Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

List faults you find with F911

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
txprog Donating Member (264 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 02:54 PM
Original message
List faults you find with F911
I loved the movie but it is not perfect. Some faults have been mentioned, and I strongly believe that it is pointless to nit pick specifics because the most important thing is the film's larger message, which is totally real and very, very scary. Many who do nit pick can't refute that larger message, but must find some way to criticize.

But, here are a couple of things I wished Moore had handled better:

1. The "evacuation" of the Saudi's and Bin Laden's after 9-11. This is very complicated and much debated stuff. The film does not tell us to what exent air travel was allowed when the flights actually occured nor how much these folks were actually interviewed. Of course the larger point that they were allowed to leave at all and not extensively interrogated is the main thing and of great significance.

2. This has been metioned before, but it's worth stating again. Moore should have mentioned the PNAC, given a brief description of who they are and what they believe, that they have been advocating and planning this invasion since the end of gulf war 1, and that Bush has surrounded himself with these guys. Yes, it might have clouded the larger point about corporatism in all of this, but Moore is deft enough to make it work. It has a place in this story.

3. Didn't mention Conidi's corporate and oil connections.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
drdigi420 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. Funny, the Pundits and other Freepers aren't mentioning this
The right wing media NEVER mentions PNAC. It's like it's taboo or something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. We have had 4 years of lies (if you include the campaign).
How is he supposed to put that in a 1.5/2 hour movie? IMHO the PNAC was left out to avoid the label of conspiracy theorist. Maybe the omissions will make those who see the film strive to answer their unanswered questions and fill in the gaps. At least is has opened the eyes of many and maybe, just maybe apathy will be replaced by curiosity and then curiosity with knowledge and knowledge with total hate and resentment of bushco for destroying our nation.

If you want answers to specifics about the numbers interviewed, to to Moores web site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beware the Beast Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. In re PNAC
What conspiracy? It's out there in print right on their website. This negates any talk of "conspiracy." I think Moore missed a golden opportunity to exploit the PNAC for what it is, part of the corporate global domination scheme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. How do you explain to the masses that 9/11 was allowed or
made to happen to further their desire for world domination in a movie without the opposition discrediting your work as a conspiracy film like Stone's JFK? Hopefully the film will open their eyes and they will (1) start demanding that the press actually start reporting the facts and/or (2) they will start doing the research themselves and discover all of the horrible truths that you and others here have known for years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beware the Beast Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. I'm not so sure if it was allowed to happen myself
But they definitely new well in advance that a golden opportunity (like 911) would definitely be in their better interest. As far as a specific time and place, I really think they had no clue. But that's just me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. I'm not sure either, but including PNAC would indicate
that Moore might consider the theory plausable, at least, imho, that is how they would spin the movie - a conspiracy flick.


(btw - if anything happens next weekend, then my mind will be changed relative to either theory. they have passed the word to law enforcment through out the nation that they anticipate some terrorist activitiy the 4th - i know that they did that last year, but they are slipping in popularity so one never knows.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the Kelly Gang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. really..has ANY film ever been so disected , probed and pummelled ?
as this one..it's just powerful and I havent even seen it yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eileen from OH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
4. Okay, I have some quibbles. . .
I think he went into too much detail about the Bush & Saudi/Binladen connection. Hell, a couple of BOOKS have been written about it. I wish he would have hit a few of the obvious and moved on.

I wish he would have included more of the rest of the family - i.e., Babs and her beautiful mind, Jeb and his "it's okay if they pass the minimum classroom requirement, I know a way to get around it." That kind of stuff. Showing the whole family as the rich, callous bunch they are would have reinforced how without a clue and cruel the whole bunch is.

