Slashdot Mirror

Even better, I'd like somebody like Michael Moore to entrap an executive into a candid, on-camera attempt to open one of his own company's packages using only the everyday household appliances to hand.

Likely after Moore films this, the DVD will sell in one of those imposible-to-open containers too (anyone remember those "I've never owned stock in my life" statements he made? Ha! http://moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog/C9/)

You sir are ignorant.

Try to find a role model that doesn't make the truth up to serve his own twisted fucking money making purposes. The only good thing this jackass does is suck money out of the pockets of liberal morons.

Michael Moore is a Big, Fat Idiot!
Calling Michael Moore!!!!
Google the big fat liar.

Moore amplifies the deceit with a montage of newspaper headlines, purporting
to show that Gore really won.
One article shows a
date of December 19, 2001, with a large headline reading, "Latest Florida
recount shows Gore won Election." The article supposedly comes from The
Pantagraph, a daily newspaper in Bloomington, Illinois. But actually, the
headline is merely for a letter to the editor--not a news article. The letter to
the editor headline is significantly enlarged to make it look like an article
headline. The actual printed
letter looked nothing like the "article" Moore fabricated for the film. The letter
ran on December 5, not December 19.
The Pantagraph contacted Moore's office to ask for an explanation, but the office refused to comment.

Read the sources.
This time he gives sources, and I suggest you actually look into them. In the past, he has included in his references sources that actually refute his claims.
I'm unsure of how prevalent that is in this instance, but some people are complaining allready.
His attempt to back up Bowling for Columbine, Wacko Attacko's, did not have much substance, for example.

If you really take an interest, you can read The Dave Kopel article and compare it with what Moore says.

Lying without uttering a false sentence?
What I'd like to have somebody do, preferably one from each "side", is go through F911 and find out wether Moore actually makes any false statement. No doubt he's lying with film and doing some Soviet Russia document revision, but saying something like "In his first eight months in office before September 11, George W. Bush was on vacation, according to the Washington Post, forty-two percent of the time.", that can't be a direct lie because the paper actually wrote that. Wether he actually WAS on vacation 42% of the time makes no difference to a rigid parsing of that statement.

And Farenhype911 just looks like talking heads to me. The Mike Wilson movie looks funnier.

And click (Flash)

BTW: Isn't it rather US-centric to have the star sprangeled banner as a logo for the politics section? (Yes, I know you're in the U.S.)

That's the problem, it wasn't obvious the piece was an opinion piece. That's how the graphics deceives. It appears when Moore is narrating about how the Florida recount allegedly showed that Gore won the election. A large newspaper headline and article is put on screen from the Pantagraph claiming this. The intent is to make it appear that this newspaper was reporting hard news about this, to give it validity.

Why would Moore take some yahoo's random letter to the editor and use it as evidence for his claim? That's why he had it retyped and enlarged to appear as a frontpage headline, to lend validity to it and make it appear that this was a majorly reported issue in 2000.

You may have qualms of bias with this site, but the story was broken on Moorewatch, and you can find scans of the film version of the article compared to the original newspaper issue.

This is something you wouldn't be able to get away with in a simple university journalism class. You can't take someone's letter to the editor and doctor it up as a valid newspaper article and then cite it as evidence for your claim. I'm not even getting into the five independent journalists who recounted the votes and found that Bush won no matter how the votes were counted (conveniently not reported in the film). This is just basic deceit, and an odd one at that. Surely he could have found a real article on this? Instead, he took a letter to the editor in some random paper and made it into a large hard news headline to bolster his claim. That is deceitful, and I suspect if a conservative had done it, many of Moore's fans would be all over it.

It doesn't matter to me if you liked and agreed with the film. It just bothers me that people are unwilling or unable to see how things are twisted in the film. My opinion is, if your "documentary" can't live up to the standards of a basic college journalism class, it's not a valid political commentary and is basically nothing more than propaganda.

