Oh the controversy! Now that Fahrenheit 9/11 is out on DVD..

---

Posted by FutureMrsH

---

Posted by june262004

How about how we had bin laden cornered???? But got Saddam instead? No beef just asking?

---

Where did you hear that? Clinton did, back in '93. If we would have gotten him then, 9-11 would not have happened.

---

Its all over the news.

---

Posted by june262004

---

Posted by FutureMrsH

---

Posted by june262004

How about how we had bin laden cornered???? But got Saddam instead? No beef just asking?

---

Where did you hear that? Clinton did, back in '93. If we would have gotten him then, 9-11 would not have happened.

---

Its all over the news.

---

Really, where? hmm...that's funny. I did a search, searched news pages...nothing. Nothing in the paper about that either. Maybe everyone missed something?

Home > Features > Issues > War on Terror > Article
Bin Laden 'cornered' by troops
February 23, 2004

Print this article
Email to a friend



US and British special forces have cornered al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in a mountainous area in north-west Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border, London's Sunday Express reported.

Quoting 'a US intelligence source', it said bin Laden and 'up to 50 fanatical henchmen' were inside an area 16 kilometres wide and deep 'north of the town of Khanozai and Quetta'. According to the source, bin Laden moved to the area one month ago.

- AFP

---

Posted by FutureMrsH

---

Posted by june262004

---

Posted by FutureMrsH

---

Posted by june262004

How about how we had bin laden cornered???? But got Saddam instead? No beef just asking?

---

Where did you hear that? Clinton did, back in '93. If we would have gotten him then, 9-11 would not have happened.

---

Its all over the news.

---

Really, where? hmm...that's funny. I did a search, searched news pages...nothing. Nothing in the paper about that either. Maybe everyone missed something?

---

Did you watch the debates? They discussed this!

---

Posted by june262004



Home > Features > Issues > War on Terror > Article
Bin Laden 'cornered' by troops
February 23, 2004

Print this article
Email to a friend



US and British special forces have cornered al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in a mountainous area in north-west Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border, London's Sunday Express reported.

Quoting 'a US intelligence source', it said bin Laden and 'up to 50 fanatical henchmen' were inside an area 16 kilometres wide and deep 'north of the town of Khanozai and Quetta'. According to the source, bin Laden moved to the area one month ago.

- AFP

---

The link does not work, could you post it (the link)? Hurry, hurry I've got to go to bed.

Maybe I did miss something, but from what I understand of the debates, Kerry was saying that Iraq was a distraction from Bin Laden

---

Posted by FutureMrsH

---

Posted by june262004



Home > Features > Issues > War on Terror > Article
Bin Laden 'cornered' by troops
February 23, 2004

Print this article
Email to a friend



US and British special forces have cornered al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in a mountainous area in north-west Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border, London's Sunday Express reported.

Quoting 'a US intelligence source', it said bin Laden and 'up to 50 fanatical henchmen' were inside an area 16 kilometres wide and deep 'north of the town of Khanozai and Quetta'. According to the source, bin Laden moved to the area one month ago.

- AFP

---

The link does not work, could you post it (the link)? Hurry, hurry I've got to go to bed.

---

Well I posted the story. I closed the link I gotta find it. Hold on...

My boss isn't going to understand that I overslept for work because I was on LIW all night...

---

Posted by FutureMrsH

My boss isn't going to understand that I overslept for work because I was on LIW all night...

---

Well I tried to go back to it and its one of those stupid sites that you have to register for it to get into it the gave me a free trial for that one story I guess.

---

Posted by june262004

---

Posted by FutureMrsH

My boss isn't going to understand that I overslept for work because I was on LIW all night...

---

Well I tried to go back to it and its one of those stupid sites that you have to register for it to get into it the gave me a free trial for that one story I guess.

---

Oh well, maybe we will try again tomorrow. I gots to go to beddy bye! Good night June! Please know, I don't take this stuff too seriously. I am trying to postpone writing my thesis is all

http://www.talonnews.com/news/2004/february/0224_bin_laden.shtml

I think this is what you are talking about. Its a tabloid, like the star or enquirer. I would give that limited validitiy.

I cannot believe what the dems are saying that 'we had Bin Laden cornered and just -let him go-'.

That is a bunch of BS. You want to know why?

If you don't think that Bush has EVERYBODY looking for Bin Laden.... you have to be crazy. If Bush finds and captures Bin Laden now... he is a SHOE-IN to win the election. Its in his best own interest to find him. And you don't need 'numbers' to look for him. But I am sure Bush has his TOP PEOPLE on the hunt for him.

He is not going to say it publically on the debate though... 'yeah we are looking for bin laden cause i know if i get him you will all vote for me'. LOL doesn't work that way

I don't think anyone said they were voting for anyone based on any film. However, someone DID mention voting for ander because pearl jam said so

For a lot fo the things MM presents, there IS no other side. Bush did stand in fonrt of a big 'mission Accomplished'sign and yet the violence in iraq has increased, there were no weapons of mass destruction in iraq. most congressmen did NOT read the USA PATRIOT Act. The Onely other side would be to try to mitiagte it witht eh same old song and dance 'oh, the rest of the binladens are good, only osama is bad.' Why didn't the FBI question the bin laden family? Why were they allowd to leave the country? What IS the toher side of that? I don't even want to hear the excuse for it, because there IS none. There is no excuse for calling a nation a frined when it allows the most atrocious of human rights records. I just don't think there IS anther side. You could include a lot of good stuff that Bush has done, but that wouldn't make the point, it wouldn;t make any point. You'd walk away saying 'well, bush has done some bad things and some good' which you may walk away saying anyway, if you already ahve prior knowledge of good things bush has done, but that wouldn't be a good documentary. I really believe a documentary is not meant to be like an extended news report (and even those are edited for shock and emotional value)...it's meant to evoke certain emotions. not that it was a documentary, but schindler's list wasn't there to just dpcumnet the holocaust, but to evoke emtions, and it didn't show the 'other side' In fact I've never seena documentary about the holocaust that showed the 'other side' of the nazi party.

---

Posted by marymoon
'oh, the rest of the binladens are good, only osama is bad.' Why didn't the FBI question the bin laden family? Why were they allowd to leave the country? What IS the toher side of that? I don't even want to hear the excuse for it, because there IS none.

---

How can you say there is no other side of the story and then proceed to ask all of these 'why' questions? Is that not counter-intuitive to you?? There is always another side to the story. You may not like what you hear but there is ALWAYS another side.

I love how people consider themselves liberal but it's only with respect to what they themselves believe! You don't believe in true free speech and democratic values if you're saying there is no other side of the story and even if there is, I don't care what it is. Hello?? Hear everything, then form an opinion - that's how educated, intelligent decisions are made.

Not to add fuel to the fire here....but regardless of what we read in the news, see on TV or hear people debate about, do you honestly think we ever get the whole story from all sides? I don't. I think it is impossible to get the whole story, and in some cases I don't think we should. I think the mere proces of us knowing puts this country in danger (I am thinking of that a$$hole Geraldo, who felt it was 'good television' to give away the soldier's positions on live TV )

I think rather, what happens is that we, for the most part, try to do what has been mentioned before. We gather up as much info from as many sides as possible & try to fill in the blanks to find the truth. What frustrates me (& I am sure many of you who are still here debating) are people who do not care enough to try and make an educated decision, yet tell us that we are wrong in what. We can disagree, as long as we disagree in an intelligent manner. JMHO

I'm just saying that I can't imagine anything that anyone could tell me that would mitigate the vast corruption of the current administration. If somsoen wants to make a george Bush is tmy hero movie, I'll gladly watch it, but I don't think it will mitigate anything, and I don't think that a filmmker needs to.

If somsone is making a documentary about George W Bush, do they need to include all of the stuff from 9/11? Of course not. A documentary, just like al news, is not unbiased. I don't think it should be. Bias is a good thing in news in some regards because on the most basic level, the editors decide what is and is not important to see. if they didn't make those decisions, every news story would get literally 2 seconds because there would be so much ut forward. On Fox News, they have something like 6 republicans for every democrat, Hannity and COlmes is basically Hannity, and umm..that other guy. But if and when I watch Fox News, i KNOW that, and that's what's important. When you go in to see something like Fahrenheit 9/11 you KNOW you're not going to see the rosier side of Dubya. There's no such thing as an unbiased documentary. We probably shouldn;t go back and forth about this for another day, but I just don't think a documentary needs to be unbiased. It woulnd't be effective, it wouldn't be interesting and it wouldn't be meaningful, IMO.

I will rent the movie even though I know a lot of it is stretched truth and rhetoric on the part of MM pushing his agenda.

I have read that MM does in fact 'spin' the truth is his 'documentaries' - in Bowling for Columbine he twisted facts around in many examples. He used footage to show the National Rifle Assoc being held in Columbine after the tragedy and Charlton Heston screaming we will not back down when it was really old footage at another convention and taken out of context. He uses his filmmaking to spin the truth. While I think his stuff can be entertaining, remember its not the whole truth and is definitely biased.

Another example in Bowling is that he used the title to show that the killers were so callous as to go bowling before they killed. But that actually never happened.

MM has made many anti-American statements too, calling Americans stupid.

check it out--

http://www.scaryjohnkerry.com/moore.htm

Mary, I agree..and I think we are, in a way, reiterating each other's point.

I think knowing the source is key.

About it being good that the media is biased..I was all for this until deregulation, because the pickings have gotten slim. After the telecommunications act of 1996 that allowed one media conglomerate to own more than 4 networks and other cross media companies in a single market, well, like I said, the pickings got slim. In reality I think 5 media conglomerates control all largely distributed mass media in NY, LA, DC, CHI..etc. That I do not like.