Bowling For Michael Moore's Bodyguard

Number Six · 20th January 2005, 02:53 PM

What irony...Michael Moore's bodyguard has been arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun. Or at least that's what the address below says...keep in mind that it is Fox News though so getting independent verification is probably not a bad idea.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_frien...144921,00.html

Charlie Monoxide · 20th January 2005, 03:03 PM

Not that ironic. Heck, Michael Moore is a card-carrying member of the NRA and claims to like hunting. We know he has at least 1 rifle, from opening up that bank account in Bowling.

New York has very tough firearm laws. He's bodyguard is up the proverbial creek without a rowing implement.

Charlie (Michael Moore in '08) Monoxide

crimresearch · 20th January 2005, 06:51 PM

http://moorewatch.com/index.php/webl...dyguard_story/

Art Vandelay · 20th January 2005, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Charlie Monoxide
We know he has at least 1 rifle, from opening up that bank account in Bowling.

We don't know that he still has it; he might have given it away to a Canadian.

Wasn't there a similar story about Rosie O'Donnell?

Checkmite · 20th January 2005, 09:14 PM

I need to make a "controversial" documentary, so that when I get subsequently rich, I can pretend I get death threats 24 hours a day and hire a bodyguard to garner even more sympathy.

Mycroft · 20th January 2005, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Charlie Monoxide
Not that ironic. Heck, Michael Moore is a card-carrying member of the NRA and claims to like hunting.

Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods?

The Fool · 20th January 2005, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi
I need to make a "controversial" documentary, so that when I get subsequently rich, I can pretend I get death threats 24 hours a day and hire a bodyguard to garner even more sympathy.

sheesh Josh...have you seen the venom that people spout any time this guy is mentioned?...If I were him I'd be sleeping in my flak jacket and checking if my coke can was ticking before opening it.

I don't think he needs to pretend he is at risk from death by loonie.

Just thinking · 20th January 2005, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Number Six
...keep in mind that it is Fox News though so getting independent verification is probably not a bad idea.

And who would you suggest for that verification, Dan Rather?

HarryKeogh · 21st January 2005, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi
I need to make a "controversial" documentary, so that when I get subsequently rich, I can pretend I get death threats 24 hours a day and hire a bodyguard to garner even more sympathy.

why would you put controversial in quotes?

and "pretend" to get death threats? c'mon, people get death threats for interfering with plays during sporting events.

a_unique_person · 21st January 2005, 03:10 AM

Gun control does not mean gun abolition. There are licenese granted in Australia to people who can justify the need for one. One such example is, for example, wholesale jewellers. In fact, one was shot with his own gun by a thief in Melbourne several years ago.

plindboe · 21st January 2005, 05:47 AM

I don't see the irony. If it was MM himself who had been arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun it would have been ironic. Or if MM's bodyguard had written and directed "Bowling for Columbine" it would have been ironic. That it's not the same person behind both events makes it completely indifferent.

*Edited to add* Ah, I see now, from the link crimsearch gave, that the story was false. What a surprise.

Tony · 21st January 2005, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Gun control does not mean gun abolition. There are licenese granted in Australia to people who can justify the need for one.

That seems more pathetic than an outright ban. Instead of not having access to a gun, you are forced to grovel at the feet of the nanny state and justify how your life is worthy of self-defense.

AWPrime · 21st January 2005, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft
Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods?

Well yes.

HarryKeogh · 21st January 2005, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft
Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods?

I agree. Hunters (and possibly bowlers) are some of the most well conditioned people out there.

Now pass me another Old Milwaukee!

Phrost · 21st January 2005, 02:49 PM

You know, the message I got out of Bowling was that the American media reporting nothing but "if it bleeds" stories, combined with racial tensions are why there are so many gun deaths in America.

I never got the Anti-gun message out of the film, and I don't particularly care for Michael Moore's style.

Silicon · 21st January 2005, 03:01 PM

Thanks for the link, Crimresearch.

That does it, I'm never trusting Fox News again!

Silicon · 21st January 2005, 03:12 PM

I see from our friends at Moorewatch a list of the other "News" outlets which covered this "story".

