Let's count the ways film (F-911) distorted facts

[malachi]

Pls read before dinner. Great possibility it will make you wretch. This is the kind of shit the once great Phila. Inquirer prints nowadays to appeal to repukes(like they have the ability to read and reason).

Despite all the critical notice and box-office success it has achieved, Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 continues a pattern of dissembling and inaccuracy found in most of his work.

Moore's antics have become notorious. He distorted the chronology of his first movie, Roger & Me; made numerous factual errors in his books Stupid White Men and Dude, Where's My Country?; and altered footage of a Bush-Quayle ad and unfairly edited a speech by National Rifle Association president Charlton Heston (among other things) in his Academy Award-winning documentary Bowling for Columbine. Although Fahrenheit 9/11 avoids glaring factual errors, it is filled with deceptive half-truths and carefully phrased but unsubstantiated insinuations.

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/9102187.htm?ERIGHTS=-8709074473134669592philly::[e-mail]&KRD_RM=8opqorutwwsxxuoxtrrooooooo|don|Y&is_rd=Y

[fearnobush]

1. I'd Rather count the ways Rush, Savage, FOX and Co. distort the Facts

and out right lie over the details. Lets see the these media whores write a story on that?

[jmparks02]

5. Seriously.....

It's always been obvious about Fox News and where they fit on the ideological spectrum, but I have never trusted them for news.

I remember on September 11th, Fox News reported that there was a low flying plane moving at a high rate of speed up the Potamac River towards Washington, DC. Nobody else was reporting this. When it turned out to not be true, Fox just kind of pretended like it never existed.

Obviously not there first lie, and definitely will not be their last lie.

[newyawker99]

8. Hi jmparks02!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[mbperrin]

2. A lie from this story:

"But Unocal dropped its support for the pipeline in 1998. Afghanistan did sign the agreement in 2002, but Unocal is not involved in the project, which is still in its planning stages."


How about visiting:
TESTIMONY

BY

JOHN J. MARESCA

VICE PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

UNOCAL CORPORATION

TO

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

FEBRUARY 12, 1998

WASHINGTON, D.C.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wsap212982.htm

<snip> The only other possible route option is across Afghanistan, which has its own unique challenges.

The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades. The territory across which the pipeline would extend is controlled by the Taliban, an Islamic movement that is not recognized as a government by most other nations. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of our proposed pipeline cannot begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders and our company.

In spite of this, a route through Afghanistan appears to be the best option with the fewest technical obstacles. It is the shortest route to the sea and has relatively favorable terrain for a pipeline. The route through Afghanistan is the one that would bring Central Asian oil closest to Asian markets and thus would be the cheapest in terms of transporting the oil.

Unocal envisions the creation of a Central Asian Oil Pipeline Consortium. The pipeline would become an integral part of a regional oil pipeline system that will utilize and gather oil from existing pipeline infrastructure in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia.

<snip>
Although Unocal has not negotiated with any one group, and does not favor any group, we have had contacts with and briefings for all of them. We know that the different factions in Afghanistan understand the importance of the pipeline project for their country, and have expressed their support of it.
<more, much more>



Now let's see what about this little old consortoium that Unocal envisioned?

Consortium formed to build Central Asia gas pipeline

http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/97news/102797a.htm

<snip>
CentGas Consortium Members:

Unocal Corporation (U.S.), 46.5 percent
Founded over 100 years ago, Unocal is one of the world's leading energy resource and project development companies providing regional integrated energy solutions. Unocal has reserves of more than 9.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas equivalent (1.6 billion barrels of oil equivalent) and major oil and gas production activities in Asia and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico.

<more>

And what's happened since they formed it in 1997, talked about needing for their pipeline in 1998?

December 31, 2002
Unocal Gets Its Pipeline Through Afghanistan

http://www.davidcogswell.com/Political/UnocalGets.html

Reposted by Truthout, a report from PakNews.com states that "Pakistan, Afghanistan and Turkmenistan on Friday signed here a framework agreement for a US $3.2 billion gas pipeline project passing through the three countries."

So where's the inaccuracy about the Unocal pipeline?

[geek tragedy]

4. Construction hasn't begun on the pipeline

and may never begin. Afghanistan is not a stable, united country right now.

[struggle4progress]

6. God Gave Afghanistan Mountains

<snip>
In May 2004 I went to Afghanistan ...

While in Afghanistan, it was my good fortune to interview Afghan presidential candidate, Dr. Massuda Jalal ...
<snip>

Apparently Afghanistan is already safe enough for the UNOCAL pipeline. Afghans who I interviewed, including Dr. Jalal, said that the pipeline is being built ...
<snip>

http://nhindymedia.org/newswire/display/901/index.php

[TankLV]

12. Ahhh - more snippets of "truth" from you I see!

Thanx for the laugh of the moment.

[struggle4progress]

7. Ron Paul, House of Representatives, November 29, 2001

<snip>
It has been known for years that Unocal, a U.S. company, has been anxious to build a pipeline through northern Afghanistan, but it has not been possible due to the weak Afghan central government. We should not be surprised now that many contend that the plan for the UN to "nation build" in Afghanistan is a logical and important consequence of this desire. The crisis has merely given those interested in this project an excuse to replace the government of Afghanistan. Since we don't even know if bin Laden is in Afghanistan, and since other countries are equally supportive of him, our concentration on this Taliban "target" remains suspect by many.

Former FBI Deputy Director John O'Neill resigned in July over duplicitous dealings with the Taliban and our oil interests. O'Neill then took a job as head of the World Trade Center security and ironically was killed in the 9-11 attack. The charges made by these authors in their recent publication deserve close scrutiny and congressional oversight investigation- and not just for the historical record.
<snip>

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2001/cr112901.htm

[Barrett808]

3. Spinsanity is actually a pretty reasonable site

They go after anybody who's not playing fair.

http://www.spinsanity.org/

[funnymanpants]

9. No it's not

They have a very silly definition of fair.

For example, they accused the Democrats when they pointed out that Bush lied about the uranium from Niger. The site spinsanity argued that Bush never said that Iraq sought uranium from Niger; rather, he said that Britain had made the claim.

Now that's pretty ridiculous, as other posters to the site pointed out.

The same website attacked the cartoonist Tom Tomorrw for pointing out that mass media lies when it says Saddam kicked the inspectors out in 1998. Tomorrow rightfully notes that the inspectors were withdrawn after Clinton decdied to bomb in 98. So how does spinsanity spin this situation? He says that Tomorrow didn't give context to the situation. Since Saddam didn't allow the inspectors to do their work, he in practice did kick them out.

That is a stupid argument on many grounds. The inspectors were working, though perhaps not as much cooperation as the UN would have liked. But they sure as heck were effective, as we know now. Further, as Tomorrow correctly points out in a respons to spinsanity, the inspectors were being used as spies against Saddam.

The site spinsanity also goes after any columnist who expresses a strong opinion. So it reguarly berates Sheer of the LA Times. Often they don't accuse him of lying, but of simply using rhetoric they don't like.

What the spinsanity tries to defend is not honesty and free speach, but the status quo. Hence, the attacks on Tom Tomorrow because it affronts their vision of how the world is supposed to be. There is no way that the mainstream press could be wrong about the weapons inspeactors in Iraq and that wild leftists could be right, so let me do a bit of spinning on my own.

The writers on spinsanity fall into the centrist trap. They believe that because they are so-called cetrists, they have a monopoly on the truth. Everyone else on the so-called political spectrum is simply wrong. But the centrist position is a myth. Centrist have their own political bias as much as anyone else, and often defend this position at the point of becoming irrational.

[tom_paine]

10. Well said, fmp!

Very true.

And yes, spinsanity is right-biased, though they pretend to centrism.

Compared to the rest of Imperial Pravda, they are actually pretty good.

But that's like saying you are the least-syphillitic STD-carrier.

[lanparty]

13. They're like O'Reilly ...

I've even come across a purported "left-wing" blog that was really a right wing shill. These people don't mis a beat and they will lie like rabid animals to get their way.

[gulliver]

15. They have a conflict of interest here though.

Spinsanity doesn't disclose that their new book All the President's Spin directly competes for the same market as Moore. I don't think they are necessarily jealous of Moore but, ... well yes I kind of do.

This column is unusually lame for Spinsanity.

[funnymanpants]

11. Reviewer has some valid points, but

doesn't comment on some of the strong points presented in the second half. Moore gave a human face to the war, and one can't attack that.

Where was Ben Fritz when he should have been attacking the Bush adminstration not for a two-hour spin, but a 3 year one? Remember when Colin Powell spoke before before the UN on February 5, 2003? He said something like "Saddam is developing anthrax. Anthrax recentely killed some Americans." He then held up a vial of white powder.

Now that was dishonest; it was known by everyone that the anthrax that killed Americans did not come from Iraq. It was just one moment of propaganda by the Bush administration amonst 1,000,000.

Now see my earlier post on how Fritz tried to defend the Bush administration on their WMD claims.

Here is a much more balanced review:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=5825

[prowler]

14. Michael Moore's corner cutting

I for one agree and have noticed some inconsistencies in Michael Moore's work, but could the person who sent the above rebuke on Moore's journalistic lack of diligence (or anyone so informed and willing) please include some specifics?

[mac56]

18. List some of those "inconsistencies", please.

I think you'll find they've all been refuted here before.

[OETKB]

16. Who are these guys?

The authors of this drivel are part of the Republican neocon noise machine described by David Brock in his book, "The Republican Noise Machine." Under the guise of what seems to be journalism, they are driven by the right wing agenda. If you look up their names up in Google search you will be taken to their real home, "The American Spectator Online" website, a despicable neocon sponsored magazine. This is the same magazine Mr. Brock left because of its lying deceptive articles.

[OETKB]

17. Leaped before I looked

Oops, mixed up American Prospect with American Spectator. I apologize. It is an edgy world, but I stand corrected. Sorry.