ABC Insider Assures Right-Wing Bloggers: ‘The Message of the Clinton Admin Failures Remains Fully Intact’
ABC Insider Assures Right-Wing Bloggers: ‘The Message of the Clinton Admin Failures Remains Fully Intact’
ABC won’t give President Clinton, Madeleine Albright or Sandy Berger a copy of its 9/11 docudrama, “The Path to 9/11.” But there is virtually nothing about the film ABC won’t share with the right-wing blogosphere.
For example, an ABC insider sent this missive to right-wing blogger Hugh Hewitt about potential edits to the film:
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.
Read the full email to Hewitt here.
Right now, former Gov. Tom Kean (R-NJ) — a paid senior advisor to this film — is digging in and defending ABC. If the network is making edits to the film to correct errors, they should tell everyone, not just right-wing bloggers.
The fact that ABC continues to cater to Rush Limbaugh and conservative bloggers, while refusing to show even the most basic courtesy to a former President of the United States, says a lot about what this “docudrama” is really about.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
201 Responses to “ABC Insider Assures Right-Wing Bloggers: ‘The Message of the Clinton Admin Failures Remains Fully Intact’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
This blatant propaganda effort keeps getting worse.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:15 pmPost links to your local ABC station and tell them what you think.
DENVER: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/index.html
September 6th, 2006 at 5:16 pmThen, everyone, contact your local affiliate. It's more effective than you think. There are progressives in every market.
ABC is the new FOX. Give 'em hell!
September 6th, 2006 at 5:17 pmI work in the film industry in SoCal and it's not without good reason that Disney is often referred to as "Mousechwitz," and "Duckau."
September 6th, 2006 at 5:18 pmI am ***outraged*** right now!
Can you imagine the cajoines of these people?
They've raised the price of poker, so should we.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:18 pmWhat now?
Dallas, Texas:
http://www.wfaa.com/customerservice/helpcenter.jsp?id=1083854504000
September 6th, 2006 at 5:18 pmIs ABC part of the "mainstream media" the rightwing is constantly pissing and moaning about?
September 6th, 2006 at 5:18 pmKeep up the good work at Think Progress! You guys are leading the way on this.
There is a great list of contacts at Kos --call/email them and blast away.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:19 pmI don't want to watch any freaking docudrama (lies) from ABC 'News'.
The truth will never be told. If the truth be told, all confidence in the US government would be lost.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:20 pmshocking
September 6th, 2006 at 5:21 pmall confidence in the US government would be lost.
Comment by wildfire
What confidence?
September 6th, 2006 at 5:21 pmEven if it is ALL true about Clinton and he was having tea parties with Osama, it still doesn't get past the point the Bush was in office when this happened. Did Clinton get a memo titled "Bin Laden To Strike USA SOON!!" (i know its not the exact title but you get the idea).
Timeline:
Bush In Office
9-11
WMD
Iraq
No WMD
Katrina
WMD
Iran
Pattern?
And if Al Qeada types are the problem, why arent we going after Osama?
September 6th, 2006 at 5:23 pmStay on these guys. It'll be so bad come Sunday's premiere that no one will take this thing seriously. At least, we can hope.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:23 pmAmerica's Least Wanted
Firedog Lake has a spotlight link on the bottom of everyone of their posts. You click on it, and it gives you EVERY major contact in whatever media you choose. (print, TV, radio...)
You click on those you want to contact, and are able to send them an email. Might be an easier way than constant searching.
http://www.thespotlightproject.org/tsp.php?blogUrl=http://www.firedoglake.com/
September 6th, 2006 at 5:25 pmI sent an email through ABC.com this morning and then one through here (thanks Randi Rhodes for letting me know about it!)....I used to have sooo much respect for ABC, if they show this crap without fixing the lies I will never be a viewer again. It's that simple. Put those bastards back into 4th place like they were for so many years. Hell, make it 5th place!!! BOYCOTT ABC if you have to! :)~
September 6th, 2006 at 5:29 pmBoycott ABC.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:31 pmABC is not going to force editorial changes or pull the program. Logistically it is simply too late for that. It's a waste of energy even to push for that, not to mention that it plays into every negative stereotype of progressives that I can think of.
If you instead simply urged viewers not to watch, that might have some impact since all the advertisers would get screwed; the effect would be tiny, but tiny is better than zero (or even negative).
And frankly, I wish C.A.P. would use the energy it is wasting on this to push for accountability from elected leaders - of BOTH parties - rather than moribund TV networks.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:31 pmA. Gog,
September 6th, 2006 at 5:32 pmThere are no advertisers!
They're showing it without commercials.
The Reagan movie was edited and then pulled shortly before it was aired. ABC can do the same thing to this thing.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:35 pmOkay, then can we just let the critics do our trashing for us and focus on something real?
September 6th, 2006 at 5:36 pmIn the Reagan movie, they excised a few lines. That's not what we're talking about here.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:36 pm#12 is right on. Even if this shit load of a show paints Clinton as conspiring with osama to do the things he did on 9/11, it doesn't change the vivid facts that Bush had more than enough intel, warning, and opportunity to do something. At least Clinton fired off 50 tomahawks into bin Laden's training camps narrowly missing bin Laden back in '98. That's more than Bush has done in the last 5 years.
And yes, in the end of that show, we'll still see Bush, Gonzales on the news being quoted as saying that bin Laden is not the main priority or even a high one at that. They guy who's killed more Americans than probably any single person is not a priority...someone who is actively planning the deaths of probably thousands more..is not a priority.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:36 pmI think the worst part is that there is a Scholastic Book on line study guide
September 6th, 2006 at 5:39 pmso that teachers can use this film as curriculm in the classroom.
I encourage everyone to block ABC from your cable box, as you would the Playboy channel (if you have kids) or any other channel you find offensive. Most cable providers give you the means to do this in their basic cable software setup screens.
I don't care if ABC is one of the big 3 networks. If enough people block it from their cable system, the cable providers would be encouraged to move that channel to the "extended cable" channels.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:40 pmdoes Mickey Mouse blaming the attacks on Clinton piss you off? maybe dig a little deeper:
Tonight at 9 p.m. on Free Radio San Diego: discussing the fifth anniversary of September 11, 2001. bring your tinfoil hat and/or blind patriotism for two hours of updates on the 9-11 Truth Movement, commentary from leading researchers, news clips and music to keep our short attention spans engaged.
tune in to 96.9 FM near downtown san diego or listen online at pirate969.org.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:41 pmStop The Propaganda...
The DNC comes out on the 9/11 slander movie being used by Disney/ABC to prop up Bush. The ABC television network -- a cog in the Walt Disney empire -- unleashed a promotional blitz in the last week for a...
September 6th, 2006 at 5:42 pm[...] I don’t link to wingnuts, so I’m running this in full. It’s a letter that an ABC insider sent to the unctuous Hugh Hewitt: 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: [...]
September 6th, 2006 at 5:43 pmActually the better option would be to exert pressure on ABC's advertisers. If enough advertisers hear from people they will start to pull their ads and that would obviously have an effect on ABC/Disney. Remember Sinclair?
Either way, I think using 9-11 in such partisan way is disgraceful. Let me be clear. I don't think there'd be anything wrong with producing a documentary or a docudrama or a fictodocureport or whatever you want to call it if it was based on facts. There's nothing wrong with arguing that Clinton didn't do as much as he could have to eradicate Al Queda while president as long as you don't twist what he did or didn't do in order to make the argument. Pigs!
September 6th, 2006 at 5:43 pmHey Bu$hy baby...who's the revisionists now? Seig!
September 6th, 2006 at 5:43 pmA. Gog, ironchef,
This IS a real story. It could actually be any of hundreds of stories over the past decade or so. The Radical Right smears us, and is able to get away with it.
Why?
Because we do precisely what you advocate. Give up.
2000- Gore gave up. Bush was able to steal an election.
2004-Kerry gave up. Bush continues his regime, unchecked.
I'm tired of us "taking the higher ground" and "knowing the real truth". All that does is allow them to continue doing it.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:43 pmAnd enough is ENOUGH!
#23 - dmd - and this is my problem with this "docudrama" - not to mention the fact that it seems that ABC didn't get some "key players" to sign off on details. I mean, why not ask those who were there to review various scenes for their accuracy - I believe all of those people are still alive - I mean, it's not like a film about Lincoln or something!
September 6th, 2006 at 5:45 pmWhen's the movie "What's been done since 9/11 coming out? As for me, I've already read the 9/11 report and find books much more enjoyable than a movie version plus Football season starts this weekend so Sunday and Monday night I will be in front of my TV but only for the annual gridiron battles.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:45 pmBoycott ABC = Always Benefit Conservatives
September 6th, 2006 at 5:49 pmLocal ABC affiliate: http://www.wnep.com
Scranton, PA and a station that goes out of its way to support the war and right wing candidates.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:54 pmI totally agree with Pointy. That's why I've started compiling a list of ABC primetime advertisers and thier contact info on my blog. If enough of these companies feel the heat from consumers, ABC will have to do something about this travesty
September 6th, 2006 at 5:56 pmGo to the spotlight link above, and you can find all of your local ABC affiliates, local papers, whatever you need to spread the word.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:56 pm"Give up"? "Get over it" is more like it. It's a TV show. If Kerry spent his whole campaign trying to censor (yes) a lame TV network, he still would have lost. Same with Gore.
