Finally the Dems have their own Rush Limbaugh
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
about whether he's being nice and civil.
Mohammed al Ghore
murdered her boy friend) wrote:
>Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
>about whether he's being nice and civil.
Moore is a coward. He has to go outside the country to say idiotic
remarks like ''We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We
don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our
stupidity is embarrassing.''
Notice he didn't specify which Americans, he meant all Americans.
Moore is too ignorant to say no to seconds. He must have pigged out on
bangers while in England making those stupid remarks.
-
Vote John Kerry -- he has 57 varieties of answers to
one question!
Ken Smith
> On 26 Jun 2004 19:25:12 -0700, xeto...@yahoo.com (Laura Bush
> murdered her boy friend) wrote:
>
>>Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
>>about whether he's being nice and civil.
>
> Moore is a coward. He has to go outside the country to say idiotic
> remarks like ''We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We
> don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our
> stupidity is embarrassing.''
As a generalization, it's painfully accurate. There are exceptions,
and in particular, expats follow the doings in their native countries
quite intently, but there are a lot of Americans who don't even own a
passport.
zepp
As a generalization, it's one of the most hilariously idiotic smears
the trash right has come up with yet in their panicked attacks on
Moore.
Moore is famous for standing face-to-face with the people he is
focussing on. "Roger and Me" was a laid-off line worker taking on one
of the biggest corporations on earth -- and winning. Moore is
anything but a coward.
I agree with Moore's generalization about American ignorance of other
nations. CBC in Canada has a show devoted to playing up that
ignorance: the guy goes up to Americans in American cities and poses
as a journalist, asking them questions like, "Should Canada stop
taking their retirees and leaving them on ice floes for the polar
bears?" or "Do you approve or disapprove of the job Dan Ackroyd is
doing as King of Canada?"
-
"The State Department officially released its annual terrorism report
just a little more than an hour ago, but unlike last year, there's no
extensive mention of alleged terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. A
senior State Department official tells CNN the U.S. government made a
mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden and 'personalizing
terrorism.'"
-- CNN, 4/30/2001.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
Steve Canyon
wrote:
>Moore is famous for standing face-to-face with the people he is
>focussing on. "Roger and Me" was a laid-off line worker taking on one
>of the biggest corporations on earth -- and winning. Moore is
>anything but a coward.
Moore is not only a cringing coward, but a liar as well. Here he is,
a multi-millionaire and a bunch of ignorant buffoons like Zepp think
he's a blue collar guy because he dresses like a bum.
-----
"Well, that's the funny thing about terrorists. If they get what they
want, they stop being terrorists."
--Zepp Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=q5sc50lf1id03ms1i9truk78v2dk6052f5%404ax.com
"The South couldn't taken any more of the Missouri Compromise,
sensing (correctly) that it would kill slavery in the end,
and Lincoln planned to uphold it."
--Zepp Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=9j2n5vsqfga7l2fsrt0polt2eg6lqs71hv%404ax.com
"The first amendment means that you are protected by law from haters."
--Zepp Jamieson
SkyModem
"Steve Canyon" <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> wrote in message
news:hiitd0hki1v3ec3pc...@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 06:17:25 -0700, zepp <zeppn...@finestplanet.com>
| wrote:
| >
| >Moore is famous for standing face-to-face with the people he is
| >focussing on. "Roger and Me" was a laid-off line worker taking on one
| >of the biggest corporations on earth -- and winning. Moore is
| >anything but a coward.
|
|
| Moore is not only a cringing coward, but a liar as well. Here he is,
| a multi-millionaire and a bunch of ignorant buffoons like Zepp think
| he's a blue collar guy because he dresses like a bum.
Burns, doesn't it? ; )
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
> On 26 Jun 2004 19:25:12 -0700, xeto...@yahoo.com (Laura Bush
> murdered her boy friend) wrote:
>
> >Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
> >about whether he's being nice and civil.
>
> Moore is a coward. He has to go outside the country to say idiotic
> remarks like ''We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We
> don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our
> stupidity is embarrassing.''
>
Well - it's true and this idiotic war in iraq has proved it.
zepp
wrote:
Man, it's got Steve spinning wildly in circles and snapping madly at
his anus, doesn't it?
Moore has gotten rich (and who would have figured Steve would have
such hatred for capitalism and the free market?) doing what he does,
but my point stands: when he began, he was a powerless nobody taking
on the most powerful entities on earth.
And I bet the well-heeled right wing billionaire whack jobs financing
the anti-Moore festival in a few months sink far more money into that
than Moore has made and spent combined.
veronica floss
xeto...@yahoo.com says...
> Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
> about whether he's being nice and civil.
>
Randi Rhodes on Air America really, really tears 'em up.
Randi is the closest comparison to Limbaugh, I think. She is
articulate and entertaining enough to beat Limbaugh in most urban
markets if she could get there. She is the one-liner Kween.
Ed Shultz in the midwest has Limbaugh's voice and pacing and
Limbaugh's ego, but he falls just a penny short. He's still great
for a midwestern and rural audiences.
Bernie Ward on KGO in San Francisco is the premier Liberal talker
in the country -- he handles callers -- esp. hot-talk loons --
better than anyone, period. His debates with loons are electric.
He is a superb, entertaining, articulate debater. He only needs
a few more quotable one-liners per hour to be perfect.
As a bonus, Ward also hosts the only "Liberal" religious talk
show in the country: "God talk" on KGO, Sunday mornings,
accessable via the internet. This show is a curiosity that
quickly becomes a habit, no matter what your interest in Religion
might be.
***
Michael Moore is also great... but he makes movies. It's not the
same thing as making good AM Radio. Moore is on his way to
becoming an historically great documentary film maker who sets
standards and styles that can not be ignored. This is recognition
enough.
v.
peeance....@bayofgoats.org
On 27-Jun-2004, Mohammed al Ghore <Gh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Notice he didn't specify which Americans, he meant all Americans.
> Moore is too ignorant to say no to seconds. He must have pigged out on
> bangers while in England making those stupid remarks.
>
> -
> Vote John Kerry -- he has 57 varieties of answers to
> one question!
What were you pigged out on when you wrote your sig?
--
"The big elephant sitting in the corner is that George W. Bush is
simply unqualified for the job... What's his accomplishment? That he's
no longer an obnoxious drunk?" [Ron Reagan, Jr. during the 2000 GOP
convention]
klystron
zeppn...@finestplanet.com says...
The Republican Spin Machine is screwing itself into the ground
over F9/11. Just look at John Parker's ridiculous reply in this
thread -- I heard the same thing on FoxNooz last night.
Seriously; Did you know that Merced, California has actually
BANNED F9/11?
How are people removed from large cities going to see this movie?
They are the ones who need to see it.
klystron
Madmartigan
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 06:17:25 -0700, zepp <zeppn...@finestplanet.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>Moore is famous for standing face-to-face with the people he is
>>focussing on. "Roger and Me" was a laid-off line worker taking on one
>>of the biggest corporations on earth -- and winning. Moore is
>>anything but a coward.
>
>
> Moore is not only a cringing coward, but a liar as well. Here he is,
> a multi-millionaire and a bunch of ignorant buffoons like Zepp think
> he's a blue collar guy because he dresses like a bum.
On his last book tour, the "man of the people" on the West Coast was flown
around in private corporate jets was given an SUV to drive from his hotel
room to local fast food joints.
He was also GIVEN bodyguards to keep the peasants at bay.
Moore loves to be a hypocrite as long as he is not paying for it.
Asked if his new chairman-of-the-board lifestyle meant he was being
hypocritical, Moore told the Los Angeles Times that the only reason he's
feeding at the corporate trough is because it's there.
"I would never pay for this," he insisted.
--
CRAWFORD, Texas (CNN) -- President Bush fell off his bicycle Saturday while
riding on his ranch, according to White House spokesman Trent Duffy.
"Did the training wheels fall off?" –-Sen. John Kerry, after being told by
reporters that President Bush took a tumble during a bike ride.
CONCORD, Mass. (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry took a
spill from his bicycle after hitting a patch of sand during a ride Sunday
afternoon, but he was uninjured, campaign officials said.
The reason Kerry fell off his bike because he "decided to brake before he
decided against it"
c-bee1
"Mohammed al Ghore" <Gh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0p4td0d9ograc2nu2...@4ax.com...
> On 26 Jun 2004 19:25:12 -0700, xeto...@yahoo.com (Laura Bush
> murdered her boy friend) wrote:
>
> >Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
> >about whether he's being nice and civil.
>
> Moore is a coward. He has to go outside the country to say idiotic
> remarks like ''We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We
> don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our
> stupidity is embarrassing.''
Maybe he doesn't want one of you crackers to plug him with a high-powered
rifle like you've done about every other unpopular truth-teller that popped
their head up.
Richard Weasel
news:rakc38lfp8qg.6...@40tude.net...
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 13:44:39 GMT, Steve Canyon wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 06:17:25 -0700, zepp <zeppn...@finestplanet.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>Moore is famous for standing face-to-face with the people he is
> >>focussing on. "Roger and Me" was a laid-off line worker taking on one
> >>of the biggest corporations on earth -- and winning. Moore is
> >>anything but a coward.
> >
> >
> > Moore is not only a cringing coward, but a liar as well. Here he is,
> > a multi-millionaire and a bunch of ignorant buffoons like Zepp think
> > he's a blue collar guy because he dresses like a bum.
>
> On his last book tour, the "man of the people" on the West Coast was flown
> around in private corporate jets was given an SUV to drive from his hotel
> room to local fast food joints.
>
> He was also GIVEN bodyguards to keep the peasants at bay.
>
> Moore loves to be a hypocrite as long as he is not paying for it.
>
> Asked if his new chairman-of-the-board lifestyle meant he was being
> hypocritical, Moore told the Los Angeles Times that the only reason he's
> feeding at the corporate trough is because it's there.
>
> "I would never pay for this," he insisted.
You call that 'hypocritical"? I call it honest.
No wonder the loons are loons. They can't even recognize (or tell) the
truth.
--
---Richard
A Fundamentalist of the Right?
"He had indeed conversed so entirely with money, that it may be almost
doubted, whether he imagined there was any other thing really existing in
the world; this at least may be certainly averred, that he firmly believed
nothing else to have any real value."
--- Henry Fielding, TOM JONES ---
Richard Weasel
news:MPG.1b47ef805...@news.sonic.net...
> In article <780ea958.04062...@posting.google.com>,
> xeto...@yahoo.com says...
>
> > Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
> > about whether he's being nice and civil.
> >
>
> Randi Rhodes on Air America really, really tears 'em up.
I like Randi Rhodes, a pretty in-your-face gal. But I eventually lose
interest because of the "nothing new" rhetoric that it eventually gets to.
>
> Randi is the closest comparison to Limbaugh, I think. She is
> articulate and entertaining enough to beat Limbaugh in most urban
> markets if she could get there. She is the one-liner Kween.
>
> Ed Shultz in the midwest has Limbaugh's voice and pacing and
> Limbaugh's ego, but he falls just a penny short. He's still great
> for a midwestern and rural audiences.
Ed is entertaining from a "down home" perspective and should be very
effective in the midwest audience, since he's so much, other than being
liberal, like them and understands them. But, like with Randi, I lose
interest because he runs out of "what's new".
He replaces three hours of Randi on XM, so the only way I can hear her in
full for her full four hours is through Air America's streaming audio.
>
> Bernie Ward on KGO in San Francisco is the premier Liberal talker
> in the country -- he handles callers -- esp. hot-talk loons --
> better than anyone, period. His debates with loons are electric.
> He is a superb, entertaining, articulate debater. He only needs
> a few more quotable one-liners per hour to be perfect.
>
> As a bonus, Ward also hosts the only "Liberal" religious talk
> show in the country: "God talk" on KGO, Sunday mornings,
> accessable via the internet. This show is a curiosity that
> quickly becomes a habit, no matter what your interest in Religion
> might be.
Gawd! I miss San Francisco! I used to listen to a selection of at least
three very entertaining talk (in those days news column) shows on AM on the
way to work.
>
> ***
>
> Michael Moore is also great... but he makes movies. It's not the
> same thing as making good AM Radio. Moore is on his way to
> becoming an historically great documentary film maker who sets
> standards and styles that can not be ignored. This is recognition
> enough.
>
>
> v.
Richard Weasel
<peeance....@bayofgoats.org> wrote in message
news:10du2cj...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> On 27-Jun-2004, Mohammed al Ghore <Gh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Notice he didn't specify which Americans, he meant all Americans.
> > Moore is too ignorant to say no to seconds. He must have pigged out on
> > bangers while in England making those stupid remarks.
> >
> > -
> > Vote John Kerry -- he has 57 varieties of answers to
> > one question!
>
> What were you pigged out on when you wrote your sig?
Oh, Muh-ho-hum is just busily pinging his hollow head to find something to
say. Obviously he gave up and went to the RNC cookbook to find that one.
With his smarts, I'm surprised he could even find it.
Scott Erb
"Mohammed al Ghore" <Gh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0p4td0d9ograc2nu2...@4ax.com...
> On 26 Jun 2004 19:25:12 -0700, xeto...@yahoo.com (Laura Bush
> murdered her boy friend) wrote:
>
> >Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
> >about whether he's being nice and civil.
>
> Moore is a coward. He has to go outside the country
Uh, he made the movie and most of his statements here in America. It's
making loads of money, and making history.
Too bad for you.
Scott Erb
"SkyModem" <skym...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:TKADc.18447306$Of.30...@news.easynews.com...
Like Dick Cheney the other day, these guys are wearing their frustration and
anger on their sleeves.
It's very fun to observe.
Madmartigan
> "Madmartigan" <Madma...@SoftHome.net> wrote in message
> news:rakc38lfp8qg.6...@40tude.net...
>> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 13:44:39 GMT, Steve Canyon wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 06:17:25 -0700, zepp <zeppn...@finestplanet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Moore is famous for standing face-to-face with the people he is
>>>>focusing on. "Roger and Me" was a laid-off line worker taking on one
>>>>of the biggest corporations on earth -- and winning. Moore is
>>>>anything but a coward.
>>>
>>>
>>> Moore is not only a cringing coward, but a liar as well. Here he is,
>>> a multi-millionaire and a bunch of ignorant buffoons like Zepp think
>>> he's a blue collar guy because he dresses like a bum.
>>
>> On his last book tour, the "man of the people" on the West Coast was flown
>> around in private corporate jets was given an SUV to drive from his hotel
>> room to local fast food joints.
>>
>> He was also GIVEN bodyguards to keep the peasants at bay.
>>
>> Moore loves to be a hypocrite as long as he is not paying for it.
>>
>> Asked if his new chairman-of-the-board lifestyle meant he was being
>> hypocritical, Moore told the Los Angeles Times that the only reason he's
>> feeding at the corporate trough is because it's there.
>>
>> "I would never pay for this," he insisted.
>
> You call that 'hypocritical"? I call it honest.
>
> No wonder the loons are loons. They can't even recognize (or tell) the
> truth.
Michael Moore is a fabricator. He calls a film a documentary when in fact
it just a fabrication to fit his agenda. Moore's "Bowling for Combine" is
full of manipulation of the facts and inherent lies.
BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE
Documentary or Fiction?
-David T. Hardy-
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" won the Oscar for best documentary.
Unfortunately, it is not a documentary, by the Academy's own definition.
The injustice here is not so much to the viewer, as to the independent
producers of real documentaries. These struggle in a field which receives
but a fraction of the recognition and financing of the "entertainment
industry." They are protected by Academy rules limiting the documentary
competition to nonfiction.
Bowling is fiction. It makes its points by deceiving and by misleading the
viewer. Statements are made which are false. Moore leads the reader to draw
inferences which he must have known were wrong. Indeed, even speeches shown
on screen are heavily edited, so that sentences are assembled in the
speaker's voice, but which were not sentences he uttered. Bowling uses
deception as its primary tool of persuasion and effect.
A film which does this may be a commercial success. It may be entertaining.
But it is not a documentary. One need only consult Rule 12 of the rules for
the Academy Award: a documentary is a non-fictional movie.
The point is not that Bowling is biased. No, the point is that Bowling is
deliberately, seriously, and consistently deceptive.
1. Willie Horton. The first edition of the webpage had a section on
falsification of the election ad regarding Willie Horton (the convict, not
the baseball star). This was one of the earliest criticisms of Bowling--Ben
Fritz caught it back in November, 2002.
