9
9 Trillion Dollar Republican Natio
Guest
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko/
Michael Moore responds to the wacko attackos...
How to Deal with the Lies and the Lying Liars When They Lie about
"Bowling for Columbine"
by Michael Moore
One thing you get used to when you're in what's called "the public
eye" is reading the humorous fiction that others like to write about
you. For instance, I have read in quite respectable and trustworthy
publications that a) I'm a college graduate (I'm not), b) I was a
factory worker (I quit the first day), and c) I have two brothers (I
have none). Newsweek wrote that I live in a penthouse on Central Park
West (I live above a Baby Gap store, and not on any park), and the
Internet Movie Database once listed me as the director of the Elvis
movie, "Blue Hawaii" ( I was 6 at the time the film was made, but I
was quite skilled in directing my sisters in building me a snowman).
Lately, my favorite mistake is the one many reviewers made crediting
the cartoon in "Bowling for Columbine" as being the work of the "South
Park" creators. It isn't. I wrote it and my buddy Harold Moss's
animation studio drew it.
I've enjoyed reading these inventions/mistakes about this "Michael
Moore." I mean, who wouldn't want to fantasize about living in
penthouses roughhousing with brothers you never had. But lately I've
begun to see so many things about me or my work that aren't true. It's
become so easy to spread these fictions through the internet (thanks
mostly to lazy reporters or web junkies who do all their research by
typing in "key words" and then just repeat the same mistakes). And so
I wonder that if I don't correct the record, then all of the people
who don't know better may just end up being filled with a bunch of
stuff that isn't true.
Of course, it would take a lot of my time to contact all these sites
and media outlets to correct their errors and I think it's more
important I spend my time on my next book or movie so I just let it
ride. But is that fair to you, the reader, who has now been told
something that isn't true?
With the unexpected and overwhelming success of "Bowling for
Columbine" and "Stupid White Men," the fiction that has been written
or spoken about me and my work has reached a whole new level of
storytelling. It's no longer about making some simple errors or
calling me "Roger" Moore. It is now about organized groups going full
blast trying to discredit me by knowingly making up lies and repeating
them over and over in the hopes that people will believe them - and,
then, stop listening to me.
Oh, that it would be so easy!
Fortunately, they are so wound up in their anger and hatred that they
have ended up discrediting themselves.
Look, I accept the fact that, if I go after the Thief-in-Chief - and
more people buy my book than any other nonfiction book last year -
then that is naturally going to send a few of his henchmen after me.
Fine. That's okay. I knew that before I got into this and I ain't
whining about it now.
I also realize that you just don't go after the NRA and its supporters
and then not expect them to come back at you with both barrels (so to
speak). These are not nice people and they don't play nice - that's
how they got to be so powerful.
So, a whole host of gun lobby groups and individual gun nuts have put
up websites where the smears on me range from the pre-adolescent (I'm
a "crapweasel," and a "fat ****ing piece of ****") to Orwellian-style
venom ("Michael Moore hates America!").
I have mostly ignored this silliness. But a few weeks ago, this
lunatic crap hit the mainstream fan. CNN actually put some guy on a
show saying that my film contains "so many falsehoods, one after the
other, after the other, after the other." They introduced him as a
"critic" and "research director" of the "Independence Institute." He
seemed mighty impressive.
Except they failed to tell their viewers who he really was: a
contributing editor of Gun Week Magazine.
CNN saw no need to inform the viewers that their "expert"-- who has
made a career out of opposing any form of gun control-has a vested
interest in convincing the public that "Bowling for Columbine" is a
horribly rotten movie.
So, what do you do when the nutcases succeed in getting on CNN? Do you
just keep ignoring them? How do you handle people who say the
Holocaust never happened or that monkeys fly? Ignore them and they'll
go away? If you give them any attention, all the nuts will come out of
the woodwork.
And that's what happened. I saw another one of these lunatics, this
time on MSNBC. A guy named John Lofton. He went on and on about how my
movie is all made up. The anchor on MSNBC never challenged him on his
lies and never told the viewers who he really was - a right wing crazy
who believes Bush is too liberal. He was once an advisor to Pat
Buchanan's Presidential campaign, and was a direct-mail writer for
Jesse Helms. Writing in opposition to Hate Crime bills in the
conservative Washington Times (where he was a columnist from '83 to
'89), Lofton explained:
Take, for example, this business of so-called "anti-gay violence."
