wow…double epu

I knew I’d get epu’d from last thread but I had no patience to wait

anyway, it’s more apropos here anyway;

here’s something everyone is REALLY going to get a kick out of

watch the think progress clip

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Miniter — conservative author of “Losing bin Laden: How Bill Clinton’s Failures Unleashed Global Terror”
drawn from internet myth…”we never had Bin laden in our sights pre 9/11″, the commision looked into this extensibly, I’ve looked into this extensively, there’s just no basis for this at all”

wow, I NEVER thought I’d quote this guy defending Clinton, but there it is, laying the internet myth to waste

never to be used again in political discussion without getting ridiculed

Christy! (my first first!)

The pushback is working because this really is a value proposition for Disney: scrutiny by Congress is not something to invite, nor is loss of revenue from advertisers, nor is the possiblity of subject to liable.

To write off the $40 million in production costs is far less costly than the possible costs of the above.

And while you are waiting for your telephone calls to connect on the lines that Christy has suggested, you can also click off a few e-mails, either on a mail-to-Disney web page or at mailto:investor.relations@disneyonline.com

Would love to see ABC “yank” something other than…

Prof @ 3

you can also click off a few e-mails, either on a mail-to-Disney web page

I should have been more clear: This particular link is where you explain that you have decided to cancel your plans to visit Disney World on a weekend with your children this fall because . . . . [fill in the blank; be truthful]

OT and EPUd: here

I wonder….

If wonder if this thinly desguised advertisement for the GOP would make ABC in total a de facto “527″ organization and hence the whole Road to 9/11 a paid political advertisement?

It would be interesting to file suit under McCain-Feingold to see what would happen….

hizzhoner

I cannot get over how nimble we have become.

Brava and bravo (as the case may be) to all here

Tst, tst, tst, what a dog world no place for rats or mice, Kobe.

Why don’t they just pull the program and show Farenheit 9/11 in stead?

I SURELY hope abc puts in something like;

due to the fact that this work of fiction was promoted as based on fact, and due to the fact that it instead contains lies designed to help get republiicans elected when they’ve done nothing but harm this nation, we have decided to pull this flick”

think that might happen?

It’s great if ABC yanks the series, but the patronizing tone of the Variety article is tells you everything you need to know about ABC is gonna spin this thing.

From the Variety article linked to above 2 things struck me:

One thing ABC doesn’t need to worry about: advertiser defections. Net decided to air the five-hour mini sans commercials after failing to find an appropriate sponsor for the project (Daily Variety, Sept. 5).

Of course, the controversial nature of the project — even before the left-wing attacks — may have caused many sponsors to shy away from a sponsorship deal.

and this:

Cliff Kincaid, editor of publications for conservative watchdog group Accuracy in Media, said the Democratic outcry is a bit of a surprise.

“Usually Democrats can count on the support of big media in Hollywood,” he said. “It’s like things are upside down now.”

It’s upside down world alright, buddy and we have Had Enough.

CNN could loan them it’s Bin Laden series to show.

Or we could watch a loop of Pres. Bush’s Monday speech and his Gibson interview. ;)

People just LUV watching President Bush.

looseheadprop @
8

I cannot get over how nimble we have become.

Brava and bravo (as the case may be) to all here

LHP — we’re all driven by the market now. :)

Not that it will matter if, in the best-case scenario, the whole thing is pulled but …

EPU’d from your thread yesterday:

Christy,

Question for you as a lawyer … If Berger and Albright are portrayed, by name, in totally ficticious scenes that defame them, would they not have cause for a slander/libel suit?

From RL…
One more thing about this movie, “Does the Clinton administration get blamed for this?” Not directly, but when you watch this, there is no escaping the fact that all during the nineties and all during his administration — the Khobar Towers, the USS Cole — oh, that one really comes through. The administration wouldn’t do diddly-squat about that. They were just afraid. I think that might have been the incident that Albright refused to do anything about because of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks going on. I’m not quite sure. But from the 1993 World Trade Center explosion and bombing to the Khobar Towers to the embassies that were blown up in Africa, to the USS Cole, it is abundantly clear this country didn’t do anything in retaliation and was hamstrung.

Any time an opportunity was presented to take to take out the people who had done this, hunting down, for example, Ramzi Binalshibh and Ramzi Yousef and so forth — and they did get Yousef, and that required an effort like you can’t believe. It had an informant, but the administration was barely able to pull the trigger, but on that one Yousef and his buddies were sentence to do 240 years in jail. We didn’t even have the death penalty for them and they’re still in jail. But in terms of retaliation for any of it, there was none — zip, zero, nada, for all of those attacks in the nineties. Nothing, and you know full well that after 9/11, we have been mobilized and we have been on the march, not only retaliating but trying to wipe these people out to prevent further attacks and a mixture of other foreign policy objectives as well, such as Iraq and democracy and freedom for these nations and so forth.

Glad to hear that our efforts are still rocking the boat; fingers crossed as to the outcome.

A quick question…I’ve now variously heard this series described as being four, five, and six hours long. Has that ever changed, or are these just factual errors by the reporters?

li$t of

ABC Entertainment $ponsor$ – with link$

http://birdoblog.birdobot.com/disney_propaganda

would love to hear that Bob Iger ‘barely touches’ or ‘nervously picks at’ his poached salmon with dill sauce lunch today, wouldn’t you ?

sponsors or no sponsors – Iger hearing from any of the folks linked above (especially as they roll out their new season)is a big deal

remember to be polite but firm in your willingness to boycott their products/services

Calling ABC gets you to a comment recording system. Not sure how effective it is, but left a msg.

30 second limit. Plan ahead.

Yeah i heard…

Wammo @ 16

From RL…
One more thing about this movie, “Does the Clinton administration get blamed for this?” Not directly, but when you watch this, there is no escaping the fact that all during the nineties and all during his administration — the Khobar Towers, the USS Cole — oh, that one really comes through. The administration wouldn’t do diddly-squat about that. They were just afraid. I think that might have been the incident that Albright refused to do anything about because of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks going on. I’m not quite sure. But from the 1993 World Trade Center explosion and bombing to the Khobar Towers to the embassies that were blown up in Africa, to the USS Cole, it is abundantly clear this country didn’t do anything in retaliation and was hamstrung.

Any time an opportunity was presented to take to take out the people who had done this, hunting down, for example, Ramzi Binalshibh and Ramzi Yousef and so forth — and they did get Yousef, and that required an effort like you can’t believe. It had an informant, but the administration was barely able to pull the trigger, but on that one Yousef and his buddies were sentence to do 240 years in jail. We didn’t even have the death penalty for them and they’re still in jail. But in terms of retaliation for any of it, there was none — zip, zero, nada, for all of those attacks in the nineties. Nothing, and you know full well that after 9/11, we have been mobilized and we have been on the march, not only retaliating but trying to wipe these people out to prevent further attacks and a mixture of other foreign policy objectives as well, such as Iraq and democracy and freedom for these nations and so forth.

But really…Richard Clarke, as portrayed in this movie, comes across as one voice trying to get everybody to pay attention here. Sandy Berger comes across as gutless. In this one episode where bin Laden in 1998 is surrounded in his digs over in Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance and the CIA team have the house surrounded. They know exactly what building in this complex he’s in. They are ready to go in and either kill him or capture him, and they don’t get the approval from Washington. Berger says (summarized), “Nope, can’t do it. If you guys do it you’re going to do it on your own and if it falls apart you get the blame.” In another incident similar to this where it was possible to take out bin Laden and perhaps other terrorists who were — and this is before 9/11 — planning 9/11, Madeleine Albright and Berger both refused to allow the CIA and the military to take any action whatsoever.

Albright says, “The president is deeply involved in peace talks between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and if there is an attack on any Muslim or Islamic people right now, it will set that back,” and I’m sitting there watching this and I’m in stunned disbelief because those negotiations never led to anything! It was all about fear. That administration was afraid of failure and what it would mean to their approval ratings, but there were problems throughout. All of the information that the FBI offices in Phoenix and in Minneapolis had that were transferred to New York FBI office and then the CIA, but they couldn’t share the information. The Zacarias Moussaoui case is well gone into.

They had his computer. He was the 20th hijacker. His computer had the data on the plans. It didn’t have the date, but had the plans. The justice department said, “Nope, we can’t open the computer. We don’t have a warrant. We’re not going to get a warrant. We’re not going to violate this man’s rights this way, so forth.” It makes it clear that nobody was serious about dealing with this prior to 9/11. As for the Bush administration, they don’t get off the hook here. They are not let off the hook. They, too, are portrayed as — well, they’re caught up and sort of hamstrung by the existing procedures that are in place. They haven’t had a chance to change them, such as getting rid of the wall and this sort of thing.

CJ at 15 — I was not a specialist in that sort of case, and it can be a tough one to argue when you have a public figure involved — the laws on slander/libel/etc. for public figures are very loose due to their higher profile. That said, I would think if they attribute specific actions or statements or the like to Berger or Albright or any other real person that they (a) never did or said and (b) which portrays them in a bad light and (c) they could show based on evidence and testimony that it was patently false and the producers and writer should have known this from documents they purport to use for the show, that they could at least get past a summary judgment standard and potentially to a jury. If there are folks who have dones those sorts of cases, please chime in — it’s a highly specialized legal area, because it is VERY nuanced in terms of what is and is not allowable — and I’d be much more comfortable hearing from someone who has successfully tried a case or two like this as to what they think. (Sorry, I know that isn’t much of an answer, but you have a fairly wide berth with public figures…and it depends on a lot of factors.)

Might I suggest a tactic for addressing both your local ABC station and Mr. Iger? Tell them that if The Path to 9/11 airs, you’ll delete the ABC station from your remote: you won’t even be channel surfing past their products. It kicks the specter of a boycott up a notch.

Joe Scarborough at the top of his program was addressing the issue as it is all Clinton’s pushback that is causing Disney to reconsider it’s options.
In our area he is on after KO and I did not get the channel changed fast enough.
What a dirtbag.

update #2 up top

ABC spent $40 million to produce it. Even in Hollywood, that’s not chump change — especially for a television program.

ask Jery Falwell about the whole public figure – slander/libel thingy *g*

someone was asking about Professor Foland -

Physics Professor at Cornell – degree from Yale (?)

I have sent my emails to ABC nationally and regionally as well as to my local BOE about Scholastic. Scholastic caught on very quickly about what a hot potato this is and dropped out by saying that they had nothing to do with it and the materials (I’m not sure whose materials) did not meet their hight standards.

I realize that I am but a drop of water in this vast ocean, but I really, really appreciate the righteous anger and quick response at this blog and others of the same outlook. The residents and visitors here give me hope that we can right (in the proper sense) the country. If only the entrenched biggies in the Democratic party would begin actually to care about winning and governing.

President Clinton’s appearances are confined to images from news conferences and his deposition: There he is denying his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, then explaining it away, and finally announcing his determination to battle terrorism. He comes off as fatally detached from America’s greatest challenges. In fairness, though, the miniseries does allow for a different interpretation: Although Clinton brought the Lewinsky mess upon himself, Republicans are to blame for letting it become a national distraction — and one that had bad consequences for O’Neill and his fellow terror hunters. Also, it’s worth mentioning that in Monday’s installment, when the miniseries turns to the early days of the Bush administration, then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice (played very effectively by 24 veteran Penny Johnson Jerald) comes off as an ignoramus, especially in a scene when she downsizes the responsibilities of counterterror official Richard Clarke (an unsung if earnest hero, by the film’s lights, and played by Stephen Root of Office Space). To call this a pro-Bush miniseries, as its critics surely will do, is a bit too simple.

Professor Foland has a blog:

http://nuclearmangos.blogspot.com/

Kean Hasn’t Talked To Clinton About Path to 9/11 Because ‘He Was Out Campaigning Against My Son Yesterday’

Thanks, Christy. Your response is perfect as usual – wouldn’t it be nice if everyone stayed within the bounds of their expertise and tempered their opinions accordingly. Your sound reasoning and temperment are precisely why I appreciate your posts. I realize it is a nuanced area – given the context I wasn’t even sure whether it would come under slander or libel but then I’m a scientist, not a lawyer.

I think I made this clear yesterday, but it is worth reiterating: constructive criticism of both the Clinton and the Bush Administrations for failures or omissions is not only appropriate, it is a good thing — we need to learn from past errors. But it needs to be done based on actual facts — not based on shit someone makes up for a better visual effect on screen or to subtly manipulate the viewer toward one ideology and away from another, etc.

It should be factually accurate — or they should call it fiction from the get go.

But the fact that the producers and writer have only given out review copies to right-wing pundits and bloggers, refuse to give the same courtesy to President Clinton or members of his staff who are portrayed in the movie says a LOT to me about CYA for the folks who made the movie. And about agenda. And about manipulative practices that they have used to gin up interest in the film. And anyone who wants to say otherwise needs to stop and think how this would have been perceived had the producers of The Reagans done the same with left-wing pundits and bloggers and the time — imagine the outcry.

Prof. Foland, I’ve just copied to the Orlando ABC affiliate’s programming director (to but not with whom I’ve been corresponding since yesterday) your exquisite letter, with this intro:

Dear Ms. Bartelt:

Good morning. I am sharing with you the following letter from a friend of mine, a Disney shareholder, to George Mitchell, in the hopes it can support your own efforts to help extricate ABC and its affiliates from the dangerous situations you all now face.

Best wishes,
[lotus]

According to donnie wahlberg’s website, the Path to 9/11 will also air in UK and Australia. Hope it gets pulled there also.

Doctor Bud @ 22

Might I suggest a tactic for addressing both your local ABC station and Mr. Iger? Tell them that if The Path to 9/11 airs, you’ll delete the ABC station from your remote: you won’t even be channel surfing past their products. It kicks the specter of a boycott up a notch.

I just added my two cents to the DNC letter including the ease with which I can eliminate both the ABC and Disney channels from my remote. Poof! Gone. Great idea!

twolf1 @ 30

Kean Hasn’t Talked To Clinton About Path to 9/11 Because ‘He Was Out Campaigning Against My Son Yesterday’

Has anyone put Tom Kean Junior, the Republican running for then US Senate for Menendez’ seat in NJ, on the spot about this controversy? Make him either support the propaganda or repudiate his Dad’s role in it.

BTW, spellcheck is busted.

this from Howie Kurtz’ column today:

Thomas H. Kean, the Republican who chaired the 9/11 commission and is a co-executive producer of the film, said in an interview that he recently asked for changes that would address complaints raised by the former aides to President Bill Clinton and that ABC is considering his request.

“These are people of integrity,” Kean said of the filmmakers. “I know there are some scenes where words are put in characters’ mouths. But the whole thing is true to the spirit of 9/11.”

(snip)

Bruce R. Lindsey, who runs Clinton’s foundation, wrote Kean last night that he was “shocked” by the former New Jersey governor’s role, saying: “Your defense of the outright lies in this film is destroying the bipartisan aura of the 9/11 Commission and tarnishing the hard work of your fellow commissioners.”

Kean said he has worked without a contract and told ABC that if it wants to pay him after the movie airs, he will donate his fee to charity.

Kean said the filmmakers have made changes — in one case, reshooting an entire scene — based in part on his recommendations. “The suggestion that this is some right-wing group in Hollywood is absurd,” he said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01454.html

beemer @ 19

Calling ABC gets you to a comment recording system. Not sure how effective it is, but left a msg.

30 second limit. Plan ahead.

http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html

Just a feedback box- not sure how effective that is either, but left my opinion

It should be noted that Robert Iger is predisposed to favor our cause.

Opensecrets.org shows him contributing mostly to Democratic interests.

Linked to it yesterday, no time today.

I find it interesting that ABC is paying attention to the letter from the Democratic Senators. At the moment, those legislative threats in the letter are empty since Dem is the minority party. ABC must be thinking that the Democrats will be majority party before long, certainly before this incident is forgotten.

T- at 38 — I am told by a couple of folks who know Mr. Iger that he is a decent guy. Which just lends some more weight in my mind to the whole potential that this is an Eisner stink bomb left hanging for the new management to deal with after he left. This would have had to have been in production for a while — from acquisition to script to casting to filming to final product takes a while — and the location stuff they would have had to do with this would have required some logistics work that couldn’t have been done in a short time frame, I wouldn’t think.

If Path to 9/11 is aired, I believe we need to select 10 of ABC largest advertisers and boycott them hard.

I wrote to Ford informing them that their company is on the Target List…and I asked them to join with defenders of Democracy and Truth to ask ABC to NOT air this show.

I’ll let you know if Ford responds.

more from thinkprogress:

Clinton On Path To 9/11: Film Contradicts ‘The Factual Findings of the 9/11 Commission’

Kean, for his part, described the miniseries as “pretty accurate.” He also added: “It’s dramatized in a couple of areas, but it’s a dramatization that’s true to the story.”
John C. @ 28

President Clinton’s appearances are confined to images from news conferences and his deposition: There he is denying his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, then explaining it away, and finally announcing his determination to battle terrorism. He comes off as fatally detached from America’s greatest challenges. In fairness, though, the miniseries does allow for a different interpretation: Although Clinton brought the Lewinsky mess upon himself, Republicans are to blame for letting it become a national distraction — and one that had bad consequences for O’Neill and his fellow terror hunters. Also, it’s worth mentioning that in Monday’s installment, when the miniseries turns to the early days of the Bush administration, then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice (played very effectively by 24 veteran Penny Johnson Jerald) comes off as an ignoramus, especially in a scene when she downsizes the responsibilities of counterterror official Richard Clarke (an unsung if earnest hero, by the film’s lights, and played by Stephen Root of Office Space). To call this a pro-Bush miniseries, as its critics surely will do, is a bit too simple.

