ABC 911 Docudrama Short On Facts

[ChumpDumper]

Seems they're might worried over what those who do watch might think.

Why would anyone get upset over lying for political purposes. It's what the US is all about now.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Additionally, the assertion that the commission failed to report on this program to protect Ms. Gorelick is ridiculous. She had nothing to do with any "wall" between law enforcement and our intelligence agencies. The 1995 Department of Justice guidelines at issue were internal to the Justice Department and were not even sent to any other agency. The guidelines had no effect on the Department of Defense and certainly did not prohibit it from communicating with the FBI, the CIA or anyone else

Later in the article

Congress created the walls that were in place before September 11 -- such as the National Security Act's prohibition on U.S. intelligence agency spying on Americans and the Posse Comitatus Act -- that have nothing to do with the Department of Justice memo. The Defense Department's own directives on sharing such information date from the 1980s.


I guess this just obliterates the talk radio and Yoni's 'Gorelick wall' argument..

[Yonivore]

Additionally, the assertion that the commission failed to report on this program to protect Ms. Gorelick is ridiculous. She had nothing to do with any "wall" between law enforcement and our intelligence agencies. The 1995 Department of Justice guidelines at issue were internal to the Justice Department and were not even sent to any other agency. The guidelines had no effect on the Department of Defense and certainly did not prohibit it from communicating with the FBI, the CIA or anyone else

Later in the article

Congress created the walls that were in place before September 11 -- such as the National Security Act's prohibition on U.S. intelligence agency spying on Americans and the Posse Comitatus Act -- that have nothing to do with the Department of Justice memo. The Defense Department's own directives on sharing such information date from the 1980s.


I guess this just obliterates the talk radio and Yoni's 'Gorelick wall' argument..

Blah, blah, blah...

So, just who does the CIA and DoD turn to when they want a national security threat surveilled domestically? That's right class, the FBI.

So, just what did the Gorelick wall do? That's right class, it prevented the FBI from sharing national security intelligence information with the law enforcement branch of the same agency. So, while you had the law enforcement branch in possession of some of the dots leading up to 9-11, you had another section of the FBI in possession of intelligence information that would have allowed the dots to be connected by the law enforcement side.

Able Danger is the prime example of how Gorelick's wall intefered with the detection of 9-11.

[Nbadan]

Able Danger is the prime example of how Gorelick's wall intefered with the detection of 9-11.

Able Danger is a prime example that the post-cold-war CIA was relying too much on technology and not enough emphasis on human intelligence. A pattern started under Reagan.

[Ya Vez]

thats just funny seeing the liberals getting rocked by someone wanting to exercise free speech.... I guess all free speech is relevant only if it supports left leaning idea's in the leftist camp...

[Nbadan]

I think it's hypocritical for ABC to run a obviously politically motivated docu-drama dressed up a do entary, profit free, two months before an election that could see their Congressional shills kicked out of office.

[Nbadan]

Since Peter Jenning's death, ABC has dropped the fascade and become FAUX-lite

Marc Platt, the executive producer of ABC's upcoming two-part miniseries set to air on September 10 and 11, led The Path to 9/11, has said that "every scene" of the film "is based on information from either the 9/11 Report ... or the books The Cell (co-written by the former ABC News correspondent John Miller) and Relentless Pursuit, written by Samuel Katz." However, in addition to co-writing The Cell: Inside the 9/11 Plot, and Why the FBI and CIA Failed to Stop It, Miller is also a member of the Bush administration, serving as the assistant director of public affairs for the FBI, as blogger Digby has noted.

Media Matters

In easy to read English: One of the books used for dramatization was "The Cell" written by John Miller who just so happens to be an AD of PR for the FBI.

[Yonivore]

Able Danger is a prime example that the post-cold-war CIA was relying too much on technology and not enough emphasis on human intelligence. A pattern started under Reagan.

A pattern that started with the Church Committee and exacerbated by Clinton's unwillingness to employ unsavory characters in foreign security surveillance missions.

[Yonivore]

I think it's hypocritical for ABC to run a obviously politically motivated docu-drama dressed up a do entary, profit free, two months before an election that could see their Congressional shills kicked out of office.

Looks like they bowed to the almighty Clinton Legacy Pursuit. It's being edited.

[Nbadan]

Ummm....It's not disney/ABC that have caved....

