Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: The True Adonis on July 20, 2007, 01:42:08 PM
-
Masterpiece-
Part 1-
Part 2-
Part 3-
Byrd blasts dogfighting as 'barbaric'
By Mannix Porterfield
THE REGISTER-HERALD (BECKLEY, W.V.)
BECKLEY, W.Va, —
Pro footballer Michael Vick inspired Sen. Robert C. Byrd to a stunning rebuke Thursday of dogfighting, an illegal activity the West Virginia lawmaker branded as "barbaric, brutal and cruel."
A dog owner himself, Byrd shied from direct comment on the Atlanta Falcons quarterback's legal troubles, reminding Senate colleagues he has been accused, not convicted.
Vick faces a July 26 hearing in a federal courtroom in Virginia on charges that he sponsored a vicious dogfighting operation on land he owned in Surry County, Va.
Although outlawed in all 50 states and at the federal level, Byrd said the practice isn't a sport, but an appalling abuse of animals who rip the flesh off one another while spectators plunk down bets as high as $50,000.
"It is a brutal, sadistic event motivated by barbarism and cruelty," said Byrd, who made his comments on the Senate floor.
"One is left wondering — who are the real animals, the creatures inside or outside the ring?"
While dogfighting hasn't been a state issue, West Virginia lawmakers last winter were asked by the Humane Society to turn cockfighting into a felony, but such a bill never was taken up by a House committee where it was designated.
Byrd described dogfighting as a matter of depravity, saying the so-called "sport" translates into a multimillion-dollar industry that thrives in 40,000 illegal operations across the country.
Undercover agents have discovered wounded dogs with ripped ears, shredded lips, genitals dangling from their scarred bodies, eyes closed shut with swelling and "faces so riddled with punctures so severe that they were barely able to breathe," Byrd said.
Survivors of such canine bloodfests typically succumb within days, even hours, of blood loss, shock, dehydration, exhaustion or infection, Byrd said in his floor speech.
Motivating them to fight entails starvation and beatings, and the presence of smaller animals, such as cats or rabbits to prompt the killing nature, he said, and the post-fight effects reaches far beyond the rings.
"There are cases of dogs trained to kill which have broken loose and mauled human beings to death," Byrd said.
Children exposed to dogfighting are more readily inclined to accept aggressive behavior and this manifests itself in violent attitudes and actions, the senator said.
Mannix Porterfield writes for The Register-Herald in Beckley, W.Va.
-
As the owner of a pit and other dogs, I am sickened by dog fighting and more specifically Vick's conduct. But is it really what we need US Senators working on right now? We got guys dieing and being maimed everyday in that middle east shithole. They shouldn't do anything else until the figure out how to get us out of that mess.
-
As the owner of a pit and other dogs, I am sickened by dog fighting and more specifically Vick's conduct. But is it really what we need US Senators working on right now? We got guys dieing and being maimed everyday in that middle east shithole. They shouldn't do anything else until the figure out how to get us out of that mess.
They are working on that. Senator Byrd stayed up all night to protest the war. He decided to use some time on his own here to talk about dogfighting. There is no work being done. He just felt like he needed to express his disgust.
I say good job.
-
Nothing like having a guy who was the Grand Pubah of KKK speaking about cruelty........how ironic ::)!
-
Is it me or is the media using publicity photo's of Vick looking so greasy, and so black like he's every white fathers nightmare walking up to a date with their 16 year old daughter.
-
Just another politician jumping up and down saying "look at me people, look at me, aren't I a great guy"
-
Yep, that is what our government needs to be focusing on: Steroids and dogfighting.
The elected officials are just a reflection of the American public... This shows us who the real idiots are.
The fact that TA is taking time to post on this when he could be using his brain to have people focus on erosion of liberty, socialist redistribution of wealth, and death by taxes, shows that he is wasting his brain just as much as the couch rider with a six pack.
As the owner of a pit and other dogs, I am sickened by dog fighting and more specifically Vick's conduct. But is it really what we need US Senators working on right now? We got guys dieing and being maimed everyday in that middle east shithole. They shouldn't do anything else until the figure out how to get us out of that mess.
-
Is it me or is the media using publicity photo's of Vick looking so greasy, and so black like he's every white fathers nightmare walking up to a date with their 16 year old daughter.
I don`t see how you guys watch football and support their salaries by doing so.
They are some of the dumbest fucks of society.
Look how ignorant these people are:
Its almost laughable.
-
I play high minded sports like chess and backgammon
-
Just another politician jumping up and down saying "look at me people, look at me, aren't I a great guy"
Actually no.
He was just using up extra time in the senate. Nothing more.
-
Nothing like having a guy who was the Grand Pubah of KKK speaking about cruelty........how ironic ::)!
were not many of your bibllical hero's murderers, liars and cheats?
-
As the owner of a pit and other dogs, I am sickened by dog fighting and more specifically Vick's conduct. But is it really what we need US Senators working on right now? We got guys dieing and being maimed everyday in that middle east shithole. They shouldn't do anything else until the figure out how to get us out of that mess.
Yes, there are wayy more important issues, but the US has a huge opportunity to make an example of something that is a terrible thing with Vick and get the publicity when they do...Fukin ghetto bastards need to be taught a lesson that just because you get millions you won't get away with everything...I can only hope justice will move swiftly so we can get back to bigger issues
-
Yep, that is what our government needs to be focusing on: Steroids and dogfighting.
The elected officials are just a reflection of the American public... This shows us who the real idiots are.
The fact that TA is taking time to post on this when he could be using his brain to have people focus on erosion of liberty, socialist redistribution of wealth, and death by taxes, shows that he is wasting his brain just as much as the couch rider with a six pack.
Obviously you haven`t seen my YOUTUBE channel then. Check out my Videos and all of my Favorites. You may just learn a thing or two. http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=TRUEADONIS
-
Yes, there are wayy more important issues, but the US has a huge opportunity to make an example of something that is a terrible thing with Vick and get the publicity when they do...Fukin ghetto bastards need to be taught a lesson that just because you get millions you won't get away with everything...I can only hope justice will move swiftly so we can get back to bigger issues
The bigger issues ARE STILL at the forefront. One is missing though. Impeachment. Contact Nancy Pelosi, tell her to put impeachment BACK on the table.
-
The bigger issues ARE STILL at the forefront. One is missing though. Impeachment. Contact Nancy Pelosi, tell her to put impeachment BACK on the table.
Who ya goin for in 2008 Adam??
-
Who ya goin for in 2008 Adam??
Mike Gravel!
-
Mike Gravel!
Gravel is the only candidate with any balls or ideas.
-
Mike Gravel!
I love his short movie on his page it is fukin great lol
-
You are too Jaded with your atheism and attack of God.
I guess you don't seem to understand that the Declaration said that we are inherintly free because of THE LAWS OF NATURE AND OF NATURES GOD.
If you don't believe, that is fine... but you cross the line by googling quotes from the founding father trying to discredit the acknowledgement of a creator.
Do you read any of their biographies? or do you just Google everything?
