Posted on 09/08/2006 6:14:38 AM PDT by pabianice
Edited on 09/08/2006 8:38:54 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
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.
Sure seems to be the guiding principle.
Too bad we don't have a wealthy conservative filmmaker who could help us make a movie. As you said, making a movie about the behind the scenes cowering by ABC to the Mob, formerly known as the Clinton administration, would make compelling viewing.
I still think it's just a distraction. The docu-drama won't change any minds one way or nother.
Mia!
You come to the rescue again.
No matter what, I'm sure you'll get every cut and we'll see them on FR.
God love ya! (ping me, okay?)
If they could be used here that would be the ultimate case of using a "Useful Idiot." I'm just asking, is this a possibility?
"You're right about that --- national security is thee issue once again."
Not only that, the 911 story "cuts" will trickle into the news for months.
It's going to be impossible to cut the movie to any point that the dimwits would ever be happy with it. It's all about the 90's...Bush was in office only 9 months, then we've got 911. The mini series is 5 hours....
I AGREE. And what the president should do is take his gloves off and kick the Demaccac-ass :) (in addition of course the McCain, Grand, and the other weasels> as HARD AS HE CAN.
Keep coming at them with everything he's got... to force to respond every other day from here to electon day and beyond... screeching and moaning like little girls.
AND MORE IMPORTANTLY... if the Demaccacas should win... and a terrorist attact should take place... then they will be on record that they denied every danger and actually aided the enemy - along with their buddies at the NYT and other such lefties) in their quest to get elected. I do wonder how can they defend the country when they are so concerned with terrorists' "rights." If they don't want the patriot act... I am afraid we will be attacked.
Screw them.
_______
I agree.
Sounds like some pretty minor edits to me" ping!
Not only that, looks like people here and in the Junk Media are reading what they want to believe into the statements by ABC.
They can't block this video. Send it to your friends and relatives.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JuH1xwLUnbg
Were the Clintoons paid by the Opecker Thugs to protect Ben Laden?
Are the Clintoons and rats in Congress still getting paid to protect the al Qaeda serial killers, who would kill all of us if given an opportunity?
"Fair Use" for scholarly purposes giving only a DVD with the missing parts for research comparison purposes should cover it. Of course, in other countries where piracy is common it could be put on the web for download....
Back in 1981, my dad wrote an article for LIFE Magazine about the West Bank. It was supposed to be the cover story. Dad, an unabashed Zionist, told them he was going to do it from Meir Kahane's POV, with history, etc. It was agreed. He went over to Israel for a month or so and did everything a writer does (he already had a relationship with Kahane). What happened after the article was written is what's interesting. When my Father started getting the galley proofs back, things started getting changed...first little things, then REALLY big things. Quotes, etc. Dad was LIVID. Finally, they last proof came and they COMPLETELY CHANGED THE LAST PARAGRAPH, giving the entire article a completely different slant.
That was it. My father demanded they not print the article, but it was too late. So he asked that his name not be put on it. He felt the article would be a betrayal to the people who spoke to him and trusted him.
When it came out, EVEN WITH all the changes, Kahane said he was happy with it, because he didn't even expect them to publish that much positive, pro-Israel stuff. Isn't that sad?
By the way, the article ended up NOT being the cover story, Why? President Reagan was shot two weeks before and that ended up being on the cover. If you ever go to the Reagan library, you'll see that issue there. Maybe one day I'll type in the original article. It was still very interesting because it gives the background of the West Bank.
I couldn't AGREE MORE!!!ElRushbo has been goin' to town on this in his first hour!!!
Well,they"Bobbitized"the WRONG"willy"!It should have been BeelzeBubba's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you mean to tell me that you did?You REALLY must read more!
The wait is over!Hour #1 is"in the can"!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm no copyright lawyer, but I would say that it would be entirely appropriate to take the original and then compare it with what was shown to the public and report it as news, specifically when you tie it to the cencorship/extortion angle.
Plus, if anyone tried to sue you, the very stuff everyone wants hidden would become public record.
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.