Fahrenheit 9/11

[ErikW]

It started out lame but by the opening credits I knew it was something special. It had a couple slow points but for the most part it was well-paced and well-structured. What was perhaps most interesting was what it lacked: no new information. It didn't even ask new (to mass media) questions. It was basically a compilation of reasons and examples of why George W. Bush is an evil doofus.

I kept an eye and ear out for lies, mistruths, and twisted facts. After all, the major criticisms of this film have been: 1) "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" is fat; and 2) "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" lies. As to the former, he appears on screeen and he is indeed overweight. Only Moore can do something about the former, but everybody is free to identify examples of the latter. Before the opening credits, Moore's narration makes him sound like just another whiner complaining that Bush stole the election with the help of his family and friends in Florida and his Pappy's friends on the supreme court. Clearly an opinion, not lies. However, I was aware of a few interesting qualifications to statements he made, such as nobody in congress is the parent of an enlisted service member in Iraq. The word "enlisted" disqualifies commisioned or warranted officers from his statement. So it's not a lie, but an interesting choice of words. He's either being weasely or is being sensitive to the fact that most of the U.S. service members dying in Iraq are enlisted men.

The editing of this film is great, and Moore uses the soundtrack to good effect. Some of the music seems leftover from Errol Morris films (Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control, The Fog of War). At one point when Moore examines the names on Texas Air National Guard documents and the camera zooms in on George Bush, the soundtrack plays a riff from Eric Clapton's Cocaine. Banjo music is featured prominently, a lame gag that falls flat on its face.

For such a serious subject, there are several funny moments in the movie, from Paul Wolfowitz's saliva-aided hair grooming to Moore going around the capitol in an ice cream truck, reading the PATRIOT act over the loudspeaker for the benefit of the congress who didn't read it before passing it. Many laughs were had from the members of Peace Fresno, an anti-war group infilitrated in an undercover counter-terrorist operation. The group is merely a handful of hippies and activists who eat cookies in their living room meetings, not exactly Al Qaeda or even the Weather Underground.

The film doesn't lay the blame of September 11 on Bush but it does portray him as asleep at the wheel. For example, instead of investigating whether he had anything to do with the apparent stand-down of D.C. area air defenses, it merely mentions the August 6 intelligence briefing about Bin Laden.

Osama Bin Laden and his family are the subject of much of the film. Moore examines the ties and connections between the second-wealthiest family in Saudi Arabia and the Bush family, which are many and varied. It also shows how much Saudi money is invested in the U.S. and suggests the U.S. could not stand the economic impact of losing the Saudi investments.

The most powerful moments of the film come from its unique war footage from Iraq, which is entirely unlike any war footage aired on U.S. television. Dead children, women, and men are carried in the back of a pickup truck. A man rushes the limp body of a child to a hospital. Doctors work on a boy whose arm is blown apart. Horribly burned women and children lie in a hospital. Doctors work on a burned child with a large, sutured head wound. In a shocking and horrifying clip, explosives detonate near U.S. servicemen as the nearby camera focuses on them; their comrades rush their torn bodies to the nearest aid station.

U.S. service members give surprisingly candid on-camera interviews. Moore shows not only the trigger-happy dimwits who are dead ringers for Pfc. Conrad Vig (Spike Jonze in Three Kings) and Bunny (Kevin Dillon in Platoon), but also the soldiers who feel what they are doing is wrong and who want themselves and the U.S. out of Iraq. In a V.A. hospital, multiple amputees are interviewed. Out of uniform, with their abbreviated appendages bandaged, they look much like the somewhat younger children in the Iraqi hospitals.

Fahrenheit 9/11 is not a documentary. It does not have any pretense of exploring a deep social problem, as does Moore's Bowling for Columbine. It is plainly and simply a hit piece, an indictment of George W. Bush and his chronies. It would be a bitter pill to swallow for someone who thinks the sun shines out of dubya's ass, which I expect is the real reason there is so much hatred directed at Moore and his movie.

[ErikW]

I notice that benos' description of this forum says, "list 'em or debate 'em." If you want to debate Fahrenheit 9/11, do so without calling Moore fat. If you have seen the movie and/or read a transcript, I would welcome any rebuttal of the movie's points. If you haven't seen it and you just want to say "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" is fat and he lies, spare us.

[diehli]

I plan to go see this (as a second movie, if you get my drift). I can't remember if it was here that I commented on it or not, but I just couldn't get as angry over BFC as "everyone" wanted me too. About the only thing that pissed me off about it was the documentary label it was given... seems like BFC and this latest are the same thing: some dude that somehow got some "cred" putting his opinion on the big screen in a way designed to shock people... nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks for the post, EW. Let's me know what to expect (so I shouldn't eat a large meal beforehand?).

[Garfield]

Thanks for this review Erik.

[Singlestack]

Fahrenheit 9/11 is not a documentary.

