Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News > MICHAEL MOORE LIED
Reload this Page Reply to Thread
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Thread: MICHAEL MOORE LIED Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Jun 3rd, 2004 02:07 PM
AChimp Maybe Moore talked to Barne' wife!
Jun 3rd, 2004 12:07 PM
El Blanco I meant in regards to this

Quote:
Each one is basically saying the other is jerk, a hypocrite and a liar.
Jun 3rd, 2004 11:01 AM
mburbank Moore says he interviewed him by phone. Barnes says he's never spoken to Moore. On that part at least, one of them is wrong.
Jun 3rd, 2004 10:55 AM
El Blanco Would it shock you if they were both right?
Jun 3rd, 2004 09:53 AM
mburbank Simply; one of them is lying.

I don't see a way to determine which one. Both scenarios strike me as plausible. The 'burden of proof' doesn't apply here, no one is on trial. It's a small issue. I think anyone who believes it's clear which one of them is lieing (or stretching, or forgetting) is being silly.

I want Moore to be telling the truth, I want him to be right, I'm on Moores side, but that doesn't mean I can't see perfectly clearly that this is just one persons word against another.

Each one is basically saying the other is jerk, a hypocrite and a liar. Does it come as any surprise that each of them would think that about the other?
Jun 2nd, 2004 08:54 PM
El Blanco
Quote:
Originally Posted by AChimp
Yep, because Barnes is the super celebrity of the world, just like the Pope, and he has dozens of levels of office secretaries in his own home that screen his phone calls. It's not even remotely possible that he hauls his own ass off of his Corinthian leather couch to answer his own phone at home.
I said nothing like that. Nothing. Give it up.

It is completly reasonable for Barnes to have a secretary at work and have an unlisted phone number at home.

Maybe he went to Barnes' press agent. Then the PA, would atleast give Barnes a heads up as to who was about to call.

Quote:
Oh, but I thought that Barnes had a secret phone number and lived in an underground cave and had armies of lawyers combing the media for references to him!
No, in fact that is quite the opposite of my point. You are taking what I said and tried to twist it into something completly different. I guess Moore does have an affect on the youth of today.

Quote:
If he didn't find out about it for TEN YEARS, then it must not have made very many waves at the time, huh?
It was about a paragraph in "Stupid White Men". If Barnes has no intrest in the book, and he hangs with other people who feel the same, it isn't hard to see how it escaped his notice for the last 2 1/2 years.


Quote:
And when it shows up in a best-selling book? You issue a single statement of denial, end of story.
which he has done

Quote:
You don't go parading yourself around and write pieces of your own to attack back with, because all you're doing is lending credence to Moore's position.
Good thing that isn't what he did. Moore has spent a greater amount of time on this whole ugliness than Barnes.

Quote:
Seriously, the people that Moore criticizes need to hire better PR agents.
Maybe Moore needs to find a smarter demographic. But then again, he'd go broke.
Jun 2nd, 2004 08:16 PM
AChimp
Quote:
Why the hell would Barnes take his call, or atleast tell him to piss off after hearing the sarcastic question.
Quote:
They don't talk to the Pope. They might get through to some high ranking bishop if they are lucky and get their hands on a good number, but its not like they are tapped into JP2's hotline.
Yep, because Barnes is the super celebrity of the world, just like the Pope, and he has dozens of levels of office secretaries in his own home that screen his phone calls. It's not even remotely possible that he hauls his own ass off of his Corinthian leather couch to answer his own phone at home.

Quote:
He wasn't aware of it. He then found out it appeared in a best seller from about 3 years ago.

And why is it when Moore writes a response, he is valiantly defending himself against losers and nutjobs with nothing better to do than criticize him, but Barnes is just whining and crying?
Oh, but I thought that Barnes had a secret phone number and lived in an underground cave and had armies of lawyers combing the media for references to him! If he didn't find out about it for TEN YEARS, then it must not have made very many waves at the time, huh?

And when it shows up in a best-selling book? You issue a single statement of denial, end of story. You don't go parading yourself around and write pieces of your own to attack back with, because all you're doing is lending credence to Moore's position. That's what whining and crying about it is.

Seriously, the people that Moore criticizes need to hire better PR agents.
Jun 2nd, 2004 07:48 PM
Perndog I really like that last question. But I'm sure some uber-liberal is going to think of a perfectly reasonable justification. Right.
Jun 2nd, 2004 04:37 PM
El Blanco
Quote:
Originally Posted by AChimp
Of course he didn't have it tattooed on his ass. He does, however, have access to sources where he can get that kind of information. It's not like Fred Barnes is an ultra-popular celebrity that has to live in secrecy and hide from the world, lest the paparazzi go nuts.
ITs not like no one knows who and what Moore is, either. Why the hell would Barnes take his call, or atleast tell him to piss off after hearing the sarcastic question.

Quote:
Haven't you heard of those radio stations that try to boost popularity by prank-calling the Pope? How do they get that number, hmm?
They don't talk to the Pope. They might get through to some high ranking bishop if they are lucky and get their hands on a good number, but its not like they are tapped into JP2's hotline.

Quote:
Quibbling about how Moore actually went about making the telephone call is meaningless.
Actually, the point is whether he made the call and had this conversation. He has to prove he did. Barnes doesn't have to prove he didn't.

Quote:
You're failing to see that Barnes is only complaining about it NOW, ten years later. It would be better to just ignore it at this point than whine and cry.
He wasn't aware of it. He then found out it appeared in a best seller from about 3 years ago.

And why is it when Moore writes a response, he is valiantly defending himself against losers and nutjobs with nothing better to do than criticize him, but Barnes is just whining and crying?
Jun 2nd, 2004 12:20 AM
AChimp Of course he didn't have it tattooed on his ass. He does, however, have access to sources where he can get that kind of information. It's not like Fred Barnes is an ultra-popular celebrity that has to live in secrecy and hide from the world, lest the paparazzi go nuts.

Haven't you heard of those radio stations that try to boost popularity by prank-calling the Pope? How do they get that number, hmm?

Quibbling about how Moore actually went about making the telephone call is meaningless. You're failing to see that Barnes is only complaining about it NOW, ten years later. It would be better to just ignore it at this point than whine and cry.
Jun 2nd, 2004 12:04 AM
El Blanco Moore said he just up and made a phjone call, not a real, formal interview. Barnes said it never happened at all.

Am I the only who finds it hard to believe that Michael Moore has the home phone number of someone the likes of Barnes within easy reach like he would make a social call?
Jun 1st, 2004 11:44 PM
AChimp Someone interviews you, and you don't follow up by reading what they say about you? Even better, you don't whine about it until a decade after the fact.

Excuse me while I .
Jun 1st, 2004 11:08 PM
El Blanco According to Barnes, he doesn't like Moore and never bothered reading any of his stuff until lately. It was whe na friend brought it up to him a few months back that he decided to give his side of the story.
Jun 1st, 2004 03:17 PM
Brandon WELL YOU MIGHT AS WELL JUST CHANGE THE FUCKING TITLE TO "SSPAD CHALLENGES VINTH"
Jun 1st, 2004 03:10 PM
mburbank Wait a sec, wait a sec now, this thread is about Michael Moore? Since when?

Seriously, though, wasn't it a possability right from the go it was Barnes who was lying?
Jun 1st, 2004 03:05 PM
Brandon Michael Moore replies:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/la...ndex.php?id=19

May 31st, 2004 12:29 pm
WACKO ATTACKO #2 – FRED BARNES FLUNKS – AGAIN!

On January 18, 1988, I published an interview with Fred Barnes in a publication which I edited at the time, called Moore’s Weekly. I interviewed Mr. Barnes about his comments on the January 2, 1988 edition of "The McLaughlin Report," in which he expressed support for then Secretary of the Education William Bennett’s theory that high school curriculum should be dominated by courses in classic Greek and English literature.

I asked Fred to share his views about two well-known classics, "the Iliad" by Homer and Dante’s Inferno. Barnes reiterated to me that these books are "what everybody oughta learn. They’re easy to read."

In the course of my interview, I decided to give him a pop quiz. As you can see, Fred didn’t do so well.

The conservative paper, The Washington Times, liked my interview with Mr. Barnes and the paper wrote about it in their January 22, 1988 "Inside the Beltway" column. The Washington Times is the kind of paper Fred Barnes probably reads before he gets out of bed in the morning.

Fred Barnes did not complain when I published the interview with him 16-years-ago. He did not complain when the Washington Times article appeared in 1988. It was not until April 2002, when Stupid White Men came out, which recounted the Mr. Barnes interview, that Fox's Brit Hume reported, "Fred Barnes told me today that he never talked to Moore in his life, and that he has read both 'The Odyssey' and 'The Iliad' cover to cover in college."

Now that that my movie Fahrenheit 9-11 is receiving significant attention, Mr. Barnes has seen fit to publicly deny the whole thing again, even though I last referenced the interview in a book published two years ago.

Now, the cynically-inclined might say that Mr. Barnes, who has steadily faded into obscurity as an editor of a small circulation weekly, is trying to take advantage of the moment. I prefer to give Mr. Barnes the benefit of the doubt and credit his belated complaint to a fading memory. We all forget things sometimes, Fred. No hard feelings here.

Michael Moore
-----------------------------------

Moore also put links to the original articles on the site.
May 28th, 2004 02:07 PM
Helm The day a picture of vinth is posted will be the happiest day for all attending the photoshops and picture captions forum.
May 28th, 2004 01:59 PM
mburbank "Uhhhng, no camera bad man! Camera steal Vinth soul!! "
-Vinth "Caveman" Clambake.

He doesn't want you to bring a camera so when you tell us he's still fairly fat he can say you're lieing. That and he still can figure out how to get the false eyelashes off.
May 28th, 2004 01:18 PM
sspadowsky I'm bringing the camera. In the even that he doesn't show, I'll take pictures of where he would have been standing if he had made it.
May 28th, 2004 01:15 PM
Anonymous Here's what will happen:

A). Vince won't bother to show up, and when Sspad returns to the boards to ask where he was, he'll say something like, "ha, you liberals are so easily manipulated!"

or

B). Vince shows up, not expecting Ssspad to follow through. However, he spots Sspad from a distance, and flees the scene, racing back to his computer so that he can make a post saying that Sspad never showed. Then, when Sspad makes a post saying that he did show, Vince will try to dismiss it as a lie.
May 28th, 2004 01:01 PM
AChimp I bet it's your chubby cheeks. No matter how much weight they lose, fat people can never get rid of their chubby cheeks.
May 28th, 2004 01:00 PM
sspadowsky

Whatever. I'm still skeptical about whether you'll be there at all, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
May 28th, 2004 12:55 PM
VinceZeb I do not like to have my picture taken. It's that simple. What I look like is not important. It's the fact that I do not like to have my picture taken.
May 28th, 2004 12:52 PM
sspadowsky
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew Katsikas
This better happen.
Count on it, my friend.
May 28th, 2004 12:48 PM
sspadowsky
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceZeb
No cameras. I don't like my picture being taken. Sorry.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, what, so now all bets are off? What the hell is this? Listen, Skippy, I'm showing up and I'm bringing a camera with me. Besides, I'm going to know what you look like anyway, so what's the fucking difference?
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:49 PM.

I-Mockery.com - Archive - Top

© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.