p2pnet - rss feed: Bill Maher in Religulous: The Movie
p2pnet news view | Movies:- “Bless me father, for I have sinned. It has been 40 years since my last confession.”
Bill Maher in the intro to the trailer on Religulous, a documentary we’re definitely not going to miss.
And in case you don’t get the pic on the right, lifted from a promo shot, back in 2004, Diana Duyser burned her grilled cheese sarnie.
She thought the result looked a bit like the Virgin Mary so she put it in a plastic box, “nestled it among cotton balls,” kept it on a shelf for 10 years —- and eventually sold it on eBay for (wait for it) $28,000 !!!
Now that’s religion.
Religulous was officially launched yesterday, and here’s what the Wikipedia says about it »»»
A range of views on the various world religions are explored as Bill Maher travels to numerous religious destinations, such as Jerusalem, the Vatican, and Salt Lake City, interviewing believers from a variety of backgrounds and groups, including Jews for Jesus, Christians, Muslims, polygamists, Satanists, Hasidic JewsRaël of the Raëlian Movement. He travels to Speakers’ Corner in Hyde Park, London and preaches Scientology beliefs. and
Interviews include:
- George Coyne, former director of the Vatican Observatory.
- Jeremiah Williams Cummings, or Jerry Cummings, former member of Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes.
- Ken Ham. young earth creationist and founder of Answers in Genesis.
- José Luis de Jesús Miranda, founder of Growing In Grace International Ministry in Miami, Florida.
- Aki Nawaz, Muslim British rapper also known as Propa-Gandhi.
- Andrew Newberg, MD University of Pennsylvania research neuroscientist. Newberg discusses the process of imaging people’s brains as they pray, meditate or speak in tongues.
- Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss, spokesman for the anti-zionist organization Neturei Karta.
Maher used a fake title to get the interviews, says Wikipedia, quoting him as saying:
“We never, ever, used my name. We never told anybody it was me who was going to do the interviews. We even had a fake title for the film. We called it ‘A Spiritual Journey.’ It didn’t work everywhere. We went to Salt Lake City, but no one would let us film there at all.”
For some reason, creationist Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis, featured in the movie, “was critical of what he called Maher’s ‘dishonesty’ to obtain the interview,” adds the post.
To get a taste, check out the YouTube video below »»»
grilled cheese sarnie - Virgin Mary on Toast gets $28K, November 23, 2004
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
October 5th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
1. Anonymous Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:38 am
A lot of the canadian news industry is starting to be owned by giant investors and foreign companies, which is also pretty alarming… I don’t know what to say about the CBC itself, since it is only funded by government. As Canadian citizens, can we really trust what’s coming from the horse’s mouth?
Also, I saw a similar article on Palin. It was titled “Is Palin a liability for the Republicans?”. It was a front-page article (continued on page E9 or whatever), and had a nice picture attached. This is from a paper with a distribution of 100,000 copies, so.
2. Mike Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:08 pm
The CBC unbiased ? They are the ultimate Liberal Party of Canada publicly financed (1 billion per year) propaganda machine. I would’nt believe yesterday’s weather report from them.
3. anon Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 7:36 pm
this is why it’s good idea to dig into every story and find the other half, then post the hell out of it in every blog and social site on net, can’t shut ‘em all down, lolz
>> or same as youtube, repost it till they give up trying to kill it
we are winning , their stats are crashing
4. Silly Ratfaced Git Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:10 pm
In reply to Mike:
“The CBC unbiased ?”
I probably was not clear in my statement. The US Media is now restricted to a range of centrist to right. The left is not represented at all in most of the MSM. Radio is the one exception as there are a few liberal talk radio shows. They are greatly outnumbered by right wing radio talk shows however. Since I view CBC as slightly left of center, they give me very useful balance to the overwhelmingly right of center US media. Since we are all in North America, the CBC is more immediately useful to me than the British, Aussie, and Kiwi media. I also care about what’s going on in Canada, believe it or not. Not all Americans are provincial twits. I certainly admit that too many are.
I have no idea how many Americans know who Harper is. If I went to the mall and asked people who the PM of Canada is, I don’t think I’d find one person that knew the answer. Change it from Canada to the UK and there might be a slight chance of getting someone to answer Gordon Brown. I expect that I’d get several Tony Blair answers. Our news media ignores the rest of the world most of the time. The last news story about Canada on US TV news was the bus murder. Major US newspapers do mention Canada regularly, particularly politics.
“They are the ultimate Liberal Party of Canada publicly financed (1 billion per year) propaganda machine.”
Since they are publicly financed, could it be that their position represents the majority of the Canadian public? Perhaps most Canadians are more liberal than you are. I have no problem with you being a conservative, please give liberals the same consideration. It takes people from both ends of the political spectrum to have a healthy government. This prevents excesses from either side.
At least you can avoid the CBC since you disagree with their political slant. I haven’t that option. There are no liberal media outlets in the US anymore, and the centrists keep moving to the right. The neocons are completely destroying the USA and the US media is complicit. Our two parties are really one big corporatist party. The US government is now a government of, for, and by the corporations. The bad news for Canada is that it looks like Harper is dragging Canada in the same direction. C-61 certainly looks like the laws we get down here written by corporate lobbyists. Welcome to fascism. We fought it in the 1940’s but it sneaked in while everyone was watching ‘Dancing with the Stars’.
Reply to anon:
I agree. The internet prevents the complete control of ‘news’ by the government and corporations. That’s why I get very nervous when I hear about throttling/censorship. Give the corporations enough time and they’ll figure out a way to control all the info on the intartubes. (New name in honor of hopefully soon to be ex US Senator Ted ‘like a series of tubes’ Stevens.)
I do believe that Anonymous has made it very difficult for the CoS to attract new members. Keep those down-stats coming. My understanding is that new membership enrollment has been steadily declining for the past 15 years. This is believed to be because of the critics that have used the internet to keep the truth out there and available.
I don’t have confirmation, but I have heard the new member enrollment is almost zero since Anonymous started their protests. Keep up the good work. They really hate down-stats.
5. Bob Says:
October 3rd, 2008 at 12:40 am
Ratfaced:
Two points for you. Why would you not support having that ridiculous diatribe by Mallick taken down? It was nothing but junior high school level insults and nothing particularly useful in any sensible political discourse. Straight up personal attacks like hers certainly don’t belong in a national media forum and, frankly, I’m stumped why you’d defend something that utterly stupid and deep in the gutter. If someone had said that garbage about your mother and family would you stand by and let it go unanswered? I’ll assume not so why would you condone the same garbage being directed at someone else?
Second point: “The US Media is now restricted to a range of centrist to right” Um no. That may be your impression but it is absolutely dead wrong and the numbers back that up. Besides Rupert owning 1 cable news station of note (yes I know I know he owns many various other news outlets but none with more audience), I have no idea how you could come to that conclusion with any lucid thought. The NY Times and MSNBC have already admitted and apologized to being shills for Obama in their coverage.
Most importantly a simple check of the fec.gov website donor list by members of the MSM will show you that 99% of the talking heads, executives and major writers donate to the Democratic party just as one would expect. I sure hope that clears up some of those wrong ideas for you.