I want to post about Fahrenheit 9/11 because I believe it is a huge injustice to the tragedy of that day. All it is, in my opinion is an attack on The president of the United States at the time, George Bush. Everything that Moore said were assumption and he was literally putting words in where he did not know what people were really saying. For example when bush was told that America was under attack, Moore said that Bush did not know what to do so he just sat. He does not know that. Doesn't it sound more likely that Bush didn't want to frighten the children by running out of the room or yelling or doing something out of the ordinary. I believe he handled it as well as anyone could have in that situation. This so called "documentary" is just another way to blame bush for something that is equally not his fault.

For me, the Farenheit 9/11 movie is just thinly veiled anti-Bush propaganda. The author doesn't even try to hide the fact that he has a deep personal dislike of Bush, and that right there shows that he's a terrible journalist, and should not be marketing this as a documentary, because clearly he doesn't have the required neutral, unbiased, point of view. He uses weak and obvious ploys to plant his own words in the ex-president's mouth by voicing his thoughts, and that's kind of pathetic honestly. If that's the only thing he could find to prove his point, then he's either a terrible journalist or a really lazy one who couldn't be bothered to find legitimate sources instead of doing bad voice overs of what he wants the president to have been thinking. It's just sad, really. And fairly irritating.

9/11 Persuasion or Propaganda?

If I didn't know anything about the Bush and Al Gore election and if I didn't know anything about the events of 9/11, I would probably really dislike George Bush because of the video. The information is presented kind of like a person that doesn't let you get a word in during an argument. Argument after argument are brought up in the video against Bush and a counterargument is never addressed. I think that for the video to seem unbiased and probably more accurate, they should address both sides of the argument and not misinterprate the evidence.