Thankyou! Don't worry about Stab as it must be apparent to most here that he has a chip on his shoulder bigger than the state of Texas.
Fahrenheit 9/11 smashing box-office records
- Thread starter sprintman
- Start date
- Status
Sprintman, I would love to invite Stab and certain others to Melbourne some time. I would take them to some great Labour Party and Trade Union heartlands such as Williamstown, Sunshine, Collingwood and the Docklands. With the proud right wing attitude they display, I reckon they'd be lucky to last 5 minutes without getting their faces rearranged
Now that's funny!
Guys, lets remain friends with this discussion. One different view:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
Tony I reread my original post and there is nothing there to indicate what I think about Moore or the movie as it's not here yet.. It was just a comment about an article from the US in the local paper. Some strange people inhabiting the board these days that's for sure.
Steve,
Honestly, I try to stay totally out of the political threads. I may start one with a link to something but I honestly try to stay neutral. After traveling the world for 25 years and living in various foreign countries for 12 of that, I have seen differing political views. An interesting one was in Caviete City in the Philippines, in the mayoral race one candidate was leading to far ahead, so the poll leader was removed from running, (shot in the head). I was in Okinawa when it reverted back to Japan. One day I drove on the right side of the road, and the next morning I was on the same highway driving on the left. The political ramifications of the whole reversion was interesting from both sides. I have toured the museum in downtown Hiroshima, interesting viewpoint on what happened during WWII. So my take on politics is I try to understand the other person, I might not agree, but that is only me.
So as long as the threads are not personal, we try to let them take their course.
Honestly, I try to stay totally out of the political threads. I may start one with a link to something but I honestly try to stay neutral. After traveling the world for 25 years and living in various foreign countries for 12 of that, I have seen differing political views. An interesting one was in Caviete City in the Philippines, in the mayoral race one candidate was leading to far ahead, so the poll leader was removed from running, (shot in the head). I was in Okinawa when it reverted back to Japan. One day I drove on the right side of the road, and the next morning I was on the same highway driving on the left. The political ramifications of the whole reversion was interesting from both sides. I have toured the museum in downtown Hiroshima, interesting viewpoint on what happened during WWII. So my take on politics is I try to understand the other person, I might not agree, but that is only me.
So as long as the threads are not personal, we try to let them take their course.
And I try that too but now I'm getting worried about posting anything non-oil related which is kinda sad.
I think it important to post Richard Clarke's 911 Commission testimony about this.
Quote:
MR. ROEMER: We will certainly be looking to people in future hearings for their recommendations in a host of different areas. So I hope that you might think through this area a little bit more and be available to us.
Mr. Clarke, let me ask you some difficult questions for you to get at the complexity of our relationship with the Saudis. On the one hand, I think it's fairly -- there's a great deal of unanimity that the Saudis were not doing everything they could before 9/11 to help us in a host of different areas. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers came from there. We had trouble tracking some of the financing for terrorist operations, that we still have too many of the madrassas and the teachings of hatred of Christians and Jews and others coming out of some of these madrassas. We need to broaden and deepen this relationship. I will ask you a part A and a part B. Part A is where do we go in this difficult relationship? And part B is, to further look at that difficulty here, you made a decision after 9/11. And I'd like to ask you more about this -- to allow a plane of Saudis to fly out of the country. And when most other planes were grounded, this plane flew from the United States back to Saudi Arabia. I'd like to know why you made that decision, who was on this plane, and if the FBI ever had the opportunity to interview those people.
MR. CLARKE: You're absolutely right that the Saudi Arabian government did not cooperate with us significantly in the fight against terrorism prior to 9/11. Indeed, it didn't really cooperate until after bombs blew up in Riyadh.
Now, as to this controversy about the Saudi evacuation aircraft, let me -- let me tell you everything I know, which is that some -- in the days following 9/11, whether it was on 9/12 or 9/15 I can't tell you, we were in a constant crisis management meeting that had started the morning of 9/11 and ran for days on end. We were making lots of decisions, but we were coordinating them with all the agencies through the video teleconference procedure. Someone -- and I wish I could tell you who, but I don't know who -- someone brought to that group a proposal that we authorize a request from the Saudi embassy. The Saudi embassy had apparently said that they feared for the lives of Saudi citizens, because they thought there would be retribution against Saudis in the United States as it became obvious to Americans that this attack was essentially done by Saudis, and that there were even Saudi citizens in the United States who were part of the bin Ladin family, which is a very large family -- very large family.
The Saudi embassy, therefore, asked for these people to be evacuated; the same sort of thing that we do all the time in similar crises, evacuating Americans.
The request came to me and I refused to approve it. I suggested that it be routed to the FBI and that the FBI look at the names of the individuals who were going to be on the passenger manifest and that they approve it or not. I spoke with the at that time the number-two person in the FBI, Dale Watson, and asked him to deal with this issue. The FBI then approved -- after some period of time, and I can't tell you how long -- approved the flight.
Now, what degree of review the FBI did of those names, I cannot tell you. How many people there are on the plane, I cannot tell you. But I have asked since, were there any individuals on that flight that in retrospect the FBI wishes they could have interviewed in this country, and the answer I've been given is no, that there was no one who left on that flight who the FBI now wants to interview.
MR. ROEMER: Despite the fact that we don't know if Dale Watson interviewed them in the first place.
MR. CLARKE: I don't think they were ever interviewed in this country.
MR. ROEMER: So they were not interviewed here. We have all their names. We don't know if there has been any follow-up to interview those people that were here and flown out of the country.
MR. CLARKE: The last time I asked that question, I was informed the FBI still had no desire to interview any of these people.
MR. ROEMER: Would you have a desire to interview some of these people that --
MR. CLARKE: I don't know who they are.
MR. ROEMER: We don't know who they are.
MR. CLARKE: I don't know who they are. The FBI knew who they were, because they --
MR. ROEMER: Given your confidence and your statements on the FBI, what's your level of comfort with this?
MR. CLARKE: Well, I will tell you in particular about the ones that get the most attention here in the press, and they are members of the bin Ladin family. I was aware for some time that there were members of the bin Ladin family living in the United States. And, let's see, in open session I can say that I was very well aware of the members of the bin Ladin family and what they were doing in the United States, and the FBI was extraordinarily well aware of what they were doing in the United States. And I was informed by the FBI that none of the members of the bin Ladin family, this large clan, were doing anything in this country that was illegal or that raised their suspicions. And I believe the FBI had very good information and good sources of information about what the members of the bin Ladin family were doing.
MR. ROEMER: I've been very impressed with your memory, sitting through all these interviews that the 9/11 Commission has conducted with you. I press you again to try to recall how this request originated, who might have passed this on to you at the White House Situation Room, or who might have originated that request for the United States government to fly out -- how many people on this plane?
MR. CLARKE: I don't know.
MR. ROEMER: We don't know how many people were on a plane that flew out of this country. Who gave the final approval, then, to say "Yes, you're clear to go, it's all right with the United States government to go to Saudi Arabia"?
MR. CLARKE: I believe after the FBI came back and said it was all right with them, we ran it through the decision process for all of these decisions that we were making in those hours, which was the Interagency Crisis Management Group on the video conference.
I was making -- or coordinating a lot of decisions on 9/11 in the days immediately after. And I would love to be able to tell you who did it, who brought this proposal to me, but I don't know. The two -- since you press me, the two possibilities that are most likely are either the Department of State of the White House Chief of Staff's Office. But I don't know.
MR. ROEMER: Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. KEAN: Senator Gorton?
MR. GORTON: One more question on that subject. When the approvals were finally made, and when the flight left, was the flight embargo still in effect or were we flying -- or was that over? We were flying once again?
MR. CLARKE: No, sir. No, Senator. The reason that a decision was needed was because the flight embargo -- the grounding was still in effect.
end quote
I think the point made in the movie is very important. Where did the Saudis have connections high enough to allow them special consideration during the air embargo? Was it their friend Bush? Got any other ideas? Who could cut through the red tape the best? Who would you have called if you knew the number and could count on someone answering?
That's about right. Radical leftists revert to calling names when they run out of rational arguments. Neandrethal, communist trade unionists would imediately start cracking skulls. Most of them wouldn't know a rational argument even if it was written in crayon in front of them and frankly the violence is good exercise seeing as how they generally don't break a sweat unless they are having bowel problems.quote:
Originally posted by Losiho:
Sprintman, I would love to invite Stab and certain others to Melbourne some time. I would take them to some great Labour Party and Trade Union heartlands such as Williamstown, Sunshine, Collingwood and the Docklands. With the proud right wing attitude they display, I reckon they'd be lucky to last 5 minutes without getting their faces rearranged
Sadly, Clark has proven to be a liar so I don't think we can take his word, no matter whose arguments he supports.
The bipartisan 9/11 commission concluded that the departing Saudi nationals WERE appropriately interviewed.
Richard Clark himself stated that the premise of Fahrenheit 9/11 is nonsense and factually incorrect, which is perhaps the most lucid comment he has made for a while
Keith.
FWIW I'm neither a Unionist or a Labour supporter - exactly the opposite. But even our "right wing" LIberal party is still to the left of the Democrats in the USA. I was just pointing out the differences in society, that's all.quote:
Originally posted by Ron Jeremy:
That's about right. Radical leftists revert to calling names when they run out of rational arguments. Neandrethal, communist trade unionists would imediately start cracking skulls. Most of them wouldn't know a rational argument even if it was written in crayon in front of them and frankly the violence is good exercise seeing as how they generally don't break a sweat unless they are having bowel problems.
There are many differences. Here in the US left and right mean one thing, elsewhere they are totally different definitions. I would say that here, both parties are not much different anymore, they are just more of the same tax and spend crowd. The middle class is being killed by both parties. I can easily see a future with only rich and poor. Scares the mess out of me.quote:
Originally posted by Losiho:
FWIW I'm neither a Unionist or a Labour supporter - exactly the opposite. But even our "right wing" LIberal party is still to the left of the Democrats in the USA. I was just pointing out the differences in society, that's all.quote:
Originally posted by Ron Jeremy:
That's about right. Radical leftists revert to calling names when they run out of rational arguments. Neandrethal, communist trade unionists would imediately start cracking skulls. Most of them wouldn't know a rational argument even if it was written in crayon in front of them and frankly the violence is good exercise seeing as how they generally don't break a sweat unless they are having bowel problems.
Dan
You got it in one. The Liberal Party here just cut taxes for the rich and nothing for the lower wage earners except a vote buying A$3000 baby bonus for all. I feel sorry for my 5yr old daughter and what the future has in store for her.
Steve, you are a true Gentleman. We all enjoy your posts and look forward to your perspective on the situation. Keep up the good work.
Tony
The majority of the media are so biased against President Bush that plain lies in Moore's movie are being ignored. Proof has been shown released about his two most inflammatory lies: that the Bin Laden family members in the U.S. in Sept. 2001 were not interviewed by the government, and that their plane left the country before the ban on air trvel was lifted. Neither of those is true. They were all interviewed by the FBI, and their plane did not depart the U.S. until commercial air travel had resumed.
Moore cares nothing for truth. He will say anything he can to defeat the President.
Moore cares nothing for truth. He will say anything he can to defeat the President.
Our friend Pitbull - You are right to be concerned about the state of healthcare in this country. It's the policy problem of the 21st century. More people need care, and more care for more people, plus the frightening Medicare cost growth problem, presents an incredible challenge. Look clsoely at Kerry's plan; he says he can fund a major expansion of healthcare, which represnets over 20% of our GDP, without raising taxes? And if he can't, he says he'll cut from other areas of the Federal budget. What will he cut? Defense and entitlemenst (mostly health care and education) represent over 85% of the Federal budget!! Will he spend less on defense? Are you willing to bet that our NATO allies will increase their very limited defense budgets so they can be our "partners" when a military presence is needed to prevent a human disaster, eg. Sudan? Which of our allies do you see loading up troops and supplies to airlift into Sudan?
We'll all benfit from less personal vitriol and more dispassionate rational examination of the policy issues.
We'll all benfit from less personal vitriol and more dispassionate rational examination of the policy issues.
FWIW I'm neither a Unionist or a Labour supporter - exactly the opposite. But even our "right wing" LIberal party is still to the left of the Democrats in the USA. I was just pointing out the differences in society, that's all. [/QB][/QUOTE]
No problem! You expressed something I saw as the truth.
So Keith, originally you attempted to show Michael Moore as a liar so Richard Clarke was used (incorrectly quoted) as credible. Now when I post Clark's entire 911 Commission (under oath) testimony to show Moore is not lieing you go back and say Clarke is a liar. Which is it?quote:
Originally posted by keith:
Sadly, Clark has proven to be a liar so I don't think we can take his word, no matter whose arguments he supports.
The bipartisan 9/11 commission concluded that the departing Saudi nationals WERE appropriately interviewed.
Richard Clark himself stated that the premise of Fahrenheit 9/11 is nonsense and factually incorrect, which is perhaps the most lucid comment he has made for a whileIf you want to quote parts of his 9/11 commission testimony, you must also be impressed by his trashing of Fahrenheit 9/11.
Keith.
It appears that Mr Opinionated Moore likes sticking his nose in any country's business :
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/07/07/1089000225280.html
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/07/07/1089000225280.html
I am in a good mood today. You get to choose:
a) Moore is a liar and Clarke is not
b) Clark is a liar and Moore is not
c) both are liars
d) Both tell the truth
Options a) and d) are already off the table though, because Clarke has testified under oath that he lied in his book.
That leaves b) or c).
But, we know that the Bin Laden family were interviewed before they left the US after 9/11, and they did not leave before the ban on commercial travel was lifted. That kind of makes b) a bad choice, leaving only c).
Anyway, your choice. Have a nice one.
Keith.
- Status
