TFRs and ADIZ: The Final Solution

Ernie Fletcher nearly got himself shot down when he penetrated the DC ADIZ
with a busted transponder. Can you imagine what would have resulted from
such an event? It could well have been the end of the Bush administration.
So, I have a modest (ahem) proposal.

Democrats! Here is your chance to so embarrass the Bush administration that
it will fall almost immediately! Each of you take your plane and
'accidentally' fly it into the ADIZ. Not all at once; it has to look random.
Be sure to take your families with you. Then, when you get shot down, the
Bush administration will get a black eye from 'killing innocent women and
children.' The Kerry campaign will have a field day criticizing 'the
reckless behavior of the Bush administration.' There will be Congressional
investigations, independent prosecutors, maybe even impeachment proceedings.
The fact that all the people killed are Democrats will make it look like
some kind of evil Republican conspiracy. It might even mean the end of the
Republican Party as we know it.

I know that many of you have said that you would do anything to get rid of
Bush, so here is your chance. After all, what are the lives of a few
Democrats compared with ousting the rascals from office? Al-Qaeda have
repeatedly demonstrated that they are willing to sacrifice their lives
simply to get Bush out of office. Can you do less than a bunch of
foreigners? I say go for it. The more of you Democrats that go and get
yourselves killed, the better off this country is going to be.

--
Christopher J. Campbell
World Famous Flight Instructor
Port Orchard, WA


If you go around beating the Bush, don't complain if you rile the animals.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 08:26:58 -0700, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

Democrats! Here is your chance to so embarrass the Bush administration that
it will fall almost immediately!

Interesting satire, CJ.

Fortunately, nothing more needs to be done to get baby Bush out of
office than wait for the Presidential election in November. Michael
Moor's latest hit cinematic documentary provides all the information
necessary for any thinking American to make the right choice.

Larry Dighera wrote:
Fortunately, nothing more needs to be done to get baby Bush out of
office than wait for the Presidential election in November. Michael
Moor's latest hit cinematic documentary provides all the information
necessary for any thinking American to make the right choice.

A better description is a "mockumentary".
Moore's film is so full of falsehoods, it's funny.

Fortunately, nothing more needs to be done to get baby Bush out of
office than wait for the Presidential election in November. Michael
Moor's latest hit cinematic documentary provides all the information
necessary for any thinking American to make the right choice.

A better description is a "mockumentary".
Moore's film is so full of falsehoods, it's funny.



Like what, f'rinstance?
www.Rosspilot.com

"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...
Fortunately, nothing more needs to be done to get baby Bush out of
office than wait for the Presidential election in November. Michael
Moor's latest hit cinematic documentary provides all the information
necessary for any thinking American to make the right choice.

A better description is a "mockumentary".
Moore's film is so full of falsehoods, it's funny.



Like what, f'rinstance?

Like the bit about Afghan pipelines, f'rinstance. There aren't any. The rest
of the movie is just about as accurate as that. It is about as much a
documentary as "JFK" or "The Day After Tomorrow" were. Disney's cartoon
"Pocahontas" was probably more historically accurate, even though that film
had the main character's age, appearance, political opinions, and love
interests wrong. "Fahrenheit 9/11" makes "The Core" look like a respected
text on physics by comparison.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 23:54:56 -0700, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

Moore's film is so full of falsehoods, it's funny.



Like what, f'rinstance?

Like the bit about Afghan pipelines, f'rinstance. There aren't any.

Of course, you are correct about the pipeline's not yet being
constructed.

Moore's film puts forth the notion, that upon being made the new
leader of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, a former advisor to the Unocal
oil company, approved the construction of a natural gas pipeline
through Afghanistan. It also mentions, that VP Cheney stands to gain
from Halliburton's contracts to construct the pipeline
http://corpwatch.radicaldesigns.org/article.php?id=6008
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/tncs/2002/cheneyafghan.htm, and
the Bush family ties to the Carlisle Group pose a conflict of interest
http://www.hereinreality.com/carlyle.html.

There's an interesting account he
http://www.thedubyareport.com/oilwar.html

I don't recall seeing where Moore implied that the pipeline had
already been constructed, so I don't consider that a to be a
falsehood.

"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...
Fortunately, nothing more needs to be done to get baby Bush out of
office than wait for the Presidential election in November. Michael
Moor's latest hit cinematic documentary provides all the information
necessary for any thinking American to make the right choice.

A better description is a "mockumentary".
Moore's film is so full of falsehoods, it's funny.



Like what, f'rinstance?

I thought you might like a more complete list:

The footage of Gore celebrating his victory is actually footage from a party
early on election day. Contrary to the film, Fox News projected a Gore
victory in Florida. The movie implies that Fox was alone in projecting a
Bush victory. All the network projections were made before the polls had
closed in Florida.

The movie says that Gore would have won with any recount in Florida. In
fact, under most recounts, Bush's lead widened. The only way Gore could win
is if the military vote was allowed to be disenfranchised and only a few
heavily Democratic counties were recounted.

The suggestion that felons are not allowed to vote because of their race is
ridiculous.

Bush in fact was able to pass a large amount of his agenda before 9/11, such
as the tax cut. His Presidency was not stalled as the movie implies. The
main thing that was stalled was the confirmation of judges due to Democratic
filibustering, which was beginning to anger the public against Democrats.

Most of the so-called "vacation time" was actually meetings with foreign
leaders at Camp David.

Although Moore presents the terror attacks very dramatically, he himself
said at the time that he though they were no big deal.

Moore criticizes the President for continuing to read to school children.
What was he supposed to do? There were no facts indicating a terrorist
attack until the second plane. He was on TV. Was he supposed to jump from
his chair and run from the room screaming in panic?

Contrary to Moore's statement, the President read the security briefing of
September 6, 2001. What has been revealed of the briefing is extremely vague
and gives no hint of any action that could have been taken to prevent the
attacks.

The Saudis in fact did leave the country on September 13, the same day that
everyone else was allowed to fly. Moore himself wanted to fly on September
14, but was persuaded not to by his wife and daughter. Nevertheless he
claims that no one except terrorists wanted to fly that week. Is he calling
himself a terrorist?

The reason James Bath's name and medical records were blacked out on Bush's
National Guard records was because of Federal privacy laws, not an evil Bush
conspiracy.

Prince Bandar is a long-time contact with the US Government. He is a good
friend of Bill Clinton as well as Bush.

Bush's sale of the Harken stock was approved by the company's lawyers and no
one but Moore has suggested any impropriety with the sale.

Claiming that Bush is tied to bin Laden because he knows someone who worked
for someone who contracted with someone else that was related to another
company that was run by someone who worked for bin Laden's estranged father
is a little ridiculous, to say the least. Al Gore probably has closer ties
than that.

The extent of claimed Saudi investment in the United States is completely
unsupported by the facts.

Bush quotes about terrorism in Israel are edited to remove references to
Israel. The Bush-Saudi conspiracy theory is completely unsupported by any
verifiable facts.

The Unocal pipeline in Afghanistan does not exist and could hardly be the
object of a Bush-Taliban conspiracy.

The Bush "welcome" of Hashemi was limited to a statement by Richard Boucher,
who said "we don't recognize the existence of any government in
Afghanistan." Some welcome.

After spending most of the movie trying to link Bush and bin Laden in a
conspiracy to commit terrorism, Moore suddenly changes tack and suggests
that bin Laden is innocent. Moore does not, however, show that any of the
evidence against bin Laden is wrong, including bin Laden's own taped
admission that he was responsible for the terrorist attack.

Moore questions the censoring of 28 pages of the 9/11 investigation. Good
for him. Even Moore cannot bat 0. Nevertheless, the censorship is probably
due to genuine security concerns rather than to cover up a fictitious
conspiracy.

Voters knew they were voting for Carnahan's wife in Missouri, not a dead
man. However, given Moore's demonstrated level of intelligence, he himself
might not have been able to figure that one out.

Bush increase funding for anti-terrorism at the FBI. The movie claims he cut
it.

Goss does indeed have a toll free number. The movie claims he does not.

Moore apparently does not realize that Oregon manages and pays for its state
troopers, not the federal government.

Numerous Palestinian bombers were funded by Saddam Hussein; even Moore does
not dispute that. Americans have been murdered by these bombers. Moore makes
the ridiculous claim that Hussein is not responsible for that.

Saddam Hussein made numerous threats to attack American targets. Moore says
he did not.

Condoleezza Rice's statement about an Iraq/al Qaeda link is taken out of
context. In fact, she said that Iraq promotes hatred of the United States
and funds terrorists, both of which facts were well known.

The scenes of pre-invasion Iraq filled with happy, smiling children are
dismissive of Hussein's genocide, use of weapons of mass destruction against
his own people, and brutal reign of terror.

Moore seems to think that we never kill anyone but women and children. That
is just plain insulting.

Moore leaves Spain, Italy, Poland, and England out of the "coalition of the
willing," implying that only tiny, inconsequential countries were part of
the coalition.

Moore conveniently ignores the softball coverage that Rather and Jennings
ran of Iraq before the war. He also ignores that these anchors have
consistently criticized the war.

Moore's scene of prisoner abuse contains no prisoners.

Moore talks about Bush closing underutilized Veteran's hospitals, without
mentioning Bush sponsored increases in pay and benefits for the military and
opening of new Veteran's hospitals.

Moore criticizes Congress members for not wanting to sacrifice their
children in Iraq. Give me a break. No soldier or his family wants him to
die.

Moore is not from Flint, Michigan as he claims in the movie. Flint's
unemployment rate has not been as high as 17% since 1993. Persons whose
unemployment insurance runs out are still counted as unemployed.

Moore does get interviews with rabid Bush-hater Tom Daschle and Saddam
sympathizer Jim McDermott. The only reason McDermott has not been charged
with treason is that he is a Congressman.

Moore has been contacted by several terrorist organizations and fronts
offering to support and promote the film in any way they can.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Moore does get interviews with rabid Bush-hater Tom Daschle and Saddam
sympathizer Jim McDermott. The only reason McDermott has not been charged
with treason is that he is a Congressman.

Visiting CJ's world is a fascinating escapist diversion. As usual, CJ cites
no sources for any of his claims, so let's just look briefly at his most
outlandish assertion. The right-wing fabrication concerning McDermott's
"sympathy" for Saddam Hussein was exposed in an earlier thread here that CJ
participated in. Here's a quick recap. (Unlike CJ, I provide actual quotes
and sources.)

In an interview two years ago, George Stephanopoulos asked McDermott what
the Iraqi officials had told him about inspectors' access to the suspect
sites. McDermott replied (emphasis added), "They said they would allow us to
go and look anywhere we wanted, AND UNTIL THEY DON'T DO THAT, there is no
need to do this coercive stuff where you bring in helicopters and armed
people and storm buildings. I think you have to take the Iraqis on their
face value." (ABC News, 29 September 2002)

So McDermott said we should TEST Iraq's pledge to allow unfettered
inspections, by taking the pledge at "face value" only in the sense of
proceeding with the inspections until and unless the pledge is violated.
Subsequently, right-wing commentators dishonestly quoted the face-value
sentence without any of the preceding context, making it sound as though
McDermott had simply proclaimed that whatever the Iraqis say should be
trusted without question! This distortion then further morphed into
McDermott's "sympathy" for Saddam (whom McDermott, in reality, condemns).

But that's still not rabid enough for CJ, who now tells us that McDermott's
conduct is treasonous. CJ thinks we live in a country where disagreeing with
the president about weapons-inspection policy constitutes treason! And if CJ
had his way, this would indeed be such a country.

--Gary

Rosspilot wrote:

Like what, f'rinstance?
www.Rosspilot.com

WNYC carried an interview with another filmmaker who discussed the film. One of the
biggest problems with Moore's work is his deliberate slanting of things by presenting
them out of context. The interviewee compared it to the butcher jobs that CBS became
famous for in the 70s. One glaring example given was the excerpt from one of Bush's
interviews in which he's promising to fight terrorists (I believe they said it was on
a golf course). In the movie, this is presented as happening in reaction to 9/11,
which makes the audience think Bush is referring to Bin Laden and his ilk. The
statement about "pursuing them wherever they may hide" is presented as intention to
pursue an invasion of Iraq. In reality, the speech was given months before 9/11 and
the topic of discussion was the suicide bombers in Irael.

Whatever it is, it is *not* a documentary.

George Patterson
In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault.
In Tennessee, it's evangelism.

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:05:53 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote:

One glaring example given was the excerpt from one of Bush's
interviews in which he's promising to fight terrorists (I believe they said it was on
a golf course). In the movie, this is presented as happening in reaction to 9/11,
which makes the audience think Bush is referring to Bin Laden and his ilk. The
statement about "pursuing them wherever they may hide" is presented as intention to
pursue an invasion of Iraq.

The clip you reference above depicts a smug world leader who feigns
concern for world affairs while obviously being considerably more
interested in his golf swing.

You really should see the movie before you comment on it.