This bill will be used to go after only those who commit crimes
against people because they are homosexuals. But this is not the most
pernicious form of "anti-gay violence." Not by a long shot.
The most violent - indeed fatal 100 percent of the time - form of
"anti-gay violence" has been committed not by so-called "homophobes"
who bash homosexuals - but by male homosexuals and bisexuals against
other male bisexuals and homosexuals.
To date, tens of thousands of male bisexual and homosexual men are
dead in our country because of AIDS, because they engaged in high-risk
homosexual sex.
Is this not "anti-gay violence" which numbers its victims far
beyond anything any "homophobes" have done?
Well, I figured I better deal with this because the nutters were now
being turned into "respectable critics" by a media that either had an
agenda or were just plain lazy.
So, how crazy are the things they've said about "Bowling for
Columbine?" Here are my favorites:
"That scene where you got the gun in the bank was staged!"
Well of course it was staged! It's a movie! We built the "bank" as a
set and then I hired actors to play the bank tellers and the manager
and we got a toy gun from the prop department and then I wrote some
really cool dialogue for me and them to say! Pretty neat, huh?
Or...
The Truth: In the spring of 2001, I saw a real ad in a real newspaper
in Michigan announcing a real promotion that this real bank had where
they would give you a gun (as your up-front interest) for opening up a
Certificate of Deposit account. They promoted this in publications all
over the country - "More Bang for Your Buck!"
There was news coverage of this bank giving away guns, long before I
even shot the scene there. The Chicago Sun Times wrote about how the
bank would "hand you a gun" with the purchase of a CD. Those are the
precise words used by a bank employee in the film.
When you see me going in to the bank and walking out with my new gun
in "Bowling for Columbine" - that is exactly as it happened. Nothing
was done out of the ordinary other than to phone ahead and ask
permission to let me bring a camera in to film me opening up my
account. I walked into that bank in northern Michigan for the first
time ever on that day in June 2001, and, with cameras rolling, gave
the bank teller $1,000 - and opened up a 20-year CD account. After you
see me filling out the required federal forms ("How do you spell
Caucasian?") - which I am filling out here for the first time - the
bank manager faxed it to the bank's main office for them to do the
background check. The bank is a licensed federal arms dealer and thus
can have guns on the premises and do the instant background checks
(the ATF's Federal Firearms database-which includes all federally
approved gun dealers-lists North Country Bank with Federal Firearms
License #4-38-153-01-5C-39922).
Within 10 minutes, the "OK" came through from the firearms background
check agency and, 5 minutes later, just as you see it in the film,
they handed me a Weatherby Mark V Magnum rifle (If you'd like to see
the outtakes, click here).
And it is that very gun that I still own to this day. I have decided
the best thing to do with this gun is to melt it down into a bust of
John Ashcroft and auction it off on E-Bay (more details on that
later). All the proceeds will go to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun
Violence to fight all these lying gun nuts who have attacked my film
and make it possible on a daily basis for America's gun epidemic to
rage on.
Here's another whopper I've had to listen to from the pro-gun groups:
"The Lockheed factory in Littleton, Colorado, has nothing to do
with weapons of mass destruction!"
That's right! That big honkin' rocket sitting behind the Lockheed
spokesman in "Bowling for Columbine"-- the one with "US AIRFORCE"
written on it in BIG ASS letters - well, I admit it, I snuck in and
painted that on that Titan IV rocket when Lockheed wasn't looking!
After all, those rockets were only being used for the Weather Channel!
Ha Ha Ha! I sure fooled everyone!!
Or....
The Truth: Lockheed Martin is the largest weapons-maker in the world.
The Littleton facility has been manufacturing missiles, missile
components, and other weapons systems for almost half a century. In
the 50s, workers at the Littleton facility constructed the first Titan
intercontinental ballistic missile, designed to unleash a nuclear
warhead on the Soviet Union; in the mid-80s, they were partially
assembling MX missiles, instruments for the minuteman ICBM, a space
laser weapon called Zenith Star, and a Star Wars program known as
Brilliant Pebbles.
In the full, unedited interview I did with the Lockheed spokesman, he
told me that Lockheed started building nuclear missiles in Littleton
and "played a role in the development of Peacekeeper MX Missiles."
As for what's currently manufactured in Littleton, McCollum told me,
"They (the rockets sitting behind him) carry mainly very large
national security satellites, some we can't talk about." (see him say
it here)
Since that interview, the Titan IV rockets manufactured in Littleton
have been critical to the war effort in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
These rockets launched advanced satellites that were "instrumental in
providing command-and-control operations over Iraq...for the rapid
targeting of Navy Tomahawk cruise missiles involved in Iraqi strikes
and clandestine communications with Special Operations Forces." (view
source here).
That Lockheed lets the occasional weather or TV satellite hitch a ride
on one of its rockets should not distract anyone from Lockheed's main
mission and moneymaker in Littleton: to make instruments that help
kill people. That two of Littleton's children decided to engineer
their own mass killing is what these guys and the Internet crazies
don't want to discuss.
The oddest of all the smears thrown at "Bowling for Columbine" is this
one:
"The film depicts NRA president Charlton Heston giving a speech
near Columbine; he actually gave it a year later and 900 miles away.
The speech he did give is edited to make conciliatory statements sound
like rudeness."
Um, yeah, that's right! I made it up! Heston never went there! He
never said those things!
Or....
The Truth: Heston took his NRA show to Denver and did and said exactly
what we recounted. From the end of my narration setting up Heston's
speech in Denver, with my words, "a big pro-gun rally," every word out
of Charlton Heston's mouth was uttered right there in Denver, just 10
days after the Columbine tragedy. But don't take my word - read the
transcript of his whole speech. Heston devotes the entire speech to
challenging the Denver mayor and mocking the mayor's pleas that the
NRA "don't come here." Far from deliberately editing the film to make
Heston look worse, I chose to leave most of this out and not make
Heston look as evil as he actually was.
Why are these gun nuts upset that their brave NRA leader's words are
in my film? You'd think they would be proud of the things he said.
Except, when intercut with the words of a grieving father (whose son
died at Columbine and happened to be speaking in a protest that same
weekend Heston was at the convention center), suddenly Charlton Heston
doesn't look so good does he? Especially to the people of Denver (and,
the following year, to the people of Flint) who were still in shock
over the tragedies when Heston showed up.
As for the clip preceding the Denver speech, when Heston proclaims
"from my cold dead hands," this appears as Heston is being introduced
in narration. It is Heston's most well-recognized NRA image - hoisting
the rifle overhead as he makes his proclamation, as he has done at
virtually every political appearance on behalf of the NRA (before and
since Columbine). I have merely re-broadcast an image supplied to us
by a Denver TV station, an image which the NRA has itself crafted for
the media, or, as one article put it, "the mantra of dedicated gun
owners" which they "wear on T-shirts, stamp it on the outside of
envelopes, e-mail it on the Internet and sometimes shout it over the
phone.". Are they now embarrassed by this sick, repulsive image and
the words that accompany it?
I've also been accused of making up the gun homicide counts in the
United States and various countries around the world. That is, like
all the rest of this stuff, a bald-face lie. Every statistic in the
film is true. They all come directly from the government. Here are the
facts, right from the sources:
The U.S. figure of 11,127 gun deaths comes from a report from the
Center for Disease Control. Japan's gun deaths of 39 was provided by
the National Police Agency of Japan; Germany: 381 gun deaths from
Bundeskriminalamt (German FBI); Canada: 165 gun deaths from Statistics
Canada, the governmental statistics agency; United Kingdom: 68 gun
deaths, from the Centre for Crime and Justice studies in Britain;
Australia: 65 gun deaths from the Australian Institute of Criminology;
France: 255 gun deaths, from the International Journal of
Epidemiology.
Finally, I've even been asked about whether the two killers were at
bowling class on the morning of the shootings. Well, that's what their
teacher told the investigators, and that's what was corroborated by
several eyewitness reports of students to the police, the FBI, and the
District Attorney's office. I'll tell you who wasn't there -- me!
