The most interesting response to F9/11 I've read

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not because I agree with it. But this is still fascinating and creepy reading:

http://www.perryonpolitics.com/archives/001930.html

Worth going to the page for all the comment hoohah, not much of which will surprise but it's interesting seeing who at least tries to parse the post and who rehashes what they already think. But as for the main post itself, from a serving Army member in Iraq, I shall quote it all. The amount of weird doublespeak throughout is seemingly apparent to me...but I'm interested in your thoughts first and foremost. But suffice to say that the first few paragraphs alone make me severely doubt he empathizes with his fellow soldiers at all, and I don't even think he realizes it.

--

Michael Moore's film, Fahrenheit 9/11, is making the rounds here at U.S. bases in Kuwait. Some soldiers have received it already and are passing is around. The impact is devastating.

Here we are, soldiers of the 1st Armored Division, just days from finally returning home after over a year serving in Iraq, and Moore's film is shocking and crushing soldiers, making them feel ashamed. Moore has abused the First Amendment and is hurting us worse than the enemy has.


There are the young and impressionable soldiers, like those who joined the Army right out of high school. They aren't familiar w/ the college-type political debate environment, and they haven't been schooled in the full range of issues involved. They are vulnerable to being hurt by a vicious film like Moore's.


There are others who joined for reasons of money and other benefits, and never gave full thought to the issues. For them, seeing this film has jolted them grievously because they never even knew where some of these countries were that we have been serving in. Imagine the impact this film has on them.


And there are those who are hurting from being away from family and loved ones. They are burnt out, already hurting inside from 15 months of duty out here, and now to be hit w/ this film.. it is devastating.


Lastly, there are those like me, who want to explode in anger and rage at this abuse of the First Amendment and the way Moore has twisted reality so harshly.


Specialist Janecek, who is feeling depressed because a close family member is nearing the end of her life, just saw the film today. I saw him in the DFAC. He is devastated. "I feel shitty, ashamed, like this was all a lie." Not only is he looking at going straight to a funeral when he returns home, but now whatever pride he felt for serving here has been crushed by Moore's film. Specialist Everett earlier after seeing the film: "You'll be mad at shit for ever having come here."


And there are others. Mostly the comments are absolute shock at the close connections Moore makes between the Bush family and the Bin Laden family in Saudi Arabia. "Bush looks really really REALLY corrupt in this film. I just don't know what to think anymore," is a common comment to hear. Some of these soldiers are darn right ashamed tonight to be American soldiers, to have been apart of this whole mission in Iraq, and are angry over all that Moore has presented in his film.


We know this is all based on Moore's lies and deceptions. But we, I'm afraid, are a minority. Right now, just days away from what should be a proud and happy return from 15 months of duty in Operation Iraqi Freedom, your U.S. soldiers are coming back ashamed and hurt because of Moore's work.


What these good yet impressionable soldiers don't realize is that twisting reality and manipulating the truth is something lawyers do every day in court for their clients. OJ Simpson, so clearly guilty in the ghastly murders, was able to get off because his lawyer team completely confused the issue. Now today, in typical fashion, Moore is doing the very same thing in this film. This is, frankly, the nature of political debate in a democracy -- especially when extremism is allowed to go unchecked.


Lt. Bischoff is so angry he could explode. He knows Moore's work is based on lies and distortions, but as he says, "the damage is done." Clearly, this is the type of thing we expect from angry leftists like Moore. What we didn't expect was the full impact this film is now having and how it has been embraced and supported by so many Hollywood elites. Lt. Bischoff says Moore's film is a work of deception, lies and distortions that when seen by those unfamiliar w/ the issues involved, has the effect of attacking the American peoples' resolve and focus in this war.


From what I've heard from the soldiers, the things that have them most shocked and upset them are the connections Moore makes between the Bush family and the Bin Ladens. The impression is that Bush is part of a conspiracy that supported the September 11th terrorist attacks. They speak of how Moore makes a convincing case all the way from the 2000 election to now that Bush and Cheney are all about making money. That the September 11th attacks were merely calculated by them as to how they would earn them more money. They speak of the Saudi who was a fellow soldier w/ Bush in the National Guard, and how Moore makes it all look like Bush is more beholden to Saudi interests than US interests.


Moore's commentary and striking video stunts, such as confronting politicians w/ enlistment papers for their kids, of course hurts and affects these soldiers out here badly. These are the ones who have sacrificed much to serve. Moore's stunt is powerful.


I sometimes want to be mad at my fellow soldiers for being susceptible to Moore's distortions, but I can't really blame them. These are good Americans, who have volunteered to serve our country. Nothing says they all have to be experts in Middle Eastern issues and history and politics to serve. That would be silly. ...But this is, of course, the vulnerability that Moore has exploited.


I wonder how damaging and shocking a Moore project would have been in the 1940s making such a video of Franklin Roosevelt. All the corruption and decadence in that administration would have fed such a project well. Or how damaging and shocking would such a Moore project have been to Lincoln, who wavered and shifted often in finding the right mediums and balances in pursuing the great causes of the Civil War. ...Need I even suggest the impact such would have had on Kennedy or Johnson and all their hypocrisies?


Moore is hurting us, hurting America, and today I can tell you he is hurting your soldiers. I don't know what to ask, except that good people out there find ways to organize information so that we can better counter Moore's impact. Is there anyone in Hollywood who is willing to stand up and make a similar film to counter Moore's? I know good people w/ integrity in the film industry don't want to be seen as pushing a political agenda in movies. But this is EXACTLY what Moore and the radical leftists in Hollywood have done. Is there no way to put together a response to them?


I hope more people will arm themselves w/ the facts and the realities of the situation out here and in the world at large. Our political arena is taking a big hit from this film by Moore, and it should tell us all something when terrorist groups like Hezbollah are distributing it around to their own people.


I think it is sad and unfortunate that at this last hour of a long and difficult deployment, so many soldiers are being made to feel ashamed and "shitty" for having ever served in this whole mission. Moore has abused the First Amendment. This is his right, and we soldiers have defended that right, but we who know better should NOT just sit back and let such enemies w/in our own country get by w/ such assaults unanswered.

---

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:32 (twenty-one years ago)

the only "lies and distortions" present are in this commentary, I think.

(and I'm not sure why it deserves its own thread but who cares.)

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:36 (twenty-one years ago)

I think because it's an interesting peek into a state of mind in a time and place. The emotion I sense most greatly from it isn't rage or self-righteousness but bitter, cruel frustration -- and I admit I'm intrigued by it.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:43 (twenty-one years ago)

He's shot himself in the foot by calling it an 'abuse of the first ammendmant', can you abuse the first ammendment? Patronizing in the extreme to 'young and impressionable soldiers, like those who joined the Army right out of high school. And quite frankly if they don't knwo where they have been fighting then they deserve ridicule.

Not thatI'm a Michael Moore Fan but still.

Ed (dali), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, it's fascinating. Of course, it's going to get quoted on every right-leaning blog in the world as further evidence of Moore's evil nature. But it's also a reminder of how little a lot of the people who have been doing this ugly job understand about it.

Of course they've been lied to about what they're doing. And if they end up believing that the whole thing is some conspiracy between Bush and bin Laden, they won't be any nearer the truth. But at least they'll be thinking someone didn't tell them the whole story.

We haven't heard the last of Fahrenheit 9/11. I think that movie is going to reverberate through unexpected pockets of the culture in ways that won't be appreciated for a while.

spittle (spittle), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:51 (twenty-one years ago)

i think this is fascinating--thanks for posting it, ned. there's more than a hint of contempt in this piece for his fellow soldiers, who are presumed too unsophisticated to handle michael moore's rhetoric, and whose reactions are presumed to be those of dupes rather than of thinking persons. if i were a soldier, of whatever political persuasion, i would probably pick up on this.

amateur!st (amateurist), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:53 (twenty-one years ago)

out of curiosity, how are soldiers in the field seeing this film?

amateur!st (amateurist), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:56 (twenty-one years ago)

probably through ripped files from the internet and/or DVDrs.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:57 (twenty-one years ago)

oh ok.

increasingly technologically illiterate (amateurist), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Iraq is awash with Pirate DVDs, especially around the army bases. My collaegue who was there recently had nothing to do in the evening but watch and trade dvds.

Ed (dali), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 05:00 (twenty-one years ago)

out of curiosity, how are soldiers in the field seeing this film?

It's ALL over BitTorrent right now. Moore himself has said that he's not adverse to folks making copies of any of his movies available for free on the net and that's fanned a lot of the distribution.

Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 05:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Clearly, this is the type of thing we expect from angry leftists like Moore.

What do righties think the motivation behind so-called angry leftists who distort the truth? Self-hatred in the form of hatred of one's own country? Selfish desire to get the populace on their side in order to gain power for themselves? Or do they not even get as far as trying to understand the psychology of the Left?

oops (Oops), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 06:44 (twenty-one years ago)

Cause I know I ask myself that about the Right, ie why exactly do they think and act the way the do? It's far too easy to just write off anyone who has a different mindset as you as inately evil or capriciously dishonest.

oops (Oops), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 06:47 (twenty-one years ago)

They are vulnerable to being hurt by a vicious film like Moore's.

This from a person who's in the 1st Armored Division.

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 10:59 (twenty-one years ago)


mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:02 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.1ad.army.mil/splashimages/back/15.jpg

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:02 (twenty-one years ago)

ihttp://www.1ad.army.mil/splashimages/back/15.jpg

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:19 (twenty-one years ago)

(Sorry for multiple posts, image linking doesn't seem to be working.)

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:22 (twenty-one years ago)

For them, seeing this film has jolted them grievously because they never even knew where some of these countries were that we have been serving in.

This is the bit that's depressing.

ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, it's a weird blend of distanced sentimentality ('Don't you see how these poor idiot soldiers know nothing? We shouldn't try and engage the issues with them, we should be cossetting them.') and calls for 'the truth' to be known. I really don't get the guy's rhetoric at all, it's a massive flail -- thus the frustration. Perhaps what he's most angry about is the idea that he can't combat a potentially attractive propaganda effort on his own -- which given so many people's frustration with doing the same with BushCo's approach is amusing.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:25 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/media_fast/632/smash.jpg

Whiskeytown Littlecock (ex machina), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Cause I know I ask myself that about the Right, ie why exactly do they think and act the way the do? It's far too easy to just write off anyone who has a different mindset as you as inately evil or capriciously dishonest.

Why does it matter? The article's certainly biased, but the sentiment expressed in it isn't -- that a film like Moore's can be incredibly damaging to the psyche of the grunts depicted. And namecalling (even passively 'it's far too easy...') just averages the level of discourse, so let's try not to be too condescendatory in our rebuttles, ehh?

j.e.r.e.m.y (x Jeremy), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:40 (twenty-one years ago)

They aren't familiar w/ the college-type political debate environment... of MM's oh-so academic films! I tried real hard to empathize but when I got to this fascist line of argument -- 'This is, frankly, the nature of political debate in a democracy' -- my ultimate response has to be DIDDUMS and FUCK OFF. It's a volunteer army.

ENRQ (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:46 (twenty-one years ago)

Forcing our fighting men to think? Oh, how it hurts.

briania (briania), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:50 (twenty-one years ago)

a film like Moore's can be incredibly damaging to the psyche of the grunts depicted

I see this argument but it's a very strange one to me. The implication is that somehow said troops haven't once had any discussion with anyone -- friends, family, fellow troops, etc. -- about the whole thing, that this is entirely some unexpected bolt out of the blue. That a number of them are affected this way is certainly likely enough, but Roche in his article ultimately draws a line between two groups -- angry people like him who apparently 'knew' what was coming and were already predisposed to hate the film and everyone else who supposedly didn't know and therefore swallowed everything whole. I don't buy that.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:50 (twenty-one years ago)

I really don't get the guy's rhetoric at all, it's a massive flail -- thus the frustration.

OTM. It's somewhat difficult to decipher, and he's certainly not above a certain type of down-the-nose cynicism. I wonder if, at least in small part, he mightn't have hated MM's film as much as he said and this whole response is a weird anxiety-of-influence thing?

j.e.r.e.m.y (x Jeremy), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Heh. Well if you want to read Roche's other stuff:

http://www.nationalcenter.org/RochePage.html

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:52 (twenty-one years ago)

can be incredibly damaging ... I may have overspoken, axully. I don't think it's terribly likely that many soldiers will leave weeping at Moore's POV, but I do think it might be a bit jarring to those who've had - and been forcefed - the military line until this moment.

j.e.r.e.m.y (x Jeremy), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:53 (twenty-one years ago)

the troops must have been exposed to all the brouhaha in march-april abt 1) no WMD, 2) massive insurgency, 3) torture in prisons. surely THAT stuff would have been more depressing/soul-search-inducing than this film????

