mainstream news still pretends they found errors in F911 - why?

[papau]

mainstream news still pretends they found errors in F911 - why?

Newsweek's Michael Isikoff and Wash Post's Richard Cohen pre July 4 comments were in error - but mainstream news still pretends they found errors in F911 - why?

http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/f911reader/index.php?id=16
Factual Back-Up For Fahrenheit 9/11: Section One
THE FOLLOWING IS THE LINE BY LINE FACTUAL BACKUP FOR 'FAHRENHEIT 9/11'
Section One covers the facts in Fahrenheit 9/11 from the 2000 election to George W. Bush's extended visit to Booker Elementary on the morning of September 11th.

Factual Back-Up for Fahrenheit 9/11: Section Two
Section Two covers the facts in Fahrenheit 9/11 from Bush's failure to meet with Richard Clarke, to the August 6th memo, and ends with the Saudi flights out of the US after 9/11.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/f911reader/index.php?id=17

Factual Back-Up for Fahrenheit 9/11: Section Three
Section Three covers the facts in Fahrenheit 9/11 from Osama's relations with his family through Bush's military records and ends with Bush's business history, including Arbusto, Harken and the Carlyle Group.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/f911reader/index.php?id=18

Factual Back-Up for Fahrenheit 9/11: Section Four
Section Four covers the facts in Fahrenheit 9/11 regarding the Carlyle Group and Saudi money in the United States and its connection to the Bush family, their friends and associates
http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/f911reader/index.php?id=19

Factual Back-Up for Fahrenheit 9/11: SectionFive
Section Five covers the facts in Fahrenheit 9/11 from Saudi Arabia's involvement in 9/11 through the natural gas pipeline in Afghanistan.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/f911reader/index.php?id=20


Factual Back-Up for Fahrenheit 9/11: Section Six
Section Six covers the facts in Fahrenheit 9/11 from the Patriot Act through the war in Iraq.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/f911reader/index.php?id=21

[damntexdem]

1. Well, since they can't admit that it's correct ...

then it simply MUST be wrong.

[Voltaire99]

2. Payback, of sorts; lots of reasons, actually

Moore has long made the press look silly, and that is something our prima donnas of the Fourth Estate can never forgive.

There is also Moore's immense talent and success, which cause envy and resentment--particularly given his celebrated blue collar roots.

There is the sense, too, however false, that this is the hour of conservatism's complete ascendance, and certain of the press are eager to prove themselves useful to power.

And there is, finally, reflexively, the media's need to protect its credibility. The press is a machine for mediating reality. Its illusions depend upon consensus. If it is upstaged, or shown to have failed, then it will act to protect its turf (and profits) by destroying critics.

[Festivito]

3. Partly because the fifty-nine deceits paper was not itself rebutted.

My family ambushed me with the fifty-nine items while I had no Internet access. I later made this rebuttal at which point I was told that “we started it all” and when the relative could not recall what it was ‘we started’ I was pushed to the door, my ability to follow my religion was denigrated, and the door was then shut in my face.

This paper is found on the Internet. Some of the points are clearly misleading. Others would take many man-hours to resolve. Mr. Kopel added more details on his website. Mr. Moore details each line of his documentary with links to major news sources for the items in his movie. I tried to read all three and put them together, but realizing Mr. Kopel’s attempts at describing deceits seemed themselves deceitful, I finished just adding my own comments. I’ve tried to embolden all my comments. The original article I left unbolded. Enjoy!

Sorry this took so long, it’s, well, long.

The rebuttal information and links resides at:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11

By Dave Kopel

Independence Institute

If all you know is what the mainstream media tell you, then you are living in a world of illusions. But you can’t free your mind if you merely replace one set of manipulative illusions with another set of manipulative illusions. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a twisted, dishonest, paranoid, and hateful fantasy. Learn the facts, and make up your own mind.

The list below is a summary of a much longer report, which is available for free at www.davekopel.org. The report also discusses many other issues about the movie.

There are lots of good reasons why people have chosen to vote against (or for) the re-election of George Bush. And there are lots of good reasons why patriotic Americans have decided to oppose (or support) the war in Iraq. One thing that all the good reasons have in common is that they are based on facts. In a democracy, we should try to convince our fellow citizens with facts and logical reasoning. To manipulate people with frauds and propaganda is to attack democracy itself.

1. The Gore "victory" rally isn’t celebrating a Florida win. It was held before the polls had even opened.


2. Like all the other networks, Fox mistakenly said that Gore had won in Florida. The first network to retract the Florida mistake was CBS, not Fox.



1. A "victory" rally before an election happens as much as introducing the "next president" of the U.S. – who cares? And, it is not misleading to indicate that Gore had been declared the victor.




2. Mm said FOX was first to call Bush the winner, not that FOX retracted "the mistake" first. Clever with an eye-roll.




3. A 6-month study by a consortium of major newspapers shows that Bush would have won the Florida recount under any of the terms which Gore sought in his lawsuits.



Mm discusses "disputed votes," Mr. Kopel discusses votes under Gore’s lawsuit’s terms. Gore agreed to a statewide recount but not in HIS lawsuit. Republicans challenged Gore to recount the entire state and Gore agreed. Republicans then fought the statewide recount in THEIR lawsuits. Craftily worded point Mr. Kopel makes here.




Deeper: FL law requires that recount lawsuits engage each county separately. Gore’s lawsuits mentioned counting under-votes and alone would not have put him over Bush. Properly counting over-votes statewide would have put Gore over. (Over-vote example: Punch Bush’s chad AND ALSO write Bush’s name on ballot. The ballot rejects and is not mechanically counted. It must be hand counted. Clearly intended as a vote for Bush, FL law says that if intent can be determined the vote should be counted, here as a vote for Bush.) (Under-vote can be someone who chooses not to vote or does intend to vote as in this example: Involves a single chad that is not fully punched, thus not mechanically read. The chad may hinge shut, may be mostly disconnected, may be partially disconnected but popped back into its hole, may be indented from a hard push with stylus, or may be slightly indented by a soft push. It can still be clear which candidate the voter intended.) Republicans contended that a soft push should not be counted since the person may have decided to vote for no one and thus retracted the stylus meaning the intent could not be determined and therefore deciding between soft pushes and hard pushes was subjective guessing such that none of the votes should be recounted.




Republicans also accused Gore of "cherry picking" counties and the recount should be statewide then fought the statewide recount to SCOTUS that allowed it, but only gave from 11pm to midnight to count the six-million votes. Gore would have lost the election if in his county by county lawsuits only under-votes were counted and over-votes were not. Many articles at the time used this crafty wording that avoided mentioning over-votes. The whole-state lawsuit is NOT Gore’s lawsuit per se – so Mr. Kopel’s statement is craftily correct except that on mm’s website mm says "disputed votes," not votes only under Gore’s lawsuit terms.




4. Investigation by the Palm Beach Post and others shows that race was not a reason why election officials mistakenly disqualified some voters because they were incorrectly thought to have felony convictions.



Bully for the Palm Beach Post. 2004’s election finds the same updated list disqualifying thousands of Democratic-voting blacks and less than ten, I think the number I heard was seven, Republican-voting Hispanics. Perhaps the Palm Beach Post will make another statement. None of this means MM movie is wrong.




5. Bush’s Presidency before 9/11 was not in serious trouble. No commentator said that he looked like a lame-duck president. Congress had passed his #1 bill (the tax cut) and was on the way to passing his #2 bill (the education bill). The scene at the end of the movie in which Bush tells a rich audience "I call you my base," was from an October 2000 charity fund-raiser. Both Gore and Bush spoke at the fund-raiser and, as is the custom at the fund-raiser, made fun of themselves.



