Food Eater Lad

Its been a while since I debated Micheal Moore. Anyone up for it? I will let you start.

Lebell

I think MM has been debated to death on these boards, with most people agreeing that he lies and the rest thinking that he "stretches the truth" in order to tell a good story (i.e. he lies).

__________________
"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!

Phaenx

He should lose some weight, guy's going to die from a heart attack here any minute.

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

BigGov

Some? More like a ton. The guy puts on 50 more pounds and he'll be one of those fat guys you see on Springer that stay in bed all day because they're too fat to move.

__________________
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!"

Food Eater Lad

I am new, didnt realise that we all agree that he is a stinking liar.

BigGov

Well it's hard not to call him a stinking liar with evidence like this:

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

__________________
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!"

eple

Well I heard he is capable of spelling his name correctly.

eple

Seriously though: the dude may have streched the truth, but I guess I do prefer leftist simplified messages over right-wing propaganda. He shows that it is possible to be populistic and popular and leftist at the same time. Showing that there is a big marked for non-conservative, non-insane opinions in the US. This is positive, and whether or not he has all his facts right is less important.

I believe the movies and books he has produces are all pointing at very important issues, fronting views which should by all means be represented in the debate. If I was american, I would support strict gun-control and be enraged by the corporate corruption taking place all to obviously in my country, just like Moore. It is clear that Moore has been successful at provoking, and creating debate in the US and elsewhere, thus he gets big, fat chunks of respect from me, for speaking up against the raging patriot-hordes. The republican masses obviously feels a need to fling all sorts of insults and seemingly incredibly pedantic complaints against him.

almostaugust

I agree completely, very well put. I'd like to add that there are alot of things in his documentary that you cannot ignore, such as the death statistics. I really liked the film and am glad it got made.

Food Eater Lad

Seriously though: Ann Coulter may have streched the truth, but I guess I do prefer rightist simplified messages over left-wing propaganda. She e shows that it is possible to be populistic and popular and rightist at the same time. Showing that there is a big marked for conservative, non-insane opinions in the US. This is positive, and whether or not she has all her facts right is less important.

I believe the books she has produced are all pointing at very important issues, fronting views which should by all means be represented in the debate. If I was american, I wouldn t support strict gun-control and be enraged by the liberal socialist corruption taking place all to obviously in my country, just like Coulter. It is clear that Coulter has been successful at provoking, and creating debate in the US and elsewhere, thus she gets big, fat chunks of respect from me, for speaking up against the raging knee jerk, emotional liberals. The Liberal masses obviously feels a need to fling all sorts of insults and seemingly incredibly pedantic complaints against her.


Do you buy this argument? I dont buy yours. a liar by any other name or reason, is still a liar.

eple

Heh, good point, but the difference as far as I can see is that Moore is fronting a view less popular, without dobt simplifying the message in the process. I believe the Issues Moore is debating are way too important to be restricted to intellectual elite only. There is a need for Popular, populistic messages from leftists as well as conservatives, you shouldnt have to be ivy-league to be a democrat or to support gun control. It's as simple as that.

Food Eater Lad

So Moore is allowed to lie to make his points, but Say Coulter is not? Are Coulter's points not important cause they are popular ( you said Moore was unpopular so I am assuming you mean that Coulter is then popular)

Anyone can argue anything. I just have a problem with him lying about it, and doing shoddy research and then having the never to harp about "ficticious times".
I guess the ultimate irony is that in these ficticious times, an oscar was given to a ficticious documentary.

james t kirk

Moore never claimed to have the answers in bowling for Columbine now did he.

The right wingers typically don't like the guy cause he made a movie that asked questions about America's gun culture. Any time you say anything to do with "hey, this current gun situation has a lot of problems" and you are bound to rile up a lot of people it would seem. These days, if anyone says anything even remotely against the status quo in the USA, they are almost tarred and feathered as being anti-american.

I saw Bowling for Columbine, and Roger and me and liked them both.

I have read the articles about how moore "lied" and all i have to say about that is that the points made are so small they are frankly irrelevant.

By the way, the bit about Torontonians not looking their doors is largely true. If i am home, the door is never locked. I have also run out over to the store even and left the front door wide open. The only time i lock the door is when i leave for the day, or sleep (and even then i forget sometimes.)

ARTelevision

To respond succintly and directly to the question posed by the thread starter.

Yes.

__________________
create evolution

Food Eater Lad

I live in NYC and I dont lock the door.


I am a right winger and I dont care if Moore asks questions. I dont think any right winger cares that he asks questions. I care that he took three Heston speaches and edited them. I care that he did shody research. I care that he LIED. I care that he said that the Littleton Plant made WMD when it didnt. I care he is a liar.

No one is a liar if they ask questions, they are a liar when they lie.

BigGov

Except that he blantantly mis-quotes and edits speeches. I don't mean cut a little bit, I mean taking one part from a speech in say North Carolina, and taking a part from a completely different speech in Denver not even on the same topic.

I don't think you quite understand that, so let me explain it better for you.

HE BLATANTLY FABRICATES SPEECHES AND MISLEADS HIS AUDIENCE.

Documentary my ass. What he does is equivlent to watching the Discovery Channel and right when the cheetah is about to chase down the gazelle it cuts to a three-year-old's drawing of a Gazelle turning around and taking a chainsaw to the cheetah and cutting back to video of a dead cheetah. You wouldn't believe that, so why are you stupid enough to believe Michael Moore?

__________________
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!"

eple

So at some point in this dicussion some people me included tried to elevate this debate to something more than a rambling shitfest of "YO MICALE MOORE IS GOD MAN" VS "NO MAN HE LIES AND RAPES BABIES", could the various people trying to drag this debate down please try to maintain a higher level of discussion?

I never said that Coulter is without right to front her views in exactly the same ways as Moore.

Darkblack

Do you care that our current administration took edited or false evidence that Iraq had WMD, was trying to buy nukes from Africa, or was able to strike the USA with said WMD? Do you care that they did shoddy research before going to war? Do you care that they LIED?

Just curious.

Anytime anyone brings up gun control people will try their best to discredit the speaker. It is not the slight errors or the stretches made by him it is the topic. IF it were the lies we would have another impeached president.

BigGov

The USA didn't do shoddy research. They've relied on intel from every single major country (yes, France and Germany included) that said Iraq had WMD's and likely had not destroyed them. They also relied on the British intelligence that the British still say is true. There has been no evidence of WMD's yet, but many UN weapon inspectors have said many times how easy they are to hide. Even though, if no WMD's are found, the Coalition acted on intel acknowledged by all of the major world powers.

Moore fabricates speeches, putting sentences from many different speeches together to assemble a false message. Moore didn't make slight errors, or stretch the truth a little bit, he ripped truth out of the "documentary".

__________________
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!"

eple

So there aren't 11000 gun-related homocides per year in the US after all? Gun control would have no effect?

that's nice, good to see there are no problems. OMG that Moore dude sure was stupid, making up a problem and its causalties and even suggesting possible solutions to a non-existant problem. Even a oscar-nominee. Man, is that dumb, when all he says are lies. AND OM HE IS FAT TOO SO HE HAS TO BE WRONG.

seriously though: I earlier adviced some people to try their hardest to elevate their arguements a bit above the "Moore is a lying liar who lies and thus have no points or right to live whatsoever" mantra. Plz try harder.

johnnymysto

Well, eple, I just read the website given at the top of the page, and it seems pretty clear that Mr. Moore lied to create this movie. So what would you have us say? The evidence shows that he is, in fact, a liar. He is a tabloid filmmaker. Is that better?

__________________
"I'm disinclined to acquiesce to your request." - Capt. Barbossa

seretogis

This has been done to death before, so please do a search for "gun control" on this forum. In general, gun control policy in the US is simply not effective, and has been proven so time and time again. What works is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and those who have no idea how to safely use them.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

Food Eater Lad

I am asking this out of sincere honesty, not sarcasm. Was my arugments like you said? I tried to keep my posts on a higher level of discusion. If I did drag it down, I apologise.

SkanK0r

I gotta say, that link is indeed very informative. I'm very liberal, but honestly don't give a crap one way or the other about gun control - I watched Bowling For Columbine for the first time last week and thought it was a little lame. It was just cheesy and relied to much on the "GOTCHA!" style that Moore loves to use.

In another thread, I think someone sai that the right-wing pundits like Coulter and O'Reilly were no different than Al Franken, and I defended Franken. But I won't defend Moore. If what is said in that link is true (and I have no reason to believe it isn't, but that's hardly a good reason to believe anything), then I too will agree that Moore is a fraud. Even a "lying liar."

smooth

How to Deal with the Lies and the Lying Liars When They Lie about "Bowling for Columbine"
by Michael Moore

One thing you get used to when you're in what's called "the public eye" is reading the humorous fiction that others like to write about you. For instance, I have read in quite respectable and trustworthy publications that a) I'm a college graduate (I'm not), b) I was a factory worker (I quit the first day), and c) I have two brothers (I have none). Newsweek wrote that I live in a penthouse on Central Park West (I live above a Baby Gap store, and not on any park), and the Internet Movie Database once listed me as the director of the Elvis movie, "Blue Hawaii" ( I was 6 at the time the film was made, but I was quite skilled in directing my sisters in building me a snowman). Lately, my favorite mistake is the one many reviewers made crediting the cartoon in "Bowling for Columbine" as being the work of the "South Park" creators. It isn't. I wrote it and my buddy Harold Moss's animation studio drew it.

I've enjoyed reading these inventions/mistakes about this "Michael Moore." I mean, who wouldn't want to fantasize about living in penthouses roughhousing with brothers you never had. But lately I've begun to see so many things about me or my work that aren't true. It's become so easy to spread these fictions through the internet (thanks mostly to lazy reporters or web junkies who do all their research by typing in "key words" and then just repeat the same mistakes). And so I wonder that if I don't correct the record, then all of the people who don't know better may just end up being filled with a bunch of stuff that isn't true.

Of course, it would take a lot of my time to contact all these sites and media outlets to correct their errors and I think it's more important I spend my time on my next book or movie so I just let it ride. But is that fair to you, the reader, who has now been told something that isn't true?

With the unexpected and overwhelming success of "Bowling for Columbine" and "Stupid White Men," the fiction that has been written or spoken about me and my work has reached a whole new level of storytelling. It's no longer about making some simple errors or calling me "Roger" Moore. It is now about organized groups going full blast trying to discredit me by knowingly making up lies and repeating them over and over in the hopes that people will believe them ? and, then, stop listening to me.

Oh, that it would be so easy!

Fortunately, they are so wound up in their anger and hatred that they have ended up discrediting themselves.

Look, I accept the fact that, if I go after the Thief-in-Chief ? and more people buy my book than any other nonfiction book last year ? then that is naturally going to send a few of his henchmen after me. Fine. That's okay. I knew that before I got into this and I ain't whining about it now.

I also realize that you just don't go after the NRA and its supporters and then not expect them to come back at you with both barrels (so to speak). These are not nice people and they don't play nice ? that's how they got to be so powerful.

So, a whole host of gun lobby groups and individual gun nuts have put up websites where the smears on me range from the pre-adolescent (I'm a "crapweasel," and a "fat fucking piece of shit") to Orwellian-style venom ("Michael Moore hates America!").

I have mostly ignored this silliness. But a few weeks ago, this lunatic crap hit the mainstream fan. CNN actually put some guy on a show saying that my film contains "so many falsehoods, one after the other, after the other, after the other." They introduced him as a "critic" and "research director" of the "Independence Institute." He seemed mighty impressive.

Except they failed to tell their viewers who he really was: a contributing editor of Gun Week Magazine.

CNN saw no need to inform the viewers that their "expert"-- who has made a career out of opposing any form of gun control?has a vested interest in convincing the public that "Bowling for Columbine" is a horribly rotten movie.

So, what do you do when the nutcases succeed in getting on CNN? Do you just keep ignoring them? How do you handle people who say the Holocaust never happened or that monkeys fly? Ignore them and they'll go away? If you give them any attention, all the nuts will come out of the woodwork.

And that's what happened. I saw another one of these lunatics, this time on MSNBC. A guy named John Lofton. He went on and on about how my movie is all made up. The anchor on MSNBC never challenged him on his lies and never told the viewers who he really was ? a right wing crazy who believes Bush is too liberal. He was once an advisor to Pat Buchanan's Presidential campaign, and was a direct-mail writer for Jesse Helms. Writing in opposition to Hate Crime bills in the conservative Washington Times (where he was a columnist from '83 to '89), Lofton explained:
Take, for example, this business of so-called "anti-gay violence." This bill will be used to go after only those who commit crimes against people because they are homosexuals. But this is not the most pernicious form of "anti-gay violence." Not by a long shot.
The most violent - indeed fatal 100 percent of the time - form of "anti-gay violence" has been committed not by so-called "homophobes" who bash homosexuals - but by male homosexuals and bisexuals against other male bisexuals and homosexuals.
To date, tens of thousands of male bisexual and homosexual men are dead in our country because of AIDS, because they engaged in high-risk homosexual sex.
Is this not "anti-gay violence" which numbers its victims far beyond anything any "homophobes" have done?

Well, I figured I better deal with this because the nutters were now being turned into "respectable critics" by a media that either had an agenda or were just plain lazy.

So, how crazy are the things they've said about "Bowling for Columbine?" Here are my favorites:
"That scene where you got the gun in the bank was staged!"

Well of course it was staged! It's a movie! We built the "bank" as a set and then I hired actors to play the bank tellers and the manager and we got a toy gun from the prop department and then I wrote some really cool dialogue for me and them to say! Pretty neat, huh?

Or...

The Truth: In the spring of 2001, I saw a real ad in a real newspaper in Michigan announcing a real promotion that this real bank had where they would give you a gun (as your up-front interest) for opening up a Certificate of Deposit account. They promoted this in publications all over the country ? "More Bang for Your Buck!"

There was news coverage of this bank giving away guns, long before I even shot the scene there. The Chicago Sun Times wrote about how the bank would "hand you a gun" with the purchase of a CD. Those are the precise words used by a bank employee in the film.

