New2grammar  +  546955 Sun, 27 Jul 08 11:52 AM What an interesting story. Two kids who were sent to a madrassah in Paskistan by their father to learn the Quran were rescued by a team of filmmakers and a senator only to find out that they didn't need rescue. The filmmaker admitted that there were inaccuracies in his 3 year long film that they thought the madrassah was related to the Taliban and Osama. It turned out that the name of the facility was very similar to a madrassah across the street at which Osama gave a public speech before 9/11. Are there any mistakes? Thanks. New2grammar Joined on Tue, Nov 21 2006 Veteran Member 7,676 Who wants to go sailing around the world with me?

	optilang  +  546956 Sun, 27 Jul 08 11:56 AM ..that they didn't need rescue. ..that they didn't need rescuing/to be rescued optilang Joined on Tue, May 13 2008 Poland Senior Member 2,521 OptiNative British English Speaker Wherever I may roam, I'm still a Londoner.

	Marius Hancu  +  546960 Sun, 27 Jul 08 12:03 PM  >Is 3 year long film understood as a film that takes 3 years to make? Nope. It was produced 3 years ago.     Marius Hancu Joined on Wed, Apr 26 2006 Veteran Member 11,673

	optilang  +  546967 Sun, 27 Jul 08 12:11 PM New2grammar “Thanks, Optilang. Is 3 year long film understood as a film that takes 3 years to make? ” Sorry, I missed that one! The filmmaker admitted that there were inaccuracies in his 3 year long film that they thought the madrassah was related to the Taliban and Osama. Taken literally, this means that the film lasts for 3 years - clearly not the case. The intended meaning is nor clear, it could be interpreted that the film was made 3 years ago or that it took 3 years to make. I think, to make the meaning clear, you have to change the sentence to something like: ..there were inaccuracies in his film, which took 3 years to make, that they .. optilang Grammar

	Mister Micawber  +  546977 Sun, 27 Jul 08 12:36 PM . Is the senator a part of the 'team'?  How many filmmakers? It is unclear as it stands.  I have presumed that there is one of each, that it is a 'team' of two: What an interesting story! A senator and a filmmaker rescued two kids sent by their father to a madrassah in Pakistan to learn the Quran, only to find out that they didn't need rescue. The filmmaker admitted that there were inaccuracies in his film, three years in the making.  They thought the madrassah was associated with the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. It turned out that the name of the facility was very similar to a madrassah across the street, at which Osama gave a public speech before 9/11. Actually, it is also unclear what the mention of the film has to do with the rest of the text. Mister Micawber Joined on Wed, Aug 4 2004 Yokohama Veteran Member 30,805 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master-- that's all.'

	New2grammar  +  546982 Sun, 27 Jul 08 12:44 PM Thank you, MM. There were a few filmmakers working together on that single documentary.  No. The senator was not part of the team but he was involved in the rescue. I see why you are confused. I used the singular "The filmmaker somewhere in the story". What's the difference between related to and associated with? And I agree with you that the relationship between the film and the story is unclear. My bad. New2grammar Difference Between