I will now attempt to riff new names for these news outlets to permanently rebrand them as part of the Republican echo chamber:

FauxNews
MSGOP
fakeNewsday
Miami RightwingHerald
The San Jose Wingnut News
The Akron FarRight Journal
The ChicaGOP Tribune
The Seattle No-Intelligence Sir
USA-USA-USA-USA-Today

Shinytop · 21st January 2005, 03:20 PM

The fact that this man was not acting as body guard only excuses him. It does not excuse that the strident anti-gun Moore hires armed body guards to protect himself. Of course, you must keep in mind that this is while the scum bag says the common citizen should not own a gun for self protection. I see nothing wrong with a man who needs protection hiring bodyguards. I object to Mike, Dianne, and Rosie being so against guns for the rest of us while employing them for their own protection. Barbie might even have been caught in the same manner, if memory serves.

Silicon · 21st January 2005, 03:26 PM

It's because you wingnuts have guns that Moore (that's MISTER Scumbag to you) needs guns.

Or are you an advocate of unilateral disamament?

;-)

Shinytop · 21st January 2005, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Silicon
It's because you wingnuts have guns that Moore (that's MISTER Scumbag to you) needs guns.

Or are you an advocate of unilateral disamament?

;-)

LOL

Questioninggeller · 22nd January 2005, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft
Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods?

I can't see Heston hunting from his home in Beverly Hills either.

Just thinking · 22nd January 2005, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Silicon
That does it, I'm never trusting Fox News again!

Tell me, do you (and any other FOX bashers) have this same opinion of CBS and Dan Rather?

If not, why?

(This is in no way of defense of FOX -- I'm simply curious.)

DavidJames · 22nd January 2005, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Just thinking
Tell me, do you (and any other FOX bashers) have this same opinion of CBS and Dan Rather?

If not, why?

(This is in no way of defense of FOX -- I'm simply curious.)

Rather and CBS have done thousands of stories over the years and have made a few mistakes causing some to believe they have a bias. Fox shows their bias daily. In the recent case, CBS recognized their error and did something about it. Maybe to little to late for some, but they at least did something. Fox sees no problems.

Just thinking · 22nd January 2005, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidJames
Rather and CBS have done thousands of stories over the years and have made a few mistakes causing some to believe they have a bias. Fox shows their bias daily. In the recent case, CBS recognized their error and did something about it. Maybe to[sic] little to[sic] late for some, but they at least did something. Fox sees no problems.

Dan Rather (and I'm paraphrasing) felt that the content of the Bush memo was more important than the validity. He knew exactly what he was saying and exactly why the story was presented when it aired. (It was clearly an attempt to influence an election -- and enough people saw through it.) CBS only did something after the election. Therefore, you are most certainly right -- I am one of those some believing they (and others) have a bias.

PS: Have you given FOX as much time as it took CBS (and Dan) to make their correction?

Charlie Monoxide · 22nd January 2005, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft
Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods?

I sure can. Michael would make a great hunting buddy for Cheney and Scalia.

Charlie (they can talk about pending court cases) Monoxide

Art Vandelay · 22nd January 2005, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Fool
sheesh Josh...have you seen the venom that people spout any time this guy is mentioned?...If I were him I'd be sleeping in my flak jacket and checking if my coke can was ticking before opening it.

I don't think he needs to pretend he is at risk from death by loonie.

Odd how Moore is allowed to slander all he wants, but when someone objects, they are clearly a homicidal "loonie". Pointing out that someone is a jackass is hardly the same as making a death threat, but I guess one can't expect someone like to be able to tell the difference.

The Central Scrutinizer · 22nd January 2005, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person
In fact, one was shot with his own gun by a thief in Melbourne several years ago.

You must be mistaken. According to Shanek 3:16, this sort of thing never happens.

DavidJames · 22nd January 2005, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Just thinking
Dan Rather (and I'm paraphrasing) felt that the content of the Bush memo was more important than the validity. He knew exactly what he was saying and exactly why the story was presented when it aired. (It was clearly an attempt to influence an election

Your evidence please.

Rather and CBS screwed up this story, no doubt about it. Sadly, what that allowed people like yourself to do is ignore the claims, claims which the secretary for the person alleged to have written the memo corroborates, and focus instead on the errors.

What happened with Rather and CBS was an embarrassing lack due diligence in corroborating sources. The consequences of which are still being reaped. Similar failures at the highest levels of our government result in the reward of re-election.

The Central Scrutinizer · 22nd January 2005, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Number Six
What irony...Michael Moore's bodyguard has been arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun. Or at least that's what the address below says...keep in mind that it is Fox News though so getting independent verification is probably not a bad idea.

Not ironic at all. Michael Moore was not arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun - his body guard was. Michael Moore and his bodyguard are two different people.

The Central Scrutinizer · 22nd January 2005, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HarryKeogh
I agree. Hunters (and possibly bowlers) are some of the most well conditioned people out there.

Now pass me another Old Milwaukee!

LOL!

/Quick derail

Anyone remember that show called "Superstars" on ABC back in the 70's? They had athletes from football, baseball, etc... competeing in sports other than there own to see who was the best athlete. I recall at least one year when they invited a bowler, and I recall him running the 100 yard dash against football players who were ripped, and this bowler was a pasty white guy who couldn't have weighed more than 140 lbs and looked like he hadn't been out in the sunshine in years. Needless to say, he didn't do very well....

/End

Ranb · 22nd January 2005, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidJames
.........In the recent case, CBS recognized their error and did something about it. Maybe to little to late for some, but they at least did something. Fox sees no problems.

Anyone know if CBS broadcast a correction in their airing of the 50 BMG rifle piece on "60 Minutes"?

Part of the program showed the NYPD comparing the 50 BMG rifle with their 30-caliber sniper rifle. They shot a 1/2" steel plate at 300 yards. The 50 caliber rifle using steel core ammo blew 1/2" holes in the plate, while the 30 caliber rifle using copper jacketed lead bullets merely put a small crater in the steel. No mention was made of the different bullets used in each rifle. The NYPD also did not demonstrate armor-piercing ammunition in the 30-caliber rifle, or copper jacketed ammo in the 50 BMG. The results would have been nearly opposite using steel core ammo in the 30-cal rifle and jacketed lead in the 50-BMG.

I can understand the NYPD's reluctance to rig the demonstration, some of the police in NYC want to ban the 50BMG rifles and will try to pull a fast one to get their point across. Never mind there is no evidence that it will be used by a terrorist in the USA.

CBS should have investigated a bit more to find out how the demonstration was run. Asking what kind of ammo was used would have been a good start. It is also possible they knew of the rigged demonstration, but let it slide to push their own gun control agenda.

A while back CNN was interviewing an NRA official and he exposed their bias in a story comparing a machinegun to a semi-automatic "assault" rifle. CNN tried to deny any bias, but later admitted there were errors in the story.

I am willing to bet that CBS will plead ignorance of any problems with the demonstration they broadcast showing the "awesome" power of the 50-BMG rifle compared to the 30 caliber rifle.

Ranb

Meadmaker · 22nd January 2005, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shinytop
It does not excuse that the strident anti-gun Moore hires armed body guards to protect himself. Of course, you must keep in mind that this is while the scum bag says the common citizen should not own a gun for self protection.

Except that Michael Moore isn't strident anti-gun. I saw Bowling for Columbine, expecting to see an anti-gun film. But it wasn't an anti-gun film.

By coincidence, I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 for the first time last week. That movie also has been mischaracterized.

a_unique_person · 22nd January 2005, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Meadmaker
Except that Michael Moore isn't strident anti-gun. I saw Bowling for Columbine, expecting to see an anti-gun film. But it wasn't an anti-gun film.

By coincidence, I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 for the first time last week. That movie also has been mischaracterized.

It's funny about that. BFC isn't anti-gun. It's certainly not pro-gun, but all he is trying to do is find out what makes the US more violent than other countries of similar cultures.

Chicago, lots of killling, a few miles away in Canada, no killing.

By reducing it to the satus of 'anti-gun', it means that those uncomfortable with the questions it asks can just go on ignoring them. Eg, he seems to claim that racism is alive and well in the US in respect of it's significant African American population, and that this has something to do with the problem.

Shinytop · 22nd January 2005, 09:46 PM

The numerous documented lies and mis-characterizations in the BFC movie make it a strident anti-gun film while masquerading as a documentary. If merely a study comparing the gun culture of two countries and if it has no agenda why the lies, why the editing to make it appear people are saying things they are not, are saying things at times they are not. No, my learned friends, the truth needs no embellishment, it needs no lies to enhance it. Michael Moore is a horse's ass with no class and no morals. Defend him all you want but explain the need for the lies. I am waiting.

Art Vandelay · 22nd January 2005, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
You must be mistaken. According to Shanek 3:16, this sort of thing never happens.

And according to Claus, it always happens.

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person
It's funny about that. BFC isn't anti-gun. It's certainly not pro-gun, but all he is trying to do is find out what makes the US more violent than other countries of similar cultures.

It's not consistently anti-gun, but Moore does engage in multiple misrepresentations, and what would motivate that other than animus towards guns? And if he is really interested in investigating violence, why is he engaging in deliberate deception?

Quote:

By reducing it to the satus of 'anti-gun', it means that those uncomfortable with the questions it asks can just go on ignoring them. Eg, he seems to claim that racism is alive and well in the US in respect of it's significant African American population, and that this has something to do with the problem.

Wow, racism is not completely dead! Race and violence are related! He also spends several minutes discussing the fact that if you want money in this country, you have to (horror of horrors) work! BFC is just filled with trenchant observations! Questions, however, are a different matter. Other than "WTF is his point?" and "Why does anyone respect this lying piece of ****?" BFC doesn't really raise very many questions. And wait a second, isn't suggesting that race has something to do with gun violence verboten? Is it okay for Moore to do so, but not Heston?

a_unique_person · 22nd January 2005, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shinytop
The numerous documented lies and mis-characterizations in the BFC movie make it a strident anti-gun film while masquerading as a documentary. If merely a study comparing the gun culture of two countries and if it has no agenda why the lies, why the editing to make it appear people are saying things they are not, are saying things at times they are not. No, my learned friends, the truth needs no embellishment, it needs no lies to enhance it. Michael Moore is a horse's ass with no class and no morals. Defend him all you want but explain the need for the lies. I am waiting.

He quite clearly points out the Canadians have plenty of guns, and very little gun crime. He concludes quite clearly that it is not just guns.

Shinytop · 22nd January 2005, 11:03 PM

Again, why the lies, why the mis-characterizations if not following an anti-gun agenda. Answers, anybody?

Meadmaker · 23rd January 2005, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shinytop
Again, why the lies, why the mis-characterizations if not following an anti-gun agenda. Answers, anybody?

If the only worthwhile question in the whole darned world was the pro-gun vs. anti-gun agenda, then maybe you would have a point. Let us grant that there are lies in the movie. (I would easily grant that there are mis-characterizations. I just don't know if I would call them "lies", but for the sake of argument, I will.)

Those lies are told, clearly, for the furtherance of his agenda. But it doesn't follow that his agenda is anti-gun. He very specifically said it was not.

He certainly opposes what might be called "the gun lobby", including the NRA leadership. That isn't the same as being anti-gun. In "Columbine" he expressed the opinion that the rhetoric of the NRA contributed to the culture of violence in America. It was that culture that he opposed.

The real villain in "Columbine" wasn't guns. It was a culture that said, "There is an enemy out there, and you need to arm yourself to protect against it! If you don't, they will get you!" When Heston uses rhetoric about "prying my gun from my cold, dead, hand." he feeds that culture, in Moore's opinion. Interestingly enough, that was pretty much the identical message in "Fahrenheit 9/11"

I don't agree with Moore's message, exactly. But I think he raises some good points while delivering it.

If you don't buy into my explanation, then I'd like to try an experiment. Someone post an example of one of Moore's "lies" in BFC that clearly is anti-gun, and I'll see if I can say what I thought he was really saying, which was not anti-gun.

Silicon · 23rd January 2005, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Just thinking
Tell me, do you (and any other FOX bashers) have this same opinion of CBS and Dan Rather?

If not, why?

(This is in no way of defense of FOX -- I'm simply curious.)

I have called on these boards for Rather's resignation, and not just from the Anchor desk.

But you can't seriously suggest that CBS and Fox are the same thing.

CBS is run by a wealthy media conglomerate with a vested interest in maintaining a status quo in deregulation so they can continue to gobble media assets. In that way, Rather was a particular embarrassment, and it caused Viacom inc to put a significant financial weight behind Bush's re-election campaign.

Fox News, by comparison, isn't run by a news expert or a journalist, but by the political operative who created Bush Sr.'s famous Willie Horton ad.

It's the right's version of having Michael Moore running a news network.

Checkmite · 23rd January 2005, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Fool
sheesh Josh...have you seen the venom that people spout any time this guy is mentioned?...If I were him I'd be sleeping in my flak jacket and checking if my coke can was ticking before opening it.

In my personal experience, the way some people talk about Moore is about the same as the way some other people talk about Bush. Both groups have their occasional valid points.

Sure he gets criticism, even vile criticism. But I think the "constant threat" this guy is under is vastly overstated. His bodyguard and bullet-proof car are nothing more than emotional grandstanding, and they don't fool me. Come on.

20th January 2005, 02:53 PM	#1
Number Six JREF Kid Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,017	Bowling For Michael Moore's Bodyguard What irony...Michael Moore's bodyguard has been arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun. Or at least that's what the address below says...keep in mind that it is Fox News though so getting independent verification is probably not a bad idea. http://www.foxnews.com/printer_frien...144921,00.html
Number Six JREF Kid Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,017

20th January 2005, 03:03 PM	#2
Charlie Monoxide Wag Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 2,761	Not that ironic. Heck, Michael Moore is a card-carrying member of the NRA and claims to like hunting. We know he has at least 1 rifle, from opening up that bank account in Bowling. New York has very tough firearm laws. He's bodyguard is up the proverbial creek without a rowing implement. Charlie (Michael Moore in '08) Monoxide
	__________________ Major General Wag of JREF

20th January 2005, 06:51 PM	#3
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	http://moorewatch.com/index.php/webl...dyguard_story/
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

20th January 2005, 09:14 PM	#5
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	I need to make a "controversial" documentary, so that when I get subsequently rich, I can pretend I get death threats 24 hours a day and hire a bodyguard to garner even more sympathy.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

20th January 2005, 09:25 PM	#6
Mycroft High Priest of Ed Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 16,105	Quote: Originally posted by Charlie Monoxide Not that ironic. Heck, Michael Moore is a card-carrying member of the NRA and claims to like hunting. Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods?
	__________________ Surely Israel is the party to blame? -a_unique_person I do have Mycroft on ignore, he is pretty much the Matt Giwer of your side. -a_unique_person Palestinian Refugees

20th January 2005, 07:07 PM	#4
Art Vandelay Illuminator Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 4,790	Quote: Originally posted by Charlie Monoxide We know he has at least 1 rifle, from opening up that bank account in Bowling. We don't know that he still has it; he might have given it away to a Canadian. Wasn't there a similar story about Rosie O'Donnell?

20th January 2005, 09:53 PM	#7
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	Quote: Originally posted by Joshua Korosi I need to make a "controversial" documentary, so that when I get subsequently rich, I can pretend I get death threats 24 hours a day and hire a bodyguard to garner even more sympathy. sheesh Josh...have you seen the venom that people spout any time this guy is mentioned?...If I were him I'd be sleeping in my flak jacket and checking if my coke can was ticking before opening it. I don't think he needs to pretend he is at risk from death by loonie.
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

20th January 2005, 11:05 PM	#8
Just thinking Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,169	Re: Bowling For Michael Moore's Bodyguard Quote: Originally posted by Number Six ...keep in mind that it is Fox News though so getting independent verification is probably not a bad idea. And who would you suggest for that verification, Dan Rather?
	__________________ Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones.

21st January 2005, 02:15 AM	#9
HarryKeogh Catholic School Survivor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 11,342	Quote: Originally posted by Joshua Korosi I need to make a "controversial" documentary, so that when I get subsequently rich, I can pretend I get death threats 24 hours a day and hire a bodyguard to garner even more sympathy. why would you put controversial in quotes? and "pretend" to get death threats? c'mon, people get death threats for interfering with plays during sporting events.

21st January 2005, 03:10 AM	#10
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,320	Gun control does not mean gun abolition. There are licenese granted in Australia to people who can justify the need for one. One such example is, for example, wholesale jewellers. In fact, one was shot with his own gun by a thief in Melbourne several years ago.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

21st January 2005, 05:47 AM	#11
plindboe Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 1,244	Re: Bowling For Michael Moore's Bodyguard I don't see the irony. If it was MM himself who had been arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun it would have been ironic. Or if MM's bodyguard had written and directed "Bowling for Columbine" it would have been ironic. That it's not the same person behind both events makes it completely indifferent. Edited to add Ah, I see now, from the link crimsearch gave, that the story was false. What a surprise.
	__________________ Peter "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." (Bertrand Russell)

21st January 2005, 09:20 AM	#12
Tony Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 13,753	Quote: Originally posted by a_unique_person Gun control does not mean gun abolition. There are licenese granted in Australia to people who can justify the need for one. That seems more pathetic than an outright ban. Instead of not having access to a gun, you are forced to grovel at the feet of the nanny state and justify how your life is worthy of self-defense.
	__________________ It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain

21st January 2005, 02:36 PM	#13
AWPrime Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,929	Quote: Originally posted by Mycroft Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods? Well yes.
AWPrime Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,929	__________________ Sir Arthur C. Clarke - "Any sufficiently advanced technology, to the uninformed observer, is indistinguishable from magic." c4ts - "Jesus loves the little children, Nice and fat and honey roasted..." Lancastic = Demonstrative of outstanding personal effort in the exposing of frauds. Rob Lister - "The enemy of my enemy probably tastes yummy. "

21st January 2005, 02:43 PM	#14
HarryKeogh Catholic School Survivor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 11,342	Quote: Originally posted by Mycroft Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods? I agree. Hunters (and possibly bowlers) are some of the most well conditioned people out there. Now pass me another Old Milwaukee!

