Michael Moore is being sued!

**shartley** · 10-31-2003, 07:52 AM

Okay.. we shall see.

Too bad YOU were not running things right?

**Collegeboy** · 10-31-2003, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by shartley
Okay.. we shall see.

Too bad YOU were not running things right?

Just giving the facts. He was exploding explosives on his property, he had bomb making equipment, he gave shelter to the two people convicted of blowing up the federal building in Ok. City.

He is a terrorist or gave aide to and shelter too terrorist. Either A or B, or both. Either way he is guilty and should not be walking these streets.

**davidb** · 10-31-2003, 07:59 AM

Originally posted by SpecialBlend2786

So what you're saying is more freedom leads to more deaths...

More freedom may not lead to more deaths, but it does lead to more crime. Just ask Russia (right, CB?).

It was said by somebody or other that MM made this movie because he questioned why America's gun-related murder rate should be higher even than countries where more people have guns. I'm still awake at quarter to six and I can figure out the answer to that.

If you were a common criminal in a country like Israel, you would damned sure wouldn't go pulling your gun on the little old lady to make her give you her purse when you know that the little old lady behind you might pull an Uzi on you! Criminals are generally quite cowardly, and are not exactly keen on the idea of picking a fight that'll probably wind up being fair.

In a society where very few people have guns, gun related murders will be relatively rare, while other types of murder will be relatively more common. In a society where nearly everyone has a gun, gun related murders will be relatively rare, and you'd have to have the balls of a lion to try another type (the phrase, "knife in a gunfight" comes to mind). In a society where guns are relatively easy to come by, but are only possessed by a minority of the population, gun-related murders will be at their highest.

Now, of course, guns will ALWAYS be easily acquired in America, regardless of what the laws may be. So that extreme is unatainable. The solution, then, must be for all responsible adult citizens to arm themselves.

Or not, but it beats the hell out of radical gun-control.

**1stdeadeye** · 10-31-2003, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by Collegeboy

And if you believe that I got some ocean view property to sell you in Arizona.

If you seriously believe that he is capable of being involved and then hiding it then you aren't to bright. That tard was a few steps above drooling on himself.

Had he helped, he probably would have blown the conspirators up in Nichols barn!

**-Carnifex-** · 10-31-2003, 10:24 AM

I don't see the problem with waiting periods for guns and background checks. Is this the issue or that guns being taken away completely? I don't follow the issue too closely, but I believe people should be able to purchase guns just with proper background checks and a waiting time.

**FactsOfLife** · 10-31-2003, 10:48 AM

Originally posted by Curly

So thousands of more deaths a year is freedom? As far I can tell, death is the farthest from freedom you can be.

Way to take half the point...

**ShooterJM** · 10-31-2003, 10:53 AM

Must......restrain......self.........

**MaChu** · 10-31-2003, 11:10 AM

We should take away the guns and destroy the 2nd amendment. Come on guys and lets have one minded liberal thinking take over the governemnt. Then after that we can silence freedom of opinion in the media so it only spouts out propaganda. THEN we can let the government decide our jobs since we dont have the mental capacity to do that and the governemnt is always right! Forget the Constitution and amendments. America will be perfect, a utopia of peace with no crime, pollution, or freedoms! Right comrades? Live long communism!

**Collegeboy** · 10-31-2003, 12:12 PM

Originally posted by Collegeboy

Just giving the facts. He was exploding explosives on his property, he had bomb making equipment, he gave shelter to the two people convicted of blowing up the federal building in Ok. City.

He is a terrorist or gave aide to and shelter too terrorist. Either A or B, or both. Either way he is guilty and should not be walking these streets.

**-Carnifex-** · 10-31-2003, 01:30 PM

I'm not seeing how the news is all propaganda.

**Albinonewt** · 10-31-2003, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by shartley

I knew there was something fishy about you :)

**Albinonewt** · 10-31-2003, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by Collegeboy
He gave shelter to terrorist at the very least. Given 1stDeadeye's claim that any Palestinian deserves what happens to them because they give shelter to terrorist ( ), he should also agree that this guy deserves to be killed, or whatever.

I don't honestly know the extent of his involvement in the whole ordeal, but if he's walking around as a free man then one has to suppose that he didn't do anything wrong, or that it was minor enough that he's served his time and is done.

**Albinonewt** · 10-31-2003, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by -Carnifex-
I'm not seeing how the news is all propaganda.

Then you're not watching it.

The news is primarily an facet for people to convey events through their eyes. It is almost always slanted towards the view of the person doing the reporting. The news you watch determines the direction and amount of slant.

**Albinonewt** · 10-31-2003, 03:44 PM

Carnifex, here's a great example

Article

When talking about the Iraqi culture in a negative light they just had th throw the word conservative in there. Never mind that the Iraqi Muslims are not conservatives in any where near the sense that AMerican readers are accumstomed to. They just wanted to equate conservatism with this incident of intolerance.

**davidb** · 10-31-2003, 03:55 PM

They'd like to remain anonymous for their safety, so here are their names, along with those of their husbands, and a description of their house...

Brilliant.

Michael Moore is being sued!

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment