So, I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 [Archive]

Michael De Panama

25th June 2004, 18:34

I got a preview screening of it last night before it was released because my girlfriend works in an independent movie theatre.

Excellent stuff there. Most it of was shit I already was aware of, but it nevertheless succeeded in pissing me off by the time I left the theatre.

Although it was more of a propaganda film than an actual documentery, it's a peice of propaganda long overdue for the political left.

I recommend every one of you go see it. Bring your friends!

Commie-K

25th June 2004, 20:05

I'm planning on seeing it tomorrow (Saturday). I'm looking forward to it, looks to be a great movie. If his former movies are any indicator, this one will be great also.

bluerev002

25th June 2004, 20:08

Im gonna see it soon.

Although there has been a lot of things against Michale Moore lately saying how he stretches the truth and things like that. I must go see it.

commieboy

25th June 2004, 22:07

I just saw it today...the first showing of it in Michigan.....it was really good, and i just LOVED how much of an ass they made bush look like....I was sitting next to an old man that kept making jokes to me about bush.....I too think everyone should see it aswell

btw.....i also saw the trailor for "Motorcycle diaries" I thought it was only in spanish...but it seemed to be in English. I cant wait till it comes out in the states.

25th June 2004, 23:51

It was brilliant. I'll admit, it nearly brought me to tears on several occasions.

robob8706

26th June 2004, 01:25

is there any links to the trailer of motorcycle diaries?

EL CHICO ROJO

26th June 2004, 02:46

im goin wit ma best friend tommaro
he aint political
hopefuly with m. moores help
i will radicalize him
the more the merrier

FatFreeMilk

26th June 2004, 05:16

This was the best 6.50 I have ever spent for a movie ever. There wasn't as much "director commentary" like there was in bowling for columbine which was a big plus. And there was plenty of facts in there that the right is gonna have a hard time negating. I never knew how close the Bin Ladens were too America! I recomend this for every American. What pissed me off even more though is that when I left there was people outside with a little table handing out Kerry fliers.

Did anybody get handed a flier for the "national on-line town meeting with michael moore" ? Check this site out : http://action.moveonpac.org/f911/

Find a gathering spot near you!

Yeah, I saw the che movie trailer...gonna make a date.

26th June 2004, 08:34

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 01:16 AM
What pissed me off even more though is that when I left there was people outside with a little table handing out Kerry fliers.

I know!

Kerry voted for the war, and is still in favor of it!
Same goes for the patriot act, which the movie spoke out against.

Comrade BNS

26th June 2004, 09:59

His Documentaries are not bad....everything else of his leaves alot to be desired though.

I never knew how close the Bin Ladens were too America!

I am wary of what you are insinuating here. The Bin Laden family are one of the biggest building contractors on the Penninsula (Arabic penninsula) and so invest heavily in US contracting and manufacturing firms etc. Aside from that, The Bin Ladens are a huge family! What does it matter that a formerly obscure cousin from a once dwindling branch of the family line is now synonomous with terror?

Were the wives, brothers and children of the Mob implicated in their father's/family's crimes? no, and why should they be! same case here. If we were to apply that logic, Mr. Moore and HIS FAMILY should be locked up for crimes against journalism and common decency!

Comrade BNS

26th June 2004, 10:04

That's if you actually believe that he is the so-called "black sheep" of the family.

I don't buy that. The Bush, Bin Laden, and Saud family are all in bed together.

commieboy

26th June 2004, 17:21

i too was handed a John Kerry flier.....I don't know enough about him to support or not support him...i only know what the media has told me...So on the way out in the parking lot i slapped the John kerry bumper sticker over a "Bush Cheny 00'" sticker....THey're both bad but you know, nothing like pissing off a bush supporter.

refuse_resist

26th June 2004, 22:59

I saw this movie at midnight last night and it was packed. It was really good too, he did a really good job on this one and presented a lot of the facts the mainstream media doesn't talk about. It was really funny how he portrayed Bush, hehe. I would highly recommend this to everyone, it's worth it.

Michael De Panama

27th June 2004, 03:05

I'll admit that I already was aware of most of the points Moore made in the film.

