Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did ABC Edit "The Path to 9/11"
hughhewitt.townhall.com ^ | Sept. 5, 2006 | Hugh Hewitt

Posted on 09/05/2006 4:57:01 PM PDT by Signalman

The Disney execs met all through the weekend - unheard of in this business - debating what changes would be made and what concessions should be given. Here is what looks to be the conclusion:

- There will be a handful of tweaks made to a few scenes. - They are minor, and nuance in most cases - a line lift here, a tweak to the edit there. - There are 900 screeners out there. When this airs this weekend, there will be a number of people who will spend their free evenings looking for these changes and will be hard pressed to identify them. They are that minor. - The average viewer would not be able to tell the difference between the two versions. - The message of the Clinton Admin failures remains fully intact.

The story here is the backlash that the Disney/ABC execs experienced was completely unexpected and is what caused them to question themselves and make these changes at all. Had this been the Bush Admin pressuring, they wouldn't have even taken the call. The execs and studio bosses are dyed in the wool liberals and huge supporters of Clinton and the Democratic Party in general. They had no idea any of this could happen. As I understand this, the lawyers and production team spent literally months corroborating every story point down to the sentence. The fact that they were the attacked and vilified by their "own team" took them completely by surprise; this is the first time they've been labeled right-wing, conservative conspiracists.

The scramble caused by this backlash was so all consuming that the execs spent their holiday weekend behind closed door meetings and revamped their ad campaign. But at the end of their mad scramble, they found only a handful of changes they could make and still be true to the events. The changes are done only to appease the Clinton team - to be able to say they made changes. But the blame on the Clinton team is in the DNA of the project and could not be eradicated without pulling the entire show. A $40 million investment on the part of ABC is enough to stem even Bill Clinton's influence.

An exclamation point on this event is the fact that Oliver Stone will endorse the project this week. Not known for his conservative leanings, he loves the project. Perhaps this and the fact that the production company that made Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" are endorsing it would underline just how far out or touch and scared the Clinton Admin is about the revelation of the facts as portrayed in this project. Is it just that Clinton is continuing to re-define his legacy? Or is it his fears for this election cycle and 2008? Or both?

Thanks for getting the word out. It's made a significant difference in getting this broadcasted as it should be.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 911; censorship; erasure; msm; pathto911
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last
To: ALOHA RONNIE

Thanks for the ping!


61 posted on 09/05/2006 10:19:01 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

>>Trust but verify.

Words to live by, for sure.


62 posted on 09/06/2006 3:00:12 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cheburashka; All
I think you may be onto something.

The true leftists have nothing but disdain for the clintons....
Most democrats don't want a hillary candidacy in '08....
Most people--and this includes Hollywood--don't want 'clinton-the sequel.' (Self-preservation trumps politics.)

 

UNITED 93:THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS
"We have to do it now. We know what happens if we just sit here and do nothing...."



CLINTON: 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+ Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)






WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?
Was it simply the constraints of his liberal mindset, or was it something even more threatening to our national security?



IT TAKES A CLINTON TO RAZE A COUNTRY


BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE


UNITED 93:THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS
"We have to do it now. We know what happens if we just sit here and do nothing...."


ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE (and doesn't even know it)



MISSING CLINTON AUDIO! 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)


WHY THE CLINTONS FAILED "TO CAPTURE OR KILL THE TALLEST MAN IN AFGHANISTAN"
(DID THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HIM OUT ANYWAY?)


'MAKE IT A RULE' -- PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR OSAMA WITH CLINTON and CO.
(HEAR HILLARY + BILL MAKE THEIR PITCH)


THE (oops!) INADVERTENT (TERRORISM) ADMISSIONS OF BILL + HILLARY CLINTON (HEAR HILLARY IN SF)


HILLARY GOES NUCLEAR
PROLIFERATION IN THE AGE OF CLINTON



THE FAILED, DYSFUNCTIONAL CLINTON PRESIDENCY
(DECONSTRUCTING CLINTON'S HOFSTRA SPEECH) -- part1: clinton's "Brinkley" Lie


AFTERWORD: ON CLINTON SMALLNESS
(BRINKLEY MISSES THE POINT)


PRESIDENTIAL FAILURE, 9/11 + KATRINA


Carpe Mañana: The (bill + hillary) clinton Terrorism Policy
('Can we kill 'em tomorrow?')



CHENEY: CALL THEM REPREHENSIBLE
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES5


sandy berger haberdashery feint
(the specs, not the pants or the socks)


CLINTON TREASON + THE GORELICK WALL


Reverse Gorelick


THE LEFT'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans


CLINTON RAPES, REVISIONISM, USEFUL IDIOTS AND ENTROPY (an update)


pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
WHY THE LEFT IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA



The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)


WAR AND TREASON AND THE NEW YORK TIMES
(Please see post 65)


IN A 'PINCH': RETHINKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT
(Which came first, the 'journalist' or the traitor?)



PINCH SULZBERGER, PEARL HARBOR + TREASON
WHY WE MUST PROSECUTE THE NEW YORK TIMES


WHY BIN LADEN WANTS HOME DELIVERY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES

MORE



COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006


63 posted on 09/06/2006 6:33:04 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE

fyi and thanx for the ping. :)


64 posted on 09/06/2006 6:41:04 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: All
Most democrats don't want a hillary candidacy in '08
65 posted on 09/06/2006 7:13:30 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

.


Keep the faith,

...and the CLARITY coming, Mia T.

You're the Greatest.

.


66 posted on 09/06/2006 7:21:17 AM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE ("ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer/Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.lzxray.comr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Wristpin
And Sandy walks out with the docs in his socks!

I sure hope this movie recounts the Burglar's theft.

67 posted on 09/06/2006 10:34:03 AM PDT by demkicker (democrats and terrorists are intimate bedfellows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bobkk47

Has anyone seen this thing advertised? I haven't seen one ad. Not one.


68 posted on 09/06/2006 11:40:18 AM PDT by jackv (just shakin' my head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mazi83

Thanks for your link to abc, I sent them this:

http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html

I’m disappointed that you bowed to the Clinton administration and changed "The Path to 9/11”. I had heard your program was truthful, now I will question it's truth, and what truth you omitted. I was going to purchase the video, now I probably won't because I am only interested in the truth, not the spin of ABC or the Clinton administration.

I don't intend to tune into your station (KXXV), unless it's to watch sports...you can't spin that.

Registered voter,


69 posted on 09/06/2006 11:53:44 AM PDT by hadnuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty

marking


70 posted on 09/06/2006 1:43:52 PM PDT by Running On Empty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bobkk47

Yup. As predicted.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1694417/posts?page=44


71 posted on 09/07/2006 4:06:29 PM PDT by Explorer24 (Steele '06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson