[dogscoff]

Moore uses film as if it were a weapon. He yeilds it against those whom he does not like

Agreed. And I don't have a problem with that. I'd rather he used film and media as a weapon than, say... an actual weapon. You are using your words as a weapon against him, so you can't criticise him for doing the same against Bush.

and he does this with dilibrate deception in mind.

Disagreed. I think he presents the truth as he sees it. Whether that's the absolute truth or not I can't say, but I don't doubt for a second that he believes every word of what he says/ writes, and that makes him nothing more nor less than honest. If all he wanted was to make a quick buck out of cheap, emotional non-content, he could do it a lot quicker and with a lot less research by making "support our troops abroad" and "tribute to the fallen heroes of 9/11" films.

Moore is a jerk and only the French would give him an award for an anti-Bush movie.

ONLY the French would give an award to an anti-bush movie eh? I reckon i could probably list a few other nations that might consider it. Iraq for one.

ONLY the French and those who love to hate America would consider ...blah blah blah ... the French who chose to give the award did

*Yawn*
Atrocities, look again at the post on this thread which lists the nationalities of the people who gave the award. THEY WERE NOT FRENCH. OK, one of them was, but three of the eight were american for crying out loud. And if you still persist that it's all some rabid anti-american conspiracy, then I think you need to ask yourself what america is doing wrong to generate so much hatred.

I'll quote it again for your convenience:

3 Americans, 1 Brit, 1 Chinese, 1 Finn, 1 Haitian and only 1 French person.

See... only 12.5% french. 37.5% American & 12.5% British- that puts at least half the votes in the "coalition of the willing." Stop blindly blaming everything on the French, it just makes you look ignorant.

The thing about Moore is he is so single-mindedly one-sided in his philosophy that it probably isn't that he is intentionally presenting only one side of the argument, he just simply can't accept any reasonable counter opinion to his own as being worthy of even consideration, much less give it time in one of hsi mockumentaries.

I think it's more that he doesn't see that as his job. There are more than enough people out there giving the other side of the argument, so he leaves that to them. He sees his views as under-represented, and so he just presents his side of the debate, and allows ppl like you to counterpoint what he has said.

Relying on his documentary and him as a source of factual evidence is like trusting Hitler when he says that the Jews are being well cared for. Now I am not comparing Mr. Moore to Hitler

Actually you are comparing him to Hitler, and I don't think it's a very fair comaprison:

Hitler: Totalitarian dictator with complete control over the press in his country.
Moore: Some guy with a film crew working within a (more or less) free-speech society.

Hitler saying Jews are well cared for: Lies to disguise Hitler's own evil behaviour.
Moore criticising Bush: Attempts to expose someone else's (alleged) evil behaviour.

Not the same thing at all.

Most of french people admire American way of life, wealth and Culture, and remember all European countries have a debt of gratitude to pay to the USA since WWII.

Yet the US seems quick to forget that it owes the French a debt of gratitude for the war of independence. Who do you think gave you the statue of liberty? If not for the French you yanks would all be speaking English...