Even if ABC pulls the miniseries & doesn’t try to “fix” it up to air later, I’m not inclined to forget this. Disney/ABC has a history.
Work up to the eyeballs but I called local abc affiliate this am & got voicemail, left a message, but will call again.
I’m fed up with the flagrant rewriting of history & deliberate distortion of facts by arrogant & greedy power brokers. They are truly ugly americans.

I have a question of my own: Where can I get an Ahmed Massoud t-shirt?

oh, Christy….

Firedoglake’s Christy Hardin Smith invokes her mother’s advice:

“Look, it is perfectly legitimate to provide materials from both sides of the political aisle, to discuss theories with kids in school, to talk about legitimate differences of opinion or approach or philosophy/ideology and political viewpoint. It’s called education in terms of political discourse — and a discussion of how things can be manipulated or used to further one agenda or another is a very, very useful discussion in terms of public education.

“What is clearly not acceptable is to provide materials that are slanted or which have facts substantially in dispute — from the very document from which they purport to be gleaned, in this particular case, since the materials in some spots don’t even track the facts in the 9/11 Commission Report — and then fail to label them as ‘theories’ or ’spin’ or ‘partisan’ or ‘propoganda’ or some other label other than truth. (You know, what your mom and mine called ‘lying’ when we were growing up.)”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..00264.html

Christy, agreed w/ your 7:31 am.

I’m glad you included your graceful words of wisdom to “Be polite,” when e-mailing Mr. Iger.

Rush Limbaugh is a cash cow for ABC Radio — somewhere on the internets yesterday, I read an opinion that this project may have bubbled up from the right wing cess pool at ABC Radio, rather than being a top down decision to air defamatory GOP propaganda.

If so, the suits in the boardroom are mighty pissed right now — having a stink bomb like this dropped in their laps is not what any corporation wants.

scory @ 14

looseheadprop @
8

I cannot get over how nimble we have become.

Brava and bravo (as the case may be) to all here

LHP — we’re all driven by the market now. :)

We need to use that nimbleness to save the War Crimes Act.

I apologize for my obsessiveness, but the Iran/Contra affair shows how difficult it is to go after a sitting president. In the Hamdan case, the Supreme Court has already ruled that the White House has violated Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. And the War Crimes Act makes violations of Common Article 3 a federal crime.

To save Bush’s ass, the White House now seeks to gut the War Crimes Act via stealth legislation. “The proposal is in the last 10 pages of an 86-page bill [sent to congress on Wednesday] devoted mostly to military commissions, and it is a tangled mix of cross-references and omissions,” according to an article by Adam Liptak, THE NEW YORK TIMES NEWS ERVICE, 08 September 2006, http://www.statesman.com/news/…..egal.html.

If you want a glimpse of the official pitch, see http://www.pe.com/localnews/op…..ab547.html

despite the serial mischaracterizations of progressive bloggers by MSM, etc.. am willing to bet we are also seen as an affluent, better educated and therefore prized demographic by the ad folks (someone with more info can disabuse me of same if you know)

which is why it is so important to hit the advertisers (see link upthread)

gotta go Firedogs, will try to check in via work

Go Dogs Go !

Angie: Wow. Thanks for posting the WaPo link. If anybody had told me a year ago that Howard Kurtz would be quoting Christy or another great FDL voice in a newspaper article, I would have thought the prediction overly optimistic, to say the least.

Though we have far to go, I think this a huge hurdle achieved…the fact that such articulate and reasoned commentaries as Christy’s and Jane’s have burst through the MSM “gate”…

The wisdom of Michael Jordan, endorser of footwear:

“Republicans buy shoes, too”.

That should go both ways, as Democrats watch television and movies, too. ABC needs to be made aware about how badly they are about to piss off a lot of people.

ABC, The Mouse That Whored

http://rogerailes.blogspot.com…..0838239668

LOL!

btw — here’s my letter to Iger:

My husband and I took our honeymoon at Walt Disney World in 19**. We have been back to visit on 11 occasions since then and brought our three-year-old daughter to WDW for the first time this past spring. We had been considering purchasing Disney time share — that will be postponed indefinitely at this point — as are our plans to go back to WDW next spring for another week-long vacation.

Our daughter’s Halloween costume was purchased yesterday — it was to have been Ariel, but we have gone with a non-Disney costume instead. I have not yet started my Christmas shopping, but you can bet that I will carefully weigh my purchases — this year and in the years to come — depending on whether Disney and ABC act with integrity or with manipulative, callous disregard for facts and history.

Both my husband and I are well educated, and we work very hard for our income and our family’s security. We have loved the Disney company, it’s movies, it’s theme parks, and it shows in the toys and movies that we have purchased for our daughter. But integrity is earned every single day by your actions and words, and at the moment I am ashamed of the Mouse. That you would allow a miniseries to go on the air about a subject so integral to our nation as 9/11 is, riddled with factual inaccuracies and nasty, manipulative political spin is appalling.

You have not only failed to exceed my expectations, but you may have lost loyal Disney customers, and all of the disposable income that used to flow from us to you. For shame.

There is still time to do the right thing, Mr. Iger — please carefully consider that 9/11 is too sacred to lie about it for too many people who lost friends and family in the Towers, the Pentagon, and on the planes. To do anything other than tell the honest truth about it is blasphemy and shameful — please pull this movie before it is too late.

angie @ 48

oh, Christy….

Firedoglake’s Christy Hardin Smith invokes her mother’s advice:

“Look, it is perfectly legitimate to provide materials from both sides of the political aisle, to discuss theories with kids in school, to talk about legitimate differences of opinion or approach or philosophy/ideology and political viewpoint. It’s called education in terms of political discourse — and a discussion of how things can be manipulated or used to further one agenda or another is a very, very useful discussion in terms of public education.

“What is clearly not acceptable is to provide materials that are slanted or which have facts substantially in dispute — from the very document from which they purport to be gleaned, in this particular case, since the materials in some spots don’t even track the facts in the 9/11 Commission Report — and then fail to label them as ‘theories’ or ’spin’ or ‘partisan’ or ‘propoganda’ or some other label other than truth. (You know, what your mom and mine called ‘lying’ when we were growing up.)”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..00264.html

Oh dear. Christy and firedoglake get quoted by H. Kurtz, and linked with motherhood and apple pie. It’s the new conventional wisdom. What are we to do? Never trust anyone over . . . uh, 30.

Does anyone have standing to seek an injunction against the airing of PT911? The DNC, based on campaign finance or FCC violations that would cause irreparable harm to the Democratic party if the GOPudrama was shown? Individuals portrayed inacurately?

Christy Hardin Smith @ 22

CJ at 15 — I was not a specialist in that sort of case, and it can be a tough one to argue when you have a public figure involved — the laws on slander/libel/etc. for public figures are very loose due to their higher profile. That said, I would think if they attribute specific actions or statements or the like to Berger or Albright or any other real person that they (a) never did or said and (b) which portrays them in a bad light and (c) they could show based on evidence and testimony that it was patently false and the producers and writer should have known this from documents they purport to use for the show, that they could at least get past a summary judgment standard and potentially to a jury. If there are folks who have dones those sorts of cases, please chime in — it’s a highly specialized legal area, because it is VERY nuanced in terms of what is and is not allowable — and I’d be much more comfortable hearing from someone who has successfully tried a case or two like this as to what they think. (Sorry, I know that isn’t much of an answer, but you have a fairly wide berth with public figures…and it depends on a lot of factors.)

Defamation inthe case of public figures has a an extra prong to prove. In most defamtion cases, for the liabilty portion, you only have to prove that the published statement was false and that it was offered as a statement of fact, not opinion. In short, that it was a lie. (for the liability phase, you must prove that it harmed you in reputation, or some other specific way).

“Pulished” is a term of art here. don’t worry about it for the purposes of this discussion.

For a public figure, you must additionally prove malice. That the lie was told with the intention of harming the public figure.

In NY State, where ABC has it’s HQ and where Clinton lives (so it gets my “choice of law” vote) there is also something called “slander per se”. That occurs with only certain enumerated slandrs, sucha as calling a married woman unchaste, or calling someone ina licensed profession unqualified to do that work, or accusing someone of a an of moral turpitude when they have a job that includes fiduciary repsonsibilites.

So, accusing a lawyer of embezzlement or of kiting checks, if untrue, is slander per se. You do not have to prove damages in salnder per se. Damages are assumed as a matter of law.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 56

btw — here’s my letter to Iger:. . .

Wow.

That ReddHedd from West Virginny, she shore does know how ta write a letter.

Bravo

The whole idea a pulling up a “dramatization” of a tragic event like 9/11 is simply ridiculous: such fresh scar on the hearth of your nation (but of the whole world I would say) cannot and should not be handled with any other tool that the whole unbiased truth. As Christie wisely said if the western society can learn something from this tragedy it can do it only if the analysis is done on what really went on, not only on the day of the tragedy, but before that in the years that led to it. It is of capital importance that the USA, being the nation focus of these events and the leading voice of the western world, would take the lead on this but outside great communities like the one of this site what one can see is an incredible apathy if not complete denial.

I really do not what can be done to change that but I know for sure that this apathy is the reason why know people like the executives of ABC-Disney were so sure they could have put on air such outrageous piece of propaganda as “Path to 9/11″ without none complaining. It is a great thing to see that at least the blogger community has no intention to take this laying down: it is a hearth warming experience to see the razor sharp wits and skills of the great persons I can see posting here (but also on other great left-leaning blogs), cut through all the crap and expose the naked true of the lies and manipulation the powers-that-be are trying to feed you.

I am really hoping that the long need change in the government of the USA is going to arrive very soon: the world is really a scary place when the only super power left behaves like the bad guy out of a James Bond movie. I have just gone through the content of the latest Bush speech and I really can’t believe what that *****ss just publicly admitted without even a moment of embarrassment or of hesitation : 14 CIA super-prisoner are going to join Guantanamo’s happy family, enjoying the thrills of detention under the ..oh so nice… BuscCo interpretation of that “pesky”, “vague” Geneva Convention (and why should be necessary to confirm that Geneva Convention is going to be respected… how this people was treated up to now ?!?!?). From where, may I ask, do these “happy tourists” come from? Maybe from those non-existing CIA secret prisons safely hidden away in East Europe or in some sympathetic Arabian country ? Or were they hidden away in some cozy little prison in the middle of the USA? One wonders which of the two possibility Bush would confirm: because Condoliza Rice (you remember her, she is supposed to be USA Secretary of State… the public face of the country, the head of USA diplomatic corps) assured several times Europe and its members that “The United States has respected — and will continue to respect — the sovereignty of other countries. ” and that “The United States does not transport, and has not transported, detainees from one country to another for the purpose of interrogation using torture” and finally that “The United States does not use the airspace or the airports of any country for the purpose of transporting a detainee to a country where he or she will be tortured. ” (Rice on the 5/12/05). So the mysterious guests cannot be coming from anywhere else than within the USA, where they have spent the last 2 or 3 years in prison outside the control of the police or of the military forces: does this sit well with the rule of the law of your country? Oh right, the law does not apply to the mighty “decider” (no thanks, no capital letter needed or deserved here). Anyway there is nothing to be worried about: those mysterious CIA “black prisons” are no longer active so there is nothing to complain about, just move along… (and look! over here here ! American idol ! the exclusive photos of Suri Cruise !!)

Then again Rice has already given us some craftily worded lies as the following one: (5/12/05) (http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/57602.htm).

“our intelligence agencies have handled the gathering of intelligence from a very small number of extremely dangerous detainees” .

Like for example Khald El Masri, German citizen kidnapped on December 31, 2003 on the border of Macedonia, because his name was identical (except for variations in English spelling) to that of Khalid al-Masri, “extraordinarily rendered” to Afghanistan where he was beaten, repeatedly interrogated and (allegedly) raped. He was released on 28/05/05 when CIA realized the “silly” mistake. They flew him out of Afghanistan and released him at night on a desolate road in Albania, without apology, or funds to return home.

Don’t get me wrong I am not saying that Europe can act as the “white pure knight” here since I am still deeply ashamed from the outrageous behavior of the right wing government that led Italy for years up to this last April. They covered up this kind of things stonewalling for example the investigation on the kidnapping of Abu Omar(**) by CIA in Milan on the 17/03/2003, then “extraordinarily rendered” to Egypt where he was interrogated and tortured. But even if our own wingnuts thought they could pull off something like that without any complain, this thing blew up in their sorry faces: the whole public opinion was against them and the people involved have being relentless prosecuted by the magistracy that finally got to the point of issuing 25 arrest warrants for CIA agents (never to be carried out of course…) and to put under close scrutiny our own secret services (SIMSI and SISDE) and the involved governement officials. I am really flabbergasted and amazed by the lukewarm reaction of the public opinion and even more by the press in the USA: people should be screaming outrage on the top of their lungs and demanding the heads of all the people involved on a plate. How can these events do not strike as unjust and un-american, not to mention unethical and unacceptable, to very single person who hears them: I can see them to be all of the above and I am living on the other side of the ocean, in Italy, for God’s sake! How can be possible that the majority of the USA feels absolutely fine about the trashing of the tradition of freedom and respect that has always been so proudly worn on USA’s sleeve?

(!) The rant really got out of control today (it ’s a good thing work is quite slow this week, no such luck next week): I hope you (all) are going to forgive me for the lengthly and disjointed post but I really needed to take it off my chest . Next time I will keep my mouth shut I promise :-P

Peace.

(**)Is Abu Omar a terrorist? I don’t know, probably yes, what I know for sure is that Abu Omar should have had a correct and lawful trial and if found guilty should have faced the punishment according the law: that is how we can prove ourselves and the world that we are better that the terrorist, that we have the moral standing for lead this *****ng world somewhere else than to its utter destruction.

Kean looked as if he embarrassed himself with the nonsense he spouted about the film farce.

Aren’t liberals supposed to be against preemptive strikes? They’ve certainly announced their opposition to pressuring networks over such matters, or at least former senator Tom Daschle has: When CBS axed The Reagans, he said that it “smells of intimidation to me.”

Unlike recent movies such as Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center and United 93, the ABC miniseries doesn’t concentrate solely on the events of 9/11. It does dramatize that day, but the bulk of the show focuses on what led up to the catastrophe: the failed attempt to destroy the Twin Towers in 1993, the embassy bombings in 1998, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in 2000, and so on. The main character is FBI agent John O’Neill (played by Harvey Keitel), who leads a counterterrorism operation aimed at nabbing Yousef, Osama bin Laden, and their ilk. He is a diligent G-man, but the miniseries is, for the most part, a chronicle of massive failure.
Wammo @ 20

Yeah i heard…

Wammo @ 16

From RL…
One more thing about this movie, “Does the Clinton administration get blamed for this?” Not directly, but when you watch this, there is no escaping the fact that all during the nineties and all during his administration — the Khobar Towers, the USS Cole — oh, that one really comes through. The administration wouldn’t do diddly-squat about that. They were just afraid. I think that might have been the incident that Albright refused to do anything about because of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks going on. I’m not quite sure. But from the 1993 World Trade Center explosion and bombing to the Khobar Towers to the embassies that were blown up in Africa, to the USS Cole, it is abundantly clear this country didn’t do anything in retaliation and was hamstrung.

Any time an opportunity was presented to take to take out the people who had done this, hunting down, for example, Ramzi Binalshibh and Ramzi Yousef and so forth — and they did get Yousef, and that required an effort like you can’t believe. It had an informant, but the administration was barely able to pull the trigger, but on that one Yousef and his buddies were sentence to do 240 years in jail. We didn’t even have the death penalty for them and they’re still in jail. But in terms of retaliation for any of it, there was none — zip, zero, nada, for all of those attacks in the nineties. Nothing, and you know full well that after 9/11, we have been mobilized and we have been on the march, not only retaliating but trying to wipe these people out to prevent further attacks and a mixture of other foreign policy objectives as well, such as Iraq and democracy and freedom for these nations and so forth.

But really…Richard Clarke, as portrayed in this movie, comes across as one voice trying to get everybody to pay attention here. Sandy Berger comes across as gutless. In this one episode where bin Laden in 1998 is surrounded in his digs over in Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance and the CIA team have the house surrounded. They know exactly what building in this complex he’s in. They are ready to go in and either kill him or capture him, and they don’t get the approval from Washington. Berger says (summarized), “Nope, can’t do it. If you guys do it you’re going to do it on your own and if it falls apart you get the blame.” In another incident similar to this where it was possible to take out bin Laden and perhaps other terrorists who were — and this is before 9/11 — planning 9/11, Madeleine Albright and Berger both refused to allow the CIA and the military to take any action whatsoever.

Albright says, “The president is deeply involved in peace talks between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and if there is an attack on any Muslim or Islamic people right now, it will set that back,” and I’m sitting there watching this and I’m in stunned disbelief because those negotiations never led to anything! It was all about fear. That administration was afraid of failure and what it would mean to their approval ratings, but there were problems throughout. All of the information that the FBI offices in Phoenix and in Minneapolis had that were transferred to New York FBI office and then the CIA, but they couldn’t share the information. The Zacarias Moussaoui case is well gone into.

They had his computer. He was the 20th hijacker. His computer had the data on the plans. It didn’t have the date, but had the plans. The justice department said, “Nope, we can’t open the computer. We don’t have a warrant. We’re not going to get a warrant. We’re not going to violate this man’s rights this way, so forth.” It makes it clear that nobody was serious about dealing with this prior to 9/11. As for the Bush administration, they don’t get off the hook here. They are not let off the hook. They, too, are portrayed as — well, they’re caught up and sort of hamstrung by the existing procedures that are in place. They haven’t had a chance to change them, such as getting rid of the wall and this sort of thing.

