US groups want Moore film banned

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by nycflasher, Jun 18, 2004.

  1. nycflasher
    Offline

    nycflasher Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,078
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    CT
    Ratings:
    +14
    BBC News snip:

    US conservative groups have launched a campaign to have Michael Moore's "misleading and grotesque" film Fahrenheit 9/11 banned from cinemas.

    The film alleges connections between President George Bush and top Saudi families, including the Bin Ladens.

    Move America Forward has begun a letter-writing campaign, while Citizens United is making TV and internet adverts which criticise Moore.

    The documentary film will be shown around the US from 25 June.

    More Moore:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3817993.stm
     
  2. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    and the push for anti american censorship begins. things starting to look familiar to anyone? circa 1933?
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    DK how can people, excercising their first amendment right of free speech, be any more wrong than those who have a right to protest the war?

    I have the right to boycott products, sponsors, etc. If I can get others to go along with me, is that not a right?

    In effect it's the 'little guys' way of play George Soros.
     
  4. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    boycotting is one thing, perfectly legal and well within the first amendment rights. Advocating a BAN is advocating censorship. There is a clear difference.
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I don't see the difference. Now if I were to erect barriers or some such thing, that would infringe on your right or accessibility, oh yeah, arrest time.

    You are not forced to join a ban I'm calling for, no matter how loud or long.
     
  6. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    Theres a difference, you know this. If I called for an outright BAN on any GW Bush book because of (insert any reason you feel like) and to burn those already in existence, that would be censorship.

    Now, boycotting would be me telling barnes and noble, waldenbooks, etc. that I'm picketing their stores telling people not to patron there because of their (insert any reason you feel like).

    Banning, if successful, prevents those who haven't seen something to make up their own mind. Boycotting still leaves people with the right or ability to make the decision.
     
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Point taken, my mistake. However we both know that there will be no ban, because that would be taken to court. So the point is moot I would think.

    The CBS Reagan thing, that was a result of a boycott, though it's been spun to a ban, it was not. Pressure on a company is from threat of boycott of viewership or sponsors.
     
  8. nycflasher
    Offline

    nycflasher Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,078
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    CT
    Ratings:
    +14
    I wonder what about the film is deemed "misleading and grotesque" by these groups.
     
  9. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    agreed, wholeheartedly. ;)
     
  10. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    you'll be able to see for yourself, provided its not banned. :p: :D
     

Share This Page