The concept of "selective editing" (a la Mike Moore ;-) was demonstrated very well in the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth".

The B5 ISN news reporter Dan Randall edited the footage in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

BTW, this Babylon 5 espisode is available on DVD

The concept of "selective editing" (a la Mike Moore ;-) was demonstrated very well in the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth".

The B5 ISN news reporter Dan Randall edited the footage in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

BTW, this Babylon 5 espisode is available on DVD

" Hi. I work for Greenpeace. ... we support ecoterrorism ... Greenpeace has a history of ... Violent Direct Actions for more than 30 years. ... We do ... ecoterrorism. ... speaking for Greenpeace, ... who just so happens to be an active reader of Slashdot ... You might not agree with protesting, but it's ... [a] type of terrorism ... It's quite obvious that this made the front page because of the people involved and the challenges that those people overcame."

There is no immediately available record that Greenpeace ever took 'Direct Action' against violent dictatorships

"truth" might not always be ethical truth "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the Babylon 5 news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

" Hi. I work for Greenpeace. ... we support ecoterrorism ... Greenpeace has a history of ... Violent Direct Actions for more than 30 years. ... We do ... ecoterrorism. ... speaking for Greenpeace, ... who just so happens to be an active reader of Slashdot ... You might not agree with protesting, but it's ... [a] type of terrorism ... It's quite obvious that this made the front page because of the people involved and the challenges that those people overcame."

There is no immediately available record that Greenpeace ever took 'Direct Action' against violent dictatorships

"truth" might not always be ethical truth "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the Babylon 5 news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

" Hi. I work for Greenpeace. ... we support ecoterrorism ... Greenpeace has a history of ... Violent Direct Actions for more than 30 years. ... We do ... ecoterrorism. ... speaking for Greenpeace, ... who just so happens to be an active reader of Slashdot ... You might not agree with protesting, but it's ... [a] type of terrorism ... It's quite obvious that this made the front page because of the people involved and the challenges that those people overcame."

There is no immediately available record that Greenpeace ever took 'Direct Action' against violent dictatorships

"truth" might not always be ethical truth "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the Babylon 5 news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Moore Lies
Moore Exposed
Moore Watch
Michael Moore Hates America

If you do need to give it a chance, read what the other side has to say, but keep your B.S. detector on for both. Acting the windup zealot for the sake of Moore or his critics will make you look like a fool.

Or, you could save your money and watch a real documentary on PBS or BBC.

"truth" might not always be ethical truth "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the Babylon 5 'news' reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell - his other writings apropos to current events
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis [Islamo-fascist?] powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell ore when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Alamein [Iraq? Afghanistan?], or the number of German planes shot down in the Battle of Britain. English [Liberal Western Democracy?] left-wing [pseudo?]intellectuals did not, of course, actually want the Germans or Japanese [Islamo-fascist groups/countries?] to win the war, but many of them could not help getting a certain kick out of seeing their own country humiliated, and wanted to feel that the final victory would be due to Russia [UN? 'world-community'], or perhaps America, and not to Britain. In foreign politics many [pseudo?]intellectuals follow the principle that any faction backed by Britain [United States?] must be in the wrong. As a result, [pseudo?] 'enlightened' opinion is quite largely a mirror-image of Conservative policy. Anglophobia is always liable to reversal, hence that fairly common spectacle, the pacifist of one war who is a bellicist in the next.

One last thing ... I triple double dare you to watch the Iraq torture video clip

"truth" might not always be ethical truth "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the Babylon 5 'news' reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell - his other writings apropos to current events
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis [Islamo-fascist?] powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell ore when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Alamein [Iraq? Afghanistan?], or the number of German planes shot down in the Battle of Britain. English [Liberal Western Democracy?] left-wing [pseudo?]intellectuals did not, of course, actually want the Germans or Japanese [Islamo-fascist groups/countries?] to win the war, but many of them could not help getting a certain kick out of seeing their own country humiliated, and wanted to feel that the final victory would be due to Russia [UN? 'world-community'], or perhaps America, and not to Britain. In foreign politics many [pseudo?]intellectuals follow the principle that any faction backed by Britain [United States?] must be in the wrong. As a result, [pseudo?] 'enlightened' opinion is quite largely a mirror-image of Conservative policy. Anglophobia is always liable to reversal, hence that fairly common spectacle, the pacifist of one war who is a bellicist in the next.

One last thing ... I triple double dare you to watch the Iraq torture video clip

I will claim that Mike Moore does not "lie" per se ... rather Mike edits "creatively" ... May I ask you to read my entire post, consider all the links, especially the Babylon 5 "Illusion of Truth" plot summaries? The DVD is also available. You might also get a kick out of the Orwell aspects.

BTW, Happy 4th :-):-):-)

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying,

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner
Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that:

"truth" might not always be ethical truth

"truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell - his other writings apropos to current events
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an

I will claim that Mike Moore does not "lie" per se ... rather Mike edits "creatively" ... May I ask you to read my entire post, consider all the links, especially the Babylon 5 "Illusion of Truth" plot summaries? The DVD is also available. You might also get a kick out of the Orwell aspects.

BTW, Happy 4th :-):-):-)

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying,

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner
Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that:

"truth" might not always be ethical truth

"truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell - his other writings apropos to current events
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an

I will claim that Mike Moore does not "lie" per se ... rather Mike edits "creatively" ... May I ask you to read my entire post, consider all the links, especially the Babylon 5 "Illusion of Truth" plot summaries? The DVD is also available. You might also get a kick out of the Orwell aspects.

BTW, Happy 4th :-):-):-)

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying,

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner
Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that:

"truth" might not always be ethical truth

"truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell - his other writings apropos to current events
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an

I will claim that Mike Moore does not "lie" per se ... rather Mike edits "creatively" ... May I ask you to read my entire post, consider all the links, especially the Babylon 5 "Illusion of Truth" plot summaries? The DVD is also available. You might also get a kick out of the Orwell aspects.

BTW, Happy 4th :-):-):-)

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying,

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner
Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that:

"truth" might not always be ethical truth

"truth" might actually be a deceitful truth

... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell - his other writings apropos to current events
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner

Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis [Islamo-fascist?] powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell ore when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Al

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner

Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis [Islamo-fascist?] powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell ore when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Al

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner

Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis [Islamo-fascist?] powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell ore when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Al

F911 - deceitful truth

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner:

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

[snip][snip][snip]

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore being truthful albeit in a deceitful manner

Babylon 5 - deceitful truth
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that "truth" might actually be a deceitful truth ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a third "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
Many mention/imply that the USA is headed in the direction of Orwell's "1984" (perhaps F911 is an example of 1984 techniques in action). However, many are not aware of Orwell's other writings. For example, Notes on Nationalism:

NEGATIVE NATIONALISM
(i) ANGLOPHOBIA. Within the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain [United States?] is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the [pseudo?]intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis [Islamo-fascist?] powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell ore when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Al

F911 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
Funny because it reminds me of a movie I am hearing a tremendous amount of buzz about where Mike Moore teaches the concept of editing out-of-context ... thus, as you say, "stopping certain content from surfacing again"

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again":

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

As usual, just like he did with the Charlton Heston speech in BFC, Mike plays fast and loose with the truth through the world of editing.

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again"

I dare say this is a good example of how an individual (Mike Moore in F911) has, as you say, attempted to "stop certain content from surfacing again" Babylon 5 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that content that exists may be prevented from seeing the light of day ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
You wrote "reminds me of a book I once read" ...

F911 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
Funny because it reminds me of a movie I am hearing a tremendous amount of buzz about where Mike Moore teaches the concept of editing out-of-context ... thus, as you say, "stopping certain content from surfacing again"

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again":

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

As usual, just like he did with the Charlton Heston speech in BFC, Mike plays fast and loose with the truth through the world of editing.

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again"

I dare say this is a good example of how an individual (Mike Moore in F911) has, as you say, attempted to "stop certain content from surfacing again" Babylon 5 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that content that exists may be prevented from seeing the light of day ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
You wrote "reminds me of a book I once read" ...

F911 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
Funny because it reminds me of a movie I am hearing a tremendous amount of buzz about where Mike Moore teaches the concept of editing out-of-context ... thus, as you say, "stopping certain content from surfacing again"

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again":

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

As usual, just like he did with the Charlton Heston speech in BFC, Mike plays fast and loose with the truth through the world of editing.

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again"

I dare say this is a good example of how an individual (Mike Moore in F911) has, as you say, attempted to "stop certain content from surfacing again" Babylon 5 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that content that exists may be prevented from seeing the light of day ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
You wrote "reminds me of a book I once read" ...

F911 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
Funny because it reminds me of a movie I am hearing a tremendous amount of buzz about where Mike Moore teaches the concept of editing out-of-context ... thus, as you say, "stopping certain content from surfacing again"

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again":

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

As usual, just like he did with the Charlton Heston speech in BFC, Mike plays fast and loose with the truth through the world of editing.

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again"

I dare say this is a good example of how an individual (Mike Moore in F911) has, as you say, attempted to "stop certain content from surfacing again" Babylon 5 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that content that exists may be prevented from seeing the light of day ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
You wrote "reminds me of a book I once read" ...

F911 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
Funny because it reminds me of a movie I am hearing a tremendous amount of buzz about where Mike Moore teaches the concept of editing out-of-context ... thus, as you say, "stopping certain content from surfacing again"

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again":

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

As usual, just like he did with the Charlton Heston speech in BFC, Mike plays fast and loose with the truth through the world of editing.

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again"

I dare say this is a good example of how an individual (Mike Moore in F911) has, as you say, attempted to "stop certain content from surfacing again" Babylon 5 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that content that exists may be prevented from seeing the light of day ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
You wrote "reminds me of a book I once read" ...

F911 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
Funny because it reminds me of a movie I am hearing a tremendous amount of buzz about where Mike Moore teaches the concept of editing out-of-context ... thus, as you say, "stopping certain content from surfacing again"

BEGIN EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again":

At the end of F911 Michael Moore quotes Condoleeza Rice as saying, "

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11."
- Condi Rice as editied by Mike Moore

As usual, just like he did with the Charlton Heston speech in BFC, Mike plays fast and loose with the truth through the world of editing.

Pretty damning stuff, isn't it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version.

Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:

"

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York."
- Condi Rice without Mike Moore editing

Mike has taken a Condi quote and given it the polar opposite meaning from what she actually said. Now, Moore fans, consider this. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video of Condi Rice talking about Iraq. If Condi had ever actually said that there was a tie between Iraq and 9/11 then Moore would have used it. So, if the Bush administration had ever actually claimed that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, why would Michael Moore feel the need to use these kind of editing tricks to try and prove his point?

Because nobody ever said it, and he damn well knows it. His entire premise is based on a lie.

END EXAMPLE showing Mike Moore attempting to "stop certain content from surfacing again"

I dare say this is a good example of how an individual (Mike Moore in F911) has, as you say, attempted to "stop certain content from surfacing again" Babylon 5 - "stopping certain content from surfacing again"
If you are still a wee-bit confused about how Mike Moore editing works then you can check out the Babylon 5 episode "Illusion of Truth" which taught me that "truth" might not always be ethical truth and that content that exists may be prevented from seeing the light of day ... remember that Dan Randall (the b5 ISN news reporter) was very truthful... he just strung the facts together in an unethically truthful way just like Mike Moore

From

"Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

Orwell
You wrote "reminds me of a book I once read" ...

