(July 17, 2004)
         My wife and I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 a second time. If you haven’t seen it yet, don’t wait!
         My 80-year-old father and I exchange a lot of e-mails, and lately the topic has often been the Iraq war and the current wrong-headed direction of our nation.
         My father isn’t offended by my rantings; he enjoys a lively discussion. He and I usually agree even though supposedly he is a conservative Republican and supposedly I am a liberal. Those words are completely outmoded. Because he labels himself conservative, he chooses "conservative" mainstream media and doesn't expose himself to information showing how ever-increasing centralization of corporate control goes against his deeper values and against what he fought for in World War II. On the other hand, he is invested in the stock market and so has a stake in corporate profits--it does get complicated. But when I engage him in discussions that go to the root of matters, he and I agree about 90% of the time.
         The main purpose of “liberal” vs. “conservative” labels is for emotional impact that divides people who otherwise might realize how many values they share; there’s little meaningful content left in those outworn terms. Michael Moore--director of Bowling for Columbine and now Fahrenheit 9/11--is really a conservative in the best sense of that term, sticking up for the principles upon which this country was founded.
         I wouldn't call Fahrenheit 9/11 a "documentary." But that's how it’s classified because movies have to be pigeonholed into categories. Really, he has developed a new form. I'd call it a film essay or film editorial, with documentary evidence that strongly backs up his political analysis. But it's classed as a documentary, and since it lacks that aura of supposed "objectivity" that standard documentaries are imbued with, Moore is blasted for being biased. Whatever.
         Time Magazine recently did a cover story on Moore and Fahrenheit 9/11. Time’s cover refers to Michael Moore's "war" and asks if it is “good for America?" Perhaps they think that too much open debate might be dangerous to our democracy. In the article, Time analyzes Moore's unorthodox filmmaking and gives an example of how he uses humor. This is when Moore learns in the film that Congress quickly passed the “Patriot Act" even though most members of congress and senators had not read much of it. In the film, Moore then says that if they haven't read it well then he's going to read it to them, and so he has an ice-cream truck driver cart him around the capitol while he reads the Patriot Act over the loudspeaker of the truck. Time Magazine implies that this is a theatrical stunt to be condemned. But they gloss over the much more outrageous idea--that our representatives would enact powerful legislation scaling back numerous liberties that lie at the heart of our nation's identity without even reading the text of the new law. That is infinitely more outrageous than any stunt with an ice-cream truck.
         I’m glad I saw the film twice. Moore wove many things together, and much of it goes by pretty quickly. For example, one section shows that many high ranking Saudis, including members of the bin Laden family, were flown out of the U.S. right after 9/11, when all other flights were grounded. Remember, most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Why weren't these other Saudis even questioned? Not an accusation of guilt, mind you, just questioning. Moore illustrates this simple idea brilliantly by splicing in a few scenes of Joe Friday from the old Dragnet TV series--where Friday and officer Gannon are simply going to question people who might provide some leads. Instead, the rich Saudis--some with longstanding connections to the Bush family--were spirited out of the country in a hurry.
         Remember the recent news about how Bush’s Homeland Security department asked John Ashcroft’s Justice department the legal steps required to postpone the November election in case of a terrorist attack? I guess maybe they've let that ludicrous idea die. It was just more fear-mongering. Moore analyzes the Bush administration’s purposeful creation of fear, especially when that non-specific national “ terrorist alert” moves from yellow to orange to red, or whatever. He goes to a mall in Michigan and a small town in Virginia, where people are fearful of terrorists. Moore shows how the American public has been manipulated by fear. This idea was also covered incisively in Bowling for Columbine: The media in the U.S., especially television, trains us to be afraid of everything from germs to hemorrhoids to terrorists. I think that fear is perhaps the ultimate source of war--probably an even deeper cause of war than is aggression.
         Speaking of aggression, I've always thought that the Iraq war was mainly about oil, but until recently I figured that mostly the oil was not yet flowing because of the chaos there. But now I realize that the black gold has indeed been flowing--plenty of it.
         Separate from the money that we U.S. taxpayers are coughing up for "reconstruction" of Iraq, the proceeds from the sale of Iraqi oil are also supposed to be used by the "coalition" for reconstruction. Of course we know who the big contractors are who get the reconstruction jobs, and of course we can be sure they don’t ever inflate the bills in any way.
         The Bush administration has repeatedly refused to provide information to U.N. accountants who are auditing how Iraq’s oil revenue is used. According to a July 16 article in the Washington Post, a preliminary audit for the period of May 2003 through December 2003 “asserts that the coalition’s management of Iraq’s oil was plagued by ‘inadequate’ bookkeeping and accounting systems, high turnover among coalition finance officials and a disregard for procedures designed to ensure competitive bidding for contracts.” In addition, the auditors “outlined a series of other shortcomings, including the coalition’s failure to install meters on Iraq’s Persian Gulf export loading platforms, making it impossible to determine how much oil Iraq was exporting.” (italics mine)
         Wow. The oil going out was (is still?) not even being metered. That’s shocking. So it looks to me like WE (or rather, large U.S.-based corporations) have been stealing the oil just as fast as we can pump it and get it out of there, all while our taxpayer-funded military stands guard over the ongoing theft. And that’s what our soldiers are killing and dying for? Undoubtedly the plan is to put in lots more wells and facilities to get more and more of the oil out faster and faster.
         An acquaintance of my father told my dad that John Kerry would “give away the country.” Unfortunately, Kerry couldn't do this--Bush has already done so. The highest principles upon which this country was founded have been trampled upon, while those performing the treason have been waving flags the whole time.
         The news just seems to get more and more outrageous every day. It's amazing to me that Bush hasn't been impeached for his many crimes, not the least of which is lying to the American people about the reasons for starting a war. It’s amazing to me that Bush appears to have a chance of being elected--goes to show what sheep many of us in America have become, under the spell of TV news hypnotism. I hope that Fahrenheit 9/11 will help Americans wake up. Michael Moore is a true patriot.
         By the way, my father assures me that he will not be voting for Bush in November.