| NYT | 0 | |
| Miami Herald | 0 | |
| Don Surber | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| WaPo | Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare] |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Change" You Can Believe In:
"Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn't control (the media). They didn’t try. [...] What the hell do they think we are, puppets?"
- Liberal opinion writer Helen Thomas, describing the Obama admin's penchant for heavily scripting public appearances & press conferences - 7/1/09
P2911- Discussion thread
Post your thoughts on part one here.
Update I: So far, what I’m seeing matches up very closely with what I’ve read in various books about the 1993 WTC attack, including the victims (the pregnant woman) and the terrorists.
Update II: The Democrats got their wish. The scene they protested was edited out. Here is the original scene, for anyone interested.
Malkin is liveblogging this.
Update III: Allah’s got a side by side comparison of what was edited.
Update IV: The post P2911 Nightline seems to be a hit piece on George Tenet. Way to go, ABC. We must absolve Clinton of any wrongdoing!
Update V: Terry Moran is in Afghanistan reporting? Oh God.
Update VI: My assessment (I posted this at HotAir as well): Overall, I found the whole near-three hours excellent. A lot of what was in the movie was factual or a good representation of it, and anyone who has read the volume of books out there on how the Clinton admin bungled counterterrorism operations knows it.
I didn’t, however, like the little Nightline segment, showing Richard Clarke passing the blame buck to George Tenet. I’m sick of this guy looking like a ‘hero’ – he’s not.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
18 Responses to “P2911- Discussion thread”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
- Its scheduled for an 8 pm showing here in San Diego. I just hope ABC/Disney did not gut it to the point where it doesn’t get the main point across… the bumbling of Clinton and his gang of polidiots.
- Hopefully this is just the first in a string of Sept/Oct surprises for the DemoFascists. Its time for the honest majority to put the “real” back in reality, and thouroughly debunk the “morally depraved equivalents” and “revisionist fantasy cult” progressives.
- Bang
I know this is a horrible criticism, but I was hoping that this would be in HD. I mean I saw the “ABC-HD” logo all week long. *sigh* Oh, well. I’m DVR-ing it now and will watch it later.
watching now
Well one thing that I have noticed is that the Youtube Video is lousier than that of the Quick Time Video was.
Good thing that I had downloaded and saved the original Quick Time Video.
Thought the film was well made cinematically. Great performances. The Youtube stuff was a pain, but the descriptions seemed like what I saw. Perhaps it’s nuance.
Makes you really wonder about everyone who thinks history began on Sept 11, 2001.
Anyone awake on the east coast yet?
- I think the one line by the guy who played O’niell summed up the entire Clintonucklehead fiasco in a concise, short and sweet way: ….”So you mean he’s leaving it up to me to make the decision, so later he can’t be blamed for it…..How pathetic”….If I could sum up Clinton’s Royal pain in the butt “Rein”, that does it pretty well.
- As far as Bush not picking up the ball, I can just imagine Clarke and Tenet, and all the other Liberal moles, working hard to make sure the “Oh it’s nothing folks, just move along” mind set going at the end of slick Willey’s term. Who knows what these snake oil politico’s were telling him and Condi.
- Bang
Harvey Keitel played O’Neill.
I’ll dissent here: I really didn’t think that the first half of the film was done that well. I am not a fan of that particular style of herky-jerky cinematography, to create the impression of tension and speed, nor did I think that the film flowed all that well.
I have been debating the criticisms of my liberal friends on my site, and they seem stuck on the part that dramatic license was used, and that it’s not 100% factually accurate. That is a legitimate criticism, as far as it goes. But that’s a criticism which tells you all about the trees, but misses the forest — and the forest is that the Clinton Administration’s (and pre-September 11th Bush Administration’s) counter-terrorism policies were so consumed with the legalistic and law enforcement mentalities that they could not be effective. Law enforcement is a means of tracking down and arresting criminals after they have committed a crime; it is frequently less successful at preventing a crime in the first place.
However, I do not criticize either the Clinton or early Bush Administrations for using a primarily law enforcement policy in counterterrorism, because the other option, the current aggressive hunt them down and kill them policy, would not have had much public support before the September 11th attacks. It is against the law for the President to simply order an assassination, and it’s real difficult to imagine that President Clinton could have given an order to assassinate Osama bin Laden without some real problems.
To me, the real impact of this film is that it demonstrates that the law enforcement method of counter-terrorism simply does not work to prevent terrorist acts. The criticisms of our liberal friends about President Bush’s policies have all been in that vein: the NSA program didn’t get warrants, we haven’t given the prisoners at Guantanamo lawyers and charged them in federal courts, we haven’t followed the letter of the Geneva Conventions, thinmgs like that. Whether our liberal friends realize it or not (and I’m not certain that they do), their criticisms are all arguing for a return to the Clinton policies — and this film shows that those policies didn’t work. Without that available to criticize the President’s counter-terrorism policies, what do they have?
Nothing.
They know it, and that’s why they are so POed about this film.
What pisses me off is some of the actors are protesting the film and it being shown cuz its not factual … they did the filming and took their damn money without saying a word till the moonbats started foaming.
RedState has the clips that were cut. Thank you, YouTube!
Cav, I linked up to the clips in this post
And yes, You Tube RULES!
One thing I don’t read much of getting discussed much regarding the Victims surviving members is the entitlement mentality that permeates the ongoing process. Ann Coulter’s specific attention to the Jersey women drew the ire and fire from the usual suspects, relative to certain aspects of this lawyer heavy element. That topic alone could fill a thousand pages and say nothing, if THESE vultures don’t get reined in and drained out. Insert an Eagles song here, as you read the rest.
The past victims of terrorist activity related deaths are now and have been lawyering up to “get some of the American Pie” since it’s generosities have reached the amount of zeros at the end of the number. Now before the heavy breathing and panting blossoms into rage, one should consider another aspect. Ask why these primarily civilian deaths are owed such extensive payoffs, while the men and women who volunteered to protect the freedom of free people everywhere are granted a TAXED monthly stipend that by design, simply prevents drowning in poverty. Meanwhile back at the harbor, too many are complaining about the size and type of engine in their yacht.
Is this the valued difference in being a volunteer to fight the invasions of evil and being unlucky to be in the wrong place and wrong time? Wrong place, wrong time for the civilians and no volunteer status separates them for some indeterminate reasoning. They all have/had families, futures and/or plans. They have all suffered the same loss. They have all endured the tragedy of a life stolen, but they do not all have big brother ensuring (dependent largely on what legal counsel one is privy to) their financial care and consideration.
Entitlement anything is a dangerous precipice. Politics aside (and that’s a lot) this is not about L/R issues. As harsh as this sounds (callousness is neither intended or should it be presumed), this is not about getting a fair share or a cut as it were. It’s about thoughtful distribution and honoring all that have met the same fate that none of them deserved. Litigators like alligators snapping up a free meal, should have no business in this involvement. Appropriate payment(s) for what should be an automatic decision, should’ve already been disbursed, as it it done with most of the military families, especially those who simply cannot afford a legal gunslinger.
Lopsided and out of balance falls so short of this entire surreal venture down the rabbit hole. Alice is more than lost here folks. She’s jumped into another story book, yet undefined.
Sorry folks, I meant to post this in the neighboring comments post.
When Michael Moore created the movie Fahrenheit 911, the Libs are ecstatic but when ABC (a liberal TV station) created the Path to 911, they’re up in arms.
What a hypocricy. Sure enough, truth does really hurts.