Michael Moore - Stupid Fat White Man?

[Sgt_Shellback]

You sure about that? Bending of the truth a bit is what gets guys to strap bombs to thier waist and walk into markets full of civilians.

His movies are a hit with the T's.

 

[CptStern]

You sure about that? Bending of the truth a bit is what gets guys to trap bombs to thier waist and walk into markets full of civilians.

or gets guys to drop bombs on water treatment facilities

His movies are a hit with the T's.

that's $119,078,393 worth of terrorists in the US alone

 

[pomegranate]

Right, I'll bite

You sure about that? Bending of the truth a bit is what gets guys to trap bombs to thier waist and walk into markets full of civilians.

His movies are a hit with the T's.

Oh that's a good one. Completely change tack. All of a sudden we're not talking about whether Michael Moore's sensationalism is okay, we're now onto terrorists. Is this how the logic works, for you:

Terrorists are bad -> President Bush is on a mission to defeat terrorists, so it's okay for him to lie -> Michael Moore doesn't like President Bush, so he (MM) is bad

Is that it?

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

Right, I'll bite



Oh that's a good one. Completely change tack. All of a sudden we're not talking about whether Michael Moore's sensationalism is okay, we're now onto terrorists. Is this how the logic works, for you:

Terrorists are bad -> President Bush is on a mission to defeat terrorists, so it's okay for him to lie -> Michael Moore doesn't like President Bush, so he (MM) is bad

Is that it?

Michael Moore is a stupid fat white man... I thought that was already understood from the beginning... Does that get me back on topic?

I was answering Sterns radical Mosque teachings where he would have you believe that the coalition has killed a bazillion Iraq's

While the real truth is those people are out voting and doing what they want for first time ever... EVER!

You have a problem with them doing what they will?

Believe the radical extremist if you want. I believe the people.

 

[Absinthe]

I have no mission. And the stuff that I have seen or ideas that are loony left, I will say are loony left. Trolling is a bit more like personally insulting a person - hey, like you just did.

You have a very obtuse definition of the word "insult".

Your "loony left" comments aren't productive at all, especially when, half the time, you won't even bother to explain yourself. And with your constant use of the words, you should expect by now for some people to become sick of it.

 

[Absinthe]

I take no offense to be called a conservative... I am.

Those liberals like to hide for some reason??? I guess they are not so secure in their own ideology.

Jesus Christ, Shellback. Do you even know what the Hell flamebaiting is?

 

[CptStern]

Michael Moore is a stupid fat white man... I thought that was already understood from the beginning... Does that get me back on topic?

I was answering Sterns radical Mosque teachings where he would have you believe that the coalition has killed a bazillion Iraq's

While the real truth is those people are out voting and doing what they want for first time ever... EVER!

You have a problem with them doing what they will?

Believe the radical extremist if you want. I believe the people.

wow, you sound just a tad bit insane, but that's whats endearing about you, shellback. I can always trust you to spew some hate filled nonsense of supporting extremists and what not ...just a smoke screen for "I cant answer the evidence so I'll just write you off as a terrorist sympathiser" ...btw never been in a mosque

 

[Absinthe]

I was answering Sterns radical Mosque teachings where he would have you believe that the coalition has killed a bazillion Iraq's.

Stern's radical mosque teachings? It's nice to see that you have a view completely free of distortion and ignorance, in which anti-war people are on par with terrorists.

While the real truth is those people are out voting and doing what they want for first time ever... EVER!

This is some strange leap in logic. You went from the Iraqi death toll to "Hey, look! People are voting!".

Good for them and their right to vote. But don't kid yourself into thinking Iraq is suddenly going to have an easy-as-pie time on the road to democracy.

You have a problem with them doing what they will?

God dammit, I am so sick and tired of conservative logical fallacies.

"You don't support the war, so you obviously don't want the Iraqi people to be free!"

Let's just ignore the fact that freeing the Iraqi people was never what sold the American people on the war. People are capable of seeing a silver lining. But does the Iraqi people's freedom make up for all its preceding events? In my eyes, it hasn't yet. I'm of the opinion that you need 20/20 hindsight on this kind of thing to judge wether or not it was worth the time, resources, and lives spent on it.

 

[GhostFox]

such as?

hey at least no one died as a result of moore's bending of the truth

You deny it and then admit it in the very same post? What was the point?

 

[Calanen]

I wish to exercise my right to freedom of speech to sometimes call, some loony left things, loony left things. Freedom of speech, is freedom of all, to freedom of speech. Even things that the left, loony left, and other assorted liberals don't want to here.

No one can get things right all the time. No one can ever get things wrong all the time, even if they tried to. But guys like Ward Churchill and Michael Moore present lies and inaccuracies as 'journalism' and 'news' or 'documentaries' when it is really just propoganda, full of major inaccuracies, lies and half-truths to push their agenda barrow.

Did any1 bother to click on the link which showed how much Michael Moore edited out of the 9/11 report which he put on his website? It was a truckload of stuff. That's just dishonest. And there are many, many more examples of his dishonesty.

 

[Calanen]

half the time, you won't even bother to explain yourself.

I normally answer unless its pointless to do so - did you have any specific question or is this just a complaint? Or won't u bother to explain yourself?

 

[pomegranate]

I wish to exercise my right to freedom of speech to sometimes call, some loony left things, loony left things. Freedom of speech, is freedom of all, to freedom of speech. Even things that the left, loony left, and other assorted liberals don't want to here.

But don't you see that that sort of pejorative disposition is part of the problem that I have been talking about - by not even pretending to respect each others opinions, we don't have reasonable, level-headed discussion anymore. Freedom of speech is right but it has to be exercised responsibly and constructively, or we might as well have either anarchy or absolute tyranny.

 

[Calanen]

But don't you see that that sort of pejorative disposition is part of the problem that I have been talking about - by not even pretending to respect each others opinions, we don't have reasonable, level-headed discussion anymore. Freedom of speech is right but it has to be exercised responsibly and constructively, or we might as well have either anarchy or absolute tyranny.

Nah - I think I'd prefer people calling each other loonies than anarchy and tyranny. And btw - I think you'll see from the threads, that I have been personally insulted, ie me, not Ward Churchill or some leftist writers, a lot....which I don't mind, necessarily except in the sense that the same people are now taking a holier than tho attitude over the use of the word loony.

 

[Nofuture]

Moore isn´t a very attractive man, but who cares? If he participated in a beauty competition, it would be relevant...


Some quotes from "I'll be around long after George Bush" and "Michael Moore is at it again":


"After four books, I haven´t been sued once for anything I`ve written."


"How do you feel about your success? Do you see a contradiction in being a left-wing thinker and in being millionaire?

It is kind of ironic. I come from working class. Those values I have are ingrained in me. They can´t leave me, no matter how much money I make now. I'm the last person in the world who can be bought off with [money]. There`s that cynical cliché that everyone has his price, but no amount of money could ever get me to change how I think."


"After Moore gave his acceptance speech at the 2003 Oscars ceremony, in which he openly attacked Bush for going to war in Iraq, there was a backlash against him. His only concern after ceremony was not that he had made a fool of himself, but that he had threatened the safety of those closest to him. "I felt like I`d put my family in danger," Moore says. "In the weeks and months after the Oscars, there wasn´t a day went by without someone trying to pick a fight with me in the street, coming right in my face, screaming at me, calling me an asshole, telling me to f*** off". A woman in a business suit came up to him at New Yor's LaGuardia airport and told him he should be exiled. A man refused to sit next to him on a plane. His home in Michigan was vandalized, and "traitor" signs were put up on the trees outside.

But for all that, looking back on it, he does not see how he could simply not have said anything. "I did not make a film about birds or insects. I made a film about American violence. Let's turn the clock back and it's 1936 in Berlin and you got a theatre award: would it be inappropriate if you say something then, or do you just accept the award because 'You don't mix up politics and theatre'?"


