Ho  /  Reuters File
Michael Moore talks with Congressman John Tanner on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. in a scene from his new film "Fahrenheit 9/11."
updated 6/25/2004 12:10:23 PM ET 2004-06-25T16:10:23

I went to see “Fahrenheit 9/11” Thursday expecting to be entertained despite political objections, but I was wrong.  To say Moore took liberty with the truth would be like saying that Ken Lay took liberties with Enron's accounting practices.  Fahrenheit 9/11,” like Enron's accountants, obviously figured that when it came to making money, the end justified the means. 

In both cases, the scale of deceit and deception is breathtaking. Though I'd need four hours to tell you the list of all the falsehoods from Moore's two-hour movie, let me give you a few glimpses into his twisted logic: 

Moore's movie begins by pitching his conspiracy theory about the 2000 election.  We're all told in the audience by all recounting methods Al Gore won Florida.  That drew a big gasp from the crowd.  But, shockingly, this first fact cited by Moore's movie is a lie.  Didn't anybody associated with Miramax or Michael Moore's movie read newspapers after the election, when some of America's most liberal papers published results from their independent review of Florida's ballots, concluding it was George W. Bush who won by all recounting methods?

And what of the second conspiracy theory, suggesting that George W. Bush kept Americans grounded after 9/11 but let the bin Laden family escape American airspace scot-free? An FBI agent suggested President Bush's action was an insult to 3,000 dead Americans, while Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan dramatically demands on tape that we must have an investigation to find out who approved this.

But Michael and the senator both know who approved the bin Laden transfer: It was none other than that Bush-bashing hero of the left, Richard Clarke.  He admitted it in the 9/11 Commission.  Now, it's funny how Michael Moore used Clarke's 9/11 testimony to bash Bush in other parts of the movie, but decided to edit out that part that lays waste to bin Laden-and- Bush conspiracy theory.

These two gross distortions are in the first five minutes of the film.  But I can tell you that this film can only add to coarsening of America's democracy.  Moore seems to promote the following slanderous conspiracy theories in his movie:

Now, there are hundreds of conspiracy theories that are simply unsupported by the facts. But Moore goes on to show pictures of dead Iraqi babies, followed immediately by American soldiers talking about the rush they got listening to rock C.D.s while they shot at anything they moved in Iraq.  Why didn't Moore just write "baby killers" on the screen and point to U.S. troops? 

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Michael Moore would make this kind of movie, but  I am stunned that movie critics, Hollywood moguls and liberal movie viewers across America really think so little of America, its soldiers and its leaders. 

Friends, it's a dark, grim and distorted perspective of our great nation.  I think it's just wrong. 


Discussion comments