liberals....

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Interestingly, and this is what I hoped our friend Rob67, who has scurried back to his hole after being challenged on his assertion about mistruths in the movie, would touch on for us. Because as of the release of the 9/11 commission report, these flights have come into question. Evidently the report says the flights took place after the airports reopened.

Let's say Moore got this wrong. Whose fault is that? These flights taking place during the shutdown of US airspace have been reported for at least a year. I believe even the Times and Washington Post reported them. If the 9/11 commission debunks this as a myth after the movie has already been made, whose fault is it? After all, the flights had been accepted as fact until then. And why didn't the commission release its report earlier? Didn't the administration have something to do with the delays?

Having said all that, I am still skeptical about the story of these flights. If Clarke says, in the context of the flights taking place during the shutdown of the airspace, that he approved them, not the White House, but the commission says they took place after the airspace was reopened, who is right? If the commission has taken Clarke's testimony and made it part of its findings in some things but has chosen to differ with him on this, then I must ask why. Am I missing something?

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flight.htm
SNOPES: Members of the Bin Laden family and several
Saudis MAY have left the US while almost all flights
were still grounded until Friday the 14th of
September, 2001. I have not found any evidence
otherwise. Not in any Newsweek article or in the 911
commissions reports, but I did find this on the Snopes
Urban Legend Reference pages (link to follow):

"However, records obtained from the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) seem to indicate that one flight carrying
approximately 46 Saudi citizens may have left the U.S.
from New York as early as September 13, before the
general ban on air travel was lifted. The records do
not identify who these passengers may have been — bin
Laden relatives, royal family members, or other Saudi
nationals. (The "Class of Admission" column in the
document lists the departing passengers as a mixture
of foreign government officials and their employees
and temporary visitors to the U.S. for either business
or pleasure.)"

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Yet you fault Moore for his gimmick.

No I do not. Please show where I did that in this film. I am just pointing it out and discussing it. I think he used it very effectively. I also think it is the same thing the other pundits you all fault use.

[Wild Heart]

Originally Posted by dissention

Because he simply stated he switched his political affiliations, supported Bush, and left a lot of things left to interpretation. If I want to ask him to expound on his thoughts, that's my right. It's his right not to do so, but it kind of shoots down the whole point of his post.

I guess I didn't make my point clear. My point was that The Ledge in general has seemed like an unwelcoming climate for opposing views, which in my case happen to be conservative. There is alot of intolerance and disrespect. My political affilation has nothing to do with it except for the fact that I'm in the minority and I was attempting to show you the minority point of view. I only shared my political affiliation to assist in making this point but instead it's become blood in the water.

You keep asking for explanation of why I support Bush now and I have refused. I will continue to refuse because history has shown me what happens to people who support Bush on The Ledge. It is happening as I type.

I have my reasons for changing sides. I know what they are and I believe in them as passionately as you believe in your views. I will not put myself on the butcher block for you, CarneVaca or anyone else. It wasn't the point of my original post anyway.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

No I do not. Please show where I did that in this film. I am just pointing it out and discussing it. I think he used it very effectively. I also think it is the same thing the other pundits you all fault use.

You've said numeorus times that Moore's approach lends him less credibility. If that's not faulting him, I don't know what is.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Wild Heart

I guess I didn't make my point clear. My point was that The Ledge in general has seemed like an unwelcoming climate for opposing views, which in my case happen to be conservative. There is alot of intolerance and disrespect. My political affilation has nothing to do with it except for the fact that I'm in the minority and I was attempting to show you the minority point of view. I only shared my political affiliation to assist in making this point but instead it's become blood in the water.

You keep asking for explanation of why I support Bush now and I have refused. I will continue to refuse because history has shown me what happens to people who support Bush on The Ledge. It is happening as I type.

I have my reasons for changing sides. I know what they are and I believe in them as passionately as you believe in your views. I will not put myself on the butcher block for you, CarneVaca or anyone else. It was the point of my original post anyway.

