• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

WikiLeaks: Cuba banned Sicko for depicting 'mythical' healthcare system

Dav

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
5,536
Reaction score
1,813
Location
Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This is... this is just... wow.

WikiLeaks: Cuba banned Sicko for depicting 'mythical' healthcare system | World news | guardian.co.uk

Cuba banned Michael Moore's 2007 documentary, Sicko, because it painted such a "mythically" favourable picture of Cuba's healthcare system that the authorities feared it could lead to a "popular backlash", according to US diplomats in Havana.

The revelation, contained in a confidential US embassy cable released by WikiLeaks , is surprising, given that the film attempted to discredit the US healthcare system by highlighting what it claimed was the excellence of the Cuban system.

But the memo reveals that when the film was shown to a group of Cuban doctors, some became so "disturbed at the blatant misrepresentation of healthcare in Cuba that they left the room".

Castro's government apparently went on to ban the film because, the leaked cable claims, it "knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them."

Is there anyone who can take that movie - and Michael Moore in general - seriously after this? It was so dishonest in its portrayal of the Cuban health care system, it was banned in Cuba for making them look too good. There's something really awe-inspiring about that. You'd think that they'd be tossing it everywhere they could to use as propaganda if it was anywhere even close to being honest (to show why they're better than those capitalist American scum, etc). Yet somehow it must have crossed the line of dishonest and entered the realm of complete fantasy at some point.
 
Oh, THAT'S funny.
 
Only the seriously stupid have ever taken Moore's Sicko seriously.

.
 
This is... this is just... wow.

WikiLeaks: Cuba banned Sicko for depicting 'mythical' healthcare system | World news | guardian.co.uk



Is there anyone who can take that movie - and Michael Moore in general - seriously after this? It was so dishonest in its portrayal of the Cuban health care system, it was banned in Cuba for making them look too good. There's something really awe-inspiring about that. You'd think that they'd be tossing it everywhere they could to use as propaganda if it was anywhere even close to being honest (to show why they're better than those capitalist American scum, etc). Yet somehow it must have crossed the line of dishonest and entered the realm of complete fantasy at some point.

So a US government diplomat during the Bush era sent a cable on what the Bush administration wanted to hear... wupti do... Problem with such a cable, no proof and 100% personal opinion (and wishful thinking) of the sender based on hearsay and a diplomat who was most likely a Bush political appointee.. which means same views and tactics as Bush and his administration in "spicing up" official correspondence to fit the world view of the administration leadership and be as far from factual as possible.

While I have no love for the Cuban government, things should always be factual and be able to be backed up.
 
So a US government diplomat during the Bush era sent a cable on what the Bush administration wanted to hear... wupti do... Problem with such a cable, no proof and 100% personal opinion (and wishful thinking) of the sender based on hearsay and a diplomat who was most likely a Bush political appointee.. which means same views and tactics as Bush and his administration in "spicing up" official correspondence to fit the world view of the administration leadership and be as far from factual as possible.

While I have no love for the Cuban government, things should always be factual and be able to be backed up.

You don't seem to have a problem believing the leaks when they about American government or big business. Why are you doubting the cuban one?


PeteEU says
2.) His death would not stop the leaks or others for doing something similar. In fact it would more than likely make people even more determined to hit the US with leaks. There is already a new competing site that opened yesterday so this kind of exposing of government and big business is set to continue regardless of threats or murders. And frankly I think it is a good thing as a principle. If such sites expose illegalities by government and/or big business then I am all for it.
3.) What real damage has the leaks actually done other than a bit of pride and embarrassment? A list of "key sites" that most terrorists and enemies most likely knew of already? Making Hilary and a few ambassadors look like fools? Telling the truth about foreign leaders.. oh the shock!http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...-declares-julian-assange-should-killed-3.html
 
Hey, Alanis Morissette -- here's an ACTUAL example of "irony." :D

The irony was that the song contained no irony.

Anyway, Moore being a partisan hack? I, for one, am shocked. Shocked I say! :D
 
I think the liberals in here would do themselves a favor to remember how they embraced Moore after his hit piece on Bush with F/911. Even had him sitting with carter in the grand suite at the Demo convention.

During the passage of health care last year there were many that embraced Moore's propaganda with willingness....For example:

hazlnut said:

The whitewashing of Cuba's health system was all through liberal debate during the last two years. Hazlnut is but one example, and I won't broad brush the entire liberal contingent in here, but let's just say that on more than one occasion liberals have been duped by Moore.

j-mac
 
I can proudly say that the only time I've supported Mr. Moore was when he blew himself up in Team America. :mrgreen:
 
I like wikileaks..:mrgreen:
 
truth is treason in an empire of lies


Not at all, but the aim here is not noble.


j-mac


[video]http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/julian-assange-calls-abc-news-reporter-tabloid-schmuck-12425603[/video]


Priceless.
 
Last edited:
The big problem with this story is...wow...just wow... Sicko was not only shown in theatres across Cuba, but the government made it a point to show it on national TV. LOL

From Moore's site:

Former health insurance executive Wendell Potter recently revealed that the insurance industry -- which had decided to spend millions to go after me and, if necessary, "push Michael Moore off a cliff" -- had begun working with anti-Castro Cubans in Miami in order to have them speak out and smear my film.

So, on January 31, 2008, a State Department official stationed in Havana took a made up story and sent it back to his HQ in Washington. Here's what they came up with:

XXXXXXXXXXXX stated that Cuban authorities have banned Michael Moore's documentary, "Sicko," as being subversive. Although the film's intent is to discredit the U.S. healthcare system by highlighting the excellence of the Cuban system, he said the regime knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them.

Sounds convincing, eh?! There's only one problem -- the entire nation of Cuba was shown the film on national television on April 25, 2008! The Cubans embraced the film so much so it became one of those rare American movies that received a theatrical distribution in Cuba. I personally ensured that a 35mm print got to the Film Institute in Havana. Screenings of 'Sicko' were set up in towns all across the country. In Havana, 'Sicko' screened at the famed Yara Theater.

But the secret cable said Cubans were banned from seeing my movie. Hmmm.

¡Viva WikiLeaks! SiCKO Was Not Banned in Cuba | MichaelMoore.com
 
You don't seem to have a problem believing the leaks when they about American government or big business. Why are you doubting the cuban one?


PeteEU says
2.) His death would not stop the leaks or others for doing something similar. In fact it would more than likely make people even more determined to hit the US with leaks. There is already a new competing site that opened yesterday so this kind of exposing of government and big business is set to continue regardless of threats or murders. And frankly I think it is a good thing as a principle. If such sites expose illegalities by government and/or big business then I am all for it.
3.) What real damage has the leaks actually done other than a bit of pride and embarrassment? A list of "key sites" that most terrorists and enemies most likely knew of already? Making Hilary and a few ambassadors look like fools? Telling the truth about foreign leaders.. oh the shock!http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...-declares-julian-assange-should-killed-3.html

Outstanding. You've probably driven him from the thread.
 
The big problem with this story is...wow...just wow... Sicko was not only shown in theatres across Cuba, but the government made it a point to show it on national TV. LOL

From Moore's site:



¡Viva WikiLeaks! SiCKO Was Not Banned in Cuba | MichaelMoore.com

Ok, According to Moore everything about Cuba from WikiLeaks is false. The lies go back as far as 1961. Hmmmmmmm.....but everything we'll be reading that is bad about America, we will be accepting as truth.
If anyone can explain to me if I have someting wrong, please do. I am really confused.
 
Ok, According to Moore everything about Cuba from WikiLeaks is false. The lies go back as far as 1961. Hmmmmmmm.....but everything we'll be reading that is bad about America, we will be accepting as truth.
If anyone can explain to me if I have someting wrong, please do. I am really confused.

Start from reading the whole link I posted. Bottom line, the movie was shown.
 
Ok, According to Moore everything about Cuba from WikiLeaks is false. The lies go back as far as 1961. Hmmmmmmm.....but everything we'll be reading that is bad about America, we will be accepting as truth.
If anyone can explain to me if I have someting wrong, please do. I am really confused.

he is asking journalists to do the fact checking.

that in itself is certainly reasonable.
 
Start from reading the whole link I posted. Bottom line, the movie was shown.

Well, Michael Moore says it was.

And the cable is dated three months before the date he gives for it being shown.

In any case, it should be a lesson for those who salivate over these leaks. Including Moore. Funny how he disparages the cables in general because of this (yet glorifies the concept of leaking them): ""a stunning look at the Orwellian nature of how bureaucrats for the state spin their lies and try to recreate reality (I assume to placate their bosses and tell them what they want to hear)."

Well, Michael, then I guess the Wikileaks enterprise produced not much other than unreliable information.
 
Start from reading the whole link I posted. Bottom line, the movie was shown.

Moore says. He also says other lies were told about Cuba.
but that's not what I'm confused about.
Since some things are lies why wouldn't we suspect other lies will be told to harm America.
I'm sure there would be more people who would want to shine a bad light on America than Cuba.
 
Back
Top Bottom