Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" gets US release date - June 25

[Sava]

Imran's right.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

And what about capitalists?

What about them?

They would've been a wiser substitute for nazis.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Sava
Imran's right.

Even if he is right, do you HAVE to make his ego even bigger than it is already?

[Kropotkin]

Silencing one group while saying that PRIVATE entities should not be able to distance themselves from another is very worrying in a democratic POV, IMO.

Where the **** did I say that they should not be able to do so?! I just said that it's a shame that a company thinks it's a risk to distribute a documentary with a controversial point of view. I did not in any form state that shouldn't have the right to do so. While on the subject, I'm not at all at the side of Moore because of his opinions, the same would hold for Gibson's Passion.

And every society has some forms of limits for what can or cannot be said in public. Moore's are, nazi opinions are probably not. I'm not the one that have decided those limits (as you seem to asume), it's society. Do you think Moore's opinion are unacceptable in your society? Do you compare it to the advocation of genocide or slavery? Your talk about consistency has very little to do with the real world.

And that Sava agrees with you just proves my point!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kropotkin
Where the **** did I say that they should not be able to do so?! I just said that it's a shame that a company thinks it's a risk to distribute a documentary with a controversial point of view.

It's a shame that they simply don't want to take sides in politics?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I just said that it's a shame that a company thinks it's a risk to distribute a documentary with a controversial point of view.

Why is it a shame if that is the public view they are going for? Democracy is about being able to have different points of view on how you want to be percieved. It's a basic component of democratic society.

And every society has some forms of limits for what can or cannot be said in public.

What should, not what can (if we are talking about political expression). Nazi opinions can be said in public, but most people don't like it and don't think some people should be able to say it. Of course, IMO, I think that's BS. They should be able to say it and they should say it if that is what they believe.

[Chemical Ollie]

If I was Moore, I would get myself filthy rich, then buy Disney and shut all it's operations down. Or even better, convert it into a porno movie distributor.

[the_ceebs]

If they didn't want to distribute the film then why did they pay for him to make it in the first place? surely it is immoral to steal a year of someones life that he spent making the film. At any point at the start when they heard what the film was about they could have said 'Well we're not giving you money to make that'.

If you really believe in Freedom of Speech then the opinions that you have to agitate to have heard are the ones that society finds most offensive.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by the_ceebs
If they didn't want to distribute the film then why did they pay for him to make it in the first place?

They didn't, Miramax did (AFAIK). Disney is the parent company of Miramax. When they Disney execs got wind of what Moore had made, they decided they didn't want anything to do with it (which was well over a year ago, btw). So they told Miramax they couldn't release it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If I was Moore, I would get myself filthy rich, then buy Disney and shut all it's operations down. Or even better, convert it into a porno movie distributor.

Do you have ANY idea how much Disney is worth?

[mrmitchell]

Do you have ANY idea how much Disney is worth?

At the current rate, he might be able to afford it after this next movie.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by the_ceebs
If they didn't want to distribute the film then why did they pay for him to make it in the first place?

Disney told Moore a year ago thier stance on the movie. Miramax continued to pay for the movie over the objections of Disney.

[Berzerker]

I just said that it's a shame that a company thinks it's a risk to distribute a documentary with a controversial point of view.

I don't agree, in a democracy people should be free to vote with their money too and that's what drove Disney's decision - fear of offending a large number of potential customers. Obviously this can result in boycotts of products some people want and a reduction in availability but it's far better than the state deciding what we can watch or use - that would be a real shame.

Don't complain about Michael Moore and Disney, complain about the FCC and Howard Stern et al - that's censorship... And then we have people like Bill O'Reilly who make their living by offering opinions trying to justify the censorship by pointing to the spector of a Nazi radio station spewing hate. So only certain ideas should be allowed, that, according to Bill O'Reilly, is what the 1st Amendment protects...

[General Ludd]

Here's the Trailer for my fellow terrorists and america haters.




I love the expression of the congressman's face when moore asks him to encourage his children to enlist and help out in Iraq.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by General Ludd
I love the expression of the congressman's face when moore asks him to encourage his children to enlist and help out in Iraq.

However, the congressman is complaining that Moore edited out his response, which was that he would be glad to help do so, and that his own two kids were in the military, one of whom was on his way to Afghanistan. That's what Kennedy (the congressman) says, anyway.