Michael Moore's Jihad Against America

[Steff]

1. I don't believe you want to know the truth or you would already.

2. It is easy to find the truth if you really want it.

3. My experience with Bush-haters is that they only want to muddy the waters. Why should I do all the work of explaining the facts to them?

Just what I expected the typical answer of someone who cannot back up their argument.

Michael Moore is a communist.

Again you give no backup for this. Like I said I don't agree with Moore on everything but his film was spot on and you STILL haven't answered the questions he asked. I would say MM is a socialist which I'm not fond of.

Bush was extremely courageous to decide our course based on right/wrong instead of legal/illegal issues. This is why liberals hate him.

Possibly, but it could also be that he is disliked because he is abusing the constitution.

Most security, especially in a free society, is best carried out by individuals protecting their own property and their own lives. The Founders certainly understood this and is the main reason we have the Second amendment. We cannot have a policeman stationed in each of our homes to prevent burglaries, but owners of property with possession of a gun can easily do it. A new giant agency for Homeland Security cannot provide security but it can severely undermine our liberties. This approach may well in the long run make many American feel less secure.

The principle of private property ownership did not work to prevent the tragedies of September 11th, and there's a reason for that. The cries have gone out that due to the failure of the airlines to protect us, we must nationalize every aspect of aviation security. This reflects a serious error in judgment, and will lead us further away from the principle of property ownership and toward increasing government dependency and control, with further sacrifice of our freedoms. More dollars and more federal control over the airline industry are not likely to give us the security we all seek.

Industrial plants in the United States enjoy reasonably good security. They are protected, not by the local police, but by owners putting up barbed wired fences, hiring guards with guns, and requiring identification cards to enter-all this without any violation of anyone's civil liberties. And in a free society, private owners have a right, if not an obligation, to engage in "profiling" if it enhances security. This technique of providing security through private property ownership is about to be rejected, in its entirety, for the airline industry.

The problem was that the principle of private property was already undermined for the airlines by the partial federalization of security by FAA regulations. Airports are all owned by various government entities.

The system that failed us prior to September 11th not only was strictly controlled by government regulations, it specifically denied the right of owners to defend their property with a gun. At one time guns were permitted on airlines to protect the US mail, but for more than 40 years airlines have not been allowed to protect human life with firearms

War in Irag will not enhance our security either.

Edited July 16, 2004 by Steff

[Guest yod]

1. I don't believe you want to know the truth or you would already.

2. It is easy to find the truth if you really want it.

3. My experience with Bush-haters is that they only want to muddy the waters. Why should I do all the work of explaining the facts to them?

Just what I expected the typical answer of someone who cannot back up their argument.

And I also expected a lazy response. I really hoped you would at least try to find out for yourself?

Here are 59 lies & deceits in his movie:

click here

[Guest yod]

A new giant agency for Homeland Security cannot provide security but it can severely undermine our liberties

except for this one statement you sound like a conservative. You are FOR gun ownership AND private property rights? Wow...that doesn't sound like any liberal I know. Maybe there is hope for you yet?

I've gone over this Patriot Act so many times that I'm just tired of it.

There MUST be an agency to supercede all the beaurocratic entanglements between our intelligence agencies and local, state, and federal law enforcement. We are dealing with a much different enemy in this war than ever before....and the era of WMDs means we must be able to react quicker than before.

The Patriot Act is no different than other laws which have been passed during war time to insure against foreign attacks and espionage in our nation's history. It also has a limited time and will have to be voted on again at the end of it to remain in effect.

"IF" there were cases of abuse against innocent civilians the Kerry Campaign would be screaming them from the highest mountain top.....as well as CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, NAACP, AARP, etc...

It has not happened.

So far, this is being used to protect us by cutting through red tape in the fastest way. I shudder to think what Kerry would do with it though and I am nervous about what "could" be done if we had men with lesser character in the White House.

And folks like Other One are convinced that it's all a Luciferian conspiracy anyway....but I choose to believe that things are what they seem unless there is a simple explanation otherwise.

One thing is for sure though....

Michael Moore is a self absorbed imbecile who would climb a tree to tell a lie about Bush when he could stand on the ground and tell the truth instead.

[tako]

Hi there, read some of your post, I must say, looking at the BIG picture when it comes ELECTION TIME what is our OPTION? only TWO, the REPULICANS for a GOD FEARING SOCIETY, or DEMOCRATS for a GODLESS SOCIETY, though the REPULICAN PARTY is not perfect, i think we all know this, but we must choose what is IMORTANT to PRESERVE CHRISTIAN AMERICA. We all should know who stands for GOD and who stands AGAINST GOD, this should be ALL IMPORTANT in how we VOTE needless to say.............TAKO

[Steff]

Yes I know who stands for God and against God and it isn't either canidate in the election. However I know who stands for the constitution and who stands against. It's funny that Christians have bought into the two party system hook line and sinker.

[Guest yod]

It's funny that Christians have bought into the two party system hook line and sinker.

Is there another one? We don't have much of a choice but the difference between the candidates is stark.

Like you, I can see how things like the Patriot Act (or the Patriot Act itself) will eventually eat our Constitution completely away....but that all began with judges who read "abortion rights" into the Constitution. Once we have allowed the Constitution to be changed by fiat on a flimsy interpretation we have fallen on a slippery slope.

When we demand that judges apply laws instead of reinterpreting them we will have found good footing to change this. I believe we have hope only because we have a Constitutional republic....but JUDGES hold the key.

Bush has proposed some very good (righteous) judges. That tells me more about his character than all the conspiracy theorists who believe he's got a hidden agenda.

I am convinced that he is a christian trying to navigate through dangerous waters, both political and spiritual. He needs our support in prayer more than we realize, I think.

However, I also see the Democratic Party as having absolutely no scruples whatsoever. Any lie will do as long as it works! I am disgusted by the harm they have caused and they are STILL trying to divide this nation for their own purposes. Shame on them!

We have become a country almost evenly divided by those who are attempting to live an honest life and those who want to party, party, party without respect to the Creator who gave them the ability to breathe.

But the police state you "think" Bush is trying to bring in is only a matter of time no matter who is the President.

Dark days ahead...but where sin abounds so does God's manifest power and grace all the more.

What? Me worry?

[Steff]

I've gone over this Patriot Act so many times that I'm just tired of it.

And I will continue to go over daily if necessary to remind people that you must protect your freedoms and cannot rely on the government to do so.

There MUST be an agency to supercede all the beaurocratic entanglements between our intelligence agencies and local, state, and federal law enforcement. We are dealing with a much different enemy in this war than ever before....and the era of WMDs means we must be able to react quicker than before.

We are always dealing with a much different enemy, but that does not mean we must compromise our principles to fight him. Do you compromise your morals each time a new moral dilemma comes up? It is a false choice to say we need the department of homeland security when we spend will over 10 billion a year on the FBI and CIA and they failed miserably.

The Patriot Act is no different than other laws which have been passed during war time to insure against foreign attacks and espionage in our nation's history. It also has a limited time and will have to be voted on again at the end of it to remain in effect.

Again it is a false choice to vote for something so unconstitutional then just "hope" that it will not be misused.

I shudder to think what Kerry would do with it though and I am nervous about what "could" be done if we had men with lesser character in the White House.

Good then at least you recognize its potential for misuse. Now is the time to voice the opinion that the so called "Patriot Act" has to go before it has a chance to be heavily misused.

Yod, if you think the war in Iraq was justified, answer these questions, they are hard questions but they are fair ones, some of them were posed by Michael Moore, others were not:

1. Is it not true that the reason we did not bomb the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War was because we knew they could retaliate?

2. Is it not also true that we are willing to invade Iraq now because we know it cannot retaliate- which just confirms that there is no real threat?

3. Is it not true that those who argue that even with inspections we cannot be sure that Hussein was hiding weapons, at the same time imply that we can be more sure that weapons exist in the absence of inspections? (Before the war)

4. Is it not true that the UN

[Steff]

Like you, I can see how things like the Patriot Act (or the Patriot Act itself) will eventually eat our Constitution completely away....but that all began with judges who read "abortion rights" into the Constitution. Once we have allowed the Constitution to be changed by fiat on a flimsy interpretation we have fallen on a slippery slope.

When we demand that judges apply laws instead of reinterpreting them we will have found good footing to change this. I believe we have hope only because we have a Constitutional republic....but JUDGES hold the key.

Bush has proposed some very good (righteous) judges. That tells me more about his character than all the conspiracy theorists who believe he's got a hidden agenda.

I am convinced that he is a christian trying to navigate through dangerous waters, both political and spiritual. He needs our support in prayer more than we realize, I think.

Well Yod I think we have found a subject to agree on, at least mostly .

Congress could statutorily remove whole issues like abortion from the federal judiciary, striking a blow against judicial tyranny and restoring some degree of states

[Guest yod]

oh goody! Some direct questions!!!!

1. Is it not true that the reason we did not bomb the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War was because we knew they could retaliate?

it's a little more complicated than that...but if you remember...Kennedy was ready to push the button when they threatened our existance.

Like terrorists are doing today...

2. Is it not also true that we are willing to invade Iraq now because we know it cannot retaliate- which just confirms that there is no real threat?

It is NOT true. We invaded Iraq and Afghanistan for the same reasons we are eyeing Syria, Iran, and North Korea (among many others)

They are attempting to harm us eventually. Should we wait for them to finish developing the means to destroy us?

A lot of lives would have been saved if Hitler were confronted in 1938

3. Is it not true that those who argue that even with inspections we cannot be sure that Hussein was hiding weapons, at the same time imply that we can be more sure that weapons exist in the absence of inspections? (Before the war)

That's the wrong question. Try this one;

Why was Hussein thumbing his nose at the WHOLE WORLD by breaking the treaty that stopped the first Gulf War? What is he hiding and why is he hiding it?

Stop blaming Bush for having the intestinal fortitude to try and get the answers from this brutal crook while the rest of the world appeases him.

4. Is it not true that the UN

[Guest yod]

There are some people who will NEVER look beyond their single focus (LIBERALS) and then there are those who are capable of reasonable discussion. (CONSERVATIVES)

Sorry...couldn't help myself.

BTW....I love you...but I hate your new avitar!