Disney Forbidding Distribution of Film That Criticizes Bush

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Hahahaha! A sure sign a discussion is going to hell is when one or more particpiants start acting like name-calling children. Well I would rather have my head in the clouds than buried in the sand.

You took the pious attitude with me first, claiming that I didn't feel positions in a debate should be supported with facts. Your whole paragraph about asking your Daddy about the rules of debate and the use of facts was done in a facetious manner. The whole post was rather pious and condescending towards me and I called you on it. If that is "name calling", so be it. I notice you had no problem retaliating in kind.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: You have ommitted the fact that the topic of the venue could have focused on the irresponsible use of handguns by minors to commit massacres. You also omit the fact that the meeting could have been canceled or postponed and the hardship endured by those with plans to attend could have deemed a sacrifice for the memeory of the 12 people slain by the wreckless use of a handgun. You also omit the fact that dozens of people protested the NRA's meeting so soon after Columbine making Moore's mention of it documentry in nature-regardless of his opinions of the matter. You also ommit the fact that the NRA, under the leadership of Charleton Heston has held meetings in other cities soon after handgun tragedies. By your own statements your ommissions make you no better than Moore.

First of all, I haven't watched BFC because of my disgust for Moore - so I didn't know about the other conventions being held in cities shortly after major tragedies. I can hardly be accused of "ommitting" facts that I was not even aware of.

I will agree that the NRA should have either cancelled their convention in Denver or focused on the irresponsible use of handguns by minors to commit massacres. In fact, given the timing of the convention, the NRA should have used it as a forum for the public to voice their concerns regarding handguns and gun control laws. So I concur they made a very poor decision to hold the convention and to stay with the pre-scheduled agenda instead of addressing the tragedy that had just occurred.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: BTW- YOu do know that Moore is a long time card carrying memeber of the NRA right? You do recall the beggining of the film where gun owners in the Michigan Militia were presented as the decent normal folk that they are rtaher than uncaring ogres.

No, I actually didn't know that. I have to admit that surprises me.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: In your opinion, or are you the one on the high horse stating that your opinion is the only correct one?

I'm just pointing out how Moore is putting the spin on this issue. He says his movie was funded by "Disney money", yet he admitted in an interview on CNN that Eisner had told him a year in advance that he was not happy with Miramax's decision to pursue the movie and that Disney would NOT distribute it when it was completed. But by saying his movie was funded by "Disney money" instead of Miramax, Moore is trying to imply that Disney "backed off" of thier initial reluctance against his project and gave him the "go ahead". He also claims that Disney is trying to prevent his movie from being seen in America...but Disney has never said he couldn't seek other distributors of his film. They just repeated the decision they made last year that THEY wouldn't distribute it.

That is a "spin" of the actual facts. If you choose not to see it or believe it, that is your choice. I'm not saying my opinion is the only correct one, nor am I getting on my "high horse". I'm pointing out documented facts about Moore's behavior regarding this project, but you choose not to believe them. Again, that is your choice.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: That is why I have a problem with Michael Moore, because it simply isn't possible to tell what is actual fact and what is being "skewed" to support his personal agenda.

In your opinion. [/QUOTE]Yes - in my opinion. An opinion that is no more valid than your own, but also is no less valid than your own.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: You took the pious attitude with me first, claiming that I didn't feel positions in a debate should be supported with facts. Your whole paragraph about asking your Daddy about the rules of debate and the use of facts was done in a facetious manner. The whole post was rather pious and condescending towards me and I called you on it. If that is "name calling", so be it. I notice you had no problem retaliating in kind.

Well if you thought that post was directed towards you, particularly in a condesending way- you are quite mistaken.

Considering you seem incapable of not taking my posting style personally and are reading insult and condesending tone into where there is none, I think it has reached the point where continuing discussion with you here is pointless.

Take care.

[Memnoch]

Now now, leave off the handbags fellas...it's unseemly...

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Well if you thought that post was directed towards you, particularly in a condesending way- you are quite mistaken.

LOL - So I am mistaken, am I? Well let's just do a quick review then, shall we?

I started off with these comments about Moore...

Aaahhh, but it IS a "crime of character" when your slanted op-ed pieces are presented as unbiased truth and facts. It completely eliminates any trust the viewer can have in the validity of the facts being presented.


followed by...

Does Michael Moore make it known that the "facts" he is presenting are slanted to support his views? If so, then I give him credit for doing that. Of course, it isn't like anybody really expects him to present an unbiased account of the facts anyway.

To which you responded...

But back to all the "skewwed" facts Moore presents in BFC- a couple of examples: He states some figures about handgun deaths in various countries- Are these facts skewwed to support his veiws? Or do these facts provoke the central question of the film....I guess that is a matter of opinion.

That was all well and good, but then you obviously decided to add another comment to emphasize your point, so you made another post immediately after that one and said...

Oh and one other thing on the idea that offering facts to support an opinion or poase a question is somehow wrong.

That is the way it works or atleast that is how I learned to make a persuasive argument in speech and debate class. I will ask my Dad-he is a High School debate coach. If he tells me it is wrong to to use facts to pose a question or to make a persuasive argument I will concede that Moore is an evil doer, or at least takes the wrong approach to invoking thought and seeking answers to challenging questions and to persuading people to to understand his opinion- what ever that maybe.

I never said the above comments were insulting...I said that your tone was pious and condescending, and I still stand by that claim.

And since I was the only member that had posted on Page 3 (other than yourself, of course ) at this point and you had quoted several of my comments in your posts, it does seem logical to assume your comments were directed at me.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Considering you seem incapable of not taking my posting style personally and are reading insult and condesending tone into where there is none, I think it has reached the point where continuing discussion with you here is pointless.

