Completely OT : Cannes, Mickael Moore and the Iraq War

Sinapus · #1 May 18th, 2004, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by trooper:
I don't think guys such as M. Moore fears polemic...

But there has been a real attempt of censorship from the US governement concerning this documentary. What does the gov. fear, if all this document is pure bull**** ? And does the US constitution still ensures freedom of speech for everyone ? That's questions I would ask to myself if I was an US citizen...

What censorship from the US government? All that's been blathered is a claim from Moore about Disney "suddenly" deciding to not distribute the film followed by a retraction from him about a day later.

Freduk: Don't bother trying to sound friendly if all you're going to do is presume that most of the people who don't agree with you are stupid, or brainwashed, etc. Give it a rest.

tesco samoa · #2 May 18th, 2004, 05:42 PM

Freduk was just having some fun hence the

I was not offened.... I may have offended person next to me when i laughed.

Atrocities · #3 May 18th, 2004, 05:46 PM

If Disney won't push it, then it must be full of crap. Good call for Disney.

rextorres · #4 May 18th, 2004, 06:03 PM

One thing the movie brings up that no one has rationailized is why did Bush allow Bin Ladin's relatives to leave the U.S. right after 9/11.

[ May 18, 2004, 17:04: Message edited by: rextorres ]

Atrocities · #5 May 18th, 2004, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rextorres:
One thing the movie brings up that no one has rationailized is why did Bush allow Bin Ladin's relatives to leave the U.S. right after 9/11.

There is no proof of that, and even if there was, there is no PROOF that Bush himself said "Ok, they can go home."

Again this guy feeds on conspiricy by tossing gas on it. If he is such a great film maker then why in the hell doesn't he do a documentary on how Clinton signed the marshal law order two hours before the explosion in Oklahoma? How in the hell did Clinton have foreknowledge of this event? Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? Simple the way it played out was NOT the way it was suppose to.

But will M. Moore do a documentary on this? Oh hell no. Shame on you Mr. Moore, shame on you!

Phoenix-D · #6 May 18th, 2004, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rextorres:
One thing the movie brings up that no one has rationailized is why did Bush allow Bin Ladin's relatives to leave the U.S. right after 9/11.

Other than the fact that said relatives have -disowned- him, and the idea was to get them away from murderous idiots? Kind of like the guy who killed a Sik here in Arizona a few days later. Because he wore a turban.

Hmm, how about the next time someone commits murder we sentance their family to death too. That'll go over well.

rextorres · #7 May 18th, 2004, 08:35 PM

Phoenix - you are going to have to do better than that - there were relatives of the hijackers that were being arrested simply because they were relatives. The Bin Ladins, on the other hand, who might have had knowledge of Osama's whereabouts were allowed to leave the country without even any questioning - sure sounds fishy to me.

Atrocities - It's common knowledge. Also - Clinton is no longer President don't know why you keep bringing him up. If anything I would compare Bush to Nixon but I won't go there.

[ May 18, 2004, 19:38: Message edited by: rextorres ]