Fahreneit 9/11 Redux

[dr_mabeuse]

I just saw “Fahrenheit 9/11” and frankly, I’m disappointed.

I think Moore made a big mistake by going after Bush on so many levels, especially that silly business of showing his blank expression while the 9/11 attack was going on. I’m no fan of Bush, but that was just a cheap shot and, worse, it makes it obvious that Moore has a deep, knee-jerk loathing for Bush, and that in turn calls into question the validity of all the other, much more substantial charges he makes, charges that should be made without the ad hominem attacks.

He could have used this opportunity to drive home the very serious point of how we’ve been lied to misled about the entire War in Terror and the Invasion of Iraq. He mentioned those, but they were just part of his ongoing anti-Bush litany.

Moore could have chosen to speak from the middle ground and thus maybe reached a wider audience. As it is, I think the whole picture will be brushed off by a lot of middle-of-the-roaders as a mere anti-Bush diatribe, and basically, that’s what it was.

---dr.M..

 

[sincerely_helene]

"I'm no fan of Bush."
I will keep that in mind, Doctor.

Has anyone heard when the movie will be released in Canada, or even if it will be at all? I don't think we ever had "Bowling for Columbine" in the theatures here.

 

[rgraham666]

Where you at in Canuckistan, sincerely?

It opened here in Toronto same day as everywhere else in North America. So did Bowling For Columbine.

Do you live in Whitehorse or Sin Jahn's or someplace way out in the boonies?

 

[shereads]

Something bizarre about those 7 minutes in the schoolroom that didn't occur to me until a day or two after I saw the movie:

The Secret Service.

WTF?

The first tower is hit before the president gets to the school; what you see on the tape happens after the second tower is hit, and the Secret Service in Washington, following emergency protocol, have "rushed the Vice President to the White House basement, lifting him by the arms."

Meanwhile, the President remains at his published location, in a public school three miles from an airport in Sarasota, Florida, and for the seven minutes of the videotape plus the few minutes he remains to shake hands with the principal and talk to the children, there's no move by his entourage to get him to an undisclosed location. (The videotape was intermittent; there's no record of exactly how long he remained at the school, the White House having had to retract their first story which was that he immediately excused himself and left for the airport.)

Air Force One takes off from Sarasota - with no military escort - at least twenty minuetes and up to thirty minutes after the president is told the country is under attack. Despite there being two Naval Air Stations in Florida, with Sarasota midway between them; and despite there being two more commercial aircraft that have changed course and are refusing radio contact, Air Force One doesn't get a fighter escort until nearly an hour after leaving Sarasota.

We've all heard the criticisms from the 9/11 commission about how long it took the White House to communicate a shoot-down authorization for the third and fourth planes, by which time it was too late to stop either one from reaching Washington, if the fourth hadn't been taken down by the pasengers.

But I haven't heard anybody question the inaction of the Presiden't security detail on that day, or why his plane spent an hour sharing the sky with an unknown number of hijackers without a military escort.


Makes you wonder if Che --- Nah. That really would be paranoid, wouldn't it?

 

[sincerely_helene]

I am in a small town just a few hours off of Vancouver in British Columbia. I have been checking around for movie times, but they have yet to be advertised.

 

[rgraham666]

Sincerely? I'm more familiar with the north end of BC having lived in Prince George for several years.

It usually did take several weeks for movies to make it there, if they did at all.

And from what I recall, it's unlikely that Moore's stuff will make it there. I found the people there to be intensely conservative for the most part.

One of the reasons I didn't stay long.

 

[rgraham666]

Shereads. Remember the joke making the rounds during the first Bush administration?

"If Bush is ever killed, the Secret Service has standing orders to shoot Dan Quayle."

Maybe the Secret Service is becoming like the old Praetorian Guard of the Roman Emporers. They're the ones with the real power, and you don't get to be President without their backing.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

I can comment on a little bit of this based on past experience.

Perhaps fighter escort wasn't available on such short notice. A whole lot of military bases don't keep fighters on alert status. I spent three years at a base with over 200 fighters on it, and we never had planes on "alert".

With planes hitting on the upper Atlantic coast, New York, DC etc., I'm sure that what few fighters were immediately available were vectored in that direction. I'm also fairly convinced that decision was made in conjunction with knowledge that all commerical traffic in the South was accounted for, and under control of the pilots. There was deemed to be no threat in the immediate area, which turned out to be the correct call.

With no threat in the immediate area, it was safe to let the President sit in place for a little bit while things sorted themselves out. The timing that you mention for fighter escort joining up with Air Force One fits my line of thinking. It would take somewhere around 30-45 minutes from first notice to get a flight crew, get a plane fueled, loaded with munitions and in the air from a non alert status. After getting airborne, they still have travel time to the designated co ordinates.

LIke I said, I don't know any of this to be fact, but it all fits what I know about military situations.

 

[Lord DragonsWing]

This looks to me like the democrats found a way to finance political commercials and call them documentaries. The reviews from the newspaper here by those who have gone to see it aren't very good. Most people feel that Moore made this a personal attack and left out alot of facts. Even the interviews with Moore on CNN are asking why certain facts have been left out that were available before the final parts of the film were made.

 

[Pure]

mab is just too damn highbrow. a documentary isn't a book. Unger's might do if you're interested. the 7 min segment has been powerful for many. the maker aims at the 'middle', not the intelligentsia.

 

[shereads]

This looks to me like the democrats found a way to finance political commercials and call them documentaries.

Moore supported the Green Party in 2000.

Most people feel that Moore made this a personal attack and left out alot of facts.

Not most people. He got an excellent review from the least likely corner, Fox News. It's a flawed film, and if I were reviewing it from an entertainment standpoint I would find it clumsy and over-the-top. The power of the film lies in its having put into a coherent context what has been evident since 9/11: the murder of those 3,000 people came an an opportune moment for Bush/Cheney, and they took full advantage. Even when it meant deceiving the young men and women they were sending to war.

The most effective scripted moment of the film is Moore's tribute to the young, predominantly working-class and minority kids who serve in the military "so that the rest of us won't have to." He adds, "What an incredible gift they give to their country. All that ask in return is that we never send them into harm's way unless there is no other choice."

And that, Litsters, is the point. Of all the people who have posted opinions and hearsay about the movie, are there really only two of us who've actually seen it?

As to the veracity of the film, Moore has effectively refuted one review after another in which he was accused of altering the facts, most recently when he demonstrated how Newsweek misquoted the film to make it appear that Moore's facts were off.

Excerpts from "My First Wild Week with 'Farenheit 9/11'" at michaelmoore.com, posted July 4.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" was the #1 movie in the country, the largest grossing documentary ever. My head is spinning. Didn't we just lose our distributor 8 weeks ago?

** "Fahrenheit 9/11" broke "Rocky IIIÕs" record for the biggest box office opening weekend ever for any film that opened in less than a thousand theaters.

** "Fahrenheit 9/11" beat the opening weekend of "Return of the Jedi."

** "Fahrenheit 9/11" instantly went to #2 on the all-time list for largest per-theater average ever for a film that opened in wide-release.

NASCAR champ Dale Earnhardt, Jr. took his crew to see ÒFahrenheit 9/11." FOX sportscaster Chris Myers delivered EarnhardtÕs review straight out of his mouth and into the heartland of America: 'He said hey, it'll be a good bonding experience no matter what your political belief. It's a good thing as an American to go see.'

"Then there was Roger Friedman from the Fox News Channel giving our film an absolutely glowing review, calling it 'a really brilliant piece of work, and a film that members of all political parties should see without fail.' IÕve never heard a decent word toward me from Fox. So, after I was revived, I wondered if a love note to me from Sean Hannity was next.

...One theatre manager after another phoned in to say that the movie was getting standing ovations as the credits rolled Ð in places like Greensboro, NC and Oklahoma City

...LadiesÕ church groups in Tulsa were going to see it, and weeping afterwards.

