Posted on 09/07/2006 4:12:34 PM PDT by Mo1
Senate Democratic leadership threatens Disney with legal and legislative sanctions
by John in DC - 9/07/2006 06:02:00 PM
This letter was sent today by the entire Democratic leadership of the US Senate. This letter is such a major shot across the bow of Disney, it's not even funny. It is FILLED with veiled threats, both legal and legislative, against Disney. US Senators don't make threats like this, especially the entire Democratic leadership en masse, unless they mean it. Disney is in serious trouble.
Read it, then read my analysis of it below:September 7, 2006
The Senate Democratic leadership just threatened Disney's broadcast license. Not the use of the word "trustee" at the beginning of the letter and "trust" at the end. This is nothing less than an implicit threat that if Disney tries to meddle in the US elections on behalf of the Republicans, they will pay a very serious price when the Democrats get back in power, or even before.
Mr. Robert A. Iger
President and CEO
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista Street
Burbank CA 91521
Dear Mr. Iger,
We write with serious concerns about the planned upcoming broadcast of The Path to 9/11 mini-series on September 10 and 11. Countless reports from experts on 9/11 who have viewed the program indicate numerous and serious inaccuracies that will undoubtedly serve to misinform the American people about the tragic events surrounding the terrible attacks of that day. Furthermore, the manner in which this program has been developed, funded, and advertised suggests a partisan bent unbecoming of a major company like Disney and a major and well respected news organization like ABC. We therefore urge you to cancel this broadcast to cease Disney’s plans to use it as a teaching tool in schools across America through Scholastic. Presenting such deeply flawed and factually inaccurate misinformation to the American public and to children would be a gross miscarriage of your corporate and civic responsibility to the law, to your shareholders, and to the nation.
The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events.
Disney and ABC claim this program to be based on the 9/11 Commission Report and are using that assertion as part of the promotional campaign for it. The 9/11 Commission is the most respected American authority on the 9/11 attacks, and association with it carries a special responsibility. Indeed, the very events themselves on 9/11, so tragic as they were, demand extreme care by any who attempt to use those events as part of an entertainment or educational program. To quote Steve McPhereson, president of ABC Entertainment, “When you take on the responsibility of telling the story behind such an important event, it is absolutely critical that you get it right.”
Unfortunately, it appears Disney and ABC got it totally wrong.
Despite claims by your network’s representatives that The Path to 9/11 is based on the report of the 9/11 Commission, 9/11 Commissioners themselves, as well as other experts on the issues, disagree.
Richard Ben-Veniste, speaking for himself and fellow 9/11 Commissioners who recently viewed the program, said, “As we were watching, we were trying to think how they could have misinterpreted the 9/11 Commission’s findings the way that they had.” [“9/11 Miniseries Is Criticized as Inaccurate and Biased,” New York Times, September 6, 2006]
Richard Clarke, the former counter-terrorism czar, and a national security advisor to ABC has described the program as “deeply flawed” and said of the program’s depiction of a Clinton official hanging up on an intelligence agent, “It’s 180 degrees from what happened.” [“9/11 Miniseries Is Criticized as Inaccurate and Biased,” New York Times, September 6, 2006]
Reports suggest that an FBI agent who worked on 9/11 and served as a consultant to ABC on this program quit halfway through because, “he thought they were making things up.” [MSNBC, September 7, 2006]
Even Thomas Kean, who serves as a paid consultant to the miniseries, has admitted that scenes in the film are fictionalized. [“9/11 Miniseries Is Criticized as Inaccurate and Biased,” New York Times, September 6, 2006]
That Disney would seek to broadcast an admittedly and proven false recounting of the events of 9/11 raises serious questions about the motivations of its creators and those who approved the deeply flawed program. Finally, that Disney plans to air commercial-free a program that reportedly cost it $40 million to produce serves to add fuel to these concerns.
These concerns are made all the more pressing by the political leaning of and the public statements made by the writer/producer of this miniseries, Mr. Cyrus Nowrasteh, in promoting this miniseries across conservative blogs and talk shows.
Frankly, that ABC and Disney would consider airing a program that could be construed as right-wing political propaganda on such a grave and important event involving the security of our nation is a discredit both to the Disney brand and to the legacy of honesty built at ABC by honorable individuals from David Brinkley to Peter Jennings. Furthermore, that Disney would seek to use Scholastic to promote this misguided programming to American children as a substitute for factual information is a disgrace.
As 9/11 Commission member Jamie Gorelick said, “It is critically important to the safety of our nation that our citizens, and particularly our school children, understand what actually happened and why – so that we can proceed from a common understanding of what went wrong and act with unity to make our country safer.”
Should Disney allow this programming to proceed as planned, the factual record, millions of viewers, countless schoolchildren, and the reputation of Disney as a corporation worthy of the trust of the American people and the United States Congress will be deeply damaged. We urge you, after full consideration of the facts, to uphold your responsibilities as a respected member of American society and as a beneficiary of the free use of the public airwaves to cancel this factually inaccurate and deeply misguided program. We look forward to hearing back from you soon.
Sincerely,
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid
Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin
Senator Debbie Stabenow
Senator Charles Schumer
Senator Byron Dorgan
This raises the stakes incredibly for Disney.
We ALL need to spend a day on the phone/ sending e-mails to get the attention it needs.
is that supposed to make us feel better, or are you telling us to really give it up?
.
EXCELLENT letters. You GO!
Oh wow......let me think on that one.
Yes - what they edited had to do with Sandy Berger after he called them and complained. It's in an article.
And they actually BELIEVED the convicted Document Stuffer.
NICE catch and I'm going to give it a bump...great context Peach.
No I don't have those anymore but we can find them tomorrow.
This is unprecedented. Obviously these people only believe in free speech if it is speech they agree with. I don't think I've ever seen such a flagrant violation of the first amendment.
Surely someone could buy a few dozen copies and donate them to the MSM! ;^)
I saw the same thing....amazing isn't it??
We have two different people on the same 9/11 Commission telling diametrically opposite stories....BUT, we also have Mansour Ijaz, and Clinton himself saying that he was "handed" Bin Ladin.
I can't imagine Tom Kean Sr. getting involved in this project and defending it like it is....if it is ALL LIES....like the Clintons, the dems, and Roemer are saying..NOW.
BTW..Old Friend, I heard Tom Kean, Jr. on with Sean today...I feel sorry for you....having to choose between him and Robert Menendez....YIKES.
They SHOULD be able to air such a program over the screams of "impropriety" and WITHOUT any hint of intimidation from the US Congress.
This letter constitutes a CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS assault on the First Amendment. That Amendment was designed to prevent goverment interference in the content of publications (broadcasts) without some overwhelming need to protect the public...such as screaming "fire" in a crowded theatre.
The signtories of the letter should be prosecuted under whatever law offers the most extreme penalty.
From Drudge:
NYT REVIEW OF ABC 9-11 MOVIE
Thu Sep 07 2006 19:52:02 ET
NEW YORK TIMES TV critic Alessandra Stanley reviews ABC's upcoming 'The Path to 9/11' in Friday editions, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE.
"'The Path to 9/11' is not a documentary, or even a docu-drama; it is a fictionalized account of what took place. It relies on the report of the Sept. 11 commission, the King James version of all Sept. 11 accounts, as well as other material and memoirs. Some scenes come straight from the writers' imaginations," writes Alessandra .
"Dramatic license was certainly taken, but blame is spread pretty evenly across the board. It's not the inaccuracies of 'The Path to 9/11' that make ABC's miniseries so upsetting. It's the situation on the ground in Afghanistan now."
Alessandra concludes: "Hindsight is heartbreaking and disturbing to watch, even in a made-for-television movie. But it's even harder to take when those steps continue to contaminate the present."
Developing...
It all boils down to what was in Sandy Burglar's pants. I believe he didn't get everything, he knows he didn't get everything, and all the clintinoids know he didn't get everything -- and they are scared whit-less that someone with power to tell all, will blab about what he wasn't able to smuggle out in his PANTS!
You mean the Senate #'s and emails??
Do they work on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays or Thursdays?
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.