I just sent this to the Disney-Investor site (thanks for including the address here)

Dear Sir/Madame,
I am deeply concerned over Disney’s role in the upcoming 9/11 propaganda piece scheduled at present to be aired on ABC. This December, my daughter and her winning Varsity basketball team are scheduled to travel to Disney for a basketball tournament. I know it will be hard for her, but I will not only insist that she not go, but also will lobby the coach, principal, and other parents (in this blue state) to pull their daughters as well if this travesty does in fact get aired.
I realize that this TV “special” is not the sort of thing that Disney usually does, and that some who may have been responsible are no longer at Disney, but Disney, like the rest of us needs to stand on principle for what is right and fair.

Bill Clinton loyalists are demanding wholesale changes to the upcoming miniseries — and while ABC is making some snips, the alterations, insiders say, may not please the Dems.

It’s funny, I haven’t seen that much “Bill Clinton loyalism” in the outrage expressed here. What I have seen is an ethical insistence that a drama allegedly based on factual events actually contain some fact-based events. “Path,” by all evidence, is a pure right-wing partisan fantasy.

Another hit to this, in the LA Times:
9/11 Miniseries Is Bunk
Former ambassador to Yemen says ABC traded fact for drama in portraying events after the 2000 bombing of the destroyer Cole.
By Barbara Bodine, BARBARA BODINE was U.S. ambassador to Yemen from 1997-2001. She is a visiting scholar at MIT’s Center for International Studies.
September 8, 2006

ON THE MORNING of Sept. 11, 2001, Americans — and the world — froze, saddened and angry. Five years later, we stop to remember those we lost and those who have sacrificed in our defense since, and to reflect on what we must learn. History will define us not by the events of that day but by who we choose to become as a result.

Regrettably, ABC has chosen not to document but to dramatize this most critical of times. Its miniseries, “The Path to 9/11,” opts for fiction when fact is needed and chooses mythmaking when the candor of history is called for. The 9/11 commission report tells the story with clear-eyed honesty, precision and studious impartiality. The ABC drama does not. The 9/11 commission spent hours interviewing virtually everyone connected not just with the events of that day but those involved in counter-terrorism over 25 years — Republican as well as Democrat. ABC did not.

lbd @ 12

It’s great if ABC yanks the series, but the patronizing tone of the Variety article is tells you everything you need to know about ABC is gonna spin this thing.

Exactly. This is how the right wing extremists justify their mindless loyalty–by failing to imagine that anybody else works on any other basis.

op99 @ 58

Does anyone have standing to seek an injunction against the airing of PT911? The DNC, based on campaign finance or FCC violations that would cause irreparable harm to the Democratic party if the GOPudrama was shown? Individuals portrayed inacurately?

Well, a number of us lawyers can weigh in on that.

As for “irreparable harm” to a political party, the courts do not (well, they better not) issue injunctions against free speech in this country. Not even against lies that cause harm.

To put the government (i.e., the courts) in the business of defining truth and lies and harm to politics is to take us in the direction that … well, that maybe a certain current President might be willing to take us (and you’ll love what his judges do with that kind of power) but that our Constitution forbids.

No prior restraint by the courts. Period. (Criminal trials excepted.)

But we have every right to use our own rights of free speech to demand honesty.

Trust our democracy, not the courts, to protect our democracy.

Call and write to Disney, ABC, Iger.

I would think Berger and Albright might.

op99 @ 58

Does anyone have standing to seek an injunction against the airing of PT911? The DNC, based on campaign finance or FCC violations that would cause irreparable harm to the Democratic party if the GOPudrama was shown? Individuals portrayed inacurately?

Mary, lhp, et al., this OT’s for you:

Writer: Mainstream media ignored torture, homicide

A column at The Columbia Journalism Review has detailed the media establishment’s collective reluctance to report incidents of detainee abuse, torture, and even homicide in the early days of the “war on terror,” RAW STORY can report. […]

EPU for TREX –

I think Dangerstein’s invocation of the old wife-beating clich betrays a sordid secret at the very heart of the Lieberman campaign. It’s not Lieberman who beats his wife but Dangerstein! And not Dangerstein’s wife. Lieberman’s! UGH!

Wammo: Wag.The.Dog.

How many times did you hear that about anything the Clinton Administration tried to do in terms of police action or military internvention?

Who would have approved the budget for any action? Who were the chairs of the Intel and Armed Forces Committees during the Clinton Administration?

Wag.The.Dog. That was the answer from Congress to the threat of terrorism.

Someone funneled $40 million (that’s the figure currently being mentioned) to Disney in order to broadcast a lying mockudrama on the ABC network — sans commercials or any known sponsor. Who?

The impetus — and perhaps the cash — seems to have come from a bizarre Christian cult called Youth With a Mission (YWAM), founded in the 1960 by Loren Cunningham, father to David Cunningham, the film’s director.

read the rest here: http://cannonfire.blogspot.com…..o-911.html

Prof @ 68

op99 @ 58

Does anyone have standing to seek an injunction against the airing of PT911? The DNC, based on campaign finance or FCC violations that would cause irreparable harm to the Democratic party if the GOPudrama was shown? Individuals portrayed inacurately?

Well, a number of us lawyers can weigh in on that.

As for “irreparable harm” to a political party, the courts do not (well, they better not) issue injunctions against free speech in this country. Not even against lies that cause harm.

To put the government (i.e., the courts) in the business of defining truth and lies and harm to politics is to take us in the direction that … well, that maybe a certain current President might be willing to take us (and you’ll love what his judges do with that kind of power) but that our Constitution forbids.

No prior restraint by the courts. Period. (Criminal trials excepted.)

But we have every right to use our own rights of free speech to demand honesty.

Trust our democracy, not the courts, to protect our democracy.

Call and write to Disney, ABC, Iger.

I would not want to see politcal parties doing that, ever. I’m woth Prof on that. But Berger and Albright are having deliberate lies told about them. I think their situation is quite different.

And then there’s the complete idiocy of suggesting 9/11 was not dramatic enough to be told truthfully.

In case you haven’t seen this on C&L, Harvey Keitel acknowledges his concerns about the truthiness of the film in which he plays one of the characters.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/…..e-correct/

I wrote ABC AGAIN:

Dear ABC,

I am hearing that your network is considering pulling ‘The Path To 9/11′. I hope that this is true. I have personally contacted all of your prime time sponsors and registered my intention to NOT purchase their products and services if they continue to advertise with ABC.

9/11 was a serious event with consequences that are still being felt. To fictionalize real people’s statements and real events is irresponsible. If you air it, I will literally never watch your network again.

[name redacted

kimba1970– thank you very much for your words.

wow.

Here’s my note to Disney, sent a few moments ago:

To ABC/Disney:

I am a 49 year old DC resident. I grew up watching the Wonderful World of Disney on Sunday nights as a child. I am saddened and outraged beyond words that Disney now stands for a distorted fantasy concerning the most tragic event of my lifetime.

My office was three blocks from the White House on the morning of September 11th. I evacuated onto Pennsylvania Avenue after the plane hit the Pentagon, and the street was unpassable with crowds wondering where to go and whether a plane would suddenly appear and strafe or bomb us as we stood completely in the open. A friend of mine was incinerated when the nose of the jet entered the Pentagon precisely where he sat.

This docudrama is profane. I cannot believe that Disney would destroy a lifetime of
goodwill by associating with such an inaccurate and inflammatory work.

For shame.

Scott Pritchett

OT to Kimba1970 (before I’ve even read your comment):

Hey, Luca’s uncle — I hope you noticed how many people have been salivating over your carbonara recipe since you shared it with us yesterday! Feel free to embellish your culinary fame around here anytime you like, okay?

Prof @
3

And while you are waiting for your telephone calls to connect on the lines that Christy has suggested, you can also click off a few e-mails, either on a mail-to-Disney web page or at mailto:investor.relations@disneyonline.com

Below, see the email I just fired off to Disney:

Let me see now, $40 million production costs, two nights prime time revenue lost, the threat of legislative action against Disney/ABC, forget the copyright extension, loss of the goodwill of progressives if it runs, loss of the goodwill of the conservatives if it doesn’t, add on the old business of the lost revenues from the Michael Moore film. Gee, what a good investment opportunity!

Every ABC affiliate is in a war with its 6PM and 10PM news products. If ABC can air such BS regarding the 9/11 attack then my regard for their news product has dropped to absolute zero. Tell the local news editor that you have no intention to view news from such an obviously biased network.

just wanted to add that I wrote to Disney and Iger using three of the email adresses found here, pointing out I’m a native New Yorker who is a long-time shareholder in Disney, and damn, am I pissed. Promised no more Disney/Pixar merch for my wonderful nieces, nephews and Godschildren, and that I’d be at the next shareholders meeting raising hell if this ‘docudrama’ airs.

thanks for the links, they helped alot. I’ll be on my cell phone in a hour (while waiting at the airport for a friend to arrive) to call the local station and ABC HQ.

geez, activism sure can be fun.

keep it up FDL’ers!

Aye Aye Captain Redd, I’ll dispatch a message immediately.

I went to the list of ABC entertainment division sponsors and clicked onthe link for Quaker oats. We eat a lot of oatmeal and could truthfully talk about how much we liked their product and used it and how it wuld pain me to have to boycott their products if they did not pull htier entire ABC entertainment division media buy for this weekend and next week as a way of publicly disassociating themselves from ABC’s breach of corporate ethics ralted to spending corporate funds to produce and propose to air a 6 hour politcal campaign commercial.

I love the crackling of the toobz in the morning.

Been busy emailing. I’ve sent nearly a dozen so far today – pretty thoroughly covering Apple and Scholastic recipients. Now on to Disney and Pixar. Then my local ABC.

I do feel these companies have really betrayed our trust by being part of this.

Hi. Thanks for the great thread. I thought I’d share my letter to Bob Iger, which I sent using the email address Christy provided above:

(you can also read it at http://witlist.blogspot.com/20…..isney.html)

Dear Bob:

First, I want to say thanks for deciding to air “The Path to 9/11″ on the ABC network this weekend. It’s a rare opportunity to see Disney’s political bias out in the open. Usually when major US corporations attempt to manipulate the political process to their advantage they to do it more covertly. I’m glad to see you guys wearing your politics on your sleeves.

It isn’t every day a major television network takes the most horrific event in the past 50 years and fictionalizes it for the benefit of its friends in the White House. How brave of you. How patriotic.

I’m sure it will be highly educational for all of the schoolchildren you’ve co-opted into watching with the help of Scholastic. I haven’t seen such a smooth effort to influence our nation’s children since RJ Reynolds introduced Joe Camel and put him on billboards outside elementary schools. Nice work.

Thanks also for deciding to run the show without commercial interruption, making it impossible for those misguided few who disagree with the program to boycott its sponsors. I understand the show will cost $40 million. I’m sure the grieving families of the 2,973 Americans who died on that day will appreciate Disney’s sacrifice.

I also want to thank you for making my life easier. No longer will I have to worry about watching ABC programs (not that I watched many to begin with) or buying Disney products. Frankly, the movies and TV shows mostly suck, though I will miss Pixar and The Pirates of the Caribbean movies.

I won’t have to write about Disney products. No more casual references to “Desperate Housewives,” no reviews of Disney phones, MP3 players, computers, games, etc. in the stories I write for national magazines and Websites. My life will be blissfully Disney free.

Best of all, I no longer have to go to Disneyworld! Thank the Lord. My kids will be upset, but they’ll get over it eventually. And I’ll save thousands of dollars that I can put toward my children’s education. Maybe they’ll learn how to tell fact from fiction, or how to recognize when someone is lying to them for their own selfish ends. That would be yet another good thing that comes out of your program. And again, I’ll have you to thank for it.

Best,

Dan Tynan
Former customer

What really puts the lie to this is Richard Clarke’s lack of involvement in it–I remember last night on Countdown that they said he was kept out of the process, and called it “a mess”. Look, this movie is theoretically supposed to be telling the story of John O’Neill, and the best, most prolific source for this story is Richard Clarke. He already is a counter-terrorism advisor for ABC. His character is in the movie, so why not tell it the way he’d tell it? Apparently because they didn’t want to tell that story. Which is too bad, because I’d definitely pay money to see it:

C.I.A. officials went to the White House and said they had “specific, predictive, actionable” intelligence that bin Laden would soon be attending a particular meeting, in a particular place. “It was a rare occurrence,” Clarke said. Clinton authorized a lethal attack. The target date, however—August 20, 1998—nearly coincided with Clinton’s deposition about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Clarke said that he and other top national-security officials at the White House went to see Clinton to warn him that he would likely be accused of “wagging the dog” in order to distract the public from his political embarrassment. Clinton was enraged. “Don’t you fucking tell me about my political problems, or my personal problems,” Clinton said, according to Clarke. “You tell me about national security. Is it the right thing to do?” Clarke thought it was. “Then fucking do it,” Clinton told him.

And then there’s the Bush administration, a week before 9/11:

On September 4, 2001, all sides agree, the issue reached a head, at a meeting of the Principal’s Committee of Bush’s national-security advisers, a Cabinet-level group that includes the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the director of the C.I.A., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Attorney General, and the national-security adviser. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz also attended that day. As Clarke, who was there, recalled, “Tenet said he opposed using the armed Predator, because it wasn’t the C.I.A.’s job to fly airplanes that shot missiles. The Air Force said it wasn’t their job to fly planes to collect intelligence. No one around the table seemed to have a can-do attitude. Everyone seemed to have an excuse.”

And there’s a lot more where that came from… of course there were failures, but ABC couldn’t manage to pin them on the right people, thereby getting the story completely wrong!

No prior restraint by the courts. Period. (Criminal trials excepted.)

But we have every right to use our own rights of free speech to demand honesty.

Trust our democracy, not the courts, to protect our democracy.

Call and write to Disney, ABC, Iger.

I would not want to see politcal parties doing that, ever. I’m woth Prof on that. But Berger and Albright are having deliberate lies told about them. I think their situation is quite different.

Berger and Albright are public figures, and will likely have a difficult time even getting a libel suit to a jury. The relevant law stems from New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964):

Facts of the Case
Decided together with Abernathy v. Sullivan, this case concerns a full-page ad in the New York Times which alleged that the arrest of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. for perjury in Alabama was part of a campaign to destroy King’s efforts to integrate public facilities and encourage blacks to vote. L. B. Sullivan, the Montgomery city commissioner, filed a libel action against the newspaper and four black ministers who were listed as endorsers of the ad, claiming that the allegations against the Montgomery police defamed him personally. Under Alabama law, Sullivan did not have to prove that he had been harmed; and a defense claiming that the ad was truthful was unavailable since the ad contained factual errors. Sullivan won a $500,000 judgment.

Conclusion
The Court held that the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements, even false ones, about the conduct of public officials except when statements are made with actual malice (with knowledge that they are false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity). Under this new standard, Sullivan’s case collapsed.

This is the message that I sent to ABC. Tired to get through on the phone lines … busy, busy, busy but I will continue to try.

I was in NYC on Sept 11th. With a clear view of the burning towers from my apt window, and within earshot the bells of a large Catholic Church which held almost daily funerals in the months afterward, I did not need a television screen to relay the horrors of that day.

I am horrified that ABC would even dream of fictionalizing one single aspect of any part of the history that culminated in the events of 9/11 and I urge ABC to pull this television show and destroy it immediately.

Americans are not stupid. We do not need to be presented with “drama” in order to understand what happened to our nation that day. In the future, I suggest you add $40 million to the budget of the news bureau, and begin to present us with facts, rather than fiction masquerading as fact.

For those who want to “call bullshit on Scholastic’s mea culpa”, I humbly submit this link to the FDL troops. Helmet tip to the General.

Why not not Steve Jobs in Mousekeeter ears?

Tomorrow, Friday morning, we’ll explore why Steve Jobs, who is on the board of Disney, is aiding and abetting Disney’s partisan effort to steal the election by permitting the free download of the fictitous 9/11 TV show via iTunes. Hard to believe that little deal was struck without board member Jobs – the largest shareholder of Disney, thank you – having a hand in it.

So Steve Jobs isn’t just someone who can help fix this problem. He’s someone who helped create the problem.

This new Mac user thinks it’s time we heard from Steve as to why he’s letting Disney use Apple to disgrace the memory of 3,000 dead Americans.

Free download?
link

They better YANK and BURN IT,

The way they’ve appartently burned their franchise and souls

ALREADY!

Pony Blow has pencilled in the Chimp for a 9.01pm EDT address. As in, slap bang in the middle of part 2 on the east coast, and just before it starts on the west.

I shit ye not.

Prof @ 90

Berger and Albright are public figures, and will likely have a difficult time even getting a libel suit to a jury. The relevant law stems from New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964):

Conclusion
The Court held that the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements, even false ones, about the conduct of public officials except when statements are made with actual malice (with knowledge that they are false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity). Under this new standard, Sullivan’s case collapsed.

So any judgment would turn on whether the court accepts the 9-11 Commission report at factual, and whether the producers “recklessly disregarded” its findings. Another option, in the case of Berger and Allbright, would be an argument that failure to even try to contact them to determine their roles would be reckless. The distribution of rough cuts to only rightwing talkers (and refusal to let the figures depicted see the same) would tend to bolster any claims of malice, IMHO, in that it goes toward proving motive and malice.

It’s a tough sell, but not out of the question at all, IMHO. Not a lawyer, just a juror . . . but that’s how I see it.

For everyone’s amusement purposes, I thought I’d do a little “concern troll” education.

This person has posted under the following rolling names on the blog in the last few days: Mr. Miller, John. C., Wammo, Pack, Wackinit, Pammy Poo, Loony, Wall Street J — for starters, anyway. All concern troll wingnut talking points. Please give our resident concern troll a round of applause for being so transparent. Thank you.

This was probably covered yesterday…Armitage On CIA Leak: ‘I Screwed Up’.

pseudonymous in nc @ 95

Pony Blow has pencilled in the Chimp for a 9.01pm EDT address. As in, slap bang in the middle of part 2 on the east coast, and just before it starts on the west.

I shit ye not.

If ABC interrupts the show for Bush and then runs it in full, it’s going to look pretty damned obvious!

posted by trblmkr on Think Progress…
Bush Plans Prime Time Sept. 11 Address
The Associated Press
Friday, September 8, 2006; 9:05 AM

This just came out:

WASHINGTON — President Bush will make a prime-time address from the Oval Office on Monday to mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the administration had requested network time for the address at 9:01 p.m. EDT. The address is expected to run 16 to 18 minutes, he said.

I wonder if this doesn’t coincide with the only part of “The Path to 9/11″ that puts Bush in a bad light, when he ignores the “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US” PDB. I don’t put anything past these bastards.

Comment by trblmkr

Christy– I be clapping wildly while ROTFLMAO.

Kimba, now that I’ve read your comment:

STANDING OVATION!

Scott at 80 — I am so sorry for the loss of your friend in the Pentagon.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 96

For everyone’s amusement purposes, I thought I’d do a little “concern troll” education.

This person has posted under the following rolling names on the blog in the last few days: Mr. Miller, John. C., Wammo, Pack, Wackinit, Pammy Poo, Loony, Wall Street J — for starters, anyway. All concern troll wingnut talking points. Please give our resident concern troll a round of applause for being so transparent. Thank you.

“I think I may have a heart attack and die of not surprised!”
–Iago, “Aladdin” (the Disney version!)

EvilDrPuma @ 98

pseudonymous in nc @ 95

Pony Blow has pencilled in the Chimp for a 9.01pm EDT address. As in, slap bang in the middle of part 2 on the east coast, and just before it starts on the west.

I shit ye not.

If ABC interrupts the show for Bush and then runs it in full, it’s going to look pretty damned obvious!

sheesh!

Christy – 707! Maybe, in your “spare time” you could give a couple of tips to the overwhelmed Joe2006.com/blog.asp as to how to run a civilized blog!

I have received responses from the following ABC sponsors using the clickable links on Benjamin Lybrand’s source material, which he compiled by watching TWO HOURS of According to Jim (blergh!):

http://birdoblog.birdobot.com/disney_propaganda

(I highly recommend this site for sponsor click-through — it took me about 30 minutes to reach more than 20 ABC network sponsors….)

Sponsors who’ve sent more than a canned autoresponse are:
mazda
landrover
iams
reckitt benckiser (which i don’t think i contacted, so maybe they are handling some client’s responses)
carl’s jr.
wishbone
verizon
lipton
office depot

All of these responses have a common theme, which is: please contact the network, we are just poor little advertisers and don’t control the content, plus we are not sponsors of this program, oh and also we have forwarded your comments to our marketing/ad people, or put your comments into our corporate database forever (I guess I have a permanent record with iams now!)

Here’s the letter I sent to ABC execs and Disney Board. In that they may be self-involved boomers like me, I tried to link this ABC tripe to the big boomer American tragedy.

Dear ABC Management and Disney Board members:

Please be patriots and honor the memory of those fallen on September 11, 2001, by only telling the truth about that day.

Imagine if John F. Kennedy’s assassination, which united our country in grief, was followed five years later by a docudramedy with fictionalized scenes and a perceived political slant. Remember, in 1968 our country was divided in ways 2006 can only envy.

Please re-consider the pleas of our fellow patriot, William Jefferson Clinton, as well as those who served our country with him and do not deserve to see their service mis-represented. It is a path to 9/11 our country does not deserve, and your company should amend.

I have communicated with forty of ABC-TV’s corporate sponsors as well as my local affiliate, KGO-TV. All tell me my only recourse is to you. Please be patriotic Americans and do the right thing for our country. Do not malign those who served us all trying mightily to prevent these attacks. Their service to their country, and their patriotism, deserves better from all of us.

Please do the right thing. As Americans, we have the right to expect that from you.

Teddy

Is an appeal to their patriotism completely naive and old-fashioned?

=============
Had Enough, Mouse?
=============

*** Contact your local ABC News affiliate ***

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
If ABC does air “The Path to 9/11″ given the importance of 9/11 and knowing the inaccuracies in this so called “docu-drama” then my regard for your news product is absolute zero. I intend to never view the news from such an obviously biased network. How can anyone purposefully lie about the events of 9/11 to push their agenda? Talk about un-American.

Most Sincerely,
(name, etc.)

Legal types –

Um, while the Fairness Doctarine no longer exists, wouldn’t the coincidence of the broadcast of a Presidential address with a (possibly) partisan program be some type of electoral violation, particularly in a national campaign season?

Just asking ….

I just phoned Disney and was put on hold and then a recording asked for my message.

My message was: I would like you folks at Disney to know that I was yanking my Disney Itinerary off of Expedia and perhaps they would join me in yanking Path to 9/11 of of ABC.

Due to the heavy volume of calls, they will be unable to answer any calls.

Lotus

Thanks, but I am afraid it got a bit out of control as usual.. Sigh! You have caught be on the door: work is over and I need some fresh air. I will try to catch up from home this evening.

P.s Luca is amazing :-) take his uncle word for it

I can’t do it, but I think it would be highly effective if any FDL’ers in New York were to go directly to ABC’s office headquarters in Manhattan and distribute information regarding the falsehoods in the Path to 9/11.

Make sure everyone who goes into the building or leaves the building gets a flier.

A physical presence can have a very significant impact. Voicemails and emails matter too, but ABC executives will know that they are in deep deep trouble if they walk out of their office building and find people handing out fliers about the lies of Path to 9/11 and demanding a boycott.

I urge anyone who is able to take this action to please do so. Godspeed.

Here’s my letter to the writer of the Variety story:

Mr. Triplett,

I read your story in Variety about ABC’s considering whether to pull ‘The Path to 9/11.’

I don’t quite agree with the following sentences from your article: “ABC thought it was limiting controversy by basing its mini on the nonpartisan 9/11 Commission’s report and having commission co-chair Tom Kean serve as a producer on the project… the firestorm of criticism is the latest example of partisan groups attempting to use their clout to bully nets and producers into serving up noncontroversial portraits of political and social matters.”

As one of the tens of thousands who sent letters to Mr. Iger requesting that ABC pull this planned movie from their schedule, I thought I’d share my perspective, in case you were not aware of how this controversy began.

First of all, while ABC claims the film was based on the 9/11 Commission Report, this film contains numerous additional scenes that directly contradict the report.

ABC distributed 900 copies of the DVD for review many TV critics. In addition, ABC sent out hundreds of copies to right-wing commentators and pundits. When commentators such as Rush Limbaugh began to crow last week about how terrific the movie was in putting all the blame on Clinton, others – including Clinton, Albright, and Berger – became curious as to the content. In fact, President Clinton requested a copy of the film for review a couple of days ago and as of yesterday, had not received one. Thus, word was filtering out through the right-wing blogosphere about the film for a full week before their counterparts on the left had seen the film.

How can ABC be surprised about the reaction to the film when it was distributed to opinion-makers on the right but not their counterparts on the left? Does that not suggest that they knew who the intended audience was?

ABC apparently spent last weekend editing the piece and an insider connected with the project e-mailed conservative pundit Hugh Hewitt to write,

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.

…But the blame on the Clinton team is in the DNA of the project and could not be eradicated without pulling the entire show.

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/

Those complaining have been concerned by the manner in which this movie was conceived, is being distributed, and to what purpose. From all I have read about this film, it appears to do maximum damage to the reputations of those in the Clinton Administration and is much kinder to those in the Bush Administration. And I do not think this is a coincidence.

Finally, this is not just a slightly higher-profile TV movie. It is being aired commercial-free with no evident sponsorship over two nights, including on the anniversary of 9/11. It is also scheduled to air before a consequential election in which issues of war, national security, and terrorism are likely to be the most salient issue.

But of greatest concern, Scholastic is partnering with ABC to provide study materials and 100,000 free copies of the film for use as classroom materials. (Under pressure, Scholastic has said that it will re-work the study guides – presumably re-shipping them, since they’ve already been mailed to schools – but Scholastic does still plan to distribute copies of the movie to schoolchildren.

I know you are a business publication about the entertainment industry, and as such wading into political waters is not your newspaper’s metier; however, this is inescapably a political issue and I think the usual he said/she said requires a bit more examination.

Thank you for your time.

Hmmm…our favorite Reddhead quoted in WaPo soon after Siun becomes Press Secretary for FDL….coincidence?

i guess the wee mr. smartypants got an advance copy of his favorite disney fantasy and that fueled his, um um er, enthusiasm.

I cannot find a carbonara recipe, kimba1970 or lotus– help?

OT – again, please point me to the discussion of Armitage’s interview article if you know where it is.

His contrition is noteworthy, and so is the sloppiness of the article:

Armitage adds that while the document was classified, “it doesn’t mean that every sentence in the document is classified.

“I had never seen a covered agent’s name in any memo in, I think, 28 years of government,” he says.

He adds that he thinks he referred to Wilson’s wife as such, or possibly as “Mrs. Wilson.” He never referred to her as Valerie Plame, he adds.

There was no prior reference to the document or the memo in the article.
Is he referring to the document on AF1? Anyone know?

I just sent this letter to George Mitchell:

Dear Senator Mitchell,

Presenting a fictionalized account of the events that led up to 9/11/01, and yet retaining the original names of the persons in government who worked to fight terrorism and claiming it is based on the 9/11 Commission Report, is a transparently partisan attempt at rewriting history. It is unfortunate that such a sinister misuse of the public airwaves snuck under your radar until this point in time.

Now is the time to pull the plug on this dishonest representation of the events that led to 9/11/01. You must realize that the program will be taken as fact by millions of viewers, despite various disclaimers that will not be read or taken seriously. 9/11 is a serious subject and, as the direct of the program dishonestly said, “it is absolutely critical that [you] get it right.”

Also, running such a politically slanted program, commercial free, places Disney is serious legal and financial jeopardy. The program clearly slanders several individuals. Also, Disney shareholders and civil court judges will fail to see how giving the Republican party this multimillion-dollar gift before the midterm elections fits within the boundaries of responsible corporate governance.

Please, sir, I urge you to stop the damage before it’s done.

Respectfully,

Pack @
63

Aren’t liberals supposed to be against preemptive strikes? They’ve certainly announced their opposition to pressuring networks over such matters, or at least former senator Tom Daschle has: When CBS axed The Reagans, he said that it “smells of intimidation to me.”

You think we should wait until *both* planes crash into the towers to see if there will be any damage?

Excerpt from American Progress Action email:

…Today we are asking you to contact the Chairman of the Board of Disney, former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell. We need to remind him that 9/11 was a national tragedy, and that politicizing and misrepresenting the facts about 9/11 is wrong.

Senator George J. Mitchell
T: (212) 335-4600
T: (212) 335-4500
F: (212) 335-4605
george.mitchell@dlapiper.com

Here we go, lhp: a solution to our shared oatmeal dilemma!

Here you go, angie and other carbonara devotees:

http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..ent-282953

voodoo @ 74

Someone funneled $40 million (that’s the figure currently being mentioned) to Disney in order to broadcast a lying mockudrama on the ABC network — sans commercials or any known sponsor. Who?

The impetus — and perhaps the cash — seems to have come from a bizarre Christian cult called Youth With a Mission (YWAM), founded in the 1960 by Loren Cunningham, father to David Cunningham, the film’s director.

read the rest here: http://cannonfire.blogspot.com…..o-911.html

That page mentioned at cannonfire is 404, but there is a cached version, which i snapshotted.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=…..ndex2.html YWAM Starting in July, along with our ‘normal’ discipleship efforts in YWAM, we will officially join The Film Institute&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

At Kos, I found a very interesting link that provides access to all of the contact information for letters to the editor in your local paper. The GOP put it together, but it can be used by anyone. Here’s the link:

http://www.gop.com/GetActive/W…..spx?aid=40

My email to Robert Iger, FWIW, sent under the subject heading 9-11 “gopudrama”: drown it while you can

Dear Mr. Iger:

Your inbox is clogged so I’ll be brief: you can eat the $40 million now or risk many times that much in defending defamation suits, fielding FEC inquiries, and repairing the PR damage wrought by dragging the ABC brand down to the level of Fox.

From where I sit, the calculus is a no-brainer.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
[ralphbon]

voodoo #74

This organisation even has its own UN – “University of Nations”!
Wonder how many people in third world countries actually think that
they are part of the United Nations?

OT to Lotus and LHP

lotus @
120

Here we go, lhp: a solution to our shared oatmeal dilemma!

McCann’s rocks.

thanks ms lotus and kimba1970! oooh that looks good.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 97

For everyone’s amusement purposes, I thought I’d do a little “concern troll” education.

This person has posted under the following rolling names on the blog in the last few days: Mr. Miller, John. C., Wammo, Pack, Wackinit, Pammy Poo, Loony, Wall Street J — for starters, anyway. All concern troll wingnut talking points. Please give our resident concern troll a round of applause for being so transparent. Thank you.

(SeatedSlumped, one-handfinger-clapping ovation.)

Done. What next, bawss?

EPU’d from the “Press for the Truth” thread yesterday:
TeddySanFran @
34

KGO/ABC- 7 (which has neither acknowledged nor answered my several emails) ran spin control on the 6pm local news, saying Democrats, including Harry Reid, were calling the movie “fiction” and then pointing out they hadn’t seen it, so viewers should watch and “judge for yourself!”

========
Had Enough?
========

I have to say that in the end, the movie will end up as a martyr itself. These guys are good at making martyrs and that it will still be a tool against those censoring liberals.

Well, at least now they’ve got something to fill the Monday slot if they kill it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14731565/

Kind of convenient, no?

–MarkusQ

Great thread, as usual, but RUN, don’t walk, to Think Progress for what appears to be the opening move in Rove/ABC/Disney’s way out of this mess: Bush to speak on network teevee at 9pm on September 11, 2006. Cuts into the crockumentary, er, big time. Let’s keep the pressure up in any case, but this seems so transparent. Thoughts?

Food for future posts? Fascinating article in today’s WaPo, “Decision to Move Detainees Reoslved Two-Year Deabte Among Bush Advisers.”

Turns out the Hamdam decision forced their hand and made the Cheney/Addington position untenable. They didn’t decide to do anything right for the right reasons, but because the Supreme Court of the United States forced them to. So what is there proposal wrt to military tribunals for the 14 and warrantless surveillance? Legislation that prevents the courts from enforcing the Constitution, Treaties etc.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01582.html

Just sent the following to Iger directly and through the DNC’s signature page:

Dear Mr. Iger,

I’d like to be quite clear about this. The problem with the film “The Path to 9/11″ is NOT that it includes fictionalized scenes and dialog which never actually happened, for such scenes and dialog are inherent in any dramatic retelling of history.

The problem is that this film repeatedly shows officials of the United States governmnent, including the President, doing and attempting to do things which are the OPPOSITE of what they were in fact doing and attempting to do at that time.

This is not fiction for the purpose of conveying the essential truth of what happened. This is fiction for the purpose of conveying a lie: that President Clinton and his administration betrayed the interests and security of the United States, opening a path for the al-Qaeda attacks.

The highly selective way in which advance, pre-final-edit copies of this film have been made available to even extreme right-wing commentators, while requests for copies from former Clinton administration officials depicted in the film, and President Clinton himself, were being denied, is especially incriminating of the film’s makers and of your company.

One can only conclude that this is in fact a propaganda film, the purpose of which is to poison people’s views of the Clinton administration in particular, and of Democrats in general, in advance of highly contested congressional elections which some say could result in the Democratic Party regaining control of at least one house of Congress.

I cannot urge you strongly enough to remove “The Path to 9/11″ from your schedule. The citizens of the United States not only deserve better than this film, we require it if we are to succesfully and effectively govern ourselves. We need to know the truth – the ACTUAL truth. A film which provided us that would be a credit not only to your company, but to a People strong enough, confident enough, mature enough, to see even our own failures with clear and open eyes, and to learn from them.

Airing this film, however, would be a great disservice to this country and potentially do us serious harm. There is no excuse for it.

Sincerely,

George Horner
Los Angeles, CA

Excuse my digression above. I’ve become obsessed with who financed this POS. The people on that website have/or had links with DTS (I believe that’s the Dallas Theological Seminary, but I might be wrong).

Great work firedoglake…thanks or the info. I’ve been emailing and calling yesterday and today threatening boycotts on both ABC & Disney…I hope we can prevail. I am so outraged and angry about this!

The photo caption is fabulous, Christi!

ot: Senate Panel to Issue Iraq Intel Report

and it doesn’t look good for the liars in the white house:

http://customwire.ap.org/dynam…..8-06-51-53

degustibus @ 93

Why not not Steve Jobs in Mousekeeter ears?

Tomorrow, Friday morning, we’ll explore why Steve Jobs, who is on the board of Disney, is aiding and abetting Disney’s partisan effort to steal the election by permitting the free download of the fictitous 9/11 TV show via iTunes. Hard to believe that little deal was struck without board member Jobs – the largest shareholder of Disney, thank you – having a hand in it.

So Steve Jobs isn’t just someone who can help fix this problem. He’s someone who helped create the problem.

This new Mac user thinks it’s time we heard from Steve as to why he’s letting Disney use Apple to disgrace the memory of 3,000 dead Americans.

