|
Dude, where's my country?
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
Michael Moore's an *******. He stands for nothing except the idea that you have to be against something.
He distorts statistics completely and utterly out of proportion to prove his "points" and only chooses ones that will defend whatever **** he's spewing. Bowling for Columbine was a very well edited, misconstruing piece of ****.
**** Michael Moore.
-Mike
 
Go listen to my band. We're awesome.
http://www.myspace.com/rosencrantzny
weallgotwoodandnails
i know i will get my head beat in for this
but michael moore is a frest breath of an american for the rest of the world
it is nice to see an american understand why the rest of the world hates them as a country (not american people singularly, i have many wonderful american friends)
i have mixed feelings regarding michael moore. bowling for columbine was largely propaganda based, but still made a valid point and made it well. also, the video he made with system of a down (was it?) boom, well made, but again, propaganda and misrepresented statistics.
i thought bowling for columbine was put together well and for that I give him credit. I cant agree with everything in it, but i do agree that it helps americans to see things from a different perspective. It might not be the better perspective but its still very necessary to be considered.
~SOFiA~
"you wont hear me, still you endear me, now..woo woo"
EU Constitution talks tanked today because they can't get the voting system down... Should Spain and Poland, two countries who each have half the population of Germany, get the same number of votes as Germany? Germany doesn't think so. Spain and Poland do. America came up with this zany "federalism" idea to solve problems like this. We'll see if Europe looks back and learns from history or if it stays stuck in its ways.
And why do we hate America? This horrible country that is the first to be blamed for everything and the first to be called to fix things? Is it because of explotation of the third-world? Take a gander and France, Germany, and Russia, three nations with their own ties to Iraqi oil before the war. Talk about how you want the best for people in countries where they're slaughtered by their ruler, and then go on talking about how that leader shouldn't be removed from power. By and large, people agree that it's a good thing to have Saddam out. So where's the legitimacy of hate in regards to that?
What other reasons for hate? I truly would like to hear about them and then either give you an American perspective on them that's different from world-news that is biased towards the opinions of wherever you get your news from (non-biased news does not exist, and don't you forget that) or wisen up myself.
-Mike
Post Edited (12-14-03 01:35)
Go listen to my band. We're awesome.
http://www.myspace.com/rosencrantzny
weallgotwoodandnails
AND WHERE THE **** WAS MICHAEL MOORE GETTING ON HIS PULPIT AT AWARD SHOWS WHEN CLINTON WAS THREATENING WAR WITH IRAQ IN 1998? WHERE WAS THE ENTIRE WORLD THEN, MARCHING IN THE STREETS?
-Mike
Go listen to my band. We're awesome.
http://www.myspace.com/rosencrantzny
weallgotwoodandnails
of course everything is biased, that's why you have to consider every perspective as valid(or at least not completely bullshit) before you can make your own opinions and judgements.
~SOFiA~
"you wont hear me, still you endear me, now..woo woo"
I have my own theory about why so many people hate America. I call it the Disgruntled Mets Fan Theory. It goes something like this.
I am a Mets fan. Therefore, I hate the Yankees.
Why do I hate the Yankees? A few reasons. Number 1, they play in the same city and are the Mets' main rivals. Number 2, they are a far better team (as much as it galls me to admit it, it's been pretty obvious for the last few years). And number 3, given the current state the Mets organization is in, every fan knows it's going to be at least a couple of seasons before the Mets can make a serious run at being the best again. Particularly when the front office is making dumb moves like ignoring the need to solidify the starting rotation while spending millions of dollars signing a shortstop when they already have Jose Reyes.
So since our own situation is hopeless, what are desperate Met fans to do? Why, turn our attention to rooting for the Yankees to crash and burn, of course, while the front office gleefully promotes the rivalry in order to sell tickets. It's so much easier to hate the better team just for being better than it is to fix our own problems.
And isn't it the same thing with politics?
The Middle East is home to some of the most backwards societies in the world. Its countries lag decades behind everyone else in technology, science, education, economics, you name it. Now, these countries could make the effort to bring themselves into the 21st century. The leaders of the Arab world could get together and say to themselves, "You know, maybe having autocratic, non-elected governments isn't good. Maybe we could improve the quality of life for our people if we didn't waste our time and resources on ludicrous rules about how people should live and dress and worship. And oh yeah, you guys over there in Palestine? Since you've been using that whole suicide-bomb-terrorism-jihad-hey-let's-blow-stuff-up strategy since roughly the invention of the wheel and in all that time it HASN'T MADE A SINGLE ASPECT OF YOUR OWN LIVES BETTER BY ONE F***ING IOTA, maybe it's time to give up on that too and give peaceful coexistence a try."
Of course, none of that happens, because it would mean that (1) most of the aforementioned leaders would find themselves unemployed and (2) the people would actually have to start thinking for themselves. This goes against the rules of a culture that builds statues honoring people who put their heads down, march like good little lemmings to whatever suicidal orders their leaders command, and most importantly, never under any circumstances stop and question why they're doing it.
So instead, they all turn their attention to hating the free world for being free and succeeding in ways that they can't. And that's why America is hated: in a nutshell, it's easier to try to knock others down to your level than it is to put in the hard work required to move yourself up to theirs.
Just ask any Mets fan.
The reason America is hated in some parts of the world is inequality.
For alot of people, there only view of america is through newspapers and TV, and the media always show america as amazingly wealthy and having money to waste (i know that this is not the case for millions). They then see there own lives, and that of there families and wonder why there is such inequality. Propoganda through the pages of the media distort everyones views on everyone else.
And, can we please be realistic about the pilght of those in the middle east? The Palestinians have been treated inhumanly by the israeli government and army (note, i do not blame the general Israeli people, who are, on the whole shocked by the treatment of there neighbours), and while i would never, ever dream of condoning suicde bombers, I wonder what drives someone to that kind of extreme. Another reason for the hatred towards America from the Arab world is that Israeli action in Palestine is funded for, on the whole, by the States, and so see them as party responsible for the current events. Its a well known fact that a third of US overseas aid goes straight to Israel.
Its a depressing state of affairs, and one that I cant see being resolved in my lifetime.
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
THE PEOPLE WE MARCHING IN THE STREETS AT THE VERY IDEA OF GOING INTO IRAQ. NOT THE CASE WITH CLINTON. WHY?
Not every Middle-Eastern country is a ****-hole. However, and you must surely admit this, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudia Arabia... All fall into the "****-hole" category. Pakistan is a bit of a ****-hole, too. Palestine isn't a country, but it's a ****-hole. So is Israel, for that matter. If you ask me, both of them are the biggest nuisance on earth today. Ariel Sharon is the worst thing to happen to peace over there, but Arafat is to blame, as well. At least Bush has his whole "roadmap" idea, but neither side will concede a damn thing. It's like two warring five year-olds. And all over what? Religion? There are more important things to fight over in this day and age than an invisible man in the sky, an invisible man THAT YOU BOTH WORSHIP. IT'S THE SAME GUY.
And what makes you think that the BBC is any less biased than American media? Is anything European magically free from tarnish?
And if your monarch isn't raping and slaughtering everyone in your country, great, have fun! But Hussein was a monster and a beast of a man, and what he was doing was something that, under no means, could be tolerated any longer, and it is not. Do I think democracy is the way to go? No, I don't, because people are stupid. here in America, we don't practice democracy, we practice republicanism. We elect people who know what the hell they're doing to take care of things. I don't believe in monarchy or any form of totalitarianism, but if it works and it's a fair and just king/queen, then run with it.
The people of Iraq are glad to be rid of him. Surely you can see that and you can see that the country is better off without him.
Remember, it was the United States that finally said "no" to the Soviet Union. Do not go thinking that the U.S. and all of it's interventions are without real cause.
As far as the peaceable folk of the Middle East, perhaps in Dubai. And have fun there. We're not coming to unseat anyone there because there's been no reason to. In the peaceable countries, leaders have not violated human rights to disgusting degrees, gone completely against world resolutions, and murdered hundreds of thousands of people for looking at the ruler there the wrong way.
And a new bit of news: Mohammed Atta, ring-leader of 9/11 hi-jackers, was trained for at least three days in Baghdad by the Hussein regime. What? Connection to terrorist organizations? Training the man who led the attack on American soil? I don't know about you, but when I hear about Atta being trained in Baghdad two months before the attacks are conducted, a red flag goes up in my mind.
And in regards to the infallible Europeans who are without wrong-doing and without tarnish, they are not wrong in what they have done, but in what they have failed to do. Years and years have gone by, sitting there and doing nothing while atrocities are committed next door to them. Malosavich, anyone? And now Hussein. We'll see what economic ties Germany and Russia had to Iraq, as well as the connections that France had to certain Iraqi programs that kept them so just and pure in their desires to not get into this war.
-Mike
Go listen to my band. We're awesome.
http://www.myspace.com/rosencrantzny
weallgotwoodandnails
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
this interesting to read with international perspectives...
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
Genesis, even though i dont agree with the reasons for going to war, i think that the outcome has justified the action.
Im not saying that we should invade countries just for the hell of it, but if human rights violations are happening (as in Zimbabwe) we have to do somthing about it.
I wonder though (and this is not a criticism just a question) how many people in America know of the shocking events unfolding in Zimbabwe. I doubt that its many, and i would put that down to lack of media coverage. If we are going to tackle Heussin, why not Mugabe?
Sorry, i'll get off my soap box now!!
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
"War on terrorism"
Shouldn't America sort out itself and get rid of all terrorists before they start trying to run every other country??
How do they propose to get world peace and no terrorists if they don't spend more time sorting out their own country?
