Kerry Film Free To Download

chef616 writes "Ain't It Cool News is reporting that the John Kerry Documentary, Going Upriver is now available as a free legal download for all. It can be downloaded at thekerrymovie.com. Links are available for direct download and via BitTorrent and eDonkey."

Comments

Going upriver?

[PrvtBurrito]

Going upriver? He should have called it "Going up the creek"

Re:Going upriver?

[Doc Ruby]

You're not the only one who thinks going to Vietnam was "going up shit creek". Now in Iraq, shitcreek budgets are sending a new generation, without a paddle.

Re:Going upriver?

[dykofone]

I enjoyed the original version of this movie. Martin Sheen's portrayal of Kerry was spot-on and heart felt, though Brando's vision of Bush was a little over acted.

Kerry: "They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound."
Bush: "Are my methods unsound?"
Kerry: "I don't see any method at all, sir."

Re:Going upriver?

[Daniel Dvorkin]

I enjoyed the original version of this movie ...

Best. Slashdot. Comment. EVER.

Re:Going upriver?

[Anonymous Coward]

hahaha best post ever. thank you.

Re:Going upriver?

[Anonymous Coward]

I never been the type to brag but beware
I'll make a man burn his draft card like it was Hair
Goin' up the river like you lookin' for Kurtz
I got the mugwump jism up in every verse

Re:Going upriver?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget that memorable scene with Col. Algore:

"You smell that? Do you smell that? Self-immolation, son. Nothing
else in the world smells like that except CBS. I love the smell of self-immolation
in the morning. You know, one time we had an election, campaigned for
twelve months. When it was all over I woke up. We didn't
find enough of 'em, not enough stinkin' florida votes. The smell, you know
that gasoline smell, the whole thing. Smelled like - george's victory.

Someday this campaign is gonna end."

Re:Going upriver?

[hackwrench]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22i+don't+se e+any+method+at+all

Site's already /really/ slow.

[infernow]

As soon as I get the torrent downloaded, a link will follow.

Re:Site's already /really/ slow.

[Anonymous Coward]

"As soon as I can, I'll Karma whore"

torrent
e-donkey

Re:Site's already /really/ slow.

[infernow]

Yeah, pretty much. But at least I'll be providing a faster link to the torrents.

The Green Berets

[b-baggins]

Is a better war movie. Better acting, better casting, and historically more accurate.

Re:The Green Berets

[fm6]

I once read a survey of Vietnam flicks, written by a former Infantry commander who was actually there. Green Berets was at the bottom of his list, mainly because of John Wayne's macho-but-dangerous grenade throwing style. His favorite was Go Tell The Spartans. Never seen it, but I gather it's more historically, politically, and militarily accurate than most war movies. Which explains why it's more or less forgotten!

Oh the punnery..

[sporty]

A democrat film on eDonkey. I am slayed. :)

Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[EnronHaliburton2004]

There's a movie being regarding Bush which is being released in early November:

It's called Going Down.

(Laugh, it's meant to be a joke!)

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[millahtime]

It could be a huge hit if your talking about the twins. We would all love to see them going down.

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[TheAngryMob]

I thought that was the discarded title for "Primary Colors."

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[Experiment 626]

With a title like that is sounds like it should be an inside look at the Clinton White House...

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[Daniel Dvorkin]

One of the best Onion headlines ever: "Jenna Bush's Federally Protected Wetlands Now Open For Public Drilling."

[shrug] Personally I don't see it, but then, I'm not much of a fan of plastic spoiled rich girls generally -- a Bush twins porn film would inspire in me the same reaction as the Paris Hilton tapes, which is to say, not much.

In fact, now that I think about it, are there any hot political families right now? None come to mind.

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[millahtime]

I'd do the bush twins. They are totally a 10.

5+5=10

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[mjackson14609]

Actually, "the Bush movie" is already out. It's a piece of religious right hagiography, if the New York Times is to be believed. I suspect that making this available for downloading by those not in its target audience would be a great service to the Kerry campaign - not that I'm encouraging copyright violation or anything. . .
--

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[follower_of_christ]

It's called Going Down.

Produced and directed by John Kerry himself.
Featuring this years candidate for president/incumbent president playing the role of national morality savior. Featuring the Kerry twins. A wildly amusing comedy portraying George Bush as a washed up old stuttering cowboy not knowing which Kerry to shoot. With a surprise appearance by Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton. It's sure to please your liberal republicrat and conservative demican friends.

Price of admission one miscounted vote.

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[Anonymous Coward]

you mean going down on each other?

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[enforcer999]

In fact, now that I think about it, are there any hot political families right now? None come to mind.

There are some hot Judges

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, we've already seen Kerry's daughter when she attended the premier of Kill Bill 2 at Cannes

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[SkyWalk423]

Have you seen Ted Nugent's daughter?? (Actually, he's got two. One's fine , the other's not.) He's not directly involved in politics, but he's got some "so-far-right-it's-left" ideas.

Does that count?

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[Anonymous Coward]

It looks like she's got a bigger gut then I do.

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[Sponge Bath]

I'm not much of a fan of plastic spoiled rich girls...

I remember the under age drinking incident down at Chuy's, where the secret service intervened to prevent Jenna's arrest. At that time, the Austin police were cracking down on under age drinking. They paraded cuffed college students around on TV as a warning to others.

Jenna's tearful quote, complaining about all the attention:
"I just want to be treated like everybody else!"

Uh huh.

Re:Followed quickly by the Bush movie in November

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if you have a body like hers, I'd drill your public wetlands.

National Lampoons Christmas Vacation

[millahtime]

Is a better war movie. Better acting, better casting, and historically more accurate.

Bittorrent and eDonkey/eMule links for the lazy

[EnronHaliburton2004]

For those too lazy to read the article: Bittorrent eDonkey / eMule Go ahead, knock down my karma.

