The only thing that really pisses me off is that the ammunition that people like Moore fires off at the US can be cut and pasted striaght into terrorist propaganda. Do we really, really need to give them more affirmation?

Once the election is over, most Americans will see F-9/11 as an historical piece, but the message will be there for those who demand "revenge" for the next few decades. Once Bush is out of office we'll cease to care about his sins, but terrorists don't distinguish between the nation and the administration. If they did they would have taken a vacation during the Clinton years.

He has every right to say what he wants. I wonder, though, how he can see the parallels between his message and terrorist propaganda and not be sickened by it.

I agree, dissent shouldn't ever be a "bad thing to do" because that will cause some serious problems. Suppose those in government collectively decided to eliminate certain race or ethnicity because nobody dissented because that's a bad thing to do?

The only type of dissent I don't like is dissent for the save of dissent.

BakerStreet:
One of the things you have to consider (as my dear mother always said) is the source. For example, if a Republican candidate shows pictures of aborted fetuses (hope I didn't spoil your lunch) as a campaign tool that doesn't make all Republicans pro-life or shockingly vulgar people. What it says is that the candidate weighed his options and decided that showing the pics was more likely to get him votes than not. Michael Moore, in a way, could be said to approach his filmmaking in the same manner. He believes he has a message and whether we like to see what he films or not, it doesn't reflect on anyone (including terrorists) other than himself.
One more thing about terrorists needing ammunition to do propoganda. Do you really think there is a terrorist ops center for propoganda research scanning U.S. programs and films to find stuff to use? I think they pretty much got a format that they stick with, right? We hate the West, we want the West to cease to exist, we're prepared to ensure that happens.
Everything else: variation on the theme.

No, i'd differ with that. Terrorists feed off conspiracy theories, you hear it all the time. The more diabolical the conspiracy, the more apt they are to sway moderate citizens around them. Moderate Muslims might not be swayed by the existence of Israel, or even the plight of the Palestinian people. On the other hand if they are told that he US is conspiring to make excuses to invade Arab countries to steal their oil, and are offered a set of spurious facts to prove it, the more gullible of them are apt to take notice.

Conspiracies take it from philosophical differences to an overt threat. You can't say people aren't more apt to act when threatened.

No different than here. Our home-grown terrorists don't just say "Down with the government", they use elaborate conspiracies filled with black UN helicopters and the Trilateral commission to unite the paranoid against a common enemy. Simple angst against the government doesn't lead people to commit acts like Oklahoma City, they have to justify it with an ornate web of evil rushing to destroy their world.

What people like Moore are giving the Arab extremists is a mythology to exploit. The more tangible the mythology, and the more authoritative the source, the more it will stick. Moore has set himself up to be a Bulfinch for at least one chapter of Arabic conspiracy theory, and has done it to make money. I find that pretty mercenary and irresponsible, personally.

So relax, Michael Moore is not your enemy, just a filmmaker.

Who says a filmmaker can not be my enemy? I don't despise Moore so much for his ideas as I do for the way he expresses them. He uses the tools of deception, and while he may not state any overt lies he does try to decieve with editing and staged events. But on a more personal note he has called me one of the "dumbest people on the planet" saying that my "stupidity is embaressing." Those are comments he made in England recently about Americans.

He may not have been addressing that to me personally, but he was addressing it to the group of which I am a member. His arrogance and misanthropy (as long as you are a citizen of his country) knows no bounds.

Last week he asked a Toronto audience, "Why would you want to be like us?" Saying that Americans are all about "Me me me me me."

Now, based on the money his movies make, I have a hard time arguing against the proposition that many Americans are stupid. But considering the lifestyle he lives he comes off a bit hypocritical condemning American capitalism.

John Kerry is not the end of civilization as we know it and you will have a say on his contribution to government in November. Mr. Cheney is not sorry he cussed at Mr. Leahy, I'm sure they've made more lunch and dinner conversation mileage out of the "skirmish" than pretty much everything else that's happened in the last couple of weeks. Somehow, I think we'll survive this too....

After re-reading your last paragraph I realized that I pretty much agree with that sentiment. I had a hard time getting to that point with you opening with Mihcael Moore (I find the man repugnant). I agree that ultimately we will get past whatever issue of the day is raised. I have no hatred for Kerry (though I have little respect for his flip-flopping). I have concerns about some of the things the Bush administration has done (though not with the war in Iraq, I think they have done about as good a job as was possible). And in the end our system of government is remarkably stable despite the regularly scheduled revolution. People tend to inject as much drama as possible into events that may not have significant impact.