View Full Version : Lets muzzle 'em if we can't beat 'em

6th May 2004, 04:21
The Walt Disney Company is blocking its Miramax division from distributing a new documentary by Michael Moore that harshly criticizes President Bush, executives at both Disney and Miramax said Tuesday.

The film, "Fahrenheit 911," links Mr. Bush and prominent Saudis — including the family of Osama bin Laden — and criticizes Mr. Bush's actions before and after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.:}

6th May 2004, 21:45
And that happens in the country of Freedom and Democracy!

What a shame!

The Filth
6th May 2004, 21:52
And that happens in the country of Freedom and Democracy!

Freedom? Democracy? US? This is my pet subject. Please don't start me going.

6th May 2004, 22:54
Uh, Granpda , last I checked, no governmental authority was telling Disney what or what not to release. Disney made a business decision. Do you really think another distributor won't pick up this now hot film? Why do you think there's a freedom or democracy issue, other than the fact that Disney is free to run its business as it sees fit?

tony draper
6th May 2004, 23:08
Oh yeh, my heart bleeds for Mr Moore.
Although his heart bleeds a lot more than mine.

7th May 2004, 00:43
Documentary huh?

scarlet wimpernel
7th May 2004, 01:31
Disney claims that Moore has known that they wouldn’t distribute the film for quite some time, but only now he’s expressing outrage. Quite a good piece of pre-film advertising I'd say.
Things couldn’t be better for Moore, a controversy prior to release (someone will release it) will have people flocking to “see what the fuss is about”.
Just ask Mel Gibson how controversy helps a film:yuk:

henry crun
7th May 2004, 05:14
Grandpa, I was told brief details of an occurence in France late last year.

It seems a French journalist decided to write a book or an article which gave an alternative opinion to the nationwide
anti Bush/anti American reporting in France.

For this the journalist was dismissed from his job.
Did you hear of this case and is it true ?

If so can you tell us more about it and if you think it is the same type of threatened censorship under discussion in this thread ?

7th May 2004, 16:19
From the Independent:

Moore accused of publicity stunt over Disney 'ban'
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles
07 May 2004

Less than 24 hours after accusing the Walt Disney Company of pulling the plug on his latest documentary in a blatant attempt at political censorship, the rabble-rousing film-maker Michael Moore has admitted he knew a year ago that Disney had no intention of distributing it.

The admission, during an interview with CNN, undermined Moore's claim that Disney was trying to sabotage the US release of Fahrenheit 911 just days before its world premiere at the Cannes film festival.

Instead, it lent credence to a growing suspicion that Moore was manufacturing a controversy to help publicise the film, a full-bore attack on the Bush administration and its handling of national security since the attacks of 11 September 2001.

In an indignant letter to his supporters, Moore said he had learnt only on Monday that Disney had put the kibosh on distributing the film, which has been financed by the semi-independent Disney subsidiary Miramax.

But in the CNN interview he said: "Almost a year ago, after we'd started making the film, the chairman of Disney, Michael Eisner, told my agent he was upset Miramax had made the film and he will not distribute it."

Nobody in Hollywood doubts Fahrenheit 911 will find a US distributor. His last documentary, Bowling for Columbine , made for $3m (£1.7m), pulled in $22m at the US box office.

But Moore's publicity stunt, if that is what is, appears to be working. A front-page news piece in The New York Times was followed yesterday by an editorial denouncing Disney for censorship and denial of Moore's right to free expression.

Moore told CNN that Disney had "signed a contract to distribute this [film]" but got cold feet. But Disney executives insists there was never any contract. And a source close to Miramax said that the only deal there was for financing, not for distribution. Moore is simply another whinging @sshole :mad:


7th May 2004, 16:30
Moore is simply another whinging @sshole ... A bigger whinger than anybody else hereabouts?! A richer @sshole with a bigger audience, certainly... ;)

7th May 2004, 17:13
There's another one of 'em out there that made a documentary about eating only at McDonalds for a month to see if he gained weight. He apparently gained about a hundred pounds in a week and a half and his chloresterol level went stratospheric. His conclusion that a diet consisting of only McDonalds - surprise surprise - wasn't healthy. One teeny weeny fact he omitted from his documentary is that he was eating 3000 calories a day. A normal caloric intake would be about 1800-2000 or so. You can eat 3000 calories a day of friqqin grass and you'll gain weight if you don't burn the calories off.

7th May 2004, 18:16
Wasn't the first rule of journalism, never let the facts get in the way of a good story!

Boss Raptor
7th May 2004, 18:30
Land of the free?!

Yeah right...too many commercial and political interests to ever get the full story...amazing what the US public doesnt see on their news programming about the rest of the world...and the BBC does show it

It was insular and now after 9/11 they've used it as an excuse to turn the place into a police state...and the locals have fallen for the excuse that it's in their interests

My answer at US Immigration to how long will u be staying 'as little time as possible' :*

Empty Cruise
7th May 2004, 19:29

Mr. Moores homepage (and newsletter for that matter) explains it like this. Quote:

"I would have hoped by now that I would be able to put my work out to the public without having to experience the profound censorship obstacles I often seem to encounter.

Yesterday I was told that Disney, the studio that owns Miramax, has officially decided to prohibit our producer, Miramax, from distributing my new film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." The reason? According to today's (May 5) New York Times, it might "endanger" millions of dollars of tax breaks Disney receives from the state of Florida because the film will "anger" the Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush. The story is on page one of the Times" unquote.

He does not claim that he didn't know that Disney had no intention of distrbuting the film. He only claims that he just learned that Disney has now officially forbidden Miramax to distribute the film.

I know how people will percieve it, though :yuk:

But honestly - I don't give a f*ck if he knew it 50 years ago or learned it ½ second ago. It just proves that capitalism is :mad: unable to :mad: ensure that views that do not :mad: :mad: sell are distributed on a broad scale. Down the same alley as WallMart not distributing music from artists that do not fit into their :mad: "family image", including the :mad: Dixie Chicks (woha - now there's some :mad: unbelivably dangerous music) - because they had gone out publicly against the Iraq war.

So given the forces he's up against - I'll allow Moore to turn one of capitalisms own guns against it :uhoh:

Rant over! :p

Send Clowns
7th May 2004, 19:47
Wasn't Mr Moore the one who was rather unimpressed by his own medicine? He that treated his employees the same way he complained about in the management of companies, so one employee resigned and started hounding him as he hounded them? Seem to remember he had a serious sense of humour failure at that, threw all his toys out of the pram.

Anyone ever seen a critique of his last piece of garbage, and the rhetorical devices he used to completely distort the truth, the urban myths he perpetuated about Columbine? Worth looking for on the 'net.

7th May 2004, 20:35
Too true on what you wrote about Michel Moore SC. It’s never fails to amaze me how people will jump on the anti-American, anti-Bush bandwagon without checking on ANY of the facts.

Oh yeah, it’s in the newspapers, it’s got to be right!

tony draper
7th May 2004, 20:45
Supprised the chaps over there haven't dealt with Moore in another way involving muzzles, but not the ones yer put on pooches.

7th May 2004, 21:22
And I think he was complaining left and right about outsourcing jobs to India, yet his own website maintainers were in fact outsourced to India. http://www.drudgereport.com/rcmm.htm

7th May 2004, 21:32
I find this site (moorewatch.com/index.php) adds a little perspective to it all.

7th May 2004, 21:54
Thank you for that!

7th May 2004, 23:15
Thank you for your kind answer (WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY QUESTION..................)

Nice from Empty Cruise to confirm the economico-political censorship in USA.

Another question: who is the most anti-american?

- The General/Officer/Soldier torturing Iraqi prisoners under American flag.......?

- Michael Moore who denounces the present prominent persons responsible for this USA's disgrace...............?

Send Clowns
8th May 2004, 00:07

I'm sure that one day you will explain the relevance of that to the issue at hand. Are you trying to say that because someone betraying the principles his nation claims to stand for is wrong, then lying about those principles and misrepresenting the issues presented in a film is suddenly less wrong? :confused: Otherwise I am not quite sure even you know what point you might be trying to make.

Empty Cruise
8th May 2004, 00:23
Pigboat - you are a great humorist :D

Moorewatch.com is really funny - especially the blog-ads on the righthand side of the page:

1) RightWingStuff.com :E
2) Conservative Pulse :uhoh:
3) SnarkBait.com - politics with reason :p

Now where did that NRA add go?

The page must - in all fairness - be said to be biased toward the right side of the political spectrum - and to these people, Moore is the best lightning rod in the US of A.