Re:Bittorrent and eDonkey/eMule links for the lazy

[Dr. Spork]

OK, I can't get that .torrent to start downloading, but my DL on eMule is well over 100Kbps, so no big problem. This is a great way for Kerry supporters (and neutral people) with decent connections to help people learn more about Kerry. Let's show some community spirit like we're supposed to!

BTW, this is not a propaganda movie. In fact, it has no narration from what I understand. It's just swiftboat footage from the 60's, much of which involves Kerry. The filmmaker is the same guy who made Pumping Iron with Arnie; it's not some hack. I heard from people who saw a theater preview that it was incredibly moving and worth seeing for the uninterpreted visuals alone.

Riiiiight

[Wylfing]

Going Upriver is now available as a free legal download for all.

Everybody knows downloading movies is theft. I'm not falling for your honeypot, MPAA.

You know what would make a good movie?

[zardinuk]

Shots of American soldiers gunning down and blowing up Iraqi insurgents and terrorists. Why don't we ever see that? I'd watch...

Re:You know what would make a good movie?

[dinojemr]

Shots of American soldiers gunning down and blowing up Iraqi insurgents and terrorists. Why don't we ever see that? I'd watch...
You mean something like Farenheit 911?

Re:You know what would make a good movie?

[Dr. Spork]

No, he said "insurgents and terrorists". In F911, it looked like they were just shooting arbitrarily. Also worth seeing, but for a very different reason. We don't yet have the technology to detect evil before we fire bullets and bombs, and a lot of our faith that we are killing and maiming "insurgents and terrorists" is blind faith. That's also why it's hard to make what was described into a movie. A film of a human tragedy where innocent people are mass-murdered would look about the same to the camera as a movie of "American soldiers gunning down and blowing up Iraqi insurgents and terrorists".

Here's the link, then

[infernow]

goingupriver.mov.torrent

Kerry's own book is free now

[Rayonic]

John Kerry's first book, "A New Soldier", has been bought out by a 527 group and is now freely available online.

Re:Kerry's own book is free now

[Anonymous Coward]

That's very cool. A few months back it was going for about 250 bucks on the used book market.

Do we get to see...?

[ConceptJunkie]

Kerry's re-enactment of his combat with fake gun fire provided by Senor Spielbergo that was shown at the convention?

Sounds like "A Burns for All Seasons" and I was saying "Boooo!", not "Boooo-urns!".

I just wish Kerry would run on something he's done since most of the electorate was born.

Re:Do we get to see...?

[dsk052]

If you piss off as many politicians as GW, then you must be doing something right!

Re:Do we get to see...?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just wish Kerry would run on something he's done since most of the electorate was born.

Half of American adults are over 40. They are also probably 2/3s of the the people who actually vote. Yes, I'm sick of their preferences too.

Re:Do we get to see...?

[ConceptJunkie]

Not to mention France and the U.N...

If you are interested...

[ImaLamer]

There is also a DVD that only costs the price of shipping over at https://www.kerrykit.com/

It has clips from Going Upriver as well as some other tidbits. It's provided by MoveOn so you get a few copies of their infamous ads with it. I ordered one when they were still free and have watched a few parts.

Cool thing is that it comes with a few fact sheets and a Kerry - Edwards bumper sticker if you want to show your support in that way. Here is a list of the stuff that comes with it. I'm not completely sure if it has been authorized by Kerry himself, it just seems to be another MoveOn attempt at regime change.

Mirror of the mov

[Jukashi]

For those bittorrentaphobic (?!) I've got a fast mirror of it on my site, jukashi.com

Nam of the Game

[Doc Ruby]

To counter this commie fantasy about Kerry's Vietnam, we need to watch the Bush reelection version. Though Dennis Hopper turns in a nice performance as Bush in his early '70s "lost years", this rendition of the Eastern White House is animated by Marlon Brando's cunningly accurate portrayal of President Vice-President Cheney.

George Butler

[krs-one]

This is done by the same director of the famous documentary, Pumping Iron about a very famous Republican. Pumping Iron was later admitted to being a docu-drama (Arnold admitted this himself).

-Vic

/Voting for Badnarik

Other political information movies:

[Futurepower(R)]

1. Uncovered: The Whole Truth about the Iraq War by Producer/ Director Robert Greenwald, 2003, 56 minutes. Independent film by the Producer. Web site: Uncovered. Reviews: Powell's (out of stock, no reviews) Barnes & Noble Amazon

   This documentary shows the actual video of Bush administration officials justifying the war in Iraq. The overall effect is powerful.

   Quotes:

   • "... it is a federal felony, it's a crime, to mislead and distort information and present it to the Congress." -- 23:14 minutes into the movie.

   • "... the administration has not been honest..."

   • "... very disturbing ... intervention by people particularly from Vice President Cheney's office and Vice President Cheney himself ... to produce precisely the language which would allow them ... to support the decision to go into Iraq." -- Dr. David C. MacMichael, former CIA analyst. Page 7 of the transcript, 7:32 minutes in the movie.

   • "It is somewhat puzzling, I think, that you can have a hundred percent certainty about the weapons of mass destruction's existence, and zero certainty about where they are." -- Hans Blix, chief weapons inspector, referring to the administration's statements, at 34:44 minutes into the movie.

   This work is available several in several forms, some of which are free:

   • A transcript of the movie is available online. NOTE: Both forms of the transcript contain errors. The errors I've seen are minor. The quotes here have been checked against the movie.

   • The transcript is also available as a downloadable Adobe Acrobat PDF file. The Acrobat PDF Reader software needed to view the transcript is a free download for all computers.

   • You can buy the DVD online for $9.95 from Amazon or Barnes & Noble or from CafeShops.com, at a Cafe Shops online store that is inappropriately titled Disinformation. The store originally sold items connected with a humorous TV show called Disinformation.

   • The DVD is available on loan through Netflix.

   • Make your own copies: Kate McArdle, one of the producers, told me that they encourage people to make copies of the DVD and give them to friends (but not sell them, of course). Also, they encourage people to play the movie for groups of people, without extra payment.

