Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Media

S-11 Redux: (Channel) Surfing the Apocalypse 308

Posted by michael from the don't-turn-that-dial dept.
Halo1 writes "The Guerrilla News Network has made a great 11 minute movie, culled from over 20 hours of footage from different channels. It's a lightning fast razorsharp analysis of the post 9/11 coverage by the general media and gives you quite a different view of the politicians and their calls for war. It's insightful, frightning and funny at the same time (we need a new mod option! :). The links on the movie page go to the Windows Media version at the Sundance Online Film Festival (they're competing with that movie), but they also have Quicktime versions available locally: low and high bandwidth (links posted with permission from all involved parties)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

S-11 Redux: (Channel) Surfing the Apocalypse More

S-11 Redux: (Channel) Surfing the Apocalypse

Comments Filter:
  • I was in Radio Shack yesterday, and saw it streamed over the demo computer. I enjoyed the fast 9/11 clips they pieced together. Especially the Dan Rather series.

  • This is quite old. (In Internet time.) (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AtariDatacenter ( 31657 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:12AM (#5065780)
    However, it was interesting to watch, if not a bit preachy. The thing that I walked away with it the previous time was this being painted as Christians vs. Muslums. It seems to be timely once again, tho'.
    • After reading what you said, I was getting ready to be angry at the movie. I watched it, and must say I thought it was very well done, and didn't quite see it in the same way you did - they said several times (well showed clips..) that the problem was that it was going to appear to be christians vs muslims, and that people would equate the war on terror as war on muslims.

      I hate to over anaylse it, but perhaps it was trying to show that this is how people see it, and they weren't trying to put a particular view across.

    • This is very timely. We just sent (or are about to send, depending when you read this) tens of thousands more troops to the Persian Gulf. I really hope there is not any type of battle, but it looks inevitable.

      I wonder if this type of "underground" media can actually change the tides of war. It certainly seems to make more sense then a bunch of hippies protesting (they seem to be completely ignored).

      --gal [slashdot.org]

  • Next story: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Omkar ( 618823 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:13AM (#5065783) Homepage Journal
    In related news, the GNN news network was disrupted by a terrorist attack. A group known as 'Slashdot' has claimed responsibility.

    Seriously, thoug, can anyone post a transcript for thoses of us with really slow internet connections?

    • Re:Next story: (Score:4, Insightful)

      by kubla2000 ( 218039 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @05:21AM (#5065901) Homepage
      The powerful message coming out of the film was that we (and by "we" it's clear GNN means "the west", not america alone) are in a position to do something about the dangerous cycle of violence that is threatening what we have come to know as free civilisation.

      By equating Al Qaeda with Islam, and the actions of terrorists with those of muslims, many in positions of responsibility in government (specifically, the clip shows Bush and his aides, Jean Chretien, Tony Blair, et al) and especially the media are pushing the views of the public toward a mindset last seen, with catastrophic outcomes, in the crusades.

      According to Bush, because "they" hate "us", we must beat them until they change their minds. Christianity == good, Islam == bad. "Either you're with us, or with the terrorists", declared Bush.

      Well, this film shows that we needn't subscribe to that point of view.
      • Unfortunately the point of view of other countries is lets lay down and accept things the way they are until something really bad happens to make us pull our skirt back up and say "no". Australia learned that when the nightclub in Bali was bombed. France still han't learned to stay saying "I give up" when faced with threats. Most of Europe is now overrun with radicals that want to bomb one thing or another and are slowly being dug up only because the US has been pushing. The only question left is what do these people have to blow up that you care about in order to wake you up? I don't care if they are the McVeighs or the bin Ladens of the world, I will not allow my children to die at their whim. If you are willing to give up a measure of your free civilization so that these baddies will love you more, then you deserve none of it. They give up their right to live when they threaten mine and swing their arms in my nose.

        • Unfortunately the point of view of other countries is lets lay down and accept things the way they are until something really bad happens to make us pull our skirt back up and say "no". Australia learned that when the nightclub in Bali was bombed.

          What the arse was Australia supposed to do *before* the attack? Perform a strategic surgical carpet bombing of the countries its tourists planned to visit?

        • Terrorism isn't stopped through the waging of war. Can you name one case where terrorism was ended by war? War "against terrorism" only brings on more terrorism.

          We really ought to consider our policies in the Middle East if we wish to eradicate terrorism. Would Iraq have built up their military had we not armed Iran to the hilt in the 50s, 60s, and 70s? Why are we arming the Israelis, Egyptians, and Saudis to the hilt (oil)? Would our interests be served better through other forms of aid? Yes, I know that Egypt is the largest recipient of non-military US aid, but Israel and Egypt are the #1 & #2 recipients of military aid.

          Why did the Bush regime stop the US policy of engagement in North Korea and with respect to the Palestinian Authority? Perhaps the US would be better served through the use of other means.

          We (the world) don't have many success stories in our fights against terrorism. The terrorism threat in Northern Ireland seems to be improving, albeit very slowly. Egypt and Israel have developed a somewhat lasting peace (hopefully it will be able to survive Israel's current regime). What has happened in these cases? First and foremost is engagement. Engagement does not require capitulation. But we must continue dialogue. Bush's approach in Israel and North Korea are completely inane. Isolationism does not work, and has never worked.

          I have always cherished America's ability to behave in a pragmatic manner. Rightly or wrongly, America usually acts in a manner that achieves their goals while minimizing the negative consequences. However, the actions the US government has taken in the past year and a half have made me question this pragmatism. Has Bush and his administration carefully considered the consequences of their militant approach to these issues? Will this approach achieve the intended results while minimizing negative consequences? I don't think so. Will they create more problems? Probably--it seems North Korea was a manufactured problem that resulted from Bush's isolationism coupled with North Korea's opportunism.

          As for giving "up a measure of your free civilization so that these baddies will love you more", I'm more worried about giving up my free civilization (yes, I'm American) in the process of attempting to *prevent* these baddies. I personally consider the rights outlined by the Articles to the Constitution (and its amendments) as inalienable rights. I find our treatment of interned foreigners completely unacceptable. I believe that America is a great nation that should rise above this current conflict and do the right thing. We can win in this current conflict. However, if we sink to the levels of war mongering and disregarding of our own Constitution, we will merely get mired into a conflict that cannot be won.
          • We have not had a good deal of success in eradicating crime from the streets of the world either, but I don't think anyone wants to start negotiations with the rapists and murderers. Terrorists are not much more than better organized criminals and there is no reason they should not be hunted down. Certainly we could be garnering the support of these countries by setting them up with hard services (help their police forces and infrastructure stabilize) and products (light water reactors) rather than hard money, and even then provide American companies to do the work in setting that up in order to give the economy a little more of a boost. But right now that is appeasement and a reward for having plotted against us, and it certainly didn't take American $$$ to have everyone in that part of the world hating each other for the past thousands of years. Right now the service and hardware they want involves killing instead of building because that is where their hearts are.

            I don't agree either that we should be detaining innocents against the letter of the constitution, but you also cannot let the constitution keep you from pointing at who is likely to be at fault for plots and schemes that have been dug up. I mean, it's certainly not the Norwegians that we're dealing with, folks. Don't detain people if there is no evidence, but wring them for all they're criminally worth once evidence shows itself - no matter where they come from. I doubt history will show we were wrong for confronting terrorists and countries that we know have supported them, but we will again be viewed with distaste for the treatment of people who came to our lands for a bit of peace.
      • Didn't see the film, it's in some strange video format I can't play, but let me make a few notes.

        By equating Al Qaeda with Islam, and the actions of terrorists with those of muslims, many in positions of responsibility in government (specifically, the clip shows Bush and his aides, Jean Chretien, Tony Blair, et al) and especially the media are pushing the views of the public toward a mindset last seen, with catastrophic outcomes, in the crusades.

        I agreed with this administration, Al Qaeda Hi-Jacked Islam to suite it's own purposes. To destroy America. It was stated on more than one occasion in plain english that we are not attacking Muslems because they are Muslems, we are attacking Al Qaeda and their allies because they funded and trained the 9/11 mass murders. They all just happen to be Muslem

        According to Bush, because "they" hate "us", we must beat them until they change their minds. Christianity == good, Islam == bad. "Either you're with us, or with the terrorists", declared Bush.

        That last quote is about what nations were going to help us hunt down and kill the people that killed thousands of our citizens. I see nothing wrong with throwing our weight around in that situation. It has nothing to do with Islam vs Christianity and everything to do with removing the threat of future terror attacks.

  • Mosaic media is fun (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Platinum Dragon ( 34829 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:20AM (#5065802) Journal
    I haven't seen 9-11: (c)StA, despite being a GNN forum semi-regular, but I've had the opportunity to view other collage film efforts on the topic.

    In particular, Plasticman and the Justice League [satanmacnuggit.com] by Toronto artist and slacker Jonathan Culp was quite hilarious and biting.

    If you're up for a slightly twisted view of things, along with some artsy-fartsy film tricks, dig around the alternative billboards in your area. There's some interesting stuff floating around out there. It may not change any minds (or it might!), but as cultural artifacts and Negativland-style low-budget social commentary efforts, many such flicks are worth seeking out.
    • A similar thing to this montage of 9/11 images was done to the Gulf War: Part One. It shows just how bad and sensationist the coverage was, focusing on the computer graphics that were created for the networks.

      It was done by Phil Patiris and you can find a clip of it at the Illegal Art [illegal-art.org] webage. Highly recommended. Read the sites legal agreement if you have the time; all is not as it seems. It's a good site, containing lot's of things that people have tried to ban or surpress over the years.

  • Direct Link (Score:4, Informative)

    by ShoeHead ( 40158 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:24AM (#5065809) Homepage
    before this get's slashdotted, you can download the movie at

    http://http.dvlabs.com/gnn/qt/gnn/redux/redux_bb .m ov

    Happy viewing!

  • While GNN is reeling from the Slashdotting.. (Score:5, Informative)

    by CBNobi ( 141146 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:26AM (#5065814)
    Do them a favor and download from the Sundance site [sundanceon...stival.com] instead of the GNN. They have a distributed, Akamai-like system for viewing the flick.

    You get the film, the GNN doesn't spend money on bandwidth, and noone feels too guilty about slashdotting a film-specializing site like Sundance. Everyone wins.

  • A few thoughts... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:39AM (#5065836)

    Interesting that the clip of Ted Koppel in which he talks about wishing "all our Muslim viewers a happy Ramadan" doesn't include the full quote, which ended with something along the lines of "We do want to be politically correct, don't we?" The full clip is available in this amazing "illegal" video Spin [illegal-art.org]
    at illegal-art.org [illegal-art.org], where incidentally you can download other illegal audio & video.

    Secondly, Steve Allen was a genius.

  • Preaching to the choir... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:41AM (#5065841)
    The only ones that will pay attention are those that held these views already. Especially since the method of information distribution is an indie film. It's not as if this stuff hasn't been exposed since 9-11, it's just that the sheeple are apathetic towards manipulation and corruption. If James Bamford can't get people to care one whit with editorial columns in USA Today, and the best Michael Moore can do is provoke a few days' worth of discussion with a nationally-distributed film, what hope does this project have?
  • links posted with permission from all involved parties
    "Fools. Only now do they begin to see the power of this fully-operational death star^W^WSlashdotting..."

  • huzzah to michael (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Hadlock ( 143607 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @04:57AM (#5065874) Homepage Journal
    kudos for doublechecking permission before slashdotting a site that is definately gonna get slammed, come morning. i know you got flamed last time for that barcode site, and it's good to see you're alerting people in advance this time.

    in other news, interesting short film, i really liked the various music they played on it. did anyone by any chance catch the piano bit and know who wrote/composed/arranged it by any chance? it almost sounded like somthing out of the thomas crown affair.

    • kudos for doublechecking permission before slashdotting a site that is definately gonna get slammed, come morning.

      Michael didn't doublecheck shit, the submitter did. You know that if it was left up to Slashdot, the willing and the unwilling alike would see their webservers reduced to smoking rubble, just like every other day.

  • my favorite part was about halfway through when they show henry kissinger (nobel peace prize winner and butcher of chile, e. timor, and vietnam) talking about the importance of strong leadership. queue "dueling banjos" and cut to president bush making an ass of himself ("...the american people...uh..."). i can't be the only person in america who cringes every time the president tries to say something off the top of his head. how in holy hell did a man that profoundly stupid become president of the united states?
    • To gauge a man's intelligence by how well he speaks in public is completely moronic.

      How smart do you think YOU are.. or how about your friends.. I bet you all think you're pretty intelligent. Now tell me.. how well do YOU speak publicly?

      • Except that the President is a politician foremost.

        You would think that after all his political experience, he would have a stronger foundation as an orator, especially since he's the Commander-in-Chief.
      • You are very wise. No wait, that's completely moronic.
      • And yet it's obvious to even the most thick-headed of us that the man is a complete fucking moron. As are, it appears, most of the twits who voted for him.

        Which makes sense, given that half the population is below average in intelligence. Finally they have equal representation in the White House!

        Max

        • Re:stick a rusty fork in my eye (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Actually only 1/2 of the people voted, and out of all those people only less that 1/2 actually voted for him. Therefore only 1/2 of the total morons in America were represented. Then again this idiot was installed in office with the direct support of less than 1/4 of the population.