When you see me going in to the bank and walking out with my new gun in "Bowling for Columbine" ? that is exactly as it happened. Nothing was done out of the ordinary other than to phone ahead and ask permission to let me bring a camera in to film me opening up my account. I walked into that bank in northern Michigan for the first time ever on that day in June 2001, and, with cameras rolling, gave the bank teller $1,000 ? and opened up a 20-year CD account. After you see me filling out the required federal forms ("How do you spell Caucasian?") ? which I am filling out here for the first time ? the bank manager faxed it to the bank's main office for them to do the background check. The bank is a licensed federal arms dealer and thus can have guns on the premises and do the instant background checks (the ATF's Federal Firearms database?which includes all federally approved gun dealers?lists North Country Bank with Federal Firearms License #4-38-153-01-5C-39922).

Within 10 minutes, the "OK" came through from the firearms background check agency and, 5 minutes later, just as you see it in the film, they handed me a Weatherby Mark V Magnum rifle (If you'd like to see the outtakes, click here).

And it is that very gun that I still own to this day. I have decided the best thing to do with this gun is to melt it down into a bust of John Ashcroft and auction it off on E-Bay (more details on that later). All the proceeds will go to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence to fight all these lying gun nuts who have attacked my film and make it possible on a daily basis for America's gun epidemic to rage on.

Here's another whopper I've had to listen to from the pro-gun groups:
"The Lockheed factory in Littleton, Colorado, has nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction!"

That's right! That big honkin' rocket sitting behind the Lockheed spokesman in "Bowling for Columbine"-- the one with "US AIRFORCE" written on it in BIG ASS letters ? well, I admit it, I snuck in and painted that on that Titan IV rocket when Lockheed wasn't looking! After all, those rockets were only being used for the Weather Channel! Ha Ha Ha! I sure fooled everyone!!

Or....

The Truth: Lockheed Martin is the largest weapons-maker in the world. The Littleton facility has been manufacturing missiles, missile components, and other weapons systems for almost half a century. In the 50s, workers at the Littleton facility constructed the first Titan intercontinental ballistic missile, designed to unleash a nuclear warhead on the Soviet Union; in the mid-80s, they were partially assembling MX missiles, instruments for the minuteman ICBM, a space laser weapon called Zenith Star, and a Star Wars program known as Brilliant Pebbles.

In the full, unedited interview I did with the Lockheed spokesman, he told me that Lockheed started building nuclear missiles in Littleton and "played a role in the development of Peacekeeper MX Missiles."

As for what's currently manufactured in Littleton, McCollum told me, "They (the rockets sitting behind him) carry mainly very large national security satellites, some we can't talk about." (see him say it here)

Since that interview, the Titan IV rockets manufactured in Littleton have been critical to the war effort in both Afghanistan and Iraq. These rockets launched advanced satellites that were "instrumental in providing command-and-control operations over Iraq...for the rapid targeting of Navy Tomahawk cruise missiles involved in Iraqi strikes and clandestine communications with Special Operations Forces." (view source here).

That Lockheed lets the occasional weather or TV satellite hitch a ride on one of its rockets should not distract anyone from Lockheed's main mission and moneymaker in Littleton: to make instruments that help kill people. That two of Littleton's children decided to engineer their own mass killing is what these guys and the Internet crazies don't want to discuss.

The oddest of all the smears thrown at "Bowling for Columbine" is this one:
"The film depicts NRA president Charlton Heston giving a speech near Columbine; he actually gave it a year later and 900 miles away. The speech he did give is edited to make conciliatory statements sound like rudeness."

Um, yeah, that's right! I made it up! Heston never went there! He never said those things!

Or....

The Truth: Heston took his NRA show to Denver and did and said exactly what we recounted. From the end of my narration setting up Heston's speech in Denver, with my words, "a big pro-gun rally," every word out of Charlton Heston's mouth was uttered right there in Denver, just 10 days after the Columbine tragedy. But don't take my word ? read the transcript of his whole speech. Heston devotes the entire speech to challenging the Denver mayor and mocking the mayor's pleas that the NRA "don't come here." Far from deliberately editing the film to make Heston look worse, I chose to leave most of this out and not make Heston look as evil as he actually was.

Why are these gun nuts upset that their brave NRA leader's words are in my film? You'd think they would be proud of the things he said. Except, when intercut with the words of a grieving father (whose son died at Columbine and happened to be speaking in a protest that same weekend Heston was at the convention center), suddenly Charlton Heston doesn't look so good does he? Especially to the people of Denver (and, the following year, to the people of Flint) who were still in shock over the tragedies when Heston showed up.

As for the clip preceding the Denver speech, when Heston proclaims "from my cold dead hands," this appears as Heston is being introduced in narration. It is Heston's most well-recognized NRA image ? hoisting the rifle overhead as he makes his proclamation, as he has done at virtually every political appearance on behalf of the NRA (before and since Columbine). I have merely re-broadcast an image supplied to us by a Denver TV station, an image which the NRA has itself crafted for the media, or, as one article put it, "the mantra of dedicated gun owners" which they "wear on T-shirts, stamp it on the outside of envelopes, e-mail it on the Internet and sometimes shout it over the phone.". Are they now embarrassed by this sick, repulsive image and the words that accompany it?

I've also been accused of making up the gun homicide counts in the United States and various countries around the world. That is, like all the rest of this stuff, a bald-face lie. Every statistic in the film is true. They all come directly from the government. Here are the facts, right from the sources:

The U.S. figure of 11,127 gun deaths comes from a report from the Center for Disease Control. Japan's gun deaths of 39 was provided by the National Police Agency of Japan; Germany: 381 gun deaths from Bundeskriminalamt (German FBI); Canada: 165 gun deaths from Statistics Canada, the governmental statistics agency; United Kingdom: 68 gun deaths, from the Centre for Crime and Justice studies in Britain; Australia: 65 gun deaths from the Australian Institute of Criminology; France: 255 gun deaths, from the International Journal of Epidemiology.

Finally, I've even been asked about whether the two killers were at bowling class on the morning of the shootings. Well, that's what their teacher told the investigators, and that's what was corroborated by several eyewitness reports of students to the police, the FBI, and the District Attorney's office. I'll tell you who wasn't there -- me! That's why in the film I pose it as a question:
"So did Dylan and Eric show up that morning and bowl two games before moving on to shoot up the school? And did they just chuck the balls down the lane? Did this mean something?"

Of course, it's a silly discussion, and it misses the whole, larger point: that blaming bowling for their killing spree would be as dumb as blaming Marilyn Manson.

But the gun nuts don't want to discuss either specific points or larger issues because when that debate is held, they lose. Most Americans want stronger gun laws (among others, see the 2001 National Gun Policy Survey from the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center) ? and the gun lobbies know it. That is why it's critical to distract and alter the debate ? and go after anyone who questions why we have so many gun deaths in America (especially if he does it in best selling books and popular films).

I can guarantee to you, without equivocation, that every fact in my movie is true. Three teams of fact-checkers and two groups of lawyers went through it with a fine tooth comb to make sure that every statement of fact is indeed an indisputable fact. Trust me, no film company would ever release a film like this without putting it through the most vigorous vetting process possible. The sheer power and threat of the NRA is reason enough to strike fear in any movie studio or theater chain. The NRA will go after you without mercy if they think there's half a chance of destroying you. That's why we don't have better gun laws in this country ? every member of Congress is scared to death of them.

Well, guess what. Total number of lawsuits to date against me or my film by the NRA? NONE. That's right, zero. And don't forget for a second that if they could have shut this film down on a technicality they would have. But they didn't and they can't ? because the film is factually solid and above reproach. In fact, we have not been sued by any individual or group over the statements made in "Bowling for Columbine?" Why is that? Because everything we say is true ? and the things that are our opinion, we say so and leave it up to the viewer to decide if our point of view is correct or not for each of them.

So, faced with a thoroughly truthful and honest film, those who object to the film's political points are left with the choice of debating us on the issues in the film ? or resorting to character assassination. They have chosen the latter. What a sad place to be.

Actually, I have found one typo in the theatrical release of the film. It was a caption that read, "Willie Horton released by Dukakis and kills again." In fact, Willie Horton was a convicted murderer who, after escaping from furlough, raped a woman and stabbed her fiancé, but didn't kill him. The caption has been permanently corrected on the DVD and home video version of the film and replaced with, "Willie Horton released. Then rapes a woman." My apologies to Willie Horton and the Horton family for implying he is a double-murderer when he is only a single-murderer/rapist. And my apologies to the late Lee Atwater who, on his deathbed, apologized for having engineered the smear campaign against Dukakis (but correctly identified Mr. Horton as a single-murderer!).

Well, there you have it. I suppose the people who tell their make-believe stories about me and my work will continue to do so. Maybe they should be sued for knowingly libeling me. Or maybe I'll just keep laughing ? laughing all the way to the end of the Bush Administration -- scheduled, I believe, for sometime in November of next year.

Yours,

Michael Moore
Director, "Bowling for Columbine"

PS. From now on, I will deal with all wacko attackos on this page. If you hear something about me that doesn't sound quite right, check in here.

Food Eater Lad

The article where Spongemike "answers" his critics is heavy on namecalling, but lacking in actual answers (as usual).

The bank where he opened the CD required a $5000 deposit into a longterm CD.
He seems to think that some nefarious bank robber is going to come in and deposit $5000 in order to obtain a weapon to commit crimes. This is ridiculous.
Has anyone ever heard of a bank robber depositing money into a bank?
If a bank robber has $5000, why wouldn't he use that to purchase a more suitable weapon prior to entering the bank.
Has anyone ever heard of a bank robber using a bolt action deer rifle to rob a bank? The bank offered other types of sporting goods in their promotion such as golf clubs. He intentionally decieves the viewers by trying to make the bank's managment and employees look wreckless and irresponsible, when they have done nothing wrong, dangerous, or illegal.

As for the Martin Murrietta boondoggle...
Spongemike tries to make the lame point that:
"Gee, maybe these kids went-off their rockers and started killing people because the grown-ups in their town make weapons of mass destruction."
Well, it has been exposed that this is a lie. Sorry, Spongemike, it just doesn't wash. A recon satellite is NOT a "weapon of mass destruction".

For the last time: Osama Bin Laden was not "trained by the CIA".
That's bunk. During the Soviet-Afghan war, the CIA provided weapons and funding to the Mujahedin mainly through the Pakistani Intelligence service. This aid mostly went to very pro-wester forces under the leadership of Akmed Shah Masood, who later rose to lead the Northern Alliance. Bin Laden was already wealthy and had his own funding.

He did not address his spurious assertion that: "the U.S. government gave billions of dollars in financial aid to the taliban."
Again, just Moore bunk.
That money was given to the UN for humanitarian aid in Afghanistan, to be used for agricultural and medical purposes. It was administered through the UN and non-governmental agencies.

Apparently, anyone who disagrees with Moore and points out his mendacity is automatically a "Gun nut". So, he believes that he doesn't have to address those inconvenient facts.


He also uses the term "gun deaths" and neglects to tell us that included in that number are deaths caused by self defence. I assume that means that self defence is not a valid reason to use a gun?

My point:
The entire point of Michael Moore's movie (documentary) was to examine American's "culture of violence" and try to divine the reason that Americans are shooting each other at higher rates than in other industrialized nations.
He attempts to find reasons, such as:
Violent music
Violent Video games
Violent movies
The NRA
Easy access to guns
The Militia movement
Charleton Heston
Defense Contractors
K-Mart
Bank (handing out "free" guns)

He asserts through his movie that the big bad boogyman is America itself. That America has a bloodthisty history based on abnormal paranoia and racism.

The facts, however, seem to allude Spongemike.
He seems to miss the rather obvious culprits, which include:
Criminals
the Drug Trade
a lenient criminal justice system
Repeat Felons
Street Gangs

Considering that 75% of violent crime in the U.S. is committed by repeat felons who have been released from prison, maybe....just MAYBE, he might want to examine the penal system's parole, probabtion, and early release policies.
MAYBE, he could even interview some CRIMINALS and ask them why they committed murder?
Instead, he concentrates on people who have never committed a crime and are completely law-abiding citizens. (Kmart manager, Bank employees, etc)

THAT is Moore's schtick! He takes his preconcieved notions and manufactures a movie around them, and disguises it as a documentary. He doesn't do research or examine data, or let facts get in the way of a "good" joke.
Example: Moore Ambush's Charleton Heston about the Kayla Roland shooting which occurred in an elementary school in Mt. Morris, Michigan; as if it is Charleton Heston's fault.
Moore fails to tell his viewers that:
-The gun used to kill Kayla Roland was stolen.
-The murderer was the young nephew of a crack dealer who had bought the gun in exchange for drugs.
-The young shooter's Mother, Grandmother, and Uncle were criminals with records.
-The young shooter was living in his uncle's crack house and had access to drugs, guns, and ammo.
-The family's entire livlihood was a criminal enterprise.

But somehow, to Spongemike....It's all Charleton Heston's fault.
Did it ever occurr to Spongemike to maybe go and interview the crackdealing uncle who left a loaded automatic pistol and drugs lying around
where his nephew could get ahold of them? Huh? Just maybe?
Of course not....it's much easier to verbally ambush and 80 year old man and make him look silly on film.
Plus, Spongemike knows that if he pisses-off that crack dealer he would probably get his fat ass shot off.
THAT's what it has to do with Moore's lying.

Food Eater Lad

I would also llike to point out that a nation with 285 million will most likely have a higher gun death rate then a nation with a fraction of its population.


Another thing Moore neglects is that in 1996 England enacted a gun ban. As of 2003 gun homocides have skyrocketed 43% as per the bbc.

Gun deaths in the same year in the USA DOWN 11%. It looks like Mikes dreams of violent america with freedom to bear arms is in direct conflict with No guns in englands super violent new gun culture.

Why are gun deaths going up in a nation that outlaws guns? Please answer me that MIkey.

Zeld2.0

Heh I think though his vision is that if there were no guns in the hands of *anyone*.

The truth is, thats not possible unless the government seriously went around and banned any possible way of getting guns and took every gun away. Then yes, *ideally* no one would have guns and there would no longer be such a thin as gun deaths.

Thats the *ideal* image.

While to many its whack, personally, if people are all willing to achieve it, rather than shrug it off saying its not feasible, then I think it *could* succeed.

There are many cases where guns NEED to stay out of the hands of people. For instance, just a few days ago, at Dodger stadium, a guy was killed (supposedly a Giants fan) over a fucking parking dispute. A FUCKING PARKING DISPUTE.

There is no fucking reason a 25 year old trying to enjoy his team should get shot dead over a damn parking dispute. In those cases, yes guns are to blame for even giving people a reason to kill.

