Lies Lies Lies!!

Now that Michael Moore is once again causing a stir with his new "documentary" Sicko, people once again start taking sides and publish information about him and about his dubious editing room ethics. I got this email from a buddy at work this morning:

As Michael Moore is coming out with a new one...Sicko...(where, I suppose, he will expose the failure of the American Health Care System because of the simplicity of black/white greedy corporate masterminds and the political stooges/lackeys that support them), and I felt that I should look around at some of his other work. I came across this on the IMDB and thought is was worth passing along. Keep in mind, I have no more supporting information for this than I suspect Moore has for his own movies but I thought it smacked of a good, well laid out set of arguments. My favorite line is "Ultimately, Moore's BFC (Bowling for Columbine) illustrates exactly what it condemns. Moore argues that media 1) distorts reality and 2) hypes fear of other Americans because 3) fear is good for a fast buck. How ironic, because Moore distorts reality, hypes fear of other Americans ("are we a nation of gun nuts, or just nuts?") and made several million fast bucks doing so" I guess the ultimate acceptance or condemnation of his work falls around this argument: If Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction. I think that we must all also assume that Bush truly believes he did the right thing in starting the war, therefore Bush believes he lied for the common good. AND Moore lies like the devil himself, twisting all arguments to suit his own ends (even to the point of editing multiple speeches together to make people say what they never did). But, we all must also assume that Moore believes that he is doing so for some kind of common good. THEREFORE Either they are both evil or are both fighting for a common good where the ends do justify the means. To support either one is to support the other. Take your pick.

