Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FILMMAKER MOORE HAS THE RIGHT TO QUESTION CONFLICT IN IRAQ
SAN ANTONIO EXPRESS-NEWS ^ | JUNE 28, 2004 | CARY CLACK

Posted on 06/28/2004 9:29:02 AM PDT by GUIDO

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last
To: My2Cents

VERY WELL SAID, but then again I expect nothing less from you.


41 posted on 06/28/2004 10:09:40 AM PDT by GUIDO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Did Fatso show clips of Bill Clinton justifying going to war with Iraq for those same exact reasons? Methinks not.


42 posted on 06/28/2004 10:09:58 AM PDT by dfwgator (It's sad that the news media treats Michael Jackson better than our military.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GUIDO
But stripped of everything else, the essence of the film is: Why are we at war in Iraq? Are the Jews to blame for Germany's troubles?


43 posted on 06/28/2004 10:19:40 AM PDT by weegee (Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them. ~~Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

"Did Fatso show clips of Bill Clinton justifying going to war with Iraq for those same exact reasons? Methinks not."




Election 2004 reminder (flashback to John Kerry's comments from 1997):




http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1087918/posts

(November 12, 1997 under a different administration of a different political party) - what has changed???

"...there's absolutely no statement that they have made or that they will make that will prevent the United States of America and this president or any president from acting in what they believe are the best interests of our country."

"I think the United States has always reserved the right and will reserve the right to act in its best interests. And clearly it is not just our best interests, it is in the best interests of the world to make it clear to Saddam Hussein that he's not going to get away with a breach of the '91 agreement that he's got to live up to, which is allowing inspections and dismantling his weapons and allowing us to know that he has dismantled his weapons. That's the price he pays for invading Kuwait and starting a war."

"I believe, and they stood with us today and I am saying to you that it is my judgment that by standing with us today and calling for the unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, you know, access, they have now taken a stand that they are duty bound to enforce and if Saddam Hussein doesn't do that, the president, I think, has begun a process which you remember very well, John, was not done in one week, in one day, in one month. It took months to weave together the fabric to lead up to an understanding of what was at stake. I am convinced that many people have not yet even focused in full measure on what is at stake."


44 posted on 06/28/2004 10:23:23 AM PDT by weegee (Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them. ~~Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GUIDO
FILMMAKER MOORE HAS THE RIGHT TO QUESTION CONFLICT IN IRAQ

Bear Has Right To Crap In Woods: Columnist

Writer Says: OK With Me If Pope's Catholic


45 posted on 06/28/2004 10:28:34 AM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GUIDO
Of course he "has the right". This is America and people have the "right" to say outrageous things, make fools of themselves, etc. Who is questioning that?

But stripped of everything else, the essence of the film is: Why are we at war in Iraq?

Easily enough answered: our Congress listed their reasons for authorizing war in Iraq in the War Powers Declaration which did so. Just a few highlights: " Iraq's war of aggression ... cease-fire agreement ... Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire ... remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations ... continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman ... the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States ... members of al Qaida...are known to be in Iraq ... the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so..." etc.

Too bad Michael Moore apparently never read the actual War Powers Resolution, it mentions lots and lots of reasons. Apparently this silly movie was entirely unnecessary and stems from Moore's ignorance and/or intellectual laziness. Pity.

Yes, Saddam was a tyrant and Iraqis are better off without him. But that wasn't the stated reason for us going to war.

Well, it was part of it (see above).

There's no "the" stated reason, that's just the usual lefty strawman.

The weapons of mass destruction that were have yet to be found.

The weapons of mass destruction were not "the" stated reason either. In almost two dozen "Whereas" paragraphs, "weapons of mass destruction" are mentioned exactly seven times and in most of those cases what is actually being cited is "Iraq's demonstrated willingness in the past to use weapons of mass destruction" or something similar.

The fact that we (supposedly) haven't found weapons of mass destructions following invasion does not invalidate that reasoning at all.

To question the war, its direction and our leaders doesn't make anyone less of a good American or less worried about terrorism than those satisfied with the answers.

Of course not.

However, to spew a bunch of dishonest propaganda so that Europeans who hate America will shower you with dollars, and to try to influence the election with that dishonesty, actually does make one less of a good American.

It's still his "right" to be a bad American, of course. I'd never question that right of his in a million years.

There are some who instead of criticizing Moore and his film on its substance and flaws are using both as springboards to attack "liberals"

Who? Name those "some" please.

There are some (Cary Clack for example) who instead of defending Moore and his film on its substance and flaws are using it as a springboard to attack unnamed "some" who (supposedly) use the film to attack "liberals".

and their purported hatred of America

Hey, if the shoe fits... methinks he protests too much here.

I only accuse Michael Moore (and, "Europeans") of hating America. Yet for some reason Cary Clack seems to hear himself in that criticism. Why would that be hm?

When the coffins of American servicemen and women killed in Iraq are returned home, they aren't draped with red flags for the states that voted Republican in the last election or with blue flags for the states that voted Democratic.

No they are not. Thanks for that great point Cary Clack.

No political party or individual is entitled to those colors more than any other.

Except Michael Moore of course who has used their deaths to create a propaganda film which is "at its most powerful and moving when it focuses on the men and women fighting the war".

Do their families get royalties?

46 posted on 06/28/2004 10:57:33 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GUIDO

Through the usual LLL haze of hedging and false equivalency, it is apparent that Clack is worried about a backlash against this film.
He isn't the only one. My ultra-lib friend Harvey (head of the local ACLU) went with me to see it the other night. His response?
"What a load of horse-s**t. This is a disaster, Moore couldn't have done us more harm if the Republicans had been paying him."
He is especially worried that the Hollywood hype machine will magnify the backlash, turning Moore into the sole perceived spokesman for "progressive" ideology---with disastrous results for the left.

That makes it official as far as I am concerned, Michael Moore (aka the Ham-ass Terrorist, Lumpy Riefenstahl, Mike Al-Moor) is now our designated poster-boy for LLL activism. He is the purest and most obvious expression of all the left stands for. This perception will destroy them and there is precious little they can or will do about it.


47 posted on 06/28/2004 11:35:33 AM PDT by atomic conspiracy (A few words for the media: Julius Streicher, follow his path, share his fate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy

"Filmmaker Moore has the right to question conflict in Iraq"

Absolutely correct. He has a right to question the conflict. He also has the responsibility to report accurately if he is calling this a documentary. Something the entire media seems to have conveniently forgotten.

Moore is schlock. His films lack any factual content, yet he is the darling of the left. Then again, so was Joseph Goebbels.


48 posted on 06/28/2004 11:55:02 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Hitler? Stalin? The left has a tough decision as to who they would rather emulate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: GUIDO

Not after July 30th he won't. HAHAHAHAHAA! CFR strikes again!


49 posted on 06/28/2004 11:57:05 AM PDT by rintense (Screw justice. I want revenge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Click on the picture to give Michael Moore the finger:

click here for more FUPPETS you can print out

click here to also see this thread: FUPPET WARS!!!

50 posted on 06/28/2004 12:11:39 PM PDT by IPWGOP (I'm Linda Eddy, and I approved this message... 'tooning the truth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy
Harvey despite his liberalism sounds like a pretty intelligent guy. He sounds as if he thinks for himself which is what Moore and the rest of the wacko leftest don't want. I should know I was there at one time. I often have agreed with the saying I DIDN'T LEAVE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, THEY LEFT ME. If your friend keeps thinking this way they will soon call for his deportation....hehehe

I often wonder what they are really thinking having people like moore, kennedy, jackson, sharpton run their party.

51 posted on 06/29/2004 10:46:43 AM PDT by GUIDO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

SSSHHHHEEESH from what I heard on the Schnit (sp??) show yesterday, he didn't even have the balls to show any not one single footage of 9-11. The only link he had to it was the screen going black and just audio. What a crock, the big time movie director, producer moore didn't want to remind his brainless followers of the tragedy that erupted and reminding them may make them believe it could happen again.eeeeeekkkkkk what a coward he is.


52 posted on 06/29/2004 10:52:17 AM PDT by GUIDO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson