07-22-2004, 08:19 AM
Galt Wrote:That was the problem with the documentary in my view. Columbine had an argument. It had a point, a conlcusion, and a coherrent argument. I disagreed with it in his "a causes b" point of view, but fine. At least it was consistent point.it's been a few weeks since i saw it, but i think i got the point, but then i was already predisposed to agree with most of what he's saying. but anyway, i think the point is that if you see this you might at least start to question things and maybe look into it for yourself, and i think that was the purpose of it all. yeah he's become the rich fatcat that he's suposedly against, but he's still important to this society because he raises the questions that people are too lazy to ask.
This last one was just all over the place, not really saying that Bush knew about it, let it happen, didn't go after those responsible, but he implied it with some of his research.
There was no point, no argument. It was weird.
what i love the most is the people who write into the papers without having seen the movie and start spewing shit comparing him to goebbels and calling him a traitor. that's fantastic