Saw moors film

[Nash]

It's not rare, Nuke.

It's more than rare. Unbiased documentaries don't exist.

[DiabloTX]

Originally posted by Nash
Okay do this for me Diablo.

Describe what you think the end product of what you're asking for would look like.

How many sources would be reasonable enough to prove that every sentence was fact?

Multiply that by the number of sentences.

How many pages do you think your request would fill?

I'm only asking y'all to take ONE sentence and call BS on it.

We are going back to square one on this Nash.  If I can't find evidence that contradicts Moore then the burden of proof is on those that support his claims.  That's all I am saying.  I am not expecting a doctoral dissertation on the subject just some kind of evidence that supports Moore's view.

[rpm]

I don't think there is anybody on these boards that thinks F9/11 isn't slanted to Moore's POV, and done so quite overtly. It's a moot point. Nobody is forcing anyone to see the film.

[DiabloTX]

Originally posted by Nash
Unbiased documentaries don't exist.

That's not true.  I saw a very engaging documentary on the sexual habits of Brazilian Fruit Flys on the other night.  Really good stuff and no bias at all.

[Toad]

C'mon.

His distributors now call it an "op-ed piece".

That's a fancy word for opinion.

You know, you turn to the columnists in the Sunday paper and read the op-ed piece.

75% of them don't know what they are talking about.

10% manage to get some facts right and then draw conclusions from outside the galaxy.

15% may actually write something worth reading that causes you to pause and reflect.

It's an OP-ED piece. It's Moore's agenda, just like you see in the papers from those guys.

[Nash]

"If I can't find evidence that contradicts Moore then the burden of proof is on those that support his claims."

No. It just means that you can't find evidence that contradicts Moore.

Got a prollem with that? Dig harder.

Because the lack of ability to find fault with his work doesn't automatically cast an entire blanket of fault on his work from which he must dig himself out under from.

That's like all of a sudden asking your wife to prove she's been faithful. The fact that you have nothing to support that doesn't mean you can dump the responsibility of proving it on her.

[Nash]

Toad nailed it. What's the big deal?

[Dead Man Flying]

Diablo, you're asking Nash to disprove a negative.  tsk tsk.  And shame on you for such an intellectually corrupt manner of arguing.  The burden of proof is on you to prove lies, not on Nash to prove "truth."

-- Todd/Leviathn

[DiabloTX]

Fine.  Cuz yer a lazy tard I'll dig further.

Your analogy is suspect but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt anyway.

[rpm]

The documentary Republicans should be worried about is Unprecedented: The 2000 Presidential Election . That one will make you think.

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Nash
It's not rare, Nuke.

It's more than rare. Unbiased documentaries don't exist.

I hate using absolutes. It would be interesting to find documentaries where the finished film was in direct contrast of the starting points/ideas.

Regards,
Nuke aka SaburoS

[DiabloTX]

Look, this is what Nash asked:

Has anyone come across something that asserts that anything in the film is a lie?

Asserts-
2 a : to demonstrate the existence of

I can no more demonstrate the existance of the lie no more than he can prove the facts.  That, Dead Man, is the essence of a debate.  I took Nash's challenge and agreed, I couldn't find anything.  All I did was challenge him to the same thing and he thinks it's an impossible task.  And tsk tsk to you for not even adding anything to the debate even remotely intellectual.

[Nash]

I *would* have asked:

"Did anyone see anything in the film that was a lie?"..... but I know that none of the people here getting worked up over this thing would have actually seen it for themselves.

So I asked "Has anyone come across anything that asserts...." because I know DAMN well that there are google experts galore in these parts. It's an area of expertise type thing that I was catering to. You should appreciate my consideration in that regard.

[DiabloTX]

Ok, found one.  And it was in Hitchin's article all along.  Moore claims that the bin Laden family was cleared for flights out of the US by Bush right after 9/11.  Wrong.  Richard Clarke claims that he and he alone approved that act.

Richard Clarke, who served as President Bush’s chief of counterterrorism, has claimed sole responsibility for approving flights of Saudi Arabian citizens, including members of Osama bin Laden’s family, from the United States immediately after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Rest of the article here

Oh wait, Moore didn't have time to edit the film after Clarke's admission.  Wrong.  He had 4 weeks to do it.  Some major films take less than that for primary photography.  

Ok, back to digging...

[Nash]

what?