Originally posted by Chris Knipp
It's unfortunate that this thread has been dominated by Anduril. This is much the same thing that happened with a lengthy thread about Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ, which I believe he liked. He went to see it. I did not like it, but I went to see it the first night, with an open mind.
Well, I'll come to Anduril's defense on this one. He wrote at length about the faults in "Passion of the Christ", and he led a healthy debate against a person here called MickeyMoose who was a strong proponent of the film. Anduril, a person with an extensive background in biblical studies, found the film to be more in line with a traditional passion play (historically anti-semitic) than a true interpretation of the Bible. I hate to be speaking for him here, but I don't think he would argue with that description. I, for one, learned alot from Anduril's postings about that film.

Of course, I agree one should see "Fahrenheit 9/11" before really delving into its subject matter. As has been mentioned before here, the images in the film are its strong point. We live in an image dominated soceity, and control of images and information is something that the Bush Administration has mastered. Now, Moore comes along and presents other images, ones that aren't nearly as flattering to the Administration. I applaud that.

I also find somewhat perplexing Anduril's statement about the "new front" on terrorism in Iraq making the U.S. safer. This argument about movements of concentrations of terrorists might be a bit more applicable, if at all, to Israel. Possibly the suicide bombers (or "suiciders" as Bush calls them) may shift their focus to Iraq, but I don't think there would be any effect on the U.S. directly.