The NYTimes on Michael Moore's 'Fahrenheit 9/11'

[DudeAsInCool]

Michael Moore's much publicized film "Fahrenheit 9/11," premieres today at the Cannes International Film Festival, and according to the NY Times, "contains stark images of civilian casualties and disillusioned soldiers from the Iraq war zone that have rarely, if ever, been shown on American television."

According to the Jim Rutenberg's article, "A Film to Polarize Along Party Lines", the film "focuses on longstanding ties between the Bush family, its associates and prominent Saudis. and on whether those ties clouded the president's judgment in recognizing warning signs before the Sept. 11 attacks and hampered his response afterward. Mr. Moore extends his critique of the president to his conduct of the war in Iraq, arguing that the war is victimizing not only Iraqis but also the lower-income enlisted Americans who are fighting in it. In addition he attempts to make a case that the government's terrorism alerts at home are being used to repeal some civil liberties."

You can read the full story here in the NY Times:

:read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/17/movies/1...ZC+rffdLgb/JSqQ

[Shawn]

Mr. Moore extends his critique of the president to his conduct of the war in Iraq, arguing that the war is victimizing not only Iraqis but also the lower-income enlisted Americans who are fighting in it. In addition he attempts to make a case that the government's terrorism alerts at home are being used to repeal some civil liberties."

yep

[DudeAsInCool]

I recently was sent the following related email - read it and make your own judgment:

***

From one of the most informed and courageous American journalists - working off-shore - Greg Palast. Hands off the fat guy in the chicken suit, Mr. Mogul. by Greg Palast, author of the New York Times bestseller, “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.” Palast is currently in LA to receive the ACLU's Freedom of Expression award.

***

WHEN the fattened cats at Disney put the kibosh on Michael Moore's new film, “Fahrenheit 9-11,” they did more than censor an artist. Gagging Moore is only the latest maneuver in suppressing some most uncomfortable facts: the Bush Administration's killing off investigations of Saudi Arabian funding of terror including evidence involving a few members of the bin Laden family in the USA.

I know, because, with my investigative team at BBC television and The Guardian of Britain, I wrote and filmed the original reports on which Moore's new documentary are based.

On November 11, 2001, just two months after the attack, BBC Television's Newsnight displayed documents indicating that FBI agents were held back from investigating two members of the bin Laden family who were fronting for a "suspected terrorist organization" out of Falls Church, Virginia - that is, until September 13, 2001. By that time, these birds had flown.

We further reported that upper level agents in the US government informed BBC that the Bush Administration had hobbled the investigation of Pakistan's Khan Laboratories, which ran a flea market in atomic bomb blueprints. Why were investigators stymied? Because the money trail led back to the Saudis.

The next day, our Guardian team reported that agents were constrained in following the money trail from an extraordinary meeting held in Paris in 1996. There, in the Hotel Monceau Royale, Saudi billionaires allegedly agreed to fund Al-Qaeda's "educational" endeavors.

Those stories ran at the top of the nightly news in Britain and worldwide but not in the USA. Why?

Our news teams picked up several awards including one I particularly hated getting: a Project Censored Award from California State University's school of journalism. It's the prize you get for a very important story that is simply locked out of the American press.

And that hurts. I'm an American, an L.A. kid sent into journalistic exile in England.

What's going on here?

Why the heck can't agents follow the money, even when it takes them to Arabia? Because, as we heard repeatedly from those muzzled inside the agencies, Saudi money trails lead back to George H.W. Bush and his very fortunate sons and retainers. We at BBC reported that too, at the top of the nightly news, everywhere but America.

Why are Americas media barons afraid to tell this story in the USA? The BBC and Guardian stories were the ugly little dots connected by a single theme: oil contamination in American politics and money poisoning in the blood of our most powerful political family. And that is news that dare not speak its name.

This is not the first time that Michael Moore attempted to take our BBC investigative reports past the US media border patrol. In fact, our joke in the London newsroom is that if we can't get our story on to American airwaves, we can just slip it to the fat guy in the chicken suit. Moore could sneak it past the censors as 'entertainment.'

Here's an example of Moore's underground railroad operation to bring hard news to America: In the Guardian and on BBC TV, I reported that Florida's then Secretary of State, Katherine Harris, removed tens of thousands of Black citizens from voter rolls just prior to the 2000 election. Her office used a list of supposed 'felons' - a roster her office knew was baloney, filled almost exclusively with innocents.

I printed the first installment of that story in the Guardian papers while Al Gore was still in the race. The Washington Post ran my story seven months later. By then, it could be read with a chuckle from the Bush White House.

The Black voter purge story would have never seen the light of day in the USA, despite its front-page play over the globe, were it not for Moore opening his book, “Stupid White Men,” with it.

So go ahead, Mr. Mickey Mouse mogul, censor the guy in the baseball cap, let the movie screens go dark, spread the blindness that is killing us. Instead, show us fake fly-boys giving the "Mission Accomplished" thumbs up. It's so much easier, with the lights off, for the sheiks, who lend their credit cards to killers, to jack up the price of oil while our politicians prepare the heist of the next election, this time by computer.

Let's not kid ourselves. Tube news in the USA is now thoroughly Fox-ified and print, with few exceptions, still kow-tows to the prevaricating pronouncements of our commander in chief.

Maybe I'm getting too worked up. After all, it's just a movie.

But choking off distribution of Moore's film looks suspiciously like a hunt and destroy mission on unwanted news, even when that news is hidden in a comic documentary. Why should the media moguls stop there? How about an extra large orange suit for Michael for the new Hollywood wing in Guantanamo?

****

On April 26, Penguin launched the Expanded Election Edition of Palast's New York Times bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. For more information, or media inquiries, go to www.GregPalast.com . Palast will be speaking at the Immanuel Presbyterian Church Friday, May 7 at 7pm, in Los Angeles, 3300 Wilshire Blvd - and in Washington DC on May 12.

[desdemona]

Cannes applauds anti-Bush film

Monday, May 17, 2004 Posted: 10:42 AM EDT (1442 GMT

CANNES, France -- Michael Moore's controversial anti-Bush film "Fahrenheit 9/11" has debuted at the Cannes Film Festival to resounding applause from film critics.

Moore, who is facing an uphill battle to get his movie into U.S. theaters this summer as planned, offers a relentless critique of the Bush administration both before and after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

"You see so many movies after they've been hyped to heaven and they turn out to be complete crap, but this is a powerful film," Baz Bamigboye, a film columnist for London's Daily Mail newspaper, told The Associated Press.

"It would be a shame if Americans didn't get to see this movie about important

stuff happening in their own backyard."

read the article here:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/...film/index.html

[Kooperman]

Money talks....if a liberal project proves there's a large paying market for it, some of the conservative distributors will loosen their standards just enough to accomodate the big bucks. I even bought Bob Woodward's new book at super conservative Sam's Discount...creating a fierce spin in Sam Walton's casket.

[Redneck4sure]

Koop, I'm sure you bought it in the fiction section. <_>

[desdemona]

hey red, watergate fiction too?

[Redneck4sure]

King Nixon!! What a guy!!

remember his slogan for the 72 election??

Nixon, now more than ever.

[DudeAsInCool]

Hey, I'd take Nixon over GW anyday...

[Redneck4sure]

He's dead Dude. Get over it and move on!!! :)

[slum_goddess]

I even bought Bob Woodward's new book at super conservative Sam's Discount...creating a fierce spin in Sam Walton's casket.

[Bombardier]

Hey, I'd take Nixon over GW anyday...

I don't know about that.

Nixon was quite a "crook"

[Redneck4sure]

I don't know about that.

Nixon was quite a "crook"

Yes but Nixon was a better speaker and looked more "presidential."

He seemed so sincere in his, "I'm not a crook" speech.

In fact he seemed much more sincere than Clinton did in his, "I did not have sex with " speeches.

[Bombardier]

I don't know about that.

Nixon was quite a "crook"

Yes but Nixon was a better speaker and looked more "presidential."

He seemed so sincere in his, "I'm not a crook" speech.

In fact he seemed much more sincere than Clinton did in his, "I did not have sex with " speeches.

I should go back and watch some of Nixon's old speeches.

He was President way before my time so I don't know too much about him.

[Redneck4sure]

He was President way before my time so I don't know too much about him.

Good speaker. Hell of a crook. Pathalogical liar. Stereotypical politician.

I was there. It was not before my time. In fact few things are before my time......... :(

[Kooperman]

Yes but Nixon was a better speaker and looked more "presidential."

He seemed so sincere in his, "I'm not a crook" speech.

In fact he seemed much more sincere than Clinton did in his, "I did not have sex with " speeches.

Actually, Nixon didn't "look Presidential". His appearance was so poor that it went a long way in costing him the 1960 election for President against John Kennedy. In televised debates (black & white only in those days) his 5 o'clock shadow and his sweaty face was in stark contrast to John Kennedy's very cool and neat look. It made an impact at the polls in Kennedy's favor.

As to his speaking ability, he'd rate average at best. Kennedy had a major advantage there....as did Bill Clinton. But I'll concede that Nixon was the most convincing liar the country has had in many a year.

[Redneck4sure]

Koop, I wasn't comparing Nixon to presidents in general. I was only comparing him to Bush. Compared to Bush, he looks presidential. Compared to Bush, he was a better speaker. And compared to anybody, he was a good liar.

[Umma]

Which side are you on?

By Chris Heard

BBC News Online entertainment staff

US film-maker Michael Moore's conflict with his country's government has led to suggestions that he is unpatriotic. He is not the first American artist to face the charge.

Moore has been an outspoken critic of President Bush

Moore says the White House tried to block his film Fahrenheit 9/11, which is critical of the Bush administration and its role in foreign affairs after 11 September.

Moore's allegation in front of the world's media at Cannes - which has received no response from the White House - has renewed the ire of his opponents who say he is anti-American.

In being critical of the government of the day, he belongs to a long tradition of US writers, directors, musicians and comics who have been castigated for a perceived lack of patriotism.

During the early 1950s, at the height of the Cold War, a host of Hollywood actors directors, producers and writers were hauled before the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC).

The so-called witch-hunt, part of Senator Joseph McCarthy's crusade against alleged communists in government and public life, became known as McCarthyism.

Its targets included On The Waterfront director Elia Kazan, who gave eight names to the committee, and screenwriter Arthur Miller, who was blacklisted by Hollywood when he refused to testify.

Read the rest

[MxRob]

Compared to Bush, he looks presidential.  Compared to Bush, he was a better speaker.  And compared to anybody, he was a good liar.

True. :bigsmile:

Some folks liked Nixon, after all they named a library after him in his honor.

As far as Michael Moore, I'd be willing to put him on a plane to anywhere in the world at my expense just so I could never hear again the crap spilling out from his mouth. I am sure he could find peace anywhere he would land. [2finga'salute]

[Redneck4sure]

As far as Michael Moore, I'd be willing to put him on a plane to anywhere in the world at my expense just so I could never hear again the crap spilling out from his mouth.

I'll split the tab with you. :D

[slum_goddess]

the film "focuses on longstanding ties between the Bush family, its associates and prominent Saudis. and on whether those ties clouded the president's judgment in recognizing warning signs before the Sept. 11 attacks and hampered his response afterward.

the thing of it is as i've written before, this info is freely available right here on the Web. (last 3 links out of 30,000+ depending upon search terms used; i used both "bin Laden family" and bush in the same searchfield).

Edited May 19, 2004 by slum_goddess

[MoonMan]

Anyone know if this (Fahrenheit 9/11) is available on any p2p networks yet and if so, do you have any hash/magnet links ?

Personally I think Bowling for Columbine was a bit overrated but I still want to see this.