Fahrenheit 9-11, So What?

Human Events ^ | June 29, 2004 | Michael P. Tremoglie

[oldironsides]

They are registering voters outside the theaters as they exit. One female leftist was handcuffed outside a theater here in Pennsylvania when she refused to stop creating a scene outside the movie theater. The movie is on private property and she refused to stop handing out voter registrations when asked. The police came and it made the morning news. They are treating this as gospel.

[Kenton]

The Democrats really think this movie is the key to the election. They know it's propaganda. They don't care, it's all they have.

Here's the quote of the day from DU, bemoaning the way that the early handover of soverienty just doesn't fit their agenda.

Here, in a rare moment of candor intended for DU'ers only, a genius called "mmonk" opines:

Pretend transfer of sovereignty is dangerous to Democrats. This was a good political move by bush in that it hides the true intent of the conquest of Iraq and takes the heat off as the press pretends we are nearing the end of this affair. Most Americans do not know of the strategy of an empire of bases. The media spin will always be "freedom for Iraq'. The problem the Dems have is that many of them share the dream of forced hegemony. Unless someone speaks out with the truth, the momentum enjoyed by the Moore movie may erode.

[expatguy]

"You are contradicting yourself. You say the film should not be reviewed and criticized because that is taking the bait. Then you say how dangerous he is."

I did not say the film should not be "reviewed".

I highlighted that the method for reviewing his film or any type of propaganda is not to attempt to prove or disprove facts or alleged factual information. Moore will go to great lengths to include factual information.

The "facts" and the "truth" are not what Moore nor his films are about.

What he is about is skillfully manipulating the viewer to come to a conclusion pre-determined by Moore based on the "information", sound. images and visuals that he weaves together.

Moore will challenge his critics to analyze and disprove specific facts that he highlights. Many critics will take the "bait" and Moore knows this and is prepared. Some facts can be disproved and some won't. The end result is the same.

"If he is as dangerous as you say ignoring him is not going to make it go away. Your statement is a non sequitur"

My statements are not non sequitur.

Is he dangerous? Try substituting the Republicans and George W. Bush with "blacks" or "Jews".

At the end of the day, Jews do pretty much control the world's diamond business, Blacks statistically are the largest percentage of US prison inmates and Cheney did once work for Halliburton.

[Maria S]

Here's one example of the many "tricks" that Moore uses in his so-called documentaries:


Moore Film has MAJOR Clip from Wrong War!!
EconomicBriefing.com ^
Posted on 06/26/2004 7:37:38 AM CDT
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1160630/posts

http://www.economicbriefing.com/perma/moore3.html

Went to see the Michael Moore film last night. To call this film a documentary is very misleading. The film is actually a video collage on four themes: 1. Bush looking confused. 2. Severely wounded American soldiers. 3. Dead Iraqis and 4. Bush Senior meeting with Saudis.

The film may wake up the masses, in a very MTV video kind of way, and cause them to question the reasons for going to war, but let's hope this is not considered the definitive film work on the very curious events prior to 9-11, its aftermath, and how we ended up attacking Iraq. That work has yet to be made.

Moore's work is, indeed, quite sloppy. I am scratching my head about Moore's supposed major fact checking of the film. The fact of the matter is that Moore has a major clip smack dab in the middle of the film that doesn't even come from the current Iraq involvement, when it is clearly in a part of the film that implies that's what it is. Those who follow the news regularly and with good memories will recall the clip is actually from a Peter Arnett report during Gulf War I. It is the clip of a woman crying hysterically in front of a bombed out building. The Iraqis, at the time, claimed the building bombed was a milk plant. The U. S. said it was a chemical factory. This was big news back then, apparently Michael Moore and his fact checkers were to busy to follow the news during that war, or this major faux pas would have never made it into his current film..
Raymond Sabat June 26, 2004 8:18 A. M. permalink

[54-46 Was My Number]

No comments, just a bump.

[COBOL2Java]

I have to wonder if the Democrats are privately disappointed in Moore, since he went so obviously over the top with this film. We may be seeing some of this Democratic party disappointment being channeled via the Washington Post and the NYT. Don't get me wrong, the Dems will put on a brave front - witness Katie Couric and Matt Lauer's performance yesterday - but behind closed doors they may be wishing that Moore wasn't such a demented whack job, and that he had exercised more restraint. Instead, now it appears that more and more people are going to think of him as the crazy uncle in the attic.

[GSWarrior]

Bump

[txrangerette]

What do you think about THIS
rejoinder?

Look at them over your glasses
& say, "Oh? Then please explain
Tony Blair."

[GSWarrior]

My new tagline

[Hill Street Blues]

It is good isn't it. Don't you think you should credit Tremoglie as the source of the quote though? We need to promote conservative writers and recognize what they do as much as possible. Otherwise they will not be able to make a living at it and then we won't have much of anything to refer to when it comes to combating the libs intellectually.

[USNFighting31st]

Look at this at a new angle and 22 million dollars at the box office doesn't seem like much.

Assuming that the vast majority of the people that saw it over the weekend were people that voted for Gore or Nader in 2000
which would equal 53,338957 people. Now take the box office take rounded-up to the nearest million ($22 Million) and devide
that by an average of $7 a ticket and you see that less than 6 percent of the liberal to leftist base has seen it. This movie is
preaching to the choir, but most members of the choir are missing.


Another thought, if it wasn't in the theater, White Chicks would be #1. Now there is some tuff competition.
Take away all the pre-release hype, and F/911 would of been a major flop.

GO SPIDERMAN GO

[GSWarrior]

Good idea, except there are too many characters.

[Christian4Bush]

Bump for later

[Hill Street Blues]

Moore only includes half truths and if you believe the one post included an incorrect segment.

For you to say Jews control the diamond business, blacks are the prison majority etc is for me to say that Moore works for the Carlyle Group because the film distributor of Fahrenheit 9-11 is owned by Carlyle.

[folderwater1]

I am pretty surprised at the positive response to the original message, as almost all of it is specious claims as well. I found refutations to almost none of the points that I found controversial in the documentary. First of all, the claim about President Bush vacationing 42% of the time. Mr. Tremoglie says "So what?" Am I missing something here? Does the average American vacation 42% of the time? Does President Bush not have many more responsibilities than the average American? Why is our president vacationing 42% of the time? Even with the aformentioned caveats, it is still a high percentage, and President Eishenhower could be criticized for the same reason.

The "war for oil" point makes no sense at all. The WWP may be crazy, but that doesn't refute the idea about the oil. I have heard Republicans mention oil as a factor in the war, so I do not see how Mr. Tremoglie dismisses this so easily.

The point about the Patriot Act is showing that the government is looking in the wrong places for terrorists. Instead of infiltrating innocent groups, the police presence on borders might be increased, or perhaps the police force, considering the several elevated status warnings that have occurred throughout the country. In addition, since President Bush received a warning that Osama bin Laden was planning on hijacking planes and flying them into buildings prior to 9/11, the implication is that additional counterterrorism measures such as the Patriot Act were not really needed.

About the congressmen and the children, is there not an unequal distribution?

From the film, I get the idea that President Bush is too invested in foreign affairs, to the detriment of the many poor communities, such as Flint, Michigan.

I am searching for a true refutatation of the Michael Moore documentary, is there anywhere I can go to find it? Certainly there's a lot of unsubstantiated points in the movie, but to dismiss the entire film without any real arguments is something I'd hope no person would do, liberal or conservative.

Someone mentioned that anyone who watches the documentary is so twisted with hatred for Bush and the United States that there is no reasoning with them. Yet I sense the same feeling in many of the replies, aimed at the liberals. A self-righteousness that someone attributed to the liberals. As conservatives, let's not repeat the same mistake.

[Hill Street Blues]

I think Tremoglie's article refuted Moore's film very succinctly - in a sarcastic way.

Just because you believe these conspiracy theories even after Tremoglie provides evidence to the contrary says more about you than anything else.

Vacationing? Tremoglie said Moore used only part of the quote. Tremoglie said Eisenhower was criticized for vacationing a lot as well. Was Eisenhower a bad president?

You believe it was a war for cheap oil? Then why is oil more expensive? Why have we given Iraq operation and profit of their oil industry? If we wanted oil from Iraq why did we embargo it.

Tremoglie makes sense, you just don't understand English.

PATRIOT Act? you say the government is infiltrating innocent groups? HOw do you konw what happened in Fresno had anything to do with the PATRIOT Act?

Besides how do you know what is innocent? Al-Haramain was a charity to help poor Muslim kids. Except it wasn't. It funneled cash to terrorists.

What about Congressman? Is there a law that says Congressmen should have kids in the service before they vote for war? PLease get a petition and try to have that law established. Let me know how many of your fellow citizens think that makes sense. You will not find a majority or even a plurality.

You are a Michael Moore fan. This is easy to tell from the remark about the poor of Flint Michigan. Your post is a thinly disguised attempt to discredit the article. As a Michael Moore fan you should know that it won't work here. There are no Clinton Kool Aid drinkers here.

[folderwater1]

Perhaps you were in a hurry and did not pay proper attention to many of the points in my message, but your post doesn't make much sense.

With regard to vacationing, you mention that Tremoglie said Moore used only part of the quotation. I was aware of that and was referring to this very point when I mentioned the "aforementioned caveats" in my first post. You also say that Eisenhower was criticized for vacationing a lot and ask whether he was a bad president. Are you saying that a single issue makes or breaks a president?

Oil might be more expensive because things in Iraq did not turn out as expected before the war. Giving Iraq operation and profit of their oil industry doesn't change the fact that leaders sympathetic to the US are in charge of Iraq. What are you talking about an oil embargo? Iraq put an embargo on oil exports back in 2002, is there a more recent occurrance that I am not aware of?

A peace group in Fresno and a Muslim charity are two different things.

I'm not looking for a law that says Congressmen need to have children in the service. I am saying that people who go into the army come from disproportionately different geographical areas based on socioeconomic status. Congress does not seem to represent the diverse opinions of America if only a single person has a child in the service.

I could elaborate on any of the above points, but it does not seem worth the time.