Michael Moore -- Bowling for Iraq??

[Timber Loftis]

http://entertainment.msn.com/netcal/?netcal=207

[Rokenn]

Bowling for Iraq? I did not see anything in his speech supporting Iraq, or is oppisition to the the war now consider treason by you too?

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Rokenn: Bowling for Iraq? I did not see anything in his speech supporting Iraq, or is oppisition to the the war now consider treason by you too?

It's a joke. He won an Oscar in "Bowling for Columbine." Please don't ascribe views to me that I do not have or would never espouse. He thinks he's being patriotic - I may disagree with how he uses a forum (OScars) to send a message in an unfair fashion - but I'm not doubting his patriotism. I'm certainly not calling anything here treasonous.

Careful or I'll smack you with the infamous troll smiley.

[Thoran]

Why was anyone surprised after watching his "intelligently veiled yet still propeganda" film that he'd be anti-Bush and anti-War (and willing to tell us all about it)? I respect the guy for standing up for what he believes in, and for looking for answers to tough questions, but he's far to Liberal to surprise me by his actions [img]smile.gif[/img] .

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: Bowling for Iraq? I did not see anything in his speech supporting Iraq, or is oppisition to the the war now consider treason by you too?

It's a joke. He won an Oscar in "Bowling for Columbine." Please don't ascribe views to me that I do not have or would never espouse. He thinks he's being patriotic - I may disagree with how he uses a forum (OScars) to send a message in an unfair fashion - but I'm not doubting his patriotism. I'm certainly not calling anything here treasonous.

Careful or I'll smack you with the infamous troll smiley. [/QUOTE]I wasn't ascribing that view to you, that's why there is a ? at the end of the sentence [img]tongue.gif[/img]

You have to admit the ambiguous nature of the post could lead one to the question I posed...

[Timber Loftis]

Fair enough, Rokenn. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[pritchke]

I think his speech was appalling and I would have been embarrassed if I was on stage with him. Many actors who are against the war expressed themselves in a much more polite way. He was just the way he spoke that even upset the peaceniks. Although he was correct in saying that the US government told many lies to sway public opion but maybe instead of making a speech here he should make another documentary. The Oscars were not the place for that.

As for "Bowling for Columbine" well that is a different topic and should not be compared to the Gulf war. Many of the illegal handguns in Canada are brought across the border from the US. It isn't a right to carry a fire arm but a privilege just as it isn't anyone's right to drive a car.

Even though I am against the illegal war in Iraq now that you are there don't come home until you get Sahddam because there should be no need to do this a third time.

My condolences for the soldiers that have died in the line of duty.

[ 03-24-2003, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[Sir Taliesin]

My personal take on Micheal Moore is that the only reason he critizes the US is because it makes him money. He really has no popularity here in the States. Most of his popularity comes from other parts of the world, who haven't been real happy with the US anyway. He's just catering to his audience. Sad that's how he makes his money; critizing his own country.

[pritchke]

He's just catering to his audience. Sad that's how he makes his money; critizing his own country.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing your own country. Do you love your country or your leaders. People who criticize their country are the ones who wish to make their country to be a better place for everyone. Those who blindly follow their leaders without question are well "Brainwashed".

So when Bush makes a connection between 9/11 and Iraq do you automatically believe him? When Bush says Iraq has weapons of mass destruction but makes a case based on circumstantial evidence do you automatically believe him? Do you automatically believe everything in the media without looking up sources of information from media sources in other countries to get a different perspective. The only thing I think the Bush regime has said that is absolutely true is that Saddham is an evil man and needs to be taken out of power. Two wrongs don't make a right however.

I am not attacking you and these questions are rhetorical.

[ 03-24-2003, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: My personal take on Micheal Moore is that the only reason he critizes the US is because it makes him money. He really has no popularity here in the States. Most of his popularity comes from other parts of the world, who haven't been real happy with the US anyway. He's just catering to his audience. Sad that's how he makes his money; critizing his own country.

Well his book has been on the NY Times best sellers list for 48 weeks and counting (number 3 this week number 1 last).

Just curious, are you equally sad with the right-wing commentators that have criticized the country in the past? Thankfully we live in a country where people like Michael can speak their minds and not be 'disappeared'.