ENRQ (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:54 (twenty-one years ago)

I know! If anything the troops in the field are far MORE aware of what's going on than in past years and other situations -- regularly e-mailing and all that to folks home, the nature of what is news and how to access it on the Net and so forth. The possibilities are omnipresent, not everyone will take advantage of it, but I refuse to believe the troops have been living in a goddamn bubble.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:57 (twenty-one years ago)

Jeremy, Jen told me than Ch4rles Qu1gl3y is in Tikrit right now.

Whiskeytown Littlecock (ex machina), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 11:59 (twenty-one years ago)

They let took him off duty at Abu Gharib?

j.e.r.e.m.y (x Jeremy), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 12:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh be quiet

Whiskeytown Littlecock (ex machina), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 12:04 (twenty-one years ago)

i don't see how having doubts about the bush admin. would really pose a challenge to troops' effectiveness in this field. am i being naive?

amateur!st (amateurist), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 14:33 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah, cf the ww1 germans' 'stabbed in the back' paranoia, as was re-routed into anti-semitism etc.

ENRQ (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 14:38 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't know about naive, but it does seem like there's an equation in Roche's mind at least with doing the job and not questioning who caused the job. That said, I do note that at nowhere does he specifically say in this essay "Bush is unquestionably right," for example (he might elsewhere in his writing, but to leave it out here would seem strange if he does believe that).

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 14:39 (twenty-one years ago)

more likely that this feeling stems from Vietnam, where the negative public perception came to outweigh any other consideration.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 14:40 (twenty-one years ago)

is there the concomitant 'one arm behind our backs' mentality in iraq?

ENRQ (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 14:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Fallujah, maybe?

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 14:46 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/27/fahrenheit.911.crawford.ap/index.html

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) -- Filmmaker Michael Moore is bringing his blockbuster documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11" to President Bush's adopted hometown -- and has invited the film's star to attend.

When it appeared that no movie theater in the president's home county would show the anti-Bush documentary, Moore promised a copy to the Crawford Peace House, a facility for seminars, meetings, or workshops dedicated to peace.

Whiskeytown Littlecock (ex machina), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 14:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Nice wierd appopo of nothing reference to OJ Simpson in that piece....making a ideogically slanted documentary=getting away with murder!

M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 17:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Interesting comment posted way down low on the page:

As a veteran who served during the Gulf War, I can certainly understand SPC Roche's exasperation with low morale, but his source of blame is misguided. If anything, Michael Moore's film has given voice to many of the frustrations soldiers are feeling right now. I was personally devastated by the testimonials of soldiers on the field in the film, because I could immediately empathize with these young men and women, having been there myself. Any soldier can smell bad leadership from a mile away, and that can be more deflating than any film out of Hollywood.

Posted by: John Livaudais at July 27, 2004 12:34 PM

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 17:56 (twenty-one years ago)

so Jeremy, you *don't* think it's intellectually lazy to label someone who you disagree with has "evil" or "dishonest" and not wonder about their motivations?

oops (Oops), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 23:22 (twenty-one years ago)

has=as

oops (Oops), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 23:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Why does it matter?

Don't you think it's useful to know the rationale behind someone's thoughts/beliefs/actions?

oops (Oops), Tuesday, 27 July 2004 23:27 (twenty-one years ago)

Why does it matter?

Don't you think it's useful to know the rationale behind someone's thoughts/beliefs/actions?

Yes, but I think they're worn fairly pinned to the sleeve of the article... it's toeing the party line. And if you look above I've retracted a bit of that statement already.

Additionally, I can't tell if you're asking that question sincerely or disingenuously so it's difficult to gauge how much time I should spend responding.

x j e r e m y (x Jeremy), Wednesday, 28 July 2004 00:04 (twenty-one years ago)

I wonder if, at least in small part, he mightn't have hated MM's film as much as he said and this whole response is a weird anxiety-of-influence thing?

Yeah, it's almost as if he's begging for the film to be debunked, so that he can feel secure in his beliefs once more.

Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 28 July 2004 00:23 (twenty-one years ago)

maybe it's condescension but i do detect a little bit of "omg this movie rocked my world...must...not...alter...views."

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 28 July 2004 02:33 (twenty-one years ago)

four weeks pass...
Another thought-provoker.

http://www.ak13.com/article.php?id=236&PHPSESSID=d05e6fd4bf0e06905acfe530faa7e74c

Jimmybommy JimmyK'KANG (Nick Southall), Friday, 27 August 2004 13:41 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.