Will ABC Trample 9/11 Dead?

The controversy over The Path To 9/11 continues to grow. This is a particularly repugnant bit of fascist-like bragging from the DNC.

Here's the good news: the suits at ABC and the Walt Disney Company have started panicking under pressure, thanks to your ferocious response to the outrageous decision to put this irresponsible miniseries on the air. But until Disney quits defending its plan to broadcast conservative propaganda -- fraudulently presented to Americans as "based on the 9/11 Commission Report" -- the company should plan to keep taking every bit of heat we dish out.

Precisely as many conservatives have long been pointing out, Liberals and many Democrats wish to pretend 9/11 never happened. They want to sweep the threat of Islamo-fascism under the carpet because they are too weak to deal with it. And as long as America remembers, Democrats can forget any chance of taking power back. That is really what this debate is about.

And if ABC buys into this pathetic bit of thought control the increasingly fascist left in America is selling, then ABC and not just the Democrats will be trampling on our 9/11 dead.

ABC must not be allowed to get away with an act of utter cowardice in the face of Democrat revisionism of a silly television docu-drama without being held to account. Someone in media has to start standing up for principle in this whole affair. And if ABC doesn't do it, it isn't just an act of appeasing weakling Democrats, it's also dishonoring our noble American dead from the entire war on terror - from before 9/11, especially from 9/11, and those fighting terrorism right on up through today.

Update via Allah: Terrorists claim 9/11 was retaliation for Bosnia.

Who was President when Clark dropped bombs from 40,000 or so feet to assist Muslims? Or didn't that happen either, according to the Dems?

Comments

[splashtc]

Seems someone at the kos group signs off as "christians for mohammad" . Is this who abc/ Disney is pandering to? What was the title of John Kasichs' book -stand for something.

[Neo]

When I came across this interview my jaw nearly dropped to the ground.

Q: I mean, isn’t it the case that this film actually does show Sandy Berger hanging up the phone in the middle of a conference call, when there are U.S. personnel whose lives are at risk on the ground, and they have bin Laden in their sights, and that really nothing like that ever happened?

KEAN: Well, the question, Shaun, is whether — whether it was Sandy Berger, or whether it was the head of the CIA? Whether the call was hung up on or whether it was totally — whether it was disrupted by a failure in communications? I mean, these are all historically, I think, open questions. But again, this is a, you know, this is a miniseries, not a documentary.

It's not like the scene that has been so upsetting never happened, but rather the detail of how the phone call ended is in dispute.

[Nathan]

Its simultaneously (1) a "silly docudrama" and (2) something that if it is not defended staunchly enough it will "dishonor" our fallen troops and 9/11 victims and "trampling our fallen dead blah blah blah" ... amazing.

Also amazing is the fact that you manage you write an entire post on this movie without even touching what is so controversial: they made up scenes out of whole cloth, for no reason, in an apparent attempt to slander and discredit the previous administration.

When the conservatives beat their chests and gnashed their teeth over the Reagan miniseries, did you call them fascists? I doubt it. . .

[Phoenix]

I read somewhere - maybe here - that the actor who plays Sandy Berger slammed the phone down when, in fact, Berger did not slam the phone down, but that the producers liked the effect and left it. Who knows.

Oh well... one thing is for sure - this is all one huge promo for the series. I bet ABC is laughing behind the scenes. Freedom of speech and all that.

It would be nice, based on the dufus response of Kean above, if they had gone to some trouble to get it right - with proof.