The Lies of Michael Moore.
Out of context: Reply #10
- Started
- Last post
- 30 Responses
- ants0
hooked: I agree, and no I'm guessing that it's not hosted anywhere else.
jstiles: I'm not up with Slate... explain?
I think what the author is showing is that the claims made in the movie aren't valid, through current evidence eg. the guy who said he authorised the flights. and also he seems to be showing that logical conclusions through evidence put to the audience are not simply the only conclusions and probably tend to be not what is actually there (for example the photo of Bush and Blair together being used as an explanation of Bush as a lazy leader etc.)
His examination of the movie's text seems to be of a historic nature. That is, eliminate those ideas that are least likely and you have your answer. Thus showing through his evidence that Moore has picked answers to evidence which do not fit into that category and are therefore false.
Hence the idea of saying that he's lying. A common way of examining historical evidence (which it has to be).