Free download?
link

Gilliard had this info up on his site:

Apple:
Main phone: 408-996-1010
1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA 95014
http://apple.com

Steve Jobs, CEO
Email: steve@apple.com, stevej@apple.com, sjobs@apple.com

Public Relations:
Katie Cotton, Vice President of Worldwide Corporate Communications
Email: katiec@apple.com

Steve Dowling, Corporate PR: 408-974-1896
Email: dowling@apple.com

Media Helpline: 408-974-2042

Apple investor relations: investor_relations@apple.com

iTunes
http://www.apple.com/…
Simon Pope, Public Relations: 408-974-0457
Email: simonp@apple.com

lotus, LHP, & scory…Another strong vote of confidence for McCann’s oatmeal, here. The texture and flavor makes the current “quick” and “instant” varieties taste like cardboard by comparison.

Sure, it costs a bit more and takes a while to cook, but we’ve found that we can cook a big pot on Sunday morning, store in the fridge, and microwave for daily breakfasts with no diminution of flavor.

Now the story has hit the financial news outlets – wow! CNBC just had a little blurb about all this in a “what companies are in the news this morning?” segment. They just gave a brief rundown of the mess – coming TV movie, controversy over its accuracy, complaints, ABC saying it is still cutting/editing, etc. – but it was accurate and to the point. And it was there, for all the stock watchers, money managers, brokers, and investors to see.

When the financial news people put a story like this up, you know you’ve got the attention of the bean counters!

Great job, everyone!!

Christy Hardin Smith @ 97

For everyone’s amusement purposes, I thought I’d do a little “concern troll” education.

This person has posted under the following rolling names on the blog in the last few days: Mr. Miller, John. C., Wammo, Pack, Wackinit, Pammy Poo, Loony, Wall Street J — for starters, anyway. All concern troll wingnut talking points. Please give our resident concern troll a round of applause for being so transparent. Thank you.

The hits just keep on coming from wingnuttia! Is much of this supportive sock-puppetry and mirroring? Could this be the recently relieved Lee Siegel with too much time on his hands?

op99 @
37

twolf1 @ 30

Kean Hasn’t Talked To Clinton About Path to 9/11 Because ‘He Was Out Campaigning Against My Son Yesterday’

Has anyone put Tom Kean Junior, the Republican running for then US Senate for Menendez’ seat in NJ, on the spot about this controversy? Make him either support the propaganda or repudiate his Dad’s role in it.

BTW, spellcheck is busted.

I SWEAR I didn’t touch it! *g*

Bowers at MyDD has a great summary of where we are now:

Two important items this morning. First, according to Daily Variety, ABC is considering pulling the “docudrama”:
“The Path to 9/11″ is looking a lot like “The Reagans, Part II.”

Bill Clinton loyalists are demanding wholesale changes to the upcoming miniseries — and while ABC is making some snips, the alterations, insiders say, may not please the Dems.

But a bombshell decision may happen anyway: Sources close to the project say the network, which has been in a media maelstrom over the pic, is mulling the idea of yanking the mini altogether.
Media Matters also has an important item that shows yet again how hypocritical Disney is being about this film:
ABC’s current promotion of an admittedly “fictionalized” attack on former President Clinton is not only inconsistent with Disney’s statements about Fahrenheit 9/11, it appears at odds with the company’s approach to a 2005 book written about it by journalist James Stewart. Disney representatives reportedly threatened to sue the publisher of Stewart’s DisneyWar (Simon & Schuster) if it contained inaccuracies, according to a February 7, 2005, Los Angeles Times article
Throw this one onto the pile over at Open Letter To ABC. With succeses mounting, today is a big day to keep up the pressure. Here are actions to take:
Think Progress: Tell ABC To Tell The Truth About 9/11

MoveOn.org: Contact your local ABC affiliate

Big List of Action Items
It annoys me that we even have to do this, but in the end I think it could have tremendous benefit if it helps to not only stop the miniseries, but to potentially help force anti-media consolidation and intellectual property reform into the legislative agenda of a Democratic Congress. Democrats of all stripes will remember this disaster, and suddenly the calls for reform among bloggers and the progressive caucus won’t seem all that bad anymore.

The links he has embedded are in the original again, here.

Mr Iger,

I urge you to pull the broadcast of The Path to 9/11 until all historical inaccuracies have been addressed and remedied. There is no escaping the impression that the purpose of the movie and its promotion are partisan in nature. This is not the kind of controversy that your company has traditionally wanted to bring upon itself, especially as we approach the midterm elections.

Telling the real story of the lead-up to this atrocity would be compelling enough, and a worthy cause. This movie falls far short, and should be withheld from broadcast.

Sincerely,

Tom Maxwell

EvilDrPuma @ 99

pseudonymous in nc @ 95

Pony Blow has pencilled in the Chimp for a 9.01pm EDT address. As in, slap bang in the middle of part 2 on the east coast, and just before it starts on the west.

I shit ye not.

If ABC interrupts the show for Bush and then runs it in full, it’s going to look pretty damned obvious!

This “interruption” may explain the divergence on the actual length of the docudramedy itself (four-and-a-half-hours? five hours? six hours?)

ABC doesn’t know whether to count Chimpy McPetGoat’s address as part of the movie’s run-time or not!

lotus says:
September 8th, 2006 at 8:37 am *

Here we go, lhp: a solution to our shared oatmeal dilemma!

I like the instant cereals from Spice Hunter (www.spicehunter.com/) myself: mixed grain instead of just oatmeal. The banana-cream is a bit bland, though: no flavor of either one. You might actually have to go online to get them, because they are hard to find in stores.

Bush Plans Prime Time Sept. 11 Address
The Associated Press
Friday, September 8, 2006; 9:05 AM

This just came out:

WASHINGTON — President Bush will make a prime-time address from the Oval Office on Monday to mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the administration had requested network time for the address at 9:01 p.m. EDT. The address is expected to run 16 to 18 minutes, he said.

I wonder if this doesn’t coincide with the only part of “The Path to 9/11″ that puts Bush in a bad light, when he ignores the “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US” PDB. I don’t put anything past these bastards.

OT, but important (emphasis mine):

From Think Progress: http://www.thinkprogress.org

Bill authorizing warrantless wiretapping stalls. “President Bush’s support proved insufficient to push a bill authorizing his warrantless wiretapping program through the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday.” The bill stalled after Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) “spoke against the bill for about a quarter of the panel’s two-hour meeting and offered four amendments.”

Russ comes through again!

Flowah needing rescue at 128, please, kind sir or ma’am mod.

Tim Tagaris has a nice commentary about Tammy Sun’s latest falsehoods:

“Disqualified
No one should ever, EVER take seriously anything the Lieberman campaign says about the Internets.

The Greenwich Times wrote about the Lieber-link on joe2006 to “No to Ned,” a blog-for-joe containing a photo of Osama bin Laden with a Ned Lamont bumper sticker on his turbin.

Now I personally don’t think every stupid comment on a whole world wide web is newsworthy (as much as Danger! (c) tries to pass them off as so) … Lord knows it’s a big place and there are many. I also believe that discussion of the fringes on each side really demeans the substantive debate that actually has dominated the discourse.

But the article was written, and Tammy Sun (Marion Seinfels v.3.0) lied about the Internets like all her predecessors.

Lieberman’s campaign said it did not know who posted the link on the incumbent’s official blog, which requires users to provide a first name, e-mail address and zip code. Bloggers can still post anonymously under an assumed name, Sun said.
Since the link was on their own blogroll, they are basically claiming their site was hacked again. Because only folks w/ admin priveledeges can update the blogroll on Joe2006. It was not the work of a random commentor, as Seinfels v.3.0 goes on to explain.

So either: A.) Tammy has no idea what she is talking about or B.) She deliberately lied to Neil Vigdor.

Either way, Joe2006’s campaign has shown they retain absolutely ZERO credibility when talking about the web, and should be disqualified from doing so for the rest of the campaign.”

Feingold!

Do you have a list of specific scenes and/or statements in the movie that we can cite as non factual (and hopefully back up with real news on the matter?) – maybe a link? I’m all for the opinions expressed here, but I’m not as informed as everyone else and don’t feel right just calling for someone’s head before understanding the severity of the transgression.

I’ve heard Clinton and Albright call for the pull, but what I can’t find is exactly why.

Thanks

I’ve signed about six petitions so far, requesting that Disney cease and desist. I will also call ABC & Disney and send an email to Iger.

What is deeply disturbing to me is the fact that this thing got all the way through the system – including scheduling a 9/10 & 11 showing of the mocumentary, the three day ABC interview of Bush culminating on 9/11, the coordination with Scholastic (Richard Robinson is the Chairman, CEO and President of Scholastic Corp, has anyone checked his political leanings?), etc. – and if Rush & his buddies hadn’t started chortling on air, we would have never known.

It is very, very chilling. I recall reading an article last week quoting Rove as saying he thought things were going to start turning around for the Republicans in the next week or two. Well, we now know why he thought that. This ABC propaganda piece must have been central to his plans.

trblmkr @ 146

Bush Plans Prime Time Sept. 11 Address
The Associated Press
Friday, September 8, 2006; 9:05 AM

This just came out:

WASHINGTON — President Bush will make a prime-time address from the Oval Office on Monday to mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the administration had requested network time for the address at 9:01 p.m. EDT. The address is expected to run 16 to 18 minutes, he said.

I wonder if this doesn’t coincide with the only part of “The Path to 9/11″ that puts Bush in a bad light, when he ignores the “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US” PDB. I don’t put anything past these bastards.

No, this is a standard time for presidential speeches.

And think about time zones, people. It may be the middle of the movie out east, but here on the West Coast, it will be interrupting the beginning of the 6PM news.

Anne @ 147

OT, but important (emphasis mine):

Wiretapping Bill Stalls

Bill authorizing warrantless wiretapping stalls. “President Bush’s support proved insufficient to push a bill authorizing his warrantless wiretapping program through the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday.” The bill stalled after Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) “spoke against the bill for about a quarter of the panel’s two-hour meeting and offered four amendments.”

Russ comes through again!

Bad link, Anne . . . and the five minute “edit this comment” clock is running!

LindyH #134

“DTS” is also “Discipleship Training School” part of YWAM’s (Youth With A Mission) “University of Nations”.

http://tinyurl.com/h9rcq

Peterr – link should work now.

Rockefeller trashing admin and their use of “intel” on CSPAN2.

wonder if he’s showcasing Patsy’s stonewalling…

Thanks, Anne, or *ilson, or whoever that was that fished me out again — wooie.

trblmkr @ 146

Bush Plans Prime Time Sept. 11 Address
The Associated Press
Friday, September 8, 2006; 9:05 AM

This just came out:

WASHINGTON — President Bush will make a prime-time address from the Oval Office on Monday to mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the administration had requested network time for the address at 9:01 p.m. EDT. The address is expected to run 16 to 18 minutes, he said.

I wonder if this doesn’t coincide with the only part of “The Path to 9/11″ that puts Bush in a bad light, when he ignores the “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US” PDB. I don’t put anything past these bastards.

This is Rover’s Plan B.

Soon, but today, ABC will issue a statement (WAG!)

“In deference to the President’s request for air time on the anniversary of 9/11, ABC Network is postponing its broadcast of ‘The Path to 9/11.’ While we stand by our production, the network believes the confluence of a fictionalized account (BASED ON THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT, so there!!) and an actual Presidential address may be confusing for some viewers. Therefore, please enjoy Aladdin and Snow White on Sunday and Monday nights on the Mouse Network!”

WAG, all WAG. But watch!

O/T -

Very little commentary on FDL regarding Armitage’s Plame outing putative “mea culpa”.

“…oh, shucks, it was just me, my Bad, really regret it. But, Fitzie told me to keep my mouth shut…”

Nothing else to see here, folks, time to move on?
_

Christy having sockpuppet fun.

On a plane to LA in a few minutes. Would love to debark & find this pig in the ABC Bad Miniseries Dustbin.

Anne @
158

Peterr – link should work now.

(. . . reloading page – F5 . . . )

Ah, much better! Thanks!

Bush plans prime time 9/11 speech…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14731565/

Feingold or Gore, cut it. Senator Clinton does not.

TeddySanFran: LOL!

My little additon to the form letter to Mr. Iger via the DNC signature drive linked to above:

“This sort of revisionist history serves only to hurt our country and further sully our already damaged image in the world. Please do not air it, sir.

Might I suggest that you air 2 consecutive nights of Disney movies? I think that would serve the public better during this time of mourning. It might elevate the general mood and give the children and adults something to cherish.

I cannot think how airing lies about this tragedy does anything but hurt America.”

oh yeah, Rockefeller going after Roberts!!!

bravo.

angie at 157 — they are supposed to release two parts of the Phase II report today. Can anyone say Friday news dump. And the whispers that I’m hearing are that the minority reports are not cheery, to say the least.

MORAL victory!

After I’ve-lost-track-of-how-many emails to WFTV-ABC Orlando, this response:

Thank you, [my given name], for sharing your concerns about this upcoming movie on ABC. I will forward your message to the network.

We did a story in our 5:30 newscast, if you’d like to see that video: http://www.wftv.com/video/9806374/index.html

Here is a statement which ABC has provided us:

The Path to 9/11 is 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 9/11originally sparked great debate, so it’s not surprising that a movie surrounding those events has revived the debate. The attacks were a pivotal moment in our history that should never be forgotten and it’s fitting that the discussion continues.

The following disclaimer will air throughout the movie:

“The following movie is a dramatization that is drawn from a variety of sources including the 9/11Commission 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.”

If you would like to communicate further with ABC, you may use this link:

http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html

The issues going on in this country have finally brought this lurker out into the open to speak out. The posters and commenters here have been such an inspiration that I’ve taken my first step.

Here is my letter to Mr. Iger.

Dir Sir,

Airing this “docudrama” would be a show of complete hypocrisy after refusing to distribute Farenheit 911. This would be showing the public that ABC and Disney have a right-wing agenda to distort the history of the most tragic day this country has seen in the last 60 years. As a father of two young boys, with another child on the way, our household is no stranger to Disney products. If this “docudrama” is allowed to air on ABC you will have lost present and future customers of your products and theme parks. I hope you do the right thing here simply because it is the right thing to do. But if that isn’t enough of a motivator for you, maybe the thought of losing more than half of the this country as potential customers (especially after the foreign policy of this administration has surely caused a dip in the attendance of your theme parks by foreigners) will do the trick. Are you really willing to take that chance? Do you think your shareholders are? Pulling this “docudrama” would show the world that Mickey Mouse is an American and not merely a conservative.

Thank you.

BobbyG at 159 — Haven’t had time to get to it yet today. Good lord, man, I’m only one person. Trying to move a mountain like ABC/Disney isn’t easy, let alone smack around the Bush Administration, get a shower, and try to grab some breakfast. *g* Give me time…

Levin says the report is a devastating indictment of the administration– he is talking now on the floor.

thanks, Christy!

Jane Hamsher @ 160

Christy having sockpuppet fun.

On a plane to LA in a few minutes. Would love to debark & find this pig in the ABC Bad Miniseries Dustbin.

… if said dustbin isn’t already full to overflowing! What ABC Entertainment puts on the air now is tripe, so we shouldn’t expect better from them anytime, EXCEPT ON 9/11, when they owe us and the victims. I stopped watching ABC miniseries when their commercial breaks started giving away crucial upcoming plot points — viewers only had to watch the break segue in order to follow the entire plot!

Fly safe, dear, and leave your fluids and gels at home!

dab from CT @ 152

I’ve signed about six petitions so far, requesting that Disney cease and desist. I will also call ABC & Disney and send an email to Iger.

What is deeply disturbing to me is the fact that this thing got all the way through the system – including scheduling a 9/10 & 11 showing of the mocumentary, the three day ABC interview of Bush culminating on 9/11, the coordination with Scholastic (Richard Robinson is the Chairman, CEO and President of Scholastic Corp, has anyone checked his political leanings?), etc. – and if Rush & his buddies hadn’t started chortling on air, we would have never known.

It is very, very chilling. I recall reading an article last week quoting Rove as saying he thought things were going to start turning around for the Republicans in the next week or two. Well, we now know why he thought that. This ABC propaganda piece must have been central to his plans.

Interesting. Anybody checked Karl’s blood pressure today?

Christy Hardin Smith @ 165

angie at 157 — they are supposed to release two parts of the Phase II report today. Can anyone say Friday news dump. And the whispers that I’m hearing are that the minority reports are not cheery, to say the least.

Not that TradMed will ever mention let alone quote any parts of the Minority Report for our viewing or reading pleasure…. Just look how TradMed lets the VRWC cherry-pick the Roberts-crafted addenda to other SSCI reports!

Christy Hardin Smith @ 167

BobbyG at 159 — Haven’t had time to get to it yet today. Good lord, man, I’m only one person. Trying to move a mountain like ABC/Disney isn’t easy, let alone smack around the Bush Administration, get a shower, and try to grab some breakfast. *g* Give me time…

Skip the shower — we all do!

BobbyG @ 159

O/T -

Very little commentary on FDL regarding Armitage’s Plame outing putative “mea culpa”.

“…oh, shucks, it was just me, my Bad, really regret it. But, Fitzie told me to keep my mouth shut…”

Nothing else to see here, folks, time to move on?

I weighed in on it a little bit yesterday. (For the record, my 2 cents is actually only worth 1 cent.)

Seems to me that Armitage was used as a bag boy, having seen some information in a document that shouldn’t have been there. He said something along the lines of “never, in 28 years of government service, had I seen a covert operative’s name” or some such. So, not knowing he was blowing Valerie’s cover, he blabs to Novak.