What I loved about it was that it covered images that CNN, Fox, etc. would never air.

It's a lot more emotionally impacting to actually see what's going on behind the mainstream media coverage than to simply read or hear about it.

It was refreshing.

fuerzasocialista

27th June 2004, 03:59

Michael Moore just kicked the ever living shit out of the Bush family. Being that I have read his books, I already knew most of what was in the documentary. I will say this though, to see it all on the big screen gave me chills. The theatre was packed with people. I did not expect it to be so damn packed. Mike literally opened up a can of whoop-ass on Dubya.

Guerrilla22

27th June 2004, 06:28

I just got done seeing it. I have to say it was pretty much what I expected. A lot of the info in the movie was also presented earlier in his book, Dude Where's My Country? It times it was definitely powerful and even disturbing (the Iraqi woman crying hysterically) and the very candid interviews with some of the American soldiers serving in Iraq were also very interesting.

Lardlad95

27th June 2004, 20:22

I saw it the day it opened with my sister, mother, and cousin. THe place was packed to the damn rafters. The movie was funny, provocative, and what I've come to expect from michael moore. Did he stretch some facts? Of course, everyone does, however I notice that all the reviewers of the movie seemed to act like movie goers are stupid. We know that michael moore is biased, we know what he thinks.

It's like he said, in the movie, there are facts and there are opinions, the facts are teh facts, and the opinions are his. The public isn't dumb, we know the opinions in the moive are those of michael moore.

Also I'd like to add that the part with the mother was very sad, especially when she went to washington. My heart goes out to her.

Over all I give the movie a...

Comedic Value: A
Information given: B+
Cinementography: A
Overall: A-

Rastafari

28th June 2004, 04:42

being the resident opponent of big mike, i must say that I give it a B overall. I thought this was much more well-constructed than BfC (or BS, as I like to call it-the funniest Documentary since "Spinal Tap"). anyways, it did make me cry for a little bit of it (burn the motherfuckin' roof down) because I am so opposed to violence and slaughtering. I don't think it will make any Conservatives into Liberals, but I think it will make quite a few liberals a lot more aware and radical in their thinking.

In the end, I'd say its an important film.

Commie-K

28th June 2004, 05:23

I thought it was great. It was better than Bowling for Columbine, and set Bush in his place. I think everyone needs to see this movie.

redstar2000

28th June 2004, 05:31

If we were to apply that logic, Mr. Moore and HIS FAMILY should be locked up for crimes against journalism and common decency!

It's probably a big mistake on my part but...BNS, what are you babbling about here?

"Crimes against journalism and common decency?"

How about locking yourself up for crimes against rational thinking?

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

life beyond life

28th June 2004, 06:19

I thought the movie was phenomenal, just like Bowling for Columbine. However, this movie had much more potential because of the international relations issue that it raises. It made me think a lot about U.S. foreign policy and how racist and imperialist Uncle Sam is. I cannot be certain that the so called "democratic" party would do things any differently. After all, wasn't the invasion of Iraq in the name of "democracy"? Across the board, foreign policy is the same, no matter what political title they have. With the vested interest of multinational corporations in the government via the Washington Lobby, I am left with little faith, if any at all.

This film made American patriotism seem shallow and meaningless when only on behalf of U.S. militarism around the globe. The United States has become its very own "terrorist enemy" and a bully of the world. The mother of that fallen soldier in the film demonstrated this with her understandable emotionalism and statements. I can relate to both her and the footage of innocent Iraqi civilians. Most Americans, who complacently defend the occupation of Iraq, don't know what its like to live in a combat zone, much less are they exposed to the foreign press coverage. In that way, the Internet has been a great asset for people of consciousness (and a sense of humanity) who don't live in war zones such as this.

Lastly, I appreciated the fact that OBL wasn't the focus of this documentary. He's a media scapegoate who managed to claim international notoriety through sensationalism. I have my own reservations about his real affiliations, but Moore's depiction was brief and still left the thinker/viewer with the urge to seek out more information on this elusive character. In short, the true diabolical enemy was the focus of the movie.

Despite the criticism about this film, the ticket sales spoke. I'm hoping this, in itself, will make a socio-political statement. And with that in mind, if you ain't seen it, you betta peep game.
One.

Guerrilla22

29th June 2004, 06:15

[QUOTE]If we were to apply that logic, Mr. Moore and HIS FAMILY should be locked up for crimes against journalism and common decency!

Ok, and where does it say that Michael More is submitting a piece of journalism? It was a documentry, a documentry where Michael Moore is expressing his opinion, it wasn't meant to be a news report.

Sabocat

29th June 2004, 19:13

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 26 2004, 04:59 AM
His Documentaries are not bad....everything else of his leaves alot to be desired though.

I am wary of what you are insinuating here. The Bin Laden family are one of the biggest building contractors on the Penninsula (Arabic penninsula) and so invest heavily in US contracting and manufacturing firms etc. Aside from that, The Bin Ladens are a huge family! What does it matter that a formerly obscure cousin from a once dwindling branch of the family line is now synonomous with terror?

Were the wives, brothers and children of the Mob implicated in their father's/family's crimes? no, and why should they be! same case here. If we were to apply that logic, Mr. Moore and HIS FAMILY should be locked up for crimes against journalism and common decency!

Comrade BNS
The point your missing though, is that some 20 members of the bin Laden family were allowed to leave the country without being so much as questioned. They were shuttled out of the country when absolutely no one but military aircraft was allowed to fly. Does that sound like normal treatment of a "contractor" to you? The round up and evacuation of the bin Laden's came from the highest level.

The point Moore was trying to make isn't that he neccesarily thought they were implicated or guilty of any crime, just protected and priviledged because of their connections.

It would be unheard of after a crime of that magnitude that authorities would not want to talk with them.

I liked the film. As has been stated, there was not a lot of real new info there, but what it did do, was put it in a format that non-politically inclined people could relate to.

I thought the images of dead children in the back of the pickup truck, the shattered babies arm and the mother wailing were particularly powerful. I thought the before and after footage of Iraq was poignant as well.

I thought it was a pretty good vehicle to perhaps radicalize some people. I also liked Moore's statement at the end with regards to poor and disenfranchised kids fighting and dying for the ruling class.

I also didn't find Moore particularly kind with his depiction of the Democrats conduct in the Senate either. :D

mentalbunny

30th June 2004, 07:25

generally I prefer Pilger when it comes to documentaries. I read Stupid White Men and saw Bowling for Columbine. But now I have problems with Moore because I simply don't know how much he's stretching things. Still, as MdeP said to begin with, it's propaganda, and long over-due high quality propaganda at that.

And there should be no mercy for the democrats, they are no better than the republicans. It seems to me that the republicans say they'll do something and they do it (although there's all that "freedom" rhetoric in the way) and the democrats just seem to pretend they'll do something different when they actually do the same as the republicans. Vote Nader!

Eddie999

30th June 2004, 11:39

I have to say Michael Moore is extremely hypocritical and guilty of plagarism. Moore says that he supports the working man and is anti-big business but he lives in a multi-million dollar mansion, sends his children to private school and charges massive amounts to do public speaking. Also he says he against US jobs going abroad but the company that runs his website is based in Canda. I like to think of him as a 'limousine leftist.'

Furthermore, Fahrenheit 9/11 is just a watered down version of a film that Alex Jones produced a few years ago and that he let people watch for free on his website. In Fahrenheit 9/11 Moore toys with the idea the the US government and the Bush administration might have let 9/11 happen. Jones, on the other hand, shows how the US government most probably carried out 9/11.

It is for these reasons I dislike Moore. However, I will be going to see the film when it comes out in th UK, if only to see for myself the lies Moore comes up with.

In addition, I recommend everyone read this article about 9/11 and make up their own minds: Muslims Suspend Laws Of Physics! (http://www.serendipity.li/wot/mslp_i.htm)

Hampton

2nd July 2004, 18:42

It's a funny thing about Moore, in the movie he shows how not one Senator signed for the disenfranchised people in Florida, neither Republican nor Democrat, how he expects people to vote for Senator John Kerry is beyond me.

Valkyrie

2nd July 2004, 19:21

I saw the very last minutes of an interview with him on Charlie Rose last night (PBS) Part 2 of the interview is suppose to air tonight.

He was asked if he supports Kerry. He "says" Not really.

He said in 92, he voted for Clinton, 96 Nader, 2000 Nader. HE said in 2000 he voted for Nader from NY, which is sure of the Democrat vote, while also going to Florida in 2000 to urge the people not to vote for Nader but vote Gore because Florida is a swing state and too close a margin not to vote Democrat in favor of a third-party and risk the Republican vote.

So, basically, he's with the wimpy "Anything but a Republican, but vote Democrat in a swing state" camp.

Here's the Swing State map for the current election, if interested.

http://www.swingstateproject.com/2003/10/m...dology_map.html (http://www.swingstateproject.com/2003/10/methodology_map.html)

Oh yeah,--- I might add, He also gave the typical "Anything But Bush" response: That Nader should not be running this year.
which is kinda idiotic - because don't Republicans run every year???

The one sensible thing he said, that I was able to catch, was that Bush brought in all his father's friends, most who are working behind the scene, who had all been voted out of office along with his father in 92.

Here's some wierd presidential trivia:
http://www.heptune.com/preslist.html

2nd July 2004, 20:18

Dean and Nader are going to have a 90 minute debate on July 9th I believe. Dean plans on asking Nader why he is going to run this election.

Nader is going to rip Dean a new one.

Pawn Power

2nd July 2004, 20:18

well they finaly released it in my local white town movie theater. They dident release it last week when it came out but now those capitalists showed it because they relized they could make money.
Nothing in it really new but i think it was good for my friends to see.

Kurai Tsuki

2nd July 2004, 20:37

Originally posted by (*@Jul 2 2004, 04:18 PM
Dean and Nader are going to have a 90 minute debate on July 9th I believe. Dean plans on asking Nader why he is going to run this election.

Nader is going to rip Dean a new one.
Very good one :lol:

Nader has to run in this election because there is very little difference in the foreign policies of Bush and Kerry, it's just a giant debate over how to present America's imperialism to the world.

Hampton

2nd July 2004, 21:25

He said in 92, he voted for Clinton, 96 Nader, 2000 Nader. HE said in 2000 he voted for Nader from NY, which is sure of the Democrat vote, while also going to Florida in 2000 to urge the people not to vote for Nader but vote Gore because Florida is a swing state and too close a margin not to vote Democrat in favor of a third-party and risk the Republican vote.

So, basically, he's with the wimpy "Anything but a Republican, but vote Democrat in a swing state" camp.

Wow, that's really disturbing. I mean doesn't the guy have a conviction, I can kind of see where he is going with it, but like he spend the 2000 election on riding on Nader's back talking about a more than two party system and about real democracy while at the same time pratically campaigning for Gore.

Talk about two faced.

I can't wait for the Nader/Dean debate though

Anarchist Freedom

9th July 2004, 01:47

good comeback redstar2000

i would have to say that this movie was pretty fuckin awsome and i enjoyed it alot the best part was when micheal moore asked senators to enlist there kids to join the army they looked at him like wtf is your problem. He said something that is amazingly true. The Poor are the ones fighting the wars and doing the dirty work they are always the ones to step up to the plate and hold our country together where are the rich?

:che:

CGLM! (http://www.cglm.net)

redstar2000

9th July 2004, 16:11

A dissenting view...

Fahrenheit 9/11 is a Stupid White Movie

by Robert Jensen

I have been defending Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 from the criticism in mainstream and conservative circles that the film is leftist propaganda. Nothing could be further from the truth; there is very little left critique in the movie. In fact, it's hard to find any coherent critique in the movie at all.

The sad truth is that Fahrenheit 9/11 is a bad movie, but not for the reasons it is being attacked in the dominant culture. It's at times a racist movie. And the analysis that underlies the film's main political points is either dangerously incomplete or virtually incoherent.

But, most important, it's a conservative movie that ends with an endorsement of one of the central lies of the United States, which should warm the hearts of the right-wingers who condemn Moore. And the real problem is that many left/liberal/progressive people are singing the film's praises, which should tell us something about the impoverished nature of the left in this country.

Full Text (http://www.guerrillanews.com/human_rights/doc4797.html)

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

pandora

12th July 2004, 03:24

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2004, 10:12 PM
It's a funny thing about Moore, in the movie he shows how not one Senator signed for the disenfranchised people in Florida, neither Republican nor Democrat, how he expects people to vote for Senator John Kerry is beyond me.
I've got to say with the choices there isn't much choice, coming back from Mexico, we got to get the extreme Right out now, and worry about working on Kerry next. Sorry to be the party pooper, but we can't survive another 4 years of this on this planet, so Fuck yeah I'll vote for Kerry fuck I'll even campaign for his white ass, and register people because we need organizations like Planned Parenthood to recover their funding, it's life and death.

The movie was awesome, liteally. He didn't stretch the truth a bit, that's pretty much the deal. I didn't find any errors in his logic. I agree that not questioning the Bin Ladens when they were in the Carlye Group was a breach of national security.

That meanwhile they were fucking over Pakistani buisness owners in Manhattan, holding them without trial is fucking disgusting.

Moore did his part to wisen up kids from joining the military to needlessly die for money for the Fortune 500, have you done yours? Incredible footage of going into houses in Iraq for no fucking reason to pull out young college students, and I hope Middle America takes the curse on their houses by the middle aged woman who just lost her uncle to heart. No it wasn't a left centered movie. It meant to grab middle of the road, middle aged fence sitters. but so what that's exactly who needs to gotten into action. That's who needs to feel responible for their actions. To have a movie of this nature on a massive scale rocks. Lets keep up the pressure, is his word the end all, no it's just a drop in the bucket, keep going, disagree with him me write talk about it. But apathetic critics are of little consequence.

Saw the movie with some revolutionary comrades who fought with the Sandinistas in Nicarqua and they fucking loved it, said about time.

Get out there and talk to people if you're all so freaking smart. You could fool me I have yet to see a great deal of articles here blowing the lid off stuff, props to those of you who have posted. The rest of you get with it and get busy here or in your community.

Cheers Pandora

redstar2000

13th July 2004, 01:21

Sorry to be the party pooper, but we can't survive another 4 years of this on this planet, so Fuck yeah I'll vote for Kerry fuck I'll even campaign for his white ass, and register people because we need organizations like Planned Parenthood to recover their funding, it's life and death.

Ah, pandora, don't do that. Whether Kerry wins or loses, you'll hate yourself afterwards.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

13th July 2004, 02:06

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2004, 09:21 PM

Ah, pandora, don't do that. Whether Kerry wins or loses, you'll hate yourself afterwards.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas
That's exactly what I tell my friends who are registered voters.

Another thing about waffle-boy(Kerry), is that he is running purely on Bush-hate. What happens when people stop hating bush and start loving him? You know, when he pulls something off like finding bin laden...Support for Bush goes up, and support for Kerry dwindles. This is why Kerry needs a platform, not that it matters really...it pretty much mirrors that of Bush and the GOP.

refuse_resist

13th July 2004, 04:21

Pandora, why are you going to vote for the bourgeios politician John Kerry? You actually think anything would be better off if whether or not he became president?

Guerrilla22

13th July 2004, 04:30

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 11:39 AM
I have to say Michael Moore is extremely hypocritical and guilty of plagarism. Moore says that he supports the working man and is anti-big business but he lives in a multi-million dollar mansion, sends his children to private school and charges massive amounts to do public speaking. Also he says he against US jobs going abroad but the company that runs his website is based in Canda. I like to think of him as a 'limousine leftist.'
<_< None of this is actually true. Most of his speaking arrangements he does for free and he never profits from any of them. You forgot to mention that he donates large amounts of money to charity.

Guerrilla22

13th July 2004, 04:53

<_< I can't believe this. <_< I just got done reading like 10 threads where people are bashing Kerry (which is fine by me because I believe he's just another elitist, reactionary) but to suggest that voting for Nader is a good alternative is just plain dumb. It seems to me that most of the people propping him up aren't even informed about where Nader stands on the issues.

Ralph Nader is an egotistical, hypocrite fuck, who knows less about foreign policy than Bush does. All he'll say is that we should pull out of Iraq, the only problem is he has not the slightest clue as to how to make that happen. In the White House he'd be in way over his head and make mistake after mistake. He wants to create jobs and repeal NAFTA, but again he has never quite explained how he could possibly go about accomplishing that.

He's also extremely hypocritical, he calls the Dems sell outs to corporate America (which they are) but at the same time his whole campaign is being proped up by the right. His staff roams arounf tractor pulls and NASCAR races to collect petitions to get him on the ballot, because the people who attend such events are red neck, conservatives, who think that they are doing Bush a favor by getting Nader into the race. He also has accepted campaign contributions from loads of right wing supporters and orginizations, including an anti-abortion group and he has even accepted contributions from the Bush Cheney campaign as well.

The other night in his debate with Dean, Dean called on this and Nader offered no rebuttle, he kept stumbling over words, not knowing how to reply. Nader got his ass handed to him soundly in that debate and it should serve as a wake up call to all you clueless Nader supporters.

antieverything

18th July 2004, 05:32

You people are so fucking arrogant I can't believe it. Pandora is right, there are real differences between Bush and Kerry and these differences mean life or death for lots of people. Like Noam Chomsky said, not supporting Kerry, even with a held nose, is the same as telling workers we don't care if they have a slightly better chance at having a pension or telling women we don't care if they are able to get safe, affordable abortions.

I say Vote Kerry, Impeach Kerry.

CubanFox

18th July 2004, 09:25

The choice in the '04 elections is clear:

"Chap with terrible policies" vs "chap with, under certain conditions, slightly better policies".

Now we must face that there is never, at least in our times, going to be a good candidate who is anything but bourgeois. So why not help put the "oh so slightly better" chap in power?

As he's the lesser of the two evils, I say, vote Kerry!

Guerrilla22

18th July 2004, 09:34

My objective for this fall's election: do what I have to do to get Bush out of office and stop this insanity (movement towards fascism) even if it means voting for Kerry.

18th July 2004, 09:42

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2004, 12:53 AM
<_< I can't believe this. <_< I just got done reading like 10 threads where people are bashing Kerry (which is fine by me because I believe he's just another elitist, reactionary) but to suggest that voting for Nader is a good alternative is just plain dumb. It seems to me that most of the people propping him up aren't even informed about where Nader stands on the issues.

Ralph Nader is an egotistical, hypocrite fuck, who knows less about foreign policy than Bush does. All he'll say is that we should pull out of Iraq, the only problem is he has not the slightest clue as to how to make that happen. In the White House he'd be in way over his head and make mistake after mistake. He wants to create jobs and repeal NAFTA, but again he has never quite explained how he could possibly go about accomplishing that.

He's also extremely hypocritical, he calls the Dems sell outs to corporate America (which they are) but at the same time his whole campaign is being proped up by the right. His staff roams arounf tractor pulls and NASCAR races to collect petitions to get him on the ballot, because the people who attend such events are red neck, conservatives, who think that they are doing Bush a favor by getting Nader into the race. He also has accepted campaign contributions from loads of right wing supporters and orginizations, including an anti-abortion group and he has even accepted contributions from the Bush Cheney campaign as well.

The other night in his debate with Dean, Dean called on this and Nader offered no rebuttle, he kept stumbling over words, not knowing how to reply. Nader got his ass handed to him soundly in that debate and it should serve as a wake up call to all you clueless Nader supporters.
Nader is more qualified than both Bush and Kerry. How on earth did you come to the conclusion that Nader "got his ass handed" to him by Dean? You could not be more wrong. Nader refuted all the claims, and explained them...you just turned a deaf ear to it.

Go ahead, vote for Kerry. That pancake flipping imperialist, pro-war, pro-patriot act bastard. You WILL regret it. You fail to see the big picture. Kerry and Bush ARE THE SAME. Yes, the differ on a few minor dometic policies...but that doesn't matter, it means nothing!

Out of the candidates running, Nader is the only real choice.

BOZG

18th July 2004, 10:06

I'm not too certain on calling a vote for Nader but I do recognise the sentiment behind it.

No socialist who calls for a vote for Nader has any illusions in him actually winning the presidency, nor do they think he'd be a great president either. The purpose of supporting Nader is really to break the strangle hold of the 2 party system and to lay the slightest basis for an independent workers' party, free of Democrat and Republican affiliations. While Nader, cannot be viewed as a socialist and is only mildly left-wing, he does represent a more radical force in American politics along with his rank-and-file. A substantial vote for Nader is essentially a vote to show that an 'alternative' can be built, though Nader is hardly an ideal alternative. For Nader to increase his platform opens up the field, to call for a union split from the Democrats and to call for their help in establishing an independent party.

18th July 2004, 10:16

True. Nader is far from being socialist, but in comparison to the other "choices" there is no contest. If people want to vote for the "lesser evil" shouldn't that be Ralph Nader?

I can't vote in American elections anyway.

BOZG

18th July 2004, 10:18

I can't vote in any election.

Guerrilla22

18th July 2004, 10:30

Originally posted by (*@Jul 18 2004, 09:42 AM
Nader is more qualified than both Bush and Kerry. How on earth did you come to the conclusion that Nader "got his ass handed" to him by Dean? You could not be more wrong. Nader refuted all the claims, and explained them...you just turned a deaf ear to it.

Go ahead, vote for Kerry. That pancake flipping imperialist, pro-war, pro-patriot act bastard. You WILL regret it. You fail to see the big picture. Kerry and Bush ARE THE SAME. Yes, the differ on a few minor dometic policies...but that doesn't matter, it means nothing!

Out of the candidates running, Nader is the only real choice.
Nader is more qualified how? He has never held any political office what so ever! He has spent his whole life as a consumer's advocate, he doesn't know the first thing about foreign policy. Nader did get his ass handed to him, he didn't turn a deaf ear to Dean, he tried to reply, but couldn't because everything Dean was saying was true, Nader was left stumbling over his words, trying to find replies that never came.

Again, Nader is being funded by the far right, I don't know about you, but I'm not throwing my vote away on an unexpierenced candidate, who has no chance in hell of winning and who criticizes the dems for soliciting campaign contributions from big corporations (his main campaign platform) while at the same time he's excepting contributions from Pro-Life groups and the Republican National Committee (who by the way, get their funds from giant corporations as well)

BOZG

18th July 2004, 10:34

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 11:30 AM
) while at the same time he's excepting contributions from Pro-Life groups and the Republican National Committee (who by the way, get their funds from giant corporations as well)
Sources

18th July 2004, 10:45

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 06:30 AM
Nader is more qualified how? He has never held any political office what so ever! He has spent his whole life as a consumer's advocate, he doesn't know the first thing about foreign policy. Nader did get his ass handed to him, he didn't turn a deaf ear to Dean, he tried to reply, but couldn't because everything Dean was saying was true, Nader was left stumbling over his words, trying to find replies that never came.

As if people who have held political office are qualified. Bush was a governer, does that make him qualified? Look at the job he did.
Research about Nader and see what he has accomplised. Do the same for Kerry and Bush. Compare.

If Nader doesn't know anything about foreign policy, can you explain why his position on foreign policy issues are better than those of Bush and Kerry?

Guerrilla22

18th July 2004, 10:52

http://www.madville.com/link.php?id=72684&t=6

http://www.keepmedia.com/ShowItemDetails.d...10032&oliID=213 (http://www.keepmedia.com/ShowItemDetails.do?itemID=506260&extID=10032&oliID=213)

Guerrilla22

18th July 2004, 10:58

Originally posted by (*@Jul 18 2004, 10:45 AM

If Nader doesn't know anything about foreign policy, can you explain why his position on foreign policy issues are better than those of Bush and Kerry?
No, I can't explain why Nader's proposed foreign policy id better than Kerry or Bush's, and either can you. Actually there aren't too many people who can tell you anything about Nader's foreign policy because he never discusses it, the only thing he seems to be campaigning on is that he's a viable alternative to the Dems, because the Dems solicate contibutions from huge crporations, which again is laughable, considering where he's getting his money from.

