It is because Goebbels is the acknowledged master of devious, nasty political propaganda. His Nazi-ness is inconsequential as far as Moore is concerned. If you know of another commonly known master of devious, nasty political propaganda, I will gladly change my description.

Dugger

If you know of another commonly known master of devious, nasty political propaganda, I will gladly change my description.

Hint; the initials are KR

Why is it everytime someone on the left mentions a Nazi they get shitted on by the right? You guys seem to love to toss refrences around though?Why is that? Is the rights fascination with Nazis some sort of foreshadowing?

Interesting to say the least. If you honestly believe that a single word that come out of Agent Annies mouth is even close to logical or accurate you have about as much credibility as the rest of your party. And FYI, that’s none!

Hitchens took a three-year sabbatical to write his big book on Jefferson which ended up at oh, 95 pages including front and back covers. Did we need another book on Jefferson? About as much as Hitchens needs another fifth of single-malt.

Ina dditon to the Iraq untruth, Moore also untruthful about the Bin Laden family leaving the US. His film discussed the White House and the president authorizing it, but it was clearly Bush hater Richard Clarke – a sub indenture Security Council official – not the Pres. Also there was the non headline he stole. I agree none of the movie is accurate as long as your definiton of accurate is moral honesty.

Mo, Coulter is a brillaint saint compared to the Goebbelsesque Moore.

Dugger

Since Clarke worked in White House, even if he was the sole contact in charge of approving the release of the bin Laden family, this statement is 100% true. The movie never said the president authorized it directly.

If people actually believe that Clarke didn’t have tacit approval from the administration for which he worked to do something that could be so politically explosive, they are a fool, but either way, the statement is correct.

Spreading “liberal bias” also known as “truth” since 1995

Hitchens (a leftist) on Moore s F 9/11:

No, no. Park Mr. Hitchens over there alongside Mr. Matthews. To borrow Hitchens’ own words, to describe Hitchens as dishonest and demogogic would be to elevate those terms.

Hitchens makes Teddy Kennedy look like Carrie Nation.

Hey, thats cool, as long as you agree that the rest of the movie was accurate.

What Moore Actually says:
NARRATOR: On March 19, 2003, George W. Bush and the United States military invaded the sovereign nation of Iraq. A nation that had never attacked the United States. A nation that had never threatened to attack the United States. A nation that had never murdered a single American citizen.

All three statements are clearly accurate. Teddy, you give these people too much credit.

“To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental.”

Moore asserts that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even threatened (his words) any American. Yet his secret police tried to kill former Pres Bush (which is why Clintin sent a cruise missile on a friendly visit to his secret police HQ.

Dugger

Dugger, gimmie that point back….NO SOUP FOR YOU!!!