Rove et al then pushed it hard to the media, confident that they weren’t going to be fingered as the original leaker(s).

Know what? Forget me and go read emptywheel at The Next Hurrah. She’s on it, as usual. Then contribute to fund her book, if you haven’t already.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 170

BobbyG at 159 — Haven’t had time to get to it yet today. Good lord, man, I’m only one person. Trying to move a mountain like ABC/Disney isn’t easy, let alone smack around the Bush Administration, get a shower, and try to grab some breakfast. *g* Give me time…

. . . and another cuppa coffee!

For you IT types, Gartner Research holds one of its annual Symposia at Disney World. It’s coming up early in October. Perhaps some pressure on them might also be appropriate. :)

Christy Hardin Smith @ 167

BobbyG at 159 — Haven’t had time to get to it yet today. Good lord, man, I’m only one person. Trying to move a mountain like ABC/Disney isn’t easy, let alone smack around the Bush Administration, get a shower, and try to grab some breakfast. *g* Give me time…

Maybe you could have one of those waterproof keyboards installed in your shower! Nah … on second thought, you deserve a long hot bubble bath with champagne, candles and soft music.

OT, but when Krauthaumer becomes a “cut and runner,” you know that Iraq is lost:

“The other rationale for withdrawal is that the war is lost and therefore it is unconscionable to make one more American soldier die for a cause that cannot be salvaged.

It is a serious argument from which we have been distracted during the past several months by the increasingly absurd debate over the meaning of the term “civil war,” and whether Iraq is in one.

Of course it is. It began when the Sunni minority, unwilling to accept the finality of the Baathist defeat, began making indiscriminate war on the Kurdish-Shiite majority that had inherited the country as a result of the U.S. invasion.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01616.html

hmmmmm……

http://www.democraticunderground

David Cunningham, director of “The Path to 9/11,” is the son of Loren Cunningham, founder of the worldwide evangelical group Youth With a Mission.

Youth With a Mission has an “auxiliary branch” called The Film Institute.

Members of The Film Institute write:

TFI’s first project is a doozy: 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!

Our goal is to help filmmakers, actors, technicians, etc. realize their God given potential and purpose in perhaps the most influential sphere of modern culture – film and television.

Here’s more information on the “Untitled History Project”:

Our next big project is to assist in the development of the new YWAM auxiliary – The Film Institute (TFI). The Film Institute is dedicated to a Godly transformation and revolution TO and THROUGH the Film and Television industry;

TO it, by serving, living humbly with integrity in what is often a world driven by selfish ambition, power an money – transforming lives from within, and THROUGH it, by creating relevant and evocative content which promotes Godly principles of Truth married with Love.

The Untitled History Project Begins Production July 25th.

Mysteriously, the pages containing those quotes – which were freely available on the Internet until yesterday – have been deleted. Here are links to the now-deleted originals:

http://www.markandkrista.com/4559.html
http://www.markandkrista.com/30257.html

Fortunately Google’s cache has preserved these pages. See here and here.

A WhoIs search reveals that markandkrista.com is registered to Mark Harris at Youth With a Mission. Last year Mark Harris spoke at Youth With a Mission’s “Viva Latin America conference.”

5hYSP9psF0J:ywamconnect.com/sites/Founders/ywamReports?multcontentitemid=186211 “mark harris” “the film institute”&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2″ target=”_blank”>Here’s a snip from the report:

Mark Harris spoke following Braulia and showed a DVD clip by film director David L. Cunningham, who together with others has formed a YWAM auxiliary called The Film Institute (TFI). One goal of TFI is to fast-track UofN School of Digital Film interns, placing them within the film industry, not to give them jobs, but so that they can begin to impact and transform Hollywood from the inside out.

UofN is University of the Nations – Youth With a Mission’s “global training network.”

Update: from mhatrw:

At the moment, ABC officials are calling the miniseries “Untitled Commission Report” and producers refer to it as the “Untitled History Project.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1639…

But it’s being filmed relatively quietly. No production announcement has been made, and it’s being shot around town under the nondescript working-title “Untitled History Project.”

http://jam.canoe.ca/Television/2005/07/2…

UHP Productions will be on site filming a miniseries starring Harvey Keitel (of Reservoir Dogs, and Pulp Fiction fame), Patricia Heaton (best known as Debra Barone from Everybody Loves Raymond), and former “New Kid On the Block”, Donnie Wahlberg. The production is currently referred to as the Untitled History Project.

http://www.myhamilton.ca/myhamilton/City…

Who are “UHP Productions”? IMDB lists them as only producing one movie:

http://www.imdb.com/company/co0163444

UHP Productions Ltd. doesn’t even appear to have a website. I’m guessing “UHP” stands for “Untitled History Project.”

This from Josh Marshall:

“At least 10 Florida journalists received regular payments from a U.S. government program aimed at undermining the Cuban government of Fidel Castro, The Miami Herald reported on Friday.
Total payments since 2001 ranged from $1,550 to $174,753 per journalist, according to the newspaper, which said it found no instance in which those involved had disclosed that they were being paid by the U.S. Office of Cuba Broadcasting.”..more

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

My personal sadness about the ABC mess aside from the obvious crockumentary promotion is that I’d gotten hooked on “Gray’s Anatomy.” Gonna have to give it up and everything else on ABC unless they relent and pull this sucker off the air.

OfT:

Damn, I am SO pissed at these converted Democrats who run for office using REAGAN in their ads! I’m sorry, there are lots of Democratic heroes to reference in your ads, Mr. Webb. I won’t underwrite your reverential treatment of St. Ronnie, who presided over the death by AIDS of so many of my dear friends in the 1980’s.

This ad really pisses me off.

http://www.webbforsenate.com/ads/

RevDeb @
183

My personal sadness about the ABC mess aside from the obvious crockumentary promotion is that I’d gotten hooked on “Gray’s Anatomy.” Gonna have to give it up and everything else on ABC unless they relent and pull this sucker off the air.

Already given up on GA, since ABC placed it opposite the new race-based Survivor, about which I have a morbid curiosity….

TeddySanFran @ 180

OfT:

Damn, I am SO pissed at these converted Democrats who run for office using REAGAN in their ads! I’m sorry, there are lots of Democratic heroes to reference in your ads, Mr. Webb. I won’t underwrite your reverential treatment of St. Ronnie, who presided over the death by AIDS of so many of my dear friends in the 1980’s.

This ad really pisses me off.

http://www.webbforsenate.com/ads/

Well, at least it is better than the one with Santorum’s kids!

When my 169 comes out of mod (thanks again, patient rescuers!) and you have a chance to watch the Orlando station’s report, note especially the local anchor’s delivery of the phrase, “At this time, the program is scheduled to run … here on Channel 9.”

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

It’s said that Bolton is toast. If so it won’t make much difference. Whether his replacement is Paula Dobriansky or whoever, as long as Bush and Cheney are dealing the cards, it will be a stacked deck. Actually, as to Rumsfeld and Bolton, if I had my druthers, I’d choose for them to stay. They are a Democrat’s dream team.

John @ 187

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

If that was the case, there wouldn’t have been a 9/11. No BS.

John wrote-

“Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?”

John,

My answer would be that it depends if the documentary is truthful or not. If it lied about the Bush administration, I would not support it. If it told the truth, I would support it.

For a slightly different take on this whole thing–a review of it on the artistic side from the Chicago Sun-Times. Maybe if it sucks that bad, it’ll tank on its own demerits…why is right-wing art so bad? (I’m thinking of that Abramoff-backed 80’s movie–Red Scorpion or whatver it was called…

http://www.suntimes.com/output…..elf08.html

John @ 187

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

9/11 is holy in America, and the victims deserve only the truth in any narrative of that day and the path to it. Richard Ben-Veniste, 9/11 Commissioner who screened only the first half of the program, speaks for me when he says that the inaccuracies are the problem, not the slant.

Yes, I believe it’s slanted. And that bothers me. But my sorrow is that ABC believes they can make shit up in their story about a holy day. Incidentally, there’s talk they’ve made shit up about BushCo as well. Disregard for the received truth — the 9/11 Commission Report is America’s received truth on the subject, for all its flaws — is what bothers me most.

As it should us all.

tommy yum @ 190

John @ 187

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

If that was the case, there wouldn’t have been a 9/11. No BS.

Alas.

John @ 186

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

Yes, I would. As I noted before, the issue here is not who is actually at fault. The issue is that this film “based on facts/reports/etc.” uses entirely fictional events to create fault, and that by doing so it reduces itself to the level of propagandic deceit. Avoiding such mendacious tricks is part of what “fair and balanced” used to mean, before Faux News got its grubby hands on the phrase, and it still means that to some of us now.

TeddySanFran:

I disliked Reagan for oh so many, many, many things including that which you cite. Webb’s got to appeal to independents and rethugs as well as dems. It is historical fact and I reckon I can understand it. Allen needs to go.

John– yes I want it yanked.

John @ 186

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

Yes, though my actions would not be as supportive.

RevDeb @ 183

My personal sadness about the ABC mess aside from the obvious crockumentary promotion is that I’d gotten hooked on “Gray’s Anatomy.” Gonna have to give it up and everything else on ABC unless they relent and pull this sucker off the air.

I’m embarrassed to say I’m hooked on LOST (my daughters got me hooked). But I will not watch if ABC goes through with this.

John at 183 — honest, no BS answer: yes, if there were the same factual inaccuracies, I’d still be pissed. I don’t like the Bush Administration, but lying about the history of 9/11 goes well beyond political differences. It’s just flat out wrong.

FWIW, I’ve also never been a big proponent of F9/11 (which will probably get me in trouble with a lot of our readers, but Michael Moore just isn’t a fave of mine). If something is sold to the public as being factually accurate, then it ought to be accurate — or it should never, ever be sold that way. Period.

John @ 186

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

Personally, I don’t watch or support political propaganda movies presented as “based on facts”. That includes Fahrenheit 911 which I didn’t watch either for that very reason.

I am incredibly proud about Harvey Keitel going on TV and asking that any mistakes in the gop-u-dram be corrected.

Now I can go back to watching Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction without feeling queasy everytime he is in a scene.

Way to go Mr. White!!!!

PS: Not surprisingly, I have not heard a peep about conservative Patricia Heaton complaining about the inaccuracies in the movie.

Auggghhh. Its gotta hurt ABC to hear that one of the stars of the movie, Keitel, is already doing a pre-emptive bad-mouthing of the project

love it, love it, love it!!!!

tommy yum @ 185

John @ 187

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

If that was the case, there wouldn’t have been a 9/11. No BS.

For some of us, especially those of us who experienced 9/11 first hand (ei, not on teevee) 9/11 isn’t just some “story.”

Has anyone heard/read anything about how the film portrayed the Bush Administration?

take the poll! cnn asks [at bottom right of their front page]:

“Should filmmakers use fictionalized scenes to dramatize the events leading up to the September 11 attacks?”

*A little something to go with Mr. Iger’s coffee this morning…

I have two daughters, 2 & 4. Do I continue to praise and promote Disney products to them, or do I begin telling them, emphatically and repeatedly, that Disney is the company that promoted mistruths about American history, and that they are no longer to be trusted?

The choice is yours, and mine. If reports to this effect in “The Path to 9/11″ are true, and if even one of those mistruths is part of a campaign with Scholastic to distribute to schools, and it is learned that you consciously had an intent to distribute these mistruths to my children, then my choice will be simple.

I strongly urge you that your best choice is to to pull this program from your schedule.

Thanks you.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 193

John at 183 — honest, no BS answer: yes, if there were the same factual inaccuracies, I’d still be pissed. I don’t like the Bush Administration, but lying about the history of 9/11 goes well beyond political differences. It’s just flat out wrong.

FWIW, I’ve also never been a big proponent of F9/11 (which will probably get me in trouble with a lot of our readers, but Michael Moore just isn’t a fave of mine). If something is sold to the public as being factually accurate, then it ought to be accurate — or it should never, ever be sold that way. Period.

I totally agree re F9/11. I have never defended that movie . . . in fact, I was offended that Moore tried to turn it into comedy a la Roger and Me.

Dale in Alabama @ 138

lotus, LHP, & scory…Another strong vote of confidence for McCann’s oatmeal, here. The texture and flavor makes the current “quick” and “instant” varieties taste like cardboard by comparison.

Sure, it costs a bit more and takes a while to cook, but we’ve found that we can cook a big pot on Sunday morning, store in the fridge, and microwave for daily breakfasts with no diminution of flavor.

Dale, if I may ask, where do you get it?

John @ 187

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

Here’s my letter to Iger (and my response)

Mr. Iger,

The American Broadcasting Company and the Disney Corporation have a distinguished history of providing memorable and effective news and entertainment to America and the world. The goodwill associated with these accomplishments is invaluable.

“The Path to 9/11″ threatens that goodwill. The use of any tragic event for partisan purposes is inappropriate. The anniversary of the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon must not be, in any way, be used to further a political agenda of any type — liberal or conservative.

Please consider the cost to the corporate goodwill and the public trust that the broadcast of “The Path to 9/11″ will cause ABC/Disney.

Sincerely,

James Scott Cory

When propaganda becomes entertainment, we’ve lost. Period.

And count me in with Christy: I haven’t, and won’t see “F 9/11″ as I find it a disrespectful spectacle. I know people hurt in the Pentagon incident, and I will never forget the black smoke and the streams of people walking home past our apartment in DC.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 198

FWIW, I’ve also never been a big proponent of F9/11 (which will probably get me in trouble with a lot of our readers, but Michael Moore just isn’t a fave of mine). If something is sold to the public as being factually accurate, then it ought to be accurate — or it should never, ever be sold that way. Period.

FWIW, I agree. I appreciate that Moore thinks he’s getting young Americans more politically involved by presenting political issues in a format accessible to them. Nevertheless, I’m old enough to remember a time when “documentary” meant dry play-by-play delivery over a film clip, and while I see the desirability of a more engaging presentation, I’ve seldom seen it done with no violence to veracity. Moore’s style and his substance collide too much for my taste.

CNN poll 9911 votes (weird)

Should filmmakers use fictionalized scenes to dramatize the events leading up to the September 11 attacks?
Yes

15%

1482 votes
No

85%

8429 votes
Total: 9911 votes

Sorry, it was so short I had to copy the whole thing.

Bowing to Pressure, Kean Asks ABC to Alter Pre-9/11 Docudrama
“ABC plans to make minor changes to its docudrama on the run-up to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in response to heated complaints from former Clinton administration officials that a number of scenes are fabricated, a network executive said yesterday.

“Thomas H. Kean, the Republican who chaired the 9/11 commission and is a co-executive producer of the film, said in an interview that he recently asked for changes that would address complaints raised by the former aides to President Bill Clinton and that ABC is considering his request.” (WaPo, NYTimes)

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001486.php

Does anyone else smell fricasseed mouse balls?

Levin says that Tenet testified in July 2006 to the intel cmte and admitted that the policymakers had pressured him to issue a statement that contradicted the CIA’s finding and supported the admin’s policy and that it was “the wrong thing to do”– Tenet’s statement was issued on the eve of the Congressional debate on Iraq.

oh my. ergo the medal he received.

Senate in recess.

OT:
from Romanesko:

National Journal
The war is a debacle, says William Powers, but “if you follow the daily coverage, you’ll see media outlets spending a lot of time tempering the basic reality of Iraq, with pulled punches, qualifiers, and other moves that make the fiasco seem a lot less fiasco-like.” If President Bush suffers a major political setback in November, “the media will feel freed up to tear into this war as they have never done before.”

Does this mean that if the dems win that the press will start doing their jobs? What a novel thought! That right there is enough to keep us going and work to take back the Congress.

“Based on the characterizations we’ve seen, it’s nothing new.” So says Tony Snow of this report which came out today:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..raq_report

“Nothing new” is true. Bush lies. Always has. Always will. We need to arrest this Ahmed Chalabi guy. And squeeze him.

I wonder how Oliver Stone’s movie did in sales? It’s difficult to believe any of these movies are drawing large numbers.

In order to see Farenheit 9/11 you had to find a theater that was showing it and buy a ticket, or wait for the DVD. The Path to 9-11 is commercial free prime time network television. Huge difference.

tommy yum @
177

BobbyG @ 159

O/T -

Very little commentary on FDL regarding Armitage’s Plame outing putative “mea culpa”.

“…oh, shucks, it was just me, my Bad, really regret it. But, Fitzie told me to keep my mouth shut…”

Nothing else to see here, folks, time to move on?

I weighed in on it a little bit yesterday. (For the record, my 2 cents is actually only worth 1 cent.)

Seems to me that Armitage was used as a bag boy, having seen some information in a document that shouldn’t have been there. He said something along the lines of “never, in 28 years of government service, had I seen a covert operative’s name” or some such. So, not knowing he was blowing Valerie’s cover, he blabs to Novak.

Rove et al then pushed it hard to the media, confident that they weren’t going to be fingered as the original leaker(s).

Know what? Forget me and go read emptywheel at The Next Hurrah. She’s on it, as usual. Then contribute to fund her book, if you haven’t already.

Yeah, I was in for $100 on Day One.
.

LindyH, if your local stores don’t carry McCann’s (possibly in the “foreign foods” section, where mine keeps it), you can order from their website:

http://www17.netrition.com/mccanns_oats_page.html

Eureka Springs, AR @ 214

I wonder how Oliver Stone’s movie did in sales? It’s difficult to believe any of these movies are drawing large numbers.

I know I’m in no great hurry to see 9/11 on film. That day is in my adult memory; I feel little need to let somebody else try to tell me what happened.

I’ve blogged about that National Journal piece today.

My email to Iger this a.m.:

Dear Mr. Iger,

Hi, I’m a consumer and parent of a child. And you have pissed me off. I do not support lies and fiction falsely labeled as fact. Constructive criticism is perfectly legitimate — but making crap up about 9/11 and trying to pass it off to the public as reality? No.
And if you think that I won’t take my dollars elsewhere — or talk with my local school board and cable company about taking their dollars elsewhere — you have another thing coming. I have already sent protest letters to my local school district (27,000 students), Scholastic (they are doing an about-face) and ABC (I have already changed my news channel to NBC for both National and local news).

Disney is next. I have spent lots of money over the years on Disney products. If you should air this fraudulent program, The Path to 9/11, Disney will NOT receive any more of my money for any Disney product. Won’t your shareholders be grateful that you have squandered the good Disney name.

You and I both have choices to make here. I have made my choice – no more Disney or ABC if this program gets broadcast. What is your choice?

Your move.

TeddySanFran @ 193

John @ 187

man, you guys want this thing yanked huh?

Honest, no BS question: if it were the Bush administration in place of the Clinton administration, would you feel the same way?

9/11 is holy in America, and the victims deserve only the truth in any narrative of that day and the path to it. Richard Ben-Veniste, 9/11 Commissioner who screened only the first half of the program, speaks for me when he says that the inaccuracies are the problem, not the slant.

Yes, I believe it’s slanted. And that bothers me. But my sorrow is that ABC believes they can make shit up in their story about a holy day. Incidentally, there’s talk they’ve made shit up about BushCo as well. Disregard for the received truth — the 9/11 Commission Report is America’s received truth on the subject, for all its flaws — is what bothers me most.

As it should us all.

It is not just disregard for the truth, the intent of such actions must be evaluated – in this instance, the lies about the Clinton Admin intend to reflect upon them negatively, while the lies about the Bush Admin are intended to gloss over their failures. thus, while it may be fairly stated that there are fictionalizations to both adminstrations, the Dems end up holding the shit end of the stick. Nice try, Karl…

Well, of course if the dems win either or both houses of congress in November, the press will immediately start investigating all the things the DEMS do — but surely they don’t want to investigate anything in the past.

Dems need to be prepared, as do we, to counter the pushback once dems are in power again. It will be Whitewater redo.

just read Bush will have live tv broadcast the same time that Path to 911 airs. This should give abc an out.

And the response that I received from my school district (27,000 students) this a.m.:

We have been working closely with our Superintendent, legal department and school sites to make sure that everyone has the information concerning the Scholastic materials. Scholastic’s press release from yesterday is being made available to all schools. The press release indicates that all new materials will be placed on their website today, Friday, September 8. My office called each school yesterday and made sure that they had all of the information.

Thank you for your communication and partnership.

Katy S. Cavanagh
Executive Director for Middle Schools
Excelling Teaching and Learning
Phone: (480) 484-6192; Fax: (480) 484-6289

Got their Legal Dept. involved?!

For residents of Texas and Ohio: go to the ABC website for a link to your local ABC affiliate.
Let the affiliate know you will be listening to the Texas v. Ohio State game on the Longhorn or Buckeye radio network rather than watching it on their station. Regardless of your plans for Saturday night.

OfT blog-whoring, I have a diary up at DK on the Webb ad, with a poll as well.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/8/125135/8554

Back to regular programming….

New Thread

[CHS notes: Impersonating someone else on this blog gets you banned. As you have posted here several times under other names, you are on notice.]

LindyH: As for Oatmeal Patrol…when we first became enamored of McCann’s we could only find it at one supermarket here in town. Nowadays, most of them carry it.

However, it took that fact a while to dawn on me because I’d gotten in the habit of looking for McCann’s distinctive metal can. (MacCan?) Nowadays it comes in boxes, too, which is good. The cans, with their antique-looking graphic design, are nice, but one can only use so many of them to store loose change, miscellaneous hardware fittings, etc.

I’d say, ask your grocer. If they don’t have it, maybe they can get it.

Mod’s help needed again at 218 and 194. Many thanks.

clueless at 225 — that’s great! Is your area blue, red or purple?

OK, I will defend Fahrenheit 911. There are documentaries and documentaries, over and above docudramas like ABC’s Path to 911. Moore’s F911 is a POV (Point of view) documentary. It is meant to be partisan and however much you decry it many of its scenes are printed indelibly on your minds. Who can forget the Black Caucus standing up to challenge the 2000 election and the silence of the Senate, or Moore encouraging a Senator or was it a Representative to sign up his child for the war in Iraq, or Bush at a black tie dinner saying, You are my people, or the My Pet Goat moment, and so many others? Sure his work is flawed and sometimes we don’t agree with either the method or the message but he’s just one guy, one POV. What’s ABC’s excuse?

over at skippy we have a list of email addresses to disney you can simply copy and paste into your “send to” box in your email.

.

.

Agreed, Hugh @ 229 and Dru also makes a good point @ 215.

Will this cure the italics problem?

Minor tweaks by ABC amount to a continuing fraud on the American public. If they are going to continue to use fiction to sell a GOP version of the run-up to 9/11, then it is critical to know what facts they are using to sell the GOP side of this issue. For example, does the crockudrama include a factual scene of Bush at his Potemkin ranch in Crawford, receiving the August 6, 2001 PDB that warns him that Bin Laden is poised to attack America, and then dismissing the aide with, “OK, you’ve covered your ass?”. To be at all balanced, if it does include this scene in Crawford, the crockudrama should then proceed to show Bush furiously clearing brush on his ranch during the following weeks while Osama’s guys put the finishing touches on their attack.

“I know I’m in no great hurry to see 9/11 on film. That day is in my adult memory; I feel little need to let somebody else try to tell me what happened.”

ditto. personally I find most depictions of the events tacky and in no way convey the fear that day trying to get home in the middle of it.

Five years later I still can’t bring myself to watch any 911 footage at all, fiction or real. Images from that day are seared into my mind’s eye forever.

I suppose one day I’ll watch the CNN, Fontline, and NOVA specials I taped way back when. Maybe to show my kids “for educational purposes” when they’re older.

And this is all getting a little too close for comfort. The plane that hit the Pentagon flew over my son’s daycare in Arlington less than a mile away. I still cringe when I see planes flying overhead against a clear blue autumn sky.

ABC/Disney better fucking yank their 911 obscenity.

we should contact abc adevertisers and their CEOs. Ask the CEOs office to contact ABC and inform the network that this kind of controversial programming is not what they pay advertising dollars for. This web site has the advertisers http://www.boomantribune.com/?…..41930/3207

Hugh @ 229

OK, I will defend Fahrenheit 911. There are documentaries and documentaries, over and above docudramas like ABC’s Path to 911. Moore’s F911 is a POV (Point of view) documentary. It is meant to be partisan and however much you decry it many of its scenes are printed indelibly on your minds. Who can forget the Black Caucus standing up to challenge the 2000 election and the silence of the Senate, or Moore encouraging a Senator or was it a Representative to sign up his child for the war in Iraq, or Bush at a black tie dinner saying, You are my people, or the My Pet Goat moment, and so many others? Sure his work is flawed and sometimes we don’t agree with either the method or the message but he’s just one guy, one POV. What’s ABC’s excuse?

THANK YOU Hugh. It was also the first time I had heard about Bush’s speech where he’s bragging to to his crowd about the “Haves and Have-mores”. I saw this movie over two weeks after it came out. When it ended there was a shocked silence and then the whole packed theatre, in late afternoon mind you, stood up and gave it a LONG standing ovation. There was very little humor in the movie, all of the scenes portrayed (95%) were too plain shocking to laugh at.

Dru is so correct, Path to Propaganda 9/11 is being aired in prime time deliberately and with malice of falsehoods to assist in electioneering campaign materials. Whereas F 9/11 was the first real documentary that put everything we suspected together and got it into the public eye, but you had to choose and PAY to go see it.

I left a polite message on Mr. Iger’s voicemail.

I hold out some hope that Disney will do the right thing at the last minute — in the past they have made the right decision when the fundies tried to mob them with anti-gay hysteria.

Should filmmakers use fictionalized scenes to dramatize the events leading up to the September 11 attacks?

Yes 15% 3088 votes

No 85% 17358 votes
Total: 20446 votes

—
I think the Mouse should surrender on this one; they’ve lost the battle already.

John,

Yes – I object to fictional representations of any sort. (I probably wouldn’t get deeply involved in an e-mail campaign for something that mistreated Bush since Bush partisans would likely be all over the issue and I have quite a long list of things I’d like to see changed!) To second all of those who referenced F911, I saw an early screening of the film and e-mailed everyone I knew to both recommend it, but also to stress that it was a polemic, not really a documentary. I’d still argue, though, that the value of that film was chiefly in the news footage most of us had never seen before. It was quite a shock to the system to realize that in our media-saturated universe, particularly with the endless coverage of all things 9/11, there were plenty of images we’d never seen. It’s one thing to live in the USSR and know you’re not being shown the breadth and depth. It’s quite another for people to realize that with the 24-hour cable news channels, many people hadn’t ever seen the full video of Bush sitting in that classroom on 9/11 with a blank expression on his face, minute after minute. That, in my view, was the value of that film.

After watching Oliver Stone’s JFK, I refused to see Nixon – not because I’m a fan of Nixon, but because fictional representations of real events have a sneaky way of imprinting in your consciousness. I’ve done a bit of research into how the brain forms memories and for this reason, I think people are kidding themselves if they think that there’s a special place in our brains that store “fiction” and another separate file cabinet of the mind that stores “nonfiction.” Even people’s own memories of their own lives are easily subject to manipulation. My friends know me as a bit of a blowhard on this subject. So I’ll move on.

Second, John, remember that Scholastic has partnered with ABC to put 100,000 copies of this DVD into the hands of schoolchildren. (Even though they’ve changed the study guides, they still plan to distribute copies of this objectionable film.)

Are we not completely irresponsible as discerning adults not to take every step to prevent this from happening?

Allen @ 244

Your dems are a bunch of hypocrites. When the message doesn’t agree you with your cause you preach censorship, but that bull crap Fahrenheit 9/11 was ok to show with all it’s lies. This why both parties blow chunks.

Allen, what was your position on the Reagan docu-drama that you forced CBS to not air?

I don’t think anyone is saying anything should be censored. If you are going to bill it as based on a factual document then don’t have scenes which contradict the document.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was not aired on free network television at all. One could choose whether or not to spend money on it. This is being aired on free network television on government owned airwaves and is being labeled as “fact” when it clearly contradicts the 9/11 Commission Report.

Longtime lurker, first time poster..went to abc.com and said I will not watching their fall programming such as”Grey’s Anatomy” or that new show I’ve dying to see “Ugly Betty”, if they don’t yank “Path to 9/11″. My best line?Untruths are not entertainment

Keep it ya’ll..we’re winning..

Allen @ 244

Your dems are a bunch of hypocrites. When the message doesn’t agree you with your cause you preach censorship, but that bull crap Fahrenheit 9/11 was ok to show with all it’s lies. This why both parties blow chunks.

Please tell us which network aired F911 commercial free, and when, please. And, I would refer you to the CBS miniseries on the Reagans, which was pulled after an outcry by…Republicans/conservatives. Was that censorship?

Don’t have time for this crap today – when you can do more than respond with knee-jerk talking points, by all means, let it rip.

Further thanks to Hugh.

People seem to project their visceral revulsion toward Michael Moore’s appearance and/or personality onto his extemely factually rigorous work. That’s grossly unfair. I may have quibbles with some of the choices Moore made in putting the F9/11 together, but his facts were solid, and he mostly kept the interpretation of those facts to a minimum. He prefers to let his subjects dig their own ruts as they lick their combs, insist that we watch their golf shots, and, of course, slaughter all the brown people they can find.

F9/11 is a far more solid piece of work, IMHO, than “The Power of Nightmares,” which has great material but goes way over the edge in telling us what to think, and somehow purports to explain the ascendancy of neoconservativism without ever (and I mean ever) uttering the word “Israel.”

I had no problem with the Regan film, I’m not that stupid to form my opions from a movie. And anybody who says otherwise is an idiot. It is just funny who left and the right act when they might be shown for the frauds they are. Clinton was more about his own ass, than the country and Bush has really f-d things up. So in my opinion they should show F-911 and than show this movie right after. There is no censorship until you disagree with me. That is how the dems are acting.

CalvinandHobbes @
246

Allen @ 244

Your dems are a bunch of hypocrites. When the message doesn’t agree you with your cause you preach censorship, but that bull crap Fahrenheit 9/11 was ok to show with all it’s lies. This why both parties blow chunks.

Allen, what was your position on the Reagan docu-drama that you forced CBS to not air?

I don’t think anyone is saying anything should be censored. If you are going to bill it as based on a factual document then don’t have scenes which contradict the document.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was not aired on free network television at all. One could choose whether or not to spend money on it. This is being aired on free network television on government owned airwaves and is being labeled as “fact” when it clearly contradicts the 9/11 Commission Report.

can someone check, this please? Can’t get through firewall here at the salt mine.

It’s on the DU board. Says, “Breaking – ABC will not air 911 movie”

lotus @ 232

Mod’s help needed again at 218 and 194. Many thanks.

clueless at 225 — that’s great! Is your area blue, red or purple?

Historically, Arizona has been VERY red and my community, Scottsdale, is even redder.

However, with the booming growth in AZ population over the last decade – MANY people moved to AZ from Dem states (including me – Chicago). The voters’ profile in AZ now is a bunch of Dems, a whole bunch of repubs, and a HUGE TON of independents. I believe the “independents” may be the largest category of voters in AZ now. Guess we are some shade of purple until we can see a track record of Independent votes. We have some real dumbass repubs in this state.

Here in Scottsdale, MANY rich pricks drive gas-guzzling Hummers/Escalades with “W” stickers in the rear windows (never see those “W” stickers on the occasional hybrid vehicle!). Rich fuckers are protecting their tax reductions. They don’t give a shit about the USA – only their own personal luxurious lifestyle.

Allen @ 244

Your dems are a bunch of hypocrites. When the message doesn’t agree you with your cause you preach censorship, but that bull crap Fahrenheit 9/11 was ok to show with all it’s lies. This why both parties blow chunks.

Allen – educate me. What were all the lies in F 9/11? And what was the bullcrap in F 9/11?

T- @ 247

can someone check, this please? Can’t get through firewall here at the salt mine.

It’s on the DU board. Says, “Breaking – ABC will not air 911 movie”

It’s a joke – from a few years ago “Fahrenheit 911″

Nobody over at DU is appreciating the humor either…

Well, clueless, their greed is mowing them down too — they just don’t realize it yet (or do but can’t admit it yet, I’m not sure which). In either case, go get ‘em!

Clueless..

How do you know for sure Path to 911 is true or false. You have not seen it, neither have I. But I don’t need a movie to tell what to believe. I believe both parties allowed 9-11, and if you can’t see that than you seriously Clueless….. Clinton worried his about d&^k and Bush is a jackass. I don’t want censorship, weather it is lies or the truth.

A quick question…I’ve now variously heard this series described as being four, five, and six hours long. Has that ever changed, or are these just factual errors by the reporters?

Perhaps the shrinking numbers for the length are due to “edits”. Hopefully, if ABC decides to air it anyway (NO, they WILL see advertisers hurt. It doesn’t matter to me at all if some company advertising on ABC isn’t specifically underwriting the Propaganda on 9/11 show, they are advertising on ABC. That’s enough for me to quit buying their sh*t and let them know why. They must DISTANCE themselves entirely from ABC)…anyway, back to what I was saying…if ABC decides to air it anyway, perhaps they will have had to edit and re-edit and chop away at it to make it fit with actual, objective reality to the point that the show is only 10 minutes long: showing the planes hitting the towers, showing Bush trying to “read” My Pet Goat to a bunch of children lightyears beyond him intellectually, show Bush being told about the attacks but just keep on reading with a vacuous look in his eyes, then get out and hide in Texas until it’s safe to come out from under his bed. Ten minutes, tops, is all you need to show that string of actual, objectively real, recorded, and documented facts.

That’d be a show I could get behind.

I wrote a bunch of letters to ABC’s sponsors and this is the only response I’ve received so far…

ConsumerRelations@cr.quakeroatmeal.comto me
2:03 pm (21 minutes ago)
RE: Quaker-Tropicana-Gatorade, a division of PepsiCo , REF.# 025832356A

J:

We appreciate receiving your comments about our advertising on the ABC network. Our company has a longstanding policy on the kinds of television programs and networks that can carry our advertising messages. We’re committed to high standards in all of our advertising, including the environment in which our advertising appears.

Please be assured that we will not be advertising on The Road to 9/11. Advertising in excessively violent programs, programs that may be distasteful as judged by contemporary society, and those that may be offensive to a significant number of people is avoided.

However, ABC is a popular television network watched by a large group of our consumers, and currently we have no plans to discontinue advertising on it. We do promise to continue to review the content of each broadcast network and make sure it fits with our programming guidelines.

Your comments will be forwarded directly to our advertising and media buying departments. They work directly with the broadcast networks and their affiliates, and we know they will appreciate hearing your thoughts. We recognize that there are many different points of view and it’s important that we know yours.

Gerri
Pepsico Consumer Response

Although this is probably late, this was my letter to Mr. Iger. It probably wasn’t as nice as I could have been, but this was as nice as I could be under the circumstances:

Dear Mr. Iger,
I am writing this in a spirit of shock and disappointment on ABC/Disney’s involvement in this deplorable affair. To knowingly falsify events leading up to a tragedy like 9/11 is nothing less than despicable, and I would hope that some level of morality and ethics is still left at your corporation. I and my family have patronized Disney-owned facilities and bought many items. For the insulting way ABC/Disney has handled this affair so far, I will NOT buy, patronize or otherwise give any of my hard-earned money to the Disney corporation for a year. This is a fait accompli, and no amount of apologies or any such mollification will change it. Now, if the 9/11 “docudrama” goes ahead as scheduled, then this boycott will become lifetime, and I will contact my political representatives to note any legislation that affects Disney interests to keep in mind the gross political manipulation that ABC/Disney has sunk to, and to act accordingly. I hear that you are a “decent person”, and I hope that you will do whatever necessary to correct this outrage. Thank you.

Micky @ 182

hmmmmm……

http://www.democraticunderground

David Cunningham, director of “The Path to 9/11,” is the son of Loren Cunningham, founder of the worldwide evangelical group Youth With a Mission.

Youth With a Mission has an “auxiliary branch” called The Film Institute.

Members of The Film Institute write:

TFI’s first project is a doozy: 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!

Our goal is to help filmmakers, actors, technicians, etc. realize their God given potential and purpose in perhaps the most influential sphere of modern culture – film and television.

Here’s more information on the “Untitled History Project”:

Our next big project is to assist in the development of the new YWAM auxiliary – The Film Institute (TFI). The Film Institute is dedicated to a Godly transformation and revolution TO and THROUGH the Film and Television industry;

TO it, by serving, living humbly with integrity in what is often a world driven by selfish ambition, power an money – transforming lives from within, and THROUGH it, by creating relevant and evocative content which promotes Godly principles of Truth married with Love.

The Untitled History Project Begins Production July 25th.

Mysteriously, the pages containing those quotes – which were freely available on the Internet until yesterday – have been deleted. Here are links to the now-deleted originals:

http://www.markandkrista.com/4559.html
http://www.markandkrista.com/30257.html

Fortunately Google’s cache has preserved these pages. See here and here.

A WhoIs search reveals that markandkrista.com is registered to Mark Harris at Youth With a Mission. Last year Mark Harris spoke at Youth With a Mission’s “Viva Latin America conference.”

5hYSP9psF0J:ywamconnect.com/sites/Founders/ywamReports?multcontentitemid=186211 “mark harris” “the film institute”&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2″ target=”_blank”>Here’s a snip from the report:

Mark Harris spoke following Braulia and showed a DVD clip by film director David L. Cunningham, who together with others has formed a YWAM auxiliary called The Film Institute (TFI). One goal of TFI is to fast-track UofN School of Digital Film interns, placing them within the film industry, not to give them jobs, but so that they can begin to impact and transform Hollywood from the inside out.

UofN is University of the Nations – Youth With a Mission’s “global training network.”

Update: from mhatrw:

At the moment, ABC officials are calling the miniseries “Untitled Commission Report” and producers refer to it as the “Untitled History Project.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1639…

But it’s being filmed relatively quietly. No production announcement has been made, and it’s being shot around town under the nondescript working-title “Untitled History Project.”

http://jam.canoe.ca/Television/2005/07/2…

UHP Productions will be on site filming a miniseries starring Harvey Keitel (of Reservoir Dogs, and Pulp Fiction fame), Patricia Heaton (best known as Debra Barone from Everybody Loves Raymond), and former “New Kid On the Block”, Donnie Wahlberg. The production is currently referred to as the Untitled History Project.

http://www.myhamilton.ca/myhamilton/City…

Who are “UHP Productions”? IMDB lists them as only producing one movie:

http://www.imdb.com/company/co0163444

UHP Productions Ltd. doesn’t even appear to have a website. I’m guessing “UHP” stands for “Untitled History Project.”

Seems like there is a lot more to be dug into here. Is someone working on that? Is Micky onto something?

Allen @ 256

I don’t want censorship, weather it is lies or the truth.

Then you won’t object to running F911 free on netwrok TV within 90 days of a major election, or running that Reagan docudrama the same way, or actually getting news stories that point out all the laws that Bush and Cheney have broken, and admitted to breaking, in the last five-nearly-six years? Because the people who keep benefitting from the way things have been run in that time period are the Republicans, only the Republicans, and not all of them, either.

I’ve had enough of a government that’s being run by the wealthy white wingnuts, for the wealthy white wingnuts, and the rest of us being basically told to go to hsll.

Allen @
256

I don’t want censorship, weather it is lies or the truth.

For the record, it’s WHETHER not WEATHER.

WEATHER = the state of the atmosphere with respect to wind, temperature, cloudiness, moisture, pressure, etc.

And you’re calling me stupid… Sheesh.

I bet they are shaking in their boots. CENSORSHIP, You are Promoting CENSORSHIP.

Look up censorship in the dictionary, ass. Nothing I am doing has a thing to do with censorship. I spend my money the way I want, and no crying, lying little prick can stop me.

Christy,

That was a perfect letter you wrote to Disney, just perfect. You know the right way to say things and make the truth resonate mightily. I am so proud of you and grateful for your work.

Amen to that, dipper!

Check out the info in this diary from Kos:

Christian YWAM $$$ behind PT911
by bewert
Fri Sep 08, 2006 at 10:33:35 AM PDT
The $40M question that’s been bugging me has been “who paid for this crapola?” And I think I’ve found the answer.

It’s the Christian organization Youth With A Mission (YWAM), through their auxiliary – The Film Institute (TFI). Loren Cunningham, the founder of YWAM, is the father of PT911 director David Cunningham.

Follow me over the flip for more stuff!

bewert’s diary :: ::
I was led to this by a comment from everhopeful and I am ever hopeful we can shitcan this crapola hit piece.

YWAM members Mark and Krista Harris commented on their website:

As we have looked around, we’ve noticed a lot of big-mouthed giants running around, but not many young warriors brave enough to stake everything on God.

So that’s what we’ve decided to do. Starting in July, along with our ‘normal’ discipleship efforts in YWAM, we will officially join The Film Institute – a new auxiliary branch of Youth With A Mission focused on tranforming film and television from the inside out. TFI’s first project is a doozy: 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!

Our goal is to help filmmakers, actors, technicians, etc. realize their God given potential and purpose in perhaps the most influential sphere of modern culture – film and television.

The “Untitled History Project” was the working title, as this Fox story shows. It was produced by in Toronto by UHP Productions. This quote from writer Cyrus Nowrasteh is particularly rich:
“Anything about 9/11 will be controversial,” he said. “I commend ABC because they have continually asked me to be as truthful and honest as I can be. The producers have made every effort to be objective and tell the story truthfully — because that’s what the subject matter, and our audience, deserves.”
This article from Hamilton (a city near Toronto) even has the publicists phone number:
UHP Productions Ltd.
Contact Phone:
(416)778-8454
And from the site YWAM Founders Site we get:
Mark Harris spoke following Braulia and showed a DVD clip by film director David L. Cunningham, who together with others has formed a YWAM auxiliary called The Film Institute (TFI). One goal of TFI is to fast-track UofN School of Digital Film interns, placing them within the film industry, not to give them jobs, but so that they can begin to impact and transform Hollywood from the inside out.

I’m trying to dig up more, but a lot has been scrubbed…thank god for Google!

Allen @ 244

Your dems are a bunch of hypocrites. When the message doesn’t agree you with your cause you preach censorship, but that bull crap Fahrenheit 9/11 was ok to show with all it’s lies. This why both parties blow chunks.

I think several posts already addressed this red herring, and the post they responded to was far less trollish than yours. Go waste somebody else’s time.

Allen, you might want to stop and think for a bit. We are, nearly all of us, in the same boat: working 40 or more hours a week to keep food on the table and a roof over our heads. Cheney, Bush: they have enough to live in luxury without working, for the rest of their lives. They have enough that they don’t even see you or me as real: we’re not in their universe, except as potential sources of more money and power through our taxes and our votes. Bush is a failed businessman, a frontman, the public face, for the neocons like Cheney and Rumsfeld and their buddies. Cheney has money through sweetheart deals like his Halliburton contract; he isn’t a successful businessman either.

BTW, if you want my job, I’d offer it to you, but you wouldn’t be able to handle it. It requires thought and judgement, all day, every day. I’m not seeing either in your writing.

Well looks like somebody tidied up the place *g*

very nice.

any relation to Senator Macaca?

Lindy H @ 122 & 135
Jinny @ 125 & 137

There is now a recommended diary at Kos on the YWAM funding…

down the rabbit hole…

Allen @ 256

Clueless..

How do you know for sure Path to 911 is true or false. You have not seen it, neither have I. But I don’t need a movie to tell what to believe. I believe both parties allowed 9-11, and if you can’t see that than you seriously Clueless….. Clinton worried his about d&^k and Bush is a jackass. I don’t want censorship, weather it is lies or the truth.

Judging by your posts here in relation to relevant statements others make in the same thread, you neither know nor care what is the truth and what is not. Here’s a pretty cone-shaped cap for you. Go model it in the corner.

AS pointed out by Digby, though, the propoganda has already been catapaulted, sent out to the right wing bloggers. If ABC now fails to air it, it will lead to the “liberal media is suppressing the “truth”" charge.

They win either way – typical Rovian strategery.

Another diary on Kos has some good info:

If ad revenue is king, then keeping affiliates happy is, well, queen. Your local ABC affiliate depends on the network to produce solid programming – especially programming that leads directly in or out of locally-produced newscasts.

The local affiliate has only a few commercials to sell in the network programs, because the majority of ads have already been bought by national advertisers (see above). Where the local affiliate makes its money is in their own newscasts, where they control (and make) 100% of the advertising inventory.

Telling the local affiliate that you won’t watch “The Path to 9/11″ is like throwing a lawn chair off the Titanic; it’s meaningless because they control so little of the ad revenue there. The only real way to pressure the local affiliate is to stop watching their news. If you do that, the affiliate will exert its pressure uphill, to the network. And the network can hardly afford to piss off its affiliates.

THIS IS IMPORTANT: many of you have been sending emails to your local affiliates via their websites. Those emails, in the vast majority of cases, are going to the affiliate’s Program Director. To be effective, you must send your emails to the General Sales Manager. He/she is the one person most concerned with the boycotts, news viewership, and the correlation between ratings and ad revenue.

Find a complete list of ABC affiliates here.

—

If you own a DVR, read this.

Your cable or satellite company (DirecTV, Dish Network) is reporting to ABC (and the other networks) what programs you have on a “timer.” If your DVR, for instance, is set to record “Desperate Housewives” or “Grey’s Anatomy,” ABC likely knows it. And those ratings projections will go up, along with ad rates, and finally, the profit in Mickey’s pocket.

Last night, I deleted all my ABC timers. There’s a fairly good chance that I’ll still watch “Desperate Housewives” when it debuts on the 24th, but I won’t give ABC the benefit of knowing that in advance. And certainly, you should not DVR “The Path to 9/11.”

Back to using the treasured VCR that has a feature that’s called “commercial advance” it zooms through the ads like magic. From there I can xfer to DVD and don’t have to even touch the TIVO.

Christy Hardin Smith @
97

For everyone’s amusement purposes, I thought I’d do a little “concern troll” education.

This person has posted under the following rolling names on the blog in the last few days: Mr. Miller, John. C., Wammo, Pack, Wackinit, Pammy Poo, Loony, Wall Street J — for starters, anyway. All concern troll wingnut talking points. Please give our resident concern troll a round of applause for being so transparent. Thank you.

I got as far as finding Wammo 17 & 21, John C. 29, Miller 45 and Pack 63. Then I thought to search for “troll” on the page, and found that you already collected the whole series! Darn, I thought I’d win a prize — perhaps a snippet of that purple hair?

Rotten Tomatoes
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/invincible/

Disney makes a lot of bad movies. Why not give them some bad reviews over at Rotten Tomatos?

The folks on the Kos thread had another good idea:

you can thumbs down or downrate all the ABC shows on your guide – these ratings are gathered minute by minute…

Just go into each program info screen and select thumbs down – mine allows three negative ratings.

It’s kinda fun. If they pull the 9/11 program I will release their channel ratings on my DVR by uprating them. For now they are hostage.

Apparently this does affect their anticipated ratings and revenue stream. Go to it!

Mr. Iger will be receiving a large box next week – I first damaged and then packed up all of my Disney tapes and shipped ‘em off. Included was a scathing (but polite) letter. At the end of it I asked him if selling his soul was worth the price. I should think he’s going to be sorry he ever got involved in this “path…”

somethingsrotten @ 10

Why don’t they just pull the program and show Farenheit 9/11 in stead?

Sounds good to me, at least it is
real!!!

ted @ 279

I love the letters they right write…long winded and stalinistic…rageful and hurtful.

Everything you’d expect from the blurry left.

Ted who? Bundy?

clueless –

Hello there, fellow Arizona resident! So you’re in Maricopa County too?

I would take with a huge grain of salt the indications that Independents are the largest group of new voters among new voters. Why?

Here’s our story — we’ve been AZ residents for a good many years now. When we first arrived we registered to vote as Democrats. We voted as registered Democrats for a good many years.

Then we bought a house, and went to MVD to change our driver’s licences and fill out a new voter registration. We VERY CAREFULLY marked “Democratic Party” as our affiliation on the form.

Imagine our surprise when our registration cards arrived in the mail marked “PND” — “Party Not Designated.”

The Sec’y of State for AZ is a Republican, as is the Board of Elections Supervisor for Maricopa County.

They have LOTS of tricks up their sleeve. By misstating how many Democrats there are, they make it look like the Party is not growing here by leaps and bounds, which IMO it is indeed doing.

If Ted knew how to write “write” right, I’d be more willing to consider if what he writes is right.

How come there are so many posts in here with people telling what is in scene after scene? Have they seen it? If so they must be from Limpballs camp because the dems have not been allowed to see it.

Apparently, ABC News thinks we’re a bunch of Clintonistas. Let’s give a welcome to Fox’s new roommate.

Peterr @ 96

Prof @ 90

Berger and Albright are public figures, and will likely have a difficult time even getting a libel suit to a jury. The relevant law stems from New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964):

Conclusion
The Court held that the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements, even false ones, about the conduct of public officials except when statements are made with actual malice (with knowledge that they are false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity). Under this new standard, Sullivan’s case collapsed.

So any judgment would turn on whether the court accepts the 9-11 Commission report at factual, and whether the producers “recklessly disregarded” its findings. Another option, in the case of Berger and Allbright, would be an argument that failure to even try to contact them to determine their roles would be reckless. The distribution of rough cuts to only rightwing talkers (and refusal to let the figures depicted see the same) would tend to bolster any claims of malice, IMHO, in that it goes toward proving motive and malice.

It’s a tough sell, but not out of the question at all, IMHO. Not a lawyer, just a juror . . . but that’s how I see it.

Actually I wonder why Democrats don’t do this more often.
John and Mo Dean won a lawsuit against St. Martin’s Press for Silent Coup under the Sullivan rule. JD describes the process in the preface to Conservatives Without Conscience. Bruce Lindsey’s letter resembles in tone what Dean wrote to Time and St. Martin’s Press pre-publication. The polite warnings and requests for specific corrections put the publisher on notice and thus help show recklessness later on.

Sullivan protects political criticism by requiring a court to separate reputational damaage from attacks on government agencies and policies. Sullivan was not even named in the civil rights ad he sued on. Here, names are named. And the damage is personal. The public figures have reputational interests as consultants, writers, and the like. In a way the Republicans have increased the impact by vilifying appeasers and the crime-fighting model.

One question I’m weighing: in dollar terms, does Disney gain more from Bush in mergers and internet and other telecom gains by going ahead than it risks on libel damages to potential plaintiffs? Jiminy Cricket is neither on the Disney board nor a paid consultant.

Here’s my e-mail to Rober Iger, the CEO of Disney. The subject line was “Lying about 9/11 is not acceptable”

**************************

Dear Mr. Iger,

I am, to put it politely, disturbed that Disney has decided to release a movie that distorts and in places outright fabricates what happened during the period leading up to the terrible attacks on the World Trade Center towers on 9/11/2001.

This movie is “Path to 9/11″, and I understand that this movie essentially puts the blame for the attacks onto former President Clinton and members of his administration.

I have read a letter on the internet by Madeline Albright, Clinton’s Secretary of State, where she says the movie “depicts scenes that never happened, events that never took place, decisions that were never made and conversations that never occurred; it asserts as fact things that are not fact.” Her letter is on the internet here http://websrvr80il.audiovideow…..6/albright letter.doc

I understand Roy Disney once said this:

“The Walt Disney Company is more than just a business. It is an authentic American icon — which is to say that over the years it has come to stand for something real and meaningful and worthwhile to millions of people of all ages and backgrounds around the world.”

So I believed too. Until now.

This movie is nothing more than political propaganda, and more worrisome it’s an attempt to rewrite history, with an eye for a politically-timed release date of just before mid-term elections.

I am angered that distortions of history are being promoted by Disney, for obviously political reasons. I am disturbed that this revisionist piece will shown in schools, to young people most vulnerable to deception.

Mr. Iger, why on earth is Disney doing this? Lying about 9/11 is not acceptable, and it is even more reprehensible when it appears to have been done for political reasons. Why is Disney so willing to lie about history? Excuse me, sir, but lying is not something that an authentic American icon does.

I have a two-year-old daughter, and I am determined that Disney will have no place in our household if this what Disney becomes — a political shill for the purposes of confusing and misleading people about their own history. I want my daughter to grow up with the truth, however unpleasant. I want her, at her vulnerable age, to be exposed to truthfulness, not subtle propaganda promoted as a true story.

Please refrain from releasing this movie. It will insidiously undermine both the facts necessary to have an effective democracy, and Disney’s reputation and special position that it stands for something real, meaningful and worthwhile.