Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ABC Shelves Path to 9/11 DVD - Yay!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 01:29 PM
Original message
ABC Shelves Path to 9/11 DVD - Yay!

Last year during the fifth anniversary of 9/11 ABC televised a mini-series "dramatizing" some of the events which supposed led to attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Now, amid virulent criticism of the accuracy of it's docu-drama, ABC has declined to release the film on DVD and it's writer/creator, avowed conservative activist, Cyrus Nowresteh is now hopping mad. From Today's WSJ.

Left-leaning pundits, politicos and bloggers waxed hysterical about its supposed inaccuracies and anti-Clinton bias, though the vast majority of them had not seen it.

This passive self-censorship is just as effective as anything Joseph Stalin or Big Brother could impose. The result is the same: the curbing of free speech and creative expression, and the suppression of a viewpoint that may be an inconvenient truth for some politicians.

But ABC pulling the DVD had nothing to do with "left-leaning pundits" and everything to do with the film being a pile of lying crap.

More blather from Nowresteh via Raw Story.

Last Wednesday, in a front page LA Times Calendar piece "Clinton and the missing DVD," reporter Martin Miller gave voice to the latest series of charges from the mini-series’ neo-con writer/producer Cyrus Nowrasteh who now claims that out of deference to Hillary Clinton, ABC is shelving the five hour mini-series which was hyper-critical of her husband’s counter-terrorism record.

Oh, so now this is a dastardly plot by the villus Hillary Clinton - do tell?

In his latest FrontPage booking, Nowrasteh whines, "Last year at this time it was a coordinated effort from the Clintons, Sandy Berger, the DNC, and the far-left loony blogosphere to swamp ABC with emails and phone calls and threats to get them to block the broadcast, or recut the movie. Since then it’s been more subtle. I know there have been phone calls to top execs at Disney from President Clinton himself, and friends of the Clintons, of which there are many in Hollywood."

Wow that Hillary sure is powerful. I wonder if she got some help from that dirty bastard George Soros?

Frankly, if this is what happened - if the "far-left loony blogosphere" actually managed to cause ABC to fix the gross errors in this movie, which as a card-carrying member of that loony far-left I blogged about thoroughly here, here, here, here and here last year (and I was far from alone) - I would be impressed.

Yet somehow, I don't think that's what happened.

I think the fact that film essentially defamed John O'Neill, Richard Clarke, George Tenet, Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger and Bill Clinton by manufacturing failures of inaction on their part which didn't take place and ignoring many successful aggressive anti-terrorist actions that did probably had more to do with it. And then there's also the issue of intellectual theft.

Don't take my word for it, listen to what Peter Lance, author of "1000 Years of Revenge" one of the books that was purportedly a major source for "Path" has to say about it...

.... 1000 Years For Revenge, was one of the three works on which ABC based the mini. They acquired it for a quarter of a million dollars in 2005 under threat of litigation, after they’d lost the book in a bidding war with NBC.

Nowrasteh then proceeded to launder most of my critical findings on negligence by the FBI and the two Bush administrations and give Path a twisted pro-Bureau slant through the eyes of ex-ABC News correspondent John Miller, who now works as Assistant Director of Public Affairs for the FBI.

"Years" documents how various failures under Bush 41 within the NYPD and NY Office of the FBI were critical in allowing Ramzi Yousef, the original WTC bomber to roam free for several years and eventually conceive of the plot which became 9/11 to finish the job he'd started in 1993.

There was a rival book on the bidding table called "The Cell" which was essential a "Disney-ized" version of similar events, but was so white-washed it was " Like telling the story of John Dillinger’s take down without mentioning FBI agent Melvin Purvis"

As it turned out, ABC failed to acquire the rights to "Years" after a fierce bidding war - so naturally Nowresteh simply appropriated parts of it to fit into his fictional narrative and went on his merry way. More from Raw Story.

Now, in July as the cameras began rolling on what ABC first called "the History Project," something told me that I should get a look at Cyrus’s script. When I turned to the first page of "Night One," I saw that Nowrasteh had lifted much of my book, scene by scene, dialogue for dialogue. He’d even titled the first two hours, "The Mozart of Terror," the name I’d coined for Yousef.

But beyond the hijacking of 1000 Years, what was most galling, was how Cyrus, hungry for some book on which to hang his story, had now embraced The Cell, the very book he’d bad-mouthed to me and elevated John Miller, who was about to take a job as chief FBI flak, to a lead character.

Worse, he’d taken the hapless Det. Lou Napoli – who had ignored Ronnie Bucca’s warnings and failed to follow the WTC bombers – and turned him into a lead member of the FBI posse out to stop bin Laden, a bullpen of real and fictional characters now led by John O’Neill.

Unable to legally acquire my book, Nowrasteh had simply appropriated it and used what he wanted from it and then set up The Cell with its pro-FBI slant as the "based on" underlying work for his re-telling of "History."

Nowresteh's unauthorized lifts from "Years" led to a lawsuit which was eventually settled for $250,000 and gave ABC the rights to the material that Nowresteh stole prior to it's airing. The settlement also included a gag-order to keep Nowresteh's theft and distortion of history and facts from becoming public - an order which Peter Lance has now knowingly breached in order to get the facts out.

Facts such as these which were not included in the film.

  • Bill Clinton personally authorized each and every aggressive action suggested to stop and/or contain Osama Bin Laden (Roger Cressey)
  • Under Clinton the CIA had standing orders to Kill Bin Laden (9/11 Report Page 199)
  • No U.S. military personnel were ever on the ground in Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and ever had visual contact with Bin Laden (Richard Clarke)
  • Bill Clinton specifically ordered Joint Chiefs Chairman Hugh Shelton to develop a plan to put Special Forces on the ground in Bin Laden's camps, but it was the Pentagon who balked - not the White House. (Richard Clarke)
  • The Development of the Armed Predator, under Clinton, to address the logistical problems which plagued Special Forces in Afghanistan
  • Richard Clarke's urgent Jan 2001 warnings about Al Qeada to Condi Rice and call for an immediate Principles Meeting which was ignored for 9 months.
  • The Bush Administration doing nothing in response to the U.S.S. Cole bombing once Al Qaeda had been confirmed as the culprits in early 2001.
  • The Midnight Ride to Condi's Office by Tenet, Cofer Black and Clark to warn that something big "10 on a scale of 1 to 10" was coming, which was ignored.
  • The August 6th PDB.
  • George Tenet's personal briefing of Bush in August at the Crawford ranch to reemphasize the PDB and make clear that "They're Coming Here"
  • The fact that the Armed Predator, though ready, was not even discussed for deployment by the WH until Clarke's "urgent" meeting finally took place on Sept 5th.
  • Sept 11th, G.W. Bush and the seven minutes of "My Pet Goat".

In the Nowresteh retelling of events, the failures of both Bush 41 are Bush 43 are completely white-washed - while any missteps by Clinton are magnified and many are completely fabricated. Clinton did everything wrong, Bush did everything right.

But how could we expect this film to give the Clinton Administration a fair and accurate shake when it was first announced and publicized triumphantly by Rush Limbaugh?

"The film really zeros in on the shortcomings of the Clinton administration in doing anything about militant Islamofascism or terrorism during its administration. It cites failures of Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright and Sandy Burglar."

The fact is that this film was never conceived of, and never will be considered a "documentary" or for that matter true. Numerous members of the 9/11 Commission have spoken up to point out that it fails to reflect their findings. It well past time that people like Mr. Nowserteh learned a) Censorship is something the Government does, not Private Companies and b) Freedom of Speech is not Freedom to Lie.

I myself regret that "Path to 9/11" won't be available on DVD since I actually missed it's original airing - I also love a good comedy.

Ok, ok... a really bad unintentional tragic hypocritical paranoid propaganda-laced bullshit black comedy (if you look at it from a Heathers-like perspective of "This is what some people actually think happened? Fuck Me Gently with a Chainsaw!" - but still a comedy.

Vyan

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. All copies and masters need to be destroyed on this propaganda crap
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Yes, by all means we must
destroy any media to which we do not agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Well I meant ABC should destoy it, as it was a fabrication and destortion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. So the US government should order all its propaganda films from WW2 and all the 'Red Scare' stuff...
Edited on Thu Sep-13-07 12:12 AM by DRoseDARs
...be destroyed as well? What about all the old footage from the Axis powers? Should mobs enter museums and university archives and aggressively destroy those records too? Like it or not, that filth along with this Path rubbish is already part of our collective history. Historians will look over it as a period piece much in the same way they do to the nonsense films and clips that came out of WW2 and Cold War. Come to terms and deal with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LTR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. I agree with you wholeheartedly
I am also in favor of allowing even those offensive old cartoons from the 40s (i.e. the Japanese-bashing Looney Tunes clips, "Song of the South", etc.) to see the light of day. These weren't exactly our finest hour, but from a sociological and historical perspective, they tell a lot about the culture of the day.