To illustrate politicians' (and especially Republican politicians')
willingness to play the "race card," Bowling shows what purports to be a
television ad run by George Bush, Sr., in his race against Governor
Dukakis. For those who weren't around back then -- Massachusetts had a
"prison furlough" program where prisoners could be given short releases
from the clink. Unfortunately, some of them never came back. Dukakis vetoed
legislation which would have forbidden furlough to persons with "life
without parole" sentences for murder, and authorities thereafter furloughed
a number of murderers. Horton, in prison for a brutal stabbing murder, got
a furlough, never returned, and then attacked a couple, assaulting both and
raping the woman. His opponents in the presidential race took advantage of
the veto.
The ad as shown by Moore begins with a "revolving door" of justice,
progresses to a picture of Willie Horton (who is black), and ends with
dramatic subtitle: "Willie Horton released. Then kills again."
Fact: Bowling splices together two different election ads, one run by the
Bush campaign (featuring a revolving door, and not even mentioning Horton)
and another run by an independent expenditure campaign (naming Horton, and
showing footage from which it can be seen that he is black). At the end,
the ad ala' Moore has the customary note that it was paid for by the
Bush-Quayle campaign. Moore intones "whether you're a psychotic killer or
running for president of the United States, the one thing you can always
count on is white America's fear of the black man." There is nothing to
reveal that most of the ad just seen (and all of it that was relevant to
Moore's claim) was not the Bush-Quayle ad, which didn't even name Horton.
Fact: Apparently unsatisfied with splicing the ads, Bowling's editors added
a subtitle "Willie Horton released. Then kills again."
Fact: Ben Fitz also noted that Bowling's editors didn't bother to research
the events before doctoring the ads. Horton's second arrest was not for
murder. (The second set of charges were aggravated assault and rape).
I originally deleted this from the main webpage, because in the VHS version
of Bowling Moore had the decency to remove the misleading footage. But as
Brendan Nyhan recently wrote in Spinsanity, he put it back in in the DVD
version! He did make one minor change, switching his edited-in caption to
"Willie Horton released. Then rapes a woman." Obviously Moore had been
informed of the Spinsanity criticism. He responded by correcting his own
typo, not by removing the edited in caption, nor by revealing that the ad
being shown was not in fact a Bush-Quayle ad.
2. NRA and the Reaction To Tragedy. A major theme in Bowling is that NRA is
callous toward slayings. In order to make this theme fit the facts,
however, Bowling repeatedly distorts the evidence.
A. Columbine Shooting/Denver NRA Meeting. Bowling portrays this with the
following sequence:
Weeping children outside Columbine;
Cut to Charlton Heston holding a musket and proclaiming "I have only five
words for you: 'from my cold, dead, hands'";
Cut to billboard advertising the meeting, while Moore intones "Just ten
days after the Columbine killings, despite the pleas of a community in
mourning, Charlton Heston came to Denver and held a large pro-gun rally for
the National Rifle Association;"
Cut to Heston (supposedly) continuing speech... "I have a message from the
Mayor, Mr. Wellington Webb, the Mayor of Denver. He sent me this; it says
'don't come here. We don't want you here.' I say to the Mayor this is our
country, as Americans we're free to travel wherever we want in our broad
land. Don't come here? We're already here!"
The portrayal is one of an arrogant protest in response to the deaths --
or, as one reviewer put it, "it seemed that Charlton Heston and others
rushed to Littleton to hold rallies and demonstrations directly after the
tragedy." The portrayal is in fact false.
Fact: The Denver event was not a demonstration relating to Columbine, but
an annual meeting (see links below), whose place and date had been fixed
years in advance.
Fact: At Denver, the NRA cancelled all events (normally several days of
committee meetings, sporting events, dinners, and rallies) save the annual
members' voting meeting -- that could not be cancelled because the state
law governing nonprofits required that it be held. [No way to change
location, since under NY law you have to give 10 days' advance notice of
that to the members, there were upwards of 4,000,000 members -- and
Columbine happened 11 days before the scheduled meeting.] As a newspaper
reported:
In a letter to NRA members Wednesday, President Charlton Heston and the
group's executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, said all seminars,
workshops, luncheons, exhibits by gun makers and other vendors, and
festivities are canceled.
All that's left is a members' reception with Rep. J.C. Watts, R-Okla., and
the annual meeting, set for 10 a.m. May 1 in the Colorado Convention
Center.
Under its bylaws and New York state law, the NRA must hold an annual
meeting.
The NRA convention April 30-May 2 was expected to draw 22,000 members and
give the city a $17.9 million economic boost.
"But the tragedy in Littleton last Tuesday calls upon us to take steps,
along with dozens of other planned public events, to modify our schedule to
show our profound sympathy and respect for the families and communities in
the Denver area in their time of great loss," Heston and LaPierre wrote.
Fact: Heston's "cold dead hands" speech, which leads off Moore's depiction
of the Denver meeting, was not given at Denver after Columbine. It was
given a year later in Charlotte, North Carolina, and was his gesture of
gratitude upon his being given a handmade musket, at that annual meeting.
Fact: When Bowling continues on to the speech which Heston did give in
Denver, it carefully edits it to change its theme.
Moore's fabrication here cannot be described by any polite term. It is a
lie, a fraud, and a few other things. Carrying it out required a LOT of
editing to mislead the viewer, as I will show below. I transcribed Heston's
speech as Moore has it, and compared it to a news agency's transcript,
color coding the passages. CLICK HERE for the comparison, with links to the
original transcript.
Moore has actually taken audio of seven sentences, from five different
parts of the speech, and a section given in a different speech entirely,
and spliced them together. Each edit is cleverly covered by inserting a
still or video footage for a few seconds.
First, right after the weeping victims, Moore puts on Heston's "I have only
five words for you . . . cold dead hands" statement, making it seem
directed at them. As noted above, it's actually a thank-you speech given a
year later in North Carolina.
Moore then has an interlude -- a visual of a billboard and his narration.
This is vital. He can't go directly to Heston's real Denver speech. If he
did that, you might ask why Heston in mid-speech changed from a purple tie
and lavender shirt to a white shirt and red tie, and the background
draperies went from maroon to blue. Moore has to separate the two segments.
Moore's second edit (covered by splicing in a pan shot of the crowd)
deletes Heston's announcement that NRA has in fact cancelled most of its
meeting:
"As you know, we've cancelled the festivities, the fellowship we normally
enjoy at our annual gatherings. This decision has perplexed a few and
inconvenienced thousands. As your president, I apologize for that."
Moore then cuts to Heston noting that Denver's mayor asked NRA not to come,
and shows Heston replying "I said to the Mayor: As Americans, we're free to
travel wherever we want in our broad land. Don't come here? We're already
here!" as if in defiance.
Actually, Moore put an edit right in the middle of the first sentence, and
another at its end! Heston really said (with reference his own WWII vet
status) "I said to the mayor, well, my reply to the mayor is, I volunteered
for the war they wanted me to attend when I was 18 years old. Since then,
I've run small errands for my country, from Nigeria to Vietnam. I know many
of you here in this room could say the same thing."
Moore cuts it after "I said to the Mayor" and attaches a sentence from the
end of the next paragraph: "As Americans, we're free to travel wherever we
want in our broad land." He hides the deletion by cutting to footage of
protestors and a photo of the Mayor before going back and showing Heston.
Moore has Heston then triumphantly announce "Don't come here? We're already
here!" Actually, that sentence is clipped from a segment five paragraphs
farther on in the speech. Again, Moore uses an editing trick to cover the
doctoring, switching to a pan shot of the audience as Heston's (edited)
voice continues.
What Heston said there was:
"NRA members are in city hall, Fort Carson, NORAD, the Air Force Academy
and the Olympic Training Center. And yes, NRA members are surely among the
police and fire and SWAT team heroes who risked their lives to rescue the
students at Columbine.
Don't come here? We're already here. This community is our home. Every
community in America is our home. We are a 128-year-old fixture of
mainstream America. The Second Amendment ethic of lawful, responsible
firearm ownership spans the broadest cross section of American life
imaginable.
So, we have the same right as all other citizens to be here. To help
shoulder the grief and share our sorrow and to offer our respectful,
reassured voice to the national discourse that has erupted around this
tragedy."
"NRA members are, above all, Americans. That means that whatever our
differences, we are respectful of one another and we stand united,
especially in adversity."
I recently discovered that Moore has set up a new webpage to respond to a
chosen few points of criticism, one of which is his, er, creative editing
of Heston's speech. Click here for a link to his page, and for my response
to his attempted defense of what he did. Basically, Moore contends that he
didn't mean for the viewer to get the impression that "cold dead hands" was
spoken at Denver -- that just "appears as Heston is being introduced in
narration."
B. Mt. Morris shooting/ Flint rally. Bowling continues by juxtaposing
another Heston speech with a school shooting of Kayla Rolland at Mt.
Morris, MI, just north of Flint. Moore makes the claim that "Just as he did
after the Columbine shooting, Charlton Heston showed up in Flint, to have a
big pro-gun rally."
Fact: Heston's speech was given at a "get out the vote" rally in Flint,
which was held when elections rolled by some eight months after the
shooting ( Feb. 29 vs Oct. 17, 2000).
Fact: Bush and Gore were then both in the Flint area, trying to gather
votes. Moore himself had been hosting rallies for Green Party candidate
Nader in Flint a few weeks before.
Here's the real setting, as reported in the Detroit Free Press one day
after Heston's speech:
What do Al Gore, Charlton Heston, Jesse Jackson, Lee Iacocca, and George
W., Laura and Barbara Bush all agree upon?
That Michigan is a really big deal right now. The candidates, their wives,
mothers, and pals are here this week, as post-debate spin control ebbs and
political ground control overtakes Michigan with 20 days left to Election
Day.....Democratic nominee Gore is to campaign in Flint tonight; Texas Gov.
Bush is to visit a Macomb County factory Thursday. . . . . For Republicans,
other surrogates include former auto executive Lee Iacocca touting Bush at
a luncheon today in Troy, and Tuesday's visit by National Rifle Association
President and movie-Moses Charlton Heston.
For the Democrats, the Rev. Jesse Jackson is seeking to mobilize black
voters for the Gore ticket Thursday at Detroit's King High School, and
Energy Secretary Bill Richardson will do the same at an Arab-American
Chamber of Commerce dinner Friday in Livonia.
How does Moore trick the viewer into believing that this speech, given in
this context, was actually a defiant response to a shooting in a nearby
town months before?
Moore creates the impression that one event was right after the other so
smoothly that I didn't spot his technique. It was picked up by Richard
Rockley, who sent me an email.
Moore works by depriving you of context and guiding your mind to fill the
vacuum -- with completely false ideas. It is brilliantly, if unethically,
done,. Let's deconstruct his method.
The entire sequence takes barely 40 seconds. Images are flying by so
rapidly that you cannot really think about them, you just form impressions.
Shot of Moore comforting Kayla's school principal after she discusses
Kayla's murder. As they turn away, we hear Heston's voice: "From my cold,
dead hands." [Moore is again attibuting it to a speech where it was not
uttered.]
When Heston becomes visible, he's telling a group that freedom needs you
now, more than ever, to come to its defense. Your impression: Heston is
responding to something urgent, presumably the controversy caused by her
death. And he's speaking about it like a fool.
Moore: "Just as he did after the Columbine shooting, Charlton Heston showed
up in Flint, to have a big pro-gun rally."
Moore continues on to say that before he came to Flint, Heston had been
interviewed by the Georgetown Hoya about Kayla's death... Why would this be
important?
Image of Hoya (a student paper) appears on screen, with highlighting on
words of reporter mentioning Kayla Rolland's name, and highlighting on
Heston's name (only his name, not his reply) as he answers. Image is on
screen only a few seconds.
Ah, you think you spot the relevance: he obviously was alerted to the case,
and that's why be came.
And, Moore continues, the case was discussed on Heston's "own NRA"
webpage... Again, your mind seeks relevance....
Image of a webpage for America's First Freedom (a website for NRA, not for
Heston) with text "48 hours after Kayla Rolland was prounced dead"
highlighted and zoomed in on.
Your impression: Heston did something 48 hours after she died. Why else
would "his" webpage note this event, whatever it is? What would Heston's
action have been? It must have been to go to Flint and hold the rally.
Scene cuts to protestors, including a woman with a Million Moms March
t-shirt, who asks how Heston could come here, she's shocked and appalled,
"it's like he's rubbing our face in it." (This speaker and the protest may
be faked, but let's assume for the moment they're real.). This caps your
impression. She's shocked by Heston coming there, 48 hours after the death.
He'd hardly be rubbing faces in it if he came there much later, on a
purpose unrelated to the death.
The viewer thinks he or she understands ....
One reviewer: Heston "held another NRA rally in Flint, Michigan, just 48
hours after a 6 year old shot and killed a classmate in that same town."
Another:"What was Heston thinking going to into Colorado and Michigan
immediately after the massacres of innocent children?"
Let's look at the facts behind the presentation:
Heston's speech, with its sense of urgency, freedom needs you now more than
ever before. As noted above, it's actually an election rally, held weeks
before the closest election in American history.
Moore: "Just as at Columbine, Heston showed up in Flint to have a large
pro-gun rally." As noted above, it was an election rally actually held
eight months later.
Georgetown Hoya interview, with highlighting on reporter mentioning Kayla
and on Heston's name where he responds.
What is not highlighted, and impossible to read except by repeating the
scene, is that the reporter asks about Kayla and about the Columbine
shooters, and Heston replies only as to the Columbine shooters. There is no
indication that he recognized Kayla Rolland's case. It flashes past in the
movie: click here to see it frozen.
"His NRA webpage" with highlighted reference to "48 hours after Kayla
Robinson is pronounced dead." Here's where it gets interesting. Moore zooms
in on that phrase so quickly that it blots out the rest of the sentence,
and then takes the image off screen before you can read anything else.
(It's clearer in the movie). The page is long gone, but I finally found an
archived version and also a June 2000 usenet posting usenet posting. Guess
what the page really said happened? Not a Heston trip to Flint, but:
"48-hours after Kayla Rolland is pronounced dead, Bill Clinton is on The
Today Show telling a sympathetic Katie Couric, "Maybe this tragic death
will help."" Nothing to do with Heston. Incidentally, if you have the DVD
version and the right player, you can freeze frame this sequence and see it
yourself. Then go back and freeze frame the rally, and you'll make out
various Bush election posters and tags.
Yep, Moore had a reason for zooming in on the 48 hours. The zooming starts
instantly, and moves sideways to block out the rest of the sentence before
even the quickest viewer could read it.
By the way, when interviewed by a reporter for the Times of London, Moore
had to admit the point: "When I spoke to Moore last week, he confirmed
Hardy's point about the date of the speech, but angrily denied the
allegation that he had misled viewers." Link to Times webpage (charge for
download).
If this is artistic talent, it's not the type that merits an Oscar.
C. Heston Interview. Having created the desired impression, Moore follows
with his Heston interview. Heston's memory of the Flint event is foggy (he
says it was an early morning event, and that they then went on to the next
rally; in fact the rally was at 6 - 7:30 PM. and the last event of the
day.). Heston's lack of recall is not surprising; it was one rally in a
nine-stop tour of three States in three days.
Moore, who had plenty of time to prepare, continues the impression he has
created, asking Heston misleading questions such as: "After that happened
you came to Flint to hold a big rally and, you know, I just, did you feel
it was being at all insensitive to the fact that this community had just
gone through this tragedy?" Moore continues, "you think you'd like to
apologize to the people in Flint for coming and doing that at that time?"
Moore knows the real sequence, and knows that Heston does not. Moore takes
full advantage.
As noted above, Moore's deception works on reviewers. In fact, when Heston
says he did not know about Kayla's shooting when he went to Flint, viewers
see Heston as an inept liar:
"Then, he [Heston] and his ilk held ANOTHER gun-rally shortly after another
child/gun tragedy in Flint, MI where a 6-year old child shot and killed a
6-year old classmate (Heston claims in the final interview of the film that
he didn't know this had just happened when he appeared)." [Click here for
original]
Bowling persuaded these viewers by deceiving them. Moore's creative skills
are used to convince the viewer that things happened which did not and that
a truthful man is a liar when he denies them.
A further question: is the end of the Heston interview faked?
3. Animated sequence equating NRA with KKK. In an animated history send-up,
with the narrator talking rapidly, Bowling equates the NRA with the Klan,
suggesting NRA was founded in 1871, "the same year that the Klan became an
illegal terrorist organization." Bowling goes on to depict Klansmen
becoming the NRA and an NRA character helping to light a burning cross.
This sequence is intended to create the impression either that NRA and the
Klan were parallel groups or that when the Klan was outlawed its members
formed the NRA.
Both impressions are not merely false, but directly opposed to the real
facts.
Fact: The NRA was founded in 1871 -- by act of the New York Legislature, at
request of former Union officers. The Klan was founded in 1866, and quickly
became a terrorist organization. One might claim that while it was an
organization and a terrorist one, it technically became an "illegal" such
with passage of the federal Ku Klux Klan Act and Enforcement Act in 1871.
These criminalized interference with civil rights, and empowered the
President to use troops to suppress the Klan. (Although we'd have to
acknowledge that murder, terror and arson were illegal long before that
time -- the Klan hadn't been operating legally until 1871, it was operating
illegally with the connivance of law enforcement.)
Fact: The Klan Act and Enforcement Act were signed into law by President
Ulysess S. Grant. Grant used their provisions vigorously, suspending habeas
corpus and deploying troops; under his leadership over 5,000 arrests were
made and the Klan was dealt a serious (if all too short-lived) blow.
Fact: Grant's vigor in disrupting the Klan earned him unpopularity among
many whites, but Frederick Douglass praised him, and an associate of
Douglass wrote that African-Americans "will ever cherish a grateful
remembrance of his name, fame and great services."
Fact: After Grant left the White House, the NRA elected him as its eighth
president.
Fact: After Grant's term, the NRA elected General Philip Sheridan, who had
removed the governors of Texas and Lousiana for failure to suppress the
KKK.
Fact: The affinity of NRA for enemies of the Klan is hardly surprising. The
NRA was founded by former Union officers, and eight of its first ten
presidents were Union veterans.
Fact: During the 1950s and 1960s, groups of blacks organized as NRA
chapters in order to obtain surplus military rifles to fight off Klansmen.
.4. Shooting at Buell Elementary School in Michigan. Bowling depicts the
juvenile shooter who killed Kayla Rolland as a sympathetic youngster, from
a struggling family, who just found a gun in his uncle's house and took it
to school. "No one knew why the little boy wanted to shoot the little
girl."
Fact: The little boy was the class thug, already suspended from school for
stabbing another kid with a pencil, and had fought with Kayla the day
before. Since the incident, he has stabbed another child with a knife.
Fact: The uncle's house was the family business -- the neighborhood
crack-house. The gun was stolen and was purchased by the uncle in exchange
for drugs.The shooter's father was already serving a prison term for theft
and drug offenses. A few weeks later police busted the shooter's
grandmother and aunt for narcotics sales. After police hauled the family
away, the neighbors applauded the officers. This was not a nice but
misunderstood family.
Links:1., 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,
5. The Taliban and American Aid. In discussing military assistance to
various countries, Bowling asserts that the U.S. gave $245 million in aid
to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan in 2000 and 2001.
Fact: The aid in question was humanitarian assistance, given through UN and
nongovernmental organizations, to relieve famine in Afghanistan. [Various
numbers are given for the amount of the aid, and some say several million
went for clearing landmines.]
6. International Comparisons. To pound home its point, Bowling flashes a
dramatic count of gun homicides in various countries: Canada 165, Germany
381, Australia 65, Japan 39, US 11,127. Now that's raw numbers, not rates
-- Here's why he doesn't talk rates.
Verifying the figures was difficult, since Moore does not give a year for
them. A lot of Moore's numbers didn't check out for any period I could
find. As a last effort at checking, I did a Google search for each number
and the word "gun" or words "gun homicides" Many traced -- only back to
webpages repeating Bowling's figures. Moore is the only one using these
numbers.
Germany: Bowling says 381: 1995 figures put homicides at 1,476, about four
times what Bowling claims, and gun homicides at 168, about half what it
claims: it's either far too high or far too low. ( Jörg Altmeppen has
emailed me a link to a German site putting the figure at Moore's 381, in
1998 -- I have to depend upon his translation here, as German is one of the
languages in which I can only curse.).
Australia: Bowling says 65. This is very close, albeit picking the year to
get the data desired. Between 1980-1995, firearm homicides varied from
64-123, although never exactly 65. In 2000, it was 64, which was proudly
proclaimed as the lowest number in the country's history.
US: Bowling says 11,127. FBI figures put it a lot lower. They report gun
homicides were 8,719 in 2001, 8,661 in 2000, 8,480 in 1999. (2001 UCR, p.
23).
To be utterly fair, this is a count of the 13,752 homicides for which
police submitted supplemental data (including weapon used): the total
homicide count was 15,980. But what weapon, if any, was used in the other
homicide is unknown to us, and was unknown to Moore.
After an email tip, I finally found a way to compute precisely 11,127.
Ignore the FBI, use Nat'l Center for Health Statistics figures. These are
based on doctors' death certificates rather than police investigation.
Then -- to their gun homicide figures, add the figure for legally-justified
homicides: self-defense and police use against criminals. Presto, you have
exactly Moore's 11,127. I can see no other way for him to get it.
Since Moore appears to use police figures for the other countries, it's
hardly a valid comparison. More to the point, it's misleading since it
includes self-defense and police: when we talk of a gun homicide problem we
hardly have in mind a woman defending against a rapist, or a cop taking out
an armed robber.
Canada: Moore's number is correct for 1999, a low point, but he ignores
some obvious differences.
Bias. I wanted to talk about fabrication, not about bias, but I've gotten
emails asking why I didn't mention that Switzerland requires almost all
adult males to have guns, but has a lower homicide rate than Great Britain,
or that Japanese-Americans, with the same proximity to guns as other
Americans, have homicide rates half that of Japan itself. (And, after
posting this, got an email saying that Switzerland doesn't require all
adult males to own guns -- not everyone is in the national militia. Here's
an encyclopedia reference to their system. 36% of entire population is
enrolled in the militia -- which must mean a very great part of the adult
male population, " All of Swiss society celebrates shooting, and skill with
the rifle. For example, each year Zurich shuts down a whole day for its
"Boys' Shooting Festival."" Sounds like a plan to me.)
And, oh, yes, there is an extremely interesting paper by Canadian
criminologist Gary Mauser, presented at a colloquium in, appropriately
enough, the Tower of London, and addressing international comparisons of
firearms laws and firearm crime rates. I highly recommend reading, if
you're interested in serious research rather than Moore's flashing numbers.
Okay, they're mentioned, now back to our regularly scheduled program.
Actually, international comparisons lead to some interesting points. Here's
a webpage which gives worldwide homicide rates. The U.S. comes in at 23rd
place. It only made the list by edging out Armenia and Bulgaria. Its former
rival as a superpower, the states of the former Soviet Union, absolutely
flatten it in this competition. Russia has four times the US rate. Ukraine
and Estonia have twice its rate. Even Poland ranks higher. South Africa's
showing is ten times the US rate! Hmm-- another point from a different
section of that site. In rape rates per 1000 population, the US ranks
ninth, at .32, just ahead of Iceland and Papua New Guinea. Canada is fifth,
at .75, over double the US rate, and Australia is third with .80.
7. Miscellaneous. Even the Canadian government is jumping in. Bowling shows
Moore casually buying ammunition at an Ontario Walmart. He asks us to "look
at what I, a foreign citizen, was able to do at a local Canadian Wal-Mart."
He buys several boxes of ammunition without a question being raised.
"That's right. I could buy as much ammunition as I wanted, in Canada."
Canadian officials have pointed out that the buy is faked or illegal:
Canadian law has since, 1998, required ammunition buyers to present proper
identification. Since Jan. 1, 2001, (sorry--link broke--it was a Canadian
government info site) it has required non-Canadians to present a firearms
borrowing or importation license, too. (Bowling appears to have been filmed
in mid and late 2001).
While we're at it: Bowling shows footage of a B-52 on display at the Air
Force Academy, while Moore scornfully intones that the plaque under it
"proudly proclaims that the plane killed Vietnamese people on Christmas Eve
of 1972."
The plaque actually reads that "Flying out of Utapao Royal Thai Naval
Airfield in southeast Thailand, the crew of 'Diamond Lil' shot down a MIG
northeast of Hanoi during 'Linebacker II' action on Christmas eve 1972."
This is pretty mild compared to the rest of Bowling, but the viewer can't
even trust Moore to honestly read a monument.
(As Spinsanity notes, Moore goes even farther in his add-on DVD. There, he
tells us, "And they've got a plaque on there proudly proclaiming that this
bomber, this B-52, killed thousands upon thousands of Vietnamese --
innocent civilians.")
8. Race. Moore does not directly state that Heston is a racist--he is the
master of creating the false impression --but reviewers come away saying
"Heston looks like an idiot, and a racist one at that" Source. "BTW, one
thing the Heston interview did clear up, that man is shockingly racist."
Source.
The remarks stem from Heston's answer (after Moore keeps pressing for why
the US has more violence than other countries) that it might be due to the
US "having a more mixed ethnicity" than other nations, and "We had enough
problems with civil rights in the beginning." A viewer who accepts Moore's
theme that gun ownership is driven by racial fears might conclude that
Heston is blaming blacks and the civil rights movement.
But if you look at some history missing from Bowling, you get exactly the
opposite picture. Heston is talking, not about race, but about racism. In
the early 1960s, the civil rights movement was fighting for acceptance.
Civil rights workers were being murdered. The Kennedy Administration,
trying to hold together a Democratic coalition that ranged from liberals to
fire-eater segregationists such as George Wallace and Lester Maddox, found
the issue too hot to touch, and offered little support.
Heston got involved. He picketed discriminating restaurants. He worked with
Martin Luther King, and helped King break Hollywood's color barrier (yes,
there was one.). He led the actors' component of King's 1963 march in
Washington, which set the stage for the key civil rights legislation in
1964.
Here's Heston's comments at the 2001 Congress on Racial Equality Martin
Luther King dinner (presided over by NRA director, and CORE President, Roy
Innes). More on Heston.
Most of the viewers were born long after the events Heston is recalling. To
them, the civil rights struggle consists of Martin Luther King speaking,
people singing "We Shall Overcome," and everyone coming to their senses.
Heston remembers what it was really like.
If Heston fails to explain this in Bowling, we've got to note that Moore
(despite his claim that he left the interview almost unedited) cut a lot of
the interview out. Watch closely and you'll see a clock on the wall near
Moore's head. When it's first seen, the time is about 5:47. When Heston
finally walks out, it reads about 6:10. That's 23 minutes. I clocked the
Heston interview in Bowling at 5 1/4 minutes. About three-quarters of what
Heston did say was trimmed out. [Why the clock indicates six o'clock, when
Moore is specific that he showed up for the interview at 8:30 AM, will have
to await another investigation!]
9. Fear. Bowling probably has a good point when it suggests that the media
feeds off fear in a search for the fast buck. For an interesting analysis
of this, showing how crime news skyrocketed (largely displacing
international coverage) even as crime fell, click here.
Bowling cites some examples: the razor blades in Halloween apples scare,
the flesh-eating bacteria scare, etc. The examples are taken straight from
Barry Glassner's excellent book on the subject, "The Culture of Fear," and
Moore interviews Glassner on-camera for the point.
Then Moore does exactly what he condemns in the media.
Given the prominence of schoolyard killings as a theme in Bowling for
Columbine, Moore must have asked Glassner about that subject. Whatever
Glassner said is, however, left on the cutting-room floor. That's because
Glassner lists schoolyard shootings as one of the mythical fears. He points
out that "More than three times as many people are killed by lightning as
by violence at schools."
This is as close as Moore comes to having a thesis, an explanation for
homicide rate differences. But here he falls flat on his face. As one of
his interviewees notes, over a period when homicide rates were falling,
media coverage of murder increased by 600%. Okay, flip it around. When
media coverage of homicides increased 600%, homicide rates fell. So much
for Moore's explanation. In fact, so much for all of his attempted
explanations. During the 1990s, homicide rates in the US went into their
steepest decline in decades, with handgun homicides leading the way. That
was the same period that saw the welfare reform laws, the bombing in
Serbia, several million firearms sold each year -- everything, in short,
that Moore condemns. (For one source, just go back up the page to the FBI
statistics: between 1997 and 2001, firearm homicides fell from 10,729 to
8,719, and 1997 was after the biggest drop had occured.
I suppose we might go farther, and ask if Moore's film is not illustrative
of what it condemns. Moore argues that the media (a) distorts reality, and
(b) hypes fear of other Americans, because (c) fear is good for a fast
buck. Moore distorts reality, hypes fear of other Americans ("are we nation
of gun nuts, or just nuts?") and, well, made several million fast bucks.
10. Guns (supposedly the point of the film). A point worth making (although
not strictly on theme here): Bowling's theme is, rather curiously, not
opposed to firearms ownership.
After making out Canada to be a haven of nonviolence, Moore asks why. He
proclaims that Canada has "a tremendous amount of gun ownership," somewhat
under one gun per household. He visits Canadian shooting ranges, gun
stores, and in the end proclaims "Canada is a gun loving, gun toting, gun
crazy country!"
Or as he put it elsewhere, "then I learned that Canada has 7 million guns
but they don't kill each other like we do. I thought, gosh, that's
uncomfortably close to the NRA position: Guns don't kill people, people
kill people."
Bowling concludes that Canada isn't peaceful because it lacks guns and gun
nuts -- it has lots of those -- but because the Canadian mass media isn't
into constant hyping of fear and loathing, and the American media is. (One
problem).
Which leaves us to wonder why the Brady Campaign/Million Moms issued a
press release. congratulating Moore on his Oscar nomination.
Or does Bowling have a hidden punch line, and in the end the joke is on
them?
One possible explanation: did Bowling begin as one movie, and end up as
another?
Incidentally, Moore has issued a webpage responding to criticism. In so
doing, he actually admits that much of the above criticism is accurate. He
did splice the Willie Horton ad, and Heston's "cold dead hands" was never
spoken at Denver, and his statistics do stem from those of the Center for
Disease Control, which include self-defense and police shootings of perps.
As far as the rest of the criticisms above -- strange, but Moore doesn't
have an answer. Here's my response.
Conclusion
The point is not that Bowling is unfair, or lacking in objectivity. The
point is far more fundamental: Bowling for Columbine is dishonest. It is
fraudulent. To trash Heston, it even uses the audio/video editor to
assemble a Heston speech that Heston did not give, and sequences images and
carefully highlighted text to spin the viewer's mind to a wrong conclusion.
If there is art in this movie, it is a dishonest art. Moore does not inform
his readers: he plays them like a violin.
A further thought, on a topic far broader (no pun intended) than Moore.
Moore's film is unquestionably popular. He's attracted an almost-cult
following. And judging from the emails I've received, plenty of his
followers don't care a bit about whether they were misled. Can broader
lessons be learned from this?
Suppose for a moment that Moore's behavior can be explained as a product of
Narcisstic Personality Disorder, that he fits the clinical symptoms to a T,
that indeed Bowling is a grand acting out of this character disorder. Does
its popularity suggest something of far greater concern than one more
narcissist in Hollywood? And does that in turn hold a key to mass
slayings?Click here for some thoughts on that score.
David T. Hardy [an amateur who has for the last year been working on a
serious bill of rights documentary], to include the Second Amendment.
dthardy at mindspring.com ["at" instead of "@" used to confuse those
blasted spam robots]
Moore is unable to tell the truth and that's the truth.
Richard Weasel
"Madmartigan" <Madma...@SoftHome.net> wrote in message
The following from Hardy is an elaborate compendium of right wing opinion
disguised as fact.
In other words: Propaganda.
Hardy is a well known right wing and NRA ideologue who wrote the book:
"Michael Moore Is A Big Fat Stupid White Man"
Hardly an independent or credible observer.
Try again with some more objective speil.
--
---Richard
A Fundamentalist of the Right?
"He had indeed conversed so entirely with money, that it may be almost
doubted, whether he imagined there was any other thing really existing in
the world; this at least may be certainly averred, that he firmly believed
nothing else to have any real value."
--- Henry Fielding, TOM JONES ---
>
Steve Canyon
Steve Canyon
wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 14:22:43 GMT, "SkyModem" <skym...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"Steve Canyon" <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> wrote in message
>>news:hiitd0hki1v3ec3pc...@4ax.com...
>>| On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 06:17:25 -0700, zepp <zeppn...@finestplanet.com>
>>| wrote:
>>| >
>>| >Moore is famous for standing face-to-face with the people he is
>>| >focussing on. "Roger and Me" was a laid-off line worker taking on one
>>| >of the biggest corporations on earth -- and winning. Moore is
>>| >anything but a coward.
>>|
>>|
>>| Moore is not only a cringing coward, but a liar as well. Here he is,
>>| a multi-millionaire and a bunch of ignorant buffoons like Zepp think
>>| he's a blue collar guy because he dresses like a bum.
>>
>>Burns, doesn't it? ; )
>
>Man, it's got Steve spinning wildly in circles and snapping madly at
>his anus, doesn't it?
Poor Zepp, he seems to have a case of "anus on the brain."
Steve Canyon
<richar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>"veronica floss" <fl...@hygene.net> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1b47ef805...@news.sonic.net...
>> In article <780ea958.04062...@posting.google.com>,
>> xeto...@yahoo.com says...
>>
>> > Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
>> > about whether he's being nice and civil.
>> >
>>
>> Randi Rhodes on Air America really, really tears 'em up.
>
>I like Randi Rhodes, a pretty in-your-face gal. But I eventually lose
>interest because of the "nothing new" rhetoric that it eventually gets to.
Who the hell is Randi Rhodes?
veronica floss
Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 23:31:26 GMT, "Richard Weasel"
> <richar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >"veronica floss" <fl...@hygene.net> wrote in message
> >news:MPG.1b47ef805...@news.sonic.net...
> >> In article <780ea958.04062...@posting.google.com>,
> >> xeto...@yahoo.com says...
> >>
> >> > Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
> >> > about whether he's being nice and civil.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Randi Rhodes on Air America really, really tears 'em up.
> >
> >I like Randi Rhodes, a pretty in-your-face gal. But I eventually lose
> >interest because of the "nothing new" rhetoric that it eventually gets to.
>
> Who the hell is Randi Rhodes?
Oh, what a bey-oo-teyful straight line. I'll leave your fetching
innocence for Zepp's tender mercies.
In the meantime, go to www.airamericaradio.com and click on the
'listen live' link after 3:00 PM EST.
You'll be listening to someone you'll be very sorry you EVER
heard of, about six months from now. I will remind you.
v.
Steve Canyon
wrote:
>In article <53svd0d851j8m0sk6...@4ax.com>,
>Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 23:31:26 GMT, "Richard Weasel"
>> <richar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"veronica floss" <fl...@hygene.net> wrote in message
>> >news:MPG.1b47ef805...@news.sonic.net...
>> >> In article <780ea958.04062...@posting.google.com>,
>> >> xeto...@yahoo.com says...
>> >>
>> >> > Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
>> >> > about whether he's being nice and civil.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Randi Rhodes on Air America really, really tears 'em up.
>> >
>> >I like Randi Rhodes, a pretty in-your-face gal. But I eventually lose
>> >interest because of the "nothing new" rhetoric that it eventually gets to.
>>
>> Who the hell is Randi Rhodes?
>
>
>Oh, what a bey-oo-teyful straight line. I'll leave your fetching
>innocence for Zepp's tender mercies.
Naw, Zepp is scared to death of me. He won't even come out of his
hidey hole when I'm around. I don't know why though, I'd never hurt a
fat retarded guy.
>In the meantime, go to www.airamericaradio.com and click on the
>'listen live' link after 3:00 PM EST.
Oh god no, I'd never do that. That's only for people who don't have
any self respect, like you brewster.
So I did a quick google search and discovered that it's a "her" and
that she's one of those losers on the liberal talk radio show...
<LOL> No wonder I never heard of her.
>You'll be listening to someone you'll be very sorry you EVER
>heard of, about six months from now. I will remind you.
Another prediction from another guy that hasn't got anything else.
zepp
wrote:
>In article <53svd0d851j8m0sk6...@4ax.com>,
>Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 23:31:26 GMT, "Richard Weasel"
>> <richar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"veronica floss" <fl...@hygene.net> wrote in message
>> >news:MPG.1b47ef805...@news.sonic.net...
>> >> In article <780ea958.04062...@posting.google.com>,
>> >> xeto...@yahoo.com says...
>> >>
>> >> > Michael Moore is willing to attack the other side without worrying
>> >> > about whether he's being nice and civil.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Randi Rhodes on Air America really, really tears 'em up.
>> >
>> >I like Randi Rhodes, a pretty in-your-face gal. But I eventually lose
>> >interest because of the "nothing new" rhetoric that it eventually gets to.
>>
>> Who the hell is Randi Rhodes?
>
>
>Oh, what a bey-oo-teyful straight line. I'll leave your fetching
>innocence for Zepp's tender mercies.
Hmm? Was I in this conversation? I usually blow old Steve off. He's
a dishonest and cowardly waste of time.
But he's apparently a wergin. That's nice.
Bet if he ever did try listening, he wouldn't last ten minutes.
>
>In the meantime, go to www.airamericaradio.com and click on the
>'listen live' link after 3:00 PM EST.
>
>You'll be listening to someone you'll be very sorry you EVER
>heard of, about six months from now. I will remind you.
>
>
>v.
>
-
"The State Department officially released its annual terrorism report
just a little more than an hour ago, but unlike last year, there's no
extensive mention of alleged terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. A
senior State Department official tells CNN the U.S. government made a
mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden and 'personalizing
terrorism.'"
-- CNN, 4/30/2001.
Cheeze Whiz
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 04:41:19 GMT, veronica floss <fl...@hygene.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <53svd0d851j8m0sk6...@4ax.com>,
> >Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
> >> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 23:31:26 GMT, "Richard Weasel"
> >> <richar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"veronica floss" <fl...@hygene.net> wrote in message
> >> >news:MPG.1b47ef805...@news.sonic.net...
> >> >> In article <780ea958.04062...@posting.google.com>,
> >> >> xeto...@yahoo.com says...
> >> >>
[snip]
> >> >> Randi Rhodes on Air America really, really tears 'em up.
> >> >
> >> >I like Randi Rhodes, a pretty in-your-face gal. But I eventually lose
> >> >interest because of the "nothing new" rhetoric that it eventually gets to.
> >>
> >> Who the hell is Randi Rhodes?
> >
> >
> >Oh, what a bey-oo-teyful straight line. I'll leave your fetching
> >innocence for Zepp's tender mercies.
>
> Naw, Zepp is scared to death of me. He won't even come out of his
> hidey hole when I'm around. I don't know why though, I'd never hurt a
> fat retarded guy.
>
> >In the meantime, go to www.airamericaradio.com and click on the
> >'listen live' link after 3:00 PM EST.
>
> Oh god no, I'd never do that. That's only for people who don't have
> any self respect, like you brewster.
>
> So I did a quick google search and discovered that it's a "her" and
> that she's one of those losers on the liberal talk radio show...
> <LOL> No wonder I never heard of her.
Bzzzzt! My LiarLiarLiar alarm just went off!
Let's see what we got:
***
Randi Rhodes happens to be the number one talk show host in Central
and South Florida and has held this position for years. She beats Rush
Limbaugh in her Florida markets.
Little Johnnie Parker (Steve Canyon) lives in Florida.
Yet little Johnnie claims never to have heard of Randi, and claims
further that Randi is a "loser." An amazingly transparent lie.
I see why my alarm went off.
***
Johnnie got cornered, and so like a good NeoCon, he blustered, and
then he ...
LiedLiedLiedLied!!!!
Typical Bush voter.
cw
veronica floss
Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
> drawing in the faithful bush-haters around the country, nothing more.
Lost again, Parkie.
Moore is pulling REPEAT business in Bush States.... even in the
South, where you live.
The only way a movie can create these numbers, is if people
actually COME BACK and see the movie again. A whole lot of pople
that voted for Bush in 2000 seem to be very interested in what
Moore has to say.
It's amazing. The new SpiderMan release isn't even denting the
ticket sales, altho it might in a couple weeks.
I don't think even Moore expected the acceptance he is receiving
this week.
v.
veronica floss
Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
Nice long reply.
Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
You live in Florida and never heard of the numma one talk show
host in the State -- a woman who beats Rush Limbaugh in precisely
the kind of listener market where he's supposed to be strongest.
... and you <chuckle> want us to believe she's a loser.
You're the loser.
v.
Steve Canyon
wrote:
>In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
>Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>
>
>[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
>
>
>Nice long reply.
>
>Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
You're probably an overweight slob like your buddy,Zepp, so I would
never allow that to happen. I see that a good share of liberals have
little will power and often eat themselves into blubber-dom.
>You live in Florida and never heard of the numma one talk show
>host in the State --
"numma one talk show host in the State???" I can see nothing to
indicate that she is that. All I see is that she has two stations
Florida, one in <lol> Key West and another in West Palm Beach. If
she had 100% of that audience, she would still be a nobody.
<LOL> The sad thing here is that you're such a dullard that you
think everyone is tuned into talk radio like you are.
>a woman who beats Rush Limbaugh in precisely
>the kind of listener market where he's supposed to be strongest.
....and most folks have enough of a life that they have much better
things to do than listen to talk radio.
>... and you <chuckle> want us to believe she's a loser.
She's on air america, That's all you need to know.
>You're the loser.
irony anyone?
Droopus
> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 02:30:09 GMT, veronica floss <fl...@hygene.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
> >Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
> >
> >
> >[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
> >
> >
> >Nice long reply.
> >
> >Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
>
> You're probably an overweight slob like your buddy,Zepp, so I would
> never allow that to happen. I see that a good share of liberals have
> little will power and often eat themselves into blubber-dom.
Yeah, instead, they should become morbidly obese JUNKIES like Rush.
Why is a guy who illegally bought Oxycontins by the bagful not in
jail?
And I wouldn't get into weight, lest I post the BMIs of Rove and
Limbaugh, both well into the 40's.
Your posts are all very similar.
You call anyone who doesn't think exactly like you "a loser" and
assume you know their opinions.
You don't. Not even slightly.
You state no one cares about the opinions of others.
Most do. Especially politicans. You do as well, or you wouldn't occupy
HOURS of your time on usenet. (Yes, time stamps tell a story too. Do
you really have so little to do that you spend such gargantuan amounts
of time on Usenet?)
You preface at least half your statements with a juvenile <LOL> which
my 11 year old daughter gave up as too childish long ago.
You are technologically illiterate, and no one really has much but
pity for you. Your opinions (such as they are) mean nothing, and all
you have is ONE vote. Knowing where you live as I do, (your IP speaks
volumes) your vote is useless except in local elections.
Rant away, wacko. You know nothing about anyone.
Steve Canyon
>Steve Canyon <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> wrote in message news:<41n7e016es6guog74...@4ax.com>...
>> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 02:30:09 GMT, veronica floss <fl...@hygene.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
>> >Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>> >
>> >
>> >[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
>> >
>> >
>> >Nice long reply.
>> >
>> >Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
>>
>> You're probably an overweight slob like your buddy,Zepp, so I would
>> never allow that to happen. I see that a good share of liberals have
>> little will power and often eat themselves into blubber-dom.
>
>
>Yeah, instead, they should become morbidly obese JUNKIES like Rush.
>Why is a guy who illegally bought Oxycontins by the bagful not in
>jail?
<LOL> You can tell when a loony leftist has been stumped for a
response because he'll start ranting about Rush Limbaugh
>And I wouldn't get into weight, lest I post the BMIs of Rove and
>Limbaugh, both well into the 40's.
>
>Your posts are all very similar.
>
>You call anyone who doesn't think exactly like you "a loser" and
>assume you know their opinions.
You're a loser.
>You don't. Not even slightly.
>
>You state no one cares about the opinions of others.
>
>Most do. Especially politicans. You do as well, or you wouldn't occupy
>HOURS of your time on usenet. (Yes, time stamps tell a story too. Do
>you really have so little to do that you spend such gargantuan amounts
>of time on Usenet?)
Ahhhh life is good when you don't have to work....
>You preface at least half your statements with a juvenile <LOL> which
>my 11 year old daughter gave up as too childish long ago.
<LOL>
>You are technologically illiterate, and no one really has much but
>pity for you. Your opinions (such as they are) mean nothing, and all
>you have is ONE vote. Knowing where you live as I do, (your IP speaks
>volumes) your vote is useless except in local elections.
Sorry, but this *IS* Florida and Florida is considered to be one of
the key battleground states.
>Rant away, wacko. You know nothing about anyone.
Translation: My analysis of droopus hit the nail right on the head
and he doesn't like it.
--
"Yes, Atkins works extremely well. I've lost 75 pounds."
-Zepp Jamieson 06 Jan 2004
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=h8vmvvsa8hl5sh9qgpt9r4gop9j3ms2gq3%404ax.com
"My goal (which I hope to hit in June) is 171."
-Zepp Jamieson 10 Jan 2004
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=gc11005u5n9v9gfrnmakta4jvqqj79ias7%404ax.com
I live in California.
I'm not a refugee, I'm not a Marxist, Zepp is my middle name, and I
weigh 237.
-Zepp Jamieson 2004-06-30
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=q327e0lto1kpfk6e5cst57ob60fbomu037%404ax.com
kb
-------------------------------------------------------
Published on Friday, July 2, 2004 by the Associated Press
Big Part of 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Profit Goes to Charity
by Bruce Orwall
After Walt Disney Co. refused to allow its Miramax Films unit to
distribute the controversial Michael Moore documentary "Fahrenheit
9/11," Miramax co-Chairmen Harvey and Bob Weinstein paid $6 million
from their own pockets to acquire the film from the company. Six weeks
later, "Fahrenheit 9/11" is a smash sensation, and the Weinsteins are
widely assumed to be laughing all the way to the bank.
If so, the laughter may be muted. Despite their personal investment,
the Weinstein brothers will not be the biggest financial beneficiaries
of "Fahrenheit." The real winner: a charity, or charities, as yet
unnamed, that will receive about 60 percent of the net profit
ultimately generated by the film -- a tally that could be tens of
millions of dollars. The Weinsteins, meanwhile, will pocket about 40
percent of the net, according to people familiar with the deal.
continues at:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0702-07.htm
======================
Fahrenheit 9/11 now on more than 1700 screens
This week, Fahrenheit has opened in hundreds of new towns and cities
across the country, hitting a total of more than 1700 screens.
Find out where it is playing near you and how to get tickets at:
http://www.f911tix.com
Biff
> On 2 Jul 2004 08:43:23 -0700, dro...@gmail.com (Droopus) wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Canyon <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> wrote in message news:<41n7e016es6guog74...@4ax.com>...
>>
>>>On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 02:30:09 GMT, veronica floss <fl...@hygene.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
>>>>Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Nice long reply.
>>>>
>>>>Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
>>>
>>>You're probably an overweight slob like your buddy,Zepp, so I would
>>>never allow that to happen. I see that a good share of liberals have
>>>little will power and often eat themselves into blubber-dom.
>>
>>
>>Yeah, instead, they should become morbidly obese JUNKIES like Rush.
>>Why is a guy who illegally bought Oxycontins by the bagful not in
>>jail?
>
>
> <LOL> You can tell when a loony leftist has been stumped for a
> response because he'll start ranting about Rush Limbaugh
Never seen you do anything BUT rant. That's your MO.
>
>
>>And I wouldn't get into weight, lest I post the BMIs of Rove and
>>Limbaugh, both well into the 40's.
>>
>>Your posts are all very similar.
>>
>>You call anyone who doesn't think exactly like you "a loser" and
>>assume you know their opinions.
>
>
> You're a loser.
And you're a loser. Now wasn't that a great exchange?
>
>
>>You don't. Not even slightly.
>>
>>You state no one cares about the opinions of others.
>>
>>Most do. Especially politicans. You do as well, or you wouldn't occupy
>>HOURS of your time on usenet. (Yes, time stamps tell a story too. Do
>>you really have so little to do that you spend such gargantuan amounts
>>of time on Usenet?)
>
>
> Ahhhh life is good when you don't have to work....
If I was like you, and getting all of my money from the government and
other people, I can think of a lot of things to do besides Usenet. Like
experience a life.
vandella los fontaigne
Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
> On 2 Jul 2004 08:43:23 -0700, dro...@gmail.com (Droopus) wrote:
>
> >Steve Canyon <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> wrote in message news:<41n7e016es6guog74...@4ax.com>...
> >> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 02:30:09 GMT, veronica floss <fl...@hygene.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
> >> >Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Nice long reply.
> >> >
> >> >Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
> >>
> >> You're probably an overweight slob like your buddy,Zepp, so I would
> >> never allow that to happen. I see that a good share of liberals have
> >> little will power and often eat themselves into blubber-dom.
My goodness, Stevie. It looks like you've stepped in something
unseemly again. "You must be fat" is transparent even for you. It
makes you soooo unattractive.
Randi Rhodes is no loser. She's number one right there in South
Florida, where you live. ... and she's a LIBERAL.
If you really don't care, then why <chuckle> did you post at all?
vandella los fontagne
senhor san
Does it matter to you that Bush and Co. perpetrated 911?
Dick Eastman's compilation of evidence proving the attack on the Pentagon
was an inside-job black-op -- implicating -- Neo-Cons Wolfowitz,
Rumsfeld, Perle, Feith, Kissinger, the true masterminds of the operation.
Here is the proof:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911crimefile/message/8
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911crimefile/message/3
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solidaritystreet/message/2
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pentagonconspiracy/message/71
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/9-11-demonstrative-evidence-of-frameup/messages/1
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pentagonconspiracy/message/78
"veronica floss" <fl...@hygene.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b4c7cd7a...@news.sonic.net...
MikeSoja
posted:
>Mr. "Veronica,"
>Does it matter to you that Bush and Co. perpetrated 911?
>Dick Eastman's compilation of evidence proving the attack on the Pentagon
>was an inside-job black-op -- implicating -- Neo-Cons Wolfowitz,
>Rumsfeld, Perle, Feith, Kissinger, the true masterminds of the operation.
>Here is the proof:
You forgot Cheney and the ghost of Richard Nixon. They were in on
it, too. Especially Nixon. It was his idea, as a matter of fact.
Mike Soja
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911crimefile/message/8
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911crimefile/message/3
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solidaritystreet/message/2
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pentagonconspiracy/message/71
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/9-11-demonstrative-evidence-of-frameup/messages/1
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pentagonconspiracy/message/78
>
>
>"veronica floss" <fl...@hygene.net> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1b4c7cd7a...@news.sonic.net...
>> In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
>> Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>>
>>
>> [yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
>>
>>
>> Nice long reply.
>>
>> Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
>>
>> You live in Florida and never heard of the numma one talk show
>> host in the State -- a woman who beats Rush Limbaugh in precisely
>> the kind of listener market where he's supposed to be strongest.
>>
>> ... and you <chuckle> want us to believe she's a loser.
>>
>> You're the loser.
>>
>>
>> v.
>>
>>
>
--
"I am quite sure no commercial jet hit the Pentagon."
--Commie conspiracy nutjob Brian "Zepp" Jamieson, May 11, 2004
"That actually makes more sense than the claim that
a large commercial aircraft, moving at cruising
speed at an altitude of ten feet, struck that
building. And the hole's about the right size."
--Commie FatBoy Brian "Zepp" Jamieson, May 12, 2004
Eagle Eye
kb <kno-...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>60% of Fahrenheit 9/11' Profit Goes to Charity
>-------------------------------------------------------
>
>Published on Friday, July 2, 2004 by the Associated Press
>Big Part of 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Profit Goes to Charity
>by Bruce Orwall
>http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0702-07.htm
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
There are many articles which have pointed out the distortions,
falsehoods, and lies in the film Fahrenheit 911. This report
compiles the Fahrenheit 911 deceits which have been identified by a
wide variety of reviewers. In addition, I identify some
inaccuracies which have not been addressed by other writers.
The report follows the approximate order in which the movie covers
particular topics: the Bush family, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and
Iraq. This report focuses solely on factual issues, and not on
aesthetic criticism of the film.
[follow URL to the rest of the article]
=====
EE
Steve Canyon
<v...@fredricks.org> wrote:
>In article <otfbe0trmqibnv2ig...@4ax.com>,
>Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>> On 2 Jul 2004 08:43:23 -0700, dro...@gmail.com (Droopus) wrote:
>>
>> >Steve Canyon <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> wrote in message news:<41n7e016es6guog74...@4ax.com>...
>> >> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 02:30:09 GMT, veronica floss <fl...@hygene.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
>> >> >Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Nice long reply.
>> >> >
>> >> >Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
>> >>
>> >> You're probably an overweight slob like your buddy,Zepp, so I would
>> >> never allow that to happen. I see that a good share of liberals have
>> >> little will power and often eat themselves into blubber-dom.
>
>
>My goodness, Stevie. It looks like you've stepped in something
>unseemly again. "You must be fat" is transparent even for you. It
>makes you soooo unattractive.
Yeah, and Brewster checks in and confirms that he's a lard butt like
Zepp. He probably has a pair of grandma boobs like Jamieson, and that
would explain why brewster is so fond of impersonating women. I
pretty high percentage of liberals are fat couch potatoes.
>Randi Rhodes is no loser. She's number one right there in South
>Florida, where you live. ... and she's a LIBERAL.
Errrr, The Tampa Bay area isn't south Florida, you geography
challenged moron. I'd never heard of Randi Rhodes. This may come as
a great surprise to you, but there's a lot of people who've never even
heard of talk radio.
Now Randi Rhodes is on Air America, <LOL> and that alone makes her a
loser, but it's so entertaining to watch the liberal morons try to
pretend that it's successful when they can't even afford to pay their
help.
Say, whatever happened to Al Gore's TV network? <LOL>
veronica floss
Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
Jeee-sus, parkie.
You've really had a bad time in your life, haven't you? You just
fail and fail and fail. Now all you can do is fantasize about
failure, and look and hope. <chuckle> You can't even post a
coherent reply in this thread.
This pretty much sums up your politics, too.
You back people who lie to you and then fail to run the economy
and can't even win a "War" against a third rate MidEast country.
You keep backing them because you can't admit you've screwed up
again.
This pretty much explains where Bush will get his votes in
November <chuckle> -- homies and losers in Border States, afraid
to admit they're being lied to by a fool who stole the Whitehouse
four years ago.
They think voting for him a second time will magically make him
smart, truthful and brave.
v.
Biff
> On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:23:56 GMT, vandella los fontaigne
> <v...@fredricks.org> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <otfbe0trmqibnv2ig...@4ax.com>,
>>Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>>
>>>On 2 Jul 2004 08:43:23 -0700, dro...@gmail.com (Droopus) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Steve Canyon <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> wrote in message news:<41n7e016es6guog74...@4ax.com>...
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 02:30:09 GMT, veronica floss <fl...@hygene.net>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <st65e0tlhehli3dil...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[yada, yada, yada, Randi Rhodes, smooth jazz, lielielie; snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nice long reply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Looks like I stepped on your webbed toes, Parkie.
>>>>>
>>>>>You're probably an overweight slob like your buddy,Zepp, so I would
>>>>>never allow that to happen. I see that a good share of liberals have
>>>>>little will power and often eat themselves into blubber-dom.
>>
>>
>>My goodness, Stevie. It looks like you've stepped in something
>>unseemly again. "You must be fat" is transparent even for you. It
>>makes you soooo unattractive.
>
>
> Yeah, and Brewster checks in and confirms that he's a lard butt like
> Zepp. He probably has a pair of grandma boobs like Jamieson, and that
> would explain why brewster is so fond of impersonating women. I
> pretty high percentage of liberals are fat couch potatoes.
As if you're a picture of fitness, sitting there on your fat ass in
front of the computer all fucking day.
>
>
>>Randi Rhodes is no loser. She's number one right there in South
>>Florida, where you live. ... and she's a LIBERAL.
>
>
> Errrr, The Tampa Bay area isn't south Florida, you geography
> challenged moron.
She's from West Palm Beach, not Tampa Bay, you ignorant fuck. And that
IS South Florida.
> I'd never heard of Randi Rhodes. This may come as
> a great surprise to you, but there's a lot of people who've never even
> heard of talk radio.
Only incredibly stupid, unobservant folks who live in a fucking tunnel.
>
> Now Randi Rhodes is on Air America, <LOL> and that alone makes her a
> loser, but it's so entertaining to watch the liberal morons try to
> pretend that it's successful when they can't even afford to pay their
> help.
Spoken like an ignorant fuck who gets most of his news from subsidized
shitrags like the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, Drudge and
Newsmax. NONE of them could exist on their own without huge infusions of
cash from the RW propaganda machine.
Meanwhile, Air America has plenty of cash, plus they have willing donors
willing to pay to keep it going in the meantime. Plus, their ad revenue
had tripled in three months. Something about 5 million streams per day
over the Internet gets the attention of major advertisers.
> Say, whatever happened to Al Gore's TV network? <LOL>
What, you ignorant fuck? You think anyone can simply announce a new
network, and it just appears?
What happened to Rush Limbaugh's hit TV show?
Steve Canyon
wrote:
>In article <rkrvd09p1kqqdomjq...@4ax.com>,
<LOL> I guess Brewster is still miffed because I exposed him as a
MORON when he posted some nonesense about how the electric grid
worked.
>This pretty much sums up your politics, too.
>
>You back people who lie to you and then fail to run the economy
>and can't even win a "War" against a third rate MidEast country.
>
>You keep backing them because you can't admit you've screwed up
>again.
>
>This pretty much explains where Bush will get his votes in
>November <chuckle> -- homies and losers in Border States, afraid
>to admit they're being lied to by a fool who stole the Whitehouse
>four years ago.
>
>They think voting for him a second time will magically make him
>smart, truthful and brave.
>
>
>v.
>
Steve Canyon
Same weight I was when I played college football. 35 pushups every
morning. Yep, I'm the picture of fitness, all right.
In case you didn't know, I've got it all.
>>>Randi Rhodes is no loser. She's number one right there in South
>>>Florida, where you live. ... and she's a LIBERAL.
>>
>>
>> Errrr, The Tampa Bay area isn't south Florida, you geography
>> challenged moron.
>
>She's from West Palm Beach, not Tampa Bay, you ignorant fuck. And that
>IS South Florida.
...and I live around Tampa Bay, you pathetic moron.
>> I'd never heard of Randi Rhodes. This may come as
>> a great surprise to you, but there's a lot of people who've never even
>> heard of talk radio.
>
>Only incredibly stupid, unobservant folks who live in a fucking tunnel.
Wow, Biff has some serious issues. Maybe he should do a little anger
management before he hurts himself.
>> Now Randi Rhodes is on Air America, <LOL> and that alone makes her a
>> loser, but it's so entertaining to watch the liberal morons try to
>> pretend that it's successful when they can't even afford to pay their
>> help.
>
>Spoken like an ignorant fuck who gets most of his news from subsidized
>shitrags like the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, Drudge and
>Newsmax. NONE of them could exist on their own without huge infusions of
>cash from the RW propaganda machine.
<LOL>
>Meanwhile, Air America has plenty of cash, plus they have willing donors
>willing to pay to keep it going in the meantime. Plus, their ad revenue
>had tripled in three months. Something about 5 million streams per day
>over the Internet gets the attention of major advertisers.
>
>> Say, whatever happened to Al Gore's TV network? <LOL>
>
>What, you ignorant fuck? You think anyone can simply announce a new
>network, and it just appears?
'cept it hasn't....
>What happened to Rush Limbaugh's hit TV show?
<shrug>
Richard Weasel
Well, you know, Parkie might even become President.
Bush made it.
Biff
You've never exposed anyone as a moron except yourself.
But then, delusions seem to be your forte.
Biff
I'm not the one claiming there are loads of people too stupid to know
what talk radio is, you dumb fuck.
>
>
>>>Now Randi Rhodes is on Air America, <LOL> and that alone makes her a
>>>loser, but it's so entertaining to watch the liberal morons try to
>>>pretend that it's successful when they can't even afford to pay their
>>>help.
>>
>>Spoken like an ignorant fuck who gets most of his news from subsidized
>>shitrags like the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, Drudge and
>>Newsmax. NONE of them could exist on their own without huge infusions of
>>cash from the RW propaganda machine.
>
>
> <LOL>
>
>>Meanwhile, Air America has plenty of cash, plus they have willing donors
>>willing to pay to keep it going in the meantime. Plus, their ad revenue
>>had tripled in three months. Something about 5 million streams per day
>>over the Internet gets the attention of major advertisers.
>>
>>
>>>Say, whatever happened to Al Gore's TV network? <LOL>
>>
>>What, you ignorant fuck? You think anyone can simply announce a new
>>network, and it just appears?
>
>
> 'cept it hasn't....
That's why I said, you illiterate fuck.
Steve Canyon
Golly, Biff, I did get you to confirm that you were a lard-butt. So
just how big is your waistline, 50 inches, or was that many, many
years ago, like in Zepp's case.
Steve Canyon
<kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
What, no reply? I guess Biff is miffed that I showed him to be a
moron.
>>>> I'd never heard of Randi Rhodes. This may come as
>>>>a great surprise to you, but there's a lot of people who've never even
>>>>heard of talk radio.
>>>
>>>Only incredibly stupid, unobservant folks who live in a fucking tunnel.
>>
>>
>> Wow, Biff has some serious issues. Maybe he should do a little anger
>> management before he hurts himself.
>
>I'm not the one claiming there are loads of people too stupid to know
>what talk radio is, you dumb fuck.
<LOL> Not too stupid, you moron, just people with enough of life that
they have better things to do than listen to talk radio.
>>>>Now Randi Rhodes is on Air America, <LOL> and that alone makes her a
>>>>loser, but it's so entertaining to watch the liberal morons try to
>>>>pretend that it's successful when they can't even afford to pay their
>>>>help.
>>>
>>>Spoken like an ignorant fuck who gets most of his news from subsidized
>>>shitrags like the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, Drudge and
>>>Newsmax. NONE of them could exist on their own without huge infusions of
>>>cash from the RW propaganda machine.
>>
>>
>> <LOL>
>>>Meanwhile, Air America has plenty of cash,
That's why they don't pay their help.... <LOL>
Air America is DOA.
>plus they have willing donors
>>>willing to pay to keep it going in the meantime. Plus, their ad revenue
>>>had tripled in three months. Something about 5 million streams per day
>>>over the Internet gets the attention of major advertisers.
'cept it hasn't.
>>>>Say, whatever happened to Al Gore's TV network? <LOL>
>>>
>>>What, you ignorant fuck? You think anyone can simply announce a new
>>>network, and it just appears?
>>
>>
>> 'cept it hasn't....
>
>That's why I said, you illiterate fuck.
Richard Weasel
news:dMadnQmfObR...@comcast.com...
Touché
Richard Weasel
Stevie must really be a puny wimp. EVERYONE looks big to him.
Biff
You're the only one who's shown to be moronic with your posts.
>
>
>>>>> I'd never heard of Randi Rhodes. This may come as
>>>>>a great surprise to you, but there's a lot of people who've never even
>>>>>heard of talk radio.
>>>>
>>>>Only incredibly stupid, unobservant folks who live in a fucking tunnel.
>>>
>>>
>>>Wow, Biff has some serious issues. Maybe he should do a little anger
>>>management before he hurts himself.
>>
>>I'm not the one claiming there are loads of people too stupid to know
>>what talk radio is, you dumb fuck.
>
>
> <LOL> Not too stupid, you moron, just people with enough of life that
> they have better things to do than listen to talk radio.
I've never had cancer, but I've heard of it.
I've never listened to one minute of Rush Limbaugh, but I've heard of him.
I've never met anyone as moronic as you, but I know you're out there.
Fucking idiot.
>
>
>>>>>Now Randi Rhodes is on Air America, <LOL> and that alone makes her a
>>>>>loser, but it's so entertaining to watch the liberal morons try to
>>>>>pretend that it's successful when they can't even afford to pay their
>>>>>help.
>>>>
>>>>Spoken like an ignorant fuck who gets most of his news from subsidized
>>>>shitrags like the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, Drudge and
>>>>Newsmax. NONE of them could exist on their own without huge infusions of
>>>>cash from the RW propaganda machine.
>>>
>>>
>>><LOL>
>>>
>>>>Meanwhile, Air America has plenty of cash,
>
>
> That's why they don't pay their help.... <LOL>
>
> Air America is DOA.
Your wet dreams are not reality. The ones you have regarding the sumo
wrestler who fucks you up the ass aren't real, either.
Biff
Why do you care? You want to fuck me bad, huh?
Biff
He sure does seem to be obsessed with our asses. Kind of like being in a
Usenet bathhouse or something. Glad I'm straight.
Steve Canyon
Enormous fat asses and bloated beer bellies always look big to us
normal people.
Steve Canyon
<LOL> Biff is just another liberal that with homosexuality on his
mind all the time.
Maybe that explains why he's trying to defend Zepp. Perhaps he and
Zepp have a "special" relationship.
How about it, Milt, errrr, Biff?
Biff
There's no way you don't weigh at least 300 pounds.
Biff
I'm not the one here obsessing over the size of other men's asses.
>
> Maybe that explains why he's trying to defend Zepp. Perhaps he and
> Zepp have a "special" relationship.
>
> How about it, Milt, errrr, Biff?
You're into fish sperm, too? That's just sick.
>
Steve Canyon
<kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
You're welcome to believe that if it makes you feel better, Milt.
Your fantasies really aren't of any interest to me.
Biff
He keeps calling me Milt <LOL>. I've seen two people named Milt in here
(although one of them never posts as Milt, so who the hell knows?), and
they both kicked your ass raw. Which one do you imagine me to be, you
fat fucking loser?
Steve Canyon
<kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
You have to feel bad about Biff's obsession with homosexuality. I
wonder why he doesn't just come on out of the closet. He might be
worried about what his kid might say? Fifteen year olds are sort of
spooky about having a queer dad.
Steve Canyon
<kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
>Bush had an advantage over him, though. Some people actually like Bush.
It's kind of an honor to be so hated by the same people that hate the
President.
Steve Canyon
<kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
<LOL> Actually, I never expected Biff to be anything but a moron.
>>>>>> I'd never heard of Randi Rhodes. This may come as
>>>>>>a great surprise to you, but there's a lot of people who've never even
>>>>>>heard of talk radio.
>>>>>
>>>>>Only incredibly stupid, unobservant folks who live in a fucking tunnel.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Wow, Biff has some serious issues. Maybe he should do a little anger
>>>>management before he hurts himself.
>>>
>>>I'm not the one claiming there are loads of people too stupid to know
>>>what talk radio is, you dumb fuck.
>>
>>
>> <LOL> Not too stupid, you moron, just people with enough of life that
>> they have better things to do than listen to talk radio.
>
>I've never had cancer, but I've heard of it.
>I've never listened to one minute of Rush Limbaugh, but I've heard of him.
>I've never met anyone as moronic as you, but I know you're out there.
>
>Fucking idiot.
The facts are pretty clear, however, the vast majority of people in
Florida have never heard of Randi Rhodes, in fact, the vast majority
have never heard of Air America, and will probably never hear of it
since it's just about belly up. So what's it like to know that your
liberal agenda has nowhere to go but down?
>>>>>>Now Randi Rhodes is on Air America, <LOL> and that alone makes her a
>>>>>>loser, but it's so entertaining to watch the liberal morons try to
>>>>>>pretend that it's successful when they can't even afford to pay their
>>>>>>help.
>>>>>
>>>>>Spoken like an ignorant fuck who gets most of his news from subsidized
>>>>>shitrags like the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, Drudge and
>>>>>Newsmax. NONE of them could exist on their own without huge infusions of
>>>>>cash from the RW propaganda machine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>><LOL>
>>>>
>>>>>Meanwhile, Air America has plenty of cash,
>>
>>
>> That's why they don't pay their help.... <LOL>
>>
>> Air America is DOA.
>
>Your wet dreams are not reality. The ones you have regarding the sumo
>wrestler who fucks you up the ass aren't real, either.
Does everyone else notice that "Biff" can hardly speak without adding
a few of his homosexual fantasies?
Steve Canyon
<kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
Header lines from Milt Shook's post:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.55.111.77
X-Complaints-To: ab...@comcast.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dm...@comcast.net
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Odidnf_Se7ME51PdRVn-hQ%40comcast.com&output=gplain
Header lines from "Biff's post:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.55.111.77
X-Complaints-To: ab...@comcast.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dm...@comcast.net
Give it up, Shook, now everybody knows that I kicked your ass so bad
that you're ashamed to come out under your own name
You'd better run away and hide gain..
MikeSoja
<Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> posted:
>On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 09:30:17 -0400, Biff
><kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
>>He keeps calling me Milt <LOL>. I've seen two people named Milt in here
>>(although one of them never posts as Milt, so who the hell knows?), and
>>they both kicked your ass raw. Which one do you imagine me to be, you
>>fat fucking loser?
>Header lines from Milt Shook's post:
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.55.111.77
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@comcast.net
>X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dm...@comcast.net
>http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Odidnf_Se7ME51PdRVn-hQ%40comcast.com&output=gplain
>Header lines from "Biff's post:
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.55.111.77
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@comcast.net
>X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dm...@comcast.net
>Give it up, Shook, now everybody knows that I kicked your ass so bad
>that you're ashamed to come out under your own name
>You'd better run away and hide gain..
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaahaaaaaaa har de harrrr
What a fucking marooooooon Milt is.
Here's the partial results of a search on the IP:
07/05 Biff Re: "Fahrenheit 9/11" may be first documentary
07/05 Biff Re: #Showtrial of Saddam leaves many Iraqis
07/05 Biff Re: #F911: the facts check out
07/05 Biff Re: Theatre chain bans F-911 - Sez it INCITES
07/05 Biff Re: #Showtrial of Saddam leaves many Iraqis
07/05 Biff Re: Here Come Da Judge
07/05 Biff Re: Here Come Da Judge
07/05 Biff Re: John Parker Lies Again
07/03 Biff Re: John Parker Lies Again
06/27 Biff Re: Kerry -- Clueless about his Cluelessness
06/25 Stung Unn Re: Air America
06/25 Stung Unn Re: # Is Usenet in Trouble?
06/24 Stung Unn Re: # Is Usenet in Trouble?
06/24 Stung Unn Re: Hey, Cheney: Prove It or Resign
06/24 Stung Unn Re: Hey, Cheney: Prove It or Resign
06/24 Stung Unn Re: Christopher Hitchens Eviscerates
06/24 Stung Unn Re: Air America
06/20 Milt Re: shirtless
06/20 Milt Re: OT:Absolutely Sick & Disgraceful!
06/15 Milt Re: Franken audience doubles; from 1 to 2 people
06/15 Milt Re: Franken audience doubles; from 1 to 2 people
06/15 Milt Re: Franken audience doubles; from 1 to 2 people
06/15 Milt Re: Franken audience doubles; from 1 to 2 people
06/15 Milt Re: Franken audience doubles; from 1 to 2 people
06/15 Milt Re: Franken audience doubles; from 1 to 2 people
Looks like Milt was playing at being Stung Unnuts, too. What an
idiot.
So, Steve, did you recognize him just by his trademark stupidity?
Mike Soja
--
"I am quite sure no commercial jet hit the Pentagon."
--Commie conspiracy nutjob Brian "Zepp" Jamieson, May 11, 2004
"That actually makes more sense than the claim that
a large commercial aircraft, moving at cruising
speed at an altitude of ten feet, struck that
building. And the hole's about the right size."
--Commie FatBoy Brian "Zepp" Jamieson, May 12, 2004
David Galehouse
"MikeSoja" <mso...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:6h1me0dov9i84d1sq...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 19:38:53 GMT, Steve Canyon
> <Steven...@yahoooooooooo.com> posted:
>
> >On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 09:30:17 -0400, Biff
> ><kerrywi...@presidency.com> wrote:
>
> >>He keeps calling me Milt <LOL>. I've seen two people named Milt in here
> >>(although one of them never posts as Milt, so who the hell knows?), and
> >>they both kicked your ass raw. Which one do you imagine me to be, you
> >>fat fucking loser?
>
> >Header lines from Milt Shook's post:
> >NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.55.111.77
> > X-Complaints-To: ab...@comcast.net
> >X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dm...@comcast.net
>
>
>http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Odidnf_Se7ME51PdRVn-hQ%40comcast.com&outp
ut=gplain
>
> >Header lines from "Biff's post:
> >NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.55.111.77
> > X-Complaints-To: ab...@comcast.net
> >X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dm...@comcast.net
>
> >Give it up, Shook, now everybody knows that I kicked your ass so bad
> >that you're ashamed to come out under your own name
>
> >You'd better run away and hide gain..
>
> Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaahaaaaaaa har de harrrr
>
> What a fucking marooooooon Milt is.
>
<snip>
After your completely idiotic involvement in the thread about Bush's
failures, I'd say you have no room to call *anybody* a moron, Soja! You are
head moron for the week around here!
Biff
Boy, is there anything stupider than a fucking moron who hitches his
star to another fucking moron. I'm not Milt Shook and I'm certainly not
Stung Unnuts.
Steve Canyon
wrote:
OMG, did you happen to notice that the "shirtless" post was on
"alt.tv.days-of-our-lives"? Milt Shook spends his time watching
soaps. He's a girly-boy first class. I wonder if he shaves his legs.
>So, Steve, did you recognize him just by his trademark stupidity?
Yeah, I thought it was sort of funny how this guy comes out of nowhere
to post such hate filled rhetoric at me, and then I realized that it
was Milt, all steamed up because I trashed the little fruit so badly
before that he was ashamed to post under his name.
>Mike Soja
"No person pays corporate taxes. The corporation pays those."[...] the
corporation is not made up of people. It is made up of paper.
--Milt Shook
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=8c046319.0403172013.7bb7c449%40posting.google.com&oe=UTF-8&
"States cannot amend the Constitution, you clod. Congress can. The states
get to ratify it or not. But they have to ratify what they're given."
--Milt Shook
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=385570ab.9710819%40news.earthlink.net
"The law doesn't "allow" any gender discrimination."
--Milt Shook
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=prqdnVQM8LfCsdLdRVn-ig%40comcast.com
"I mean, Jesus, you moron; basically what you're arguing is that the Bill
of Rights only protects you from the government. That's insane."
--Milt Shook
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=rOednTyGe5IzVjvd4p2dnA%40comcast.com
Steve Canyon
You have to feel sorry for old Milt. First I make a monkey of him
about his moron claims in th sig below, and then he admits to his
shame by coming on here under another name.
woof woof
Author-Address-Header@[127.1] says...
Once again, an anonymous poster screams for Bush while hidden in
the shadows. Almost as brave as his AWOL Hero. Almost.
> In article <7s0ee0l2esen667mm...@4ax.com>
> kb <kno-...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >60% of Fahrenheit 9/11' Profit Goes to Charity
> >-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >Published on Friday, July 2, 2004 by the Associated Press
> >Big Part of 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Profit Goes to Charity
> >by Bruce Orwall
> [snip]
> >http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0702-07.htm
>
> http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
>
> There are many articles which have pointed out the distortions,
> falsehoods, and lies in the film Fahrenheit 911.
Actually, no. But there *are* a few paid articles posted on Loon
websites, though.
... articles by FoxBots who have just never heard Bush tell a
lie and haven't heard that anybody has died in Iraq.
> This report
> compiles the Fahrenheit 911 deceits which have been identified by a
> wide variety of reviewers.
Nah.... Not deceits. Just truths that are hard for foolish people
like you to handle. The video footage speaks for itself.
Harry Truman said he never said "Hell..." he just told the truth
and Republicans thought it was Hell. You qualify, Kleagle.
> In addition, I identify some
> inaccuracies which have not been addressed by other writers.
How very proud (and how very full of yourself) you must be.
>
> The report follows the approximate order in which the movie covers
> particular topics: the Bush family, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and
> Iraq. This report focuses solely on factual issues, and not on
> aesthetic criticism of the film.
Reading this anal-retentive nonsense from Der Kleagle, I can
almost hear the German accent.
woof
former subscribers who disappeared glenn patricksion ron michael bill tisken kim nunn jack snyder david uva tim hutton lucy lenya scott monkin ana brown tim kendall judy gligg brian kraft tanya smith
woof woof <wo...@lostdog.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b5656c16...@news.sonic.net...
Please ignore these tests
does not include keneth hjelte aalc 0389 dina davis aalc 0389 glenn
patricksion aalc 0389 ron michael aalc 0389 bill tisken aalc 0389 kim nunn
aalc 0389 jack snyder aalc 0389 david uva aalc 0389 uri leonid aalc 0389
jesica nixon aalc 0389 tim hutton aalc 0389 ana brown aalc 0389 tim kendall
aalc 0389 judy gligg aalc 0389 brian kraft aalc 0389 tanya smith aalc 0389
ernie reeder aalc 0389 tammy byrne aalc 0389 second does not include keneth
hjelte aalc 0389 dina davis aalc 0389 glenn patricksion aalc 0389 ron
michael aalc 0389 bill tisken aalc 0389 kim nunn aalc 0389 jack snyder aalc
0389 david uva aalc 0389 uri leonid aalc 0389 jesica nixon aalc 0389 tim
hutton aalc 0389 ana brown aalc 0389 tim kendall aalc 0389 judy gligg aalc
0389 brian kraft aalc 0389 tanya smith aalc 0389 ernie reeder aalc 0389
tammy byrne aalc 0389 no longer subscribing keneth hjelte aalc 0389 dina
davis aalc 0389 glenn patricksion aalc 0389 ron michael aalc 0389 bill
tisken aalc 0389 kim nunn aalc 0389 jack snyder aalc 0389 david uva aalc
0389 uri leonid aalc 0389 jesica nixon aalc 0389 tim hutton aalc 0389 ana
brown aalc 0389 tim kendall aalc 0389 judy gligg aalc 0389 brian kraft aalc
0389 tanya smith aalc 0389 ernie reeder aalc 0389 tammy byrne aalc 0389
keneth hjelte aalc 0389 dina davis aalc 0389 glenn patricksion aalc 0389 ron
michael aalc 0389 bill tisken aalc 0389 kim nunn aalc 0389 jack snyder aalc
0389 david uva aalc 0389 uri leonid aalc 0389 jesica nixon aalc 0389 tim
hutton aalc 0389 ana brown aalc 0389 tim kendall aalc 0389 judy gligg aalc
0389 brian kraft aalc 0389 tanya smith aalc 0389 ernie reeder aalc 0389
tammy byrne aalc 0389 former subscribers who disappeared keneth hjelte aalc
0389 dina davis aalc 0389 glenn patricksion aalc 0389 ron michael aalc 0389
bill tisken aalc 0389 kim nunn aalc 0389 jack snyder aalc 0389 david uva
aalc 0389 uri leonid aalc 0389 jesica nixon aalc 0389 tim hutton aalc 0389
lucy lenya aalc 0389 scott monkin aalc 0389 ana brown aalc 0389 tim kendall
aalc 0389 judy gligg aalc 0389 brian kraft keneth hjelte aalc 0389 dina
davis aalc 0389 glenn patricksion aalc 0389 ron michael aalc 0389 bill
tisken aalc 0389 kim nunn aalc 0389 jack snyder aalc 0389 david uva aalc
0389 uri leonid aalc 0389 jesica nixon aalc 0389 tim hutton aalc 0389 lucy
lenya aalc 0389 scott monkin aalc 0389 ana brown aalc 0389 tim kendall aalc
0389 judy gligg aalc 0389 brian kraft aalc 0389
Ken Smith
> In article <2004070505065...@nym.alias.net>, Use-
> Author-Address-Header@[127.1] says...
>
> Once again, an anonymous poster screams for Bush while hidden in
> the shadows. Almost as brave as his AWOL Hero. Almost.
>
>>In article <7s0ee0l2esen667mm...@4ax.com>
>>kb <kno-...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>60% of Fahrenheit 9/11' Profit Goes to Charity
>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>Published on Friday, July 2, 2004 by the Associated Press
>>>Big Part of 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Profit Goes to Charity
>>>by Bruce Orwall
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0702-07.htm
>>
>>http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
>>
>>There are many articles which have pointed out the distortions,
>>falsehoods, and lies in the film Fahrenheit 911.
Most of the "deceit" comes from Dave Kopel's keyboard.
Eagle Eye
Milt Brewster, using one of his many sockpuppet names, "woof woof",
wrote:>Once again, an anonymous poster screams [sniptroll] while hidden in
>the shadows.
heston...@post.com (Stung Unnuts) wrote:
>There's no honesty in a political newsgroup. For fuck's sake,
>count the number of people who use their actual names...
This is not because they are lying. Sometimes they are having
fun. Very often, it is because they don't want to be harrassed
by people who disagree with them. It is also occasionally
because they are whistleblowers with very important posts to
make. You would be surprised at how often that has happened on
Usenet, and how interesting it is when you find an authentic
anonymized post like that.
-- Milt Brewster 6/25/04 http://tinyurl.com/2orqw
Then again, sometimes people pretend to be their arch-enemies:
See also:
=====
EE
Eagle Eye
Ken Smith <Rang...@concentric.net> wrote:
[snip]
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
>>>There are many articles which have pointed out the distortions,
>>>falsehoods, and lies in the film Fahrenheit 911.
> Most of the "deceit" comes from Dave Kopel's keyboard.
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/kopelcritiquepart.htm
This critique is rather flimsy. It only addresses a few of Kopel's
points. Many of the responses are nothing but ad hominems--not
actually addressing the substance, but merely attacking the
political ideology of the source. Several responses are nothing
but partisan political opinions, rather than factual refuations.
Many contain unsubstantiated assertions or merely a repetition of
Moore's arguments or suggestions, ignoring the essence of Moore's
deception.
For example, you assert that "[t]he bin Laden clan probably
wasn't interviewed as thoroughly as they probably should have [been]."
On what do you base this? Because every article I've read indicates
that the FBI did interview nearly all these people (I'm guessing
the remainder were children). Can you cite anyone who witnessed
the interviews (or was sufficiently briefed on them), with pertinent
experience and judgement, who says that these people should have
been interviewed more? The fact that not one of the people on
these flights is now considered to be involved in terrorism
terrorism demonstrates that you and Moore are flat wrong.
As another example, you assert "[t]he departure dates are
accurate...." But, as Kopel points out, the deception lies not in
the literal accuracy of each individual statement regarding the
flights, without regard to context. The deception lies in the
clear and obvious implication that the bin Laden family left the
country before the general public could do so. That is false and
Moore has told that lie many times in interviews, even after being
corrected.
I agree with you regarding "Deciet 9". Kopel lamely offered only
the words of the principal of the school, which is totally irrelevant.
I also agree with you regarding "Deceit 24". Kopel omits the word
"conservatively" which Ms. Hsu used to qualify her estimate. But,
you still have shown that Moore's source, Craig Unger, gave an
accurate estimate, or that the actual number is anywhere in the
ballpark. If it isn't, then Moore definitely was deceptive. Otherwise,
he was just sloppy.
But beyond those, and perhaps one or two others, I'd say that Kopel
scored dozens of solid blows to Moore's credibility. Moore is a
fraud. Beyond the understandable desire for financial success and
acclaim, which belies his man-of-the-people affectation, Moore is
only interested in scoring partisan points for shallow, short-term
political goals.
If he were actually concerned with the plight of US troops, many
who come from poor backgrounds, or for Iraqi and Afghani civilians,
he wouldn't proverbially shit on them with his portrayals or cheer
on the murderous savages constantly blowing up fellow Muslims as
"freedom fighters".
I really wonder how people will regard this movie after the election,
particularly if Kerry wins. At some point, will the people now touting
this movie--once there is little or no political motivation to do so--
look in shame upon their current support, sheepishly admitting that,
yes, Michael Moore is a propagandist who ultimately did more harm
than good? If not, does that not bode ill for our future, when facts
don't really matter anymore to so many?
=====
EE
classicliberal2
>>> There are many articles which have pointed out the distortions,
>>> falsehoods, and lies in the film Fahrenheit 911.
>
> Most of the "deceit" comes from Dave Kopel's keyboard.
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/kopelcritiquepart.htm
Pretty good, but far too short, and far too easy on Kopel.
America
> Most of the "deceit" comes from Dave Kopel's keyboard.
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/kopelcritiquepart.htm
Great link. Thanks for posting this.
Cheeze Whiz
> In article <40ED96B0...@it.com>
> Ken Smith <Rang...@concentric.net> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
>
> >>>There are many articles which have pointed out the distortions,
> >>>falsehoods, and lies in the film Fahrenheit 911.
> > Most of the "deceit" comes from Dave Kopel's keyboard.
> >
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/kopelcritiquepart.htm
>
Eagle Eye: This critique is rather flimsy.
[mercy snip]
On Usenet, you present yourself as an objective observer who
personally hates government and loves Civil Rights: A regular
beady-eyed Southern Minuteman.
In fact you are a Republican partisan who never deviates from Fox News
talking points; doesn't care that Bush has made the Government a
growth industry; and sees nothing wrong with the Patriot act or with
the torture it legalizes. This is truely ironic considering your
Usenet pose as (alternately) a Libertarian or an anarchist.
***
Have I mischaracterized your posts over the last four years? I'll
apologize to you if I have.... but first, let's all go to Google and
decide for ourselves. Just look for "Eagle Eye" and read a few
hundred: Too many to link to here.
But I digress. I assert that your "objectivity" is really in question
here based on your own posting record -- especially considering that
you yourself have not offered any proof of anything in your response
-- but still pretended to.
If you had offered evidence of any kind here, then I wouldn't have
bothered to reply -- but you didn't. You just procede to disparage
Moore's F9/11 documentary where you find it uncomfortable. Pressed;
you resort to ad homenems yourself, often calling him a "liar" with no
explanation, like the Fox News SpinLoons do.
You're a partisan hack.
.. and a hypocrite.
And probably worse.
In the meantime, the FBI conducted *no* interviews of the Bin Laden
family before Bush flew them out of the country on at least four
secret chartered flights, where those contacts followed general FBI
procedures. There were NONE. It Didn't Happen.
These charter flights happened while domestic air traffic was
grounded. The Bin Laden family started to leave within 18 hours (that
Tuesday), and the rest of us weren't flying again generally, for about
five days (that Saturday), altho a few individual flights were
authorized beginning around 72 hours later (Wednesday night).
Bush lied about the flights taking place. He lied about authorizing
the flights. He lied about the FBI interviewing the Bin Laden family.
He got caught. You know it. Live with it.
But please, please, don't take my word for it. The Saudis have
seriously compromised Bush's ability to fight a "war" against
terrorism. This is well documented in books written by good
Republicans like John Dean and Kevin Philips. These are credible,
well-researched books, unlike those from O'Reilly or Coulter, whom you
seem to prefer. ... So you don't have to take Moore's word for it in
F9/11 -- Just read Dean or Phillips and follow the footnotes.
... and please, please ask me why the Bush-Saudi connection
compromises America's fight against terrorism.
cw
Eagle Eye
Milt Brewster wrote:
[sniptroll]
>In the meantime, the FBI conducted *no* interviews of the Bin Laden
>family before Bush flew them out of the country on at least four
>secret chartered flights, where those contacts followed general FBI
>procedures. There were NONE. It Didn't Happen.
According to the Congressional Committee, you're lying:
The Saudi Flights
National air space was closed on September 11. Fearing
reprisals against Saudi nationals, the Saudi government
asked for help in getting some of its citizens out of the
country. We have not yet identified who they contacted for
help. But we have found that the request came to the
attention of Richard Clarke and that each of the flights we
have studied was investigated by the FBI and dealt with in
a professional manner prior to its departure.
No commercial planes, including chartered flights, were
permitted to fly into, out of, or within the United States
until September 13, 2001. After the airspace reopened, six
chartered flights with 142 people, mostly Saudi Arabian
nationals, departed from the United States between
September 14 and 24. One flight, the so-called Bin Ladin
flight, departed the United States on September 20 with 26
passengers, most of them relatives of Usama Bin Ladin. We
have found no credible evidence that any chartered flights
of Saudi Arabian nationals departed the United States
before the reopening of national airspace.
The Saudi flights were screened by law enforcement
officials, primarily the FBI, to ensure that people on
these flights did not pose a threat to national security,
and that nobody of interest to the FBI with regard to the
9/11 investigation was allowed to leave the country. Thirty
of the 142 people on these flights were interviewed by the
FBI, including 22 of the 26 people (23 passengers and 3
private security guards) on the Bin Ladin flight. Many were
asked detailed questions. None of the passengers stated
that they had any recent contact with Usama Bin Ladin or
knew anything about terrorist activity.
The FBI checked a variety of databases for information on
the Bin Ladin flight passengers and searched the aircraft.
It is unclear whether the TIPOFF terrorist watchlist was
checked. At our request, the Terrorist Screening Center has
rechecked the names of individuals on the flight manifests
of these six Saudi flights against the current TIPOFF
watchlist. There are no matches.
The FBI has concluded that nobody was allowed to depart on
these six flights who the FBI wanted to interview in
connection with the 9/11 attacks, or who the FBI later
concluded had any involvement in those attacks. To date, we
have uncovered no evidence to contradict this conclusion.
"Threats and Responses in 2001 : Staff Statement No. 10."
National Commission on Terrorist Atacks Upon the United
States. P. 12. http://tinyurl.com/3ftxq [PDF
Document].
>These charter flights happened while domestic air traffic was
>grounded. The Bin Laden family started to leave within 18 hours (that
>Tuesday), and the rest of us weren't flying again generally, for about
>five days (that Saturday), altho a few individual flights were
>authorized beginning around 72 hours later (Wednesday night).
Again, you're lying. See above.
>Bush lied about the flights taking place.
That's probably true. See the St. Petersburg article
(http://tinyurl.com/3fupz) about one flight the administration denies.
[sniptroll]
> ... and please, please ask me why the Bush-Saudi connection
>compromises America's fight against terrorism.
I don't care what you think. You're just a crackpot with an
identity crisis.
The problem isn't a single family's or political party's
associations with the Saudi Royals. America's dependence on Saudi
oil and the fear that something worse could replace the House of
Saud, has motivated plenty of politicians and businesspeople to
look the other way from Saudi despotism and support of terrorism.
The Saudis built the Wahabbite Frankenstein and it's coming back to
bite them on the ass. The fanatical savages who were brianwashed
in Saudi-funded madrassas are biting the hand that feeds them.
But partisan idiots like you only care about such things when you
can use them as ammunition against your political enemies. You'll
post any lie to that end.
Meanwhile, the Wahhabite monster takes advantage of the internal
strife in the West.
=====
EE
America
There's more than one 'Eagle Eye' posting, but this is a suitable
response to the one who should call itself 'Buzzard Breath' ...
Bush is not on the same side as the USA. The Bush crime family
has been working for enemies of Americans for generations now.
They're all far too wimpy to even survive in any honest capacity.
Cheeze Whiz
> In article <7d7f81d3.04070...@posting.google.com>
> Milt Brewster wrote:
> [sniptroll]
> >In the meantime, the FBI conducted *no* interviews of the Bin Laden
> >family before Bush flew them out of the country on at least four
> >secret chartered flights, where those contacts followed general FBI
> >procedures. There were NONE. It Didn't Happen.
>
> According to the Congressional Committee, you're lying:
[snip for space -- find it in another post]
As long as Congress is in the hands of Republicans who put
partisanship ahead of patriotism; their Congressional announcements
and speeches are suspect.
You probably don't know this, but speeches in Congress do NOT prove
anything anyway. Any Congressional Representative can claim anything
in a speech or report. They often do.
Congressional "Reports" are therefore best treated as claims, not
findings. They are there for the rest of us to verify or disprove as
we can.
***
In the meantime, we still have REAL evidence to deal with. Bush
denied the flights took place. His denial is on the record. FBI
investigators spoke out at the time, complaining they were not allowed
to conduct interviews, and then were told to shut up. We now have
evidence that FAA records for 9/11 and some subsequent days that week
were conventiently destroyed "to save space" on orders from
Administration officials. We now have discovered some regional flight
records documenting those flights, especially from Las Vegas and from
Tampa, Florida.
Your objection is a quibble. Calling me a "liar" is just hype. You and
I agree that the flights took place. We agree that Saudis were on
those planes and that members of the Bin Laden family were on those
planes. We agree within a few hours on *when* the flights took place.
Your grudging agreement comes AFTER you and Mikey Soja (and other
loons here shilling for Republicans) denied the flights took place,
for two years!!
So what was Bush hiding? It must have been pretty important.
cw
Cheeze Whiz
> In article <7d7f81d3.04070...@posting.google.com>
>
> >In the meantime, the FBI conducted *no* interviews of the Bin Laden
> >family before Bush flew them out of the country on at least four
> >secret chartered flights, where those contacts followed general FBI
> >procedures. There were NONE. It Didn't Happen.
>
> According to the Congressional Committee, you're lying:
[snip, and it will be obvious why, in a moment]
Wow. This is interesting.
You have apparently used exactly the same vague "Congressional
Committee" Report snippet that Bill O'Reilly used two days ago, where
he mischaracterized the Saudi flights. He apparently followed a
confidential talking point mailed out by the Bush Re-Election
committee a day or two before that.
O'Reilly has been caught in yet another lie regarding this. He now
has people building compeditive radio shows around the lies he tells,
but I didn't get it there. I got it from a Republican who's not liking
O'Reilly these days, either.
The similarity between O'Reilly's latest lie and your latest post is
overwhelming. You either snatched it from him, or you're on the RNC
insider's email talking points list. Are you maybe a "Ranger?"
Either way, you're dumber than even *I* thought you were.
****
So, are you getting your best stuff from O'Reilly? .. because it
would save the rest of us a LOT of time, taking your exhalted word for
anything.
Pull your pants up.
cw
zepp
wrote:
>Eagle Eye <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message news:<2004071013124...@nym.alias.net>...
>> In article <7d7f81d3.04070...@posting.google.com>
>> Usenet Genius wrote:
>>
>> >In the meantime, the FBI conducted *no* interviews of the Bin Laden
>> >family before Bush flew them out of the country on at least four
>> >secret chartered flights, where those contacts followed general FBI
>> >procedures. There were NONE. It Didn't Happen.
>>
>> According to the Congressional Committee, you're lying:
>
>
>[snip, and it will be obvious why, in a moment]
>
>
>Wow. This is interesting.
>
>You have apparently used exactly the same vague "Congressional
>Committee" Report snippet that Bill O'Reilly used two days ago, where
>he mischaracterized the Saudi flights. He apparently followed a
>confidential talking point mailed out by the Bush Re-Election
>committee a day or two before that.
>
>O'Reilly has been caught in yet another lie regarding this. He now
>has people building compeditive radio shows around the lies he tells,
>but I didn't get it there.
Actually, you can. It's http://www.airamericaradio.com and the Al
Franken Show is on from noon to 3pm, Eastern Time. They have an
archive section if you happen to be at work during that time, and the
shows also rebroadcast on the weekend.
It had been called "The O'Franken Factor" but he changed it last week
after admitting that they hadn't been able to get O'Reilly to file
anouther suit against them.
I got it from a Republican who's not liking
>O'Reilly these days, either.
>
>The similarity between O'Reilly's latest lie and your latest post is
>overwhelming. You either snatched it from him, or you're on the RNC
>insider's email talking points list. Are you maybe a "Ranger?"
>Either way, you're dumber than even *I* thought you were.
>
>****
>
>So, are you getting your best stuff from O'Reilly? .. because it
>would save the rest of us a LOT of time, taking your exhalted word for
>anything.
>
>Pull your pants up.
>
>
>cw
-
"The State Department officially released its annual terrorism report
just a little more than an hour ago, but unlike last year, there's no
extensive mention of alleged terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. A
senior State Department official tells CNN the U.S. government made a
mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden and 'personalizing
terrorism.'"
-- CNN, 4/30/2001.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
Jim Alder
news:7d7f81d3.04071...@posting.google.com:
> Eagle Eye <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
> news:<2004071013124...@nym.alias.net>...
>> In article <7d7f81d3.04070...@posting.google.com>
>> Milt Brewster wrote:
>> [sniptroll]
>> >In the meantime, the FBI conducted *no* interviews of the Bin Laden
>> >family before Bush flew them out of the country on at least four
>> >secret chartered flights, where those contacts followed general FBI
>> >procedures. There were NONE. It Didn't Happen.
>>
>> According to the Congressional Committee, you're lying:
>
> [snip for space -- find it in another post]
>
>
> As long as Congress is in the hands of Republicans who put
> partisanship ahead of patriotism; their Congressional announcements
> and speeches are suspect.
>
> You probably don't know this, but speeches in Congress do NOT prove
> anything anyway. Any Congressional Representative can claim anything
> in a speech or report. They often do.
>
> Congressional "Reports" are therefore best treated as claims, not
> findings. They are there for the rest of us to verify or disprove as
> we can.
What a fascinating world of denial you've built around yourself. You'd
rather believe Moore, a demonstrated liar, than a bipartisan investigating
committee? Why do you even come here to hear different opinions? Obviously
you just decide what to believe, or are told what to believe, and nothing
else gets in. So why bother?
> ***
>
> In the meantime, we still have REAL evidence to deal with. Bush
> denied the flights took place. His denial is on the record. FBI
> investigators spoke out at the time, complaining they were not allowed
> to conduct interviews, and then were told to shut up. We now have
> evidence that FAA records for 9/11 and some subsequent days that week
> were conventiently destroyed "to save space" on orders from
> Administration officials. We now have discovered some regional flight
> records documenting those flights, especially from Las Vegas and from
> Tampa, Florida.
>
> Your objection is a quibble. Calling me a "liar" is just hype. You and
> I agree that the flights took place. We agree that Saudis were on
> those planes and that members of the Bin Laden family were on those
> planes. We agree within a few hours on *when* the flights took place.
>
> Your grudging agreement comes AFTER you and Mikey Soja (and other
> loons here shilling for Republicans) denied the flights took place,
> for two years!!
>
> So what was Bush hiding? It must have been pretty important.
And while dealing with possible informants about the most despicable
terrorist act ever perpetrated on American soil, what POSSIBLE thing could
the PotUS have to keep confidential?
It must be a conspiracy.
--
Metaphors bewitch you
John French-looking Kerry
bin Ladens leaving the U.S.
http://www.hillnews.com/news/052604/Clarke.aspx
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=%5C%5CSpecialReports%5C
%5Carchive%5C%5C200406%5C%5CSPE20040601a.html
STFU!
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"This is John Effing Kerry, and I fucking approved this fucking message."
Jim Alder
news:20040715000618...@mb-m01.aol.com:
> Richard Clarke is on record as having said that HE and he ALONE
> approved the bin Ladens leaving the U.S.
And that he would do it again, I believe.
> http://www.hillnews.com/news/052604/Clarke.aspx
>
> http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=%5C%5CSpecialReports%
> 5C %5Carchive%5C%5C200406%5C%5CSPE20040601a.html
>
> STFU!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> "This is John Effing Kerry, and I fucking approved this fucking
> message."
>
--
Metaphors bewitch you
Eagle Eye
Alder <jima...@ssnet.com> wrote:
>mbre...@genesyslab.com [Milt Brewster] wrote in
Milt Brewster is just a crank.
He's been posting trolls and loony theories for years now. That's
why he has to keep switching his nickname--people keep ignoring him
once they realize he's the same crackpot who posted nonsense a few
months back.
=====
EE
Eagle Eye
Milt Brewster <mbre...@genesyslab.com> wrote:
>Eagle Eye <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
>news:<2004071013124...@nym.alias.net>...
>> In article <7d7f81d3.04070...@posting.google.com>
>> >In the meantime, the FBI conducted *no* interviews of the Bin Laden
>> >family before Bush flew them out of the country on at least four
>> >secret chartered flights, where those contacts followed general FBI
>> >procedures. There were NONE. It Didn't Happen.
>> According to the Congressional Committee, you're lying:
>You have apparently used exactly the same vague "Congressional
>Committee" Report snippet that Bill O'Reilly used two days ago
Whatever, crackpot.
Go redo the foil lining in your bedroom. The mind-control rays
are seeping in, again.
=====
EE
sparrow
"Eagle Eye" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
AAAAAAAAAAH HAHAHAHAHAAHHHHH!!!!!
I'll bet they didn't!!!
Scott Erb
"Eagle Eye" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
>
> Milt Brewster is just a crank.
>
> He's been posting trolls and loony theories for years now. That's
> why he has to keep switching his nickname--people keep ignoring him
> once they realize he's the same crackpot who posted nonsense a few
> months back.
Ever think that maybe you're being played like a fiddle -- after all, you
don't ignore him. Ever think that maybe he's having a delightful time
toying with you, chuckling at your obsessive responses and your inability to
ignore him?
Just something to think about. Remember: this is play, it's not reality.
Very few people read these, fewer still care or remember. The best you can
hope for is to learn something and have some fun. Perspective: use it or
lose it. I recall someone awhile back thinking that if somebody said
something wrong about someone else (in this case it was a fast food joint)
that would open them up to law suits and trouble. That was a sign of
someone who is mentally out of touch with reality, taking this all far more
seriously than it deserves to be taken.
It's just play.
Cheeze Whiz
I am amazed. Is this all you got?
That what I say should be dismissed because you don't like me?
Really? That's it??
What about you building your counter argument on what you knew to be a
lie?
Call me crazy, but I don't think that posting a lie counts as a good
counter-argument.
If this is the best you got, then it looks like I am correct: George
Bush flew the Bin Laden family out of the US a scant 48 hours after
the World Trade Center collapsed, and while the rest of us couldn't
fly anywhere. He shielded them from the FBI. There were MULTIPLE
flights, and the FAA was ordered to cover them up.
George Bush lied about it to everybody.
He's been found out.
He is literally in league with the Bin Ladens.
***
You're a very foolish, sad little man, Kleagle.
cw
Gary_Roselles:_A_Loony
I agree with you absolutely, Scott, but among the Lying Weasels, I
dare say you're in the minority in your attitude about the seriousness
of what happens here. Have a peek at Roselles' numbing, repetitious
obscenities, the obsessive,daily cutting-pasting from Gandolf and
Jamieson and the pious sanctimoniousness of Milt the B.
For them it's NOT play at all. They're all 'fighting the good fight'
that all leftwingers "know" is necessary to save this country from
itself.
So Eagle Eye is having some fun needling Milt. We all needle Milt.
Don't worry...it's just play. Right?
Eagle Eye
<i7FJc.260717$Gx4.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> Scott
Erb <scot...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>"Eagle Eye" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
>news:200407151721...@nym.alias.net...
>> Milt Brewster is just a crank.
>>
>> He's been posting trolls and loony theories for years now.
>> That's why he has to keep switching his nickname--people keep
>> ignoring him once they realize he's the same crackpot who posted
>> nonsense a few months back.
>Ever think that maybe you're being played like a fiddle -- after
>all, you don't ignore him. Ever think that maybe he's having a
>delightful time toying with you, chuckling at your obsessive
>responses and your inability to ignore him?
I've never understood this sort of argument when applied to someone
in a political discussion forum who is pushing a particular agenda
or ideology. Isn't the cost to Milt of being known as a liar and a
crackpot, and having his idiocy associated with Democrats,
"liberals", etc., far worse than the minor pleasure he may derive
from tricking people into responding?
I can't imagine taking pleasure in such things. Does it give you
a significant amount of pleasure? Could you explain this to me?
Because it strikes me as childish at best, and a pathological
defect at worst.
>Just something to think about. Remember: this is play, it's not
>reality.
It may be play, but it's still part of reality. There are real
people reading and posting, discussing actual events, such as
elections, legislation, wars, and the like.
Facts are still facts.
>Very few people read these, fewer still care or remember.
Don't tell Milt that:
No other single media outlet is as large as Usenet today. Time-
Warner is smaller. NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, Sky, the New York Times
and the Wall Street Journal are all smaller. ALL of Cable TV
taken together is smaller. In fact, whole national chains of
daily newspapers (Gannett, Ridder, etc.), magazine groups and
National News Services like the BBC are smaller.
-- Milt Brewster http://tinyurl.com/2kve8
<chuckle>
>The best you can hope for is to learn something and have some
>fun. Perspective: use it or lose it. I recall someone awhile
>back thinking that if somebody said something wrong about someone
>else (in this case it was a fast food joint) that would open them
>up to law suits and trouble.
You're revising history, again. You tried to get away with that
particular lie years ago:
... Billy Beck wrote to Burger King to tell their legal
department that Silverback said something nasty about them and
they should sue him.
-- Scott Erb http://tinyurl.com/5a674
Later in the thread, in response to "Silverback", Billy set the
record straight:
I had no contact whatever with Burger King's "legal department",
nor did I suggest that "they should sue" you or anyone else.
I pointed out to a corporate PR representative what you'd
said about them, and that's the fact.
-- Billy Beck http://tinyurl.com/42nw3
>That was a sign of someone who is mentally out of touch with
>reality, taking this all far more seriously than it deserves to be
>taken.
If you want a real example of someone out of touch with
reality, check this out:
Once I locate him, I'll send the authorities (police or lawyers)
to call on him and his ISP with *my* complaints. I'll Subpoena
his criminal and health records. I'll contact his employer for
more information. I'll sue him and his real ISP. If criminal
charges are appropriate, I'll make them.
-- Milt Brewster http://tinyurl.com/3xlsn
He's talking about me. But the funniest part is that the offenses
which he alleged that I committed NEVER HAPPENED.
Why do you think I poke fun at him about wearing foil hats and
having little invisible men in his house?
>It's just play.
Facts matter. It's wrong to post lies here, even if it's just a
diversion for you.
Incidentally, I finally got around to responding to a post you
made a few weeks back, concerning my motivations for adopting an
individualist ontology. In case you missed my response, you
can find it on Google ( http://tinyurl.com/4y4ad ).
=====
EE
Eagle Eye
>George Bush flew the Bin Laden family out of the US a scant 48
>hours after the World Trade Center collapsed, and while the rest
>of us couldn't fly anywhere. He shielded them from the FBI.
None of that is true.
The FBI checked a variety of databases for information on
the Bin Ladin flight passengers and searched the aircraft.
It is unclear whether the TIPOFF terrorist watchlist was
checked. At our request, the Terrorist Screening Center has
rechecked the names of individuals on the flight manifests
of these six Saudi flights against the current TIPOFF
watchlist. There are no matches.
The FBI has concluded that nobody was allowed to depart on
these six flights who the FBI wanted to interview in
connection with the 9/11 attacks, or who the FBI later
concluded had any involvement in those attacks. To date, we
have uncovered no evidence to contradict this conclusion.
"Threats and Responses in 2001 : Staff Statement No. 10."
National Commission on Terrorist Atacks Upon the United
States. P. 12.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing10/staff_statement_10.pdf
>There were MULTIPLE flights, and the FAA was ordered to cover them
>up.
That's possible. See: ( http://tinyurl.com/3fupz ).
>George Bush lied about it to everybody.
>
>He's been found out.
>
>He is literally in league with the Bin Ladens.
All of this was revealed to you by the aliens who abducted you, no
doubt.
=====
EE
Scott Erb
"Eagle Eye" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
> >Just something to think about. Remember: this is play, it's not
> >reality.
>
> It may be play, but it's still part of reality.
As much as any game of cops and robbers by kids is part of reality.
Your whole rambling response (the kind that few on usenet read, let alone
take seriously -- I didn't even read it carefully) shows me you take this
and yourself far too seriously.
I'm just trying to help you gain some perspective here. The irony was
that you talk about how people ignore another poster when you obsess on him
to an almost unhealthy level. That realization should give you pause and
cause you to reflect abit.
Scott Erb
"Gary_Roselles:_A_Loony" <isopro...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a3b8f662.04071...@posting.google.com...
Well, you're all having fun together, that's fine. I just found it ironic
that Eagle would go on about how everyone ignores a poster that he thinks
can't be taken seriously, when he postiively obsesses on him.
But yeah, this is the part of the playground where people are constantly
getting in fights. But no blood, no broken bones, no pain...just virtual
insults and gamesmanship, all disappearing as the the button to move on is
pushed...
Though, to be sure, I've learned a lot here, even from people with whom I
disagree. I also learned a lot about this kind of communication, how
misunderstandings emerge, how some people really carry grudges (I've never
been able to carry a grudge so it amazes me to see long term anger from
some), and tactics of debate. But that's the point -- you can learn
something and have some fun. That's got some value, though these days more
pressing needs take my time. I've got to work through recess :-(
zepp
(Gary_Roselles:_A_Loony) wrote:
Knickers is in a rather unenviable position, Scott. In order to take
himself seriously, he needs to beleive that we take him seriously.
Steve Canyon
<scot...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>Though, to be sure, I've learned a lot here, even from people with whom I
>disagree. I also learned a lot about this kind of communication, how
>misunderstandings emerge, how some people really carry grudges (I've never
>been able to carry a grudge so it amazes me to see long term anger from
>some), and tactics of debate.
<LOL> Erb says he's never been able to carry a grudge. That's
pretty funny. I'll bet he carry's a lot of grudges that go all the
way back to his childhood where he was the butt of jokes and the
plaything of the bullies. It must have been difficult to have been
such a mamma's boy
--
"I have the right to vote against him in the next
election." --Zepp Jamieson, 1996
http://www.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=4l6trj%24iq4%40news.snowcrest.net
"Legal resident alien Zepp Jamieson, a Canadian who has lived
in the United States for more than 30 years, said his status
changed dramatically with the Patriot Act."
http://www.mtshastanews.com/archives/index.inn?loc=detail&doc=/2003/June/04-1695-news11.txt
Legal resident aliens aren't allowed to vote, Jamieson.
Eagle Eye
<nmQJc.100814$OB3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> Scott
Erb <scot...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>"Eagle Eye" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
>news:2004071612420...@nym.alias.net...
>> >Just something to think about. Remember: this is play, it's
>> >not reality.
>> It may be play, but it's still part of reality.
>As much as any game of cops and robbers by kids is part of
>reality.
Are elections, legislation, wars, etc. as fictional as the fantasy
children make up when playing a game of cops and robbers?
You've posted over 20,000 messages to t.p.m alone. Isn't that a
huge amount of time to devote to something you consider to be so
frivolous?
>Your whole rambling response (the kind that few on usenet read,
>let alone take seriously -- I didn't even read it carefully) shows
>me you take this and yourself far too seriously.
<laugh>
You don't have to read my posts or respond to them, Scott.
Nor is it necessary for you to pretend not to care, while spending
the time to respond and analyze my post. When you explicitly
claim not to have carefully read the post to which you responded,
your affectatin is rather obvious, don't you think? You've got to
be a bit more subtle, man.
>I'm just trying to help you gain some perspective here.
Suddenly you want to HELP me? That's rich, considering the number
of times you've smeared me with false accusations and made
mean-spirited, bigotted jabs about my clinical depression, for
example.
>The irony was that you talk about how people ignore another poster
>when you obsess on him to an almost unhealthy level. That
>realization should give you pause and cause you to reflect abit.
But according to you, this isn't reality. It's just play. If
that's the case, why do you care how often I respond to him, or
even what I say about him?
I did used to waste too much time on him. But, I've mentioned him
in only 38 posts in the past six months, according to Google. If
you want to characterize that as "unhealthy", then I suppose this
newsgroup is filled with rather unhealthy people, including you.
But I would rather spend 100 hours posting what I really think,
even if it is boring to others, than to spend 10 minutes trying to
sell some idea or claim I knew was false, the way you weasels do.
You are a disingenuous fraud, but at least you TRY to give the
appearance of being reasonable. Milt looks like a lunatic and
he just doesn't care anymore.
=====
EE
Cheeze Whiz
"Eagle Eye" gives me lots of power over him. His tremendously
flattering attention would have corrupted me completely a long time
ago, if I weren't so pious and sanctimonious.
***
I'll never give him the satisfaction, but Usenet stats are fairly easy
to come by; even if you have to extrapolate from what you find. They
show that Usenet is holding at around 18 million regular visitors per
year, with half of those mostly binary visitors -- and these days,
mostly downloading MP3 files. The rest visit text groups. These
numbers makes Usenet a sizable communications medium -- ignored by
other media because there's no money to be made here.
If you think nobody reads these messages, you're partly right. Nobody
reads MOST of these messages. On the other hand, a well-written short
message that hits a hot spot can still get discovered quickly and
passed around all over the web. I think Veronica Floss has been
mentioned on the radio four times now, and she's on at least three
websites I know of. Others here have had similar experiences.
Usenet is still the greatest communications laboratory ever
implemented in the history of our species. Is this sentence what
Eagle Eye meant when he said I was "sanctimonious?"
cw
Eagle Eye
Scott Erb <scot...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
[snip]
>I also learned a lot about this kind of communication, how
>misunderstandings emerge, how some people really carry grudges (I've never
>been able to carry a grudge so it amazes me to see long term anger from
>some), and tactics of debate.
You're lying. I've seen you carry many grudges. For example, you
carried such a grudge against Rob Robertson that you created a
sockpuppet account ( http://tinyurl.com/r328 ) with which you made
some nasty personal attacks, such as making a joke about his
father's suicide. You've carried a grudge against me, making
bigotted remarks about me having "mental problems" because I
mentioned that I had clinical depression in the past.
But usually, what you characterize as "grudges" are simply
instances in which other people REMEMBER what you said in the past
and remind you of it later, particularly when you're attempting
to revise history or present yourself as something other than
what you really are.
You try too hard to appear nonchalant, and your actions contradict
your claims.
=====
EE
Steve Canyon
<Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Indeed, Erb is as transparent as glass. He's desperate to present
himself as a paragon of maturity in order to hide his childish
insecurities that drove him to the collectivism he craves. It
probably works with the teenagers that sit in his classroom, but
among adults, he is still the little momma's boy he's always been.