[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Memnoch: He said: "When you see the movie you will see things you have never seen before. You will learn things you have never known before. "Half the movie is about Iraq. We were able to get film crews embedded with American troops without them knowing that it was Michael Moore. They are totally f---ed.

So he got film crews "imbedded" under false pretenses. In other words, he lied.

Originally posted by Memnoch: Moore was enthusiastic about doing everything in his power to help defeat President George Bush in the election in November.

THIS statement by Moore is the very crux of this whole issue, IMHO. I knew this was his goal from the very first post I saw on this topic. Given the "spin" and the misinformation he has used already (claiming that Disney reneged on their deal {lie} and that they tried to prevent distribution {lie}), coupled with the lack of scruples he has been accused of exercising in former "documentaries" - I can't help but question the validity of ANYTHING this film has to say. When the director comes out and says his sole purpose for creating a "documentary" is to get the current President fired, even his most passionate defender should stop and wonder just what means Moore would be willing to use to accomplish his goal.

Originally posted by Memnoch: Moore's position has not met with universal sympathy. A piece in the Los Angeles Times last week accused his last film, Bowling for Columbine, of being "a torrent of partial truths, pointed omissions and deliberate misimpressions".

Hmmm...that sounds very much like what *I've* been saying throughout this entire thread regarding Moore and his films. Given that the Los Angeles Times isn't exactly a conservative stronghold in the media (I believe their war coverage represented the liberal angle far more than the conservative, IIRC), this is a very interesting comment for them to make. Seems like maybe some of Moore's former defenders are starting to view him and his works with a more critical eye.