"For a start, he listens. Even though he is the one being interviewed, he is very ready to engage in a dialogue. Even though the opinions in his book are vey direct, they are not finished. He is still thinking. He does not consider that being challenged is an act of impoliteness. In fact, you get the impression that he really rather enjoys it."


"Even though Moore is now a star who earns millions, he is pretty grounded. He puts this down to the fact that he has kept the same circle of friends that he had in Flint, Michigan, where he grew up. "Maybe the lucky part of this for me is that this so-called success didn´t happen until I was 35, and by that age you're kind of set in your ways. I'm in the same relationship I was in when I was 22. I have no friends in this business. I don´t go to movie premieres. I like the life I always had."

 

[CptStern]

I wish to exercise my right to freedom of speech to sometimes call, some loony left things, loony left things. Freedom of speech, is freedom of all, to freedom of speech. Even things that the left, loony left, and other assorted liberals don't want to here.

ya but freedom of speech doesnt change the fact that it's annoying ..sure once, or twice but after multiple times it just sounds deliberately condescending.

No one can get things right all the time. No one can ever get things wrong all the time, even if they tried to. .

moore and churchill are about as alike in political viewpoints as Bush and Jimmy Swaggart ..meaning, they walk the same walk but hardly talk the same talk ..if you know what I mean

But guys like Ward Churchill and Michael Moore present lies and inaccuracies as 'journalism' and 'news' or 'documentaries' when it is really just propoganda, full of major inaccuracies, lies and half-truths to push their agenda barrow

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003


We know where they (WMD) are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad.

Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003


Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.

Dick Cheney August 26, 2002


Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush September 12, 2002

Did any1 bother to click on the link which showed how much Michael Moore edited out of the 9/11 report which he put on his website? It was a truckload of stuff. That's just dishonest. And there are many, many more examples of his dishonesty.

nitpicking at best ...did you bother to look at the justifications behind the war with just as much scrutiny? It's complete hypocrisy ...according to you and your ilk Moore is "anti-american", yet bush, who's responsible for the deaths of 18,000 civilians and another 1500 americans is a freakin "hero". Hypocrisy ...you're like sheep being led by a hyena

 

[Absinthe]

I normally answer unless its pointless to do so - did you have any specific question or is this just a complaint? Or won't u bother to explain yourself?

If you're going to call something loony, I'd expect you to properly back up your statement with reasoning.

Snide comments like "This says more about you than it says about me" do not constitute the above. But more importantly, monotonous and annoying repetition of the term is entirely unnecessary, especially when you're fully aware of how irritating it is. Now, am I suggesting that we turn the Politics forum into a happy land of sunshine and sensitivity? Not really, since I know that will never happen and people will always say things at the displeasure of somebody else. But there is still a line of courtesy.

Calanen, aside from this crap, I've found you to be an able debater and I otherwise have no problem with you.

So... please... I'm not going to be an ass when I ask this... but could you at least cut back on them a bit.

 

[Calanen]

"This says more about you than it says about me"

Captain Stern is now using my material, including the above, is he being snide? or just picking up some good tips?

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=74604&page=2&pp=15

 

[Calanen]

nitpicking at best ...did you bother to look at the justifications behind the war with just as much scrutiny? It's complete hypocrisy ...according to you and your ilk Moore is "anti-american", yet bush, who's responsible for the deaths of 18,000 civilians and another 1500 americans is a freakin "hero". Hypocrisy ...you're like sheep being led by a hyena

Nitpicking? Deleting most of the key sections of the report was nitpicking? He was not correcting typos.

And the war -which was done, to stop a guy who has lead to the deaths of like 1 million people or thereabouts? And if the US had not stopped him, the number you are talking about above are like a months' work for the Baathists and the Saddam Fedayeen. So let's be clear about what you want Stern - no casualties of any kind, and no war, and the continued torture and death of 10s of thousands of Iraqi people from now until whenever Saddam died. And no sanctions either.

There were people about during the Second World War who protested against stopping Hitler too. Neville Chamberlian and Peace in Our TIme with this peace of Paper. The problem is that things are never neat and simple, and Kumbaya my Lord and Peace Concerts don't stop evil dictators that brutalise and kill 100s of 1000s of people. And when someone has the guts to stop him, every1 keeps pointing at the 'needless death' caused by the guy who has come to remove Saddam. How bout how much needless death Saddam caused all by himself, and would have continued to do so way into the future had not the US intervened. BUT We should have tried sanctions first before war.....we did, and then we get blamed for that too when people die of starvation because he spends whatever money there is on palaces and stadiums and does not buy food for the people. So sanctions did not work, nothing did. And we got rid of him and good riddance.

There is no way that whatever goes on in Iraq today, even if you say that the US is responsible completely for all the people the terrorists kill (which is silly but lets just say that) will come anywhere *near* the amount of people that Saddam and his henchmen killed. So what do you want Stern:

1. Saddam in power and killing his own people by the 100s of 1000s with reckless abandon from now until he was 70 or so or longer?

2. Or the US stopping him.

Most people said, the US stopping him. Which is why George Bush got elected again, despite all the spin, despite Moveon.org, forged National Guard documents, Michael Moore and all the other rubbish.... Because the average person in the street, thinks that you and those like you Stern, on this issue, are full of bs.

 

[CptStern]

Nitpicking? Deleting most of the key sections of the report was nitpicking? He was not correcting typos.

but the person glossed over the main facts ..hmmm I wonder why?

And the war -which was done, to stop a guy who has lead to the deaths of like 1 million people or thereabouts?

no, 800,000 of those were iranian soldiers during war ...200,000 civilians were killed ....you didnt bat an eyelash when the US caused the deaths of 500,000 children ...or are you still planning to get back to me on that?

And if the US had not stopped him,

he wasnt a threat to anyone except his own people, but that's not who you went to save is it? no one could successfully argue that you had the people of iraq's best interests in mind when you invaded iraq ...the water treatment bombings prove that

the number you are talking about above are like a months' work for the Baathists and the Saddam Fedayeen.

which the US helped put into place just like they did with the murderous SAVAK, the contras, and various other death squads the US armed trained and supported

So let's be clear about what you want Stern - no casualties of any kind, and no war, and the continued torture and death of 10s of thousands of Iraqi people from now until whenever Saddam died. And no sanctions either.

you know nothing of me so dont put words in my mouth ...if the US hadnt propped up saddam for over 30 years none of this would have happened

There were people about during the Second World War who protested against stopping Hitler too. Neville Chamberlian and Peace in Our TIme with this peace of Paper. The problem is that things are never neat and simple, and Kumbaya my Lord and Peace Concerts don't stop evil dictators that brutalise and kill 100s of 1000s of people.

so what's going to stop state sponsored terrorism that destroys entire generations of people? 500,000 children Calanen, does that mean nothing to you?

And when someone has the guts to stop him,

the GUTS???!??!?!? did you just get here? where do you get your info from? the big book of US propaganda? there was no justification behind the wwar ...they LIED!!! I guess they conviently want you to forget this ...they knew exactly what they were doing

every1 keeps pointing at the 'needless death' caused by the guy who has come to remove Saddam. How bout how much needless death Saddam caused all by himself, and would have continued to do so way into the future had not the US intervened.

show me where saddam was responsible or would have ever been responsible for the deaths of 500,000 children?

BUT We should have tried sanctions first before war.....we did, and then we get blamed for that too

you're blamed because you purposefully caused conditions that was responsible for the deaths of 500,000 children ...at one point it was 6000 children per week

when people die of starvation because he spends whatever money there is on palaces and stadiums and does not buy food for the people.

bullshit, saddam started a ration system to make sure every single iraqi had food (which is still in place today ..except during saddam's time only 60% of iraqis were using it ..now 100% of iraqis use it ...100%) ...most died of disease

So sanctions did not work, nothing did. And we got rid of him and good riddance.

so the deaths of 500,000 children was worth it?