That's why in the film I pose it as a question:
"So did Dylan and Eric show up that morning and bowl two games
before moving on to shoot up the school? And did they just chuck the
balls down the lane? Did this mean something?"
Of course, it's a silly discussion, and it misses the whole, larger
point: that blaming bowling for their killing spree would be as dumb
as blaming Marilyn Manson.
But the gun nuts don't want to discuss either specific points or
larger issues because when that debate is held, they lose. Most
Americans want stronger gun laws (among others, see the 2001 National
Gun Policy Survey from the University of Chicago's National Opinion
Research Center) - and the gun lobbies know it. That is why it's
critical to distract and alter the debate - and go after anyone who
questions why we have so many gun deaths in America (especially if he
does it in best selling books and popular films).
I can guarantee to you, without equivocation, that every fact in my
movie is true. Three teams of fact-checkers and two groups of lawyers
went through it with a fine tooth comb to make sure that every
statement of fact is indeed an indisputable fact. Trust me, no film
company would ever release a film like this without putting it through
the most vigorous vetting process possible. The sheer power and threat
of the NRA is reason enough to strike fear in any movie studio or
theater chain. The NRA will go after you without mercy if they think
there's half a chance of destroying you. That's why we don't have
better gun laws in this country - every member of Congress is scared
to death of them.
Well, guess what. Total number of lawsuits to date against me or my
film by the NRA? NONE. That's right, zero. And don't forget for a
second that if they could have shut this film down on a technicality
they would have. But they didn't and they can't - because the film is
factually solid and above reproach. In fact, we have not been sued by
any individual or group over the statements made in "Bowling for
Columbine?" Why is that? Because everything we say is true - and the
things that are our opinion, we say so and leave it up to the viewer
to decide if our point of view is correct or not for each of them.
So, faced with a thoroughly truthful and honest film, those who object
to the film's political points are left with the choice of debating us
on the issues in the film - or resorting to character assassination.
They have chosen the latter. What a sad place to be.
Actually, I have found one typo in the theatrical release of the film.
It was a caption that read, "Willie Horton released by Dukakis and
kills again." In fact, Willie Horton was a convicted murderer who,
after escaping from furlough, raped a woman and stabbed her fianc
Michael Moore responds to the wacko attackos...
How to Deal with the Lies and the Lying Liars When They Lie about
"Bowling for Columbine"
by Michael Moore
One thing you get used to when you're in what's called "the public
eye" is reading the humorous fiction that others like to write about
you. For instance, I have read in quite respectable and trustworthy
publications that a) I'm a college graduate (I'm not), b) I was a
factory worker (I quit the first day), and c) I have two brothers (I
have none). Newsweek wrote that I live in a penthouse on Central Park
West (I live above a Baby Gap store, and not on any park), and the
Internet Movie Database once listed me as the director of the Elvis
movie, "Blue Hawaii" ( I was 6 at the time the film was made, but I
was quite skilled in directing my sisters in building me a snowman).
Lately, my favorite mistake is the one many reviewers made crediting
the cartoon in "Bowling for Columbine" as being the work of the "South
Park" creators. It isn't. I wrote it and my buddy Harold Moss's
animation studio drew it.
I've enjoyed reading these inventions/mistakes about this "Michael
Moore." I mean, who wouldn't want to fantasize about living in
penthouses roughhousing with brothers you never had. But lately I've
begun to see so many things about me or my work that aren't true. It's
become so easy to spread these fictions through the internet (thanks
mostly to lazy reporters or web junkies who do all their research by
typing in "key words" and then just repeat the same mistakes). And so
I wonder that if I don't correct the record, then all of the people
who don't know better may just end up being filled with a bunch of
stuff that isn't true.
Of course, it would take a lot of my time to contact all these sites
and media outlets to correct their errors and I think it's more
important I spend my time on my next book or movie so I just let it
ride. But is that fair to you, the reader, who has now been told
something that isn't true?
With the unexpected and overwhelming success of "Bowling for
Columbine" and "Stupid White Men," the fiction that has been written
or spoken about me and my work has reached a whole new level of
storytelling. It's no longer about making some simple errors or
calling me "Roger" Moore. It is now about organized groups going full
blast trying to discredit me by knowingly making up lies and repeating
them over and over in the hopes that people will believe them - and,
then, stop listening to me.