          Well that is a republic for you. And please stop making excuses like "how would you feel if you had to speak in public." Well I don't know, because I am not the #$@#ing president, darn it... if you are going to be the most powerful man on earth you better be able to at least articulate your thoughts in public. How come this guy has never appeared on a non-orchestrated live event, where it HAS TO SPEAK FOR ITSELF? Everytime its handlers have left it, it made an ass of itself.

          Let's see so far we have had what:

          Election fraud, diplomatic crisis with China, terrorist attacks, 7 of the largest bankrupcies in history, economic recession, record unemployment rise, record low stock performance, record DOW year close, record national spending/debt increase (after inherinting a surplus), war, etc. etc.... And they tried to tell me that I should not judge this idiot because it speaks like a jackass in public. I don't have to, all I need to do is to look at its record... I am pretty sure my dog could do a better job.
      • But as a politician, it's his job to hold dialogue, change peoples minds, make compromises, understand wtf the issue is and be able to communicate that with other people, inform, motivate, and do all that stuff which one does with the use of that skill we call public speaking. It's his job to be a qualified demogogue...and he isn't a skilled orator at all.

        But even then, I know lots of people who aren't skilled orators, but are smart. When they have to speak, there might be lots of ums and ahs, but what comes out is generally intelligent (and intelligable) thought. That's just not the case with GWB.

        Also, how else are you going to judge GWB's capabilities? The only side you see is what's on tv. And if you'd've bothered to dig deeper, you'd already know the guy is a complete moron, based on his accomplishments.
    • i can't be the only person in america who cringes every time the president tries to say something off the top of his head. how in holy hell did a man that profoundly stupid become president of the united states?

      I suggest you read "Stupid White Men" by Michael Moore.

  • that vid was scary... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by LadyGuardian ( 568469 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @05:07AM (#5065889) Homepage Journal
    ... only in the way that now people are going to go around spouting this stuff as gospel because they are too lazy to go do their own research. Yes, it is well done. I even chuckled at the banjo music. However, quotes taken out of context do not count as fact. No matter who said it or how many there are in a row, it's still not the whole truth. I laugh at CNN for their egotistical 'learn about whole world's events in 30 seconds' approach to news, but this is something else entirely.

    This, to me, is how MTV would cover the news in a desperate stab at keeping people's attention.
  • this [churchofeuthanasia.org]
    • Personally, I thought "I like to watch" was incredibly daring when it appeared (what, a month or two after 11/9?).

      The difference here is that GNN's film attempts to be constructive and that, in my view, is an important difference. We can snigger at Bush's pea-sized brain but the fact is, he (and Blair et al) has got the sales pitch going and those against his war-mongering, do not. We can't just say, "don't destroy out civil rights, don't go to war" without offering an alternative, without offering some kind of argument.

      "I like to watch" is a wonderful pisstake of the media. "Redux" is a powerful and persuasive argument against going to war.

      • Re:see also (Score:5, Insightful)

        by the gnat ( 153162 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @05:49AM (#5065951)
        We can snigger at Bush's pea-sized brain but the fact is, he (and Blair et al) has got the sales pitch going and those against his war-mongering, do not. We can't just say, "don't destroy out civil rights, don't go to war" without offering an alternative, without offering some kind of argument

        To give Bush some credit, he's not really that stupid. He's certainly not a deep thinker or a great speaker, and too many people mistake those qualities for good leadership. His gaffes tend to get inflated by the liberal news media, just as Clinton's so-called corruption was inflated by the conservative (and mainstream!) news media. A lot of the rhetoric being tossed about regarding Bush sounds suspiciously like the drivel we heard about Clinton for eight years- driven by partisanship rather than facts, and ignoring the more substantive criticisms.

        Anyway, you've pretty much highlighted the current dilemma of the Democratic party, which came across as the Prescription Drug Party this past election. All the campaign updates I receive (I do still vote Dem, reluctantly) sounded exactly the same:

        GEORGE W. BUSH WANTS TO PAVE THE RAINFORESTS, AUCTION OFF YOUR UTERUS TO ENRON, AND BOMB STARVING THIRD-WORLD COUNTRIES WITH BIBLES.

