I don't see any signs of trolling in what I said. (That, of course, depends on what one means by 'trolling'. Unfortunately on Slashdot, any attempt to oppose anti-Israeli libels and bias, is automatically qualified as 'Troll'.)
Let me repeat that it would be better for everyone to adhere to facts, and not to reproduce falseful mantras of Arab nationalists. OKay? Focus-shmokus -- doesn't matter. Arabs want the rest of the world to believe that Israel is their main cause of grief, instead of putting blame for their social troubles, stagnation, poor economics etc. on themselves. The fact that the world easily accepts their version makes me suspect something about the world, which I wouldn't rather elaborate here, otherwise you will accuse me of something horrible, he-he.
Speaking of trolling, why in your last comment you're just mounting another heap of lies, cliches and bias, absolutely not related to the discussion.
How on Earth the 'fuzz about Gaza' and 'UN routinely condemning Israeli actions' are connect to incorrect presentation of the history and facts in your original comment and my (rather polite) attempts to correct you? What Gaza has to do with this? What does your comment prove or disprove?
And, to feed the troll, final remarks:
Last time I checked, Israel was planning to relocate Jews from Gaza strip. Which is not quite fair, by the way, because no Arabs are relocated from Israel territory at the same time.
Re. who is trying to appease Arabs. These are: European Union (mostly France, Germany and the UK), and the United Nations (the majority in which are either Arabs themselves, or Muslims, or depend on the former two for oil); whose condemnations have nothing to do with justice, balance or other similar old-fashioned notions. It's all about oil. It is a widely known fact that the political course of Europe changed abruptly in the pro-arab direction exactly after the ill-famous Oil Embargoe declared by Arabs in 1970s. (Mass immigration from Arab countries started about the same time, by the way; poor Europeans are now dealing with consequences).
Since you agree that the amount of the land doesn't matter -- you shouldn't have used the word "large".
Since creation of the state of Israel was not the initiative of the USA, you should not attribute it to the USA.
Finally, Israel didn't seize not even one sq.mile from any other country when it was created. Like the Island of Cyprus was divided into two parts the Greek and the Turkish, so the Palestine (being at the moment British colony, and before that the colony of the Ottoman Empire, and before that of the Rome Empire) was divided into Jewish and Arab parts by a UN resolution. Jews were living in their respective part for decades, in some places for centuries and all the land was legitimately acquired through purchases etc. So the part populated by Jews was about to be allotted to the Jewish state. The fact that Arabs rejected the partition doesn't make their claims to the land legitimate at any degree.
So US may have done whatever to earn the hatred of Arabs, but creation of Israel was definitely not one of that. So that is a BAD example.
Besides, it seems to me that Arabs are way to easy to be annoyed. The world community should stop trying to appease them at any price - that may end even worse than if we keep annoying them.
"because you took a large part of their land and turned it into a refuge for Israel"
And when exactly was last time you looked at a map? Large part of their land, huh?
So there are 22 (twenty-two) Arab countries (Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen) with total land area of 11,796,381 sq.km.
And then there is State of Israel (whose size is approx. same as the size of New Jersey) with the land area of 20,770 sq.km -- which is what? less than 0.2 per cent of the Arab land area?
And, PUHLEEZE! USA was just ONE of 33 countries that voted on 11/29/1947 for the UN resolution on partition of British Palestine. So putting the blame for creation of Israel solely on the Americans is, err, a bit of exaggeration.
And, FYI, in the first ten or twenty years of the young state of Israel, USA gave no support to the country at all -- it even embargoed selling arms to Israel during the Arab-Israeli war of 1948-49. The main supporter of Israel in that period was France, not USA.
I am an Israeli, who has been systematically moderateed down only for expressing my pro-Israel opinions and views here. So now I have the TERRIBLE karma and can only post my comments twice a day. Nice.
So please calm down and tone down you rage! You guys are systematically doing here exactly what Bush's administration does with this what-its-name comission. You're not better than them.
Good point, especially its wording made by J.Lennon. Good, but not practical.
People are different and different people prefer (no matter what humanists and liberals want to believe) to live separately.
And "assuming a peacefull life is what people want" is just extrapolation of your own attitude to people of absolutely different cultures. Consider the raise of Islamic radicalism today in muslim countries - that's definitely not an indication of the desire to live in peace...
Gaza is in Palestine. As well as Jordan and Israel
on
Mapping Google News
·
· Score: 0, Interesting
"Palestine" was a name given by Romes to the province comprising several territories conquered by them - and Gaza was 100% sure among them.
It is quite confusing to use the name of Palestine nowadays, when the map of the region changes so dramaticlly. For example, before 1922, British Palestine included the territories not only of the modern Israel but also that of the Kingdom of Jordan! In 1949 Gaza and Judea/Samaria (the latter often referred to as the West Bank) were occupied in 1949 by Egypt and Jordan respectively.
As to the real source of all of the problems in the Middle East, hardly it is the situation with the Palestinian Arabs (which you probably mean here), but instead it a complex combination of problems, including lack of industrial development in the region, complete lack of democracy, extremely levels of education, low level of life, religious fanatism, and corrupted regimes of the Arab nations of the region.
What's so insane in building barriers preventing movement of people and machinery through some border?
The Berlin Wall worked perfectly well and did the very job its builder (=pro-Sovied East Germany government) built it for. For those wishing to flee to the West it was extremely difficult to penetrate the wall.
The Israel (not Isreal) Barrier, as you solemnly name it, also does its job pretty well -- since it has been started and partially built, the number and frequency of terror attacks carried out by Arab terror gangs in Israel reduced significantly.
Well, sooner or later the music industry as wee see it today, will end. The end of the era began when the technical means appeared that make it possible to instantly deliver exact copies of musical contents to anyone wishing that. All the efforts to stop that via legislation are futile in the long run. The means don't fit the current production relation - and the history shows that in the past, it were the later that had to accomodate to the former.
So musitians, artists and others will have to find some other way to receive fair compensation for their work. And quite probably they won't be all multimillionaires like they are today. (They weren't so in 14th century)
Which was one single case, by the way. It was with the sole purpose to make an excuse for all future supporters of Arab terrorism (encountering thousand of cases).
He also hates Israel and US support for its occupation of Palestinian lands and attacks on Palestinian people
Israel doesn't occupy any Palestinian land, because there's no Palestinian land. Israel doesn't attack Palestinian people, because there's no such thing as a Palestinian people. Like there's no Latin American people, or Western European people.
There is Arab population of former British colony of Palestine. But besides Arabs, other people happened and happen to populate that area. For example, Jewish people.
Israel has complete and full right to defend itself against Arab terrorists. (Please don't tell me they are freedom fighters. They aren't).
Arabs of Gaza and the West Bank could have had their independent state long ago. By the way, Arafat's PLO was founded in 1964, when West Bank and Gaza was under Egyptian and Jordanian control (lasted between 1948 and 1967) -- plenty of time to get independence.
More than that, the so-called Oslo agreement followed by plentitude of Israel concessions gave them that possibility not once. Arafat's gang just doesn't want their state beside Israel, they want it instead of and in place of Israel. And brutal terror is their method to achieve that goal. And thank you, we Israelis don't agree with that.
Summary.
Bin Laden is terrorist.
Arafat is terrorist.
"A complete withdrawal, not only from Iraq, but from the whole of the Middle East, especially of military support for Israel, might break the cycle and at least stop the creation of new terrorists. Otherwise, we continue to make terrorists faster than we can kill them: a war we can never win." -- that's absolute bullshit. Giving up to terroist demands won't appease them -- it'll just wet their appetite. As to withdrawing military support for Israel -- that will end with destruction of Israel and murdering another 6 million of Jews. But that's OK with the modern Leftist quasiliberals. They did nothing to save European Jews from German Nazism, they don't want to do anything to save them from Arab Nazism.
Good fucking luck.
P.S.1)
It's worth mentioning here that numerous Leftist politicians and journalists unanimously started to demand breaking American support for Israel the very next day after 9/11 attacks. Even before Al-Qaeda claimed their responsibility. Even before it was even known that Al-Qaeda had anything to do with attacks. Actually they (Leftists) served as spokepersons and promoters of the Islamists cause and demands. Exactly as you do in your posting.
P.S.2)
You will convert to Islam sooner than you think. For Leftists like yourself it is much more attractive to accept enemy's values than to defend their own freedom and values. That's my prediction.
Regarding your mentioning Israel as terrorist state as well as American financial aid to it -- this statement is as inaccurate as it is an excellent example of cheerful pro-Arab leftist propaganda. Moore would be sure proud of you. Good Job!
