Need some debunking help re: F 9/11

[NewJeffCT]

A local freeper quoted 'liberal' Time Magazine in debunking two main points in regards to Fahrenheit 9/11 in my local paper... (1 regarding the Saudi Flights and the other that Bush favored the Taliban prior to 9/11)

Would I be mistaken in my response to say that the article writer has has axe to grind against Moore or was at least a RW Republican? I don't have access to the Time article.

My response was helped a lot by DailyKos, but they don't respond to Time, I believe.

Thanks

[IdaBriggs]

1. Go to the Michael Moore Website...

Its at www.michaelmoore.com where he has a "War Room" and "Frequently Asked Questions" section. The entire thing was fact checked; the opinions are open discussion points. Good luck! :) Best, Ida

[NewJeffCT]

3. Thanks, but

I was able to debunk the two points of the author - just wanted info on the Time article's authoer, which I cannot find.

[KurtNYC]

2. The Saudi flight thing comes up over and over

I haven't seen the Time article either but usually in these things they pretend that Moore said the main issue was special flights going around pick-up Saudis while other planes were banned from the skies. And I believe there is debate about how many planes did this (some say just 1) and when but...

The issue they avoid with this argument is the REAL issue -- that the Saudis were not interviewed by the FBI or other authorities on their way out of the country.

Another standard non-lie in the film is they claim the film says 'Bush approved the flights' and again I believe F911 says 'the Whitehouse.' They make a lot of hey out of these not-really-ambiguous terms. Richard Clarke approved the flights but it seems highly unlikely he would do that without higher approval.

Here is the quote: “The White House approved planes to pick up the bin Ladens and numerous other Saudis.”

and

“At least six private jets and nearly two dozen commercial planes carried the Saudis and the bin Ladens out of the U.S. after September 13th. In all, 142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, were allowed to leave the country.”

Note he says in the film "after September 13th" -- this is after the ban is lifted so the film is not wrong on that point. They have to distort to make it sound that way. It is such a bone of contention that Moore goes out of his way to address it:

NOTE: It should be noted that even though the film does not make the allegation, strong evidence has recently come to light that at least one private plane flew to pick up Saudi nationals while private flights were still grounded. Moreover, for nearly three years, the White House has denied that this flight existed.

More with sources at:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/f911notes/

[bossfish]

4. Make them come to you with their "proof"

Did the guy show you the magazine? or the paper?

The Saudi flight thing has been beat to death...

The US did give Afghanistan $43 m in "aid" prior to 2001...

How is TIME a liberal magazine? Owned by AOL-Time Warner (yeah, a real bunch of lefties there). Even in the old days, I don't think one can describe the Luce family as liberals.

The first response I give to most of these "accusations" is "what is your source?" "Prove it", etc.

Going after the writer's credibility is one approach, although TIME has tradtionally been an "editor's" mag as opposed to Sports Illustrated, which was more of a "writer's" mag (but the writing has become so insipid I cancelled by sub after 20 years)

[NewJeffCT]

5. Thanks, but

I thought I remember that the Time article writer was somebody that either had an axe to grind with Moore or was one of those Lying Liar RW types... maybe my memory is foggy?