Support NeoGAF

[open_mouth_]

"Hey Mikey, I got the motts, whatta you got???"

 

[sefskillz]

Let’s be clear about this, for it bears repeating: the administration has repeatedly and forcefully connected Iraq and Al-Qaeda—and, as recent evidence has shown, for good reason. What the administration has not done—contrary to popular belief—is publicly link Iraq to the attacks of September 11.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3403519/

Still, as recently as Sept. 14, Cheney continued to leave the door open to Iraqi complicity. He brought up a report—widely discredited by U.S. intelligence officials—that 9/11 hijacker Muhammad Atta had met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in April 2001. And he described Iraq as “the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11.”

 

[KingV]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3403519/

Look, this isn't about whether or not some people in the administration claim that were ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Nor is it even really about whether or not the administration directly tried to tie Iraq to 9/11. Go back and read the article I posted and tell me that Moore's use of Condoleeza Rice's quote wasn't completely, 100% out of context and incredibly misleading given what she said immediately following.

My point isn't whether or not you think the Administration lied, nor is this the topic of the thread. It's specifically about Michael Moore. I realize that most people have made their minds up one way or another about what the actions of the Administration leading up to the Iraq War and after, and I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise. I'm merely pointing out that Moore is incredibly misleading at best, and downright lies at worst to make his point. You might think he makes a great point, but I don't see how you can deny that it's poorly presented.

Edit: Through reading the article you posted, you can see that even Bush denies that there's evidence tieing Iraq to 9/11.

A few days later, a somewhat sheepish President Bush publicly corrected the vice president. There was no evidence, Bush admitted, to suggest that the Iraqis were behind 9/11.

This article was written in November of last year, well before Moore released F-911, yet he still insisted that the administration publicly claimed that Iraq had ties to 9/11.

 

[GG-Duo]

“Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.”

Personally, I don't think the quote changed much even if you put it in context like that. IMO, there is nothing wrong with that edit.

What are "ideaologies of hatred"? Could you prove objectively that Saddam and Osama believe in the same ideology? Instead of having "oh there is a tie", we have "oh there is a tie, because due to our unproven opinion."

Again, Michael Moore is a filmmaker. He is not a news reporter. It is not in his interest to tell all the facts, but only the facts that support his story. And if you have his message in mind, then you can understand why this out-of-context quote was 100% valid.

 

[Guzim]

Mach 4 or Mach 4 Turbo?

There's a Mach 4? I only thought there was a Mach 3!

 

[KingV]

Personally, I don't think the quote changed much even if you put it in context like that. IMO, there is nothing wrong with that edit.

What are "ideaologies of hatred"? Could you prove objectively that Saddam and Osama believe in the same ideology? Instead of having "oh there is a tie", we have "oh there is a tie, because due to our unproven opinion."

Again, Michael Moore is a filmmaker. He is not a news reporter. It is not in his interest to tell all the facts, but only the facts that support his story. And if you have his message in mind, then you can understand why this out-of-context quote was 100% valid.

Moore uses the quote to prove that the administration was claiming direct links between Iraq and 9/11. That is not what was said at all. Condoleeza Rice was claiming that the link was more symbolic, in that Middle Eastern regimes and power bases that have intense hate for the US drove people to drive planes into the WTC. I think that's a valid point, and it certainly is not the smoking gun of White House lies it's presented as.

You still see this as claiming there is a direct tie. I don't really read it that way at all. Probably both of us are jaded somewhat by personal beliefs to read into what we want to read into it.

 

[Outlaw Pro Mod]

There's a Mach 4?

Don't forget Turbo! I think it's kind of like blast processing.

 

[pestul]

Why don't you get F9/11 on some liberal cable channel pre-election? Or is money still that important to you Mr. Moore?

 

[Drensch]

Why do your movies receive more scrutiny than any claim or action by Bush?

 

[ge-man]

Actually Matlock there was an interview on the daily show (i think) a while back where he just about answered your very question. He said that he was sort of a propagandist and had an agenda and was very biased. He also said that he used only the facts.

He just did an interview on Fresh Air recently in which he basically said that same thing. Frankly, I don't see the problem. He isn't reporter--his work is more in line with the satirical tradition within our country. He straddles a thin line between fact and fiction, but that is because first and foremost he is a filmmaker. Good reporting doesn't always make for good filmmaking.

I think the real problem here is that most of us have a narrow view of filmmaking and documentary. Moore is definately not the first or only filmmaker to use the documentary in such loose terms. The form is more akin to a piece of art that incorporates real life objects than it is to news reporting.

I can understand if people have a problem with the way he present his agend, however. If you disagree with how he supports his point of view, then you have decent point to argue.

 

[DarthWoo]

Why don't you get F9/11 on some liberal cable channel pre-election? Or is money still that important to you Mr. Moore?

Umm...I thought he actually WANTED to do just that (or actually on a broadcast network), but that he was contractually forbidden to do it for some reason (related to DVD distribution or something). There was also some school that refused to pay him to speak (even after they had earlier approved the funding), so he went and spoke anyway. I heard there's supposed to be some free F9/11 rental program from Blockbuster as well.

 

[cvxfreak]

Where do you get your stuff?

 

[pestul]

Umm...I thought he actually WANTED to do just that (or actually on a broadcast network), but that he was contractually forbidden to do it for some reason (related to DVD distribution or something). There was also some school that refused to pay him to speak (even after they had earlier approved the funding), so he went and spoke anyway. I heard there's supposed to be some free F9/11 rental program from Blockbuster as well.

Cool, didn't know that.

 

[KingV]

Umm...I thought he actually WANTED to do just that (or actually on a broadcast network), but that he was contractually forbidden to do it for some reason (related to DVD distribution or something). There was also some school that refused to pay him to speak (even after they had earlier approved the funding), so he went and spoke anyway. I heard there's supposed to be some free F9/11 rental program from Blockbuster as well.

He publically offered to show it for free, probably fully knowing that he didn't own the distribution rights, so depending on your cynicism it was either a knowingly empty promise or the man holding him down. I think it's like Oct 26th that it's available to rent for free from blockbuster. I'm thinking about going and picking up a copy of that and farenhype 9/11 from our local blockbuster to get both sides of the story back to back.

 

[Acrylamid]

What is the airspeed velocity of a swallow

This contest is over! Give that man the $10,000.

 

[Prince of Space]

"Do YOU think Shane died in the end?"

 

[DJ_Tet]

There's a Mach 4? I only thought there was a Mach 3!

Do not question John Titor.