Imagine if a "man" like Moore was your president during WW2? Then europe would be either nazist or communist today.

The only good thing Bush did in his whole presidency was to invade Afghanistan to get Osama Bin Laden. Everything after that was complete and utter lunacy. Instead of continuing to focus on Osama Bin Laden, Bush and his government used the tragedy of 9/11 and the "war on terrorism" to embark on a crusade to win the war his Dad didn't finish when he had the chance. There was absolutely no justification whatsoever for going to war in Iraq. None. Sure, Saddam's gone, hooray for that, but what the hell does all this have to do with finding Osama Bin Laden, the perpetrator of one of the most heinous crimes in recent history?

Bush, Cheney and the whole US government turned it's backs on it's own people and instead of hunting down Bin Laden, decided to pursue the agenda it had before 9/11 even happened...to secure one of the biggest oil reserves in the world for their own capitalistic gains.

Three cheers for Michael Moore for putting together a movie that, if there is any justice, will help aid in getting these vile, lying criminals out of the White House. If Bush gets re-elected, then I will have lost all faith in America.

Btw...I am Canadian.

Michael Moore cites his plethora of sources at his website - EXTERNAL LINK - .

Now, Nachtkreichen, it's your turn.

I think John just hit the nail on the head. Quite frankly, I am surprised we are still having this conversation. It's gotten kinda ugly. Everyone has their own opinion, and come November people will have their chance. We just owe to ourselves to look all sides of the story and make a logical asssement from there. Come on guys this is a movie message board no reason to get personal. We should treat this like a bar, office place, or any social gathering. No religion, no politics.

John,

To clear the air (if your comment of "bigoted name calling" was directed at me) I never said anything of the sort, and if I implied that at all, I appologize. I appreciate the differences in opinion here at DVD Town especially. This topic hit on a nerve, and got me WAY out of character. Generally as a rule of thumb I tend to stay away from political discussions for this very reason. Again... I appologize if anything I said offended you. I hold you and the rest of the staff here at DVD Town in the highest regard.

Tony,

Actually you and John BOTH hit the preverbial nail on the head. I actually did plan on my last post being back when Sean and I had finished discussing. It just got out of hand. Bravo for putting things in perspective.

Kilgore,

In as much as you didn't provide any further information except more information from Moore, I don't feel bad in ending this here and now. I appologize to you as well if I offended you. I'm sure that these types of discussions were not what Henning intended when he started this site. I'm sorry I let it go this far.

Sincerely

- Josh

Josh,

I taught school for too long ever to take offense at something people say; besides which, my comment about name-calling was certainly not directed at you. I was suggesting to Orpheus that it was not fair to say that Moore (or anyone with his views on Iraq) would have been a coward during WWII and not stood up to Hitler.

After I wrote that criticism, I realized it did sound rather like I was losing my patience; I guess I was. No, in the heat of discussion I understand that a lot of things can be taken the wrong way, so I try never to get angry. Surely, not with friends like you and the rest of the DVD Town family. But I forget that not everyone sees my own remarks in the same way. I'll try to behave.

John

John,

No problem, I didn't take offense to what you said, moreover I was worried that I had offended you. As always it's a pleasure to discuss these things with you and the rest of the "gang". As I've mentioned before, I really do try to stay away from these topics, for the mere fact that (with little exception) discussions almost always escalate to arguements, then to fights, and then offending someone somewhere. It just goes back to that age old saying. Don't discuss politics, religion, and in today's world sexual preferance. You don't know whom you're going to offend. Thus the reason I "tried" to tip toe around my comment on "The Village". I'm worried that I may have offended other people though (including staff). I hope you all understand in reading my posts over the last 8 or so months that this was completely out of character for me. I have Scottish in my blood, and I think my unwillingness to back down from a fight comes from that. I've tried hard over the years to subdue it, but occasionally, it rears it's angry red head!

I hope you all accept my appology, and I hope to see you on the other threads.

- Josh

Where was Mr. Bush's proof for going to war? Turns out, according to his own commision's report, it was zero. It was a hunch. And it has already cost the lives of almost 900 American soldiers and 17,000 innocent Iraqi civilians. Some of us wish the results were worth the price.

And suggesting that anyone who opposes the war in Iraq--like me, Moore, and millions of others--as being disloyal cowards who would not have stood up to Hitler in WWII is unfair, bigoted name-calling of the worst order and unworthy of the discussion at hand.

John

I think it's completely fair to question your country and pose the same questions of it if you're going to do the same of ours. How is that turning and attacking you when you did that very thing? By definition alone would mean that you "attacked".

I supose I could equate Canada "not invading" to sitting on your hands as well. If you're sitting at home and hear the neighbors fighting, and someone screaming for help, I'm sure the right thing to do is not be "invasive"... after all... it's none of your business right? Obviously when you're talking about a global scale it's not exactly that simple. However, I'd rather my country go down in history as a nation that stood up in the face of tyranny and terrorism, and did what we thought was the right thing to do, than sit back and say "it's none of our business" and not get involved. If you don't make some kind of contribution you really have no right to complain.

How about before I'm required to bring factual evidence forward (which I'm assuming you're requireing of me) to disprove any of Michael Moore's statements or propeganda, why shouldn't you, Moore, or anyone else siding with Moore have to prove his statements or allegations factual first? Or does the old saying go "guilty until proven innocent"? I could go out and make a movie surrounding contraversial topics on my own, and then slap a "documentary" label on it and testify that it's all true. That doesn't make it all true, it doesn't make it a documentary, nor does it make anything within it factual. As I have said many times at this point, in a "MOVIE" (which Fahrenheit 9/11 is) you are forced to see what ever the director WANTS you to see. It's the directors job to make everything "seem" to have continuity, and to tell a "story" visually. How is anything that people regurgitate from Moore proof that it's factual? It just serves to prove that people will believe anything they see in movies, let alone if it's in print.

so...now, instead of turning your attacks to ME and my country...could you now respond to the issues presented in the movie?