21st January 2005, 02:49 PM	#15
Phrost The Fighting Skeptic Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Cowtown, Missouri Posts: 1,656	You know, the message I got out of Bowling was that the American media reporting nothing but "if it bleeds" stories, combined with racial tensions are why there are so many gun deaths in America. I never got the Anti-gun message out of the film, and I don't particularly care for Michael Moore's style.
	__________________ "I never intend for my posts to read like I'm aggressive or confrontational, but I am so they do." Executive Director: Bullshido.net Fighting BS in the Martial Arts Amateur No-Holds-Barred/MMA Fighter, Skeptic, Bright. www.Phrost.com

21st January 2005, 03:01 PM	#16
Silicon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,644	Thanks for the link, Crimresearch. That does it, I'm never trusting Fox News again!
Silicon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,644	__________________ Man, if this isn't exactly what Alexander Hamilton warned us about in Federalist #84. -Shanek

21st January 2005, 03:12 PM	#17
Silicon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,644	I see from our friends at Moorewatch a list of the other "News" outlets which covered this "story". I will now attempt to riff new names for these news outlets to permanently rebrand them as part of the Republican echo chamber: FauxNews MSGOP fakeNewsday Miami RightwingHerald The San Jose Wingnut News The Akron FarRight Journal The ChicaGOP Tribune The Seattle No-Intelligence Sir USA-USA-USA-USA-Today
Silicon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,644	__________________ Man, if this isn't exactly what Alexander Hamilton warned us about in Federalist #84. -Shanek

21st January 2005, 03:20 PM	#18
Shinytop Thinker Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 238	The fact that this man was not acting as body guard only excuses him. It does not excuse that the strident anti-gun Moore hires armed body guards to protect himself. Of course, you must keep in mind that this is while the scum bag says the common citizen should not own a gun for self protection. I see nothing wrong with a man who needs protection hiring bodyguards. I object to Mike, Dianne, and Rosie being so against guns for the rest of us while employing them for their own protection. Barbie might even have been caught in the same manner, if memory serves.
Shinytop Thinker Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 238	__________________ We are ruled by a plethora of Constitutional morons.

21st January 2005, 03:26 PM	#19
Silicon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,644	It's because you wingnuts have guns that Moore (that's MISTER Scumbag to you) needs guns. Or are you an advocate of unilateral disamament? ;-)
Silicon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,644	__________________ Man, if this isn't exactly what Alexander Hamilton warned us about in Federalist #84. -Shanek

21st January 2005, 03:34 PM	#20
Shinytop Thinker Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 238	Quote: Originally posted by Silicon It's because you wingnuts have guns that Moore (that's MISTER Scumbag to you) needs guns. Or are you an advocate of unilateral disamament? ;-) LOL
Shinytop Thinker Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 238	__________________ We are ruled by a plethora of Constitutional morons.

22nd January 2005, 12:04 AM	#21
Questioninggeller Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,030	Quote: Originally posted by Mycroft Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods? I can't see Heston hunting from his home in Beverly Hills either.

22nd January 2005, 08:59 AM	#22
Just thinking Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,169	Quote: Originally posted by Silicon That does it, I'm never trusting Fox News again! Tell me, do you (and any other FOX bashers) have this same opinion of CBS and Dan Rather? If not, why? (This is in no way of defense of FOX -- I'm simply curious.)
	__________________ Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones.

22nd January 2005, 10:16 AM	#23
DavidJames Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 7,084	Quote: Originally posted by Just thinking Tell me, do you (and any other FOX bashers) have this same opinion of CBS and Dan Rather? If not, why? (This is in no way of defense of FOX -- I'm simply curious.) Rather and CBS have done thousands of stories over the years and have made a few mistakes causing some to believe they have a bias. Fox shows their bias daily. In the recent case, CBS recognized their error and did something about it. Maybe to little to late for some, but they at least did something. Fox sees no problems.
	__________________ I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars. Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.

