Unfairenheit 9/11

[Guest JMT]

full article can be found at http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/ yes, its a little long.

----------------------------------------------------

"Unfairenheit 9/11: The lies of Michael Moore"

By Christopher Hitchens (a liberal)

Posted Monday, June 21, 2004, at 12:26 PM PT

One of the many problems with the American left, and indeed of the American left, has been its image and self-image as something rather too solemn, mirthless, herbivorous, dull, monochrome, righteous, and boring. How many times, in my old days at The Nation magazine, did I hear wistful and semienvious ruminations? Where was the radical Firing Line show? Who will be our Rush Limbaugh? I used privately to hope that the emphasis, if the comrades ever got around to it, would be on the first of those and not the second. But the meetings themselves were so mind-numbing and lugubrious that I thought the danger of success on either front was infinitely slight.

Nonetheless, it seems that an answer to this long-felt need is finally beginning to emerge. I exempt Al Franken's unintentionally funny Air America network, to which I gave a couple of interviews in its early days. There, one could hear the reassuring noise of collapsing scenery and tripped-over wires and be reminded once again that correct politics and smooth media presentation are not even distant cousins. With Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, however, an entirely new note has been struck. Here we glimpse a possible fusion between the turgid routines of MoveOn.org and the filmic standards, if not exactly the filmic skills, of Sergei Eisenstein or Leni Riefenstahl.

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.

In late 2002, almost a year after the al-Qaida assault on American society, I had an onstage debate with Michael Moore at the Telluride Film Festival. In the course of this exchange, he stated his view that Osama Bin Laden should be considered innocent until proven guilty. This was, he said, the American way. The intervention in Afghanistan, he maintained, had been at least to that extent unjustified. Something—I cannot guess what, since we knew as much then as we do now—has since apparently persuaded Moore that Osama Bin Laden is as guilty as hell. Indeed, Osama is suddenly so guilty and so all-powerful that any other discussion of any other topic is a dangerous "distraction" from the fight against him. I believe that I understand the convenience of this late conversion.....

[Guest Cybercop106]

What can you expect from Michael Moore tho? He's proven time and time again he's completely free of the ravages of intellectual honesty. What I can't understand is how there are actually people out there who believe what he says.

If only they knew what the word 'RESEARCH' meant..........

[tgibson]

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

Have not read this yet, but apparently there were many inaccuracies and out-of-context quotes in the movie that that this guy details in this article. (he voted Nader too apparently, so I can only guess it's an un-political article)

[tgibson]

Read the whole 45 pages last night.

Very interesting. It makes sense to read this and understand the facts, whichever side of the issue you're on...

Please let me know if anyone finds anything that backs up any of the apparent lies this author outlined...