Close Topic Options

Fahrenheit 9/11

This thread is not about the doumentary as a movie presentation, this thread is about the content of it. It was presented in such a way so as to feed the audience information about Bush and Iraq war from a different perspective. Do you believe this documentary is accurate in its' research about the Bush and Iraq war? How did you feel after wathing it?

Fahrenheit

I just saw it. Very interesting. I would like to see someone commentary on it, but the facts presented are quite eye-opening. Some things covered are:

1. Why Bin Ladin's family was shipped out of the US so quickly instead of being interrogated?
2. Why Bush sat in the kindergarden when his staff just told him the country is under attack? It is also interesting that none of his guards swoop him away in order to protect him.
3. Saudi's and Bin Laden family did a lot of investing with the Bush family
4. Saudi's have 7% of the economy of the US and if they were to pull it out it would be a severe blow to the US
5. Patriot Act
6. Only one congressman has a child in the war in Iraq

Fahrenheit 9/11 History & Civil Business Politics

On Tuesday, August 10th, 2004, George W. Bush nominated Florida Rep. Porter Goss to head the Central Intelligence Agency.

Rep. Porter Goss, appeared briefly in Michael Moore's 'Fahrenheit 9/11.' But part of his March 3, 2004 interview for the movie, which did not make it into the film, has suddenly taken on major significance. The following is an excerpt from the interview:

INTERVIEWER: [Y]ou come from intelligence. This is what you did, this is what you know.
REP. GOSS: Uh, that was, uh, 35 years ago.
INTERVIEWER: Okay.
Ref. https://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php?id=128


September 21st, 2004 5:43 pm
U.S. Troops in Iraq Gather to Watch 'Fahrenheit 9/11'; Anti-Bush sentiment growing
Ref. https://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php?id=164

Fahrenheit

Something interesting I saw a few days ago, and I'm sure no one will be surprised (though some will be surprised they didn't hear of it sooner). Apparently, there's a group doing a project called "Farenhype 9/11." Basically, it's an anti-Farenheit 9/11 film, but their approach is simple. They're basically saying Moore took several liberties with the truth. One example they listed is that, in Moore's film, Bush visited a Florida classroom, and that he "looked befuddled and like he had nothing to do." The makers of the new film say Moore didn't show the whole picture. Therefore, they interview the teacher who was there, who is quoted as saying she thought it "went well" and was pleased that George had come.

There were other examples listed, but that basically the summary I heard on the new project. I'm kinda interested in seeing how it turns out, and how credible it is.

Fahrenheit

I saw this documentary a couple of days ago since I worked in Media for more than 10 years I can clearly see the approach or intentions that Mr. Moore tried to put in his work.

The good points:

1) The off-records and off camera scenes were fantastic.

2) His selection of speakers was pretty good.

3) Documents presented.


The bad points:

1) EXTREMELY bias.

2) Purposely edit statements of politians to fit to the message he wants to give. (way too many edited statements, he would show just once sentence without giving you the option to explore the context in which that statement was made).

3) Play too low with people's feelings (he would show the camera as closer as possible when a mother who lost her son was crying)

Fahrenheit 9/11

I was just wondering how the director of this film feels knowing despite all his rants and presentations Bush still got a majority vote?

Fahrenheit 9/11

I said some.

I believe the movie tried to hint that Bush actually arranged, in some part, the incident, which I can't see as true. I don't see why he would do that. An excuse to enter Iraq? I don't know, that part I don't really buy.

I would probably do the same. To process this incident must take a lot of time, especially since the US was not touched by terrorism until then, and it came almost out of nowhere (although the movie did say there was a warning which was paid no attention.)

I found all of these very curious. I don't see any other reason why bush might ship out Bin Ladin's family so fast except for to protect their investments, but Moore might not be showing all the evidence there is, of course, as his documentary is very far from neutral.

I think the patriot act was just a result from the panic that 9/11 brought, and the inexperience of the United States in similar situations. It was really funny, though, that in the airports they allowed only 3 lighters and two matchboxes. Why would they want to limit it, if it's allowed in the first place?

That wasn't really surprising. The congressmen were expecting the people to volunteer, but of course not their own sons!

I agree. I wonder how come Michael Moore got sued for copying the name from a book instead of for the actual contents of the movie.

Fahrenheit 9/11 Politics Business Civil & History

Of course the movie was bias...There is no question about it ! But there some things said there that were on everybody's mind. Some questions were raze and also the appetit to know more about the things unsaid...that I think is the best aspect of the film.