QUES: You write: "Having created the desired impression, Moore follows with his Heston interview." No, he doesn't. You accuse Moore so often of changing the chronology, yet you have no problems changing it yourself. The Heston interview is at the very end of the movie. After the Flint rally comes a brief TV interview with Heston, where he is asked about Kayla Rolland (again, clear evidence that the local media in Flint raised questions about the NRA's presence), then an inteview with country prosecutor Arthur Busch, entirely ignored by critics of the film, who also mentions Heston's presence as notable, and refers to the immediate reactions of "people from all over America", gun owners/groups who, according to him, reacted aggressively to warnings of having guns accessible to children, much like spanking advocates react aggressively when anti-spankers point to a case of a child being killed or severely injured by a beating. These people do not feel the need to express sympathy, or to think about ways to avoid such incidents, but they feel the need to assert their "rights" and to look for quick, simple answers -- as Busch states, gun owners wanted to "hang [the child] from the highest tree". This is all not mentioned by critics of Moore's movie, who claim to be objective. Perhaps the best example of the paranoia surrounding Moore's film is your sub-essay "Is the end of the Heston interview itself faked?" Moore answers a simple question -- how could the scene have been filmed -- with a simple answer: two cameras. From this, you construct an obscure conspiracy of "re-enactment": "For all we can tell, Moore could have shouted 'Hey!' to make Heston turn around and then remained silent as Heston left." Even if your "re-enactment" theory is true (and I see no evidence that you have actually tried to ask the people involved in the filmmaking for their opinion), this itself is not unethical, and you have no evidence whatsoever that Moore has done anything unethical here, just like you have no evidence that Moore has unethically removed parts of the interview. You use standard filmmaking technique as a basis to construct bizarre conspiracies which sound plausible to the gullible reader, without ever providing any evidence for the implicit or explicit claims of fraud and distortion. 
Do you have any questions?
MY QUESTION: Which standard filmmaking technique is used as a basis to construct conspiracies?

QUES: Johnnie had a set of small volumes of English verse, extensively annotated by his own hand, which Stoddard had brought to her early in their acquaintance, leaving it with her more as a gift than as a loan.  She kept these little books after all the others had gone back.  She had read and reread them--cullings from Chaucer, from Spenser, from the Elizabethan lyrists, the border balladry, fierce, tender, oh, so human--till she knew pages of them by heart, and their vocabulary influenced her own, their imagery tinged all her leisure thoughts.  It seemed to her, whenever she debated returning them, that she could not bear it.  She would get them out and sit with one of them open in her hands, not reading, but staring at the pages with unseeing eyes, passing her fingers over it, as one strokes a beloved hand, or turning through each book only to find the pencilled words in the margins.  She would be giving up part of herself when she took these back.  Yet it had to be done, and one miserable morning she made them all into a neat package, intending to carry them to the mill and place them on Stoddard's desk thus early, when nobody would be in the office.  Then the children came in; Deanie was half sick; and in the distress of getting the ailing child comfortably into her own bed, Johnnie forgot the books.  Taking them in at noon, she met Stoddard himself. 
Do you have any questions?
MY QUESTION: Did the main character originally keep stories by Chaucer after the others had all gone back?

QUES: So what is gravity? A typical definition of gravity is that it is a force. It causes an attraction between two masses. According to this definition, anything that has mass exerts a force. Any object exerts gravity on other objects. It does not matter how small it is, it has gravity. The more matter an object has, the more gravity it has. Your pencil has a tiny bit of gravity, but far too little to notice. What about a planet? It would have a lot of gravity. An objects gravity exerts a pull on other objects. Friction only occurs between objects that are touching. Gravity can act between objects that are not touching. In fact, gravity can act over very long distances. Where else can you feel gravity? 
Do you have any questions?
MY QUESTION: How do gravity and friction differ?

QUES: Is this an insect or an animal? A snail is an animal just like you and me. Thats right, you too are an animal. No, you don't look like a snail. You do have some things in common. Animals can be divided into many groups. These groups are decided based on their characteristics. All animals have some basic features in common. That does not mean they are the same. They also have many differences. For example, snails are mollusks and not insects. Mollusks have a unique set of features. Notice the large foot that allows it to move. Yes, it only has one foot. Did you notice the long antennas on its head? This is where the snail's eyes are. They are on the end of the antenna. They are not on its head like most animals. The foot and eyes are unique features. Scientists use these features to place animals into groups. 
Do you have any questions?
MY QUESTION:
Name one identified difference between snails and insects.