Food Eater Lad

Take away all legal means of getting a gun and what you are are left with are those that get their guns from blackmarket means such as the Russian Mafia. YOu are describing the situation in England. No one can get a gun LEGALLY. So the criminals still get their guns and shoot each other and regular joes. This is why the homocide rate in England is up 43%.

james t kirk

Please post your link.....

I would like to confirm your post.

Off hand, without any hard numbers, i would say that in 1996 Britain had 100 gun murders, but in 2003 they had 143 verses 11,000 in the USA. Or, maybe Britain had 10 gun murders in 1996 and in 2003 they had 14.

Americans love to quote percentages. You see the talking heads on the news day in and day out quoting the percentage of this verses the percentage of that.

According to the article by moore, there were 68 gun deaths in the UNITED KINGDOM. Well, that includes Northern Ireland then if he is quoting the UNITED KINGDOM i believe. Either way, so in 1996 the UK had 45 gun related homicides and now they have 68. In percentage terms that sounds a lot, but in actual numbers it's insignificant.

Have you ever been to Britain???? The COPS DON'T EVEN CARRY GUNS.


That was a great article written by moore by the way.

I maintain that Bowling was an excellent movie, i saw it in the theatres, i own the DVD.

The amount of out and out hatred leveled at moore by the hysterical right is completely over the top. You say anything about their precious little guns and they get their ovaries in an uproar.

My lasting impressions of BFC was that:

1. Dick Clarke came across as a complete asshole.

2. Marlynne Manson was suprisingly intelligent and made the most sense of anyone there.

3. Charleton Heston is a confused old man who is suffering from the ravages of Alzheimers and Moore should not have picked on him when it was clear that Heston was confused. The scene where Moore left the photo of the little girl was a bit over the top in my eyes.

4. I am shocked that Moore is an NRA member.

BigGov

Since no one is paying attention to the obvious evidence, I point you again: http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

Again, a fabricated piece of shit like the rest of Moore's work.

Anyone doubt this and want sources? Want more reasoning? Want complete and utter proof shown in not only photographs but transcripts? Then read that website I posted at the beginning because this is straight from it.

[EDIT]

I'm too tired to argue the Britain vs. America deal, so I'll just point you to someone else that will say about the same thing: http://www.claytoncramer.com/Britain.pdf

__________________
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!"

Food Eater Lad

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2069400.st

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3112818.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2656875.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2640817.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2632163.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/1057562.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/246962.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...ts/2131318.stm

james t kirk

Your first link didn't work.

Your second link said 23 people were murdered with guns last year in Britain. (Washington or Detroit will suffer more than that in a weekend)

The third revealed this interesting tid bit

"Much is made of the higher American rate for murder. That is true and has been for some time. But as the Office of Health Economics in London found, not weapons availability, but "particular cultural factors" are to blame.

A study comparing New York and London over 200 years found the New York homicide rate consistently five times the London rate, although for most of that period residents of both cities had unrestricted access to firearms"

Exactly what moore was arguing in BFC that in america there exists this "culture of fear" that leads to the sense that everyone out there is sick and twisted and wants to bring harm to you.

Your choice of ariticle would appear to back up his claim.

The raw numbers do not show a major problem with gun murders in Britain, though, it would appear that crime is on the increase.

Food Eater Lad

The first link works for me. It says gun crime in England up 49%.
Yes I can see how Gun Crime up 35%, and Gun Homocide up 49% can MISLEAD you into thinking that England has gun problems.


So in england its not guns that kill, but culture. And in America its guns that kill? Odd.

james t kirk

gun crimes can mean a lot of things.

It could be something as simple as owning a hand gun since that is against the law in Britain, or maybe some guy was out shooting at tin cans and the cops got called.

Bottom line, it would appear that very few people are getting blasted by guns in Britain (23) verses over 11,000 in the USA.

Food Eater Lad

But gun homicides up 49% one year can only mean one thing. And how much next year? The USA is still down 11%. I doubt it will be going down soon, as the guns are pouring in to England from ex soviet block nations.

England is going to have some scary times in the next few years.

Food Eater Lad

Hey for those that still doubt Moore as a liar, check out the Heston Speach.

Here is what Moore showed in his film:


Heston's Denver speech as edited by Moore







Weeping children outside Columbine, explaining how near they had come to death and how their friends had just been murdered before their eyes;



Cut to Charleton Heston holding a musket over his head and happily proclaiming "I have only five words for you: 'from my cold, dead, hands'" to a cheering NRA crowd.

Cut to billboard advertising the meeting, while Moore in voiceover intones: "Just ten days after the Columbine killings, despite the pleas of a community in mourning, Charleton Heston came to Denver and held a large pro-gun rally for the National Rifle Association." [But for this break, the viewer would spot that two different speeches are being merged, since Heston has lavender shirt and tie in the above speech, and white shirt and red tie in the one below.]

Heston (supposedly) continues speech...

"Good Morning. Thank you all for coming, and thank you for supporting your organization. I also want to applaud your courage in coming here today." [Footage of protest outside] "I have a message from the Mayor, Mr. Wellington Webb, the Mayor of Denver. [picture of Webb, then back to Heston] He sent me this, and said 'don't come here. We don't want you here.' I said to the Mayor this is our country, as Americans we're free to travel wherever we want in our broad land. [cut to crowd cheering, then back to Heston] Don't come here? We're already here."




Heston's speech as actually given [link is to www.freedaily.com/articles/990504n1.html]

In the transcript below, the portions used by Moore are italicized. Note how they come from entirely different parts of the speech. Moore takes video and audio of seven sentences and assembles them into a speech which was never given. He covers the audio edits by breaking to images of the crowd and of protestors. This is not slipshod; this is the creation of a lie.



["Cold dead hands" is nowhere in speech. It is actually from a speech given by Heston in Charlotte, N.C., a year later. By swapping in the billboard and his narration, Moore covers the splice.]















Thank you. Thank you very much. Good morning. I am very happy to welcome you to this abbreviated annual gathering of the National Rifle Association. Thank you all for coming and thank you for supporting your organization.

I also want to applaud your courage in coming here today. Or course, you have a right to be here. As you know, we've cancelled the festivities, the fellowship we normally enjoy at our annual gatherings. This decision has perplexed a few and inconvenienced thousands. As your president, I apologize for that.

But it's fitting and proper that we should do this. Because NRA members are, above all, Americans. That means that whatever our differences, we are respectful of one another and we stand united, especially in adversity.

I have a message from the mayor, Mr. Wellington Webb, the mayor of Denver. He sent me this and said don't come here, we don't want you here. I said to the mayor, well, my reply to the mayor is, I volunteered for the war they wanted me to attend when I was 18 years old. Since then, I've run small errands for my country, from Nigeria to Vietnam. I know many of you here in this room could say the same thing. But the mayor said don't come.

I'm sorry for that. I'm sorry for the newspaper ads saying the same thing, don't come here. This is our country. As Americans, we're free to travel wherever we want in our broad land.

They say we'll create a media distraction, but we were preceded here by hundreds of intrusive news crews. They say we'll create political distraction, but it's not been the NRA pressing for political advantage, calling press conferences to propose vast packages of new legislation.

Still they say don't come here. I guess what saddens me the most is how that suggests complicity. It implies that you and I and 80 million honest gun owners are somehow to blame, that we don't care. We don't care as much as they do, or that we don't deserve to be as shocked and horrified as every other soul in America mourning for the people of Littleton.

Don't come here. That's offensive. It's also absurd because we live here. There are thousands of NRA members in Denver, and tens upon tens of thousands in the state of Colorado.

NRA members labor in Denver's factories, they populate Denver's faculties, run Denver corporations, play on Colorado sports teams, work in media across the Front Range, parent and teach and coach Denver's children, attend Denver's churches and proudly represent Denver in uniform on the world's oceans and in the skies over Kosovo at this very moment.

NRA members are in city hall, Fort Carson, NORAD, the Air Force Academy and the Olympic Training Center. And yes, NRA members are surely among the police and fire and SWAT team heroes who risked their lives to rescue the students at Columbine.

Don't come here? We're already here. This community is our home. Every community in America is our home. We are a 128-year-old fixture of mainstream America. The Second Amendment ethic of lawful, responsible firearm ownership spans the broadest cross section of American life imaginable.



So, we have the same right as all other citizens to be here. To help shoulder the grief and share our sorrow and to offer our respectful, reassured voice to the national discourse that has erupted around this tragedy.



One more thing. Our words and our behavior will be scrutinized more than ever this morning. Those who are hostile towards us will lie in wait to seize on a soundbite out of context, ever searching for an embarrassing moment to ridicule us. So, let us be mindful. The eyes of the nation are upon us today.

Leander

Ok, I saw BFC a couple of times and I daresay that several people have missed the boat. The main thrust of BFC is not that guns are bad, rather the theme is what makes American Society so violent. I already knew that the bank scene was not as advertised. I know that just eliminating guns is not the answer. The film succeeded because it asked questions about American society. Why in hell are we so violent? I still don't know and I'm sure Moore doesn't either, but we have a culture of firearms that make such an easy target.
I come from a line of gun owners and don't believe banning them is a panacea. I do beleieve that asking questions about the society we live in is just as valid as the 2nd Ammendment. We as a people have work to do and it doesn't just involve guns.

__________________
Just me and God, watching Scotty die..

healyk

Thanks for the link, Jimmy4. All this time I thought Michael Moore was someone who misrepresented the facts to suit his own convictions but was able to rationalize it to himself because he was so convinced of the righteousness of his cause. Now I see that he's just a liar.

His inablility to see how his fabrications do nothing to help society and cause real harm to many people suggests self-delusion on a grand scale.

But his is making lots of money. That must give him a warm feeling inside.

smooth

the shit just keeps getting better!