Replies

It's obvious that it's the reviews that have angered me, af_vet_1981, not the movie itself. But you can't stop blaming it on the movie, can you? It -has- to be Gibson's fault,

No. I think it is your fault. You saw the movie. You acted out your hatred and anger online for all to read. You just couldn't help yourself. The movie triggered that in you Qwinn.

THAT is the biggest lie in our conversation, af_vet. Your claim that I lied is because I repeated what you said in a more "vulgar" way (gee - "hell hole" is an extreme vulgarity now apparently). I didn't change the meaning of what you said, however. My "lie" was a paraphrase. The same can't be said of your lie, that it is the movie that has enraged me. That's not a paraphrase, that's an active distortion.

No Qwinn. You lied. Your lie was both of semantics and substance. You cannot use FR as a shield for your own comments. You are responsible for them. You cannot reword my comments. They stand as I wrote them. You were attempting to do that, possibly after your reread your own rhetoric. You are simply inflamed by this movie and the criticism of it.

You were the target audience some hoped to reach with this movie for evangelism.

Without the critics, I'd have nothing to be angry about. If you wish, I can cite you EXACTLY what I am angry about, from Krauthammer's article, from Dowd's rant, from Malzberg's diatribe - I can cite for you outright -lies- and -demonization- and -bigotry- on their part.

Are you denying me the right to be angry and hostile toward demonization and bigotry? It really sounds like you are. Apparently, it's okay for -you- and Dowd to be offended at those things, to lash out with anger at Christians for it, but if I am offended by them, then it's the part of some sinister cabal's evil plans of evangelism.

Heh. Listen to yourself. "You were the target audience some hoped to reach with this movie for evangelism." You make them sound like some sort of evil cabal. Sound familiar?

Well, guess what? The movie couldn't have done a damn thing to spur anger in me without the critics. I would simply have -nothing- to be angry about. You keep trying to pretend as if the movie AND the criticism is what makes me angry, as if the movie did some, and the criticism some more. Bull. It is -just- the criticism that has angered me, because it's been so patently unfair. There is absolutely nothing in the movie itself that angers me.

But you claim that it's obviously the movie, because it's watching it that triggered it. Well - DUH. There is one reason and one reason only that my anger was triggered by the watching of the movie - and that is because the critics launched their diatribes BEFORE THEY EVER SAW THE MOVIE. Before the movie was even -able- to be seen. They made it -impossible- for me to see the movie, react with no hostility toward anyone, and -then- see the criticisms and get angry at them.

And that's very convenient for you, isn't it? It was made -impossible- for me - or anyone who doesn't live in a hole, for that matter - to see the movie without having all the false criticisms in the forefront of my mind. So you tell me - how could my anger at false demonization of Christians -not- coincide with my seeing the film and gauging for myself if the attacks were warranted, given that the demonization went on for a whole year prior to the film's release?

But even so, you're still so so so off about me. You've got me pegged into a little box, and you couldn't be more wrong.

Cause, you see, I actually wasn't even a little angry during the watching of the movie, or afterwards. It was only until late tonight, upon coming back and -rereading- Krauthammer's diatribe, and reading comments like yours that claim "personal attacks" were there were none, that I grew angry.

Yup, it's true, and I'll swear that on anything you wish me to. I wasn't angry today until I came back on FR and reread some of the screeds which until today I couldn't really evaluate, not having seen the movie myself. It was only upon coming back tonight and rereading the demonizations that I realized how absolutely, wildly distorted they are, and how often they simply, blatantly, outrageously LIE about it. The distortions go so far beyond any possible difference of perspective that I can't just dismiss it (however much I might want to, and this may surprise you, but I wish I -could-) as a difference of opinion. No. There's simply too many outright falsehoods, too many actual discrepancies to -fact- of what occurs in the movie.

So, no, sorry. It wasn't the movie that ignited my anger. It was coming on FR and rereading the lies and wilful distortions, which you apparently are only too happy to continue. As long as you continue to, I'll continue to be angry. But I know you won't be happy unless you can keep right on doing it while playing yourself as a victim as you keep on demonizing me and the evil cabal of evangelists for manipulating me (hehehehe - it's so ridiculous, as if they are responsible for Dowd's article, or Krauthammer's), so go right ahead. It's obvious that your bigotry will permit no other response.

Qwinn