Hear 'The Path to 9/11' Writer-CLINTON WILLFULLY FAILED TO NAIL BIN LADEN A DOZEN TIMES: CIA

The Sean Hannity Show | 9.13.06 | Mia T

[Mia T]

ping

[Mia T]

ping

[308MBR]

Dang Mia! Do you have any evidence? LOL

Seriously, you may get more pings if it doesn't take half the night to scroll through your post ;)

[msnimje]

He was busy nailing everything else.

[Mia T]

touché

[Mia T]

;)

[nopardons]

WOW!

Thanks for the ping...as always, your stuff is always top drawer! :-)

[Mia T]

BTW, the writer does not appear to use his craft to advance any political agenda. His projects run the gamut politically.

[Mia T]

thanx, nopardons :)

[Mia T]

ping

[Big Horn]

Clintoon gave Monica more time than BL.

[Brad from Tennessee]

The Democrats are howling because the ABC production did not follow the script of the 9/11 Commission. But the 9/11 Commission script doesn't follow historical reality.

[Paleo Conservative]

He was more interested in nailing interns.

[Mia T]

The Democrats are howling because the ABC production did not follow the script of the 9/11 Commission. But the 9/11 Commission script doesn't follow historical reality.--Brad from Tennessee

Gorelick (and Ben Veniste and Berger) made sure of that....

Gorelick's surreal presence on the 911 commission investigating Gorelick's Justice Department, a maneuver that effectively removes from the universe of witnesses a central witness, Gorelick, even as it uniquely positions a central player, Gorelick, to directly shape the commission's conclusions. (Is there any question which two people are responsible for Gorelick's insertion on the commission?)

Conversely, that it never occurred to anyone on the commission that Gorelick's flagrant conflict of interest renders her presence on the commission beyond farce calls into question the commission's judgment if not its integrity. Washington's mutual protection racket writ large, I suspect....

Reverse Gorelick
by Mia T, 4.15.04

[Mia T]

"Path to 9/11" Controversy Continues 09/07 10:30 AM - The Markup Howard Kurtz has a summary of the Clinton gang's three main objections to the miniseries: · [Former NSA Sandy] Berger is seen as refusing authorization for a proposed raid to capture bin Laden in spring 1998 to CIA operatives in Afghanistan who have the terrorist leader in their sights. [...] Berger said that neither he nor Clinton ever rejected a CIA or military request to conduct an operation against bin Laden. The Sept. 11 commission said no CIA operatives were poised to attack; that Afghanistan's rebel Northern Alliance was not involved, as the film says; and that then-CIA Director George J. Tenet decided the plan would not work. · [Former DCI George] Tenet is depicted as challenging Albright for having alerted Pakistan in advance of the August 1998 missile strike that unsuccessfully targeted bin Laden. [...] Albright said she never warned Pakistan. The Sept. 11 commission found that a senior U.S. military official warned Pakistan that missiles crossing its airspace would not be from its archenemy, India. · "The Path to 9/11" uses news footage to suggest that Clinton was distracted by the Republican drive to impeach him. [...] The Sept. 11 commission found no evidence that the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal played a role in the August 1998 missile strike, but added that the "intense partisanship of the period" was one factor that "likely had a cumulative effect on future decisions about the use of force against bin Laden." The New York Post adds that Bill Clinton himself has gotten in on the campaign against ABC.  Hugh Hewitt interviewed the program's writer/producer Cyrus Nowrasteh last night and came away convinced that these complaints are without merit: I spent most of yesterday's three hour program with the program's writer/producer Cyrus Nowrasteh, and no serious observer could listen to this interview and conclude that the movie is other than a deeply serious attempt to recount the events leading to the massacre of five years ago, primarily through the eyes of John O'Neill, the FBI agent who had taken over security at the World Trade Center just weeks prior to the attack and whose actions that day are believed to have saved thousans of lives. For the Clinton team to demand cancelation or edits of the movie is to once again see them elevate their own pesonal vanity above every other interest, especially over the interests of John O'Neill and th emany other public servants who saw the threat clearly and did their best to stop it. The objections of various Clinton-era figures —Berger rightly argues he didn't hang up a phone in one scene, for example— are absurd complaints about the tiny details used to compress eight years and eight months into five hours of drama. From these complaints they have built a tissue-thin demand for an Orwellian memory-hole moment. [...] It isn't like we don't know that Monica was a distraction and Madeleine Albright a less-than-brilliant Secretary of State (how about that late lurch towards North Korea?)  John O'Neill was in fact fired; there were warnings that were ignored about the African embassy bombings, and no response followed the Cole attack and the American ambassador to Yemen was an obstruction to that investigation, Massoud was assasinated by al Qaeda.  These are not debatable subjects.  They are facts. I haven't seen the film, but I share Dean Barnett's concern that any ahistorical content provides an easy target for the film's enemies and a distraction from the real record of Clinton-era failure.

© National Review Online 2006-2007. All Rights Reserved.

Home | Search | NR / Digital | Donate | Media Kit | Contact Us

This page loaded in 0.009815 seconds.

[Leofl]

Bookmark

[scott7278]

Excellent work once again! It's like the old days of FR (yes, I was around then).

[Gail Wynand]

Seemingly we are at a point, a moment in history, where a majority of the rest of the world, and up to 49% of the US is suffering collective cognitive dissonance in regard to the nature of the world, as regards Islamic Jihadism (a variant of National Socialist passive agression), as regards the use of national power, and the nature of reality in general.

No doubt of course that the delusional fables engaged in by the Left are consciously spread by leaders who know the truth but see advantages in duming down the West for purposes of acquiring power themselves. People like Osama Bin Ladin, Sheik Omar, and Hillary Clinton for example.

The incredible challenge facing the rational, sane, healty minority of people who have not a) deliberately joined the dark side; or, b) succumbed to the intimidation of the MSM and other influential elites, is to function effectively in the face of a world gone mad.

The ABC drama was transparently as close to truth as one could get in the context of the medium and the time. The creators deviated from the 9/11 commission because in looking into their subject matter they found relevant truth was omitted by the 9/11 commission (though they did not by any means find all of the ommissions). Putting together what they found to be true from multiple reliable sources and without meaningful distortion they told the story that needs to be told, not merely the heroism of flight 93 or the personal drama of the 9/11 victims, but something truthful and important about the nature of the causes of 9/11. Who were these people, what were their motives and how were they able to carry out such a horror? Important questions that have rarely been discussed, by anyone in five years.

Now they are on the defensive, having to explain and justify a verifiable truth. The truth that the ultimate horror of 9/11 is that it was entirely unnecessary it did not have to happen. The FBI did not fail. The CIA did not fail. The airlines did not fail. The average American citizen did not fail. We were sold out by the likes of the Clintons, Sandy Berger, Allbright and Jamie Gorelick along with the ACLU and the rest of the nitpicking handwringing Left.

Responding to absurd charges of the Clintons, intended to distort and confuse the average citizen into not trusting their own perceptions when confronted by obvious truth such as the 9/11 tv movie, is an ineffective and inappropriate strategy. Rather that defend the facts and explain irrelevant details, which only comes across as validating/legitimating the Clinton / Left charges, one must challenge directly the sanity, motives, and loyalties of the leaders of the seditious chourus that is being allowed to monopolize and set the agenda for todays policital discussions. Clinton is a disgraced former Presdient who has been cited for serious misconduct by a Federal Judge and who has failed to deny credible allegations of rape by a former campaign worker. Mr. Berger is a convicted felon. Ms. Albright is the architect of the famed Clinton N. Korea strategy, who cares what they think about anything. Why are they still in public. What has been fellow travellers would give them the time of day?

In short if the good guys are going to win/survive they need to drop their ingrained civility, and deal with these vermin as vermin.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.


NEVER FORGET


3 Free Offers refused by the CLINTONS that were offered them by the Sudan during the 1990's to bring OSAMA bin LADEN to America's custody before he could injure our precious Homeland =


9/11 Lifesaver RICK RESCORLA, ..R.I.P.


(RICK RESCORLA - Website)
http://www.RickRescorla.com

(RICK RESCORLA 'Follow Me' Statue's joyful unveiling at Ft. Benning GA - Pictures)
http://www.RickRescorla.com/The%20Statue.htm

(RICK RESCORLA - Forum Thread)
http://www.ArmchairGeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24361



NEVER FORGET

.