Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9-11 1/2"???

[Thunder]

Didn't we hear a few years ago that Moore was making a sequel to his 9-11 movie?

Was it all just a stupid Alex Jones hoax..or did the NWO threaten Moore?

:)

[triforcharity]

Moore has a new movie coming out. I am not sure exactly what it's called.


Of all the conspiracy type people, I think he makes the most sense to me.

But, that is a completely different section all together.

[Thunder]

Moore has a new movie coming out. I am not sure exactly what it's called.


Of all the conspiracy type people, I think he makes the most sense to me.

But, that is a completely different section all together.


Moore isn't paranoid or a nut. That's why he makes soo much money and theatres are willing to show his films.

[triforcharity]

True. I stand corrected. Which is also why I have actually watched his movies, and payed attention when he speaks. I may not agree with all of them, but I at least listen to them.

But, Fahrenheit 9/11 was more about the political backlash of 9/11, and the media's encouragement of the war in Iraq. It was not anout an inside jobbity job though.

Oh, and he set records with that movie. $220 million worldwide!!

[TruthersLie]

I do love how Michael Moore has just distanced himself from twoofs.
4J1tc1fcWuI

Pay attention at :47 to :53 second mark.
these are thugs, these are criminals who committed mass murder of 3000 individuals who should have been brought to justice.

Way to go Michael...

Yet another star leaves the twoof fold. hahahahahaha.

[akama1]

True. I stand corrected. Which is also why I have actually watched his movies, and payed attention when he speaks. I may not agree with all of them, but I at least listen to them.


Agree 100%. I saw him live in 2002 in London at the round, I listened to what he said, and realised there I don't agree with everything he says, (He can go off tap on some areas) But I do pay attention.

I think the problem with Mr Moore, is when you either dismiss or accept everything he says outright. you are allowed to agree with some and not all he states (I did enjoy the columbine one he did, even thou I could see the issues with some of his arguments)

[AJM8125]

I do love how Michael Moore has just distanced himself from twoofs.
4J1tc1fcWuI

Pay attention at :47 to :53 second mark.
these are thugs, these are criminals who committed mass murder of 3000 individuals who should have been brought to justice.

Way to go Michael...

Yet another star leaves the twoof fold. hahahahahaha.

They're wusses compared to us!

Man I hope AQ reads this board because that really has to sting, coming from him. :D

[Thunder]

I do love how Michael Moore has just distanced himself from twoofs.
4J1tc1fcWuI

Pay attention at :47 to :53 second mark.
these are thugs, these are criminals who committed mass murder of 3000 individuals who should have been brought to justice.

Way to go Michael...

Yet another star leaves the twoof fold. hahahahahaha.

Um, on the contrary, 9-11 conspiracy theories had NOTHING to do with this debate. These theories are for nuts on the street and cable access, not for the big boys to talk about.

9-11 Truth is in the same rhealm as Bigfoot, Nessy, and Alien Abductions, and forever it shall stay.

[TruthersLie]

Agree 100%. I saw him live in 2002 in London at the round, I listened to what he said, and realised there I don't agree with everything he says, (He can go off tap on some areas) But I do pay attention.

I think the problem with Mr Moore, is when you either dismiss or accept everything he says outright. you are allowed to agree with some and not all he states (I did enjoy the columbine one he did, even thou I could see the issues with some of his arguments)

My biggest problem with him is that he lies, manipulates and distorts anyone he disagrees with.

If you examine Bowling for columbine you will find dozens of distortions, many logical fallacies and several outright LIES... My issue is that he doesn't make documentaries... they are not. They are political hit pieces.

[Sam.I.Am]

My biggest problem with him is that he lies, manipulates and distorts anyone he disagrees with.

If you examine Bowling for columbine you will find dozens of distortions, many logical fallacies and several outright LIES... My issue is that he doesn't make documentaries... they are not. They are political hit pieces.

This is why I take anything he says with a grain of salt and go back and verify his claims. One thing that comes to mind in BFC was that he showed clips from two different speeches by Charlton Heston back to back with no break so he made it seem like Heston was saying something that he didn't say at all. There's some other stuff in there as well where he edited interviews to make it seem that someone had one point of view or opinion that was completely opposite of their actual point of view or opinion.

There was a movie made called Fahrenhype 9/11 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9087291936502859172#) (LGT Google video) that covered this type of stuff.

[triforcharity]

I never saaw BFC. Will look it up later.

Some of his points, specifically in Sicko, were very true, and verifiable. But, that is not to say that his others were 100% fact.

[akama1]

My biggest problem with him is that he lies, manipulates and distorts anyone he disagrees with.

If you examine Bowling for columbine you will find dozens of distortions, many logical fallacies and several outright LIES... My issue is that he doesn't make documentaries... they are not. They are political hit pieces.

True, he is not a documentary maker, and his distortions can be quite bad. That is one reason seeing him live was so interesting. As Sam.I.Am mentioned, you have to take him with a grain of salt. (It is what ***** me about him, If he had of decided to not stuff around with the truth to heighten his points, I believe he would of had greater impact with his overall messages, instead now you get, "he lied here, so everything he says must be a lie" which weakens his stance badly)

[Sam.I.Am]

True, he is not a documentary maker, and his distortions can be quite bad. That is one reason seeing him live was so interesting. As Sam.I.Am mentioned, you have to take him with a grain of salt. (It is what ***** me about him, If he had of decided to not stuff around with the truth to heighten his points, I believe he would of had greater impact with his overall messages, instead now you get, "he lied here, so everything he says must be a lie" which weakens his stance badly)

Absolutely. Once you have proven yourself to willfully lie and distort to make a buck or to shield yourself or to promote your weak beliefs, everything else you said or did before or after comes into question. You could be telling the 100% gods honest truth this time but you still have earned much closer scrutiny into your claims from your past indiscretions.

Moore falls solidly into this catagory in my opinion.

[whatnot]

I recommend "Manufacturing Dissent" for anyone with vestigial respect for the guy.

[Brainster]

Moore indulged himself in a little 9-11 Trooferism (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8399599446820879166&ei=f4rNSt7cLZPaqwK60-zGAQ&q=Michael+Moore+We+Are+Change&hl=en#) in this video. See starting at 6:00 into the video where Moore talks about how firefighters told him they heard these "explosions", or where he talks about the 100 video cameras at the Pentagon.

So while I'm pleased to hear he's not a "no hijacker" guy, I'm not sure he's off the hook as far as being a Troofer.

[TruthersLie]

Actually my favorite about him is
Michael Moore hates america (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb2hZW3uvS8)

It is available on youtube, and as opposed to what Moore does, this documentary film maker tries to present both sides...

[dudalb]

If Moore is making a sequel to F 9/11,then, at this point in time, it is one of the worst cases of

:deadhorse


that I have seen.

I have noticied that when asked about the 9/11 Conspiracy theories, Moore gets very,very, evasive.

[whatnot]

For those who haven't seen it, "Manufacturing Dissent" originated as a bio of MM by two acolytes. In the process of making their film, they learned some unsavory (and incontrovertible) things about Moore. Chief among them: though he spends "Roger & Me" trying in vain to meet the cagey GM chief, Moore met with Smith during production and filmed the interview.

So much for speaking truth to power.

[Puppycow]

If Moore is making a sequel to F 9/11,then, at this point in time, it is one of the worst cases of

:deadhorse


that I have seen.

I have noticied that when asked about the 9/11 Conspiracy theories, Moore gets very,very, evasive.

I imagine he's not. Perhaps he was toying with the idea and decided not to. He's made several other movies in the meantime, and it's not a movie crying out to be made.





Unless maybe we start thinking about attacking Iran.

[Sam.I.Am]

If he was going to make one he would've done it while Bush and Cheney were still in office. The motivations behind his films are obvious politically charged hit pieces. I think he didn't delve into 9/11 Truth because he knew that he would irreversibly damage his reputation (and his bottom line) and that he knew there was no "There" "There". I also think that he had probably toyed with the idea for awhile because of the problems it would create for Bush swatting out hundreds of small brushfires instead of chasing his own agenda.

[akama1]

For those who haven't seen it, "Manufacturing Dissent" originated as a bio of MM by two acolytes. In the process of making their film, they learned some unsavory (and incontrovertible) things about Moore. Chief among them: though he spends "Roger & Me" trying in vain to meet the cagey GM chief, Moore met with Smith during production and filmed the interview.

So much for speaking truth to power.

Might have to track both this and "roger & me" down, have not seen either.

[Oliver]

Didn't we hear a few years ago that Moore was making a sequel to his 9-11 movie?

Was it all just a stupid Alex Jones hoax..or did the NWO threaten Moore?

:)


Don't know if it's true, but ...

When Michael Moore went looking for funding for his newest film, he claims he told the studio that it would be a kind of sequel to Fahrenheit 9/11, the director's most financially successful film to date. They handed over the cash, and he turned around and made a film that has little to do with that anti-Bush polemic, that is instead unapologetic about biting the corporate hands that feed him. [source (http://dcist.com/2009/10/out_of_frame_capitalism_a_love_stor.php)]

[Perfume V]

Perhaps that's it. I do remember him talking about a sequel to F9/11 in 2004 or thereabouts; perhaps it hasn't materialised because he didn't foresee that attacking the Bush administration in 2008 would be a fairly pointless endeavour.

[Oliver]

Perhaps that's it. I do remember him talking about a sequel to F9/11 in 2004 or thereabouts; perhaps it hasn't materialised because he didn't foresee that attacking the Bush administration in 2008 would be a fairly pointless endeavour.


Well, in 2008 it wouldn't have been pointless at all, given the election thingy going on. I also have no idea when he started to focus on capitalism, so maybe the F9/11 sequel was indeed nothing but a smokescreen.

[Puppycow]

Don't know if it's true, but ...

How about "Fahrenheit 9/12" if it's about Glenn Beck and the crazy right-wing teabaggers?

[Bobby078]

Moore lies too much for my liking he like to twist things. He is biased and unobjective

[Caustic Logic]

June 2007:
Then he said “lemme just give you one thing that I’ve asked for for a long time,” and turned to and lingered on the Pentagon attack. Noting the well-surveilled nature of the area, he told the interviewer “I wanna see the video, I wanna see a hundred videos that exist of this. Why don’t they want us to see that plane coming in to the building?” This is of course the prime driver of suspicions over that strike – the fact that we haven’t seen it, except two low-res and dubious frames and trace only in another of the four videos released so far. Moore is aware of the other lines of questioning as well – the precision approach that we’re told took the plane into the Pentagon’s ground floor but without marking the lawn: “to hit a building that’s only five stories high that expertly uhh, I believe that there will be answers in that videotape and we should demand that tape.”
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/06/news-michael-moore-911-and-pentagon.html

To be fair, he was asked, and AFAIK that's as Truthy as he ever got.

[Caustic Logic]

How about "Fahrenheit 9/12" if it's about Glenn Beck and the crazy right-wing teabaggers?

That would be a good movie. It would help the Right though to show up the nuttery too clearly. Let them soak in the stupid and fall apart like corn flakes in milk, he's likely to say if comprehending.