If the Dems had the balls to impeach Bush and try him for treason (yes), I don't think Bush would use this program as a defense. WAKE UP.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:58 pmI'm going out on a limb and guessing the following:
1) This movie is a ratings disaster;
2) Lawsuits are filed alleging this is an illegal in-kind campaign contribution;
3) The Democrats take over the House and Senate in November;
4) They immediately rattle their sabers, threatening to hold investigations;
5) At some point prior to or during said investigations, Disney voluntarily agrees to a bunch of sanctions to prevent such overtly partisan behavior in the future, including the sacrificial firing of a few of the decisionmakers behind the production and airing of this movie.
I'm sure when Disney/ABC decided to sign off on this movie, it seemed like a great idea. Bush was probably still relatively popular at the time, the notion of more deregulation in media by the Republicans seemed delightful, and the prospect of pissing off the Bushies (I'm sure an appropriate Bush emissary was sent to relay the message that it would be a great idea if ABC aired such a "docudrama"; multibillion dollar corporations don't just decide to commit $40 million to a partisan cause without some impetus or expected payback) seemed very undesirable.
I don't think they had any idea what they'd gotten themselves into. If the Republicans manage to hold onto Congress, *maybe* Disney/ABC gets out of this scot-free. But if the Dems take over, I think it may be time to break out the popcorn...
September 6th, 2006 at 5:59 pm"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? "
That's the best part of the email.
It's not a documentary, it's a dramatization, but it's the facts.
ABC has become a part of the right wing media, in grand fashion.
I'd boycott them, if they had any shows worth watching.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:03 pmWhat's playing before and after this show. Target the ads on these for starters.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:05 pmThis just gets curiouser and curiouser. Remember when Disney (which owns ABC) blocked Miramax (which it owned at the time) from releasing "Fahrenheit 9/11"?
Coincidence? I think not... As Atrios would say, time for a blogger ethics panel...
September 6th, 2006 at 6:05 pmSpread the word through the entire progressive network to boycott all ABC/Disney primetime shows for at least a year. Make it painfull for these arrogant assholes to try to re-write history and attempt to brainwash our school children. Time to finally remove the gloves and take our media back.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:10 pmHere' s a thought....what if it really was the Clinton administrations fault? Did that ever cross your minds at all? If so, are you all saying you want suppression of freedon of speech...exactly what you always acuse Republicans of...and are you saying even if it is true, that it should not be shown simply because it would help the Rebuplicans in the coming elections? Do you even know how hipocritical that is?
September 6th, 2006 at 6:14 pmI'm going to amend my post to include that I don't believe the email was sent by an 'ABC insider' and my money is with it being a complete fraud.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:14 pmHey Disney Execs: Eventually, the Dems will control the SEC again.
Hey ABC Execs: Eventually the Dems will control the FCC again.
You better pray you're retired before that day comes.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:15 pmAs I stated in a previous thread, miniblue has been advised to uncerimoniously toss any Scholastic drivel right into the trash.
Any showing of this pos in her class, she will be given a note of excusal.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:16 pmMedia Matters for America just posted an item regarding the misleading teaching materials being sent out with the movie.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200609060005?src=item200609060005
Thank you David Brock.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:17 pmNice of Tom Kean to use the 9/11 tragedy to line his pockets.
Rah, rah, rah.
Now it's time for the rest of America to get on the Osama Bin Laden Day party festival that the Republican Party is promoting. Hooray, let's have beer and wings and red, white and blue streamers.
Talk about a "culture of death".
-GSD
September 6th, 2006 at 6:19 pmAt what point do the writers and directors cross the line and open themselves up to liable charges. To purposely misrepresent the facts and actions of real people to cause harm should give the legal staff at ABC pause.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:21 pmSilly Libs. It is fine to have an examination of the facts. Not a propaganda piece written by friends of Rush Limbaugh that deliberately skew the facts.
Yes to truth, no to Limbaugh/Rove/Tom Kean's Mole-faced propaganda.
Why not have an open congressional hearing on the fatcs?
-GSD
September 6th, 2006 at 6:22 pmHere’ s a thought….what if it really was the Clinton administrations fault? Did that ever cross your minds at all? If so, are you all saying you want suppression of freedon of speech…exactly what you always acuse Republicans of…and are you saying even if it is true, that it should not be shown simply because it would help the Rebuplicans in the coming elections? Do you even know how hipocritical that is?
Comment by Silly Libs
Dear Brain-dead Conservative,
It IS a lie!
Clarke and Cressy AND Albreight have all come out and said that what they 'depict' never happened!
Not even the 9-11 Report states anything near what they're sending out.
Instead of automatically joining in lock-step, just ONCE look into the facts.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:22 pm"Here’ s a thought….what if it really was the Clinton administrations fault? Did that ever cross your minds at all?"
Last I checked, it wasn't Bill Clinton who responded to a PDB entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" by saying, "That's nice, you've covered your ass now." Somehow I bet that real scene doesn't make it into the docudrama even as the utterly fabricated scene about Clinton & co. nixing a chance to take out Bin Laden does.
As Ronald Reagan once said, "Facts are such stupid things." I guess that's why conservatives try so hard to avoid them at all costs...
September 6th, 2006 at 6:23 pmABC=Advancing Bush's Cause
-GSD
September 6th, 2006 at 6:23 pmmy local abc station, out of Springfield, Illinois, is part of the infamous Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc....
http://www.wics.com/
lost cause...
September 6th, 2006 at 6:24 pm#43, freedom of speech is not the issue, lying and propaganda is the issue. If ABC stops calling the film a 'docudrama' and instead classes it with next week's run of 'John Edward Cross Country' for factual basis, I'm fine with it. However, the ABC execs seem to have decided to use their immense access to the public to deliberately distort a history the facts of which in the hands of an informed public will possibly sway an election. That's out of the Goebbels playbook and you should be concerned.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:24 pmWith this weekend's upcoming mockumentary "The Path to 9/11," Disney and ABC are breaking dangerous new ground in the conservative propaganda war. Even as the ABC network follows in the footsteps of Mel Gibson and The Passion of the Christ in "mobilizing the base," ABC News on Sunday declared Robert Greenwald's new documentary "Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers" a left-wing hatchet job "produced like a political campaign."
For the details, see:
September 6th, 2006 at 6:25 pm"ABC Slams New Iraq Documentary, Ignores Own 9/11 Right-Wing Fantasy."
Despite the growing outcry over its conservative 9/11 historical fiction packaged as fact, ABC is proceeding full speed ahead with this weekend's "Path to 9/11." The contrast with CBS' 2003 capitulation over its controversial mini-series "The Reagans" could not be more stark. The only similarity is both networks' kowtowing to the pressure and the agenda of the right.
For the story, see:
September 6th, 2006 at 6:26 pm"The Right Wins Again: ABC's '9/11' and CBS's 'Reagans.'"
Silly Libs. It is fine to have an examination of the facts. Not a propaganda piece written by friends of Rush Limbaugh that deliberately skew the facts.
Yes to truth, no to Limbaugh/Rove/Tom Kean’s Mole-faced propaganda.
Why not have an open congressional hearing on the fatcs?
-GSD
Comment by GSD — September 6, 2006 @ 6:22 pm
Farenheit 911--- no that's not propaganda at all....that is a fine examination of the facts...HIPOCRIT.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:28 pm#43. "Here’ s a thought….what if it really was the Clinton administrations fault?"
Bush had the intelligence, and by that I mean the intelligence reports not the smarts, to stop it and did nothing which is why it happened. Even after it happened Bush continued to read "My Pet Goat" for 7 minutes after the second tower was hit and then only got off his duff because someone leaned over and told him what to do. This is a perfect demonstration of his lack of vigilance. Bill Clinton was not president on 9/11 but Bush apologists rush to blame Clinton as if he was president on 9/11.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:31 pmBoycott ABC and Disney!
September 6th, 2006 at 6:35 pmI am confounded by this topic...why...in your warped little liberal minds...can it not be possible that Clinton screwed up at it lead to security problems which lead to 911? Oh that's right...the republicans did it, not radical muslims or Bin Laden. I know it may be painful for you to fathom but...it is entriely possible that it is Clintons fault. I am sorry that the truth is going to get out. It is just a shame that they do not do this on the eve on the November election like that fruitloop Micheal Moorehammed did with F911.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:40 pmF911 was a drama sprinkled with a few facts and loads of lies.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:41 pmIf Bush had prevented 9/11 would you be giving the credit to Clinton, hypocrite?
September 6th, 2006 at 6:42 pm#62
"Would you support having F911 shown in schools along side this?"
Neither.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:43 pm#65
BOTH would and should have gotten credit, but in reality BOTH get blame.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:45 pmThey know they control the minds of millions and there is nothing a couple blogs and Olberman can do about it. NOTHING.
Conservatives are taking the nation and the world to very dark place and, like they were blind to the ramifications of their plan free war in Iraq, the cult of conservatism cannot see what they are doing. Just like a cult, they are blind to where their leaders are taking them.
The country is gone, kiss it goodbye. When one major network willingly, OPENLY, in your face, spreads lies and helps promote the alternate false reality for the cult that controls the government, you can say it and say it loud, America is gone.
I am sure the right's "TRUE" savior is loving every minute of it.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/9/13513/46197
Before you conditioned cult clowns start, Rather lost his job for a stupid mistake, The Reagan show was pulled...the nation's death is on your theocratic fascist authoritarian BLIND hands.
You know, Rush has told you cult clowns what and how to think three hours a day, five days week, for the last 16 years, Koresh didn't talk to his cult that much.
You are conditioned blind fools.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:46 pmOh, #43, you try to stir up the kettle, but only display your own ignorance. Were the "docudrama" factually sound, it'd be fine--the problem, of course, is that the counterfactual doesn't exist. It's NOT factually sound--it's a misrepresentation of the highest order. Now, if someone wants to show a version of it that shows, say, Bush's friendship with the bin Ladens...oh, wait, that was actually true. OK, well, let's say it's one where Bush finds out two days before 9/11 exactly what will happen, and lets it happen deliberately. That would be just as outrageous, and just as potentially prejudicial to an election. The difference between Moore's film and this piece of historical forgery is that Moore's information was, with a few small exceptions, correct in its basis. You could argue with his interpretations and presentation, but he wasn't wrong about the base facts.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:47 pmIt's amazing when republican fascists will lie to themselves and others to cover their neo-nazi dumb#@!k of a reject president. Remember Richard Clarke telling everyone OBL and Al Quaeda and he was fired? Remember the Prez Daily Briefing, Osama determined to strike in the US and the dumb#@!k of a reject president's answer, "OK, now you told me, you've covered your ass". Remeber the blank, scared, I don't know what the hell to do look as the dumb#@!k of a reject president sat there and let 2 more planes kill people. yeah, it's Clinton's fault. Idiots.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:48 pmIf Bush had prevented 9/11 would you be giving the credit to Clinton, hypocrite?
Comment by Republicans are the fear and smear party — September 6, 2006 @ 6:42 pm
If Bush prevented it, why the hell would I give credit to Clinton you idiot. This is a stupid argument. And heres a shocker for you...I am not a Bush supporter. I am not religious like you all want to accuse me of, I do not care if gays marry, I am not against all abortion...all of the labels you think I am...but liberals who argue silly nonsense like letting F911 out is ok but this is not makes you look like fruitloops. That is the definition of hipocrit...let them put what ever they want on and let the people decide who is telling the truth. You only want the most extreme anti-American, Bush hating, we are the bad guys propaganda out there. I know most of you think we attacked ourselves on 911, but I want you out there saying that...I would never try to stop you from saying that. Even if you are insane.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:49 pmClinton kept the citizens of this country safer than anyone in the Bush Cabal ever has or ever will. Project Bojinka was thwarted. Serious threats against y2k celebrations were thwarted. President Clinton actively hunted UBL and nearly got him several times. He did all these things and much more without invading a single country or needlessly sacrificing US lives.
Emperor Bush, OTOH, knows nothing but death and distruction. He avoided the warnings of world leaders and the intelligence services. He invaded the wrong country. He chased the wrong man. He has brought not one single person of importance to face justice for what they did to the USA.
Fortunately, many Americans are waking up to some very simple facts.
[from: http://www.pollingreport.com/terror.htm ]
"Do you think that Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi leader, was personally involved in the September 11th terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, or not?"
Was Was Not Unsure
These are the facts. Emperor Bush is trying to make us hate a people who had nothing to do with the events of 9/11/01.
It's sad that some people still buy into Bush's hateful agenda.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:50 pmIt should have read:
Do you think that Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi leader, was personally involved in the September 11th terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, or not?â€
Was Was Not Unsure
38 53 8 per cent
I feel sorry for those 38 percent who still have their heads stuck up their asses.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:52 pmSilly Libs, you arguments are spurious and the name you chose speaks for itself. go back under the republofascist rock you crawled out from under, your ignorence fits you.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:53 pmCalm down silly lips. You're looking dumb, stupid, idiotic, and insane.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:55 pm…I am not a Bush supporter...
oh... yea... another one of those...
September 6th, 2006 at 6:57 pm74...I only chose the name to get a rise out of you. I am finding it so entertaining to see how you all are so upset about this when, for five year, all that has been done is both sides sputing nonsense. Hipocracy is one of the most dangerous triats in man. You can't have it both ways...you can't bash, bash, bash for five years and yell..."Don't bash us!" when someone pushes back. I told you already, I am no fan of Bush. I would have destroyed Afganhastan and Iraq, rather than have one of our soldiers die.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:57 pmABC is complicit - Boycott them now! Boycott the Mouse for supporting such lies.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:58 pmBones: If you don't like this blog, take your "bones" somewhere else.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:59 pmSilly Libs: TMI - besides who cares what you are?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:00 pmDear Silly LIb: Why is not possible to conclude that it could be "Clinton"s fault"? Well, for one thing, of course, your selectively ignorant little conservative mind conveniently forgets which Party controlled Congress while Clinton was President. And which Party controlled Congress when 9-11 happened? Your Party was and is clearly responsible for the creature which is Bin Laden which you people created in Afghanistan against the Russians when he was Mujahadeen instead of terrorist. Conservative stupidity knows no limits....
September 6th, 2006 at 7:01 pm78....That why I will never be one you either. You only deal in extremes. I can't be a non-supporter of Bush but disagree with smashing and balming everything on him? That is why you keep losing elections. That is why, when you make arguments like this one....F911 is ok but this is not...you sound like children taking a temper tantrum.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:01 pmSilly Lips....there's certainly nothing outrageous about this statement....
"I would have destroyed Afganhastan and Iraq, rather than have one of our soldiers die. "
September 6th, 2006 at 7:03 pmThe right wingnuts can dish it out but they surely can't take it! hahahah!
September 6th, 2006 at 7:04 pmBones: If you don’t like this blog, take your “bones†somewhere else.
Comment by suggie — September 6, 2006 @ 6:59 pm
Would you like to explain that ridiculous comment suggie?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:05 pm88 I never said I was not a republican...I said I am not a Bush supporter. And 87...there is nothing worng with that comment. America first...that is why, even though I am not happy with how things are being handled...I will never be a Democrat.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:06 pmIt is indeed possible that some mistakes were made during the Clinton administration that didn't help things. But this film fabricates entire scenes and puts them out there as truth. Worse, they know that the people who read blogs and watch cable news channels are pretty much already decided on their political leanings, so discovering all the falsehoods like we here have does not make much difference. The problem and the real deceit is that the vast majority of Americans do not come into the blog-reading, cable news-watching group and thus will tune into this propaganda having no idea that it is not fact. It will purport to be fact and they will have no reason to suspect otherwise. And thus they may well be swayed politically by the egregious falsehoods they see. Let's face it, if it were true and we (the Lefties) discovered that Clinton opted not to take a surefire shot at Bin Laden, even we might be swayed. And surprise, surprise, there are elections coming up. It is really quite despicable.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:06 pmAre there not laws against a network being overtly political? Cable news is a choice - you pay for cable and you elect to watch a channel that you know leans one way or the other. But is it not the point that the networks, which can be picked up by an antenna by those who do not want/cannot get/cannot afford cable, and thus have no choice in their TV viewing, must remain neutral? Should this not be law? In the UK the political parties are allowed a certain amount of TV time for political broadcasts. They are put on during election times, and every party gets the SAME AMOUNT OF TIME. There is no sneaking in political broadcasts disguised as fiction pretending to be fact. It boggles the mind.
#72
"Clinton kept the citizens of this country safer than anyone in the Bush Cabal ever has or ever will."
Even after the multiple attacks that occured on his watch?
"President Clinton actively hunted UBL and nearly got him several times."
Yes, he reminded us of this many times. Almost is meaningless.
"He did all these things and much more without invading a single country or needlessly sacrificing US lives."
Don't forget allowing al Qaeda to become powerful, emboldened, and sophisticated enough to plot and suceed in carrying out 9/11.
"He has brought not one single person of importance to face justice for what they did to the USA."
He is going to if of course those on the left scream loud enough to stop their prosecution.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14689359/
September 6th, 2006 at 7:08 pmTracy your points are really, really lame but I'm sure you've been told that before.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:12 pm>I will never be a Democrat.
We don't let just anyone in our party, pal.
Just people who have a respect for the truth, competence, and democratic ideas and ideals.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:13 pmCould America be that STUPID and fall for this crap????? My God!!!! If so, this country is doomed. Surely all this has to back fire on ABC as it is all too obvious what they are doing.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:16 pm#83
"Your Party was and is clearly responsible for the creature which is Bin Laden which you people created in Afghanistan against the Russians when he was Mujahadeen instead of terrorist."
Bin Laden became a terrorist and made al Qaeda what it is today during the 1990s.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:16 pm#96
Yes, by really really lame people.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:17 pmOK so if it's Clinton's fault explain this testimony, Senate hearings:
BEN-VENISTE: Good afternoon, gentlemen.
Mr. Pickard, on January 21st of this year you met with our staff. Is that correct?
PICKARD: That’s correct.
BEN-VENISTE: And according to our staff report, you told them that in June 2001, you met with Attorney General Ashcroft and he told you that you would be the acting FBI director.
PICKARD: That’s correct.
BEN-VENISTE: You had some seven or eight meetings with the attorney general?
PICKARD: Somewhere in that number. I have the exact number, but I don’t know the total.
BEN-VENISTE: And according to the statement that our staff took from you, you said that you would start each meeting discussing either counterterrorism or counterintelligence. At the same time the threat level was going up and was very high. Mr. Watson had come to you and said that the CIA was very concerned that there would be an attack. You said that you told the attorney general this fact repeatedly in these meetings. Is that correct?
PICKARD: I told him at least on two occasions.
BEN-VENISTE: And you told the staff according to this statement that Mr. Ashcroft told you that he did not want to hear about this anymore. Is that correct?
PICKARD: That is correct.
Sounds like we know who was responsible for 9-11 and the acting FBI director, Packard knows too.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:17 pmSilly Libs, what a great idea for a movie!
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, President Bill Clinton gives "dictation" to Monica L, an under-cover laison between the White House and OBL. Clinton transmits encoded messages via his DNA on a blue dress to OBL, who, using his kidney dialysis machine in a cave in Afghanistan deciphers his next Impossible Mission.
In a stunning twist of intrigue and suspense, Clinton must keep his successor off-guard and unsuspecting of any possible terrorist activities. He manages to pull this off by leaving in place various agents and officials who dupe the next President by constantly reminding him of terrorist threats. Like hearing a boy crying wolf too many times, Clinton's successor is lulled into a stupor and Clinton's plan is pulled off in a magnificient display of fire and ash.
Yes, Clinton planned it all: the Paula Jones lawsuit; the Ken Starr investigation; even the impeachment, were all carefully contrived distractions designed to keep the American People from knowing what was really going on in the oval office: the hatching of a masterfully diabolical plot to make his successor look bad.
But the ultimate irony was, it was all aimed at Al Gore, who, at the time was thought to be a shoo-in for the next President!!!
September 6th, 2006 at 7:17 pmProblem is that many of their affiliates are owned by Sinclair, which is probably pushing this fictional piece of crap.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:17 pmBin Laden became a terrorist and made al Qaeda what it is today during the 1990s.
Comment by Tracy — September 6, 2006 @ 7:16 pm
LMFAO, yeah, just ignore his roots, that wouldn't look good for cons.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:18 pmAnd you can easily overlook the fact that the Bush family has been in business with the Bin Ladin family for 30 YEARS. So a lot of that money Osama used to set up a terrorist organization is the profits from the Bush-BinLadin businesses. So I guess ABC will be showing that, the Bush profits used to kill Americans.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:21 pmAs a grandmother who raised my children on Disney, I am apalled at the conduct of the Disney CO. What a dishonest example they have become. What example can my grandchildren now look up to?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:22 pmABC = Aiding and/or Abetting Bush/Cheney
September 6th, 2006 at 7:23 pmWith this ABC documentary, is it really any surprise that the right wingers here are so badly misinformed and disengenuous?
You'd think after Curveball, WMDs, mobile bio-weapons labs, Saddam's linking to 911, 45 minute deployment and smoking guns in the form of mushroom clouds that these guys would have learned by now that truth is not on their side.
It's embarrassing that our government is controlled by the same kind of people.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:25 pmNow that Disney has joined the right wing liars what decent role model is left for the kids?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:29 pmI don't know where they got the habit, but it's annoying as hell.
Here they are today, defending a unfactual 'factual' accounting of the 911 Commission report.
What I'd really like to know is, is their disdain for the truth for our benefit or theirs?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:31 pmSL, if you insist on blaming someone who wasn't in office at the time 9/11 happened, what about Reagan? We went into Afghanistan, gave Osama Bin Laden guns and training, then pulled out (cut and ran, as it were) leaving him to consolidate the power base that became Al Quaeda.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:35 pmBlaming Clinton for not stopping Bin Laden is like blaming Lincoln for not stopping Hitler.
The argument here is not Bush vs. Clinton, but if it must become a sticking point then it is important to note that Clinton was hogtied by a hostile Republican Congress after Newt's '94 takeover. There are many examples of Clinton's anti-terrorism inititiatives that were shot-down by the Republicans in Congress between '94 and '99.
It is also well-documented that Clinton identified 'terrorism' as the largest issue facing the country as he gave the presidency over to Bush in 2001.
Congress, which exclusively owns the legislative process in this country, has been run by Republicans since 1994. Any shortcomings in anti-terrorism legislation lies squarely on their shoulders.
The problem with ABC's mini-series is that it has been wholly dissected by those in-the-know and can no longer be considered anything other than a work of fiction. 'Docudrama' is not even accurate - it's fiction. It needs to be labeled as such during the showing and it has no business being supplied to teachers as any type of study reference on the events of 9/11/01.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:35 pmListening to Bernie Ward on KGO.com or 810AM, 10PM to 1AM, I saw what a man he really is. KGO is owned by ABC and this is not stopping Bernie from coming down hard on them and expressing to the audience what he feels is right. Some hosts do their job for entertainment alone and there are others, the real truthseekers who put their job on the line to get the truth out there.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:40 pmBlaming Clinton for not stopping Bin Laden is like blaming Lincoln for not stopping Hitler.
Because Lincoln was too much of a hand-wringing liberal to send troops into Germany.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:43 pmThat email stinks of BS right from the start: It's "unheard of" for movie executives to work over the weekend on a film? What kind of moron wrote that sentence?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:45 pmBoycott all ABC shows until they air an opposing view of 911, like "Loose Change" or even Farenheit 911. (Which they refused to air on TV in '04 against Moores request. ) Shame on you Disney. While we are at it, all democrats, or progressives should not acknowledge FOX "news" either. These are both symptoms of the extreme facist movement the republican party has taken this county down, THE GOVERNMENT IS IN CONTROL OF OUR MEDIA! we must take it back with the almighty dollar, don't watch and they will shift back to the center. Oh yeah, then impeach and imprison Bush. GO to http://www.worldcantwait.org, lets do it on OCT. 5!
September 6th, 2006 at 7:46 pmbut liberals who argue silly nonsense like letting F911 out is ok but this is not makes you look like fruitloops.
I for one am glad this came out, so we can expose how cavalier conservatives are with the truth.
For all the uproar over F911, does anyone remember one falsehood in that movie?
We have a few doosies in TPT911 that we can repeat over and over to remind the voting public that they were and are being lied to.
Would you vote for someone who says Berger hung up on a clandestine team while they were within sight of bin Laden?
Even Republicans are debunking this mockumentary. Or looking like fools as they try to defend it with lines like, "Oh it's sort of loosely based on several different events."
Bring it on. I'm more than ready for a battle of free speech.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:48 pm#117 More like, it's unheard of for movie executives to work at all!
The movie makers, otoh, work 24/7.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:50 pmABC Anti-Clinton Hit Piece...
I have posted a good bit about this Path to 9/11 "docudrama" that ABC is putting out.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:02 pmI apologize if it is too much, but ABC is just making the situation more blatant that this is, in fact, an anti-Bill Clinton hit piece....
#117 I agree with Wrong on this, after reading the 'email from the ABC insider' with lines like
I'm not buying it being authentic. Besides, who trusts cons to be truthful?
September 6th, 2006 at 8:04 pm[...] It appears that our brutal corporate overlords have simply decided that America will be ruled by Republicans forever, no matter how openly and ridiculously they have to intervene in public discourse: 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: [...]
September 6th, 2006 at 8:14 pmSeattle's affiliate is KOMO -- http://www.komotv.com
This shouldn't be hard to argue. The way it is being promoted puts a lie to any claim that it is nonpartisan. ABC's best defense is that it is a "dramatization" -- they admit it portrays events that did not happen. Since when does good journalism involve publishing historical fiction as news? If Clinton was really that negligent, wouldn't they be able to demonstrate that by reporting what actually did happen rather than fictional stories that are supposed to represent the alleged negligence?
September 6th, 2006 at 8:38 pmOh, and don't forget to call your local affiliate, this is much more effective than any other form of communication. Be polite and tell all your friends to call.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:45 pmMickey mouse is a rodent and so is the company that made him. You would expect any different behavior from a rodent? I hope Clinton and all the others slandered by this flea ridden rodent sue the living shit out of Disney and slam their asses out of business. Rodent should be exterminated.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:57 pmLet me get this straight. Clinton higher ups have called ABC, demanding the network cut scenes which tell the truth about the irresponsibility, the cowardice and the emphasis on politics over national security exhibited for the eight years of the Clinton administration. But is the left angry because Clinton was more interested in polls than the well-being of the United States? No. The left is upset because those dirty, rotten conservatives want the film to remain factual and truthful. And these people wonder why they don't win elections!
September 6th, 2006 at 8:58 pmAnyone working on candidate campaigns - tell the press coordinator for the campaign to consider boycotting ABC stations during the 2006 elections. There are four other networks not to mention cable where they can spend their money - they don't have to spend it with stations/networks that are providing free airtime for right-wing propoganda.
Make sure the campaign informs their local ABC affiliate by COB Friday of their intentions so there is time for them to find alternate programming to put on in lieu of the network movie.
Cy Guy
September 6th, 2006 at 9:06 pm"900 screeners" and not a one to President Clinton? Or to Albright or Berger?
Yeah, that seems fair and balanced. Just call it ABC/Disney/Fox.
September 6th, 2006 at 9:14 pmYou see, the reason Clinton let Osama slip through his fingers is because they were full of Monica's hair, and Monica was not really Jewish. She was actuallyan Arab agent of al Queda. Also, the real reason we lost China in '49 was because.......
September 6th, 2006 at 9:22 pmWhat do you expect from Disney? A company founded by a NAZI sympathizer.
September 6th, 2006 at 9:24 pmGosh, that "Silly Girl" sure is tough. Where were all these Rambos on 9-11? These little chickenhawks are so amusing. They would piss in their britches if sent "over there" with our real soldiers. Your remarks show neither courage or substance, much like a little boy wanting to "play" war. Grow up, you little shit...
September 6th, 2006 at 9:37 pmContact Keitel and the other actors - get them to distance themselves from this tripe.
September 6th, 2006 at 10:11 pmit's 1984 folks! the bush neocon cabal want to rewrite history.one state ,one truth,no dissent.the necons are getting the reeducation camps ready.if they say black is white or up is down ,you better agree or you'll be put in one.
September 6th, 2006 at 10:38 pm#71 - WTF? Dissing F911 (excellent film) is a mute point. HELLOOOO!!! I have yet to see F911 on a nationally broadcast network. This pos "Path(etic) to 9/11" is being aired as propaganda over our airwaves for free. No one has to buy a ticket or cable to see it and therein lies the difference. No one would pay to see this crap and the Disney/ABC Facists know this.
BOYCOTT all Disney (and associates) and ABC if they broadcast this insult on our intelligence.
September 6th, 2006 at 10:45 pmBOYCOTT ABC AND THEIR SPONSERS AND TELL YOUR FRIENDS
September 6th, 2006 at 11:00 pmYou people see that blogs like this let the republican spin meisters post. And see the hate and vile and lies that they come up with. rush, o'reilly, malken and the other republican sites won't let anyone but the way out far out rightwing nuts post. That's what you get from censurship.
I like to read the sh*tty lies that the republicans post it only re-inforces the reserve to us to get out then and throw theh dog turds out.
September 6th, 2006 at 11:03 pmTP Assures Right-Wing Bloggers: ‘The Message of the Clinton Admin Failures Remains Fully Debunked’
September 6th, 2006 at 11:53 pmYou people see that blogs like this let the republican spin meisters post. And see the hate and vile and lies that they come up with. rush, o’reilly, malken and the other republican sites won’t let anyone but the way out far out rightwing nuts post. That’s what you get from censurship.
--Marge
==
Indeed they are their own worst enemy, it's like they are stuck in the two minutes of hate [1984] 24 hours a day seven days a week. Now I live in Texas, and if you go out in public these people are nowhere to be found.
They act like normal citizens when they can't hide behind their 101st hate-monger division computer screens. They are like Walter Mittys. Acting out what they cannot in real life. If you want an eye opening experience go to freeper.com and read the violent and hatred posts to anyone that does not agree with their very narrow, very unchristian like views.
September 6th, 2006 at 11:59 pmWalt Disney was a good honest man who loved children, but after he died and Michael Eisner took over as CEO of Disney Corp. the operation turned to greed! Disney is no longer a role model for children, and since they now work for the Bush Regime/GOP, everything they represent is now 100% bad!
September 7th, 2006 at 12:04 amI work in the film industry in SoCal and it’s not without good reason that Disney is often referred to as “Mousechwitz,†and “Duckau.â€
Comment by Badmoodman
September 7th, 2006 at 12:05 am==
Hmm, very interesting, maybe it's time to boycott Disney World?
Well, bloggers, if you want to change the world, follow the money.
For the next three weeks, watch ABC. Write down every single advertiser on your local network affliliate. Call them. Write to them. Let them know whether you will choose to direct your dollars to a company that is supporting ABC through advertising sponsorship-- even if they aren't running ads during TPT911.
One of the very very few strengths left to the average joe in America is we have a little control over where we spend our dollars. Everyone vying for them knows this. No one, short of utilities and the phone company, has big margins and can afford to blow off even single individuals.
Evidence? SBC wouldn't even answer their own customer service or help me when my long-distance service got slammed. Why? they were confident that regardless, they woudl get my dollars, as they didn;t perceive any competition in the local phone market. They were incorrect. I bagged the home phone entirely, and got a cell. Verizon answers right away. Why? Cause it takes me 15 minutes to drop them and pick up another provider. It took me much longer than that to explain to the SBC fool that no, I wasn't startign service at another addres; that I just wanted to be rid of them.
So wield the power you have. And get ready to apply for asylum.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:41 amABC's "The Path To 911" Is Now Totally Politicized...
I haven't weighed on the controversy over ABC's upcoming docudrama "The Path to 911." But now it's time to say it.
After what I've rea......
September 7th, 2006 at 12:51 am#43 said, "Here’ s a thought….what if it really was the Clinton administrations fault? Did that ever cross your minds at all? If so, are you all saying you want suppression of freedon of speech…exactly what you always acuse Republicans of…and are you saying even if it is true, that it should not be shown simply because it would help the Rebuplicans in the coming elections? Do you even know how hipocritical that is?"
The plain meaning of this comment is just right: the goal of ALL investigations of 9/11 ought to be to get at the truth. But, #43, the purpose of the ABC program is to put out an openly-slanted political opinion piece, whose all-but-stated goal is to influence voters in an upcoming election. For the very reason that neither you nor I has the resources to get out OUR OWN policital messages to so wide an audience ==>through the public airwaves
September 7th, 2006 at 12:55 amcorrect me if i am wrong but this email assuring the right wing blogs that there will be no substantial changes in that made for TV dreck...doesnt this put the airing of that propoganda piece into the category of campaign donation to the RNC?
it seems this is now a matter of free campaign air time for the republican party. were any election campaign financing laws possibly broken here?
September 7th, 2006 at 12:56 am(repost because of errant HTML tag in previous message)
#43 said, "Here’ s a thought….what if it really was the Clinton administrations fault? Did that ever cross your minds at all? If so, are you all saying you want suppression of freedon of speech…exactly what you always acuse Republicans of…and are you saying even if it is true, that it should not be shown simply because it would help the Rebuplicans in the coming elections? Do you even know how hipocritical that is?"
The plain meaning of this comment is just right: the goal of ALL investigations of 9/11 ought to be to get at the truth. But, #43, the purpose of the ABC program is to put out an openly-slanted political opinion piece, whose all-but-stated goal is to influence voters in an upcoming election. For the very reason that neither you nor I has the resources to get out OUR OWN policital messages to so wide an audience **through the public airwaves**, this ought to fall under the category of an unauthorized (large!!) political contribution by ABC to the Republicans. This statement stands whether some facts in the piece are true or not; it is absolutely clear that some major "facts" -- such as Clinton not allowing an attack on Al Qaeda -- are untrue in the face of the only real evidence we have: testimony of those involved in these policy decisions. This situation is not analogous to the privately-produced film "Fahrenheit 911", also offered with the purpose of influencing political opinion, because if you visit Moore's website, you can read exhaustive documentation for every fact that is presented in that film.
Yes, indeed, I have no doubt that Clinton made mistakes; but he was laboring under relentless opposition from the Contract With America [sic] Congress. #43, you will have to concede that this would have to a considerable extent tied his hands. But Bush 43 labors under no such limitation at all: he has the full (could even say "abject") support of Congress. It would therefore be expected that Bush 43 should have been more effective in reducing world terrorism including Al Qaeda than Clinton, but both have been ineffective. Moreover, #43, will you not concede that abundant evidence exists to suggest that, in fact, Bush has bungled this effort through blind idiology and just mind-numbing incompetence? Clearly, U.S. foreign policy of late has resulted in the rapid rise of terrorist groups and sympathizers all over the world. If you actually believe Bush 43 has made us safer, mail me your credit card number, that I can sell you a bridge across the East River.
All comments like this tend to do exactly as the Roves of the world would like: and that is for all of us to think of other, and equally-loyal, Americans as The Enemy simply for holding a contrary viewpoint. Rove only wins so long as we are thus divided. So, #43, the correct response in the present case is, indeed, to allow the program to be aired, PROVIDED! equal rebuttal time, for free, is given to those who were active, first-hand participants in the events therein described. We have to start seeing all the peoples of the world as being just as deserving as are we of basic human things: freedom from hunger, shelter, medical care, a basically secure life. We have to see 9/11 not as the onset of a war, fought against us by some people far, far away in the caves of the Hindu Kush, but rather as a symptom of our presently-fragile human condition. We must, ALL of us, pull together for the common good. If we don't abandon our tendency to address our differences by force of arms, sooner or later everybody will have these Very Bad Weapons mainly developed, and sadly used by, the military of the U. S. of A. Advocates/practicioners of right behavior can be found among us: Christ, Gandhi, King, Mandela, John-Paul II. If we ignore their message of nonviolent conflict resolution, then, as Miriam McGillis says, we might well be kicked off the planet as an evolutionary failure. Listen to the wise words of Aragorn: I am come to serve all the peoples of this Middle Earth, to throw down the forces of evil wherever they might be. Will you aid in this effort, or thwart me? Choose quickly
September 7th, 2006 at 12:57 amYou can also file complaints with the FCC, both Informal and 'Petitions to Deny License Renewal, regarding ABC owned and also ABC affiliated stations. The stations do have to deal with these. Have Fun.
Filing TV station complaints with FCC -
http://www.fcc.gov/localism/renew_process_handout.pdf
Explains the renewal process and how to file an informal complaint, or a formal petition to deny (license renewal) against a TV station.
Here are the ABC Owned and Operated TV stations
WABC-TV in New York; KABC-TV in Los Angeles; WLS-TV in Chicago; WPVI-TV in Philadelphia; KGO-TV in San Francisco; and KTRK-TV in Houston (all six among Nielsen's top 10 markets) and WTVD-TV in Raleigh-Durham, NC; KFSN-TV in Fresno, CA; WJRT-TV in Flint, MI; and WTVG-TV in Toledo.
Of course you can also file complaints about any ABC affiliated stations too.
September 7th, 2006 at 1:00 amHere’ s a thought….what if it really was the Clinton administrations fault? Did that ever cross your minds at all? If so, are you all saying you want suppression of freedon of speech…exactly what you always acuse Republicans of…and are you saying even if it is true, that it should not be shown simply because it would help the Rebuplicans in the coming elections? Do you even know how hipocritical that is?â€
September 7th, 2006 at 1:01 am==
Al qaeda, as posted on TP earlier by me, grew out of the Cold War. Further we find that Britain and America helped out Saddam with his WMD capabilities. This occured under Regan and Bush Sr. In order for you to try and blame Clinton then you must also blame Reagan and Bush Sr. I hope you can see the fallacy of your argument.
that it should not be shown simply because it would help the Rebuplicans in the coming elections? Do you even know how hipocritical that is?â€
==
Lets look at the Reagan film that was planned and nixed by the GOP Neo-Cons, They did nix that film and it never showed, they also tried to nix the Moore film. Do you see how hypocritical that is?
Now, I haven't said this film should not be shown, it should should not be shown in school.
Secondly I have stated that they should give the free film to blockbuster and other outlets so it can be viewed by those who want to see it.
Who's the hypocrite?
September 7th, 2006 at 1:06 amStarting tomorrow, I plan on watching ABC for about an hour or two and write down every local business that advertises. Then the phone calls start to the managers at every business listed, notifying them that I intend to boycott their business for one year if ABC runs this travesty as scheduled. Then the flyers listing the businesses get posted.
The affiliates have no choice but to run it. As viewers we can complain all we want, and nothing will happen; however if we get customers paying for advertising time ON the local affiliates to complain about lost business, and then affiliates complaining to corporate, then we'll have the chain working in our favor and not against our message.
Pencil some time in tomorrow folks..... game on!
September 7th, 2006 at 1:45 am"Don’t forget (Clinton) allowing al Qaeda to become powerful, emboldened, and sophisticated enough to plot and suceed in carrying out 9/11."
So, let's see ---- there were about twenty Al Qaida cells broken up during Clinton's watch. (including the thwarting of the millenium plot.) That's allowing AQ to become powerful?
September 7th, 2006 at 6:56 amre 151
The affiliates DO have a choice.
Don't remember where it was posted but it was reported that there is an affiliate in the West that is not airing it.
Not that I don't agree about going after advertisers, but keep emailing your affiliates!
September 7th, 2006 at 7:32 amWell I just checked ABC off my list of networks, so now all the 3 major networks are off and both Fox and Cnn cables channels as well. I won't miss them...The truth is not to be found in the Corporate Media.
September 7th, 2006 at 8:20 am[...] More anti-Bush dogmafrom the liberal elite media. [...]
September 7th, 2006 at 8:49 am#99 - Tracy, "there you go again!" Usama bin Laden was the brain child or Pres. Reagan.
http://www.slate.com/id/2102243/
Pres. Reagan is the reason that modern day terrorism is such a problem.
(Second article)
http://www.slate.com/id/2101866/
"It's often forgotten, but Reagan's eight years in office witnessed a marked increase in acts of international terrorism. In fact, terrorists killed far more Americans during the 1980s than during the 1990s. In 1983, Hezbollah suicide bombers attacked the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 63. Later that year, in October, a 12,000-pound bomb destroyed the Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 Americans--the most deadly terrorist strike against the United States until September 11. In March 1984, Islamic terrorists kidnapped, and eventually killed, a CIA officer. The following month, Hezbollah killed 18 American soldiers in an attack on a restaurant near an airbase in Spain. Two U.S. military personnel were killed by another truck bombing in Beirut in September 1984. Terrorists hijacked an airliner, TWA 847, in July 1985 and killed one American, Navy diver Robert Stethem, whose corpse was thrown out of the plane and onto the runway. In October came the Achille Lauro incident, in which Palestinian terrorists commandeered a cruise ship and executed Leon Klinghoffer, a wheelchair-bound American tourist. In December, Abu Nidal terrorists attacked travelers simultaneously at airports in Rome and Vienna. In March 1986, terrorists killed four Americans in Greece. In April, Libyans bombed a West Berlin disco, killing two American soldiers and injuring dozens more. The Libyan attack finally elicited a military response from Reagan, who sent U.S. bombers to attack Tripoli and Benghazi. Commenting on the years of passivity preceding the Libya bombing, Reagan's biographer, Lou Cannon, observed, "For five years of his presidency, Reagan talked tough about terrorism but did virtually nothing in the way of retaliatory action to stop it.""
http://www.tnr.com/user/nregi.mhtml?i=20040621&s=lizza062104&pt=WAlKuCoRTI77zApgT0aIQx%3D%3D
You need to look beyond the Republican whipping boy Pres. Clinton when looking for a beginning for international terrorism.
September 7th, 2006 at 9:07 amPersonally, I'll be watching the documentary "The secret history of 9/11" on CBC this sunday evening, starting at 7pm. The authors of ABC's crockudrama and the network itself can go sod themselves.
September 7th, 2006 at 9:09 amHouse of Lies...
The House of Mouse is taking fire from all sides for its ABC "docu-drama" on the September 11 terror attacks, and it's not just from Clinton sympathisers....
September 7th, 2006 at 9:47 am[...] Â Congress voiced their displeasure over the program, and in seeming acquiescence, ABC decided to change a few things. Why then, is an ABC insider assuring right-wing bloggers that “Clinton’s failure will remain fully intact despite minor changes to the program?” Is this why they’ve refused to give anyone who worked with the Clinton administration copies of the program? I know…they just need to disguise themselves by saying how much they love Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly….then they’ll get a copy overnighted. [...]
September 7th, 2006 at 10:15 am[...] If Hugh Hewitt is to be believed (a dicey prospect at best), then ABC’s unrepentant politicizing of 9/11 continues. Via ThinkProgress: ABC Insider Assures Right-Wing Bloggers: ‘The Message of the Clinton Admin Failures Remains Fully Intact’ ABC won’t give President Clinton, Madeleine Albright or Sandy Berger a copy of its 9/11 docudrama, “The Path to 9/11.†But there is virtually nothing about the film ABC won’t share with the right-wing blogosphere. [...]
September 7th, 2006 at 10:58 amClinton and Gore made deals. Bush won't. Democrats put Bush in because the terror bill added up and we all know what Bush is like.
Clinton and Gore knew there was going to be terror. your going to need us..................
September 7th, 2006 at 11:31 amA nationwide boycott of the sponsors is one way to combat this. Also, of course, NOBODY should ever fork over any money to see a Disney movie again, nor should they visit Disney theme parks.
Then, we must ensure that the word gets out that this program is a partisan hit, created by partisan hacks. Those slandered should sue. We might even consider a class action suit on behalf of the whole country, as 911 was a very personal experience for everyone, and Disney is deliberately attempting to rewrite history.
The fact is, that this would be a great time to broadcast to all how BushCo allowed 911 to happen. Emphasis should be put on the facts, that there were many warnings that were not acted upon. It is a great opportunity to open up a discussion that the right really doesn't want to revisit. In other words, turn this around on them.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:36 pmI've got a burning question about this propagandistic mini-series -- if it's going for two nights, prime-time on ABC WITHOUT COMMERCIALS, then WHO is funding this film? In this day and age of big-profits business, how can they air something for 6 hours over 2 nights without any monetary input from sponsors?
September 7th, 2006 at 12:38 pm#156
"Pres. Reagan is the reason that modern day terrorism is such a problem."
Yeah, whatever its all Regan's fault. Given that I guess it's OK to credit Clinton with Al Qaeda becoming so powerful and bold during the 1990s?
If you think that international terrorism started during the early 1980s then you need to look at your history books again.
"You need to look beyond the Republican whipping boy Pres. Clinton when looking for a beginning for international terrorism."
I blame Clinton for not doing nearly enough to keep al Qaeda in check or try to disable the network during the 1990s.
"For five years of his presidency, Reagan talked tough about terrorism but did virtually nothing in the way of retaliatory action to stop it.â€"
Sounds alot how Clinton talked tough about terroism for eight years,but did virtually nothing in the way of retaliatory action to stop it....which unfortunately led to 9/11. LOL!
There has only been one who has actually taken real action against international terrorism.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:48 pm#164 - "There has only been one who has actually taken real action against international terrorism. "
Comment by Tracy — September 7, 2006 @ 12:48 pm
I know you're not talking about Pres. Bush!
Why is the Taliban back in Afghanistan if Pres. Bush is taking what you call "real action"?
Why have there been more acts of international terrorism if Pres. Bush is taking what you call "real action"?
Why is international terrorism on the rise if Pres. Bush is taking what you call "real action"?
I will admit that Pres. Clinton could have done more in responding to international terrorism, but you seem to think that no Republicans are responsible for any incidents of international terrorism. You're blinders are causing you to see the world in a skewed fashion.
September 7th, 2006 at 2:04 pmFolks, we should lay off "Silly Libs" ... it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Not nearly sporting enough for me.
Oh, and Tracy ... how's that "retaliatory action" going these days? Seems like Iraq and Afghanistan are real calm places. And by the way, if terrorism took off so much in the 1990's, what does that say about the efficacy of whatever "retaliatory action" Reagan and Bush 41 took?
(Of course, the truth is, terrorism was worse in the 1980's - after Israel invaded Lebanon with the tacit (or explicit) support of Pres. Reagan - and spiked again in Bush's term, where it continues to increase despite Bush's "retaliatory action." It's funny, whenever Democrats - Carter, Clinton- work for peace in the middle east, things tend to calm down. Whenever Republicans - Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43 - undercut the middle east peace process (not to mention bolster that there Saddam Hussein - oops!), terrorism surges. Hmm. Could there be a connection?)
September 7th, 2006 at 2:55 pm#165
"I know you’re not talking about Pres. Bush!"
You know I am, because compared to Clinton or any other U.S. president, Bush has done more to confront terrorism, shut down their networks, their finances, and take out their training camps. That's of course if you can present some evidence to the contrary.
"Why is the Taliban back in Afghanistan"
You know and I know that it would be impossible to eradicate all of the Taliban elements in Afghanistan. Are the Taliban in control of any part of Afghanistan? No. Yes they still cause problems, launch their little attacks from time to time, but they aren't a controlling force like they once were.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/10551/
Why are there no al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan anymore? That is of course you can present some evidence to the contrary.
"Why have there been more acts of international terrorism if Pres. Bush is taking what you call “real action�"
ANY enemy will do all it can in acts of desperation to counter those that are hunting them. I would say that the rise in the number of individual attacks is very logical since we TRUELY started hunting these thugs.
"...but you seem to think that no Republicans are responsible for any incidents of international terrorism."
Those who committed the acts are resonsible first and foremost. I agree that Regan didn't correctly treat terrorism (really the rise of Islamic fundementalism) the same as he did in fighting the Cold War against the Soviets. Clinton, in my opinion, is responsible for al Qaeda's rise and expansion as an international terrorist organization. I believe however, that Clinton and Bush BOTH bear all the blame for not being able to stop 9/11.
September 7th, 2006 at 4:08 pmDo you even know how hipocritical that is?
Comment by Silly Libs — September 6, 2006 @ 6:14 pm
Do you even know how to spell hypocritical, Silly Neocon?
September 7th, 2006 at 4:17 pmWalt Disney was a good honest man who loved children, but after he died and Michael Eisner took over as CEO of Disney Corp. the operation turned to greed! Disney is no longer a role model for children, and since they now work for the Bush Regime/GOP, everything they represent is now 100% bad!
Comment by Jay Randal — September 7, 2006 @ 12:04 am
Are you shittin' me? Walt Disney was a notorious Nazi sympathizer. There was nothing good about that man.
September 7th, 2006 at 4:30 pmWell you would think that if OBL was behind the attacks, the FBI would include that in his wanted poster. It's not there Hum! And I bet they don't show Bush saying he saw the first plane hit before he went into the classroom to cower with the children. How could that moron have seen that? And he said it twice. And the "Pulling" of WTC 7 I suppose Bill Clinton ordered that too. It doesn't matter if Bill Clinton didn't kill or catch OBL according to the FBI OBL didn't do it. The "Dick" Cheney is the terrorist you asshole Repugs are looking for. I bet you Repugs blame Clinton for the boyle on Rushs butt too.
September 7th, 2006 at 5:49 pm“You know I am, because compared to Clinton or any other U.S. president, Bush has done more to confront terrorism, shut down their networks, their finances, and take out their training camps. That’s of course if you can present some evidence to the contrary.â€
Is that why he caved in to the demands of Bin Laden to remove our troops from Saudi Arabia? In 1996, Osama demanded that America remove their troops from SA, and wanted the price of oil to rise. In 2003, Bush quietly started removing our troops from SA, and the price of oil has steadily risen.
And since Bush came into power, terrorist organizations have become more and more powerful, gaining more recruits due to our illegal invasion and occupation of a sovereign country. Do you know what the PNAC is? Do you know that Bush and his cabal were drooling about the idea of getting to invade Iraq even before 9/11 happened? Have you noticed that every single reason Bush and his cronies gave as reasons we should invade Iraq has been proven wrong? And that during his last press conference, Bush even answered the question of "What did Iraq have to do with 9/11?" with the answer: "Nothing at all."
Why have the companies that are all run by Bush loyalists and friends being handed no-bid contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, with corruption running completely rampant?
"You know and I know that it would be impossible to eradicate all of the Taliban elements in Afghanistan. Are the Taliban in control of any part of Afghanistan? No. Yes they still cause problems, launch their little attacks from time to time, but they aren’t a controlling force like they once were.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/10551/
Why are there no al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan anymore? That is of course you can present some evidence to the contrary."
Do you have proof there AREN'T any training camps? I'd like to see you prove this statement. Because if you can't prove there aren't any, why do you ask others to prove there are? Where does the burden of proof lie? The fact that terrorists are still attacking, that the Taliban is resurgent and taking over southern Afghanistan again, the opium production is at an all-time high, etc, does not tend to inspire confidence that the terrorists and their supporters/allies are "done" in that country. And I don't think the people being gunned down and killed would consider that "little attacks".
"ANY enemy will do all it can in acts of desperation to counter those that are hunting them. I would say that the rise in the number of individual attacks is very logical since we TRUELY started hunting these thugs."
Actually, the number of attacks skyrocketed for one reason: we invaded Iraq. We are now occupiers in their country. Even the generals on the ground say that the number of foreign fighters in Iraq is "less than 5%". The people that are shooting at our troops in Iraq are Iraqis. They want us out of their country. Yet Bush has come out and said "As long as I'm president, we're not leaving Iraq".
"Those who committed the acts are resonsible first and foremost. I agree that Regan didn’t correctly treat terrorism (really the rise of Islamic fundementalism) the same as he did in fighting the Cold War against the Soviets. Clinton, in my opinion, is responsible for al Qaeda’s rise and expansion as an international terrorist organization. I believe however, that Clinton and Bush BOTH bear all the blame for not being able to stop 9/11."
Actually, I would tend to put the blame more squarely on the Republican congress who was attempting to hamstring Clinton in every way they could with partisan attacks whenever he tried to do something about it. They accused him of "wag the dog" tactics, and decried his attempts to go after the people who committed the acts.
After Bush came into power, he essentially tossed aside EVERY anti-terrorism program that Clinton had put into effect, and dismissed his statement that "terrorism is the number one threat to the country". Rice even admitted that she hadn't even looked at the huge folder of Al-Quaeda information until after the 9/11 attacks. Richard Clarke kept hammering home the idea that Al-Quaeda was a major threat, and should be dealt with. He was ignored.
In August, Bush was handed a report that said "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside US". It spoke of a major hijacking attempt in the works. At the G8 summit, there were warnings of terrorists flying planes into the building. That's why Bush slept on a boat instead. Yet they claimed "we had no idea anyone would use a plane as a weapon".
When Bush was told a second plane had struck the WTC, he shrugged it off and sat in a classroom full of children, putting them all at risk, for quite some time before posing for a few more photos and departing, rather than immediately leaving to take care of what was going on.
Why wasn't the plane that struck the Pentagon shot down? The airspace over the Pentagon is a permanent "no-fly zone", and is within minutes of an air force base with intercept fighters.
You claim Bush has "done more than any other president" as far as fighting terrorism.
I counter that he has done more to appease, embolden and encourage terrorism through his criminal policies, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and foreign policy that essentially amounts to telling everyone to "suck my ****".
Why will diplomacy "take a long time, and be a long process" with North Korea, yet they bang the drums and stumble over themselves to rush to war with Iraq, and now are doing the same thing in starting to push for a war with Iran.
The simple fact is, Bush has done more harm to our country and the rest of the world than any other president in the history of our country.
He should be impeached, and imprisoned, along with the rest of his criminal cabal.
September 7th, 2006 at 6:03 pmHere Here # 171
September 7th, 2006 at 6:24 pmThese silly right winged nuts. You would think they would see the light by now. They even think they actually won the elections of 2000 and 2004 without cheating. LOL! Stupid is as stupid does.
[...] But, you say, ABC says no one has seen the final edit! Okay, but let’s not forget that ABC has already reassured its winger supporters that it wouldn’t make substantial edits to the film. 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: [...]
September 7th, 2006 at 8:22 pmIt is utterly nauseating that anyone is trying to make a profit on this tragedy.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:53 pmThe main reason Clinton and the left never received any viewing copies of this garbage is because they would already be suing abc and disney. They want everyone to have to shovel down there crap Sun. and Mon.by having to watch or tape it Before they can SUE the s.o.b.'s!
September 7th, 2006 at 11:14 pmBoycott,Boycott,Boycott !!!!!!
Conservatives Should Hate Disney's Path to 911 Too...
When I heard that Disney was making The Path to 9/11, I thought it was too soon to be making a cartoon about September 11....
September 8th, 2006 at 4:35 am#171
"In 2003, Bush quietly started removing our troops from SA, and the price of oil has steadily risen. "
Saddam was no longer in control of Iraq in 2003 and the NFZ was no longer needed. The troops in Saudi Arabia we those that supported Prince Sultan Air Base where many of the NFZ patrol aircraft operated from. I thought you were asking a serious question...my bad.
"And since Bush came into power, terrorist organizations have become more and more powerful..."
Like al Qaeda? Are you suggesting that they are more capable than prior to 9/11?
"Do you know what the PNAC is?"
Yes I do.
"Do you know that Bush and his cabal were drooling about the idea of getting to invade Iraq even before 9/11 happened?"
Yes, I have heard this BS theory before.
"Have you noticed that every single reason Bush and his cronies gave as reasons we should invade Iraq has been proven wrong?"
Except the push for democracy. The later were a result of faulty intelligence assessments.
"And that during his last press conference, Bush even answered the question of “What did Iraq have to do with 9/11?†with the answer: “Nothing at all.â€"
And in all of his speeches leading up to the invasion he never once said the Iraq did have a role in 9/11. I you thought you heard that Bush said this then you weren't listening.
"Why have the companies that are all run by Bush loyalists and friends being handed no-bid contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, with corruption running completely rampant?"
Good question. I don't like the idea of no bid contracts, however there aren't ANY American companies that have the capability of Halliburton.
"Do you have proof there AREN’T any training camps?"
Other than what the Pentagon or the Pakistani government says. Do you actually think that if a terrorist training camp were discovered in Afghanistan with all of the patrols on the ground and in the air, something that would be very hard to hide BTW, that it would be there the next day? If there were training camps in Afghanistan the press would have found out about them or they would have been leaked to the press or more realistically the press would have reported it's destruction by U.S jets.
"...that the Taliban is resurgent and taking over southern Afghanistan again,"
I will ask the same of you do you have proof that the Taliban are taking over southern Afghanistan?
"Actually, the number of attacks skyrocketed for one reason: we invaded Iraq."
The terrorist attacks skyrocketed because they tried to test the resolve of the American military to see if they could get them to pull out so THEY could move in an take control of Iraq considering their former haven, i.e. Afghanistan, was taken away. I sure hope you aren't suggesting that those in Iraq launching IED attacks against U.S. troops are doing so because they are trying to "liberate" Iraq from foreign occupation.
"Actually, I would tend to put the blame more squarely on the Republican congress who was attempting to hamstring Clinton in every way they could with partisan attacks whenever he tried to do something about it."
Are you kidding? If Clinton was actually "hamstrung" by the U.S. Congress when he was conducting his campaign against the terrorists, which BTW he had carte blanch authority to do just about anything militarily, cover or overt, short of declaring war on another country against international terrorism during the 1990s, then he was the biggest wimp of a president there ever was. So Clinton actually bowed to the partisan attacks by the Republican congress and retreated from what he thought he had to do in order prevent terrorist attacks? Is that what you are suggesting?
"In August, Bush was handed a report that said “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside USâ€."
This was not hot new information handed to the Bush administration.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/14/terror/main611775.shtml
"Yet Bush has come out and said “As long as I’m president, we’re not leaving Iraqâ€."
He said that until the Iraqi's can fend for themselves we're not leaving Iraq. Nice try to take his words out of context.
"When Bush was told a second plane had struck the WTC, he shrugged it off..."
Shrugged it off? I remember vividly the look on Bush's face was one of utter anger and definitely had the "I'm going to kick their ass" look. The president relied on the secret service security detail to instructed him on what he was to do when he was whispered the news. This BS idea that many thought they saw a "deer caught in the headlights" is total nonsense. This interpretation was circulated by those who have zero knowledge of presidential security protocol.
"Why wasn’t the plane that struck the Pentagon shot down?"
Same reason the none of the planes were shot down. Once those planes turned off their transponders and stopped "sqawking" the FAA lost track of them considering this is how they track aircraft over the U.S. Contrary to those with no experience in how the FAA tracks aircraft, they don't use ground based radars to do it. The range of these radars is about 20 miles and is used to track for emergency purposes only.
"The airspace over the Pentagon is a permanent “no-fly zoneâ€,"
That's really funny because you can see Reagan International Airport which is less than a mile away and the N-S approach to runway 15 is directly over the Pentagon.
"I counter that he has done more to appease, embolden and encourage terrorism..."
Appease? How? Embolden and encourage....of course in the short term this is going to be true, but if the political climate in the Middle East will change, which had zero chance of doing prior to Bush being in office, then it will most likely drop considerably.
"...and now are doing the same thing in starting to push for a war with Iran."
The Bush administration is not pushing for a war with Iran, and those who talk about military strikes on Iran are doing so because of what Iran has DONE and TALKS about doing, one being the destruction of Israel and the other is hurting the U.S.
September 8th, 2006 at 9:21 amAs long as their audiences are the same uneducated self indulgent turds that elected this adolescent shit for brains president, the country will remain in the hands of these dull witted douchebags.
September 8th, 2006 at 12:11 pmI guess the only reason this story is news is because it highlights what jolly campers mainstream media insiders are with themselves about being propagandists for the regime. They no longer feel the need to hide it or fake shame over it.
September 8th, 2006 at 12:33 pmTell Disney how you feel when you spend your dollars---boycott!!
September 8th, 2006 at 12:35 pmHas anyone been to Disney World lately?
After buying your ticket (only guessing here, but I would suggest the vast majority of visitors use credit cards to cover the outlandish admission price - the Disney kiosks, significantly, do not accept debit cards unless they are also credit cards) and taking a train or boat to the secondary gates, you must pass through a turnstile. At this turnstile, you are required to insert the ticket you purchased at the front gate AND stick your finger into a hooded receptacle which can only be a fingerprint reader.
Because they have your credit card number, Disney has the necessary root information to determine your address and other personal information; and, with your fingerprint cross-referenced to your credit card, Disney has a pretty high quality "security" database.
Let's not forget that the Patriot Act allows the government to obtain any and all information they want from any US corporation - so, the Disney database magically (how appropriate!) becomes a government database.
So, in the twenty-first century, where do the corporations end and government begin? As far as Disney is concerned, the line has definitely blurred to the point of total erasure.
September 8th, 2006 at 2:45 pmi was all ready to make the call you asked me to make until i read the full email that you linked to.
(did the rest of you read it?)
the comments you took out of context take on a completely different character than you would have us believe when read within the body of the original email.
if we're going to "get the enemy", you can't f*ck with the facts just to make "them" sound worse. they're already bad enough, and you just make "our side" look as bad as them for twisting the truth to fit our agenda.
now i'm totally pissed at you instead of them, which is a total waste of energy!
September 8th, 2006 at 6:13 pm~chris
Chris of Comment 182,
If you are referring to the link at the top of this page to the email sent to Hugh Hewitt I don't understand your point. Do you know Hugh's position? Did you look at the titles of his books and the people who are guests on his show? What could you possibly see in that email that would make you change your position.
Why care about "comments out of context" when it would appear that the writers/producers of this mini-series have not taken their comments and script-writing from the facts.
Linking Clinton admin with 9/11 is B/S and once you know the facts it doesn't matter what some silly Disney exec says. Mickey Mouse reigns and young american men are dying in Iraq!
Make the call.
Jerry
September 8th, 2006 at 8:11 pmCongrats to tracy for arranging direct deposit of her checks from the GOP. Apparently God AND Bush walk on water. Whether it's the war(s) or a movie, some folks just don't let the facts get in the way of a good profit stream.
September 8th, 2006 at 9:39 pmI left a voice message for Senator Mitchell saying how irresponsible it would be for ABC to air a "docudrama" they KNEW misrepresented the accuracy of the 9/11 Commission Report.
I politely demanded that they PULL the movie because the American people have been lied to enough, and this particular lie would be one too many!
September 8th, 2006 at 10:39 pmHeh..."basic courtesty to a former President?"???
What do you consider "basic courtesy"?
Changing the facts to suit his ego? Get with it lefty media...
September 8th, 2006 at 11:14 pmWhat's one more post about this subject really worth? I was thinking as I ran down all the posts - what does this really matter? And the answer is: It matters because it shows that there are a hell of a lot of people out there who hate what's happening to this country. I take you back to 1933, when a paltry few, backed by only 30% of a nation took control of the government and the media. It took 12 years and 50 million lives to bring them down. There is very little difference in the tactics we are seeing now: "Tell a lie enough times, and it will be believed." That was Josef Goebbels' philosophy, and it is clearly the practice of the Right-Wing Political Machine here and now.
Kudos to Scholastic Books for rewriting their materials to help kids tell the truth from the lies being presented in this film. At least one corporate machine still has some honor left.
And, by the way, Disney has always been bigoted and discriminatory in their practices. Ask the actors who play the characters and had to sue to be allowed to wear their own underwear and not the lice-ridden underwear provided by the company. First they wouldn't hire anyone over a certain age - until they were sued. Then they wouldn't hire people of color - until they were sued. Get the pattern here? Is there any doubt as to their corporate conscience? There is none, and as far back as I can remember, there never was.
I say talk to everyone we know, boycott Disney and ABC and all their affiliates. Between us, we know a lot of people. Hit them where it hurts the most - in their wallets.
September 9th, 2006 at 10:55 amBOYCOTT ABC & DISNEY IF PATH TO 911 IS AIRED. TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW.
September 10th, 2006 at 2:19 amIf you believe "The Path to 9/11" is propaganda, then you are part of the problem not part of the solution.
September 11th, 2006 at 3:16 pmRegardless the subject from each of the posts, fingerpointing continues with no resolve. Our politicians have and will continue to lie to us because they can and believe it's the best for us. We're simply too busy with our own lives or arguing with each other (politically) and that's a great shield for any politician. We speak out, then cocoon in our world at home with no passion to unite as a country because we're preoccupied with ourselves to ever stand up collectively and create change.
We continue everyday to divide ourselves due to varying politics as another attack is being planned against Americans, here and abroad. We are not united as a country, as a people, and that's a victory for any terrorist group. Nothing would make the radical Muslims of the world more happy than a civil war on our soil. For the vast majority of us, we don't believe we're at war (with terrorists) because it's not in our face, in our streets everyday. We are simply in denial, believing we are safe and the bloodshed will never happen to us, in our neighborhood. Least not forget, the hatred you have for opposing politics in America pales to those Muslims willing to die for their cause.
September 13th, 2006 at 10:40 amccitibank sears credit card91
September 29th, 2006 at 10:59 amdisney's mickey mouse
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page...and have to say thanks. nice read.
March 14th, 2008 at 8:10 amKds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 11:14 pmEric
Such a fun and informative blog! Hopefully others can find value in my site as well.
March 18th, 2008 at 2:45 amholly madison nude pics
Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !
March 18th, 2008 at 7:20 amBasic Baby Wear
It is a quite interesting post but quite difficult to understand for me -
March 18th, 2008 at 5:37 pmPee Public Pee Public Pissing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 10:52 pmgroups cruise
Interestingly, this was on CNN last week.
March 18th, 2008 at 11:12 pmWeb Service Relay
Extremely interesting post. A little bit different from my point of view but neverless an interesting opinion.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:36 amHow To File Bankruptcy Without Attorney Ca
Please keep these excellent posts coming.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:52 amtarget baby gates
Thanks for creating this blog. I thought it was a very interesting read. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 23rd, 2008 at 8:23 amGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 7:20 pmCable Channels
watch tv on my computer
March 24th, 2008 at 2:01 amBlack Pussy Black Lesbian Porn Fat Black Pussy
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 10:29 pmGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 8:08 amGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 12:55 pmAss Thick Ass Babes Kick Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 10:49 pmJessie
If you truly want to learn more see this article
March 31st, 2008 at 2:41 pmRorie
I think you hit the nail on the head with this.
April 1st, 2008 at 4:02 amJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:48 amfile-taxes-online-free
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:15 pmYoung Girls Youngest Boys Gallery Young Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:25 pmzero setup
You've nailed it.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:26 am