        Obviously the majority of the people who bothered to show up at the polls weren't very impressed. I'm moderately anti-abortion and moderately pro-war, and though I have little love for the GOP I'm finding it very hard to support the Democrats given that their existence seems to rest on being the anti-Bush party right now. They'd do well to stop pandering to NOW, the NAACP, and the AARP, and actually come up with some substantive policy.
        • So long as there's a bunch of anti-abortion pro-war shitheads who have nothing better to do than to fuck about in their neighbors business and vote for people who pass laws pissing all over the Constitution, Bush is pretty much set no matter what the Democrats do.

          The primary problem here is that there are a whole bunch of Americans who just love being bent over and fucked up the ass by their politicians - so long as the guy next door with different political views gets the shaft as well. Minding your own fucking business is something the Enquirer-reading generation just can't seem to get a handle on.

          Probably because their own lives are so pathetic.

          Max
          • > So long as there's a bunch of anti-abortion
            >pro-war shitheads who have nothing better to do
            >than to fuck about in their neighbors business and
            >vote for people who pass laws pissing all over the
            > Constitution

            I think you just proved his point.

  • Sheep (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Carrierwave ( 640525 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @05:22AM (#5065905)
    In a recent news report covering an anti-US rally in Iraq, one man was shown holding a banner reading "A nation of sheep, owned by pigs, and led by wolves." (or something to that effect). Most Americans would probably find this very offensive unless they consider the facts of the matter, and the truth is that we have let Donald "Let's Rumble" Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush-lynching mob get completely out of control. This movie only helps to drive that point home.

    • Re:Sheep (Score:5, Interesting)

      by DarkZero ( 516460 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @05:53AM (#5065956)
      In a recent news report covering an anti-US rally in Iraq, one man was shown holding a banner reading "A nation of sheep, owned by pigs, and led by wolves." (or something to that effect). Most Americans would probably find this very offensive unless they consider the facts of the matter, and the truth is that we have let Donald "Let's Rumble" Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush-lynching mob get completely out of control.

      Yes, because all Americans happily serve our corporate employers in our wonderfully spacious cubicles without a hint of grumbling or complaining, and cheer on a daily basis as yet another politician gives Big Business a nice, hard bitch slap for the little guy because he's an upstanding, principled American citizen.

      This message brought to you by 1940s American sitcoms, whose sponsors remind you to, "Grow up, you ignorant, self-important fuckwit that assumes that everyone else is stupid."

      While you're assuming what "most Americans" would do, you may want to look at one of the latest polls [cbsnews.com], the second most popular source of generalizations about American beliefs (with first place going to the speaker's ass, of course). It paints a pretty unsurprising picture for anyone that doesn't blindly assume that those around them are inferior to themselves. It states that the American people disagree with the Bush Administration in its priorities, believe that its policies favor the rich, believe both that Bush is handling Iraq the wrong way and that that sentiment will be ignored, that the US is not winning the "War On Terror", and that Bush is too quick to involve the military. As always, though, the President's approval rating remains unchanged even as American attitudes slowly change, because the approval rating for an American president usually only changes when they either do something or are close to an election, and Bush has been dragging his feet for months on the Iraq issue.

      • Re:Sheep (Score:5, Interesting)

        by startled ( 144833 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @06:10AM (#5065996)
        "As always, though, the President's approval rating remains unchanged even as American attitudes slowly change...."

        And there we go right back to me feeling superior to them. :) The NYT had a pretty good article about rising unemployment and the shitty economy. In one interview with an unemployed man who wasn't going to receive any more benefits (not even with the recent extention; he was laid off too early), the man claimed he felt betrayed, surprised, and so on.

        Yes, that's right. An unemployed man feeling "betrayed" by a Republican president who isn't giving him money for not working. Wasn't that blatantly fucking obvious from the get-go? Wait-- you mean that if I vote for the Republican candidate, I'll get less welfare and social services? Run that by me again. Hold on a minute-- this from the man who vowed to cut taxes on inheritances over $1 million? Who's crusading for elimination of the tax on dividends, which will primarily effect people earning several hundred thousand dollars a year?

        If people can't figure out that the Republicans are NOT the party to vote for if you want a larger unemployment check, they're too fucking stupid to vote.

        I do think (well, hope anyway) that person was anomalous. So, while I think exactly the same thing when I read the post you were responding to-- that is, I think "Grow up, you ignorant, self-important fuckwit that assumes that everyone else is stupid"-- I also see the reason he's started to think that. Anyone with half a brain and 10 minutes a day on the newspaper knew who they were voting for.
        • Which is rather a good argument against representative democracy, which recently seems like an abject failure. Let's try something new, shall we? Perhaps an intelligence test to get the vote? And while we're at it, only those that can vote can breed.

          Max

        • Re:Sheep (Score:3, Interesting)

          by DarkZero ( 516460 )
          "As always, though, the President's approval rating remains unchanged even as American attitudes slowly change...."

          And there we go right back to me feeling superior to them. :)

          Democracy is a not a quick thing, like a dictatorship. It is a huge, lumbering beast that makes a lot of noise, but moves very slowly. If the President's approval rating dropped because he didn't instantaneously respond to an issue, it would start hovering around 0% most of the time because the maximum speed of the executive and legislative branches moving together is roughly equal to that of two drunks in a three-legged race. Conversely, if his approval rating went up every time he laid out a solid economic plan, his approval rating would be hovering around 100% most of the time because democracies are filled with far more words than actions. This is why you end up with the way approval ratings currently work. They stay the same until action is taken or something external makes things a lot better or worse than they have been. This system has its flaws, but it's the best we have right now, sort of like representative democracy itself.

          As for the rest of your post, I think you adequately summed up why Some Anonymous Jackass That Was Interviewed By The NYT is a total fucking moron. I'm sure he feels very bad about that right now, or at least he will when he gets a job and starts visiting /. during work hours shortly before he is fired. However, I don't see why a sample of one proves that "most Americans" are stupid, nor why you would assume that they are based on some guy that made a nice, stupid quote for a journalist.
        • You should be outraged that anybody would feel betrayed because he expects the State to keep him in money all the time.

          I don't know how much you make a year but after paying for a modest house and barely enough food to live on do you just give the rest of your money away? If not you're a hypocrite.

          I'm not rich, but I'll appreciate the no tax on dividends. See 75% of Americans own stocks these days. So unless you consider 75% of the US rich, this helps everyone.

          Welfare is ok for a short-term fix but it makes you lazy if you continue to recieve it. What motivation was there for me to look for a job when I was getting unemployment? None. It helped, that's for sure, but I'm not upset that I don't get another 13 weeks, I mean what happens after that? This economy sucks, I'd probably not have a job still, so should I get 13 more weeks? See where I'm going, it becomes a crutch.

          But hey, if you want the taxes to go up on the 'rich' don't be surprised when you get laid off because with the increased taxes, you are the easy way to reduce expenses for a company. Tax cuts spur the economy, a spurred economy gets people off welfare, we all win.

          • "I don't know how much you make a year but after paying for a modest house and barely enough food to live on do you just give the rest of your money away? If not you're a hypocrite."

            What are you talking about? I never stated my opinion on welfare, unemployment benefits, or the current president in my post. I simply said that if you vote Republican and are shocked when they cut benefits, you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. Your argument seems crafted against some point I never made.

            "I'm not rich, but I'll appreciate the no tax on dividends. See 75% of Americans own stocks these days."

            Most of those 75% own most or all of their stock through their already tax-sheltered accounts (401(k)), and would receive no benefit from the current proposition.
      • Splitting the vote between Iraq, War on Terror, and Economy.

        A better indication would have been War vs. Economy, then see if folks want to finish the job on 'Terror' or start a new war to git Saddam, IMO.

  • facts (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mcbevin ( 450303 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @05:28AM (#5065915) Homepage
    refreshing to see slashdot address some real issues rather than 'dmca is evil take 1024'. i must've downloaded the video a couple of months back though so i don't know how its news - quite funny but of course lacking in any hard facts so not going to really convert anyone but the converted. the GNN also has a series of videos on 'unanswered questions about sept 11' which are interesting and more informative but rather conspiracy theorist.

    in my search for a bit of truth about the whole matter, i've put together a small set of actual facts about sept 11 + american foreign policy in general and thrown them on my website www.bevin.de/usa/ . every fact/claim is linked to relatively credible documents / news stories. i'd like to hear some slashdotters' opinions - the site is pretty anti us-foreign-policy in its leaning but like i said, nothings there thats not well backed up, which is in contrast to everything else i've been able to find on the web.
    • i'd like to hear some slashdotters' opinions

      Um, okay. See, I actually know someone who was in the WTC when it collapsed. Just an acquaintance, really- he was a year ahead of me in college (he had just graduated when he was killed), lived across the courtyard my junior year, and helped me get a good room my senior year even after I fucked up with the forms. Not really a close connection, but it's something. One girl was in tears that afternoon because her dad worked in the WTC and she didn't know if he was okay- fortunately, he'd left the building at about 8:30. A number of our alums were killed, and the school newspaper published biographies of them- one woman had just gotten engaged.

