http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3817993.stm What, and the speeches issued by the president arent? Get real woman, the movie is just a POV that's raises questions. Its not a definitive answer. I'll agree that Moore hates Bush (oscar speech for "bowling for columbine" anyone?), but you cant censor something you dont like unfortunatly unless it breaks the law.
I say let the people decided. This comes down as censorship, of course the US want it banned they don't want to come off looking bad which obvious they will since it's Moore. I don't see how this movie can be stop on the grounds that it's properganda (which it clearly isn't). Imo it's just another example of how the US goverment think they have the right to interfer in everything. I am personally looking foreward to seeing this film.
The film alleges connections between President George Bush and top Saudi families, including the Bin Ladens. I don't see what all the fuss is about. There is nothing to 'allege' those connections are true. In fact it was said on a UK documentary just after the start of the Iraq war if I remember correctly. The reporter / investigator even went as far as saying that Osama himself was being 'hidden' in Bush senior's ranch somewhere in Texas. I can't remember all the details, but anyway, the fact is that the Bush's are filthy people - in every meaning of the word.
"Since we are the customers of the American movie theatres it is important for us to speak up loudly and tell the industry executives that we don't want this misleading and grotesque movie being shown at our local cinema," the group said on its website, listing contact details for various US cinemas. And yet I bet they all went to see that Mel Gibson excretion, "The Passion of the Christ". If that wasn't misleading.. and in fact grotesque.. then I don't know what is.
Yeah, Osama was definitely in Texas pitiful. Think of the money spent on slandering Bush... all that research trying to find exactly where each penny went... Did you know the Bin Ladens are actually a very respectable family which owns the largest construction business in the Islamic world? And that many members of the family wanted more distance between Osama and the family name... The only reason the family never made a public statement was because he was still family, and in some cultures that is more important than anything he could do. If you don't want to understand that you won't, and I don't think they expect anyone to. And did you know that the Binladens have $millions invested in American companies? Now, if that's the case, why wouldn't some american investors have money in the largest construction firm in the east? http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?011112fa_FACT3 if you want to understand. As for the movie, it's just one stupid group out there trying to ban a movie that they don't have a right to try to ban. Nothing will come of it, they're just trying to get press. Our media is stupid and that's all there is to it.
I'll up the bet, I wouldn't be suprised if these people wanting the ban are employed by Moore or the movie company. His contraversy is the only thing keeping him in business. He hasn't done anything remotely funny or interesting since his failled show TV Nation, which I liked but the guy is downright annoying now.
I want to see this film so I hope it doesn't get banned its due for release next friday so they are gonna have to hurry to get it banned.
It's quite amusing that one of the conservative groups mentioned is called "Move America Forwards"... when their aim is to, er, conserve. Anyway... Typical of such groups though, objecting to something that isn't going to affect their lives one little bit (just like they object to gay marriages) and trying to ban it for everyone else. Using the "it's propaganda" line to cover the fact that it's their own moral outrage that's making them object to it. Whilst disseminating much grotesque propaganda of their own, claiming the right to freedom of speech (such as pro-life campaigns and teenage abstinence programmes). I get the feeling they're a minority in this case though, and a lot of Americans will want to at least watch the film, even if they disagree with it. I'll certainly go if they get it distributed over here.
Certainly they are in the minority. But so are the number of people who are going to see this movie, his audience in the US is declining since the days of Roger and Me and I don't see that trend changing. I'm not going to be bothered to see it but I have no problem with anyone who wants to doing so.
I tend to agree with Eddie on this one. Personally, I will not go see this movie, there's too much pessimism and finger pointing going around, but yet no one has the jewels to do anything about it other than make a contraversial film and profit from it. Is Moore actually doing anything about any of this? I don't see it if he is.. I'm not siding with Bush, nor am I siding against him, all I'm saying is that I'm tired of listening to Moore when all he has become is a self-righteous, self-promoting blowhard.
If it was to get banned, it would have never reached the film executives. As for it being a possibility, it is. The Patriot Act makes any sort of anti-american or anti-war slogans bannable and the publisher jailable. We'll see how this works out.
I don't think the USA PATRIOT Act offers that wide of latitude. I'll admit, I have not read the whole bill, but I have skimmed over it. You can read H.R. 3162 ("Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001") here, and you can about it here. From what I inderstand, the PATRIOT Act expands the powers of the Federal Government, as well as our foreign counterparts, in the area of criminal investigation. If I understand correctly, voicing your opinion about the Federal Government or the war is still protected by the First Ammendment, unless it falls into the Clear and Present Danger area. I think heelan and eddie are right on the mark. Usually, any time a seemingly controversial movie/concert/book/whathaveyou comes around, any number of "activist" groups come out of the woodwork to voice their opinions. More often than not, these opinions don't amount to much, and quickly fall off once the item in question has been out. Eddie could be right about Moore and/or the studio hiring people to create controversy. When I was in college, Marilyn Manson came to town (if you've ever lived in Lubbock, TX, you would know why this is such a big deal). His concert hadn't sold many tickets at all, until about two weeks before the concert. Suddenly, out of nowhere, flyers started popping up around town claiming all sorts of wild things about Manson and his concerts, none of which was true. Once the controversy started, chruches, local news and activists alike started telling everyone their opinions. The concert promptly sold out within a couple days. So many people wanted to go see it just to see what all the fuss was about. Nobody ever took credit for the flyers, and nobody can say for sure where they came from, but my friends and I have our suspicions. Don't read into any of the protests. I would bet almost anything that once the movie comes out, and people realize that it will not, in fact, cause the end of the world, the protestors will go away as quickly as they appeared. It's kind of like how every time a new Harry Potter book comes out, people start ranting about how Rowling is promoting witchcraft and her books are Satan's tools. There is absolutely no substance to any of their ranting. -monkey
Yes, now that I read that I remember perfectly what it was the program was saying. It was in fact the Bush family having business with the Bin Laden family - that does not mean Osama himself, and it is true that he is pretty much disowned by his family.
i really wanna see this film tbh it would make me laugh if they did ban the film as that goes agianst freedom of speach everything that america supposedly stnds for
Errrrrr, hes releasing a movie to tell people what is really going on so they can make a better choice when they go to vote, what else do you suggest he does??
The while point to my little rant is that I'm tired of self-appointed experts (see actors / directors) telling me "what's really happening" and how I should react or vote. What makes Michael Moore an expert in foreign relations? What makes him any better qualified to criticize anyone or otherwise fan the flames? I'm not saying that I disagree or that I agree with his viewpoint, I'm only asking you why I should believe him over someone else who may actually be more qualified in this situation. To me, this movie is nothing but a long, profit based news editorial and should be treated as such.
I'm not going to pretend to know everything about everything and, yes, being an informed voter is always a good idea. I consider myself to be a fairly informed person in current affairs, maybe more than the average person but by no means an expert. But (ain't there always one of these) Should I feel the need for more information to make a wise voting decision, I will seek the aid of a self-inflicted blunt head trauma before the 24 frames/sec drooling of Michael Moore.