2. Unprecedented - 2000 Presidential Election by Richard Ray Perez, Joan Sekler, and Robert Greenwald, 2002, reissued 2004. Web site: Unprecedented. Reviews: Barnes & Noble Amazon, DVD Amazon, VHS IMDB

   From a

Re:Other political information movies:

[ronfar]

This one is pretty good too:

Iraq - On The Brink

It's a short film from Journeyman Pictures (the link has a pretty long clip), the most interesting scene to me (from the clip) is this one:

The army's current tactics are winning no friends. As a platoon approaches a house at night, the owner mistakes the soldiers for thieves and fires a shot into the air. It's an action he will live to regret. Troops kick his door in and move to arrest him. "Welcome, Welcome," the man says. But the soldiers can't understand him and don't have a translator. "I might shoot you. Get the fuck over here. Get the fuck over here now," a soldier screams. Terrified the man starts praying but even his praying antagonises the troops. "Who the fuck are you talking to? Shut the fuck up!" one shouts.

Re:Other political information movies:

[Rayonic]

Fahrenheit 9/11 uses several psychological techniques commonly used in propoganda. It takes advantage of "bugs" in the human cognitive "hardware", if you will. This isn't a partisan attack, and you can read a rather interesting analysis on the subject here.

(Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader)

Re:Other political information movies:

[Futurepower(R)]

I agree that Michael Moore sometimes has an objectionable way of presenting material. But, as you are doing, many people talk about Michael Moore instead of talking about the huge amount of corruption he tries to document.

There is a huge, huge amount of material. Here are reviews of 35 books that say the same thing as Michael Moore. You can have the same message presented in a learned way, or a funny way, or a typically Republican way, or a journalistic way: Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government

Here is just a little hint of the corruption: Bush borrows money to kill Iraqis. 140 billion borrowed. With interest, you pay 200 billion. When Saudis attack, invade Iraq?

Here's another hint: George W. Bush's brother was shown in a lawsuit deposition on 20/20 talking about his prostitutes and using government influence to make money. Family values?

Here's another hint: The U.S. government has engaged in 24 wars since WW2: The system of violence works by creating fear so rich people can profit.

Here's another hint: Did you see the network footage of George W. Bush holding hands with a Saudi man the Bush family knows as "Bandar Bush"? Since it was Saudis who attacked on 9/11, why did Bush invade Iraq. Was it partly a smokescreen to get attention away from the Saudis?

Re:Other political information movies:

[GoodbyeBlueSky1]

Fahrenheit 9/11 uses several psychological techniques commonly used in propoganda

True, but this is not the whole story. You need another sentence where you replace "Fahrenheit 9/11" with "The Bush Administration", just to be fair and balanced.

Re:Other political information movies:

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation: Michael Moore's propaganda was completely effective on you. See, it does work!

Re:Other political information movies:

[Rayonic]

I agree that Michael Moore sometimes has an objectionable way of presenting material. But, as you are doing, many people talk about Michael Moore instead of talking about the huge amount of corruption he tries to document.

He used propagandistic methods to such an extent that it undermined his whole movie. F9/11's main thrust is mere insinuation.

Here are reviews of 35 books that say the same thing as Michael Moore.

There are also a large number of books that say the opposite of what Mr. Moore says.

Here is just a little hint of the corruption: Bush borrows money to kill Iraqis. 140 billion borrowed. With interest, you pay 200 billion. When Saudis attack, invade Iraq?

I have to tell you that CostofWar and IraqBodyCount are not reliable sources of information. A few have looked into it, but even a cursory glance at the sites will tell you that they have an axe to grind.

When Saudis attack, invade Iraq?

Saudi Arabia did not attack the United States. A terrorist group aided and sheltered by Afghanistan did. As for radical groups in Saudi Arabia, their government has been cooperating with us since 9/11/01. Saudi Arabia has had a long relationship with the U.S., after all. They can't reform too fast, though, or the religious nuts will revolt and then the shit will really hit the fan.

If Iraq cooperated even as much as Saudi Arabia has, then we wouldn't have invaded Iraq.

Here's another hint: George W. Bush's brother was shown in a lawsuit deposition on 20/20 talking about his prostitutes and using government influence to make money. Family values?

Bush is his brother's keeper?

Here's another hint: The U.S. government has engaged in 24 wars since WW2: The system of violence works by creating fear so rich people can profit.

You really might want to consider checking your sources. For instance, the Halliburton charges just don't check out.

Did you see the network footage of George W. Bush holding hands with a Saudi man the Bush family knows as "Bandar Bush"?

It is rather common in Arabic culture for men to hold hands, and engage in other niceties that seem strange to Western eyes. Don't let your own monocultural viewpoint obscure your vision.

Re:Other political information movies:

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if you know of have a similar analysis on propoganda by the Bush administration, let's have it.

Re:Other political information movies:

[Brandybuck]

Since it was Saudis who attacked on 9/11, why did Bush invade Iraq

Or to rephrase that question, since it was Japan who attacked on 12/7, why did Roosevelt invade Germany?

The answer is the same to both questions. The US didn't invade Germany because of 12/7, and it didn't invade Iraq because of 9/11.

Re:Other political information movies:

[doofus1]

The answer is the same to both questions. The US didn't invade Germany because of 12/7, and it didn't invade Iraq because of 9/11.


Bush's rhetoric to the contrary.

Re:Other political information movies:

[Anonymous Coward]

Fahrenheit 9/11 uses several psychological techniques commonly used in propoganda.

I don't get the point. Bush and the Bush administration used and still uses this techniques hundred of times more. Like "We are attacked, and the evil evil guy MAY attack us, and everyone must follow the Great Enlightened Commander in Chief, The Guide, The Small Father of the undemocratically Oppressed People - and everyone who protest is a terrorist lover and a traitor"

Re:Other political information movies:

[Dr. Spork]

OK, Japan and Germany had an alliance; you couldn't just fight one of the allies. The analogy might hold if the regime in Iraq had any connection with the attackers of 9/11. But there wasn't any connection. Even Cheney admitted that on Tuesday, and he was the last holdout to do so. Bush and Rummsfeld admitted this many months ago. Now the American people need to catch up. (The rest of the world doesn't seem to be having trouble seeing the former Iraqi government as being totally distinct from Al Quaeda, as they are. In fact, they were enemies; Saddam hated Islamicists more than he hated the Bushes!)

Re:Other political information movies:

[IndependentVik]

Or to rephrase that question, since it was Japan who attacked on 12/7, why did Roosevelt invade Germany?

You realize we had a war with Japan in the Pacific and that we dropped two atomic bombs on them, right? So I guess, we should be nuking Saudi Arabia anytime now . . .

(see other reply to this post for details on Japan's open alliance with Germany)

Re:Other political information movies:

[ronfar]

Or to rephrase that question, since it was Japan who attacked on 12/7, why did Roosevelt invade Germany?

Perhaps, because Hitler was crazy enough to officially declare war on the United States?

1941: Germany and Italy declare war on US

Which he did, you know, in support of his fellow Axis power, Japan. Probably the United States would have had to forget about Europe and focus on the Pacific, such was American rage, if Hitler hadn't decided "we're all in this together." Then again, that's just speculation, but even though Bush wanted to attack Iraq first thing, he realized that he had to start with Afghanistan.

"One of the delightful things about Americans is that they have absolutely no historical memory." -- Chou En-lai

Thats...thats just great

[Tyndmyr]

Im really stretching for something to post here. Ive got three more hours of "work" ahead, and Im outta stuff to read on /. This is new, and I love politics, but it just aint doin it.

Its not just the website, which didn't exactly exude professionalism. Im used to less than perfect web design.... I do work for the government after all. It's not even the obvious promotion of a canidate that looses my intrest. Ive grown used to the crazy stuff that happens every four years here.

Its the sheer emptiness of it all. He fought in Vietnam. Great. Lots of people did, and while Im not trying to put down what they did, and hes done far more than Bush, we've all heard about it already. But really, who cares? Its nice that he did that, but it doesnt distinguish him as a leader from among the number of men who've also risked their lives.

I want interesting debate, non-evasive comments, and a lot less pointless "image-building", dammit. Bah, theres no room in society for intelligent people any more...

This bitter diatribe brought to you by Tyndmyr

Re:Thats...thats just great

[mooredav]

I saw Going Upriver in the theatre last week. I didn't know what to expect going in. I came out with a lot on my mind. This is not a boring film.

The story is larger than just Kerry. It's about Vietnam Veterans Against the War, a group that Kerry organized. Before I saw the movie, I didn't know that their protests were so difficult and so significant. I had heard about some things before: Kerry's testimony before Congress, and the veterans throwing away their medals. I just shrugged them off until this film gave me the context to appreciate those events.

It's a not-so-subtle reminder that we should consider the lessons of Vietnam in our current affairs. Do not dismiss Going Upriver as just an "image-building" piece for Kerry.

Re:Thats...thats just great

[ortcutt]

Did you watch the movie? Did you? I'm guessing you didn't since you wanted to talk about the website more than the movie. Don't bitch about how it's image-building before you've even see it. Post again after you've watched it and I might take you seriously.

Re:Thats...thats just great

[Dr. Spork]

OK, exactly you need to watch the movie. I'm uploading it at full bandwidth on through eMule as are many others, apparently, so it should come in fast. If you see in an come back and say "But really, who cares?" I'll be impressed.

From the Makers of South Park

[Marxist Hacker 42]

I think it's called America: World Police, and it's a cartoon....

Re:From the Makers of South Park

[zardinuk]

Hah, I'm watching a sneak preview of that this saturday.

Re:From the Makers of South Park

[kLaNk]

It is called "Team America: World Police" and it is with marionettes.

Get yo facts straight fool.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[w3rzr0b0t5]

I forgot capitalist.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Actually- It comes out more like this for the true lefty (got to remember, you see, that Clinton was RIGHT WING from our point of view):
Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - bad...
Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq - bad...
Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - bad..
Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - bad...
Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - bad...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...
Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists - bad...
Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad...
Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - bad...
Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad...
Clinton commits felonies while in office - bad...
Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit - bad...
No mass graves found in Serbia - bad...
No WMD found Iraq - bad...
Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton - bad...
Economy on upswing (for the rich alone- middle class need not apply) under Bush - bad...
Clinton refuses to take custody of Bin Laden - bad...
World Trade Centers fall under Bush - bad...
Clinton says Saddam has nukes - bad...
Bush says Saddam has nukes - bad...
Clinton calls for regime change in Iraq - bad...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...
Terrorist training in Afghanistan under Clinton - bad...
Bush destroys training camps in Afghanistan - bad...
Milosevic not yet convicted - bad...
Saddam turned over for trial - bad...
And let's not forget- Kerry is just as bad as either Bush or Clinton. Time to kill all the rich white men and take this country back for the TRIBES!

Re:Bias

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Individual editor != Slashdot. Pudge, for instance, posts content heavily biased towards the right- when he can find it.

Keep It Going

[hprotagonist0]

Check out Keep It Going, a site dedicated to getting people to go see this movie. We're signing up volunteers to host screenings on a national screening day.

So come to the site and read through our blog or sign up to host a screening. More info on the site.

Can anyone run a new tracker

[linzeal]

We has kill't the 6969 on the original and need someone else to sends up the flag, ARRRRR.

Wait, I'm not a pirate today? Damnit!

You forgot one

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot one:

Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's war on journalism.

Direct by Robert Greenwald, the all of the original, digital footage is available for free under a creative commons license.

Legal? Really?

[HyperLemur]

I don't see anything that states that this is clearly the case. I don't want to cause trouble for other people.

More free Kerry stuff!

[Bombcar]

Kerry's not-so-best selling book!

Hey, we all want free stuff, right?

Re:John Kerry's coffin called

[Anonymous Coward]

They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Anonymous Coward]

No! Everybody who is against Bush loves Clinton! It must be so!

