Micheal Moore, big fat liar? - Page 3 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

eple · 09-27-2003, 01:07 PM

Uh....well I have seen the film and found it amusing and thought-provoking to an extent. I guess my problem when understanding your anger here might be not relating personally to this issue You, however, likewise suffer from being too subjective. You become enraged by minor "lies" and things that really don't interfere with the big issues presented. Gun murders per year don't change wether or not Moore staged a scene in a bank. Highly increasing media coverage of violence does not change wether or not Moore has edited a speech by som altzheimer-stricken old gun-nut.

Being a Noregian, I saw the movie first and foremost as a way of adressing a serious issue. And since most of the people who viewed this movie had a similar objective experience, we all got a message of high body counts and some theories regarding this: Theories not involving "violent history", "too many immigrants", "popular music" or other stereotype explanations.

I believe your emotional reactions, anger towars Moore seriously cripple your ability to discuss this issue. Your anger towards mr.Moore seems misplaced, and somethimes come trough as quite ridiculous "Moore is a fatty liar LOL".

Most of us don't view the movie as an attack at the NRA or Lockheed or Heston, thus, claims of lies conserning any of these aren't really too interesting.

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 01:10 PM

Minor lies? The whole movie was based on either lies or staged events. You can not present a documentary based on lies or staged events.

My question to you, is why do you draw conclusions on a movie that needed to lie and stage events to make a point?

eple · 09-27-2003, 01:22 PM

eh....the movie as far as I can see was based on statistics conserning gun-related killings in the US, and different opinions/problems/solutions. I can't really see how he faked it all. What you are saying is that there is no gun-related probnlems in the US. I thought we had already agreed that this is not a fact. The movie is not based on lies, it might contain elements which can be debated or doubted, but the gun-related problems in the US are not made up by Moore, n'est pas?

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 02:04 PM

Where did I say there were no gun problems in the US? Please post that part. I am saying that Moore is a liar. something you agreed with me on in more than one post.

So BFC, to you, boils down to when Moore showed the gun homcide rates, and that was it. The rest could have been Tom and JErry cartoons and his point would have been made?

PS his stats were off. He included death by police in justifed shootings, and self defence. The FBI puts the gun MURDER rates at 8500 or so, I forget the actual number. This is too high also, but its just another example of Moore padding his numbers. I dont include self defence deaths as part of the reason for gun control. Self defence and police use are exactly what gun use is supposed to be for.

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 02:15 PM

I also think it telling that Moore never touched on the fact that the shooters in columbine were harrassed daily. That the day before the shootings they were run off the road by the local jocks and told that "next time we will kill you for real".
The fact that school personal were aware of the teasing and abuse to the shooters and did nothing about it had nothing to do with the killings in Moore's eyes. It had to be the Lie that the littleton plant made WMD ( they didnt and still dont).
Moore could have played hours of taped footage of the survivors of Littleton talking about "those queers" faggots" and other names the shooters were called in the first few days after the shootings. The fact that the whole school picked on these kids and made them fearful had not one iota to do with them snapping and lashing out. They had to be killers because their parents made WMD ( again they didnt)

Why Moore choose to create a lie and then use this lie to explain the shootings is LAUGHABLE! Not one second of the film talked about the abuse the shooters went through.
This is why I cant stand Moore. He ignores the evidence that makes the most sense, and picks and chooses the evidence that he wants to use to present his agenda. And if that evidence is not there, he makes it up.

I dont know about Norway, but where I come from, a liar is not someone to be admired or respected.

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 03:05 PM

As an aside, since Moore didnt sue Hardy, does that make Hardy's claims true?

eple · 09-27-2003, 03:57 PM

Hmmm...
I guess this is where the debate ends for me. I won't change my mind, neither will you. I view Moore's movie as a clearly populistic, still thought-provoking movie, you view it as a cook-up of lies. Both stances are subjective, and thus none of them infintively wrong or right. Maybe I would keep on arguing until we end up insulting each other further, but right now I just saw Good Will Hunting and got all thoughtful and shit. Sorry if I have insulted any you in any way in the heat of battle

Thanks for an interesting debate, though.

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 08:36 PM

Not insulted one bit. You were civil, probably more so than I.

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 08:37 PM

The lies you can not explain away,

1 Editing Heston's speach to misrepresent him. No I dont expect to see every word he said, but I do expect the CORRECT context and intention. I guess you dont expect that from Moore, and to tell the truth, neither do I. You even said the speaches were different. Now read them both and tell me seriously if the contex of both speaches was the same. It clearly is not.

2 The NRA never helped the KKK, in fact, the NRA are and were a major thorn in the side of the KKK, but Moore is allowed to say other wise cause its a cartoon.

3 The US government never supported the Taliban as Moore said in his film.
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20021119.html

4 The Canadian Government says that Moore could not legally buy ammo in that K Mart.

5 A NY resident can not get a gun in Michigan, like Moore claims to have done in the bank. If you have proof that he lived in Michigan when he was a NY resident at the time, please post it.

6 And the biggest lie, the whole blaming the Massacre at Columbine on the parents makeing WMD, when NOT ONE Parent made WMD. In fact they did the opposite. THey took weapons and made them into communication equipment. Again, you seem to be the only person that didnt see that Moore blamed Lockheed Martin. I guess you have the special edition. Here is the quote. Moore intones that the missiles with their "Pentagon payloads" are trucked through the town "in the middle of the night while the children are asleep." Moore asks whether knowledge that weapons of "mass destruction" were being built nearby might have motivated the Columbine shooter. Not that the shooters here harrassed and abused by the other school students.
Here is another quote to be dismissed by Shrod.

"So you don't think our kids say to themselves, 'Dad goes off to the factory every day, he builds missiles of mass destruction. What's the difference between that mass destruction and the mass destruction over at Columbine High School?'"

The difference is, as Shrod even said, the parents DONT make Weapons of mass destruction.

7 Other silly lies and misrepresentations are the plague, Moore didnt paraphrase it, he misrepresented it. I guess the soliders in ww2 didnt kill combatants but "german villiagers?" O please. The whole reason the plague was created was to celebrate the fact that in a B-52 / fighter encounter, the B-52 almost always went down. It had very little defensive armament -- one gun mount in the tail -- a LOT less than a WWII bomber. Even if the fighter had already used its missiles, it had only to come in from above, below, or the sides, and the B-52 had no defense at all.

The plaque isn't celebrating killing (for all we know, the enemy pilot bailed out), but the fact that the American bomber came off the better in a fight where all the odds were against it.
Moore wants us to think that the plague was for "killing Veitnamese on Christmas Eve" The man is pathological.

8 the lie that Heston showed up in flint to promote guns 48 hours after kayla's shooting. Moore: "Just as he did after the Columbine shooting, Charlton Heston showed up in Flint, to have a big pro-gun rally." When the fact that it was 8 months later and for "rock the vote" doesnt enter the film. Again, if you freeze the DVD you can see the people Heston is talking to holding signs that say rock the vote, and Vote Bush.

Moore Lies. Lets hear your rationalisations for these lies.

smooth · 09-27-2003, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Food Eater Lad
The lies you can not explain away,

6 And the biggest lie, the whole blaming the Massacre at Columbine on the parents makeing WMD:

Quote:

"Pentagon payloads"

Please post what the plant made and whether it sold any product to the Pentagon.

Quote:

Moore asks whether knowledge that weapons of "mass destruction" were being built nearby might have motivated the Columbine shooter.

Are you claiming that Moore's question regarding the interviewee's opinion is a lie?

How can a question be a lie?

Quote:

"So you don't think our kids say to themselves, 'Dad goes off to the factory every day, he builds missiles of mass destruction. What's the difference between that mass destruction and the mass destruction over at Columbine High School?'"

This is a question--your answer to the above questions will apply to this as well.

Is positing a hypothesis a lie? One usually posits a hypothesis and then attempts to determine if it is accurate or not--I've never heard anyone called a liar due to an incorrent hypothesis.

This is a statement regarding children's perceptions. Young children do not distinguish between rockets used for satellites or rockets used for weapons. They are viewing rockets used for WMD currently. That is the definition of a rocket to many children.

Older students might make the distinction between peaceful rockets and warfare rockets--but then they might not know or care that the government defense project in their neighborhood is conducting peaceful military production.

In light of what you are claiming regarding their background they might have felt justified in making a defense. And their culture, which justifies military action in defense and generally opposes offensive military excursions, seems to support such a conclusion.

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 11:00 PM

Why would they ask that question when the Littleton Plant doesnt make WMDs? I am sure the parents in the town know what their jobs were. And the funny thing that Moore leaves out is that one of the parents of the shooters was an anti gun activist that wouldnt even let the shooter play with guns as a child. By Moore's poor logic he could just have easily said that anti gun activisim caused the massacre. I mean it is just as silly as imagined killer rockets.

The problem with your question is you assume that no kid in town actually speaks to their parents. I think the parents that are the engineers could tell that they were designing killer rockets or communication equipment.

And there wasnt knowledge of making nearby WMD as it was not happening. So there was no knowledge of it.

Food Eater Lad · 09-27-2003, 11:02 PM

The pentagon payloads are satellites that detect incoming rockets and notify us. Hardy killer rockets or weapons of mass destruction. But that wouldnt make quite the point Moore wanted, so he lied.

splck · 09-29-2003, 05:52 AM

Here's another response to the "Truth about bowling for Columbine" website that I stumbled across. I doubt it will change anyone's opinion on the movie, but you never know.

Link

eple · 09-29-2003, 07:01 AM

Thank you splck, that guy made some good points.

Lebell · 09-29-2003, 08:29 AM

Thanks for the link, splck.

At least this guy admits his bias.

Unfortunately, he more or less proves the points we've been trying to make.

BigGov · 09-29-2003, 04:06 PM

Now the defense for parts like the NRA/KKK cartoon is "oh, you can't take that seriously, that's meant all in humor, not the slightest bit true."

Lets see all you Moore supporters respond to this.

http://www.hardylaw.net/hestonfilming.html

Now, if you've ever flimed anything with a camera, you know exactly where you would need to be standing. When you see Heston, the only area that the camera could be that has that exact shot of Moore magically disappears.

Conclamo Ludus · 09-29-2003, 04:12 PM

If Michael Moore is really interested in the blinding truth, why would he employ any of these tactics. If his message is so strong it should speak for itself. He shouldn't have to do any of these camera and editing tricks to persuade you. I saw another documentary that was just as good. Best in Show. Its hilarious. No really, everyone should see it. Its the same type of documentary style. I think they call it mockumentary or something like that.

eple · 09-29-2003, 04:41 PM

If he shouldn't have used any dramatic effect, humour or otherwise, Moore could have saved a lot of money just posting all the important facts on big-ass posters all over the US. But then again, movies have a greater impact, and a movie usualy reqiures more than just 5 mins of scrolling statistics.

Now please, stop claiming any use of dramatic effect or humour is an attempt to lie to the people. I believe most of you are smarter than that, and easily able to spot the ironic twists and dramatic parts if you try not being 100% focused on shooting the messenger.

Zeld2.0 · 09-29-2003, 04:53 PM

Heh I think he accomplished his message just fine - the fact that people are arguing over it now means its obviously left an impression of people for good or worse.

And as for the entire actual columbine incident - I don't think anyone should point out what happened to the kids and give them an excuse of whether they are picked or not. It should never have happened for *any* reason - and everyone was at fault.

Food Eater Lad · 09-29-2003, 05:37 PM

I was not at fault for Columbine.

eple · 10-02-2003, 11:17 AM

Me neither, it's not my fucked up country.

