Michael Moore-Smarter Than You

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2003-05-13 10:48am

International Man Of Mystery Michael Moore knows where Osama Bin Laden is, and he knows that Bush knows too....

http://gopusa.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard ... f=1;t=3405

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-05-13 10:49am

if bush got osama, wouldnt he gain the next election without a hitch?

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-05-13 10:59am

I know where Osama is he`s in Montreal,shaved his beard and he`s having a three for one special on glasses and lenses.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-05-13 11:08am

Enforcer Talen wrote:if bush got osama, wouldnt he gain the next election without a hitch?

Of course. But in Michael Moore's mind we haven't brought him in because it gives us the perfect excuse to bomb a whole bunch of non-white people to make us rich, white, gun-toting, CEOs some thing to feel good about.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-05-13 11:40am

Montcalm wrote:I know where Osama is he`s in Montreal,shaved his beard and he`s having a three for one special on glasses and lenses.

if he was there, he'd be getting $20 lap dances at Super Sexe on St Catherine street

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-05-13 01:27pm

If Bush did know he'd bring him in ASAP for the re-election and fundraising. Then he'd string the fucker up in Times Square and sell rocks for $1000 apiece. 50% discount for NYC natives and military personnel

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-13 02:24pm

Darth Fanboy wrote:If Bush did know he'd bring him in ASAP for the re-election and fundraising. Then he'd string the fucker up in Times Square and sell rocks for $1000 apiece. 50% discount for NYC natives and military personnel

And they'd be small rocks so the soon to be corpse would last longer. Moore's level of stupidity is incredible. Like so many conspiracy theories he has failed to think past its initial conception. The man is an utter moron.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-05-13 03:24pm

Using logic similar to Moore's, I can safely conclude that Moore and Osama are the same exact person. I mean, when was the last time you saw Michael Moore and Osama Bin Laden in the same room at the same times?

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2003-05-13 08:32pm

HemlockGrey wrote:Using logic similar to Moore's, I can safely conclude that Moore and Osama are the same exact person. I mean, when was the last time you saw Michael Moore and Osama Bin Laden in the same room at the same times?

Everyone knows you're bin Laden. I haven't seen you two in the same room either! Of course, we both may be right, and you're Micheal Moore as well.

As for what Moore said, he failed to take into consideration that catching bin Laden would probably bring Bush's approval rating sky-high, and like all politicians, he probably won't pass such a chance up. Political gain is more important than nonexistant ties, after all.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2003-05-13 08:40pm

My God, Moore is a dumbass. He might have had supporters during the Bowling For Colombine ordeal, but NO ONE, save for the most extreme leftists and conspiracy theorists, will side with him on this.

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-05-13 10:44pm

Enforcer Talen wrote:if bush got osama, wouldnt he gain the next election without a hitch?

no quite the opposite, if he got osama, he wouldnt have any boogie man to scare americans into thinking that we still need this war on the bill of rights, thus his power would be destroyed.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-13 10:45pm

NapoleonGH wrote:
Enforcer Talen wrote:if bush got osama, wouldnt he gain the next election without a hitch?

no quite the opposite, if he got osama, he wouldnt have any boogie man to scare americans into thinking that we still need this war on the bill of rights, thus his power would be destroyed.

Not really. Bush has only one more election to win, and capturing OBL would likely carry him through it.

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-05-13 10:54pm

no way, cuz once he got rid of bin ladin, people would actually want their rights back, and when he didnt give them to them, he would be outa there.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-13 10:59pm

NapoleonGH wrote:no way, cuz once he got rid of bin ladin, people would actually want their rights back, and when he didnt give them to them, he would be outa there.

Give me a few examples of the rights we have lost (not the stuff the government had the power to do under the Patriot, just the rights that are actively being infringed).

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-05-13 11:34pm

Several people have been held indefinately without being charged with a crime. Thats a goddamn big problem in my book.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2003-05-13 11:54pm

Maybe if Bush reveals that he's got Osama just before the election, his approval rating will soar, the hoopla will die after the election.

Who would be the worlds next boogeyman in the long tradition of boogeymen?

1945- 1991 USSR
1991- 2001 Osama
2001- 2003 Iraq
2003- ?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-13 11:59pm

Howedar wrote:Several people have been held indefinately without being charged with a crime. Thats a goddamn big problem in my book.

That still does not approach times like the Civil War and WWI, when the Civil Rights of EVERYONE were constantly in danger. Hell, it doesn't even approach the McCarthy era. It's true that we could be doing a little better, but the "police-state" bullshit is just oh so ridiculous.

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-05-14 12:00am

Durran Korr wrote:
NapoleonGH wrote:no way, cuz once he got rid of bin ladin, people would actually want their rights back, and when he didnt give them to them, he would be outa there.
Give me a few examples of the rights we have lost (not the stuff the government had the power to do under the Patriot, just the rights that are actively being infringed).

um well im sorry but the patriot acts qualifies 110% as rights we have lost, regardless of what you want to think, the patriot acts are in direct violation of the bill of rights, mostly Amendments 1 and 4.

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-05-14 12:03am

and durran, you want us to say that just because in the past our government robbed its citzens of their rights, that this makes them doing it today RIGHT? Im sorry, but they were wrong then, they are wrong now, and are in complete violation of the social contract between the government and the people, which according to the philosophy which this nation is based on, and the reasoning behind this nation's rebellion, gives us the full rights to rebel against this illegal government and recreate a government according either to the original social contract, or to create a new one (im not advocating rebellion, im merely saying that the government has broken its end of the deal and thus we have the justification to rebel)

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-14 12:05am

There are laws on the books on both the federal and state level that violate the Bill of Rights. Their existence is clearly not a good thing, but if they are not enforced heavily (and the Patriot Act is not being heavily enforced at the moment), they are not too much to worry about. What concerns me more if the blatant disregard for the Bill of Rights displayed by our very active federal drug policy.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-14 12:07am

and durran, you want us to say that just because in the past our government robbed its citzens of their rights, that this makes them doing it today RIGHT?

That's a nice straw man of my position. Perhaps you could stuff it with more bullshit, though.

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-05-14 12:18am

No it really isnt a strawman. you said we should give examples of the rights we lost, everything in the patriot acts qualify as rights that we have lost.

Then you said that the laws removing our rights aren't as bad as they used to be, and that saying we are losing rights is bs.

I dont see how that is a strawman of your postion, you are attempting to justify current action, or at least make it seem like it isnt a problem, by saying that previous action was worse. Well all i can say is too damned bad for our predicessors, yes the government was wrong then, it is wrong now. It took rights then, It is taking rights now. It violated the bill of rights then, it is violating the bill of rights now. Frankly though it doesnt matter if the bill of rights was completely ignored in the past, what matters is that it is being shreded right now.

Also i 100% agree that the drug policy is complete BS, and i would claim that prohibition of drug posession and sale is a violation of our rights to, i would make the argument that it violates the 14th ammendment. I mean, back in the day they had to pass an ammendment to make one of the more addictive and more dangerous drugs, alcohol, illegal; yet they get off not needing an ammendment to make safer and less addictive drugs illegal? bullshit i say (examples of less dangerous and non-physically addictive drugs than alcohol include but are not limited to, magic mushrooms, LSD, Cannabis, DMT, peyote, amphetamines, methamphetamines (hell the perscribe all different kinds of amphetamines, including meth, to 3 year olds, to take a dose nearing recreational levels sometimes twice daily)

but lets talk about busho and his little war on our rights under the pretext of a war on terror (which it should be painfully obvious will do nothing to reduce the threat of terrorism, and probably as an end result will cause more anti-us violence then we are experiencing now)

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-05-14 12:22am

I said that while America isn't as good on rights as it ought to be (and that does not alter my original point, which is that the vast majority of Americans have lost no rights), the situation in no way approaches some of the more serious eras of our history. In no way did I imply that that made it OK. I not once have given approval to the Patriot Act.

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-05-14 12:24am

so then what pretell is the point of pointing out that in our history the government was worse? seems to be neither here nor there now doesnt it, and a red herring.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2003-05-14 12:46am

Gandalf wrote:Maybe if Bush reveals that he's got Osama just before the election, his approval rating will soar, the hoopla will die after the election.

Who would be the worlds next boogeyman in the long tradition of boogeymen?

1945- 1991 USSR
1991- 2001 Osama
2001- 2003 Iraq
2003- ?

North Korea could be the perfect boogeyman. Hell, Kim Jong Il is the one trying his damndest to make it that way.