Blogcritics: Comments on The puzzling phenomenon of Fahrenheit 9/11

Comment by Sortelli

Fri, 2 Jul 2004 01:34:49 EDT

While not all the facts in the movie are completely true.. LOL Leave it to Michael Moore to make a fact unfactual. And leave it to his fans to justify it.

Comment by Laura

Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:34:11 EDT

two things: 1. Moore is expressing his opinion and he has done a good job at getting the word out - It was the number one selling movie this weekend. People want to see what he has to say... 2. While not all the facts in the movie are completely true.. bottom line is Bush and Cheney are making personal profit from attacking Iraq because of the oil company that they have invested in, in 2000, Colin Powell did not see Iraq as a threat, but in 2002-3 they did, and went to Iraq and found no WMD......

Comment by jack e. jett

Tue, 29 Jun 2004 12:18:43 EDT

hitchens is too pissy for my taste. he is just a bit too vomity fair for my taste. i do like his hair. i did like his article on mother t. but he should still go fuck himself. jack jack e. jett

Comment by Mark Edward Manning

Mon, 28 Jun 2004 18:10:10 EDT

Just don't want to face the facts on Iraq, which Hitchens exposes marvelously, do you, Jack? When anyone defends Moore over Hitchens, that's pretty bad.

Comment by jack e. jett

Mon, 28 Jun 2004 17:57:27 EDT

christopher hitchens can go f*uck himself if he hasn't already. this has become my new favorite expresssion. jack

Comment by Natalie Davis

Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:01:18 EDT

"Maybe they are viewing this rubbish in the hopes that they can catch a glimpse of just what kind of madman they are dealing with" Yeah. We wanted a glimpse of what the Terrorist-in-Thief is doing. Moore is allowed to spout his POV, just as you are.

Comment by boomcrashbaby

Mon, 28 Jun 2004 11:50:21 EDT

I saw a People in the News segment on CNN that profiled Michael Moore. One of the critics mentioned that Moore gets a viewpoint on something, then will use footage to get his viewpoint across, so that while the usage of the footage might be taking extreme liberty, there is still a viewpoint or a message in what he says. Knowing that, I don't see how it is much different than this post, except perhaps on a much larger scale. After all, Mark, you do go about Moore's motivations being greed and the almighty dollar. I've never seen his movies but I've heard enough about him and his beliefs to know that making millions isn't his primary motivation. It is frustrating when people present things out of context, or promote opinion as fact, I agree with you. Such tactics come from the left and the right. I personally think his movies would reach and motivate a lot more people to his cause, if he wasn't so freehanded with the way he presents things. Oh, the CNN segment also said that Moore does not consider his work documentaries, but editorials. There just is no recognition of a film being an editorial so people call it a documentary.

Comment by Johnny Nemo

Mon, 28 Jun 2004 11:07:33 EDT

Because Mr. Moore criticises his government's policy, he must hate his country. The logic is inescapable. And even worse than that, Mr. Moore just might be a -- a France-lover!

Comment by Marc

Mon, 28 Jun 2004 10:42:19 EDT

I agree you and Hitchens have said it all minus a couple of other Saddam attacks on the US. The USS Stark was hit by a French made exocet missle fired by an Iraqi French made Mirage fighter jet. The claim at the time was that it was a case of "mistaken identity," Ok, sure. I contend the difference between a 400 foot warship and an 800 foot oil tanker is too great to be a mistake. The USS Tripoli was holed by an Iraqi mine and had to limp back into port for repairs.