To: lizol
The book is a work of fiction. The arthur himself says as much. Believing it is true is like beliving that National Treasure is real.
7 posted on
05/19/2006 1:11:18 PM PDT by
sportutegrl
(People who say, "All I know is . . ." really mean, "All I want you to focus on is . . .")
To: sportutegrl
The book is a work of fiction. The arthur himself says as much. Believing it is true is like beliving that National Treasure is real. If someone wrote a fictional book that made all kinds of wild accusations about your best friend, would you stick up for him/her?
9 posted on
05/19/2006 1:25:21 PM PDT by
frogjerk
(LIBERALISM: The perpetual insulting of common sense.)
To: sportutegrl
The story is fiction, but Dan Brown has been extremely outspoken in claiming that this story is based on factual history - and that's a big problem.
To: sportutegrl
You must have missed the part at the front of the book that Brown calls "Facts:"
13 posted on
05/19/2006 3:05:11 PM PDT by
D-fendr
To: sportutegrl
Well, someone should tell the reviewer that was on Fox this morning, because he went on and on about the historical accuracy. Steve Doucie and Brian Kilmeade tried to call him on it, but he kept insisting it had been well researched.
Did the reviewer not know it was a fictional movie? Or was he ignorant of history and duped by the promos and Dan Brown? At any rate, it isn't simply simpletons who think it isn't fiction.
15 posted on
05/19/2006 3:08:47 PM PDT by
Miss Marple
(Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's and Jemian's sons and keep them strong.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson