Subscribe"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...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."Tell ABC to Tell the Truth About 9/11.
'The following movie is a dramatization that is drawn from a variety of sources including the 9/11 Commission Report and other published materials, and from personal interviews. The movie is not a documentary. For dramatic and narrative purposes, the movie contains fictionalized scenes, composite and representative characters and dialogue, as well as time compression.'Network officials have sent a statement affiliates are supposed to read to viewers who write in or call to complain. And basically the statement is just a recitation of this disclaimer.""...the local affiliates who are actually owned and operated by ABC parent company Disney. Here's the list of all of them. But the rest -- listed here -- are independently owned. They don't have to run the ABC 9/11 bamboozler if they don't want to....
Boston, MA WCVB
Manchester, NH WMUR
Pittsburgh, PA WTAE
W. Palm Beach, FL WPBF
Portland-Auburn, ME WMTW
Kansas City, MO KMBC
Milwaukee, WI WISN
Oklahoma City, OK KOCO
Omaha, NE KETV
Jackson, MS WAPT
Fort Smith/Fayettville, AR KHBS/KHOG
Albuquerque, NM KOAT
Honolulu, HI KITV"
"CBS' decision was applauded by fans of the former president, who were worried the film scheduled to air Nov. 16 and Nov. 18 would distort Ronald Reagan's legacy."I guess the victors do get to write the history!
"One of the most blatant factual errors in the ABC miniseries next week on the 9/11 attacks...is a claim that The Washington Post ruined a valuable form of surveillance of Osama bin Laden by disclosing that the U.S. was monitoring his cell phone calls.
Indeed, that charge has been made -- but the alleged wrongdoer was a different paper, The Washington Times.
In part II of the docudrama, 'The Path to 9/11' -- which has been knocked by liberal bloggers and some Clinton offiicials, and hailed by conservatives -- a CIA analyst shortly before the terrorist attacks on the U.S. complains to a colleague that 'ever since the Washington Post disclosed that we intercepted his calls,' bin Laden has ended that form of communication and is 'using couriers now, like they did a thousand years ago.'
It's a good plot device but, for one thing, the paper in question was the conservative Washington Times. That paper's Aug. 21, 1998 edition reported on bin Laden's use of satellite phones and computers.
In addition, many observers strongly doubt that the newspaper blew the surveillance method. Bin Laden's use of a satellite phone, they say, had already been widely reported by August 1998.
On Dec. 22, 2005, Glenn Kessler reported in The Washington Post that 'it appears to be an urban myth. The al Qaeda leader's communication to aides via satellite phone had already been reported in 1996 -- and the source of the information was another government, the Taliban, which ruled Afghanistan at the time.'"
"Sandy Berger did not slam down the phone," Mr. Nowrasteh said. "That is not in the report. That was not script. But you know when you’re making a movie, a lot of things happen on set that are unscripted. Accidents occur, spontaneous reactions of actors performing a role take place. It's the job of the filmmaker to say, 'You know, maybe we can use that.'"Mr. Nowrasteh is a conservative activist.
It seems improbable that anyone's mind will change as a result of watching this program.
As Chair of the 9/11 Commission, I worked closely with the filmmakers and the network to ensure the miniseries accurately reflects both the facts and the spirit of the Commission's findings. In addition to my input, the film reflects the guidance of many people who were involved in the events depicted -- from the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, and the White House.Meanwhile, the writer and director are explaining away all the historical inaccuracies by trying to claim that it's a docudrama, not a documentary.
"...this scene — which makes the incendiary claim that the Clinton administration passed on a surefire chance to kill or catch bin Laden — never happened. It was completely made up by Nowrasteh."I just want to see the scene where Bush accepts the hundred thousand dollar campaign contribution from bin Laden. That scene will really set up the tension later in the film.
I really wish we could call it mockumentary...
The measure, which the Senate passed overwhelmingly Wednesday evening, is a watered-down version of the White House's proposal. The Clinton administration has been critical of the bill, calling it too weak.President wants Senate to hurry with new anti-terrorism laws, July 30, 1996:
...
But Sen. Don Nickles, R-Oklahoma, while praising the bill, said the country remains "very open" to terrorism. "Will it stop any acts of terrorism, domestic and international? No," he said, adding, "We don't want a police state."
President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess.
But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.
...
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, emerged from the meeting and said, "These are very controversial provisions that the White House wants. Some they're not going to get."
"ABC, after exploring all advertising avenues, has decided to show its upcoming two-part U.S. film, 'The Path to 9/11,' commercial-free when it airs next week.Unfortunately, some of those findings have been distorted as a result of fabricated events.
ABC Entertainment President Steve McPherson said his network made the decision to air the $30 million project without commercials or sponsors after all such options appeared inappropriate given the sensitive Sept. 11 material involved, said Daily Variety.
'We looked at different scenarios (and) talked to possible (advertising) partners, and none of it made sense,' said the network head. 'This is the most respectful way to present this.'
In yet another surprise move, ABC has revealed it will also offer both parts of the film as a free online download at Apple`s iTunes Music Store and stream the miniseries on its own Web site, ABC.com.
McPherson said the online offerings, which will be paired with a audio broadcast of the film on XM Radio, were created to help inform the public of the findings of the Sept. 11 Commission that acted as the basis of the project."
"The screenwriter says it wasn’t in the script, and it was improvised on the spot–he sort of liked the way it looked–it went over well when it was being filmed so they left it in. It seems like an appalling thing to admit for a film on such a serious subject.–It is definitely slanted against the Clinton administration…It does not hit the Bush administration much at all. So, ummm–I understand that they are probably editing it heavily now. It’s interesting that they now say today that they said the complaints of the film are irresponsible because they’re still editing the film. Yet, they were very happy to send out review copies. Reviews have already started to appear in magazines–certainly they thought it was finished enough at that time to send it to reviewers, but now they’re saying it’s irresponsible to critique the film when they’re still editing. It’s a well made movie, but it’s incredibly flawed and raises real problems about how this subject is being tackled."
"Educational media giant Scholastic, Inc. announced it's dropping its original classroom companion guides to a controversial new docudrama about the events preceding the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks -- and replacing them with materials stressing critical thinking and media literacy.Good for them.
'After a thorough review of the original guide that we offered online to about 25,000 high school teachers, we determined that the materials did not meet our high standards for dealing with controversial issues,' said Dick Robinson, Chairman, President and CEO of Scholastic, in a press release.
The original materials had been criticized for oversimplifications and failures to address flaws in post-9/11 policies, including the invasion of Iraq."
While this story is based on true life events, some of the facts presented herein were changed, distorted or fabricated to conform to a right wing agenda.I'd be okay with that, I guess.
"The Path to 9/11" is produced and promoted by a well-honed propaganda operation consisting of a network of little-known right-wingers working from within Hollywood to counter its supposedly liberal bias. This is the network within the ABC network. Its godfather is far right activist David Horowitz, who has worked for more than a decade to establish a right-wing presence in Hollywood and to discredit mainstream film and TV production. On this project, he is working with a secretive evangelical religious right group founded by The Path to 9/11's director David Cunningham that proclaims its goal to "transform Hollywood" in line with its messianic vision.
"I think it is important for you to know that ABC had factual errors in
its dramatization, and we are looking at possible legal actions as a result.
According to the 9-11 Commission report, it was not American Airlines, nor was it even the right airport that was depicted. In reality, it was another airline, flying out of Maine.
Please know this was a tragic incident in our company's history and we hope you will be
sympathetic to our employees and our airline on this day especially.
Again, we are outraged by this situation, and we alerted ABC about its gross error. It is very unfortunate."
"ABC's airing of its 'Path to 9/11' docudrama last night has drawn its first lawsuit threat, and the surprise is that it's coming not from angry Democrats but from an 'outraged' American Airlines."
"Mr. Bush spent roughly one-fifth of his 17-minute address making the case that the United States’ safety hinged on success in Iraq, even as he implicitly acknowledged there was no link between Saddam Hussein and the Sept. 11 strikes."Once again Bush articulates the so-called Bush Doctrine: “We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.”
"American Airlines is prepared to pull its advertising from ABC in order to protest its portrayal in the network's recently aired movie The Path to 9/11, according to a source. The carrier also said it is considering legal action against the network.
...The airline spends $25 million annually on broadcast TV ads; it could not immediately determined how much is spent on ABC, but according to one source, 'It's extensive.'
Roger Frizzell, vice president, corporate communications and advertising, American, confirmed that the client is mulling its legal options."
[AdWeek | September 12, 2006]
« Older FROM SECRET PRISONS TO GUANTANAMO... | Save the Girls!... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 7:16 PM on September 6, 2006