June 19, 2007

"This was an inside job," says Michael Moore of the pirating of his film "Sicko."

Someone with access to the master uploaded the movie to YouTube, but who? Yesterday, I speculated that Moore himself was behind the link. I'm not the only one, because Moore was asked about this and denied it. He turned the suspicion on competitors: "Who do you think benefits from that?"
The Weinstein Co. is distributing the $9 million documentary through Lionsgate but handling all marketing and other costs not related to theatrical distribution. A Weinstein Co. source said that the company has hired several firms that specialize in dealing with piracy and is taking "a very aggressive approach to protecting the film."

"Every DVD screener that comes from the Weinstein Co. is watermarked and traceable," Weinstein Co. general counsel Peter Hurwitz said. "We are actively investigating who illegally uploaded 'Sicko' to the Internet, and we will take appropriate action against that person(s)."
Good! I hope they find the culprit so I can be cured of my suspicion.

117 comments:

Virtually Actual said...

I was willing to entertain socialized medicine, but now Moore is in favor of the socialized dissemination of cultural products? That is beyond the pale.

...except, isn't that how NPR operates?

steve simels said...

Good! Ihope they find the culprit so I can be cured of my suspicion.

The level of narcissism here is rather stunning.

Ann's motto: L'histoire, c'est moi!

dave™© said...

Good! I hope they find the culprit so I can be cured of my suspicion.

Considering your "suspicions" yesterday were absolutely, positively 100% wrong, this statement is more amusing than usual.

Isn't it a little early to have already polished off a box of wine?

shrimplate said...

Pharmacological patents are sacred protector-agents of capitalist innovative risk, but movie copyrights are nothing but shrill socialist market interventions that eat away at the foundations of freedom in America.

Heheheh.

jane said...

"This was an inside job, a copy made from a high-quality master and could potentially impact the opening weekend boxoffice. Who do you think benefits from that?"

Presumably the public doesn’t know employees associated with the film or anyone close to Moore who would profit by bootlegging his work, so he sounds as if he’s suggesting political opponents- Bush, Cheney and maybe a very covert Hollywood Repub- are trying to hurt him in a Watergate way.

As sure as the sun rises, Moore makes conspiratorial rumblings before his movies get released. We can only wonder who benefits from them.

Mike said...

Sicko? Michael Moore wrote an autobiography?

Luckyoldson said...

jane,
do you EVER write anything that doesn't bear the stench of right wing inuendo?

when you say: "so he sounds as if he’s suggesting political opponents- Bush, Cheney and maybe a very covert Hollywood Repub- are trying to hurt him in a Watergate way"...are you actually suggesting that bush and cheney would rather have 100's of millions of people around the world see the film for free...then pay for it at a theater??? even you can't be that dense.

and i certainly have to admit, the bush/cheney team have already proven themselves to be less than brilliant, but to help distribute a michael moore film is beyond the pale...even for these guys.

right now, pirating and "posting" of damn near everything in hollywood is a huge problem and ends up costing the producers and actors untold millions of dollars...so i also find ann's suggestion that moore or the weinstein brothers would forego profits by releasing it for free is laughable at best.

**Oh, off topic, but I knew many here would want to know about this:

Glenn Greenwald’s new book about Bush, "A Tragic Legacy," just hit Amazon and it’s already up to # 35 on the charts. (Update: It’s climbing…ranked # 12…)

Luckyoldson said...

mikey,
i know you're going to hate hearing this, but even your favorite news source, FOX...gave it a rave review.

sorry.

Bea Arthur said...

Jesus! You people!

The Professor here wondered who ripped this movie off (with the ghost of Abbie Hoffmann hovering around), and you jump down her throat for using the first-person?

How is she supposed to say it? It's her blog, for chrissakes.

You want she should use the third-person?

(Best Ronald Coleman accent): "One had one's suspicions. It would be a fructifying thing, indeed, to have them allayed."

Or maybe she should just worship the little greasy bastard who made this instant classic. You think we'll be quoting lines from it 40 years from now? I haven't seen it. Tell me, is there like a "Rosebud" in it or something?

PatCA said...

But if Moore is only interested in educating us about The Truth, why would he object to the pirating?

steve simels said...

Everyhing the preening narcissist posts is about her.

Like I said -- her motto is
L'histoire c'est moi!

Freeman Hunt said...

Somewhere, someone has ended a career in movies by uploading that film.

Luckyoldson said...

bea,
she also said she thought moore himself may have done it.

do people here actually think michael moore has no responsibilities relating to the people who put up the money to make the film? the people involved in the film who's wages may be tied to the profits?

*and, as for patca's inane comment: sure, moore is certainly interested in "educating the public,' and he does a great job of it...but...THE MOVIE WAS FINANCED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE DRIVEN BY "PROFITS."

duh.

dave™© said...

Glenn Greenwald’s new book about Bush, "A Tragic Legacy," just hit Amazon and it’s already up to # 35 on the charts. (Update: It’s climbing…ranked # 12…)

Stupid liberal! Blithering Misogynist Idiot's book has sold more than th-- ohwaitaminnit...

AJ Lynch said...

That leads to the question...who are Moore's competitors?

Other lib film makers, The Michelin Man, Rosie, The Hamburglar, Wimpy from the Popeye cartoons, that German lady propagandist Reifenstahl??

steve simels said...

AJ Lynch said...
That leads to the question...who are Moore's competitors?...that German lady propagandist Reifenstahl??


Wow. Comparing a liberal to a Nazi.