Not our best moments, but highly important nonetheless.

There are a lot of other things out there that should be preserved, even though they were a bit tasteless by today's standards. Remember when The Flintstones did cigarette ads?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. No, not U.S Government mandated....ABC executives say they have shelved
...this piece of right wing bigoted propaganda which they can do because they own the rights to the film. My comment was they should go even further and destroy the negatives and masters and any copies which they possess in the same manner that you or I would take a piece of meat which has gone rotten and stinking with maggots in our refrigerator and throw it out with the garbage.

There can be nothing of any socially redeeming value to a film production based on distortions and filled with a pack of lies that would be worthy of preservation that would possibly serve any cause for future generations even if it were only to point to such tripe and say, what fools these people were to perpetrate such nonsense on the American audience and suggest that anybody would buy into such distortions of facts, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. ABC Shelves Path to 9/11?
Link? I see lots in your post, but none saying ABC announced they are shelving it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. I couldn't watch it past "My Pet Goat" though that was unintentionally funny
the spun it so it made Bush like calm and decisive, like he was so cool, he didn't have to get up right away.

The other unintentional humor was the same actor who played Bush in "Path to 9/11" played him in Comedy Central's "That's My Bush" series that had an episode where Bush meets with the head of a pro-life group who is the victim of a botched abortion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
5. 2 animations on Disney's 9/11 Reichstag Fire:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
7. The public could not stop them from running such a hit piece.
But "because" of the public they aren't going to try to sell it. You know why. They have control over the air waves, we cant' stop them. But they want to make money, so they know that it would waste their precious money trying to sell it, cause no body would buy it. They found that out with all the protests when they were readying it to bash the democrats, the Clintons especially.

The republicans don't spend their money for CD's etc so they are stuck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-14-07 01:55 AM
Response to Reply #7
27. Just a reminder
Pto9/11 was originally aired without ads. It was an inkind promotion for the Bush Administration.

Vyan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
8. To the Greatest!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosesaylavee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. "the far-left loony blogosphere"
If that is what it took to keep this trash off the shelves, then I am a very proud member of the the far-left loony blogosphere! :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. One inaccuracy
"No U.S. military personnel were ever on the ground in Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and ever had visual contact with Bin Laden (Richard Clarke)"

Half of that statement appears true, since Discovery Channel on Jan 30, 2003, aired a program stating that Special Forces Task Force 574 was in Afganistan in July, 2001, weeks before the Sept 11th attacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antiimperialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-12-07 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Another lie
the head of the northern alliance was nowhere near the bin laden camp and didn't see him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. I think his larger point was that the forces were there under Bush 43, in July 2001.
Clinton had been out of office and no longer the sitting President for 6 months at that point. Any failings with actions taken or not taken would lie squarely with the Bush Administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #13
21. Clinton as scapegoat for neocons. All sins attributable to Bill
That's why I made a note of this while watching the Discovery channel program, whose title I didn't make note of (sorry) but the info blew my mind when I heard it. Also, Clinton's role in the Enron build up to the Indian pipeline deal may or may not have been significant, but once * came into office it was a "done deal" via Condi et al.

Remember, at this timeframe even Thomas 'Flathead' Friedman's book The Lexus and The Olive Tree was touting Enron as one of the best US companies. Sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. The issue is...
Edited on Thu Sep-13-07 01:52 AM by Vyan
as it was presented during P-to-9/11 was that during the Clinton Administration U.S. Special Forces and CIA supposedly had Bin Laden "in their sights", but when they asked for authorization to "take him out" then NSA director Sandy Berger refused and hung up the phone one them.

Except that scene never freaking happened.

In fairness, Richard Clarke has stated that he did think he saw what was probably Bin Ladin one one, possibly two Predator fly-overs - but that was before the Predator the armed version with Hellfire missles had been deployed.

Just for the record, it was Bush who delayed deployment of the armed Predator.

Vyan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
12. *pffft* Like it WON'T be available on Teh Intertubeses via YouTube or BitTorrent... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mad_Dem_X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
16. "Freedom of Speech is not Freedom to Lie"
Excellent - I'm glad they are not releasing this thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LTR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
17. I may be in the minority here, but...
...I think it should be released.

First and foremost, I am a firm believer in the First Amendment. Sure, this movie is probably a bit thin in the facts department, but it is a dramatic film. To fight to prevent its release only gives more ammo to the wingnuts who claim that the media/entertainment industry is chock full of liberals, and that liberals believe in censorship.

I don't see the harm in releasing the DVD. After all, who's going to buy it anyway, save for Hannity fans, and they're already drinking the Kool-Aid.

Even Oliver Stone, far from being a wingnut, has been very vocal about letting this film be released.

I say release it, and let the marketplace decide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nxylas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. I used to think the same way
When I found out how libellous the film was, I changed my mind. I'm no constitutional expert, but AFAIK, the First Amendment doesn't allow for defamation of character. Hypothetical example: if you were a public figure and a TV network produced a drama-documentary alleging that you were a predatory pedophile, would you say they had a right to say those things about you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. And let's market The Turner Diaries
And the Protocols of the Elders of Zion while we're at it. False, to be sure. Steaming heaps of bullshit, rotting in the sun and stinking up the place without a doubt. But let the marketplace decide, and let some deranged moron use these scurrilous bits of "history" to inspire, oh, I don't know, the blowing up of let's say a federal building in some out of the way place in Kansas or Oklahoma somewhere.

Yep, the marketplace sure decides a lot, like which 168 people should die on a bright morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LTR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. So, by your way of thinking...
...Let's ban "Catcher in the Rye" while we're at it. It allegedly inspired Mark David Chapman to kill John Lennon.

Let's also ban the movie "Taxi Driver" as it inspired John Hinckley.

How about "The Matrix" or various video games, which are alleged to have inspired the Columbine massacre. Where does it all end?

And who would be the arbitrary body to make these decisions? Yep, you guessed it - the federal government. The same federal government who we often blame for censorship, and who can barely handle the economy, infrastructure and the current war in Iraq. I certainly wouldn't trust them with deciding what media I can or cannot consume.

I'm no fan of either of the two titles you mentioned. I think they're appalling pieces of work. But if someone is persuaded to commit a heinous act just because a book, movie, video game, song or whatever told them to, who's fault is it really? The blame ultimately lies with the weak-minded idiots who carried it out.

And to compare a stupid TV movie with lots of partisan distortions with "The Turner Diaries" is quite a stretch. We all know the movie's bullshit, and we all know it did poorly in ratings, reviews and advertising too. I'll bet if it was released, it wouldn't do too hot in the marketplace either. It would bury itself.

BTW: I don't ever recall "The Turner Diaries" being a major bestseller. It's merely an obscure diatribe circulating almost solely in white supremacist circles. And they're all a bunch of nuts anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-14-07 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #24
28. Actually I agree -
as I ascribe to the adage that it's better to let a fool open his mouth and reveal himself than the silence him and leave his incompetence in doubt.

Vyan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minnesota_liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
22. Haven't watched ABC since they aired this piece of crap!
Just as I told ABC's head honcho and local affiliate, if they aired "Path to 9/11" I would never watch ABC again.

Haven't watched it, haven't missed it and wouldn't have touched the DVD ... except to mix it in with the "Barney" DVDs at the retail outlet!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Might I ask why?
If it's just out of personal revulsion, OK that makes sense.

But if it's boycotting to hurt their ratings, well, unless you're a Neilsen subscriber, it has zero effect on their ratings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minnesota_liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Boycotting ABC gives me some satisfaction, even if I'm not really hurting their ratings
Besides, unlike a few possible responses to ABC's attempt to influence an election by broadcasting neo-fascist propaganda, this one won't get me in any trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-14-07 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #25
29. I agree and have done exactly the same...
with the lone exception of This Week with Stephanopolous, but that I watch because of the statements made by the guest are sometimes highly relevant and revealing both pro and neo-con.

The other fact I've realized since avoiding ABC is that pretty much all their programming is purient small minded crap anyway. I don't miss a second of it.

Vyan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MetaTrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-14-07 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
30. There will be a nice cell waiting for Nowresteh at Guatanamo Bay once the next administration comes
No hard feelings though, right Cyrus?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC