¿ Have you seen the docummentary " Bowling for Columbine"?

Do you think it represents exactly U.S. cityzens?
The movie have some impact in the country?

I ask all that cause I could seen it and I was really shocked.

Pippo,
more more shocking information have a gander at: The Truth About Bowling for Columbine

I haven't yet seen it but have heard "mixed" reactions about it. For example, my ladyfriend in Madrid was stirred by it and strongly recommended I see it too. My parents knew of the movie's message and decided NOT to see it. I honestly don't know much about it (yet) but I gather it has some "anti-American" sentiments. Well.... "anti-American" may not be the correct term. Maybe, instead, it's "anti-establishment" and questioning what we're told/taught to believe by our own government. Hmmm... Maybe I'll go out this weekend and rent that one so I can make my own judgements.

Saludos, MadridMan

Well , Jaime , I have read the page but there.s a point , ( point five) that is totally false:

"5. The Taliban and American Aid. In discussing military assistance to various countries, Bowling asserts that the U.S. gave $245 million in aid to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan in 2000 and 2001.

"Fact: The aid in question was humanitarian assistance, given through UN and nongovernmental organizations, to relieve famine in Afghanistan. [Various numbers are given for the amount of the aid, and some say several million went for clearing landmines.]"

The talibans were armed by U.S. across Pakistan , that is a proved fact.

Pippo,

It's obvious your intent was never to open discussion on the issue of the fictional piece put together by Moore, but to start an argument that was pointedly against the U.S.

They call this "baiting." All you wanted was someone to disagree so you could start an argument.

Then, when Jaime posted a link to the facts that show that the whole thing was a farce, you throw out something from 15 years earlier as "fact" related to the year 2000. That's as reckless as the offering Moore put on film. Totally inaccurate, but it fits your needs.

Yes, the US did in fact help arm the true government factions of Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion period, when the Soviets forced the Afghan government into exile. Of course we weren't alone in doing it, since the UN passed a resolution that the invasion by the Soviets was an act of agression. Apparently you have "conveniently" forgotten that point, so you could throw out your second post.

If you know as much as you should about the arming of the Afghans, you'd find that Spain, France, Great Britain, Germany, and many other nations were directly involved in the support of the government in exile, and did in fact assist in the issuing of arms for the people to fight against the puppet communist government that was installed in Kabul.

As far as Moore's work, it's trash, totally inaccurate, and is not a work of art. If anyone has seen it, and believes what he said, following Jaime's link should shed new light on what it was. If they haven't seen it yet, they should follow the link anyway, and they can then see the points made that Moore not only used poor judgement, but told out-and-out lies from beginning to end.

If a person doesn't realize that, after following the link, and it's sources, it's obvious they've decided they'd rather believe in Moore's fairy tale instead of the truth, because it fits more with their political beliefs, and facts will never enter their closed minds.

Wolf

Right on, Wolf!

jaimemiguel says, 'glad to see another person who has chosen to educate himself and form his own opinion.'

NRA's List of Enemies Includes Britney
Jan 4, 1:01 PM EST--msn.com

What do Britney Spears, the United Methodist Church, the St. Louis Rams and Hallmark Cards have in common? They're among the hundreds of celebrities, organizations and companies on the National Rifle Association's roster of entities that it considers hostile to gun-ownership rights.

The Fairfax-based NRA has compiled a 15-page list of supporters of the Brady law — which requires federally licensed gun dealers to do background checks on gun buyers — and other gun-control measures.

NRA spokesman Ted Novin said the list was solely for "informational purposes and that it's nothing new."

"It's a good way for our members to know who's opposing their Second Amendment rights and who's not," he said.

But many consider being included on the blacklist a badge of honor, and some have even complained about being left off. Dustin Hoffman's name was added after he wrote to NRA President Kayne Robinson in October, saying that "as a supporter of comprehensive gun safety measures, I was deeply disappointed when I discovered that my name was not on this list."

Along with Spears, and usual NRA targets Michael Moore and Barbra Streisand, the organization's anti-gun roster names actors Julia Roberts and George Clooney. Professional athletes Doug Flutie and Rick Fox join entire teams on the list, including the St. Louis Rams and Cardinals, and the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence recently drew attention to the NRA list after linking to it on its Web site to encourage people to lend their names to support gun-control measures. Close to 100,000 had signed up for the Brady list by the end of 2003.

"We were trying to bring attention to the paranoia, for lack of a better word," said Peter Hamm, a Brady Campaign spokesman.

Hamm said his group also wanted to point out "the innate humor in this list while also making a serious statement that in America we're not too fond of enemies lists and blacklists."

Both sides are looking ahead to later this year, when the ban on assault weapons is set to expire in September.

———

On the Net:

NRA List: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID15

Brady: http://www.bradycampaign.org

Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
advertisement

Pippo, obviously the 2nd ammendment is controversial. But it tells you a lot about an organization, especially one that takes the 2nd ammendment seriously, that thinks that a greeting card company is a threat to the right to bear arms.

But Pippo,

You have to admit, it says a lot that these people feel comfortable enough with the gun toters, that they aren't afraid to be enemies of the NRA. Do they consider them responsible enough not to use their guns against them? Think about it.

Pippo,

I too am for tighter legislation on gun control. I guess that would make me a "candidate" for the NRA list. But that doesn't alter the fact that the Moore offering was a pack of lies, and that the whole issue you brought to the table was to start an argument.

Moreover, being on someone's "list" here in the U.S. refers more to tactical buying than anything else. What the NRA hopes is that their membership will boycott these organizations, sports teams, and even movies made by individuals. It isn't a "hit list" like some people would like to believe, or is made up by a radical or subversive organization.

The fact is, truth is what counts. When anyone points at a piece of trash like Moore's offering and says; "See? This is America!" Nothing could be further from the truth.

Political differences should create discussion, not confrontation like Moore's offering does by distorting facts. To the vast majority of Americans, his being given an Academy Award was a slap in the face to the issuing group. The little credibility they had was gone after it happened.

So, what does the article about the NRA mean? Absolutely nothing, because I own guns myself, and am in favor of tighter gun control. In the end, you can count on Americans to make the right decisions when it comes to their own protection at home. You can also count on us owning guns. It's just the type of guns we own that matters.

So, do I belong in NRA as a member or on their list? I guess it all depends on how you want to view the issue. The thing is, more than half of all Americans believe in about the same thing that I do.

Wolf