Posted on 09/01/2006 8:24:53 PM PDT by STARWISE
I told you people yesterday and the day before of a movie, a mini-series running on ABC on September 10th and 11th, called The Path to 9/11 and I told you that I have the DVDs. I also told you because I am in touch -- I am poor when I'm in New York -- I do not have a DVD player.
I don't. My apartment's got an old media room in it, it's got a laser disk player in it, but it doesn't have a DVD. Well, actually it has a DVD player in it, but the TV doesn't work. The projector does, and it's the only room in the house where there's a DVD player, and I can't watch DVDs on computers because I can't hear well through computer speakers. So I watched it. It's four hours.
I have the DVDs right here. I'm holding them in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers. I watched on the plane flight home last night. I watched part of the first one. I had to go to the airplane to watch it. I'll tell you, this is called being in touch with the average American.
I couldn't watch a DVD at home. At any rate, let me just give you the upshot of this, because I've mentioned to you even without having seen it I know what it's about. The Path to 9/11 essentially chronicles everything we know that happened in the nineties that prevented the capture of Osama bin Laden.
It indicts the Clinton administration, Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger.
It is just devastating to the Clinton administration. It talks about how we had chances to capture bin Laden in specific detail, which I will get to in just a moment.
That's not the point. I mentioned to you yesterday or the day before, the days are running together, that a friend of mine did this. His first name is Cyrus, and Cyrus has got some other film credits.
He took it to Washington in the middle of last week and screened it for people and it caused nearly bloody uproar where they showed it.
Richard Ben-Veniste went up in Cyrus's face and told him it was disgusting. This film was disgusting.
It caused all kinds of havoc and that led to the creation of efforts to try to get this program banned, put pressure on ABC to get it canceled and not run and so forth.
It also had a lot of people in the room that loved it. There were many people, Michael Barone saw it, a lot of people were in the screening there and loved it.
Here is what is happening today. Bill Clinton himself is going to call Bob Iger, the CEO of Disney, and demand or ask that this mini-series, The Path to 9/11, be reedited and recut so as not to depict Bill Clinton and his administration as they are currently portrayed in this mini-series.
Bill Clinton himself is going to call Bob Iger -- and this is not breaking news; I got the e-mail on this last night, and there have been some local hosts out in California who have been talking about this, but there is a huge movement afoot from inside the Clinton administration to put pressure on ABC to get this thing recut, reedited, if not more.
Very powerful players obviously, much higher than just Richard Ben-Veniste and so forth.
You know, folks, the whole 9/11 Commission, if you go back and look at these things that we know now, the Clinton administration's ability to camouflage history, to rewrite it, is just amazing.
Look at who they got on the 9/11 Commission. They got Jamie Gorelick, who authored the wall, and this mini-series explains the wall and gives illustrations of fact of how it hurt our ability to capture Osama bin Laden.
I'll get to that in just a second. They had had Gorelick on there; they had Ben-Veniste (who was a partisan hack lawyer from the Watergate days), and Tim Roemer, who is a Democrat from Indiana, and that was to ensure that the Clinton administration was protected, and so that the top structural explanation for intelligence failure was white-washed.
(snip)
I don't understand why the Bush administration, the Department of Justice, gave Burglar the sweetheart deal of the century, then suppressed all the evidence involved in his action. Like I asked at the time, can you imagine if Condoleezza Rice had pled guilty to a misdemeanor mishandling of classified information, the media sitting silent about it?
Rest at link
I may have to resort to calling one of the kids! My grandkid is too young.......but then again, he probably already knows more than I! LOL!
Sleep is a waste of time. ;*)
I am hoping that this time, the news that he's trying/tried to influence this movie as an item in itself will have some meaning. Whether he succeeds or not.
Well said Fudd!
Brilliant idea!
Watch your back Rush. And put those DVD's in a safe place.
Let's hope you're right.
The ironic part is, the critics of this movie who haven’t seen it yet are going to have egg on their face. This film in no way “blames the entire event on Clinton” as some falsely claim. “The Path to 9/11″ absolutely slams Bush in a number of ways:
1. It depicts Condi Rice ignoring Richard Clarke’s advice about Al-Queda and undercutting his authority within the White House.
2. It depicts the August 6th “Presidential Daily Briefing” wherein Rice is explicitly warned before 9/11 that Bin Laden intends to hijack American airplanes.
3. It makes Richard Clarke look like a tragic hero (even though everyone knows that he later went on to become one of Bush’s biggest critics).
4. It contains an epliogue that cites 9/11 Commission members giving the current government a failing grade in implementing their recommendations.
Few people have seen the whole film. Even the select group in Washington only got to see the first half of the film (which obviously doesn’t deal with the Bush administration, based on how the timeline worked). As a result, there is a lot of misinformation going on about what “The Path To 9/11″ is really about.
With all of that said — what this film also does is set the record straight on a number of events that the Clinton administration has previously tried to whitewash or ignore. That is the real reason why the left is going nuts over this. It wants to blame everything on Bush. Thus in its twisted logic, it cannot stand to see any criticism of Clinton whatsoever. (See my C-SPAN analogy in my previous post for more on this argument.)
Furthermore, they will go nuts when confronted with the truth that the Patriot Act was necessary in order to get various government agencies to share vital information with each other. They will go nuts when the depiction of historical events end up making the case for airport profiling. In other words, this film will force them to specifically articulate what tools they wish to employ in order to keep this country safe. That seems to make them uncomfortable for some reason.
To these early critics: Look, I know how frustrating it is to try and argue with someone who has actually seen the film when you haven’t. I had the same dilemma with Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 (I had to wait a full month after it was in theaters to score a free bootlegged copy to view so that I could speak about it intelligently). Trust me when I tell you that you don’t know what you are talking about. Still don’t believe me? Then all you have to do is wait until 9/11, see the film, and find out yourself (assuming it still airs in its current form).
http://patterico.com/2006/08/31/5068/the-war-over-the-path-to-911/
Dear ABC and Mr. Iger,
For once, let the truth be told about 9/11.
Be courageous and let this movie be shown
without sanitizing it for Bill Clinton.
Jo Nuvark
(Thanks for the tip FF)
Ping to post #88 now this paragraphs
Thanks for the info.
I've been quite surprised to read other articles about this movie because no one has mentioned that some of the movie will certainly slam the Bush administration. This sounds like a more true representation of what's in the movie.
I was initially very pissed off and have been faxing, calling, and emailing ABC.
However, after pondering further I think that this controversy alone is shedding the proper light on Clinton's misdeeds and missed opportunities.
Rush of all people has the original. If ABC practices censorship, they will be exposed in a big way and them and Clintoon will lose in the end.
If it is true then there is no reason for ABC to pull it or edit it. If Bush can take the heat then so can Clinton, the damn wuss.
Exactly. It's important to note that the Bush administration aren't the ones trying to get this movie re-cut...
Please ping your lists.
E-mail regarding ABC's Primetime and Daytime shows, as well as our Movies and Specials, can be sent directly to our Audience Relations Department at:
netaudr@abc.com
bttt
But the charge against Condi about the "hijacking of airplanes" is slightly distorted .. in that nobody could imagine the planes being used as weapons and being flown into buildings .. it was the usual method of hijacking which was foremost in the minds of everyone.
Why get excited about people planning to hijack airplanes .. they had done it before .. lots of times .. this was nothing new.
To say she ignored this info .. is really a distortion of the facts - and I'm not that much of a Condi fan but this charge is irrational.
And .. the arrogance of the Commission having a cow because their every word was not followed is just plain disgusting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.