As much as I hate to admit it, you are correct. If you said I like W because:

he is strong on terror

the economy has gotten better

I support the war in Iraq

which are the usual iems, no one would have said "I respect your opinion" and here is why I do not think that. You would get pounced on. That is sad to me. And, although I try not to, I am guilty of it as well.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The Saudis have been in bed with every other administration since the 60's and maybe even before that. Yet, that is not brought out. Why? Well, I think that is because it would lessen in people's heads the any link that may exist between the Saudis, the BL's, and W.

We're not voting for Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush or Clinton. That's not the point of this movie. The main objective of this film is to remedy the biggest problem our country now has: it's unelected commander in chief.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

You've said numeorus times that Moore's approach lends him less credibility. If that's not faulting him, I don't know what is.

Well, it does, but I also said it lessens the credibility of Hannity, Rhodes, etc. So, I am unsure how that supports you original statements.

Again, I think this movie is well made propoganda. It is not a fair and balanced look. It was never meant to be. Yet, people tout it as if it is. I am commenting on that. I applaud MM for making this film. I just wish he had shown both sides a little more. I think not doing that negates the credibility of what he is saying as does the use on the Bonanza music, the ice cream truck, etc. But, I still think it is a good film.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

We're not voting for Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush or Clinton. That's not the point of this movie. The main objective of this film is to remedy the biggest problem our country now has: it's unelected commander in chief.

I agree and have repeatedly said that.

BTW and again, wehen the USSC decides something it is the law. Therefore W was elected pure and simple.

Why is it the far left has issues with understanding legal concepts?

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

When the USSC decides something it is the law. Therefore W was elected pure and simple.

Yup. Even if the people of a democratic country elect Al Gore, the USSC makes the final decision and did. We were given a president we did not elect.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, let's see, like 15 years ago James R, Bath gave W. $50,000 to help launch W's oil company called Arbusto. Mr. Bath served in the Texas NG with W and is a friend of the Bushes who served as a financial advisor to a brother of OBL. He is a shadey character. Although many believe there are other connections and that the BL had other investments in this oil company, there are not as provable. But, even if they are, that was a long time ago - June 1977 to be exact And - if all they can come up with is a $50,000 investment 15 years ago, I am not buying that $50,000 is a drop in the bucket when we are talking about oil money.

There are photocopies of letters of intent, checks and wires.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Yup. Even if the people of a democratic country elect Al Gore, the USSC makes the final decision and did. We were given a president we did not elect.

Once again with the legal principles, read the U.S. Const. The poplular vote has never elected any President BTW - the people of Florida elected W. Prove me wrong.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, it does, but I also said it lessens the credibility of Hannity, Rhodes, etc. So, I am unsure how that supports you original statements.

Again, I think this movie is well made propoganda. It is not a fair and balanced look. It was never meant to be. Yet, people tout it as if it is. I am commenting on that. I applaud MM for making this film. I just wish he had shown both sides a little more. I think not doing that negates the credibility of what he is saying as does the use on the Bonanza music, the ice cream truck, etc. But, I still think it is a good film.

You've totally lost me AND your arguments.

You went from faulting him for his gimmick, to saying you're not faulting him for his gimmick, back to faulting him for his gimmick.

I'm done with this line of debate, you aren't making sense.

As for people touting it as fair and balanced, put down the crackpipe. No one has ever said that. The most we've said is that it's factual, which it is.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

There are photocopies of letters of intent, checks and wires.

From Bath. If there are any of these items from others, lets see them.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Gee, Jason, did you forget Osama's brother Salem was partners with Georgie boy? Salem invested money when Arbuston was launched in 1977. It's not like Bath went around the community with hat in hand. He got the money from Osama's own brother.

What exactly did you like about the movie again?

Salem died mysteriously in 1988, by the way.

Right outside of Crawford Texas.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Once again with the legal principles, read the U.S. Const. The poplular vote has never elected any President BTW - the people of Florida elected W. Prove me wrong.

No thanks, Mrs. Harris. I'm a bit tired of that discussion.