The Path to 9/11 Cover-ups
By Thomas Lindaman (09/09/06)
By the time you read this, ABC will either be preparing to air a docudrama titled “The Path to 9/11” based in part on the findings of the 9/11 Commission or it will have aired in part or in total. As controversial as the topic of 9/11 is, what’s interesting to me is to see the side controversies that have erupted as a result of “The Path to 9/11.”
At the top of the list of side controversies is how the Clinton Administration is portrayed in the film. Everyone from Bill Clinton to Madeline Albright to Sandy Burger are seen as ineffective or distracted by other events to effectively handle the terrorist threats that culminated in the September 11th attacks five years ago. Of course, their complaints fall on deaf ears from this commentator because, well, they were ineffective or distracted by other events, like golfing during impeachment.
In an attempt to put a little White Out on the historical record, the Clintonites are saying ABC should either edit out the offensive parts or pull the docudrama altogether. Berger, Albright, and former White House Counsel Bruce Lindsey have all weighed in with their outrage at the portrayal of the Clinton Administration in the docudrama. Both Berger and Albright have gone so far as to say that the events shown in the film didn’t happen.
Maybe you guys didn’t get the memo on this, but a “docudrama” is a dramatic retelling of events that may include elements of dramatic license, meaning not everything in the film is going to be true. If ABC had claimed “The Path to 9/11” was a documentary, you’d have a point, but they didn’t. That makes it a moot point, kids.
Some online and offline commentators have suggested the inclusion of this inflammatory information is because of pressure from conservatives to smear Clinton and his Administration. Of course, what they don’t tell you is “The Path to 9/11” is also critical of the Bush Administration. If conservatives were so hot and heavy to get Clinton, why wouldn’t they have whitewashed the Bush Administration failures? That’s as dumb as letting Bob Shrum run a Presidential campaign…wait, you guys did that. Nevermind.
This brings me to another bone of contention, that being the Democrats’ cries for historical accuracy. Notice that this cry only covers what the Clinton Administration did or did not do. No mention is made of anything the film says about the Bush Administration. In other words, Democrats are saying, “We object to the inaccuracies of the film’s portrayal of the Clinton Administration and think those parts should be removed, but the inaccuracies of the portrayal of the Bush Administration? Leave ‘em in there!” If you’re going to play the historical accuracy card, you can’t play favorites. Then again, if you were concerned about historical accuracy, you wouldn’t have let Michael Moore make “Fahrenheit 911.”
And while we’re on the topic of accuracy, I do have to take issue with conservatives calling what the Clintonites are asking ABC to do “censorship.” Censorship tends to come from governmental agencies or from high-level corporate types. Last time I checked, Clinton was neither anymore. That takes his request to expunge the film of the more controversial elements that make him look bad out of the realm of censorship and into the realm of self-serving whining. Dude, you are a former President of the United States and have women falling all over you to recreate the situation that got you impeached in the first place. You’re getting paid big bucks to show up, give a speech, and pick up a check. The least of your worries should be some made-for-TV movie. Well, except if it’s done for Lifetime.
Instead of focusing on what we don’t know about the lead-up to 9/11, let’s take a moment to recount what we do know.
- The Clinton Administration treated terrorism like jaywalking, while treating a successful computer company like it was the biggest threat to mankind.
- The FBI and CIA under both the Clinton and Bush Administrations were inept at best at responding to the needs for strong intelligence and follow-up on leads.
- The Bush Administration didn’t really do much with what little information they had when they got it from the Clinton Administration.
- “Gigli” still sucks.
There’s enough blame to go around when it comes to the lead-up to 9/11, and whitewashing one side by complaining loudly and often only serves to prove how guilty the complainers are. To paraphrase William Shakespeare, “Methinks the laddie doth protest too much. Oh, and wouldst thou tellest Clinton to pull up his breaches and cease hitting on the chubby bar wench with the pizza?”
(Printer friendly version) Email: Thomas Lindaman