US Goverment does direct $2 billion to Israel (which is its ally). It gives the same amount to Egypt. So what!?
The money goes exclusively and entirely to arms purchases in the USA itself (that's the pre-condition of this money aid). Actually gives jobs to American workers and helps a lot to the US Military industries.
Now regarding disrespect for internation law -- as vague statement as a complete bullshit. Which international law?! If by that you mean the idiotic ICJ decision regarding the Counter-Terrorism Fence -- it had no credentials to even consider the case. By its own statut, the Court only can consider cases between two states upon their consent -- neither of which was true in this case. Palestinian Authority isn't a state. And Israel didn't agree to this case being taken into the court.
The UN General Assembly decisions? They're not biding by definition.
So even technically Israel isn't a terrorist state.
Now I wonder do people ever understand the words they use. Care to lookup the meaning of word terror in a dictionary? Israel is a state trying to protect its own citizens from being attacked by gang of ruthless murderer fanatics lacking any notion of civilizational values and/or ethics ever. Arab terrorists blow up school buses, supermarkets, discos, kill women and children in cold blood to impose terror on Israelis and you dare to call Israel a terrorist state? Are you nuts?!
And, the last thing. You're fucker yourself (or should it be "sucker"? Whatever)
Re:Busting him for violating sanctions
on
Bobby Fischer Found
·
· Score: 0, Insightful
It's ISRAEL, not ISREAL, for God's sake!
As to the popular mindset in Europe right now appears to be that "Zionist Isreal crushing Palestinians is a very bad thing," -- the Europeans happen to be blissfully ignorant.
Granted, Israel is a Zionist country(that's all Zionism is about -- creation of a state for Jewish people). The conflict isn't about "crushing" so-called Palestinians (more correct term is Palestinian Arabs, since Palestine is just a name for the region where Israel happens to be as well) -- it's about refusal of all Arab world (more than 20 countries) to accept existence of Israel. That is Arabs want to destroy Israel, whereas Israel wants not to be destroyed.
Europeans chose to be on the Arab side for many reasons, partially for their historical anti-semitism, partially for their desire to appease their own Islamic population (more than 10% of citizens of Belgium are emigrants from Muslim countries), partially for their dependency on Arab oil and investments based on oil money.
And sorry, but with all disgust I feel agains all kinds of extremism, Islamic extremists happen the most brutal and dangerous (based on their actual deeds). I never heard of a Christian fundamentalist fanatics blowing up a passenger bus or taking hostages or decapitating prisoners.
Funny you have to say that. Michael Moore's movie/documentary is itself outstanding example of biased propaganda. You shouldn't expect that a person distorting the facts "to the other side" all of a sudden becomes balanced and objective.
As they say, if all you have is a hammer, then everything around you looks like nails. Or something like that.
The fact that Moore tries to decry the tragedy tell a lot about his moral stand. Sorry, but it's enough for me to question his views -- I am a human, after all. Dostoevsky was a great Russian writer -- and I enjoyed his novels a lot (really), until I learned from his diaries that he was a passional antisemite; from that moment on, I have just been unable to enjoy his works anymore. Too bad.
Moore may have as many valid points as he wants in his movie. There are a lot more valid points he intentionally left out of it -- for the sake of pushing his ultraleftist political agenda. Why he did that? The quote sheds a bit of light on his background and gives probably the explanation.
As to this POS, his movie, what irritates me the most, is that it is being touted on this board and elsewhere as the last gospel truth, an eye opening revelation ("I cried in the movie theater many times"), whereas this is nothing more than a well made propaganda full of selective omissions, manipulations and such. Granted, any political movie is skewed in some ways. But that much skewed?..
And his political brethern from the European Left awarded him the Golden Palm -- for what? For artistic achievements? No, for serving their political agenda - nothing more.
Edward Koch, the former Democratic Mayor of New York City, writes:
A year after 9/11, I was part of a panel discussion on BBC-TV's "Question Time" show which aired live in the United Kingdom. A portion of my commentary at that time follows:
"One of the panelists was Michael Moore...During the warm-up before the studio audience, Moore said something along the lines of "I don't know why we are making so much of an act of terror. It is three times more likely that you will be struck by lightening than die from an act of terror."...I mention this exchange because it was not televised, occurring as it did before the show went live. It shows where he was coming from long before he produced "Fahrenheit 9/11."
Slashdot Mirror
Napoleon's invasion of Russia started on June 24, 1812 and ended on November 28, 1812.
Only by killing 47,000% of suspects.
This is a blatant lie.
I don't see any signs of trolling in what I said. (That, of course, depends on what one means by 'trolling'. Unfortunately on Slashdot, any attempt to oppose anti-Israeli libels and bias, is automatically qualified as 'Troll'.)
Let me repeat that it would be better for everyone to adhere to facts, and not to reproduce falseful mantras of Arab nationalists. OKay? Focus-shmokus -- doesn't matter. Arabs want the rest of the world to believe that Israel is their main cause of grief, instead of putting blame for their social troubles, stagnation, poor economics etc. on themselves. The fact that the world easily accepts their version makes me suspect something about the world, which I wouldn't rather elaborate here, otherwise you will accuse me of something horrible, he-he.
Speaking of trolling, why in your last comment you're just mounting another heap of lies, cliches and bias, absolutely not related to the discussion.
How on Earth the 'fuzz about Gaza' and 'UN routinely condemning Israeli actions' are connect to incorrect presentation of the history and facts in your original comment and my (rather polite) attempts to correct you? What Gaza has to do with this? What does your comment prove or disprove?
And, to feed the troll, final remarks:
Last time I checked, Israel was planning to relocate Jews from Gaza strip. Which is not quite fair, by the way, because no Arabs are relocated from Israel territory at the same time.
Re. who is trying to appease Arabs. These are: European Union (mostly France, Germany and the UK), and the United Nations (the majority in which are either Arabs themselves, or Muslims, or depend on the former two for oil); whose condemnations have nothing to do with justice, balance or other similar old-fashioned notions. It's all about oil. It is a widely known fact that the political course of Europe changed abruptly in the pro-arab direction exactly after the ill-famous Oil Embargoe declared by Arabs in 1970s. (Mass immigration from Arab countries started about the same time, by the way; poor Europeans are now dealing with consequences).
Since you agree that the amount of the land doesn't matter -- you shouldn't have used the word "large".
Since creation of the state of Israel was not the initiative of the USA, you should not attribute it to the USA.
Finally, Israel didn't seize not even one sq.mile from any other country when it was created. Like the Island of Cyprus was divided into two parts the Greek and the Turkish, so the Palestine (being at the moment British colony, and before that the colony of the Ottoman Empire, and before that of the Rome Empire) was divided into Jewish and Arab parts by a UN resolution. Jews were living in their respective part for decades, in some places for centuries and all the land was legitimately acquired through purchases etc. So the part populated by Jews was about to be allotted to the Jewish state. The fact that Arabs rejected the partition doesn't make their claims to the land legitimate at any degree.
So US may have done whatever to earn the hatred of Arabs, but creation of Israel was definitely not one of that. So that is a BAD example.
Besides, it seems to me that Arabs are way to easy to be annoyed. The world community should stop trying to appease them at any price - that may end even worse than if we keep annoying them.
And when exactly was last time you looked at a map? Large part of their land, huh?
So there are 22 (twenty-two) Arab countries (Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen) with total land area of 11,796,381 sq.km.
And then there is State of Israel (whose size is approx. same as the size of New Jersey) with the land area of 20,770 sq.km -- which is what? less than 0.2 per cent of the Arab land area?
And, PUHLEEZE! USA was just ONE of 33 countries that voted on 11/29/1947 for the UN resolution on partition of British Palestine. So putting the blame for creation of Israel solely on the Americans is, err, a bit of exaggeration.
And, FYI, in the first ten or twenty years of the young state of Israel, USA gave no support to the country at all -- it even embargoed selling arms to Israel during the Arab-Israeli war of 1948-49.
The main supporter of Israel in that period was France, not USA.
I am an Israeli, who has been systematically moderateed down only for expressing my pro-Israel opinions and views here. So now I have the TERRIBLE karma and can only post my comments twice a day. Nice.
So please calm down and tone down you rage! You guys are systematically doing here exactly what Bush's administration does with this what-its-name comission. You're not better than them.
Good point, especially its wording made by J.Lennon. Good, but not practical.
People are different and different people prefer (no matter what humanists and liberals want to believe) to live separately.
And "assuming a peacefull life is what people want" is just extrapolation of your own attitude to people of absolutely different cultures. Consider the raise of Islamic radicalism today in muslim countries - that's definitely not an indication of the desire to live in peace...
"Palestine" was a name given by Romes to the province comprising several territories conquered by them - and Gaza was 100% sure among them.
It is quite confusing to use the name of Palestine nowadays, when the map of the region changes so dramaticlly. For example, before 1922, British Palestine included the territories not only of the modern Israel but also that of the Kingdom of Jordan! In 1949 Gaza and Judea/Samaria (the latter often referred to as the West Bank) were occupied in 1949 by Egypt and Jordan respectively.
As to the real source of all of the problems in the Middle East, hardly it is the situation with the Palestinian Arabs (which you probably mean here), but instead it a complex combination of problems, including lack of industrial development in the region, complete lack of democracy, extremely levels of education, low level of life, religious fanatism, and corrupted regimes of the Arab nations of the region.
What's so insane in building barriers preventing movement of people and machinery through some border?
The Berlin Wall worked perfectly well and did the very job its builder (=pro-Sovied East Germany government) built it for. For those wishing to flee to the West it was extremely difficult to penetrate the wall.
The Israel (not Isreal) Barrier, as you solemnly name it, also does its job pretty well -- since it has been started and partially built, the number and frequency of terror attacks carried out by Arab terror gangs in Israel reduced significantly.
Well, sooner or later the music industry as wee see it today, will end. The end of the era began when the technical means appeared that make it possible to instantly deliver exact copies of musical contents to anyone wishing that. All the efforts to stop that via legislation are futile in the long run. The means don't fit the current production relation - and the history shows that in the past, it were the later that had to accomodate to the former.
So musitians, artists and others will have to find some other way to receive fair compensation for their work. And quite probably they won't be all multimillionaires like they are today. (They weren't so in 14th century)
Which was one single case, by the way. It was with the sole purpose to make an excuse for all future supporters of Arab terrorism (encountering thousand of cases).
King David Hotel, by the way was the Headquarters of British Army in Jerusalem.
And, they got a warning phone call about the attack a couple of days before it.
but sometimes avoiding war is uglier.
Israel has complete and full right to defend itself against Arab terrorists. (Please don't tell me they are freedom fighters. They aren't).
Arabs of Gaza and the West Bank could have had their independent state long ago. By the way, Arafat's PLO was founded in 1964, when West Bank and Gaza was under Egyptian and Jordanian control (lasted between 1948 and 1967) -- plenty of time to get independence.
More than that, the so-called Oslo agreement followed by plentitude of Israel concessions gave them that possibility not once. Arafat's gang just doesn't want their state beside Israel, they want it instead of and in place of Israel. And brutal terror is their method to achieve that goal. And thank you, we Israelis don't agree with that.
Summary.
Bin Laden is terrorist.
Arafat is terrorist.
"A complete withdrawal, not only from Iraq, but from the whole of the Middle East, especially of military support for Israel, might break the cycle and at least stop the creation of new terrorists. Otherwise, we continue to make terrorists faster than we can kill them: a war we can never win." -- that's absolute bullshit. Giving up to terroist demands won't appease them -- it'll just wet their appetite. As to withdrawing military support for Israel -- that will end with destruction of Israel and murdering another 6 million of Jews. But that's OK with the modern Leftist quasiliberals. They did nothing to save European Jews from German Nazism, they don't want to do anything to save them from Arab Nazism. Good fucking luck.
P.S.1)
It's worth mentioning here that numerous Leftist politicians and journalists unanimously started to demand breaking American support for Israel the very next day after 9/11 attacks. Even before Al-Qaeda claimed their responsibility. Even before it was even known that Al-Qaeda had anything to do with attacks. Actually they (Leftists) served as spokepersons and promoters of the Islamists cause and demands. Exactly as you do in your posting.
P.S.2)
You will convert to Islam sooner than you think. For Leftists like yourself it is much more attractive to accept enemy's values than to defend their own freedom and values. That's my prediction.
You probably wanted to say a government. I mean, would you trust another government more than the current one? I doubt so...
US Goverment does direct $2 billion to Israel (which is its ally). It gives the same amount to Egypt. So what!?
The money goes exclusively and entirely to arms purchases in the USA itself (that's the pre-condition of this money aid). Actually gives jobs to American workers and helps a lot to the US Military industries.
Now regarding disrespect for internation law -- as vague statement as a complete bullshit. Which international law?! If by that you mean the idiotic ICJ decision regarding the Counter-Terrorism Fence -- it had no credentials to even consider the case. By its own statut, the Court only can consider cases between two states upon their consent -- neither of which was true in this case. Palestinian Authority isn't a state. And Israel didn't agree to this case being taken into the court.
The UN General Assembly decisions? They're not biding by definition.
So even technically Israel isn't a terrorist state.
Now I wonder do people ever understand the words they use. Care to lookup the meaning of word
terror in a dictionary? Israel is a state trying to protect its own citizens from being attacked by gang of ruthless murderer fanatics lacking any notion of civilizational values and/or ethics ever. Arab terrorists blow up school buses, supermarkets, discos, kill women and children in cold blood to impose terror on Israelis and you dare to call Israel a terrorist state? Are you nuts?!
And, the last thing. You're fucker yourself (or should it be "sucker"? Whatever)
You fucking moron change your stupid signature and go fuck your own fucking goverment yourself.
And ah, for your reading pleasure:
http://www.bbcwatch.com/july04.html
It's ISRAEL, not ISREAL, for God's sake!
As to the popular mindset in Europe right now appears to be that "Zionist Isreal crushing Palestinians is a very bad thing," -- the Europeans happen to be blissfully ignorant.
Granted, Israel is a Zionist country(that's all Zionism is about -- creation of a state for Jewish people). The conflict isn't about "crushing" so-called Palestinians (more correct term is Palestinian Arabs, since Palestine is just a name for the region where Israel happens to be as well) -- it's about refusal of all Arab world (more than 20 countries) to accept existence of Israel. That is Arabs want to destroy Israel, whereas Israel wants not to be destroyed.
Europeans chose to be on the Arab side for many reasons, partially for their historical anti-semitism, partially for their desire to appease their own Islamic population (more than 10% of citizens of Belgium are emigrants from Muslim countries), partially for their dependency on Arab oil and investments based on oil money.
And sorry, but with all disgust I feel agains all kinds of extremism, Islamic extremists happen the most brutal and dangerous (based on their actual deeds). I never heard of a Christian fundamentalist fanatics blowing up a passenger bus or taking hostages or decapitating prisoners.
Allahu Akbar, dear Europe!
Funny you have to say that. Michael Moore's movie/documentary is itself outstanding example of biased propaganda. You shouldn't expect that a person distorting the facts "to the other side" all of a sudden becomes balanced and objective.
Good job, Mossad!
And a good hint to other 'inventors' willing to cooperate with tyrans and dictators.
He-he!
...such people are now moving on to the next big thing now that IT isn't so hot anymore...
Hopefully not into biotechnology -- that would be way too scary!
Since the curse word Israel is mentioned in the original posting, here comes the question of the day:
Who's going to post first antisemitic posting here?
Moore may have as many valid points as he wants in his movie. There are a lot more valid points he intentionally left out of it -- for the sake of pushing his ultraleftist political agenda. Why he did that? The quote sheds a bit of light on his background and gives probably the explanation.
As to this POS, his movie, what irritates me the most, is that it is being touted on this board and elsewhere as the last gospel truth, an eye opening revelation ("I cried in the movie theater many times"), whereas this is nothing more than a well made propaganda full of selective omissions, manipulations and such. Granted, any political movie is skewed in some ways. But that much skewed?..
And his political brethern from the European Left awarded him the Golden Palm -- for what? For artistic achievements? No, for serving their political agenda - nothing more.
What's a big deal about this 9/11 attack. Moore himself doesn't see so much reason for all the fuss about it:
:
quote from Fifty-six Deceits in Fahrenheit 911
Edward Koch, the former Democratic Mayor of New York City, writes:
A year after 9/11, I was part of a panel discussion on BBC-TV's "Question Time" show which aired live in the United Kingdom. A portion of my commentary at that time follows:
"One of the panelists was Michael Moore...During the warm-up before the studio audience, Moore said something along the lines of "I don't know why we are making so much of an act of terror. It is three times more likely that you will be struck by lightening than die from an act of terror."...I mention this exchange because it was not televised, occurring as it did before the show went live. It shows where he was coming from long before he produced "Fahrenheit 9/11."