Quote:
Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
Oh, it gets better. Apparently the new film has its issues as well.
A preview of what's to come: In making a big hullabaloo about Congressmen's relatives *not* being in Iraq, the big frumpy fatass actually LEFT OUT interviews where the Congressmen said "Well, actually, I *do* have relatives in Iraq." Apparently, as always, Moore liked the spin he thunked up (that our Congressmen's relatives don't get touched by their decisions) more than he liked the TRUTH, so he altered reality accordingly.
And, that, my friends, is why he's so dangerous. Combine falsity with a faux image of veracity and you are in for trouble. It should not be allowed to be called a documentary. Maybe a "reality OpEd" or a "mockumentary" but not a "documentary."
|
Source???
Preferably one with exact quotes from the film and with statistics of how many relatives of congressmen are serving or have served in the armed forces, specificallly in combat zones in recent times.
I recall from an earlier piece on the film that Moore's inquiry was if any congressmen had
sons and/or daughters not "relatives".
I also recall leading up the war that calls for the draft were made by congressmen simply because only one of the bunch had a
son or daughter serving in the armed forces.
So an actually credible nuetral source to back the oft repeated opinion "Moore twists the truth" would be nice for a change. Making such an opinion based on the flimsy evidence offered through-out this thread makes me wonder who exactly is twisting the truth and to what degree....