That seems so apt, albeit only on the Bizarro World.

Joe Hogan said...

While everyone is speculating and arguing about the heinous theft of Moore's work, has anyone checked YouTube recently to actually see the movie? If you do you will find that it is, in fact, not even there.

Do a search for Sicko at YouTube and all you will see are official trailers and pieces of the film released by Michael Moore or the film companies. If it ever was actually there for some brief period of time, it has since been removed by YouTube, presumably at the demand of the filmmakers.

Has anyone ever heard the phrase, publicity stunt? I, for one, won't be playing Mr. Moore's game any longer.

AJ Lynch said...

Steve:
I can tell you are a lib because you lack a sense of humor.

Answer this question: Who is generally behind smoking bans in privately-owned restaurants, transfat bans in entire cities, creating state obesity programs, bicycle helmet laws for adults? Crap like that which abridge our freedoms in general.

Jeff said...

"Wow. Comparing a liberal to a Nazi.

That seems so apt, albeit only on the Bizarro World."

Are you kidding me?

steve simels said...

Answer this question: Who is generally behind smoking bans in privately-owned restaurants, transfat bans in entire cities, creating state obesity programs, bicycle helmet laws for adults? Crap like that which abridge our freedoms in general.


Obviously, the same wonderful people that brought us the Holocaust.

You're a mongrel idiot.

Mr.Murder said...

THIS WAS NO INSIDE JOB! TEH FILM IMPLODED ON ITS OWN!
(/Merkin Patriot)

Luckyoldson said...

aj lynch says: "Answer this question: Who is generally behind smoking bans in privately-owned restaurants, transfat bans in entire cities, creating state obesity programs, bicycle helmet laws for adults? Crap like that which abridge our freedoms in general."

let's see now: smoking kills about 365,000 a year, heart disease kills another 450,000 a year, in 1997, at least 22% of the pedal cyclists who were killed or seriously injured were not wearing a helmet...(and you don't even want to see how many motorcyclists are killed.)

can you imagine a group of people (liberals) attempting to make americans healthier or save lives through simple safety measures???

i mean, who are these maniacs??

jane said...

“*and keep in mind, this from one who fully supported the "plot and scandal" of clinton getting blojobs...hillary killing vince and anything else that rush/sean/bill/ann/michael tell her to believe.” (lying Luckyoldson)

You’re still an insulting, assaulting jerk who didn’t document his animal droppings from last night as I had asked you to do, since I don’t go around and accuse you of picking your nose and smearing it under tabletops without actual evidence.

Here’s Moore claiming a corporate-Republican cabal out to squelch his artistic/ political oevre:

“Producing company Miramax was forbidden from releasing Fahrenheit 9/11 by its parent company, Walt Disney. When Michael Moore went public about the ban, Disney president Michael Eisner accused the director of cheap self-promotion, since the controversial documentary was to be shown at the Cannes Film Festival in a matter of days. Moore retorted that Eisner had vetoed the distribution of his film because the studio head was afraid that Florida governor Jeb Bush, George W.'s brother, would retaliate by axing tax breaks granted to Disneyworld and other Disney businesses in that state.”

More alleged nasty Republican doings to hurt Moore:

“In a letter dated May 2, the treasury department notified Moore that it was investigating him for unlicensed travel to Cuba, or, as the missive put it, engaging in "travel-related transactions involving Cuba."

”Now team Moore is hitting back. Weinstein has hired an attorney, David Boies, who has lodged a request under the US freedom of information act to find out what motivated the treasury to begin its investigation. "They have to tell us why they did it and what they did," said Weinstein. "And they are not too happy about it."

”Weinstein believes the investigation has a political agenda. "We want to find out who motivated this. We suspect there may be interference from another office," he said. "Otherwise, I don't understand why this would have come about."

”Weinstein named no suspects in this putative political interference, but referred to outspoken critics of Moore on the Republican right - who tend to accuse him of peddling propaganda rather than of undertaking serious journalism - including presidential hopeful Bob Thompson.

"Senator Thompson has come out with a tirade against Michael. Michael said he'd debate him, but Thompson turned him down," said Weinstein. He also said that insurers and pharmaceutical companies had "already sent out letters advising employees how to react when the film comes out".

”Weinstein appeared to be enjoying the brouhaha that the film is stirring up before it has even screened. "I've already told the Treasury that they are saving me money on advertising."

The only question is- are Moore and cohorts genuine paranoid nuts or just nuts for conspiracy-driven profits?

Luckyoldson said...

jane, you ignorant...oh, you know.

there's absolutely nothing in your silly posting that relates to moore ever accusing or even implying the republicans were going to "release his film to the internet." (that's the topic at hand)

as for the other posting about clinton, etc., i have no idea what the hell you're talking about...(especially when we ALL know that you did indeed support what the republicans did to clinton.)

*by the way, whatever writing course you took...didn't take.

Luckyoldson said...

murder...you're killing us.

vnjagvet said...

The conventional wisdom among PR types is that any publicity is good publicity.

Especially effective to likely attendees of a Moore production would be a well publicized story of an attempt to "silence" him or to damage him economically.

Viola' -- one appears.

Transparent attempt says I.

Now I will await the onslaught from the usual suspects

Luckyoldson said...

vnjagvet said..."The conventional wisdom among PR types is that any publicity is good publicity."

that is true, but generally the comment relates to the "publicity" resulting in additional revenues...not a freebie for the entire world...which in turn would curtail ticket sales.

i doubt there are many producer or actors who would suggest first throwing their productions onto the internet for "free"...before selling any tickets at a theater.

somebody on the inside got their hands on a copy and posted it. it happens every day. (there were 1,000's of the latest pirate's movie being sold in china before the damn thing even hit the theaters...and i bet they didn't give it to them first.)

An Edjamikated Redneck said...

let's see now: smoking kills about 365,000 a year, heart disease kills another 450,000 a year, in 1997, at least 22% of the pedal cyclists who were killed or seriously injured were not wearing a helmet...(and you don't even want to see how many motorcyclists are killed.)

Add it up Lucky- less than a million people a year. Yeah that sounds like a lot, but it is less than 0.3% of our legal population.

What other causes are killing 0.3% of the population that we need to pass legislation to prevent? How about alcohol, or illegal drugs?

Besides, its not up to you to decide what kills me. If I want to ride a bike or motorcycle without a helmut, or drive my car without a seatbelt, chalk it up to Darwin if it kills me.

If it doesn't, chalk it up to Nietzsche.

amba said...

OFF TOPIC:

For the past 45 minutes or more I can't access TypePad, my own blog, or any other TypePad blog. The SixApart status page says TypePad and all its blogs are "up." When you click on "Support" to protest, that's inaccessible too.

No information, no recourse. It feels positively totalitarian.

Mike said...

There are bicycle helmet laws for adults?

Jeff said...

For a hypocrite like Moore, capitalism is fine when it involves private production and distribution of films; government interference is to be abhorred. The healthcare industry, however, should not be allowed to remain in private hands- nevermind that private companies invented all of the drugs and devices that help keep even the tragically obese in good health. The heavy bureaucratic hand of government is to be welcomed in that case.

Why he should trust his health to a government that (in his view) neglects rust belt cities, allows children access to firearms and lied about 9/11 is beyond my comprehension.

Hoosier Daddy said...

and i certainly have to admit, the bush/cheney team have already proven themselves to be less than brilliant

Considering they were smart enough to win the last two presidential elections, that isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for your team.

Ann Althouse said...

Lucky: "i doubt there are many producer or actors who would suggest first throwing their productions onto the internet for "free"...before selling any tickets at a theater."

I'm sure there are very few who would do it this way, but there is good reason to think that Michael Moore is such a person.

1. Did he not use his own great personal wealth to finance the film? (A key point. I don't know the answer, but I did try to look it up.)

2. He has expressed approval of free distribution of his films in the past along with antagonism toward copyright.

3. His film is a commercial for a cause, and wide distribution of it serves that interest.

4. He cares about political change more than amassing greater wealth, I think.

5. This controversy is functioning as publicity for the movie.

Mike said...

I liked this one, HD:

"are you actually suggesting that bush and cheney would rather have 100's of millions of people around the world see the film for free"

Yep, Bush and Cheney are quaking in their boots that someone might see Sicko.

jane said...

"as for the other posting about clinton, etc., i have no idea what the hell you're talking about...(especially when we ALL know that you did indeed support what the republicans did to clinton.)" (mendacious Luckyoldson)

Luckyoldson said... rush/sean/bill/ann/michael)...[Jane] is a complete right wing nutcase.

*and keep in mind, this from one who fully supported the "plot and scandal" of clinton getting blojobs...hillary killing vince and anything else that rush/sean/bill/ann/michael tell her to believe.

dumb as a stump. 9:16 PM
----------

9:16 PM LAST NIGHT. You seriously think you can get away with such a thing just a couple of threads later? Please show us the evidence for my listening to, much less believing whatever Fox commentators say (other than Brit), re the Vince murder theory, etc.

Put it in the original thread on which you made your lying assertions, please. I fully admit that your garbage is beautifully written and provocative, like how you accuse some male commenters here of being homos when you disagree with them. You simply are the man.

My point about Moore isn't difficult to grasp. Right before his movies debut, there is always some kind of controversy where somebody's out to get him, and that somebody is invariably Republican or big biz (redundant in his eyes, I know.)

Moore projects a lot of dots to connect, all of his own doing.

Mike said...

Ann said: "4. He cares about political change more than amassing greater wealth, I think."

I wouldn't be too sure about that one, Ann.

Ann Althouse said...

Amba: "For the past 45 minutes or more I can't access TypePad, my own blog, or any other TypePad blog."

I'll save that for the next time I have a problem with Blogger, and people tell me that I'd do better paying for a service. But good luck! Start a Blogger blog!

Mike said...

You're wasting your time, Jane (of course, it's yours to waste).

AJ Lynch said...

Mike asked:

"There are bicycle helmet laws for adults?"

Probably in some state- I threw that in to see if anyone would notice my stretch.

Luckyoldson said...

jane,
"you accuse some male commenters here of being homos..."

homos?

getting up there, aren't you, jane??

"Moore projects a lot of dots to connect, all of his own doing."

huh??

amba said...

Ann: yup! My sentiments exackly.

Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
amba said...

With Blogger, the worst you can say is, "It's worth what I'm paying for it."

Luckyoldson said...

Mike said...

Ann said: "4. He cares about political change more than amassing greater wealth, I think."

I wouldn't be too sure about that one, Ann.

*if moore was more interested in making $$$$ he wouldn't be making documentaries.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"There are bicycle helmet laws for adults?"

Not in Indiana that I am aware of. As a competitive cyclist, everytime I see someone riding without one I refer them as a Darwin Award waiting to happen.

Sigivald said...

Lucky: So, uh, who is he referring to, then?

The article doesn't elaborate at all, though it does include: How the leak of a version apparently taken from a DVD copy will affect the film's theatrical boxoffice remains unclear. Moore's documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11" was widely bootlegged and available in a pirated version online around its June 2004 opening but went on to earn $119 million at the domestic boxoffice.

And "I think the music industry's response to Napster was misguided ... and for me, it's about getting people to see the movie and that's what I want, so they will talk about it," Moore recently told Brandweek magazine. "... I would never want to prosecute anybody who would download (his film)."

That sure makes me think he might just possibly be less than sincere in his denial of being involved in the leak.

Furthermore, it doesn't seem paranoid to think that Moore might imply that his political enemies benefit from a reduced profit from this film to Moore or Moore's studio.

(It's by no means clear that Moore meant that, but my only point is that, given his paranoid mindset and ability to blame Bush for every-god-damn-thing, it's not out of character for him to have implied such a thing.)

(And, oh, I think Moore has responsibilities to Lion's Gate and the Weinsteins. I also see no particular reason to think he necessarily honors those responsibilities more than his ideological points.

His filmmaking techniques don't exactly make him out to be a rigorously principled and honorable person, you see.)

(Yeah, I know, I'm wasting my time too.)

Mike said...

if moore was more interested in making $$$$ he wouldn't be making documentaries

Anybody willing to explain this to him, so that I don't have to talk to him?

An Edjamikated Redneck said...

I have a two year old granddaughter- maybe she can explain it so he'll understand.

Hint Lucky:It starts with $119,000,000.

Pogo said...

All news about Mr. Moore is a variation of Hey! HEY! Look at ME! Look at MEeeeeeeee."

AJ Lynch said...

Mike:
FYI - found this on googles. Looks pretty old and I don't know what current legislation entails..

"Rockland County (NY) adopted legislation in mid-1992 requiring all cyclists of all ages to wear helmets. While no states have passed mandatory bicycle helmet laws for adults, a number of such bills have been introduced in state legislatures. A law mandating adult helmet use in Ontario, Canada is scheduled to take effect by 1994, even though 80% of cyclists surveyed there said they opposed the measure. "

jane said...

Thanks, guys. I wrote out a response to "huh?" using single syllables, but there's a chance he'd still try to act even thicker than he is, and your answers/ retorts are way funner.

Mike said...

AJ: Well, it turned out not to be a strech after all (unfortunately).

O'er the land of the (previously) free, ...

Mike said...

Jane, we'd enjoy your response, but it would be lost on him.

amba said...

I have never seen a Michael Moore movie.

mcg said...

can you imagine a group of people (liberals) attempting to make americans healthier or save lives through simple safety measures???

The death rate is firmly pegged at 100%, you know. It's not a matter of if, but when and how. Give me my trans fats, my windblown hear yearning to be helmet free!

Luckyoldson said...

An Edjamikated Redneck said..."Hint Lucky:It starts with $119,000,000."

911 actually grossed more than $125,000,000...but it was by far the most EVER grossed on a documentary. (Bowling For Columbine grossed about $40,000,000 and only cost about $4,000,000 so that was very good, too...but not in the same league as 911.)

it does look like moore has discovered the magic formula for making documentaries that will make money, but the real dough is in entertainment productions...and i don't think moore is driven by money. (his appearance would suggest he's more interested in food.)

*i predict "sicko" will have a dramatic impact (financially, too) because of the american public's interest in affordable national health care. a remedy for sky-high health care costs many here think is some kind of socialist plot.

mcg said...

oops: "hear" --> "hair"

mcg said...

it does look like moore has discovered the magic formula for making documentaries that will make money

Yes, by playing a bit loose with the term "documentary" :)

Pogo said...

Re: "I have never seen a Michael Moore movie."

I saw Roger & Me. I was disturbed because I thought who in their right mind would talk to that guy, the one with the permanent sneer?
and I was bothered how he was subtly mocking the realy poor folks in Flint, like the "rabbit lady".

P.S. Exactly how national health care is not socialism escapes me.
P.P.S. And why would socialism be bad anyway, lucky?

Mike said...

it does look like moore has discovered the magic formula for making documentaries that will make money

PT Barnum discovered it years ago.

Luckyoldson said...

mcg,
i understand your yearning for the wind blowing through your hair while riding your motorcycle, but the accidents that take lives, leave families behind and the cost of the hospitalization from accidents that don't kill...drives up everybody else's costs, too.

as for transfat...i could care less...i eat hamburgers and fries, too...but...i also have the kind of genetic make-up that allows me to eat damn near anything and not get fat nor, at this point show any sign of heart disease.

hence...the moniker..."lucky."

Luckyoldson said...

mike,
speaking of p.t. barnum and "selling" bullshit...

...why not read some of the books about the bush administration's circus of lies and distortions?

*and speaking of moore's films...have you read "my pet goat" yet?

Luckyoldson said...

mcg,
if you don't think moore is producing honest "documentaries," why not list all of the fallacies or lies you've discovered.

*and just as moore does, be sure to provide factual links to your claims.

Justin said...

Luckyoldson said...

*by the way, whatever writing course you took...didn't take.

Do you really think you should be criticizing other people's writing?

blake said...

First, Moore tried his hand at a feature film. It was called Canadian Bacon and it starred Alan Alda and the late, lamented John Candy.

Problem is, it takes a lot of money and, yes, a lot of talent to make a good feature film, or even just one that people will go to. And for some reason, quoting a feature film to support a political point sounds dumber than quoting a documentary, even when the documentary is known to be absurdly biased.

IMDB has "Canadian Bacon" at a 5.5, near the bottom of his work, and shows it has a domestic box office gross of $178,000. (Box Office Mojo reports $163K.) I remember wanting to see it when it came out and not having the opportunity as it never opened wide. ("Canadian Bacon" was remade as the more successful "South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut".)

It's not surprising that Mr. Moore would return to pretending to make documentaries.

As for Bicycle Helmet laws, most don't include adults but see:

http://www.helmets.org/mandator.htm

Palladian said...

The PBS cliché about documentary filmmakers is that they are changed in the process of making their films. That through the process of telling the story their ideas are transformed. They discover something.

This could not be said of Michael Moore. His films are not documentaries, they're political infomercials, propaganda pieces. They may be great examples of that genre, but they're not documentaries.

A great documentary does not set out to prove something. It sets out to tell a story that's already there in the world. If there's a point to be made, it will be made through the story you illuminate. Moore is not telling stories, he's selling something. If you want great documentaries, watch Grey Gardens or Michael Apted's Up series.

It's also amusing to me how shocked! some people seem to be at the suggestion that Moore planned this whole thing as a publicity stunt: How dare you suggest that Michael Moore would ever perpetrate a publicity stunt! That's ridiculous! Who would ever think such a thing about Michael Moore?!

Luckyoldson said...

blake says: "It's not surprising that Mr. Moore would return to pretending to make documentaries."

i'll issue you the same challenge as mcg:

if you don't think moore is producing honest "documentaries," why not list all of the fallacies or lies you've discovered.

*and just as moore does, be sure to provide factual links to your claims.

Luckyoldson said...

Justin,
yes.

jane said...

"*and just as moore does, be sure to provide factual links to your claims."

LOL! Lucky-makelyingnastyassertionsandrefusetobackthemup-OldSon wrote that?

Freeman Hunt said...

I don't think it's a publicity stunt because if it were, the Weinsteins would eat Moore's lunch.

Luckyoldson said...

Palladian,
you're wrong...as usual.

many documentaries are made to "prove" a specific claim or to root out fallacies or lies people think are true. "frontline" does an excellent job of doing just those things.

maybe a few here should consider staying off rush and the gang for a day or two and watching this:

"Endgame"
Jun. 19, 2007 at 9pm
As the United States begins one final effort to secure victory through a "surge" of troops, FRONTLINE investigates how strategic and tactical mistakes brought Iraq to virtual civil war.

*as for moore giving the film away free to the internet...for publicity...get real...he has financial partners who have invested money and look for a return.

Luckyoldson said...

Freeman Hunt said..."I don't think it's a publicity stunt because if it were, the Weinsteins would eat Moore's lunch."

you got that right.

P.S. janey: if, by assertions...you mean that i think you and many here listen to rush, sean, bill and watch fox news...i could be wrong in a few cases, but i wouldn't bet on it.

jane said...

Oh, so now it's "think"?

Luckyoldsonny,

Are you, or are you not backing down and apologizing for what you declaratively asserted about me (cited above)? Or, are you now trying to weasel the meaning of your clearly obnoxious statements?

You abuse people personally, when others try to stick to their opinions on the topic, and then you're not honest enough to own up to what you say.

Factual links, indeed.

Palladian said...

"Palladian,
you're wrong...as usual."

No, YOU'RE WRONG! AS USUAL!!!11

I can't wait for your next 40 comments, though I shouldn't have to wait more than 5 minutes or so!

AJ Lynch said...

Lucky claimed:
"FRONTLINE investigates how strategic and tactical mistakes brought Iraq to virtual civil war."

So you are gullible enough to think civil war / sectarian violence on a grand scale could have been avoided?

And it was primarily mistakes by Bush and Co?

It had little or nothing to do with hundreds of years of tribal enmities and just plain lunatics in that desert country?

And you believe all this because Frontline proved it to you or they just met your existing paradigm?

Do you also lick Harry Reid's boots?

AJ Lynch said...

That has a ring to it....Luckyoldson aka The Bootlicker!

Luckyoldson said...

jane,
buzz off.

An Edjamikated Redneck said...

Lucky, I would love to take you up on your challenge, but space here does not permit.

Google 'Michael Moores Errors' and when you done get back to me.

That should keep him ouit of our hair for a month or so.

Luckyoldson said...

aj asks: "And it was primarily mistakes by Bush and Co?"

are you daft????

who the hell would i or anyone else blame???

why read a few books about the iragi situation and get back to me...try "fiasco" as a start.

and if the "civil war" we see right now was inevitable...where was it for the decades on end before we went in??

discussing something like this with someone who has obviously not read a damn thing about how we've gotten ourselves into this thing is a waste of my time.

almost as much as trading barbs with janey the right wing mouthpiece...who doesn't have the guts to even admit what her real politics are.

Luckyoldson said...

i have a suggestion for those who do not like michael moore.

don't go to his film.

how's that?

jane said...

"almost as much as trading barbs with janey the right wing mouthpiece...who doesn't have the guts to even admit what her real politics are."

Another lie, Luckoldsonny. I have admitted to being Republican over and over at this blog and elsewhere. I range from liberal to conservative on the issues spectrum, but would never vote for your party, for some reason.

I don't admit to watching and following the marching orders of those pundits you listed, because I don't. I don't admit to any view on the Foster suicide/murder case, b/c the facts are too murky. IOW, you're full of it and refuse to document your wild, rude mischaracterizations with fact, because you can't.

