.

 Middle East Uproar Over Fahrenheit 9/11 


08-01-04
.
(antiTainment) Saudi Arabian and Kuwait have both come out against Michael Moore�s Fahrenheit 9/11. Kuwait has banned the film in their country because they feel it is insulting to the Saudi royal family and critical of the war with Iraq.  Kuwait cites a law that prohibits insulting friendly nations. 

The Kuwaiti government sees Moore�s criticism of the invasion of Iraq as a criticism of their efforts in the liberation of their neighboring country. They also find a problem with the portrayal of pre-invasion of Iraq. "The movie made Iraq look like a paradise whose problems started with the American invasion," said Abdul-Aziz Bou Dastour, the cinema and production supervisor at the Kuwaiti Information Ministry. "It would have angered Kuwaitis." 

The Saudi royal family has also denounced the film as inaccurate, especially an accusation that high-ranking Saudi nationals were allowed to flee the United States immediately following the 9/11 attacks, despite a ban on all air traffic. A claim that was refuted by the 9/11 commission. 

Prince Turki al-Faisal, the Saudi ambassador to England, said that Moore did not properly research the information for his film. In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Prince Turki, who was in charge of Saudi intelligence in 2001 when the attacks occurred, said that Moore�s film was �grossly unfair� to Saudi Arabia. He also said that Moore was given a visa to visit Saudi Arabia but the director never used it. 

The Saudi and Kuwaiti�s are not the only ones to recently take issue with accuracy of the film. Last week an Illinois newspaper sent a letter to Moore and the film�s distributor Lions Gate Entertainment Corp., seeking an apology for Moore�s use of a �doctored� front page in the film. 

The film includes a shot of the front page of Bloomington based The Pantagraph newspaper front page containing the headline "Latest Florida recount shows Gore won election." The film has the dateline for the story as  Dec. 19, 2001. 

The newspaper says that the headline in the film never appeared on that day and was not featured on the front page on the day that it did run, Dec. 5, 2001. The newspaper says that the headline was much smaller and was used above a letter to the editor and was used to reflect 'only the opinions of the letter writer'.  

"If (Moore) wants to 'edit' The Pantagraph, he should apply for a copy-editing job," the newspaper said. They are seeking $1 in damages. 


.




advertisement