From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: U.S. | Anti-War
Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" Omits Many Important Questions
by Concerned Americans
Thursday Jul 1st, 2004 5:50 PM
Moore's film is misleading, smug and cowardly. He picks on the easy "usual suspect" and ignores the driving forces behind the so-called "war on terror": Zionism, Zionist Israel and the NeoConservatives. He's like a politician who speaks out of both sides of his mouth. And he knows who to please in order to get rich.
Michael Moore’s new documentary raises many interesting issues with regards to 9-11 and the Bush Administration, as well as the war on Iraq and Afghanistan. However, his film avoids many more important, but politically hot questions.

Why does Moore focus only on the Saudis, yet never mentions the well-known role of Zionist Israel and the NeoConservatives, who are mostly Zionist American Jews as well as Zionist American Christians, in the war on Iraq? (Check out one of the NeoConservative websites such as and see how they called for an attack on Iraq even back in 1996, and how they “needed” a Pearl Harbor-style event “to happen” to “motivate” Americans to allow such a war, where Iraq would only be the beginning of endless war, to achieve a Zionist-American empire.)

Why does Moore omit facts such as that bin Laden and Al Qaeda never even publicly claimed credit for 9-11? Yes, apparently bin Laden stated publicly he was happy about 9-11, but so too did former Israeli prime minister Netanyahu state that he was happy about 9-11, since then Israel’s “war on terror” or more accurately, Israel’s racist ethnic cleansing against indigenous non-Jewish Palestinians and other Arabs outside of Israel, would now be fought by Americans against Israel’s enemies (not necessarily America’s enemies if it weren’t for America’s unconditional support of Zionist Israel)? 9-11 very well could have been an “inside job” in collusion with the Mossad, for all we know. It could have been what is known as a “false flag” operation. Ask yourself? Who has benefited most from the war on Iraq? Not the Saudis, who even had to back out of the Halliburton war profits as Moore’s film shows. Even the American corporations aren’t getting too much out of the deal. And even Bush is getting bashed everywhere. Yet, not only is Moore too afraid to “bash” Israel for its role in this imperial war, he’s afraid to even mention Zionist Israel’s and the NeoConservatives’ roles in the Bush administration (and they will also have in any democratic administration as well). The furthest Moore goes out on this limb is to show a couple of cameos in the film of the topdog NeoConservative deputy of defense Paul Wolfowitz, without even explaining who he is and who he represents (the NeoConservatives, and mostly Israel, or so it seems).

Why does he not mention that at least 5 of the so-called Saudi hijackers were cases of stolen identity? ( Do a Google-search on “mistaken identity of 9-11 hijackers”. While American media under-reported this fact and even has tried to suppress it, it was widely reported in foreign media, including BBC). Therefore we really do not know where all the hijackers came from or who they were.

Why does Michael Moore never even mention the “dancing Israeli spies” and their suspicious behavior while videotaping the 9-11 WTC attacks and whooping it up? They were detained for a couple months by the FBI and then released on “visa violations”. (Do a Google-search on “dancing Israeli spies 9-11”). There are many reports of Israeli spies who lived on the same block as the 9-11 terrorists and were engaged in suspicious activities during that time as well as recently just prior to the G-8 Summit, as a general Google search on “Israeli spies” will reveal.

Why does Michael Moore never mention in this film the fact that employees of Odigo, an Israeli-owned company who had offices in the WTC, were forewarned to leave the WTC offices a couple hours before the attacks (a fact confirmed in the esteemed Israeli newspaper the Ha’aretz)?

Why does Michael Moore fail to explain how bin Laden was excommunicated from his own family and that the government of Saudi Arabia also not only permanently expelled bin Laden for his militant activities against the Saudi government, but also froze his bank accounts?

Why does Michael Moore not mention the reasons that bin Laden explained detailing “why they hate us” and by the way, it’s not “because they hate our freedom”? Bin Laden has many times stated that Al Qaeda considered the United States as the enemy of the Arab world because of the unconditional US support (financial, political and military) gives to the apartheid, ethnic-cleansing Jewish state of Israel, as well as the continuing stationing of US troops on Saudi Arabia’s soil.

Why does Michael Moore mention the bombing of the USS Cole by Al Qaeda but does not mention the massive bombing of the USS Liberty by the Israeli army in 1967 which killed 34 US navymen and wounded 120 more? This was also suppressed by our own government until recently. For the details, go to:

Why does Michael Moore focus on the money that our government receives from Saudi Arabia, but fails to mention the billions of dollars that our US government gives to Israel every year in exchange for the massive financial contributions, influence and power of the Zionist Jewish and Israeli lobby groups (such as AIPAC) as well as the largely Zionist Jewish-owned US media which combined can make or break any politician who fails to pledge allegiance to the “security” of Israel? The US media completely dropped presidential candidate Howard Dean for even just suggesting that the US government should have a more “balanced” approach towards the Palestine-Israel conflict.

Why does Moore not mention that the Saudi Arabian government has pleaded with the American government to publicly release ALL of the pages of its findings on 9-11 that supposedly have “something to do with Saudi Arabia”? Certain people for their own certain reasons do not want this to come to light. Could it be because certain people want Americans to imagine the worst about Saudi Arabia and thereby serve as a convenient scapegoat for 9-11?

Why does Michael Moore fail to show footage or photos of the many occasions that President Bush has stood in front of the Israeli flag with his hand over his heart in allegiance, including at the recent AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) conference where he got 22 standing ovations from Zionist Jews?

Why has Michael Moore failed to show President Bush making the claim that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon “is a man of peace” while the Israeli army continued to demolish entire sections of Palestinian cities while he spoke the words, killing scores of Palestinian civilians, as in the case of Jenin? This gave Israel the green light to continue on its massive campaign of ethnic cleansing against the indigenous non-Jewish Palestinian people.

Why does Michael Moore gratuitously show a rapid clip of someone being beheaded in Saudi Arabia, but fails to show scenes such as an Israeli army Apache helicopter (courtesy of American taxpayers) dropping a one-ton bomb (again, courtesy of American taxpayers) in the middle of the night onto a crowded Palestinian apartment building, killing hundreds of innocent Palestinian civilians, including women and children, in order to kill one Palestinian militant? And Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon said publicly he was pleased with the results of this murder spree.

Why does every Hollywood film-maker and the US media fail to address the unjust way in which Israel was created in the first place? After WWI, Britain took over Palestine, and made empty promises to both Eastern European Zionist Jews about giving them a Jewish state in Palestine, versus promising the Palestinians their own sovereign state of Palestine. After WWII, Britain “gave” Palestine over to the United Nations, which was made up of White European countries, who then unilaterally decided that because of the Holocaust (which happened in Europe but the Palestinians had nothing to do with it) to give away Palestinians’ lands to Eastern European Zionist Jews for an ethnocentric Jewish state, without even any compensation to the Palestinians, not that anyone should have to give up their land because they are not the “right” religion or ethnicity. The war that Zionists began back in 1948 when Israel was thus created when stealing Palestinian lands continues today due to unconditional support of the US government and with US taxpayers’ money.

Could it be that Michael Moore ignored the major role that Israel, Zionists, and NeoConservatives play in the war on “terror” (as if “war” is not “terror”!?) because he would have a hard time getting it distributed by the Weinstein brothers of Miramax, or anyone else in Hollywood for that matter (like Mel Gibson with his “The Passion”)? Could it be that Michael Moore prefers to get rich financially rather than tell the whole truth? But we can hope Moore uses his new incredible success with this film to step up to the more important politically hot questions that have been left unasked and unanswered. We must deal truthfully with all the issues involved in order to achieve justice and peace in this world. There must be equal rights for all people regardless of religion, race, ethnicity or gender in any country which our government supports, and that includes Israel. If segregation and apartheid were bad in the U.S. and in South Africa, then they are also bad in Israel.
For more information, check out the following websites: for the “Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict” written by the Jews for Justice in the Middle East for up-to-date news on the Middle East and more every day. and look at the section on Israel, Israeli Spies and 9-11. for info on Zionism, the racist ideology that claims that there must be a Jewish state in Palestine about Israeli apartheid and related documentaries. about how many Jews consider Zionism the exact opposite of Judaism. for documentaries showing the truth about the Palestine-Israel conflict such as “Jenin, Jenin” and “Gaza Strip”.

by Beagle
Thursday Jul 1st, 2004 7:42 PM
The one serious weakness of Michael Moore's film is the lie that Saudi Arabia somehow perpetrated the 9/11/01 Massacre as all of the Arab countries are puppet governments of the US. The socialist press is certainly concerned about this weakness. See the World Socialist Website, 6/30/04 at:

Israel is just a US puppet and a US military base to protect US oil profits in the Middle East. To the extent that any Israeli may have had anything to do with the 9/11/01 Hoax, they did so under the direction of the US military and the CIA.

The 9/11/01 Hoax was perpetrated by the US military and the CIA for the same reason as the Nazis perpetrated the Reichstag Fire: To promote fascism at home and war abroad so as to maximize the profits of the capitalist class.

The 9/11/01 Hoax was the CIA's Operation Northwoods realized, the 1960s plan approved by the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff, but vetoed by Kennedy, to create agent provcateur actions, such as blowing up a US airplane and blaming it on Cuba so as to have an excuse to invade Cuba.

The planes used to hit the Twin Towers, a plan modeled on a computer game that existed for 17 years before 9/11/01, were on automatic pilot, run by the US air force. There were no hijackers on those planes. The names given to the public of alleged hijackers are of people who are mostly still alive, while the others died years ago. There were no Arab names on the passenger lists. The Twin Towers and Building 7, which was not hit by any plane, were brought down by construction explosives in their own footprint at the fast speed of construction demolition. The Twin Towers underwent a Power Down the weekend before 9/11/01 supposedly to upgrade cabling to increase computer bandwidth, a good opportunity to set explosives, obviously. Firefighters were quoted as hearing explosives and they made it to the first floor that was hit, proving that there were no raging fires, and of course, no steel frame is brought down by fire as it can never get hot enough. The black smoke we have all seen in the pictures is of a dying fire by definition. The Pentagon was damaged by construction explosives. Construction was taking place at part of the Pentagon at that time. The cell phone calls were staged; no one calls their mother and gives their full name, as the government's conspiracy theory story claims. Your mother knows your voice without your giving any name. Condolezza Rice admitted on CNN and this story was rebroadcast on Pacifica news in May 2002 that she called former "mayor" Willie Brown of San Francisco 8 hours before he was due to board an airplane, warning him to stay off airplanes as there would be problems at airports. Any foreknowledge is complicity. Any one of these points destroys the whole government conspiracy theory.

We also know that all metropolitan areas and the Pentagon have full air defense and not even the first plane crash would have occurred if our air defense had not been told to stand down. Since the president is commander in chief, the responsibility rests with him. Bush spent his time during the 9/11/01 massacre reading a goat story to children in his brother's fiefdom of Florida without acting because he knew the whole massacre was staged.

We have outstanding military defense and intelligence services and it is insulting to the taxpayers and to the people who do the work to say that somehow they were not doing their job or are incompetent. They were clearly told not to act, and such instructions can only come from the commander in chief.

Then there is the question of who benefits, the answer being the capitalist class and its front and center proud member, George W. Bush, all of whose profits increased with these long planned wars and oil exploration in Afghanistan and Iraq. They also benefit from the reign of terror perpetrated by the "Patriot" Act, the hundreds of pages of which were clearly written well before 9/11/01, and the anti-immigrant hysteria, immigrants being the usual scapegoat for economic problems perpetrated by the profit motive of capitalism.

And there is the issue of the put options (bets that a stock price would fall) on United and American Airlines and companies housed at the Twin Towers, just before 9/11/01, with alarm bells ringing at the unusual trading the afternoon before 9/11/01.

There are also basic rules of thumb: Bush always lies; do not believe anything he says. Always ask, who benefits? Only the US capitalist class can benefit from such a massacre and only the US capitalist class has the technical means and expertise to carry out such a hoax and to threaten people to be silent.

Those of us who have done our homework, including but not limited to reading the many articles that have been reproduced on these Indymedia websites, reading the 9/11/01 Hoax websites and reading the books readily available in American bookstores now ask the socialist press:


The evidence is massive and everywhere. The CIA perpetrates these horrors everyday all around the world, killing millions of people, both poor and middle class. The ruling class has now brought the war home as capitalism is in a desperate crisis.

THE WHOLE WORLD AND MILLIONS OF AMERICANS KNOW THE 9/11/01 HOAX WAS A REICHSTAG FIRE PERPETRATED BY THE US MILITARY AND CIA. When is the American socialist press going to print what every progressive person all around the world knows to be true? The silence of the American socialist press stands in direct contradiction to the progressive press outside the US and to every thinking American, many of whom are socialists, all of whom know the 9/11/01 massacre was an inside job, a Reichstag Fire.
by and we ought to get the clue....
Thursday Jul 1st, 2004 11:56 PM
MM is ardently against the far right in this country, and he doesn't have to stoop to ideological dogmatism to do it. He particularly avoids the typical knee-jerk "leftist" Jew-baiting and Jew-hating that too often passes for concern about the real plight of Palestinians.

It's high time, and I'm all the prouder of him for it. It's time to ditch the dogma and tell it like it is, and that includes calling your hate, hate.
by Robert Sprye
(beowulf [at] Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:49 AM
Outstanding analyses from both of you. Thanks for pointing up among other things the facts that are not printed in the
American prostituted media for profit.

The oligarch is manipulating Judaic culture for a profit.

The oligarch is bribing Arabian leadership for a profit.

The oligarch is using Congress like a dog. They seem to like it, though.

The oligarch is demonizing Islam because it has to.
If Islam didn´t exist, the oligarch would invent it.

The oligarch is a liar because we allow it to be. Who doesn´t need a reason to believe?

The oligarch is a traitor to the rule of law who will hang. I can hear them hammering on the scaffold at The Peoples Own Tribunal even as we speak, can´t you?

To you and many others who also clearly see the distance we have all been taken from the concept of equality under impartial law thanks to the incorrectly defined self centered interests of an international corporate leadership long since gone stark raving mad...

... so what?

Ask yourself what is the point of belaboring the obvious, ie the fact that:

-- political frameworks, court systems, nationstates, media outlets, religions, cultures, and all peoples across the entire planet are manipulated beyond reason in order to maintain a semblance that the chimera of equality and democracy is maintained, for example in a society where over 30 million "citizens" are malnourished, 44 million
"citizens" are by definition living "at or below" the poverty line.

We all has got some real FINE freedom we does...just keep waving that flag, boy, because it is about as close to
"e pluribus unum" as you are likely to get, barring a small miracle of civic aptitude.

Is democracy maintained by the willful murder of over 500,000 Iraqi children? Or is control of the profit from oil?

Is democracy maintained by the willful and criminal misuse of the commitment of a single citizen soldier´s life? How about the lives of tens of thousands of citizen soldiers and the lives and hopes of all their families? Or is profitability for arms dealers?

Is democracy maintained by the deliberate withholding of habeus corpus from the innocent until proven guilty?
Or is rape and torture?

Is democracy maintained by providing billions of American taxpayers dollars to a rogue regime openly castigated by the UN for its racist policy of ethnic cleansing of innocent civilian homeowners because of their ... religion?
Or is the backlash of terror from the criminally traumatized?

The opposition is not the rather pathetic figure of a George Bush, or a fawning Tiny Blair. The true opposition is already busily fixing seating arrangements in order for poor Dubya to take the fall, while it grooms the falsely privileged Kerry in his soundbites. You won´t see them on the stage at the RNC or DNC, though.

While it ensures that the so called courts of justice are packed with reliable supporters of false privilege and corporate "personhood". The day that the individuals who are corporate owners and senior leaders are personally held liable for daily corporate activity is the day that justice will prevail across the land. We´ll need Judges for that, though.

While the prostituted media does not even bother to see to it that you get the awful truth concerning the true state of the don´t pay them enough to wean them away from the oligarchian sphere of interest. The principles of principled men that launched a nation founded on freedom of the press and freedom of speech are silenced ... for the illegitimate profits of a few. I wouldn´t necessarily call them...journalists, though. Your name would have to be Pilger or something like that to merit such a professional...title.

Thomas Jefferson stated the duty of every citizen.

The opposition clearly demonstrates the need.

Remove the oligarch and save the Earth!
by Israel & Zionism caused 9/11
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 7:39 AM
The "Socialist" above says this:

"Israel is just a US puppet and a US military base to protect US oil profits in the Middle East. To the extent that any Israeli may have had anything to do with the 9/11/01 Hoax, they did so under the direction of the US military and the CIA."

Israel is NOT a US puppet--- Israel does exactly as Israel pleases, defying over 70 UN Resolutions, breaking International Law every day, and blowing off anything that any US president asks it to do.

Israel is NOT a US military base!!!!!! There are NO US troops in Israel (as there are in Saudi Arabia just for ONE instance) and last time I looked, Israel is NOT the 51st state of the USA!!!

The US has plenty of sources for oil OUTSIDE of the Middle East including domesticly, Venezuala, Mexico, Alaska, Russia, Canada, and friendly Arab countries including Saudi Arabia!!!!!! In case you haven't noticed, oil is cheaper than bottled water!!!!

The USA does NOT need Israel. NOT AT ALL. Israel needs the USA.

The CIA and FBI have arrested and detained many Israeli spies. The Mossad probably orchestrated the 9/11 disasters, and it has been proven that the Mossad KNEW when, how, where and who did it (they probably recruited the perpetrators).

To the Zionist Zionazi who loves FFMM (Fat Fuck Michael Moore)'s new film, it figures!!! Of course YOU love it! It takes the heat off Israel and Zionists!!! It totally deflects the blame from GUILTY Israel and Zionists!! And it is a racist, Arab-bashing film!!! And it misses the most important point: Zionists are the driving force behind the "war on terror". All the corporations and military companies will make some chump change off this war that has already cost American lives and some $200 BILLION US tax dollars!!!! FOR ISRAEL's sake NOT American citizens.
by GENUINE anti-racist
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 7:56 AM
Both the above post (i.e "Jews caused 9/11") and the original were authored by Wendy Klanbell- who is a Nazi cuntbag and Bay Area organizer for the National Alliance, a white supremacist organization-you can see her byline on theirs and many other white supremacist sites such as "Stormwatch". She has claimed that the Nazi holocaust is a "zionist lie" for which there is "no proof", that Soviet Communism was a Jewish conspiracy and she maintains links to Holocaust denial organizations as well as other blatantly racist anti-Jewish sites such as Jewish Tribal Review and "Dr" Kevin McDonald on her webpage. She regularly refers to "Jew York City" and the "Jew York Times". And even above we see her rantings about "the Jews" in Hollywood. Do not be fooled about her real agenda; she is no mere "anti-zionist" but a GENUINE Jew-hating racist.
by gehrig
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 8:05 AM
Wendy Campbell, as "Concerned Americans": "yammity yammity JEWS yammity yammity ZIONIST JEWS yammity JEWS JEWS JEWS yammity ISRAEL yammity yammity JEWS yammity yammity JEWISH NEOCONS yammity yammity"


Wendy Campbell, as "Concerned Americans": ""

Hey, that's the site with the National Alliance anti-Jew propaganda on it, isn't it, as I have demonstrated several times in the past? The one you _know_ has white supremicist literature on it, but continue to post anyway?

Remind me again, Wendy-- how exactly does posting National Alliance anti-Jew propaganda further the cause of justice?

Let me ask you point-blank, Wendy -- why do you post the URL of a site you know contains white supremicist literature?

Wendy Campbell again, this time as "Israel and Zionism" : "[...] !!!!!! [...] !!! [...] !!!!!! [...] !!!! [...] To the Zionist Zionazi who loves FFMM (Fat Fuck Michael Moore)'s new film, it figures!!!"

Kinda speaks for itself, doesn't it. And it says, "Wendy's off her meds again."

Remember, folks, you don't have to be an antisemite to criticize Israel. But Wendy unquestionably is.

by Moore &quot;forgets&quot; to include NeoCons
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 8:16 AM
Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 Doesn't Go Far Enough

July 1 2004
Joseph Cannon

Many have offered either intensely negative criticisms of Fahrenheit 9/11, while those with an opposing agenda provide glowing, endearing reviews of Michael Moore's latest film. I will do neither, but rather, provide a respectfully critical view of the film: where it hits, and what it misses.

For the most part, I was happy with Fahrenheit 9/11, which relays many a fact known to Internet researchers but not to the general public. The film's most important revelation -- the appearance of James R. Bath's name on one of Bush's service records -- has gone almost without comment. Bath later functioned as the go-between linking the Bushes, the Bin Ladens, and the Saudis.

This link tends to buttress some of the more controversial allegations made by Daniel Hopsicker, who alleges that W, during the famed "missing period" of his National Guard service, actually went on a mission for the CIA. Bath, claims this writer, did likewise:

For answers we turned to the story of an important 'player' in the saga of George W Bush in the National Guard, James Bath. Bath was mustered out of the Texas National Guard -- and allegedly into the CIA -- exactly one month from when George W Bush allegedly goes through the same process. Bath's story is entwined with George W's for the next twenty years, almost as if they worked for the same company...from the Texas Guard to BCCI to Saudi money allegedly funneled into George W. Bush's first fledgling oil venture, Arbusto, and then later into Bush’s failing Harken Energy, from people who increasingly are being fingered as having participated in the attack on America September 11, 2001.
Hopsicker here operates in a speculative (arguably too speculative) mode here. Still, one fact gnaws at me: Why was Bath's name redacted from the document? Given the current enmity between the Agency and the neo-cons, maybe a further leak or two will clear up these mysteries.

Speaking of the neo-cons, I was a little bothered that Michael Moore did not. Speak of them, that is. How can someone make a feature-length critique of Bush's foreign policy without once mentioning "neo-conservatism"? I suspect that the audience would have been shocked by some of the riper quotations offered by the Machiavellian worthies of PNAC, whose rantings helped father the current debacle. The well-known neo-con prophecy about a new "Pearl Harbor" surely rated a mention.

Moore's odd silence on this topic is the foundation of Bob Dreyfuss' over-the-top denunciation published by the Tom Paine website. Dreyfuss represents a viewpoint which damns Moore's emphasis on the Bush/Saudi relationship.

In my view, that relationship does deserve scrutiny -- Moore's "Who's your daddy?" crack is priceless -- but any discussion of the topic requires greater context. The film should have noted that the neo-cons also view Saudi Arabia as a target for destabilization, and that Osama Bin Laden unwittingly functions in accordance with their grand scheme.

Osama's ultimate goal -- which many on both the left and the right tend to forget -- is dynasty change in the Islamic holy land. This simple, all-important fact undermines the oft-heard charge that Saudi Arabia funded the 9/11 terrorists -- a misperception which may afflict some of Moore's viewers.

True, it has been established that the leaders of Saudi Arabia gave Osama Bin Laden "go play somewhere else" money. No one should doubt that factions within that country share Al-Qaeda's vision of a change in rulers; history teaches us that plotters against the throne skulk within every monarchy. So far, though, I've seen no evidence that the rulers of Saudi Arabia viewed the World Trade Center attacks with anything other than horror. Moreover, Saudi Arabia offered strong cautions against Bush's Iraq adventure -- a fact unmentioned by Michael Moore.

However, he does discuss the massive Saudi investment in the United States. That fact alone will give the public good reason to mistrust those voices who consider Saudi Arabia the real enemy, and who call for "democratization" of that nation. War and turmoil in that land probably will not create democracy -- more likely, Saudi assets (representing a huge chunk of our economy) will fall into the hands of Salafist religious maniacs.

The film's odd reluctance to address the issue of neo-conservatism affects its coverage of the drumbeat for war. The film offers not a word about the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, the Office of Strategic Influence, the Redon Group, or the little shop of liars run by Ahmed Chalabi. (For more on these topics, see here.) Neither, if memory serves, does Moore see fit to mention the Plame scandal or the Niger uranium lie.

Israel and Ariel Sharon rate nary a mention. Had Moore breathed a word about the convergence of Likudnik aspirations and the neo-conservatives' grand visions -- well, one can easily guess the response.

Toward the end of the film, Moore offers his thesis statement. Memory does not allow a precise quote, but here's the gist: "Our soldiers are mostly poor and working class. They represent America at her finest. All they ask is that we not go to war unless absolutely necessary."

A very admirable sentiment. Although the reactionary pundits will try to convince you otherwise, Moore takes a very pro-military stance. He is at his best when he details Bush's budget-cutting disservices to our men and women in uniform.

Unfortunately, in his understandable and laudatory zeal to salute the grunts, he turns away, for the most part, from the prisoner abuse scandals. (The film does contain some video of open-air prisoner mistreatment. I wasn't shocked by this footage; the worse images we've all seen may have had a desensitizing influence.) I suspect Moore did not want to portray ground-level military men in a poor light. In an odd sense, Moore's sympathy for the servicemen, and his closeness to the mother of a fallen soldier, may have transformed him into something akin to an embedded journalist.

Moore shows the hideous fate of American contractors in Fallujah, but neglects to detail the vicious American response, which killed many civilians but managed to leave Al Zarqawi and his ilk unharmed. Also unmentioned is the fact that American forces withdrew from the city, now controlled by the insurgency. In essence, we lost the battle. Moore's coverage of these events does not differ much from the view one might find on FOX News.

I expected some discussion of the lies surrounding the actual invasion. For example, on April 2, 2003, the public heard reports of a grand battle in which the Third Infantry Division took out two Iraqi Republican Guard divisions -- a battle which never took place. In fact, the much-vaunted Republican Guard seems to have bowed out of the fight entirely, perhaps because its leaders (wisely) took a pay-off. We were told -- falsely -- that Syria had supplied Saddam with night vision goggles. The pulling down of Saddam Hussein's statue was a public relations scam using imported cheering "Iraqis," who were actually Chalabi's goons. One can list many similar deceptions.

I'm not sure why Moore shied away from these fabrications. He may have feared that bringing these matters up might have made our fighting men and women look unheroic.

Moore implies -- correctly -- that the primary motive for the war was to seize the oil fields. He does not discuss "peak oil" theory, which -- if valid -- does much to explain why Bush viewed this seizure as a necessity. I suppose the time is not yet ripe for public debate over peak oil. (Although one wonders when the right time will come. Perhaps after we've all reverted to horse-drawn carriages?)

I hope these criticisms will not dissuade anyone from seeing the film. It is a remarkable, effective document. Moore's editing is sharp, and his commentary has real bite. Jeff Gibbs provides a terrific score with a discernable Philip Glass influence. (Few documentaries generate soundtrack albums; Mondo Cane and The Thin Blue Line come to mind. Fahrenheit 9/11 should join their ranks.) The responses of the reactionaries -- who have resorted to their usual tactics of distortion, character assassination, and the trumpeting of opinion as fact -- only underscore the power of Moore's argument.

Perhaps some future filmmaker will take that argument into deeper realms.


Joseph Cannon is a writer and graphic designer in Los Angeles, California. He runs the Cannonfire weblog.
by gehrig
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 8:19 AM
Some of the above post is true, but I believe some of it isn't.

"Both the above post (i.e "Jews caused 9/11") and the original were authored by Wendy Klanbell"

I agree.

"who is a Nazi cuntbag and Bay Area organizer for the National Alliance, a white supremacist organization"

I know of no evidence that she is a member of the National Alliance, other than her pimping for an "anti-Zionist" site that includes National Alliance antisemitic propaganda. She has a disturbing habit of posting URLs for anti-Israel essays which, upon inspection, turn out to be hosted on Holocaust denial sites. She sees nothing wrong with that.

"you can see her byline on theirs and many other white supremacist sites such as "Stormwatch"."

I have seen some of her stuff turn up in white supremicist forums, but it's possible that they've been reposted there without her knowledge.

"She has claimed that the Nazi holocaust is a "zionist lie" for which there is "no proof""

She has claimed that she hasn't yet seen sufficient evidence to accuse the Nazis of having murdered six million Jews, and she has floated the possibility that the six million figure is a "Zionist lie."

"that Soviet Communism was a Jewish conspiracy"

Yes, she has claimed that.

"and she maintains links to Holocaust denial organizations as well as other blatantly racist anti-Jewish sites such as Jewish Tribal Review and "Dr" Kevin McDonald on her webpage."

Yes, she does link to the antisemitic "Jewish Tribal Review" site on her home page. I do not think Kevin MacDonald is an antisemite; I think that his cultural Darwinian theories are of questionable value and have been exploited by antisemites, but that's a different thing.

"She regularly refers to "Jew York City" and the "Jew York Times"".

I have not seen her refer to Jew York City. I have seen her refer to the Jew York Times once, and then later defend herself for having done so.

"And even above we see her rantings about "the Jews" in Hollywood."

This is true.

"Do not be fooled about her real agenda; she is no mere "anti-zionist" but a GENUINE Jew-hating racist."

I think it's quite clear that Wendy Campbell is an antisemite posing as an "anti-Zionist." However, it's not necessary to lie about her in order to prove it. And it gives her the chance to wave away your entire post with, "look, Zionist lies."

by heard it before
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 8:57 AM
Don't think about the NeoCons. Don't think about why Moore never mentions Israel. Think about Wendy Campbell's anti-Semitism.
by gehrig
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 9:13 AM
Do not think about anything that nessie doesn't want you to think about. It's bad karma and will make all your hair fall out.

And once again, it's nessie to the defence of the raging antisemite Wendy Campbell. Just like old times, ain't it.

by MR
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:02 PM
Fahrenheit 9/11: Questions for Michael Moore (continued)

If the Saudis were behind 9-11 and were kind enough to warn Odigo, then why did they themselves wait until AFTER the attacks before they left, when the requirement for special permission from Bush would only call attention to their departure?

Question 2: Is Michael Moore aware that the video tape of Osama "confessing" to 9-11 has been proven a fake?

Question 3: Is Michael Moore aware that just ten days after 9-11, the FBI stated (and CNN reported) that the 9-11 perpetrators were using skillfully made fake IDs with identities stolen from Arab men?

Question 4: Is Michael Moore aware that FBI Director Robert Mueller has admitted in public that there is actually no evidence that proves the named 9-11 hijackers were actually on the aircraft?

Question 5: Calling attention to the Anthrax letters case, in which letters which appeared to to be written by Arab Muslims contained Anthrax spores identified as coming from a US Government laboratory. Is Michael Moore aware that neither of the two suspects in the case, Dr. Stephen Hatfill or Dr.Philip Zack, are Arabs, and doesn't this case prove that Arabs are being framed for terror attacks in the United States?

Michael Moore rightly condemns the US Government for the USAPATRIOT act's draconian assault opon our rights. However, one of those rights as that nobody shall be declared guilty of a crime without proof beyond a reasonable doubt. As Michael Moore professes a deep respect for American values, he should not glibly declare that someone is guilty of a crime without being able to make his case beyond that reasonable doubt.

There is a reasonable doubt.

And if Michael Moore is a reasonable man who respects American principles, he must acknowledge that.
Back to Page 1 <>

by Michael Moore is Fat-headed
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:04 PM
Blind, or a Coward?
Tom Paine – June 30, 2004
One of the first things I did when I got back from vacation was to go see Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11. It’s a brilliant piece of propaganda, entertaining and funny, and it skewers the president deliciously. But am I the only one to notice that in one critically important way, it entirely misses the boat and gets nearly everything wrong? Maybe this has been said before—I’ve hardly read all of the criticism of Moore—but if so, I haven’t seen it. Moore totally avoids the question of Israel.
Not only that, but the opening polemic of the movie ties President Bush and company mightily to Saudi Arabia. In one sequence, what seems like several dozen images flash by showing Bush and his advisers shaking hands and chumming it up with leading members of the Saudi royal family. Moore says outright that while Bush is paid $400,000 by U.S. taxpayers in salary, Saudi Arabia has supported Bush and his family with more than $1 billion in business-related subsidies. (That amount, it seems to me, is ridiculously inflated and must be nonsense.) The stated implication is that Bush is more loyal to the Saudis than he is to America.
Huh? Here are some questions for Moore: If Bush is so “in the pocket” of Saudi Arabia, why is he Ariel Sharon’s strongest backer? Why, when he had Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah down at the Texas ranch a few years ago, did he flip off the Saudi’s peace plan? And most important, why did he invade Iraq—since Saudi Arabia was strongly opposed to the U.S. invasion of Iraq? Why did he launch his Iraqi adventure over Saudi objections, with many of his advisers chortling that Saudi Arabia would be “next”? Why did he stock his administration with militant neocon crusaders who see Saudi Arabia as the main enemy? Why, Michael?
I have to conclude the Michael Moore is either blind, or a coward. Blind, if he can’t see Bush’s craven ties to Israel, driven by the neocons and the Christian Zionists and Bible-thumping fundamentalists like Jerry Falwell, who consider Israel Jesus’ next stop and see Saudi Arabia as Satanic. Or cowardly, because he knows it and decided not to mention it. Is that because attacking Israel is too hard? Moore’s photo-montage of Saudi princes borders on the racist, showing Bush & Co. clinging to grinning, Semitic-looking Arabs in flowing white robes one after another. Would we stand for a similar, racist-leaning montage of Bush palling around with grinning, Semitic-looking Jews in skullcaps? 'Course not. More important, Moore completely misses the political boat. Perhaps that’s because he relies so heavily on Craig Unger and his book, House of Bush, House of Saud , which makes the same “error.”
And more for Moore. Yes, Bush 41 and his advisers—the Carlyle Group-linked James Baker, et al.—were (and are) connected to Saudi Arabia. Did Moore notice that Baker, along with Brent Scowcroft, and other former advisers to Bush 41 (including Colin Powell) were against the Iraq adventure? And that there were reports that Bush 41 himself thought it was a stupid idea? I can’t believe that Moore can be so stupid. So I can only conclude that he produced this movie the way he did on purpose. Then I read that he didn’t bother inviting Ralph Nader to the Washington, D.C., premiere of the film, and (according to The Washington Post ), Nader called Moore “fat.” Well. Moore is fatheaded.

Last updated 01/07/2004
by LB
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:08 PM
I certainly agree with you that F-911 is missing a large part of the story - the Israeli connection. I wonder if Moore actually missed it or if he purposely omitted it because it would be just too much for American audiences to bite off in one chunk. I hope that it was done purposely in order to focus on the illogical "reasons" for attacking Iraq. Sometimes it is more effective not to attempt to destroy everything that people have been left to believe in one shot. If you do you come across as a flake, a conspiracy theorist, etc. As it is the movie is jam packed with information and there wasn't a slow moment in it. I think it will be very effective on regular Joe American.

The main thing that irritated me was that he did engage in some vilification of Saudi Arabia, e.g. the mention of public beheadings. That has nothing to do with it and even if Bin Laden was responsible for 9-11 he is ONE Saudi. This should not incriminate his entire nation nor his entire family which I felt that Moore was doing to some extent. Going into Afghanistan was logical if indeed Bin Laden did it as his r supposed bases were there but bombing Saudi Arabia would have made no more sense than bombing Iraq as enemy Saudis could not in any way be distinguished from "terrorist" Saudis. Intelligence and police work is what was needed but that plainly did not serve the Neo-con purposes.
by and its internal contradiction.
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:21 PM
So let me see if I got this:

The Jews control all the US media, so the truth can't get out about Palestine. They control a lot of business and government in the USA, so that the USA keeps supplying Israel with weaponry and international political cover &c.

However, it is the Israelis that attacked the physical infrastructure of US commerce and military might? That which you argue is the very basis of their existence?

You guys are delusional, like too-much-PCP-smoking delusional. You need to reduce systems of complex interrelation down to simple bogeymen. Most rational people outgrew that kind of thinking by college, and that's why people don't really take you seriously when you talk like that.

Here's some reductionism for ya: your contradictions are much more readily explained as Jew-hating.
by no doubt about it
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:44 PM
See the movie "The Control Room" which is receiving rave reviews.

Michael Moore doesn't have the guts to show, as in this film, scenes such as the Iraqis burning the flags of the true axis of evil: the current Zionist-dominated (both Jewish & Christian) US government, the poodle-dog Great Britain, and the ethnic-cleansing, racist Jewish state of Israel.

Israel uses the US for political cover and money, but feels no allegiance to the US at all, as episodes like the USS Liberty prove ( and other such murderous, treacherous episodes you can find by doing a Google-search on "israeli spies" and "Lavon Affair". That's why it seems counter-intuitive for some less well-read to suspect Zionist Israel and Zionist Jewish Americans who are Neocons (who are actually in fact Israeli-Americans, full citizens of both the US and Israel, but who put Israel first and foremost in their hearts) as well as their sympathizing Christian Zionists(like Bush). for being part of the driving force behind 9-11 and the endless war that the NeoCons and even now Kerry are gunning for. The Zionist Jewish lobby groups such as AIPAC have far more influence than any Arab group in determining American policies. And by the way.... how many Arab-Americans serve in our current US foreign policy dept.?
Exactly ZERO. How many Zionist Jews are in the current US foreign policy depts.? Let's name a few names... like Wolfowitz, Abrams, Feith, Libby, Perle, Kristol, Lantos, and many, many more, including the massive influence of such think-tanks as JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs)...just to name a few. And what about how Zionist Jews make up 11% at least of US Senate-House?

How many Arab-Americans own major US newspapers and TV stations? Exactly none. Most are owned by Zionist Jews. And a couple conservative Christians. It's a simple fact.

And the media shapes public opinion. Often the first victim in times of war is the truth. It's a war of words and propaganda. So whoever dominates the media has lots of influence.

Isn't it time to demand affirmative action in US media and in the US foreign policies depts.?
by gehrig
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:46 PM
It's not Jew-hating to wonder -- in the absense of evidence -- whether the Mossad had anything to do with 9/11. In the absense of evidence, the whole world's suspect.

To _conclude_ -- in the continued absense of evidence -- that it was the Mossad, the way Wendy Campbell does above ("The Mossad probably orchestrated the 9/11 disasters"), is impossible to justify on rational grounds. Like an awful lot of what she says.

There was an old saying in the shtetl: "A gentile thief is called a thief; a Jewish thief is called a Jew." Apparently, nowadays, there's a modification: "a venal gentile conservative is called a conservative; a venal Jewish conservative is called a neo-con."

by GENUINE anti-racist
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:51 PM
The post above was also written by the Nazi cuntbag Wendy Klanbell who has also called for the complete expulsion and/or physical extermination of all Jews in the U.S government and "Jewsmedia".
by historian
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 12:54 PM
The Recihstag Fire was started by a Dutch council communist, not the Nazis. The Nazis may have used the fire to their advantage but they did not start the fire. This is common knowledge to anyone who has taken a modern European history class...
by Beagle
Friday Jul 2nd, 2004 7:20 PM
The Nazis set the Reichstag Fire. The mentally ill Marinus van der Lubbe, who happened to be a Dutch communist, was the fall guy. Four Bulgarian communists, including Georgi Dimitroff (who later became Prime Minister of Bulgaria) were acquitted of the crime, after putting the Nazis on the witness stand and proving to the world that the Nazis burned down their own congressional building. This is described in the benchmark text on Nazi Germany by William L .Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

This writer has a degree in history, if that matters to anyone.

As to the lies you learned in your generation's history classes, please remember we are many generations on the Internet.

My generation, the First Generation After the Holocaust and World War 2, did not study World War 2 in any history class as our parents and teachers were all World War 2 veterans and thus World War 2 was not history, but their lives and the lives of our families, described at the dinner table every night.

European history was taught as part of World History in 7th grade and repeated in 9th grade, the world being defined as non-USA as American history was taught in 8th grade, 10th grade and to some extent in 12 grade, along with civics which was taught in 8th grade and repeated in 12th grade. We could not graduate from 8th grade without passing a rigorous civics exam that included writing verbatim the Preamble to the Constitution, the first 1.5 paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence and listing the provisions of the Constitution and its Amendments, and answering questions about all of this. As to European history, they usually managed to get to World War 1, which was about 30 years before I was born.

Those of us from Holocaust families were constantly lectured on European history, the history of anti-Semitism in Europe, on World War 2 and all the lessons of Nazi Germany, and saturated with lots of books and other reading material as well. It was, after all, our family history.

The reason I refer to lies in your history classes is because the American school system teaches lies routinely in all its history classes, which are, after all, the propaganda machine of the capitalist class, teaching anti-communism and contempt for labor just like Nazi Germany, another capitalist, anti-communist, anti-labor society.

It is clear that your generation is learning the same lies the Nazis taught in their school system. This should not be surprising given the similarity of the two societies.

The First Generation After did not experience the worst of the 1950s anti-communist Fascist Era in the US, but the effects are certainly with us and were deeply impressed upon my generation. The terror that existed in the 1950 (mitigated somewhat by the peace and civil rights movements of the 1960s) and the terror we are experiencing today are similar, and both remind all who remember and know their history of Nazi Germany.

After all, George Bush's grandfather was a financier of Nazi Germany.

The slogan of the Warsaw Ghetto Resistance says it all:
Nicht Vergeben! Nicht Vergessen! Never Forgive! Never Forget!
by JD
Saturday Jul 3rd, 2004 1:54 AM
Those commentators who say the U.S. is waging Israel and that Israel / Zionists are not waging the U.S. need to read what congresspersons are saying about the Zionist lobbying in Washington. Here are two articles that I recommend as a start:

From Senator Abourezk:

From Representative Findley: (also wrote a book about it)

Both are ex-congresspersons. One can't stay in congress and speak against the Zionist lobby like they did.
by gehrig
Saturday Jul 3rd, 2004 10:59 AM
Findley lost his office due to post-census redistricting and a national recession that hurt his party bad. He said as much in the local paper the week he was defeated. Then he discovered that congressmen who say they were defeated by grand international machinations get bigger lecture fees than poor zhlubs who were merely redistricted out of office. Funny how that works.

by A true American and anti-racist
Saturday Jul 3rd, 2004 12:18 PM
For more about Paul Findley, check out this link:

As anyone knows, it's hard to get rich touting the pro-Palestinian cause, as Michael Moore also well knows. That's why he completely ignores the role of NeoCons, Zionists, and the ethnic-cleansing, genocidal Jewish state of Israel in his biased documentary. Otherwise the Weinstein brothers of Miramax surely would not produce or distribute it.

Isn't it just so convenient to blame everything on Arabs, who Bush (and other US presidents) has stabbed in the back time and time again, just like Great Britain did. Is there a big Arab-American presence anywhere in American society--- in our media, in our government, in our banking institutions? No.

As Moore points out in his movie, the Saudis only invest alot in American corporations, but even had to back out of the Halliburton deal after 9-11 under pressure from Zionists and others. Just how did the Saudis benefit from 9-11? They didn't. But Israel did. And so did all the Zionist-dominated and Zionist-friendly US corporations. And so do all the Zionist-dominated politicians who know they have to pledge unconditional support to the Jewish state of Israel publicly and over and over and back it up with pledges of billions of US tax dollars yearly.

Israel and the Zionists got America to fight one of Israel's enemies (who also happens to have alot of oil). In fact, Israel wants free oil from Iraq, and wants the US to reopen the oil pipeline from Iraq to Haifa now. Do a Google search on "Iraq pipeline to Haifa" and see for yourself. Naturally, the Zionist-dominated US media has underreported this fact and even suppressed it since it obviously shows how the war on Iraq is definately at the behest of Zionist Israel and its supporters, whether for ideology or money.

But anyway, Paul Findley is a true American who puts America first and foremost, unlike neoconservatives who primarily use America as a cash cow / political cover for Israel, and others who go along with this because of political ambition and monetary gain.

Again, check out his organization Council for National Interest (and please support their efforts).
by and the agendas they serve.
Saturday Jul 3rd, 2004 1:27 PM
The royal house of Saud does not equal Arabs by any stretch, or their interests. They are the very cornerstone of reactionary conservatism in the Muslim world-- as if the neocons and the 700 club were running America. Ever heard of Wahhabism? Go read a book, and get back to us about the innocence and purity of its intentions, okay?

The best thing the Arabs in America could hope for is the fall of the house of Saud, because then they might be able to do something to develop their own true voice and their own true agenda, both at home and in the diaspora.

Blaming this situation on "the Zionists" or *whatever,* is not empowering to Arab America or the Arab world-- it is, rather, the perpetuation of the very shackles and blinders that prevent a real "people power" revolution in the Arab part of the Muslim world, both in America and back home. US imperialism is another half-truth that bind the people and prevent their will from developing and being effectively expressed. Furthermore, a lot of folks over there know it.

You Jew-haters really ought to bother learning something about the forces you in fact defend. You are a disservice to the people you ostensibly advocate for. It is to Michael Moore's credit that he can analyze an issue without getting caught up in the whirlwind of other people's agendas and the lies that serve them, lies-- I hasten to add-- that are mostly those of omission.
by gehrig
Saturday Jul 3rd, 2004 2:36 PM
For more information about Paul Findley, ask someone who grew up in his Congressional district -- me. Better yet, ask Findley himself, who was quite clear after his 1982 defeat why he'd lost: a combination of redistricting and the 1982 Reagan recession.

But from the moment he decided to don the cloak of Zionist martyr, and to become as obsessed with Israel-bashing as nessie-obsessie is, lo and behold, the story is changed. Gone is any mention of the reshaping of the 20th Illinois congressional district in a way that cut away some heavy areas of support, and replaced them with areas undergoing record unemployment due to the Reagan recession of 1982 (and, particularly, the Reagan embargo of heavy equipment -- read "cat" and "deere"). The same recession cost forty other Republicans their house seats. Funny how that part doesn't get mentioned any more.

By the way -- knowing how much some of you get off on International Zionist Conspiracy plots -- you should that redistricting map was drawn by a majority-Republican board, and if you think that any force on earth would have them intentionally redistrict one of their own out of office, you don't know swing-state politics.

So when I hear, once again, someone from some other time zone, let alone state, trying to play the "Oh, those Zionists got Findley!" tune, how I laugh. You've been played like a fiddle.

Incidentally, as a self-proclaimed "True American," does it bother you that Findley's "Council for the National Interest" was founded with a big check from overseas?
Check this (ardently anti-Zionist) source about the truth behind the Council for the Saudi National Interest:

by it's about anti-zionism
Sunday Jul 4th, 2004 11:26 PM
It's about anti-zionism, anti-racism, anti-deception, anti-double-standards, anti-support-for-Israel as a racist Jewish supremacist state.
by Robert Sprye
(beowulf [at] Monday Jul 5th, 2004 4:33 AM

I find it amusing to review the many postings that adhere to the claim that the "Israeli lobby" has managed to gain control of American foreign policy and several different cabinets, Presidents, and their politica agendas.

My reason for finding this ludicrous display of what I call "spook fever" humorous is that I never seem to find any postings concerning the possibility that our intelligence community (which, trust me, is far more astute than many of you seem to presume, which may eventually prove to be rather detrimental to your personal health and well being)
has once again manipulated public opinion into an empty corner.

Steady now, I am the first to admit that there are strong international forces lobbying the administration constantly with bribes (oops i mean of course campaign funding), Israelis among them. I would be disappointed to hear that that nationstate´s representatives weren´t as capable as others when it comes to the timeworn and well proven tactic of simple monetary coercion against the...despicably weak characters of those who call themselves representative government.

Which brings me to my point; There may very well be whole legions of angry Zionists swarming the corridors of our usurped Congress waving fistfuls of dollars and you blame them? Do you think our administration is not busily passing bribes (oops, i did it again. i mean of course providing AID) to all and sundry in order to gain advantage for their own peculiar brand of "freedom and democracy, with equality for all"?

Has it never occured to you the manipulative force unleashed by the horrors of what those of Judaic thought or faith went through? How easy it would be to extend a semblance of hope and a livable future in order to gain, ultimately, genuine physical control over, in this instance, the Middle Eastern resources? By gaining a ready to believe, ready to just breathe, duped proxy as a bridgehead, scapegoat, and desperately, constantly, dependent ally?

Oh, really? Well then explain why that ally needs to be the largest recipient of US manipulative expenditures (oops, I mean AID). Maybe it is so they can run to Washington and lobby with those funds?

Thereafter how easy it would be to continuously fan the flames of justifiable uncertainty and fears among the regions peoples in order to maintain that fundamental element of control over the attitudes and opinions of various social strata?

I guess not, F*ck it, it is too complicated. The Jews did it.

Let´s usn´s start us a GOOD war, ok?

Where have I heard that before?

Those of you who have bothered to ... read ... some of what I write, know very well that I am entirely against Israeli policies. They don´t work, they just get people killed and more people started on that endless cycle of hate and vengeance. My faith is in only in the fact that Palestine, like all the planet, belongs to all the people, all the time, and it is all the peoples duty to steward. I am not about to take the leap of seeming madness from there to "the Israeli´s stole our government!", which seems popular to some.

If for no other reason, it is obvious that there are other shows in town, always; how about if one of them....arranged.....for certain critically CIRCUMSTANTIAL and UNQUALIFIED information leaked that points to...well you can see for yourself how easy this game is, I am honestly surprised that more of you haven´t tried it on! Especially with a traumatized American populace that now sees spooks in every window!

I think many of you are sadly mistaken in your appraisal of the overall situation; but then, you don´t have a clue about 911 either, do you? Haven´t raised an audible peep about the bogus election prior to that, nor the genocide of tens of thousands of innocent the American representative government, not by a long shot.

But you want to run to the charge that "the Jews did it" when it comes to the failures and shortcomings of ....the American brand of public representation, the value scales, apparently, of the majority of just plain American folks, the rampant and highly visible corporate corruption that inundates our so called government.

Anybody (even an Israeli or Arab or Chinese or African or European or....American.... "lobbyist") can try to get you to commit a crime. Only YOU can agree to perform it.

The blame, the bucks,....and the bombs....stop here.

Just swallow, and like it.

by A
Monday Jul 5th, 2004 10:09 AM
information about the AEI, PNAC, Huntington, Fukyama, Leo Strauss, keery and Bush can be found on:

free version of the "pamflet for war" of perle and frum can be find on:

by bunk logic
Saturday Jul 31st, 2004 8:49 AM
Even if Pantagraph's allegation is true, which has yet to be proven, to say that it refutes Moore's other contentions is bunk logic.


by or is it freedom of thought?
Saturday Jul 31st, 2004 9:58 AM
Seems like the Zionists hate us for our freedoms.
by Unbiased Onlooker
Sunday Jan 9th, 2005 7:47 AM
Oh man, you guys need a coffee break.

Everybody knows that F-9/11 was biased. Get over it.

Everybody knows about Bush's links to the Israeli government and to Arab governments. Bush has created a network of business and political links, as a man of Dubya's character would. Get over it.

So what is if Jews own bit of the US media? You should be more concerned about other statistics, like only 28% of US citizens believe in evolution. Stop the anti-semitism, get over it.

George W Bush is an idiot. Get over it, you voted him in, you must love the guy. Live with it and make sure you actually think about who you vote for next time.

Media is biased. Get over it. Networks like Fox are Ceo-Conservative and guys like Moore are Democrats. You have just got to learn to sift through the propaganda.

Don't worry about who did what, who is friends with who or what who is doing; just ask yourself this: "Am I happy with my President?" or "Do I agree with Moore?".
Nobody cares about complicated stuff any more anyway. We live in a sound-bite society. Good or bad, this or that.

- Unbiased Opinion
by You must be a Zionist
Monday Jan 10th, 2005 10:28 AM
Seems like mr. "unbiased" is quite content with the status quo, ie. the Zionist dominated US media.

Well, mr. "unbiased" --- haven't you ever heard that "silence is complicity" ??

Just because you're a Zionist slacker doesn't mean the rest of us are going to follow your very lame lead.

And please don't insult the American people. They have been lied to, and they have been very busy trying to maintain jobs and families, so they often have little time for activism, and have to rely on Zionized media "sound bytes". But don't think the Truth won't catch up with the majority Americans. It will.

And then you will see, the good-hearted American people will demand an end to US support of racist, apartheid Israel. Sooner than you think.
by You must be an anti-semite
Monday Jan 10th, 2005 10:42 AM
Seems like ms. "You must be a Zionist" is quite content with the anti-semitic status quo, ie. the neo-Nazi affiliated anti-Zionist sidekick for racist US media.

Well, ms. "You must be a Zionist" --- haven't you ever heard that "silence is complicity" ??

Just because you're an anti-semitic anti-Zionist slacker doesn't mean the rest of us are going to follow your very lame and racist lead.

And please don't insult the American people. They have been lied to, and they have been very busy trying to maintain jobs and families, so they often have little time for activism, and have to rely on neoNazified media "sound bytes". But don't think the truth won't catch up with the majority of Americans. It sure will.

And then you will see, the good-hearted American people will demand an end to US support of racist, apartheid "Palestine". Sooner than you think.
by heard it before
Monday Jan 10th, 2005 10:52 AM
(1.) An ad hominem is not a rebuttal.

(2.) To be anti-Semitic and to be anti-Zionist are two different things. Don’t let the Zionist propaganda mill confuse you about this vital point. It’s a trick. Don’t fall for it.
by gehrig
Monday Jan 10th, 2005 11:00 AM
nessie-nym: "To be anti-Semitic and to be anti-Zionist are two different things."

Except on SF-IMC, when nessie will turn a blind eye toward antisemitism as long as it's properly couched in the language of "anti-Zionism." Just ask "You must be a Zionist," aka Wehrmacht Wendy Campbell, whom SF-IMC let run free for a year.

Israelis have no more right to their own state than the Palestinians do. States do not exist by right, but by force of arms.

A Jewish state is no different than an Aryan state. They are both racist by definition.

Jews have no right to rule Palestine, and lord it over the other Palestinians, because they they happen to be of the right bloodline. That's racism. The only non racist solution is a single, secular, egalitarian society in which it doesn't matter who your mother was or what name you use for deity.
by gehrig
Monday Jan 10th, 2005 12:03 PM
"Israelis have no more right to their own state than the Palestinians do. "

Or the French, or the Germans, or the Russians, or whomever, according to your doctrine.

But complaining about the Russians just doesn't light your fires the way complaining about the Jewish state does. Why is that?

by anil
Friday Apr 1st, 2005 12:28 AM
God said to isreal go to that land and kill every thing over there that land is the promise land i promise you.

But isreal went there start fucking palestine and geting childrens that is the problem today.

by um
Friday Apr 1st, 2005 7:45 AM
"But complaining about the Russians just doesn't light your fires the way complaining about the Jewish state does. Why is that?"

While largely ignored in the US, the brutal occcupation of Chechnya does get a lot of attention by left-wing activists in Europe. BUT, wehn a post to this (or other ) sites is about Chechnya it doesnt spark the same sort of anger that one sees when anything about Palestine/Israel is posted. I have never heard anyone argue that Chechens dont really exist, that they are illegally occupying land that was inhabitted by Christians for most of the last 2000 years, that the Chechens deserve the human rights abuse because they are terrorists and bring it on themselves. The Chechen rebels have probably killed more Russian civilians than the Palestinians but people just don't hate them as a group as much and people focus their anger on the small rebel group that does the worst actions (such as Beslan). It isnt that in the Palestinian case the population is more sympathetic to such attacks than the Chechen population; there is little opposition to any rebel activity among the Chechens and the former secular/nationalist leadership has backed the islamists largely becasue as with the Palestinian case, despair leads people to support anyone doing anything to make a change.

So to those constantly attacking any articles that deal with Israeli human righs abuses in the West Bank and Gaza and new settlements that could make a 2 state solution impossible, it seems pretty clear that "complaining about the Russians just doesn't light your fires the way complaining about the Jewish state does. Why is that?"
by because our USA is supporting &quot;Israel&qu
Sunday Apr 3rd, 2005 1:20 PM
Don't you get it YET???

We don't want our government to support with our tax dollars and OUR country's reputation and clout the RACIST, APARTHEID, ETHNIC-CLEANSING, HYPOCRITICAL, LYING, TERRORIST ZIONIST ENTITY AKA "Israel".

Repeat this over and over until you finally GET IT!
by Fuck off, wendy campbell
Sunday Apr 3rd, 2005 1:46 PM
Wendy Campbell,

Fuck you, and fuck your whore of a mother for spewing a piece of shit like you into this world.
by Critical Thinker
Sunday Apr 3rd, 2005 2:21 PM
>>>"I have never heard anyone argue that Chechens dont really exist, that they are illegally occupying land that was inhabitted by Christians for most of the last 2000 years, that the Chechens deserve the human rights abuse because they are terrorists and bring it on themselves."<<<

Granted, it's true Chechen terrorists are a very close match to the Palestinian ones as far as cruelty goes. Maybe they do not defer in this respect. However, there is much difference between the levels of legitimacy of Chechen nationalism and Palestinian nationalism -- the former has a much better case than the latter, which is one of the least legitimate in modern history, though countless people beg to differ.

What's almost for certain: the Palestinians must probably be the youngest nation on earth. Also, the basis of their consolidation into a distinct national unity is rooted overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, in the negation of the expression of Jewish nationalism in the Land of Israel. This is quintessential form of national antagonism, so you shouldn't really be all that astounded that it not only doesn't evoke respect from certain people, it even elicits contempt, hatred and anger. Many detest Zionism...I feel that way about Palestinism; it's based on so much negativity on different facets, it can be mind boggling.

I've already pointed out on another thread in reply to TW that the Palestinians originated mostly from migrants streaming into the holy land during the 1st half of the last century. This influx was followed by a refugee problem on which many Arabs hitched a ride, inflating the real dimensions of the original 1948 refugee problem. UNRWA was a willing accomplice in exacerbating this problem, but much of the anger is nevertheless directed at the Palestinians.

Combine this historical backdrop with what had occurred from 1964 (founding of the PLO) or better yet since 1949 (commencement of incessant terror attacks by local Arabs from Judea-Samaria and Gaza) until Arafat's death last year, and you'll might begin to realize why the Palestinians as a national group attract more hostility than the Chechens.
by the whole world can't be wrong
Sunday Apr 3rd, 2005 9:26 PM
That French ambassador to England didn't call "Israel" "that shitty little country" for nothing...
No one really likes "Israel", and the Zionists know it. Why would anyone actually like such a ruthless, selfish "state"? That's why the Zionists continually LIE to the American people cuz if Amercians knew the TRUTH about the Zionist entity aka "Israel", they would greatly object to US support of such a terrorist state aka "Israel". But thank GOD people ARE catching on to the truth about the matter.
Be afraid, Zionists. Be very afraid. Or better yet, change your EVIL behavior and/or support of the EVIL Zionist entity. Before it's too late.
by gehrig
Sunday Apr 3rd, 2005 10:43 PM
Wehrmacht Wendy: "yammity yammity But thank GOD people ARE catching on to the truth about the matter"

Which is that you're as mad as a thousand battlefields, Wendy.

Wehrmacht Wendy: "yammity yammity Be afraid, Zionists. Be very afraid yammity yammity"

Or else what, you'll praise Ernst Zundel again?