# Farenheit 9/11 **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [June 26, 2004, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292 "2004-06-26T07:20:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Annie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/858c86/32.png) [@Annie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/41 "2004-06-27T14:48:38Z")
> [@jellyblue](#): > > [Hollywood Bitchslap - Defending Truth: Slate's Chris Hitchens does a hatchet job on Michael Moore](http://www.hollywoodbitchslap.com/feature.php?feature=1150) > > In it, the other reports that just yesterday the Carlyle group bought Loew’s theatre chain. Does anyone have another cite for that besides the Hollywood Bitchslap? > > Wrap me in tinfoil if you want, but that’s kinda scary. :eek: Indeedie-doo:[Carlyle press release about it](http://www.thecarlylegroup.com/eng/news/l5-news2805.html) ---
**Author:** ![jellyblue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e480ec/32.png) [@jellyblue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jellyblue)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/42 "2004-06-27T16:18:16Z")
Wow. Thanks, **Annie**. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Stilettos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/fbc32d/32.png) [@Red\_Stilettos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Stilettos)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/43 "2004-06-27T18:51:47Z")
I saw the movie yesterday and, yes it is preaching to the choir. If you need evidence, my 89 yo grandmother who is very fragile and hates to travel was willing to drive 5 hours to the nearest theater showing this movie. I have to say, it was a blast seeing this with her. And, the showing was punctuated by synchronized uh-huh’s from the audience. One thing Moore touched on was the overwhelming contributions of the poor and minorities to the war effort. And also the “systematic” elimination of minority (and presumably Democratic) votes in 2000. Unfortunately, I don’t think Moore’s going to hit his target audience with those assertions. I saw the movie in a poor, African-American neighborhood. The theater was only about 1/4 full, while most of the other shows (i.e.- White Chicks, for Og’s sake! :smack: ) were sold out. Overall, I think Moore did a great job of making an entertaining, attention-grabbing movie out of a subject that could have worn very thin. ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/44 "2004-06-27T19:09:59Z")
As far as the classroom scene goes, I don’t think there was any implication that he was leading the classroom in the excercise. Moore is putting words in his brain as far as his rhetorical questions go, but what I do see there is a man who knows the shit just hit the fan and is aware he is on camera. You can pretty much see the gears turning in his head – a very pained expression as he struggles to figure out what to do. Finally, you can almost see him think, “better do **something** ” so he picks up the book everyone is reading and makes a pass at following along. It’s not a great moment of leadership. ---
**Author:** ![chula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a4c791/32.png) [@chula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chula)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/45 "2004-06-27T19:16:15Z")
> [@Askia](#): > > I’m no Bush fanatic by any means, but I do have to take issue with what’s being reported about the classroom Bush is visiting. I think people are misinterpreting what’s going on in the scene, including filmmaker Michael Moore and other commentators, like Chicago Sun-Times’ Roger Ebert, who says, > > I recognized the book that the president was holding. It is part of the SRA Reading Mastery series. The students are using a phonics based reading program called [Direct Instruction](http://www.sraonline.com/index.php/home/curriculumsolutions/di/rmrainbow/100), the Rainbow Edition, for k-6 classrooms. When Bush first sits down, the teacher is to the left of the president, and the students are seated in front of them, and he has a copy of the textbook they’re reading from in hand, presumably so he can follow along. The seating is also consistent with maximizing the instructional time as per SRA guidelines. Now, while it’s been extensively reported that Bush is reading to the class, that’s doesn’t appear to be true. The whole point of the SRA Reading Mastery series is the the students do the reading using decoding and phonics skills while the teacher monitors their progress, keeps them focussed and makes corrections, not the other way around. To the casual eye it may appear as if he’s reading to the class but that’s not the case. Bush is not reading to the children; they’re reading to him and the classroom teacher. If you get an opportunity again, look at the back of the children’s heads during that scene, and you will see that they’re not looking at the president at all; they’re bent down reading the textbooks in their laps. Look again and you’ll see that the president may look dazed, yes, but consider the news he’s just gotten. > > While that may not seem to be a big distinction, it clarifies a few things. > > 1. Moore says in the narrative that the president was informed of the first plane slamming into the World Trade Center prior entering the classroom, yet the president chose to go on with the visit anyway. There are many differing accounts when precisely Bush was informed of the first crash, but it seems likely he was informed while in the motorcade, or perhaps upon entering the school. It is almost certain he knew about it before sittng down with the children for the photo-op. > > 2. At no time does it appear that Bush was ever an active participant in the learning going on in the classroom during the reading lesson. He’s an appreciative audience, occaionally asking questions of the students, but mostly listening. > > 3. Apologists who claim the president would have alarmed the children by leaving don’t realize how focussed the reading instruction is. He could have easily excused himself if he so desired, especially if he was just observing and listening anyway. Instead he chose to sit and continue with the photo op. It’s more likely the presient didn’t want to alarm the 100-plus reporters in the room. > > 4. Considering the nature of the news he’s received it may be understandable that he was momentarily frozen, perhaps processing the news and considering his course of actions. (Or as Moore put it, thinking about the Sauds and wondering, IIRC, “Which of these guys screwed me?”) > > 5. Another obvious possibility is that The Secret Service may not have wanted the president to leave until the 20 minute photo-op’s scheduled conclusion, because they needed to further secure the perimeter before leaving or execute some other arcane contingency plans. [There is some speculation there may have been an assassination attempt on the president while he was in Florida, that the Service might have been instrumental in foiling.](http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html) > > Anyway – my two cents about that scene. Uh, you obviously haven’t seen the movie. Bush clearly isn’t reading that scene. It does seem that some critics have said that Bush was reading _to_ the class, when what they meant is that he was reading _with_ the class, as in he was following along with his own copy of the book. (Appropriate, since his language skills are at an elementary-school level.) Michael Moore’s critics keep focusing on minute details, accusing him of distorting facts. Here, the viewer simply sees what Bush did and can judge for themselves. Some critics use of the wrong preposition does not make MM a liar. And anyway, what difference could that distinction possibly make? If anything, it’s more damning that he couldn’t find a way to excuse himself when all he was doing was sitting there listening. ---
**Author:** ![jellyblue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e480ec/32.png) [@jellyblue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jellyblue)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2004, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/46 "2004-06-27T22:27:39Z")
Not to pile on here, **Askia** , but how long did it take most people to figure out there was some serious shit going on? My girlfriend was on her way to work, listening to the radio and didn’t make it out of the development before making a u-turn, coming back home and turning on CNN. I’ll never forget her coming through the door and saying “Something really bad is happening in the world.” A minute later, my mom called. So most civilians dropped absolutely anything they were doing & tried to get more info about what was going on. I just think it’s reasonable to expect the same from the PotUS. ---
**Author:** ![Charlie\_Tan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/charlie_tan/32/12582_2.png) [@Charlie\_Tan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charlie_Tan)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/47 "2004-06-28T13:28:22Z")
Are there more than one version out? It might seem like a _really_ stupid question, but I’ve read references to State troopers in Oregon (or some such) and klids in Iraq playing before the war. The version I downloaded did not contain any such scenes. Also, the scene from the trailer, with Moore driving around in an ice cream van was also missing. In fact, there was nothing about the patriot act at all. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/48 "2004-06-28T14:29:03Z")
I Have Not Yet Seen The Movie ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/49 "2004-06-28T14:34:11Z")
Yes, **The Gaspode** , all of those bits are in the actual feature film. ---
**Author:** ![Slacker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6bbea6/32.png) [@Slacker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slacker)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/50 "2004-06-28T14:36:22Z")
> [@The Gaspode](#): > > Are there more than one version out? > > It might seem like a _really_ stupid question, but I’ve read references to State troopers in Oregon (or some such) and klids in Iraq playing before the war. The version I downloaded did not contain any such scenes. Also, the scene from the trailer, with Moore driving around in an ice cream van was also missing. In fact, there was nothing about the patriot act at all. This may seem like a stupider question, but did you ever think about plunking down six bucks for the matinee and finding out for yourself? ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/51 "2004-06-28T14:40:17Z")