Oh, that it would be so easy!
Fortunately, they are so wound up in their anger and hatred that they
have ended up discrediting themselves.
Look, I accept the fact that, if I go after the Thief-in-Chief - and
more people buy my book than any other nonfiction book last year -
then that is naturally going to send a few of his henchmen after me.
Fine. That's okay. I knew that before I got into this and I ain't
whining about it now.
I also realize that you just don't go after the NRA and its supporters
and then not expect them to come back at you with both barrels (so to
speak). These are not nice people and they don't play nice - that's
how they got to be so powerful.
So, a whole host of gun lobby groups and individual gun nuts have put
up websites where the smears on me range from the pre-adolescent (I'm
a "crapweasel," and a "fat ****ing piece of ****") to Orwellian-style
venom ("Michael Moore hates America!").
I have mostly ignored this silliness. But a few weeks ago, this
lunatic crap hit the mainstream fan. CNN actually put some guy on a
show saying that my film contains "so many falsehoods, one after the
other, after the other, after the other." They introduced him as a
"critic" and "research director" of the "Independence Institute." He
seemed mighty impressive.
Except they failed to tell their viewers who he really was: a
contributing editor of Gun Week Magazine.
CNN saw no need to inform the viewers that their "expert"-- who has
made a career out of opposing any form of gun control-has a vested
interest in convincing the public that "Bowling for Columbine" is a
horribly rotten movie.
So, what do you do when the nutcases succeed in getting on CNN? Do you
just keep ignoring them? How do you handle people who say the
Holocaust never happened or that monkeys fly? Ignore them and they'll
go away? If you give them any attention, all the nuts will come out of
the woodwork.
And that's what happened. I saw another one of these lunatics, this
time on MSNBC. A guy named John Lofton. He went on and on about how my
movie is all made up. The anchor on MSNBC never challenged him on his
lies and never told the viewers who he really was - a right wing crazy
who believes Bush is too liberal. He was once an advisor to Pat
Buchanan's Presidential campaign, and was a direct-mail writer for
Jesse Helms. Writing in opposition to Hate Crime bills in the
conservative Washington Times (where he was a columnist from '83 to
'89), Lofton explained:
Take, for example, this business of so-called "anti-gay violence."
This bill will be used to go after only those who commit crimes
against people because they are homosexuals. But this is not the most
pernicious form of "anti-gay violence." Not by a long shot.
The most violent - indeed fatal 100 percent of the time - form of
"anti-gay violence" has been committed not by so-called "homophobes"
who bash homosexuals - but by male homosexuals and bisexuals against
other male bisexuals and homosexuals.
To date, tens of thousands of male bisexual and homosexual men are
dead in our country because of AIDS, because they engaged in high-risk
homosexual sex.
Is this not "anti-gay violence" which numbers its victims far
beyond anything any "homophobes" have done?
Well, I figured I better deal with this because the nutters were now
being turned into "respectable critics" by a media that either had an
agenda or were just plain lazy.
So, how crazy are the things they've said about "Bowling for
Columbine?" Here are my favorites:
"That scene where you got the gun in the bank was staged!"
Well of course it was staged! It's a movie! We built the "bank" as a
set and then I hired actors to play the bank tellers and the manager
and we got a toy gun from the prop department and then I wrote some
really cool dialogue for me and them to say! Pretty neat, huh?
Or...
The Truth: In the spring of 2001, I saw a real ad in a real newspaper
in Michigan announcing a real promotion that this real bank had where
they would give you a gun (as your up-front interest) for opening up a
Certificate of Deposit account. They promoted this in publications all
over the country - "More Bang for Your Buck!"
There was news coverage of this bank giving away guns, long before I
even shot the scene there. The Chicago Sun Times wrote about how the
bank would "hand you a gun" with the purchase of a CD. Those are the
precise words used by a bank employee in the film.
When you see me going in to the bank and walking out with my new gun
in "Bowling for Columbine" - that is exactly as it happened. Nothing
was done out of the ordinary other than to phone ahead and ask
permission to let me bring a camera in to film me opening up my
account. I walked into that bank in northern Michigan for the first
time ever on that day in June 2001, and, with cameras rolling, gave
the bank teller $1,000 - and opened up a 20-year CD account. After you
see me filling out the required federal forms ("How do you spell
Caucasian?") - which I am filling out here for the first time - the
bank manager faxed it to the bank's main office for them to do the
background check. The bank is a licensed federal arms dealer and thus
can have guns on the premises and do the instant background checks
(the ATF's Federal Firearms database-which includes all federally
approved gun dealers-lists North Country Bank with Federal Firearms
License #4-38-153-01-5C-39922).
Within 10 minutes, the "OK" came through from the firearms background
check agency and, 5 minutes later, just as you see it in the film,
they handed me a Weatherby Mark V Magnum rifle (If you'd like to see
the outtakes, click here).
And it is that very gun that I still own to this day. I have decided
the best thing to do with this gun is to melt it down into a bust of
John Ashcroft and auction it off on E-Bay (more details on that
later). All the proceeds will go to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun
Violence to fight all these lying gun nuts who have attacked my film
and make it possible on a daily basis for America's gun epidemic to
rage on.
Here's another whopper I've had to listen to from the pro-gun groups:
"The Lockheed factory in Littleton, Colorado, has nothing to do
with weapons of mass destruction!"
That's right! That big honkin' rocket sitting behind the Lockheed
spokesman in "Bowling for Columbine"-- the one with "US AIRFORCE"
written on it in BIG ASS letters - well, I admit it, I snuck in and
painted that on that Titan IV rocket when Lockheed wasn't looking!
After all, those rockets were only being used for the Weather Channel!
Ha Ha Ha! I sure fooled everyone!!
Or....
The Truth: Lockheed Martin is the largest weapons-maker in the world.
The Littleton facility has been manufacturing missiles, missile
components, and other weapons systems for almost half a century. In
the 50s, workers at the Littleton facility constructed the first Titan
intercontinental ballistic missile, designed to unleash a nuclear
warhead on the Soviet Union; in the mid-80s, they were partially
assembling MX missiles, instruments for the minuteman ICBM, a space
laser weapon called Zenith Star, and a Star Wars program known as
Brilliant Pebbles.
In the full, unedited interview I did with the Lockheed spokesman, he
told me that Lockheed started building nuclear missiles in Littleton
and "played a role in the development of Peacekeeper MX Missiles."
As for what's currently manufactured in Littleton, McCollum told me,
"They (the rockets sitting behind him) carry mainly very large
national security satellites, some we can't talk about." (see him say
it here)
Since that interview, the Titan IV rockets manufactured in Littleton
have been critical to the war effort in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
These rockets launched advanced satellites that were "instrumental in
providing command-and-control operations over Iraq...for the rapid
targeting of Navy Tomahawk cruise missiles involved in Iraqi strikes
and clandestine communications with Special Operations Forces." (view
source here).
That Lockheed lets the occasional weather or TV satellite hitch a ride
on one of its rockets should not distract anyone from Lockheed's main
mission and moneymaker in Littleton: to make instruments that help
kill people. That two of Littleton's children decided to engineer
their own mass killing is what these guys and the Internet crazies
don't want to discuss.
The oddest of all the smears thrown at "Bowling for Columbine" is this
one:
"The film depicts NRA president Charlton Heston giving a speech
near Columbine; he actually gave it a year later and 900 miles away.
The speech he did give is edited to make conciliatory statements sound
like rudeness."
Um, yeah, that's right! I made it up! Heston never went there! He
never said those things!
Or....
The Truth: Heston took his NRA show to Denver and did and said exactly
what we recounted. From the end of my narration setting up Heston's
speech in Denver, with my words, "a big pro-gun rally," every word out
of Charlton Heston's mouth was uttered right there in Denver, just 10
days after the Columbine tragedy. But don't take my word - read the
transcript of his whole speech. Heston devotes the entire speech to
challenging the Denver mayor and mocking the mayor's pleas that the
NRA "don't come here." Far from deliberately editing the film to make
Heston look worse, I chose to leave most of this out and not make
Heston look as evil as he actually was.
Why are these gun nuts upset that their brave NRA leader's words are
in my film? You'd think they would be proud of the things he said.
Except, when intercut with the words of a grieving father (whose son
died at Columbine and happened to be speaking in a protest that same
weekend Heston was at the convention center), suddenly Charlton Heston
doesn't look so good does he? Especially to the people of Denver (and,
the following year, to the people of Flint) who were still in shock
over the tragedies when Heston showed up.
As for the clip preceding the Denver speech, when Heston proclaims
"from my cold dead hands," this appears as Heston is being introduced
in narration. It is Heston's most well-recognized NRA image - hoisting
the rifle overhead as he makes his proclamation, as he has done at
virtually every political appearance on behalf of the NRA (before and
since Columbine). I have merely re-broadcast an image supplied to us
by a Denver TV station, an image which the NRA has itself crafted for
the media, or, as one article put it, "the mantra of dedicated gun
owners" which they "wear on T-shirts, stamp it on the outside of
envelopes, e-mail it on the Internet and sometimes shout it over the
phone.". Are they now embarrassed by this sick, repulsive image and
the words that accompany it?
I've also been accused of making up the gun homicide counts in the
United States and various countries around the world. That is, like
all the rest of this stuff, a bald-face lie. Every statistic in the
film is true. They all come directly from the government. Here are the
facts, right from the sources:
The U.S. figure of 11,127 gun deaths comes from a report from the
Center for Disease Control. Japan's gun deaths of 39 was provided by
the National Police Agency of Japan; Germany: 381 gun deaths from
Bundeskriminalamt (German FBI); Canada: 165 gun deaths from Statistics
Canada, the governmental statistics agency; United Kingdom: 68 gun
deaths, from the Centre for Crime and Justice studies in Britain;
Australia: 65 gun deaths from the Australian Institute of Criminology;
France: 255 gun deaths, from the International Journal of
Epidemiology.
Finally, I've even been asked about whether the two killers were at
bowling class on the morning of the shootings. Well, that's what their
teacher told the investigators, and that's what was corroborated by
several eyewitness reports of students to the police, the FBI, and the
District Attorney's office. I'll tell you who wasn't there -- me!
That's why in the film I pose it as a question:
"So did Dylan and Eric show up that morning and bowl two games
before moving on to shoot up the school? And did they just chuck the
balls down the lane? Did this mean something?"
Of course, it's a silly discussion, and it misses the whole, larger
point: that blaming bowling for their killing spree would be as dumb
as blaming Marilyn Manson.
But the gun nuts don't want to discuss either specific points or
larger issues because when that debate is held, they lose. Most
Americans want stronger gun laws (among others, see the 2001 National
Gun Policy Survey from the University of Chicago's National Opinion
Research Center) - and the gun lobbies know it. That is why it's
critical to distract and alter the debate - and go after anyone who
questions why we have so many gun deaths in America (especially if he
does it in best selling books and popular films).
I can guarantee to you, without equivocation, that every fact in my
movie is true. Three teams of fact-checkers and two groups of lawyers
went through it with a fine tooth comb to make sure that every
statement of fact is indeed an indisputable fact. Trust me, no film
company would ever release a film like this without putting it through
the most vigorous vetting process possible. The sheer power and threat
of the NRA is reason enough to strike fear in any movie studio or
theater chain. The NRA will go after you without mercy if they think
there's half a chance of destroying you. That's why we don't have
better gun laws in this country - every member of Congress is scared
to death of them.
Well, guess what. Total number of lawsuits to date against me or my
film by the NRA? NONE. That's right, zero. And don't forget for a
second that if they could have shut this film down on a technicality
they would have. But they didn't and they can't - because the film is
factually solid and above reproach. In fact, we have not been sued by
any individual or group over the statements made in "Bowling for
Columbine?" Why is that? Because everything we say is true - and the
things that are our opinion, we say so and leave it up to the viewer
to decide if our point of view is correct or not for each of them.
So, faced with a thoroughly truthful and honest film, those who object
to the film's political points are left with the choice of debating us
on the issues in the film - or resorting to character assassination.
They have chosen the latter. What a sad place to be.
Actually, I have found one typo in the theatrical release of the film.
It was a caption that read, "Willie Horton released by Dukakis and
kills again." In fact, Willie Horton was a convicted murderer who,
after escaping from furlough, raped a woman and stabbed her fianc