Slashdot Mirror

This happens elsewhere too. In the latest Israel-Hezballah conflict victims were paraded in a show for journalists. Here's another list of staged incidents, including one woman who's house was destroyed twice in the same day in two different locations. It even happens in Canada .

Ya because humans never make mistakes do they?!?

Really, both sides contributed to people not having faith in voting systems just so each could push their own case.

I can't even believe their are people still bring this crap up again and again.

My question to all is "If the Dems where so upset about the elections of 2000, what have then done to ensure that it doesn't happen again?"

Why compare Fahrenheit 911 to what really happens in REAL life? Really, Mr. Moore has been proven

to lie many times (in many movies) to make his false points, his home town has even disowned him in a blue state. That tells you something.

Check it out for yourself http://www.davekopel.org/terror/59Deceits.pdf

by cliffski (65094) on Friday March 04, @05:17PM (#11848579)

well if you lived in a society with minimal gun crime would you fund a study into it? or be mroe likely to do so if you have rampant gun crime, like (for example) the USA? Its just sensible allocation of research money.

Simply put, the Japanese are among the most law-abiding people on earth, and far more law-abiding than Americans. America's non-gun robbery rate is over 70 times Japan's, an indication that something more significant than gun policy is involved in the differing crime rates between the two nations.[129] Neither Japanese nor American prisoners have guns, but homicide by prisoners and attacks on guards occur frequently in American prisons, and almost never in Japanese prisons.[130] Another indication that social standards matter more than gun laws is that Japanese-Americans, who have access to firearms, have a lower violent crime rate than do Japanese in Japan.[131]

by cliffski (65094) on Friday March 04, @05:17PM (#11848579)

well if you lived in a society with minimal gun crime would you fund a study into it? or be mroe likely to do so if you have rampant gun crime, like (for example) the USA? Its just sensible allocation of research money.

Simply put, the Japanese are among the most law-abiding people on earth, and far more law-abiding than Americans. America's non-gun robbery rate is over 70 times Japan's, an indication that something more significant than gun policy is involved in the differing crime rates between the two nations.[129] Neither Japanese nor American prisoners have guns, but homicide by prisoners and attacks on guards occur frequently in American prisons, and almost never in Japanese prisons.[130] Another indication that social standards matter more than gun laws is that Japanese-Americans, who have access to firearms, have a lower violent crime rate than do Japanese in Japan.[131]

by cliffski (65094) on Friday March 04, @05:17PM (#11848579)

well if you lived in a society with minimal gun crime would you fund a study into it? or be mroe likely to do so if you have rampant gun crime, like (for example) the USA? Its just sensible allocation of research money.

Simply put, the Japanese are among the most law-abiding people on earth, and far more law-abiding than Americans. America's non-gun robbery rate is over 70 times Japan's, an indication that something more significant than gun policy is involved in the differing crime rates between the two nations.[129] Neither Japanese nor American prisoners have guns, but homicide by prisoners and attacks on guards occur frequently in American prisons, and almost never in Japanese prisons.[130] Another indication that social standards matter more than gun laws is that Japanese-Americans, who have access to firearms, have a lower violent crime rate than do Japanese in Japan.[131]

by cliffski (65094) on Friday March 04, @05:17PM (#11848579)

well if you lived in a society with minimal gun crime would you fund a study into it? or be mroe likely to do so if you have rampant gun crime, like (for example) the USA? Its just sensible allocation of research money.

Simply put, the Japanese are among the most law-abiding people on earth, and far more law-abiding than Americans. America's non-gun robbery rate is over 70 times Japan's, an indication that something more significant than gun policy is involved in the differing crime rates between the two nations.[129] Neither Japanese nor American prisoners have guns, but homicide by prisoners and attacks on guards occur frequently in American prisons, and almost never in Japanese prisons.[130] Another indication that social standards matter more than gun laws is that Japanese-Americans, who have access to firearms, have a lower violent crime rate than do Japanese in Japan.[131]

And this mechanism would work in the 12 acres of private property my friend has behind his house (which is large enough to hunt legally)? It would work every single time we felt like going out back and putting a few round into paper? How would that work, exactly?

So no, I have absolutely no problem rendering a dangerous tool inoperable in settings where it should never be used.

There is virtually no such setting, and even if there were you would have to assign the task of deciding that to someone.

Giving people freedoms doesn't necessarily have to be a free-for-all.

Indeed. That's what licenses/permits are for. Considering the rate at which legal firearm holders commit crimes (much lower than the population as a whole) I think it's a pretty damn good system.

You're link mentions nothing of Enron, and the "conspiracy" links you post afterwords do nothing to give merit to your post. Here is a link that uses what we call "facts" to support an idea. Unocal Drops Pipeline Deal

It's not that hard to find rebuttals to Moore's references. It all comes down to which set of lunatics you already agree with.

The full anaysis was that in 6 of 9 recount scenreos, including ALL scenereos where the "will of the voter" was the primary consideration, and ALL of the scenereos where over-votes were recounted as well as undercounts, Gore won.

How do you define "will of the voter"?

From Dave Kopel:

"Who would have won if Al Gore had gotten manual counts he requested in four counties? Answer: George W. Bush."

"Who would have won if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the hand recount of undervotes, which are ballots that registered no machine-readable vote for president? Answer: Bush, under three of four standards."

"Who would have won if all disputed ballots -- including those rejected by machines because they had more than one vote for president -- had been recounted by hand? Answer: Bush, under the two most widely used standards; Gore, under the two least used."

If you want to discuss the will of the voter then maybe you should mention the overwhelmingly conservative voters in the Florida panhandle, thousands of whom simply went home without voting at all when the major news outlets prematurely called Florida for Gore?

Debunking

This is a good debunking of the "facts" in F911, even includes links to Moores rebuttle.

There is a link at the bottom of this comment that I think many would be interested in reading. At least it is a more objective source of "fact checking" than Michael Moore and his own website..

I'll agree that some of the movie has less spin than other parts of it. However, I would submit that since he enjoys twisting the truth in his movie, there is absolutely no reason to believe that he won't twist the truth again on his website.

You're not using additional sources to validate his claims. That's not corroborating evidence.

His movie is all about spin, and it's completely about influencing the election. He made back what it took to create the thing opening weekend. After that, he said he was cool with people posting it and sharing a copy on kazaa and bittorrent. Now he wants to air it on national TV the night before the election.

I have no problem with him having an agenda, nor do I expect him NOT to be biased. I'd like him not to be, but I don't expect it. He doesn't like Bush, and he wants him gone. He's using his position as a filmmaker to help with that goal. However, I just wish he'd be MORE up-front about his bias. But if he did that, then he wouldn't have as many sheep..

I don't like being lied to by our current administration. I don't like the whole "we never said there were definately WMD" game. I don't think the President is above a little stinging sarcasm or humor. Just don't pass off your propaganda as "the full truth" when it's really just an interesting movie with lots of creative editing and half truths. Michael Moore knows that the great majority of his viewers will NOT seek out additional information, nor validate his claims. He hopes they will presume that since he is not (currently) being sued out of his pants, what he says must be true.

He is very crafty at perfectly phrasing a response to any question. Read the site linked below, then watch him sometime on one of the many media shows he is currently whoring himself (and his viewpoint on). Watch how exquisitely careful he is to avoid direct and complete answers for many of the questions he is asked. I will give him some credit: He is a master of semantics.

Here's a more objective analysis of Farenheit. [ pdf]

Pure propaganda - chock full of deceit. The 9/11 commission report refutes virtually every point in the film.