Excellent synopsis, and all too truthful!
Here's hoping IT GETS AIRED!
As a Baha'i, I know the value of the independent investigation of truth!
That is really good. You have it covered.
Well done! I'm linking to your fine summary from our blog. You have save me (and others) a lot of time with your post and I thank you!
What G- Man said...
thank you
Good post. I'm not even a "conservative", but am dismayed by the hypocrisy of this situation. I got one of those petitions to send to ABC about censuring the show and let the sender know what a load of crap it was. The last thing this country needs is the media being censured by politicians, be they left or right.
Again with the Michael Moore obsession?
The difference here is simple. "Fahrenheit 9/11" was an openly partisan film. It did not pretend to be anything other than a left-wing take on 9/11.
The Path to 9/11 is being billed as a non-partisan, objective, based-on-the-report movie, even though it is actually a partisan right-wing movie, made by partisan right-wingers, marketed to right-wingers and with a publicity campaign built around right-wing pundits and blogs. The movie pushes a right-wing interpretation of how 9/11 came about (Clinton wasn't tough enough). If presented as a partisan movie, that's all fine. If presented as non-partisan, it will give the impression that "everyone" agrees on the view presented in this film.
ABC should be at least as honest as Michael Moore, and admit that this is a partisan film, just as Moore admitted that he had made a partisan film.
Either that, or they can follow up with a movie presenting the liberal point of view about how Bush ignored Clinton's warnings about Bin Laden, and focused on the non-threat of Saddam instead of the gathering threat of Al Qaeda. In other words, the liberal view is that Clinton did a pretty good job and the Republicans, due to their CDS didn't (and still don't) follow Clinton's successful anti-terrorism policies. That is a partisan view too, but at least I admit it. ABC must be as honest and admit that this is a right-wing movie.
First they came for the docu-dramas...
Then they came for the talk shows.
So Harry Reid wants to play hardball on control of broadcast licenses?
Let's cut the taxpayer subsidy to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting - why should I fund the socialist babble on NPR?
Then, let's take a look at the Pacifica Foundation. Their five FM stations broadcast stuff that makes Kos seem a mellow middle-of-the-roader. They have grandfathered FM broadcast licenses for very powerful transmitters in major markets that some industry experts have valued at half a billion dollars - and we citizens GIVE them the exclusive bandwidth.
Senator Reid has broken the rules of our democracy. Maybe he needs a fast beaner high and inside to remind him that hardball works both ways.
BTW, he and Durbin are in the Senate, not the House.
Red State Baron - Have you seen the entire mini-series already? If so, I congratulate you as being a viewer of one of only 900 copies sent out for preview. By ranting about it here, aren't you violating your NDA?
So since you've seen it already, maybe you can tell us if the entire 5+ hours of the presentation is used to exclusively blame the Clinton administration for 9/11?
Joseph - thanks for the heads up and the comment, I've fixed the incorrect reference to the House of Representatives.
Bush has done an excellent job capturing Bin Laden himself....hope he is somewhere in Iraq.
BTW, didn't the GOP cry like babies when there was suppose to be a docu-drama on Reagan?????
Doug, you need to start buying you one party brown shirt...lol 
Excellent post. I enjoyed reading the comments even though Red State Baron is incorrect when he claims "The Path to 9/11 is being billed as a non-partisan, objective, based-on-the-report movie" when in fact it's been classified clearly by ABC as a "docudrama."
does 9/11 need more dramatizing?
so this is "the official true story"?
i think anybody woul trust the 9/11 commission over the moonie wash times.
Commenting by HaloScan