      I mention this not because I feel blind revenge is appropriate or that I have more of a right to be enraged than you do, but to point out an essential problem with all you snotty Europeans who spew conspiracy theories about Sept. 11th: you don't give a shit about the people who died, and are incapable of recognizing them as people. This dehumanization is every bit as bad as the nonchalance most Americans have towards foreign civilian casualties and the victims of US-backed dictatorships. Many of us are horrified by some of the things the US has done in the past, and are very worried about what will happen to the poor Afghans. Nonetheless, we're still able to recognize that some things are truly evil and need to be dealt with appropriately, and do not try to make excuses for mass murderers.

      Obviously you can argue that the US deliberately provoked bin Laden until you're blue in the face, and there's not really anything I can do to convince you otherwise. Still, there's a case to be made that bin Laden deserves to die just for the embassy bombings alone, in which 200 innocent African civilians were killed (compared to about 20 Americans). Since you seem to have given this issue quite a bit of thought, perhaps you could also suggest the proper course of action for America to take when innocents are butchered? Right now, all I see on your site is typical smug European elitism, and a bunch of "facts" lined up in a way such as to suggest that we simply had it coming, and should bend over and take it like a bitch. Your jealousy over not being a real superpower any more, and the luxury of having nearly zero foreign policy outside of Europe, has led you into the belief that America and Bush are far more evil and murderous than Islamofascism and bin Laden.

      I'd suggest that anyone who finds this sort of thinking attractive read Christopher Hitchens, who is both a fierce critic of US foreign policy and an opponent of everything bin Laden stands for.

  • Art or propaganda? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by syphoon ( 619506 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @05:33AM (#5065926)
    The thing I really didn't like about this video (aside from its political angle, but it _did_ come from GNN after all..) was its methodology of trying to create a constant stream of ideas (like a audio-visual 'stream of consciousness') out of a series of quotes taken out of context, or even cut to mean the complete opposite of what was then said. Add to that the various funny bits, such as slow framing Bush, and him umming and ahhing with the combined effect of making him appear vacant, and altogether we actually have a standard piece of propaganda: Shaping how we think through use of the media, and giving 'sound bites' to give the appearance of rational arguments, while the actual content is a lot more vacuous than it appears.

  • WTF is this? (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by E-Rock ( 84950 )
    I watched it, and it's not about anything! It's a bunch of VERY short clips pasted together in a unintelligible narrative. So the American white man's war is bad? Retaliation against an armed aggressor is bad? Is that what they're trying to say?

    It's just more of the same old same old objectionist nonsense ["You're bad, what you do is bad, shame on you, shame on you."] without any attempt to provide an alternative. Why? Because that's hard to do.

    So they come off looking like a bunch of bitch ass, daddy's buying, whiners.

    Someone please explain what the hell this actually was if I'm wrong.

    • Retaliation against an armed aggressor? What armed aggressor? America hasn't been up against an armed aggressor since 1945.

      In fact, all we've been doing since then is getting involved in petty wars to prove that this president or that president has a bigger dick than some other national leader.

      Hey, fuck the rest of the world. Let them kill each other. Do I care? So long as they sell us oil who gives a shit if the Iraqis and Israelis wipe each other out? Who cares if the maniacs in the Balkans want to set up a Fourth Reich? Who really gives a damn if Libya decides to go on a North African rampage?

      Honestly, if we just minded our own goddamned business in the Middle East do you really think the winner would refuse to sell oil to the biggest consumer on the planet? Yeah, tell me another.

      I vote for non-interference and non-involvement. Let the fanatics have at each other. When the dust settles, do business with the winner.

      Max
    • Perhaps they were just having some fun.
    • Learn some history, will you; the US isn't just up against an "armed agressor"...they're up against the very people they funded and/or put into power in the first place!

      I guess what goes around comes around, really. The objection is against the US fscking about with other countries souvereignity without any better cause than "we want power". The alternative is just as simple as "don't do it anymore".

      And to go further: any terrorist organisation is just that; an organisation. Not a country. So wtf is up with that "war on terror"? Just like the "war on drugs" (both of which are propaganda driven, the actual facts of the matter being swept under the carpet), even the actual term used is rediculous. Both terrorism and drugs are an ongoing problem for any nation and must be dealt with accordingly. One cannot use a shortterm solution (going to war) for a long term problem. Or at least you can't without misrepresenting the problem, and screwing up your countries finances.

