im really confused... are those accusations supported by real evidence or is it just like da vinci code?
2006-07-01 23:34:16 · 18 answers · asked by chock d. 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It's media hype. It was made to be contraversial in order to get more (read:free) advertising. Many of the statements were taken out of context and there are several lawsuits pending from people in the movie for just that reason. It sort of like seeing high tide come in and try to convince the sea levels are rising due to ice-cap melting.
2006-07-01 23:40:37 · answer #1 · answered by xtowgrunt 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It is exactly like the da Vinci code. The truth of the matter is that you can twist facts to say whatever you want. Look at the source - Michael Moore. Hardly an objective journalist looking for the truth. More like an ultra left-wing liberal looking to further an agenda. All good journalism requires that BOTH sides of a story be told OBJECTIVELY so the consumer can make up his or her mind.
If you want to see Fahrenheit 9/11 debunked, check out the following websites:
http://www.tommyduggan.com/VP080304moore.html
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1165837/posts
Bottom line is that you should check things out for yourself. Make sure you have BOTH sides of a story before making up your mind. Get your information from REPUTABLE, TRUSTED and INDEPENDENT sources - Michael Moore is none of these.
Michael Moore has an obvious agenda. And it is not just Moore. Many people on both sides of the aisle have agendas. When someone has an agenda, everything they say must be taken with a grain of salt.
2006-07-02 07:44:12 · answer #2 · answered by Outlaw 1-3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The film is an extreme treatment of unfortunate fact. The point of the film is that the things in it did occur, the consequences have been horrible, and the behavior of the President abominable. The way the film makes its point is by hyperbole - the technique of exaggeration in order to establish a conclusion.
The same kind of film could have been made about Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma. Images of the president wobbling around his ranch on a mountain bike, sitting with some friends and colleagues playing the guitar, and making one of his infamous not-funny jokes could have been posted right alongside a minute-by-minute report on those storms. Any number of different treatments of fact would show the same result: The president is arrogant, high-handed, duplicitous, short-sighted, self-important, and incompetent. And the consequences in the real world are death, destruction, misery, and the degradation of America.
2006-07-02 06:53:07 · answer #3 · answered by Der Lange 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not like the Da Vinci Code, which is fiction. F911 is true, the snippets are taken from real life news clips, the people are real, the Senators who won't be sending their kids to Iraq are real, The parents who lost kids in Iraq are real... Michael Moore may take some poetic license to get his point across, but it's an accurate portrayal. Please see Bowling for Columbine also.
2006-07-03 01:39:14 · answer #4 · answered by Sidoney 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a combination of fiction and non-fiction. Michael Moore who is a brilliant documentary film maker allowed his personal hatred of George Bush to cloud his judgments and edit the movie in such a way that he portrays the whole Republican party as liars and war mongers. I believe there were lapses of judgments and faulty intelligence, but that film portrays a vast conspiracy by the pentagon, the white house, and intelligence community. Compelling, but the bottom line is it has made about 200 million, and that is why it was made.
2006-07-02 06:46:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Moore is real while DVC is fictional. In fact the first is a documentary supported with evidence and the second is a nice, well done thriller
2006-07-02 09:16:36 · answer #6 · answered by Vincenzo C 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most of it is real. Some is exaggerated or taken out of context, but the end result is a pretty accurate picture of George W. Bush and his administration.
2006-07-02 07:28:24 · answer #7 · answered by blorgo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, this is real. Though there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that would not hold up in court. Does not mean it is fiction just.... well you seen the movie. They mean what they imply, let me put it that way.
2006-07-02 06:37:37 · answer #8 · answered by Puppy Zwolle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, most of that film was misreprestation of facts and a biased compilation of half- truths. Fahrenheit 911 was mislabeled as a documentry instead of a political editorial.
2006-07-02 06:46:59 · answer #9 · answered by Nicholas G 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Most of it is just half truth. Not exactly any specific lie, but it not balanced.
For a fantasy example:
"Police shoot and kill a 19 year old woman"
What?!?! F' the police!! Pigs!!
Another way of telling the story.....
"A 19 year old woman shot and killed a fellow student and open fire on responding police. One officer was wounded. a second officer fired his service weapon and mortally wounded the woman"
My first line is somewhat that movie is all about.
A common slang term is "Yellow Journalism".
2006-07-02 06:43:20 · answer #10 · answered by manofadvntr 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