There is no way that whatever goes on in Iraq today, even if you say that the US is responsible completely for all the people the terrorists kill (which is silly but lets just say that) will come anywhere *near* the amount of people that Saddam and his henchmen killed.

nope, the US killed directly/indirectly almost twice as much as saddam did ...in a relatively shorter timespan

So what do you want Stern:

1. Saddam in power and killing his own people by the 100s of 1000s with reckless abandon from now until he was 70 or so or longer?

no, I want you to stop ****ing with other countries ...this is NOT new but goes back over 50 years ..you did the same in panama, el salvador, niceragua, congo, haiti etc etc etc etc

2. Or the US stopping him.

the US made him just like they made osama ...it's the chicken and the egg thing

Most people said, the US stopping him. Which is why George Bush got elected again, despite all the spin, despite Moveon.org, forged National Guard documents, Michael Moore and all the other rubbish.... Because the average person in the street, thinks that you and those like you Stern, on this issue, are full of bs.

hahah maybe in middle america or in military circles but most people see right through bush's bs

 

[pomegranate]

Calanen, you're kind of missing the point.
I think what most people are saying is that the government lied about the grounds that they put forward to justify the invasion.
No-one would argue that the liberation of Iraq isn't a good thing, but that wasn't the main reason the coalition members gave for his removal - they focussed on the threat to the US and other countries, and Iraq's supposed support of terrorists. No matter the end result, willfully and knowingly decieving your public is never acceptable, especially in a country that reckons itself to be the spreader of democracy and truth.

Could it be that people wouldn't have supported the invasion on merely humanitarian grounds, and that this was the only way to get most of America to support the war? I'll leave that for you to decide.

Personally, I would have supported the war if somone, even President Bush, had said, "Look, there are countries in the world where people don't have any freedom of speech, and are injustifiably imprisoned and tortured. It is humanity's responsibility to help people in such countries. Here is a list of countries where these things happen. We believe the only way to effectively liberate this countries from their repressive governments is by military action. Let's start with, say, Iraq."

But's that's not what we had. The very questionable justification used alienated many of America's staunchest allies and if anything increased the hate of America by various extremists.

 

[GhostFox]

Could it be that people wouldn't have supported the invasion on merely humanitarian grounds, and that this was the only way to get most of America to support the war

If FDR knowing let PH occur (not that he did, but work with me here) in order to convince the US into joining the war, would he have been wrong?

 

[No Limit]

Most people said, the US stopping him. Which is why George Bush got elected again, despite all the spin, despite Moveon.org, forged National Guard documents, Michael Moore and all the other rubbish.... Because the average person in the street, thinks that you and those like you Stern, on this issue, are full of bs.

Bush won by 1% and suddenly the average person in the street agrees with you? I love the examples you pointed out, would you like me to post examples of conservative lies about Kerry such as the vietnam vets against Kerry that tried to turn a national hero in to a traitor? The problem is I don't think this site has enough bandwidth for all those lies.

 

[pomegranate]

If FDR knowing let PH occur (not that he did, but work with me here) in order to convince the US into joining the war, would he have been wrong?

Um, I don't get the comparision. Germany and Japan were rapidly invading large portions of the globe at the time, with a view to imposing facism/racist imperialism in said places, and actual plans and quite real capacities to eventually take the whole world.

What was Saddam doing? Sitting on his arse in his palace being being very unpleasant to his own citizens.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Get back on Topic please.

 

[Calanen]

Bush won by 1% and suddenly the average person in the street agrees with you?

No he did not - who was giving me a hard time about factchecking because Stern found som1 who gives origami lessons with the same surname as the criminal I was talking about? Then you reduce George Bush's electoral margin by more than 50%.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/national.php?f=0

Bush/Cheny got 62,041,268 and 50.73% of the popular vote

and 286 or 53.16% of the Electoral college votes

Edwards/Kerry 59,028,548 and 48.27% of the popular vote

and 251 or 46.65% of the Electoral College Vote

So Bush's actual margin on popular votes was 2.44% and 6.51% on electoral college votes.

So its not really 1% anywhere, is it No Limit?...

Factchecking, its the Kryptnonite of the Left, but more particularly, the kryptonite of No Limit.

 

[Calanen]

Back on topic now, promise - but I had to reply to that inaccuracy.

