Drowned in Sound

Search



F 9/11

Michael Moore, George Bush: Fahrenheit 9/11

no votes
?
by Toby Jarvis
  • Type: Cinema
  • Release date: 10/07/2004

As I write this, the BBC news is reporting that the Bush administration have warned the threat of terrorism may force them to find a legal way to delay the US Presidential elections. Nothing to do with desperation then. The juggernaut people-power success in the States of Michael Moore's documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11 must be truly terrifying if you're one of those oily scrotes currently running America. Despite your best efforts to suppress and slander the movie, freedom of speech (well, freedom to go to the pictures) has prevailed. $60 million at the US box office in three weeks and sold-out cinemas across Republican heartlands like Texas are a foghorn wake up call.

In fact F9/11 is a fairly conventional documentary, though stylishly compiled and injected with Moore's sense of the hip and the darkly comic. There are far fewer silly stunts than Bowling For Columbine and even Moore's narration seems quieter and angled downbeat. Also there's a linear narrative this time. Focus is sharper - obviously - because the target is specific. George Bush is the playboy fool. No words needed when you watch him mugging like Benny Hill at the camera, moments before announcing he's taken the US into war. Those around him, propping him up, his family, are shifty, money-drenched whores to the oil industry and the Carlyle Group. Some of the pandering to Saudi money is horrifying.

The mainstream US media, always in the pocket of the super-rich, have called this 'propaganda', as if every wardancing Fox News bulletin over the last eighteen months was pure objectivity. That these Ugly Rightists, in their smuggery, are subjecting this openly polemicising filmmaker to tougher scrutiny than their own government is embarrassing. Luckily, there's not a single duff fact in this movie - it's been meticulously checked and double-checked.

And it's enough, whatever you believe, to see - for the first time - American soldiers who've lost limbs during the occupation of Iraq, questioning why they were sent there. It's a patriotic, brave and moving segment that gives us possibly the most honest portrayal of bored and scared smalltown kids trying to police a hostile desert I've seen anywhere in the media.

Michael Moore was always going to follow Bowling For Columbine with something truly special. But it's a testament to his sincerity of purpose that Moore suppressed the showman's ego and removed most of himself and his kooky humour from the mix, presented instead a film built largely from saved footage and interviews.

If the Democrats can pull themselves together enough to take advantage of this powerful head start, we may well see the back of the awful Bush. And if so, Michael Moore will have made a real contribution. Please go and see Fahrenheit 9/11 and take a good look at the man Blair still follows to the ends of the earth.

  • Michael Moore 8 / 10

Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Although a follower of Michael Moore's view of the world and particularly his view on the Bush administration's (and friend) illigal war on Iraq, I find the film somewhat disjointed. The documentary itelf as opposed to the subject matter, has flaws. I don't buy the shots of Baghdad before the war, insinuating it to be a place at peace with itself. I don't like the way Moore's narrative puts words in Bush's head, particularly in the aftermath of 9/11 when he's told about it. The use of the Mother, which has been seen by the Right as exploitative, is overplayed toward the end. She is used too often to reenforce a point that doesn't need reenforcing. The film quite clearly IS propaganda to remove Bush. Michael Moore is unashamed in this. However, the positives to come from this far outway the negatives, Bush is exposed as the Bluechip-controlled, inept leader puppet we thought and the Republicans are shiting themselves. Now Mark Thomas, about that Tony Blair fella...

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

"The pursuit of anything resembling logic.... Not particularly in that order."

I got that from your profile.

Judging by your view on Moore, your pursuit is currently fruitless. That said, at least you had the good sense to admit that he does talk some shit.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

My thoughts exactly.

Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

The thing with Michael Moore at the end of the day is, he's always going to be very forthright and determined in his films. He has to show a very clear line between right and wrong because that's what the US government and media do. Therefore, because in a sense he's fighting them on their own terms (propagandist). As a documentary, it's quite good. But as an attempt to save the world, perhaps, unrivalled.

Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

I love the word 'scrote'. Scrote scrote scrote...
The weird thing about a political documentary film like this is that it's almost instantly dated. I'd almost rather they were made for TV because of that. I liked John Pilger's 'The New Rulers of The World' because it was a little more of a historical bigger picture, rather than just a single issue rant. Stupid White Men was very informative about one thing - the election, but once you've read it once that's it.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Did you know that you can rearrange the word Escort to say 'Scrote'? I noticed that whilst sitting in traffic behind an escort with some letters missing...the idea of sneaking around in the night rearranging people's escort's to say Scrote and them not noticing for a long time tickled me something crazy.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

i can't believe i just said Escort's. SHAME ON ME. Escorts. Fucking plural, not posessive innit.

Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

I'm off to see this tonight, so can't comment on the movie... but worth reminding folks is that most americans, even the ones you think are informed, don't even know who Bill Hicks is (seriously!) and they dont have the kinda Channel 4 news or revealing, critical news paper industry wot we've got in rule Britiannia.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Yeah but let's face it, Bill Hicks ain't really worth knowing about.

My opinion aside, yer right of course.


N.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Bill Hicks not worth knowing about - are you crazy?!?!

The man was a comedy genius and defined the whole angro-political comedy genre!

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Yeah, but he wasn't actually *funny* though.

I'm well aware that I'm probably the only person round here who thinks that, but I just don't geddit.


N.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

true

but

most brits, similarly, won't & don't know who the fuck bill hicks is, was, did, or if he's even still alive.

ditto the C4 news - how many tune in every night? Regardless of the fact it's some of the very best around

just to prick any superiority bubble in that post... (fair point on the US/UK press matter tho).

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

yeah, our newspapers have news in them and no tits on page 3.
In Americaer, Jordan does not qualify as news.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Yeah but Baseball does and what the fuck is that? I'll tell you. It's rounders, y'know, the game played exclusively by middle aged mum's who belong to churches.

That's your no1 sport, that is...

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

baseball is more of a sport than darts or bowls surely?
i cant say i know bill hicks.i might know/recognise him if i saw him,or some of his creations.but i dont know him offhand.
and if b.hs is a british legend(?) why should americans know about him? im sure most of us not from the usa coulnt name all the legendary u.s funny men/women.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Hicks was American! Very American.

When was the last time Bowls was given prominent reportage in the paper?

And theres no tits on page 3 of the papers i read. Must be buying the wrong one :(

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

ohok,that shows how much i know :/.
bowls is on tv,and ive seen it reported in broadsheet sports section.
granted it doesnt get massive coverage ,like glorified-rounders in the u.s.,but it still gets coverage.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

You buy a paper that doesn't have tits in it? What a waste of money! If you want to know whats going on, wtach the news on telly. It's on all the fucking time and bang up to date. Newspapers are for ogling tits (Sundays excepted).

Can you tell I'm from Essex?

Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Aye we might moan about Britain but it is better than America, particularly the middle American attitudes and mindsets that many Americans have.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

keep on rockin for the free world na na naaa na na naaaa na

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Nah, Americas better.

Everythings cheaper there, cos of "imperialism" or something. i read that in a book i bought at the train station, or out of hmv.

And America could rule the world if it wanted cos tis big, but it cant be arsed. I wish i could live there. I could have my cheap oil, and then not worry about the old world. Although it does have old stuff, which is kinda cool. maybe it'd be alright for holidays. i hear they have mcdonald there anyway. its cheap and sometimes features local foods...

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

i certainly hope you've actually been to middle america and encountered the "attitudes" and "mindsets" firsthand before making a comment like that.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Will you people shut the fuck up. Is slagging off America all you ever do? Alright, they've made their mistakes but who would you prefer to be holding all the cards? Russia again? China? You should thank your lucky fucking stars that the Yanks are in charge of this planet. Anyone else and we'd probably be enslaved Communists. Mmmmm, that would be nice. Gulags and Salt mines. Great...

Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

The danger with this film is that Moore is held up as the way 'liberals' are by the right wing sections of American society. I loved TV Nation, Roger and Me is a great film but Moore's increasingly gone over to the other side, like he's the caped crusader against the Bushian classes. It's one thing to argue that Bush doesn't ever hold a debate with someone of a higher intelligence: the same can be said for Moore. it's easy to sit and make comment over footage of a leader but another to actually speak publicly and debate. Moore doesn't do that, it seems too easy and, let's face it, in the era of political spin and henchmen behind the scenes running things tighter than Francis Ford Coppola during Apocalypse Now, the actual style of Moore's work against some political TV sloganeering isn't that different.

I listen to this horseshit bandied about that Bush represents Middle America.. the fuck he does, Middle America doesn't have an oil background and an ex President for a father. 'Middle' suggests a point in between, an exact point. Well, the middle classes are slowly becoming poorer, any study of the rich-poor gap in Canada, the US and Britain will show you that. And c'mon, Bush desperate? At the height of war, way before Hussein had been captured, the fucker barely slipped below halfway in the opinion poll rating (not that opinion polls matter a toss in any real voting scenario). The recent federal elections in Canada saw an oily Liberal machine stay in power despite scandal running out of its pores like milk.

I haven't sen the film and I doubt I will for some time. It's interesting that despite everyone saying the press in the US is a virtual right-wing monopoly, the most insightful and thoughtfully critical (as opposed to idiot criticism where you just slate something without any thought) commentary on the film has come from Britain.



Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Spot on!

(but im probably not gonna watch this, cos i fucking hate michael moore, and all the dumbed-down destructive bullshit that passes for left-wing press these days)

At one point, i thought since the democrats had Kerry as a candidate: Bush would almost certainly stay as president. But now im not so sure.

The really sick irony is: if they do get rid of Bush (as looks likely) it'll be because of two type main types of voters. Usual democrat voters, who are basically isolationists. (Or they at least dont want to see the results of american foreign policy on TV, and they dont want any military action). And young people who don't normally vote, who are going for the anything but Bush camp - the irony here being that they're only voting against him because of propaganda and celebrity endorsement on the "left".

If you're gonna do a satire, fair enough. but dont hype it into something revolutionary.
And if you're gonna be political, be political. Any twat can point out all the things wrong with government, when they're not offering any alternatives.

I hate Michael Moore. Dont go to see these film. He's got enough money. (and had enough mcdonalds. probably).

Oh, and I hate John Pilger too, just not quite as much.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

i love michael moore...hes like a lil munchkin you wanna pick up and cuddle and feed mini muffins to...

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Actually, Democrats are usually more interventionist (and internationalist) and Republicans isolationists, Democrats traditionally carry the votes of the jewish lobby, and are traditionally the pro israeli party. Republicans have traditionally been more pro-Arab.
In many ways Bush's govt. is an aberration from Republican traditions, though the way their unilateralism in various trade negotiations and in the war itself is as expected. Someone postulated that Cheney,Wolfowitz etc. wanted to pick a war because if they insisted on US companies doing the reconstruction it would effectively boost US 'exports' and stimulate the economy, which is getting harder and harder to do without the politically untenable cost cutting measures which would be needed to make it more competitive. The fact that US taxpayers are paying for reconstruction makes it a kind of public spending Keynesian economics by the back door, and also provides a way for the administration to give US taxpayers money to their mates, like Halliburton etc.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

In recent history is a pro-Israel or pro-Arab position more isolationist or more interventionist than the other?

And Republicans as isolationists? Bush Snr. and Reagan? I dont think thats true... Although, i accept, the same goes for Clinton.
If you're talking longer-term (pre-cold war, pre-20th century) then both main parties were isolationist, werent they? (or, longer ago, either pro-british, or pro-french...)

What i really meant was the attitude of voters. My impression was that a lot of Democrat voters want out of Iraq. Get the Americans home. It's a bad situation, but its not our fault; we told you the war was wrong. we'll never be able to do anything to help that country, and its a long way away anyway. and being there makes no difference (or makes worse) the threat to our country.
On the more general isolationist point, while they might look to charities and specific lobby groups to influence things like aid abroad, i dont think Democrats expect the government to do more than impose token (to america) sanctions.
Are you saying, in general, you dont think Democrat voters dont feel like this? (sorry for all the questions, my minds been trying to grasp what you're saying and they're partly rhetorical... it's that last one i really want the answer to though)


Sidenote: I take your points about the economy; but if they really thought a war would have any significant affect on the economy as a whole, either by creating a multiplier effect through jobs in the arms industry, or by increased trade and investment opportunities, then they're more stupid than everyone thinks they are.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

"I take your points about the economy; but if they really thought a war would have any significant affect on the economy as a whole, either by creating a multiplier effect through jobs in the arms industry, or by increased trade and investment opportunities, then they're more stupid than everyone thinks they are."

I think its more likely to be the latter: opening up more markets abroad to help the trade deficit. Don't quote me on this I'm not an economist. Either way its not something likely to pay off in the near future. As far as I see it though, rather than directly exploiting Iraq according to American interest, the neo-conservatives are much more interested in restructuring Iraq along "free market" principles, i.e. selling it off to multinationals before the Iraqis can elect their own government to decide what they want to do. The current US administration are ultimately much more representative of corporate power than they are of "middle America" (whether they realise it directly or not). That's what "America" has become: a corporate machine, disguised as a nationalist cult (to please the Republicans), disguised as a liberal democracy, whatever that is (to please the Democrats).

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Democrat voters are much more likely to want troops out of Iraq, and much mor likely to be anti-watr

By isolationist I meant anti-UN and thinking in a little-american (can I use that in the same way as 'little-england'?) nationalistic way about often complex international issues.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

>>>>I hate Michael MooreOh, and I hate John Pilger too, just not quite as much.

Who do you like?

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Louis Theroux!!!!!

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

"Bush represents Middle America...the fuck he does"
Sure he does! You don't have to be anything at all like someone to 'represent' them: take robin hood, george orwell or tony benn (all can be said to represent the working classes despite being toffs) or indeed morrissey (a hero to - and model for - english middle-class youngsters depite having distinctly working class origins himself).

At any rate the worldview of the playboy at the top actually pretty much does mirror that of the middle american: venal, nasty, utterly rejecting empathy for people who look or act differently, deeply anti-intellectual, primitively religious and ambitious for personal success without any higher desire to contribute to the world (and from a psycological point of view, christian evangelising comes under the heading of pursuit of 'personal success' rather than contribution). In all these respects he's on the same level as the average american, only with vastly more inherited wealth.

Not that michael moore actually ever tries to analyse anything on this sort of level. he's become a bit wank since his tv stuff frankly.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

'morrissey (a hero to - and model for - english middle-class youngsters' ??

Speak for yourself mate!

I enjoyed the movie but thought it could have been a lot more effective if done differently.
- overuse of the crying mother - seems tacky and a bit exploitative
- throwing a barage of not necessarily associated facts about bush at us, in the hope we'll draw a general conclusion from them without noticing the slightly dodgy logic that connects them
- quite a few badly-checked facts thrown about by the sounds of it, which he could easily have avoided by asking for some criticism on his voiceover script

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Name one fact that doesn't hold up. When you say 'badly checked', the New Yorker's fact checkers and several legal teams went through every statement. And nobody else has found a single duff one.

Did you spot something the mighty American Right missed? Or haven't you seen it yet?

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

I've seen it, this was based on reading the christopher hitchens article and some other pieces on the net. It's mostly pretty nitpicking stuff but nevertheless I think he could have covered his ass better. Shame as I do agree with the general points the film is trying to make.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723

if you want to see some of the many holes he picks in moore's argument and various facts presented in the film. Hitchens is a bit of an arrogant tosspot but he does have some points

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

The article I read about it in The Sunday Times tore absolute shreds off of Moore. The reviewer (sorry, name escapes me) actually rated the film quite highly, but he managed to pick six or seven scenes in which Moore was talking utter bullshit. See my earlier post about Bush sitting round the pool with his 'mates'.

The difference Tobyj, is that you will find that Moore only lied about stuff he couldn't be sued for. All of the 'hard facts' quoted by Moore (and let's face it, there's only about 12 of them in the entire film), are meticulously researched and unquestionable. My beef is with the other hour and a half of sketchy bollocks and conjecture.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

"you will find that Moore only lied about stuff he couldn't be sued for"

he shouldn't have to lie!

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

"A bit" of an arrogant tosspot? I think its pathological. As ever, Hitchens is obsessed with nit-picking and with individual, unconnected issues. Yes, Michael Moore isn't as great as a lot of people think he is, and no doubt nor is this film, but we should not mistake this for the presumption that any effect his film will have will be negative.

As ever, Hitchens wears his own gushing pompousness as a badge of honour, and is more interested in feeding his own ego and taking pot-shots at people he doesn't like than in getting a coherent picture which assesses the long term consequences of the invasion of Iraq, or of Moore's film.

We can immediately dismiss anybody who uses the tired old hyperbole about "If we listened to....then....would still be in power", but Hitchens goes much further: he is far too short sighted not to cut his nose off to spite his face by feeding the corrupt interests he supposedly opposes. Right now, the task is to get rid of Bush, and this film is likely to cause more good than harm in that respect.

Hitchens mistakes the fact that he has a lot to say with the idea that he actually has any intellectual integrity. He is considerably less clever than he thinks he is. Both Moore and Hitchens are the kind of people that try to cover up their inability to present a logical argument with a barrage of facts. The difference is that Hitchens seems to delight in adding fuel to the fire of people that want to silence anybody that stands up to the establishment, while Moore might, albeit more by luck than judgement, do some good.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

And even crispy hitchens' brother has said he's a liar. The key question someone should ask crispy is, does he still think Kissinger is a war criminal, and if so, why does he defend the administration that employs him.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

There's nothing like consistency. And this is nothing like consistency. Hitchens is a cock juggler. I don't know what makes Kissinger a war criminal for Vietnam, Nicaragua and whatever, and not Don Rumsfeld, Ricardo Sanchez or whoever was in charge of the massacres in Falluja, or using cluster bombs or napalm on press-ganged Iraqi "soldiers". Do two wrongs make a right? Hitchens seems to operate on whatever whim seems more irritating at the time.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

"As ever, Hitchens wears his own gushing pompousness as a badge of honour"

Gushing pompousness? Surely the badge of the left, not the right?

"Right now, the task is to get rid of Bush, and this film is likely to cause more good than harm in that respect."

Wasn't that what people said about our Tory government? What did we get instead. New Labour. If it weren't for Gordon Brown being a decent chancellor, New Labour would have done literally everything wrong, from the trivial (anyone remember the Milennium Dome) to the serious (Britain starting a war! Even Thatcher only invaded the Falklands in defence) and all of the fuck ups in between. Will Kerry do any better then Bush. I can't wait to find out...

"while Moore might, albeit more by luck than judgement, do some good."

Is that a fact or your opinion? I think it may well be your blinkered, radical left opinion...

Look at the people Moore targets. Radical left aged 19, middle class with two labradors and a Volvo by age 35, and voting centre right for ever more. The man's a big child who thinks he's still running for class president.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

whats centre-right about labradors?? labradors are so apolitical, they even come in a choice of colours.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Right now, the task is to get rid of Bush, and this film is likely to cause more good than harm in that respect."

Wasn't that what people said about our Tory government? What did we get instead. New Labour. If it weren't for Gordon Brown being a decent chancellor, New Labour would have done literally everything wrong, from the trivial (anyone remember the Milennium Dome) to the serious (Britain starting a war! Even Thatcher only invaded the Falklands in defence) and all of the fuck ups in between. Will Kerry do any better then Bush. I can't wait to find out...

Cynicism will get you nowhere. I think you may have forgotten what Thatcher was really like. No I don't like New Labour and don't trust Tony Blair as far as I could throw him (in fact I despise him), but they are, honestly better than Thatcher for this country at least. You never hear about any positive things in the media. Extra investment in public services, and a commitment not to entirely cover poor people with shit is a start. Look at Michael Howard's domestic policies - they just seem to parrot Labour, but magnify all the shit things they do even more. Look at hospitals - they've started this totally pointless war of words over "patient choice", and want to subsidise people to use private health care. I'll be voting for you then Howard, when hell freezes over. It would require a pretty superhuman feat for Kerry to do worse than Bush.

And Gordon Brown, decent chancellor? Yes if all you're interested is keeping "the British economy" healthy, but one of the problems with New Labour's economic policy (and with neo-liberalism in general) is that they think that economic growth is an end in itself. In fact they seem to want to turn the public services into one big market and feed the corporations in a way that totally undermines their supposed social democratic credentials. Their 'Third Way' seems to imply an incoherent, almost deceptive agenda. I don't expect Brown to be any better than Blair.


"while Moore might, albeit more by luck than judgement, do some good."

Is that a fact or your opinion? I think it may well be your blinkered, radical left opinion...

To paraphrase Goethe, all facts are already opinions. The question makes no sense. But I resent being labelled as "radical left". Radical yes, but part of the problem is the fundamentalism implied by labels - with the entire "left" being written off just because of Michael Moore. Gushing pompousness is anybody's prerogative. Frankly, our political system is a mess: policy seems to be based on social theory which is consistently about 30 years out of date, and the only people who become politicians have more ego than nous. The entire country is kept in a state of political inertia by a shit, cynical media. All I'm trying to do is make the best of the situation we have - revolution is so 1968. Yes, it isn't promising that Moore is the most outspoken voice on the American "left", but I have to concede, reluctantly, he's better than no voice at all.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Well said. Finally, a well balanced and non-vitriolic response. Give yourself a pat on the back for making me take notice of your opinion.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Yeah, seconded. Well done for actually thinking in more than one dimension.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

Thirded, and i agree almost all of that. Especially the bits about Tory and Labour war of words over hospitals, and the reluctance in recognising Moore as better than nothing.

I'd say further in defense of (New) Labour that they only lost their way in the second term. Whereas the first term was a pretty good left of centre, reforming government.

My only slight quibble would be that i think economic growth, low unemployment and low inflation are reasonable obejctives for economic policy. i'm not sure what you could have instead...

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

You're a 20 year old guy in Oxford. How on earth do you know what the real middle of America is like? There is a mass of evidence and analysis that suggests the bracket that were the middle classes in terms of income and standard of life is slipping toward the end of the scale marked 'poor'. Check out Statistics Canada for reports on the increase of the rich-poor gap, how the old middle class is increasingly hard up, how middl emanagerial positions in various corporations are fazed out, leaving the top few, a couple of bosses and then the drone workers. The old standards of class are pretty much fucked nowdays, it's pointless to use them. I live in a shitty Wiltshire town. My parents own their house so get considered to be middle class, depsite us not having a new car and cable TV as many on the nearby council estate do. Does living on a council estate make you working class? My mother has worked for 25 years as a school teacher coming from a poor backgorund in East London. She isn't 'Middle England'. In the end, your diatribe about Middle America is retarded to the highest possible level and, at best, could be said to be as blinkered and xenophobic as some of those Americans that you express such hate for. And fuck off with the snide comment about Christian evangelism: go and see some black evangelical services in poor black majority areas of Toronto and tell them that it's all about personal success and not about the community or contribution).

It seems that Michael Moore isn't the only one who's a bit wank.

Re: Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11

"Does living on a council estate make you working class?"