Why do I seem incapable of not taking your posting style personally? Perhaps it has something to do with comments like this...

You have ommitted the fact that the topic of the venue could have focused on the irresponsible use of handguns by minors to commit massacres. You also omit the fact that the meeting could have been canceled or postponed and the hardship endured by those with plans to attend could have deemed a sacrifice for the memeory of the 12 people slain by the wreckless use of a handgun. You also omit the fact that dozens of people protested the NRA's meeting so soon after Columbine making Moore's mention of it documentry in nature-regardless of his opinions of the matter. You also ommit the fact that the NRA, under the leadership of Charleton Heston has held meetings in other cities soon after handgun tragedies. By your own statements your ommissions make you no better than Moore.

These comments were in response to the accusation I made against Moore about chastising the NRA for holding their convention in Denver right after the Columbine shootings, but conveniently ommitting the fact that the convention had been scheduled a year in advance.

In case the font color doesn't highligh it enough, you directed your comments specifically towards me by using "you" and "your" a total of 7 times. Gee, I can't imagine why I took your comments personally [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img] Or are you going to claim that you were using those terms in a generic sense to apply to all members of IW?

You know, the really sad part is that I actually agreed with your points about the Denver convention, but it appears as if it was more important for you to attack me for "ommitting" facts I didn't even know about (unlike Moore) than it was for you to acknowledge I had agreed with you and pursue the conversation from there. [img]graemlins/dontknowaboutyou.gif[/img]

As for "reading insults where none exist", I offer this comment of yours made in response to my accusation that you were getting on your "high horse" with the post where you were gonna ask your Dad about the formal rules of debate...

Well I would rather have my head in the clouds than buried in the sand.

Nope, can't imagine why I would think that comment was insulting.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Take care.

Thanks. I will.

[The Hierophant]

Awww, I love it when you guys fight. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Memnoch: Now now, leave off the handbags fellas...it's unseemly...

Sorry Mems. This must have been posted while I was working on my previous response. Sadly, I have to admit it wouldn't have made any difference.

I'm sick and tired of members making veiled insults and then - when they get called on it - reacting with mock wide-eyed innocence and saying "Golly, gosh, gee...I didn't do anything wrong". I'm also absolutely sick and tired at the complete lack of respect shown by BOTH sides in this forum for anybody that has a different opinion or view. There WAS a time when people at IW could actually discuss opposing viewpoints without slinging mud in each other's faces, but that respect for the other person disappeared a loooooong freakin' time ago. And I fully admit that I'm as guilty as the next person. That's one reason why I left C.E. for awhile. And this current exchange has just proven what a mistake it was for me to come back.

I had hoped the members here had finally reached a point where they could actually discuss ideas respectfully with one another - but I see it is still the S.O.S. Nothing but a bunch of mud-slinging by both sides.

Feel free to take whatever action is necessary for my posts and this RANT. I'm done with C.E. anyway. I won't be coming back until I start seeing some respect displayed by the members here. From the looks of things, that's a long way off.

[The Hierophant]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: I'm also absolutely sick and tired at the complete lack of respect shown by BOTH sides in this forum for anybody that has a different opinion or view.

I'm genuinely curious as to whom, or what, you consider the two 'sides' of the forum to be.

I had hoped the members here had finally reached a point where they could actually discuss ideas respectfully with one another - but I see it is still the S.O.S. Nothing but a bunch of mud-slinging by both sides. Feel free to take whatever action is necessary for my posts and this RANT. I'm done with C.E. anyway. I won't be coming back until I start seeing some respect displayed by the members here. From the looks of things, that's a long way off.

I can't say as I've ever experienced or noticed this mud-slinging or animosity you're talking about. But maybe I'm just pig-headed/thick-skinned. Maybe it's the nature of your interpretations/the way you react to people's posts that is causing you grief? If you read an opinion you don't like or that you disagree with, chew on it for a bit, digest it, but don't get insulted by it. I see alot of stuff I don't necessarily like on these forums, but it doesn't really bother me all that much becuase they're just words. I like to read other people's opinions, but I usually don't take them to heart.

But then, you never asked for MY opinion, so I'll be moseying along now...

[Chewbacca]

Well I would rather have my head in the clouds than buried in the sand.

I was refering to my own head-not your's Cerek.

As for my use of the word "you"-I feel sorry for you if that hurt your feelings or was found offensive in the context the word was used.


edit- I just realized how stupidly OT this thread has become with all the accussations of insult and disrespect.

When I encountered the (first I can see) jibe about being on a high horse I more or less took it in stride with some humor but I also noted that was usually a sign of a thread going to hell. The thread is in hell now.

[ 05-11-2004, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Well I would rather have my head in the clouds than buried in the sand.

I was refering to my own head-not your's Cerek.

As for my use of the word "you"-I feel sorry for you if that hurt your feelings or was found offensive in the context the word was used.


edit- I just realized how stupidly OT this thread has become with all the accussations of insult and disrespect.

When I encountered the (first I can see) jibe about being on a high horse I more or less took it in stride with some humor but I also noted that was usually a sign of a thread going to hell. The thread is in hell now. [/QUOTE]Well, Chewbacca, all I can do is offer my own apology in return if I took your posts the wrong way.

I will be leaving C.E. so that no other threads get derailed in such a manner, but I felt you deserved an apology for my posts before I left.

[Djinn Raffo]

I'm not on any sides.. I try to disrespect everyone equally! [img]smile.gif[/img]