The path to "The Path to 9/11," Contd....

It's nice to see you only quote right wingers, and then throw in a Clinton foe. I think you make the case about how the right-wing is given control of the media, at least at ABC. I don't give a darn what any right-wing propagandist thinks about this or anything else. Only people who deal strictly with fact and truth should have their opinions considered.

That is the issue with the mini-series as well, and now I get why you don't object to it - you have no issue with professional liars.

I have no connection to the tragic 9/11, other than being an American...I for one hope ABC does go on with the show...As Americans, I think we can form our own thoughts, as to what we believe or don't...It does not matter as to what party we belong to, both parties are guilty of not doing enough to prevent this, and maybe we can learn from your show as to what we can do as Americans to prevent it from happening again.The Republicans didn't like it when Michael Moore did his show and put down Pres. Bush, and we watched it , because it was our choice, now the Democrats don't like it, and it should be our choice again.

I get a kick out of these little right-wing neo-con robots(the ones who claim not to be republicans) crying "freedom of speech" and censorship" this from the same bunch that calls anyone who critises Bush a Nazi and wants evolution removed from school curiculums. Give me a break.

One problem with "The Path to 9/11" is that it has a political agenda. Its message, "Democrats gave us 911" isn't supported by the 9/11 Commisson report, although it dovetails nicely with the Republican's persistent campaign theme "If the Democrats win we'll have another 9/11"

1984 !

What ever happened to the Freedom of Speech the liberals and the Democrats insist on bringing up when ever Hollywood makes a movie "they" agree with or like?? Michael Moore called his movie a Documentary when it was NOT!! ABC says their movie is not a documentary--yet Bill Clinton and the like are really having a fit!! I say --Go ABC--

I just sent an e-mail to ABC and told them this: If it airs without ALL corrections made in terms of accuracy and bias, then no kidding around. I will not support ABC or the Walt Disney Corporation, their associated companies or their sponsors. I have a seven year old daughter - she loves Disney princesses and has been to Disneyland. But I'm not fooling around; Ariel, Belle and Cinderella will be persona non grata in my household. I haven't set foot in Walmart in five years, and everyone who knows me well knows exactly why. I'm not shy about it. I think ABC is making a HUGE mistake here - Walt Disney can kiss their $32 billion revenue good-bye. Sell your Disney stock if you've got any.

Part of the problem here is that the very airing of the film is a massive coup for Karl Rove and yet another deception forced on the American public. Rove knows that once the film has aired most viewers will not follow the fallout and the truth about who is behind it. While many of us are against censorship, what are we supposed to do with a 5-6 hour uninterupted Bush commercial complete with a live speech (not on West Coast) from Bush right at the climax? This has been planned for some time and all the spinmeisters really have to do is make sure it is aired. The truth be damned! As we will see in the next few months this agenda has only just begun.

If ABC edits, any of this series, then Clinton wins again. I don't blame just Clinton, it was the Presidents, before and after him, too. I am so tired of Democrats trying to white-wash the Clinton era and people turnig a deaf ear to what he stands for, I don't think he or Hilary would know truth if it came knocking. I believe in free speech and if ABC edits this, then I will realize, free speech is only if you don't critisize Democrats, just Republicans, of which I am neither. We all have been let down by the White house and neither party has shown to be best
or that old word we don't hear to often HONESTY.

Don't worry, Jake. Just ignore what all those mean people are saying about you and your parent company. Your cocktail wienies will still be waiting for you.

I have had it with the media. That ABC would bow to the pressure of the Clintons and the other liberals and "rewrite" the program so that it places them in a favorable light is the last straw with me.

We the American People can stand the truth and we actually know the truth and do not need anyone to water it down or make it a little more palatable for us. We need the truth no matter who it points out or paints in a harsh light. Bill Clinton in my opinion is trying to rewrite history books so that he will look good. Too late for that.

I will not watch your program tomorrow night and Monday night no matter which version you air. I will not watch anything that has "had" to be made more palatable and censored by anyone.

Nor will I watch anything produced by cowards.

As far as I am concerned Bill Clinton and his wife and administration did more harm to this country than any other in our history. Certainly in my opinion they were the most corrupt. His wife now changes her tune in order to stay in public view hoping for a shot in the White House. One Clinton in the Whitehouse was too costly for me.

And the blame for 9/11 certainly lies squarely with the Clinton Administration and President Bush inherited it. Perhaps if Bill Clinton paid as much attention to presidential business as he did with Monica Lewinsky perhaps we would not be in the mess we are in right now.

I changed political parties because of Bill Clinton and his shenanigans. I can and will certainly change my television dial.

I am interested in who paid the 40 million for this right wing hit piece. I am also interested in how much T.Kean was paid. Was there governmental involvement?
Max Blumenthal has an excellent review of the motivations behind the production and the marketing of this conservative spun fantasy.

While ABC provided 900 DVDs of this movie to conservatives, Clinton officials and objective mainstream outlets were denied them. The email Liberty Film Festival co founder Govindini Murty sent out promoting this farce really says it all:
"Please do everything you can to spread the word about this excellent miniseries," "so that 'The Path to 9/11' gets the highest ratings possible when it airs on September 10 & 11! If this show gets huge ratings, then ABC will be more likely to produce pro-American movies and TV shows in the future!"
I will never look at Mickey Mouse again without picturing the 9/11 tragedy and its exploitation. I don't want to show my children propaganda disguised as entertainment. I value truth, not politics. I no longer value ABC. Goodnight and goodluck.

The reader who thinks we who support Bill Clinton are brainwashed, please think again. This White House has lied so often about really important matters, and if they were telling the thruth, we wouldn't know it. Why was Clinton impeached for a sex act, but Bush and co. continue to get away with all the lies? The right wing nut jobs make me ill.

I think both sides of this argument would be well served to read Mr. Scheuer's book. He explains it all nicely. The Clinton apologists are unwilling to consider anything but blind faith that Clinton can do no wrong, it is only evil Republicans. That is a very dangerous way of viewing the world.

ABC needs to step up to this issue big time. I would love to see scene by scene analysis with opportunity for participants to commend and discuss. Notice I didn't say censor it, I said call it what it is: FICTION. Unfortunately by blurring the line between history and fiction, ABC is eroding respect for its programming including its news organization.

“The Path to 9/11” controversy points out something that ought to be self-evident: a docudrama is a dangerous and easily abused art form. It is inherently dangerous to blend fact and fiction together and then pass it off as a serious portrayal of real events. The average viewer, who has no clue which details are factual and which are the figment of some writer’s imagination, will inevitably believe some or all of the fictional parts to be fact and be left with a warped understanding of history. Hitler’s minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebels, understood only too well how such techniques could be used to deliberately influence the minds of viewers to support the goals of National Socialism. Even if one were to somehow clearly mark all fictionalized scenes as “fiction”, there would still be some that would give undue credence to them.

Why do the news media create docudrama movies when the actual facts and actual events are for the most part known or available, and when those whom they portray in fictitious scenes are available to tell what really occurred? Probably for the same reason they cover major points of contention by presenting spokesmen from opposing camps who can’t even agree on the basic facts, much less solutions. Investigative reporting no doubt takes more time, effort, and money than just relying on self-proclaimed “experts” or on writers with a good imagination.

It used to be the job of the news media to do some investigative research to find out the facts, and not just let groups and individuals get away with distorting the facts to promote their own agenda. Opposing views are not of equal value when one is based on demonstrable falsehoods, and it is a disservice when the news media under the guise of “equal treatment” fails to do its homework and point out lies for what they are.

It would be better that docudrama be avoided wherever possible, but if not, the only semi-responsible way to do it requires scrupulously avoiding drama that contradicts known facts, or depicts people as taking actions or positions that contradict known facts, or substituting drama in cases where some serious research could be expected to uncover the real facts. The drama part should be reserved for details that are basically unknowable. All the evidence so far suggests that “The Path to 7/11” steps way over this line.

The movie is completely ridiculous. Where is it mentioned that the actual scene they are trying to depict was the scene between George Tenet and Dick Cheney. The CIA counterterroism operation in Afghanistan had bin Laden cornered at Tora Bora. Tenet called direct to Dick Cheney for assistance from the Pentagon, and he got nothing!

bin Laden escaped Tora Bora because of the political power play that Bush Cheney have been making in DC. AND that is the bottom line.

If ABC airs this blatant propaganda, it will be the last time this American family spends any money for Disney, Touchstone, Miramax, Hyperion, Baby Eintein, ABC or any of their subsidiaries or advertisers. My economic relationship with the Disney Corp is over!

don't want PathTo911 censored, but Judith Miller can go to jail over the Plame CIA story.

demanded Clinton tell the truth, but not Bush.

purport to support the troops, but won't let them obey the Army Field Manual.

i want freedom.

ABC needs to play the movie the way it was made. Censoship leads to loss of freedom of speech and our way of life. How are we the people to believe the media when they choose to edit the movie and show it their way. I didn't see anyone change farenheit 911 when Michale Moore put it out there. Its seems that the democratic party makes ABC's executive decisions.

I have lost all respect for ABC and Disney. It's just disgusting... this is what they are presenting as "based on the 9/11 Commission Report?" Jake why aren't you taking a stand against this or are you too afraid. If you support what ABC is doing, your readers would appreciate it if you state that for the record as well. What is YOUR view -- should ABC air this piece of garbage or not??

ABC's marketing in Australia says "The story of exactly what happened" Oh really? From Americablog...

1. American Airlines had Mohammad Atta at its ticket counter and a warning came up on the screen when he tried to check in. The AA employee called a supervisor who said, just let him through. The first employee said, shouldn't we search him? And the supervisor says, nah, just hold his luggage until he boards the plane. This is clearly intended to make American Airlines look negligent. Is this true?

Did this happen?

FACT: This kind of happened, buy they still got a lot wrong. First, they've got the airport wrong. The warning popped up in Portland, not at Boston Logan as the tv show claims. Second, the rules at the time said nothing about searching him, they only required that the bags be held until he boarded - the tv show clearly tries to imply American Airlines violated their own rules in letting Atta go, which they clearly did not.

Second, Atta didn't fly American from Portland, he flew a US Airways Express affiliate. It was the US Airways Express folks who held his bags but didn't do more, not American. So, when the film tries to pain American Airlines employees in Boston as morons, it's really the US Airways employees in Portland who are the relevant parties. I'm only ten minutes into this film and we're already getting the wrong cities and the wrong players.