in article 5jvud0letuaicti8oj71rcojhh75210ifo@4ax.com, Raj Feridun at
rferid@NOSPAMyahoo.co.jp wrote on 6/28/04 11:18 AM:

> On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 10:03:00 +0900, Ernest Schaal
> <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
> 
>>> I can tell I gotta drop this thread....
> 
>> "In this case it is the truth"? Surely you jest.
> 
>> One does not go to Moore for "Truth," one goes to him for entertainment.
> 
> Here's a perfect example of what I was talking about..
> 
> Surely you've actually SEEN the film in order to make such criticisms,
> Ernest?
> 
> Why don't you do that first and then come back with some specific
> facts to counter his rather than making such general, uneducated
> remarks? Personally, nothing pisses me off worse than knee-jerkers of
> any persuasion.
> 
> I would suggest to the right-wingers that if it's so easy to make up a
> movie filled with "lies" why don't they either refute the "lies" with
> the truth or make their own documentary film about the left?? The
> reason is of course because they cannot.
> 
> Raj

Raj,

I have seen Michael Moore films before, I have seen clips of the film on
television, I have heard liberal commentators discuss the film (admitting
that it is propaganda), and I have seen Moore admit that his movie is
propaganda, and that his purpose in making the film is to defeat Bush in the
upcoming election. In fact, the ONLY place I have seen anyone refer to the
"truth" is this newsgroup.

By the way, I never said the movie was "filled with lies." That charge comes
from your twisted mind. I don't even think it is "filled with lies."
Instead, I consider the film as truthful as the typical political ad by both
sides.

I am suspicious of any Usenet nut who would believe everything said by a
political spokesman, whether that spokesman be Michael Moore or Rush
Limbaugh.