December 6, 2007, - 1:06 pm

I Don’t Believe Morgan Spurlock Found Bin Laden

By Debbie Schlussel
Yesterday, Bob Mccarty wrote about phony documentary-maker Morgan Spurlock’s claim that he’s found Bin Laden.
Having had my own personal experience with Morgan Spurlock and his fraud-purveying production team, I don’t believe for a second that he’s found Osama Bin Laden, as he’s claiming in hype to promote his new fake-umentary. And we also know how Spurlock lied about McDonald’s in “Supersize Me.” So, it’s hard to believe that this conceited uber-leftist is telling any truths here.


The Company He Keeps: Morgan Spurlock Gets Award From CAIR

The movie debuts at the Sundance Film Festival in January, along with other Islamist fraud like “Slingshot Hip Hop.” Don’t forget that Spurlock received an award from HAMAS front-group CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) for his F/X “Thirty Days” episode depicting his dumb friend, David Stacy, living as a Muslim for 30 days (and getting paid $30,000) to do it. I was asked by Spurlock’s crew to participate in the show, but when I saw what a sham it was, I refused to sign a release for them to use my footage. The show attempted to legitimize so many extremist Muslims in Detroit, my head was spinning. I wrote about it in the Wall Street Journal.
There was so much fraud involved, I can’t believe that there is anything more going on here. As incompetent as our own CIA and other clandestine and spy agencies are, Morgan Spurlock isn’t any more competent or better at spying. He’s just better at marketing. And better at being a left-winger who gets his fellow ideologues in Hollywood to eat out of his hand. Oprah promoted Spurlock’s Muslim episode of “Thirty Days.”
If Spurlock ever were to find Bin Laden, though, he’d probably be welcomed to have some falafel and Turkish coffee. After all, Spurlock is purveying far more effective pan-Islamist propaganda on behalf of Islamic extremists than his shorter, pudgier American cohort Azzam Al-Amriki a/k/a Adam Gadahn is putting out there.
I expect that “Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden?“–Spurlock’s latest docufakery–will be more pan-Islamist propaganda about why we legitimately deserve to be hated by Islam, how Muslims are “the real victims” of this and that, and probably some anti-Israel junk stunk in for good measure. That’s how Spurlock makes salami. And the liberal movie critics will gobble it up like hungry dogs.
Again, you need to read my Wall Street Journal article on my experience with Spurlock to understand what I mean. Here’s an excerpt:

While Mr. Spurlock is often referred to as a journalist, and touts “30 Days” as a “documentary,” the outcome of the show was decided before production began. A show summary sent to me before taping said: “This process aims to deconstruct common misconceptions and stereotypes. . . . Our character will learn firsthand about Islam and the daily issues that . . . Muslims in America face today. The viewers will witness our character emerge from the immersion situation with a deeper understanding and appreciation for the Muslim-American experience. . . . The potential is great for this program to enlighten a national television audience about the Muslim American experience and increase their compassion, understanding and support.”

Remember, as I wrote in the Journal piece, Spurlock’s top production people all worked for Michael Moore. Do you really think they found Bin Laden?
The only reason he’d meet with them is to thank them for being his satellite office of As-Sahab. And he respects infidel traitors even less than we do.
By the way, Spurlock’s next production is entitled, “The Republican War on Science” (based on the book of the same title), which comes with this summary:

A look at the U.S. government and the right-wing approach to scientific topics such as stem-cell research, global warming and and sex education.

Any questions?
**** UPDATE: Reader Sean writes:

Has anyone told Morgan that his handlebar mustache makes him looks like a cross between the biker guy from the Village People and a ’70s porn star? I actually hope he keeps that cheesy ‘stache because it makes him look like the tool he really is. Why does this guy keep getting work?

Good question. Answer: It’s all about ideology–left wing ideology–babe.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

11 Responses

Debbie, Thanks for the great information to supplement my original post about Spurlock. I had no idea you had such a plethora of insight about the fast-food film maker and wannabe terrorist hunter.

Bob on December 6, 2007 at 5:42 pm

If Spurlock actually found him, he should be waterboarded till he tells. Then he can report on whether it’s actually torture.

kishke on December 7, 2007 at 9:59 am

exactly how did Morgan Spurlock lie about McDonalds in super size me? He ate the food for 30 days, got sick and fat and felt lousy while making a hugely entertaining documentary. Serious question, not a troll.

watadoo on December 7, 2007 at 11:44 am

It seems to me that for someone like Morgan Spurlock finding Bin Laden is akin to Charles Colson finding Jesus.

Esbiem on December 7, 2007 at 11:54 am

“Any questions?”
Yes, when does “The Republican War on Science”come out.
I bet it will be highly entertaining to see all of the ways science has been downplayed by the Republicans for the last 6 years.
I also hope Spurlock will add something about Huckabee, the man running for the leader of one of the most technologically advanced and dependent civilizations on Earth professing his belief in the scientific superiority of a Bronze Age superstition.
(h/t Drifty)

Robert on December 7, 2007 at 1:13 pm

hi there,
can you post the links about supersize me. i didn’t know that people thought it was a fraud.

bmunch on December 7, 2007 at 6:50 pm

That was my question, too. I’ve never heard from a single person or source who didn’t like that documentary, though I imagine the folks at McDonalds and other fast food outlets didn’t much care for it.

watadoo on December 8, 2007 at 10:01 am

A genius at marketing indeed. And you fell for it. Sucker.

JD Rhoades on December 9, 2007 at 10:29 am

That didn’t even remotely answer my question mr Rhoades. What were the lies that have you and ms Schlussel in such a state of high dudgeon and did you really hate the movie simply because it was well marketed? That’s a pretty narrow criteria to liking/not liking a movie. If you have scorn for everything that is well marketed, you must hate pretty much everything in America.

watadoo on December 10, 2007 at 9:51 am

I mean, so far in this blog post here’s what I’ve read/learned about Morgan Spurlock:1. That he has a documentary coming out, yet unseen, but is being criticized for some reason — perhaps because whether or not he actually finds OBL, it may well serve to remind the vox populi of the shortcomings of the people we are paying a lot of money who have failed for 6 years to find and imprison/kill him 2. undocumented accusation of “lies” about one of his earlier very, very sucessful works 3. that one or more posters do not like his mustache and 4. that one writer objects to documentary files that user marketing in approaching the marketplace.
So far pretty content free, though I’ve been asking politely for three or four days now for an honest answer.

watadoo on December 10, 2007 at 10:18 am

Actually, the “Sucker” I was referring to was Ms. Schlussel, who played right into a clear publicity stunt. I don’t know that Spurlock lied per se, but his Super Size Me was based on a fatally stupid premise. Hint: You’re not SUPPOSED to eat Mickey D’s every day.

JD Rhoades on December 10, 2007 at 5:06 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field