Free Republic

Michael Moore Lies & Distortions Documented LATEST ADDITION: (Dave Kopel: Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11) There Wasn't, Isn't, Never Will Be an Afghan Oil Pipeline!(Unocal Reiterates Position on Withdrawal from Afghanistan Pipeline) (NYP: Moore Myths)(AP: Bin Laden Brother Disputes Moore Film)(Slate: Unfairenheit 9/11. The lies of Michael Moore - Christopher Hitchens)(UK Guardian: Michael Moore is a bully, says Who guitarist)(Newsweek: More Distortions From Michael Moore - Michael Isikoff)(McCaslin: Major's Mom Call Moore "Maggot That Eats The Dead")(Sydney Morning Herald: Less is Moore)(Ed Koch: Moore Would've Opposed WWII Too)(Washington Post: Baloney, Moore or Less - Richard Cohen)(American Spectator: Coalition of...

<p>LOS ANGELES — California's high-stakes recall election has another court date Monday, when a federal judge is scheduled to hear arguments by the American Civil Liberties Union (search) that using outdated punch card machines (search) threatens to disenfranchise minorities.</p> <p>"Democracy in California should not hang by a chad," said ACLU attorney Mark Rosenbaum, referring to the small pieces of paper that voters punch out of ballots that were blamed for problems in Florida in the 2000 presidential election.</p>

Errors of Mass Destruction WMD search and accusations. The Bush administration has made two errors regarding weapons of mass destruction. First, it is now failing to make clear that prior to the war the administration did not have the burden of proving that there were, or were not, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That burden fell on Saddam Hussein. (This simple conclusion should have always been clear to all, since the U.N. inspectors never carried the burden of proof either.) Since Iraq was known by U.N. inspectors to have had many such weapons until 1998, and since the disposition...

I have been a grateful lurker at FreeRepublic since impeachment and need your help. My self-styled-intellectual cousin recently replied to my Support-Bush email with the following screed. He is a high school teacher and I'm sure his students get a daily earful so I would really like to counter his arguments. Where else could I turn but to the intelligent posters at FreeRepublic? Thanks for all of your help refuting the following dribble!Friends, 1.) This is war of choice--not necessity. Iraq is not an imminent threat to the United States. Other NATIONS are and were. All during the Cold...

To sum up: In going to war against Iraq, the United States is engaged in a unilateral, unprovoked attack on a sovereign country, whose regime it once supported. Not only is this in clear defiance of international law and the United Nations, it sets a precedent that can only invite other countries to do the same. There is no proof that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. Even if it does, it poses no imminent threat -- certainly none to justify the incalculable risks of war: regional instability, Muslim resentment, terrorist reprisals, to say nothing of the hundreds of thousands...