Posted on 09/10/2006 9:36:29 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
NEW YORK - ABC aired its miniseries "The Path to 9/11" on Sunday but made editing changes after former Clinton administration officials complained it contained fabricated scenes about their actions prior to the terrorist attacks.
ABC's editing of the five-hour movie, airing on two successive nights starting Sunday, was evident from the very beginning. Twice, the network de-emphasized the role of the 9/11 commission's final report as source material for the film.
The version that aired Sunday also changed a scene that, in a copy of the movie given to television critics a few weeks ago, indicated President Clinton's preoccupation with his potential impeachment may have affected an effort to go after Osama bin Laden.
In the original scene, an actor portraying White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke shares a limousine ride with FBI agent John O'Neill and tells him: "The Republicans are going all-out for impeachment. I just don't see in that climate the president's going to take chances" and give the order to kill bin Laden.
But in the film aired Sunday, Clarke says to O'Neill: "The president has assured me this ... won't affect his decision-making."
O'Neill replies: "So it's OK if somebody kills bin Laden, as long as he didn't give the order. It's pathetic."
The critics' version contained a note in the opening scenes that the film is "based on the 9/11 commission report." That was omitted from the film aired Sunday. A disclaimer aired three times emphasized it was not a documentary.
"For dramatic and narrative purposes the movie contains fictionalized scenes, composite and representative characters and dialogue, as well as time compression," the note that ran before the movie said.
The note said the material is "drawn from a variety of sources including the 9/11 commission report and other published materials and from personal interviews." That differs from a note in the critics' version that said the dramatization "is based on the 9/11 commission report and other published sources and personal interviews."
Critics, such as historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr., said it was "disingenuous and dangerous" not to include accurate historical accounts in the movie.
A scene in the movie depicting a team of CIA operatives poised in darkness outside of bin Laden's fortess in Afghanistan, ready to attack, was substantially cut down from the original. Pictures of the waiting Afghanistan operatives are interspersed with those of officials in Washington, who had to approve the mission.
The original version depicted national security adviser Samuel R. Berger hanging up on CIA chief George Tenet as Tenet sought permission to attack bin Laden. The movie aired Sunday did not include Berger hanging up.
The affect of the changes is to deflect specific blame. It ends with actor Donnie Wahlberg, head of the CIA team in Afghanistan, saying, "Are there no men in Washington?"
Another scene in the critics' cut pictured O'Neill asking Clarke on the telephone: "What's Clinton going to do (about bin Laden)?"
Clarke replies, "I don't know. The Lewinsky thing is a noose around his neck."
This was cut entirely from the film that aired Sunday.
Editors left intact a scene that had angered former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, portraying her as being behind a move to inform the Pakistani government in advance of a U.S. missile strike against bin Laden. The movie indicated that was a key factor in bin Laden getting away.
The movie, scheduled to air from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m., finished at 10:40 p.m. ET.
ABC has said little about the controversy, and said Sunday it would not comment.
Thomas Kean, head of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks and a backer of the film, said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday that he hadn't seen the final cut of the movie but urged Americans to watch it.
"If people blame Bill Clinton after seeing this, then the miniseries has failed," said Kean, the former Republican New Jersey governor. "That's wrong and it shouldn't happen."
John Lehman, another Republican commission members, said on the ABC News show that he's told the film is equally harsh on the administrations of President Bush and his father, former President George H.W. Bush.
"And if you don't like the hits to the Clinton administration, well, welcome to the club," Lehman said. "The Republicans have lived with Michael Moore and Oliver Stone and most of Hollywood as a fact of life."
___
AP Television Writer Frazier Moore contributed to this report.
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."
They sure did.
Fixed that!
I'm with you. I think the new version is sharper.
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
The Entire Cole Incident was skipped ... how else could the program finish 20 minutes early?
"The character who made the comment was the Afghani (Pakistani?) standing next to Wahlberg.
Northern Kurd. Ahmed Shah Massoud. He's a key player.
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!
"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.
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!
Anyone blaming Bush for not responding to the Cole is missing the point altogether.
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.
bttt
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?
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.
*************************************
That point needs to be made often on this forum!!!! Thanks for your excellent statement!
The House should have impeached him for this as well.
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.