Hehe, MiniD is calling me a love muffin and all is well in the world.
At least it shows he's still reading my posts. I am touched.
SOB - if you cannot download it from Kazaa as I did, I'd be glad to send you the movie on a CD via airmail. Might be quicker than trying to download it - lol.
Narsus, your list is incomplete. In addition to 3, there should be a question asking "should the academy feel obliged to rescind its decision to award Moore his Oscar, given the pressure coming from certain groups of people?". And the answer should be "Nope".
As for point 4, ROFL. You want TV to be sanitised in such a way that everything shown is a true reflection of real life? If you did that to American TV there'd be nothing left! I personally blame TV for the false expectations many people have of their daily lives. They see homicide detectives solving cases in 50 minutes. They see soap operas in which every man is handsome and every woman is stunning, and think that's the way the world really is - except where
they are. They might see war films in which good triumphs over evil in all of 3 hours - and then wonder why coalition forces in Iraq, whose land area is greater than California, cannot find WMD in two short weeks. Yes, the simpletons are swayed by TV, but not just by Moore's movie. For you to single that out indicates bias, and you clearly have an axe to grind. Because if you're serious about sanitising TV for the sake of the simpletons of the world, you'll need to do more than revoke Moore's Oscar.
Speaking of bias, I still think the gun lobby has got its head up its arse on this one. Just look at that website. It analyses the figures presented by Moore compared with figures from their own sources, and uses the discrepancies in an attempt to discredit Moore and his movie. Look at the comment for Australia - an entire paragraph given to debating a discrepancy of
1. Was it 65? Or was it only 64? 
Maybe it was 66! 
I'll reproduce the page here as best I can, and continue my post after it.
And yet I can produce figures showing a 25 year period in which there were more than 300,000 gun related homicides in the US! Think about that for a moment. That's the equivalent of the entire city where I was born being wiped out by gun crime in 25 years! 
And what does the NRA/gun lobby have to say about this? - Big fat NOTHING. And what do the gun lobbyists on this BBS have to say about this? Not much. I have seen the gun crime death tally of America dismissed as a "pittance", and "a price worth paying to maintain freedom and the right to bear arms". Or "most of those homicides were of blacks by other blacks". (Great - does that mean it doesn't matter?) Or "many of those gun homicides were committed by criminals against other criminals". Oh well that's all right then - except if you get caught in the crossfire, as happened to some unfortunate teenage girls attending a party at a hair salon in England not long ago.
So there you have it. 300,000 gun homicides in a 25 year period are dismissed as a "pittance", and yet here in the anti-Moore website we see people arguing over a double digit stat, a discrepancy of ONE, and the supposed wrongul ownership of a freaking 12 inch statuette. There isn't a rolleyes icon big enough to express my feeling about that.
Get a sense of proportion already!
