[geeks] RIP, Ronald Reagan

[Phil Stracchino]

On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 12:48:18AM -0500, Jim wrote:
[quoting Michael Moore]
> -=-=-=-
> The oddest of all the smears thrown at "Bowling for Columbine" is this
> one:
>  "The film depicts NRA president Charlton Heston giving a speech near
> Columbine; he actually gave it a year later and 900 miles away. The
> speech he did give is edited to make conciliatory statements sound like
> rudeness."

[ I note at this point that Moore, in fact, misquoted the allegation
to make his own explanation sound more plausible.  The allegation is not
that Moore portrayed a Heston speech in Denver 10 days after Columbine
that never happened.  The allegation, which can be unquestionably
verified by comparing Moore's speech sequence with transcripts from the
actual speeches from which it was assembled, is that Moore heavily
edited this speech and pasted in sections from speeches as much as a
year later in order to put the words into Heston's mouth that HE wanted
the public to believe Heston said ten days after Columbine.  Not only
is Moore lying in the film, but he's setting up a straw man to use in
answering the allegations of his lying -- in other words, he's trying
to refute the charges of lying by lying even more. ]


Moore continues,
> The Truth: Heston took his NRA show to Denver and did and said exactly
> what we recounted. From the end of my narration setting up Heston's
> speech in Denver, with my words, "a big pro-gun rally," every word out
> of Charlton Heston's mouth was uttered right there in Denver, just 10
> days after the Columbine tragedy. But don't take my word  read the
> transcript of his whole speech. Heston devotes the entire speech to
> challenging the Denver mayor and mocking the mayor's pleas that the NRA
> "don't come here." 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.
>
>  Why are these gun nuts upset that their brave NRA leader's words are
> in my film?

OK, I think that's about enough to show Moore's venomous bias.  It's a
shame he can be documentably shown to be lying.  Moore is cherrypicking
bits and pieces of quotes to present the worst possible image.

Yes, there was an NRA convention in Denver 10 days after Columbine.
No-one's denying that.  It had been planned, and many of the attendees
had purchased their tickets, many months in advance.  Charlton Heston
did not "mock the mayor's pleas", he expressed his utmost sympathy for
waht had happened, but said "We've spent a lot of money to book this
hotel, a lot of people paid a lot of money to come here, and we're not
going to tell all these people that their airline ticket money was
wasted and they should turn around and go home."  He expressed his and
the NRA's most profound regrets and sympathies over what had happened,
and called for a period of silence in recognition of the losses.  If
this is Michael Moore's idea of mocking, then I'm really curious to
know what he'd consider sympathy -- perhaps he'd be satisfied if all the
conference attendees had walked barefoot and single-file to Columbine
and, there, committed ritual seppuku with letter openers?

If Moore "chose to leave most of this out and not make Heston look as
evil as he actually was", why does the color of Charlton Heston's tie
change so many times during a speech shot that's AT MOST a couple of
minutes long?

BfC is not unique in this regard.  He has a documented history of, shall
we diplomatically say, "stretching the truth for artistic effect" in
every one of his so-called documentaries.

Of course Moore's going to say the people who are calling him a liar are
themselves lying.  But you know, when he stands there and says, "Who are
you gonna believe, me or them?  Would I lie to you?" the answer appears
to be, "Well, considering that you already have, again and again and
again....  Yes.  Without the slightest qualms."


> Problem with these point the finger on either side things, is I can't
> believe any one. Everyone on all sides are just throwing their agenda
> in your face. If not distorting the facts, at least just giving you the
> ones that support their point of view.

Well, there's a problem here.  You see, the people who are calling Moore
a liar have the unedited footage, the roiginal documents etc. to prove
it.  Moore has no "references" except himself; he can't compare to the
originals, because the originals incriminate him.  (This is why his
first move is to call his accusers wackos.)  When you're being accused
of lying, pointing at yourself and saying, "Of course it's true! I said
it right here!" carries about as much weight as the kid with strawberry
pie filling smeared all over his face and clothes who's innocently
denying getting into the pie.



--
  ========== Fight Back!  It may not be just YOUR life at risk. ==========
  alaric at caerllewys.net : phil-stracchino at earthlink.net : phil at novylen.net
   phil stracchino : unix ronin : renaissance man : mystic zen biker geek
     2000 CBR929RR, 1991 VFR750F3 (foully murdered), 1986 VF500F (sold)
           Linux Now!  ...Friends don't let friends use Microsoft.