Michael Moore (attempts to) defend questionable claims made in BFC.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Teufelhunden

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
378
Location
Southern GA, US of A
Didn't see it anywhere here yet, so here goes.

From the horses mouth.

Michael Moore's website now has a rebuttle, written by Moore, to the accusations leveled against his mockumentary 'Bowling for Columbine'.

The fact that he refers to criticism of his film as a 'wacko attacko' should give you enough of a hint as to his feelings on the matter.

Enjoy...:banghead: :cuss:

-Teuf
 
There used to be a forum on his site. I went there and many times asked for a defense of the numbers put forth in Bolwing for Columbine... and presented the reasoning I had that they were simply made up.

Heard a lot of heat and whining and flaming... but nobody was ever able to defend the numbers.

Apparently all Moore is capable of doing is screaming "LIAR" at the top of his lungs when the fact is, he's the liar.
 
Here is an interview with the lady who appears in the bank scene that provides some things Moore leaves out.

http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/bowlingforcolumbine/scenes/bank.htm

This is also encouraging:

[Jacobson says the bank's so-called "Weatherby Program" has "absolutely" been a smashing success. She says their corporate office was braced for some possible criticism because of BFC. But, they got only two calls -- and these were from people wanting to know the details of the "Weatherby Program" so they, too, could get their long-guns!]
 
He seems to have forgotten the bit where he put up the words "48 hours later" when talking about the NRA going to Littleton, when in fact they went there 8 months later, as well as when he told us that the NRA was started by the KKK. This is pretty sad. I love the way that, instead of refuting the claims that his critics made, he instead makes sure that we know that one writes for a gun magazine, so obviously he has no opinion, and the other is a homophobe. It's actually rather funny.
 
Yadda yadda yadda. As per the link calmwater posted:

[Moore claims the bank scene was real. Well, yeah, it was filmed, and he walked out with a gun, but...]
"In fact, despite what BFC wants us to believe, Jacobson says there are no long-guns at her bank. The 500 guns mentioned in the movie are in a vault four hours away. But wait a second... Didn't I see some long guns sitting right there on the rack above her shoulder? Yes - you're not going crazy - those guns you saw (as shown in the picture up the page) are models.

She says that Moore's signing papers in the film was just for show. His immediately walking out of the bank with a long-gun was allowed because "this whole thing was set up two months prior to the filming of the movie" when he had already complied with all the rules, including a background check."


Next, Moore claims his Lockheed bashing was legit because they used to make weapons (and/or weapons platforms) at that plant.
[blockquote]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."[/blockquote]
So he assumes "national security" means "secret weapons platforms" when he says, in the movie, that the plant designs [present tense] weapons. He ignores the fact that no country has ever used an ICBM. He ignores the fact that his own commentary in BFC connects the delivery systems with Weapons of Mass Destruction (that have never been used), and instead defends the general connection between Lockheed and offensive weapons systems by claiming that satellites launched by Lockheed's rockets helped the [offensive] effort in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Then Moore addresses complaints about the Heston Speech, and even provides a link to the real speech. Moore acknowledges that "from my cold dead hands" was not part of that speech. He says the "cold dead hands" clip was a lead-in to Heston. Great. Except that his voice-over talking about the NRA meeting begins while the clip of the "cold dead hands" speech is still playing... clearly identifiable because Heston doesn't have a rifle within reach during the Denver conference. He ignores the fact that the NRA convention couldn't be feasibly cancelled (according to the original BFC rebuttal). Without the "from my cold dead hands" bit, the Heston material from the real speech becomes rather unoffensive.


Oh, the 11127 figure. Well, Moore claims he got it from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/releases/01facts/99mortality.htm, but I can't find it there or in the pdf it links to.


Then he wraps up with stuff like "I can guarantee to you, without equivocation, that every fact in my movie is true."

OKay...
 
Then he wraps up with stuff like "I can guarantee to you, without equivocation, that every fact in my movie is true."

Of course. Facts, by definition, are true. There just aren't very many facts.
 
I like how Moore refutes the critics that have appeared in the mainstream media because they are writers in Gun Week or they have some sort of tie to the gun community. So by the same reasoning, since he is going to melt down his Mark IV Wheatherby and give the proceeds to the Brady Campaign, we can equally discount all of his arguments because he is clearly anti-gun. What an idiot.
 
I would just love to see a fellow gun nut buy that melted rifle, turn it back into a firearm, and then sell THAT with all proceeds going to a pro-gun group. :D
 
http://www.hardylaw.net/MoorereplyHeston.html

Addresses the 'rebuttal' concerning the speech part.

My favorite part is Moore assuring us that, "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."

Because these parts of the speech are soooo evil?

"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."

"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."

"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."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top