Originally posted by funkedup
Beet please show how anyone's freedom of speech is being compromised here? Freedom of speech applies to those who express political views, and it also applies to those who point out that they are full of ****.
Freedom of speech applies to those who create dishonest "documentaries" and it also applies to those who seek to discredit such dishonest work.
You seem to be arguing that free speech should be allowed only for those voicing minority opinions.
Well what I meant was Moore's freedom of speech - his right to make a doc... er, movie. BTW who the hell cares if it was a documentary or a movie? Well quite a few people, it would seem, but why???
I'm just saying that Moore is entitled to make his own cinematographic production (for want of a more generic description) and for the folks running the Oscars to make the awards as they see fit.
Many years ago, the Eurovision song contest was won by a crappy Israeli entry. The British offering, a marginally less crappy record called Save all your kisses for me, by Brotherhood of Man, came last. Did I campaign to have the awards decision reversed? No. I quickly arrived at the opinion that the Eurovision song contest was a load of crap (not a huge leap to make) and never paid any attention to it again.
Instead of getting upset about the Oscars, the gun lobby should just ignore what happened, make their own movie, whatever.
I keep hearing that Moore's movie/documentary was "dishonest", and I think that's bull
shit. How can a collection of interviews be "dishonest"? Oh wait, he got the KKK foundation date wrong by 5 years...
But for the gun lobby to want to interfere with the machinations at the Academy Awards ceremony, oh puhleeeeze!!! Geez, guys, get a freakin' grip.
Toodle-Pip.
PS Yeager, nice location, but the correct spelling is "demarcation".