If I deserve your nasty ad hominem based on being a Republican, then well, you're the man.

Justin said...

Luckyoldson said...

i have a suggestion for those who do not like michael moore.

don't go to his film.


And I have a suggestion for people who hate Ann Althouse and her commenters: Don't read this blog.

How's that?

Naked Lunch said...

Yep. The Clinton Body Count/Michael Moore Sabotaging His Own Movie With Zero Motive Theory makes perfect sense. To a braindead scandal mongering wingnut that is.

It's all so murky! But there must be something there! I mean, Vince Foster died, right? Sheesh.

Luckyoldson said...

justin,
where have i ever intimated that i "hated" ann? first of all, i don't know the woman, and i certainly don't think that disagreement or sarcasm has anything to do with literally hating someone. (i personally consider the term itself to be overused in the extreme.)

as for the people who provide comments here...i merely think they're mostly right wing idealogues who consider any belief, other than what they already believe to be so some kind of "liberal" assault on american values.

in reality, america would not exist but for "liberal" thinkers like washington, jefferson, franklin and the like.

Luckyoldson said...

jane says: "...I range from liberal to conservative on the issues spectrum..."

really?

what are your "liberal" views?

*and please...you're much more than a plain ol' republican. i have quite a few republican friends and business associates and very few are as far to the right yourself.

some of them have actually come to believe bush has been a disaster for america.

how about YOU?

jane said...

What's with bringing up Hillary's friend and Clinton counsel, poor dead Vince, as a rejoinder to everything a centrist or conservative might say about Moore or the weather? Is is in the handbook? Sheesh is right.

Shouldn't we rightwingidjits be shouting Plame blame game!! right about now? Or are we to believe a manipulative PR creature like Moore who charged that Jeb and the WH put the squeeze on Eisner just to torpedo his movie release last time could EVER insinuate that the Feds were out to get him, again. Whatever you do, don't read the article cited in the 12:12 comment.

jane said...

Luckyoldsonny, you're a lying, rude SOB. When I'm in the mood for a grand inquisition by a Larouche devotee and no-moon-landing conspiratorialist, I'll look you up.

Please don't expect me to provide links to my statements of fact. I will only keep changing the subject and calling you a moronic, whacked our extremist, per your way.

Love,
a docent at that Creation Museum you say I attend

Joshua said...

When I'm in the mood for a grand inquisition by a Larouche devotee and no-moon-landing conspiratorialist, I'll look you up.

What if he doesn't take a view on whether there was a moon landing or not? You know, because the facts are "too murky"?

Luckyoldson said...

anybody see any of those "liberal" views janey holds?

Hoosier Daddy said...

in reality, america would not exist but for "liberal" thinkers like washington, jefferson, franklin and the like.

Heh...I love it when they bring out the Founding Fathers to justify 'liberal' thought yet will turn on a dime and remind us all that Jefferson had slaves and knocked up a few of them to boot. So much for being a liberal.

jane said...

Here's one for you, sonny and josh:

I practice green architecture. Charleston green shutters and celadon clapboard is a combo I like.

I just love a good grilling by libruls to see if I have any bona fides. What masterly PC interrogators, judges and hangmen you clever gentlemen are.

Revenant said...

are you actually suggesting that bush and cheney would rather have 100's of millions of people around the world see the film for free...then pay for it at a theater???

Neither Bush nor Cheney has any reason to give a shit if people see "Sicko".

Bush and Cheney do, however, have reason to personally dislike Michael Moore, both for his portrayals of them in "Fahrenheit 9/11" and for his actions on behalf of the Democratic Party. So, yes, there is an obvious and rational motive for Bush and/or Cheney to want to do financial harm to Moore. I don't think that's what happened, but it is no less likely than any of the other conspiracy theories Moore has pushed in the past.

Luckyoldson said...

so, let's get this straight:

hoosier thinks thomas jefferson is an asshole. (because he owned slaves - WOW!! - and he had relations with them, too - WOW!!)

janey is still immersed in her remedial writing course practice.
(petty not pithy)

and...

rev stops by to drop in yet another inane comment regarding bush and cheney's dislike for michael moore (SHOCKING!!)...which has absolutely nothing to do with what has been discussed...the pirating of "sicko" and who was behind it.

i'd like to say this dynamic trio could do better, but i've read many of their other comments and this is about as good as it gets.

what a hoot...keep 'em coming!!

Methadras said...

Luckyoldson said...

*and please...you're much more than a plain ol' republican. i have quite a few republican friends and business associates and very few are as far to the right yourself.


Stop the presses. I'm stunned at your claim that you have friends, much less business associates. What have you done with the real Luckyoldson? These are alleged facts that you need to prove. Considering the way you communicate with people, at least, on this blog, I'm amazed you've even had the chance to even spell the word friend.

Joshua said...

I'm not interested in your green architecture. I'm interested in what other nutball conspiracy theories you are unwilling to dismiss because the facts are murky. How about the "9/11 was an inside job" theory? Is the jury still out on that one for you?

Methadras said...

Luckyoldson said...

jane,
buzz off.


When I first read this, the first thought that came to mind was that this was one of your mating calls. But considering you've claimed that you have 'friends & business associates' I'm sure you've tried this line on them whenever you felt rejected or frisky.

Methadras said...

Joshua said...

I'm not interested in your green architecture. I'm interested in what other nutball conspiracy theories you are unwilling to dismiss because the facts are murky. How about the "9/11 was an inside job" theory? Is the jury still out on that one for you?