22nd January 2005, 11:42 AM	#24
Just thinking Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,169	Quote: Originally posted by DavidJames Rather and CBS have done thousands of stories over the years and have made a few mistakes causing some to believe they have a bias. Fox shows their bias daily. In the recent case, CBS recognized their error and did something about it. Maybe to[sic] little to[sic] late for some, but they at least did something. Fox sees no problems. Dan Rather (and I'm paraphrasing) felt that the content of the Bush memo was more important than the validity. He knew exactly what he was saying and exactly why the story was presented when it aired. (It was clearly an attempt to influence an election -- and enough people saw through it.) CBS only did something after the election. Therefore, you are most certainly right -- I am one of those some believing they (and others) have a bias. PS: Have you given FOX as much time as it took CBS (and Dan) to make their correction?
	__________________ Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones.

22nd January 2005, 12:54 PM	#25
Charlie Monoxide Wag Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 2,761	Quote: Originally posted by Mycroft Can you really see that guy huffin' and puffin' through the woods? I sure can. Michael would make a great hunting buddy for Cheney and Scalia. Charlie (they can talk about pending court cases) Monoxide
	__________________ Major General Wag of JREF

22nd January 2005, 01:18 PM	#26
Art Vandelay Illuminator Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 4,790	Quote: Originally posted by The Fool sheesh Josh...have you seen the venom that people spout any time this guy is mentioned?...If I were him I'd be sleeping in my flak jacket and checking if my coke can was ticking before opening it. I don't think he needs to pretend he is at risk from death by loonie. Odd how Moore is allowed to slander all he wants, but when someone objects, they are clearly a homicidal "loonie". Pointing out that someone is a jackass is hardly the same as making a death threat, but I guess one can't expect someone like to be able to tell the difference.

22nd January 2005, 01:25 PM	#27
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,266	Quote: Originally posted by a_unique_person In fact, one was shot with his own gun by a thief in Melbourne several years ago. You must be mistaken. According to Shanek 3:16, this sort of thing never happens.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

22nd January 2005, 01:26 PM	#28
DavidJames Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 7,084	Quote: Originally posted by Just thinking Dan Rather (and I'm paraphrasing) felt that the content of the Bush memo was more important than the validity. He knew exactly what he was saying and exactly why the story was presented when it aired. (It was clearly an attempt to influence an election Your evidence please. Rather and CBS screwed up this story, no doubt about it. Sadly, what that allowed people like yourself to do is ignore the claims, claims which the secretary for the person alleged to have written the memo corroborates, and focus instead on the errors. What happened with Rather and CBS was an embarrassing lack due diligence in corroborating sources. The consequences of which are still being reaped. Similar failures at the highest levels of our government result in the reward of re-election.
	__________________ I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars. Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.

22nd January 2005, 01:29 PM	#29
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,266	Re: Bowling For Michael Moore's Bodyguard Quote: Originally posted by Number Six What irony...Michael Moore's bodyguard has been arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun. Or at least that's what the address below says...keep in mind that it is Fox News though so getting independent verification is probably not a bad idea. Not ironic at all. Michael Moore was not arrested for carrying an unlicensed gun - his body guard was. Michael Moore and his bodyguard are two different people.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

22nd January 2005, 01:35 PM	#30
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,266	Quote: Originally posted by HarryKeogh I agree. Hunters (and possibly bowlers) are some of the most well conditioned people out there. Now pass me another Old Milwaukee! LOL! /Quick derail Anyone remember that show called "Superstars" on ABC back in the 70's? They had athletes from football, baseball, etc... competeing in sports other than there own to see who was the best athlete. I recall at least one year when they invited a bowler, and I recall him running the 100 yard dash against football players who were ripped, and this bowler was a pasty white guy who couldn't have weighed more than 140 lbs and looked like he hadn't been out in the sunshine in years. Needless to say, he didn't do very well.... /End
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

22nd January 2005, 05:35 PM	#31
Ranb Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: WA USA Posts: 4,096	Quote: Originally posted by DavidJames .........In the recent case, CBS recognized their error and did something about it. Maybe to little to late for some, but they at least did something. Fox sees no problems. Anyone know if CBS broadcast a correction in their airing of the 50 BMG rifle piece on "60 Minutes"? Part of the program showed the NYPD comparing the 50 BMG rifle with their 30-caliber sniper rifle. They shot a 1/2" steel plate at 300 yards. The 50 caliber rifle using steel core ammo blew 1/2" holes in the plate, while the 30 caliber rifle using copper jacketed lead bullets merely put a small crater in the steel. No mention was made of the different bullets used in each rifle. The NYPD also did not demonstrate armor-piercing ammunition in the 30-caliber rifle, or copper jacketed ammo in the 50 BMG. The results would have been nearly opposite using steel core ammo in the 30-cal rifle and jacketed lead in the 50-BMG. I can understand the NYPD's reluctance to rig the demonstration, some of the police in NYC want to ban the 50BMG rifles and will try to pull a fast one to get their point across. Never mind there is no evidence that it will be used by a terrorist in the USA. CBS should have investigated a bit more to find out how the demonstration was run. Asking what kind of ammo was used would have been a good start. It is also possible they knew of the rigged demonstration, but let it slide to push their own gun control agenda. A while back CNN was interviewing an NRA official and he exposed their bias in a story comparing a machinegun to a semi-automatic "assault" rifle. CNN tried to deny any bias, but later admitted there were errors in the story. I am willing to bet that CBS will plead ignorance of any problems with the demonstration they broadcast showing the "awesome" power of the 50-BMG rifle compared to the 30 caliber rifle. Ranb

22nd January 2005, 08:32 PM	#32
Meadmaker Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Detroit suburbs Posts: 11,435	Quote: Originally posted by Shinytop It does not excuse that the strident anti-gun Moore hires armed body guards to protect himself. Of course, you must keep in mind that this is while the scum bag says the common citizen should not own a gun for self protection. Except that Michael Moore isn't strident anti-gun. I saw Bowling for Columbine, expecting to see an anti-gun film. But it wasn't an anti-gun film. By coincidence, I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 for the first time last week. That movie also has been mischaracterized.
	__________________ Dave "War is Peace. Freedom is slavery. Particles are waves."

22nd January 2005, 09:31 PM	#33
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,320	Quote: Originally posted by Meadmaker Except that Michael Moore isn't strident anti-gun. I saw Bowling for Columbine, expecting to see an anti-gun film. But it wasn't an anti-gun film. By coincidence, I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 for the first time last week. That movie also has been mischaracterized. It's funny about that. BFC isn't anti-gun. It's certainly not pro-gun, but all he is trying to do is find out what makes the US more violent than other countries of similar cultures. Chicago, lots of killling, a few miles away in Canada, no killing. By reducing it to the satus of 'anti-gun', it means that those uncomfortable with the questions it asks can just go on ignoring them. Eg, he seems to claim that racism is alive and well in the US in respect of it's significant African American population, and that this has something to do with the problem.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

22nd January 2005, 09:46 PM	#34
Shinytop Thinker Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 238	The numerous documented lies and mis-characterizations in the BFC movie make it a strident anti-gun film while masquerading as a documentary. If merely a study comparing the gun culture of two countries and if it has no agenda why the lies, why the editing to make it appear people are saying things they are not, are saying things at times they are not. No, my learned friends, the truth needs no embellishment, it needs no lies to enhance it. Michael Moore is a horse's ass with no class and no morals. Defend him all you want but explain the need for the lies. I am waiting.
Shinytop Thinker Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 238	__________________ We are ruled by a plethora of Constitutional morons.

22nd January 2005, 10:08 PM	#35
Art Vandelay Illuminator Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 4,790	Quote: Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer You must be mistaken. According to Shanek 3:16, this sort of thing never happens. And according to Claus, it always happens. Quote: Originally posted by a_unique_person It's funny about that. BFC isn't anti-gun. It's certainly not pro-gun, but all he is trying to do is find out what makes the US more violent than other countries of similar cultures. It's not consistently anti-gun, but Moore does engage in multiple misrepresentations, and what would motivate that other than animus towards guns? And if he is really interested in investigating violence, why is he engaging in deliberate deception? Quote: By reducing it to the satus of 'anti-gun', it means that those uncomfortable with the questions it asks can just go on ignoring them. Eg, he seems to claim that racism is alive and well in the US in respect of it's significant African American population, and that this has something to do with the problem. Wow, racism is not completely dead! Race and violence are related! He also spends several minutes discussing the fact that if you want money in this country, you have to (horror of horrors) work! BFC is just filled with trenchant observations! Questions, however, are a different matter. Other than "WTF is his point?" and "Why does anyone respect this lying piece of ****?" BFC doesn't really raise very many questions. And wait a second, isn't suggesting that race has something to do with gun violence verboten? Is it okay for Moore to do so, but not Heston?