Your above post as it might be quoted by your evil twin "Skippy" after having learned a thing or two about editing out-of-context from Mike Moore

See how Mike Moore editing works? 'Skippy' truthfully quoted what you wrote. Isn't he great. 'Skippy' can now claim that he honestly quoted you. 'Skippy' has the facts correct. You might be angry that 'Skippy' added some extra stuff such that your original intent changes, but you are being mean because 'Skippy' did not put quotes (") around the extra stuff ... he just sort of added it at the end of your prediction of the future. Isn't 'Skippy' a swell guy?

'Skippy' is practicing Mike Moore editing

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

One last thing ... I triple double dare you to watch the Saddam (Iraq torture video clip)

Your above post as it might be quoted by your evil twin "Skippy" after having learned a thing or two about editing out-of-context from Mike Moore

See how Mike Moore editing works? 'Skippy' truthfully quoted what you wrote. Isn't he great. 'Skippy' can now claim that he honestly quoted you. 'Skippy' has the facts correct. You might be angry that 'Skippy' added some extra stuff such that your original intent changes, but you are being mean because 'Skippy' did not put quotes (") around the extra stuff ... he just sort of added it at the end of your prediction of the future. Isn't 'Skippy' a swell guy?

'Skippy' is practicing Mike Moore editing

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

One last thing ... I triple double dare you to watch the Saddam (Iraq torture video clip)

Your above post as it might be quoted by your evil twin "Skippy" after having learned a thing or two about editing out-of-context from Mike Moore

See how Mike Moore editing works? 'Skippy' truthfully quoted what you wrote. Isn't he great. 'Skippy' can now claim that he honestly quoted you. 'Skippy' has the facts correct. You might be angry that 'Skippy' added some extra stuff such that your original intent changes, but you are being mean because 'Skippy' did not put quotes (") around the extra stuff ... he just sort of added it at the end of your prediction of the future. Isn't 'Skippy' a swell guy?

'Skippy' is practicing Mike Moore editing

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

One last thing ... I triple double dare you to watch the Saddam (Iraq torture video clip)

Your above post as it might be quoted by your evil twin "Skippy" after having learned a thing or two about editing out-of-context from Mike Moore

See how Mike Moore editing works? 'Skippy' truthfully quoted what you wrote. Isn't he great. 'Skippy' can now claim that he honestly quoted you. 'Skippy' has the facts correct. You might be angry that 'Skippy' added some extra stuff such that your original intent changes, but you are being mean because 'Skippy' did not put quotes (") around the extra stuff ... he just sort of added it at the end of your prediction of the future. Isn't 'Skippy' a swell guy?

'Skippy' is practicing Mike Moore editing

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

One last thing ... I triple double dare you to watch the Saddam (Iraq torture video clip)

Your above post as it might be quoted by your evil twin "Skippy" after having learned a thing or two about editing out-of-context from Mike Moore

See how Mike Moore editing works? 'Skippy' truthfully quoted what you wrote. Isn't he great. 'Skippy' can now claim that he honestly quoted you. 'Skippy' has the facts correct. You might be angry that 'Skippy' added some extra stuff such that your original intent changes, but you are being mean because 'Skippy' did not put quotes (") around the extra stuff ... he just sort of added it at the end of your prediction of the future. Isn't 'Skippy' a swell guy?

'Skippy' is practicing Mike Moore editing

From "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a second "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

From a thrid "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (spoiler warning)

And finally a fourth "Illusion of Truth" plot summary (minor spoiler warning)

One last thing ... I triple double dare you to watch the Saddam (Iraq torture video clip)

yes I'm a troll.

But go on living in your fantasy world that michael moore is a saint or whatever you want to belief. Michael Moore has made his fair share of money off of Columbine and now 9/11 by lying and decieving. Well i haven't seen farenheit 9/11, but he did seem to already start off on a bad leg by stealing his title from Fahrenheit 451. And according to Ray Bradbury, Michael Moore lied to Ray Bradbury as well. An update to that article, apperently moore never contacts Bradbury after saying he would. Another Lie? go figure.

Funny thing about this moderation is /. is basically doing what it decries people like bush for doing. Pot meet kettle.

He's the perfect limousine liberal, except he looks and dresses like a skid row slob.

In addition to that, this site (also has a link to the .torrent of the movie) is dedicated to uncovering the truth behind moore's claims. I find it interesting to read about how his editing distorts things so much.

In Bowling the speech given by NRA pres. Heston was actually snippets from two different speeches spliced together in numerous places. If you watch it, you'll see that Heston is even wearing different clothes during the clip of what is supposed to be one continual flow of speech.

There are many more things in Moore's movies that are so misleading that I have no desire to sit through one of his movies. I will watch it, but only to see what kind of claims he makes and whether they actually carry any validity.

See Michael Moore expose himself.

See how much Michael Moore lied about.

Watch a movie more closely based on reality than any of Michael Moore's films.

Even the Internet Video Pirates refuse to watch and record his film, does that tell you something?

I used to like moore until he became a self-serving messiah of the wackos....

www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com

www.moorewatch.com

That is if, you are not a war profiteer yourself, Michael Moore!

http://www.moorewatch.com/~ryanm/index.html

Release the movie: a campaign by a Moore "fan".

I don't think he can release the movie for free on P2P. I think that would violate his contract with Miramax, and possibly with actors/copyright holders for source material that might have a gross percentage deal on the movie. It won't happen.

• Hardylaw
• Moore lies
• Moore Watch

Moore currently doesn't have a US distributor because of the Disney/Miramax situation, but Moore feels so strongly about the the content of Farenheit 911 and that American voters especially need to see the movie before the November election.

I'm personally not a fan of Michael Moore at all, but I will give Moore a lot of credit if he does what seems to be the best option right now: release the movie online, for free. If he does that, he shows that he isn't being a hypocritical war profiteer - he cares more about people hearing the message than the paycheck.

The petition to release the movie is here.

Michael Moore has decided to play the victim of some sort of Disney / Bush conspiracy to suppress his new film. Which is hard to swallow, since he could release it independently if he was not out to make millions from it. Sign the petition and let Mr. Moore prove that the message is more important than the money.

Michel Moore is available. Especially if you need a LARGE talking anus.

Lets face it, Michael Moore is an idiot and we should take back his Oscar. Where does he get off calling our President fictitious...moreover, sending a quarter of a million troops into war for "fictitious reasons."

Moore along with the Dixie Chicks, should pack their bags and make a b-line for nearest communist country. Their personal attacks on our beloved President are cowardly and utterly disrespectful.

Mr. President Bush, if you ever read this article, take peace in knowing that while the majority of Hollywood is not taking sides with you, the majority of America supports your cause as it is in the best interest of national security. God Bless your soul, God Bless the troops in Iraq, God Bless America!

I'm glad I voted for you. And just in case if any of you out there are wondering what party I am? I'm not a republican, but an independent.

Remember, most of what Moore says are lies. Including elements that are included in his movies. To find out the truth please visit MOORE WATCH.

BTW FP BITCHES!!

Lets face it, Michael Moore is an idiot and we should take back his Oscar. Where does he get off calling our President fictitious...moreover, sending a quarter of a million troops into war for "fictitious reasons."

Moore along with the Dixie Chicks, should pack their bags and make a b-line for nearest communist country. Their personal attacks on our beloved President are cowardly and utterly disrespectful.

Mr. President Bush, if you ever read this article, take peace in knowing that while the majority of Hollywood is not taking sides with you, the majority of America supports your cause as it is in the best interest of national security. God Bless your soul, God Bless the troops in Iraq, God Bless America!

I'm glad I voted for you. And just in case if any of you out there are wondering what party I am? I'm not a republican, but an independent.

Remember, most of what Moore says are lies. Including elements that are included in his movies. To find out the truth please visit MOORE WATCH.

Lets face it, Michael Moore is an idiot and we should take back his Oscar. Where does he get off calling our President fictitious...moreover, sending a quarter of a million troops into war for "fictitious reasons."

Moore along with the Dixie Chicks, should pack their bags and make a b-line for nearest communist country. Their personal attacks on our beloved President are cowardly and utterly disrespectful.

Mr. President Bush, if you ever read this article, take peace in knowing that while the majority of Hollywood is not taking sides with you, the majority of America supports your cause as it is in the best interest of national security. God Bless your soul, God Bless the troops in Iraq, God Bless America!

I'm glad I voted for you. And just in case if any of you out there are wondering what party I am? I'm not a republican, but an independent.

Remember, most of what Moore says are lies. Including elements that are included in his movies. To find out the truth please visit MOORE WATCH.

Lets face it, Michael Moore is an idiot and we should take back his Oscar. Where does he get off calling our President fictitious...moreover, sending a quarter of a million troops into war for "fictitious reasons."

Moore along with the Dixie Chicks, should pack their bags and make a b-line for nearest communist country. Their personal attacks on our beloved President are cowardly and utterly disrespectful.

Mr. President Bush, if you ever read this article, take peace in knowing that while the majority of Hollywood is not taking sides with you, the majority of America supports your cause as it is in the best interest of national security. God Bless your soul, God Bless the troops in Iraq, God Bless America!

I'm glad I voted for you. And just in case if any of you out there are wondering what party I am? I'm not a republican, but an independent.

Remember, most of what Moore says are lies. Including elements that are included in his movies. To find out the truth please visit MOORE WATCH.

Lets face it, Michael Moore is an idiot and we should take back his Oscar. Where does he get off calling our President fictitious...moreover, sending a quarter of a million troops into war for "fictitious reasons."

Moore along with the Dixie Chicks, should pack their bags and make a b-line for nearest communist country. Their personal attacks on our beloved President are cowardly and utterly disrespectful.

Mr. President Bush, if you ever read this article, take peace in knowing that while the majority of Hollywood is not taking sides with you, the majority of America supports your cause as it is in the best interest of national security. God Bless your soul, God Bless the troops in Iraq, God Bless America!

I'm glad I voted for you. And just in case if any of you out there are wondering what party I am? I'm not a republican, but an independent.

Remember, most of what Moore says are lies. Including elements that are included in his movies. To find out the truth please visit MOORE WATCH.

Lets face it, Michael Moore is an idiot and we should take back his Oscar. Where does he get off calling our President fictitious...moreover, sending a quarter of a million troops into war for "fictitious reasons."

Moore along with the Dixie Chicks, should pack their bags and make a b-line for nearest communist country. Their personal attacks on our beloved President are cowardly and utterly disrespectful.

Mr. President Bush, if you ever read this article, take peace in knowing that while the majority of Hollywood is not taking sides with you, the majority of America supports your cause as it is in the best interest of national security. God Bless your soul, God Bless the troops in Iraq, God Bless America!

I'm glad I voted for you. And just in case if any of you out there are wondering what party I am? I'm not a republican, but an independent.

Remember, most of what Moore says are lies. Including elements that are included in his movies. To find out the truth please visit MOORE WATCH.

Lets face it, Michael Moore is an idiot and we should take back his Oscar. Where does he get off calling our President fictitious...moreover, sending a quarter of a million troops into war for "fictitious reasons."

Moore along with the Dixie Chicks, should pack their bags and make a b-line for nearest communist country. Their personal attacks on our beloved President are cowardly and utterly disrespectful.

Mr. President Bush, if you ever read this article, take peace in knowing that while the majority of Hollywood is not taking sides with you, the majority of America supports your cause as it is in the best interest of national security. God Bless your soul, God Bless the troops in Iraq, God Bless America!

I'm glad I voted for you. And just in case if any of you out there are wondering what party I am? I'm not a republican, but an independent.

Remember, most of what Moore says are lies. Including elements that are included in his movies. To find out the truth please visit MOORE WATCH.