The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum

=> Re: When are you going to learn

Re: When are you going to learn
Posted by St. Me (Guest) - Friday, October 22 2004, 17:54:19 (CEST)
from 4.42.18.169 - lsanca1-ar51-4-42-018-169.lsanca1.dsl-verizon.net Network - Windows XP - Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

Disney's Saudi Connection
Thursday, October 21, 2004
By Roger Friedman

Disney Chaos: $140 Million and a Saudi Problem

Remember back in June when “Fahrenheit 9/11” was about to be released? Disney wouldn’t put it out, and critics said the reason was they feared that Florida Gov. Jeb Bush would hurt the company’s tax breaks at Walt Disney World in Orlando.

The tussle was so bad that it led to an onerous break between Disney and Miramax’s Weinstein brothers. Since then, Miramax has been in furious cutbacks and internal strife, with Disney claiming in print that the small studio lied to them about the financing of the Michael Moore movie. But a recent report in New York magazine claims that Miramax never lied and Disney always knew they were financing “9/11.”

But was it really all about tax breaks in Florida? Maybe not. The rush to point fingers for blame may have overlooked the obvious.

In June, just as “Fahrenheit 9/11” won the top prize at the Cannes Film Festival and was heading into what would be its $125 million box office take, something else altogether was going on at Disney. According to published reports in the New York Times and business papers, EuroDisney – Disney’s financially challenged theme park — was in grave trouble.


On July 1, just a week after “Fahrenheit 9/11” opened, the Times reported “Disney Gives Details of Plan to Aid European Parks.” The story details the financial history of EuroDisney, including this one important fact that has somehow been overlooked: In 1994, two years after the theme park opened and was already plunged into financial chaos, one man saved it. That was Prince Walid bin Talal of Saudi Arabia. His investment, valued at above $24 million, literally saved EuroDisney from closing and created a bond between the Saudi royal family and Disney CEO Michael Eisner that lasts until this day.

Of course, one of the major subjects of “Fahrenheit 9/11” is the connections between the Saudi royal family and the Bush administration, in which the prince is perhaps the most visible international businessman. According to my sources, Eisner was keenly aware of this when he banned Miramax from releasing the movie. Disney was also trying to get the prince to take part in the financial restructuring of EuroDisney this summer, according to my sources, which would have been severely hindered by the company’s release of the Moore film.

Meanwhile, the Disney shareholders' lawsuit against Eisner and the company’s board concerning how ex-Disney president Michael Ovitz earned $140 million for about a year's worth of work continues in Delaware. Eisner is also facing a soon-to-be-released book by former Wall Street Journal reporter James Stewart, which should be published when the trial is completed. The book, “Disneywar,” is said to have explosive information about inner workings of Eisner’s office, including his backroom tactics in dealing with both Miramax and animation giant Pixar of “Toy Story” fame.









St. Me wrote:
>parhad wrote:
>>St. Me wrote:
>>>This is the best you can do. Did you not read that Richard Clark was the one who authorized the flights after the skies were opened again? What's a matter just because Ricky Martin was stuck on an airport it makes you sad? Remember Richard Clark was the terrorist Czar appointed by Clinton so was George Tenet head of the CIA appointed by Clinton. So with you’re washed up conspiracy theories. By the way...why should anyone sue anybody? What happened to your idea of freedom of speech hypocrite? Give me some more Fyrenhype lies as examples I will shoot out some facts. I’m waiting
>>
>>...like I said...if there was ONE inaccuracy all you neojerks would have sued in a minute. That tells us all we need know. There isn't a SINGLE inaccuracy in his film..not a one. I'm sure the eleven lawyers who screened the film for Miramax cut out several parts that Moore really wanted in there...but no one was taking any chances..if it wasn't absolutely true and unassailable...they wouldn't include it in the film...Miramax is a serious company with a lot of assets to protect...such a lawsuit would not only have hurt them financially but openned them up to all sorts of charges....so it's clear...whatever Moore says in that film is 100% ironclad...or else you'd have all hauled him into court so that anything you now say on the internet in a silly post of several...is merely the same old same old Moore exposed...you people lie and for good reason...the truth would set us free.
>>>
>>>



---------------------


The full topic:



Content-length: 5118
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave-flash, application/vnd.ms-excel, applicatio...
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Accept-language: en-us
Cache-control: no-cache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf3/rkvsf_core.php?Re_Whenh_are_you_going_to_learn-5Nlx.DMWh.QUOTE
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9