Legal?

[gmuslera]

That means if Kerry wins, p2p per se will not have legal problems during the next administration like it was tried to be banned in this one?

Re:Legal?

[OYAHHH]

> That means if Kerry wins, p2p per se will not have legal problems during the next administration like it was tried to be banned [com.com] in this one?

Wait a second! Let's be fair here.

The article to which you refer to describes the Induce Act. Which I am diametrically opposed to.

But, to set the record straight, Senator Barbara Boxer is one of the co-sponsers of this miserable legislation.

And I can assure you that the liberal that Boxer is, has nothing, and I repeat nothing, to do with in "this administration" assuming you are refering to the George Bush administration.

Yet she still is pushing this crap on you and I.

The torrent is broken

[noa]

I get through to the tracker about 5% of the time. However it is available from thepiratebay.com also and that one seems quite fast, at least from over here in Sweden.

Direct link to the torrent

Re:The torrent is broken

[david_reese]

Props to you brotha... someone pls mod up parent. I think the original torrent is hosed. This is the only working link on the page. Also linked your torrent on other sites (dailykos.com)

Having seen Uncovered...

[Anonymous Coward]

This movie had a pretty significant impact. They essentially convict the administration with their own words, and experts. After seeing something like this it is a little difficult to avoid demonizing the current administration. When they even now talk about that everyone *knew* that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, they're plainly lying. They knew better. They lied so Americans would kill and die. From every office of the administration, before the UN, the Congress and the American public. Administrations like this are why impeachment exists. Those in the administration are not simply guilty of bad govenment, they're horrible examples of human beings, and have betrayed our ideals.

Moderator Abuse ?? [Re: Let me see; have I got]

[rm3friskerFTN]

How is the "Let me see; have I got this straight?" post by LouCifer considered "flamebait" ???

Seems to be a good summary of the history and hypocrisy surrounding many of the issues over the last twelve-years.

Re:Moderator Abuse ?? [Re: Let me see; have I got]

[putch]

if by 'good summary' you mean incomplete, biased, out of context, and off-topic then you are right.

Re:Moderator Abuse ?? [Re: Let me see; have I got]

[OYAHHH]

Per,

The flamebait question. At the moment I looked at the summary of moderation and it came out like this:

--------------------
Moderation 0
30% Interesting
30% Informative
20% Offtopic
Extra 'Troll' Modifier 0 (Edit)
Total Score: 0
---------------------

For an overall score of 'Troll'.

My question is, how does 30% interesting, 30% informative, 20% offtopic, and 20% ??? not add up to something 'positive'?

Re:Moderator Abuse ?? [Re: Let me see; have I got]

[Anonymous Coward]

Incomplete, YES! Too much liberal BS has happened just in the last year to even begin posting here.

Biased? Perhaps from an uneducated person's point of view (i.e. YOU)

Out of context - hardly. This topic is largely in the news right now.

it's not confusing, you're an idiot.

[Anonymous Coward]

1)when we went to serbia we went with a true international mandate. remember? russia sent all of those troops as well.
2) your muslim/christian rhetoric is absurd. unless you are advocating holy war, in which case i feel like an idiot for even responding to you.
3)the '25 million' are anything but liberated, atm. some might even say they are occupied.
4)i'm not sure what economic upswing you see but under bush we've gone from a budget surplus to crushing debt. the overwhelming majority of his tax cuts go to wealthiest few. so, what's he done?

i can understand why people are hesitant to support kerry. he isn't a very intriguing, exciting, or refreshing candidate. but i will NEVER even begin to understand how a rational person could even begin to think that, in terms of public policy substance, that bush deserves to remain as our president. (except, of course, if you root for holy war, make $200k+ a year and want a tax cut, don't care that this administration has done nothing but plunder our tax dollars and our international goodwill).

it's not confusing, you're an idiot.

Re:it's not confusing, you're an idiot.

[Anonymous Coward]

The sooner we pull out of the united nations and regain our sovernty, the better. Either that, or ally with responsible countries like Japan and some other Asian countries. Europe is moving towards socialism and secularism faster than we are. America/Socialism don't mix. Its been a long time coming that we pull out of Europe and let it stagger without us and see how well it does.

The muslim/christian rhetoric is a little absurd. He should have thrown secularism in there too. Before the Muslims threw their 2 cents in we were fighting a 2 way religious war. One side of the two believes there is an all powerful God that created everything and can't provide proof that stimulates the 5 senses. The other believes that *poof* we existed from nothing obviously not being able to prove that nothing existed before something did. Both sides believing that elimination of the other will make the world a better place. The muslims jumped in and decided that giving their life is the ultimate good thing to do if you attempt to kill many of the other two. Muslims have been violently warring the entire world since it was created by Mohamed. They merely burst onto the scene recently with some very loud and uninteligable screaming. The Christian "Crusades" were a response to the Muslim advance upon the world. Islam had spread from the middle-east to Africa, Asia, and began threatening Europe. I wonder how long its going to take for Europe to remember what threatened them and caused the Crusades.

Most popular opinion polls in Iraq suggest that the Iraqis are all saying, 'Thank you for very much for getting rid of that bad man that was killing us by the hundreds of thousands a year. Now get out! .... But wait until we're stable please.' If you take it from the horses mouth, your point three is half true. They are occupied, but feel very liberated and don't want us to leave until things are stable, but much like socialism and America, Arabs and ocupation don't mix. Its too bad we have a political party trying to sell to the world that its the Bush administrations intent although it has no proof.

Every person who obtained a paycheck prior to Bush tax cuts obtained more of a paycheck with the Bush tax cuts. I'd rather control where I donate my money rather than have the government use it to support social programs I don't agree with. I personally give more than 15% of my pay away to the poor and social programs of my choosing. Any "idiot" with a calculator can use it like the current presidential election polls (as far as only being a glimpse in time) and determine what, at this current second in time, the deficit would be if we raise taxes. Of course, the people who do such things and create policies around a stamp in time are terribly short sighted. These policies slow economic progress. The Repubs are attempting to turn around the economic slide Clinton created with higher taxes on everyone. Rich people are always going to be rich, when the economy slows down, the poor people suffer terribly.

