Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:43 pm
the pearl, that post reinforces my mindset that reporters really do lean to whatever side is fashionable, if they do a report on some leftist group fighting for so and so, they usually pick a group or a person that seems kinda cooky. if you're the type quick to judge, then you're left with the impression that these leftist groups are really just a bunch of weirdo cry babies.
and that goes for alotta other things too like the movie Shooter, if you noticed the FBI guy who ended up helping Walberg's character in tracking down the 'bad guy', at one point is shown wearing a shirt with a picture of Che Guevara, in turn instilling in old american minds that only a 'colored' FBI agent with communist leanings would of helped another disgruntled soldier take down a government official.
maybe i'm stretching it thin but these days you never know what are the reporter's or a film-maker's intentions. they hardly ever do interviews or get asked the right kind of questions.
300 was filled with gross historical errors, some obviously made to make the Persian empire look like a group of not only dark skin middle-eatern peoples, but black as well, and asians. It seemed that anybody that was not white 'was' the 'enemy'. I read that at the time of that certain battle the Persian empire hadn't stretched down into Africa and the Orient for that matter. The Spartans did not practice democracy so all those battle cries for 'freedom' were misleading. They were in fact slave holders and forced many slaves to head first in front of the battle to receive the initial blow. They also had strong homosexual tendencies and yet the gayest character in the movie was Xerxes the enemy's leader.
shit, now this thread is turning into a conspiracy-nut thread
and that goes for alotta other things too like the movie Shooter, if you noticed the FBI guy who ended up helping Walberg's character in tracking down the 'bad guy', at one point is shown wearing a shirt with a picture of Che Guevara, in turn instilling in old american minds that only a 'colored' FBI agent with communist leanings would of helped another disgruntled soldier take down a government official.
maybe i'm stretching it thin but these days you never know what are the reporter's or a film-maker's intentions. they hardly ever do interviews or get asked the right kind of questions.
300 was filled with gross historical errors, some obviously made to make the Persian empire look like a group of not only dark skin middle-eatern peoples, but black as well, and asians. It seemed that anybody that was not white 'was' the 'enemy'. I read that at the time of that certain battle the Persian empire hadn't stretched down into Africa and the Orient for that matter. The Spartans did not practice democracy so all those battle cries for 'freedom' were misleading. They were in fact slave holders and forced many slaves to head first in front of the battle to receive the initial blow. They also had strong homosexual tendencies and yet the gayest character in the movie was Xerxes the enemy's leader.
shit, now this thread is turning into a conspiracy-nut thread