Thank you very much for the review, Debbie.

I am so tired of this insulting trash from Hollywood.

Dear Debbie,

Please try not to take it too hard. It’s just a movie. The theme seems to be based loosely on the book “1984” only ending in victory instead of defeat and tweaked for a more modern appeal. Written in the late ‘40s, it could not be considered part of your feared liberal agenda. I wonder at times, do you fear movies because you think America is composed of easily influenced fools who will fall victim or because you rely on people believing anything they are told and can’t stand the competition.

Come on MikeR. Do you not see the bias and hypocrisy of movies like V, Syriana, Paradise Now. When Hollywood refuses to make movies about the real enemies (Islam, liberalism), Debbie has a right to point out the agenda of these films. If the Jews control Hollywood, why are they so determined to bash the West? A lot of young people see these movies and get the impression that the gov't is their enemy and anarchists are their friends. Who finances these 'hate the West' movies? Isn't it ironic that the West, who does not hinder in any way the making or promotion of these movies, is 'the enemy?'

Natalie Portman, born in Jerusalem in 1981, should know better.

I guess MikeR here never heard of the propaganda films that kept the german people in line in the 30's & 40's. Or has noticed the erosion of American society from the pap that two generations have been fed on film and in our schools.

You're right to point this out Debbie. Thanks for the heads up. Hopefully when enough of these movies flop, they'll finally get the message & stop making this leftist crap.

See "Missed Tributes", March 6, in the American Spectator On-line @www.spectator.org regarding Hollywood's disconnect with America.

However, as with most thinking people I no longer go to the movies.

The closing line from "Oh Calcutta" is appropriate for most of Hollywood's failed eforts.

The closing line is: " Who wrote this piece of ----?"

Supreme irony. U.S. soldiers freed survivors of the Holocaust who then migrated to Hollywood or their offspring did so.

The compassion of the saviors,i.e. the U.S. military and U.S. citizens, is repaid by vile, vituperative films which demean the U.S. which are produced in large measure by the survivors of the Holocaust and their offspring.

When one adds the hate-America films to ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, al-Jazeera news, complemented by the DNC sponsored left-stream print meda, is it no wonder that the great unwashed are confused and vote Democrat?

I think our country's worst enemy is "Hollywood". Nothing but Propoganda IMHO..We need to see more people (from that neck of the woods) like Mel Gibson for instance;) ;) I feel as a Christian that we are so under attack right now at every angle... We need more "Christian" film makers, movie starts and yes Politicians...to flex some muscles and take a huge stance by fighting back, speaking out for those with no voice or small voices.. Like us for example who seem to have no or little say anymore.. (Off on a rant.. I apologize.. But articles like this get the blood boiling..KWIM :)

I'm thankful movies like this are made. Anything that stirs the bile of a wingnut so effectively is good. If Debbie suffers just a few gray hairs, a couple fitful nights of sleep, an hour or two of clenched teeth every time one of these terrible leftist transgressions stick in her craw so much the better. Stress is bad, it adds up and it probably shaves a few days, months or years off your life. Go ahead Debbie, have some stress courtesy of us lefties. It won't do you any good, and that's a good thing.

I understand; and in truth, it’s easy to find fault with my comment. But my real point is that I don’t like to refer to “the people” as stupid or gullible. We too are “the people”. I’m not swayed by this movie and I’m sure none of you will be either. If we label this movie as propaganda we could easily do the same for Debbie’s work. Hollywood is not Moveon.org. I’ve devoted a great deal of study to history and know full well the use of propaganda. Furthermore, Debbie’s tale of woe, echoed by many here, is not new. It’s found throughout history and is almost always disproved through time. So, I’m not going to declare myself to be superior to the average man yet I survived propaganda of the past and present. Say no to this movie by not going. I stand by my original statement. Don’t take it too hard.

Oh my gawd this is the so stupid I can’t fit it all into one comment thread, if you'd like my full reaction you may read it here. I don’t like to blogwhore and I never bothered to register to comment before but his is a very special (in the Olympic sense) case.

Now, I have no doubt that Deb will delete this ASAP but let me just say in regards to this bit:

Terrorists and terrorism are the heroes, the government fighting them and trying to keep us safe are the enemy.

From that I can only conclude that Debbie Schlussel is a sniveling coward who would trade her freedom for fascism with the promise that she be safe and anyone who makes her feel uncomfortable be rounded up and liquidated. She is the worst sort of human slime and exactly the kind of moral decay that allows the growth of evils like Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.

Go hide in a closet Deb, leave living in the dangerous world to your betters.

Ah no code needed for links, that always catches me out, here it is:

http://www.hairyfishnuts.com/articles/v%20for%20vendetta.htm

I do agree with you, MikeR, that I don't like to refer to "the people" as stupid or gullible. A lot are, but I still believe there is more common sense people than Hollywood believes, which is why the box office is slumping from what I've read and seen.

As for propaganda, I have to disagree that most of current Hollywood is pure propaganda. I don't have any study to back me up, but like the Supreme Court Judge (Stephens?) said about obscenity, I know it when I see it.

I think it is VERY important to keep speaking up about these insulting films. I don't know whether you are being disenguous or naive, but the "just a movie" argument is silly. George Looney's current lefty movies don't mean anything" "Brokeback Mountain" is not trying to further an agenda? PUHLEEEEZE!

Lastly, I don't lie awake worrying about the Hollywood pinkos. I recommend voting where it matters most, with my money by not supporting Hollywood. As lefty as they are, they worship money above all and that sends the most important message.

Savage

I just read the web page that I assume you run. You really need to see a doctor and quit trying to write a blog that makes no sense what so ever.

If you are going to attack Debbie you should at least try to write something coherently rather than use ample expletives in your missives which make no sense to anyone but mental patients.

ScottyDog beat me to it! I too tried reading Savage's crazy leftist rantings and couldn't find a single coherent thought.

Dear Debbie,

This Hollywood Blitz is the proof that the LEFT is running scared and desperate. Their propaganda machine, which has done far more harm than some would have us believe, is in danger of financial ruin and complete irrelevance. It knows that it is going extinct and is lashing out. All diseased and psychotic things lash out in the end.

Those who criticize your commentaries by trying to make them seem childish or neurotic are also the proof of this. The LEFT is desperate to defuse sites like this at any cost by chiding them.

Being a Marine, I smile when I see these things ... I can smell the fear and panic of my enemies.

I like that.

Only a drugged out Hollywood could come up with a movie like 'V'. No one is going to destroy the Republic, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Churches and Synagogues with the American Military on watch.

The Left isn't just an illusion, it's a delusion. A force of words and images, the Dance Maccabre, a parody of Adult reality ... look at Hollywood and Berkley. Could these gerbel worshipping wimps ever overthrow anything in a real fight? Could an army of drugged out social scum last 15 minutes in a real fight with the military?

Do you know why Marines get to pull riot control? Ask the idiots who were on the receiving end :)

But is Commie-wood doing harm? Yes. They can influence every idiot with an MTV IQ at the ballot box ... which always was their only hope.

Look at the Clinton-Gore administration ... MTV in the Oval office starring Pee Wee Herman, Earl's little brother, and a neo-dyke version of Evita Perone.

The Left is desperate to get that back again ... that's why the Big Blitz.

Keep up the great work Debbie ... I admire your devout patriotism. You tell it for what it is.

[One character--a gay, British Jay Leno type who hosts a latenight show--keeps a secret vault of prohibited items, including a giant poster of "the Coalition of the Willing," depicting the American and British flags surrounding a swastika.]

http://imdb.com/title/tt0434409/ looks as crappy as it gets. Plus gays - no, no, no.

Hey everybody ...

Is it my imagination, or does Salvage sound identicle to SOX ???

Well, I could be wrong, but the dementia levels are certianly identicle.

On the other hand ... I guess high dementia levels are endemic to the LEFT.

Athling, your first post was awesome.

I salute you for your service and that post.

"Only a drugged out Hollywood could come up with a movie like 'V'"

Just so all of you can direct your amusing hate of a movie you haven't seen and obviously don't understand to the proper place, it's "Only a drugged out leftist writer from England could come up with a movie like 'V'"

I SAW IT, FROM BEGINNING TO END.
DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL

Thank You Jeff ... the Truth always feels good. The Truth will always set you Free.

It doesn't take guns to beat liars here in America ... it only takes truth .. that's what separates us from the rest of the world.

Hector ... what makes you think that the Left in England is not the Left in America???

Surely you are not that naive.

I don't have to roll around in crap to smell it at a distance. But, hey, some people understand crap a lot better than the rest of us ... the NEA for example.

Not my point, though.

Surely, you can all blame Hollywood for making this movie, but the Wachowski brothers didn't came up with it. It was written by a writer named Alan Moore more than twenty years ago.

Most of the things Debbie was complaining about were part of that, the blowing up government buildings, the concentration camps for dissident and gays, the rapist priest, etc were all part of the graphic novel the movie is based on.

All the Wachowski was update it a little bit, quite effortesly I might add.

Hector,

This isn't just post 9-11, it's also post-McVey.

The fact that Commie-wood can and does act that irresponsibly simply bears out what I said about them not being ADULT.

I've read plenty of appocalyptic literature ... that doesn't mean that I need to excuse it on artistic licence when it deliberately targets things that I believe in ... especially now that the blood really is flowing.

Do you believe in a totalitarian regime taking control of your life? In rounding up, abusing and killing those who are different? Do you believe in letting those in power getting away with everything they want? Do you believe it's right for the goverment to take away every freedom from?

Those were rethorical, by the way. I don't think you do. But those are the thing V for Vendetta targets.

It isn't about post-9/11, the graphic novel was written as a reflection of Thatcher's England. Everything else is just window dressing to update it to current times.

