Comments on: Debunking the 59 Deceits

Debunking the 59 Deceits

mcsweetie — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 06:57:27 -0800

vs Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11.

By: banished

banished — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:17:26 -0800

Sweet. Now I don't have to write that up myself.

By: dand

dand — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:35:12 -0800

oh look, another FPP from the Democrat lobbyist to add to our 14 others! http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ametafilter.com+dailykos

By: mcsweetie

mcsweetie — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:42:48 -0800

only one of the FPPs linked from that google search was from dailykos. did you check them at all, or was your reply just a knee jerk reaction? (more info on the anchor tag can be found here.)

By: dand

dand — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:51:54 -0800

It might be better to work with the 65 articles mentioning his work: http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ametafilter.com+kos&num=100 Do you think we could save time supporting this Kos fellow by automating the crosspost of his most "effective" material?

By: quonsar

quonsar — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:57:02 -0800

go read metatalk and shut the fuck up.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:57:18 -0800

this is very good...so what if it's from kos? Speaking truth in the face of lies and spin is one of the best things about the net. We certainly don't get it in most other media.

By: mcsweetie

mcsweetie — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:57:57 -0800

...or we could talk about this unique opportunity to discuss the FPP at hand. (more info on metatalk can be found here.)

By: quonsar

quonsar — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:00:32 -0800

i was talking to dand, mcsweetie.

By: dand

dand — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:10:52 -0800

Since you've worked his stuff in 8 times in the past, McSweetie, I'm just trying to save you time in carrying his water. http://www.google.com/search?&q=site%3Ametafilter.com+kos+mcsweetie > ... Like someone on Daily Kos said earlier, I'll be impressed when Bush spends the ... so he exploited them just barely enough for the "cons?" posted by mcsweetie

By: mcsweetie

mcsweetie — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:17:43 -0800

i was talking to dand, mcsweetie. so was I! Since you've worked his stuff in 8 times in the past, McSweetie, I'm just trying to save you time in carrying his water. of those 8 results, 0 were links to me mentioning dailykos. the quote you posted was a google spit-up of something XQUZYPHYR said (that mentioned kos) and a later thing that I had said (that had nothing to do with kis). at this rate, someone else is gonna take me to metatalk for moderating.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:19:14 -0800

shorter dand: "i have nothing to say so I'll just piss on the thread for a while". Great story, thanks mcsweetie. I have a feeling this will be a useful one to bookmark.

By: skallas

skallas — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:22:52 -0800

http://anton-sirius.dailykos.com/ See "anton-sirius" in there? the kos site provides blogs for members. Kos did not write this. Anton did. Thanks for playing. That said, why can't the media and bloggers put this laser-like examination of Moore on Bush's claims too? Hey, I'm all for fairness, now lets do this to everything Bush has done in the past three years. Something tells me Moore's detractors wouldnt like that at all.

By: dand

dand — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:24:23 -0800

> Speaking truth in the face of lies and spin is one of the best things about the net. > why can't the media and bloggers put this laser-like examination of Moore on Bush's claims too? Winning sales for Moore's movie is a noble cause indeed. But maybe one of the 700 existing pages referencing this important document of truth will suffice? < http://www.google.com/search?q=Debunking+the+59+Deceits&num=100 a>http://www.google.com/search?q=Debunking+the+59+Deceits&num=100 This Kos guy has a hell of a time getting attention for the issues he's paid to advocate. Thank you all for the help!

By: quonsar

quonsar — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:35:11 -0800

Winning sales for Moore's movie is a noble cause indeed. far more noble than winning fresh meat for bushco's sausage grinding kiddie rape apparatus.

By: Zonker

Zonker — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:36:09 -0800

Intersting link, mcsweetie, thanks. dand, if you don't like this (or any) thread, please consider: (a) skipping it, and directing your attention to something you do like, (b) discussing the link's merit (or lack thereof) in metatalk or (c) starting your own community-driven website where posts you don't like aren't allowed.

By: bargle

bargle — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 08:36:11 -0800

dand = seth's little brother.

By: destro

destro — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 09:39:39 -0800

You think that's bad, look how many times Drudge has been linked. Metafilter: Winning sales for Matt Drudge everyday

By: dodgygeezer

dodgygeezer — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 11:12:51 -0800

I've just been skimming through the document of the 59 deceits and it looks like a lot of words but not much substance. The sort of thing you use to win an argument by deluging your opponent in data. For example, what the hell is this: "Second, make sure the chairman of your campaign is also the vote count woman." Actually Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris was not the "vote count woman." Vote counting in Florida is performed by the election commissioners in each of Florida's counties. What the fuck is he debunking here? That Harris isn't counting the votes herself? It's obvious to even an eight year old child that Moore is simplifying. If this Kopel twit made a film we'd still be watching it when Bush the third becomes president.

By: mrgrimm

mrgrimm — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 11:37:48 -0800

interesting exercise, but i couldn't get past 3-7. as he notes in the first entry, most of the "deceits" are based around "creating an impression," which quickly descends into minutiae such as editing, sequencing, etc. anybody see Michael Moore and Bill Maher down on their knees last night (not sure if it was a first-run Maher show), begging Ralph Nader to drop his candidacy? classic. on preview: i'm with you dodgygeezer. to me, it almost seems counterproductive to respond steaming pile of crap, but i guess i can understand the writer's frustration.

By: mrgrimm

mrgrimm — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 11:39:59 -0800

to a ...

By: soulhuntre

soulhuntre — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 11:57:28 -0800

"starting your own community-driven website where posts you don't like aren't allowed." That used to be here. Just in case you forget, there was a time when Metafilter wasn't really a place to grind a left wing political axe. So is that it then? Are we all just agreed that Mefi is now another political rant blog and just deal with it and move on? if so, I can deal with that.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Sat, 31 Jul 2004 13:44:14 -0800

debunking someone else's ax-grinding gets labelled as ax-grinding itself. Film at 11.

By: Onanist

Onanist — Mon, 02 Aug 2004 00:54:33 -0800

There was a discussion about Fahrenheit 9/11 on Australian ABC TV recently, featuring Christopher Hitchens and George Monbiot. I couldn't believe it when Hitchens started using rebuttals obviously sourced straight from the Fifty-nine Deceits website, then going on to promote the site as "a fantastic resource" or some bs. Having actually read the site my opinion of Hitchens dropped considerably.

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Mon, 02 Aug 2004 11:05:12 -0800

interesting exercise, but i couldn't get past 3-7. as he notes in the first entry, most of the "deceits" are based around "creating an impression," which quickly descends into minutiae such as editing, sequencing, etc. Pantagraph to Moore: Headline use 'misleading' Often think Moore would like his films to be questioned which would result in YOU knowing the facts yourself. Then create a buzz about facts that should be publicly answered, not hid under our nose out of sight. Remember there were many US forefathers that ran newspapers and some even changed the truth in their effort gaining support from the Colonist against the British. Check out the news articles about the first shots in the revolutionary war - today history proves they contained fictional material, iirc penned by Hale, Revere…..

By: nath

nath — Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:08:55 -0800

Having actually read the site my opinion of Hitchens dropped considerably. Hitchens is a drunk who whores himself out to whoever's in power at the time to give them intellectual legitimacy. To quote Gary Indiana in this column in the Village Voice, "[T]he eloquent-as-a-treacle-tart Christopher Hitchens, in a prodigious outpouring of books and articles, has rendered the mental process by which intellectual prostitutes magically change form in alignment with shifting power formations as legibly as few besides Curzio Malaparte have managed since the fall of Mussolini."