Michael Moore's Open Letter To George Bush (2 Viewers)

[walrusbear]

Well there is a thin line between left and right isn't there?

The ABC bias is extremely weak now, because the ALP is weak, and no person who has their head right could possibly follow the ALP at the moment (those who currently like the ALP party are in denial, are half-wits and are hoping that if they think hard enough.. That Australia will return to the days of the 70's; the days of blindly following left wing bullcrap). If the mood should change.. Even in the slightest way to pro-ALP.. The ABC would be advocating the ALP. They need to watch that they don’t hurt the hand that feeds them. If I were John Howard I would have axed the ABC by now. The moment that it had aired Playschool with a girl who went to the zoo with her lesbian parents.. I would have walked in there and torn the place apart. John Howard likes to remain calm and remain the good guy, so it's fortunate for them.

what are you talking about??
you want the ABC axed? for portaying lesbians onscreen?

there is such a thing as regular journalism in between the extreme political bias we see day to day. nothing is objective, but you can be a lot more even that many media forms are, at the moment. i'd say ABC and SBS are the most moderate television news stations

 

[Iron]

He says some wicked things about the democrats, but im not convinced that he believes it.
Middle-men media is boring. I rather hear from both sides, then landing in the middle myself.

 

[walrusbear]

yeah walrusbear, the thing about moore is that he might be more appreciated in the US because they have ppl like ann coulter, rush limbaugh and bill o'reilly. we don't have that here. as a result f911 comes across as far too strong and irritating. maybe it balances things out in the US...here it does the opposite.

i think it's probably his weakest effort. put together quickly in an attempt to influence US voters. criticising michael moore for being politically biased is plain stupid. he isn't a news service, he is an entertainer and polemicist (to use it for the 5th time).

 

[walrusbear]

To 6 year olds...

oh you're right
maybe they'd grow up thinking it's not ok to marginalise gay people

 

[jellybeenz]

Yeah because that would be wrong.

 

[Sepulchres]

meng?

(10 chars)

Meng = Man

 

[spell check]

Wtf? Why should I give a crap if it's a good movie or not. It presented outright lies and decieved people just to push his bs agenda, then you have people still comming out to defend the bs lies and not bothering to even listen to the counter-evidence.

what are the lies?

this is exactly the inverse of you not accepting that fox news is biased and full of lies

the difference is that fox news proclaims to be 'fair and balanced'

 

[jennylim]

ok spell check...

i will grudgingly admit that moore probably has the facts right and what he filmed was true.

huge caveat though, in what he does NOT show that is also true. for example, his footage of pre-war iraq is so sunshine 'n daisies happy that an ignorant viewer may deduce that iraq never knew what the term 'civilian casualty' was.

oh wait - there was also the fact that afghanistan does have a standing army that does NOT consist of US marines, the fact that the UK, spain and poland were supporters of the war (not just mauritius or whatever gay countries he mentioned), the fact that iraqis certainly had killed americans previously (not - "a sovereign nation that had never killed a single american"), the fact that the clinton administration was JUST as guilty of cultivating close links with the saudis (no, it's not just a bush thing!!)....

and then my little problem with his argument: arguing correlation does not equate causation. yeah, they happened at the same time. well i tell you what, right when i switched on my TV it started to rain outside. wow, go me, i caused the rain!

it's ridiculous to assume that bin laden did what he did to financially benefit his family..not only is he estranged, but every evidence points to the fact that he is an extremist muslim fanatic who is declaring an ideological war on the US.

i don't give a fuck about fox news, frankly, and i think it's quite beside the point. it may be propaganda, it may not be. it could be ann coulter right for all i care. the point here is that f911 IS propaganda. whether or not it balances the news in america out, or provides a great alternative view is irrelevant to this particular issue. the way that he manipulates information to give false impressions, weak arguments, and generally emotional graphics is aimed at influencing the way we view this issue and therefore is propaganda...end of story!

 

[supercharged]

huge caveat though, in what he does NOT show that is also true. for example, his footage of pre-war iraq is so sunshine 'n daisies happy that an ignorant viewer may deduce that iraq never knew what the term 'civilian casualty' was.

prewar Iraq had pretty shitty living conditions, but who's fault was that? Saddams? No.

12 years of harsh UN sanctions screws a country up pretty badly. The Americans like to forget this and simply blame everything bad in prewar Iraq on Saddam's 'mismangement'

 

[jennylim]

prewar Iraq had pretty shitty living conditions, but who's fault was that? Saddams? No.