Of course, I'm talking about the GN, which I have read several times, and about what I've heard about the movie. For all I know the movie could be about something else entirely. Alan Moore hasn't exactly been lucky with adaptations in the past.

FYI;
As I recall, the original "V for Vendetta" graphic novel storyline involved a tyrannical government that came about through *socialized* programs, not through religious ones. I may be wrong. Also, while the left likes to equate the Right with Hitler and Nazis, it is certainly at least as appropriate (if not more so) to equate the Left with Stalin and Communists. What I think would be a better message than arguing over who should be wearing the boot on your neck, one should look at what policies must be in place to allow Tyranny of any stripe to assume such power. To do so, look at what measures were universally implemented by Tyrannical regimes, and oppose the policies, regardless of the letter that follows the politicians name who espouses them.
The one thing I am sure must have been enacted by this tyrannical government for the plot to be anywhere near believable, in this movie adaptation (which, btw, was shunned by the original creator), is gun control.
Armed people are never oppressed. It is like trying to burn water; it just won't happen.
So, if you want to know who is acting most like a Nascent Tyranny, look at how a politician views the armed citizen. Is it with suspicion and distrust, or with respect?

Nice try Hector,

When is political commentary art, and when is art treason?

Depends on what you call art, and what you know in your heart is treason.

Doc Russia summed it up nicely ... Hollywood, the LEFT in general, likes to label any opposition as Fascist ... that's why the propaganda shot, their 'revisionist' version, equates my Flag and my Faith with a swastika.

The Libs are really the wanna be oppressors. They passed 'Hate Speech' laws against free speech, religious speech, and they limit access to the liberal media ... they censor it ... that's why we even need Blogs ... and every normal American is fed up with this crap.

The Lib tyranny ... a paper tyranny of the mind ... is over. The drugged out Boomers are now worthless and clinging to AARP, the drugged out Gen-Xers are completely unreliable and clinging to MTV, and the NORMAL people are completely fed up with this crap and the crime wave that came with it.

When is political commentary hypocrisy, and when is hypocrisy treason?

Depends on who and what you are in your heart.

Doc Russia ...

I guess sometimes it does take the direct approach. No sense dancing around it.

The original 'V' was a warning against the marxist wing of the Libs. It was a warning against the very people who made this newest adaptation.

How poetic that the Hollywood Marxists would shamelessly dare to adapt it as their own devise.

How lyrical that they would also take a cheap shot at the very religions they've vowed to destroy.

How ironic that they get caught at every turn in a world that is now just a little too sophisticated for them ... and their tired old myopic obsession with the dictaorship of the proletariate ... poor sad little wanna be dictators.

As you said ... how can anyone trust a politician who is paranoid about its own citizenry being well armed?

Worse ... how can 'they' trust a military that is sworn to protect the Constitution and the Republic? ... they can't.

No wonder they're pathologically paranoid ....they've earned it.

What??? No takers??? No Lefties out there who want to call me on what I said about the original 'V' being anti-marxist, anti-Lib ???

I love Hector's comment insinuating that Alan Moore's motive for creating 'V' was based on Margret Thatcher's conservative government :)

You only need to know how well Moore got along with the Brits, especially the Brit Libs and their censorship of Moore's best creative work to know the real basis of his resentment. For Moore there was no difference between a Commie or a Nazi, and his works reflected that sentiment.

Moore absolutely despized the Brit libs and their suck up American counter-parts. They threatened his best work ... and, as you look around ... where is Moore's best work these days???

Ah, yes ... censored out by the Lib controlled media at every level.

That's how they work their lie ... they censor something out, then wait long enough to 'revise' it without risking a copywrite litigation, then reconstitute it to suit their own aganda.

That's why their grip on the media was dangerous.

But now the game is up ... they get caught at every turn by Blog savvy people who thik for themselves.

This is no tribute to Moore ... it's what Debbie said it is ... pure PROPAGANDA hiding behind and slandering a very talented man's name and reputation.

Wow.

Just wow.

"What??? No takers??? No Lefties out there who want to call me on what I said about the original 'V' being anti-marxist, anti-Lib ???"

Yeah, I'd like to ask about how did you reach that conclusion.

By the way, I said that much of V is a reflection of Thatcher's England. A period Moore completely despised. He says so in the introduction of the book.

"You only need to know how well Moore got along with the Brits, especially the Brit Libs and their censorship of Moore's best creative work to know the real basis of his resentment. For Moore there was no difference between a Commie or a Nazi, and his works reflected that sentiment."

Do you have a source for this?

Slandering Moore? For drawing a parallel between the United States and the dystopian future of V for Vendetta? Well, no. He has done it himself, after all:

"Well, the one thing with writing stories about the rise of fascism is that if you wait long enough, you'll almost certainly be proved right. Fascism is like a hydra -- you can cut off its head in the Germany of the '30s and '40s, but it'll still turn up on your back doorstep in a slightly altered guise. I'd agree that the current situation is particularly alarming. I tend to think that this momentum seems to have sprung up entirely from a group of largely discredited, extreme right-wingers who have been skulking in the shadows since the Ford administration and have suddenly come into the light of day surrounding George W. Bush. I think they've overreached themselves, at least I hope that."

http://www.salon.com/books/int/2004/07/22/moore/index1.html

You hit it right the first time, Athling. I thought as I read Debbie's review that the Hollywood Left is making movies like this because it is the only way that the left can have their views "validated"--or at least be able to see or hear them. Think about it. They cannot get it from talk radio (we own that); they cannot get it from books and magazines (they don't read much); and they don't get it from the administration (they believe more like us than the left).

The left is so filled with rage that they will do whatever it takes to "get their view out" because they believe that the public agrees with them--or at least it will if they can get the public to hear that message. If they cannot get their message out, you will see them go completely insane. Of course, they already are insane, but it's only noticable when they lose power and cannot hear their message or if they hear the truth.

Hang in there, Debbie. Don't blow a gasket over their rants and propaganda movies. Laugh instead. It will irritate them. Taking them seriously will give them some semblance of validation.

I think it's a good idea to see movies like this. That way when someone starts ranting about our imperial presidency or how we were lied into war, you can say, "Did you see V for Vendetta? That was real tyranny. You can't possibly equate our lives to this."
Of course reason doesn't usually win over emotion with these sorts of people, but you get the idea.

Funny how a story written so long ago in an entirely different country could cause you such concern.

I live in the area the graphic novel is set, it is a tale of what could happen, same as Orwell's 1984. They are not meant to depict any real events, they just serve as a warning.

I think the reason Debbie is upset is because she doesn't like the fact that parrells can be soo easily drawn between the film and what is happening in America right now.

I mean really, is that such a good thing?

A story based around the rise of fascism and the loss of civil liberties, being soo easily compared to the Bush administration?

No wonder the right is attacking the film like mad.

You should step back and ask yourself, how come this movie is soo easily compared, surely such a movie should be as far removed from our Leadership as possible, people like Debbie shouldn't be able to insinuate that the movie is about modern day events, because we shouldn't be living in a world where anything is comparable to such a story.

Yet we do, and Debbie can attack the movie as if it was an attack on Bush or the Right, or more likely in her warped mind, the righeous, you just have to ask yourself how come she can do that?

Remember this America, you had the McCarthy years not so long ago, something I expect Debbie is very proud of, something any self respecting American is ashamed of, freedoms, liberties, they ceased to exist for a time.

What makes you think people like Debbie won't take you there again?

The point is that these movies influence people's minds. Not everyone is so intelligent that they can see through all the metaphors. What about the young minds in our homes?

I read guys like MikeR and it becomes obvious that he has no children. The future is our youth. They WILL believe in the possiblility of these movies as they view them now and in the future unless they are taught otherwise. But with all the irresponsible fathers who either play part time dad to their kids or completely abandon them, who is left to raise the youth of tomorrow? The media! If you don't believe that then you are naive, ignorant and obviously have no kids!

Still Don't believe it? Check out what Rap and Rap videos have done for the moral attitude and language of the youth of America since Rap's induction into society in the 90's. Still don't see it? Then YOU ARE BLIND!

The problem with this is that it's not the film's or source material's fault for promoting a Leftist agenda...it's the world's fault for becoming in such a state where similiarties can be drawn oh so closely to the material.

Debbie seems to be able to draw any similarities with this and the current state of the world is because it is happening. Or at least happening in such a way that Debbie at least could decry it that it isn't happening.

It's a movie people, made from geeks for geeks. I'd probably agree somewhat with this review if it was produced by someone like Clooney or some other celebrity that is overly "leftist", but considering this is a movie adaption of a comic, leads me to think that Debbie et al. seems to be making too much of a big deal about what's essentially the equivalent to Pokemon.

And as for deep throat, children are influenced by media because they are stupid and lazy, not because they are impressionable. We need a good depression to smarten them up.

Hector,

Just put his name into Google and read all of the entries ... maybe you'll encounter something that will wise you up.

Moore was 'anti-establishment' ... he viewed all oppressive government as Orwellian. He saw no difference between fascists and Marxists. And, let's face it, the modern Libs are heavy handed these days.

Fascists are socialists ... nazis are socialists ... marxists are socialists ... progressive liberals are socialists ... all socialists get arrogant ... and all socialists regulate media, destroy free speech, and denounce anyone who opposes them as EVIL .. as if they're always the good guys.

Moore pretty much hated Orwellian types as much as he hated Neo-Cons. Just look at his art. So, yeah, trying to use Moore to prop up a cheap shot propaganda stunt for the Left is as cheap and as shoddy as it gets. Especially since thewy waited until the copyright expired then used the following language ... a movie 'based upon'. Yeah, sure ... Anyone who lies that pathologically never once had a clue about truth or honesty.

