A stronger example here is Moore's attempts to tie Bush with the Taliban and bin Laden, surely the two most extreme cases of "them." Here, merely being in the same State as one of these is a sufficient tie. Moore notes that Taliban representatives visited Texas while Bush was governor, trying to push for an oil pipeline thru Afghanistan. As I note in reviewing that claim in his earlier book, Bush had nothing to do with their visit, and the pipeline was being sponsored by the Clinton Administration, to benefit Unocal, a major Texas contributor to the Democratic Party. Moore then states that Taliban representatives (after Bush's election and before 9/11) visited Washington and met with the Bush Administration. He doesn't mention that the Administration told them that it did not recognize the Taliban as the government of Afghanistan, and did not believe its claims that it was acting against bin Laden.
Another tool of the propagandist is not merely to take an item out of context, but to weave a new context around it. In Bowling for Columbine, Moore showed his skill with this tool, and in F9/11 he shows his mastery of it. Condaleeza Rice is shown stating that of course there is a connection between Hussein and 9/11 ... the viewer is not shown the rest of her sentence, that the connection is not a matter of planning or aid, but that both are aspects of radical Islamic hatred of the U.S.
