'No end in sight'

[Vronsky]

Fella's,
Go see this recent documentary if you can: 'No end in sight'
Here's what IMDB has to say about it:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0912593/

Cheers,
V.

[Botnst]

Vronsky! I'll be darned.

Still promoting propaganda, I see.

B

[cmac2012]

Originally Posted by Botnst

Vronsky! I'll be darned.

Still promoting propaganda, I see.

Unlike yourself, who deals in solid gold facts, unimpeachable, at all times.

[raymr]

'propaganda' - according to Merriam-Webster: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person

In effect, any non-neutral statement by anyone can be construed as propaganda.

[Gurkha]

Originally Posted by raymr

'propaganda' - according to Merriam-Webster: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person

In effect, any non-neutral statement by anyone can be construed as propaganda.

Neutrality is again a relative issue. What appears neutral to you may not appear neutral to others.

[LaRondo]

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Unlike yourself, who deals in solid gold facts, unimpeachable, at all times.

LOL !

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Unlike yourself, who deals in solid gold facts, unimpeachable, at all times.

If you are unable to impeach Bot's facts then try arguing with someone less informed/intelligent and you may feel less frustrated than this post indicates. Maybe one of the younger lads.

[LaRondo]

Originally Posted by John Doe

If you are unable to impeach Bot's facts then try arguing with someone less informed/intelligent and you may feel less frustrated than this post indicates. Maybe one of the younger lads.

Informed and intelligent are completely independent forms of existence.
Bot's facts are mostly very easily impeached, while his intelligence remains mostly undisputed

[tankdriver]

Originally Posted by John Doe

If you are unable to impeach Bot's facts then try arguing with someone less informed/intelligent and you may feel less frustrated than this post indicates. Maybe one of the younger lads.

What facts? All I read was that he called it propaganda, I didn't see where he wrote he'd seen it, or pulled facts to refute something in it.

[Gurkha]

Its another perspective, propaganda to some is fact for others and vice versa. Least give it a chance before censoring it or condemning it as propaganda. If it doesn't suit one's agenda, doesn't necessarily mean its propaganda.

[rickg]

uh-huh! Is too!

[Botnst]

Originally Posted by Gurkha

Its another perspective, propaganda to some is fact for others and vice versa. Least give it a chance before censoring it or condemning it as propaganda. If it doesn't suit one's agenda, doesn't necessarily mean its propaganda.

Nah, propaganda is easy to recognize. You take facts combined with conjecture and string them together in a way that is plausible then use it to make an emotional appeal.

This thing that Vronsky provides is exactly that kind of storytelling.

B

[Gurkha]

Correct, everything is propaganda regardless, all have an agenda and thats normal, point is what suits one's point of view.

[Gurkha]

So if it doesn't fit your agenda, its storytelling, whatever is opposing your point of view is a conjecture and whatever you say is etched in Gold, kind of condescending isn't it. If you don't allow an opposing viewpoint and try to censure it prematurely before it has even had a chance for others to absorb, how do you expect a healthy democracy to survive may I ask? In your case, it has to be in your docket or nothing else.

As for storytelling, everyone in the entire globe is into yarn and that makes it go around, point is one to discern oneself from it every which way possible. All the so called storytelling is the reason why the world today is a bafangu place to be in.

[Botnst]

Originally Posted by Gurkha

So if it doesn't fit your agenda, its storytelling,....

Who said anything about fitting an agenda? I described propaganda.

B