Things like "Pursuit of happiness" means "Right use and control of property" as is protected by the 14th amendment. If Jefferson had left the word "property" in, how much more aware people would be that they have a RIGHT to own things, and NOBODY has the right to take from them, no matter how badly they need it.
Obviously you haven`t seen my YOUTUBE channel then. Check out my Videos and all of my Favorites. You may just learn a thing or two. http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=TRUEADONIS
-
I love his short movie on his page it is fukin great lol
Yah I have been in contact with Matt and Gus who made those videos. They are good people. They did it for free and was their idea. Mike was honored that they asked him to do it.
Mike is really a great beam of hope. He is equally hard on Democrats and Republicans. Check out my videos.
-
You are too Jaded with your atheism and attack of God.
I guess you don't seem to understand that the Declaration said that we are inherintly free because of THE LAWS OF NATURE AND OF NATURES GOD.
If you don't believe, that is fine... but you cross the line by googling quotes from the founding father trying to discredit the acknowledgement of a creator.
Do you read any of their biographies? or do you just Google everything?
Things like "Pursuit of happiness" means "Right use and control of property" as is protected by the 14th amendment.
There is not one single reference to god in the ENTIRE Constitution of the United States of America. It does not appear anywhere. Would you like me to post the entire document?
-
Declaration of Independence
don't change the fuc.king topic asshole
THE LAWS OF NATURE AND OF NATURES GOD
SIGNED BY ALL 56 DELEGATES.
There is not one single reference to god in the ENTIRE Constitution of the United States of America. It does not appear anywhere. Would you like me to post the entire document?
-
Declaration of Independence
don't change the fuc.king topic asshole
THE LAWS OF NATURE AND OF NATURES GOD
SIGNED BY ALL 56 DELEGATES.
The declaration of independence is nothing more than a letter to the British.
The Constitution is what GOVERNS the LAND. IT is the document that MATTERS.
The founding fathers wanted nothing to do with god in it and it was so.
Why are you calling me an asshole? Because I am correct?
You call me Mr. Copy and Paste, but since when is backing up arguments with factual evidence a bad thing?
-
Like I said, believe what you want, but don't you dare come on here and post your garbage about the founders and a lack of belief in "god"
There are many idiots on here that don't know any better and will never take you to task.
-
Like I said, believe what you want, but don't you dare come on here and post your garbage about the founders and a lack of belief in "god"
There are many idiots on here that don't know any better and will never take you to task.
So you are saying I fabricated all of those Anti-God and Religion quotes by the founding fathers?
I`ll bump up the topic so people can read them all again.
-
Just a letter to the Brittish?
It is very clear that you make NO ATTEMPT to understand the principles and reasons behind the documents and freedoms you take at face value only.
I'm not even going to discuss this any further, I just wanted to publically discredit your bullshit.
-
You are a joke...
Just like Michael Moore...
-
Just a letter to the Brittish?
It is very clear that you make NO ATTEMPT to understand the principles and reasons behind the documents and freedoms you take at face value only.
I'm not even going to discuss this any further, I just wanted to publically discredit your bullshit.
You didn`t discredit a thing.
1. The Declaration of Independence is not used to decide ANY SINGLE law or right in America. The Constitutuion is.
2. If you knew anything about history, you would know that we had the Articles of Confederation after the the Declaration of Independence. When that failed after revisions, something had to be done. Thus the Constitutional conventions and finally, in 1791, the US Constitution was adopted. That is a good 15 years AFTER the Declaration of Independece, a document written to protest the British.
3. You need a Middle School level civics class.
-
HERE IS the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE in its short entirety.
It is a simple letter to the British highlighting the facts of secession.
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
— John Hancock
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
-
Like I said, believe what you want, but don't you dare come on here and post your garbage about the founders and a lack of belief in "god"
There are many idiots on here that don't know any better and will never take you to task.
They were secular and deists.
And back then, who wasn't religious? The founding fathers very could have been closet atheists or agnostics, and you can't disprove that.. THERE are several quotes from John Adams and Thomas Jefferson against organized faith and christianity. Of course there are quotes for religion as well..
But they were very much for seperation of church and state, gee, I wonder how that came about? The didn't mold the Constitution out of religion, but the ideas of John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, ancient Rome and Greece and many other people and civilizations that had little to do with faith.
-
Yep, that is what our government needs to be focusing on: Steroids and dogfighting.
You're so right. Just wait until they find out that the Pitbulls and Rotts doing the fighting are all JUICED! Then the shitt will really hit the fan!
-
You and Moore could work side by side.
Your understanding of the fathers is LIMITED to a middle school civics class - AND GOOGLE
You didn`t discredit a thing.
1. The Declaration of Independence is not used to decide ANY SINGLE law or right in America. The Constitutuion is.
2. If you knew anything about history, you would know that we had the Articles of Confederation after the the Declaration of Independence. When that failed after revisions, something had to be done. Thus the Constitutional conventions and finally, in 1791, the US Constitution was adopted. That is a good 15 years AFTER the Declaration of Independece, a document written to protest the British.
3. You need a Middle School level civics class.
-
You didn`t discredit a thing.
1. The Declaration of Independence is not used to decide ANY SINGLE law or right in America. The Constitutuion is.
2. If you knew anything about history, you would know that we had the Articles of Confederation after the the Declaration of Independence. When that failed after revisions, something had to be done. Thus the Constitutional conventions and finally, in 1791, the US Constitution was adopted. That is a good 15 years AFTER the Declaration of Independece, a document written to protest the British.
3. You need a Middle School level civics class.
hence the name Declaration of Independence
-
Thank YOU
"Deists hold that religious beliefs must be founded on human reason and observed features of the natural world, and that these sources reveal the existence of one God or supreme being."
They were secular and deists.
-
Byrd is a fuckin' clown. Really needs to give up the ghost.
-
Why is this such a debate? Generations of the past had similar differences as generations of today.....some believe in God, some do not.
-
You are a joke...
Just like Michael Moore...
What is wrong with Michael Moore?
Turned out he was correct with EVERYTHING he put forth in Farahenheit 9/11.
and now Sicko. There is not one single fact that is incorrect in the movie. Check for yourself. Please post ANY errors that you find.
You won`t be able to. Try anyway. You may just learn something.
I worked for UnitedHealth and know firsthand what they do.
-
TA is correct that the Declaration of Independence is a letter to the Brittish telling them that we are no longer under their rule and the reasons why. TA is not necessarily correct that the founding father's were anti religion. They were anti-STATE SPONSORED OR SUPPORTED religion.
-
Correct,
and by "state" they meant federal government. The actual states were free to do as they chose.
They were anti-STATE SPONSORED OR SUPPORTED religion.
-
TA is correct that the Declaration of Independence is a letter to the Brittish telling them that we are no longer under their rule and the reasons why. TA is not necessarily correct that the founding father's were anti religion. They were anti-STATE SPONSORED OR SUPPORTED religion.
A great deal were Anti-Religion but allowed for the belief, including Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison just to name a few.
-
Wow...
Dude, when you post rubbish like this, I'm not even going to bother continuing this discussion.
Later....
What is wrong with Michael Moore?
Turned out he was correct with EVERYTHING he put forth in Farahenheit 9/11.
and now Sicko. There is not one single fact that is incorrect in the movie. Check for yourself. Please post ANY errors that you find.
You won`t be able to. Try anyway. You may just learn something.
I worked for UnitedHealth and know firsthand what they do.
-
Correct,
and by "state" they meant federal government. The actual states were free to do as they chose.
Not at all.
Read the first ammendment to the Constitution.
-
Wow...
Dude, when you post rubbish like this, I'm not even going to bother continuing this discussion.
Later....
Why are you running away? DEFEND your statements. Why can`t you use FACT and EVIDENCE to try and defend your assertations about Michael Moore?
Please post one fact that he got wrong in Sicko. Please post any innaccuracy. You can`t just go around spouting shit without evidence and accept it as being true.
Wait, maybe you can....Its called the belief in faith.
Seriously though, Back up your hatred for Moore with fact. Can you do that? I bet you can`t.
-
Byrd is Speaker Pro Tempore. If The President and the Vice die, Byrd is the president.
He is an interesting guy for sure.
LOL. That's a polite way of putting it, TA. The guy is the very definition of a 'pork barrel' politician.
/at last count there were over 200 robert byrd memorial buildings/objects/roads. ::)
-
What is wrong with Michael Moore?
Turned out he was correct with EVERYTHING he put forth in Farahenheit 9/11.
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
http://slate.com/id/2102723/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/MooresMyths.html
-
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
http://slate.com/id/2102723/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/MooresMyths.html
I have read through those and guess what....They are all dated 2004....Guess what, they all have been PROVEN FALSE by now.
Seriously, check each fact point for point.
Put up a fact here in question and I can show you.
Also, you won`t find any errors at all in Sicko. Try that one too while you are at it. I want to show you how you can use FACTS and EVIDENCE instead of emotional response and mischaraterization.
Also, why do people feel the need to attack Moore? He is simply shedding light on big problems and fuck ups in American Society and policy. Where is the harm in that?
Is it better to lay down and do nothing?
-
You'll like the Slate article. Hitchens is one of your heroes, no?
-
I have read through those and guess what....They are all dated 2004....Guess what, they all have been PROVEN FALSE by now.
Seriously, check each fact point for point.
Put up a fact here in question and I can show you.
Also, you won`t find any errors at all in Sicko. Try that one too while you are at it. I want to show you how you can use FACTS and EVIDENCE instead of emotional response and mischaraterization.
Also, why do people feel the need to attack Moore? He is simply shedding light on big problems and fuck ups in American Society and policy. Where is the harm in that?
Is it better to lay down and do nothing?
Christopher Hitchens: "To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of 'dissenting' bravery."
-
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
http://slate.com/id/2102723/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/MooresMyths.html
This is what Hitchens Contended then:
) The Bin Laden family (if not exactly Osama himself) had a close if convoluted business relationship with the Bush family, through the Carlyle Group.
2) Saudi capital in general is a very large element of foreign investment in the United States.
3) The Unocal company in Texas had been willing to discuss a gas pipeline across Afghanistan with the Taliban, as had other vested interests.
4) The Bush administration sent far too few ground troops to Afghanistan and thus allowed far too many Taliban and al-Qaida members to escape.
5) The Afghan government, in supporting the coalition in Iraq, was purely risible in that its non-army was purely American.
6) The American lives lost in Afghanistan have been wasted. (This I divine from the fact that this supposedly "antiwar" film is dedicated ruefully to all those killed there, as well as in Iraq.)
Which number is false?
Number 6 never even appears in the film. It is true though.
-
Christopher Hitchens: "To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of 'dissenting' bravery."
Where are the facts and evidence that prove Michael Moore wrong in that article?
-
You'll like the Slate article. Hitchens is one of your heroes, no?
yes
-
This is what Hitchens Contended then:
1) The Bin Laden family (if not exactly Osama himself) had a close if convoluted business relationship with the Bush family, through the Carlyle Group.
Which number is false?
Moore’s film suggests that Bush has close family ties to the bin Laden family—principally through Bush’s father’s relationship with the Carlyle Group, a private investment firm. The president’s father, George H.W. Bush, was a senior adviser to the Carlyle Group’s Asian affiliate until recently; members of the bin Laden family—who own one of Saudi Arabia’s biggest construction firms—had invested $2 million in a Carlyle Group fund. Bush Sr. and the bin Ladens have since severed ties with the Carlyle Group, which in any case has a bipartisan roster of partners, including Bill Clinton’s former SEC chairman Arthur Levitt. The movie quotes author Dan Briody claiming that the Carlyle Group "gained" from September 11 because it owned United Defense, a military contractor. Carlyle Group spokesman Chris Ullman notes that United Defense holds a special distinction among U.S. defense contractors that is not mentioned in Moore’s movie: the firm’s $11 billion Crusader artillery rocket system developed for the U.S. Army is one of the only weapons systems canceled by the Bush administration.
Michael Isikoff, "Under the Hot Lights. Moore’s movie will make waves. But it’s a fine line between fact and fanaticism. Deconstructing ‘Fahrenheit 9/11." Newsweek, June 28, 2004. (Isikoff appears to be wrong on one fact; the Crusader uses a self-propelled gun, and does not fire rockets.)
Moore claims that refusing to mention the Crusader cancellation was all right because the cancellation came after the United Defense initial public offering (stock sale to the public). But the cancellation had a serious negative financial impact on Carlyle, since Carlyle still owns 47% of United Defense.
Moore tells us that when Carlyle took United Defense public, they made a one-day profit of $237 million, but under all the public scrutiny, the bin Laden family eventually had to withdraw (Moore doesn’t tell us that they withdrew before the public offering, not after it).
Labash, Weekly Standard.
There is another famous investor in Carlyle whom Moore does not reveal: George Soros. (Oliver Burkeman & Julian Borger, "The Ex-Presidents’ Club," The Guardian (London), Oct. 31, 2000.) But the fact that the anti-Bush billionaire has invested in Carlyle would detract from Moore’s simplistic conspiracy theory.
Moore alleges that the Saudis have given 1.4 billion dollars to the Bushes and their associates.
Moore derives the $1.4 billion figure from journalist Craig Unger’s book, "House of Bush, House of Saud." Nearly 90 percent of that amount, $1.18 billion, comes from just one source: contracts in the early to mid-1990’s that the Saudi Arabian government awarded to a U.S. defense contractor, BDM, for training the country’s military and National Guard. What’s the significance of BDM? The firm at the time was owned by the Carlyle Group, the powerhouse private-equity firm whose Asian-affiliate advisory board has included the president’s father, George H.W. Bush.
...The main problem with this figure, according to Carlyle spokesman Chris Ullman, is that former president Bush didn’t join the Carlyle advisory board until April, 1998—five months after Carlyle had already sold BDM to another defense firm.
Isikoff & Hosenball, MSNBC.com. (The full text of the article contains the counter-argument by Moore's "war room" and the replies by Isikoff and Hosenball. Moore's staff points out that at the time of the bin Laden $1.18 billion investment, Carlyle included some Bush associates).
Craig Unger points out that George H.W. Bush still receives daily C.I.A. briefings. As Unger points out, Bush has the right to do, but he is the only former President who does. The suggestion is made that Bush uses the C.I.A. information for personal business purposes. We have no way of knowing, and it is possible the Bush does so. On the other hand, this segment of Fahrenheit omits a very relevant fact which would supply an alternative explanation: Bush served as C.I.A. Director in 1976. It would not be surprising for him to want to follow C.I.A. activities in retirement. Earlier in the film, however, Moore does state, in passing, that "Bush’s dad was head of the CIA."
[Moore response: Provides extensive citations for facts about Carlyle which were never disputed. Does not address the fact that Democrats and George Soros are also involved in Carlyle. Does not address how Bush administration severely harmed Carlyle by cancelling the Crusader. Reiterates the points made in response to Isikoff & Hosenball, that Bush friends were involved in Carlyle before George H.W. Bush was.]
-
2) Saudi capital in general is a very large element of foreign investment in the United States.
Which number is false?
Moore asks Craig Unger: "How much money do the Saudis have invested in America, roughly?"
Unger replies, "Uh, I've heard figures as high as $860 billion dollars."
What is the basis of Unger's claim? The $860 billion figure appears on page 28 of Unger's House of Bush, House of Saud. He cites two sources: The Saudi Ambassador's 1996 speech to the U.S.-Saudi Arabian Business Council. In that speech, Prince Bandar discussed the Saudi economy, but said nothing about the size of Saudi investment in the U.S.
Unger's other cited source is a February 11, 2002, Washington Post story, titled "Enormous Wealth Spilled Into American Coffers." The $860 billion figure does not appear there, either. The article states:
After nearly three decades of accumulating this wealth, the group referred to by bankers as "high net worth Saudi individuals" holds between $500 billion and $1 trillion abroad, most of it in European and American investments. Brad Bourland, chief economist of the Saudi American Bank (one-quarter owned by Citibank), said in a speech in London last June that his bank's best estimate of the total is about $700 billion, with the possibility that it is as much as $1 trillion.
Raymond Seitz, vice chairman of Lehman Brothers in London and a former U.S. ambassador to Britain, gave a similar estimate. Seitz said Saudis typically put about three-quarters of their money into the United States, the rest in Europe and Asia. That would mean that Saudi nationals have invested perhaps $500 billion to $700 billion in the American economy.
In short, Unger's cited sources do not support his $860 billion figure. He may have "heard" the figure of $860 billion dollars, but only from people who were repeating the factoid which he invented.
According to the Institute for Research Middle Eastern Policy (a pro-Saudi think tank which tries to emphasize the importance of Saudi money to the United States), in February 2003 total worldwide Saudi investment was at least $700 billion, conservatively estimated. Sixty percent of the Saudi investments were in the United States, so the Saudis had at least 420 billion dollars invested in the U.S. (Tanya C. Hsu , "The United States Must Not Neglect Saudi Arabian Investment," Sept. 23, 2003.)
Unger is asked "what percentage of our economy is that?" (Meaning the supposed $860 billion.)
He replies, "Well, in terms of investments on Wall Street, American equities, it's roughly six or seven percent of America. They own a fairly good slice of America." A little bit later, Moore states that "Saudi Prince Bandar is perhaps the best protected ambassador in the US...Considering how he and his family, and the Saudi elite own seven percent of America, it's probably not a bad idea."
According the Census Bureau, the top countries which own U.S. stocks and bonds are the United Kingdom and Japan. Foreign investors owned $1,690 billion in corporate bonds in 2002. The Census Bureau lists the major national holders, and then groups all the minor holders--including Saudi Arabia--into "Other Countries." All of these other countries combined (including Saudi Arabia) account for only 6 percent of total foreign ownership of U.S. corporate bonds. Likewise, all "Other Countries" combined account for only 7 percent of total foreign ownership of corporate stocks. (And of course the large majority of U.S. corporate stocks and bonds are owned by Americans.) Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, table 1203.
According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, total foreign investment in the United States in 2003 was $10,515 billion dollars. This means that even if the figure that Unger "heard" about Saudis having $860 billion is correct, then the Saudis would only have about 8 percent of total foreign investment in the United States. Unless you believe that almost all American assets are owned by foreigners, then it cannot possibly be true that Saudis "own seven percent of America."
[Moore response: Cites Unger's book, and a lawyer who filed an anti-Saudi lawsuit and repeated the Unger figure. Does not address the fact that Unger's sources do not support his claim. Points out that the capitalization of the New York Stock Exchange composite is $12 trillion and that $860 billion amounts to approximately 7 percent of that. But even if the Saudis owned 7% of the stocks on the New York Stock Exchange, the NYSE does not include all of America's wealth--which includes real estate, businesses which are not traded on the NYSE because they are privately owned, and so on. The data show that the Saudis own between 4% (420 billion) and 7% (700 billion) of total foreign investment in the U.S. Moore's assertion that Saudis "own seven percent of America" is completely false.]
-
3) The Unocal company in Texas had been willing to discuss a gas pipeline across Afghanistan with the Taliban, as had other vested interests.
Which number is false?
This segment is introduced with the question, "Or was the war in Afghanistan really about something else?" The "something else" is shown to be a Unocal pipeline.
Moore mentions that the Taliban visited Texas while Bush was governor, over a possible pipeline deal with Unocal. But Moore doesn’t say that they never actually met with Bush or that the deal went bust in 1998 and had been supported by the Clinton administration.
Labash, Weekly Standard.
Moore asserts that the Afghan war was fought only to enable the Unocal company to build a pipeline. In fact, Unocal dropped that idea back in August 1998.
Jonathan Foreman, "Moore’s The Pity," New York Post, June 23, 2004.
In December 1997, a delegation from Afghanistan’s ruling and ruthless Taliban visited the United States to meet with an oil and gas company that had extensive dealings in Texas. The company, Unocal, was interested in building a natural gas line through Afghanistan. Moore implies that Bush, who was then governor of Texas, met with the delegation.
But, as Gannett News Service points out, Bush did not meet with the Taliban representatives. What’s more, Clinton administration officials did sit down with Taliban officials, and the delegation’s visit was made with the Clinton administration’s permission.
McNamee, Chicago Sun-Times.
Whatever the motive, the Unocal pipeline project was entirely a Clinton-era proposal: By 1998, as the Taliban hardened its positions, the U.S. oil company pulled out of the deal. By the time George W. Bush took office, it was a dead issue—and no longer the subject of any lobbying in Washington.
Isikoff & Hosenball, MSNBC.com.
Moore claims that "Enron stood to benefit from the pipeline." To the contrary, Enron was not part of the consortium which expressed interest in working with Unocal on the pipeline.
On December 9, 2003, the new Afghanistan government did sign a protocol with Turkmenistan and Pakistan to facilitate a pipeline. Indeed, any Afghani government (Taliban or otherwise) would rationally seek the revenue that could be gained from a pipeline. But the protocol merely aims to entice corporations to build a new pipeline; no corporation has has agreed to do so. Nor does the new proposed pipeline even resemble Unocal's failed proposal; the new pipeline would the bring oil and gas from the Caspian Sea basin, whereas Unocal's proposal involved deposits five hundred miles away, in eastern Turkmenistan.
Fahrenheit showed images of pipeline construction, but the images have nothing to do with the Caspian Sea pipeline, for which construction has never begun. Nor do they have anything to do with the Unocal pipeline, which never existed except on paper.
According to Fahrenheit, Afghanistan's new President, Hamid Karzai, was a Unocal consultant. This is false. Sumana Chatterjee and David Goldstein, "A lowdown on the facts behind the allegations in 'Fahrenheit 9/11'," Knight-Ridder newspapers, July 2, 2004. The origin of the claim appears to be a December 6, 2001 story in the center-left French newspaper Le Monde. The story does not cite any source for its claim. (The story is available on-line from Le Monde's website; registration and payment are required.) Unocal has denied that Karzai was ever a consultant.
(Deceits: 1. Governor Bush never met the Taliban; 2. The Unocal pipeline idea was abandoned; 3. The new pipeline is different from the Unocal proposal; 4. Construction has not begun. Bonus deceit: Enron.)
[Moore response: Regarding Karzai, cites the article in Le Monde, and two later articles which appear to use Le Monde's information. Moore's translation is: "He was a consultant for the American oil company Unocal, while they studied the construction of a pipeline in Afghanistan." The actual sentence was "Après Kaboul et l'Inde ou il a étudié le droit, il a parfait sa formation aux Etats-Unis ou il fut un moment consultant de l'enterprise pétrolière américaine Unocal, quand celle-ci étudiant la construction d'un oléduc en Afghanistan." Translated: After Kabul and India where he had studied law, he completed his training in the United States where he was briefly (literally: "for a moment") a consultant for the American petroleum business Unocal, when it was studying the construction of a pipeline in Afghanistan." Neither Le Monde nor Moore has provided any evidence to substantiate the claim about Unocal and Karzai.
Regarding Enron, Moore cites a 1997 speech a professor, in which the professor said that Enron would be interested in helping to build the Unocal pipeline. There is no reason to doubt the professor, but the fact is that Enron was not among the companies which Unocal chose to work with. There is no evidence supporting Moore's assertion that Enron would benefit from the new Caspian Sea basin pipeline.
Moore does not attempt to defend the other falsities which are detailed in this section: that Unocal had abandoned the project in 1998, that the 2003 Protocol involves an entirely different pipeline, and that the pipeline footage in the movie has nothing to do with either the 1998 or 2003 proposals.]
-
Gravel is the only candidate with any balls or ideas.
Kucinich is good too!!
-
This segment is introduced with the question, "Or was the war in Afghanistan really about something else?" The "something else" is shown to be a Unocal pipeline.
Moore mentions that the Taliban visited Texas while Bush was governor, over a possible pipeline deal with Unocal. But Moore doesn’t say that they never actually met with Bush or that the deal went bust in 1998 and had been supported by the Clinton administration.
Labash, Weekly Standard.
Moore asserts that the Afghan war was fought only to enable the Unocal company to build a pipeline. In fact, Unocal dropped that idea back in August 1998.
Jonathan Foreman, "Moore’s The Pity," New York Post, June 23, 2004.
In December 1997, a delegation from Afghanistan’s ruling and ruthless Taliban visited the United States to meet with an oil and gas company that had extensive dealings in Texas. The company, Unocal, was interested in building a natural gas line through Afghanistan. Moore implies that Bush, who was then governor of Texas, met with the delegation.
But, as Gannett News Service points out, Bush did not meet with the Taliban representatives. What’s more, Clinton administration officials did sit down with Taliban officials, and the delegation’s visit was made with the Clinton administration’s permission.
McNamee, Chicago Sun-Times.
Whatever the motive, the Unocal pipeline project was entirely a Clinton-era proposal: By 1998, as the Taliban hardened its positions, the U.S. oil company pulled out of the deal. By the time George W. Bush took office, it was a dead issue—and no longer the subject of any lobbying in Washington.
Isikoff & Hosenball, MSNBC.com.
Moore claims that "Enron stood to benefit from the pipeline." To the contrary, Enron was not part of the consortium which expressed interest in working with Unocal on the pipeline.
On December 9, 2003, the new Afghanistan government did sign a protocol with Turkmenistan and Pakistan to facilitate a pipeline. Indeed, any Afghani government (Taliban or otherwise) would rationally seek the revenue that could be gained from a pipeline. But the protocol merely aims to entice corporations to build a new pipeline; no corporation has has agreed to do so. Nor does the new proposed pipeline even resemble Unocal's failed proposal; the new pipeline would the bring oil and gas from the Caspian Sea basin, whereas Unocal's proposal involved deposits five hundred miles away, in eastern Turkmenistan.
Fahrenheit showed images of pipeline construction, but the images have nothing to do with the Caspian Sea pipeline, for which construction has never begun. Nor do they have anything to do with the Unocal pipeline, which never existed except on paper.
According to Fahrenheit, Afghanistan's new President, Hamid Karzai, was a Unocal consultant. This is false. Sumana Chatterjee and David Goldstein, "A lowdown on the facts behind the allegations in 'Fahrenheit 9/11'," Knight-Ridder newspapers, July 2, 2004. The origin of the claim appears to be a December 6, 2001 story in the center-left French newspaper Le Monde. The story does not cite any source for its claim. (The story is available on-line from Le Monde's website; registration and payment are required.) Unocal has denied that Karzai was ever a consultant.
(Deceits: 1. Governor Bush never met the Taliban; 2. The Unocal pipeline idea was abandoned; 3. The new pipeline is different from the Unocal proposal; 4. Construction has not begun. Bonus deceit: Enron.)
[Moore response: Regarding Karzai, cites the article in Le Monde, and two later articles which appear to use Le Monde's information. Moore's translation is: "He was a consultant for the American oil company Unocal, while they studied the construction of a pipeline in Afghanistan." The actual sentence was "Après Kaboul et l'Inde ou il a étudié le droit, il a parfait sa formation aux Etats-Unis ou il fut un moment consultant de l'enterprise pétrolière américaine Unocal, quand celle-ci étudiant la construction d'un oléduc en Afghanistan." Translated: After Kabul and India where he had studied law, he completed his training in the United States where he was briefly (literally: "for a moment") a consultant for the American petroleum business Unocal, when it was studying the construction of a pipeline in Afghanistan." Neither Le Monde nor Moore has provided any evidence to substantiate the claim about Unocal and Karzai.
Regarding Enron, Moore cites a 1997 speech a professor, in which the professor said that Enron would be interested in helping to build the Unocal pipeline. There is no reason to doubt the professor, but the fact is that Enron was not among the companies which Unocal chose to work with. There is no evidence supporting Moore's assertion that Enron would benefit from the new Caspian Sea basin pipeline.
Moore does not attempt to defend the other falsities which are detailed in this section: that Unocal had abandoned the project in 1998, that the 2003 Protocol involves an entirely different pipeline, and that the pipeline footage in the movie has nothing to do with either the 1998 or 2003 proposals.]
I am still unable to find anything in any of that you posted to be false.
Please highlight a segment which you think is false.
-
4) The Bush administration sent far too few ground troops to Afghanistan and thus allowed far too many Taliban and al-Qaida members to escape.
Which number is false?
Moore's a military strategist?
-
Moore's a military strategist?
That doesn`t appear in the film either by the way.
But We could easily agree with that assessment based on how the wars were managed and the fact that Bin Laden and company were easily able to pass from border to border from Pakistan and on.
-
ya'll might want to know that the Emir of Dubai is purchasing the Carlyle Group
-
Etc.
YOU read and highlight.
-
But We could easily agree with that assessment based on how the wars were managed and the fact that Bin Laden and company were easily able to pass from border to border from Pakistan and on.
What's this "we" shit?
-
If I were to pray tonight.. (I dont pray) I'd pray adonis dies.
-
Etc.
YOU read and highlight.
I did read. I highlight all that you posted as incorrect or misconstrued or false. Find me something in there that is not one of the two.
-
How about trying to find me those errors in Sicko. hahah
You can`t.
-
Masterpiece-
Part 1-
Part 2-
Part 3-
Byrd blasts dogfighting as 'barbaric'
By Mannix Porterfield
THE REGISTER-HERALD (BECKLEY, W.V.)
BECKLEY, W.Va, —
Pro footballer Michael Vick inspired Sen. Robert C. Byrd to a stunning rebuke Thursday of dogfighting, an illegal activity the West Virginia lawmaker branded as "barbaric, brutal and cruel."
A dog owner himself, Byrd shied from direct comment on the Atlanta Falcons quarterback's legal troubles, reminding Senate colleagues he has been accused, not convicted.
Vick faces a July 26 hearing in a federal courtroom in Virginia on charges that he sponsored a vicious dogfighting operation on land he owned in Surry County, Va.
Although outlawed in all 50 states and at the federal level, Byrd said the practice isn't a sport, but an appalling abuse of animals who rip the flesh off one another while spectators plunk down bets as high as $50,000.
"It is a brutal, sadistic event motivated by barbarism and cruelty," said Byrd, who made his comments on the Senate floor.
"One is left wondering — who are the real animals, the creatures inside or outside the ring?"
While dogfighting hasn't been a state issue, West Virginia lawmakers last winter were asked by the Humane Society to turn cockfighting into a felony, but such a bill never was taken up by a House committee where it was designated.
Byrd described dogfighting as a matter of depravity, saying the so-called "sport" translates into a multimillion-dollar industry that thrives in 40,000 illegal operations across the country.
Undercover agents have discovered wounded dogs with ripped ears, shredded lips, genitals dangling from their scarred bodies, eyes closed shut with swelling and "faces so riddled with punctures so severe that they were barely able to breathe," Byrd said.
Survivors of such canine bloodfests typically succumb within days, even hours, of blood loss, shock, dehydration, exhaustion or infection, Byrd said in his floor speech.
Motivating them to fight entails starvation and beatings, and the presence of smaller animals, such as cats or rabbits to prompt the killing nature, he said, and the post-fight effects reaches far beyond the rings.
"There are cases of dogs trained to kill which have broken loose and mauled human beings to death," Byrd said.
Children exposed to dogfighting are more readily inclined to accept aggressive behavior and this manifests itself in violent attitudes and actions, the senator said.
Mannix Porterfield writes for The Register-Herald in Beckley, W.Va.
Dude is a glory hound who is past his prime.
-
How about trying to find me those errors in Sicko. hahah
You can`t.
There are many errors in sicko you uglyy fuck
-
There are many errors in sicko you uglyy fuck
Please show me one. Can you do that rather than lie and say that there are errors?
Surely if you know of one you can tell us all what that error is. So tell us.
-
Please show me one. Can you do that rather than lie and say that there are errors?
Surely if you know of one you can tell us all what that error is. So tell us.
Bitch please.
-
Bitch please.
Again I ask, find me something that is untrue in the movie Sicko and please cite your source and show why it is untrue.
Calling me names is not proving your point.
-
True Adonis you think it is okay to have sex with young highschool girls but dogfighting is wrong? ::)
-
True Adonis you think it is okay to have sex with young highschool girls but dogfighting is wrong? ::)
The age of consent is too high, dumbass. Women have been shown to develop faster than men. And what's to say a 17 year old wouldn't fuck a guy if she were 21?
Dogfighting is cruel, inhumane and not worthy of people who are civilized. And Vick did more than just dogfight; he killed those poor animals in brutal fashion.
-
yes
you should see some of the shit he's written about Henry Kissinger.
-
The age of consent is too high, dumbass. Women have been shown to develop faster than men. And what's to say a 17 year old wouldn't fuck a guy if she were 21?
Dogfighting is cruel, inhumane and not worthy of people who are civilized. And Vick did more than just dogfight; he killed those poor animals in brutal fashion.
No need for name calling. I didnt give an age billybob. So you approve of 14 year olds having sex with people that are grown? If you had a 14 year old daughter that was having sex with a 21 year old would you think it is okay? It is okay because she is develop right?
-
Michael Moore is a national hero.
Michael vick should be thrown to the dogs as bait and torn apart.
-
Byrd is Speaker Pro Tempore. If The President and the Vice die, Byrd is the president.
He is an interesting guy for sure.
No hes not...Nancy Pelosi is President you dumbass.
-
you should see some of the shit he's written about Henry Kissinger.
oh and what he's written about Mother Theresa is even better!
-
How about trying to find me those errors in Sicko. hahah
You can`t.
Go live in Cuba then you stupid shit. You have spewed some of the dumbest shit I have ever heard in this thread. Micheal Moore is a piece of crap. Ask yourself one questiuon about F 911...why in the beginning of the movie do you only HEAR the events of 9/11 and the screen is black, but later in the movie it is ok to show blown up Iraqi kids laying on the ground? It is called fucking propaganda you stupid brainwashed fucking idiot.
-
Mike Gravel!
why not just vote for a corpse or write in your own name...Gravel is almost 80 years old...Obviously even he doesn't want to be president. And you yourself don't want to vote for someone who can actually have a chance of serving the country...
-
Simply put, Bush wants to win this war. And hes willing to sacrifice all of your children to do it.
Except his own.
-
Simply put, Bush wants to win this war. And hes willing to sacrifice all of your children to do it.
Except his own.
bush cant win war...where the fuck is condi now?
-
bush cant win war...where the fuck is condi now?
Bush couldnt catch his own shitlog from his own toilet. :-[
-
Go live in Cuba then you stupid shit. You have spewed some of the dumbest shit I have ever heard in this thread. Micheal Moore is a piece of crap. Ask yourself one questiuon about F 911...why in the beginning of the movie do you only HEAR the events of 9/11 and the screen is black, but later in the movie it is ok to show blown up Iraqi kids laying on the ground? It is called fucking propaganda you stupid brainwashed fucking idiot.
Again, where are the errors? Where is the propaganda. You are saying it is propaganda, but can you cite where? Can you cite just one instance of the movie where it is false or non-factual.
What is wrong with a black screen and blown up Iraqi-kids. Also, there is no video to be had of dead people in the WTC, largely in part due to the debris field. I don`t think the media was able to film that. In Faraenheit 9/11 he does have some in there that lost loved ones in the WTC and they do wonerful in describing their situations.
Again, where are your FACTS and EVIDENCE?
-
Michael Moore is a national hero.
Perhaps. Which makes it official: We're fucked.
-
Perhaps. Which makes it official: We're fucked.
Where are your facts?
-
Where are your facts?
ADONIS IS THE NATURAL IDEAL.
-
life in prison he should get and serve it untill hes 70,,so he has time to think and make good with god and maybe learn to like animals,,
should be kicked out of the nfl and out of the team for ever
this guy is going down no matter how you look at it,,he is done with football,,someone will kill him 100%,,the peta members are that crazy but in this case i dont blame them,,they are right
mother fuckin merciless son of a bitch with no soul,,he should be put away for life in federal usa prison
-
Again, where are the errors? Where is the propaganda. You are saying it is propaganda, but can you cite where? Can you cite just one instance of the movie where it is false or non-factual.
What is wrong with a black screen and blown up Iraqi-kids. Also, there is no video to be had of dead people in the WTC, largely in part due to the debris field. I don`t think the media was able to film that. In Faraenheit 9/11 he does have some in there that lost loved ones in the WTC and they do wonerful in describing their situations.
Again, where are your FACTS and EVIDENCE?
What about the people jumping out of the fucking windows you stupid shit.
-
What about the people jumping out of the fucking windows you stupid shit.
What about them?
Where is your evidence about Michael Moore being wrong?
-
What about the people jumping out of the fucking windows you stupid shit.
i dont think there was anybody gayer than Liberace! LOL
-
How did this thread morph from a discussion about the grand standing Byrd to one about Moore?
-
yea arrogant as can be and the money makes them even more arrogant
-
Byrd is soo old and out of step with reality. Not that agree with Vick, but Byrd certainly isn't someone I would care to listen to about anything.
-
I`m still waiting for the evidence against Moore. Where is it?
-
I`m still waiting for the evidence against Moore. Where is it?
there is none that's why guys like Hannity, O'Reilly, Limbaugh etc. are always trying to discredit him.
-
there is none that's why guys like Hannity, O'Reilly, Limbaugh etc. are always trying to discredit him.
Those fucking windbags never make any sense.
-
yeah good Michael Vick is a fucking girl.
cant throw a ball for shit
-
At first I had some doubts about Michael Moore agenda as well, but TA has won me over with his well-written challenge to disprove Moore. The man is asking for actual facts that discredits Moore's statements and it seems the naysayers can't walk the walk. Unlike the others spewing pure emotion, I actually spent time looking into this challenge to disprove Moore and after doing research that were beyond a quick Google search and at a high level, I simply could not find any evidence. Michael Moore is telling the truth and for some reason, certain citizens of the US just doesn't want to hear it.
-
I`m still waiting for the evidence against Moore. Where is it?
same here. I just see name calling. Some guys on here are clearly, dipshits.
-
His facts are certainly correct, they would have to be. But, what the Newsweek article that was posted as well as some other arugements being made are that Moores facts are correct but it is the way in which a presents them to the viewer and certain things that are left out of his film(s) that make the movie completely biased towards his viewpoint. Plain and simple. He is not "lying" per-se, but his films are def. slanted toward his view point simply by what facts he chooses to include, exclude and how they are presented.
Example: The U.S. healthcare system is a mess, but he presents Cubas/French system as a crowning achievement in medical effiencey. It isn't. And of course your response will be "FACTS,EVIDENCE" and again, the facts are true, the presentation of those facts unfortunately is not. It's his film, his message and he can do whatever he wants with it. Fair enough.
Oh, and as for "Grand High Wizard" Robert Byrd....he made a complete clown, fool, doddering moron out of himself during his glorious speech. And yes I got a chance to listen to plenty of it and I was embarrased for the poor guy. "CAN YOU HEAR ME!!!....(shuffling of papers, loosing place) BARBARIC!!!.....(shuffling of papers, loosing place) HOMELAND!!!!......" I would ask "How did he get elected" but then again, I could ask that question a hundred or two times about many other members of our wonderful Congress. HOMELAND!!!
-
same here. I just see name calling. Some guys on here are clearly, dipshits.
clearly no need for that comma at the end of your sentence, freind.
-
His facts are certainly correct, they would have to be. But, what the Newsweek article that was posted as well as some other arugements being made are that Moores facts are correct but it is the way in which a presents them to the viewer and certain things that are left out of his film(s) that make the movie completely biased towards his viewpoint. Plain and simple. He is not "lying" per-se, but his films are def. slanted toward his view point simply by what facts he chooses to include, exclude and how they are presented.
Example: The U.S. healthcare system is a mess, but he presents Cubas/French system as a crowning achievement in medical effiencey. It isn't. And of course your response will be "FACTS,EVIDENCE" and again, the facts are true, the presentation of those facts unfortunately is not. It's his film, his message and he can do whatever he wants with it. Fair enough.
Bingo. He is a polemicist like many others; and that's what they do. He's no different that many others, except his medium is 'documentary' films.
-
His facts are certainly correct, they would have to be. But, what the Newsweek article that was posted as well as some other arugements being made are that Moores facts are correct but it is the way in which a presents them to the viewer and certain things that are left out of his film(s) that make the movie completely biased towards his viewpoint. Plain and simple. He is not "lying" per-se, but his films are def. slanted toward his view point simply by what facts he chooses to include, exclude and how they are presented.
Example: The U.S. healthcare system is a mess, but he presents Cubas/French system as a crowning achievement in medical effiencey. It isn't. And of course your response will be "FACTS,EVIDENCE" and again, the facts are true, the presentation of those facts unfortunately is not. It's his film, his message and he can do whatever he wants with it. Fair enough.
Oh, and as for "Grand High Wizard" Robert Byrd....he made a complete clown, fool, doddering moron out of himself during his glorious speech. And yes I got a chance to listen to plenty of it and I was embarrased for the poor guy. "CAN YOU HEAR ME!!!....(shuffling of papers, loosing place) BARBARIC!!!.....(shuffling of papers, loosing place) HOMELAND!!!!......" I would ask "How did he get elected" but then again, I could ask that question a hundred or two times about many other members of our wonderful Congress. HOMELAND!!!
yes and opinions are like assholes, everybody's got one
-
Michael Vick should be electrocuted....
hey..I mean it's what he did to dogs who weren't "good enough", right?
Well, Michael Vick is a dog who isn't good enough to be called a human...so down he goes.
end of story guy ;D
a good Sat. Nite Live skit:
Michael Vick starts screwing up royally during NFL games and finally the head coach & team owner come to him and tell him that his performance has been really bad all season and that it's just not working out having him on the team.
Vick starts to look real nervous, sweat rolls off his forehead...The coach says "Sorry Michael...you just haven't been serving your purpose on the field...no hard feelings man. We can't afford to lose any more bets made on your pathetic ass and your salary can go to someone who is worth it."
Vick looks around and suddenly he's surrounded by a couple of big guys in white coats. They lead him off the field and into the underground sewer beneath the stadium. Now he's standing in a shallow trench of water, and one of the guys attaches a thick wire noose tightly around Vicks neck.
The big electrical switch is flipped and dumbass is shocked into oblivion.
is that so wrong??
-
SOUNDS GREAT. Where can i get tickets to watch ;D
-
Masterpiece-
Part 1-
Part 2-
Part 3-
Byrd blasts dogfighting as 'barbaric'
By Mannix Porterfield
THE REGISTER-HERALD (BECKLEY, W.V.)
BECKLEY, W.Va, —
Pro footballer Michael Vick inspired Sen. Robert C. Byrd to a stunning rebuke Thursday of dogfighting, an illegal activity the West Virginia lawmaker branded as "barbaric, brutal and cruel."
A dog owner himself, Byrd shied from direct comment on the Atlanta Falcons quarterback's legal troubles, reminding Senate colleagues he has been accused, not convicted.
Vick faces a July 26 hearing in a federal courtroom in Virginia on charges that he sponsored a vicious dogfighting operation on land he owned in Surry County, Va.
Although outlawed in all 50 states and at the federal level, Byrd said the practice isn't a sport, but an appalling abuse of animals who rip the flesh off one another while spectators plunk down bets as high as $50,000.
"It is a brutal, sadistic event motivated by barbarism and cruelty," said Byrd, who made his comments on the Senate floor.
"One is left wondering — who are the real animals, the creatures inside or outside the ring?"
While dogfighting hasn't been a state issue, West Virginia lawmakers last winter were asked by the Humane Society to turn cockfighting into a felony, but such a bill never was taken up by a House committee where it was designated.
Byrd described dogfighting as a matter of depravity, saying the so-called "sport" translates into a multimillion-dollar industry that thrives in 40,000 illegal operations across the country.
Undercover agents have discovered wounded dogs with ripped ears, shredded lips, genitals dangling from their scarred bodies, eyes closed shut with swelling and "faces so riddled with punctures so severe that they were barely able to breathe," Byrd said.
Survivors of such canine bloodfests typically succumb within days, even hours, of blood loss, shock, dehydration, exhaustion or infection, Byrd said in his floor speech.
Motivating them to fight entails starvation and beatings, and the presence of smaller animals, such as cats or rabbits to prompt the killing nature, he said, and the post-fight effects reaches far beyond the rings.
"There are cases of dogs trained to kill which have broken loose and mauled human beings to death," Byrd said.
Children exposed to dogfighting are more readily inclined to accept aggressive behavior and this manifests itself in violent attitudes and actions, the senator said.
Mannix Porterfield writes for The Register-Herald in Beckley, W.Va.
You would think senators would have a lot more important things to consider...This shows where their priorities are...
-
You would think senators would have a lot more important things to consider...This shows where their priorities are...
Yeah, like baseball. Im surprised the UN hasnt gotten together to talk about Barry Bonds.
-
You would think senators would have a lot more important things to consider...This shows where their priorities are...
Again, he was taking up EXTRA time on the Senate Floor. It was not a congressional hearing. Senator Byrd is one senator who has opposed the Iraq War way before it started and continues his effort.
-
As much as I am embarrassed for the man and his blubbering, continually repeating himself and being as close to alzheimers as one can get....I do remember listening to his "you can hear a pin drop" speech on the eve of the Iraq Invasion, and as much as I laugh at the man, that speech impressed me.
-
The declaration of independence is nothing more than a letter to the British.
The Constitution is what GOVERNS the LAND. IT is the document that MATTERS.
The founding fathers wanted nothing to do with god in it and it was so.
Why are you calling me an asshole? Because I am correct?
You call me Mr. Copy and Paste, but since when is backing up arguments with factual evidence a bad thing?
There may be no mention about God in the constitution, but it is clearly an underlying influence:
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --John Adams, October 11, 1798
-
senator byrd has no problem calling a lack of respect for canines rights dispicable, but back when he was a grandmaster of the KKK, he has a much harder time being able to recognize a race of HUMAN BEINGS rights.
hypocritical, over-aged, simple minded, white man. = must be a politician.
-
There may be no mention about God in the constitution, but it is clearly an underlying influence:
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --John Adams, October 11, 1798
that is one mans opinion. if it was true, then we would be in need of a whole new constitution....not an altered religious version of the one we already have.
-
No hes not...Nancy Pelosi is President you dumbass.
do you know the difference between the HOUSE, and the SENATE; between a CONGRESSMAN, and a SENATOR?
-
What is wrong with Michael Moore?
Turned out he was correct with EVERYTHING he put forth in Farahenheit 9/11.
and now Sicko. There is not one single fact that is incorrect in the movie. Check for yourself. Please post ANY errors that you find.
You won`t be able to. Try anyway. You may just learn something.
I worked for UnitedHealth and know firsthand what they do.
WELL NO, ACTUALLY ADONIS; THERE WERE ALOT OF ERRORS, AND MISREPRESENTATIONS IN FARENHEIT 9/11. MICHAEL MOORE DID IN 9/11 WHAT CHENEY DID IN THE LEAD UP TO THE IRAQ WAR. THEY BOTH USED EVERY SINGLE PEICE OF INFORMATION THAT THEY COULD, EVEN IF THEY PREVIOUSLY KNEW IT TO BE FALSE, OR EVEN IF THE GENERAL CONSENSUC WAS TO THE CONTRARY OF THE POINT......THEY BOTH A HAD A GOAL, AND THEY WANTED IT SO BADLY THAT BOTH USED EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING THEY COULD TO PERSUADE THEIR AUDIENCES INTO BELIEVING IN THEIR ARGUMENT.
(sorry for the caps).
Sicko, in fact, is a much better film for michael moore, because he does not take the "no holds barred, anything to make my point" stance when making it. he sticks to the facts, and lets people tell the story for him, instead of basing it mostly on his own ideas and opinions/dialogue.
part of the reason 9/11 was discredited to the point it was, was because of its many stretched-truths, and mistated facts. even if there WAS alot of truth in it, the presence of the errors made the whole film seem illegitimate.
-
The bigger issues ARE STILL at the forefront. One is missing though. Impeachment. Contact Nancy Pelosi, tell her to put impeachment BACK on the table.
impeachement is NOT a political tool Adam. it may be used on cheney; but only if we can PROVE that he lied about his intelligence..if we can PROVE he knew the inteligence he was feeding the american public was faulty. but that willl be hard to do. he mostly used REAL intelligence, but it was just outdated, or freshly denounced. but bush...there is no way you could be able to impeach him.
-
dogs are better than people.
Then why do they eat poop?
-
Then why do they eat poop?
Packed with fiber and corn...maybe theyre onto something.. ???
-
senator byrd has no problem calling a lack of respect for canines rights dispicable, but back when he was a grandmaster of the KKK, he has a much harder time being able to recognize a race of HUMAN BEINGS rights.
hypocritical, over-aged, simple minded, white man. = must be a politician.
Yeah, well maybe so. But when you start electrocuting dogs, you kind of leave yourself open to a little criticism....