Christopher Hitchens reviews Farenheit 9/11.

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of “dissenting” bravery.

It should be noted that Michael Moore has assembled an attack team of lawyers to sue anyone who insults him or his film. Hitchens goes on to deconstruct the contradictions and outright fictions at length in the so-called “documentary”.

Perhaps vaguely aware that his movie so completely lacks gravitas, Moore concludes with a sonorous reading of some words from George Orwell. The words are taken from 1984 and consist of a third-person analysis of a hypothetical, endless, and contrived war between three superpowers. The clear intention, as clumsily excerpted like this (…) is to suggest that there is no moral distinction between the United States, the Taliban, and the Baath Party and that the war against jihad is about nothing. If Moore had studied a bit more, or at all, he could have read Orwell really saying, and in his own voice, the following:

“The majority of pacifists either belong to obscure religious sects or are simply humanitarians who object to taking life and prefer not to follow their thoughts beyond that point. But there is a minority of intellectual pacifists, whose real though unacknowledged motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration for totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but if one looks closely at the writing of the younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the United States “

And that’s just from Orwell’s Notes on Nationalism in May 1945. A short word of advice: In general, it’s highly unwise to quote Orwell if you are already way out of your depth on the question of moral equivalence. It’s also incautious to remind people of Orwell if you are engaged in a sophomoric celluloid rewriting of recent history.

(By way of comparison, the approving pap from a clueless Roger Ebert.)
hat tip – QandO

CBC Watch:

With copy slogans like “He came inside me,” “I came inside him” and “He likes it Raw,” Health Canada and a handful of AIDS groups are running a new national HIV ad campaign targeting gay men under the catch phrase “Think Again”(a phrase already used by Health Canada for a campaign to target smokers).

CBC Watch has a followup on the reaction of the People’s Network to Jim Pattison’s refusal to run the images on Pattison Group billboards. Short version: “bad conservative billionaire!”.
I like Kathy Shaidle’s take.
A couple of years ago, a friend who works with Sask Health mentioned that they were worried that a new needle exchange program was going to anger diabetics, who had to pay for their own. I told her, “And rightfully so.”
“But,” she protested, “AIDS is a public health issue.”
“and diabetes isn’t?”
“A lot of people don’t know that you can catch HIV through intravenous drug usage. They don’t know….”
“What.. ? Did they miss the day in Grade 6 where we learned shooting drugs into your veins with a needle is bad for you???