[punky]

Originally Posted by Damien

First of all what is wrong with confronting the teacher? She had to agree to appear whats what those films are about is the effect on real people. What did you want? Why is he a *******? Talking to the person who was there? It is a powerful moment and there are news items and other things that show people crying! Why is he a ******* for doing it?

I just thought it was really nasty that he reduced the poor woman to tears (hadn't she suffered enough?) and then he had the gall to comfort her? I just thought it was out of order. One of the ethics points that I didn't put down, is that it is bad enough he had millions out of the misery and death of others, but deliberately upsetting people for the camera is a bit much.

Originally Posted by Damien

Also you go on about money but everyone makes money! You make money does that mean your points are any less valid? If you want to discredit someone then giving them a motive is a good thing to do.

Yeah, but I am pro-capitalist. I am unashamedly very much pro-capitalist. I have never, even during my left-wing years, ever was a socialist or a communist, and neither will I ever be. Moore wants to be. But you can't do both. George Soros is the left wing billionaire, who invests heavily the carlyle group, and formed MoveOn, but that's ok because he isn't a socialist.

Originally Posted by Damien

Also he isnt the greatest fan of the democrats ever he said they where the best out of a bad bunch. Also you keep linkking to right wings sources who try to discredit moore and hence the issues are not talked about

I wish they wern't all right-wing sources, and I tried to find as indpendent ones as I can. At the end of the day, Moore attacks the right 90%, and the left 10%. The right have far more to defend against, and more incentive to come with a response.

Originally Posted by Damien

Gun control is a problem
The media is a problem
The fact people didnt listain to the kids was a problem

Check my next post in this thread, i'll make that point I have been meaning to.

Originally Posted by Damien

The way the war was decided was a problem
The effects of war are true
The fact that bush proposed to cut soldiers wages and stuff was true
The election was a problem

The reason the right wingers try to personally attack moore is because they know they cannot defend these points. When they stop trying personal insults and talk about the issues and points is the time i will take notice of the anti-moore crowd

The right-wingers don't attack Moore. (Not that i'm really aware of. Some just insult Moore because of his weight, but that is silly). They make points in response to Moore's very loose allegations. See, we say Moore lies, but that isn't strictly speaking true. He decieves. All lies are deceit, but not all deceit involves lies. Moore tells you only what you need to know to form the opinion he wants you to think. He doesn't have to say it, he can make you think it. All we do most of the time, is put it into context. I.E. Moore would like you to believe that the NRA went to Littleton 3 days after Columbine, to "rally the troops", but the opposite is true. That meeting had to go ahead, it is part of corporate law. The date and was fixed well before Columbine, and couldn't be changed. They cut back everything not required by law though. Moore doesn't tell you that. What made it worse, is that Moore manufactured a speech using part Littleton, part another speech 8 months later to make Heston appear callous, when the Columbine speech was quite sensitive. (see here)

I don't know if you are interested, but when I said that F9/11 was tighter, that was till I realised, just how much background he leaves out to make his point valid. If you have some spare time, you should read this