You know what I like about the 9/11 was an inside job theory? I'm still waiting to hear the list of the names of all the people that were involved.

Methadras said...

oh wait. I just found the list:

George W. Bush — eldest son of Bush crime family; guilty of election fraud in 2000, 2004; guilty of war crimes, war profiteering, treason, crimes against humanity; likely “signed-off” on 9-11 plot

Dick Cheney — former PNAC member; guilty of war profiteering, treason; was in bunker on 9-11 directing several “war games”; lied to 9-11 Omission Commission about riming of 9-11 activities

Donald Rumsfeld — former Secretary of War and PNAC member; close friend of Cheney; was at Pentagon on 9-11; once slipped and said “when that missile hit the Pentagon”

Paul Wolfowitz — Zionist; investigated for spying for Israel; former PNAC member; Deputy Secretary of War on 9-11; chief architect of Iraq war; now heads World Bank

Richard Perle — Zionist; former assistant Secretary of War, chairman War Policy Board, and PNAC member; nicknamed “Prince of Darkness”

Dov Zakheim — rabid Zionist; Shul Rabbi; former CFR member; Pentagon comptroller when a trillion dollars was reported missing on 9-10-01; former CEO of fly-by-remote manufacturer; possible 9-11 mastermind

George Tenet — Director of the CIA on 9-11; was awarded the “Medal of Freedom” by Bush for his fine work on 9-11

Robert Mueller — FBI Director on 9-11; under his “leadership”, FBI field agents’ warning of an imminent attack were stifled

Richard Meyers — in charge of USA air defenses on 9-11; lied to 9-11 Omission Commission about reasons for air defense failure on 9-11; promoted to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Ralph Eberhardt — NORAD Commander on 9-11; fanatical supporter of missile defense scheme, militarization of space; enthusiastic supporter of merging law enforcement and the military

Larry Arnold — NORAD Commander Major General on 9-11; has used 9-11 to push militarization of USA

Douglas Feith — Zionist; investigated for spying for Israel; former PNAC member; effectively he and Wolfowitz were in command of War Department on 9-11; Undersecretary of War for Policy

Michael Chertoff — Zionist; likely Mossad agent; Assistant Attorney General on 9-11; freed over 100 Israeli spies in the US after 9-11; promoted to head Homeland Security

Jerome Hauer — “terrorism” expert who put John O'Neill at the WTC on 9-11; lied to Dan Rather on CBS News on 9-11 about the controlled demolition of WTC buildings

Jack Abramoff — ardent Zionist; entertained USG “terrorist” patsy Mohammed Atta on his yacht just before 9-11; convicted criminal lobbyist

Philip Zelikow — led the 9-11 Cover-Up Commission; personally wrote the 9-11 Omission Commission Report, a best-selling work of fiction; appointed Counselor of US Department of State

Porter Goss — former House Intelligence Chair; was meeting with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, on 9-11; promoted to Director of CIA, resigned after “hookergate”

Bob Graham — former Florida Senator; was meeting with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, on 9-11; ran for President in 2004

Marc Grossman — Under Secretary for Political Affairs on 9-11; met with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, on or shortly after 9-11

Richard Armitage — former member of PNAC, Deputy Secretary of State; met with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, shortly after 9-11

Elliot Abrams — former member of PNAC, National Security Council; pleaded guilty in 1991 to lying to Congress about Iran-Contra affair

Lewis “Scooter” Libby — former PNAC member; studied political science at Yale under Paul Wolfowitz; aid to Cheney; convicted for lying about outing of Valerie Plame

William Kristol — Zionist; PNAC co-founder; adherent of Leo Strauss; editor of The Weekly Standard; strong advocate of the Iraq war

John Ashcroft — protected “terrorist” patsy Abdussattar Shaikh from subpoena after 9-11; stopped flying commercial aircraft in 2001

Condi Rice — National Security Adviser on 9-11; promoted to Secretary of State; lied to 9-11 Omission Commission while under oath

Colin Powell — Secretary of State on 9-11; met with General Mahmoud Ahmad two days after 9-11; former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; helped cover up Vietnam My Lai massacre

Jeb Bush — brother of George Bush; PNAC member; Florida governor; guilty of election fraud in 2000; declared martial law in Florida four days before 9-11

Marvin Bush — brother of George Bush; on board of Securacom, US-Kuwaiti company paid $9.2 to manage WTC security October 1996 to 1998; on board of HCC Insurance, big WTC insurer

Wirt Walker — cousin of George Bush; principal at Securacom, US-Kuwaiti joint-venture that managed security for WTC, United Airlines, and Dulles Airport, all of which figured into 9-11

Larry Silverstein — he and partner Frank Lowy obtained 99-year lease on WTC shortly before 9-11; made several billion dollars on 9-11 insurance fraud; admitted to “pulling” WTC 7

Rudolph Giuliani — mayor of New York on 9-11; hailed as “hero” for his “gutsy” leadership on 9-11; allegedly involved with FEMA and former NYC Police Chief Kerik in Operation Code Angel

Bernard Kerik — former NYC Police Chief; “sidekick” of Giuliani; allegedly involved with FEMA in WTC demolition “war games” called Operation Code Angel

A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard — now number three Executive Director at the CIA; until 1998, managed firm used to place “put options” on United Airlines which has left $2.5 million in “profits” unclaimed

Mark Loizeaux — as CEO of CDI was instrumental in “recycling” steel from WTC crime scene; CDI also buried the rubble from the crime scene of the Murrah Federal Building

Benjamin Chertoff — 25-year-old cousin of Michael Chertoff; senior “researcher” for Popular Mechanics’ hit piece on 9-11 Truth Movement

Mahmoud Ahmad — head of Pakistan’s ISI; had Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh wire $100,000 to lead 9-11 “terrorist” patsy Mohammad Atta

Abdussattar Shaikh — FBI informant to the San Diego office; helped bring “terrorist” patsies to USA; protected by Attorney General Ashcroft

Warren Buffett — world's second richest person; was hosting golf charity event at the US Strategic Command headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha; Bush flew to Offutt afternoon of 9-11

George H.W. Bush — Bush crime family Don; Skull and Bones; CIA operative involved in JFK assassination; former head of CIA; son of friend shot Reagan when he was VP; war profiteer

Tony Blair — British Prime Minister; ally and partner in crime of George Bush; London 7-7 bombings were also “false flag” operations

Benjamin Netanyahu — former Israeli Prime Minister; said 9-11 was “good” for US-Israeli relationship

Revenant said...

bush and cheney's dislike for michael moore (SHOCKING!!)...which has absolutely nothing to do with what has been discussed

Some simpleton was babbling about how Cheney and Bush obviously wouldn't want anyone to see the movie for free, so I corrected him.

the pirating of "sicko" and who was behind it.

Which your plug for Greenwald's new book had some mysterious relationship to, no doubt.

Anyway, I don't care who pirated "Sicko". Its probably just another publicity stunt, like the fake controversy over F9/11's "distribution problems". But if I'm wrong and someone stole it, well... I still don't care.

jane said...

Heh, Methedras.

Surely, the dynamic duo here doesn't believe in a single Bush conspiracy, and would vehemently disagree with Moore's murky muck-mongering?

Classic projection.

update: Wow! You laid it all out in your 8:35. On the same sheet of music, I guess :)

Yep, Revenant. Keep trying logic on specific points raised. Maybe they'll get the hang of it one day.

Seven Machos said...

Random sentence by Steve Simel on his blog: "Many's the evening my brother and I spent down there watching 16 millimeter versions of Warner Bros. cartoons and Roger Corman films. "Bucket of Blood" is still my favorite B-movie..."

It's okay to have your blog be about your views and interests if nobody reads it. That must be the theory.

Hector Owen said...

Someone asked for a list of lies in Moore's movies. Here is a good list for one of them: Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11, by Dave Kopel.

Revenant said...

Someone asked for a list of lies in Moore's movies.

If they need to ask, there probably isn't any point in telling them.

It isn't like it is hard to see that Moore is playing fast and loose with the truth, after all.

Luckyoldson said...

Methadras...

is your moniker based on doing meth or selling meth?

if it's the latter, give janey a call...she needs something in her life...and you just may be it.

Luckyoldson said...

anybody watch frontline's "endgame?"

doubt it.

Luckyoldson said...

hector,
Dave Kopel is nuttier than Cheney.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Lucky said:

hoosier thinks thomas jefferson is an asshole.

Hmm...You know, I went back to my post and for the life of me could not see anywhere where I stated that Jefferson was an asshole.

Lucky, if you want to have a serious debate, bring it on. If all you can do is make stuff up as you did with me then bugger off. You've become tiresome.

Joshua said...

good list, Methadras. hey jane, how about shooting a watermelon to add to the evidence 9/11 was actually an inside job? these facts sure are murky!

jane said...

Josh,

I appreciate your obsession with me and murky, but I gotta tell you, I'm clearly not interested in you or your inane poking. Get a new joke, maybe.

Fen said...

anybody watch frontline's "endgame?"

Yah, I sat through about 10 minutes before I realized it was agenda-driven propaganda and switched the channel.

Of course, you think BBC is an unbiased broker of information, so I'm sure you lapped it up.

Revenant said...

Of course, you think BBC is an unbiased broker of information

Which is funny, because not even the BBC itself thinks the BBC is unbiased.

Joshua said...

Jane, if you're sick of being mocked for saying stupid things, the solution is to stop saying stupid things. Life is full of lessons!

jane said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jane said...

Oh, you're right, Joshua. Thanks! Unlike you, I've said a bunch of really stupid things. Your clever mocking is just what I needed for an attitude adjustment and to help me say things you want me to say. I need your approval for my politics, Josh. Real bad.

Luckyoldson said...

Fen said, in response to my question: anybody watch frontline's "endgame?"

"Yah, I sat through about 10 minutes before I realized it was agenda-driven propaganda and switched the channel."

so i guess kagan from the american enterprise institute, general casey's top aid, condi's top aide, thomas ricks, various other generals and colonels who served in iraq...were just too liberal for your tastes?

and you wonder why people think you're a frigging moron?

Luckyoldson said...

hoosier,
i mentioned that jefferson was a liberal and instead of discussing or debating the comment...you immediately brought up the fact that jefferson had slaves, had children by them and if that was what a liberal is...you basically wanted no part of it.

oh, wait...i guess you weren't intimating he was some kind of asshole...you were actually saying he was a terrific guy.

my bad.

Luckyoldson said...

Hoosier Daddy said...

"I love it when they bring out the Founding Fathers to justify 'liberal' thought yet will turn on a dime and remind us all that Jefferson had slaves and knocked up a few of them to boot. So much for being a liberal."

when may i ask, have "liberals" ever reminded anybody "that Jefferson had slaves and knocked up a few of them to boot."

provide a link.