Bowling for Columbine (page 6)

Aztec

Just popped in to say "Hello" to Julie! Thanks for the email. I will respond tomorrow. Thanks so much!

BTW Micheal Moore is correct. Sorry Jayson. ;-)

~Aztec

If your time line is correct, and I assume it is, then Moore gets an out for attacking Chuck. It still does not excuse all of Moors lies though. He did do some fancy editing in order to make Heston appear is a seperate context that what was reality.

Terry

patio34

at first i enjoyed the movie, but was a bit uncomfortable with it. he made some very good points, but his conclusion that people killed ea other because of the media just didn't make sense. all he did was present a problem, but his theory just didn't fit.

What's the media supposed to do with over 11,000 murders per year? Ignore them? Of course, it's on the news a lot, even if overdone. That's a lot of killing and it'll show. Canada doesn't report a lot of murders because they don't have a lot apparently.

It doesn't add up what MM says. I'm also enjoying all the posts on this thread.

I'm reading Stupid White Men by MM and it's full of accusatory statements, but not verified. So, while MM is funny, it may not be reliable info or, imo, worth the time.

Pat

drwtsn32

What's the media supposed to do with over 11,000 murders per year? Ignore them? Of course, it's on the news a lot, even if overdone. That's a lot of killing and it'll show. Canada doesn't report a lot of murders because they don't have a lot apparently.

In the movie MM pointed out that even when murders DECREASED the number of murders covered in the news INCREASED 600% (or something like that).

Phantom Stranger

The timeling is the only point I'm making, jelly. I don't know anything about how the movie was made...but I know when. ;)

I looked it up on Google because I seemed to remember the announcement just happening prior to the release of the film.

Thanks for your gracious response.

Patio, best wishes for your son - take care. I like Chomsky too.

PS

Oh, and Jayson, get gone already, you punk-ass.

Abaddon

Hi Jayson;

I can't believe that you guys can sit here and know that this movie is a 100% fabrication but still support it.

Substitute the word 'movie' with 'reasons for war'. Congratulations and welcome to the left wing.

funkyderek

MM is simply an entertainer. Like John Stewart. He can be funny but the only problem is when people think his videos are actual news.

Like the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences who gave him the Oscar for Best Documentary. They obviously didn't realise he was joking. Maybe he was only "being funny" in his acceptance speech when he said: "We like nonfiction and we live in fictitious times." I guess that was meant to be irony.

RAYZORBLADE

Hey Patio34

Re: Canada not reporting murders (or a lot of them), check this link out, it's phenominal:

http://www.statcan.ca/start.html

I reside in the city of Toronto, which has a population of 2.7 million (city), and maybe 5 million greater metropolitan area: murder rate for the city as of yesterday:

40

Too many, and that is atrocious.

Check out the link above.

It's a federal website. Great search engine too.

Find out what us maple leaf eatin' Canucks are up to.

jelly

FunkyD.

You miss my point. MM takes him self seriously, I dont. I dont think other people should either. Even though he probably believes his films are documentaries, they are nothing but fiction.

I think Jasons comments are spot on. It amazes me how people can be shown how everything Moore tapes is a twisted lie yet they still think he has some valid point. I think some people dont care about the argument they just want a serious of excuses to justify their beliefs. Basically, facts are not relevant all some people want is justifications for the preconcivied ideas.

Terry

AlanF

As far as I'm concerned, the fact that Michael Moore plays fast and loose with the truth -- no matter whether his basic admonitions about gun control are valid -- totally eliminates him from the running as a credible source for anything.

Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Lie to me once; take your damn lies somewhere else.

Period.

Moore may have some good points about gun control, and I don't argue against better control of gun distribution in the U.S. Nor do I argue against responsible gun ownership and useage; it's a basic component of the constitution. What I'm bothered by is that a very vocal proponent of gun control has been caught in a number of flat out lies. Moore's misrepresentations count for little against the basic notion that guns ought to be controlled more stringently than they are at present in the U.S. (which I agree with), but they disqualify him and anything he says from the debate. Debate cannot continue properly when supposedly truthful debaters tell flat-out lies.

AlanF

Bowling for Columbine

Share this