-------------------------------------------------------- "BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE" EXAMPLES:
1. Heston's "I have only five words for you...cold, dead hands" statement was meant to look like it was aimed at the weeping victims. Moore then inserts an interlude - THIS PART IS VITAL! He cannot go directly to Heston's real speech because it wasn't even at the same date as what he's portraying. He separated the two segments with a visual distraction. Heston's "cold, dead hands" speech was not given at Denver after Columbine. It was given a year later in Charlotte, North Carolina and was actually referring to a present that Heston was given at a meeting.
2. Another edit deletes Heston's announcement about scaling back the convention's events (what you don't know is actually during the speech, Heston mentions that BECAUSE OF COLUMBINE, all events scheduled will be cancelled). He goes on to say "as you know, we've cancelled the festivities, the fellowship we normally enjoy at our annual gatherings." But Moore cuts this part out and goes to Heston's response to the mayor which was "I said to the Mayor: As Americans were free to travel wherever we want in our broad land. Don't come here? Were already here!" Moore actually puts an edit right in the middle of the first sentence and another at the end. Here's what Heston really said, which was a reference to his own WWII vet status: "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. Ive run small errands for my country from Nigeria to Vietnam. I know many of you here in this room could say the same thing.'" Moore cuts it after "I said to the mayor" and attaches a sentence from the end of the next paragraph: "As Americans, were free to travel wherever we want in our broad land". Moore hides this deletion by cutting to footage of protesters and a photo of the Mayor before going back and showing Heston. But the viewer thinks he's hearing Heston in a continuous audio stream. It's also important to note that every single scene involving Heston was edited in some way to sway the truth. ---the cartoon presents wrong historical dates as well as just pure lies. The NRA actually had many black people as members so that they could try to ATTACK and get rid of the KKK. (In case you didn't see the movie, Moore ties a connection to the NRA and the KKK as organizations working together, when in fact one was trying to abolish the other.) That is a HUGE difference. ---NRA was founded by Union officials in the north, the KKK was founded by confederate officials in the south. ---Moore goes to the Lockheed Martin manufacturing facility near Columbine and makes it sound like it creates WMD (loosely and sloppily connecting it to the columbine tragedy ) when in reality, that facility makes rockets for LAUNCHING SATELLITES. This explains why when he interviews McCollum and when asked "What's the difference between THAT mass destruction and Columbine's", McCollum acts somewhat confused since they don't make WMD. Yet, to the viewer and his lack of knowledge of what is going on, he sees it as McCollum being ignorant. ---Moore makes the killer from columbine's family look like they are innocent and puts the blame elsewhere. If one was to research that family, they will see that the family has had many criminal records and the kid was raised in a violent household. The violence did not originate from outside of the household, but within. ---Even the beginning scene is fabricated. The Gun control act of 1968 tightly restricts gun transfers between residents of different states. Moore was currently a resident of NY during the taping and therefore could not have purchased that gun unless he got a permit there before. The permit is issued approximately 3-6 months. This means that Moore either waited there for 3-6 months to get his permit and then shot the scene after his permit was issued, or somehow lied and was able to make his purchase (which is considered a felony). When asked about this, Moore denies spending 3-6 months there previous to the filming. So it was either completely fabricated, or Moore committed a felony. Also, in a later interview with the people who worked at the bank (in the movie "Michael Moore Hates America"), they revealed Moore's fabrication in the scene. They also mentioned that he made it sound like the Bank carried guns in their "vault". What Moore actually did was edit the scene when he asks about the guns in the vault. What the woman's actually response was "we have about 300 of them in our vault 300 miles away." The Bank only carried 1 (UNLOADED) gun there, the same one that Moore took out with him. ---Moore makes Heston sound like a racist. (Moore will do anything to bring down the people who he hates.) In fact, Heston actually was friends with and worked with Martin Luther King himself in the early '60s, becoming involved in boycotts and marches regarding the civil rights movement. Being that the viewer is an uneducated teenager, he probably is not aware of this. OK, and consider this. Ultimately, Moore's BFC illustrates exactly what it condemns. Moore argues that media 1) distorts reality and 2) hypes fear of other Americans because 3) fear is good for a fast buck. How ironic, because Moore distorts reality, hypes fear of other Americans ("are we a nation of gun nuts, or just nuts?") and made several million fast bucks doing so. "ROGER AND ME" Harlan Jacobson was editor of "Film Comment" magazine and had done some digging of the subject of Moore's accusations. When he landed an interview with Moore (note: interview with Moore are very difficult because when he gets asked questions pertaining to his legitimacy, he gets very offensive and starts ranting on yelling at the interviewer, never actually answering the initial question, claiming that the interviewer was paid by a right wing activist, in conspiracy to "get" him.)
"When did Auto World open?"
Moore: Autoworld opened July 4 1984
"And when did it close?"
Moore: January 6, 1985
"The Hyatt?"
Moore: The Hyatt opened in 1982.
"The Pavilion?"
Moore: December of 1985.
All seems fairly innocuous until you realize that the big layoffs that decimated Flint occurred in May and December 1986 - at least A YEAR AFTER many of the above events Moore described as the city's "responses" to the crisis. In case that doesn't make sense in your little brains, just like Bowling for Columbine, the major thesis of Moore's documentary was based on fabrications and his own invented timelime. Moore's interview with Jacobson quickly went downhill after this. More truths were revealed: Ronald Reagan's visit had been in 1980, as a candidate rather than a president, and the cash register was actually stolen two days before. The televangelist had been brought to town in 1982. Moore's feeble justification: "I didn't say it was done post-1986...it happened during the same decade..." Moore admit later: "Okay, so you can say that the chronology skips around a bit...This movie is about essentially what happened to this town during the 1980s...so everything that happened, happened." FEHRENHEIT 911: EXAMPLES: Watch "Fehrenhype 911", read the "59 deceits of F911" because I don't feel like typing anymore lies and those sum it up pretty well. And consider this, if there are 59 deceits, that's about 60, and the movie is 122 minutes. Let's round that down to 120, now what would that mean kids? It would mean that there is a lie/fabrication/deceit every 2 minutes. That's pretty deceitful for calling a movie a "documentary" and having stupid hopeful teenagers believe every second of it.


Blah Blah Blah Michael Moore is bad blah blah ...is a liar....

So this is what I think: Michael Moore's success is a child of the times we live in, where shock and awe sells and the public takes whatever they hear or see in the media as face value, not bothering to do the research or take it in with a grain of salt. Unfortunately, 99% of the population (well...maybe 95%, I still have some faith in society) believe anything media networks (and individuals such as Michael Moore) publish or release. Well... here's a reality check: media corporations are here to make money, if that means distorting the news, then they will do so... and of course they are not going to tell you that they are lying. Politicians simply jump on the bandwagon of whomever's lies are better and the crowd believes more. I am sick and tired of both sides arguing that the other side is lying to the people... THEY ARE BOTH LYING!!! WE JUST PICK THE SIDE THAT LIES THE BEST.