From Lileks, Christopher Hitchens administers a brutal review/spanking of Michael Moore’s comedy Fahrenheit 9/11:
Thus, in spite of the film’s loaded bias against the work of the mind, you can grasp even while watching it that Michael Moore has just said, in so many words, the one thing that no reflective or informed person can possibly believe: that Saddam Hussein was no problem. No problem at all. Now look again at the facts I have cited above. If these things had been allowed to happen under any other administration, you can be sure that Moore and others would now glibly be accusing the president of ignoring, or of having ignored, some fairly unmistakable “warnings.”
The same “let’s have it both ways” opportunism infects his treatment of another very serious subject, namely domestic counterterrorist policy. From being accused of overlooking too many warnings?not exactly an original point?the administration is now lavishly taunted for issuing too many. (Would there not have been “fear” if the harbingers of 9/11 had been taken seriously?) We are shown some American civilians who have had absurd encounters with idiotic “security” staff. (Have you ever met anyone who can’t tell such a story?) Then we are immediately shown underfunded police departments that don’t have the means or the manpower to do any stop-and-search: a power suddenly demanded by Moore on their behalf that we know by definition would at least lead to some ridiculous interrogations. Finally, Moore complains that there isn’t enough intrusion and confiscation at airports and says that it is appalling that every air traveler is not forcibly relieved of all matches and lighters. (Cue mood music for sinister influence of Big Tobacco.) So?he wants even more pocket-rummaging by airport officials? Uh, no, not exactly. But by this stage, who’s counting? Moore is having it three ways and asserting everything and nothing. Again?simply not serious.
As I’ve said before, it’s okay if you’re going to release a propaganda film. Just be sure to label it that way, for Christ’s sake. Don’t lie to us and call a pack of falsehoods a documentary.
Once again, I am placed in the unenviable position of defending Michael Moore. I have not yet see FAHRENHEIT 911, and I am not at all certain that I will. Michael Moore is a man of the Left who has been an amusing critic of our social and economic system in such documentaries as ROGER AND ME and THE BIG ONE, but the man is woefully ignorant about the world at large beyond Flint, Michigan and Hollywood. In this respect he is not unique; most of leading Democratic candidates for the office of President and 95 percent of the people attending the Cannes Film Festival are similarly afflicted.
The main thesis of this film, apparently, and I am carefully making this criticism, because I have not seen the film, is that President Bush is in bed with the Saudi royal family and in the pocket of American defense industries, neither accusation holding up under too much scrutiny. Is Michael Moore aware that Bush and Rumsfeld cancelled one the most expenesive defense programs of the post-Cold War era in the face of fierce opposition from Congress and the Army. That was the 11-billion dollar, 80-ton Crusader mobile artillery sytem that was to replace the 40-year-old Paladin system. A superb weapon for the next war if that next war involves an armored drive to Moscow or Beijing, but quite worthless in small mobile wars against terrorists and insurgents in remote mountain strongholds and Third World urban battlefields. Still, it was a pork-barrel project that seemed to have a life of its own and the entenched interests were determined to see 480 of the behemoths come off the assembly line before 2008. Clinton, always willing to leave pork alone, would never have touched it. Some of those jobs that were lost in the last few years probably disaappeared as a consequence of the Crusader cancellation and United Defense Industries, a Bush campaign contributor, took a nose dive on Wall Street. Not what you would expect from someone in the pocket of the defense industry. As to being in bed with the Saudis, the House of Saud would give you an argument on that score as U.S. ties with those Zionist devils in Israel have never been closer.
Oh yes, I was going to defend Mr. Moore, wasn’t I. All the best documentaries I have ever seen are in some manner propaganda. Propaganda is the selective manipulation of truth to drive home a political or social point of view that will influence the audience. Watch Frank Capra’s WHY WE FIGHT documentaries made during the Second World War or the Edward R. Murrow documentaries of the 1950s and 60s on the evils of McCarthyism and the plight of farm workers or the 1970 Academy Award winning ducumentary HEARTS AND MINDS showing the American military in Vietnam engaged in Nazi-style atrocities on a large scale. All of these films, whatever I might think of their content, are superb examples of documentary filmmaking. I give Michael Moore some credit for reviving this type of film and even making it somewhat popular. There is no doubt a geat deal of truth in FAHENHEIT 911, but I caution anyone viewing the film to remember that it is highly selective truth that ignores a mountain of other facts. The conclusions that Michael draws are absurd, but he is preaching to the choir and the choir is looking for the message that he provides in what is, for all its faults and probable inaccuracies, a geniune piece of ducumentary filmmaking.
Yes, I’ve seen the movie, and I understand the buzz. Mr. Moore certainly does his share of bashing, but there are both hits and misses involved in this movie. Perhaps the most damaging argument against Bush was the 7 minutes he sat stagnately in the school classroom after being informed of the second plane crashing into the World Trade Center towers. It certainly shows a chilling lack of leadership on the part of the President, and his motionless frame during those moments was quite scary and incomprehensible to watch. However, Mr. Moore does drag on about the Iraq war a little too much without really punching in a point. Was he suggesting we invade Saudi Arabia instead? He doesn’t say. And sure, maybe the administration did adhere to scare tactics to get America’s support for a ill-conceived invasion, but the truth remains that someone in the Arab world did kill 5,000 of our friends and relatives, and some payback was required — if for nothing more than to get the attention of the world that we were not going to sit on our hands and do nothing about it. War is not pretty by any means, but inaction would have been deadlier. The American people are not stupid, Mr. Moore. Anything that was said about the Bush administration being in bed with the Saudi’s was not as incriminating as the after war affect (bad intelligence) and the slow realization that the current administration is truely incompetent. If I were you, I would have pushed the Saudi point a little further and passed on all the other irrevelent stuff, such as having matches on airplanes, or showing the lack of security on the Oregon coastline. Not relevent to your points. But should Bush not be re-elected, I can’t give you credit for it, Mr. Moore. Bush did this to himself, and we all see it. Americans are not as ill-informed as you might believe. Next time you make a movie, try to stay focused. I saw a lot of finger pointing but no solutions or plausible recommendations. Anyone can bash. Next time, have the courage to be a little less one sided so your “good” points don’t lose credibilty with the lack of focus in so many other areas.