I'm not trying to defend his handling of former employees, outsourcing web-hotel to India etc. - and he DOES turn every perspective on every case in the direction most favourable to his view of the world - but right now, we could all use a bit of perspective. He may not make sense all of the time, and he is biased in his world-view - but he says a lot of important stuff. Who else dares speak up against corporate power - and be funny at the same time :} ?

I don't subscribe to his point of view - but neither to the view of the Thief-in-Chief running Pensylvania Av. 1800 for - uh, hopefully - the next 6 months :E


Member of Coalition of the Willing... scrables for cover

Send Clowns
8th May 2004, 00:29

I've just reread the thread, including your comment to Henry Thank you for your kind answer (WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY QUESTION..................)Which is interesting since you never asked him a question, yet he asked you one, which you have not bothered to try to answer. Isn't that ironic? Especially when he was sticking to the issue at hand, censorship of views that are contrary to the local orthodoxy. You seem not to like it when people point out issues when they occur in France that you rant about happening in the US.

8th May 2004, 12:39
According to yesterday's New York Times, the issue of whether to release Fahrenheit 9/11 was discussed at Disney's board meeting last week. It was decided that Disney should not distribute our movie.

Earlier this week we got the final, official call: Disney will not put out Fahrenheit 9/11. When the story broke in the New York Times, Disney, instead of telling the truth, turned into Pinocchio.

Here are my favorite nuggets that have come out of the mouths of their spinmeisters (roughly quoted):

"Michael Moore has known for a year that we will not distribute this movie, so this is not news." Yes, that is what I thought, too, except Disney kept sending us all that money to make the movie. Miramax said there was no problem. I got the idea that everything was fine.

"It is not in the best interests of our company to distribute a partisan political film that may offend some of our customers." Hmmm. Disney doesn't distribute work that has partisan politics? Disney distributes and syndicates the Sean Hannity radio show every day? I get to listen to Rush Limbaugh every day on Disney-owned WABC. I also seem to remember that Disney distributed a very partisan political movie during a Congressional election year, 1998—a film called The Big One… by, um… ME!

"Fahrenheit 9/11 is not the Disney brand; we put out family oriented films." So true. That's why the #1 Disney film in theaters right now is a film called, KILL BILL, VOL. 2. This excellent Miramax film, along with other classics like Pulp Fiction, have all been distributed by Disney. That's why Miramax exists -- to provide an ALTERNATIVE to the usual Disney fare. And, unless they were NC-17, Disney has distributed them.

"Mr. Moore is doing this as a publicity stunt." Michael Eisner reportedly said this the other day while he was at a publicity stunt cutting the ribbon for the new "Tower of Terror" ride (what a pleasant name considering what the country has gone through recently) at Disney's California Adventure Park. Let me tell you something: NO filmmaker wants to go through this kind of controversy. It does NOT sell tickets (I can cite many examples of movies who have had to change distributors at the last minute and all have failed). I made this movie so people could see it as soon as possible. This is a huge and unwanted distraction. I want people discussing the issues raised in my film, not some inside Hollywood fracas surrounding who is going to ship the prints to the theaters. Plus, I think it is fairly safe to say that Fahrenheit 9/11 has a good chance of doing just fine, considering that my last movie set a box office record and the subject matter (Bush, the War on Terror, the War in Iraq) is at the forefront of most people's minds.

So what will happen to my movie? I still don't know. What I do know is that I will make sure all of you see it by hook or crook. We are Americans. There are a lot of screwed up things about us right now, but one thing that most of us have in common is that we don't like someone telling us we can't see something. We despise censors, and the worst censors are those who would dare to limit thoughts and ideas and silence dissent. THAT is un-American. If I have to travel across the country and show it in city parks (or, as one person offered yesterday, to show it on the side of his house for the neighborhood to see), that is what I will do.

More to come, stay tuned.

Michael Moore

8th May 2004, 12:53
The title sounds like it was inspired by that other B-movie great, "Farenheit 451" or, 481, or whatever it was, the temperature in the title being that at which paper apparently burns. I seem to recall that it was something to do with book burning in the US in the fifties. One of our resident Search Engineers will probably correct me on the detail, my memory being understandably addled by time and so forth...;)

8th May 2004, 13:00
Talk about quick Bluewolf:ok:

8th May 2004, 14:16
This is about taxes pure and simple. Disney are terrified they will lose all kinds of tax incentives they get in Orlando because of course the governor of Florida is........

This film will be released, its going to be shown in Europe and no doubt will make its way onto the internet. How many americans are online in this day and age?

Whether people like it or not, this will ask questions over the Bush family's peculiar relationship with the Saudi's and in particular the some $4 Billion the family has received from the Saudi's over time.

But don't listen to Moore, do your own research. And especially look at the Carlyle group. Look at Yale's Skull and Bones society and look how Dubbya got in there with woeful grades. Look at the history of Prescott Bush ( a guy who was not shy about doing business with the Nazis) and of course George senior.

This is one seriously dirty family with no scruples whatsover.

8th May 2004, 15:16
What makes me smile is the amount of energy and vitriol expended, on this site by a select few, in the direction of Mr Moore. It seems to me that some people doth protest too much about what he has to say.

If he is just spouting rubbish then he is just one of hundreds of loons in the US who do that everyday. From televangelists to militia men. What makes MM so different? Why does he threaten you so?

Look at it this way, there are literally hundreds of televangelists taking money from the mentally vulnerable everyday. So why not stop them? The militia men are armed to the teeth and crying out for a reason and an opportunity to overthrow the government. So why not stop them.

MM is a man with a camera and enough moeny to make a movie. Oh my god lets shut him down. He made Charlton Heston look like a gun nut. Lets cut off his bollocks for that.

The real reason I feel that MM engenders such emotions is that deep down most Americans know he is right. He raises the issues that most would like not to have to deal with. Most Americans hate to be told that they do not live in a utopian society. So MM is not perfect but how does that detract from his message? The simple answer is that it does not.

I am well aware that this post will be denounced as America bashing. If that makes it easier for you all then feel free as it is no skin of my nose. I like America. I have enjoyed those parts I have seen and look forward to my next trip there. I know many Americans that I like.



8th May 2004, 15:32
Got it in one, BHR.

Furthermore, if you attack the President of the USA, too many see it as attacking the USA itself and therefore "unAmerican".

Senator Joe McCarthy is alive and well.

Empty Cruise
8th May 2004, 17:17
BHR - in one his books (can't remember which :rolleyes: ) MM gave an explaination to the question:

Why are the conservatives so full of hate & anger?

They won the cold war, they hold the majority in both houses, they got their tax breaks - so why are they so :mad: angry?

Because - MM believes - they know they are a minority in the country they run. :{

Most people would not support what - when judged by their actions - the conservatives have on the agenda. Most people want a clean environment, civil liberties and their fair share of the pie once the paycheck arrives in the mail.

But - and this is where I think MM has his grudge with capitalism - the business community can always come out and have their say: "OK, you can pass that law (or forbid this kind of energy waste, or recount those votes...) - but then we'll unfortunately have to move our business overseas (as if we wouldn't do that anyhow :yuk: )". How are people expected to engage in free and unbiased debate (or elections for that matter) with that kind of business influence on society?

Right up the same street as Eisner not allowing Miramax to distribute the film - because it is a "family industry" and he's afraid of losing his tax cut by P*ssing Jeb Bush off.

I wonder where Jeb is in this debate - why isn't he publickly kicking some Eisner *ss over suggesting that he would do something as low as using political power for personal vengance?

Perhaps because he might? :uhoh:

Interesting thread this one - we are actually debating the US of A without flinging mud at eachother - is anybody out there sober or something :E


8th May 2004, 19:18
Say hamasandtahini may I ask you a question?

What makes you think that the Moore Watch web site is so wrong, because according to your views it is an ultra-right wing site and Moore’s position, which is very ultra-left wing liberal view correct?

Would not possibly the truth be somewhat between the two radical viewpoints?

8th May 2004, 19:30
I'd hardly call Moore's views Ultra left wing, con!!!

He's not calling for the Nationalisation of all US industry or an end to Capitalism. He sticks up for workers rights, you know the ordinary american and is sick as many are at the ridiculous loss of life caused by the continuing obsession with guns.

He did highlight the plight of FO's in the US in one of his books informing readers how some of them were actually qualifying for food stamps.

Send Clowns
8th May 2004, 19:33
Like his employee who was so badly treated by Moore he ended up following him round, in a Moore-inspired protest, OneWorld? It may be better to think of Moore as a self-satisfied, self-opinionated self-publicist.