Message deleted on 2015-09-05 06:30:16 PDT
That, Genesis, is a very, very good question. "We" can mean pretty much anything.
With Iraq, the problem with UN approval was that, as France and Germany were always going to veto it, it would never have got approval.
Now the question is, do you go to war without UN approval? I can't really give a yes or no answer to that. However, even though i dont think Bush/Blair went into war for human rights abuses, the result has been that people are no longer being killed (aside from the killings from suicde bombers) and that has to be better than what was before.
___________________________________
Hamilton Sky
James Mead
UN approval? The UN didn't approve action in Kosovo with the genocide going on over there. Where was the UN for Rwanda and Uganda?
The UN gives millions of dollars to African dictators thinking they're going to use the money for the people, and then wonder why everyone's still dying of starvation and those leaders are driving around in new Mercedes cars.
**** the UN. The UN is a bad idea badly implemented. Even if a UN resolution were passed (another resolution, let's not forget all the ones passed against Iraq previously, that called for armed intervention -- but the UN wouldn't go there) one of the major nations with their own dubious ties to Iraq would have done nothing.
The UN is like a bad mother: they tell the kid to stop jumping on the bed or else, but does absolutely nothing about it.
Be glad. The world is a better place now, whether you would admit it or not.
-Mike
Go listen to my band. We're awesome.
http://www.myspace.com/rosencrantzny
weallgotwoodandnails
Let's not forget that the philosophy "the end justifies the means" was Hitler's point of view.
Saddam bad? Yes.
Should he have been overthrown? Yes.
By US forces? No. As in the past, when a population is fedup, they revolt and overthrow evil powers that be. Apparently Iraqi citizens either weren't feed up enough to do it on their own or ... gasp! ... they liked the way things were and we had no business messing with their affairs. After all, anthropological thought (and the Prime directive) lead us more self appointed civilized people to not interfere with other religions or practices. It is not our right to tell tribes what god to worship, nor how to govern. Evil is evil and will be rooted out and eliminated. But we can not claim moral authority and say we declare one evil and others good. After all, isn't it "them" calling "us" evil that started this. And from their point of view we are evil.
Bottom line, we should mind our own business. Sure genocide and attrocities against fellow humans is bad. But whilst we damn Saddam, we turn a blind eye to many others who are just as evil and far more worthy of being dethroned. And why do we turn a blind eye? Political reasons. Good trade standings. And a multitude of other rationales that make the whole morale authority argument weak.
We bomb them because we say they are a threat to our way of life and that they will bomb us because we are a threat to their way of life. And we are proving that fear right.
If "they" did to us what we are doing to them right now, how would we feel? But they can use the exact same arguments we use and the same justifications. It's all about point of view. (And we actually do have WMD.)
Michael Moore is an extremest ass. But when so many liberal minded patriots are willing to take the high ground and not raise the debate whilst the right bullies and runs over them and the rest of the country simply because they are not bothered by playing dirty and being bullies, it's refreshing to have Michael Moore be just as loud and annoying as Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly (both of whom can be easily discredited in most things they proport to say, but no one will call them on it.) The far right distorts the truth to support their views, so does the far left. And you know what? They are the two minorities in all this, but they are trying to run the country and the world. More people are in the middle, but that is less flashy and less easy to pick apart. The world is gray but the power brokers are trying to paint in black and white. We have to stop them and keep this country and this world gray, otherwise it is going to be constant civil war between extremes.
Hey, I have issues with Michael Moore. But God bless him for being willing to yell and scream on the silent side's behalf. And if you don't like his book, I strongly suggest checking out Al Franken's Lies book. It is dead on target and is very accurate and well researched.
Quite often the truth isn't very true. It's just what either side can make the masses believe.
We should question all authority. Because when we do stand up and demand answers and justifications for actions and accountability, then and only then do we assume our true role as the founders of this great nation intended us to be.
Just because Saddam was bad and we won the war doesn't mean we shouldn't want the truth no matter how dirty or unfavorable it is. It is our right to know the whole truth.
I've met Micheal Moore.. on accident.. his home town of Flint is like 20 min from here... We met at a restaurant.. and i had time to sit and chat with him about Bowling for Columbine..... I also raised some of the valid points that your guys are raising about him backing it all up with propaganda... I don't think Micheal Moore is a bad guy at all.. He was very nice to say the least..... He explained his views on certain things.. i understood... when i first watched Bowling for Columbine i never really understood the point Micheal Moore was trying to make.. I don't think he really intended to serve us his opinions on anything.. He left is open so that we could make our opinions what we want.. sure, he left out important information that makes his opinions a bit more prevelant in the film, but i don't think it was bad at all... But i do think BUSH SUCKS ass. and will go down in history as one of the careless presidents of all time... Biggest Polluting president (rolling stone)... and biggest crock of crap.. he hasnt done anything to better my life.....
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Eric
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|
|
