It sounds like Micheal Moore has done it again....
 

Great revues for his new film "Sicko".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6673039.stm

I have to admit I found 911 a little self serving and it had too many contradictions.

finally something he made might be worth seeing?

how was 9/11 self serving? One Rush Limbaugh show -ONE - has more lies in it than all MM movies put together and quadrupled.

I don't agree with a lot of his politics, but his movies are good. I actually didn't like his last couple movies as much as his old stuff.

I'm too drunk to debate it ATM - ask me tomorrow.

there were 59 documented misrepresentations in fahrenheit 9/11

assuming that all the other movies MM created had only 1 error (yeah right)that would mean 1 1/2 episode of rush limbaugh has 240 independently documented errors

Link please

You think??? :winkwink: If there is so much concern about "misprepresentations" in a movie - you really need to check out all documentaries and find the same hair-splitting. Where there is a "need" anyone can find anything to suit their agenda.

Even better... just turn on Fox News for an hour and count them.

Limbaugh is irrelevant - his only "ability" is the same as the Reich propaganda "anchors" - all wind and no substance. He could not make any movie if his life depended on it.

well the 59 documented errors were not nitpicked errors but big ones like

Michael Moore states, ?While Bush was busy taking care of his base and professing his love for our troops, he proposed cutting combat soldiers' pay by 33% and assistance to their families by 60%.?

when in fact

Cash compensation for active duty service members increased by some 25 percent between 1999 and 2005, according to the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments


he did this by ignoring the increase in base pay which was designed to offset the cut in combat pay (BTW which was done because it resulted in military personal getting a serious pay cut when the were on duty recovering from a war injury).

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/...sh_popcorn.jpg

Fahrenheit 9/11 was an eye opener for most Americans. While most of the media was marching in lockstep to a military drum beat, Michael Moore asked the hard questions that the troops couldn't ask, and the media was too timid to investigate at the time.

For those of you who saw the movie, and are not just repeating the widely circulated 59 Deceits (which Moore addresses on his web site), I'm not sure if you know it, since it didn't make big headlines, but the Marine recruiter who appeared in a segment of the movie was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq in 2006 - just another casualty of a war gone horribly wrong due to lies, miscalculations and poor leadership.

Michael Moore's 9/11 movie served as a catalyst for many people to begin asking hard questions about the war and demanding answers.

A majority of Americans are now opposed to the war, and want it to end.

Regarding "Sicko" (the new Moore movie), I think most working class people who have had to deal with the health care system have some issues with it already, not to mention the 50 million uninsured Americans.

I genuinely hope the new Moore movie inspires a united movement for change, particularly since it crosses political lines. Once people feel empowered to work for change, it can have an impact on other issues affecting our society as well.

ADG

Well, maybe if he didn't blatantly lie over and over again in his previous one-sided "documentary" more people would believe him and his movies.

lie about what ... a war based on lies ... and a very one-sided war indeed....

Here here! I agree ! And when the rest of us are serious about finding out what is really truth and what isn't ... the truth is out there... It just hurts to see it... it is much less pretty than any of us can imagine. I understand hiding behind the debunking lies and all of that. It is not easy to accept but one way or the other you will need to look at it. Unfortunately it will likely be when there is no choice but look. I am guilty too.

You are right, sort of. Moore leaves out part of the facts to make his case more compelling. The 33% was for imminent danger pay and the 60% was for family separation allowances. Taking his quote word for word would make you think that they cut pay to soldiers when in actuality they just cut parts of it down.

He didn't pull the facts out of his ass though, he got it from an Army Times article in 2003.

But it does bring up a point of how much we pay our soldiers. We pay mercenaries from other countries between 5-15 times as much as our soldiers. I've been reading a book called Blackwater that is really good and details how it all works.

fox gave this one a good review,health has very few friends left or right lol
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,273875,00.html

Read two books on creating documentaries, no where does it say you have to be balanced.

IT not just leaving out parts to make his case more compelling it leaving out a part to distort the truth and make a pay increase look like a cut


Before the if you were fighting in the war and you got wounded, but the wound was not sever enough to get you discharged or sent home. you would be treated in country. Your pay would drop like 42.3%.

What the government did is increase the base pay and then decreased the surplus you would get for being directly in the field

over all combat pay went up like 10% and injured but active pay went up like 23%.

There was no cut in pay, by pretending that the base pay increase never happened he turned a pay raise into a pay cut.

Just remember there are wheels within wheels here.

The "Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments" may be right in what they say, but this is no government organization. It's a private organization, a member of the Security Policy Working Group and they've received $4m in grants from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and Smith Richardson Foundation.

Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation: The overall objective of the Bradley Foundation is to return the U.S. to the days before governments began to regulate big business and before corporations were forced to make concessions to an organized labor force. Basically, capitalism without any checks and balances.

Smith Richardson Foundation: Built on the Vicks Vaporub fortune, it gives millions in grants to numerous conservative organizations, including The Brookings Institute and the American Enterprise Institute, among others.

Now I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with what they're doing or who they're contributing to, but I think their "facts" are as decidely right-leaning as Michael Moore's are left-leaning.

There is no truth, there is only interpretation. Horrifying.

pay cut for troops:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...14/MN94780.DTL
If they cut one penny from one soldiers pay its too fucking much.
Micheal Moore makes one movies every couple of years but the right has truth twisting about 40 hrs a week and thats ok. Dont understand that.

As your gross distortion demonstrates, people will believe whatever they want to believe, regardless of whether facts get in the way. Were that not the case, there would be no need for people like Michael Moore to make movies in the first place.

The reality is sadder still: that the majority of people are blissfully unaware of the facts, convenient ones or otherwise. Instead they take on board the current opinions being fed to whatever part of the social/political spectrum they see themselves as belonging to and then parrot these second-hand opinions as if they had reasoned them out for themselves.

only a democrat would call this a cut

"Last month, the Pentagon sent Congress an interim budget report saying the extra $225 monthly for the two pay categories was costing about $25 million more a month, or $300 million for a full year. In its "appeals package" laying out its requests for cuts in pending congressional spending legislation, Pentagon officials recommended returning to the old, lower rates of special pay and said military experts would study the question of combat pay in coming months. "

it not that their pay was getting cut it was just that they recommended they not get a 50% pay increase (150 to 225).

btw the government did bump it to 175 that year so

this is another example of democrats misrepresenting a pay increase (+25) as a pay cut.

for you guys that don't get it

say playboy cash post in this forum that they are thinking about raising payouts to $60 from $30

They run the number and figuire out they would lose money on that rate and say we can raise it that much but we are going to raise payouts to $40

what you are doing now is equivalent to saying that playboy cut your commission by 50% (20/40) when infact you are getting paid 33% more (10/30)

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

TODAY:

Amazing how both parties are using " the troops " to their political goal.

GideonGallery is comparing apples to oranges in his response to what was actually stated in Fahrenheit 9/11 regarding military pay cuts.

ADG

There are thousands of these right-wing 'think tanks' that produce results on demand according to whatever evil deed the Repubs have been caught doing at a given moment. They give people like Gideon, who desperately NEED to believe in Republicans for some demented reason, something to say when there really is no defense for the things they do. And Michael Moore doesn't lie, but you'd think he was Satan himself according to how they demonize him. I sort of pity hardcore conservatives because I think for the most part they're damaged, insecure people. I HATE wishy washy motherfucking 'democrats' who won't call a spade a spade and enable these unamerican sob's in their shenanigans.

This is a party that had our wounded troops recovering in a building filled with rats and cockroaches. You didn't expect them to actually give a raise to our troops, did you?

the key point you are deliberately ignoring is i am pulling the numbers directly from the article that tony404 quoted his pay cut arguement from
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...14/MN94780.DTL




in 2002 the combat pay was $150
in 2003 the combat pay was still $150

that is not a cut it a freeze in pay

but the problem is that military recieved a minimum pay increase of 4.5% (maxed out 9.5%) for that fiscal year. Which both the article you quoted and MM decided to ignore.

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/blpay.htm

btw those number are from the army payroll not some "think tank"


A combat deployed soldier (E3) base salary went from 1303.50 in 2002 to 1442.10 in 2003.

all of that is BEFORE you add one cent of combat pay (which was not reduced once cent just frozen at the old levels)

add to fact that 2003 was the first year in which the new combat zone tax abatement came into effect which made base pay tax free if you were in a combat zone ("Unless serving in a designated combat zone, base pay is taxable ")

Republicans more than doubled combat bonus pay ( 30% $1500 > $150)

A year on year freeze is a cut - you have to take into account inflation.

Still debating the Fat Man's movies?? :winkwink:

That's part of the reason he made the thing - so seems to be working well :pimp

Carry on....

http://moorelies.com/

Lol actually I couldn't care less about moore or that website, just thought i'd post that. :1orglaugh

your missing the points
1. it was only part of the compensation

combat pay BONUS was frozen to be the same
but in that year


base pay increased combat ready (E3) from 1303.50 to 1442.10

AND

base pay in when serving in a combat zone became tax free income that year

which translates in a combat pay bump of around $450 (1500 X.30%)

The pentagon basically said adding an extra 225 above and beyond that was a bit excessive.

BTW check the next year and you will see the military got the bump

a $600 pay raise on a 1303.50 monthly pay was called a CUT by MM
which is a bald face lie.

Something tells me i'll prefer this one.

All this debate about cut this and cut that... who gives a fuck... the bottom line is that the us govt serves corporations much more then it's citizens... I'm not a republican (thank god I have a brain) or a democrat (which is almost as bad as being a republican)... I am a us citizen who is sick and fucking tired of the stench of corporate politics that eminates from washington... Our country is being wholesaled to the highest corporate bidder and if you can't see that then you are just fucking stupid... flat out... no playing around... you live in tv land and are an idiot.

The majority of americans are slaves... in the true meaning of the word... If it weren't for their corporate masters they would go hungry... Most americans have no idea how to be self sufficient and typically count those who are as "lucky"... There is a basic reason for this... Mass social control via media, religion and governance. We tote ourselves as the most free country in the world... but that is a lie... actually... we are way down on the list.

Bush is really insignificant in the scheme of things... he will be the scapegoat. It's really about the same age old story... The rich vs. the poor. The "base" (rich elite) are really who the right wing consider to be citizens... not the average american.

It kills me to read some of the idiotic blather that some of you post about politics... At least Moore is focused on raising awareness. Bravo for that... Most other media are busy spitting propoganda (fox, cnn, msnbc, etc.) to serve the New World Order.

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

i am a canadian and a liberal (thank god we have a middle ground between the right and the left)


i call "propoganda" on both sides of the isles the only reason you guys keep calling me a conservative is because democrats in your country say so many blatently false things. The age old dem practice of representing the difference between two pay increases as a cut (i want to give a 20% pay bump, you want to give 10% so i say you are cutting pay by 10%) is the reason why democrats lose so often. As people get smarter they realize the democrats are lying more and more.

it has gotten so bad people with view perfectly match democrat views

claim they are not democrats to make their views sound more resonable.

if you truly were neither a republican or a democrat you would realize that your government system is based on the peddling of influance. Big business has lobbiest representing them , labour has political arms, as well as socio-economic (over 60, enviroment) they compete to get their own point of view across the only reason that business interests are winning is because democrat side is still using propoganda method and they get called on.

Idiots like MM are the reason that the rich are gaining more and more influence.

Simply put when MM say that the military is getting a 33% cut all the other side has do to is trot out the pay stubs for those average military people and show that their salary increase $600 in pay per month in that year. Once they proved that his number are totally wrong every thing said by that democrat irregardless of weather it is true or not is suspect.

I dont mind minor distortions if it calls to attention the failings of this once great country. At least someone has the balls to say something...

So let's see. There may have been some inaccuracies in Michael Moore's 9/11 movie. How many people died as a result of that?

None that I recall.

We now know that the Bush Administration (aided and abetted by the Demo's) perpetrated massive lies that led us into war in Iraq. How many people did that kill (so far)?

U.S. MILITARY DEATHS (IRAQ): 3,422
U.S. MILITARY WOUNDED (IRAQ): 25,378
IRAQI CIVILIAN DEATHS (MIN): 63,929
'EXCESS' IRAQI DEATHS: 655,000

Whose inaccuracies/lies are worse?

ADG

bingo...

exactly what lie are you talking about ?

Damn good thread and excellent comments.