Stay up-to-date via RSS!

Good news, friends! ABC’s going to blame Clinton for 9/11.

From the NYT, via TPMI:

Days before its scheduled debut, the first major television miniseries about the Sept. 11 attacks was being criticized on Tuesday as biased and inaccurate by bloggers, terrorism experts and a member of the Sept. 11 commission, whose report makes up much of the film’s source material.

The six-hour miniseries, “The Path to 9/11,” is to be shown on ABC on Sunday and Monday. The network has been advertising the program as a “historic broadcast” that uses the commission’s report on the 2001 attacks as its “primary foundation.”

On Tuesday, several liberal blogs were questioning whether ABC’s version was overly critical of the Clinton administration while letting the Bush administration off easy.

Yes, NYT, of the 3 groups critical of the series, let’s zero in on the bloggers, because they’re not just trying to make the world listen to the voices of the

TERRORISM EXPERTS

and

9/11 COMMISSION

No, bloggers are simply drunk on zee crazy.

The Poor Man Institute adds:

And, as Jonathan Schwartz notes, ABC will be showing the $30 million series without commercials, and even giving it away for free on iTunes – forgoing any opportunity to recoup any of their money. Now, I’m no business major, but this seems like an odd way for a for-profit company to behave, particularly when compared with the similarly-controversial Fahrenheit 911, which ABC’s parent company Disney deemed too “political” to release. Huh.

Disney! If you want to know what George Bush’s ass smells like, just sniff our dick!

TPMI also links to a full deconstruction of the many layers of fakery at Source Watch. One scenario that will make your head spin:

According to Barone, one “gripping scene” shows “CIA agents surrounding bin Laden’s encampments and then being called back when National Security Adviser Sandy Berger refuses to give a go-ahead for the operation.”
[...]
The movie’s account directly contradicts the 9/11 commission report, however, which states that it was CIA Director George Tenet that called off the operation, which itself never got off the ground.

The fix is in, folks. This will all be laid at the feet of Clinton in the media, despite the work done by the 9/11 Commission, Richard Clarke, and reality that clearly proves otherwise. By the time 2008 rolls around, look for SARS and the plague of feminism to be laid squarely at the feet of Willie C. The best part is, the accusations will come from trusted sources like ABC.

This is because the media has given up the fight for truth.

ABC/Disney’s ploy is no shocker. They might be stupid, since rosier, fearmongering-free times usually result in public hunger for the sugary sweetness of happy endings and animated baby animals singing [see the Clinton era for reference,], but they are clearly biased and prone to this sort of misinformation.

No, it’s actually the re-dead-to-me NYT that once again proves the point. In their piece, they quote Richard Clarke extensively on the faked bin Laden assassination sequence, who tears it to shreds. But they follow it with ABC’s response:

ABC responded Tuesday with a statement saying that the miniseries was “a dramatization, not a documentary, drawn from a variety of sources, including the 9/11 commission report, other published materials and from personal interviews.”

“The events that lead to 9/11 originally sparked great debate,” the statement continued, “so it’s not surprising that a movie surrounding those events has revived the debate.”

As the Times itself pointed out in its opener, the network is _not_ touting this as a dramatization, they are claiming it’s “historic” and sourced directly from the 9/11 commission report. Moreover, there is no debate on the issue. They are provably lying about some of the touchiest subjects possible: how bin Laden “got away” and who’s at fault for it. But the Times glibly prints their “debate” retort as though it measures equitably against fact.

After talking with 9/11 commission member Richard Ben-Veniste about ABC’s lies, lies, and more lies, the Times finishes the article with this fun fact:

Mr. Ben-Veniste said he did, however, approve of the casting. “I like Harvey Keitel,” he said of the actor who plays John O’Neil, the onetime F.B.I. counterterrorism expert who died in the attacks. “I liked him in ‘Mean Streets.’ I’m a fan.”

Now, pardon me for a moment, but one of the Big Three networks is airing a commercial-free “historic broadcast” they claim uses the 9/11 commission as its “primary foundation.” Disney filled this broadcast, which will reach millions of Americans who will have no reason to disbelieve Disney/ABC, with absurdly false claims about who is responsible for bin Laden remaining at large and how he came to destroy the Towers. They are demonstrably lying about the origins of 9/11 on air to all of us FOR FREE.

But hey, the debate is wide open and the commission guy digs Harvey Keitel, so no reason to raise the alarms and do a good old-fashioned expose. Let’s just balance it out, hold hands, and sing Cumbaya.

I

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats’ feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar

Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;

Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death’s other Kingdom
Remember us — if at all — not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.

II

Eyes I dare not meet in dreams
In death’s dream kingdom
These do not appear:
There, the eyes are
Sunlight on a broken column
There, is a tree swinging
And voices are
In the wind’s singing
More distant and more solemn
Than a fading star.

Let me be no nearer
In death’s dream kingdom
Let me also wear
Such deliberate disguises
Rat’s coat, crowskin, crossed staves
In a field
Behaving as the wind behaves
No nearer –

Not that final meeting
In the twilight kingdom

III

This is the dead land
This is cactus land
Here the stone images
Are raised, here they receive
The supplication of a dead man’s hand
Under the twinkle of a fading star.

Is it like this
In death’s other kingdom
Waking alone
At the hour when we are
Trembling with tenderness
Lips that would kiss
Form prayers to broken stone.

IV

The eyes are not here
There are no eyes here
In this valley of dying stars
In this hollow valley
This broken jaw of our lost kingdoms

In this last of meeting places
We grope together
And avoid speech
Gathered on this beach of the tumid river

Sightless, unless
The eyes reappear
As the perpetual star
Multifoliate rose
Of death’s twilight kingdom
The hope only
Of empty men.

V

Here we go round the prickly pear
Prickly pear prickly pear
Here we go round the prickly pear
At five o’clock in the morning.

Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow

For Thine is the Kingdom

Between the conception
And the creation
Between the emotion
And the response
Falls the Shadow

Life is very long

Between the desire
And the spasm
Between the potency
And the existence
Between the essence
And the descent
Falls the Shadow
For Thine is the Kingdom

For Thine is
Life is
For Thine is the

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 6th, 2006 at 7:38 am and is filed under Entertainment, Governmental Failures, Historical Wankery, Media hackery, War HUH! What is it good for?. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.