If you haven’t made up your mind about just how vile Michael Moore really is, go read Jonathon Foreman’s review:
But you certainly don’t have to be a fan of Bush or his policies to be offended by “Fahrenheit 9/11” lies, half-lies and distortions, or by Moore’s shockingly low expectations of his audience:
Moore’s favorite anti-administration interviewee is former National Security Council aide Richard Clarke. Yet the film never mentions that it was Clarke who gave the order to spirit the bin Laden family out of America immediately after 9/11. Moore makes much of this mystery; why didn’t he ask Clarke about it ? At one point of the film, he portrays GIs as moronic savages who work themselves up with music before setting out to kill. Later, he depicts them as proletarian victims of a cynical ruling class, who deserve sympathy and honor for their sacrifice. The film’s amusing (if bordering on racist) Saudi-bashing sequences rely for their effect on the audience having forgotten that President Bill Clinton was every bit as friendly with Prince Bandar (or “Bandar Bush,” as Moore calls him) and the Saudi monarchy as his successor. In general, the movie is packed with points that Moore assumes his audience will never check, or are either lies or cleverly hedged half-lies: Moore says that the Saudis have paid the Bush family $1.4 billion. But wait ?the Bushes aren’t billionaires. If you watch the film a second time you’ll note Moore saying that they paid $1.4 billion to the Bush family and (added very quietly and quickly) its friends and associates. Moore asserts that the Afghan war was fought only to enable the Unocal company to build a pipeline. In fact, Unocal dropped that idea back in August 1998. Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan are looking at the idea now, but nothing has come of it so far, and in any case Unocal has nothing to do with it. In a “congressmen with no kids at war” stunt, Moore claims that no one in Congress has a son or daughter fighting in America’s armed services, then approaches several congressmen in the street and asks them to sign up and send their kids to Iraq. His claim would certainly surprise Sgt. Brooks Johnson of the 101st Airborne, the son of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.). And for that matter the active-duty sons of Sen. Joseph Biden and Attorney General John Ashcroft, among others. The most offensive sequence in “Fahrenheit 9/11″‘s long two hours lasts only a few minutes. It’s Moore’s file-footage depiction of happy Iraq before the Americans began their supposedly pointless invasion. You see men sitting in cafes, kids flying kites, women shopping. Cut to bombs exploding at night.
What Moore presumably doesn’t know, or simply doesn’t care about, is that the building you see being blown up is the Iraqi Ministry of Defense in Baghdad. Not many children flew kites there. It was in a part of the city that ordinary Iraqis weren’t allowed to visit ? on pain of death.
The most offensive — and most blatantly false — part of the movie is the depiction of life under Saddam. Had Saddam been a Republican, Moore would have painted a very different picture.
I’ll just respond to the last paragraph, and the point about the soldiers being “savages.” Every other point’s already been beaten to death by other folks; you should really consider getting new material, Richard.
1. Regarding the 20 seconds showingIraqi mothers and children in a playground: Moore’s said that he put this in to show that these were real people who would be bombed. He said that the rest of the media covered Saddam’s tyranny. Now, it is pretty much a fact that there were, indeed, mothers and children in Iraq. In effect, you want to have this point denied. The Daily Howler covered this point really well. Do some opp research before you go to the keyboard again.
2. Regarding the “savages,” as Gwynne Dyer pointed out in his documentary War about 20 years ago, the whole point of basic training is to get young men to do instinctively what they would not ordinarily do: kill their fellow human beings without any reflection. In order to do this, drill seargants encourage exactly the behavior seen in Moore’s film.
You might take offense at it, but that’s how our country’s actually defended, dummy. And Moore makes no commentary on it- apparently Moore knows too what I just wrote here. But then again, regarding the pundits you so breathlessly quote, it would take work to actually find out whether they were being honest, wouldn’t it?