'Fahrenheit 9/11' Interview of CIA Nominee Porter Goss: "I am not qualified."

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Interview of CIA Nominee Porter Goss: "I am not qualified."
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Posted by ZinG on Aug-13-2004 00:33:

'Fahrenheit 9/11' Interview of CIA Nominee Porter Goss: "I am not qualified."

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php?id=128

Please no biased bullcrap, the guy said it himself so I don't see how this had happened

Posted by speedracer_mec on Aug-13-2004 01:24:

And this is coming straight from the reliable source of michaelmoore.com

Posted by ZinG on Aug-13-2004 01:33:

are u kidding me?
did you even watch it?

Posted by torontotrance on Aug-13-2004 01:45:

As if I'd ever watch anything from the horse's mouth aka Michael Moore.

Posted by ZinG on Aug-13-2004 01:53:

Andy you're an idiot, an exception

Posted by torontotrance on Aug-13-2004 01:55:

don't provoke me, you small minded fool. We all know you hate Bush and honestly I don't care, if the guy said he was not qualified then so be it but I won't believe anything that's on Moore's site, he is a bigger fraud than Dubya.

Posted by Cyrus King on Aug-13-2004 02:17:

quote:
Originally posted by torontotrance
don't provoke me, you small minded fool. We all know you hate Bush and honestly I don't care, if the guy said he was not qualified then so be it but I won't believe anything that's on Moore's site, he is a bigger fraud than Dubya.

Moore has backed up EVERy point made in Fahrenheit 9/11 on his website, and you still wish to not beleive it becuase you personally label him a liar without backing up your statements.

He may have skewed some things here and ther in his past, but with this film... its pathetic to even try and refute what 6 full time lawyers researched for 8 months prior to filming.

Posted by LiquidX on Aug-13-2004 03:14:

Posted by malek on Aug-13-2004 03:25:

andy STFU and watch it! Moore doesn't say a word in there.

Posted by Q5echo on Aug-13-2004 04:00:

WTF?
that shit meant nothing.
it meant zip towards whether he could lead the CIA or not.
for all we know he was pulling the interviewer's chain.
let it lead you down whatever little path you want, it meant nothing.

Posted by Matt on Aug-13-2004 04:19:

Posted by St_Andrew on Aug-13-2004 11:49:

quote:
Originally posted by Q5echo
WTF?
that shit meant nothing.
it meant zip towards whether he could lead the CIA or not.
for all we know he was pulling the interviewer's chain.
let it lead you down whatever little path you want, it meant nothing.

that is actually kinda true. but of bush to say that he know cia inside out when he worked there 30 years ago is obviously a lie.

Posted by St_Andrew on Aug-13-2004 11:51:

quote:
Originally posted by speedracer_mec
And this is coming straight from the reliable source of michaelmoore.com

yeah he made up the whole VIEDO CLIP!!!! damn michel more =/

stop beeing so ignorant... i think we have seen a lot of more biased information here from other sources than michelmoore.com, ie right wing bias!

Posted by arctic on Aug-13-2004 12:35:

quote:
Originally posted by speedracer_mec
And this is coming straight from the reliable source of michaelmoore.com

Have you watched the video, or is this just an uninformed slur?

Posted by tupsox on Aug-13-2004 14:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Cyrus King
Moore has backed up EVERy point made in Fahrenheit 9/11 on his website, and you still wish to not beleive it becuase you personally label him a liar without backing up your statements.

He may have skewed some things here and ther in his past, but with this film... its pathetic to even try and refute what 6 full time lawyers researched for 8 months prior to filming.

Oh lord Cyrus, have you even bothered reading:
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fif...renheit-911.htm

Tons of refutations. It was appended with Moore's responses, which are also refuted.

Farenheit 9/11 is one of the most deceitful, dishonest documentaries ever produced, and employs cinematic techniques worthy of Leni Riefenstahl (I now call Moore "Lumpy Riefenstahl"). There's plenty of stuff to criticize the Bush administration for, but if you try to defend Michael Moore it simply discredits you and your cause.

You can convince if you sift through all 59 deceits listed in that web page and prove to me that Moore was telling the objective truth (i.e. not presenting things in such a way as to intentionally mislead viewers).

Posted by tupsox on Aug-13-2004 14:07:

Re: 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Interview of CIA Nominee Porter Goss: "I am not qualified."

quote:
Originally posted by ZinG
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php?id=128

Please no biased bullcrap, the guy said it himself so I don't see how this had happened

Regarding the interview, where does Mr. Goss say he is unqualified to be the CIA director, an administrative position?

I simply see him saying that in the modern age, he's unqualified to be a CIA agent based on the new focus on arabic and the middle east, etc.

This doesn't strike me as a bombshell of any sort. Once agian, Michael Moore trying to mislead people by taking quotes out of context.

Posted by ZinG on Aug-13-2004 17:04:

if you'reunqualified to be a CIA agent, how the hell can you be qualified to be CHIEF of CIA

Posted by Q5echo on Aug-13-2004 17:06:

quote:
Originally posted by St_Andrew
that is actually kinda true. but of bush to say that he know cia inside out when he worked there 30 years ago is obviously a lie.

what lie? why do you always jump to the lying conclusion? nobody lied.

Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a former officer with U.S. Army Intelligence and the CIA.

Posted by tupsox on Aug-13-2004 18:34:

quote:
Originally posted by ZinG
if you'reunqualified to be a CIA agent, how the hell can you be qualified to be CHIEF of CIA

I work in a large beaurocracy; my particularly department is perhaps 150 people. The head of our department sometimes gives little motivational pep talks, and one of his points is that he couldn't do the jobs we do; there are so many people doing so many different specialized things, its too much for one person. All the people combine to make the department productive. The upper level administation/management have totally different problems to face than the lower level employees.

The head of our department is not qualified to do what I do. Yet I am not qualified to do what he does. However, I am more replaceable than him. Thus, I earn about 20% what he does

Posted by FuzzyGreen on Aug-13-2004 18:37:

Re: 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Interview of CIA Nominee Porter Goss: "I am not qualified."

quote:
Originally posted by ZinG
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php?id=128

Please no biased bullcrap, the guy said it himself so I don't see how this had happened

Another out of context Moore quote/clip. This guy is not refering to leading the CIA, but rather if he is qualified to be a CIA agent. There is a difference in knowing how to lead and having the technical abilities to be a standard officer.

For instance, at my work, the director of engineering is not an engineer, he is a talented manager, but he is not qualified to be an engineer and he doesn't need to be in order to be a good director.

Posted by FuzzyGreen on Aug-13-2004 18:42:

Posted by NeoPhono on Aug-13-2004 19:10:

I have to agree with tupsox. After watching the "interview" it is easy to see that one, this is a snippet taken from a longer train of thought and that two, his demeanor is much too relaxed to be making a revelation about his inability to be the CIA director. It seems to me that he is pointing out the skills needed by today's new CIA officers, and that his "old school" skills would no longer cut it as a new recruit. I think he's trying to praise the quality of new agents using a little self-deprecation. I would think that if Mr. Moore truly wanted to be objective on this issue, he would let us see the interview in its entirety.

Posted by NYCTrancefan on Aug-13-2004 22:51:

Higher quality clip:

http://real.feedroom.com/smile.jsp?...431313937653730

As much as I despise the Bush administration I must admit that Mr. Goss was referring to being a CIA field agent as opposed to leading the CIA, take that whichever way you want. If he can't even be a field agent he can be "numero uno" figure that one out.

Posted by speedracer_mec on Aug-14-2004 00:20:

quote:
Originally posted by St_Andrew
yeah he made up the whole VIEDO CLIP!!!! damn michel more =/

stop beeing so ignorant... i think we have seen a lot of more biased information here from other sources than michelmoore.com, ie right wing bias!

Ummm i did see the video.

Just to note.

He ISNT qualified to be an operative .... that doesnt mean he is NOT qualified to run it.

Most VP's people work with ARENT qualified to be a developer, but most are qualified to run a development organization.

And since he HAS been there, he understands the nature of that business, plus since he was a congressman he understand the group of people he reports to. All in all i'd say he is qualified and his quote was taken completely out of context.

Posted by speedracer_mec on Aug-14-2004 00:23:

quote:
Originally posted by NeoPhono
I have to agree with tupsox. After watching the "interview" it is easy to see that one, this is a snippet taken from a longer train of thought and that two, his demeanor is much too relaxed to be making a revelation about his inability to be the CIA director. It seems to me that he is pointing out the skills needed by today's new CIA officers, and that his "old school" skills would no longer cut it as a new recruit. I think he's trying to praise the quality of new agents using a little self-deprecation. I would think that if Mr. Moore truly wanted to be objective on this issue, he would let us see the interview in its entirety.

Exactly Good point

Once again...

Michael Moore is brainwashing you noobs..

Watch the clip with a bit more thought next time peeps.

Pages (2): [1] 2 »