Food Eater Lad · 10-02-2003, 12:18 PM

I think it would be hard to blame the kids at the school for terrorising the shooters and running them off the road while threatening to kill them next time. But Moore never mentions the fact that those shooters were harrassed. Na, it must be the lie that the parents make bombs. That makes sense.

eple · 10-02-2003, 01:20 PM

seriously, can't you ever see that the bomb-comment was just that, a comment, it was never presented as a main solution or a direct cause. It was just an interesting paradox. Watch the movie one more time, how the fuck is it not possible to grasp this movie? It's not Shakespeare, it's simple and populistic, and that just makes it more embarrasing for you guys when you start putting your limited understanding of this oh so understandable movie on display on tha intarweb. The speech is not edited, the Heston-clip is shown before the rest of the speech, you need to be ignorant and/or completely biased to ignore that. Same thing with the bomb IT'S A PARADOX, NOT THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM!
Jesus, this debate would be so fucking unneccesary if some ppl could just chill off and check their facts one more time.

Food Eater Lad · 10-02-2003, 03:20 PM

Simple, populistic, and wrong, This debate could chill if Moore checked his facts one more time.

eple · 10-02-2003, 04:02 PM

Well, as long as you guys would counter this movie on facts, and not on all this "he lies 'cuz i thought he edited a speech" bs.

The "lies" you are pointing to are bs, so if it's the entire point that the US has a problem with guns you are opposing, then debate that, not wether or not Heston's speech was edited or not, or wether or not Lockheed are producing weapons.

Food Eater Lad · 10-02-2003, 05:57 PM

This thread is about How Moore Lies, if you want to argue Guns start a new thread.

eple · 10-02-2003, 11:20 PM

Exactly, taht is the problem, the thread is nothing but repeated bs about Moore lying, although every charge seems to be nothing but misinterpretations on your account. Wether or not that bullshit "truth about BFC"-site is linked a thousand times, the canadian in the link earlier already discredited that, so stfu please.

Food Eater Lad · 10-03-2003, 11:39 AM

So then the NRA did help the KKK light cross's? Americans burnt witches at the stake? The Littleton Plant makes WMD's? Americans can buy ammo in Canadian Walmarts? Heston gave a speach about guns 48 hours after Kayla's shooting? Heston gave his speach as it was shown in the film? The wall plaque read as Moore said it did? ETC? These are all true to you?

aryan · 10-03-2003, 05:27 PM

mm is a total idiot

Food Eater Lad · 10-03-2003, 06:42 PM

And to make a movie and title it after the Columbine shootings, and try to understand why such a horrid thing happened and neglect the most probable cause is just shoddy filmmaking.

BigGov · 10-03-2003, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by eple
Exactly, taht is the problem, the thread is nothing but repeated bs about Moore lying, although every charge seems to be nothing but misinterpretations on your account. Wether or not that bullshit "truth about BFC"-site is linked a thousand times, the canadian in the link earlier already discredited that, so stfu please.

Discredited?

How so?

It has an average of about 3 sentences on each topic, and is composed mostly of opinion. Besides, the defenses aren't even anything to brag about. "That 'Cold Dead Hands' clip is like Arnold saying 'I'll be back'" Please. The NRA and KKK clip, yes, all meant in 100% humor, you'd have to be CRAZY to see something else. Does the Canadian website mention anything about how the NRA cancelled everything in Denver except the meeting they were REQUIRED to have? Oh, wait, I missed this part, "He showed the very beginning of the convention! I have read the entire transcript from Heston's speech, and I don't think Moore cut anything out or re-edited anything that put Heston's speech out of context. What was Moore supposed to do? Show the entire convention in a two-hour film? BFC is an anti-gun film. Of course Moore is going to use clips that support his opinion." Wow, that Canadian website sure did discredit Hardylaw

Lebell · 10-08-2003, 08:14 PM

For anyone who wants a line by line disection of Michael Moore and how he lied in Bowling for Columbine:

http://bowlingfortruth.com/index.htm

Quote:

About the Site

Dear Viewers,

My name is Richard Bushnell and on the summer of August 2003, I have just opened www.bowlingfortruth.com. This website is here as a recourse to expose the distortions and dishonesty in fictitious film director Michael Moore's Oscar winning documentary, Bowling For Columbine.

The point of this website IS a lot of things, but here are some that it is not: It is not to reveal a 'bias' in Moore's work - bias in documentaries doesn't bother me. I echo David Hardy's assessment in that "The point is not that Bowling is biased. No, the point is that Bowling is deliberately, seriously, and consistently deceptive." It is not to make the case for guns - I've never owned a gun, never shot a gun, and probably never even held a real gun; Guns scare me. It is not, in large part anyway, even to rebut Moore's beliefs. Rather, this site exists because Michael Moore is clever and glib and a very good film maker - but he uses his powers for evil. Michael Moore persuades his viewers by deceiving them, and this site exists for those who wish not to be fooled.

This site is not here to change anyone's mind about anything except the honesty of Michael Moore. It is not here to make you love guns, conservatives, republicans or Charlton Heston. It is not here to make you hate Marilyn Manson, gun control lobbyists, liberals or even Michael Moore. It's here to give you the truth that Moore withholds and perverts on a regular basis to fid an ideological gain.

These facts and information are here to let you make informed decisions - not necessarily different ones.

The main purpose of the site is to reveal the outright lies and extreme spin that Michael Moore displays as fact in his work quite regularly - most notably in his most popular film Bowling for Columbine. The purpose is to give you the information you didn't see in the movie that is important to your decision making.

I don't care if you hate guns. I don't care if you hate America. I don't care if you hate Charlton Heston. And I don't care if you hate me.

I DO care if you hold these convictions because of lies.

And I don't mean that in a way to where I am on a crusade to convert you. Not at all. Live in ignorance if you wish. Flop around in it like a pig in the mud and do so with my blessing (muddy pigs are funny).

My crusade is to fight for the people who don't accept disinformation. Who are looking for a tool to clean away the hogwash. This website is here to provide the ammunition that every honest person should hold within their intellectual arsenal. Use it - don't use it - shoot yourself in the head with it.

Use this website however you wish.

Yours,

Richard Bushnell
www.richardbushnell.com

09-27-2003, 01:07 PM	#81 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	Uh....well I have seen the film and found it amusing and thought-provoking to an extent. I guess my problem when understanding your anger here might be not relating personally to this issue You, however, likewise suffer from being too subjective. You become enraged by minor "lies" and things that really don't interfere with the big issues presented. Gun murders per year don't change wether or not Moore staged a scene in a bank. Highly increasing media coverage of violence does not change wether or not Moore has edited a speech by som altzheimer-stricken old gun-nut. Being a Noregian, I saw the movie first and foremost as a way of adressing a serious issue. And since most of the people who viewed this movie had a similar objective experience, we all got a message of high body counts and some theories regarding this: Theories not involving "violent history", "too many immigrants", "popular music" or other stereotype explanations. I believe your emotional reactions, anger towars Moore seriously cripple your ability to discuss this issue. Your anger towards mr.Moore seems misplaced, and somethimes come trough as quite ridiculous "Moore is a fatty liar LOL". Most of us don't view the movie as an attack at the NRA or Lockheed or Heston, thus, claims of lies conserning any of these aren't really too interesting. Last edited by eple; 09-27-2003 at 04:05 PM..

09-29-2003, 05:52 AM	#93 (permalink)
splck it's jam Location: Lowerainland BC	Here's another response to the "Truth about bowling for Columbine" website that I stumbled across. I doubt it will change anyone's opinion on the movie, but you never know. Link __________________ nice line eh?

09-29-2003, 08:29 AM	#95 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Thanks for the link, splck. At least this guy admits his bias. Unfortunately, he more or less proves the points we've been trying to make. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

09-29-2003, 04:06 PM	#96 (permalink)
BigGov WoW or Class... Location: UWW	Now the defense for parts like the NRA/KKK cartoon is "oh, you can't take that seriously, that's meant all in humor, not the slightest bit true." Lets see all you Moore supporters respond to this. http://www.hardylaw.net/hestonfilming.html Now, if you've ever flimed anything with a camera, you know exactly where you would need to be standing. When you see Heston, the only area that the camera could be that has that exact shot of Moore magically disappears. __________________ One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

09-29-2003, 04:12 PM	#97 (permalink)
Conclamo Ludus Modern Man Location: West Michigan	If Michael Moore is really interested in the blinding truth, why would he employ any of these tactics. If his message is so strong it should speak for itself. He shouldn't have to do any of these camera and editing tricks to persuade you. I saw another documentary that was just as good. Best in Show. Its hilarious. No really, everyone should see it. Its the same type of documentary style. I think they call it mockumentary or something like that. __________________ Lord, have mercy on my wicked soul I wouldn't mistreat you baby, for my weight in gold. -Son House, Death Letter Blues

09-27-2003, 01:10 PM	#82 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	Minor lies? The whole movie was based on either lies or staged events. You can not present a documentary based on lies or staged events. My question to you, is why do you draw conclusions on a movie that needed to lie and stage events to make a point?

09-27-2003, 01:22 PM	#83 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	eh....the movie as far as I can see was based on statistics conserning gun-related killings in the US, and different opinions/problems/solutions. I can't really see how he faked it all. What you are saying is that there is no gun-related probnlems in the US. I thought we had already agreed that this is not a fact. The movie is not based on lies, it might contain elements which can be debated or doubted, but the gun-related problems in the US are not made up by Moore, n'est pas?

09-27-2003, 02:04 PM	#84 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	Where did I say there were no gun problems in the US? Please post that part. I am saying that Moore is a liar. something you agreed with me on in more than one post. So BFC, to you, boils down to when Moore showed the gun homcide rates, and that was it. The rest could have been Tom and JErry cartoons and his point would have been made? PS his stats were off. He included death by police in justifed shootings, and self defence. The FBI puts the gun MURDER rates at 8500 or so, I forget the actual number. This is too high also, but its just another example of Moore padding his numbers. I dont include self defence deaths as part of the reason for gun control. Self defence and police use are exactly what gun use is supposed to be for.

09-27-2003, 02:15 PM	#85 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	I also think it telling that Moore never touched on the fact that the shooters in columbine were harrassed daily. That the day before the shootings they were run off the road by the local jocks and told that "next time we will kill you for real". The fact that school personal were aware of the teasing and abuse to the shooters and did nothing about it had nothing to do with the killings in Moore's eyes. It had to be the Lie that the littleton plant made WMD ( they didnt and still dont). Moore could have played hours of taped footage of the survivors of Littleton talking about "those queers" faggots" and other names the shooters were called in the first few days after the shootings. The fact that the whole school picked on these kids and made them fearful had not one iota to do with them snapping and lashing out. They had to be killers because their parents made WMD ( again they didnt) Why Moore choose to create a lie and then use this lie to explain the shootings is LAUGHABLE! Not one second of the film talked about the abuse the shooters went through. This is why I cant stand Moore. He ignores the evidence that makes the most sense, and picks and chooses the evidence that he wants to use to present his agenda. And if that evidence is not there, he makes it up. I dont know about Norway, but where I come from, a liar is not someone to be admired or respected.

09-27-2003, 03:05 PM	#86 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	As an aside, since Moore didnt sue Hardy, does that make Hardy's claims true?

09-27-2003, 03:57 PM	#87 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	Hmmm... I guess this is where the debate ends for me. I won't change my mind, neither will you. I view Moore's movie as a clearly populistic, still thought-provoking movie, you view it as a cook-up of lies. Both stances are subjective, and thus none of them infintively wrong or right. Maybe I would keep on arguing until we end up insulting each other further, but right now I just saw Good Will Hunting and got all thoughtful and shit. Sorry if I have insulted any you in any way in the heat of battle Thanks for an interesting debate, though.

09-27-2003, 08:36 PM	#88 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	Not insulted one bit. You were civil, probably more so than I.

09-27-2003, 08:37 PM	#89 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	The lies you can not explain away, 1 Editing Heston's speach to misrepresent him. No I dont expect to see every word he said, but I do expect the CORRECT context and intention. I guess you dont expect that from Moore, and to tell the truth, neither do I. You even said the speaches were different. Now read them both and tell me seriously if the contex of both speaches was the same. It clearly is not. 2 The NRA never helped the KKK, in fact, the NRA are and were a major thorn in the side of the KKK, but Moore is allowed to say other wise cause its a cartoon. 3 The US government never supported the Taliban as Moore said in his film. http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20021119.html 4 The Canadian Government says that Moore could not legally buy ammo in that K Mart. 5 A NY resident can not get a gun in Michigan, like Moore claims to have done in the bank. If you have proof that he lived in Michigan when he was a NY resident at the time, please post it. 6 And the biggest lie, the whole blaming the Massacre at Columbine on the parents makeing WMD, when NOT ONE Parent made WMD. In fact they did the opposite. THey took weapons and made them into communication equipment. Again, you seem to be the only person that didnt see that Moore blamed Lockheed Martin. I guess you have the special edition. Here is the quote. Moore intones that the missiles with their "Pentagon payloads" are trucked through the town "in the middle of the night while the children are asleep." Moore asks whether knowledge that weapons of "mass destruction" were being built nearby might have motivated the Columbine shooter. Not that the shooters here harrassed and abused by the other school students. Here is another quote to be dismissed by Shrod. "So you don't think our kids say to themselves, 'Dad goes off to the factory every day, he builds missiles of mass destruction. What's the difference between that mass destruction and the mass destruction over at Columbine High School?'" The difference is, as Shrod even said, the parents DONT make Weapons of mass destruction. 7 Other silly lies and misrepresentations are the plague, Moore didnt paraphrase it, he misrepresented it. I guess the soliders in ww2 didnt kill combatants but "german villiagers?" O please. The whole reason the plague was created was to celebrate the fact that in a B-52 / fighter encounter, the B-52 almost always went down. It had very little defensive armament -- one gun mount in the tail -- a LOT less than a WWII bomber. Even if the fighter had already used its missiles, it had only to come in from above, below, or the sides, and the B-52 had no defense at all. The plaque isn't celebrating killing (for all we know, the enemy pilot bailed out), but the fact that the American bomber came off the better in a fight where all the odds were against it. Moore wants us to think that the plague was for "killing Veitnamese on Christmas Eve" The man is pathological. 8 the lie that Heston showed up in flint to promote guns 48 hours after kayla's shooting. Moore: "Just as he did after the Columbine shooting, Charlton Heston showed up in Flint, to have a big pro-gun rally." When the fact that it was 8 months later and for "rock the vote" doesnt enter the film. Again, if you freeze the DVD you can see the people Heston is talking to holding signs that say rock the vote, and Vote Bush. Moore Lies. Lets hear your rationalisations for these lies.

09-27-2003, 11:00 PM	#91 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	Why would they ask that question when the Littleton Plant doesnt make WMDs? I am sure the parents in the town know what their jobs were. And the funny thing that Moore leaves out is that one of the parents of the shooters was an anti gun activist that wouldnt even let the shooter play with guns as a child. By Moore's poor logic he could just have easily said that anti gun activisim caused the massacre. I mean it is just as silly as imagined killer rockets. The problem with your question is you assume that no kid in town actually speaks to their parents. I think the parents that are the engineers could tell that they were designing killer rockets or communication equipment. And there wasnt knowledge of making nearby WMD as it was not happening. So there was no knowledge of it.

09-27-2003, 11:02 PM	#92 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	The pentagon payloads are satellites that detect incoming rockets and notify us. Hardy killer rockets or weapons of mass destruction. But that wouldnt make quite the point Moore wanted, so he lied.

09-29-2003, 07:01 AM	#94 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	Thank you splck, that guy made some good points.

09-29-2003, 04:41 PM	#98 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	If he shouldn't have used any dramatic effect, humour or otherwise, Moore could have saved a lot of money just posting all the important facts on big-ass posters all over the US. But then again, movies have a greater impact, and a movie usualy reqiures more than just 5 mins of scrolling statistics. Now please, stop claiming any use of dramatic effect or humour is an attempt to lie to the people. I believe most of you are smarter than that, and easily able to spot the ironic twists and dramatic parts if you try not being 100% focused on shooting the messenger.

09-29-2003, 04:53 PM	#99 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Heh I think he accomplished his message just fine - the fact that people are arguing over it now means its obviously left an impression of people for good or worse. And as for the entire actual columbine incident - I don't think anyone should point out what happened to the kids and give them an excuse of whether they are picked or not. It should never have happened for any reason - and everyone was at fault.

09-29-2003, 05:37 PM	#100 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	I was not at fault for Columbine.

10-02-2003, 11:17 AM	#101 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	Me neither, it's not my fucked up country.

10-02-2003, 12:18 PM	#102 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	I think it would be hard to blame the kids at the school for terrorising the shooters and running them off the road while threatening to kill them next time. But Moore never mentions the fact that those shooters were harrassed. Na, it must be the lie that the parents make bombs. That makes sense.

10-02-2003, 01:20 PM	#103 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	seriously, can't you ever see that the bomb-comment was just that, a comment, it was never presented as a main solution or a direct cause. It was just an interesting paradox. Watch the movie one more time, how the fuck is it not possible to grasp this movie? It's not Shakespeare, it's simple and populistic, and that just makes it more embarrasing for you guys when you start putting your limited understanding of this oh so understandable movie on display on tha intarweb. The speech is not edited, the Heston-clip is shown before the rest of the speech, you need to be ignorant and/or completely biased to ignore that. Same thing with the bomb IT'S A PARADOX, NOT THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM! Jesus, this debate would be so fucking unneccesary if some ppl could just chill off and check their facts one more time.

10-02-2003, 03:20 PM	#104 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	Simple, populistic, and wrong, This debate could chill if Moore checked his facts one more time.

10-02-2003, 04:02 PM	#105 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	Well, as long as you guys would counter this movie on facts, and not on all this "he lies 'cuz i thought he edited a speech" bs. The "lies" you are pointing to are bs, so if it's the entire point that the US has a problem with guns you are opposing, then debate that, not wether or not Heston's speech was edited or not, or wether or not Lockheed are producing weapons.

10-02-2003, 05:57 PM	#106 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	This thread is about How Moore Lies, if you want to argue Guns start a new thread.

10-02-2003, 11:20 PM	#107 (permalink)
eple Banned Location: norway	Exactly, taht is the problem, the thread is nothing but repeated bs about Moore lying, although every charge seems to be nothing but misinterpretations on your account. Wether or not that bullshit "truth about BFC"-site is linked a thousand times, the canadian in the link earlier already discredited that, so stfu please.

10-03-2003, 11:39 AM	#108 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	So then the NRA did help the KKK light cross's? Americans burnt witches at the stake? The Littleton Plant makes WMD's? Americans can buy ammo in Canadian Walmarts? Heston gave a speach about guns 48 hours after Kayla's shooting? Heston gave his speach as it was shown in the film? The wall plaque read as Moore said it did? ETC? These are all true to you?

10-03-2003, 05:27 PM	#109 (permalink)
aryan Upright	mm is a total idiot

10-03-2003, 06:42 PM	#110 (permalink)
Food Eater Lad Banned	And to make a movie and title it after the Columbine shootings, and try to understand why such a horrid thing happened and neglect the most probable cause is just shoddy filmmaking.