ABC Altering 9/11 Film After Clinton Officials Express Outrage

Fox News ^ | 9/8/06

[pabianice]

ABC is altering its upcoming miniseries "The Path to 9/11" in response to intense criticism from members of the Clinton administration that the two-part, made-for-TV film is filled with factual errors and lies, a network official reportedly said.

Three members of the administration — former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, former National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger and Clinton aide Bruce Lindsey, who now heads the Clinton Foundation — said they sent letters to Walt Disney Company, parent of ABC, demanding that it re-edit or pull the five-hour film, scheduled for air Sunday and Monday nights without commercial interruption.

The Washington Post reported Friday that an ABC executive, who requested anonymity because the network is making only written comments, said small revisions have been underway for weeks.

Excerpt

[CDB]

The ultimate irony is that the original uncut DVD is almost certainly available for two bucks in Communist China--bastion of free speech (s)--and not on US TV.

[bobsunshine]

I read that the cuts or changes are small compared to the effect the movie will have on people. They will see the terrorists as they are, evil people (like how you feel after watching Jack Bauer get one of them) and the DVD sales are already picking up.

Remember all those uncut DVD's handed out in "gift bags" at the screening. Well, according to MacRanger over at his site:

Looks like Bill is going to need a case of Pepto, email from overseas, guess what “bootleg” movie is showing up? Told you, can’t stop the flood. Look for the “Berger Cuts” to show up on You Tube any day now.

Also from MacRanger:

Think about it folks, ABC wouldn’t have spent $40 million dollars and two years of production if they hadn’t already vetted the facts they will portray. Regardless of the hysteria, they are on pretty good ground. In fact, the witnesses are all too willing to come forward if needed to give their accounts in person if needed.

Let’s remember that the 9/11 Commission report didn’t report all the facts and in some cases - like Able Danger - ignored facts. The writers and directors pulled a lot of storyline not from editorial license, but from eye witness accounts. THATS why you see such a push back. They know the real Clinton legacy is about to go in the crapper and while the Democratic Party has pretty much disavowed the Clinton’s, the fact is that they are the last Democrats that were in power during the terrorism filled 90s, and proved that they cannot be trusted with National Security.

So look for more craziness to come, but in the final analysis they are going to lose this battle and lose it big.

[angkor]

ABC could solve the whole problem by giving the characters names like George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condalizza Rice, and Carl Rove.

Then the DNC would be quiet about it.

Hey, it's fiction, right?

[Seattle Conservative]

"Rush said he never received a copy of the tape, He saw it live..."

"I thought he said he had 'received' an unofficial copy of the DVD -- from an unnamed source."

I recall Rush saying he received a copy from Cyrus (forget his last name) who was the author/screenwriter I believe and a friend/acquaintance of Rush. He said that BJ and other Clintonistas wanted a copy, but ABC wouldn't give them one, nor did they supposedly give anyone a copy. There was a screening in DC with about 1/2 Pubbies and 1/2 Dims within the last month or so. IIRC Rush said none of the Dims said anything negative after they saw the screening of the original version.

[rintense]

Correct. The story right now is the editing of a movie. The REAL story is political censorship by liberals. Remember what happened to Tipper Gore and Aerosmith? We need an Aerosmith to come out loudly against censorship now.

[Williams]

Hey, Bill Clinton raped and molested and then terrorized women and young girls, and they made him a hero. They can and will do anything.

Like Clinton said, he did it "because he could." They will come for us soon enough. And the republicans will go quietly, hats in hand.

[netmilsmom]

>> As he preaches to the choir<<

As does FR, Little Green Footballs, Instapundit and Hot Air.
That doesn't mean I don't enjoy them.

[scott7278]

Do you know the answer into my #217? I'm looking for the answer now.

[Antoninus]

Surprise, surprise, surprise. /Pyle

[From One - Many]

I always thought (abc) would cave. clintoon and his band of criminals receive cover yet again.

[mazda77]

I specifically heard him say he had the advance DVD on Tuesday at the beginning of the show. He did not say then who he had received it from but he did mention the person yesterday.

[chimera]

I'm wondering how much intent there was from the get-go that any controversial scenes, that is, anything critical of Clinton or cast the Clintonians in a bad light, would ever see the light of day. To be honest, this whole slimy affair looks like nothing more than the typical political dirty trick the Clintons used the entire time they were in office, which was just different versions of front-running. That is, put out the word that something really, really bad was coming, raise holy Hell about it, relentlessly hammer any opposition down, get whatever changes and soft-pedaling you squeeze out of the (accommodating) media, and then when whatever it was actually breaks, everyone says, geez, this isn't so bad, what's all the fuss about?

We saw this same game played, with minor variations, countless times in dealing with the multiple of Clinton scandals over the years. Do a preemptive strike to make it seem things are really bad, and when the thing actually comes out a lot the public is pretty much inoculated to it, but also play the "victim" angle for all its worth so you end up gaining more sympathy than antipathy.

[Williams]

If the republican establishment had engaged in this there would be public hearings and the media would attack the GOP and run them out of office. Keep in mind the thing the democrats are covering up is their complicity in the deaths of thousands of Americans.

[Beagle8U]

"Chris Wallace already said he will boycott covering the 9/11 documentary! and thats FNC!"

He can stay home if he wants to boycott it, Brit Hume wont, and HE calls the shots!

[Williams]

No big deal just the use of raw government power and threats to rewrite the history of Americans killed by their incompetence, just the burial of the First Amendment. Clinton rapes America again, and walks away smiling. Again.

[Mo1]

Does anyone know how, as a citizen of the United States, to formally request an investigation into abuse of power and conduct unbecoming a senator for these five fools?

I'm not sure you can do anything to them except to elect them out of office

Voter can have the last say .. but that is up to the voters

It is possible for ethic charges to be brought on them for throwing their weight as US Senators to make a threat to a TV Station

[wai-ming]

Perhaps all the publicity will generate some interest in what Clinton actually did (or in this case, didn't do) prior to 9-11.

CNN should really capitalize on this. It's a great opportunity for them to trounce another network, and get the truth out about Clinton for once.

Somehow, I doubt CNN will take advantage of this golden opportunity. It could bring them both credibility and profit, but I guess kowtowing to the liberals gods trumps all that.

[WOSG]

"Chris Wallace tried to compare this with the Reagan movie that got shuffled to Showtime."

If truth = fiction, yeah, there is a comparison.

Reagan movie was a protest about obviously false protrayals.

Clintonistas are protesting the truth.

[El Gato]

No, its bias.

Censorship is when the govt does it.

In this case "intimidation", or "blackmail" might be better terms.

[Williams]

I believe a lawsuit could certainly be brought by citizens who believe their First Amendment rights were infringed by government action, due to the involvement of current officeholders. The lawsuit would at least be embarrassing to the network and the politicians. Would the citizens have standing? The lawsuit would have much better legal grounds if brought by ABC.