ABC makes some changes to 9/11 series

AP on Yahoo ^ | 9/10/06 | David Bauder - ap

[bimbo]

Edited or not, it's pretty damning to the Clinton admin.

That's the way I saw it, too. The more they tried to protect Clinton, Berger, and Albright, the worse they looked. Richard Clarke's condemnation of George Tenet as the sole bad guy reminded me that he "doth protest too much."

[veronica]

I saw it as a disaster for Clinton, Allbright, and the Burglar. They all came out looking terrible in the cut version.

They sure did.

[razorback-bert]

Critics, such as historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr., said it was "disingenuous and dangerous" not to include accurate historical accounts

Fixed that!

[Xenalyte]

I'm with you. I think the new version is sharper.

[pinz-n-needlez]

This movie is a graphic preview of what a Hillary administration would be. All of these folks are still loyalists, and would form the backbone of a Hillary term.

Bill had to fight this, or suffer her wrath. He may still! LOL

[bimbo]

Tonight's segment seems to leap back to AA #11, which would skip right over the Cole by 11 months.

The Entire Cole Incident was skipped ... how else could the program finish 20 minutes early?

[toddlintown]

"The character who made the comment was the Afghani (Pakistani?) standing next to Wahlberg.

Northern Kurd. Ahmed Shah Massoud. He's a key player.

[Diggler]

And what was with blaming Bush at least as equally as Clinton for not going after Bin Laden in retribution for the Cole?

It happened on Clinton's watch. Plus, since we had trouble getting Clinton to leave the WH for a while, Cheney had to work from his kitchen table for a few months!

[EQAndyBuzz]

"The Entire Cole Incident was skipped ... how else could the program finish 20 minutes early?"

And the Cole incident would be the last attack before 9/11.

ABC butchered what looked to be a good film. It wouldn't suprise me if tonight they added things like Bush picking his nose, Bush tripping over a crack in the sidewalk and Bush failing to spell "is" correctly.

On a good note, tonight starts Monday Night Football.

[kattracks]

It does sound worse.

Also, with the omission of the impeachment factor, but with the reminder of Lewinsky in the film, it comes across as though SHE'S what clinton was preoccupied with, nothing more.

O'Neill replies: "So it's OK if somebody kills bin Laden, as long as he didn't give the order. It's pathetic" was a killer line!

[Mo1]

Of Topic

Rummy is having a hard time with his speech .. he keeps choking up and fighting back tears remembering 5 years ago

[rintense]

So Clinton had November and December to respond to the Cole. Did he? No. And for the leftists who say there wasn't enough time, President Bush attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan less than a month after 9-11- including one of the most rapid military mobilizations ever.

Anyone blaming Bush for not responding to the Cole is missing the point altogether.

[kattracks]

"He avoided his responsibility on this one too. Attorney General Janet Reno claimed she gave the order and was responsible."

So Reno was the only one in the entire clinton administration who would make that kind of decision without clinton's approval? There were men on his cabinet with more power than she ever had who wouldn't make any final decisions without clinton's ok.

According to the film, one aspect that was repeated, and with no apparent objection from clinton or his minions in their censorship mode, was that clinton made all final decisions as to any attack plans. One has to believe this also held true when it came to the attack on Waco.

[reformedliberal]

Not just you.

Leaving out "The Republicans" actually helped us more and Clinton less. The way it aired, the viewer is left with "That's pathetic" and sees that Clinton avoided any responsibility. The original makes it the fault of "the Republicans."

Leaving out the night scene was not a big deal either, IMO. We see the NA sneaking up on OBL. We see the frustration of trying to get a *go* order. We hear Masood saying there are no men left in Washington. Even if it was just a rhetorical question, the viewer takes away the thought of squishy wimps in charge of our security.

[Beckwith]

It was not my argument that Reno WAS responsible.

It was my argument that Reno gave Clinton the cover that he WAS NOT responsible.

After all, the Clinton's never accept the consequences of their actions, either of them.

It amazes me that anyone could misinterpret the statement, "He avoided his responsibility on this one too. Attorney General Janet Reno claimed she gave the order and was responsible", as I somehow was absolving Clinton of his complete responsibility is way, way beyond my comprehension.

[shield]

bttt

[dalight]

Used to be equally harsh.. Now we get to revisit Richard Clarks self aggrandizing.. and no one is going to even attempt to set the record straight.

Nevertheless, these corrections to the movie sought and won by the Democrats are in actuality a really serious loss, because we we have been shown again who is really a threat to freedom in the US.

What was Clinton using Echelon to do, obviously all of the ACLU lawyers were missing then. Clinton's abuses of the IRS as retribution are legend, and these folks won't think twice about extinguishing their detractors. Is this the America we want?

[kattracks]

"It amazes me that anyone could misinterpret the statement, "He avoided his responsibility on this one too. Attorney General Janet Reno claimed she gave the order and was responsible", as I somehow was absolving Clinton of his complete responsibility is way, way beyond my comprehension."

I'm sorry you got this impression from my response to your post. I was simply pointing out why Reno's "acceptance for responsibility" for Waco was a blatant lie.

In no way did I mean to imply that you were absolving clinton.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Last, IMO, it should wake up those 'purist' conservatives who are willing to take the risk of allowing the Dems to re-take control of Congress, The WH, and our military...just to make a point and make themselves 'feel better'.

*************************************

That point needs to be made often on this forum!!!! Thanks for your excellent statement!

[My2Cents]

Stuff like changing the authority so that sensitive dual-use technology could be sold to the Chinese -- money trails from China and Indonesia with real quid pro quo.

The House should have impeached him for this as well.