Gore won Florida” is preposterous! This is undoubtedly why Moore didn’t choose to name these “numerous sources.” There were none.
Wrong, there were sources, which were named in the article I posted.

Then, in a pure pathetic act, Moore shows footage of CNN calling Florida for Gore, followed by Fox News calling Florida for Bush, and then CNN retracting their previous claim. The theory here was that Gore had won Florida and numerous stations announced it until, lo and behold, Fox News said Bush won Florida and the rest of the news stations “followed their lead.” First off, the notion that CNN and the rest of the news stations would all of a sudden change the results to fit those of one station- Fox News- is ridiculous. I highly doubt that Tom Brokaw sat; waiting for what Fox said in order to “follow their lead.” If that were the case, I would argue that CNN and all the rest who changed their results, to fit those of Fox News, should be wiped off the face of journalism as we know it. Just imagine it: “Well... Fox News said Bush won... we better say Bush won too!” Give me a break.
Instead of giving real facts, he gives speculation. While this isn't really bad, the facts mentioned in the article translated are more effective and better. They also look better because they're impartial, unlike this.

Furthermore, that article mainly fails to come up with good solid facts and retains an image of pure unbridled, and annoying, partiality and the article uses speech that is much too informal and redundant to be any good as an article.
 
Then don't vote.


When Sander and I agree on something, you know something is up. I'm beggining to think that his obesity is somehow god's punishment for lies, like how with me it's for jerking off like a Bunny that just had an opposable thumb attached.
 
... No obesity is a direct result of eating foods that you shouldnt be eating... CCR, If you're fat, get some exercise... and not just your forearms damnit.
 
Forearms, wrists, and the muscles involved in pulling you're pants up when you're parents get into the room!

Seriously, I've lost almost 20 pounds recently, and I'm still loosing it. God bless the Treadmill, which allows me to exercise without facing the world I so sorely fear!
 
Fahrenheit screened yesterday, down here. I went a few hours ago to see it. I must admit that even though some of Moore's facts don't hold up that well to (shall I flimsy and leave it at that?) scrutiny, the movie did make me think about what has happened since 9/11.

The fact which surprises me the most is that people took the Patridiot Act lying down. I would have expected that from an ignorant populace such as the one from my country but the first nation in the world allowed this to happen, without repercusions? I think Rosh and the others were right when they cussed the young members of the board at that thread about job losses and such. Might and money doesn't make it right. To can people like fishes just because they are downsizing is immoral and unethical. Illegal? No, its not legal but then again laws have nothing to do with justice, right, wrong, good, evil, truth or lies.

The system has won a great victory and it shows from the fact that most young ones justify the economical decisions made in the country (mine and yours) because the rich have and they don't. As I see it, the system has taken most of our balls away. Today, you lose part of your freedom and your job just because. Later on, you might lose the right to express yourself or the right to live, if the rich ever mass produce an inexpensive and more efficient labor mass. Why share the world with a populace that might think but it sure as well consumes resources and that doesn't have any power at all?

Perhaps I'm a bit paranoid, maybe the world is not as grim as I paint it but one thing is for sure: we better start planning and acting NOW that we can. Later on, your right to bear arms to protect the country from foreign invasion, an opressive government or even an overpowering elite class that runs the government, for reasons of "security". Ask yourself: whose security?
 
I just got Farenheit on DVD. (My brother picked it up when he was in China just recently. He returned the day before yesterday with about 50 DVDs of which many haven't hit the theaters yet in Sweden).

Even though discussing politics on forums is like discussing religion (ie, it sucks) I'll state that I'm looking forward to seeing it.
 
look: Fahrenheit is just a propaganda movie. things stated in the movie are true, but Moore takes liberty into portraiting them as he pleases, which can give a wrong impression of certain events. if the things stated in the movie were false, don't you think Moore would get his ass sued right now?
 
look: Fahrenheit is just a propaganda movie. things stated in the movie are true, but Moore takes liberty into portraiting them as he pleases, which can give a wrong impression of certain events. if the things stated in the movie were false, don't you think Moore would get his ass sued right now?
No, freedom of speech and all that. And obviously you did NOT just read what I (or rather, NRC Handlesblad) wrote. Read it.
 
no, freedom of speech is offcourse aloud, but slander is not. Moore could get into serious trouble saying things that are false. i could make a movie about Bush being the bastard child of satan, but if it were false, it could mean that Bush would be put into a difficult possision, by false rumors. i would get to meet his advocates in court.

Moore is know to use true facts and twist them into his own image. this offcourse is a pretty shitty way of doing things, but it's propaganda, and Moore is succesfull in achieving is goal, which is showing the viewer that Bush is a very naughty man.
 
no, freedom of speech is offcourse aloud, but slander is not.
Slander is not the same as making false statements. Many people make this mistake.

Moore could get into serious trouble saying things that are false. i could make a movie about Bush being the bastard child of satan, but if it were false, it could mean that Bush would be put into a difficult possision, by false rumors. i would get to meet his advocates in court.
Here we go, then:
Moore said:
The family of Osama Bin Laden and other Saoudis were allowed to leave the USA after 9/11, despite the fact that flying was forbidden
False, since the family of Bin Laden left after the flying restriction was lifted.

Moore said:
James Bath, a friend of Bush from his military days, invested on behalf of the Bin Lade family money in the USA. Bath invested in one of Bush's businesses
There is no proof whatsoever that Bath invested in one of Bush's firms, so this, again, can be considered false.

If you'd read my post, you'd know this. Next time, read it, as I said before.
 
i have read read from other sources that those two points were in fact true...see if i can dig those up somewhere...
 
well, seems that more recent findings show that you are right, unless it's all part of a big disinfo scam.

but the question is: does it matter? it's obvious Bush is a big fat liar and not much of a president. with his actions, he has certainly made the world a less safe place and i believe that Moore's theory about fear-mongering in order to gain control are right (we're basicly living in Orwells 1984 right now). plus, again, it's propaganda. if you've seen the movie and you believe that Bush is unfit to be a president, Moore has succeded and isn't the end result more important then how you get there?
 
but the question is: does it matter?
See, this is what I loathe about a lot of left-wing thinkers.
Because now as soon as people find out that Moore was either lying or manipulating, they switch from "it's the truth!" to "does it matter he's lying?"
Hell yes, it matters. Why? Ideological consequence is why. Moore accuses Bush of being a lying son-of-a-bitch who sucks at running the USA, but he himself is lying and manipulating. Hypocrisy is what it is called, and the apologetics call it "fighting a man with his own weapons". Well guess what, if you degrade yourself to deluding people, you're no better than them. Showing the truth should be and is enough.

t's obvious Bush is a big fat liar and not much of a president. with his actions, he has certainly made the world a less safe place and i believe that Moore's theory about fear-mongering in order to gain control are right (we're basicly living in Orwells 1984 right now).
No, we're not. Understand the horror that is 1984 and reasonably compare it to todays world. Another thing I dislike about my ideological companions is the fact that they tend to disregard proportion. Bush may be an asshole, but he isn't the devil nor does his reign mean the end of the free world.

plus, again, it's propaganda. if you've seen the movie and you believe that Bush is unfit to be a president, Moore has succeded
I know Bush is unfit to be president, and I've known it for the past three and a half years. I didn't need a lying propagandizing bastard to tell me that.
and isn't the end result more important then how you get there?
Eh-huh. That's the logic Bush has used to justify the Iraq invasion recently (oh, look, we may have been lying, but our "real" goal was getting Saddam out of there. That was good, wasn't it? Does it matter we lied to you?)
Using the truth to show people what is right and wrong is always, always better than lying. Why? Because truth is the justification of any ideology, and any ideology that needs to revert to lies to convicne others, actually doesn't think too highly of its own truths.
 
]
See, this is what I loathe about a lot of left-wing thinkers.
Because now as soon as people find out that Moore was either lying or manipulating, they switch from "it's the truth!" to "does it matter he's lying?"
Hell yes, it matters. Why? Ideological consequence is why. Moore accuses Bush of being a lying son-of-a-bitch who sucks at running the USA, but he himself is lying and manipulating. Hypocrisy is what it is called, and the apologetics call it "fighting a man with his own weapons". Well guess what, if you degrade yourself to deluding people, you're no better than them. Showing the truth should be and is enough.

offcourse lying is not a nice thing to do. but Moore has a directive: make people hate Bush. simple. he achieves this by turning and twising facts and succeeds (still hard to believe that Bush won't sue him btw.). i'm not saying that it's morally justified to lie about things like this (if it's really lieing or just misinformed is something i can't judge about), but Moore achieves what he wants. and untill the public can have a public, official statement that Moore lied, i'm not going to bash Moore. i may be a deranged conspiracy theorist, but it would certainly not be the first time things like this happen. i may have to swallow my words though, but that's allright.

No, we're not. Understand the horror that is 1984 and reasonably compare it to todays world. Another thing I dislike about my ideological companions is the fact that they tend to disregard proportion. Bush may be an asshole, but he isn't the devil nor does his reign mean the end of the free world.

yes he is. but it isn't just him. it's the people that pass laws like the Patriot Act (which is far from patriotic) which goes directly against the first amedment. that's a huge threat towards the free (HA!) world today, because this means that with a terroristic threat as excuse, it's possible to take people's freedom. and that is a big advantage.

I know Bush is unfit to be president, and I've known it for the past three and a half years. I didn't need a lying propagandizing bastard to tell me that.

if Moore really is lying, i agree.

[guote]
Using the truth to show people what is right and wrong is always, always better than lying. Why? Because truth is the justification of any ideology, and any ideology that needs to revert to lies to convicne others, actually doesn't think too highly of its own truths.[/quote]

nicely spoken. it is.
 
offcourse lying is not a nice thing to do. but Moore has a directive: make people hate Bush. simple. he achieves this by turning and twising facts and succeeds (still hard to believe that Bush won't sue him btw.). i'm not saying that it's morally justified to lie about things like this (if it's really lieing or just misinformed is something i can't judge about), but Moore achieves what he wants. and untill the public can have a public, official statement that Moore lied, i'm not going to bash Moore. i may be a deranged conspiracy theorist, but it would certainly not be the first time things like this happen. i may have to swallow my words though, but that's allright.
*nods*

yes he is. but it isn't just him. it's the people that pass laws like the Patriot Act (which is far from patriotic) which goes directly against the first amedment. that's a huge threat towards the free (HA!) world today, because this means that with a terroristic threat as excuse, it's possible to take people's freedom. and that is a big advantage.
I agree that the USPATRIOT Act (PATRIOT is an acronym) was a very very stupid thing, but the fact remains that comparing the USA today to 1984 is exaggerating, and that is something I have a clear dislike for.

nicely spoken. it is.
Thank you.
 
Back
Top