Michael Moore Fahrenheit 911

1
Michael Moore- Fahrenheit 911
As in many of his documentaries, Michael uses
many of the tools of spin and propaganda in his
documentary Fahrenheit 911 including well placed
music, emotional scenes and language, misuse of
context and others.
2

• Key Points made or suggested by Michael Moore
  include
• Iraq (Saddam Hussein) was not a threat to US
  security.
• American Soldiers were blood thirsty
• American soldiers were needlessly being killed
  for no cause or reason
• Innocent Iraqis civilians were being killed in
  Iraq
• Recruitment was done mainly in poor areas where
  the future was limited.
• No real terrorist threat exists
• Invasion was about oil and money for connected
  business
• George Bush had ties with the Saudi Bin Laden
  family
• George Bush is an elitist (associates only with
  wealthy)- haves, and have more
• It was a terrible decision to go to war
• Bush didnt even win the election to become
  president
• Bush actually cut back on police (Oregon) during
  his presidency.

3
FahrenHYPE 911- Was a video documentary
response to Michael Moore suggestions made in his
documentary. The purpose of this documentary was
to tell a different story, from a different
perspective. This documentary was written by Dick
Morris and Eileen McGann- two individuals who
specialize in election strategy for political
candidates. Dick worked for Bill Clinton in the
1996 presidential elections. Both write (and
sell) books on American politics.
4

• Key Points made by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
• Following the US led 1990 gulf war where US
  destroyed Saddams invasion of Kuwait in just
  days, Saddam had vowed revenge on the US.
• American soldiers were proud of their duties in
  Iraq. They liberated children from prisons and
  were welcomed.
• Us Bombs were hitting strategic military targets
  (Saddams Palace), not children.
• Recruitment of new soldiers is voluntary.
• Numerous terrorist plots were identified and
  thwarted as a result of the Patriot Act.
• Not about Money- many better opportunities
  existed. A pipeline through Afghanistan was
  Clintons idea- the Democrats are reaping as much
  wealth from big corporations as republicans.
• All Presidents have had amicable relationships
  with the Saudi (oil rich) families.
• Various independent studies did indeed show that
  George Bush won the election in 2001.

5
Perhaps the most important realizations made in
the counter documentary were from people shown in
Michael Moores film. Many felt misled, misused,
and bluntly add that they do not share Michael
Moores views with regards to the war in Iraq, or
George Bush.
Did Michael Moore cross the line with his
account of the events of 911 and the war? Did he
mislead viewers? Did he mislead subjects in his
documentary? Did he imply or suggest things that
are false? Was Fahrenheit 911 just a good editing
job of various bits of film?
6
To Consider

• Is it possible that George Bushs policy of
  Preemptive strikes (Ill attack you before you
  attack me) is perhaps the only effective measure
  against militant Islam?
• Is/was there a genuine risk of a nuclear or
  chemical attack in the US by Islamic militants?
  (Their primary goal is to attack the US)
• Conspiracy theories suggest that it was the US
  government that planned the 9/11 attacks to
  justify a war in the Middle East (Iraq). If the
  threat of a nuclear attack was their primary
  excuse form the invasion, why wouldnt they have
  just planted and then discovered the weapons
  to save face? Why endure the criticism?
• Was doing nothing too big of risk to take?

7
The Patriot Act
While the Patriot Act most certainly infringed on
some civil liberties of the citizens, proponents
argue it was a necessary tool to effectively
monitor and intercept potential terrorist plots
BEFORE they happen. The act involved eliminating
administrative and government barriers (red tape)
so that law enforcement agencies could cooperate
and act more swiftly on perceived threats. This
was done by allowing arrest and detention with
out charges, permitting electronic surveillance
of suspects etc Though these new powers of law
enforcement are open to abuse, if you are a law
abiding citizen the Patriot Act would not have
affected your daily life to any extent. In the
hands of responsible government, it is an
effective and necessary tool for protecting our
communities. And guess what.we did the same
thing in Canada!
8
Anti-Terrorism Act
The Government of Canada Anti-Terrorism Plan has
four objectives 1) Stop terrorists from getting
into Canada and protect Canadians from terrorist
acts 2) Bring forward tools to identify,
prosecute, convict and punish terrorists 3)
Prevent the Canada-US border from being held
hostage by terrorists and impacting on the
Canadian economy. 4) Work with the international
community to bring terrorists to justice and
address the root causes of such hatred.
9
..and the new tools given to law
enforcement a) Making it easier to use
electronic surveillance against terrorist groups
b) Creating new offences targeting unlawful
disclosure of certain information of national
interest c) Amending the Canada Evidence Act
to guard certain information of national interest
from disclosure during courtroom or other
judicial proceedings d) Amending the National
Defence Act to continue and clarify the mandate
of the Communications Security Establishment
(CSE) to collect foreign communications e)
Within carefully defined limits, allowing the
arrest, detention and imposition of conditions of
release on suspected terrorists to prevent
terrorist acts and save lives f) Requiring
individuals who have information related to a
terrorist group or offence to appear before a
judge to provide that information and extending
the DNA warrant scheme and data bank to include
terrorist crimes.
10
Suppose George Bush made the right decisions to
invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Both regimes were
openly hostile to the United States, and both
have had connections with previous attacks on US
embassies and businesses around the world.
Suppose the new anti-Terror laws did indeed foil
a catastrophic attack on Canadian or American
soil. We will of course never know, but we must
question what if? Did G.W. Bush save us? What
do you think? Given the knowledge you have now,
is the US policy of Pre-emptive force a
catastrophe or necessity? What decision would you
make regarding the invasion of Afghanistan and
Iraq? Explain.
11
George Bushs policies have enraged many moderate
Islamics and have further alienated the US from
the rest of the world. The aggression by the US
has destroyed any possibility of discourse with
militant Islam in creating a peaceful
relationship. What George Bush needed to do was
ask the fundamental question Why do they hate
us? Only in finding this answer will the western
world ever be at peace with Islamic Extremists.