Michael Moore - the Fraud continues

[Boris]

This guy is such a bozo.
The Left Wing Rush Limbaugh (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901)

Moore admits Disney 'ban' was a stunt
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles
07 May 2004



Less than 24 hours after accusing the Walt Disney Company of pulling the plug on his latest documentary in a blatant attempt at political censorship, the rabble-rousing film-maker Michael Moore has admitted he knew a year ago that Disney had no intention of distributing it.

The admission, during an interview with CNN, undermined Moore's claim that Disney was trying to sabotage the US release of Fahrenheit 911 just days before its world premiere at the Cannes film festival.

Instead, it lent credence to a growing suspicion that Moore was manufacturing a controversy to help publicise the film, a full-bore attack on the Bush administration and its handling of national security since the attacks of 11 September 2001.

In an indignant letter to his supporters, Moore said he had learnt only on Monday that Disney had put the kibosh on distributing the film, which has been financed by the semi-independent Disney subsidiary Miramax.

But in the CNN interview he said: "Almost a year ago, after we'd started making the film, the chairman of Disney, Michael Eisner, told my agent he was upset Miramax had made the film and he will not distribute it."

Nobody in Hollywood doubts Fahrenheit 911 will find a US distributor. His last documentary, Bowling for Columbine , made for $3m (£1.7m), pulled in $22m at the US box office.

But Moore's publicity stunt, if that is what is, appears to be working. A front-page news piece in The New York Times was followed yesterday by an editorial denouncing Disney for censorship and denial of Moore's right to free expression.

Moore told CNN that Disney had "signed a contract to distribute this [film]" but got cold feet. But Disney executives insists there was never any contract. And a source close to Miramax said that the only deal there was for financing, not for distribution.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
This guy is such a bozo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jackass is more like it.

http://www.preventtruthdecay.com/mainmiscmoore.htm

(excerpt)THE LIES:

* LIE: The Lockheed-Martin facility depicted in the film is presented as a manufacturer of weapons of mass destruction. (TRUTH: the facility produces rockets for launching satellites)

* LIE: The NRA is callous to gun slayings. (TRUTH: the evidence distorted to reach this infactual end is expansive. The sequence in Bowling in which Charlton Heston gives a defiant pro-gun speech in Denver is edited to unbelievable distortion. The fiery "cold dead hands" statement was not even made in Denver, but a YEAR after the Denver (annual NRA members' meeting) in Charlotte, North Carolina. Compare Bowling's version of the Heston speech in Denver to REALITY

* LIE: The impression is given in Bowling that the NRA and the KKK were (are?) parallel groups - or more likely, that when the Klan was outlawed, the NRA filled its shoes. (TRUTH: Charlton Heston is NOT a racist, as alleged in Bowling. Heston involved himself in the civil rights movement in the early 60's while the issue was still too hot for Hollywooders concerned about their careers. He also helped Martin Luther King break the Hollywood color barrier that existed at that time. After its founding in New York by two Union Officers, the NRA itself has a long and comprehensive history of aligning itself in diametrical opposition to racism and the KKK.)

* LIE: Moore sympathizes with the "little boy" at Buell Elementary in Michigan who just found a gun in his uncle's house and took it to school to kill a girl. Moore says "No one knew why the little boy wanted to shoot the little girl". (TRUTH: The "little boy" was the class bully and was already suspended for stabbing another child with a pencil. Since that incident, the "little boy" also stabbed another kid with a knife. Also- the "uncle's house" was a neighborhood crack house. The uncle and the "little boy's" father were, at the time, serving time for theft and cocaine possession. His aunt earned her living from drug dealing. The gun was stolen by one of the uncle's customers and purchased by him in exchange for drugs.

* LIE: Bowling makes note of $245 million that the U.S. gave to the Taliban government of Afghanistan in 2000 and 2001 and then proceeds to illustrate the alleged "result" by showing planes hitting the twin towers. (TRUTH: The $245 million in aid was given through the U.N. and non-governmental organizations to relieve the famine that existed in Afghanistan at that time.

* LIE: Bowling showcases a dramatic comparison of gun homicide stats from various countries. (TRUTH: The numbers don't add up - click here)

* LIE: In Bowling, Moore enters a WalMart in Ontario, Canada to purchase, with ease and without being identified, several boxes of ammunition. (TRUTH: Canadian officials have indicated that the purchase, as depicted in the movie, is either fake or illegal)

* LIE: Moore shows footage of a B-52 on display at the Air Force Academy, and sadly announces that the plaque under it "proudly proclaims that the plane killed Vietnamese people on Christmas Eve of 1972." Interestingly enough, Moore's camera only lets you see the plaque from a distance sufficient enough to render the plaque impossible to read. (TRUTH: The inscription on the plaque is: "Dedicated to the men and women of the Strategic Air Command who flew and maintained the B-52D throughout its 26 year history in the command. Aircraft 55,003, with over 15,000 flying hours, is one of two B-52's credited with a confirmed MIG kill during the Vietnam conflict. Flying out of Utapao Royal Thai Naval Airfield in southeast Thailand, the crew of "Diamond Lil" shot down a MIG northeast of Hanoi during "Linebacker II" action on Christmas eve 1972.")

Nice tries Mike.(end excerpt)

The web page also gives a link atr the bottom to a page which goes into greater detailk about the deliberate deceptions in Bowling For Columbine.

[Matt Flynn]

what does it matter? michael moore's a wingnut, but he's just copying from the playbook of right wing radio and george bush. what's the difference between him and bush saying there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq, or pretending iraq wasn't his goal all along, or pretending to chastise rumsfeld. it's all bullsh*t, and that includes bush's supposed christianity and rove-driven statements about getting to heaven only through jesus christ. if bush is a true christian i'm the pope. the man is calculating and stupid. moore's just calculating. they all need to be excommunicated from politics. truly disgusting on both sides.

p.s. how about moore's canadian homicide statistics that failed to adjust for population? made it look like america has 20x the kill rate of canada. pura mierda.

[Chris Alger]

The controversy concerns Disney's decision not to distribute the film. That decision purportedly stemmed from Eisner's expressed concerns about tax breaks from the President's brother's home state and possibly based on a concern about a critical Saudi investor of EuroDisney. No one cares about the precise date on which Moore personally learned of Disney's decision. The article hardly points to "fraud" or a "manufactured" controversy and seems to fall all over itself in trying to gloss over the big picture Moore is trying to publicize.

It isn't even clear from this article that Moore lied about when he "knew" that Disney had made a final decision. Disney's stated "intentions" a year ago could well have been a preliminary position open for negotiation, depending on the final cut, distribution publicity, etc.

That Disney's intentions a year ago were not final seems more likely given that Disney would never refuse to distribute a movie without knowing it's content. What if Moore makes a pile of cash through another company and his attacks on Bush are barely worse than what Disney routinely allows on ABC? Just how does an under-seige CEO who's already screwed up the Pixar deal explain throwing away a guaranteed profit for no reason?

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Just how does an under-seige CEO who's already screwed up the Pixar deal explain throwing away a guaranteed profit for no reason?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe Disney just didn't want to be involved in distributing another piece of Moore's fraudulent garbage--profit or no profit. The guy has a track record of portraying fiction as fact, so why should Disney expect his newest work to be any different?

[Chris Alger]

[ QUOTE ]
made it look like america has 20x the kill rate of canada

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't recall him using the term "kill rate" or anything that suggested so many deaths per so many people. He said that Canada and a host of other countries have less than 100 gun deaths a year while the U.S. has more than 10,000. His point was that guns wreak more havoc in the U.S. than most other countries, and he proved it.

[nicky g]

I'm not really a fan of Moore (I agree he is something of a left-wing equivalent of a right-wing shock-jock) but I saw him interviewed on British TV the day before yesterday and he was quite candid that Disney had said they were not willing to distribute the film for some time, but that he and his agent had been trying to negotiate with them up to now to change their minds.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I think it's interesting to note that Wesley Clark's campaign went south shortly after he received Michael Moore's endorsement.

[elwoodblues]

I agree that Moore goes over the top. But your list of "Lies" are just as shaky as the claims they try to disprove. Many of the "facts" that are disproved by your list aren't anything to disprove, they're opinions. For example:
"LIE: The NRA is callous to gun slayings." This was never stated as fact in the movie.

Or this one: "LIE: The impression is given in Bowling that the NRA and the KKK were (are?) parallel groups - or more likely, that when the Klan was outlawed, the NRA filled its shoes" Then the "truth" that follows doesn't even address the "lie" asserted. The "truth" about whether the NRA and KKK were parallel groups - "Charlton Heston is NOT a racist."

Another example of this: "LIE: Moore sympathizes with the "little boy" at Buell Elementary in Michigan who just found a gun in his uncle's house and took it to school to kill a girl. Moore says "No one knew why the little boy wanted to shoot the little girl". " The truth is that the little boy is a bully. Okay, so that means Moore doesn't sympathize with him???

Or how about the one that doesn't even get the facts right about the lie (I know, it's confusing):
"LIE: In Bowling, Moore enters a WalMart in Ontario..." It was KMart, not a big deal (and probably overly nitpicky), but when you are pointing out other's lies, you should have your facts straight (did they even watch the movie or did they just get second-hand recounts of it).

[MMMMMM]

I'm no Moore expert but his Bowling bullsh!t has been roundly debunked by many articles. That site was just the first one I pulled off the Web. Other debunkings have been posted here before and they were probably better. Also, "goes over-the-top" doesn't do justice, in my opinion, as the description of someone who makes a fictional movie and calls it a documentary.

[elwoodblues]

Michael Moore is like Rush Limbaugh. You have to take what he says with a grain of salt (or more accurately a bucket of salt). Both use creative license with facts and both take quotes wildly out of context. I personally feel that both are entertaining. The problem with both is they want to have it both ways --- as entertainment and as news/information. When they are criticized as distorting the facts they suggest that they are just entertainment. When they are criticized as being "just entertainment" they suggest that they are being trivialized.

I honestly don't know how anyone could watch Moore's works and not be entertained and moved in some way. His short-lived tv show TV Nation was brilliant. Roger and Me was very effective; and Bowling for Columbine was an emotional roller-coaster. If you can, I would also suggest getting your hands on his (much lesser known) Blood In The Face --- in it he follows around several neo-nazi and militia groups.

[MMMMMM]

Comparing Rush and Michael is fine---until Michael makes a documentary. Let them spout all they want but a damn documentary is supposed to be fact not fiction.

[pretender2k]

He wants to be known for serious political statements, but when confronted with a error he says he is just a comedian. Enough said. You can have it one of two ways. Either you are entertainment or you stand up and say yes I was wrong there but this was my point and here are the facts that were true. If I did my job with those excuses I wouldn't have one.

[elwoodblues]

That's exactly right, and I think it is a fair criticism. I also think it is a fair criticism of a lot of talk radio.