12 years of harsh UN sanctions screws a country up pretty badly. The Americans like to forget this and simply blame everything bad in prewar Iraq on Saddam's 'mismangement'

er...supercharged...do your research.

yeah, UN sanctions are harsh. but there was that food-for-oil program, aimed at giving the iraqi people supplies. and the money for this conveniently slipped into saddam's pocket and to the expansion of the army. so yeah, a lot of pre-war ills can be blamed on saddam. the americans have it right. (ooh yes, i know how much it hurts to say that.)

but my main criticism regarding the "civilian casualties" was more the fact that stuff like genocide and democide experienced under saddam was completely glossed over. ie, 2 million people being killed, kurds being gassed, whole families being tortured and murdered if one was suspected of opposing saddam. oh yeah, and the fact that saddam sponsored the suicide bombers in palestine, therefore creating many more casualties. obviously, it was convenient for mike to forget about all this.

i think a lot of us like to give saddam a much easier time than he deserves, simply for the sake of making america look as evil as humanly possible. i really don't see any benefit in doing that.

 

[braindrainedAsh]

People that are Michael Moore bashes fail to neglect one point. He is simply giving his opinion... just like we are on this forum... whether it be through a letter like this or a movie. He is certainly no authorative source, and you can agree and disagree with him how you like etc. I don't think he makes any pretensions that he is doing much more than giving his opinion etc.

Anyway, I think everything he has said in his letter is valid. My mum has access to Fox News and she reckons that even Fox News reporters are criticizing the govt's response, so it must be bad lol!

As my dad put it, Australia had cyclone tracy... during a time when half the country was shut down because it was holidays... in a particularly remote and isolated part of the country... it may not have been as large a number of people affected, but Australia had a much smaller population and access to resources. There sure as shit weren't people starving without access to water 5 days after cyclone tracy hit, and that was more than 20 years ago, think of the technological development we have had since then.

If we could manage Cyclone Tracy, why the hell can't the yanks manage New Orleans. Most people aren't asking much.... if they had food and water for the people and were making good attempts to evacuate them I wouldn't be criticizing them. But their efforts have been piss weak.

Mathemite, why is this only a concern of the states? Whenever a national disaster happens it is a national concern. You can bet it wasn't only the NT govt that helped during cyclone tracy... things shouldn't come down to the borders on a map when people's lives are at risk.

In my opinion this event has revealed some of the worst aspects of US society and culture. Does anyone think that the early focus on muggers was simply to distract media audiences from the real issues behind this and the lack of government response?

 

[withoutaface]

Managing a cyclone that hit darwin and a huge hurricane that hit a city which is below sea level are two completely different things.

 

[supercharged]

but my main criticism regarding the "civilian casualties" was more the fact that stuff like genocide and democide experienced under saddam was completely glossed over. ie, 2 million people being killed, kurds being gassed, whole families being tortured and murdered if one was suspected of opposing saddam. oh yeah, and the fact that saddam sponsored the suicide bombers in palestine, therefore creating many more casualties. obviously, it was convenient for mike to forget about all this.

The UN food for oil program was a load of crap since they were only allowed to sell minimal amounts of oil to trade for very basic goods, just compare the living standards in Iraq before and after the sanctions imposed after the first gulf war. People died from lack of medical supplies and malnutrition in Iraq's crippled economy because of these sanctions, did that happen pre UN sanction?

Sure Saddam killed alot of people, but how many have been killed in the daily chaos that has followed the toppling of his government? Considering there are daily suicide bombing, shootings, dozens of bodies found tied up and executed in dried river beds, and even stampede that killed nearly a thousand in just one day, I would bet another 20 years of Saddam rule would not of killed as many as in the past two years without him.

Before the war, there was no massive civilians massacres in Iraq, all those examples you used such as gassing of Kurds etc were after the first gulf war when the shites and kurds were in civil war against the government. During 'normal' times, that didn't happen. And yes Saddam tortured dissidents but so does America, Abu Graib anyone? so how is that any better?

Trying to say that life without Saddam is better because you can escape death or torture is like jumping from the pan into the fire.... People are under EVEN MORE chaotic violence and abuse now than 5 years ago.

 

[withoutaface]

I wish I could make completely original anti-Bush remarks while continually justifying the actions of the far worse CCP.

 

[tempco]

But perhaps the greatest disappointment stands at the breached 17th Street levee. Touring this critical site yesterday with the President, I saw what I believed to be a real and significant effort to get a handle on a major cause of this catastrophe. Flying over this critical spot again this morning, less than 24 hours later, it became apparent that yesterday we witnessed a hastily prepared stage set for a Presidential photo opportunity; and the desperately needed resources we saw were this morning reduced to a single, lonely piece of equipment. The good and decent people of southeast Louisiana and the Gulf Coast - black and white, rich and poor, young annd old - deserve far better from their national government.

he's got his priorities straight.

 

[Xayma]

Yeh.. Just like the introduction of the black women (Tricia i think her name is) stops Australians from being racist....

It's not ok to expose people of that age to such things. Almost every child who saw that would be thinking "what the f**k!?" if they picked up on it, and it would probably make them grow up thinking strangely of homosexuals.

So how about they don't introduce any new concepts at all. Kindness to animals, affection between any two people and the like.

 

[White Rabbit]

People that are Michael Moore bashes fail to neglect one point. He is simply giving his opinion... just like we are on this forum... whether it be through a letter like this or a movie. He is certainly no authorative source, and you can agree and disagree with him how you like etc. I don't think he makes any pretensions that he is doing much more than giving his opinion etc.

True, but he passes his opinion off as fact. Thats were my dislike of him comes from - he expects his word to be treated as gospel, in the exact same way as the Bush Admin does. He, in my opinion, is just as bad as that administration.

I personally think the response was too slow, but it was somewhat aggrevating to see people - some of the most privliged in the world - complaining about the anarchy of a few days. Yes the government should have acted quicker, but the fact remains people live in worse conditions their entire lives and I find it rather annoying that these people - lucky enough to lead realitivly privlidged lives, cry discrimination, and anger at the world of a few days of poverty and hardship. How long did the people of Tsuanmi devestated nations live in poverty and substandard conditions post impact? How long did it take the US government to respond to that?

Yes, the most powerful and rich nation in the world should have reacted faster and done much more - shame on the Bush Admin for not acting faster - like Tracy in 74', Australia delt with devestated Darwin on Christmas Day no less, in a much more effective manner than the US has for Katrina. But at the same time, the reaction of the citizens of New Orleans show just how selfish people can be, and to cry poverty after 3 days does nothing but reflect their ignorance.

 

[Iron]

True, but he passes his opinion off as fact. Thats were my dislike of him comes from - he expects his word to be treated as gospel, in the exact same way as the Bush Admin does. He, in my opinion, is just as bad as that administration.

I personally think the response was too slow, but it was somewhat aggrevating to see people - some of the most privliged in the world - complaining about the anarchy of a few days. Yes the government should have acted quicker, but the fact remains people live in worse conditions their entire lives and I find it rather annoying that these people - lucky enough to lead realitivly privlidged lives, cry discrimination, and anger at the world of a few days of poverty and hardship. How long did the people of Tsuanmi devestated nations live in poverty and substandard conditions post impact? How long did it take the US government to respond to that?

Yes, the most powerful and rich nation in the world should have reacted faster and done much more - shame on the Bush Admin for not acting faster - like Tracy in 74', Australia delt with devestated Darwin on Christmas Day no less, in a much more effective manner than the US has for Katrina. But at the same time, the reaction of the citizens of New Orleans show just how selfish people can be, and to cry poverty after 3 days does nothing but reflect their ignorance.

Thank god for nurses

 

[Generator]

But at the same time, the reaction of the citizens of New Orleans show just how selfish people can be, and to cry poverty after 3 days does nothing but reflect their ignorance.

That comment reflects your own ignorance. It's a bit rich to criticise the already marginalised and poor for 'expressing' their poverty when they have been living in such conditions for some time. The only difference between now and then (before the hurricane) is that the conditions of poverty (exacerbated by Katrina) are now on show for the nation at large, a nation that is essentially living in ignorance when it comes to the plight of its own marginalised and poor.

 

[tempco]

I personally think the response was too slow, but it was somewhat aggrevating to see people - some of the most privliged in the world - complaining about the anarchy of a few days. Yes the government should have acted quicker, but the fact remains people live in worse conditions their entire lives and I find it rather annoying that these people - lucky enough to lead realitivly privlidged lives, cry discrimination, and anger at the world of a few days of poverty and hardship. How long did the people of Tsuanmi devestated nations live in poverty and substandard conditions post impact? How long did it take the US government to respond to that?

Yes, the most powerful and rich nation in the world should have reacted faster and done much more - shame on the Bush Admin for not acting faster - like Tracy in 74', Australia delt with devestated Darwin on Christmas Day no less, in a much more effective manner than the US has for Katrina. But at the same time, the reaction of the citizens of New Orleans show just how selfish people can be, and to cry poverty after 3 days does nothing but reflect their ignorance.

if we had been in their position, we'd all be crying out too. louder even. keep in mind that new orleans isn't exactly a prime example of american standards of living.