To: prairiebreeze; Mo1; Howlin
Ping list worthy.
This sounds like a show we can all support and lays the blame for the increase in Islamofascists squarely at the feet of the Clinton administration.
"This is the first Hollywood production Ive seen that honestly depicts how the Clinton administration repeatedly bungled the capture of Osama Bin Laden. One astonishing sequence in "The Path to 9/11" shows the CIA and the Northern Alliance surrounding Bin Ladens house in Afghanistan.
They're on the verge of capturing Bin Laden, but they need final approval from the Clinton administration in order to go ahead. They phone Clinton, but he and his senior staff refuse to give authorization for the capture of Bin Laden, for fear of political fall-out if the mission should go wrong and civilians are harmed. National Security Adviser Sandy Berger in essence tells the team in Afghanistan that if they want to capture Bin Laden, they'll have to go ahead and do it on their own without any official authorization. That way, their necks will be on the line - and not his.
The astonished CIA agent on the ground in Afghanistan repeatedly asks Berger if this is really what the administration wants. Berger refuses to answer, and then finally just hangs up on the agent."
6 posted on
08/23/2006 7:10:09 AM PDT by
Peach
(The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
To: Peach
"This is the first Hollywood production Ive seen that honestly depicts how the Clinton administration repeatedly bungled the capture of Osama Bin Laden.That assumes bungling on the Clinton admin. I'd argue that they knew darn good and well what they were doing. And that there was no bungling involved.
11 posted on
08/23/2006 7:12:21 AM PDT by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: Peach
The astonished CIA agent on the ground in Afghanistan repeatedly asks Berger if this is really what the administration wants. Berger refuses to answer, and then finally just hangs up on the agent."Gee, I wonder if any of this was related to what Berger subsequently stuffed into his underwear?
15 posted on
08/23/2006 7:15:48 AM PDT by
dirtboy
(This tagline has been photoshopped)
To: Peach
Berger refuses to answer, and then finally just hangs up on the agent.Pretty breathtaking, isn't it. And this is a man with whom this Administration's justice department struck a deal to return his security clearance after 3 years. I have never understood that.
72 posted on
08/23/2006 8:09:28 AM PDT by
Bahbah
(Goldwasser, Regev and Shalit, we are praying for you...and now Steve and Olaf.)
To: Peach
What is going on here? Hollywood getting Religion is too unbelievable for me to accept. What is the real reason the truth is starting to be told?
Lord knows movies about this struggle could be made which would blow most of the trivial pap typically produced completely out of the water.
97 posted on
08/23/2006 9:35:27 AM PDT by
justshutupandtakeit
(If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
To: Peach
"The astonished CIA agent on the ground in Afghanistan repeatedly asks Berger if this is really what the administration wants. Berger refuses to answer, and then finally just hangs up on the agent."
The 9/11 Omission-Commission should have been all over this kind of stuff, but of course that would not have served the Gorelicker-Ben Veniste-Demagogue agenda of whitewashing the Clintonista failures. Why so many Republicans have participated is this cover-up I'll never fully understand, the desire to be "bi-partisan" should not have trumped the need for everyone in the public, media, and government to understand how we got to 9/11. Why Sandy Burglar was not hung from the top of the Washington Monument long ago, I'll never understand......
I'm amazed that ABC is going to air this, but maybe they will edit out some of the most 'embarrassing' parts before it airs. Still, now that it has been seen in public it will be hard for them to really suppress it.
111 posted on
08/23/2006 10:16:29 AM PDT by
Enchante
(There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Mainstream Journalism)
To: Peach
This is from ABC??
What gives???
Because this doesn't help the Clinton's .. nor the Dems .. especially right before the November election
112 posted on
08/23/2006 10:16:53 AM PDT by
Mo1
(Bolton- "No one has explained how you negotiate a ceasefire with terrorists")
To: Peach
The problem is that I dont see ABC marketing it at all, and Im concerned that theyre dropping the ball on getting the word out about this show. Theyve reportedly spent more than $40 million producing "The Path to 9/11," and yet I see little advertising or promotion anywhereAh yes, we'll make a halfway accurate depiction of the leadup events so we can claim we're objective journalists etc....but then not market it.
148 posted on
08/23/2006 4:41:39 PM PDT by
prairiebreeze
(Brought to you by the American Democrat Party, aka alQaeda, Western Division.)
To: Peach
Who portrays Bill Clinton? Pee Wee Herman?
165 posted on
08/23/2006 8:44:26 PM PDT by
F.J. Mitchell
(But who or what can check or balance the appointed for life, dictatorial US Supreme Court?)
To: Peach; MinuteGal; Mase; RNO1; Nick Danger; mission9; pleikumud; Dominick; tutstar; sarasmom; ...
FRiends......this ABC Special mini-series looks like a show worth watching.....Mark you calendars........PING
182 posted on
08/29/2006 2:34:55 PM PDT by
JulieRNR21
(Freedom isn't Free.........Support Our Troops......Thank a Veteran Today)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson