Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

The Right-Wing Roots of ABC's 9/11 Movie

By Max Blumenthal, The Nation. Posted September 13, 2006.


How conservative zealot David Horowitz and a band of little-known operatives produced and promoted ABC's skewed 'The Path to 9/11.'

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Who's Paying for the Recession Most of All? Young Workers
Lizzy Ratner

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Women's Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
10 Suicides a Month at Ft. Hood -- War Stress Is Taking Soldiers to the Brink
Dahr Jamail

More stories by Max Blumenthal

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On Friday, September 8, just forty-eight hours before ABC planned to air its so-called "docudrama," The Path to 9/11, Robert Iger, CEO of ABC's corporate parent, the Walt Disney Company, was presented with incontrovertible evidence outlining the involvement of that film's screenwriter and director in a concerted right-wing effort to blame former President Bill Clinton for allowing the 9/11 attacks to take place. Iger told a source close to ABC that he was "deeply troubled" by the information and claimed he had no previous knowledge of the institutional right-wing ties of The Path to 9/11's creators. He reportedly said that he has commenced an internal investigation to verify the role of the film's creators in deliberately advancing disinformation through ABC.

After stating that she was "looking into" my questions about the production of The Path to 9/11, ABC Vice President of Media Relations Hope Hartman declined to comment on this story.

All week, ABC has withstood withering criticism for The Path to 9/11's imaginative screenwriting that depicts Clinton and members of his administration either ignoring threats from Al Qaeda or botching operations that could have eliminated terror-master Osama bin Laden. Iger conceded in a September 5 press release that key scenes in The Path to 9/11 were indeed fabricated, calling the film "a dramatization, not a documentary." Behind the scenes, Iger reportedly made personal assurances to some of the film's most prominent critics that those scenes would be edited out. But even though some deceptive footage was cut from the original, much of its falsified version of events leading up to 9/11 remains.

Iger now bears ultimate responsibility for authorizing the product of a well-honed propaganda operation--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, a secretive evangelical religious right group long associated with Horowitz, founded by The Path to 9/11's director, David Cunningham, that aims to "transform Hollywood" in line with its messianic vision, has taken the lead.

Before The Path to 9/11 entered the production stage, Disney/ABC signed David Cunningham as the film's director. Cunningham is no ordinary Hollywood journeyman. He is in fact the son of Loren Cunningham, founder of the right-wing evangelical group Youth With A Mission (YWAM). According to Sara Diamond's book Spiritual Warfare, during the 1980's YWAM "sought to gain influence within the Republican party" while assisting authoritarian governments in South Africa and Central America. Cunningham, Diamond noted, was a follower of Christian Reconstructionism, an extreme current of evangelical theology that advocates using stealth political methods to put the United States under the control of Biblical law and jettison the Constitution. Cunningham instilled his radical ideology in young missionaries by sending them to "Discipleship Training School." A former student of Cunningham's school claimed "similarities between cult mind controlling techniques and the [Discipleship Training School] program instituted by YWAM."

When the young Cunningham entered his father's ministry, he helped found an auxiliary group called The Film Institute (TFI). According to its mission statement, TFI is "dedicated to a Godly transformation and revolution TO and THROUGH the Film and Television industry." Cunningham has placed over a dozen interns from Youth With A Mission's Discipleship Training School in film industry jobs "so that they can begin to impact and transform Hollywood from the inside out," according to a YWAM report.

Last June, Cunningham's TFI announced it was producing its first film, mysteriously titled Untitled History Project. "TFI's first project is a doozy," a newsletter to YWAM members read. "Simply being referred to as: The Untitled History Project, it is already being called the television event of the decade and not one second has been put to film yet. Talk about great expectations!" (A web edition of the newsletter was mysteriously deleted last week after its publication by the blogger Digby, but has been cached on Google at the link above).

The following month, on July 28, the New York Post reported that ABC was filming a mini-series "under a shroud of secrecy" about the 9/11 attacks. "At the moment, ABC officials are calling the miniseries 'Untitled Commission Report' and producers refer to it as the 'Untitled History Project,'" the Post noted.

Early on, Cunningham had recruited a young Iranian-American screenwriter named Cyrus Nowrasteh to write the script of his secretive Untitled film. Not only is Nowrasteh an outspoken conservative, he is also a fervent member of the emerging network of right-wing people burrowing into the film industry with ulterior sectarian political and religious agendas, like Cunningham.

Nowrasteh's conservatism was on display when he appeared as a featured speaker at the Liberty Film Festival (LFF), an annual event founded in 2004 to premier and promote conservative-themed films supposedly too "politically incorrect" to gain acceptance at mainstream film festivals. This June, while The Path to 9/11 was being filmed, LFF founders Govindini Murty and Jason Apuzzo--both friends of Nowrasteh--

announced
they were "partnering" with Horowitz. Indeed, the 2006 LFF is listed as "A Program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center."



Since the inauguration of Bill Clinton in 1992, Horowitz has labored to create a network of politically active conservatives in Hollywood. His Hollywood nest centers around his Wednesday Morning Club, a weekly meet-and-greet session for Left Coast conservatives that has been graced with speeches by the likes of Newt Gingrich, Victor Davis Hanson and Christopher Hitchens. The group's headquarters are at the offices of Horowitz's Center for the Study of Popular Culture, a "think tank" bankrolled for years with millions by right-wing sugar daddies like billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife. (Scaife financed the Arkansas Project, a $2.3 million dirty tricks operation that included paying sources for negative stories about Bill Clinton that turned out to be false.)

In the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks, Horowitz led the right's campaign to pin the blame for attacks on Clinton. On February 19, 2002, Horowitz's organization mailed 1,500 lengthy pamphlets to major media outlets which claimed to expose how "the left" in general and Clinton in particular had "undermined America's security," thus causing 9/11. Two years later, Horowitz penned a lengthy manifesto for his FrontPageMag blaming Clinton once again for having "accepted defeat" in the fight against Al Qaeda. Horowitz singled out Clinton's National Security Council Director, Samuel "Sandy" Berger, as especially culpable for allowing the terror threat to fester, casting him as "a veteran of the Sixties 'anti-war' movement" who "abetted the Communist victories in Vietnam and Cambodia."



This year, Horowitz's Hollywood hothouse finally spawned his most potent anti-Clinton propaganda device. With the LFF under Horowitz's control, his political machine began drumming up support for Cunningham and Nowrasteh's Untitled project, which finally was revealed last August as The Path to 9/11.





Like Iger, Horowitz has pleaded ignorance about the sectarian agenda of the film's creators. Responding to an article I wrote for the Huffington Post exposing Horowitz's involvement in The Path to 9/11 (on which this article is adapted), he claimed in a blog post, "In fact, I never heard of David Cunningham or his group before reading about them in Max's hilarious column."



However, Horowitz's public relations blitz on behalf of the film began at least a month ago with an August 16 interview

with Nowrasteh on his FrontPageMag webzine In the interview, Nowrasteh described how The Path to 9/11 was filmed "under the very able direction of David L. Cunningham." (Doesn't Horowitz read his own magazine?)



Nowrasteh also foreshadowed the film's assault on Clinton's record on fighting terror. "The 9/11 report details the Clinton's administration's response--or lack of response--to Al Qaida and how this emboldened Bin Laden to keep attacking American interests," Nowrasteh told FrontPageMag's Jamie Glazov. "There simply was no response. Nothing."



A week later, ABC hosted LFF co-founder Murty and several other conservative operatives at an advance screening of The Path to 9/11. (While ABC provided 900 DVDs of the film to conservatives, Clinton Administration officials and reviewers from mainstream outlets were denied them.) Murty returned with a glowing review published by FrontPageMag that emphasized the film's partisan nature. "The Path to 9/11 is one of the best, most intelligent, most pro-American miniseries I've ever seen on TV, and conservatives should support it and promote it as vigorously as possible," Murty wrote. As a result of the special access granted by ABC, Murty's article was the first published review of The Path to 9/11, preceding those by the New York Times and

Los Angeles Times by more than a week.



Murty followed her review with a blast e-mail to conservative websites such as Liberty Post and Free Republic on September 1 urging their readers to throw their weight behind ABC's mini-series. "Please do everything you can to spread the word about this excellent miniseries," Murty wrote, "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!"



Murty's efforts were supported by Appuzo, who handles LFF's heavily-trafficked blog, Libertas. Appuzo was instrumental in marketing The Path to 9/11 to conservatives, writing in a blog post on September 2, "Make no mistake about what this film does, among other things: it places the question of the Clinton Administration's culpability for the 9/11 attacks front and center.... Bravo to Cyrus Nowrasteh and David Cunningham for creating this gritty, stylish and gripping piece of entertainment."



When a group of leading Senate Democrats sent a letter to Iger urging him to cancel The Path to 9/11 because of its glaring factual errors and distortions, Apuzzo launched a retaliatory campaign to paint the Democrats as foes of free speech. "Here at LIBERTAS we urge the public to make noise over this, and to demand that Democrats back down," he wrote on September 7. "What is at stake is nothing short of the 1st Amendment."






At FrontPageMag, Horowitz singled out Nowrasteh as the victim of an unconstitutional crime. "The attacks by former president Bill Clinton, former Clinton Administration officials and Democratic US senators on Cyrus Nowrasteh's ABC mini-series The Path to 9/11 "are easily the gravest and most brazen and damaging governmental attacks on the civil liberties of ordinary Americans since 9/11," Horowitz declared. The next day, Horowitz reposted his 2004 manifesto holding Clinton responsible for 9/11, explaining that, "With tonight's premiere of the ABC-TV movie The Path to 9/11, the truth [sic] impact of the Left's policies in bringing about the nation's worst terrorist attack is finally coming to light."



Although Iger and ABC trimmed as much as thirty minutes of deceptive footage from Sunday's episode of The Path to 9/11, it appeared nonetheless as a mostly faithful adaptation of Horowitz's anti-Clinton essay. Indeed, The Path to 9/11 still contained its most egregiously false scene, in which Sandy Berger refuses to authorize a CIA officer's request to capture bin Laden, who is completely surrounded by rival Northern Alliance soldiers. After the halted (and totally fictional) operation, "Kirk," the (completely imaginary) CIA op played by Donny Wahlberg of New Kids on the Block fame, stands on a hilltop beside the Northern Alliance's quixotic warlord, Ahmed Shah Massoud.



"Are there any men left in Washington?" the script has a frustrated Massoud asking "Kirk." "Or just cowards?"



"Cowards?" The question is quietly being raised in the corridors of ABC-TV's headquarters in Burbank, California. Besieged in his lush office, Iger privately agonizes that he was complacent about an attack on his network's reputation by a band of political terrorists. But when faced with his own version of the Taliban, he appeased them.



Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Max Blumenthal is a Puffin Foundation writing fellow at the Nation Institute based in Washington, DC. Read his blog at maxblumenthal.blogspot.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
stupid
Posted by: rsaxto on Sep 13, 2006 1:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't watch TV dramas any more because they are just stupid brainwashing for corrupt electoral and corporate profit and to hypnotize viewers into voting for warmongering idiots like the Bushies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Meh... Posted by: doctorsquared
dangerous little men like Horowitz
Posted by: Lector on Sep 13, 2006 1:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, Horowitz, the professional provocateur, has shown how dangerous little men like him can become when a nation’s citizenry remains ignorant because major media has failed time and again to ask the hard questions about what’s going on in our government and how it affects our lives, to be part of the dialogue a Democracy like ours was supposed to be, without fear of reprisal from this administration or other power groups. This is the cue for the cockroaches to move in, utilizing the freedoms we have in America to twist the truth. This wouldn’t be a problem if Americans could be truly informed – the falseness of provocateurs like Horowitz would be seen immediately by those they attempt to dupe. Some of these people who see themselves as intellectuals, for whatever personal reasons, are working fulltime among themselves to subvert the American way of life. These most un-American types are recasting truth. These little men wash their own laundry among themselves because to do it transparently would reveal their ugliness. Whatever delusions they suffer behind the scenes is kept unseen. Do they really expect all Americans to take them at their word, to believe and be lead by them? No. That’s why they are working like bees in a beehive to change the laws so they will someday be able to enforce their ideology on us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The door swings both ways! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» No it does not. Posted by: Jnutter
» Iranian or democrat policy? Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Iranian or democrat policy? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Add homonym, attack Posted by: fifthworld
Boycott Boycott Boycott
Posted by: logicaldog on Sep 13, 2006 3:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really do think it is time to get serious so that we can be taken serioiusly. People against the illegal and immoral and false Iraq war are over 60% over this country and this kind of democracy killing propaganda shouldnt be tolerated byany free citizen. I buy ALOT of disney crap and go to crappy theme parks, it is just as easy to go to Universal Studios and watch other kid products and try not to watch ABC.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Boycotting the Mousefather ... Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: Boycott Boycott Boycott Posted by: starcom2
Excellent docu-drama
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Sep 13, 2006 5:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you have to admit, this was well done and gave as good account as they could with available info.. unlike that biased, highly edited junk that Moore protrayed as fact.. thank god someone is suing him for faslely portraying an interview he did.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: edraven
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: jackie
» Wow, that sucks!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: YogiBear
» What????? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: What????? Posted by: freedem
» RE: What????? Posted by: RevRick
» you know when you ASSUME!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: you know when you ASSUME!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: you know when you ASSUME!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: LucidNation
» Apples and Oranges Posted by: Jnutter
» Naked News!!!!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Naked News - WOW Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Split Hairs Posted by: Jnutter
» Liberal Watergate! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: iRikk
» RE: xcellent docu-drama Posted by: RevRick
» Hey, thanks for the help!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Hey, thanks for the help!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Moore lawsuit Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Conservasaurus voted for Bush Posted by: may261989
» a Vote is such a personal thing Posted by: Conservasaurus
» I can imagine... Posted by: Jnutter
» RE: I can imagine... Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: I can imagine... Posted by: Jnutter
» RE: I can imagine... Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: I can imagine... Posted by: Jnutter
» Lets talk about Bush. Posted by: Jnutter
» RE: a Vote is such a personal thing Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: a Vote is such a personal thing Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Please Don't Feed the Troll Posted by: IntlDad
» RE: Please Don't Feed the Troll Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Please Don't Heed the Troll Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Please Don't Heed the Troll Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Please Don't Feed the Troll Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Please Don't Feed the Troll Posted by: Conservasaurus
It just goes to show
Posted by: ArchiesBoy on Sep 13, 2006 5:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When someone sees the world through an extremist ideology — like neocons, like Muslim and Christian extremists — we can expect them everywhere, and we can expect them to do anything, since their ideologies allow them to do anything to achieve their ends. The whole world is in danger of falling under the domination of such extremists, and we must fight them wherever we find them. They will stop at nothing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We ought to write ABC and convey our thoughts
Posted by: sheena2u on Sep 13, 2006 5:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I signed several petitions asking ABC/Disney to pull this program, and not air it. While I am glad they apparently re-edited, and took out the most slanderous material which was aimed against ex President Clinton and his staff, I still don't think it was enough. I am not inclined to watch any ABC programs, and I guess it won't kill me to boycott all Disney products as well. As long as they stand behind that right wing type of propaganda, and they are willing to stoop so low as to exploit something that was so traumatic for the country merely for their own political agenda then they don't deserve my respect or patronage.

I tried to watch the ABC 9/11 programs so I would at least know what they were, but I found them offensive and extremely annoying. Watching the program was akin to being tortured with toothpicks or having to be subjected to domestic violence. The show was incendiary, chaotic, and had excessive profanity and gratuitous mind-numbing violence. It was anything but subtle, and I found it so extremely irritating and offensive that I could not even watch it although I tried. I saw bits and pieces of the first, and I saw ten minutes of the 2nd installation before I turned it off in disgust.

Honestly, if this is the best ABC can do then they don't deserve my business or my time. I am sorry Disney was also a part of this. Disneyland and Disney products have been a part of my life, and my child's life, but from now on I guess we shall do without them. I will not support anyone who would do what they did by airing a program like that. It has been only five years since 9/11. Most people in this country have not yet healed. So many people lost loved ones, and many Americans remain shattered and confused.

The program did nothing to foster understanding, tolerance, responsibility, cultural sensitivity, or clarity. It did nothing to encourage peace, healing, or understanding. It was not enlightening, or useful in any way. A man who was a part of setting up the 9/11 Commission Report said, we don't need a program like this that makes a difficult subject even more difficult to understand. I noticed that there were some factual references in the program, but it was full of offensive and unbelievable embellishments. I thought that even without the worst scenes which slandered Clinton, it was still insulting toward him, and it was still a very cheezy example of propaganda. It insulted my intelligence and sensibilities. There were continual odd and offensive images, constant disturbing music, blurred focus, and crooked shots. It bludgeoned the viewer with chaos and violent anger. It made me ill.

I have always liked Harvey Keitel. I think he is a very good actor, and I enjoyed him in "The Piano." I believe he did a good job, but there was entirely too much distracting nonsense in the miniseries, and he deserves better parts. However, the point of airing something like that show at this particular time was to portray Democrats in the worst possible light, right before an election, even if it meant telling vicious lies to the American public. So, the Republicans did what they do best, and they proved themselves once again to be unending liars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Truth"
Posted by: redstarwraith on Sep 13, 2006 5:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The thing is, they have already won. Once this miniseries airs, it will be seen by all the wrong people; who are the very people for which it is intended; the lumpens--people incapable of having a critical thought, people incapable of virtually anything other than passive consumption of what is on their tv screens. Sure, you could write books like Horowitz does and be truthful like Horowitz isn't, but you don't have the $ of The Heritage Foundation behind you. Mind you of course, the lumpens don't read Horowitz either, it's merely comforting for them to know that, "There's a "conservative innalekshual" out there adovating all the things they're too stupid to articulate. You could stand. . .out on the street corners and make speeches to these lumpens, maybe even expose Horowitz for the lying little shit-stain that he is, but they will mock you. You have no credibility because you're not on their tv screen.
It's sad but true, money buys credibility (and air time). The 9/11 miniseries doesn't have to be true (or false) it merely needs to appear on tv and it's as good as true to many Americans. Hell, why else do you think the right was absolutely frothing at the mouth over the near showing of a Ronald Raygun miniseries that portrayed that once doddering, dead old douche bag as less than "the great communicator" he never was?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Truth" Posted by: ReallyBearish
» RE: "Truth" Posted by: redstarwraith
» RE: "Truth" Posted by: redstarwraith
TV...Why???
Posted by: hapibeli on Sep 13, 2006 7:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of the biggest problems in America today, is that people watch CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX. Why? Why do people watch that crap? Why spend more than 1-2 hours per week in front of the god damned tube? What is the purpose. Self anesthesism? What a nation of boobs! Pun rendered with little forethought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It gets worse and worse ...
Posted by: AdamSelene40 on Sep 13, 2006 7:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was something inherently stinky about a 4 hour docudrama about the Towers attacks scheduled for the anniversary of the event .... even more stinky, KNOWING the President would break into the narrative to put his own point of view into the mix.

'History,' a historian friend once expained to me , 'is a form of literature: fiction created with documented, rather than imagined, occurances" These narratives mean pretty much whatever we need them to mean at the moment, and when those needs change, the meanings, (but not the stories themselves) change also."

Problem is: 99 44/100% of the people who watched the show, can be told all day every day that Davie Horror-wits and the Christian Reconstructionists were elbow deep in the production and it would mean exactly NOTHING. In fact, telling these people that they DON'T know something, or that what they think they know is WRONG is the surest way to bring them to the Polls to vote against 'your guy' if not to have them actually try to crack your head open on the spot.

EXAMPLE: (Try discussing "Pearl Harbor" in some kind of context, and without discarding the uncomfortable facts. the Japanese attacks on Hong Kong and Singapore occured at dawn on the same day as the attack on Pearl Harbor . However, even the Encyclopedia Britannica dates the attack on Pearl Harbor as "Dec 7, 1941" and the conquest of Hong Kong as "December 8, 1941, local time."

What's going on? The Americans don't to share THEIR "day that will live in Infamy" with the British. Would it matter if Americans saw Pearl Harbor as being merely a sideshow and an afterthought to Japan's "Great Southern Operation" -- whose ultimate objective was the conquest of Southeast Asia and the occupation of British india ? Or that the Battle of Brtain had been fought 18 months before? Or that Germany declared war on the United States and NOT the other way around?" If you're Henry Ford II or Prescott Bush ... it matters very much indeed.

The intellectal fast ball thrown by the ABC mocumentary is that "If only (Bill Clinton hadn't been such a Wimp, and) Osama bin Laden had been killed or captured, there would have been no attack on 9/11, (and no War on Terror) " -- which makes about the same sense as the also-popular idea that "if Hitler had been killed in the Munich Putch, there would have been no WWII."

At this point in time there's probably no good reason to deconstruct American beliefs about Pearl Harbor -- except to be help create a less insanely jingoistic 'historical artifact' for NineEleven.

But, everyone loves weeping over their sacred dead and cursing the villians who murdered them ... and their leaders love it when they do -- and it never grows stale. Think of Slobodivan Milosevich and his "Field of Ravens" rhetoric. Someone betrayed someoneone back in the 14th century, the Serbs lost, the Turks won, lots of Serbs (and Turks) were killed -- and this justifies Ethnic Cleansing of Greater Serbia 600 years later.

Nine Eleven is fast becoming the American "Field of Ravens" ... with help from the Rabid Right, or just on the natural juices of American sentiment.

Heaven help the Moslems in Chicago a hundred years from now!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Milosevic's rhetoric v facts Posted by: brunowe
» What this really shows... Posted by: ignition
» Abuse of the term Posted by: brunowe
It Was Not Even Good Entertainment.
Posted by: Bab5nutz on Sep 13, 2006 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even, though I am not an American, and somewhat removed from the emotional issues and the debate surrounding this, I did hear a great deal about this. From this site, and others.
My country screened the mini-series on national TV on Sunday night - except that it would have been Saturday night in some places of the US. I was curious, and taking the view of 'know thine enemy', I watched it.
My conclusion. It was not even good entertainment. It was boring. I went to sleep. I got so bored, that I picked up the latest of the Left Behind series, and read that - more 'know thine enemy' stuff.

About the only bit that was any good, was the end when the Towers were hit - and I think that they used a lot of real footage for that one.

BTW, if you are wondering whether my country bows at the foot of the Bushies throne, they did screen Fahrenheit 9/11 on Saturday night.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It all amounts to subversion of the American way of life
Posted by: outlander55 on Sep 13, 2006 9:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People like David Horowitz and David Cunninghan and groups like YWAM (Youths with a mission) amount to subversives who would take over America, conduct their own inquisition and enslave those who don't think like they do. What ever happened to diversity in America? If those people are allowed to spread their propagana, are we not allowing them to under cut our Constitution? Propaganda is illegal, is it not? These people and their revisionists groups are enemies of the constitution and therefore, domestic enemies of the United States of America. Why are they allowed to roam free to poison our youth. They use the guise of "free speech", but in reality it is just prodaganda. They need to be exposed for what they really are - "Enemies of the American way of life". If they truely want to control a populace, maybe we should find them a region of some sort and let them have it to live out their miserable exsistance.
As for "The Path to 9/11", I would not have watched it anyway. When the networks air shows like "Dancing With the Stars", "American Idol" and "Survivor", what is the point. I won't even watch their news broadcasts anymore because the networks just don't cover real news. A great example of this is the day a federal judge accused President Bush of violating the Constitution, the lead news story was about the arrest of the man who was suspected of killing Jon Benet Ramsey.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

taliban christians on the right, Stalinist atheists on the left
Posted by: gerdhansel on Sep 13, 2006 10:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Extremists on both the right and the left are determined to subvert our democracy.

The American right-wing Taliban woke up to the fact that MEDIA MATTERS during the Reagan Revolution and have since been trying to infiltrate the television and film industry. Why are we surprised at this?

The Stalinists of the American left have been trying to do the same thing since the 1930s. They are in love with Castro and worship at the throne of the Mommy state. Their heydey was in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and the Baby Boomers among them yearn with all their hearts to relive their salad days at Berkeley.

Both the Taliban of the right and the Stalinists of the left want to turn America into 1984 or Animal Farm. The only difference between the extemists of the right and left is which group of enemies will be the first hauled off in cattle cars to concentration camps in the desert.

The Stalinists will persecute Christians, Jews and Muslims. The American Taliban will persecute homosexuals, feminists, New Yorkers, San Franciscans and Muslims.

Most of us are caught in the middle, quibbling over which side makes the most evil propaganda. Is Horowitz worse than Michael Moore? Is Path to 9/11 worse than the hit piece on Ronald Reagan?

Depends on where your sympathies lie.

Have we all become so stupid and anesthetized that we can't see the dangers lurking on both the right and the left?

Yep, there truly is a vast right-wing conspiracy. And there's an equally vast left-wing one.

The Taliban righties are running scared right now, and the Stalinists are licking their chops. Happy days are here again.

Oh really? A big lie whispered in your right ear is the same lie when it's whispered in your left ear. Don't be fooled. Do your own thinking.

Turn off the TV and start reading again. Time is running out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good call! Posted by: Mycos
» RE: Good call! Posted by: Jnutter
» socialist-Stalinist crap Posted by: YogiBear
» I could not agree more. Posted by: Jnutter
» Stalinism, socialism and so forth Posted by: gerdhansel
You want to get rid of Bush?
Posted by: johndoraemi on Sep 13, 2006 10:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See this film:

9/11 Press For Truth could be the best and most credible study of September 11th 2001 anywhere. Paul Thompson's Complete 9/11 Timeline provides the research for this documentary.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1016720641536424083

Send the link to everyone you know, and urge them to do likewise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fair and balanced... Posted by: collective_intel
Tell ABC what you think of their propaganda
Posted by: collective_intel on Sep 13, 2006 11:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ABC is not technically savvy enough, or just too scared, to take email comments. But here is contact info for their "customer relations department." Keep the pressure on.

ABC, Inc.
500 S. Buena Vista Street
Burbank, CA 91521-4551

(818) 460-7477

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't forget Disney
Posted by: collective_intel on Sep 13, 2006 11:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's also let Disney know that "integrity" does not include propaganda.

"At The Walt Disney Company, each of us is responsible for upholding our excellence and our integrity. This means acting responsibly in all our professional relationships, in a manner consistent with the high standards we set for our business conduct." - Bob Iger ,President and Chief Executive Officer

Makes me sick...

The Walt Disney Company
500 S. Buena Vista Street
Burbank CA 91521

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ABC should lose its broadcasting license.
Posted by: Jnutter on Sep 13, 2006 11:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ABC is a Network Television Channel. It is not Cable TV, it is not a Theatre. Do not confuse this issue by comparing 'the Path to 9/11' with any other "propaganda" piece - this one was beamed into our homes using public airwaves, not privately owned cable lines or privately owned theatre screens. You all got this movie beamed into your homes whether you paid for it or not. To add further extreme injury to the insult, Disney plans on using this propaganda piece in its Scholastic program to brainwash the next generation of voters.

As a network TV station, ABC does not have the right to broadcast offensive material. This is laid out in the Communications Act of 1934 under which ABC received its broadcast license (and, thus, its "network" status).

The following is a quote from a letter by leading senate democrats to the CEO of Disney:

"The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events."

The full text of the letter can be found here

Keep up the pressure, save our children from being taught outright lies. If your children are exposed to "Scholastic" materials from Disney, pull them out of that program! This is not an issue about left or right, this is an issue about American or Un-American.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

40 million is chicken feed in Hollywood...
Posted by: babs on Sep 13, 2006 11:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... and the fact that they devoted such a small budget to a four hour program should tell you that it was a throwaway for a behemoth like Disney/ABC. I'll bet that as much money was spent advertising what passes for a C or D-movie at best.

Keitel must have worked for points cause this mess wouldn't have had the cash to pay him his regular movie star salary. If he settled for points, he probably agreed with the content of the script, in which case, he's added to the list of actors/production companies I will avoid which include Mel Gibson/Icon, Tom Cruise and his shiny new company, Robert Duvall, Fox, et al.

In the arena of entertainment, we can only vote with our feet and our wallets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This Side-Show Is A Real Threat
Posted by: Mycos on Sep 13, 2006 12:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As another poster noted, Horowitz is not /just/ a conservative. He is dangerous man. He is an extremist with a chameleon past, the one personality trait that is least common among, and perhaps even mutually exclusive to that of the truly conservative mindset, which is by definition a mind that is opposed to change. The fact of his many incarnations is one that speaks less about his conservative values, but rather reflective of how a man behaves when responding to the fears and paranoia generated by the reptilian portion of the brain.

Myself, I have been watching the man and his FPM website with increasing fascination. As someone who found Abnormal Psychology classes to have almost voyeuristic appeal, his website is sheer pornography, a parade of freakish pleasures not seen since Barnum and Bailey gave in to the pressures of more enlightened times. This carnival consists of contributions from disturbed writers who show us their most disturbing preoccupations. These are always told with distortions vividly reflective of their prejudices and personal demons. It gets even better with pages of commentary by fans whose flashes of lunacy all adds up to make perhaps the webs best virtual smorgasboard of pathological personalities.

Fortunately it seems that the "reality makers" in Washington are feeling less secure in their creations. "Homeland Security", one of those newly created institution's they originally had hoped would create more fear than security... is now looking like it's members have seen the future as it will exist without their neocon benefactors to cover for them. A policy of covering one' a** is seems to be compelling them to take security seriously, thereby paying more attention to FPM-type websites. Up to this point, merely describing oneself as "conservative" has given them freedom to play loose with the law that divides free-speech from hate propaganda.

FPM is a website that will soon disappear, despite the guilty pleasure that this little ring-master/chameleon/side-show freak has consistently been able to produce.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

email Disney
Posted by: babs on Sep 13, 2006 1:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
anyone wanting to express their sentiments to ABC's parent company can send them to:

media contact: Karen.Hobson@disney.com or

I assume that like other companies, the addresses follow a format, i.e. Robert.Iger@disney.com or Andy.Bird@disney.com

names and positions of Disney management:

Robert A. Iger
President and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company

CORPORATE
Andy Bird
President, Walt Disney International

Alan Braverman
Senior Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, The Walt Disney Company

Ronald L. Iden
Senior Vice President, Security, The Walt Disney Company

Kevin Mayer
Executive Vice President, Corporate Strategy, Business Development and Technology Group, The Walt Disney Company

Christine M. McCarthy
Executive Vice President, Corporate Finance and Real Estate and Treasurer, The Walt Disney Company

Zenia Mucha
Executive Vice President, Corporate Communications, The Walt Disney Company

Preston Padden
Executive Vice President Government Relations, The Walt Disney Company

Thomas O. Staggs
Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, The Walt Disney Company

Brent Woodford
Senior Vice President, Planning and Control, The Walt Disney Company

BUSINESS UNIT
George W. Bodenheimer
Co-Chairman, Disney Media Networks, President, ESPN, Inc. and ABC Sports, Chairman, ESPN Board of Directors

Richard Cook
Chairman, The Walt Disney Studios

John Hare
President, ABC Radio

Walter C. Liss
President, ABC Owned Television Stations

Andrew P. Mooney
Chairman, Disney Consumer Products

Jay Rasulo
Chairman, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts

Anne Sweeney
Co-Chair Disney Media Networks and President, Disney-ABC Television Group

Steve Wadsworth
President, Walt Disney Internet Group

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Horowitz is a Self-Confessed American Traitor
Posted by: ark on Sep 13, 2006 2:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What needs to be understood, and the data exchanged is just what a reprehensible and immoral person David Horowitz really is.

In an article written by Horowitz in 2000 for his online zine, Front Page, he admitted to comitting treason against the United States in 1972. You might ask why this is relevent 3 decades later. First; there is no statute of limitations for acts of treason, Horowitz has publicly confessed to this crime. Second, Horowitz had no higher purpose in mind when committing this crime, it was just to hurt America. Third, he is still a rabid barking dog about Fonda's Hanoi trip in 1972, which although reprehensible, was done for what was a higher purpose in her mind, to aid in the end of the Vietnam war, and she has apologized many times for her ill-behavior. A dishonest campaign has been waged against her for many years, and continues to this day. The Urban Legends website has a very fine article regarding the truths and deceptions of Fonda's Hanoi trip. Horowitz is well aware of this, but he still publishes lies. The article in which he congesses to treason is:

David Horowitz, "Spy Stories: The Wen Ho Lee Cover-Up", Front Page Magazine, October 3, 2000

In it, Horowitz admits to a premeditatied violation of the US Secrecy Acts, and engaging in conspiracy. He also readily admits that this violation aided two foreign nations, one the USSR. Even though he alludes to the Vietnam war and Daniel Ellsberg when telling the story, the information he provided came from a former NSA agent in Turkey, and was not relevant to the Vietnam War.

With his typical denials and moral relativism, Horowitz goes on to blame the left for his own personal crimes.

He is an evil ass.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Horowitz is a totalitarian fascist... and other topics
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Sep 13, 2006 5:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Horowitz has a long history of this kind of thing. His on-campus organizations and activities are described at Campus Progress. He created an organization "Students for Academic Freedom", which is nice use of newspeak since the goal of the group is as follows: "The Academic Bill of Rights would prohibit professors at both public and private colleges from introducing “controversial matter” into the classroom. The bill would shift oversight of college course content away from trained professors and administrators and into the hands of state governments and courts."

This approach is eerily similar to that of the Hitler Youth Movement, run by Baldur von Schirach - all educational materials must be pre-approved by the Party. I didn't know Horowitz was linked to a right wing evangelical movement called "Youth With A Mission" via Cunningham, but it fits. The Christian Reconstruction Movement? Whoever said that the Christian fascists are the greatest threat this country faces was correct.

As far as movies about 9/11 goes, see Wikipedia (List of 9/11 Films). Take Flight 93 - there are three films: The Flight That Fought Back (TV), Flight 93 (TV), and United 93 (film). A lot of evidence indicates that this flight was shot down at 10:06 am over a remote area of Pennsylvania to keep it from crashing into a building and killing even more people. http://www.flight93crash.com/. This story paints the US government in a very bad light for not preventing the attacks.

Michael Moore is making a "Farenheit 9/11 and 1/2" sequel and Oliver Stone is also planning on another 9/11 movie. They might be decent films...wait and see.

Then we come to Loose Change... a very curious piece of work. Let's look at this statement from their website: "Loose Change 2nd Edition contains unlicensed footage including, without limitation, copyrighted footage owned by FOX, CNN, NBC, CSPAN and Camera Planet, as well as Gedeon and Jules Naudet and James Hanlon"

Loose Change is now being shown in theaters that are charging admission at the door - and where are the lawsuits? This is pretty astounding - and the film is very slick, obviously not the product of $2,000 and a laptop. The Naudet Brothers are now suing, but not the media majors! The logical conclusion is that the film is the product of a government-funded PR operation aimed at discrediting anyone who asks questions about foreknowledge of 9/11 on the part of the President. The film has nothing in it about the events leading up to 9/11. See also http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ The Loose Change PR techniques are called transferance and smearing.

A far better film on the events leading up to 9/11 is Press for Truth (Google Video) which discusses the multiple evidenciary lines that Bush had advance knowledge of 9/11. The film has numerous factual details that are independently corroborated. It is likely that this is the film that inspired the Loose Change PR effort.

I've left the very best film on 9/11 related airplane hijacking issues for last, however. This film is a true masterpiece and is certain to become a cult classic - and it's not even on the Wikipedia list! It puts everything in perspective and has the powerful effect of dispelling fear and inspiring hope - yup, you guessed it: Snakes on a Plane!

The real snakes are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice - and yes, they do have dollar signs in their eyes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Curse Of The Lucid Mind
Posted by: dhartleyc60 on Sep 13, 2006 10:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unlike best supporting actress of "Clueless" George W. Bush, Senator John Kerry is both blessed and cursed with a very capable and highly functioning mind. This affords him the ability of reflective thought, once again unlike George W. "blankly staring into the headlights like a dear facing oncoming traffic as the Twin Towers collapse" Bush. This attribute of reflective thought in turns lends itself to a mind capable of changing not only it's way of thinking but conclusions drawn from it's past thoughts, once again unlike George W. "I'll think I'll play my kazoo as Iraq burns" Bush. So, as Conservasaurus points out Kerry is indeed cursed with a reflective mind unlike Bush who is blessed with oatmeal for brains and thus never finds himself burdened with subtlety. And, given the quagmire George W. "Doh" Bush has gotten America into with regards to Vietnam (I mean Iraq) and with no end in sight a Vote for John Kerry in 2004 is looking mighty good now. A final note: Considering Bush's abysmal approval rating of 36% (about the same as Richard M. Nixon's just before he was about to be impeached) and the abysmal ratings ABC suffererd during the airing of "Lies To 9/11" perhaps there are more Republicans out there capable of lucid thought just like Kerry than I once thought possible.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrifying!
Posted by: vincen13 on Sep 15, 2006 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What terrifies me is that Disney controls so much of our entertainment. They are known as being conservative with great aspirations to effect social control. And they get away with it. The American public sits quietly watching television and takes this stuff in, uncritically. When liberals raise a challenge and ask people to consider what is being done we are called names and criticized.

How do these people get away with this? How do they evade being held accountable?

One idea I rarely see raised is the idea that the right-wing attack on Clinton may have distracted him from the very real work of running the country on all fronts. I think he was a great president, a million times better than this nincompoop, but it had to cost him something to be constantly under attack. And the media, who should have been informing us about the development of this terrorist network was always focusing on Clinton's sex life and the O.J. trial.

I would like to see every single one of the right wing vigilantes who started attacking Clinton from the moment he took office be hauled into court and charged with treason. I know it won't happen but I ask you, how can anyone have the emotional strength to deal with being the President of this great country and fight off the legions of right-wing harpies and low lifes who went after him?

Just my two cents worth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Terrifying! Posted by: babs
Yeah! That mean & nasty ABC Has A Whole Lotta "Chutzpah"
Posted by: NeoCogito on Sep 16, 2006 4:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the "over-the-top" indignation over ABC's "spoiling Clinton's image" :-) totally knocks me out. With respect to Clinton, the Father of Fake News & Spin there's no way to top this for poetic justice Hill & Bill thought they had the media tied up but ABC, broke the juggernaut. Aw Gee!, all that trouble!! crafting that image. Which one of us is beast :-) enough not to sympathize with the "good-natured" jock whose only crime was loving a good cigar (?) --and now that mean & nasty ABC is spoiling it.

"The Terminator" says "It Ain't Over" and Clinton vigilantes threaten ABC-- no problem. The Clinton retribution is legend, mean and unforgiving --the worst threat THEY face is truth and transparency! Maybe the most daring crime on Hill & Bill's heavily funded "democratic" media, is about exposing Clintomics. Then it gets sort of dicey --what!!!! kind of a chance do regular guys like us have trying to clue the public in re Clinton's hard right history when he can substantively threaten ABC???. As many true-blues have learned the hard way, the web is infested with Clinton's cyber-goons and vigilante-avalanches where posts frowned on by the hegemony go down the tubes daily (censored, buried, lost, banned, locked out) by the cyber-gazillions.

As long as we're being led by the hard-right (DLC e.g., Hill, Bill, Lieberman et al) then we might as well kiss off the DEMOCRATIC party and democracy with it.


We are not as Clinton often cynically observes, "All Good Republicans"--No knuckling up to the "Unity" sound-bite.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Left Wing Conspiracy and Defense of Clinton
Posted by: bullwhip7 on Sep 17, 2006 1:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberals across America cried foul, citing CBS' decision in 2003 to cancel its TV-movie called "The Reagans" in the wake of conservative pressure. They suggested conservatives were hypocrites to support pulling that film while defending this one. But there are significant differences between the two projects.

Most obviously, "The Reagans" had at its center a dangerously doltish Ronald Reagan and a witchy Nancy Reagan. By contrast, "The Path to 9/11" was not designed as a deeply personal attack on Bill and Hillary Clinton. There was no actor playing Bill Clinton in the ABC movie. He only appeared in the ABC movie in news clips, which were hardly fictional. Hillary Clinton made no appearance of any kind.

It's also obvious that Bill Clinton is alert and healthy and able to defend himself against whatever the ABC movie would suggest. At the time CBS prepared to air "The Reagans," Ronald Reagan was unable to defend himself, deep under the veil of Alzheimer's disease and just months away from death. A docudrama that created a sense that Reagan's policies were failures would have been debatable, but a movie cartooning him on his deathbed as stupid and evil was beyond the border of good taste. No such similarity existed with "The Path to 9/11."

During the fuss over the Reagan movie, the liberal media were beside themselves denouncing that dastardly thing called censorship. The New York Times even editorialized that conservatives "helped create the Soviet-style chill embedded in the idea that we, as a nation, will not allow critical portrayals of one of our own recent leaders."

So where was The Times -- and everyone else -- finding Soviet-style censorship in Team Clinton's demands that the ABC film be pulled? Instead, they sympathized with Clinton, editorializing: "One suggestion: When attempting to recreate real events on screen, you do not show real people doing things they never did." For the record, The Times was utterly silent when CBS planned to feature Ronald Reagan declaring people deserved to die of AIDS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

http://members.nowpublic.com/starcom2
Posted by: starcom2 on Sep 17, 2006 1:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Friend, i am the least perfect human on this planet. i try hard to be better. Politicians and all of us:
don't you think it is time for all humans to fess up to:
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul and with all of your mind, and Love your Neighbor as your self.
we should even try:
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you
judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use,
it will be measured to you.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and
pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to
your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the
time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the
plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to
remove the speck from your brother's eye.
who among men are, perfect?
your friend, Doc

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

http://img10.picsplace.to/16/pic_q.jpg
Posted by: starcom2 on Sep 17, 2006 1:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
none of us are above the law. not even politicians. not even sewer plant workers or dogcatchers. why is it so hard to follow the 10 rules of God? i am far from perfect but i try.
Do not steal. 'Do not lie. 'Do not deceive one another.
Do not swear falsely by my name and so profane the name of your God.
I am the LORD.
Do not defraud your neighbor or rob him.
Do not hold back the wages of a hired man overnight.
my comment is completed at:

http://jesus-pictures.blogspot.com

http://unicef1.blogspot.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

http://img10.picsplace.to/16/pic_q.jpg
Posted by: starcom2 on Sep 17, 2006 1:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
none of us are above the law. not even politicians. not even sewer plant workers or dogcatchers. why is it so hard to follow the 10 rules of God? i am far from perfect but i try.
Do not steal. 'Do not lie. 'Do not deceive one another.
Do not swear falsely by my name and so profane the name of your God.
I am the LORD.
Do not defraud your neighbor or rob him.
Do not hold back the wages of a hired man overnight.
my comment is completed at:

http://jesus-pictures.blogspot.com

http://unicef1.blogspot.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement