Posted on 09/06/2006 4:09:12 PM PDT by hipaatwo
It would be important near the end of this to have a scene where Sandy Burgler is stuffing evidence down his pants to protect the Clintons.
If I had worked on this project, that would be in this.
I actually might of ended the miniseries this way. Reminds me of when they hid the arc in the warehouse at the end of Indiana Jones.
And today we have the CLinton partyon the senate floor lieing the clymer's off about Iraq and terrorism. The docu-drama must really hit home, and its about damn time that the american people understand that old Slick WIlly was all talk and no action. the number of terrorist attacks on this country and our interests were enormous during the Clinton administration. And yes, Billy boy did turn down OBL, on more than one occasion. Now, just what was it that Sandy Burg(l)er was stuffing down his pants so the 9/11 commission could not read? Talk about incompetent. Their reaction is really amazing, and is certainly telling.
Kewl! What a way to kick off the 2006 campaign season.
This week, the talking heads will be talking about the CIA secret detention program, about the rules of engagement for this program, and about how to try terrorist masterminds. Advantage Pubbies.
Next week, as a result of this film, they'll be talking about Clinton's failed legacy vs alQaeda. Advantage Pubbies.
The week after, we'll probably be talking about the wiretapping / international monitoring program. Advantage Pubbies.
And then finishing off the month by ending the congressional session on a bunch of anti-terror bills that will drive a wedge between the MoveOn/ACLU/CAIR crowd & the voting public.
Clinton diddled while America burned.
HAHAHAHAHAH... It was ok when Michael Moore lie to do it..but now when it's the truth before and election, it's OUTRAGEOUS.... psst, libs: S U F F E R.
It became a criminal enterprise when that b!tch Gorelick wasn't thrown off the committee and prosecuted for dereliction of duty.
"Curious how they know what is in the tape since it has not aired yet. Guess this must be going hit them pretty hard. IF this really was what they claimed nothing but an obvious PR hit piece, they would not be screaming about it at the top of their lungs. Guess they do not get it that screaming about it just makes sure more people hear about it and watch it."
John Gibson showed a few clips today and they were really damning of Clinton...and the funny thing was the rat pundit, Doug Scheon, was more concerned about the mentioning of Monica.....had to see it to believe it!
Yahh, thats why the Clintons were in total panic mode this week calling ABC trying to get them to censor this movie.
Because the Clintons were soo committed to stopping terrorism......
The reason you are hearing from Richard Clarke through mostly Podesta’s “Think Progress” website, is that Clarke has much to answer for for 9/11, and much that may become clearer by it’s airing.
Among those I personally know who have given me the low down on Clarke over the last few years, there is also a more visible figure who knows about the wasted efforts to capture Osama Bin Laden, and he’s no fan of Clarke. From a Weekly Standard article in 2004, speaking of former Bin Laden unit commander Michael Scheuer who had these thoughts on Clarke:
“Scheuer thinks Clarke is a risk-averse poseur who didn’t do enough to fight bin Laden prior to September 11, 2001. At his breakfast with reporters, Scheuer said that on 10 separate occasions his unit, codename “Alec,” provided key policymakers with information that could’ve lead to the killing or capture of Osama bin Laden. “In each of those 10 instances,” Scheuer said, “the senior policymaker in charge, whether it was Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke, or George Tenet,” resisted taking action, afraid it would result in collateral damage or a backlash on the Arab street.
Which is precisely what the 9/11 Commission Report tells us. The Berger/Clarke/Albright sideshow was afraid to pull the trigger. Ops who were there - and yes they were on the ground in Afghanistan in spite of Clarke’s insistance they were not - and got their hands tied by “handwringing” by the Clinton Administration and especially the doofus duo of Albright and Berger, who didn’t make a move without getting “The Boss” to nod.
I’m going to have a lot more to say on this in th coming days, and like I said before there are those who were there and not drinking the Clinton Kool Aid. They too will be telling their story as well.
The fact that there is such a push back from former Clintonistas is proof in itself that this is a film to watch and take note of. Let’s not forget the real reason for all the venom. Democrats power again, and given what we saw them do - or rather not do when it counted during the Clinton eight-year reign, we simply can’t afford it.
After this week, most of the Nation will know this as well.
http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2006/09/06/why-clarke-doesnt-want-you-to-see-the-path-to-911/
Miniter: Here's a rundown. The Clinton administration:
1. Did not follow-up on the attempted bombing of Aden marines in Yemen.
2. Shut the CIA out of the 1993 WTC bombing investigation, hamstringing their effort to capture bin Laden.
3. Had Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a key bin Laden lieutenant, slip through their fingers in Qatar.
4. Did not militarily react to the al Qaeda bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
5. Did not accept the Sudanese offer to turn bin Laden.
6. Did not follow-up on another offer from Sudan through a private back channel.
7. Objected to Northern Alliance efforts to assassinate bin Laden in Afghanistan.
8. Decided against using special forces to take down bin Laden in Afghanistan.
9. Did not take an opportunity to take into custody two al Qaeda operatives involved in the East African embassy bombings. In another little scoop, I am able to show that Sudan arrested these two terrorists and offered them to the FBI. The Clinton administration declined to pick them up and they were later allowed to return to Pakistan.
10. Ordered an ineffectual, token missile strike against a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory.
11. Clumsily tipped off Pakistani officials sympathetic to bin Laden before a planned missile strike against bin Laden on August 20, 1998. Bin Laden left the camp with only minutes to spare.
12-14. Three times, Clinton hesitated or deferred in ordering missile strikes against bin Laden in 1999 and 2000.
15. When they finally launched and armed the Predator spy drone plane, which captured amazing live video images of bin Laden, the Clinton administration no longer had military assets in place to strike the archterrorist.
16. Did not order a retaliatory strike on bin Laden for the murderous attack on the USS Cole.
A lot of non-MSM TV viewers will tune in to this. Cash in the bank for ABC. I'm amazed the networks lose so much profit by normally alienating half the country with their left lean.
It's way past time for the networks to present this material -- Clinton has had a pass on his lackadaisical attitude toward terrorism for five years.
How can people be writing about a movie that hasn't aired yet??
Thanks! I'll check them out.
In the Democrats ideal world they would have control of all the TV stations.
Top Dems and top media personalaties (also Dems) attended the DC premiere. It was disgusting.
BTTT
I love to hear the moonbat lefties scream that network TV is being unfair to them, it doesn't happen near enough.
When Iraq is finally free the truth will flow like a river most likely exposing the sins of many Americans. That, IMO, is what the Dems fear most and why they fight so hard against success in Iraq. The Democrat Party will not survive a full accounting of all those complicit in Saddam's reign of terror.
Good post Howlin, real good.
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.