 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rhv5862
PO2
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 379
Location: Massachusetts
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:34 pm Post subject: ABC Mini series "the path to 9/11" |
 |
|
Great review. This line worries me. "The problem is that I don't see ABC marketing it at all, and I'm concerned that they're dropping the ball on getting the word out about this show."
I sure hope it's wrong and ABC markets this as they know how to.
RHV |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Snipe
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 03 Jun 2004
Posts: 574
Location: Peoria, Illinois
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK. I've got it programmed into my DVD recorder. Hopefully, they
will show it.
_________________
Tin Can Sailor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rush said he just finished watching the movie. He is going to give his review at the top of the hour. LISTEN UP!!
Says the path of Madeline Albright is just amazing.
Also says ABC is running it without commercials. Hasn't heard anything yet about ABC caving to Dem's pleadings.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doll
Commander
Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Posts: 339
Location: The Beltway
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am shocked. It is hard to believe that they are doing this, and doing it with sincere intent.
If they are sincere, and this is not some sort of whitewash, then good for them. It is time the msm get its act together, if at all possible, ever.
_________________
The HILL Chronicles
Soldiers' Angels
"Wednesday Hero - Google It!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Schadow
Vice Admiral
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 936
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shawa wrote: | | According to Rush, the pressure has been on for the last week or more and Iger has been hanging tough. Hence, the personal appeal from Bill today. |
It does look more probable that the piece will run unedited due to the publicity and the number of people who have already seen it. We know that Rush has a DVD of the master version and you can bet that if there are changes, Rush and his guys will cover it point by point and publish any deception.
I wonder if I can find ABC on my TV. It's been so long..... .
Schadow
_________________
Capt, 8th U.S. Army, Korea '53 - '54 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dusty
Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 1264
Location: East Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Schadow wrote: | | shawa wrote: | | According to Rush, the pressure has been on for the last week or more and Iger has been hanging tough. Hence, the personal appeal from Bill today. |
It does look more probable that the piece will run unedited due to the publicity and the number of people who have already seen it. We know that Rush has a DVD of the master version and you can bet that if there are changes, Rush and his guys will cover it point by point and publish any deception.
I wonder if I can find ABC on my TV. It's been so long..... .
Schadow |
Hehe. Well that's my problem. I haven't a clue as to what channel ABC or any of them are on.
_________________
Left and Wrong are the opposite of Right! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doll
Commander
Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Posts: 339
Location: The Beltway
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shawa wrote: | Rush said he just finished watching the movie. He is going to give his review at the top of the hour. LISTEN UP!!
Says the path of Madeline Albright is just amazing.
Also says ABC is running it without commercials. Hasn't heard anything yet about ABC caving to Dem's pleadings. |
Well that will be a first! It is time the Democrat's to learn that American's want more than appeasement and caving in.
_________________
The HILL Chronicles
Soldiers' Angels
"Wednesday Hero - Google It!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Democrats are whining about this already. Amazing they had no problems with movies like Farenheit 911, but now question the timing of this one.
| Quote: | Slaughter Calls for ABC to Come Clean on New 9-11 Docudrama
Divisive and Politicized Accounts of September 11th Attacks and National Security Issues Endanger Nation
Washington, DC - Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY-28 ), Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee, today called for ABC to make clear to viewers that its upcoming television mini-series The Path to 9/11 is not a documentary account of the events and political decisions that preceded the terrorist attacks of that day.
"ABC has a responsibility to make clear that this film is not a documentary, and does not represent an official account of the facts surrounding the September 11th attacks," Rep. Slaughter said. "Disclaimers noting that The Path to 9/11 is a docudrama should be shown throughout its airing. We have yet to establish the impartiality and accuracy of the people behind this film and the claims it advances, and the American people need to know that."
Rep. Slaughter also expressed concern over the timing of the mini-series, as well as recent Republican rhetoric on the issue of national security and its connection to the war in Iraq.
"But what is far more important is the timing of this movie," Rep. Slaughter continued. "The anniversary of the attacks is an emotional time, and it is wrong for anyone to play on those emotions and use them to advance a political agenda." |
Rest of Article
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GenrXr
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 1720
Location: Houston
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Doc Farmer wrote: | | shawa wrote: | Rush is saying that apparently Bill Clinton himself is calling Robert Eiger(sp?) the head of Disney, to demand that the film be withdrawn or re-edited to cut out all the negative Clinton stuff!!
Must be desperate, usually he has his henchman do this. |
By henchman, I assume you mean the Hildebeast... |
lmao
_________________
"An activist is the person who cleans up the water, not the one claiming its dirty."
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729-1797), Founder of Conservative Philosophy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
And the trashing continues, even before it is shown;
Controversy Over 9/11 Film Hits Press
Some quotes;
| Quote: | Just bubbling up from the blogs into the mainstream press – a New York Time article appears today -- is debate over the “The Path to 911” TV movie to be aired on ABC this coming Sept. 10 and 11. Liberal bloggers have said that it reportedly pins much of the blame for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on President Clinton, often citing as their sources conservatives who made this very point after attending screenings.
Meanwhile, at least two real life figures portrayed in the movie, Richard Clarke and Sandy Berger, have raised factual objections, and it appears that the script has mistaken the Washington Post and the Washington Times at one moment. ABC, and an adviser to the series – former Gov. Thomas Kean, co-chair of the 9/11 Commission — have said it is balanced and objective, and a docu-drama, not literal truth. (they caved already?)
But few critics have actually seen the film. E&P obtained an advance review copy today, and we summarize the film below. It’s possible that some changes may have been, or will be, made in this cut. |
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rhv5862
PO2
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 379
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 3:39 pm Post subject: ABC Miniseries:"Path to 9/11" |
|
|
They (Dems) had no problem with Farenheit 911 since it was by one of their own. From reviews Path to 9/11 even though it is appearing on MSM outlet it shows Clinton and party in a bad light, therefore Dems want it censored. Democrates love to talk about free speech, and freedom of the press but only when it benifits them, and comes from one of their own.
RHV5862 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doc Farmer
LCDR
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 442
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LewWaters wrote: | And the trashing continues, even before it is shown;
Controversy Over 9/11 Film Hits Press
Some quotes;
| Quote: | Just bubbling up from the blogs into the mainstream press – a New York Time article appears today -- is debate over the “The Path to 911” TV movie to be aired on ABC this coming Sept. 10 and 11. Liberal bloggers have said that it reportedly pins much of the blame for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on President Clinton, often citing as their sources conservatives who made this very point after attending screenings.
Meanwhile, at least two real life figures portrayed in the movie, Richard Clarke and Sandy Berger, have raised factual objections, and it appears that the script has mistaken the Washington Post and the Washington Times at one moment. ABC, and an adviser to the series – former Gov. Thomas Kean, co-chair of the 9/11 Commission — have said it is balanced and objective, and a docu-drama, not literal truth. (they caved already?)
But few critics have actually seen the film. E&P obtained an advance review copy today, and we summarize the film below. It’s possible that some changes may have been, or will be, made in this cut. |
|
El Rushbo mentioned at the top of his program that apparently some scenes will be edited from the miniseries. Don't know any details yet, though...
_________________
Fat, Bald and Ugly - And PROUD Of It! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Schadow
Vice Admiral
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 936
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From Hugh Hewitt's blog last night:
| Quote: | Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Did ABC Edit "The Path to 9/11?
Posted by Hugh Hewitt | 6:17 PM
From the e-mail box:
The Disney execs met all through the weekend - unheard of in this business - debating what changes would be made and what concessions should be given. Here is what looks to be the conclusion:
- There will be a handful of tweaks made to a few scenes.
- They are minor, and nuance in most cases - a line lift here, a tweak to the edit there.
- There are 900 screeners out there. When this airs this weekend, there will be a number of people who will spend their free evenings looking for these changes and will be hard pressed to identify them. They are that minor.
- The average viewer would not be able to tell the difference between the two versions.
- The message of the Clinton Admin failures remains fully intact.
The story here is the backlash that the Disney/ABC execs experienced was completely unexpected and is what caused them to question themselves and make these changes at all. Had this been the Bush Admin pressuring, they wouldn't have even taken the call. The execs and studio bosses are dyed in the wool liberals and huge supporters of Clinton and the Democratic Party in general. They had no idea any of this could happen. As I understand this, the lawyers and production team spent literally months corroborating every story point down to the sentence. The fact that they were the attacked and vilified by their "own team" took them completely by surprise; this is the first time they've been labeled right-wing, conservative conspiracists.
The scramble caused by this backlash was so all consuming that the execs spent their holiday weekend behind closed door meetings and revamped their ad campaign. But at the end of their mad scramble, they found only a handful of changes they could make and still be true to the events. The changes are done only to appease the Clinton team - to be able to say they made changes. But the blame on the Clinton team is in the DNA of the project and could not be eradicated without pulling the entire show. A $40 million investment on the part of ABC is enough to stem even Bill Clinton's influence.
An exclamation point on this event is the fact that Oliver Stone will endorse the project this week. Not known for his conservative leanings, he loves the project. Perhaps this and the fact that the production company that made Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" are endorsing it would underline just how far out or touch and scared the Clinton Admin is about the revelation of the facts as portrayed in this project. Is it just that Clinton is continuing to re-define his legacy? Or is it his fears for this election cycle and 2008? Or both?
Thanks for getting the word out. It's made a significant difference in getting this broadcasted as it should be. |
Source
We'll see. I'll never forget Moore's treatment of the seven minutes spent by the President reading to the kids after Andy Card told him we were under attack. That could have been fleshed out with all the work the Secret Service detail was doing notifying Barksdale and Offutt AFBs that they were coming, getting AF1's engines spooled-up, etc., etc. But no, Moore chose to portray Bush as indecisive and not knowing what to do next, as if he were supposed to be out at the airport shouting orders (as I'm sure Gore would have done).
Schadow
_________________
Capt, 8th U.S. Army, Korea '53 - '54 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, keep going ballistic Bubba. Creates more publicity for the film!!
I guess since they weren't able to get the movie pulled the next best
thing they can do is TRASH it.
I love it!!
AND it is being provided to high schools as a teaching aid.
Heh heh.
NY Post
| Quote: | BUBBA GOES BALLISTIC ON ABC ABOUT ITS DAMNING 9/11 MOVIE
By IAN BISHOP Post Correspondent
September 7, 2006 -- WASHINGTON - A furious Bill Clinton is warning ABC that its mini-series "The Path to 9/11" grossly misrepresents his pursuit of Osama bin Laden - and he is demanding the network "pull the drama" if changes aren't made.
Clinton pointedly refuted several fictionalized scenes that he claims insinuate he was too distracted by the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal to care about bin Laden and that a top adviser pulled the plug on CIA operatives who were just moments away from bagging the terror master, according to a letter to ABC boss Bob Iger obtained by The Post.
The former president also disputed the portrayal of then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright as having tipped off Pakistani officials that a strike was coming, giving bin Laden a chance to flee.
"The content of this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has the duty to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely," the four-page letter said.
The movie is set to air on Sunday and Monday nights. Monday is the fifth anniversary of the attacks.
Based on the 9/11 commission's report, the miniseries is also being provided to high schools as a teaching aid - although ABC admits key scenes are dramatizations.
The letter, written by Bruce Lindsey, head of the Clinton Foundation, and Douglas Bond, a top lawyer in Clinton's office, accuses the ABC drama of "bias" and a "fictitious rewriting of history that will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans."
Clinton, whose aides first learned from a TV trailer about a week ago that the miniseries would slam his administration, was "surprised" and "incredulous" when told about the film's slant, sources said.
Albright and former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger also dashed off letters to Iger, accusing the network of lying in the miniseries and demanding changes.
ABC spokesman Jonathan Hogan last night defended the miniseries as a "dramatization, not a documentary, drawn from a variety of sources, including the 9/11 commission report, other published materials and personal interviews."
"Many of the people who have expressed opinions about the film have yet to see it in its entirety or in its final broadcast form," he said. "We hope viewers will watch the entire broadcast before forming their own opinion."
Executive producer Marc Platt told The Washington Post that he worked "very hard to be fair. If individuals feel they're wrongly portrayed, that's obviously of concern. We've portrayed the essence of the truth of these events. Our intention was not in any way to be political or present a point of view."
The miniseries' creator and the 9/11 panel's former co-chairman, Tom Kean, who was a paid adviser on the film, said some scenes are made up and plan to include a statement at the show's beginning.
In the movie, FBI anti-terror agent John O'Neill, played by Harvey Keitel, and a composite CIA operative named Kirk grouse about bureaucratic red tape following a meeting with Berger and Albright.
"How do you win a law-and-orderly war?" Kirk asks.
"You don't," O'Neill snaps.
The movie then cuts immediately to a newsreel close-up of Clinton insisting he did "not have sex with that woman" - Monica Lewinsky.
Although the movie thrust Lewinsky into the mix as a White House distraction, the 9/11 commission's report found Clinton was "deeply concerned about bin Laden" and that he received daily reports "on bin Laden's reported location," Clinton's letter notes.
In another scene, CIA operatives working with Afghani anti-al Qaeda fighter Ahmed Shah Massoud, the leader of the Northern Alliance who was assassinated by bin Laden days before 9/11, gather on a hill near bin Laden's residence at Tarnak Farms - the terror thug easily in their grasp.
"It's perfect for us," says Kirk, a composite character played by Donnie Wahlberg. But the team aborts the mission when an actor portraying Berger tells them he can't authorize a strike.
"I don't have that authority," the Berger character says.
"Are there any men in Washington," Massoud asks Kirk later in the film, "or are they all cowards?"
The reps for an outraged Clinton wrote to Iger that "no such episode ever occurred - nor did anything like it."
The 9/11 commission report echoes his denial, and found that Clinton's Cabinet gave "its blessing" for a CIA plan to capture bin Laden and determined that ex-CIA Director George Tenet squashed the plan.
The third contested scene focuses on Albright, who is depicted alerting Pakistani officials in advance of a 1998 U.S. missile strike against bin Laden in Afghanistan - over the objections of the Pentagon. The movie claims the tip-off allowed bin Laden to escape.
But the 9/11 commission reported that it was a member of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff - not Albright - who met with a senior Pakistani Army official prior to the strike to "assure him the missiles were not coming from India." |
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As they keep trashing this movie, before seeing it, I recalled a page from Dereliction of Duty and looked it up. Seems Lt. Col. Patterson depicts a scene similar to the one Berger claims is fabricated about the CIA being refused authorization to get Bin Laden.
I have the quote here: Preemptive CYA by Democrats
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