BOZG

18th July 2004, 11:01

Very interesting. I'll try and read up on more. You cannot say it's the same as Bush or Kerry though.

Guerrilla22

18th July 2004, 11:04

Again, I'm not saying that Kerry is a good candidate, he's just another elitist and the Democratic party is far from being "left" however, I just don't want people to be disallusioned that Ralph Nader is a great candidate, or a great socialist as some people on this community have called him, Nader is just another fuck, just like every other US politician.

18th July 2004, 11:13

Don't the democrats and republicans throw money into each others campaigns? Nader has accepted money from registered republicans, big deal. They are American citizens. The dems and republicans accept money from coroporate criminals.

How do you figure that Nader does not discuss foreign policy? In all the presidential races he has been in, are you telling me that there is no record of his foreign policy views?

Here is the bottom line, and this is all that is important...If you want to further the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, further support Israel, aid in supporting the "2-party" system, support a corporate slave, support a candidate who is against gay marriage, and who supports the patriot act...vote for Kerry.

Guerrilla22

18th July 2004, 11:15

Well if you can find some statements by Nader on foreign policy please feel free to share them.

18th July 2004, 11:17

In regards to contributions

Regarding the support of organizations that oppose the Nader-Camejo agenda, Nader said: "All we have seen is press reports and press releases. There has been no contact with them. We don’t ask people their Party registration or interview them before they donate. Nor do any other parties. We do not take money from commercial interests or political action committees. We accept money only from individuals. Over the years Democrats have taken big money from Republicans and vice versa because these donors hedge their bets."

For example, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, five of Kerry’s top 19 donors have also donated to the Bush Campaign. These include people from major US corporate interests: Citigroup ($157,806 to Kerry, $557,275 to Bush), UBS Americas ($157,450 to Kerry, $431,850 to Bush), Goldman Sachs ($155,250 to Kerry, $350,875 to Bush), Microsoft ($104,663 to Kerry, $184,040 for Bush), Morgan Stanley ($101,954 to Kerry, $557,275 to Bush). Are the Democrats and the media going to ask John Kerry to return the nearly $700,000 he has received from these donors * as well as from the many others who are also supporting the Republican campaign?

"Why is it acceptable for the Kerry campaign to share donors with corporate interests (e.g., banking, oil, drug, insurance, securities) and at the same time criticize the Nader-Camejo campaign for receiving support from a handful of individual Republicans? Why is it acceptable for Kerry to court Republican, pro Iraq War, Sen. John McCain as his first-choice running mate, even though they disagree on many issues, but unacceptable for some Republicans to support the Nader-Camejo campaign which, by the way, is trying to get the votes of disaffected Republicans’ who are furious with Bush’s practices? (See Ralph Nader’s letter to conservatives upset with Bush policies and his interview with American Conservative at: http://www.votenader.org/why_ralph/writings.php.) There seems to be a hypocritical double standard here," said Nader. "The Democrats are whining to mask their own shenanigans."

18th July 2004, 11:25

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:15 AM
Well if you can find some statements by Nader on foreign policy please feel free to share them.
Foreign policy encompasses a lot of different issues. Give me a specific issue and I will research Naders perspective, you can find Kerrys. We shall compare notes. :D

Guerrilla22

18th July 2004, 11:29

Originally posted by (*@Jul 18 2004, 11:13 AM
Don't the democrats and republicans throw money into each others campaigns? Nader has accepted money from registered republicans, big deal. They are American citizens. The dems and republicans accept money from coroporate criminals.

Nader didn't just accept money from registered Republicans, he accepted money from the Republican National Committee, which gets its money from the "corporate criminals" that you mentioned, so basically Nader is accepting funds from giant corporations also, only not directly, but at the same time he rips the Dems for accepting corporate contibutions, a tad bit hypocritical, as far as what your last thread, Nader doesn't deny taking money from the GOP National Committee.