Michael Moore Owns Halliburton

Michael Moore
owns Halliburton!
[size=+1]New book debunks claims of celebrity activists[/size]
[size=-1]Posted: November 1, 2005
10:23 p.m. Eastern

[/size]


[size=-1]© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com [/size]




Michael Moore

"I don't own a single share of stock!" filmmaker Michael Moore proudly proclaimed.

He's right. He doesn't own a single share. He owns tens of thousands of shares – including nearly 2,000 shares of Boeing, nearly 1,000 of Sonoco, more than 4,000 of Best Foods, more than 3,000 of Eli Lilly, more than 8,000 of Bank One and more than 2,000 of Halliburton, the company most vilified by Moore in "Fahrenheit 9/11."






If you want to see Moore's own signed Schedule D declaring his capital gains and losses where his stock ownership is listed, it's emblazoned on the cover of Peter Schweizer's new book, "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy."

And it's just one of the startling revelations by Schweizer, famous for his previous works, "Reagan's War" and "The Bushes."

Other examples:

• House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who proclaims her support for unions, yet the luxury resort, the vineyard and the restaurants she partly owns are strictly non-union. While she advocates tough new laws enforcing environmental regulations on the private sector, the exclusive country club she partly owns failed to comply with existing environmental regulations for the past eight years – including a failure to protect endangered species.
• Noam Chomsky has made a reputation for calling America a police state and branding the Pentagon "the most hideous institution on earth," yet his entire academic career, writes Schweizer, has been subsidized by the U.S. military.
• Barbra Streisand is another proponent of environmentalism, yet she drives an SUV, lives in a mansion and has a $22,000 annual water bill. In the past, she has driven to appointments in Beverly Hills in a motor home because of her aversion to using public bathrooms.
• Ralph Nader plays the role of the citizen avenger – the populist uninterested in wealth and materialism, pretending to live in a modest apartment. In fact, he lives in fancy homes registered in the names of his siblings.

This is not just a book of "gotcha" journalism, explains Schweizer. He says the dozens and dozens of examples of "liberal hypocrisy" he cites in his book "are of central importance in evaluating the validity and usefulness of liberal ideas."

"Using IRS records, court depositions, news reports, financial disclosures and their own statements, I sought to answer a particular question: Do these liberal leaders and activists practice what they preach?" he writes. "What I found was a stunning record of open and shameless hypocrisy. Those who champion the cause of organized labor had developed various methods to avoid paying union wages or shunned unions altogether.

"Those who believe that the rich need to pay more in taxes proved especially adept at avoiding taxes themselves. Critics of capitalism and corporate enterprise frequently invested in the very companies they denounced. Those who espouse strict environmental regulations worked vigorously to sidestep them when it came to their own businesses and properties. Those who advocate steep inheritance taxes to promote fairer income distribution hid their investments in trusts or exotic overseas locales to reduce their own tax liability. Those who are strong proponents of affirmative action rarely practiced it themselves, and some had abysmal records when it came to hiring minorities. Those who proclaim themselves champions of civil liberties when it comes to criminal or terrorist cases went to extraordinary lengths to curtail the civil liberties of others when they felt threatened or just inconvenienced. Advocates of gun control had no problem making sure that an arsenal of weapons was available to protect them from dangerous criminals."
________________________________________________________

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47174

Isn't that interesting, now is it?

 

i am gonna bump this thread ..once a week.

 

Halliburton also owns rights over some opium feilds in Afghanistan.

 

I dunno.. but he is extremely tenuous.. i spotted something about Cheney wishing to overplay avian flu.. so he could boost the share price [he owns some shares in a subsidiary of the company that makes a vaccine]

 

Micheal moore is a great filmaker, but thats as much as I'll give him. Otherwise, although I hat bush and the war and all that, I still think moore is an idiot. Never saw farenheit 9/11, but apparently he blames Saudi Arabia for the attacks? In all the time I've been reading all the different theories and accusations I haven't seen one mention of Saudi Arabia. Sounds like dis-information to me...

 

So what? So some liberals are hypocrits? I'd say probably some folks of EVERY party affiliation are hypocrits. Who cares? I don't need Michael Moore or Barbara Streisand to tell me I'm living in Babylon with a bunch of spiritually dead flesheaters at the controls. Thanks though.

 

Halliburton is making all kinds of cash right out of our tax dollars, maybe he is just claiming his back

 

the rich are always hypocrites. Is anyone surprised?

 

I wonder what else he is hiding ?.

 

In those fat rolls of his, he could be hiding Jimmy Hoffa.

 

Hi Folks,


possibly, and notice the possibly, this is just more evidence of the New World Order agenda. The false Left-Right paradigm is being exposed right in front of you, oh, but it doesnt really mean anything right, Mike's just a hipocrite, nothing to worry about, I'll just jump on the Fuck Michael Moore bandwagon like I jumped on the Michael Moore is A Patriotic Journalist Bandwagon after Fahrenheight 9/11 came out.

I suppose you'd think this http://www.infowars.com/articles/science/weather_mod_ben_livingston_cloud_physicist.htm
is cooky conspiracy theory. I thought the same.

Then I got this in my email:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9880231/

It seems things are slowly being brought out of the darkness...

laterz

 

I think everyone is simply out for their own gain.. I've yet to see anything to disprove that.

 

And Michael Moore still hasn't even mentioned this article on his website, or tried to reedeem himself over this news, what an idiot.

 

em.... he only really needs to own one stock to go to most shareholder meetings.....

 

OK, I've performed a bit of research and this appears to be adding up to a 'smear' campaign by use of facts about Moore's actions and statements but, as presented by Peter Schweizer, that misrepresent the actual nature of the facts. In these types of 'smear' campaigns a rapid and decisive resopnse is usually required because these campaigns 'bank' on public misunderstanding of the facts involved.

http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=382415253&yr=200012&rt=990PF&t9=B
http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=382415253&yr=200112&rt=990PF&t9=B
http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=382415253&yr=200212&rt=990PF&t9=B
http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=382415253&yr=200312&rt=990PF&t9=B

source: http://sbrady2.blogspot.com/

Also, the above named source (a blog) makes some interesting points and raises some good questions (search the page for "Moore").

According to a quick check of the tax returns provided at the pages linked to above, the statement by Schweizer, at the above linked blog, "And he [Moore] has hundreds of thousands of dollars on the stock market" appears to be a misrepresentation in that it implies that he has invested "hundreds of thousands of dollars" into the companies in question which, according to my brief look at these resturns is not true. Note that the attachments to the Schedule-D forms list a number of companies that Moore has reported about (see post #16 in this thread).

As time permits, and as I ascertain answers to some additional questions, I hope to present an orderly, simple to read and understand, analysis of the facts and how these facts contrast with the above referred presentation by Peter Schweizer.


Peace,

David


.

 

Skip,


To me, 'smear' implies unethical behavior; the use of lies and manipulation of truth in order to create false impressions in order to undermine an individual or group of individuals. In my view, this is the symptom of an illness that will tend to "infect" or cause damage to others, damage to society in general. I hope that 'level heads' prevail in the immedate future but this may not be the case; this is important if we are to make better societies, better governments and a better world. There are so many who are far from maintaining a healthy balance through "difficulty" such that they do not become corrupted. These difficulties might be, for example, that one is being pressured, maybe by a threat of harm, if one does not act in an immoral or unethical manner; it is "the strong ones" that are our immediate hope, and it is my hope that those who have been weak will learn to humble themselves into being truly good citizens of this world.

Peace,

David


.

 

Skip,

Yes, I know.

Peace,

David


.