 

[seinfeldrules]

he wasnt a threat to anyone except his own people, but that's not who you went to save is it? no one could successfully argue that you had the people of iraq's best interests in mind when you invaded iraq ...the water treatment bombings prove that

Kuwait
America
Saudi Arabia
Israel
Iran
Anfal Campaign
Etc. Etc.

 

[Calanen]

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

I think Dave Kopel does the best and most thorough job of exposing Moore for the deceptive liar that he is. He is critical of the Bush Administration too - so unless criticising the President is all part of the clever ruse - which is what Moore might say or some people who use this forum - I think he's about as independent as you can get.

Read it - if you don't mind your dogma being challenged, or not, if your wworld view cant handle being a bit shaken. What's clear, is that Fahrenheit 911 should never have been labelled a documentary, nor won an Oscar for one It would have won an Oscar for lowbrow propaganda films, if there was such a category.

 

[CptStern]

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

I think Dave Kopel does the best and most thorough job of exposing Moore for the deceptive liar that he is. He is critical of the Bush Administration too - so unless criticising the President is all part of the clever ruse - which is what Moore might say or some people who use this forum - I think he's about as independent as you can get.

Read it - if you don't mind your dogma being challenged, or not, if your wworld view cant handle being a bit shaken. What's clear, is that Fahrenheit 911 should never have been labelled a documentary, nor won an Oscar for one It would have won an Oscar for lowbrow propaganda films, if there was such a category.

Dave kopel pro-gun advocate and staunch republican ..ya the voice of reason :upstare:


I'll read every last word of Kopel as soon as you all read this or watch this

here's a good start

 

[seinfeldrules]

Stern, you've avoided the 51 points (or however many there are) every time they are brought up.

 

[kmack]

I can't believe the amount of fear, hatred, resentment etc. etc. that Michael Moore gets. If you don't like him, don't watch his movies. I hate Martin Laurence, I dont watch his movies or his interviews, problem solved. Suck it up conservatives, Michael Moore made Bush look like an idiot, who cares! Its his opinion, you dont like it? TOO BAD, its a free country he can do what he wants, and so can you, so dont see it.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Its his opinion, you dont like it? TOO BAD, its a free country he can do what he wants, and so can you, so dont see it.

Nobody says otherwise...

Just as he has his right to say what he wants, I have my right to criticize what he says.

 

[Calanen]

Dave kopel pro-gun advocate and staunch republican ..ya the voice of reason

So there are no reasonable people who are pro-gun advocates, nor any reasonable people who are Republicans. Pretty bold statemtn to make? So just by being proi-gun, or in the Republican party, a person is without reason? Minds my differ on matters - there can be alternative viewpoints without labelling those who oppose you as insane. There are insane viewpoints to be sure - but I don't think anything Kopel has said about Moore is insane. Pretty reasoned. Gives Michael Moore far more of a chance to responsd, and counter argue, then Moore ever does to his victims.

Ok let's say hes a complete nutter, no credibility at all, just for arguments sake. Then lets hear your answers to what he says Stern. If its all bunkum, demolish it. Dave Kopel is pretty fair at giving Moore his side of the story, acknowleding where he corrected things and where he did not, publishing Moore's letters and letters from Moore's supporters. The same cannot be said of Moore - so I think that as far as a claim to be reasonable goes, Dave Kopel has more of a basis for being labelled reasonable in this context than Moore does.

Opinions are one thing. But Moore gives his opinions as facts, without the facts. As Dave Kopel shows, many, many times over.

 

[Calanen]

Btw I would love to do a movie called 'Michael and Me' where we follow Moore around and ask him embarassing questions about his career, tantrums, and lies throughout his 'propogandamentry' career.

 

[Calanen]

I did not read all your Chomsky stuff Stern. The bits of commentary on 911, I may not agree with but are nothing earth shattering.

But I know who the guy is. But don't derail the thread by throwing up another left icon, as if to say, hey Moore might be full of BS, but Noam Chomsky is not! Noam Chomsky is a lot more measured and reasonable, with his opinions having more weight, and he (afaik) does not have the huge record of manufacturing statistics as Moore does. Sure there are plenty of academics from tghe left who may have better and more reasoned opinions than Moore.