Prior to 9/11 Bush’s poll numbers were descending in a near straight line. Some might call it pseudo-serious, some might call it very serious, some might call it serious. MM said Bush was beginning to look like a lame duck president, not that a commentator said it. And, anyway, MM is a commentator himself.




6. "In his first eight months in office before September 11th, George W. Bush was on vacation, according to the Washington Post, forty-two percent of the time." As the Washington Post reported, the figure includes weekends, and includes time in "vacation locations" such as Camp David, where Bush was working—as when he met with Tony Blair.



He took a month vacation, the largest ever, after reading what he thought a historical document stating "Osama binladen determined to attack inside United States." Yes, he took off weekends also. Yes, he met with people while in vacation locations. Can you make a better guess of the percentage? What? 40% 41%?




7. In the golf course scene (about the middle of the movie), Bush had just heard about a terrorist attack on Israel. He called the press together to make a quick statement condemning the terrorism against Israel. He was not speaking about attacks on the United States.



Of course not. When the US was under attack he read about the goat.




8. There is no evidence that Bush did not read the Aug. 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing about al Qaeda.



It is even sadder to say he did read it, and then vacationed for a month.




9. He never claimed that the title’s "vagueness" was an excuse for not reading it.



No, he thought it historical, in a vague sort of way. "Osama Binladen determined to strike inside U.S."




10. The Briefing did not say "said that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes." It said that the FBI has "not been able to corroborate" such a threat.



Bush stopped FBI speaking directly with CIA as it had under Clinton who stopped five attacks. Bush attended a European conference staying aboard and aircraft carrier since warnings indicated planes could attack the sleeping quarters. National Security Advisor Condi Rice forgot any notion about hijacked planes attacking by the time August rolled into September despite being National Security Advisor.




11. The Saudis left the U.S. only after air travel was opened for the general public.



Proven wrong. They left during the ban.




12. According to Richard Clarke and the September 11 Commission, Clarke personally approved the Saudi departures, and the decision went no higher in the chain of command.



Okay, I don’t know. It was approved at "high levels" as I recall.




13. Moore lied to a TV reporter in claiming that Fahrenheit discloses Clarke’s decision to the audience. Clarke called the Saudi exit material in Fahrenheit a "mistake" by Moore.



Yea, but, what’s the mistake here.




14. Contrary to what Fahrenheit claims, the September 11 Commission found that many Saudis were asked "detailed questions" before being allowed to leave.



Not by the FBI. By the baggage handlers? "Did you pack your own bags?" That’s detailed.




15. James Bath did not invest bin Laden family money in Bush’s energy company Arbusto. He invested his own money.



Bath did have binladen money, was an investor for other people, and invested money in Arbusto.




16. Bath’s name was blacked-out from an Alabama National Guard record released by the White House as required by federal law, which prohibits the disclosure of health-related personal information.



Guess they forgot during the first release.




17. Prince Bandar has way too much influence on the U.S. government, as Fahrenheit shows, but American coddling of the Saudi tyranny is a long-standing bi-partisan tradition, not a Bush invention.



Bush did not invent Saudi coddling? So what? Both sides coddle? Hmmm. If a Dem buys oil its coddling, if a Bush flies Saudis out of the country, and hides their names from a government report that could be coddling also. Right?




18. Harken Energy: Bush only sold the stock after company lawyers told him it was OK.



And, it was okay since his dad appointed the head of the SEC, the SEC that did not investigate and explicitly did not exonerate the young Bush.




19. The reason that Bush "beat the rap" was because there was no evidence he had engaged in insider trading.



Certainly no evidence when you don’t find any after you don’t look for any.




20. The Carlyle Group is not a Bush playground. Many Bush opponents are investors, including George Soros.



A playground. I wonder how that relates to a technical term. Yes, George Soros has those investments also. Don’t people just hate it when a fellow investor blows a whistle.




21. The Bush administration dealt Carlyle a huge financial blow by canceling the Crusader missile, one of the few weapons cancellations in the Bush administration.



Good. Were they shaking in their boots? I doubt it. It was a Clinton weapon anyway. Made them feel dirty. Bush even ridiculed Clinton for trying to hit OBL by saying that he was trying to hit a camel in the butt or trying to hit an empty tent in the middle of the desert.

A lot more money is made on ground wars. Halliburton knows this. Bush was clear that he wanted a ground war.




22. The bin Ladens dropped out of Carlyle before the stock sale. Of the 1.4 billion that the Saudis invested in companies with Bush connections, the vast majority of the money was invested in Carlyle before George H.W. Bush joined the firm.



And, what a lovely business to enter upon leaving government.




23. Craig Unger claims that the Saudis have $860 billion invested in the U.S. The figure appears in his book House of Bush, House of Saud, but neither of Unger’s cited sources support such a large figure.



Most people don’t know what a billion is. Want to make your own estimate? I don’t think so.




24. Moore claims that the Saudis "own 7% of America." But even if you believe Unger’s fictitious $860 billion figure, the Saudis own only about 7% of total foreign investment in America, which is over 10 trillion dollars. Only if all of America were owned by foreigners could Moore’s claim be correct.



I didn’t hear this. Can you check Moore’s site?




25. The Saudi embassy does not receive special protection. It is not the only foreign embassy which is guarded by the U.S. Secret Service. An international treaty signed by the U.S. requires the U.S. to protect any embassy which asks for protection.



And, the Saudis certainly get theirs. Stand in front of any other embassy and see if you get a SS visit.




26. Moore’s insinuation that Bush runs U.S. foreign policy according to Saudi instructions is contradicted by the Afghanistan invasion (which toppled the Taliban regime which the Saudis strongly supported), and by the Iraq War (which the Saudis opposed, in part because Iraqi oil will compete with Saudi oil).



Oh, this is getting boring. So, the Saudis cannot dictate all our foreign policy. Do they dictate some of it? They certainly have the ear or our president.




27. As Governor of Texas, Bush never met with Taliban representatives.



The Taliban in the film visited someone in the Bush administration while they were hosting Osama binladen. What? Not Bush, not while governor? Which? Both?




28. The proposed Unocal pipeline was supported by the Clinton administration, but Unocal abandoned the pipeline idea in 1998.



Those pesky Talibaners wouldn’t budge for Clinton, would they? They did when carpet bombed out of power. And, that Unocal pipeline went in.




29. The new Afghani government has signed a protocol to build a pipeline, but it is an entirely different pipeline, in a location hundreds of miles distant from the Unocal proposal.



Oh, how different, how new, how … NOT REALLY DIFFERENT.




30. Construction has not begun on the new pipeline. Although Moore claims that "Enron stood to benefit" from the pipeline, Enron has never had any participation in either pipeline.



It was not Enron in the movie, it was Dick Cheney’s Halliburton. Enron needed it to connect to India as I recall and would thereby benefit even if Enron did not lift a finger to build it.




31. The Bush administration did not "welcome" Taliban diplomats in March 2001, but instead condemned them for failing to hand over Osama bin Laden.



It was not March? Bush gave them millions of dollars later for not growing drugs. Bush did condemn them later for not turning over OBL, just before bombing them. Imagine if we had to turn over Eric Rudolf to a European country. Oh, that’s right WE could not find HIM.




32. Despite Moore’s pose in the movie, he opposed the Afghanistan War, and—in December 2002—claimed that Osama bin Laden might be innocent.



He did oppose both wars. Innocent until proven guilty, what a concept. A bunch of Saudis jump into planes to terrorize US and who else would you blame than Afghanistan.




33. In claiming that the Afghanistan invasion was a mere ruse to protect the Saudis, Moore omits the results of liberation in Afghanistan: destruction of al Qaeda training camps, the creation of free elections, more freedom for women, and the homecoming of 1.5 million refugees from the Taliban.



And, the lovely new pipeline they now have. I personally hated the Taliban and I was even upset that Bush rewarded them with the drug prevention money. I hope the new democracy stands for a long good time.




34. The various quotes about Bush administration cooperation with the September 11 Commission have been resequenced to create a false impression. In July 2003, Chairman Kean complained about lack of cooperation. In February 2004, Bush said that the White House had given extraordinary cooperation. Kean agreed, and praised the White House for providing "unprecedented" access.



Gov. Kean, R-NJ, was hand picked by Bush people to head the so-called bi-partisan 9/11 commission. Not all the details of Bush’s reluctance were in the movie. If each part were re-arranged do you think it would be flattering to Bush?




35. John Ashcroft didn’t really lose a Senate election to a "dead guy." Mel Carnahan died in a plane crash a few weeks before the election, and the Missouri Governor had promised to appoint Carnahan’s widow Jean Carnahan if voters pulled the lever for Mel Carnahan.



The voters voted for Mel on the preprinted labels, he was dead, and all but a few possible idiots knew it. He lost to a dead guy.




36. The FBI did not "know" about al Qaeda suspects who were attending flight training schools. The information was never passed above the level of one field office.



But, the person who stopped the investigation in the FBI was rewarded with a bonus. The usual bonus we are told. And, the whistle blowers made the cover of Time.




37. Ashcroft did not cut overall counter-terrorism funding. He only proposed a one-year cut in a particular program that already had two years of unspent money.



He was doing a one-year budget. He completely omitted the anti-terrorism request. (Under Clinton meetings occurred every workday. What budget was used then.)




38. Rep. Porter Goss says he has an "800 number," and the Fahrenheit caption says "He’s lying." Goss does have a tollfree number, although the prefix is 877.



I didn’t see this. BTW: Porter Goss also voted against the six-billion dollars for intelligence that Kerry voted against, since the CIA was not spending it at that time.




39. Moore say Saddam’s Iraq "had never murdered a single American citizen." In fact, Saddam paid for terrorist bombers in Israel who murdered Americans, along with people of other nationalities. Saddam also sheltered the American-killing terrorist Abu Nidal, and the bomb-maker for the 1993 World Trade Center bombings.



Never say never. It was not for those Israeli Americans nor for Abu Nidal that we invaded Iraq.




40. In addition, Saddam ordered assassination attempts against former President Bush and against U.S. diplomats in the Philippines.



We wanted Saddam assassinated too and asked his people to do it and then did not support the people who tried. When they rose up to oust Saddam, Saddam killed them and buried them in mass graves. Then we villainized Saddam for what Saddam says is himself protecting his country from insurgents. Actually, I think we were suppose to think that the mass graves were recent, rather than connected to Desert Storm I.




41. Moore claims that the Saddam regime "never threatened to attack the United States." In fact, in 1997 the regime publicly ordered: "American and British interests, embassies, and naval ships in the Arab region should be the targets of military operations and commando attacks by Arab political forces." On the first anniversary of September 11, Saddam's regime called for suicide attacks on Americans.



"…in the Arab region…"




42. Moore claims that there was no connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. In fact, there is an extensive record of collaboration although—as the September 11 Commission announced—there is no proof that Saddam participated beforehand in al Qaeda attacks on America.



OBL hates Saddam for Saddam loves Western things OBL hates. Did Mr. Kopel read his own statement here? No connection as the 9/11 commission announced.




43. Fahrenheit shows Condoleezza Rice saying, "Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11." The audience laughs derisively. Here is what Rice really said on Nov. 28, 2003: "Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York. This is a great terrorist, international terrorist network that is determined to defeat freedom. It has perverted Islam from a peaceful religion into one in which they call on it for violence. And they’re all linked. And Iraq is a central front because, if and when, and we will, we change the nature of Iraq to a place that is peaceful and democratic and prosperous in the heart of the Middle East, you will begin to change the Middle East...."



