The Lies of Michael Moore.
- Started
- Last post
- 30 Responses
- ants
www.christiancounterculture.com... anyone read it? thoughts?
- ants0
- lowimpakt0
" Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is the latest example of how a gullible public can be easily manipulated to believe things that are truly ridiculous when examined rationally. The fact that he represents "the American Left" (politically) is almost incidental."
I stopped after that. The editor must be a child of some description
- save0
- rasko40
the fact that Christians are asking people to maintain a 'healthy skepticism' just takes the piss really.. if you know what I mean.
- pascii0
rap in baghdad says it all
- Retro0
Boring crap. Tried to find something interesting by skimming after that first couple of paragraphs, but it was all poo.
- Bluejam0
round and round here we go where will the political bickering stop nobody knows...
- hooked0
i think there's some interesting stuff in that. is there anywhere else that hosts that article so that i can email it on to to my friends without them thinking i've gone god-squad
- jstiles0
that seems like the same crap article from Slate. it has been discussed here before. funny how the author doesnt point out the "lies" but keeps saying that the movie is dishonest.
the editor's introduction was highly disturbing.
- ants0
hooked: I agree, and no I'm guessing that it's not hosted anywhere else.
jstiles: I'm not up with Slate... explain?
I think what the author is showing is that the claims made in the movie aren't valid, through current evidence eg. the guy who said he authorised the flights. and also he seems to be showing that logical conclusions through evidence put to the audience are not simply the only conclusions and probably tend to be not what is actually there (for example the photo of Bush and Blair together being used as an explanation of Bush as a lazy leader etc.)
His examination of the movie's text seems to be of a historic nature. That is, eliminate those ideas that are least likely and you have your answer. Thus showing through his evidence that Moore has picked answers to evidence which do not fit into that category and are therefore false.
Hence the idea of saying that he's lying. A common way of examining historical evidence (which it has to be).
- lowimpakt0
do you think we are morons.
like the editor does.
- ********0
it's all opinionated anyway, both MM and those that oppose him, which I would think would include Bushie and a lot of so-called Independents. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, doesn't mean they are right or wrong. Fahrenheit 9.11 might open your eyes, but then again so might a response to it from a Republican standpoint. I don't think one should be so quick to judge.
- ants0
Rasko: On the off chance that you were actually thinking seriously when you posted that I'd love to know why you think that. Because from what I'm reading in your post your attitude seems to be that of what you are laughing at.
Oh wait that's right... I'm a Christian because I'm stupid and believe everything everyone says... especially a silly 4000year old book with absolutely no historical proof or evidence upholding its claims... silly me.
- meok0
Damn ants, did you write that article? Your rhetoric babble matches that of the author.
I wish there was an article where they just go: "ok, here are the lies and here are the facts that proves it"
- ants0
lowimpakt: no, I think debate is good though.
- ants0
meok: that would be good... like a CSS comparison chart. okay so my inner nerd (not so deep below the surface actually... I think that's how I get pimples.) has been pushing its way out.
I'm used to talking nerdlike.
- lowimpakt0
true, debate is good. I'd rather you made points for debate instead of posting articles where the editor sets out by trying to assert some authority by trying to insult and patronise people.
- washington0
Shouldn't it all be lie until prvoen truth rather than truth until proven lie?
Both sides.
- ********0
someone got ants in their pants.
glad it's not me ;)
- ants0
yeah he's a bit harsh I agree. I'm not really keen on that kind of debate.
Still I posted it because it's the first one that I've read debating the text of the movie, and maybe people have thoughts on it. And yours is a valid one at that.