Sorry, hit enter by mistake. To continue: I HAVE NOT YET SEEN THE MOVIE, so what follows is more a reaction to the reactions than to the film itself. It seems to me, having seen all of Moore’s other films, that the label “polemicist,” and even “propagandist,” are valid. But I don’t have a problem with that. What gets people steamed is Moore’s winking approach: he is explicitly–well, maybe not explicitly; there seems to be a little pomo subtlety involved–he is using Bush, et al.'s, own tools against them. Yes, his approach is an emotional one. But the soundbites and bumpersticker-thinking he’s attacking are shamelessy emotional, too. Moore is a product of the Reagan era, in that his style is an indignant reaction to the sugarcoated lies that have become the standard political style since then. And no one has benefited more from the post-Reagan political style than George W. Bush, the personification of the American Dream: Style Over Substance. ---
**Author:** ![Charlie\_Tan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/charlie_tan/32/12582_2.png) [@Charlie\_Tan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charlie_Tan)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/52 "2004-06-28T14:54:56Z")
> [@Slacker](#): > > This may seem like a stupider question, but did you ever think about plunking down six bucks for the matinee and finding out for yourself? You might not have noticed my location, but it opens here Aug. 27th. And while I’ll be paying something like $10 to see it at that time, and probably buy the DVD, I just couldn’t wait. Spider-Man opens at the same time in most countries, but we have to wait for this. ---
**Author:** ![vibrotronica](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a9a28c/32.png) [@vibrotronica](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vibrotronica)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/53 "2004-06-28T15:06:48Z")
I saw the movie on Saturday. I was very impressed. It is easily his best movie–surpassing _Roger and Me_ and _Bowling for Columbine_. A big question I had going in was, “Did it deserve the Palm d’Or on its merits, or was it a political thing?” My conclusion, upon a day and a half’s reflection, is that it probably did deserve the award. Now, I haven’t seen most of the movies it was up against at Cannes, so take that statement with a grain of salt. Nonetheless, it is one of the best documentaries I’ve ever seen. It is a very, very good movie. _Guernica_ it ain’t, but it might be _Uncle Tom’s Cabin_. Both were pieces of political art that were very rooted in their times. The difference is that _Guernica_ has lost none of its power over the years, while _Uncle Tom’s Cabin_ is only read in college-level history classes. I don’t think _Farenheit 9/11_ will be widely viewed outside of film classes in 70 years–but it will be taught as a landmark documentary. ---
**Author:** ![Dogzilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e480ec/32.png) [@Dogzilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogzilla)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/54 "2004-06-28T15:29:47Z")
Although I’d already seen/heard/read about most of Moore’s assertions in the movie, it did seem like a succinct summary of those – all in one place with video and documentation to back up some of the more far-out facts. I was wondering, in between crying jags (I found this movie very disturbing and could not laugh during most of the “funny” lines. It’s all too disgusting for me to find funny anymore.) why, exactly do conservatives call Moore a liar? I couldn’t get much past the first page in the “Michael Moore = Liar?” thread. Did anyone ever manage to definitively prove a lie? Taking things out of context, exaggerating, sure. I can see those claims. I’m looking for definitive proof that he lies – deliberately creates falsehoods to make his point. I kept thinking, “Nobody who _should_ see this movie is here.” Anyone who thinks Moore is full of beans should watch this movie and take notes. Then go to the library, get on the internet, do whatever to find all the facts that definitively disprove the assertions in this movie. Are there Saudi ties to the Bush family or not? Is that a conflict of interest or not? Prove your side. Then go register to vote and make sure you vote based on your research. I’m betting that anyone who actually does so will end up voting ABB - Anybody But Bush. But I believe blindy in propaganda. Hey, 49% of the country can’t go wrong! Baaaaaa baaaa [/sheep] ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/55 "2004-06-28T19:40:59Z")
> [@Dogzilla](#): > > I was wondering, in between crying jags (I found this movie very disturbing and could not laugh during most of the “funny” lines. It’s all too disgusting for me to find funny anymore.) why, exactly do conservatives call Moore a liar? Because it’s easier than refuting the data he brings to the table. > [@Dogzilla](#): > > Did anyone ever manage to definitively prove a lie? I’ve been browsing the internet all weekend, trying to see what kind of counter-arguments people can make for **Fahrenheit 9/11.** The only one I’ve heard that wasn’t a name-calling cheap-shot was that then-governor Bush _didn’t_ meet with the Taliban, as Moore claims in the movie. Though I’m trying to remember if Moore said the Taliban met with Bush while he was governor, or in the summer of 2001 (which did happen). > [@Dogzilla](#): > > I kept thinking, “Nobody who _should_ see this movie is here.” Moore’s got excerpts from email on his site from viewers; some folks mentioned taking Republican friends and family to the movie, and a fair number of them were convinced to vote Bush out in November. OTOH, various local newspapers also talked to Republicans who’ve seen the movie and dismissed it, though they couldn’t offer any criticism more substantial than “Moore was only presenting half of the story.” ---
**Author:** ![Dogzilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e480ec/32.png) [@Dogzilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogzilla)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/56 "2004-06-28T19:54:21Z")
Thanks **rjung**. That’s sort of what I thought. Yes, he’s a propagandist. I see that as anti-propaganda. As in fighting fire with fire… as if both sides haven’t used propaganda since 1787. :rolleyes: As if there’s something wrong with that… I guess I could go peruse one of Airman Doors’ threads. Surely an upstanding and thoughtful Doper like Airman Doors has found documented, verifiable proof that Moore is a liar and I should change sides. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/57 "2004-06-28T20:15:38Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > . . . OTOH, various local newspapers also talked to Republicans who’ve seen the movie and dismissed it, though they couldn’t offer any criticism more substantial than “Moore was only presenting half of the story.” This cracks me up. No substantiation that his half of the story is untrue; only that it’s “half the story.” Darwin only told half the story because he didn’t cover the Big Bang. “Cinderella” is only half the story because it doesn’t focus on the prince. What EVER. No one I can find actually disputes any of the facts behind Moore; they only object to his methods of presenting them. ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/58 "2004-06-28T22:45:37Z")
Die-Hard Liberal Who Would Rather Poke Her Eyes Out Than Vote For Bush here… Moore seemed to indicate that it was unusual for the Secret Service to be protecting the Saudi embassy. I’d have to see the movie again to see exactly what he says, so it might not be classified as a “lie,” but that’s certainly the impression I got. In fact, protecting diplomatic missions is one of the Secret Service’s jobs. From [here, Protection, Uniformed Division](http://www.ustreas.gov/usss/ud.shtml) : > [@](#): > > In 1970, Public Law 91-217 expanded the role of the White House Police, newly named the Executive Protective Service, **to include protection of diplomatic missions in the Washington, D.C.,area**. Congress later added the protection of the Vice President’s immediate family to the Executive Protective Service’s growing responsibilities in 1974. Now, nobody better be goin’ around sayin’ that liberals won’t call out Moore when he deserves it. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2004, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/59 "2004-06-28T23:41:16Z")
> [@Equipoise](#): > > Moore seemed to indicate that it was unusual for the Secret Service to be protecting the Saudi embassy. I’d have to see the movie again to see exactly what he says, so it might not be classified as a “lie,” but that’s certainly the impression I got. IIRC, the exchange was more like– **Moore:** “Does the Secret Service regularly protect foreign embassies?” **Agent:** “Not really, it’s pretty must just the Saudis.” Assuming my memory isn’t wrong here, then this is merely Moore repeating what he was told, from an authoritative source. I see the whole thing as similar to the whole “former Presidents can get classified CIA briefings if they want to” – most people won’t exercise that privilege, but a few will… > [@Equipoise](#): > > Now, nobody better be goin’ around sayin’ that liberals won’t call out Moore when he deserves it. I hear ya. I’ve been rather disenchanted with Moore after hearing how he distorted some facts in his last two books, and have avoided buying them for that reason. The (so far) bulletproof fact-checking behind **Fahrenheit 9/11** has redeemed him quite a bit IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2004, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292/60 "2004-06-29T00:04:25Z")
Although it may be part of their charter, it still might be possible that they don’t end up regularly protecting foreign embassies. There may be no need, perhaps from the embassies preferring their own security (I’m merely speculating, I have no idea if they do or not). The Agent may not have even been wrong. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/farenheit-9-11/252292.md?page=4)