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

Some Guy <noemailformethanks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:qhqNg.2892
$nL2.2564@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> news:Xns983BA126F7F9taustingmail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> 
>>>"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>news:Kq2dnYV0Ha1de5jYnZ2dnUVZ_tidnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>>>"No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>news:Xns983B9ED7554B6taustingmail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Main Entry: 1doc·u·men·ta·ry
>>>>
>>>>Selective argument-by-dictionary is pathetic even for you, Terry.
>>>
>>>If you claim it's a documentary, then "documentary" must have *some*
>>>meaning.
>> 
>> 
>> You are familiar with terms of art, are you not?
>> 
>> 
>>>>Being objective is not a requirement for a documentary film, moron.
>>>
>>>According to the common usage, yes, actually, it does.
>> 
>> 
>> ...not according to Wikipedia, or any other source I have seen.
>> 
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_film
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_film
>> 
>> You are welcome to counter with your sources, of course.
>> 
> 
> And note F911's movie poster in the "Documentary" page, not the 
> "Propaganda" page.  While some documentaries are propaganda as well, 
not 
> all propaganda movies are nonfiction.  Some, such as Reefer Madness, 
are 
> completely fiction.
> 
> That's the difference between "Fahrenheit 911" and "Red Dawn"; while 
> both of them can be considered propaganda, the former is still a 
> documentary and non-fictional,

Except for all the deliberate lies in it, which you've agreed are there.

You really need to learn to lie better, Burke, if you're ever going to be 
a pro like Moore.

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