But what we are saying is that Moore is BS - not that Moore and Chomsky are BS. So let's stick to the topic OK?

 

[CptStern]

So there are no reasonable people who are pro-gun advocates, nor any reasonable people who are Republicans. Pretty bold statemtn to make? So just by being proi-gun, or in the Republican party, a person is without reason?

dont twist my words calanen as your so oft to do. Of course there are reasonable republicans but that's not my point. Kopel has an agenda to push in discrediting moore because of his pro-gun stance ..he makes a living off of it:

http://chezjacq.com/kopel_001030.htm

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/GCGRpreface.htm

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel122101.shtml

he's the editor in chief of the Journal on Firearms & Public Policy.
he's the Peer Reviewer, Criminal Justice Policy Review
he's the Contributing Editor, Gun Week
he's the Contributing Legal Editor, The Firearms & Outdoor Trade
he's a State of Arizona, concealed handgun license instructor
he's a member of the American Civil Liberties Union
he's a NRA-certified instructor for Pistol and for Personal
he's a NRA-qualified Distinguished Expert rating for Handgun.


he wrote:
Guns in American Society: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics, Culture, and the Law

Gun Laws of Montana
Supreme Court Gun Cases: Two Centuries of Rights Revealed.

Guns, Crime, and Punishment in America.

Gun Control and Gun Rights: A Reader and Guide

Supreme Court Gun Cases

Guns: Who Should Have Them?

The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies?

Gun Control in Great Britain: Saving Lives or Constricting Liberty?

Things You Can Do to Protect Your Gun Rights

More Things You Can Do to Protect Your Gun Rights



here's some of his articles:

"Why Good People Own Guns: Better Safe than Sorry,"

"Media Bias in Coverage of Gun Control: The Press Evaluates the Popular Culture,"

"Microdisarmament: The Consequences for Public Safety and Human Rights."

"The Licensing of Concealed Handguns for Lawful Protection: Support from Five State Supreme Courts,"

"Firearms Possession by 'Non-State Actors': the Question of Sovereignty

"The Torah and Self-Defense."



he teaches at the University of New York ..about gun rights

Ok let's say hes a complete nutter, no credibility at all, just for arguments sake. Then lets hear your answers to what he says Stern.

find me someone who has less of an agenda to push and then I'll give it a serious once over ...sorry but in this instance I'm not willing to be my normally flexible self ..I dont like Kopel or what he stands for ..god he rights articles like this, how can I possibly take him seriously?

"Hate Crime Laws: Dangerous and Divisive."

"Children and Guns: Sensible Solutions."


and for the record, I"ve said numerous times Moore is a documentary film maker how can you possibly be in-depth in under 2 hours on film? It's the idiot box, it's tailor made for short attention spans and is low balled in order to make it accessible to a wide audience ..why do you think I've brought up Chomsky? The right doesnt like facts so someone like Chomsky is disconcerting to say the least. This forum is an exact microcosm of that same duality. Moore is often atarget because he presents ideas that are highly subjective in nature and emotionally charged ..Chomsky on the other hand presents cold facts that cannot be disputed

Moore is an entertainer chomsky is an academic ..in this the right falters ...you can debate emotion but you cant debate the facts ...just as in this forum ..you'll all rally around the emotional threads about the spread of democracy or the horror of terrorism yet when confronted with facts this place becomes a right-wing ghost town ...case in point: this piece of evidence scares the beejebus out of most of you

 

[Bodacious]

..case in point: this piece of evidence scares the beejebus out of most of you

Hahahaha!

 

[CptStern]

heh it's true isnt it?

 

[Bodacious]

heh it's true isnt it?

I don't think anyone has ever argued it wasn't true. At least I haven't.

You know what I think about that issue.

 

[CptStern]

yes and I still owe you 3 replies, I havent forgotten ...incidentily when I said:

"out of most of you"

I was referring to you specifically (as in, you're the only one who has tackled it)