Re: [OT] Fahrenheit 9-11 was Re: Mazes and Monsters

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:NOqdnfSFMdE7fZjYnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

> 
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:Xns983B65569C3B4taustingmail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> news:vOKdnTCHStalFZjYnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>>
>>> "Green Clogs" <GC45@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:TcfNg.17066$o42.12598@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Green Clogs" <GC45@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>> news:9fcNg.19368$dl.7038@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>>>Malachias Invictus wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Ubiquitous" <weberm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:mfadnSE3i4PdR5nYnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That does not negate the fact that "Fahrenheit 9-11" was a
>>>>>>>>fictional movie,
>>>>>>>>not a do***entary.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Upon what evidence are you basing that claim?  Be specific.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Upon what eviodence do you base the claim that the sun is hot?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice dodge.  Let me know when you grow the balls to actually
>>>>> answer the question.
>>>>>
>>>> That was the answer.
>>>
>>> No, it wasn't.  It was a question.
>>>
>>>> If you're too dim to understand it,
>>>
>>> I understand exactly what you are doing, coward.  It is a common
>>> rhetorical trick.
>>>
>>>> that's your problem.
>>>
>>> Let me know when you grow the balls to actually answer the question.
>>>
>> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1164856/posts
gives specific
>> lies by Moore, and cites sources.
> 
> I have read these before. 

So you're just lying about everything, then. That makes you *just* like 
Moore.

> You really need to learn to read the claim, wingnut.  You still have
> not shown that this film is not a do***entary.
> 
There's plenty of do***entation on the stuff that Moore could not 
*possibly* have thought was true. When you present material you *know* is 
false, you are lying. When you make a do***entary, you try to present the 
facts that are true. When you call something a do***entary, but 
*deliberarely* lie, you are not making a do***entary.

Main Entry: 1doc·u·men·ta·ry 
Pronunciation: -'men-t&-rE, -'men-trE
Function: adjective
1 : being or consisting of do***ents : contained or certified in writing 
<do***entary evidence>
2 : of, relating to, or employing do***entation in literature or art; 
broadly : FACTUAL, OBJECTIVE <a do***entary film of the war> 

Even by your own analysis, and admission that Moore was not even trying 
to be objective, you've agreed it wasn't a do***entary. You'll lie about 
that, too, of course.

What Moore made was propaganda. Only a 'tard like you could possibly not 
realize it.

-- 
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
              -- William Hyde
Terry Austin