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.
ABC, meanwhile, is tip-toeing away from the film's version of events. In a statement, the network said the miniseries "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."


tiptoeing around the clinton legacy is fair payback for tiptoeing around the reagan legacy.
i saw this in a south park two-parter, also. but i doubt manatees wrote the 9-11 docu-drama.
Posted by: rwilymz | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 03:46 PM
Conservatives stopped the miniseries "The Reagans" so good for the Dems if they give ABC/Disney hell. The writer was on tAlk radio saying he totally made up the berger scene and it wasn't even in the script. OOPS...
Posted by: issac | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 03:49 PM
"he totally made up the berger scene "
Yeah? and?
How much of Saving Private Ryan was real? How much of United 93?
Oh, nobody survived, and the cockpit voice recorder only recorded the voices in the cockpit? So nobody knows?
Gosh, so you think that maybe the **hollywood writers** made it up? Ya think?
Whoa, he totally made up the berger scene! Wow. He should be, like a **hollywood writer** or something.
Posted by: rwilymz | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 03:57 PM
the clinton legacy
That's an oxymoron. He'd need to have one to tip toe around. Which is what this is all about. Idiot hasn't figured out that if you're searching for your legacy 6 years out of office, you don't have one, not one worthy of note, anyway.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 04:00 PM
Clinton made many "factual" errors did he not? Spike Lee's movie about Katrina only tells the story of the black people in New Orleans. What about the white people of New Orleans and all the people of the Miss. Gulf Coast? He left all those out.
Posted by: nova | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 04:20 PM
Perhaps al-Qaedas' new video release is their version of the path to 9/11- feeling a little left out- after all it was their idea. Osama is screaming -get my lawyer!
Posted by: splashtc | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 05:07 PM
Actually what the writer said was that Sandy Berger did not slam the phone down. Sandy didn't slam the phone, but the actor did and it played well in the dailies so they kept it.
Posted by: Peejz | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 06:40 PM
Democrats: People who remorselessly attack the leaders of their country for pursuing a war for which they voted but who cry like babies when the spotlight is turned on their gross neglect that got us into this mess in the first place.
Posted by: Terry Gain | Thursday, September 07, 2006 at 09:00 PM
elections are coming soon. do you feel safe in the USA? 5 years and no attack here is the good news. and also gas prices are way down. and going down more. all good news for Republican candidates.
Posted by: nova | Friday, September 08, 2006 at 08:48 AM
The gross neglect that got us to our current position transcends party line, and all shades of ideology within party line.
"Gross neglect" includes the desperate, braying self-serving, as well. The concept of "we need this for political purposes, so we'll say it even if it's false".
The gross neglect includes Reagan turning tail in Lebanon in '83 instead of flattening Hezbollah, anyone who looked like Hezbollah, and the camels they rode in on.
The gross neglect includes the first Bush administration failing to support the Shi'a uprising in '92 -- as we promised, and which might very well have forestalled any current occupation of Iraq.
The gross neglect includes eight years of Clinton administration refusing to have competent military advisors in his Cabinet, refusing to take the sound military advice he *was* getting, and for treating the US military as if it were a flaming bag of dog poo he could leave on the neighborhood bully's front porch and giggle behind the bushes about. If Clinton can't be militarily knowledgeable or competent, he can hire people who are; he didn't.
The gross neglect includes rejoining acts of war taken against the US during those eight Clinton years with lawyers [WTC '93, embassy bombings, Khobar Towers], or with nothing [USS Cole].
The gross neglect includes Democrats who gleefully rallied around the flag during Clinton's years claiming Iraq was part and parcel of the islamist terror front, supported undertaking military dog poo actions against same for ditto, but then claimed their fingers were really crossed the whole time as soon as the next Bush took office, just so they could contradict the position they held not one week earlier.
The gross neglect includes the younger Bush for being virtually incapable of articulating what is, frankly, basically sound foreign policy with anything but platitudes and posturing. If Bush can't be a charismatic public speaker, he can hire someone who is; he didn't.
Posted by: rwilymz | Friday, September 08, 2006 at 09:05 AM
I have a problem with a movie that is supposed to be based on facts displaying untruths. The reason for this is there are folks out there that will watch the movie and take everything in it as fact. I don't care how many times you tell someone it's not real, it's not true... if they see it they will believe it for years to come.
I'll probably be slammed for this, but it's like those Americans that believe we are in the war in Iraq soley as retribution for 9/11.
Posted by: jadensmokes | Friday, September 08, 2006 at 10:37 AM
The problem isn't a movie about an actual historical event being inaccurate, that happens all the time, JFK, The Libertine...
The problem is the faux and misleading nomenclature of "DocuDrama" which seeks to give the movie a fake sense of importance, to mislead the viewer that its TRUE, it is more than just a movie, see, its a DOCUdrama, when in reality its a movie given a pretentious title that means nothing and allows the producers to create "drama" while failing to conform to the rules of a documentary.
Posted by: xxx | Friday, September 08, 2006 at 10:59 AM
xxx: yes you have gotten it right. this show will be neither fact or fiction. go figure.
Posted by: nova | Friday, September 08, 2006 at 11:32 AM