Dylan Doesn't Want Bush to Go to Jail
Here's an interesting interview (Windows Media file) with Dylan Avery, in which he discusses the genesis of the movie. How many of you know it started out as a fictional movie? How many of you know it ended up as a fictional movie?
But the oddest part of the interview comes around 2:15:
I would like to see George Bush walk out of office and into a jail cell. Or at least into a courtroom. I don't think he deserves a jail cell.
Let me get this straight, Dylan. You think George Bush was behind a plot that killed 3,000 Americans, but you don't think he deserves a jail cell?
posted by Pat @ 2:30 PM
9 comments
9 Comments:
I don't think Bu$h deserves jail either. He should be tried and found guilty of treason; a crime punishable by DEATH. I'm pretty certain Dylan was thinking in those terms.
But it doesn't take 9/11 to charge Bu$h with high crimes and misdemeanors, when he and his chicken hawk administration lied the nation into war, they all became traitors to this country.
I don't know why nesync was able to see that and you weren't.
Because they are so used to attacking the messenger instead of the message, anything Dylan or other will say simply means they are kooky and incoherent.
The personal attacks now appearing all over this blog show the dwindling credibility of it's authors.
The lowest form of debate is personal attacks and name calling. When it's come down to this you know these guys have become desperate and willing to say anything to get attention.
Did you listen to the interview, nesnyc? Because if you had, you'd know that's not what Avery indicated at all.
Seriously, Pat, James, I know you're trying to express the rights of others to express their views, but this Blog has the potential to be one heck of a resource for those who are actually looking to educate themselves about some of the almost-persuasive arguments made by the CT crowd. That potential is somewhat lessened when every comments section is filled with gormless drivel from the same 3 characters. The comments sections should be a place to discuss the finer points of each article, not a place for victims of Bush Derangement Syndrome to vent their frustrations. On any other blog I'd oppose censorship, but here, I think the site would really benefit from the removal of individuals such as non-sync over there.
Alex, I appreciate the sentiment, but the CT crowd does keep us on our toes and have given us material to work with. If I feel that the comments are getting excessively off-topic or abusive I'll start banning people or shut down the comments altogether. So far that hasn't happened.
Jason, basically my impression is that he felt perhaps he had gone too far and started backtracking. After the quote I gave he finished with something along the lines of "I don't know what I think."
So Joan, you'd like to elect ANOTHER liar and swindler into power? Man, those ideals really swirl down the toilet when he says things that confirm your biases.
I need to be reminded why we gave women the power to vote (<-- that's a joke, so don't get your panties in a bunch).
Why do you waste time on personal attacks of the producers? Curious because it completely detracts from the purpose of your website.
Are you guys jealous about all the press the 'Louder Than Words'crew is getting and you aren't?? A couple of passing thoughts in an article and now it's Attack The Character fallacy? Thought so....
Post a Comment
<< Home