What bugs me the most is that people I see on TV issue mild compliments while tap-dancing around the issue of the movie's distortion of the truth. "Poetic truth", "thought-provoking", "interesting opinions". Give me a break.

I'm going to see it tomorrow. Hype? Propaganda? Maybe. Better to spend $7.50 on this, than say, a Beniffer movie.

I am glad to see that you read the British press Brad, you are becoming more Maxwellian by the day. This Michael Moore chap is a fat whining moron, I think it is commendable that George can warn the world about terrorist killers, and then turn around to whack out a few drives on the course. It shows how unfazed he is is by terrorism. "Now watch this drive" I believe George says after speaking to the press, absolutely splendid.

You are totally correct. Hopefully, the voters will see much of what you say. It may turn out that Moore will actually help Bush get elected. Hillary talked about the vast right wing conspiracy which I don't believe even existed. However, there does seem to be a vast left wing conspiracy composed of the media, the Hollywood elites, etc. These people are so nuts and biased that it may all backfire on them.

If the American people put some thought and intelligence into who they vote for this year, then Bush should win decisively.

Although I cannot speak to your criticism of Michael Moore and his movie, I can speak to your blatant use of propaganda - it starts in the first sentence with "name-calling" and continues throughout the article in different forms. I am conservative by nature, own
a business that does about 15 milllion a year in sales, employ about 100 people and pay HUGE amoounts of taxes. Yet, if I choose to criticize my governmnent for a foreign policy that is comparable
to that of the WWII Axis Powers, I am somehow in the "looney left wing camp" or am one of "a zillion conspiracy nuts". That is GREAT PROPAGANDA! However, it is incorrect and the authors sloppy use of propaganda throughout the article just takes away his
own credibility.

Also, to make the statement that you "don't have any ties to big oil" is wishful thinking at best. If you live in America, you have ties to big oil, whether direct or indirect. America consumes about 1/3rd of the
worlds oil, and produces about 20-25% of the worlds goods with that consumption. Start looking at the information on "Peak Oil". You may not understand how important oil is to our civilization and may feel that our wars
have nothing to do with resources, but you are wrong and uninformed. Oil IS Society in the West, and to think we wouldn't go to war for a resource as valuable as oil is just naive and almost as ideological as, say, a 23 year old lliberal.

Finally, have you asked yourself about any of the irregularities surrounding 9/11 and the events since? If looked at objectively, any rational person should be able to eaisly discern many inconsistencies with the "official story" of 9/11 and many of the events that
have taken place since. To brush these inconsistencies aside is a travesty of justice regarding the single biggest criminal event EVER. To simply look away from facts such as these would be very foolish: put options on the airlines (a clear indicator or foreknowledge), Willie Brown being warned not to fly - another
clear indicator of foreknowledge, firemen claiming there were explosions in the buildings, a kid in new york pointing to the WTC 1 week before and telling his school teacher that "those buildins won't be there next weeK", no jets scrambling to intercept, all steel from WTC melted down within
days in China or India and no metallurgical testing (for the BIGGEST CRIME EVER and no metal testing! how can that not be a red flag?). There are many more FACTS that would lead an intelligent person to believe the official story is a lie.

Criticism of Michael Moore and his movie will not make the questions about the 9/11 inconsitencies or the Federal power grabs since, go away, and it now looks like more and more people are realizing that a foreign policy based on revenge and "pre-empitve" strikes
should not be the policy of a Republic. That type of foreign policy is that of a dictator and I am disappointed with the author for his glorification of revenge - that attitude will only cause more violence and is based solely on negative emotions such as fear and anger.

Call me cynical, but after watching a few interviews Micheal Moore is looking a lot like Howard Stern to me. There is a difference between his "true self" and his popular persona, enough that I think he is a lot more into marketing than politics. I have no doubt that he is honest about his views, but I think all the nutty bull-horn crap is selling the persona, not the philosophy.

Poster #5: (anonymous guy) yes, I am quite comfortable saying that you are a left-wing loon based on what you just wrote.

Michael Moore, btw, is technically a business man too and employs hundreds of people and pays high amounts of taxes and yes, he's a left wing loon IMO.

Criticizing ones country has nothing to do with being a loon. I think Bush is a pretty mediocre President (worst President since Carter in my opinion). Criticism is fine. Wacko theories with no basis in reality is what makes somone a loon.  Combine a heavy dose of manipulation of actual facts and you have propaganda as well. 

But hey, it's apparently okay for Moore and his ilk to run around smearing Bush and co. but if you criticize Moore you are (to use the words anonymous charged me with) "that attitude will only cause more violence and is based solely on negative emotions such as fear and anger". 

Left-wing criticism is apparently patriotic. But if conservatives criticize the left, it's based soley on negative emotions such as fear and anger.  Wow. I would have used the term "amusement" more than fear or anger to describe my raction to Moorelings who spout off "Da Truth".

Draginol,

I think you don't understand where I am coning from - and you again cover it by using propaganda in the first sentence by telling me I'm a left wing loon for asking you to tone down your propaganda against those criticizing Bush.

Moore may be a "businessman", but not in the traditional, conservative, Mid-West Manufacturing sense that I was speaking of.

I don't know which "wacko theories with no basis in reality" I brought up. Which ones are they? Peak Oil certainly has basis in reality, and so does going to war for resources as is proven by history. I can give you articles from the Mainstream Media that tell about all the stories I stated it would be foolish to overlook. I am not pulling this stuff out of thin air!

Nowhere do I state that it is okay for Moore to run around "smearing" Bush. What I do state is that there are a lot of questions he is asking that should be asked. I told you in my first line that I could not speak to your criticism of Michael Moore or his movie.
You then connect my line about revenge and fear with criticizing Moore! That line was about foreign policy, not Michael Moore and you took it and used a propaganda technique to manipulate my meaning.

Nowhere do I state that "left-wing" criticism is patriotic or that any criticism is patriotic or not. That is your conclusion and does not really represent what I wrote.

Please let me know what "Da Truth" is - please let me know what facts I listed are incorrect so I do not repeat them. From what I have researched, everything I mentioned that would be foolish to not look at more closely is FACT.

look away from facts such as these would be very foolish: put options on the airlines (a clear indicator or foreknowledge), Willie Brown being warned not to fly - another clear indicator of foreknowledge, firemen claiming there were explosions in the buildings, a kid in new york pointing to the WTC 1 week before and telling his school teacher that "those buildins won't be there next weeK", no jets scrambling to intercept, all steel from WTC melted down within days in China or India and no metallurgical testing (for the BIGGEST CRIME EVER and no metal testing! how can that not be a red flag?). There are many more FACTS that would lead an intelligent person to believe the official story is a lie.

I am not going to scour the net to debunk this kind of nonsense. I am quite comfortable stating that those who believe there is some conspiracy to cover up the "real story" of 9/11 based on the things you state above are loons/kooks/whatever.

Moreover, you most definitely claimed that those who disagree with such kookiness are motivated soley by anger and fear. Give me a break. There's nothign to fear or be angry about with regards to kooks.

You go ahead and wear your tin foil hat and yell as loud as you can the "facts" that Moore wants to peddle.

Also, to make the statement that you "don't have any ties to big oil" is wishful thinking at best. If you live in America, you have ties to big oil, whether direct or indirect.

When you think about that, it means that not only those who supported the war did it for oil, but those who were against the war did it for oil as well.

The attacks of 9/11, which were planned during the Clinton years, demonstrate to clear thinking Americans that there is no foreign policy that would satisfy these maniacs.

As you no doubt remember, Osama planned the previous and unsuccessful truckbombing of the WTC in 96, for which cruise missiles were fired into various locations in the Middle East.

The foreign policy outcomes haven't changed - Bush is merely attempting to use infantry rather than missiles for any unsuccessful attacks on Osama.

It has been interesting for me to note, as a bill of rights advocate, how many people are crying about their rights being violated, then complaining that Bush did nothing before 9/11. Let's face it, before 9/11 any information was just "possible" evidence of terrorist activity, and it's pretty hard to do something before someone strikes anyway.

But let's assume that they DID know, and that all passengers scheduled to board those planes were strip searched before boarding. Can you imagine the outcry?

Along those lines, can you imagine trying to convince the world that 3000 people might have died if we hadn't dragged those Arabs of the plane, dangerously armed with carpet knives?

It is laughable. We can't convict these people now, even after 9/11, with draconian laws in place. This was the era that we were embracing people like Arafat as "diplomats", and terrorists were just criminals.

My suggestion is to ignore the conspiracy theorists. Their arguments aren't based on reason, so they won't be swayed by reason. A priori logic has its own proof built in, and you can't refute it. Paranoia is the glue that holds all these inconsequential details together.

I am willing to accept a certain exposure to terrorism as a trade-off for living in a fair and open society, personally. If you want security, move to Cuba. Nobody ever said living in an open society was safe.

I quite agree that there is little that Bush could have done to prevent 9/11, just like there is nothing more Clinton could have done to stop al-Qaeda. It, unfortunately, took a spectacular attack to get the American people behind the notion that we would need to use force again against an enemy.

However, it is also true that Bush did not take the al-Qaeda threat seriously before the tragedies in New York. It is true that Bush is, by his own admission, not an intellectually curious person. He's a "big picture" man that "doesn't do nuance." He also believes that God told him to become President, and was saying so as far back as 1998. It is facts like that which turn me off to Mr. Bush. Admittedly, I didn't vote for him in 2000, but I didn't vote for the Democrat either. I think Bush's problem is that he lacks an understanding of nuance, that he does not grasp the subtilities of the situation that we are in. He is like an elephant chasing a mouse in the china shop- he may or may not eventually get what he is after, but he's going to completely destroy everything else in the process.

Whether or not people agree with Moore, I've noticed that it's only when he (or the conservative equivalent) bashes "their guy/party) that folks get mad. We heard it with "Monicagate", and we're hearing it now. Let's face it, for most of the "peasants", what we think doesn't amount to much.