I wish also that he would have restricted his commentary more - particularly over the classroom thing. It didn't NEED a thing, and Moore sounded kinda snarky and well, it just wasn't needed and woulda been a lot more powerful if he had done it in silence.

eileen from OH



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txprog Donating Member (264 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. How better to make the point
that Bush is clueless than by using the classroom thing? One of the film's central messages is that Bush IS clueless and incompentent among other things. What better way to initiate and accentuate this point by showing him, confused and rudder-less, after being informed that the USA was under attack. He should have politely excused himself and done his job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
25. FratBoy sitting in the classroom is, IMHO, a red herring. He was....
...informed that America was attacked while he was still in his limo on the way to the school. Andy Card told FratBoy about the SECOND plane that hit the WTC.

Additionally, after burning up 7 minutes just sitting there, he then read a book and listened to the kids for the NEXT 23 minutes. That's a total of 30 minutes where FratBoy failed to do anything at all. He says he didn't want to scare the kids. Right.

Even a panicked, clueless, legally elected president would have reacted to Card's whispered statement by jumping to his feet and leaving the room.

Why did FratBoy continue on to the school once he knew about the first plane at the WTC, and especially if he really thought Air Force One was a target? Why did he spend another 30 minutes at the school following word of the second attack?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eileen from OH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #11
48. I think you misunderstand me. ..
I think the classroom footage is GREAT. I just think that Mooore's Voice Over detracted from it and took the focus AWAY fron it.

eileen from OH
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cease_fire Donating Member (159 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
39. I appreciate your issue with the Saudi connection, but...
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 05:49 PM by cease_fire
I feel that its one of the most important points of the film.

Our current President has done nearly a quarter of a million dollars worth of business with the brother of the man (Salem Bin Laden) who organized the attacks on 9/11.

Our President's father is an advisor to Carlyle - Carlyle has become the nation's 11th largest defense contractor, owning companies that make tanks, aircraft wings and a broad array of other military equipment. The Carlyle group's prestigious equituy investors includes the Saudi Royal Family - contracts to the Bin Laden Group.


Babs and her beautiful mind, Jeb and his minimum standard - "all children left behind" are simply overshadowed by the fact that:

15 Saudi's took part in 9/11. What has the Saudi Govenrment done about it?

Nothing.

Here's the question: Is it appropriate for the Bush family to ever have had any finacially lucrative relationship with anyone who is tied to the horror of 9/11?

9/11.

Not Babs, Not Jeb. 9/11

Moore could have stopped there.

And if he did, it still should have been enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eileen from OH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #39
49. My quibble isn't about TRUTH
it's about what would resonate the most. The Bush/Saudi ties are complicated and not easy to distill. I just think that, story-wise, he devoted too much of the movie to unraveling that, and that because the first part of the movie was devoted to that, it was hard to follow from a non-political junkie POV. The POINT of that section was the connection between the Bushes and the Saudis but the CONCLUSION was that they are a family completely out of touch with you and me.

eileen from OH
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
5. Should've included how US is poisoning troops
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 03:12 PM by vickiss
and the ENTIRE world with subtle radiation from depleted uranium.

Great job other though.

Mike is true American Hero!

bad typist sorry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
6. Should have cited connections tween Bush Family and Nazis
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 03:14 PM by SpiralHawk
I do think it is entirely relevant to cite the shady dealings of Prescott Bush (Skull and Boner) and the Walker clan, and their violations of the Trading with the Enemy Act before and during WWII as they financially helped Hitler and the Nazis build their war machine.

It is all well documented, and all completely ignored by the mass media. But citizens have a right to know, it's not just Poppy and Shrubby -- the families rotten roots go back at least to GrandPappy Geronimo-skull-stealing Prescott Bush.

For that matter, the film might also have made mention of all the Bush Brothers nefarious dealings: George aWol, Jumping Jebbie, Marvelous Marvin, and Neil "Silverado" Bush. Acknowledging the ignoble Band of Bogus Bush Bros would have added another dimension -- possibly even a mythic dimension.

If Moore had done added these two things, he might well have needed to change the title to Fahrenheit - 1911.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. It made the Dem party look like GOP lite
oh , wait... Thats my beef with the Dem party.
My only beef with f911 - emotional roller coaster - too many emotions packed on top of each other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gmoney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'd ditch the ice cream truck stunt...
At least he kept the truck stunt short. It seemed like the one point where he sort of forced himself into the flow of the film. (The recruitment of Fortunate Sons somehow avoided that feeling.) It works much better when he sits back and lets the facts and their own statements bury these guys.

The ice cream truck stunt time could have been better used to tell the AUDIENCE what the real ramifications are of that legislation, or how it was written so that it actually couldn't even be read on its own even if you WANTED to. Or how it was magically produced as if it had been sitting on a shelf for years, just waiting. I guess he did hint at that a bit, but it could have been more forceful.

The theatre I saw it in clipped the bottom few inches off the frame, it seemed, so I didn't get the full effect of Ashcroft's stack o' Bibles. How many were there? At one point, I could make out three. Moore could have pointed out a bit more of Ashcroft's wacky brand of fundamentalism... the cooking oil, the calico cats. Or maybe that's another movie entirely.

The make-up montage over the opening credits was really great... not only was it funny, but it also points out that these guys are NOT who they seem to be.

The right should be counting their blessings on how much dirt Moore left OUT of the film. And I think Moore was right only hinting at some of the questionable personal beliefs and practices, rather than making them the centerpiece. As it is, it illuminates bad policy and conflicts of interest, rather than simply being a character assassination that could be more easily discounted by the right.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
linazelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
9. No mention of OSP....but he only had TWO HOURS
He provided enough--I could hardly keep up with all the Saudi connections between Bath, Carlyle, Baker et al. Hey, he just needs to do a sequel--that's all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gmoney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Sequel!?!? DVD extras!!!
Yeah, a sequel would be great, but I doubt he'll have time!

I'm counting on a LOT of good DVD extras though. I'm not sure Mystic River merits a 3-disc deluxe edition, but F-9/11 sure could, especially if he has as much unused footage as is being reported (Nick Berg, Abu Ghraib, etc.) and he could get into the Bush Dynasty territory maybe, even if his team just did quick and dirty interviews with some of the authors of those books, just to collect it all in one place.

I also hope he makes a "budget" DVD package that he could sell wholesale to political groups to hand out before election day... replication is so cheap these days, he could wholesale 100 DVDs in plain cardboard sleeves for about $125 or so, and still make some money.

He's going to make SO much money on the theatrical release, I hope he'll set capitalism aside on the DVD release to ensure as many people as possible see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beware the Beast Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #13
29. Fahrenheit 912: The special edition DVD
I can see it :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
10. Are we going to give Uncle Karl's Boys some ammunition?
I am not accusing anyone of being a Bushevik Psyop or Mockingbird.

However, if Uncle Karl's Drty Tricks Squad is reading this, they are getting all that they need.

Please stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gmoney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Have you seen the new Bush ad?
I don't see anything on this page that really refutes anything presented in the film, just more like a wish list of stuff that should have also been included or expanded upon, or maybe clarified further.

Rove is not going to go on TV and say "Moore is wrong, the film is flawed because F-9/11 falls short of bringing out the evil that is the entire Bush Dynasty, not just Poppy and W." :)

The new Bush ad presents all these highly vocal and emotionally charged proponents against him, even airing the comparison of W. to Hitler in Prime Time. I can't believe that's not going to backfire on him hugely. But if Rove is scraping the barrel in that manner, what a bunch of us peons say here won't be useful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
32. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. Didn't mention PNAC directly
Though he did say that the plan to invade Iraq existed before 9-11 and even before Junior was selected, he didn't explain the roots of PNAC, nor the fact that virtually all of Junior's cabinet came from this cabal of treasonous double agents. This exclusion was probably a casualty of the fact that the movie's original concept (9-11 and the Bush-Saudi-Bin Laden connection) had to share time with the Iraq war, and it's a little difficult to fit it all into just 2 hours.