International good-will is virtual. We are the "Microsoft" of the world that many in the world were wishing under their breath would be defeated or weakened. Now that we are embattled they'll attempt to get a couple of quick political jabs in hoping they can derail the champ. Are all of the Oil-for-Food scandals showing good will? Here's a conspiracy theory for you. France, Germany, and Russia were allied with Iraq due to Saddam's Oil-for-Food program loopholes and handouts and the first chance that they decided they were capable of inflicting serious damage on the U.S. they would. Our "allies" have been proven in the past months to have been working with our enemies against us. America didn't generate ill-will towards America with the Iraq war, just exposed it. I have a couple of friends from France that don't like the US due to several several issues and Iraq to them is just "par for the course" as far as they are concerned. When they tell me their concerns it deals with installing dictator

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Procrastin8er]

You forgot, Gore claims Internet creation - bad...

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Wasn't in the original list- I just wanted to point out that just because Clinton did something doesn't mean that it's good....and that I'm generally against all of the above. Gore claiming to invent the internet- not sure if I'd classify that as bad or just stupid.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gore claiming to invent the internet- not sure if I'd classify that as bad or just stupid.

Gore never claimed he invented the internet. Anybody that tells you he did is misinformed.

He did claim that he supported legislation that helped the internet in its early days-- which is true.

"Gore claimed he invented the internet" was a campaign claim that the Bush people pushed in 2000, because it fit with the image they pushed of Gore as an exaggerator.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Procrastin8er]

Time to kill all the rich white men and take this country back for the TRIBES! You are kidding here, aren't you? I mean, uh cause I am uh white, and I wouldn't say I am rich but uh some might....Gulp....

Re:Reenacting Battles ?

[CptNerd]

Check out a little movie called "Patton", that showed Patton landing in Sicily. MacArthur did it too, and I suppose Kerry thought he'd be in the same league eventually.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't say I am rich but uh some might....

If you earn more than $35K, John Kerry thinks you're rich.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

You are kidding here, aren't you? I mean, uh cause I am uh white, and I wouldn't say I am rich but uh some might....Gulp....

Only partially- I do feel that ever since the white man came this continent has basically been headed in the wrong direction- and W/Kerry is just the culmination of that.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

If you earn more than $35K, John Kerry thinks you're rich.

If you actually READ his website instead of listening to a bunch of talk radio idiots who couldn't be bothered to read something even if it was printed on their paychecks, you'd see that Kerry only thinks you're rich if you earn over $200,000/year- anyway, that's where he'd start repealing the tax breaks.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Beyond_GoodandEvil]

Right b/c b4 the white man, there was human sacrifice and other egalitarian goodness. Prior to the "white" man's arrival this continent wasn't headed in any direction. "An object at rest cannot be stopped!"

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Just because you don't recognize the goal of actually living as a part of nature and in harmony with nature does not mean that the goal does not exist.

Many people just don't want to know...

[Futurepower(R)]

Many people just don't want to know how corrupt the U.S. government is, and they find any small reason to avoid to deny the overall picture, while still pretending to be logical.

There is no way to argue away all the material in 35 books and 5 movies! There are NOT an equal number of books arguing the opposite side. The books in the article Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government are from respected publishers. The pro-Bush books are, generally, not.

You said, "It is rather common in Arabic culture for men to hold hands..." That's exactly right. But George W. Bush had never left the U.S. when he began running for president. Why is HE holding hands? The answer is that he has what the Bush family thinks is a close relationship with Prince "Bandar Bush". Anyone who knows the Saudi culture knows that it is highly unlikely Prince Bandar likes the Bush family. He is only using his relationship with the Bush family for his own benefit.

FactCheck.org is NOT a reputable organization. They check "facts" only one level deep. The real facts are that Cheney arranged to have no-bid contracts made legal during the time he was Secretary of Defense. He knew that the U.S. would attack Iraq, so Halliburton could be prepared in advance. That's why only Halliburton had the resources for the Iraq contract.

No, not just yet...

[Sponge Bath]

I'm going to wait for the extended version box set.

Re:No, not just yet...

[Chaotic Evil Cleric]

In the new version, Kerry shot first.

NOT "international mandate"

[rm3friskerFTN]

"when we went to serbia we went with a true international mandate"

define "international mandate"? UN Authorized? ... NOT

recall "a coalition of the willing" (grin) made up of NATO Members authorized by NATO (NATO != UN and UN != NATO) went into the former Yugoslovia

sounds like "jury shopping" to me:

international group UN does not authorize this ... try another group

international group XYZ does not authorize this ... try another group

international group PDQ does not authorize this ... try another group

international group ABC does not authorize this ... try another group

international group NAMBLA (grin) has authorized this ... hurray the world is saved

if looks like "jury shopping", smells like "jurry shopping", quacks like "jury shoppping" then it must be "jury shopping"

Re:NOT "international mandate"

[Anonymous Coward]

umm, even the French helped...

It's not like we're stuck with a bloody quagmire in Serbia...

and Clinton never told us Serbia had weapons of mass destruction...

Re:NOT "international mandate"

[IndependentVik]

It was a humanitarian mission with a broad-based coalition behind it, not this Orwellian nightmare (with Americans bearing 90% of the casualties--how many Americans died in Clinton's war again?) we have going on now. The reasons for the Iraq war have been shifting constantly. If its true aim at the outset had been to help the Iraqi people and there'd been none of the fearmongering that went down, I might've even supported it.

Free and legal?

[Artifex]

Funny, I don't see any relation to the official movie website, goingupriver.com:

thekerrymovie.com -

Registrant:
ZiaSpace Productions
12210.5 Nebraska Avenue

NO UNSOLICITED MAIL
Los Angeles, CA 90025
US

Domain name: THEKERRYMOVIE.COM

Administrative Contact:
Klos, John john@ziaspace.com
12210.5 Nebraska Avenue

NO UNSOLICITED MAIL
Los Angeles, CA 90025
US
+1.3109800704
Technical Contact:
Klos, John john@ziaspace.com
12210.5 Nebraska Avenue

NO UNSOLICITED MAIL
Los Angeles, CA 90025
US
+1.3109800704

Registration Service Provider:
ZiaSpace Productions, domains@ziaspace.com
917-723-0802
http://www.ziaspace.com/
This company may be contacted for domain login/passwords,
DNS/Nameserver changes, and general domain support questions.

goingupriver.com -

Name Servers: ns.addr.com
ns2.addr.com
Domain Created: 8/2/2004
Domain Expires: 8/2/2005

Craig Ullman
112 Willow St 4A
Brooklyn, NY 11201
United States -- US
cdullman@yahoo.com
phone: 7188020198
fax: 7188020198

The Data provided by Stargate.com, Inc. Whois Service is provided on an "as is" basis and its accuracy is not guaranteed. By accessing and/or using the Data provided by Stargate.com, Inc.' Whois Service you agree to use this Data only for lawful purposes and you agree not use to this Data to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of unsolicited advertising or solicitations via email (spam); or (2) enable any high volume or automated electronic processes.

Not to mention that the AICN link mentioned in the article goes to dead space? And most interestingly, there are NO links from the download section of the official site to this site.

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[IndependentVik]

Gore never said that.

What I want to know ...

[jc42]

What's Kerry's Bacon number?

For that matter, is Osama bin Laden's number still 3?

Historical Data??? [Moderator Abuse]

[rm3friskerFTN]

This link will take you to the twenty-three (23) "reasons [paragraphs] for the Iraq war" ... not that the truth would ever get in the way of a good SlashDot "script kiddie swarm" ;-);-);-)

Here's one of the twenty-three (23) reasons we went to war:

true aim at the outset had been to help the Iraqi people???
Whereas in December 1991,Congress expressed its sense that it ''supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Public Law 102 -1),''that Iraq 's [Saddam's] repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and "constitutes a continuing threat to the peace,security,and stability of the Persian Gulf region," and that Congress, "supports the use of all necessary means [war???] to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688";

If you have time then you might also read yet another one of the twenty-three (23) reasons we went to war:

Enforcing UN Security Council Resolutions???
Whereas Congress in the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President "to use United States Armed Forces [war???] pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677";

Again if you have time ...

Re:Historical Data??? [Moderator Abuse]

[IndependentVik]

I'm sorry, but that document isn't how the war was sold to the American people and you know it. The war was sold on the grounds that the smoking gun for Iraq's WMD could "come in the form of a mushroom cloud". The war was sold to the populace on fear. Fear of WMD and fear of this non-existant alliance between bin Laden and Hussein.

If Bush had gone to the American people asking for a humanitarian mission, then you'd have a point, but he didn't and you don't. And no, the resolution doesn't count, Joe Citizen doesn't read those (and neither to most of our esteemed congressional representatives, I'd wager).

Re:Historical Data??? [Moderator Abuse]

[IndependentVik]

Hopefully you will not disagree that Saddam had a history (smoking guns ... qty 2) of using WMD (i.e. chemical weapons) against the Kurds (#1) & Iranians (#2) ... see quantity 2. Thus it might (just might) be logical to conclude that he might be doing some nuclear stuff ...

You don't lead a country to preemptive war on that thin a premise, Sparky. Incidentally, Iran actually HAS a nuclear program. Why did we not invade them?

I have many points ... everyone has a point or two ... the real point you might be making (if I may be so bold as to put words on your monitor) is that "you disagree with my points"

Your points are non-sequitor nonsense. Give me something other than some document that less than 2% of the population read before we went to war and you might have something. Oh, but apparently I'm wrong: according to you, everybody and his brother read the thing. After all there's a LINK to the document on a website. Wow, I guess if someone posts a link to something on the WWW, then it's automatically widely read! Instant notoriety here I come . . .

And I watch enough C-SPAN, thank you, enough to see Senator Robert Byrd reduce the arguments for preemptive invasion to tatters.

And now you're calling me a script kiddie? Face it, old man, your arguments are tired and weak. Now you're just calling me names in the vain attempt that nobody will notice all the holes.

Re:Historical Data??? [Moderator Abuse]

[rm3friskerFTN]

More reading for you ... being the informed individual you are (like myself ;-) I have no doubt you are already reading the original Comprehensive Report of the Special Advisor to the DCI on Iraq's WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction)

From a recent MSNBC column [Cliff Notes review - prior to reading the source document]:

The weapons of mass destruction case is a bit more, um, nuanced than a lot of the press treatment makes it sound, of course. No weapons have been found, but the Iraq Survey Group's report makes clear that Saddam wanted to outwait sanctions and then start making the [WMD] weapons again:

The ISG, who confirmed last autumn that they had found no WMD, last night presented detailed findings from interviews with Iraqi officials and documents laying out his plans to bribe foreign businessmen and politicians.

Although they found no evidence that Saddam had made any WMD since 1992, they found documents which showed the "guiding theme" of his regime was to be able to start making [WMD] again with as short a lead time as possible."

But hey, Kerry voted for the war, so his arguments on that topic boil down to either: Bush lied, and I'm [Kerry is] gullible Bush and I both got fooled [Kerry got fooled just like Bush], but I'll do better next time.

Neither is [a] very compelling [argument by Kerry].

Sure glad people like ourselves are well informed, taking the time to read the original source documents

Historical Data??? [Moderator Abuse]

[rm3friskerFTN]

"... but that document isn't how the war was sold to the American people and you know it."

Wrong ... I would link to additional documents but you would just poo-poo those too

The war was sold on the grounds that the smoking gun for Iraq's WMD could "come in the form of a mushroom cloud"

Hopefully you will not disagree that Saddam had a history (smoking guns ... qty 2) of using WMD (i.e. chemical weapons) against the Kurds (#1) & Iranians (#2) ... see quantity 2. Thus it might (just might) be logical to conclude that he might be doing some nuclear stuff ... of course Mao said " The atomic bomb is a paper tiger" ... I doubt Saddam reads Mao. Do you?

you'd have a point, but he didn't and you don't

I have many points ... everyone has a point or two ... the real point you might be making (if I may be so bold as to put words on your monitor) is that "you disagree with my points"

the resolution doesn't count, Joe Citizen doesn't read those (and neither to most of our esteemed congressional representatives, I'd wager).

Wrong again ... if you watch C-SPAN more frequently then you might self-discover this also ... it is very interesting watching and occaisionally screaming at the Congressional hearings on CSPAN. Likewise listening to the viewer call-ins & shout-outs. BTW, why would C-SPAN provide links to the documents if "Joe Citizen" does not read them

Sad that you can lead a horse (script kiddie?) to water but can't even ask them to drink (read?)

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[coyotegestalt]

"Time to kill all the rich white men and take this country back for the TRIBES!" But what if we don't want back the parts you guys have screwed up?

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[MImeKillEr]

..and since he lives off his nutcase wife's money, he can claim he's poor to appeal to the 'masses', despite the fact that they own mulitple homes and he gets to ski in the summer.

Yeah, a real 'man for the people'

And did anyone notice his fake & bake orange tan had mysteriously disappeared before the last debate?

And what the fuck was up with him pulling cheat notes out of his pocket when he got to the poduim at the first debate?

FOUR MORE YEARS!

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

"Time to kill all the rich white men and take this country back for the TRIBES!" But what if we don't want back the parts you guys have screwed up?

True enough- who would want Manhattan Island back now? Or San Fancisco (oops, no, that tribe died out). Or LA (not sure who controled that area- I think it was orignally a part of Aztlan, the Aztec Empire).

23 Reasons vs 1 'thin' Premise [Moderator Abuse]

[rm3friskerFTN]

You don't lead a country to preemptive war on that thin a premise,

On one "thin premise" ... NO ... one would not lead "a coalition of the willing" into war on one "thin premise" ... not with standing Saddam having actually used WMD twice before against the Iranians and Kurds ... BTW, please do not cheapen their painful WMD deaths by calling those two Saddam WMD use events "thin evidence" of Saddam's capacity both to construct and to use WMDs

However, combining a "thick premise" (i.e. actual use of WMD twice before) with twenty-two (22) additional "thick premises" one could and should lead "an international coalition of the willing" into war ... in other words, twenty-three "thick premises" for why we went to war with an "international coalition of the willing"

"Incidentally, Iran actually HAS a nuclear program. Why did we not invade them?"

We have not yet invaded Iran because Iran has not yet violated twelve (12) "UN Security Council Resolutions (i.e. Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677)" over the course of twelve (12) years.

Hopefully you will agree that a nation (e.g. Saddam's Iraq) that repeatably violates twelve UN Security Council Resolutions over the course of twelve-years is engaging in "Darwin Award" behavior

Furthermore, we have not yet invaded Iran because democratic forces (e.g. students) are actively working inside Iran to change the theocratic political system in Iran ... you are informed of current events? You do chat up the international students and immigrants from the region?

Why invade when covert CIA support to the Iranian Opposition might change things? ... see also Azar Nafisi's "Reading Lolita in Tehran"

If John Kerry does not rush us into war (grin) with Iran then things might turn out alright in Iran

Unfortunately, Saddam's Iraq was too much of a police state for such opposition forces to exist inside Iraq. Some examples of how Saddam's Iraq controlled dissent ... video clip illustrate the difference between Saddam's Iraq and Iran

Oh, but apparently I'm wrong: according to you, everybody and his brother read the thing.

You are onto something if you step further back from the issue 'de jour' (sic) ... basically the MainStreamMedia ( MSM) does a very poor job keeping the public informed ... hence the explosion of blogs by subject matter experts.

Read the about the Mainstream Media vs Kid Internet "battle in the clouds" happening in the background of the current political campaign ... this is an Alvin Toffler event.

You doubt Bush uses propropagand?

[beetle496]

Are you really questioning if the Bush administration uses propaganda?

Well, if you know of have a similar analysis on propoganda by the Bush administration, let's have it.

How about The 'Prop-Agenda' At War, a leading hit from a restrictive search which returned almost 600 items (ironically, the top one was the Rhoads paper).

Re: Let me see; have I got this straight?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Yes- but the Republicans think he did, and none of this is actually about reality, but rather about perception.

Where the French were - taking bribes???

[rm3friskerFTN]

If only Milosovich (still on trial for "war crimes" - year 5 or so ;-) had been bribing Chirac's friends then the Yugoslavian genocide could have continued.

More reading ;-);-);-) from the London Observer:

France's Saddam deals revealed by Antony Barnett and Martin Bright on Sunday October 10, 2004

Dramatic new details of France's secret dealings with Saddam Hussein's regime have emerged as part of a fresh corruption investigation into alleged illicit oil deals.

[snip][snip][snip]

The disclosure will embarrass President Jacques Chirac as it follows on from claims last week by the Iraq Survey Group that Saddam indirectly paid French politicians and individuals to gain support for lifting UN sanctions and influencing French policy. The ISG's claims were dismissed by Chirac as politically motivated.

[snip][snip][snip]

Patrick Maugein, whom the Iraqis considered a conduit to Chirac, is also accused of receiving oil through a Dutch-registered company. The report claims a 1992 Iraqi intelligence service report said Iraq had paid the French Socialist party $1m in 1988.

[snip][snip][snip]

I'd rather see "Stolen Honor"

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone know if this is slated for free download?

I'd also like to buy a dead-tree copy of Kerry's "New Soldier." Anyone know where there's one for sale under the $500 per copy the Democrats have been paying to keep these out of JoeSixpack's hands?