"FAHRENHEIT 9/11,"opening weekend. Where do I begin? After hearing all of the media hype about this documentary, I decided I should go witness the commotion for myself. Devoid of intellectual critique, this documentary is reminiscent of propagandist films dating back to the Soviet Union.
According to Merriam-Webster, a documentary is meant to be "factual and objective." "Fahrenheit 9/11" failed to meet any of these criteria. While it was not Michael Moore's goal to present both sides of the issues fairly, he did claim that his movie was factually accurate.
On the surface, he was successful at bashing Bush, but on closer examination, a more substantive case can be made that the damage Moore inflicted on his own credibility as a commentator and documentarian (if he had any to begin with) far outweighs the harm to the Bush administration and his reelection bid.
The movie was filled with false accusations, inconclusive and one-sided "evidence," blatant contradictions, illicit emotional evocations and the occasional bout of humor. Moore panders to people's emotions, the basest and least scholarly form of persuasion, which he uses to make up for the lack of concrete, indisputable evidence.
He certainly took full advantage of the advanced editing technology available. One of the more memorable scenes of Bush commenting on the seriousness of the war on terror, then turning his attention back to his golf game, was actually a discussion on the terrorist attacks in Israel (which liberals prefer Bush not interfere with), not the U.S. war on terror, as it appears.
In the beginning of the film, the audience is informed that 24 members of the bin Laden family and several dozen other Saudis left the United States in the days following Sept. 11. Moore's conclusion that Bush did the Saudis a favor by letting them escape is completely unfounded and even goes against the findings of the Sept. 11 Commission, which is hardly devoted to protecting to the president. The preliminary report states, "The FBI has concluded that nobody was allowed to depart on these six flights that the FBI wanted to interview in connection with the 9/11 attacks, or who the FBI later concluded had any involvement in those attacks. To date, we have uncovered no evidence to contradict those conclusions."
When questioned in an ABC interview about his dubious inferences, Moore stated, "No, I'm presenting the truth." On Dateline NBC, he proclaimed, "They got special help. They were put first in line because of this relationship between the Bush family and the Saudi royal family and I wish somebody would just say that."
Moore presented quotes from Richard Clarke about Bush's alleged ineffectiveness on the terrorism front, but he left out Clarke's leading role in the decision to permit the Saudi flights out of the country, for which he has no regrets. Clarke wrote in his recent book, Against All Enemies, "I take responsibility for it. I don't think it was a mistake and I'd do it again." If Moore's previous statement were true, wouldn't Clarke, who personally made this judgment call, have informed the country of Bush's treachery in his tell-all book?Essentially, Moore lambasts Clarke's competence in one frame, and then places all faith in him in another.
Also, holes in the country's national security, such as the scarce and rather pathetic patrol along the coast of Oregon, are exposed, insinuating that more law enforcement officials are needed to protect our nation's borders, which is a valid point. Yet Moore would have been fighting for the civil liberties of any suspicious and unscrupulous characters infiltrating the United States by means of the Oregon aquatic boundary that might have been caught and detained had there been more manpower. His hypocrisy and contradictory nature are clearly visible.
Moore rails on Bush for failing to recognize the danger that the terrorists pose, since they had struck the World Trade Center only eight years prior to Sept. 11, 2001. I doubt that if any pro-active measures were taken to prevent Sept. 11, such as profiling, increased airport security and increased police presence, they would have been met with a laudatory and favorable response, especially considering Moore's reaction to the Patriot Act, passed after the largest act of terrorism in U.S. history. Of course, this isn't the only option to combating terrorism. We could have just attacked countries where al Qaeda harbored terrorists before Sept. 11. But, considering that Moore thinks that we went to war in Afghanistan after Sept. 11 to line the pockets of Dick Cheney and purports this to be the reality (even though he sold all of his stock and has released a multitude of documentation to prove it), he wouldn't have been satisfied with that either.
All of these elements in "Fahrenheit 9/11," along with many others, just go to show that Michael Moore is an extremist who at best provides entertainment value. His agenda to get Bush out of office may not be advanced effectively with the release of the movie. It might not make people flock to Bush, but it doesn't exactly help Bush's opponent, which is the logical course of action to pursue if you want him to be a one-termer. Kerry's campaign advisers have cautioned him to distance himself from this far left-wing icon. If the old saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend," does not apply here, what real purpose does this film serve, other than for Moore to capitalize on an unsuspecting public?
Whitney Blake is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at wblake@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