Suggestion to Michael Moore: Take a page from Peter Jackson and release a 3 1/2 hour DVD version with the stuff you cut out because of time constraints. Before the election, of course :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
linazelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Damn you're good...I like the extended DVD idea -eom-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Devils Advocate NZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
17. re: the flights...
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 03:35 PM by Devils Advocate NZ
1. The "evacuation" of the Saudi's and Bin Laden's after 9-11. This is very complicated and much debated stuff. The film does not tell us to what exent air travel was allowed when the flights actually occured nor how much these folks were actually interviewed. Of course the larger point that they were allowed to leave at all and not extensively interrogated is the main thing and of great significance.

Here is how it went:

During the NO-FLY time at least one flight was allowed to fly around WITHIN the US picking up Suadis to be evacuated. I am not sure whether they were Bin Ladens or other Suadis, but the flight itself has been confirmed.

Finally, just after the NO-FLY order was rescinded numerous flights took off and left the US, during the period when commercial flights had not yet restarted except for relocation flights repositioning aircraft that had been grounded in the wrong locations.

So when you hear right-wingers say Saudis were not allowed to fly OUT of the country when no-one else was allowed to fly, ask them "But what about flights WITHIN the US?"

The fact is, Saudis and probably Bin Ladens WERE allowed to fly when no-one else was, however they weren't allowed to leave the country. They flew around picking up passengers and taking them to a central location from which they could leave when the ban was lifted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fescue4u Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Almost true.
"The fact is, Saudis and probably Bin Ladens WERE allowed to fly when no-one else was,"

Actually there were a large number of internal flights. Flights of an emergency nature were cleared. Examples include organ transplant flights, "aircare" flights, police helicopters, FEMA employees, Government officials, and of course bin ladeys.

your point is still accurate, but I just wanted to add some detail since you know the freepies are watching.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fescue4u Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
18. Biggest fault is Michael Moores Baggage
Moores has never been exactly an honest filmmaker.

Therefore he must pay extra attention to detail and accuracy otherwise he'll get skewered.

From early reports, it sounds like he has forgone his penchant for fiction which I applaud.

Im looking forward to seeing the movie tonight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigDaddyLove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #18
38. What's most working in his favor in the honesty department.....
for this film is that there is so very much that the Bush administration has done that's so wrong for the world to see that there is absolutely no need to fabricate....all he has to do is collect it all and point it in one direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
durutti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
43. Prove it.
One has to keep in mind that just because someone says something is a lie, that doesn't make it so.

In particular: the popular claims of dishonest in "Bowling for Columbine" are the real lies -- demonstrably so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NecessaryOnslaught Donating Member (691 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
19. The living Hijackers...
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 03:38 PM by NecessaryOnslaught
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

What a bombshell it would have been had Moore sent a camera crew to interview these guys. Seeing the men who we were led to believe Kamikazed planes, up on the big screen, alive would have blown some minds.
Of course this would have opened up a whole new can of worms.

Only so much of the Bush crime family and their financial backers crimes can be fit into a feature film
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
21. The Carlyle stuff obscured the main point.
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 03:47 PM by gulliver
Moore's "Who do you think G.H.W. Bush cares about? Americans or Saudi's?" obscured the main point. It was intemperate and childish, even if true.

The main point is that the Bush family and friends are heavily invested in and representatives of a business concern that deals primarily in government sales and government regulated business. For the Bushes, politics is only half of the family business. Their "niche" is the corrupt nexus of crony capitalism and politics. The Bush's money is dirty and bloody.

Moore should have just said that, IMO. The Bush's money is dirty and bloody.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CaptainClark23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
23. Anthrax attacks
and the lack of investigation thereof. Would have tied in very nicely with the theme of instilled fear.

But I do understand a movie can be only so long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toucano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #23
37. I think you are so right.
People really should be reminded of that. If only he could have squeezed it in!

I thought about that as soon as I left the theatre.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoadRunner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
26. It was too short.
Two hours is not enough time to cover all of Bush's crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Amen!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike1963 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
30. PNAC is somewhat complex - it's something that really does take some
research to figure out. I think it would just have confused viewers, although it probably would have been good if he had had someone in the film at least mention it and give the URL for it. (I haven't yet seen it but I almost feel like I have thanks to DU) :D

Closest theater is Tulsa and they're sold out until Mon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
31. Far too easy on Bush. Bush stayed at that school house for 29 minutes
AFTER he heard "America is under attack" -- putting 200 little kids' lives more in danger each minute he wasted in clearing out of there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. BOOKER film
I wish he had used more of that -- just kept showing * as the clock ticked. Before seeing it, I had the impression there would be much more of him squriming in it.

I want the ENTIRE Booker video on the DVD!

To keep the film breezy (as much as it was) requires cutting a LOT. I have no doubt he could have made a 10-hour movie and still had stuff on the floor that we would have wanted included.

I look forward to seeing it again soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newsguyatl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
33. DEFINITELY
agree with you on two and three (especially the PNAC)...

also wished he'd talked more about bush's NON service in the texas national guard.

and maybe some on cheney's secret energy meetings where he and his pals were divvying up iraq oil wells in '99.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lucky777 Donating Member (298 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
35. Needed More on 9-11 itself
Should have gone into the breakdown of NORAD, lack of black boxes, identities of hijackers, lack of video from airports, flight school issues in FL, etc. That would have been sweet.

In 'Dude' he talks about a rogue Saudi element being responsible for the 9-11 attacks (this explains the flight training, etc); none of this shows up in the movie.

Still, he showed how these people are all in bed together -- Bush, the Saudis, Baker, Cheney, the oil and military companies, etc.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContinentalOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
36. I noticed one outright lie!
At one point Moore mentions Bush going to bed in his fine linen sheets and shows footage of someone being tucked into bed. That footage was not actually Bush! I beleive it was doctored.

But seriously, I was thinking about why he didn't include PNAC and other stuff like that and I think he decided to rely mostly on what could be shown. The Bush/Saudi connection worked so well because we could actually see it onscreen with the parade of hand-shaking and deal-making. And James Bath's name being censored from the military records worked well because it made a good visual with the exposed name fading into the blacked-out version. But relying too heavily on documents and interviewing writers could have gotten a little too boring and hard to follow. Now if he had footage of a PNAC meeting with some revealing soundbites then I'm sure he would have gone with that angle too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lil-petunia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
40. not quite topical
but my biggest regret is that Moore did not have a time machine to add the image of an Irish witch casting spells on shrub seeking that he leave their country. Apparently, (reuters and others) that happened this afternoon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ibegurpard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
41. Why?
I haven't seen it yet but when I do, if I find myself agreeing with the film as a whole, I'm bloody well not going to nitpick it. FAUX and the rest of the right-wing echo chamber can do that just fine without my help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
42. It isn't showing in enough theaters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
durutti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
44. I think he might have made a mistake on the PATRIOT Act part...
He seemed to conflate police infiltration of Peace Fresno with the USA PATRIOT Act. As far as I know, the infilitration had nothing to do with the Act. It would've happened with or without it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
45. He should have dealt with the apparent "stand down"
...of interceptor jets on 9-11.
And he could have gone into tht extensively.
I think that is more important even than the insider trading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
46. Answers: (duck for cover)
1 - Any doco that claims a fact but doesn't follow it up with some hard proof means that fact should NOT be taken at face value. If Moore is trying to cut corners and shovel out falsities, you can bet your sweet bippy that people will vote for * in retaliation. "Moore's one of them lyin' lib'ruls ya' know and * is always honest and speaks just like us."

2 - PNAC yes. If that wouldn't be enough to get him on a death list, name-dropping clearly would. Remember, Moore is out to make money. If he's dead, he can't do squat with all the dough he's rakin' in.

3 - that would have been nice to hear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #46
55. Sorry Hypno, but Michael isn't for the $$ on this one at all,
He said that people would see it if he had to drive it from state to state in his car when miramax refused to distribute it. Check his web site.