A "Crockumentary" would have been a better description.

[3quartertime]

Rush said something funny about this yesterday...

( Paraphrased )

Did you hear that the record profits for an opening day for a documentary just occured? Yea 40 million the first day and it was a weekday!!! Who would have thought that the new documentary 'Spiderman 2' would have made such a big splash.

--someone is talking to him we can't hear--

What? You mean 'Spiderman 2' isn't a documentary? Well it has the same factual representations as 'Fahrenheit 9/11' why isn't it???

At least I thought it was funny...

Thanks for the review Erik!!!

I probably would get lumped into the "thinks the sun shines out of dubya's ass" crowd for my support of the Prez and his party. But that's not why I'm not going to see this movie. I choose not to support MM with my time or money. When it comes to cable I may watch a little of it as I drink a cold one and have a good laugh!!!

[aussieboy]

If we were not at war it would be a crockumentary, but we are at war and that makes it sedition.

Stuff like this emboldens the enemy to think he might win if he sticks in there long enough. This results in more of our troops getting killed.

[lynn jones]

mm is just big boned and mentally challenged.

[Matthew_Mink]

Yeah, I'm REAL sure Moore tells all sides of the story, and not just the liberal one.

[rhino]

I can't and won't comment on "Farenheit 9/11" or even "Bowling for Columbine" because I refuse to see them. I'm not afraid to have my opinions challenged or to see another point of view, but I absolutely refuse to pay any money that will benefit "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" or the studios and distributors who are behind the movie. He's getting exactly nothing from me.

I might watch them if and when they air on one of my satellite channels since whether or not I watch it at that point won't make any financial difference to Moore.

[EricW]

What absolutely kills me is the liberal party line: Racism is bad. Jingoism is bad. Unless of course its OUR racist, jingoistic crap. It's amazing how being friends with the Saudi Royal family suddenly turns into a murder indictment. Could it be that.......gasp!........there's no evil connection and that the two families are simply........gasp!.......friends?! I've had a few friends and acquaintances over the years from the Middle East, and there's one constant: they're some of the nicest, friendliest people I've ever met. True people people.

Being friends with Bin Laden's family would hardly be a crime either. They have a reputation for just being good people.

"Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" is obviously totally oblivious to that fact or any fact for that matter. I haven't seen the movie, but based on previous performances, the guy is just a cockroach. There's no such thing as having a mature, adult, 2-way conversation with him. The guy's just a classless turd.

I'd have 10,000 Saudis over for dinner before I let "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" mow my lawn.

[John Dunn]

Moderator fight!

[kdj]

I've never seen a "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" movie.

This has convinced me that I should. The polarization of opinion is truly amazing: From "It's all lies and he's the anti-{pick your own religious icon}" to "He's boldly telling a story that most people are afraid to touch".

I'm probably close to truly neutral here since: I'm not American; I chose to move to the USA; I don't belong to any political party; I live in one of the Liberal hotbeds of the country and most of my friends are very liberal; I've seen the damage socialist views can do to a country; I've had guns confiscated due to a change in government policy! Maybe I'm just confused

I'll watch both "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" movies and see which thread I empathise with.

Either way, I'm glad that this forum has both points of view since rational disagreement is the source of most progress

Kevin

[Wakal]

Gee, I thought this was a "no politics" forum...but here we have Erik Warren...AGAIN...playing politics. How droll, and a sad commentary on the lack of even application of the forum rules.

That said...

I liked 9/11. It filled the gap in mockumentaries left open since Spinal Tap.

If this is the best the raging anti-American left wing socialists (but I repeat myself) can do, bring it on

Alex

[uscbigdawg]

Alex,

What about Best of Show (whatever the title, but the Spinal Tap-ish film about the AKC/dog shows)?

For anyone that knows Erik, are you suprised he's being 'controversial/confrontational'? Conflict is a great means of spurring a discussion and/or watching a train wreck.

Rich

[Guest Larry Cazes]

I guess only moderators can post about political issues?

[tightloop]

Erik

I can't believe you wasted the time and energy typing a page of crap about this guy. Let it go...he's a jerk and you are too smart to be sucked in by his crap, so just drop it...

Just my .02

[EricW]

I guess only moderators can post about political issues?

Nope. I'll be happy to egg on all the MM haters.

[EricW]

Bowling For Truth .com

Highly reccomended if you prefer facts to hype.

George Bush's Saudi Arabia connections

Moore distorts Bush Saudi Ties

As noted on this site, "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" completely misrepresents the action of certain Saudi's that were flown out of the country on 9/11. Working off the same theme, Moore paints an inaccurate portrait of Bush's ties to Saudi Arabia. Ignoring completely the connection every president has had to the Saudi's since FDR, Moore goes to lengths to defame Bush.  Newsmax reports:

A central theme of "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum"’s controversial documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11” is a bare allegation that Saudi Arabian interests provided $1.4 billion to firms connected to the family and friends of President George W. Bush.

However, as a special Newsweek investigative report notes, there is really less – not more – than meets the eye re the dramatic Moore claim:

Nearly 90 percent of that claimed amount, $1.18 billion, comes from contracts in the early to mid-1990’s that the Saudi Arabian government awarded to a U.S. defense contractor, BDM, for training the country’s military and National Guard. The “Bush” connection: The firm at the time was owned by the Carlyle Group, a private-equity firm whose Asian-affiliate advisory board once included the president’s father, George H.W. Bush.

 

But, points out Newsweek, former president Bush didn’t join the Carlyle advisory board until April, 1998 -- five months after Carlyle had already sold BDM to another defense firm.

 

As for the sitting president’s own Carlyle link, his service on the board ended when he quit to run for Texas governor -- a few months before the first of the Saudi contracts to the unrelated BDM firm was awarded.

 

The Carlyle Group is hardly a “Bush Inc,” noted Newsweek – but rather features a roster of bipartisan Washington power figures. “Its founding and still managing partner is Howard Rubenstein, a former top domestic policy advisor to Jimmy Carter. Among the firm’s senior advisors is Thomas “Mack” McLarty, Bill Clinton’s former White House chief of staff, and Arthur Levitt, Clinton’s former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. One of its other managing partners is William Cannard, Clinton’s chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.”

 

According to the report, the movie neglects to offer any evidence that Bush White House intervened in any way to bolster the interests of the Carlyle Group. In fact, the one major Bush administration decision that most directly affected the company’s interest was the cancellation of a $11 billion program for the Crusader rocket artillery system. The Crusader was manufactured by United Defense, which had been wholly owned by Carlyle until it spun the company off in a public offering in October, 2001. Carlyle still owned 47 percent of the shares in the defense company at the time that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld canceled the Crusader program the following year.

 

As to Moore’s dealings with the matter of the departing Saudis flown out of the United States in the days after the September 11 terror attacks, the 9/11 commission found that the FBI screened the Saudi passengers, ran their names through federal databases, interviewed 30 of them and asked many of them "detailed questions." "Nobody of interest to the FBI with regard to the 9/11 investigation was allowed to leave the country," the commission stated.

 

The entity in the White House that approved the flights wasn’t the president, or the vice president -- it was Richard Clarke, the counter-terrorism czar who was a holdover from the Clinton administration. Clarke has testified that he gave the approval conditioned on FBI clearance.

[short_round]

Nope.  I'll be happy to egg on all the MM haters. 

All right then, I'll jump on the bandwagon too.

moorewatch.com is another refutable site. You can do a search there on "steal this movie" and it will bring up the post that has the link to bootlegs of F9/11. According to Moore, it's not about the money and he does not mind if his movie is distributed over the internet.

Here is an article about it.

[BigDave]

I think if you're going to cast down this movie as a travesty, you owe it to yourself and others you share your views with to experience the movie first hand and have a factual basis for your criticisms.

I can hear it now "I don't need to see a piece of shit to know it is a piece of shit, made by a piece of shit". Well, yeah you do. If you can't stomach to sit through the film, I suggest you keep your un-inormed opion about M. Moore and his films to yourself (thank for the suggestion, Duane )

Erik has an informed opinion of the film. What do the rest of you have?

[short_round]

What do the rest of you have?

I have a Diet Sprite, half a pack of cigarettes, and most of a twinkie.

[tightloop]

BigDave

I have read enough thru this forum and from information on the Net, and from my relatives to get a glimpse of this guy, his philosophy and idiology to feel qualified enough to call him a jerk. I don't know anything about the editing of either of the films in discussion here, and make no commentary on them at all.

This guy is the lowest form of human, a person who would make a film about two of the worst tragedies that have taken place in this country just to further his political views, distort the words, actions and ideals of the leaders of this country, and to line his own pockets is SCUM.

That is my story and I'm sticking to it...

PS, IMO you are wrong, you don't have to step in it, just to find out you should have stepped over it...

[BigDave]

BigDave

I have read enough thru this forum and from information on the Net, and from my relatives to get a glimpse of this guy, his philosophy and idiology to feel qualified enough to call him a jerk. I don't know anything about the editing of either of the films in discussion here, and make no commentary on them at all.

This guy is the lowest form of human, a person who would make a film about two of the worst tragedies that have taken place in this country just to further his political views, distort the words, actions and ideals of the leaders of this country, and to line his own pockets is SCUM.

That is my story and I'm sticking to it...

PS, IMO you are wrong, you don't have to step in it, just to find out you should have stepped over it...

Point taken.

[rhino]

Heh. While I won't comment on the movies, I do think I know enough to assert that I dislike "Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum" and find him to be intellectually dishonest (to put it kindly).