This isn't about LEFT vs RIGHT ... this is about Orwellian mentality. You know .. like when Hillary was running around with all of those FBI files in the White House ...ever wonder where those files went off to?

But ... and here's the clincher ... the Brits ripped him off. They got caught at it, and covered it up with legal double talk.

Moore had no use for Thatcher, but he had no use for the Brit Lib establishment that back stabbed him.

Funny how Libs are as filthy as Neo-Cons when it comes to money :)

Who are the Nazis?

The Nazis were not fascists ... the stupid French Fascists betrayed France and let the Nazis in ... then woke up in a real nightmare when they found out the Nazis were not Fascists. The NAZIs used fascists as pawns.

The Nazis were Eugenic Marxists.

Abortion, euthanasia, animal rights ... all of it right out of Hitler's little handbook ... the platform of the modern Progressive Libs at DNC .. whooppiee!!! WE ARE THE WORLD !!! Seig Heil, cha cha cha.

And then someone has the nerve to call Bush a Nazi ... oh the side splitting humor ... I can't take it anymore!!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Ya gotta love the LEFT ... marching knee jerk to the Ober Munchkin anthem and swearing that they are 'liberals' ... LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Not to worry folks ... the American Military watches these things, roles its eyes, sighs deeply ... but knows that Americans always snap out of it sooner or later all on their very own.

No socialist banana republics here, thank you.

Did you somehow missed the part of the interview where I posted where Moore himself sees parallels with Bush's America?

Here is it again, just for you:

"Well, the one thing with writing stories about the rise of fascism is that if you wait long enough, you'll almost certainly be proved right. Fascism is like a hydra -- you can cut off its head in the Germany of the '30s and '40s, but it'll still turn up on your back doorstep in a slightly altered guise. I'd agree that the current situation is particularly alarming. I tend to think that this momentum seems to have sprung up entirely from a group of largely discredited, extreme right-wingers who have been skulking in the shadows since the Ford administration and have suddenly come into the light of day surrounding George W. Bush. I think they've overreached themselves, at least I hope that."

So, there you are. Alan Moore. The writer of V for Vendetta. Drawing parallels between his fascist Britain and Bush's America. He loathed Thatcher, he loathed Reagan, both Bushed, etc.

So, yeah. He's extremely anti right-wing nuts.

So, I ask you, again, where can I found all the examples of the work he had censored by those elusive brit libs. Or are just making stuff as you go? Do you even know who Alan Moore is?

I ask because I do. I have read books about him, I have wrote about him and have read most os what he has written.

And you don't seem to have an idea about what you're talking.

Are you going to answer, or are just going to keep talking to yourself?

Fong,

There were two McCarthys ... not one as in the ongoing Hollywood fiction ... the commie-wood social mythology. However, for the sake of brevity ....

EVERYTHING McCarthy said about the Hollywood marxists came true ... to the letter.

Oh WoW !!! Where's the block buster movie to cover that little fact?

Instead we get their 'woe is me' Blacklist movies ... poor misunderstood little commies who only wanted to betray America and drag it into the nearest socialist moral sewer as soon as possible .. how dare they blacklist us???

I hate McCarthy every time a Lib attacks the 10 commandments in a public forum.
I hate McCarthy every time the Libs extend their 'Hate List' to crush freedom of speech.
I hate McCarthy every time a 'special' law is created that undermines the very concept of equality under the law.
I hate McCarthy every time I have to protect my kids from being sodomized by a Loyal Democrat.

Self respecting? Liberal now means Libertine ... the sewer that spawns all filth, moral and social.

Everyone knows it ... so why pretend otherwise? Your Hollywood glorifies it at every opportunity.

You people are the Dance Maccabre in a world that is too dangerous for such infantile narcissism in the Halls of Power ...

Unless we want another 'self respecting' Liberal repeat of the Monica thing in the Oval Office ... starring Pee Wee Herman, Earl's little brother, and the neo-dyke version of Evita Perone.

Yeah Fong ... self respecting ... I can't even believe that a Liberal would stoop to using such a 'conservative' word.

I have a simple question for supporters of Bush. Has nothing to do with V but it is an interesting question.

When asked 4 days after Katrina Bush replied.

"No one knew, no one could have anticipated."

This was touted by the Right as the reason that Bush didn't do anything, well he couldn't could he, no one knew, if no one knew, how can you blame Bush. He isn't psychic he can only react to the information he has, not his fault!

Then we find out that he did know the day before the disaster hit, that he was told in a conference call, quite clearly, on more then one occasion about how big this storm was.

What do the right say about the interview where he claimed that no one knew?

Oh a slip of the tongue, a minor slip is all.

Ok, lets say we believe that was just a slip of the tongue, a rather fortunate slip of the tongue that created a lovely excuse for him, but lets pretend that we believe the propaganda that he didn't mean to say that.

Then what was his excuse for doing nothing then?

Remember, his excuse for doing nothing was because no one could have known it was going to happen. Well we now know that people did know it was going to happen, and they told Bush, and we know that Bush knew, because his claim that he didn't know was a slip of the tongue.

Well what's his excuse now for not doing enough?

Hector,

How many times do I have to say it ... He's anti establishment, he always was anti-establishment, he always was a big fan of LSD, and he's always had that early druggie paranoia for any form of government that seemed to him authoritarian.

YES ... he hates Neo-Cons ... I never once denied it.

What YOU keep going DEAF on is that his history, his backgrpound, brought him into contention with the Brits. Not just a dislike for Thatcher ... his legal problems were with the Lib establishment as well. They, his so called Lib buddies, ripped him off big time when he was under contract to them ... and I'd like to hear him deny it publicly ... too many on the record statements, too many interviews, too much public venom to back out now without playing the all time hypocrit.

Moore's message always was simple ... anything Orwellian is BAD.

Turn the clock back ... his views were out of what era?
Have you ever read Clockwork Orange? Try to convince me that it depicted a Conservative social scheme.

Most anti-Orwellian work targeted the Brits through the 60's and 70's. And the Brits were Moore's favorite target well before Thatcher. So, for the neo-Orwellian Left of today to pretend to be the good guys is a bit much.

If you don't like Bush, fine ... scream bloody murder ... but don't try to pretend that Moore's early works did not denounced the very mentality that we see in the modern Left today.

Thats MY point ... the hypocrisy of this whole 'V' thing.

It's a rank propaganda scam. And to call the Conservatives Nazis ... that's a bit over the top while the Libs are pressing for the smoothering decay of a socialist NWO sans the Bill of Rights.

Who's kidding who here Hector? Anyone can pick up a comic and know that every word I said about his hatred for the Orwellian, of any stripe, is true.

FONG,

FEMA has been so over-engineered by the mommy state mentality that it's a wonder it can ever work again.

There is more than enough blame to go around to both sides, which is why I get annoyed with the witch hunt mentality.

A Lib Judge blocked the Army from putting in he spill ways because they upset the ecological mantra. The spill ways prevent back flow, back flow will always raise the incomimg tide,and in a severe storm the high tide took out the walls.

So who murdered the people of New Orleans? A mayor who didn't move fast enough or efficiently enough? A governor who was asleep through most of it? A FEMA director who may or may not be a total incompetent? A President who does not have God like powers after all?

Or an eco-nazi Liberal judge who stopped the one Army project that would have limmited the high tide scenareo and maybe saved all of those innocent lives. But, hey, ecology first ... right man???

Want a witch hunt??? Your side better be very careful about the BS lies they're telling.

Like I said, there's more than enough blame to go around ... so why not accept your share of it?

Oh yeah ... Libs are blameless ... Never do anything wrong.

"It is Ok, we will have the assests you need on the ground"

As said by Bush to FEMA and everyone else you want to blame.

They are Bush's own words. He spoke them to those people in a conference call.

I am not asking for God Like powers, but when a leader says, I will make sure that there are assests on the ground, and when the time comes, there are no assests on the ground.

Then I think they should take the blame.

Not lie about it, and pretend they didn't know, not go all shifty and blame everyone else. But stand up tall and say, Yes I made a mistake.

Bush doesn't, seems incapable of doing that, instead he goes all weasly and starts to lie.

YOu then back him up on those lies, and when he is found out, like he is every time, you pretend that the lie wasn't the major issue anyway, and that really it was something completely different.

It is a theme of the Bush Presidency, first we were told Yes WMD do exist, absolutely 100% he has weapons of mass destruction and a program to build more. Wrong, but that wasn't the issue, we went becuase he was getting nuclear stuff from Nigera. Wrong, but that wasn't the issue we went because of links to Al-Qaeda. Wrong, but that wasn't the issue we went because we wanted to free the people of Iraqi.

When you just pull out because Iraq has fallen into civil war and there is nothing you can do about it, how you going to explain that you just wanted to free the people of Iraq.

See all these lies and excuses and just plain stupidity that takes time to disprove, just distances us from the moment.

The moment is when the country is angry, when it is upset, when it wants answers.

Bush doens't have any answers. So he makes them up. Then by the time he is found out, the moment has passed, people are forgetting Katrina in favour of some other issue that Bush will just make up an excuse for to get past.

Look at the past years of the Presidency, it has been one fumbling load of old rubbish after another, statements that are found out weeks or months later to be entirely misleading or untrue, but by then its too late.

Maybe if we didn't live in the age of superfast communications and instant endless news and entertainment, we might be able to hold onto an issue long enough to clobber Bush with it.

Unfortunately we don't, and Bush staggers from one disaster to another with a trail of lies lingering behind him.

Thanks Debbie and other commentators.
Not all Brits are scummy little traitorous drugged out whinge-bags.
Fuck this film and the Hollywood morons that backed it.
Why do you think they set the film in Britain?
They would have been lynched if they had shown the WhiteHouse being Blow apart.
I hope Hollywood goes bust. You despoil the memory of Chaplin and the many Brits and European film-makers that went there and created the store house of Cultural wealth that Hollywood once was.
When will the Jewish film-makers of West Hollywood realise their asses are on the line and it's time they stood up to the Left-leaning faggots whose lives revolve around the mirror and the line of coke.
Wake up you bloody fools and make some films that tell the truth.
Before they build minarets on your Synagogues.
Not that you go there anymore.
Hollywood...Change now before you fall into obscurity and your bank-balances empty, you cowards.

Fong;
Bush and FEMA's assets were waiting for authorization by Governor Blanco to deploy. She hesitated, and was more concerned about what kind of wardrobe to wear than actually getting the aid in.
Let me ask you this:
What would your reaction have been had Bush simply ignored the duly elected governor of Louisiana, and sent in Government forces to impose order and provide aid?

Personally, I do not want *ANY* president to be able to do that.

The one lesson EVERYBODY should have learned from Katrina, New Orleans, and Ray Nagin, is that the government is unreliable. For this reason, I strongly encourage people to be self-reliant. As a corollary, the people who suffered the least in the aftermath of Katrina were those who had made their own preparations, and decided not to rely upon the government (local, state, or federal) for their welfare.
If you cannot take care of yourself, and must rely upon the government to take of you instead, then you are a slave to that government. All they need to do to keep you in line, and keep you slaving away for their own purposes is to threaten to withdraw support. So, you will do whatever they say, as long as they keep the 'help' coming.

Ah ... more Lefty distractions from the main theme. They're running scared:)

Back to 'V' ......

Hector,

Moore hates all Conservatives. He equates a normal society with fascism. Moore's dream is the Dance Maccabre from all of that LSD he took. That he hates Neo-Cons is no secret. The dirty little lie is that he 'now' loves the Commie Left.

Moore got victimized by a process called 'mining'. This is the ugly truth about media, including Hollywood. Mining is a legal way for
companies to sidestep plagiarism litigations from their employees. The company publishes most of the work, but holds back the best work, then pays someone else 'much less' to reconstitute it. Moore got mined by the Brits. This became a very public scandal.

Now, all this time later, the Wolachinski Brothers, on Hollywood's payroll, run another end play around Moore. The end play is 'based on' a work by Moore. Funny how the Hollywood Commies loath Neo-Cons but act even worse when it comes to their own profit margins.

So ... and here's the sad little secret ... faced with being completely disenfranchised by both the Brits and Hollywood, good old Moore sold out so they'd throw him a scrap. Fine, he hates Neo-Cons, but to let his exploiters alter his work for their own propaganda stunt ... poor little Moore.

So who is the dirty, evil power behind all of this? Not the Conservatives.

I'm not writing this for you Hector. I know who you are ... rhetorically speaking of course. This is for everyone else who loves pursuing
the truth. This is very easy to substantiate by using Google.

So who is the evil power?

How about an industry so corrupt and evil that it pretends to ideology while 'mining' its victims, then steals from them using the 'based on' label, and maybe throws them a scrap if they play along with an endorsement.

Anyone who trusts Hollywood is very naive. Anyone who doesn't know how their propaganda machine works should find out. If ever there should be a RICO filled against an industry, it's Hollywood and any other Leftist controled outlet. They corrupt everything they touch.

Repeating the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true, Athling.

And, once again, you have failed to produce one single link about these things you have been saying. Not one.

So, once again, I ask, where is the source of your claims? If your answer, once again, turns out to be 'search in google' I must conclude that you don't have any idea what about what you're talking about.

Like this, for example:

"So ... and here's the sad little secret ... faced with being completely disenfranchised by both the Brits and Hollywood, good old Moore sold out so they'd throw him a scrap. Fine, he hates Neo-Cons, but to let his exploiters alter his work for their own propaganda stunt ... poor little Moore."

Since we have already established that Moore himself sees parallels between Bush's America and V's future, as he himself said so, there is no reason to pity him.

Also, you seem to imply that this is Moore endorsing the movie so Hollywood 'throw him a scarp' See? These are the kinds of things that make me think you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

First of all, when Moore said that, he hadn't read the script for V, so there wasn't any endorsing. He said so because he tought so.

And second, have you seen the posters for V for Vendetta? Have you noticed they read 'Based on the Graphic Novel illustrated by David Lloyd'? You know why is that? Because after being sued for copyright infringement by someone who claimed The League of Extraordinary Gentleman movie was a rip-off he swore off Hollywood forever.

So, sold-out? No. Because his toughts on the US asa potentially dangerous fascist state are from well before the movie was made. And since his toughts on the setting are very similar to what will be on the screen, there is no need to pity him, either. Also, since he doesn't want anything to do with the movie for reasons entirely different from what we're discussing, there is no need for him to play along for 'scraps'

Oh, and David Lloyd? He endorses the movie completely.

Hector,

This isn't about Moore's beliefs. It never was. We all know what Moore is. His LSD addled brain views all normal society as Fascist ... like anyone is really surprised.

As for the links .. are your fingers broken??? .. am I your maid service or something? Put Moore's name into Google, read everything that comes up ... not all of it is Lefty propaganda.

Look for the good stuff about the litigations and 'mining'.

The other's on this site have already done it ... that's why I brought this up in the first place.

It's for them, not you ... it's obvious who you are ... rhetorically speaking, of course :)

But his isn't about Moore either, per se. And it's not even about the Wack-o-ski Bros. They get paid to rework someone else's talent into Lefty propaganda trash like Matrix ... they destroyed a perfectly good movie with that socialist fairytale crap .. man I almost cried at that point.

This is about 'mining', 'revising', 'stealing', and worse by Hollywood.

Hollywood accuses the Right of being Fascist, but Hollywood runs itself like any money grubbing Neo-Con mafioso dictatorship. Tell me it's not all about the money and nepotism in Hollywood.

Then Hollywood has the nerve to pretend to 'a higher moral ground' to launch trash propaganda like this???

And then here YOU are pimping this off as valid, as if Bush is somehow a Fascist, as if Hollywood or Moore are sane enough to be an authority ??? How much dope does it take to reach those kind of conclusions, Hector?

This argument started about 'V' being propaganda ... it is propaganda ... it is propaganda generated by people who are so degenerate that they never will get near real poliical power ... they've got way too much to hide.

But Hollywood sells UFO and Alien movies to the sane people for entertainment ... then movies like 'V' for the mentally defective. That's why 'V' sells so good.

It's irresponsible ... but Hollywood loves to sell fear to the weak minded ... it always pays big bucks ... and MONEY is GOD in Hollywood.

The Left is the Dance Maccabre ... nothing Moore and nothing Lesse .. and Hollywood makes a fortune off of it :)

What evil are you talking about Hector??? You asked who's behind 'it' ... what 'it' ???

We are at war ... security is always high during war ... the Dems kept the security high even in the Cold War, or did you forget that part?

Bush is acting like Cold War Democrat ... nothing more and nothing less ... and if that scares you ... oh golly :)

I see that, once more, you have completely failed to substantiate your claims of Moore battle against the evil Brit libs.

So, you say ridiculous remarks without any kind of backup and expect me to substantate them for you? No doubt you must adore the chimpanzee you have for president.

Anyway, hopefully V for Vendetta is a success. It's the kind of movie the lethargic audience needs to awake from their stupor. Obviously not you, Athling. You have already made your own mind about a movie you haven't seen just because Ms. Schlussel didn't liked it. Apparently you like to be told how to think. A movie about freedom and personal responsability like V is supposed to be about isn't for you.

Hector,

Why should I rush this ... it's too much fun.

Do you know Dennis Hopper?
Starred in "Easy Rider" .... now stars in E-Ring.

Guess who ripped Dennis off, Hector??? :)

Here's how Hollywood works ... URL and all

http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2005/09/19/dennis_hopper_land_of_the_dead_interview.shtml

Q: There has been constant rumours about an Easy Rider sequel. Do you know anything about this?

A: I think that they're trying to do it now. They're doing it without me. I think that Peter [Fonda] may be involved. Peter and I have not spoken in a few years. I had to sue Peter to be paid for Easy Rider. We had a falling out before we started shooting principle photography for Easy Rider and never really got back together. But I made him look very good in that movie and I'm proud of the job he did. But no, I'm not involved.
Unfortunately, I don't own the movie and I don't own the rights to make a sequel ... even though I wrote the film.

Q: Did you have an idea for a sequel?

A: I had a great sequel but they're not doing the one I thought of.

Q: What was it like?

A: Oh, you don't want to get me telling you about a movie I'm never going to make, do you?

So you see Hector ... this is how it works, they wait until the copyright is expired then they make a sequel 'based on' ... very honest and forthright of Hollywood isn't it :)

I'm saving Moore for last ... I'm enjoying this Hector ... :)

Hopper's life was nearly destroyed by drugs and alcohol. Finally he got de-tox'd and started thinking clearly and coherently again and ... OH MY GOD he became a Republican !!!!!!!!!!!

Alas, poore Moore took far too much LSD and hasn't been anywhere near sanity since, which is why he's so easy to rip off ... all druggies are.

Every socialist Utopia rounds up the druggies and execute them ... Soviets did it Maoists did it .. I think that was a social statement.

Druggies do not win revolutions or wars ... sorry Hector, that's Hollywood BS :)

Hector,

Unfortunately something important came up and I can't hang around and play any moore ...

So here's the url about Moore ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Moore

This isn't the only one by a long throw ... but since you seem to have a problem with the concept of Google, and you can't even use Wikipedia, I took mercy on you.

This isn't about Moore or Hopper ... this is about how Hollywood operates ... and how they operate makes them anything but reliable when it comes to moral or ethical concepts ... much less political concepts.

If you like Moore ... fine. He seems like your kinda guy ... rhetorically speaking, of course :)

By the way Hector,

There are other sites that explore this topic in greater depth. I choice a 'neutral' site that is readily available to anyone so that I can't be accused of spinning this. And there's enough in the 'neutral' info to lead people to other sites.

Now that I've humored you, Hector ... I 'demand' a 'neutral' site from you that proves Bush is a Fascist.

If you cannot do that, Hector, then you prove my point that 'V' is rank propaganda, and that there is NO justification for that kind of rhetoric ... not even for fun and profit.

Natalie Portman somehow dodged serving in the Israeli army as it is mandatory when you become of age.

I think Hollywood will soon be performing for itself.

I, TOO, WONDERED HOW SHE GOT OUT OF MANDATORY SERVICE, SINCE SHE WAS BORN THERE AND BOTH PARENTS ARE REPORTEDLY ISRAELIS. IF ANYONE KNOWS THE ANSWER, PLEASE E-MAIL ME.
DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL

You claimed that Moore was censured, and had a continuing stuggle with the 'Brit Libs', a government which he hated.

So, somehow, in your view, DC Comics and Marvel Comics are part of this elusive liberal British government? Funny thing. And here I was thinking they were comic book publishing companies located in New York. Silly me.

Which just proves you just don't have an idea about what you're talking about. Which I knew since your third post about Moore, but I just wanted to be sure.

Why should I post a link 'proving' Bush is a fascist? Where did I said that? Oh, yeah. I didn't. I posted an interview with Moore saying he sees similarities between the US and a fascist state. But, as far as I know, the movie doesn't explicity says 'BUSH IS FASCIST'. That people like you and several others here dislike the movie so much says more about you than about Moore or the filmmakers.

I mean, in Debbie's 'critic' she somehow manages to be obvlivous to the fact that the goverment in the movie exterminated minorities, effectively ceased any kind of civil liberty using fear and 'security' as an excuse and routinely rapes and murder people at their whim. Nice thinking there.

But hey, if that's the goverment you prefer, I can't do anything to change your mind.

By the way, no need to thank me about the Wikipedia article, which probably is where you found all your information about Moore, I helped write it and fact check it so people could learn about more about such great writer.

Hector,

SOPHISTRY works on college freshmen, not mature adults.

When you stated that there was credibility to the claims in 'V', when you champion the proponents of 'V', when you quote them, when you call the President a chimp, when you use every opportunity to pretend that this garbage is not blatant propaganda ... that's called sophistry ... the tool of cowards who elude responsibility for their words and actions.

Hollywood is corrupt ... that's common knowledge. I don't need a URL to prove what is common knowledge. And you side stepped the Easy Rider issue .. or did you write that one too ... LOLOL ... please send me the URL proving you wrote the wikipedia piece ... yeah, sure.

You are soo full of it Hector, and now you're trying to run from the issues I spelt out for the whole world to see.

Moore hated the Brits who ripped him off ... why shouldn't he??? Are you denying that? Again, sophistry.

Are you denying the linkage between the Brit comics and Pinewood, and between Pinewood and Holywood, and between the American comics?? Are you so deluded that you honestly think that no one else knows??? Wow ... imagine that ... Hector is guarding the deep dark secret.

Have you been at Moore's stash, Hector? You must be to think that everyone is as gullible as you need them to be.

Go to De-Tox ... it'll clear your head up.

PS Hector,

Moore doesn't hate lefty dictatorships, or socialist cess pits ... he loves them ... when I said he hated the Brits, I meant specifically his good ole lefty buddies who ripped him off. Why shouldn't he?

I pointed this out because ... once again Hector ... it's about the money. The Brit Libs are as Neo-Con as their Yank counterparts when it comes to money.

I did NOT say that Moore was 'censured' ... nice try Hector :)

Using that word ... censure ... also tells me that you are a Limey Lefty ... no wonder you got so twitchy when I brought up the evil Brit Libs.

Stick to running your own Clockwork Orange, Hector. We've got enough of a mess from Yank LIbs without Euro-trash marxists butting in.

'Euro-trash marxist' Man, you're a laugh riot!

You going all Sherlock Holmes, 'deducting' I'm a 'Limey Left' because I wrote censure instead of censored (which, you know, you did said, here: -especially the Brit Libs and their censorship of Moore's best creative work-) was also funny as hell.

But no, your deductive reasoning is on par with your debating skills. Twice you have implied I do drugs, which I don't. Never have. Never interested me at all. And I'm not british, either. Or european for that matter.

But it's easier that way, isn't it? Dismiss based on useless ad hominem. Boring tactic.

Oh, I see. You couldn't find when I said Bush was fascist. Another straw man. I did called him a chimp. Because he's an incompetent idiot. But chimps aren't fascist, are they?

I wasn't championing the movie. What I did said was that both the writer of the original GN and the filmmakers could find similarities with Bush's America. Against your claims that Hollywood perverted V for Vendetta with their views.

I'm not championing this movie. I haven't seen it. Who knows? I'll probably won't like it. Perhaps I have read the GN so many times I won't be able to accept any change made, no matter how minimal.

But those who have been angered about this movie? Maybe they think Bush is a fascist. Maybe you think he is a fascist and you're pissed because this movie implies that. Maybe those who have hated the movie think fascism is a good thing. The review opening this discussion certainly seems to think so.

Or maybe, people will hate this movie because it challenges you. Because it says things you don't want to hear. You, and all here who 'thanked' Debbie for telling them that they shouldn't see this movie seems like the type or people who like to be told how to think, instead of thinking for themselves.

What should have answered when you brought up Dennis Hopper? That Hollywood rips people off. That studios routinely make sequels of movies without the participation of the creators? Well, duh.

I don't need to prove that I wrote the Wikipedia article (which, again, what I said was that I helped write it, and fact check it.) that wasn't part of the discussion. It's for my own amusement, as when this discussion started I genuinely tought you might know something about Moore I didn't. Obviously I was wrong.

Thank you Hector ...

I wanted everyone to see propaganda in action. I pushed your buttons, you complied. Thanks man.

You pretend to be reasonable until someone stresses you, then it's 'Bush is a chimp'.

If you did write the Wikipedia piece, then you have revealed yourself as a pathological liar.

I stated that Moore had been mined by the Brits. This data was in the Wikipedia piece. If you wrote that piece, you should have admitted it, then questioned my conclusions. Instead you cat called me for 'not substantiating' my claim by providing you with a url ... what was wrong with admitting to that one little truth, Hector?

That, Hector, is a propaganda tactic. There is no attempt for dialogue. It is sophistry, intellectual dishonesty, with intent. You meant to deceive from the first until you got caught at it.

When I further stated that there is collusion between the comics and the movie industry. YOU called me a moron, or what ever ... while deliberately ignoring the syndications that link comics to "TV", from "TV to movies" in both the US and UK, then arrogantly dismiss me for not knowing what I'm talking about ... LOLOLOLOLOLOL

That's not even sophistry Hector ... that's a blatant lie by ommision ... another propaganda technique. Except you screwed it all up :)

Then the verbal slip ... no YANK would ever substitute 'Censure for Censor' ... scream all you want, Hector, the American speaking audience reading these posts know it's true ... man you are too easy :) LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Propaganda is always reasonable ... but depends on lies, mainly by ommision, a deliberate unwillingness to engage in forthright dialogue while concealing malice ... but you screwed up calling Bush a chimp ... so you've been outed :)

There IS and NEVER was dialogue with the LEFT. The left is a movement of pathological liars.

But here's the absolutely best part ...

Fascism is evil ... we must fear Fascism ... Bush is a Fascist ... Bush is a chimp ... we must fear the diabolical fascist chimps ... run away !!! run away !!!

Kind of mixing your signals huh, Hector :)LOLOL

Real Patriots, both Democrats and Republicans, fought Fascism in WW2. Arlington cemetary is filled with the Crosses and Stars of David of those fallen patriots. The Republicans, and those few conservative Democrats who are still around, continue to honor that patriotic tradition ... and then a guy like you comes along and equates this with Fascism? ... why else argue FOR a piece of blatant propaganda like 'V' ... what? ... oh, on principle? ... what principle? ... certainly not the principle that filled Arlington with patriots fighting fascism.

Nice try though ... truly worthy of your idol ... a self consumed sociopath on LSD.

You DID write that Wikipedia article to let people know how wonderful Moore is ... right?

Don't worry. I'm not stressed at all. Certainly calling Bush a chimp isn't a sign of stress. Frankly, it seems to stress you more than it does me.

And now I'm a liar? More insults. Where exactly did I lie? Becuse I'm pointing your straw men? Or maybe because I don't see where Moore was 'mined' by the brits? I honestly don't. You say it's there in the Wikipedia article (which, I again, I never said I wrote it entirely) So, I ask, where is the exact part where it says that. Copy and paste it. I'll admit if I'm wrong.

You say that there can't be a dialogue. Well, who is the one here throwing insults? Twice you have implied I'm a junkie, you called me 'Euro-trash marxist' and now a liar. Mind you, I find it hysterical. But still I don't think I'm being the close-minded one here.

Ah, that 'verbal slip' which you seem to love patting yourself in the back for your impressive deductive skill, what does it matter? What does it matter where I come from? I'm not from either the US or England, but what would it matter if I were?

Debbie,

You may wonder why I'm doing this. It does seem rather childish, right? It isn't. YOU were very correct when you said that 'V" is deliberate propaganda. Now I'm going to tell you who is behind it, and why.

My first interest was to determine 'who' had come on your site to engage in deliberate disinformation. Since Moore is a cult figure, I started screwing with his image and Hector responded. It is VITALLY important to them to preserve Moore's cult standing as some kind of anti-fascist hero.

Hector is not one person. Hector is a collective ... at leat two people. One is older, either Brit or Canadian, the younger may be American, and may be a recent defector to Canada. This double teaming is done so that if the older one is caught at it, he can blame the ranting on the younger one ... this tactic is all about plausible deniability. But, oh dear, they messed up with the 'censor' to 'censure' slip. It was bound to happen sooner or latter.

I appealed to their arrogance by pretending to be less than knowldgeable .... they took the bait.

The hard Left in the UK, Canada, and the US are in big trouble over a scandal that is going to break very soon.

The Libs in Canada were content to be a second rate socialist welfare state until the defector Yanks moved in recently. You know ... the ones who left recently calling America a fascist state. It is these hard Left Yanks who actually talked the Canadian Libs into an extreamist platform ... cracking down on churches that defied their leftist agenda. They went too far ... they sued a Catholic Church in New Foundland into bankruptcy, among oher things, and revealed how FASCIST the Left really is when it comes out of the closet.

The Canadians, including the French Canadians, were outraged and voted in a Conservative government. The conservatives are now finding out just how far the Libs went, and how much they broke the law ... not just Canadian law, but international law.

I have plenty of Canuck friends, and for them to vote conservative is right up there with Elvis giving up rock&roll for opera.

Worse yet, the Libs imported marxist south Americans and militant jihadists, among others, to help overthrow Canada in the event of a civil uprising as Canada was dragged into a Marxist dictatorship, and then wanted to use them against us ... those idiots actually thought they could control the jihadists.

This whole plot tanked when the conservatives took power. The Libs freaked ... including the ones here in the US ... ever wonder why they suddenly started screaming like Hawks over the Dubai thing??? Believe me when I say they are running scared and trying to distance themselves from the repercussions in Canada by pretending to be vehemently anti-jihadist.

Why is 'V' so importantant to them? They're desperately trying to make Americans paranoid over the Homeland Security act by calling it fascist. If they can scare enough people, maybe they can take the White House and supresss the truth by threatening the conservatives in Canada.

Again .... if you want to see fascism, just look at what the Libs were doing to religious groups in Canada. They've even come up with this phoney 'clerical union', as if clerics are supposed to be unionized and tout the socialist agenda ... pretty much what Mao did in China. I can't imagine why we are trying to liberate Iraq when so many of our Canuck friends needed liberation from the Marxist gulag that was solidifying into power.

These people are desperate ... which is why they've dropped their usual arrogance to pretend they are reasonable people again.

You've seen how many circular lies I've caught Hector in ... I do not apologize for my tactics ... and, yes, these are profiler tactics ... but you need to cultivate their arrogance before they slip and reveal themselves.

But I'm not paranoid about this ... they're too arrogant to fool thinking people.

God loves America ... how do I know this is true? ... He gave us YOU :)

Thank you for having the spirit to call it for what it is ... and this is why Marines adore 'Babes with Brains' :)

This is just too much!

I mean, seriously, wow. I can't say I've ever laughed so much at an anonymous internet poster. Thanks, man.

Though, I got to say, that last post became quite predictable. After my last post I tought 'hmm, I bet that since I told than I'm not from the US or England, he will think I'm Canadian, and then proceed to rant against Canadian liberals' And, voilá!

But no, Athling. I'm not Canadian either. And I don't know much about Canada's politics, so I didn't read what you're babbling about. The entertaining factor about reading paranoid delusions drop if one isn't familiar with the subject. And I'm just one guy, by the way.

So, that 'profiler' thing? Since so far you haven't said one correct thing about me, I wouldn't advice to persue it as a career. You're just not good at it.

On the other hand, the part where you pretended to be ignorant and clueless? Man, that was brilliant. I totally bought it. I didn't doubt that for a second!

Anyway, even if it became pretty easy after the third or fourth post, it's been a fun 'spot the logical fallacies' game. Thank you.

So, as Ed Murrow used to say, 'Good night, and good luck'.

This is a horribly flawed movie and a perfect example of flawed liberal thinking.

The movie is not about a fascist government or a socialist government or marxists or communist. It is about a whole fictitious and unbelievable government. A conservative right-wing theocracy so extreme that it could we never exist as long as freedom loving people are willing to fight against tyranny. I mean it goes way too far. Orwellian is an understatement. But we know from the first 2 minutes of the movie what they are trying to imply.

As Americans our founding fathers fought AGAINST that sort of thing; and I have a hard time believing that things would ever get that bad without someone taking a stand MUCH sooner.

On the plus side, the movie could be said to be about the importance of freedom... about what could happen if one person (or a small group of people) controlled virtually all branches of government... about what would happen if the media always sided with the ruling party... about what would happen if the government could label anyone that disagreed with them as unpatriotic or lock them up.

On the negative side, in doing this Hollywood seem completely detached from reality (as usual).

For example, in the movie the government convinces people to allow phone calls to be monitored; they allow the government to monitor EVERYTHING, from what they read, to where they go. And the people supposedly allow all this because they are frightened of terrorists.

Now I worry about terrorists as much as the next guy, but this is utter crap. It would be impossible for ANY government to fool an educated populous so completely that they would just surrender their liberties because it make them feel safe.

I mean sure, maybe something small... like driving the speed limit... that we can all agree on... but privacy is too important to just give away like that. People would never let it get away with that.

In the US our founding fathers fought for those freedoms... and our brave soldiers over in Iraq die every day defending them. We would simply not allow it. No one would.

Another thing in the movie that bothered me was the portrayal of government censorship. It made Fahrenheit 451 look tame (the book by Ray Bradbury not the movie by that obnoxious pig Michael Moore, someone should shut him up). I mean everything was censored... from anti-government posters... to nude art work... to music with bad words... to pornography. I mean Alberto Gonzales wants to censored porn... but with the exception of John Ashcroft I don't think many people are clamoring for censor our art and music.

Another example, in the movie the government has exploited fear to expand their powers until they could control things like the decisions that we make in our own homes. For example, in the movie, gay people are not allowed to marry. I bet the Hollywood folks loved that... the oppressed homosexuals.

Although it makes for a creepy Orwellian story line; free societies believe that people have certain inalienable rights: like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The movie also imagines a world were religion rules the government. This is also utter nonsense. There are far too many religions in the world. I for one can not imagine any society tolerating the establishment of a national religion... if I remember my history that is exactly what our founding fathers were trying to escape... the Church of England. To imagine a world were people would welcome that back is beyond ridiculous.

Another aspect that I found troubling was that the government in the movie had secret prisons where "terrorists" were held indefinitely and tortured. Again, although I see what the Hollywood folk that made this are trying to say... this again is something that people simply wouldn't tolerate... even out of fear. The bags over the head were a nice touch.

And lastly. The biggest problem I had with the movie. The "hero" fights the "tyranny" of the government by being a terrorist... guilty of treason... and calling himself a freedom fighter.

Now while I do understand that our founding fathers blew up English government property... were guilty of treason... and were probably considered terrorists by the English government... there is a HUGE difference.

We are Americans.

And we will always fight back when the government tries to control us or tax us or take away our guns or our liberties or our rights to make our own decisions and control our own lives. That's what makes us freedom fighters and not terrorists.

Like the movie said... The people shouldn't be afraid of the government. The government should be afraid of the people.

And that is something that we never need to worry about. Our government knows that we will rise up if they become too big or too corrupt or if they have too many cronies or if they just start acting like a dictatorship.

It short... don't go see this movie. Debbie is right. Sometimes I wish there were more limits on free speech.

W .... yeah, you feel the twisted thing slithering beneath the slick productions and know in your heart that you have encountered incarnate EVIL.

But the best litimus is: 'If the NEA loves it, it's got to be perverted or treasonous, or both.'

About Hector ... notice he never owned up to where he's from ... like there's any doubt :)

A pathological liar to the bitter end. And, yes, a lie by ommision is still a lie if deliberate.

However ... I'm not arrogant enough to believe that everyone, including my fellow conservatives, will side with me on every issue, or on every perception.

I don't want to live in a country where everyone has to think a certain way (political correctness)as per one central poitical ideology. In fact, I reserve the right to change my own mind as often and as much as it pleases me.

Republicans can disagree, bicker, and quarrel among ourselves without apology because that is how true democratic process works ... a marked contrast to the Liberal lockstep culture that does not tolerate any internal challenge to the party doctrine and the DNC 'Thought Police'.

The Canadians Libs sued a catholic Church into bankruptcy because a priest told his congregation that homosexuality is an abomination. The Libs in control of the government called this 'hate speech' and allowed the litigation to go through.

The world finally got to see what Progressive Liberals do when they think they've got total power. I'm trying hard to determine the differences between them, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao.

In a free world, if someone doesn't like the sermon, they can join a different church ... it's that easy. Crushing a church is either siding with an alternative faith, or repressing a religion for political purposes, both of which are violations of the Human Rights charter under the UN.

I won't quarrel with their opinion about hate speech, they have a right to love to be as perverted as it pleases them ... I will, however, quarrel with any political ideology that militantly attacks and represses my religion, then demands that I be 'reasonable'.

So who's the FASCIST???

And why should I tolerate people who mean to actively repress me?

But ... bottom line ... who do you want in the White House?

There is a very simple rule of thumb ... which candidate would you allow your children to be exposed to?

Check out Moore on Wikipedia ... look at his picture ... ask yoursef if you'd let this self possessed drug crazed sociopath around your kids.

If not, then why would you want your kids to be exposed to this man's twisted mind at the movies?

It's all about ADULT responsibility. Use it or lose it ... if you let the Libs win, you forfeit your adult status to the mommy state run by some very sick and twisted mommies.

Debbie is right ... 'V' is deliberate, and desperate, propaganda at it's worst.

One response to W -

I would suggest going back and reading what you wrote because you contradicted yourself at the end.

I would also suggest reading some current events. Often all branches of government, military, money, etc DO get consolidated into one party (see Venezuela). Also, you could say the same thing about our government...
conservative republicans control the House, the Senate, the White House and the Supreme Court.

Oh, and we already do imprison people without coucil, without a speedy trial and we torture them to get information out of them. Some of them are American citizens. We have ignored our own Constitution and agreed upon international treaties like the Geneva Conventions in how we have imprisoned "enemy combatants".

You did make one good point though... the British probably did think we were terrorists during the Revolutionary War... that's because we were! We used guerilla war tactics and did "symbolic" acts of sabotage (see the Boston Tea Party).

For everyone else -

I do want to ask one thing...why do you think that those who you call liberals have as much power as you think they do?

Even if they "control Hollywood", you (conservatives) control all three branches of government, all the federal courts, the radio media, big business and most of the powerful lobbyists.

I think John Stewart said it best... "You're not some rag-tag group of rebels trying to overthrow the empire... you are the empire."

I did like the earlier comment that maybe the reason people are so upset about this movie is that they see bits of truth about our current and future situation in the story line. Whether the movie was written 10 years ago or last year, the similarities may be striking for some...on both sides.

From my point of view, historically, it seems like "liberals" tend to make policies that "conservatives" hate, speak out against, but never actually change when they have the chance. Yet the conservatives spend billions of dollars trying to "fix" these programs (see Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Social Programs, Public radio and television, much of our country's infrastructure, etc).

Unless you are in business or the business of war, the conservative Republican party seems to have very little for you. However, if you care about social policies, the poor, education, the environment, old people, international agreements, etc...then you probably find plenty of room in the liberal Democratic party. If you find yourself in the middle, then just go and talk to a conservative for awhile and express some opinions...if they are "left" enough, you won't have to choose anymore. There is very little room in the conservative party for those who do not completely, entirely agree with the current expressed dogma.

Oh, a couple more things that I don't understand...

Since when did disagreeing with the government become treason? ...at least in a democratic country?

And, since when did disagreeing with the reasons for war mean that you hated American troops?

And one tidbit to take with you...we are currently NOT at war. Anyone know when we last fought an actual official war? I think it is weird the we "won" the war in Iraq like 2+ years ago, but are still fighting the war. The "job was done" when the statue of Sadaam fell, but we, today, we are still at war.

I guess that makes sense since this war is not over a country or against a person or a group, but against "terrorism"...it make sense since we are in a perpetual war now that will never end. Terrorism will never go away. We will never kill or capture all the terrorists and the more we try...the more we invade countries, the more people we will anger...the more terrorists we will make. This is an interesting strategy coming from a "Christian", since Jesus himself promoted pacifism. Hmm...how does that work? Being a Christian nation supposedly, but then fighting a constant war?

This movie was actually spot on... all one needs to do is tweak the marketing... this movie is probably very much what it was like to live in Sadam's Iraq.... by plugging that in... I found the movie enjoyable... much to the chagrin of my lovable but left leaning wife...

My objection to 'V' is not the satire.

My objection to 'V' is that it is satire directed at conservatives by liberals who, as can be plainly demonstrated in the example of Canada, behave like Fascists when they get power.

My objection to people who define 'Christianity' by making incorrect statements about Jesus is also another reason I get fed up with Libs.

When asked about paying the Roman tax, Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's"

The tax paid for political, judicial, and military expenditures. Jesus obviously felt that it was correct to be a good citizen, and to uphold one's civic responsibilities.

Jesus was not born in Judea ... he was born in the Roman sector of Palestine, (the partitioned side). Jesus was a Roman subject.

Because of this statement, all Christians were free to serve as cops and military when the government finally quit persecuting Christians.

Jesus was not a pacifist. Jesus believed in moral and ethical behavior, he did not promote lawlessness, treason, cowardice, immorality, and any of the other Lib platform choices.

As to the American Revolution ... it happened because Parliament was behaving like a criminal organization. The Yanks who 'rebelled' were fed up with being treated like 3rd rate citizens by their own government. That's not terrorism ... the politicians were the terrorists, and they wree using Judicial Activism to circumvent the law.

I love the way Libs distort history and religion to justify their abuses of both.

But ... I'm getting very irked with Republicans who wave the flag then knife the Vets in the back on medical benefits. Bush is burning bridges that the next Republican candidate won't be able to replace. If the 'Means Testing' applies to Veterans, why not to SSN???

If they want to fix SSN, quit handing out critical medical services for free to people who can easily afford to pay their own way. Since when should Trump get full SSN services?

Re: Athling

A couple replies...

One, your interpretation of the "give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's" is incorrect. And your reasoning is flawed...or at least, probably far too extrapolated. Especially given historical evidence that points to the fact that the early Christians WERE all pacifists, meaning that that was part of the apostle’s teaching. That fits in like with versus like “turn the other cheek” and “if they ask you to walk one mile, walk two”.

A couple questions for clarification of your points…

One, why do you think those who run Canada are fascists?

Merriam-Webster defines fascism as “a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.”

Canada seems to be doing ok versus this definition.

Why is it that, as posted earlier, everything OTHER than American-Western Capitalistic Democracy seems to be fascism? However, I do see “forcible suppression of opposition” in this country. I see a growing, centralized government in this country…headed not by the Democrats, as usually stated, but by a Conservative, Republican House, Senate and White House. BUT, I don’t call our country a fascist nation… nor a socialist nation… nor a communist nation. So, why the extremity for EVERY OTHER nation?!?

Second, you wrote, “Jesus… did not promote lawlessness, treason, cowardice, immorality, and any of the other Lib platform choices.” Now, I haven’t been to a Democratic Convention, but I do keep up with what comes out of these and I have never heard “lawlessness, treason, cowardice, or immorality” as part of the platform. Why the excessive extremity?

Third, your argument about the American Revolution was completely circular and subjective.

And I still don’t understand who these crazy liberals are who are ruining our country and running everything. However, I do see a majority in the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, all other Federal Courts, the print, radio and television media and the White House…who ALL are dominated by Republican Conservatives.

After the election, I often heard comments towards Democrats or Liberals of “you lost, so shut up” and thought…what has happened to our country…winning is fine, but when one party loses, they don’t lose their rights to free speech or freedom of the press. However, I find it FAR more ironic that even though the Conservative Republicans have “won”, they seemingly can’t stop talking about the minority Liberals and how they are destroying America. Maybe they should shut up and do some work…they finally have what they want and all I hear is whining and complaining about some fictitious, villainous, enormous group of Liberals ruining the world.

mdsnod ...

Just how long have you Libs had to endure this Republican domination of all branches??? What, 15 minutes now, and America is suddenly a tyranny? Let's not forget how long you Libs have had control, and how little you did to curb the crime wave. Or did Clinton's little 'I didn't inhale stunt' tickle your Lib fancy? So please do not tell me that Libs don't encourage drugs, wanton sex in the Oval Office, and stupidity all the way around (current foreign policy platform).

As to Canada ... just because people say they're liberal doesn't mean they're liberal, especially when they start crushing churches on the pretext of 'hate speech'. If it acts like a Nazi, then it's a Nazi no matter what the offical label. And pushing that phoney 'clerical union' was right up there with Stalin and Mao ... so maybe they're Marxists who act like fascists. I've heard from Marxists that Stalin acted like a fascist :)

As to Jesus ...

Let's clarify something. YOU may believe what you want to believe. My issue with YOU is:

(Your words)

"This is an interesting strategy coming from a "Christian", since Jesus himself promoted pacifism. Hmm...how does that work? Being a Christian nation supposedly, but then fighting a constant war?"

How dare YOU determine what ALL Christians are supposed to believe? How dare YOU think YOU can speak for ALL Christians ... by what authority?

If you had stated that YOU believe that all Christians should be pacifists ... fine. That would have been intellectually honest. You chose the intellectually dishonest path.

As to my views on Jesus and the pacifism issue ... tell me first IF you are a Christian. I don't deal with imposters who engage in sophistry for the sake of propaganda.

This isn't a religion course, and for you to accuse me of circular reasoning demonstrates that you are either very shallow in your theology, or an enemy of the faith looking for an opening.

But, hey, nice try .. you are one of the few libs I've encountered who actually has a functional IQ. Too bad you people always rely on distortions and myths to sell your propaganda.

mdsnod ...

Oh yeah ... the American Revolution ...

EVERY colony had a contractual CHARTER that specified that all colonial government had to be based upon and consistent with the Magna Charta and British civil laws.

This makes splendid sense. If anyone wanted to appeal a ruling handed down by a colonial court, the legal framework could be readily addressed by the Crown.

The Colonials were part and parcel to the British political and legal process. This also meant that the Colonials could appeal against political decisions forged by Parliament and foisted on the colonies ... much like modern American states can appeal againt federal abuses foisted by the Senate.

Every attempt to appeal the 'criminal' abuses of the colonies by Parliament was rejected by the appeals courts ... which were in the hands of appointees of those same miscreants in Parliament.

When judicial activism is used to disenfranchise anyone of their 'rights' under the law, it eventually leads to reform of rebellion. English hostory is releat with rebellions against the crown. And so it happened here as well.

Obviously you never investigated this aspect of the Revolution ... yet you try to penalize me for your ignorance.

YES ... judicial activism is a dirty word. You libs used it to stack up a huge barrier that makes sensible laws impossible ... we Conservatives have to tear that wall down brick by brick ... and then you have the nerve to call us lazy??? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Nice try though ... but you people have copied the very Parliament that drove the Colonies to rebelle ... what were you thinking???

Israel -vs- the MINDLESS PACIFIST crowd.

Thanks to a large heretical movement in Christian circles, it is somehow believed that pacifism is manditory. Worse yet, they've encouraged non-Christians to enjoy this same expectation.

Funny thing, as I read the Hebrew and Christian Testaments I find plenty of instruction on how to be a good husband and father. I find nothing on merrily abandoning my innocent family to torture and death at the hands of human animals. I cannot imagine how any man could be a good husband and father who would stand idly by and sacrifice his own wife and children to his personal religious belief ... it sounds just a bit too pagan to me.

Funny thing, suicide is a mortal sin, but my enemies say that I have a religious obligation to let them murder me and my family ... they say it's written in the Bible. They are obviously the morons who flunked religion 101 and took up drugs 101, sex 696 (bisexual), morality 000, and political ideoloy 666. In other words, only a devoutly perverse mentality would even try this approach.

Let me explain how my faith really works when you threaten my family ... first I punch your teeth out, then punch your face in, then I start breaking various body parts ... if you were dumb enough to bring a weapon, I shove it where the sun doesn't shine ... nor do I consider it a sin to defend myself and my family from human animals.

The 'turn the cheek' instruction is for those who 'witness' for their faith. If I care enough to witness to someone, I should be ready to go the extra mile, or even face martyrdom. That's why I consider it a sin to use institutional forums and peer-group status to pressure people into conversion.

This requirement for martyrdom under certain circumstances is just that ... conditional.

Yet, thanks to a deliberate perversion of this requirement, it is said that 'pacifism' is a manditory requirement for Christianity. And it is this crowd that would have us sell out Israel under a false and heretical religious principle.

Even Ghandi observed that 'pacifism' without a political objective is mindlessly foolish. Organized pacifism forces the 'oppressor' to make a very public moral decision. If the pacifism fails, then violence is legitimized.

Dr. Martin Luther King understood and employed precisely the same tactic. He also understood that people do not, and cannot change unless they want to.

Pacifism is to be used in lieu of violence to accomplish a specific goal ... not as a life style based on institutionalized cowardice (by some) and pathological suicide (martyr syndrome) by others.

Selling ou Israel on some kind of 'feel good' 'we are the world' pacifism is elective murder ... those who preach this lie are asking you to engage in premeditiated murder. This is the Holocaust with an MTV Happy Face.

I am astonished that there are morons who still try to foist this 'pacifiism' scam off on Christians and Jews ... especially with Islam all dressed up for a Jihad.

I am even more astonished that there are so called Christians and Jews who endorse it.

If these people really believe in their cause ... let them please go to the varous Islamic nations and engage in political pacifism to force those governments to: (1) allow for freedom of religion, (2) freedom of speech, (3) freedom from those mindlessly bloody Jihads, and (4) my personal favorite ... protest for the right to spread the 'mindless pacifist' movement.

So you think that speaking in black and white is the best way to go. Do you have any idea what this story is based on? Guy Fawkes. Forever he was considered a bad guy for killing in the name of Catholism in England, but was he? I mean the Church of England killed many Irish Catholic Families. One Catholic tried to fight the person really in charge, no families. That is trully what this is about in the movie. He never kills families, only the ones that tried and basically did kill him and his family. To compare this to Bin Ladin is luticrous. That is something that you fear not Liberals. The key here is that to stay free you all need us liberals as much as we need you conservatives. One to fight and one to love. It doesn't matter who is right it is the fact that if you all shut us all liberals out our country will become FACIST that is the comparison we are looking at. SO PLEASE F****NG QUIT IT, with the whole patronizing, hateful, Biased Party attitude that you are writing and look at the bigger picture. THE MOVIE SAID USA WENT INTO CIVIL WAR. What do you think they meant by that. If we dont start respecting each other we will be back into a CIVIL WAR. Duh, we have already been in one, do not think it could happen again? Liberals keep Democracy alive while the conservative job is to keep the Republic alive. With only extreme liberals we will have Communism with only extreme conservatives we will have a Fascist State, so forget about who is right or not it is about how we can COMPLIMENT each other. Now my opinion on the movie, is that it was awesome, I do believe that freedom of Speech is becoming more and more sacraficed, but thats it I do not want to blow up the White House or anything. We do let things controlled more and more by the government ESPECIALLY MEDIA AND IF YOU THINK MEDIA IS LIBERAL YOUR NUTS. First of all if someone speaks independently the get fired, secondly (besides parts of Canada, Australia, and Britain, and other FASCIST STATES (ex. old Afghanistan)) We are one of the only countries that do not ALLOW NUDITY/SEX, SOME VIOLIENCE, AND CURSING ON THE PUBLIC TELEVISION. that is NOT LIBERAL. And to justify it for the sake of family under Jesus is a little silly since Jesus was never married and had kids? Anyways I do not want to offend anyone religiously because that would be against their RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. But its NOT FREEDOM when you tell me I NEED TO BE CHRISTIAN AND NOTHING ELSE. Besides the RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IS FOR THE SAKE OF CHRISTIANITY. What if the GOVERNMENT could control what you DID in Church, that use to be the case in ALL OF EUROPE and some now in the Middle East. So stop being scared of it and keep Religious Freedom alive by practicing it on others as well. No need to control the Government cause if you do it will only backlash and the opposite will happen (CAUSING CIVIL WAR) so please STOP THE CHAOS BUT DO NOT BE AFRAID OF IT INSTEAD IMBRACE WHAT WE COULD LEARN FROM IT (hince the message of the movie).

cbuck2,

You are a laugh a second ... Civil War??? From who??? The pansey limp wrist Left ... LOLOLOLOLOL
I hope so, I really do ... I'd just love it ... every Marine I know would love it. Every Seal I know would love it. Every Ranger and Green Beret I know would love it. Every A-Teamer I know would love it ... and that's just for openers.

Imagine that ... a 15 second civil war against the dope heads and pervs ... LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Let me see if I get this from your perspective ... if we run the marxists out, we'll only have fascists remaining?

Yep, typical marxist rant ... oh the logic, oh the IQ at work .... give it up man, America grew up, and everyone is tired of that BS, except of course the delusional doped up Left.

And ... LEARN WHAT ???

The Guy Fawkes, the real one, had a real cause. I should know, my family is English Papist from that period. And I assure you, that had nothing at all to do with you and your perverse Lib doped up delusions. How dare you equate Catholicism with a political ideology that despizes and actually persecutes Catholicism at every opportunity.

Another thing ... not all English Papists were persecuted. There were shires in England where that was really a bad idea. Even Cromwell tiptoed around certain shires after the militias formed.

So ... I guess 'V' was what? A Lib threat against the rest of us??? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

By the way ... and I've got this from an expert ... the movie was an attempt to explain 'communication theory' ... and it fell right on its butt because they (the doped up Commie-Wood crowd) don't have a clue what they are talking about.

The only threat against free communication was Clinton and that dirty little chip they wanted to use to regulate every computer in America.

Once again, the people who don't have a clue how the real world works try to lecture the rest of us with propaganda flicks that only manage to razzle and dazzle the dysfunctional IQ crowd ... and then the dysfunctional IQ crowd rush right out to lecture and threaten (?) the rest of us.

You might try detox and a few courses in adult reasoning before you hurt yourself.

Sorry I haven't posted in a while. Been busy becoming more liberal...I mean...learning things in school:)

Athling -

I am not sure what is wrong with you, but I am sure that something is wrong. But, personal attacks aside, here is a reply to the SEVERAL comments, questions, bad conclusions and bad logic from the half dozen replies since my last post.

#1 The Conservatives have been in power for longer than 15 minutes.

#2 I have NO idea what "Let's not forget how long you Libs have had control, and how little you did to curb the crime wave. Or did Clinton's little 'I didn't inhale stunt' tickle your Lib fancy? So please do not tell me that Libs don't encourage drugs, wanton sex in the Oval Office, and stupidity all the way around (current foreign policy platform)." this is about?!? Doesn't even make gramatical sense.

#3 Same with the Canada speech after this. Not sure what your point was.

#4 Yes, let's clarify something since several posts were about an idea that I was not promoting.

First, why get so upset when I say that Jesus and the early Christians were pacifists? This is historically true. Did I say that all Christians were to be pacifists? Did I say that we should let people beat up and rape our wives and children? From the replies, one would think that I must have, but when did I say that? When did Jesus or the early Christians say that?

If you don't like the term "pacifism" then use another term in its place. My point was to bring out the irony that we are supposedly a Christian nation with a supposedly Christian President, who when faced with an attack, IMMEDIATELY replies with violence.

Afganistan and Iraq were NOT immediate self-defense. They were retaliations. The plane that crashed in Pennsylvania crashed because the passengers were defending themselves and the lives of others. Self-defense is time dependent. If you do something to me and several months later I retailate, I can't really call that self-defense.

Now, if you want to argue that Afganistan was national self-defense to try and eliminate (capture, kill, whatever) the leader of a terrorist organization, maybe that is understandable. But my point still stands...why promote yourself as a Christian and then believe in rampant retaliation...clearly an anti-Christian idea?

#5 The authority I claim is based on scripture...based on what God, Jesus and their followers promoted in the New and Old Testament. Jesus did NOT defend himself. He condemned Peter for trying to defend him. You can say that is a unique situation, but when you follow church history, you see that the early followers, who were greatly persecuted, similarly to Jesus, did not defend themselves. This indicates to me that the early Christians either believed in pure pacifism OR in at least religious belief pacifism.

Either way, the emphasis given is the OPPOSITE of retaliation, the opposite of vengence. SO, again, why support and promote those are "right" while supposedly being Christian, which by all accounts, seems to indicate the opposite OR at least, alternative means?

#6 Yes, I am a Christian. Just not a radical, right wi