It was this last group that gave lie to all the yakking pundits who declared that only the hard-core 'choir' would go to see "Fahrenheit 9/11." They couldn't have been more wrong. Theaters in the Deep South and the Midwest set house records for any film theyÕd ever shown. Yes, it even sold out in Peoria. And Lubbock, Texas. And Anchorage, Alaska!

Moore has this to say about the facts as they are presented in Farenheit 9/11:

"Every single fact I state in "Fahrenheit 9/11" is the absolute and irrefutable truth. This movie is perhaps the most thoroughly researched and vetted documentary of our time. No fewer than a dozen people, including three teams of lawyers and the venerable one-time fact-checkers from The New Yorker went through this movie with a fine-tooth comb so that we can make this guarantee to you. Do not let anyone say this or that isn't true. If they say that, they are lying. Let them know that the OPINIONS in the film are mine, and anyone certainly has a right to disagree with them. And the questions I pose in the movie, based on these irrefutable facts, are also mine. And I have a right to ask them. And I will continue to ask them until they are answered."

 

[Lord DragonsWing]

Moore supported the Green Party in 2000. Not most people. He got an excellent review from the least likely corner, Fox News. It's a flawed film, and if I were reviewing it from an entertainment standpoint I would find it clumsy and over-the-top. The power of the film lies in its having put into a coherent context what has been evident since 9/11: the murder of those 3,000 people came an an opportune moment for Bush/Cheney, and they took full advantage. Even when it meant deceiving the young men and women they were sending to war.

The most effective scripted moment of the film is Moore's tribute to the young, predominantly working-class and minority kids who serve in the military "so that the rest of us won't have to." He adds, "What an incredible gift they give to their country. All that ask in return is that we never send them into harm's way unless there is no other choice."

And that, Litsters, is the point. Of all the people who have posted opinions and hearsay about the movie, are there really only two of us who've actually seen it?

As to the veracity of the film, Moore has effectively refuted one review after another in which he was accused of altering the facts, most recently when he demonstrated how Newsweek misquoted the film to make it appear that Moore's facts were off.

Excerpts from "My First Wild Week with 'Farenheit 9/11'" at michaelmoore.com, posted July 4.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" was the #1 movie in the country, the largest grossing documentary ever. My head is spinning. Didn't we just lose our distributor 8 weeks ago?

** "Fahrenheit 9/11" broke "Rocky IIIÕs" record for the biggest box office opening weekend ever for any film that opened in less than a thousand theaters.

** "Fahrenheit 9/11" beat the opening weekend of "Return of the Jedi."

** "Fahrenheit 9/11" instantly went to #2 on the all-time list for largest per-theater average ever for a film that opened in wide-release.

NASCAR champ Dale Earnhardt, Jr. took his crew to see ÒFahrenheit 9/11." FOX sportscaster Chris Myers delivered EarnhardtÕs review straight out of his mouth and into the heartland of America: 'He said hey, it'll be a good bonding experience no matter what your political belief. It's a good thing as an American to go see.'

"Then there was Roger Friedman from the Fox News Channel giving our film an absolutely glowing review, calling it 'a really brilliant piece of work, and a film that members of all political parties should see without fail.' IÕve never heard a decent word toward me from Fox. So, after I was revived, I wondered if a love note to me from Sean Hannity was next.

...One theatre manager after another phoned in to say that the movie was getting standing ovations as the credits rolled Ð in places like Greensboro, NC and Oklahoma City

...LadiesÕ church groups in Tulsa were going to see it, and weeping afterwards.

It was this last group that gave lie to all the yakking pundits who declared that only the hard-core 'choir' would go to see "Fahrenheit 9/11." They couldn't have been more wrong. Theaters in the Deep South and the Midwest set house records for any film theyÕd ever shown. Yes, it even sold out in Peoria. And Lubbock, Texas. And Anchorage, Alaska!

Moore has this to say about the facts as they are presented in Farenheit 9/11:

"Every single fact I state in "Fahrenheit 9/11" is the absolute and irrefutable truth. This movie is perhaps the most thoroughly researched and vetted documentary of our time. No fewer than a dozen people, including three teams of lawyers and the venerable one-time fact-checkers from The New Yorker went through this movie with a fine-tooth comb so that we can make this guarantee to you. Do not let anyone say this or that isn't true. If they say that, they are lying. Let them know that the OPINIONS in the film are mine, and anyone certainly has a right to disagree with them. And the questions I pose in the movie, based on these irrefutable facts, are also mine. And I have a right to ask them. And I will continue to ask them until they are answered."

Yes, Moore supported the Green Party in the year 2000. Now he seems to support the Democrats and their view of things by having Hollywood finance this political commercial. Most individuals I talk with laugh at this being a documentary. It's a personal attack against Bush.

I don't agree with the war in Iraq. I was a Soldier Once. No Soldier likes War and I don't feel this war was warranted. But Moore left alot of facts out at his discretion. Facts that were available during the filming. What he says is true, but he choses his facts selectively. It seems he accepts only those facts that fit with his beliefs.

A documentary should show all facts. No matter the producer/directors opinion. He hasn't done that. Each of us has our opinion. He may call this art, I call it a personal attack financed by Hollywood.

Each of us are smart enough to do our own reseach. Moore doesn't give us credit for that by calling his film a documentary and having us pay to see it. Unfortunately he is probably right. The middle class and lower class will pay to see a high ranked movie that is controversial. He will get his point across to many and he shall make an influence in the vote of America.

It shall be interesting to see how the next election goes after this. Perhaps there will be another documentary about Bush or Kerry. Another record breaker for documentaries. Maybe Moore will pick and chose the facts again as to his beliefs.

Of course, once again it will be considered art. Financed by Hollywood and with positive reviews by those who support his beliefs. Maybe by then, a producer can learn what a documentary is and tell us all the facts. Of course, he probably wouldn't receive funding.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

The real voices of the left-wing: Tom Tomorrow, Ted Rall, Scott Bateman, Tim Kreider, Aaron McGruder and Allison Bechdel. These people argue the left-wing position with the neccesary vitriol and incisive wit.

Michael Moore, though I know it is heresy to say so, isn't all that great. He's popular, i'll admit that. He's actually known in the media instead of being one of these alternative press punks because he makes movies instead of comics. However, his points don't best present the left-wing side. He's too easily lured into bashing, always features one reaching moment in each of his works, and his wit is frankly not all that great. The good thing that can be said about him is he draws the fire well and presents a left-wing side in the predominatally right-wing public arena.

But if you're looking for the left-wing presented with tact, sarcasm, wit, and persuasiveness then you probably want one of the others especially Rall and Tomorrow.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I certainly don;t think of Moore as being any sort of ideolgical voice for the left. I think of him more as a populist, a reputation he's had since "Roger and Me."

I don't think the film was much in the way of misrepresentation. At least, it jibes with other things I've read and heard in places other than broadcast media, and things like the report of the 9/11 commission.

I'd be interesting in knowing what facts LDW thinks that Moore left out.

---dr.M.

 

[shereads]

What will be even more interesting will be seeing how few of the people who post opinons about the film will have seen it.

Like the man said, the facts are facts, and they support a point of view that he believed had been ignored by the media. He was right. In the aftermath of Bill Maher's firing and later Wolf Blitzer's, it appeared that the press had become a branch office of government, so afraid was everyone of being the next to be labeled, "unpatriotic," a "traitor." The invasion of Iraq was announced like a football game, right down to terms like "huddling with Tommy Franks."

Where were the people who are offended by Moore's facts, when those facts were being kept out of the mass media?

Most of what he brings to light in Farenheit 9/11 had already been posted in bits and pieces at political threads on this site, by people who did their research on the internet. It was certainly never front-and-center in any of the so-called "liberal media" outlets. I never heard a word about the Saudi evacuation flights until an article appeared last year in Vanity Fair. It was disputed by the White House until they learned that the author had obtained proof; when they retracted the lie, there was barely a whisper of it in the press.

Thank God there are people like Moore who devote themselves to showing the hidden truths.

Is it the whole truth? What fact-based film has ever achieved that? And why should Moore have turned a 2-hour film into a multipart epic, by repeating the Bush/Cheney view that we've all got memorized by now?

Is there anybody reading this thread who can't recite every reason and subsequent reason that Bush/Cheney have given for the Iraq invasion?

I still haven't heard any of Moore's critics explain why it's essential for a filmmaker to tell the ENTIRE truth, but not a President on whose word people are sent to kill and die?

 

[seasparks]

Yes, Moore supported the Green Party in the year 2000. Now he seems to support the Democrats and their view of things by having Hollywood finance this political commercial. Most individuals I talk with laugh at this being a documentary. It's a personal attack against Bush.

I don't agree with the war in Iraq. I was a Soldier Once. No Soldier likes War and I don't feel this war was warranted. But Moore left alot of facts out at his discretion. Facts that were available during the filming. What he says is true, but he choses his facts selectively. It seems he accepts only those facts that fit with his beliefs.

A documentary should show all facts. No matter the producer/directors opinion. He hasn't done that. Each of us has our opinion. He may call this art, I call it a personal attack financed by Hollywood.

Each of us are smart enough to do our own reseach. Moore doesn't give us credit for that by calling his film a documentary and having us pay to see it. Unfortunately he is probably right. The middle class and lower class will pay to see a high ranked movie that is controversial. He will get his point across to many and he shall make an influence in the vote of America.

It shall be interesting to see how the next election goes after this. Perhaps there will be another documentary about Bush or Kerry. Another record breaker for documentaries. Maybe Moore will pick and chose the facts again as to his beliefs.

Of course, once again it will be considered art. Financed by Hollywood and with positive reviews by those who support his beliefs. Maybe by then, a producer can learn what a documentary is and tell us all the facts. Of course, he probably wouldn't receive funding.

I think you're right.
Moore get's his funding precisely because he IS so far left.
If he had to restrict him self to the facts, All of the facts, not a studio or hollywood backer would touch him.
But since he is so far left that he makes Joe Stalin look like Rush Limbaugh, he will continue to feed at the trough of all thiose so called intelligensia (sp?) out there in Hollywood.

I spent my time in the Navy, And I got shot at in Beirut among other places.
I support our troops, but disagree with the reasons for being in Iraq right now.

 

[shereads]

Yes, Moore supported the Green Party in the year 2000. Now he seems to support the Democrats and their view of things by having Hollywood finance this political commercial.

He saw some ugly things happening to which little attention was being paid. If that makes him a Democrat, that I'm proud to welcome him to the party.

For what it's worth, Hollywood wanted nothing to do with this film. The distributor who rescued the film after Disney dumped it, is Canadian.

Edited to add: See how tough it is to have all of the facts?

 

[doormouse]

I haven't seen the movie, but who needs it?

Anyone for popcorn? ;-)

 

[Pure]

LordDragon's Wingy,
A documentary should show all facts.

Kindly supply a couple titles of genuine documentaries.

I take it they would be rather long.

 

[shereads]

 

[Pure]

seasparks said,

But since he [Moore] is so fat[far] left that he makes Joe Stalin look like Rush Limbaugh,

I take it you've not read any 'far left' classics, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Luxemburg.

I take it you've not studied any political theory, either.

But maybe I'm wrong, and there's something on your shelves besides 'None dare call it treason.'

 

[shereads]

Each of us are smart enough to do our own research.

And do we all have the time and the resources? To track down documents that have been doctored, or to hire private detectives to learn the truths that have been hidden by people in power? Do we all have the money to hire lawyers to sue for the release of documents under the Federal Freedom of Information Act?

Personally, I'm appreciative of people who make it their business to find out what my government is doing in my name, behind my back. I read and research as much as I can, but I have neither the time nor the resources to make it a full-time job. Moore made it his business to bring out parts of the truth that powerful people kept hidden for everything they were worth. You should at least respect the effort.

The Hollywood support came a bit late. They all wish now that they'd backed Moore when Disney dumped him, but the established financial powers in Hollywood ran from this like scared rabbits. Their companies are owned by Rupert Murdoch, like everything else.

 

[Seattle Zack]

Gotta agree with doc, here, after seeing the film.

(And why are people who haven't seen the film opening their pie holes to criticize it? Go see the goddamn movie or shut up, assholes. Rushing to refute an indictment of their beloved administration that they haven't even seen. What an indication of the polarization of this country.)

Moore has always been, to me, more of a populist than anything else (not a liberal demagogue, or a leftist guerilla, no matter what the Post might tell you to say). The beauty of a documentary is that it allows oneself to express a voice, no matter politically unsavory it might be.

Of course, his films have an agenda, I knew that going in. Watch "Roger and Me" if you have any doubts about Moore's populist leanings. No effective documentary is presented without a point of view. In fact, one could argue, that the documentary format allows more latitude than any other medium in that regard.

I thought the film was very effective, in the points it made. I thought it was also very biased, in that it reflected the rage and helplessness that Moore felt at being part of this unprovoked Bush attack which violated many of the core beliefs of our society.

I wished Moore had been subtler at times -- but I also understood why he felt that he shouldn't be. Anyone who hasn't seen this film (which, make no mistake, is very powerful) has no business criticizing its message.

--Zack

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I think you're right.
Moore get's his funding precisely because he IS so far left.
If he had to restrict him self to the facts, All of the facts, not a studio or hollywood backer would touch him.
But since he is so fat left that he makes Joe Stalin look like Rush Limbaugh, he will continue to feed at the trough of all thiose so called intelligensia (sp?) out there in Hollywood.

I spent my time in the Navy, And I got shot at in Beirut among other places.
I support our troops, but disagree with the reasons for being in Iraq right now.

Um...he aint all that leftist. He's got a bit of populism in his blood and some old-school liberalism, which when combined makes him centrist-leaning-strongly-left (at most mildly leftist), but he isn't really an extremist dashiki wearer. I realize that during the Cold War admitting that poor people exist is considered communistic extreme leftist thinking but it's not true.

Furthermore in the political mapping joe stalin would be a strong downist for his totalitarian policies according to the political mapping system.

Also, I know everyone is confused because of who gets the air time. So here's the synopsis: Fox News is mildly rightist (or centrist-leaning-very strongly-right). The "liberal news media" is centrist-leaning-right. Democrats are centrist-leaning-left. Libertarians are centrist-currently leaning right but are actually by definition straight up. The administration is rightist with a few centrists (Powell). Neocons and their backers such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are fairly heavily rightist, but not nearly as rightist as Pat Buchanan. Ted Rall and Aaron McGruder are leftist, but not nearly as leftist as Che Gueverra. And furthermore the level of genuine communists in this country is nearly zip as well as genuine country-haters so those two overused rhetorics can be put in the closet forever.

Also, he is mostly self-funding from the large amounts of liberals who treat him as a God ('fraid I don't fall in this camp).

 

[shereads]

It's a funny thing about facts. You can think you have them all, and then up pops an inconvenient one. If it's hard to have enough to back your post in an internet forum, imagine what it might be like to include every single fact pertaining to this topic. Who would determine when you had included enough facts to be considered anything other than a leftist rabble-rouser? Is there a minimum number of facts?

I notice that the "selective inclusion of facts" criticism is relatively new, following on the heels of so many thoroughly debunked accusations that Moore actually lied.

Next on the agenda: Moore used subliminal images of Bush as Adolph Hitler. They're flashed on the screen for fractions of a second, to brainwash the masses. Moore has a mistress. Moore is a drug fiend. Moore is the nephew of Saddam. Moore had powerful financial backers from liberal Hollywood.

Whatever you do, Bush voters, do NOT allow your minds to be contaminated with incomplete facts about the President's debt to the Saudi royal family and the Bin Ladens. Osama who?