  • EBN (Score:4, Interesting)

    by limekiller4 ( 451497 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @06:56AM (#5066074) Homepage
    EBN [guerrillanews.com] was doing this stuff, much better, I might add, in the early 90's.

    I qualify that slightly because afaik, it might even be some or all of the founding members of EBN that are behind GNN. Their original stuff, however, was far more deft and sarcastic. This 11-minute clip was fairly boring bore none of the medium-bending antics of the previous group.
  • That was an incredibly biting and funny piece of political satire! I've been a fan of GNN for a while, ever since they re-released their 'Real War' video.

    I wonder how long it will take for GNN to be classed amongst the 'Axis of Evil' :)

  • Mirror opf Quicktime version (Score:4, Informative)

    by Halo1 ( 136547 ) on Sunday January 12, 2003 @08:10AM (#5066172)
    I forewarned the gnn guys and got their permission to include direct links to the Quicktme versions on their site, but I just got a mail of them stating that if the slashdotting of their site continues like this, they'll be broke by morning :)

    I've setup a mirror of the Quicktime version here [rug.ac.be]. It's limited to 30 connections currently, but this may change at any time.

  • 9-11, Road to Tyranny, a full length video on the same subject, vhs or dvd, free to copy and redistribute for non profit educational purposes. [infowars.com]

    It's pretty good and gets into some detail. He has some other videos as well, and a good mon-fri daily radio show. Also check on the site the link to the 9-11, government prior knowledge collection of articles.

  • <i>then our concept of a democracy (which is founded on the ability for all citizens to choose their nation's destiny based on a full spectrum of information) is in desperate peril. </i>

    These people can't stop rewriting history. Our _Republic_ was based on the idea that wealthy men should be in office because the wealty men would be incorruptable (whoops!)

    As for: <i>Film Synopsis: A clever and cutting critique of media coverage on terrorism after September 11th. </i>

    When you consider that all the major news outfits on TV, Cbale and Print are wildly liberal just what the fuck are these people complaining about? (Yes I know all abot AM radio and FOX (which ain't so far to the right.))

    Americans are violent. Just watch our TV shows. Attacking us will sure be your demise. And (apparently) if we can't find you we will kill someone else. Best to leave US alone.

  • HELP! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Ian-GNN ( 640582 )
    OK So I just awoke to this onslaught. My partner stayed up late and gave out the direct links to Michael. We are being crushed. I beg that you try and Watch&Vote [sundanceon...stival.com]the movie on Sundance. They have a Kontiki downloadable version. Also any more people with a little extra bandwidth please contact me and help mirror our videos. Even before this slashing we were notified by our video hosting vendor that we were blowing through bandwidth due to growing interest in our other investigative 9/11 piece "Aftermath: Unanswered Questions of 9/11". We need help hosting vids and getting our info out to the public. Finally, If you like our stuff and want to help support a blood, sweat and tears project, buy our dvd and/or sign up for our mailing list. Thanks for the attention. Love and (r)evolution GNN
  • Part the first: "Let's piece together different clips and put words in people's mouths to make America sound EVIL!"

    Part the second: "OMG LOL Banjo music and GWB he iz such a redneck ROTFLMAO kthx"

    Part the third: "Now let's piece together a few more sound bites and finish off with a whiny hippy rant."

    Tim
  • It's pretty alarming that we have psychos for citizens, but it looks like we do. The kind of people who will in all seriousness think the question is whether to exterminate all the Arabs now or later, the kind of person who will SERIOUSLY claim that the trouble is people who hate us because we have freedom- not because PR handlers have fed them that soundbite to learn, but because they seriously believe it! And yet we do have people like that. On another thread about the Nike case it turned out we have people who consider the main problem with Indonesian sweatshops is public image, and people shouldn't be allowed to use the word. I wonder if you're allowed to use the word 'whip' or 'club', or whether you are supposed to call it 'factory security enforcement mechanism'.

    It would be really, really nice if we didn't have psychotics for citizens. Things would be so simple, we could point at other countries' psychotics and say 'You keep those people in line!'.

    And we still should, because we are NOT the only country with psychotics and maniacs running around loose.

    But we gotta remember to smack our OWN psychotics down if we expect anyone else to do the same in our support.

    If anyone reading this (who's not a psychotic) is nodding thoughtfully, I hope to hell you vote. It looks like a citizen's obligation to society is not as passive as it appeared to be. It looks like we have to continually make some efforts to clean our government just like you have to clean a stove that gets used to cook on. Here's hoping our government doesn't get so filthy it's not worth cleaning...

Slashdot Top Deals

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"

Close