Slashdot Mirror
Celsius 41.11: A Rebuttal to Michael Moore
deezl writes "Michael Moore released a controversial movie revealing 'facts' about the Bush Presidency. A new rebuttal has just been released called Celsius 41.11. I would think that time sensitive political commentaries would be available for download to ensure the widest possible distribution base. If documentary makers are so interested in getting their message out and arguments across, why not encourage free BitTorrent type distribution for their movies?"
Michael Moore DID encourage downloading of his movie via Bittorrent, and other means.
-9mm-
The video has some shocking content. The worst was a clip of a kid getting his fingers chopped off. That almost made me ralph with the hangover I have this morning.
Vonnegut was right: Of all the words of mice and men, the saddest are, "It might have been."
Nothing like loading /. in the browser and seeing what at first glance appears to be your own rather obscure domain name in the first story next to "Michael Moore".
/.
Note to self: have more coffee before logging on
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
Having not particularly been impressed, well with any of Moore's movies, and having seen this. I'm filled with new found respect for Moore. They manage to make the tubby hack look, well pretty subtle and tactful. I'm not sure how they pulled that off....
I like how they equate even rudimentary social programs with out of control totalitarianism.
I mean I was a *little* tired of the latest excuse for liberating Iraq, "What you though Hussein was a nice person, well why do *you* live with him?" But seriously, they're making the obvious response, as grim and undignified as it is, look ever more appropriate.
Some notes on David Bossie.
Two new films offer a rebuttal to the slanted views of Michael Moore. Michael Moore Hates America and FahrenHYPE 9/11 . Both are due to be released to DVD on October 5th to coincide with the DVD release of Fahrenheit 9/11. I have yet to see either of these films, but the trailers look compelling.
For an detailed rebuttal of Fahrenheit 9/11 read Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11 .
Let me explain. Once you look past Mr. Moore's biased you'll see that the film is doing nothing more than asking the question that should have been asked by the media we already have in place. The media failed to do so, thus we have Moore's film filling in where they came up short. Does he get somethings wrong? Your goddamn right he does, but it doesn't mean we should ignore him completely.
Now the same can be said for the rebuttal. Moore's obviously put his own spin on things (as he should) after all, all he's doing is connecting dots to make a point. He most likely went overboard with some of his assumptions. Now I haven't seen the new movie yet, but lets hope it fills the holes in Moore's movie and is not just an outright attack on Moore (I hope this makes my own biased completely clear).
This shouldn't have to be said, but everyone should watch both movies and then make up their own minds.
Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
They must be forced to use exceptionally accurate thermometers in hospitals in the rest of the world. Who would have guessed that they must measure down to 1/100th of a degree! It just makes it clear to me that metric is the wrong way to go.
On an unrelated note, I have to ask why they had so many photos of planes flying into buildings, women in burkas, and the attack on the USS Cole. But all of the voiceover was eerily disconnected from the images. They kept talking about Iraq, while showing images from an unrelated war a half a world away in Afghanistan.
What's the deal with that? Why would anyone want to relate Afghanistan and Iraq?
Wrong. At the time F911 came out, there was no number at all. Only in response to the movie was the number created. (And it's not 888, either)
The most balanced objective take on the file I've seen so far is the point by point list of deceits.
I can already find multiple obvious lies in that file... and an even greater number of deciets (using truth in a misleading way). The single funniest mistake is #21, although it's irrelevant to the overall theme. The Crusader was NOT a missile! There's even some weird things like #35 and #36, which affirms a fact and then immediately claims it's not true- even though that same document just said so! #42 is funny too, because by those standards, the Bush Administration were also Al Quaeda collaborators.
#58 is by far the gravest lie and reveals a true bias by the file's author:
- In Fahrenheit, Moore pretends to support our troops. But in fact, he supports the enemy
In reality, he said the enemy was going to win; that's a pessimistic prediction, not a statement of support. For example, I don't support G.W. Bush, but I do say he's going to win re-election.Still, it would be nice to have a version of F911 containing only the facts, minus Moore's leading sarcasm. Bush would only come off worse if you actually sit there watching him for 7 minutes without a stream of jokes in the background. Maybe a special "no director commentary" feature on the DVD.
There's doing nothing. (What happened)
There's running around in a panic. (What is suggested here as THE alternative.)
Then again...
I got the official 9/11 report for my birthday. I haven't had time to read it, but I have cracked it a little. I've also read another minute-by-minute account of the morning of 9/11, backed up by source links.
The *real* crime of 9/11 had nothing to do with Bush, but rather with the link between the FAA and NORAD. FAA rules state that NORAD is to be notified immediately of all hijackings. There was a delay of nearly 1/2 hour between recognition of the first hijacking and NORAD acknowledgement. (This is from the other report, I need to verify this in the 9/11 report.)
Next, in that first hour or so after the hijacking there appeared to be mass confusion between ATC and NORAD. There was uncertainty about how many hijackings, who should be looking where for what, etc. (Still from the other report.)
Finally, within the space of a few minutes, the first jet hit the WTC, and the other 3 jets were hijacked. (From the 9/11 report) We were a half-hour into the confusion, with another half-hour to go, by which time the whole thing was pretty well over, except for the shouting.
I don't know if anything could have been done to stop the first jet, after the hijacking. Ignoring the intelligence leading up to 9/11 is a different issue. But about the time one jet has crashed into a building and 3 more are known hijacked, we should have been into Full Response, instead of confusion.
What would I want Bush to have done? Put someone in Charge. He was probably too far out of the loop, in Florida. But he should have put someone in Charge to tie together ATC, NORAD, and whoever else was appropriate.
But then again, the famed 7-minute pause was *after* the 2nd jet crashed into the WTC. So even had he calmly stood up, excused himself, and taken/delegated control, it was too late. There's some question about whether or not he heard about the first jet hitting the WTC prior to entering the school. There's some question about those in the White House delaying feeding him info for 10 minutes or so. The findings: "A Failure of Imagination." Whatever happened to Truman's, "The Buck Stops Here?"
The machine called "The US Government" had multiple failures that day. In fact, the only correct, effective response was by passengers. Grounding all air traffic was correct, and might have been effective had there been more jets-as-missiles planned, and did serve to restart air traffic with better security.
Back to Moore... It's so fun to tear down 1-800 vs 1-888, and Enlisted vs Officers, etc that we just lose track of the other points where the facts were less tilted and more clear. The less disputed facts raise perhaps the more important questions, yet recieve little focus.
But then that's been the way of this whole election cycle.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Contrary to your sig, Bush never claimed Saddam was linked to 9/11.
He and his administration just insinuated it at every possible opportunity.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?