CIA Saddam raises an ideology of hatred, and ideology that perverted Islam opening the way for OBL to order 9/11 and this is the connection between Saddam and 9/11 that killed 100,000 Iraqis. NOT!




44. Moore portrays pre-liberation Iraq as a happy nation of kite-flying and weddings. In fact, a sixth of the population had fled Saddam’s tyranny. The United Nations and Amnesty International condemned "the systematic, widespread and extremely grave violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law by the Government of Iraq, resulting in an all-pervasive repression and oppression sustained by broad-based discrimination and widespread terror.’’



Given the chance, a lot of people would prefer the US to their own democratic countries. The kite-flying and weddings are too dangerous now. Let us hope Iraqis will be happier and won’t mind the huge cost in lives their new voting rights cost them.




45. The only Iraqi casualties which Moore shows are civilians, although military casualties far outnumbered civilian.



Military casket photo were prohibited by Bush administration. The last estimate is that 100,000 Iraquis died not counting Falujah adding another 20,000. We’ve lost 1,111 soldiers as of today.




46. When showing pictures of buildings being blown up, Moore does not reveal that many of them were military buildings, and civilians were never allowed anywhere near them.



Many?




47. A humorous sequence making fun of tiny countries in the Iraq liberation Coalition does not even mention the major countries in the Coalition, such as the U.K., Australia, Italy, and Japan. Not a deceit, but mean-spirited and exploitive: The footage of the funeral of U.S. Air Force Maj. Gregory Stone at Arlington National Cemetery appears without his family's permission, and over their vehement objection. Major Stone strongly believed in the Iraq mission, as does his family. The footage of Massachusetts National Guardsman Peter Damon, who is undergoing therapy at Walter Reed Army Medical Center is also used without his permission.



It is a documentary. Are they suing? Good.




48. Despite Moore’s claims, American media have not been mindlessly supportive of the Iraq war. For example, Peter Jennings has been extremely critical. The evidence that Moore offers to portray Jennings as a war supporter is a clip of Jennings reporting in April 2003 that Saddam’s army had collapsed—which was true.



The media have apologized for not being more critical in their reporting of the lead to the Iraq war.




49. The scene of American soldiers making fun of a man underneath a sheet is not torture of a prisoner of war. They are making fun of a drunk who passed out in the street.



Very sensitive. I thought the torture was not an issue yet. Maybe I missed it again. I’m tired.




50. Moore reports that Bush proposed closing some Veteran’s hospitals. But he also proposed opening other veteran’s hospitals.



Could be. Same area?




51. Bush once opposed renewing a special bonus of $75/ month for soldiers in "imminent danger zones." Moore claims that Bush proposed cutting combat soldiers’ pay by 1/3; but a soldier's pay and benefits is over $27,000 per year, even at low enlisted grades.



Benefits are not usually included in a salary calculation. That would change a percentage radically.




52. While making false claims about a Bush pay cut, Moore omits the fact that Bush sought and won a 3.7% military pay raise in 2003.



1. The benefits might make the false claims a false claim. 2. Who got the pay raise, I wonder.




53. Moore claims that only one Congressman has a child in Iraq. Actually, two do. (Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of S.D., and Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter of California.) Also, John Ashcroft has a son on a naval ship in the Persian Gulf.



Two out of 535 representatives and Ashcroft’s is safe. I’d have to as if one went in recently.




54. Fahrenheit deceptively cut the footage of Rep. Mark Kennedy to make it look like Kennedy rebuffed Moore’s request to help enlist Congressional children. In fact, Kennedy said it was a good idea, and offered to help.



Has he picked up the idea and run with it? He is the one being paid.




55. Fahrenheit shows Rep. Michael Castle walking past Moore. But Rep. Castle is childless.



Perhaps he’d have an available nephew or cousin – for the cause.




56. Based on Census Bureau data, Congressional families are more likely than other families to have children serving in Iraq.



Let’s see: 2:535 as 150,000:x. x is 40 million. Hey, not bad.




57. Moore calls Flint, Michigan, "my hometown." In fact, he grew up in Davison, a much wealthier and much whiter suburb.



And, some people say they’re from Detroit even though they are from Dearborn Heights. When MM grew up, Flint was nice, I’d be sure he visited Flint often enough.




58. In Fahrenheit, Moore pretends to support our troops. But in fact, he supports the enemy in Iraq-the coalition of Saddam loyalists, al Qaeda operatives, and terrorists controlled by Iran or Syria-who are united in their desire to murder Iraqis, and to destroy any possibility of democracy in Iraq. Here is what Moore said on April 14, 2004, about the forces who are killing Americans and trying to impose totalitarian rule on Iraq: "The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow—and they will win." Do you really think that someone who wants Iraq to be ruled by Islamist or Ba’athist tyranny, and who deliberately kills innocent civilians with car bombs, is like the American Minutemen?



MM has his own straight forward review of Iraqi insurgents. Understanding insurgents can lead to a solution. One thing certain is that they don’t hate us for our freedoms. They may not like Ba’athists any more than Republicans liked Bill Clinton, but, if Russia invaded us to remove Clinton, even Republicans would be upset.




59. As reported in the trade journal Screen Daily, affiliates of the Iranian and Syrian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah are promoting Fahrenheit 9/11, and Moore’s Middle East distributor, Front Row, is accepting the terrorist assistance: "In terms of marketing the film, Front Row is getting a boost from organizations related to Hezbollah which have rung up from Lebanon to ask if there is anything they can do to support the film. And although Chacra says he and his company feel strongly that Fahrenheit is not anti-American, but anti-Bush, ‘we can’t go against these organizations as they could strongly boycott the film in Lebanon and Syria.’" (Nancy Tartaglione, "Fahrenheit to be first doc released theatrically in Middle East," Screen Daily.com, June 9, 2004. The story is discussed in Samantha Ellis, "Fahrenheit 9/11 gets help offer from Hezbollah," The Guardian (London), June 17, 2004.)

The article says: "contacted by organisations related to the Hezbollah" Reread the title again and see if it is the same as the article states. No one says he took the offered help. And, another country wanting to see a documentary unflattering to Bush is just as awful as having them read the Starr report on Monica Lewinski which Republicans would not mind.

The following requires that the title I just noted is the truth, not the line within the article that I see as badly summarized.

Slate.com (6/24/04) followed up on the story, and reported: "Gianluca Chacra, the managing director of Front Row Entertainment, the movie’s distributor in the United Arab Emirates, confirms that Lebanese student members of Hezbollah ‘have asked us if there’s any way they could support the film.’ Chacra was unfazed, even excited, about their offer. ‘Having the support of such an entity in Lebanon is quite significant for that market and not at all controversial. I think it’s quite natural.’"

Do you think it’s patriotic to accept help from a terrorist organization which has killed and kidnapped hundreds of Americans, which works with al Qaeda and other terrorists, and which is currently aiding the killing of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians? American patriotism can include presenting honest arguments against a particular American military policy. Hateriotism is the spreading of vicious lies against American soldiers and in favor of tyrants.

It’s not unpatriotic to criticize a war or particular wartime policies. But how many patriots do you know who take aid from terrorists who kill Americans?

This essay comes from the Independence Institute, a thinktank in Colorado which is founded on the principles of the Declaration of Independence (www.independenceinstitute.org). The author, Dave Kopel, is a life-long Democrat who endorsed and voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. He supports some but not all aspects of the current war on terror.

Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute this flyer, provided you obey each of these three requirements:

1. Respect private property and leave any area which the owner or manager tells you to leave;


2. Pick up all flyers in the area which are discarded as litter;


3. Respond to hateful or antagonistic people with kindness and maturity.

I like his ending. But, his complaints lack merit in regard to asking people not to see the movie.