Moore Is Blind, Or A Coward?
By Bob Dreyfuss
June 30, 2004
of the first things I did when I got back from vacation was to go see
Michael Moores Fahrenheit 9/11. Its a brilliant piece of
propaganda, entertaining and funny, and it skewers the president deliciously.
But am I the only one to notice that in one critically important way,
it entirely misses the boat and gets nearly everything wrong? Maybe
this has been said beforeIve hardly read all of the criticism
of Moorebut if so, I havent seen it. Moore totally avoids
the question of Israel.
Not only that, but
the opening polemic of the movie ties President Bush and company mightily
to Saudi Arabia. In one sequence, what seems like several dozen images
flash by showing Bush and his advisers shaking hands and chumming it
up with leading members of the Saudi royal family. Moore says outright
that while Bush is paid $400,000 by U.S. taxpayers in salary, Saudi
Arabia has supported Bush and his family with more than $1 billion in
business-related subsidies. (That amount, it seems to me, is ridiculously
inflated and must be nonsense.) The stated implication is that Bush
is more loyal to the Saudis than he is to America.
Huh? Here are some
questions for Moore: If Bush is so in the pocket of Saudi
Arabia, why is he Ariel Sharons strongest backer? Why, when he
had Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah down at the Texas ranch a few years
ago, did he flip off the Saudis peace plan? And most important,
why did he invade Iraqsince Saudi Arabia was strongly opposed
to the U.S. invasion of Iraq? Why did he launch his Iraqi adventure
over Saudi objections, with many of his advisers chortling that Saudi
Arabia would be next? Why did he stock his administration
with militant neocon crusaders who see Saudi Arabia as the main enemy?
I have to conclude
the Michael Moore is either blind, or a coward. Blind, if he cant
see Bushs craven ties to Israel, driven by the neocons and the
Christian Zionists and Bible-thumping fundamentalists like Jerry Falwell,
who consider Israel Jesus next stop and see Saudi Arabia as Satanic.
Or cowardly, because he knows it and decided not to mention it. Is that
because attacking Israel is too hard? Moores photo-montage of
Saudi princes borders on the racist, showing Bush & Co. clinging
to grinning, Semitic-looking Arabs in flowing white robes one after
another. Would we stand for a similar, racist-leaning montage of Bush
palling around with grinning, Semitic-looking Jews in skullcaps? 'Course
not. More important, Moore completely misses the political boat. Perhaps
thats because he relies so heavily on Craig Unger and his book,
House of Bush, House of Saud , which makes the same error.
And more for Moore.
Yes, Bush 41 and his advisersthe Carlyle Group-linked James Baker,
et al.were (and are) connected to Saudi Arabia. Did Moore notice
that Baker, along with Brent Scowcroft, and other former advisers to
Bush 41 (including Colin Powell) were against the Iraq adventure? And
that there were reports that Bush 41 himself thought it was a stupid
idea? I cant believe that Moore can be so stupid. So I can only
conclude that he produced this movie the way he did on purpose. Then
I read that he didnt bother inviting Ralph Nader to the Washington,
D.C., premiere of the film, and (according to The Washington Post ),
Nader called Moore fat. Well. Moore is fatheaded.
Written by veteran investigative reporter Bob Dreyfuss , The Dreyfuss
Report offers readers the story behind daily headlines and policies
pursued on behalf of national security.