I am watching F-911 tomorrow

Page 1 of 3 123 Last
  1. I am watching F-911 tomorrow


    1 Question my buddies and I are going to watch it tomorrow since they are showing it on school grounds and have invited the student body to attend and offered refreshments.
    Should we:

    A) Just go in and then half way through stand up and say this is bull **** and then leave
    or
    B) Sport the Bush/Cheney and NRA apparell and give the college liberals an opportunity to excercise their beloved ability to tolerate people and give us a chance to excercise freedom of speech

    Either way we will conduct ourselves in a responsible and respectful attitude.


  2. Do both if you are comfortable with it. If you choose, I like B.
    •   
       


  3. Watch it with an open mind, then go rent or buy FarenHYPE 9-11.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by DieTrying
    Watch it with an open mind, then go rent or buy FarenHYPE 9-11.
    I choose B.

    And BTW, F-HYPE 911 Kicked ass!! I was hootin' and hollerin' all the way through that one.

  5. How about option C..

    After the movie, hand out copies of F-Hype 911 or the 55 page document that is out detailing all of the inaccuracies and untruth that was spun in the movie so everyone can see the facts. They can't fault you for that since you are just providing an opportunity to show the other side so people are left with their own opinion to decide and not just based on one that is biased by an inaccurate pseudo-documentary.

    BTW, if you need an electronic copy of the 55 page document, PM me with your email and I will send it over.

  6. C) Options A & B

    I'm jealous! That sounds like a lot of fun!

  7. yeah and hold an affirmative action bake sale after. whites pay 1 dollar for a cookie, asians and mexicans pay 50 cents and black only have to pay 25 cents........that always pisses of the libs at the universities.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by goldylight
    yeah and hold an affirmative action bake sale after. whites pay 1 dollar for a cookie, asians and mexicans pay 50 cents and black only have to pay 25 cents........that always pisses of the libs at the universities.
    LMAO... good one..

  9. How about just staying home and cramming turds into each others ear canals? Same experience. And at least you'd know where the **** you were being fed came from.

  10. fight those america hating hippies
    My Little Site about Hair Loss & Anabolics-
    hair loss from steroids dot com
    •   
       


  11. Quote Originally Posted by jarhead
    How about just staying home and cramming turds into each others ear canals? Same experience. And at least you'd know where the **** you were being fed came from.

    Uhhhhhhhh? As fun as that sounds no.


    I will let you guys know how it turns out

  12. I have seen some circulating sites that supposely are offering free copies of about the mis-truths of Sept ll. Do any of you guys know where I can get a copy?

  13. Quote Originally Posted by CEDeoudes59
    fight those america hating hippies
    Not all hippies hate america.
    MOTIV8 II Challenge
    -=The Big Squirrel Nut Swingers=-
  14. Documented 911 info


    You can check out these sites. These are some great folks with extensive knowledge as to how, and why are government opperates. You can spend months reading this stuff. They also have some great films that will explain things.

    1. The best site is Alex jones. www.infowars.com Listen live talk.
    2. www.Letsroll911.org
    3. www.rense.com Listen live talk.
    4. www.thepowerhour.com Listen live talk.

    I would highly reccomend listen to Alex jones live talk radio at his web site, and the powerhour web site, and order alex jones documentary videos. These videso are much more detailed, and researched than micheal moores. Have fun.

  15. Watch it with an open mind, then go rent or buy FarenHYPE 9-11.
    I was going to suggest that myself. Moore is a fat socialist pig propagandist. Other than that I don't have a problem with the guy.

  16. I'd suggest renting Fahrenheit 9/11 and heading to your local library and borrowing Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 Reader. That book goes further into detail as to where he got his facts, and debunks supposed inaccuracies in the film. It is made to read along as you are watching the film. The fact is that Michael Moore went EASY on the Bush administration, even going so far as to avoid pushing the envelope with certain accusations so as to avoid Oliver Stone syndrome. The truth is worse, and much like Pearl Harbor, it may take decades to reveal just how bad that truth is.

  17. Oh please Brooklyn, Moore's "rebuttals" are against the weakest challenges that have been made to the film.

    I have read his so called responses to the criticisms and he either totally ignores the strongest ones or claims that "technicially" that's not exactly what he "said", nevermind the extremely strong innuendo and spliced video.

  18. Name some untruths in the film.

  19. Read them yourself:

    http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fift...enheit-911.htm

    You'll notice that barely any of these points have been rebutted by Moore.


    Also, the above criticism was written by a person who voted for and supported Nader in the 2000 election, much like Mr. Moore.

    Take it as you wish.

  20. This months issue of Scientific America had some interesting FACTS about what happened on 9/11 and they started out trying to find something that would point the finger at the government but in the end they said that no one could give factual evidence to back up any of there claims. I thought that was interesting.

    I hope no one here actually believes bull**** like the buildings didn't come down because two 747's flew into them it was because Bush and Cheney were detonating bombs in the basement as they sipped on brandy and smoked cigars in the white house.
  21. Exclamation


    Read them yourself:

    http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fif...renheit-911.htm

    You'll notice that barely any of these points have been rebutted by Moore.


    Also, the above criticism was written by a person who voted for and supported Nader in the 2000 election, much like Mr. Moore.

    Take it as you wish.
    I've already read much of this from other sources. Most of the stated problems with Moore's accuracy are themselves a matter of point of view. Of course Moore presents the facts in the matter he wants to in order to present a convincing argument. This is what every news channel and candidate for public office does on a daily basis in order to effect a result in the favor of the desired side. I've watched Fox News present as "fact" a number of opinions and assertions which were both off-target and slanted. Does Moore uncover a smoking gun? No. He does exhibit a large amount of material which is designed to help the American public better understand the character of the leaders they have representing them in office. His hope is that a better understanding of how the Bush administration has trampled on civil liberties and could care less about the poor in America would help turn the tide of public approval against said administration. He needed little help in making Bush appear to be an ass. Dubya accomplishes that mission quite well on his own.

  22. I never understood how anyone could think Bush is a good President or anything other than a retard.

    I am especially appalled when people CLAIMING to be Libertarians support him. His SPENDING policies are the worst in US history. We're so far in debt that many in the financial world are starting to get worried because US Treasury Bonds have dropped low enough that they are actually nearing China's and several other major nations' stop-loss orders. If that occurs, you will see a Depression much like we saw in the 30s.


    Bush is NOT a Conservative and neither is the entire Republican Party Leadership. The Republican Party is now The Christian Party. Their goals are SOCIAL Conservatism, forcing religion into government agencies and into laws, and most importantly increased spending. Their tax breaks don't even do any good since they are only for the upper 10% bracket. I have news for Libertarians here: The Republican Party is not your party anymore. Even Reagan wasn't this bad with spending (admittedly he at least was justified). We need a return to the roots. True FISCAL Conservatism. We need FISCAL Conservatism and social liberalism. More personal freedom and less government spending and less taxes = SMALLER GOVERNMENT.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by Brooklyn
    I've already read much of this from other sources. Most of the stated problems with Moore's accuracy are themselves a matter of point of view. Of course Moore presents the facts in the matter he wants to in order to present a convincing argument. This is what every news channel and candidate for public office does on a daily basis in order to effect a result in the favor of the desired side. I've watched Fox News present as "fact" a number of opinions and assertions which were both off-target and slanted. Does Moore uncover a smoking gun? No. He does exhibit a large amount of material which is designed to help the American public better understand the character of the leaders they have representing them in office. His hope is that a better understanding of how the Bush administration has trampled on civil liberties and could care less about the poor in America would help turn the tide of public approval against said administration. He needed little help in making Bush appear to be an ass. Dubya accomplishes that mission quite well on his own.
    Yes, however when taken out of context, or cleverly edited there is a gigantic difference in the perception of the facts.

    A "point of view" is a cheap way of saying "well he didn't actually SAY that" but anyone with half a braincell knows that when Mr. Moore narrates something and then splices in footage, there is an intent to lead the viewer into believing something that is NOT factual. Of course there is always the caveat and wiggle room where he can say "well I didn't technically say that" but come on, everyone realizes his intent to deceive.

    For example, the way that Moore portrays Bush in the dinner speech and the famous "some may call you the elite, I call you my base" statement. The average viewer does not understand that the dinner has traditionally involved BOTH presidential candidates (Gore was also there) who participate in self degrading humor, which is what Bush did. But yet it is presented as a serious statement by Bush.

    Mr. Moore is brilliant in that he understands that the overwhelming majority of his viewers will already have a preconceived set of ideals that more than likely agree with his own. Couple that preconception along with the fact that most of his viewers don't care to research anything or question his work and you have the climate to easily fool people and create an illusion that events happened a certain way. Mr. Moore is very clever in his wording to give himself wiggle room in all events.

    And yes, I am sure that the same happens in major media outlets, but to a much lesser degree. However that is no excuse, I am sorry but the "well gee everybody else does it too" thing doesn't fly here.

    For example, the rebuttal movie to F 9/11, Farenhype did accurately put things in context. But there was a heavy smattering of raw patriotic crap, which turned me off. But, they didn't video splice and edit. Two different styles designed to influence opinion, but one uses emotion while the other uses clever editing and noncontextual deception. I'll take raw patriotic crap over Mr. Moore's style any day since that is easily filtered.

    There are things that agree with Bush on, and things that I disagree with Bush on. But Mr. Moore does a tremendous disservice to his own parties causes by putting out this highly suspect and easily shredded garbage.


    Edit: Null, I respect your opinion but it is off topic on thread.

  24. I never understood how anyone could think Bush is a good President or anything other than a retard.
    That's easy put into context. Do I pick a retard or Al Gore? I'll pick a retard. ( actually personally I went with a third party in that one). Do I pick a retard or John Kerry? I'll go with a retard. It's funny how a retard got better grades than Kerry isn't it? Does a retard flunk out of divinity school? Yes.. his name was Al Gore.




    I am especially appalled when people CLAIMING to be Libertarians support him. His SPENDING policies are the worst in US history. We're so far in debt that many in the financial world are starting to get worried because US Treasury Bonds have dropped low enough that they are actually nearing China's and several other major nations' stop-loss orders. If that occurs, you will see a Depression much like we saw in the 30s.
    I don't understand how someone can claim to be a libertarian yet only read left wing web sites and only criticize republicans and consistently give democrats a pass. Libertarianism (the school of thought not the party) is a hell of a lot closer to a conservative point a view than a liberal one. I guess there must be a almost socialist wing of the libertarian party.

    [QUOTE]Bush is NOT a Conservative and neither is the entire Republican Party Leadership. The Republican Party is now The Christian Party. Their goals are SOCIAL Conservatism, forcing religion into government agencies and into laws, and most importantly increased spending.[QUOTE]

    The only thing we agree on is that Bush is not a conservative. I can name several republicans that are moderate to liberal. I can only name two democrats who are moderate and one of them retired.

    Their tax breaks don't even do any good since they are only for the upper 10% bracket. I have news for Libertarians here: The Republican Party is not your party anymore. Even Reagan wasn't this bad with spending (admittedly he at least was justified). We need a return to the roots. True FISCAL Conservatism. We need FISCAL Conservatism and social liberalism. More personal freedom and less government spending and less taxes = SMALLER GOVERNMENT.
    I am not in the top 10 % and I have many friends that aren't in the top 10 % who saved money on taxes. The top 10 % also pays something like 50 to 60 % of the taxes. Why shouldn't they get a tax break too? Why should people be punished for making money? Should we give a tax break to people who pay very little in taxes? It wasn't Regan who was spending back then it was the senate who was controlled by democrats.

  25. The fact is that Michael Moore went EASY on the Bush administration, even going so far as to avoid pushing the envelope with certain accusations so as to avoid Oliver Stone syndrome.
    Is that why Moore said on national television that the U.S Government knows where Bin Laden is?

    [QUOTE]
    I've already read much of this from other sources. Most of the stated problems with Moore's accuracy are themselves a matter of point of view. Of course Moore presents the facts in the matter he wants to in order to present a convincing argument. This is what every news channel and candidate for public office does on a daily basis in order to effect a result in the favor of the desired side.
    Facts are facts. Moore doesn't report facts he reports propaganda. He distorts, omits, and flat out lies. For example the scene were he says Bush did nothing at the school for 7 minutes. It turns out it was 5 minutes and Bush was writing notes and passing notes to the people around him. Moore had to of watched that footage but deliberately left it out to make Bush look bad. Moore is also being sued by a newspaper because he doctored the front page of the paper to say that Gore won the election when it never appeared on the front page.

    I've watched Fox News present as "fact" a number of opinions and assertions which were both off-target and slanted. Does Moore uncover a smoking gun? No. He does exhibit a large amount of material which is designed to help the American public better understand the character of the leaders they have representing them in office. His hope is that a better understanding of how the Bush administration has trampled on civil liberties and could care less about the poor in America would help turn the tide of public approval against said administration. He needed little help in making Bush appear to be an ass. Dubya accomplishes that mission quite well on his own.
    Moore is not trying to help anyone. He is a propagandist. There is a huge monumental difference between lying , distorting, and omitting and reporting who, what where and when. You can not compare or even mention in the same sentence Moore and any news channel. The guy has done a great job is presenting himself as Mr.. average crusader for the working man but he is not. He didn't grow up in Flint, he lives in a million dollar condo in Manhattan, he sends he kids to private school and he is a socialist. Nothing in that movie is designed to help the American people. The movie is design to make Moore a boat load of money (I don't have a problem with that but it makes him a hypocrite when he whines about capitalism and evil corporations) and make Bush look Bad.

  26. VG, you didn't address the Christian aspect of the Repblican Party in your post.


    Plus, as far as tax breaks go, ultimately there shouldn't be ANY income tax. However if you are cutting taxes you have to have a purpose in mind. If the purpose is to stimulate the economy, you cut it for the lowest bracket. Why? Because they SPEND their money whereas those in the top save it. Economies are stimulated when people spend money. Giving money to people in the top tax bracket will just wind up sitting in the economic equivilient of "in a box under the mattress."

    As for the rich paying taxes, that's a lie. The upper 10% tax bracket payed 50% of the tax income, correct. However, the upper 5% INCOME bracket in the US was actually in the lower 90% of the tax bracket. Do you know why? Tax loopholes. You say there is no incentive for making more money? Bull****. Once you start to recieve most of your income from your own business, capital gains, real estate, etc. you can get away with bloody murder when it comes to taxes. Just as an example, Bill Gates last year received 3 billion dollars in shares from a special dividend Microsoft paid to shareholders. Bill Gates paid quite literally 0% taxes on that 3 billion. Not so much as a red cent. How? Using a Charitable Remainder Trust. The long and the short of it is that he used a fake charity and a type of trust fund specifically designed as a tax shelter to avoid capital gains to completely avoid paying any taxes on his money.


    If you want to talk about fairness, is it fair that Christy Todd Whitman paid less in property taxes on her $20+ million estate than a friend of mine paid on his $300,000 1 bedroom house in New Providence? Is it fair that Teresa Heinz Kerry only paid taxes on 5 million last year when her gross income was in the hundreds of millions? Is it fair that the middle class pay over 40% in taxes on their gross income while the top most in society pay less than 5% in taxes on their gross income? Is it fair that several CEOs in fortune 500 companies haven't had to pay ANY taxes at all in the past 10 years? Don't talk about disincentive to increase income. That's the biggest load of horse**** I ever hear. Rich people do not pay taxes. My great uncle is a perfect example. When he started his business as much as 45% of his profits went straight to the government. However the larger his business grew, the les taxes he had to pay because of all the loopsholes that became available. You know how much he pays in taxes now? None. Zip. He's worth hundreds of millions and he pays nada to the government.

    If you want to be fair, demand a flat tax. A flat tax that removes ALL loopholes and simplifies tax law. It's real simple to make things fair. For one thing, remove deductions for charities. Remove classification of income source; income should be taxed evenly, not 15% for capital gains, 43% for employee income, etc. A flat tax would mean everyone get's hit with something like 15% across the board. You know who opposes a flat tax though? The rich. The extremely wealthy oppose it. Why? Because for them it means a horribly drastic increase in the amount of taxes they will have to pay.

    As for you claiming I'm a Liberal, all you did was call me a name. You didn't say anything to support that statement or back it up in any way. Anyone can do that. Heck I can call you a Nazi but that doesn't mean you are one and it doesn't mean I have anything to back it. You know what news source I get my daily dose from? The BBC; the only neutral source still in existance. Everything in the US media is so tainted by sensationalism it disgusts me. Half of it is propaganda, and the other half is just schlock. I'm sick of seeing Christian this and Jesus that. It's always crap like "Video games that teach children how to kill cops! ... news at 11".

    The current state of this nation is a disgrace to our founding fathers.

  27. ummm, I thought this thread was about f 9-11.

  28. Quote Originally Posted by Nullifidian
    Plus, as far as tax breaks go, ultimately there shouldn't be ANY income tax. However if you are cutting taxes you have to have a purpose in mind. If the purpose is to stimulate the economy, you cut it for the lowest bracket. Why? Because they SPEND their money whereas those in the top save it. Economies are stimulated when people spend money. Giving money to people in the top tax bracket will just wind up sitting in the economic equivilient of "in a box under the mattress."
    This is flat out wrong. Saving and investment are what cause economic growth. Without saving and investment there's no way for any large pools of capitol to form because all rescources and investments in society are geared towards satisfying immediate demands. With no capitol to invest, there are no new jobs, no new products, no new development in the infrastructure, etc. There is not optimal ratio at which people spend vs save, but it's the saving of money, and thus its allocation towards future consumption, that causes growth. All spending does is justify already existing investments. Saving and investment creates new opportunities for profit and exchange. And the rich, like it or not, are more likely to try and use capital productively than the poor or middle class.

    You have points regarding taxation in this post, but this one is wrong.

  29. Quote Originally Posted by Nullifidian
    Everything in the US media is so tainted by sensationalism it disgusts me. Half of it is propaganda, and the other half is just schlock. I'm sick of seeing Christian this and Jesus that. It's always crap like "Video games that teach children how to kill cops! ... news at 11".
    Exactely what stations are you watching. Either the stations you watch do have a lot to say about Christian this Jesus that or you are selective about what you here.

    About the only thing I agree with you about is a flat tax and this nation would be a disgrace to our founding fathers

  30. VG, you didn't address the Christian aspect of the Repblican Party in your post.
    I did but I'll clarify it. There is a Christian wing of the republican party. However, my point was I can think of several moderate to liberal senators in the republican party. I can only think of two moderate to conservative democratic senators. So while there is a religious wing of the party the notion that the republicans have been high jacked by Christians is false IMO. The front runners for the republicans in 08 are all liberal republicans. Both Rudy and McCain aren't very conservative. At the other side you have Hillary who is very liberal despite her attempt to reinvent herself.


    Plus, as far as tax breaks go, ultimately there shouldn't be ANY income tax.
    I agree with that. Certain people have made a pretty good case that the income tax wasn't properly ratified.

    However if you are cutting taxes you have to have a purpose in mind. If the purpose is to stimulate the economy, you cut it for the lowest bracket. Why? Because they SPEND their money whereas those in the top save it. Economies are stimulated when people spend money. Giving money to people in the top tax bracket will just wind up sitting in the economic equivilient of "in a box under the mattress."
    That is simply not true and fails to address my questions in my previous post. Why should people be penalized for making money?

    As for the rich paying taxes, that's a lie. The upper 10% tax bracket payed 50% of the tax income, correct. However, the upper 5% INCOME bracket in the US was actually in the lower 90% of the tax bracket. Do you know why? Tax loopholes. You say there is no incentive for making more money? Bull****. Once you start to recieve most of your income from your own business, capital gains, real estate, etc. you can get away with bloody murder when it comes to taxes. Just as an example, Bill Gates last year received 3 billion dollars in shares from a special dividend Microsoft paid to shareholders. Bill Gates paid quite literally 0% taxes on that 3 billion. Not so much as a red cent. How? Using a Charitable Remainder Trust. The long and the short of it is that he used a fake charity and a type of trust fund specifically designed as a tax shelter to avoid capital gains to completely avoid paying any taxes on his money.
    Actually the top 5 % pay around 50 % of the taxes and the top 10 % pay about 65%. Try running a business null and see how much you pay in taxes. I don't know how much Microsoft paid in taxes this year but my bet is it's a hell of allot more than what both we made combined. As far as the other things........... I don't care. Bill Gates is a smart guy , he worked hard, was very innovative, and he deservers to keep what he earns.


    If you want to talk about fairness, is it fair that Christy Todd Whitman paid less in property taxes on her $20+ million estate than a friend of mine paid on his $300,000 1 bedroom house in New Providence? Is it fair that Teresa Heinz Kerry only paid taxes on 5 million last year when her gross income was in the hundreds of millions? Is it fair that the middle class pay over 40% in taxes on their gross income while the top most in society pay less than 5% in taxes on their gross income? Is it fair that several CEOs in fortune 500 companies haven't had to pay ANY taxes at all in the past 10 years? Don't talk about disincentive to increase income. That's the biggest load of horse**** I ever hear. Rich people do not pay taxes. My great uncle is a perfect example. When he started his business as much as 45% of his profits went straight to the government. However the larger his business grew, the les taxes he had to pay because of all the loopsholes that became available. You know how much he pays in taxes now? None. Zip. He's worth hundreds of millions and he pays nada to the government.
    And how many people do these evil corporations and big business provide jobs for? At what point is taxes too high? Many people who make a 6 figure income tax rate is 50%. That is too high regardless of how much money you make. Most people pay between 30 to 40 %. That is too high as well. Which goes back to my original point. The money you makes is yours and the money Bill gates makes is his not the governments. It's not fair that the government takes 30 % off my paycheck and it's not fair that the government takes 50 % from someone who makes more than me.

    If you want to be fair, demand a flat tax. A flat tax that removes ALL loopholes and simplifies tax law. It's real simple to make things fair. For one thing, remove deductions for charities. Remove classification of income source; income should be taxed evenly, not 15% for capital gains, 43% for employee income, etc. A flat tax would mean everyone get's hit with something like 15% across the board. You know who opposes a flat tax though? The rich. The extremely wealthy oppose it. Why? Because for them it means a horribly drastic increase in the amount of taxes they will have to pay.
    I think you buying into the class warfare garbage. The rich do pay enough in taxes. Why is being rich a crime? In fact I think this detracts from the real issue here, which is the size of government is out of control and government spending is out of control.

    As for you claiming I'm a Liberal, all you did was call me a name. You didn't say anything to support that statement or back it up in any way.Anyone can do that. Heck I can call you a Nazi but that doesn't mean you are one and it doesn't mean I have anything to back it.
    That's not true I pointed out that in prior debates you consistently post links to extremely left wing websites and don't hold the same standard to democrats as you do to republicans. In fact I don't recall you ever criticizing a democrat.

    You know what news source I get my daily dose from? The BBC; the only neutral source still in existance.
    That's not true at all.

    Everything in the US media is so tainted by sensationalism it disgusts me. Half of it is propaganda, and the other half is just schlock. I'm sick of seeing Christian this and Jesus that. It's always crap like "Video games that teach children how to kill cops! ... news at 11".
    I don't seem to recall on CNN the tag lines............. O.J Simpson being chased followed by a reporter saying praise Jesus. What channel do you watch? Actually if I recall there have been a few studies that have shown that video games aren't that healthy for developing children.

    The current state of this nation is a disgrace to our founding fathers.
    Another area where we agree. Again this is not about F 9-11 if you want to continue this start another tread about taxes.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-13-2011, 03:00 AM
  2. So who is gonna watch I am Legend ?
    By ReaperX in forum General Chat
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 12-23-2007, 06:31 AM
  3. Stupid AM.com Heisman Watch 2006-2007
    By CEDeoudes59 in forum Sports Talk
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 11-10-2006, 09:16 PM
  4. I am trying out a NO2 hombrew for kicks!
    By windwords7 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-13-2003, 12:50 PM
  5. I AM SICK.. of feeling over loaded with info
    By WanaKnowMore in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-28-2002, 09:34 PM
Log in
Log in