wilkes

It's on demand.

have not been able to watch I hope they re-run it....

If you watch it Sam Adams beer is the major advertiser. I guess the people that made it wanted to make old Sam look as tough as possible.

Man it's a TV show.

You mean they did not have tanks and bazookas back then?

http://newsbusters.org/blog...ns-liberty

I never saw this mini-series advertised as a documentary, or as historically accurate. It was advertised as a dramatization of historical events. That's what it is. It's pretty entertaining too.

The current movie Selma is completely inaccurate from a historical standpoint as well, but it still seems to be immensely popular.

You know I was thinking the same thing maybe He!! froze over.

JOSEPH, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ON THIS.

THIS IS GETTING SCARY, YOU AND I AGREEING ON SOMETHING.

You know I think part of problem is the fact that history is not correctly taught in school any more. I remember when my kids were in the 7th grade they were taught that Alexander Hamilton agued in favor of the bill of rights when in fact he was against them. I down loaded his Federalist paper #84 from the library of Congress and high lighted the part when he argued against the BOR and sent that to my sons teachers.

She argue that they covered a broad area of history and that's what the book had to say and never did correct the class that the book was wrong. I ask her who she would believe a book written by a company for the purpose of making money or the Library of congress who jobs was to protect the history and historical documents of the USA. This was just one of many things that my sons where incorrectly taught that was in a book used by the public schools.

Since the founding fathers were liberal, I guess Gowilkes Conservatards will be cheering on the Tory side :'(
http://aattp.org/9-founding...s-explode/

I KNOW JOSEPH. JUST LOOK AT THE FIRST TEN MINUTES.

1) IT SHOWS SAMUEL A****S AS BEING IN HIS EARLY THIRTY'S IN 1765 WHEN HE WAS ACTUALLY 43.

2) THE SHOW SAYS THAT HUTCHINSON WAS GOVERNOR. HE WAS LT. GOVERNOR AND DIDN'T BECOME GOVERNOR UNTIL 1768.

3) IT SHOWS BRITISH REGULARS BUSTING INTO THE PUB WITH AN ARREST WARRANT FOR A****S. TWO INACCURACIES HERE. ONE, AS IT IS TODAY, THE SHERIFF OR MAGISTRATE HANDLED ARREST WARRANTS. AND TWO, THERE WERE NO BRITISH TROOPS IN BOSTON IN 1765. THEY ONLY ARRIVE IN 1768.

If given the chance give us a synopsis on how you would have "accurately" made this show.
I have yet to view it but will stand behind my post it's made by people in. Hollywood, and are trying to generate ratings. Responsibilities still falls on the viewer. Information not included, for sake of time constraints. What was so misleading that leading that you spent time frustrated watching "a .
show" Just like the internet not everything is truthful. jmo

You know umpire I believe they had a good chance to have a really popular show if it had been accurate and covered the whole war. But like you I think they blew it. Why is it that producers can't seem to tell it like it really is?

THE FIRST TEN MINUTES WERE SO INACCURATE THAT I STOPPED WATCHING FOR HISTORICAL PURPOSES AND JUST WATCHED TO SEE HOW MANY WRONG THINGS I COULD PICK OUT.

I don't drink but if I did I think I would have a Sam Adams tonight.

I haven't seen it on TV in Years check YouTube or Netflix. You might be able to rent it at a video store.

What channel and time