The Path to 9/11
Posted by Moonage on 07 Sep 2006 | Tagged as: Conspiracy Theories
Acording to IMDB, which I respect as being about as non-partisan as a database can get, "The Path to 9/11" is a drama. A drama does not invoke any expectations of accuracy. However, that hasn’t stopped every person involved with the Clinton administration from condemning the "drama" as being inaccurate. That also hasn’t concerned the Center for American Progress from launching a protest campaign against ABC regarding the accuracy of this "drama". ( We’ll just ignore the fact the leader of that organization is a former Clinton aide as well ). And several Democrat representatives are criticizing ABC as well.
What I want to know, is why didn’t all those same people feel compelled to criticize Michael Moore for all the inaccuracies in "Fahrenheit 9/11", a "documentary"? Or for that matter, Al Gore for all the inaccuracies in "An Inconvenient Truth", another "documentary".
Huh? Why is that? Are the only "inaccuracies" they’re concerned with are the ones that point out that between 1993 and 2001 the US was repeatedly attacked by Osama Bin Laden and regardless of the individual actions of everyone in the Clinton Administration, NOTHING WAS DONE? Pissing over individual details in this movie is irrelevent. That fact is Osama said he was going to blow up the Towers, he tried more than once, and nothing was done to stop him. Nothing. Trying to dump this in someone else’s lap by bitch-slapping anyone who points out that NOTHING WAS DONE will only work for so long. Over time, when the Clintons have faded into obscurity, and our grandkids are examing the history of the US, they’ll only know that Osama Bin Laden attacked the US several times in the 90’s, and WE DID NOTHING UNTIL AFTER CLINTON LEFT OFFICE.
That fact can never be changed no matter how many "documentaries" are made.
No Comments »