He just wants America to see the truth about the lies of shrub's WH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NecessaryOnslaught Donating Member (691 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
47. While following the recruiters
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 06:19 PM by NecessaryOnslaught
Mike could have mentioned the No child left behind act, which requires schools to release the names, addresses and phone numbers of every student to military recruiters or lose all federal funding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #47
56. Wasn't aware of this part, thanks Necessary!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaiso Donating Member (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
50. Patriot Act: Stress that a US citizen could be held witout legal counsel
or having been charged....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Delano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
51. Too short...
Doesn't elaborate enough on Bush's various lies and crimes.

But I know that brevity is the soul of wit, especially when dealing with movie audiences with short attention spans, so overall, I loved it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignoramus Donating Member (610 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
52. evacuation
Having the scenes regarding the evacuation selected for the preview and tv commercial seems really unfortunate.

The tv commercials show grounded airplanes, and a guy saying all commercial flights were grounded, yet the flights taking members of the bin laden family out of the country were authorized at the highest levels of the bush administration (I think that was roughly what was said). The film itself added some additional details, but it was essentially still that claim.

The general thrust of the point made by the commercial appears to me to be that George Bush was involved in something fishy involving giving special privileges to the bin ladens and flying them out of the country without reasonable attention from intelligence people.

Now, the more I read about this, the more it seems to unravel. Michael Moore's list of facts on his web page, points you to "the 9-11 commission" staff statement.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/f911facts/isikoff.php

I didn't read all of it, but it says on pg. 12 roughly that the bin laden's initiated the process (not Bush), asking to have their family flown out of the country, the request was then approved, not by Bush, but by Richard Clarke. The flight containing the bin laden's took place not when flights were grounded, but on Sept. 20th, an entire week after "the airspace was reopened" (not sure exactly what it means that the airspace was reopened). And, 20 of the 26 members were "questioned" by the FBI before flying, "many" of them being asked "detailed" questions (the implication in the staff statement is that the FBI questioning of the bin laden's was out of the ordinary, e.g. it could be that the people assigned to ask routine questions of all passengers were FBI employees, but it's not made clear).

In the film Mr. Unger (I think) says that the bin laden's were asked the types of questions that any other passenger was asked. It's possible that that was the case. If so shouldn't the film clarify.

What was the point again? The commercial and preview are supposed to sum up the ideas in the film. It does convey the idea that Bush arranged to have the bin laden's flown out of the country when normal flights were grounded. This apparently is false.

Please straighten me out if I'm missing something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the_outsider Donating Member (258 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 04:24 AM
Response to Original message
53. too short, more middle east history and a broader perspective
Edited on Sun Jun-27-04 05:02 AM by the_outsider
First, I saw the film today and was moved very much. I am very grateful to Michael for making this film and Miramax/LGF/IFC for producing and distributing this film. Easily the most important film in years.

Having said that, I think a little more about the history of US/UK intervention in middle east politics would have given the film a broader perspective. Historically US/UK has favored autocratic despots opposed to progressive liberal forces over the years which has eventually resulted in converting parts of middle east into fertile ground for development of Wahabi extremist sect and for terrorist recruitment. Bathist party's coup in 1963 to overthrow Qassem, support to Saddam during Iran-Iraq war, support to Mujahideen in Afghanistan, propping up military dictators in Pakistan and indirectly supporting terrorism in Kashmir, support to Israeli occupation, how the huge amount of oil money directly flow back into Wall Street, do not improve the lot of common people of middle east and create extreme poverty and a sense of helpless frustration - are all very relevant issues. In short, the story does not and should not begin with 9/11. All of this is very complex though and I am not sure how to fit this into a 2 hour film. Also some of it will implicate democratic leaders which probably defeats the immediate and very important goal a little bit. Personally I would have liked to see a little more on this.

This brings me to the second point which completely contradicts the previous paragraph. I felt that for a 2 hour film, he touched too many topics which reduced the impact a little bit. But it's hard to distribute a 4 hour documentary.

Perhaps he could have done a four hour film, divided it into two installments (ala Tarantino's Kill Bill) and released the second part just before the elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sampsonblk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-04 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
54. No Duct Tape
Moore could have (and should have) had a lot of fun with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Feb 12th 2025, 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC