What did you not buy about an attack on Earth? It has happened several times and it is in fact the most often used threat in Trek movies (1,4,8,10,11).
As you throw this propaganda word around so often I have to give you some of your own medicine and assume that you believe some typical leftish propaganda: there are no real bad guys, nobody could threaten the very existence of somebody else, we just gotta try to understand these poor, underpriviliged souls who join Al-Qaeda ... sorry but I don't give a damn about mass murderers. Al Qaeda ain't the same as some local political conflict.
Aha, now it is not direct influence propaganda but indirect influence via the iconography which is shaped by propaganda.
Ever read Tolkien? He explicitly stated in his Lord of the Rings that this is not an allegory, that it has nothing to do with WWII, that Sauron is not Hitler and so on. But whether he wanted it or not, he was influenced by his times, we all are.
The question in Tolkien's case is not whether his iconography matches WWII anyhow but whether he can tell us something interesting about evil and he can. Sauron has one eye, he has one ring and this monoism is a good depection of evil.
But I am digressing, back to ENT. Ignore the darkness in it and simply focus upon the mere story essentials. Archer talked with the reasonable Xindi and convinced them that humans are not the real threat. Now what for f**k's sake does this have to do with neoconservatism? It virtually offers a different solution to the Al Qaeda issue than the one the neocons offered. Convince them that the US is not the enemy or that there are no 80 or whatever virgins in paradise because they have all been f**ed already by the previous suicide bombers.
But I can't convince you that ENT hasn't sprung out of the mind of DoubleU himself so feel free to continue to play this pathetic good liberal TNG vs. bad conservative ENT game.
By the way, the Vulcan arc has nothing to do with the Xindi arc. Just sayin'.
Last edited by horatio : 06-19-2010 at 03:58 PM.