8th May 2004, 19:45
OK, I say Send Clowns wins!:)

Hey, just one guy's opinion.:}

8th May 2004, 20:18
Like Rush Limbaugh SC?

Send Clowns
8th May 2004, 20:31
Yes, OW22, with the added hypocrisy I mentioned.

8th May 2004, 20:41
SC, are you celebrating Maggies 25th?

I'm not being smart but I would have to guess you're a huge Thatch fan?!;)

Give me your honest opinion on her tenure as PM, how did you rate her and how would compare her to Tony.

This is a serious question, after you give yours I'll give you my opinion on her.

DC Meatloaf
9th May 2004, 02:07
BHR, I think you and Huggy vie constantly for the most patronizing posts on Pprune. You may have pulled into the lead spot with your last effort. The idea that you've got some insight into the real thoughts of Americans -- thoughts that we're too stupid to realize ourselves -- is both laughable and insulting (if that's possible).

First, sort of a side point. I don't know why you think televangelists get a free pass here. I think there are few groups more mocked in American popular culture than televangelists. Maybe used car salesmen, politicians, and lawyers...but only just barely.

Second, I'd argue that the reason Moore gets so many people upset here has less to do with what he says than the way he goes about saying it. After all, there are plenty of other people/programs making similar cases to Moore -- PBS, for example, is chock full of well-produced documentaries that come from left field (so to speak). But Moore has developed a particularly polarizing style of ambush interviews, quick-edits that distort chronologies and context, and veracity-stretching (which he has defended, when caught, as necessary to serve the punchline of whatever joke he was shooting for -- he's a comedian, he has said, not a journalist (paraphrase)). So, if Moore's in-your-face viewpoint coincides with your own, you're thrilled with his presentation. But if you disagree, his every in-your-face move just makes him look like more and more of a f*ckwit.

And I'm not even going to tackle his track-record generally, as it's been well-covered on PPRuNe already. Here's a sample thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73301&perpage=15&highlight=michael%20moore&pagenumber=2) from a few months back. The guy's got his schtick, and for those who get sucked in by it, it's obviously very convincing. But I find it ironic that our Euro cousins -- who are always quick to label the average American hopelessly naive -- can't see right through this guy.

henry crun
9th May 2004, 03:59
Grandpa, as you are obviously not going to answer the questions I asked, I shall presume the story about the dismissed French journalist is true.

(Thanks SC)

9th May 2004, 04:25
This is about taxes pure and simple. Disney are terrified they will lose all kinds of tax incentives they get in Orlando because of course the governor of Florida is........ Geez, all you lefties must search the same sites because I just read this on another board! In any case, this is not true. First of all, the tax incentives are contractual--when they are up, they are up. Second, no local authority is going to make a deal based on "political" reasons--they give these incentives for jobs, and as long as it makes sense economically, the incentives will remain. 3rd, these incentives are very common. In NYC, very few companies with large staffs have offices here if they haven't received incentives, as operating across the river (in New Jersey), is often half the cost--and they give incentives also.

9th May 2004, 04:41
I'd love to see Moore turn his documentary skills to this (www.commentarymagazine.com/article.asp?aid=11705017_1) subject.

scarlet wimpernel
9th May 2004, 06:09
How can Moore be unhappy about this? How can he possibly be anything but thrilled? Disney is “blocking” distribution of a film about the bush family because it is scared of ramifications of none other than Jeb Bush. You can not buy that kind of advertising. The only thing missing is a grassy knoll.
The truth might be a bit more boring.
Words like “family oriented” are just descriptions of brands. Brands are an advertising tool and I think to read more into them, or confuse them with morals is a mistake. I’d wager that Disney simply decided that Moore’s new film didn’t fit into their Miramax brand. They have a target consumer which might not enjoy Moore’s tirades.
On the other hand Moore has his own brand and he is using it right now on what he sees as “the masses to be educated.” I have little doubt that someone will distribute the film now, along with the free advertising it has already created.
I happen to agree with Moore’s politics on many issues but I get very tired whenever I see him or read his work. Perhaps he has an important place on the left but I would like to see more rational debate (see “Fast Food Nation”) and less sensational sledgehammers like “Stupid White Men” and other Moorisms.
By the way, censorship was a main theme in Bradbury’s “Fahrenheit 451”…quite a coincidence I’d have to say;) ;)

9th May 2004, 10:52
I don't actually think the left are too enamoured with Moore either after the last election......

Bubbette, nice to see you reading left wing web pages!! Anything you find interesting?

El Grifo
9th May 2004, 12:33
Having just finished reading Moores latest offering "Dude where's my country" I find it difficult to understand the logic of those who rant and rave against him and accuse him of all sorts of untruths and "Anti-Americanisms"

In accordance with the notes at the foot of page one, all of his assertions in chapter one, contain the source notes at the end of each page. Added to that, the last 30 pages of the book are solidly packed with the source notes of any other assertions he makes throughout the remainder of the book.

I imagine the idea was to counteract the very same kind of negative, shoot in the dark, un-researched detractions and character assassinations which we are reading from the same old same olds, here on Pprune.

Strikes me that the guy is one stage ahead of you.

Just because you do not like to hear his assertions, does not mean that they are not true.

If you truly believe that they are false, then take a leaf out of his book (so to speak) counter his assertions and supply the source notes.

Easy Peasy

I for one, found it a very revealing, but not all together surprising read.

9th May 2004, 12:49
Its the same old story El Grifo, any revelations on the shenenigans of Republicans is immediatley discredited. These weasels will trawl through trash to find anything they can use against the source and when they can't find anything they'll just make it up...

Look at the accusations made against Clark recently, instantly dismissed as someone who was bitter over the way he was treated in the administration, jealous because some people got promoted.......yawn........... :yuk:

Look at the way they handled the Scott Ritter situation, the man who stated quite clearly that there was no WMD's

And sure enough as soon as it appears on the GOP love-in websites, where readers regulary masterbate over the guff coming from the likes of Limbaugh, it appears here on PPRuNe courtesy of the usual suspects who funnily enough just take as gospel the ramblings of a writer who has just put up his opinion without any sources himself!!

The sheer brass neck of some GOP brown nosers here is incredible.

9th May 2004, 16:47
But there were/are WMDs--so Scott Ritter was wrong.

9th May 2004, 16:51

Is this an exclusive you are breaking? You know where there are Iraqi WMDS still in Iraq right now?



9th May 2004, 16:51
Look it is no secret that I am a Republican. I consider myself a moderate Republican and at the risk of being accused of stating an oxymoron, a liberal Republican.

I no more take all that Limbaugh says to be the absolute truth than what Moore says to be true. The real truth is somewhere in the middle of the two views.

Limbaugh and Moore, one could say, are the ying and yang of American politics.

In the State I live in, Oklahoma, which is considered a Southern state, the most conservative, the most religious and right wing people are Democrats. We call them “Yellow Dog” Democrats. This is NOT a racial or ethic slanderous term. The term comes from the fact that in the South that generation after generation will vote the straight Democratic line and if an “old yellow dog” ran for office under the Democratic Party ticket they would vote for it just because it was a Democrat.

Hell, to have any semi-liberal laws passed down here you have to be a Republican. Laws such as the lottery, free choice, repealing the ‘Blue Laws’, separation of Church and State in regards to subjects taught in schools, etc. Ever time someone tries to replace the Darwin theory with the Biblical view in our schools it is always the Democrats supporting the change.

Do I feel that President Bush is the best president we have ever had, not by a long shot. Is he better than ‘I invented the internet’ Al Gore? Only by about 10,000%.

The bottom line is, if one wants to believe that Moore is 100% accurate one has that choice, thank God the vast majority of Americans know Moore for what he really is and either try to ignore him (which is real hard the way his mouth yaps) or laughs at him.

Oh yes, who would I liked to have seen win the last Presidential Election?

Barbara Bush!

9th May 2004, 16:57
Is this an exclusive you are breaking? You know where there are Iraqi WMDS still in Iraq right now?

No, I think they have been moved to Syria, and also to Jordan--see here:

9th May 2004, 17:09
Ahhhhhhhhhhh!!!! So that's where they all went, and the US Right knows.

Do you think perhaps someone in the US Government might have told the ISG about that? If not, why not? :rolleyes:

9th May 2004, 17:38
Damn it! i just had a reeeeaallly good point to make but it logged me out and i lost it!

9th May 2004, 17:41
Bubette and Hug,

Can I ask you not to get this thread closed as well?



9th May 2004, 17:43
I hope that won't be a problem here!

9th May 2004, 17:46

So do I. Since you and Hug got Speakers Corner closed down.



El Grifo
9th May 2004, 19:11
Bubette, what an amazing revelation, I always suspected you had "special connections".

With information like that, you could possibly save the political careers of the young Georgie and his pal Toni, both of whom are sure to be really grateful. They obviously are having facts denied to them by the Men in Black

Take my advice, post no more of this secret information, somone may steal your thunder.

Get right on to the blower this second, The civilised world may thank you.

9th May 2004, 22:51
Wino, Bubbette, WC, con-pilot et al, We have our profound differences on US politics, but just remember, this is the kind of guff I have to put up with here on PPRuNE as an American when you guys are nowhere to be found.....

click here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=129631&perpage=15&pagenumber=2)

El Grifo
9th May 2004, 23:06
One World, Do not fall for the psychobabble of an apparently deranged ex cop.

I find it absolutely incredible that his shyte was allowed to stand for so long. Is someone playing games with our heads for fux saxe.

Please do not attempt to find refuge within the band of Ultras, it is well below your esteemed level.

9th May 2004, 23:14
Sorry El Grifo, but I disagree deeply with some of my fellow americans on how we beleive the country should be run. Sometimes those discussions can get so heated we may even descend into calling each other Un-American or other such rubbish.

I'm just pointing out that despite our differences, we are countrymen and when we're attacked we do tend to band together.

Don't be too put off by some of the comments from the guys, I suspect that away from these discussions, Wino, WC, DCM, Con-Pilot et al are a great bunch of guys and would be great to have a few beers with.

I do agree thought that this ex-copper does seem seriously unstable. Thank god he's not still on the beat....

El Grifo
9th May 2004, 23:36
A few beers eh ??

Yeah I might go along with that !

One one condition though !

As long as the leave their "Neutron Bomb Solutions" and their "Pathological Hatred" on the hat stand at the door!!

:cool: ;) :cool:

10th May 2004, 14:49
Banned from speaker corner by Danny, (or Flaps, the mention was changed...).

So I can only tell you my dream: I saw Lucy!

Here is what she told me:

"Grandpa! I'm ashamed of you!
You were banned from Speaker's corner by Danny, and I fully support this decision!

How could you forget what Wholigan told everyone on this very thread?(NEVER MAKE A GENERALISATION ABOUT ONE CATEGORY OF PEOPLE AND PUT ANY LABEL ON THIS CATEGORY!!!)

Now what have you done, insulting my people as a whole, reducing ALL Neanderthalians at the level of a stubborn racist poster on Pprune?

Can't you imagine we Neanderthalians are individuals, who can sometime make deductions like a few of you 21st century men and women..................and express kind of altruism among our communities and even toward people outside our group unlike most of you?"

In my dream, I kissed Lucy's hairy hand, and she vanished.

My first reaction was frustration from her departure............then I began to check my past attitude, and now here I am:

Danny, Flaps, Wholigan, I'm very sorry for what I have done, will never ever do it again, and offer you my deepest apologies.
The punishment inflicted on me by Pprune's authority is fully justified .

Oyez! Oyez! Hear! Hear! Ppruners!

10th May 2004, 15:09
That's an immense ammount of loud hot air just been expended folks, anyone for some hot air ballooning before the supply gets banned from here too??:p

10th May 2004, 17:33
Just won't give up will he. Did Captain Ed move to France?:E

tony draper
10th May 2004, 18:05
Lucy was a Australopithecine not a Neaderthal Grandad, she had a brain smaller than a present day chimp,one should be more cautious of ones choice of spirit guides.


PS Neadertals had a brain slightly larger than ours,perchance thats why our species scragged em all.
Survival of the fittest and all that, yer can't wack it.

10th May 2004, 20:25
....after reading this "Neanderthalising" accusation on my ban orders by Danny and Flaps.

Article1 : Boss never mistakes
Article2 : When Boss makes a mistake, enforce Article 1

(You shouldn't wonder if sometimes my answers don't arrive fast( I hope you miss it...............don't you?)

10th May 2004, 20:38
El Grifo,

Talking about something is far different than advocating it, which I NEVER did. But if the technology exists, there is nothing to be lost by discussing it and then ruling it out...

Pretending the elephant in the room doesn't exist is just silly. And NOT talking about distastfull things lead to the failure of imagination that made 9/11 possible.