In a statement released late this afternoon, education publishing giant Scholastic announced it is permanently withdrawing the materials it originally created for classroom use in conjunction with "The Path to 9/11." Materials that Media Matters for America first noted, was "rife with conservative misinformation."

According to Scholastic Chairman, President and CEO Robinson, the materials "did not meet our high standards for dealing with controversial issues." New materials will be posted tomorrow. Additionally, the new materials will make clear Scholastic had no involvement in the development of "The Path to 9/11" and that the company is not promoting the primetime mini-series.

Huffington Post

Meanwhile, scenes cut from 'Path to GOP' in the interest of fairness by ABC.

1. Threesome with Bill, Monica and Osama.

2. Hilary with Osama.

3. Boots with Osama.

4. Howard Dean with Osama.

5. Kerry giving flying lessons to terrorists.

6. Al Gore giving Bush a drink laced with a massive dose of Valium & THC to explain Bush's response to 9-11.

7. Nancy Pelosi ing the White House's water supply with LSD to explain the way the Iraq war has been handled.

8. Max Cleland sending suitcases of money to Al Qaida.

9. Dennis Kucinich sending anthrax to Bush but it's mis-delivered.

[Ya Vez]

I didn't hear this outrage by the left for the movie Farenhiet 911...

[Nbadan]

FBI Agent Who Consulted On Path to 9/11 Quit Halfway Through Because ‘They Were Making Things Up’

James Bamford, an author and journalist who has written about security issues, appeared on MSNBC to discuss “The Path to 9/11.” Bamford revealed that an FBI agent who worked as a consultant to the film quit halfway through production of the mini-series because he believed the writers and producers were “making things up.”

BAMFORD: It’s made-up. This is fiction. This is not real. One of my friends actually was a consultant to this production — an FBI agent who worked on 9/11. He quit halfway through because he thought they were making things up.

Video Up!

[Yonivore]

FBI Agent Who Consulted On Path to 9/11 Quit Halfway Through Because ‘They Were Making Things Up’

James Bamford, an author and journalist who has written about security issues, appeared on MSNBC to discuss “The Path to 9/11.” Bamford revealed that an FBI agent who worked as a consultant to the film quit halfway through production of the mini-series because he believed the writers and producers were “making things up.”



Video Up!

Of course he said what parts were made up, right?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Let's see, the Repugs are running on their phony national security record, while claiming the Dems are a bunch of national security wimps.

A few weeks before the election, obviously random/co-incidental timing for a $40M production, ABC shows a docudrama masqerading as do entary that shows the Dems as a bunch of national security wimps and sliming Dems as responsible for WTC attack, although Repugs were responsible for the national security apparatus for the 8 months before 9/11.

What were the Repugs doing for those 8 months? Nothing but cutting taxes for the super-rich, their only policy.

ABC smells like a Rove slime job. Probably will be very difficult to trace back to Rove and RNC, but it's worth a try. I'm sure someone will.

And you're still a hypocritical little pissant.

Where was the crying over Michael Moore's 9/11 flick in the leadup to the previous election?

THat was a of a lot worse than this ABC thing, strangely I didn't hear Clitton or croutons or anyone else expressing outrage about that.

Boo ing hoo.

And for the record, Sandy Berger and Madelaine Albright are ing idiots and hypocrits.

Albright amazes me. She was friends with one of my profs at A&M and came and spoke to the class one day. She candidly admitted failures WRT bin Laden while she was in office and that the Clinton administration had made, and thought Bush was doing a good job leading the country.

Then not a week later she was out on the democratic attack trashing Bush for his leadership. Nothing but a political bigot and a liar. She deserves all the criticism she gets.

[Ocotillo]

I didn't hear this outrage by the left for the movie Farenhiet 911...

1. Farenheit 911 was a do entary, not a "docudrama"

2. If one wanted to see F 911, they had to pay and find a theatre to see it.

3. Disney declined to distribute F 911, yet they are not only running this propaganda piece for free, they are trying to pass it off as educational.

4. Path to 911 will run two nights without commercials on "free television"

5. While F 911 was one sided, where was it fictional?

6. This is a pre-election smear and should be investigated to see why Disney is bound and determined to run a GOP campaign commercial.

[Zunni]

I didn't hear this outrage by the left for the movie Farenhiet 911...

I didn't hear the strident defense of free speech by the GOP then, either. This is nothing more than the GOP's attempt at a propaganda video. THe great thing is that F911 didn't work worth , and neither will this. If you things up badly enough, people will actually open their eyes and stop being sheeple for short periods of time. Amazing.

[Yonivore]

I didn't hear the strident defense of free speech by the GOP then, either. This is nothing more than the GOP's attempt at a propaganda video. THe great thing is that F911 didn't work worth , and neither will this. If you things up badly enough, people will actually open their eyes and stop being sheeple for short periods of time. Amazing.

I think the Clinton gang's apoplexy over this thing have done more for America's perceptions of what happened than will actually viewing the movie.

Priceless.

[Spurminator]

So is anyone actually going to watch this movie or are we just going to continue to and make assumptions about what apparently amounts to about 30 seconds of it?

[boutons_]

I've not heard that ABC is portraying the Repugs totally ignoring the warnings from CIA/FBI in the weeks before WTC attack. I wonder why that is?

It's an pure and simple ABC slime job on the Dems to pin complete fault for WTC on the Dems, while refusing to place any blame on the Repugs who had been running the country and intelligence for 8 monhts up to 9/11.

[Nbadan]

I've not heard that ABC is portraying the Repugs totally ignoring the warnings from CIA/FBI in the weeks before WTC attack. I wonder why that is?

Don't forget the ignored warnings from foreign intelligence agencies that a domestic attack was being planned. Some State Department officials stopped flying on public transportation weeks before 911. You think they should have clued in the public?

[Nbadan]

ABC alters 9/11 show under pressure

ABC's upcoming five-hour docudrama "The Path to 9/11" is quickly becoming a political cause célèbre.

The network has in recent days made changes to the film, set to air Sunday and Monday, after leading political figures, many of them Democrats, complained about bias and alleged inaccuracies. Meanwhile, a left-wing organization has launched a letter-writing campaign urging the network to "correct" or dump the miniseries, while conservative blogs have launched a vigorous defense.

...

After much discussion, ABC executives and the producers toned down, but did not eliminate entirely, a scene that involved Clinton's national security advisor, Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, declining to give the order to kill Bin Laden, according to a person involved with the film who declined to be identified because of the sensitivities involved.

"That sequence has been the focus of attention," the source said, adding: "These are very slight alterations."

In addition, the network decided that the credits would say the film is based "in part" on the 9/11 commission report, rather than simply "based on" the bestselling report, as the producers originally intended.

Calendar Live

So this 'docu-drama' by ABC is based partly on facts, as presented by the 911 Commission Report, and mostly based on fantasy, as presented by ABC's penchant for wingnut-spin.

Seems fair.

[Ya Vez]

if you don't want to watch it... watch something else... people on the left act like people are going to be forced to watch this movie by some great coordinator in the sky.... lol... it's so f***ing funny to watch... and no zunni I paid no money for F911 and will not pay any attention to this movie either... lol

[George Gervin's Afro]

Blah, blah, blah...

So, just who does the CIA and DoD turn to when they want a national security threat surveilled domestically? That's right class, the FBI.

So, just what did the Gorelick wall do? That's right class, it prevented the FBI from sharing national security intelligence information with the law enforcement branch of the same agency. So, while you had the law enforcement branch in possession of some of the dots leading up to 9-11, you had another section of the FBI in possession of intelligence information that would have allowed the dots to be connected by the law enforcement side.

Able Danger is the prime example of how Gorelick's wall intefered with the detection of 9-11.

Oh Yoni we are so easily manipulated:


While the truth remains unclear, Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) and Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer have recently suggested that Shaffer's classified military intelligence unit Able Danger identified Atta more than a year before the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks but was unable to relay that information to the FBI.
But if Able Danger did in fact identify Atta, the Gorelick memo and the subsequent 1995 Clinton administration guidelines based on it did not prevent the group from sharing that information with intelligence agencies or law enforcement officials. As former Attorney General John Ashcroft noted in his testimony before the 9-11 Commission, the Gorelick memo provided the "basic architecture" for the 1995 guidelines established by then-Attorney General Janet Reno that formalized rules for intelligence sharing that were already in place. But, as the 1995 guidelines clearly state, the Gorelick memo and the guidelines applied only to intelligence sharing "between the FBI and the Criminal Division" within the Justice Department, not a military unit established by the Defense Department:
SUBJECT: Procedures for Contacts Between the FBI [intelligence/counterintelligence functions] and the Criminal Division Concerning Foreign Intelligence and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations
The procedures contained herein, unless otherwise specified by the Attorney General, apply to foreign intelligence (FI) and foreign counterintelligence (FCI) investigations conducted by the FBI, including investigations related to espionage and foreign and international terrorism. The purpose of these procedures is to ensure that FI and FCI investigations are conducted lawfully, and that the Department's criminal and intelligence/counterintelligence functions are properly coordinated.
9-11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow also clearly noted during the commission's hearings that the "wall" applied only to the Justice Department: "Over time, the wall requirement came to be interpreted by the Justice Department, and particularly the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as imposing an increasingly stringent barrier to communications between FBI intelligence agents and criminal prosecutors."
As is evident from the language of the Gorelick memo itself, it didn't apply to Able Danger. But in response to growing misinformation on the topic in The Washington Times, former Republican senator Slade Gorton, a 9-11 Commission member, specifically addressed and debunked the theory that Gorelick's memo prevented intelligence sharing about Atta in an August 18 letter to the editor in the Times:
The one witness who did name Atta came to our staff shortly before the commission's report went to the printer. He said he thought he had seen something showing Atta in Brooklyn early in 2000. We knew, in fact, that Atta first arrived in the United States in June 2000 with a visa. For this and other reasons, the witness simply was not credible on this subject.
Additionally, the assertion that the commission failed to report on this program to protect Ms. Gorelick is ridiculous. She had nothing to do with any "wall" between law enforcement and our intelligence agencies. The 1995 Department of Justice guidelines at issue were internal to the Justice Department and were not even sent to any other agency. The guidelines had no effect on the Department of Defense and certainly did not prohibit it from communicating with the FBI, the CIA or anyone else.Some online commentators also observed that Gorelick's memo could not have blocked intelligence sharing by Able Danger. For example, Slate.com's Mickey Kaus noted on August 16 that "the 'wall' codified in Gorelick's famous 1995 memo didn't apply to the Pentagon, only to the FBI." Even John Hinderaker of the conservative weblog Power Line similarly do ented on August 17:
Gorelick's memo is limited in scope; it limits the prosecutors' ability to get information from the FBI's counterintelligence division. It would not have covered the situation at issue in Able Danger, that is, information gathered by military intelligence.


Next..

[George Gervin's Afro]

if you don't want to watch it... watch something else... people on the left act like people are going to be forced to watch this movie by some great coordinator in the sky.... lol... it's so f***ing funny to watch... and no zunni I paid no money for F911 and will not pay any attention to this movie either... lol

I agree just don't watch it if you think you'll have a problem with it. I do find it rather coincedental that the Consrevative movement was 'selectively' outraged whne the CBS Reagan miniseries came out... we had people coming out of the woodwork stating that some of the things portrayed in the moive weren't accurate and they were aware of this because they were present when these vents happened. We now have Democrats coming out of the woodwork saying the same things "I was there and it that's not the way it happened", or " I did not say this"..etc.. and cons suddenly have a problem with it..yes some conservatives are so blinded by their hatred ( ) they are oblivious to the fact that they are blatant hypocrites..

This for people like Yoni who want to treat this fictionalized account as fact concerning the Clintons. To then turn around and use the docudrama as some sort of reference when trying to bloody up Bill Cinton. I will take a line from my conservative brothers "Clinton is not running anymore"


STATEMENT from ABC Entertainment on "The Path to 9/11"
“The Path to 9/11” is not a do entary of the events leading to 9/11. It is a dramatization, drawn from a variety of sources including the 9/11 Commission Report, other published materials, and personal interviews. As such, for dramatic and narrative purposes, the movie contains fictionalized scenes, composite and representative characters and dialogue, and time compression. No one has seen the final version of the film, because the editing process is not yet complete, so criticisms of film specifics are premature and irresponsible. The attacks of 9/11 were a pivotal moment in our history, and it is fitting that the debate about the events related to the attacks continue. However, we hope viewers will watch the entire broadcast of the finished film before forming an opinion about it.

[boutons_]

"fitting that the debate about the events related to the attacks continue"

.... which is why ABC creates Democratic "events" that never happened and that place 100% of the blame for WTC on out-of-office Dems, and leaves out the Repug events that really did happen when the Repugs were responsible for defending the USA, but failed to defend the USA.