Michael Moore's "Sicko" is hot internet news

[kandrathe]

... I can distinguish clearly between facts and populist cutting and pasting. Remember that even at the time of Colin Powells speech about the "proofs" of the WMD in Iraq (remember the satalite pictures) I was still sure of the non existence of these things...

So how do you explain the difference between the actual documentation, destruction and evidence presented by the UN from the initial inspectors who were then kicked out, and then the lack of progress after the Hans Blix crew (security like a sieve) were somewhat allowed to come back with severe escort restrictions and having to give days of advanced notice of everywhere they went. Colin Powell's presentation was a sad case, but the UN inspectors research of Iraqi documentation was much more compelling in my opinion.

Is it plausible that the Saddam regime decided that they were suddenly going to play a great trick on the west and destroy all their proscribed materials and then harrass and taunt the UN into a war? Is it possible that WMD's were moved or buried somewhere that we are unable to find? I still think it is a plausible answer. Maybe not likely, but still plausible. It becomes meaningless with Bathists and Saddam out of power, but not so good if the Iraqi state fails and something ugly replaces whatever limp democracy they have now. There was obviously no freely available WMD's laying around weaponized or we'd have seen it used by now, but the UN inspectors wanted to know where all the precursor materials went, and so do I.

Mr. Moore's so called documentary of the prelude to the Iraq War was to stretch out a bunch of (imho, intentionally) unproven hypotheticals about the close relationship between the Bush's and the House of Saud. Um, duh. The House of Saud over its multi generational rule has had close relationships with every powerful family in the world of all political bents. They are fairly prolific and ubiquitious in the Saudi aristocracy, so its not hard to find that someone knows someone who is related somehow. So it would be easy to make similiar "documentaries" casting doubt on the motives of the Ford's, the Rockefellers, the DuPont's, etc. if they were in the White House. Just not those hicks from Arkansas. So what I see are people willing to watch the movie, but then would never look at its criticism and read something like The lies of Fahrenheit 9/11 or FarenHype 911with an open mind.

But, then again while we are distacted on arguing the past, it will be mere months before Iran replaces Iraq as the WMD terror of the middle east. Iraq and 9/11 are old news. At this point, we are merely a foreign hated police force in Iraq and need to help Iraq become a self sufficient stable nation of self determination if we can. I mean agree with the war or not, but I would think the world would demand that the USA stay the course just to spare the rest of the world from the results of what would happen if Iraq became a Somalia. But hey, we are still in the Balkans from the Clinton administration and no one seems to mind that illegal war and waste of money. As far as 9/11 lessons learned, we need wake up and be more aware of terrorists within the US (like by not having an open sieve of a border).

[Jester]

Is it possible that WMD's were moved or buried somewhere that we are unable to find? I still think it is a plausible answer. Maybe not likely, but still plausible.

Desert's a big place. Is there way that hypothesis would cease to be plausible?

-Jester

[eppie]

So how do you explain the difference between the actual documentation, destruction and evidence presented by the UN from the initial inspectors who were then kicked out, and then the lack of progress after the Hans Blix crew (security like a sieve) were somewhat allowed to come back with severe escort restrictions and having to give days of advanced notice of everywhere they went. Colin Powell's presentation was a sad case, but the UN inspectors research of Iraqi documentation was much more compelling in my opinion.

That just doesn't make sense. A country that has done nothing wrong or wants to believe it has done nothing wrong will in both cases not allow another country (or the UN) to investigate their possesion of arms.
Not such a strange thing especially in the case of Iraq. First yoiu have "the West" check all your arms, and then they attack you (of course knowing the exact position of all your (normal) weapons....that doesn't seem fair to me.
(this still apart from the fact that they destroyed all their weapons, and everything that entered that country since 1991 was closely monitored, but this is not the topic of the discussion)

Is it plausible that the Saddam regime decided that they were suddenly going to play a great trick on the west and destroy all their proscribed materials and then harrass and taunt the UN into a war? Is it possible that WMD's were moved or buried somewhere that we are unable to find? I still think it is a plausible answer. Maybe not likely, but still plausible. It becomes meaningless with Bathists and Saddam out of power, but not so good if the Iraqi state fails and something ugly replaces whatever limp democracy they have now. There was obviously no freely available WMD's laying around weaponized or we'd have seen it used by now, but the UN inspectors wanted to know where all the precursor materials went, and so do I.

This has a big fairy tail rate.

Mr. Moore's so called documentary of the prelude to the Iraq War was to stretch out a bunch of (imho, intentionally) unproven hypotheticals about the close relationship between the Bush's and the House of Saud. Um, duh. The House of Saud over its multi generational rule has had close relationships with every powerful family in the world of all political bents.

Point taken, you are right.....but I wouldn't want to have one of those families running my country, which again is a very fair point of view I think. Anyway, I didn't know these things before I saw the Moore movie. And apparantly he was right and you think so as well (that is what the Um, duh means right?)

They are fairly prolific and ubiquitious in the Saudi aristocracy, so its not hard to find that someone knows someone who is related somehow. So it would be easy to make similiar "documentaries" casting doubt on the motives of the Ford's, the Rockefellers, the DuPont's, etc. if they were in the White House. Just not those hicks from Arkansas. So what I see are people willing to watch the movie, but then would never look at its criticism and read something like The lies of Fahrenheit 9/11 or FarenHype 911with an open mind.

I think many people do that, seeing all the websites they make. (thanks for the links by the way)

But, then again while we are distacted on arguing the past, it will be mere months before Iran replaces Iraq as the WMD terror of the middle east. Iraq and 9/11 are old news. At this point, we are merely a foreign hated police force in Iraq and need to help Iraq become a self sufficient stable nation of self determination if we can. I mean agree with the war or not, but I would think the world would demand that the USA stay the course just to spare the rest of the world from the results of what would happen if Iraq became a Somalia.

Agreed, although I think it might be very difficult not to let Iraq become a second Iran, of when business would go better a second Saudie Arabie...but than one with more aggresive politics.

But hey, we are still in the Balkans from the Clinton administration and no one seems to mind that illegal war and waste of money. As far as 9/11 lessons learned, we need wake up and be more aware of terrorists within the US (like by not having an open sieve of a border).

The largest part of the Balkans are doing quite well at the moment, and after the Kosovo business is arranged the situation might be better there. Of course we will never know if without the UN presence it would have been better.

I still think most important is the behaviour of the state itsself. Of course the situation in the US is different than e.g. Holland, because even when the US would do everything that Iran or the palestinians like they would still be seen as the enemy, this is of course the price of being the world power, but still.
I think by the way that letting me remove my shoes, or having me stand in line at the customs 1 and a half hour every time I go to the states is not helping decreasing terrorism.

[kandrathe]

That just doesn't make sense. A country that has done nothing wrong or wants to believe it has done nothing wrong will in both cases not allow another country (or the UN) to investigate their possesion of arms. Not such a strange thing especially in the case of Iraq. First yoiu have "the West" check all your arms, and then they attack you (of course knowing the exact position of all your (normal) weapons....that doesn't seem fair to me. (this still apart from the fact that they destroyed all their weapons, and everything that entered that country since 1991 was closely monitored, but this is not the topic of the discussion)

Unless you call the unprovoked driving of your troops through another nations sovereignty, and the rape and pillage of the population as "nothing wrong".

This has a big fairy tail rate.

As told by the UN then. In my reality 2+2=4, and the evidence of procurement of warfare materials <> the accounted for materials (up to this day).

Point taken, you are right.....but I wouldn't want to have one of those families running my country, which again is a very fair point of view I think. Anyway, I didn't know these things before I saw the Moore movie. And apparantly he was right and you think so as well (that is what the Um, duh means right?)

Moore is correct in that the US administrations (going way back) have had a very close relationship with the Saudi Royal Family, but it as expository as making a documentary on the shocking relationship between the US and their automobiles.

I think many people do that, seeing all the websites they make. (thanks for the links by the way)

So, this is where Moore's work in its seemingly intentional incorrectness resembles propaganda films. For me, all his work is now suspect and bears close scrutiny.

The largest part of the Balkans are doing quite well at the moment, and after the Kosovo business is arranged the situation might be better there. Of course we will never know if without the UN presence it would have been better.

But, the press reports nothing of the "SUCCESS!!!" of the Kosovo mission. We agonize over the struggle that was fortold. No one ever told the US that the "War on Terror" would be easy and over quickly. What we see today is a sickness that exists within the PEOPLE and the PRESS, in that they have mass attention deficit disorder. We cannot stay focused on any problem for more than 18 months. After that, we get Press Fatigue, and enmasse ignore or destroy the former work we've done. Sort of like a perpetual biannual Wickerman. I cannot wait until we "burn" this Hilton nonsense.

I still think most important is the behaviour of the state itsself. Of course the situation in the US is different than e.g. Holland, because even when the US would do everything that Iran or the palestinians like they would still be seen as the enemy, this is of course the price of being the world power, but still.
I think by the way that letting me remove my shoes, or having me stand in line at the customs 1 and a half hour every time I go to the states is not helping decreasing terrorism.

1/2 right. They will attack you if attacking you makes them look good to their terrorist constituency, or hurts us. I agree on the airport nonsense, in that the real dangerous people will just choose to walk or boat across the border from Canada or Mexico. This is the government way, where they have been inattentive to border security for 50 years so when an incident happens the citizens are punished by strict travel controls while the (12 million) illegal aliens are given amnesty and government welfare yet again. The borders, of course, will remain as porous as ever. It is kind of a joke really in how predictable the governments response will be; e.g. if you point at the failings of education, the government answer is to raise taxes.

[Alram]

The legacy of Britain's socialized medical system is a growing reliance on foreign doctors, like seven of the eight suspects arrested in the failed London car bombing and Glasgow airport attack.

from:
click

Canadian doctors, once quiet on the issue of private health care, elected Brian Day as president of their national association. Dr. Day is a leading critic of Canadian medicare; he opened a private surgery hospital and then challenged the government to shut it down. "This is a country," Dr. Day said by way of explanation, "in which dogs can get a hip replacement in under a week and in which humans can wait two to three years."

from:
click