Path to 9/11

13 posts / 0 new
Last post
Path to 9/11

Bit early for discussion on this, being as it hasn't aired yet (BBC2 Sunday and Monday nights) - but I've been checking up in various places to see what previewing reactions have been. Generally scathing. - 'twisted', 'totally inaccurate', 'factually shaky', politically inflammatory' are just a selection from sources that wouldn't normally be regarded as sensationalist. One critic whose views I normally respect, writing on the IMDB, calls it 'despicable' and 'history rewritten for political gain'.
The most telling reaction came, I think, from the writer and producer. They said their goal was not to make a documentary. As if that absolves them from any responsibility. The mini-series is meant to be based on the report of the 9/11 Commission - but the small print on the credits shows that several books on the subject were also used as source material.
We can only reserve judgement.
One other point, though, is that it's been made by ABC (the other one!), which is owned by the ultra-conservative Disney Corporation. A disclaimer from ABC, acknowledging some of the factual inaccuracies, dismisses them as "composite and representative characters and time compression . . . for dramatic purposes."
As Tom Shales of The Washington Post remarked: "How much more drama does 9/11 need?"

'One other point, though, is that it's been made by ABC (the other one!), which is owned by the ultra-conservative Disney Corporation.' I bet Daffy Duck will portray a hijacker cos he looks Asian. jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

 

So who would Goofy portray? Let me guess...
Goofy as Bush Pluto as Blair Donald Rumsfeld played by...? ~ www.fabulousmother.com
Enjoyed watching it tonight. Then it was straight over to national geo for 'bin laden's spy'. Which was just as good. Now..erm...I might see what's on Bravo. If there's nothing there I suppose it's babestation. There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennet

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Caught the end of it, didn't like it much. Mainly because I am uncomfortable with the idea of people dramatising these events for the purpose of entertainment. Also because it was missing some important events that I knew about. I doubt we'll get the famous 'you've covered your ass' quote tonight. That said, some of it, particuarly the afgahnistan battle scenes and some bits set in Africa, looked very impressive, and obvioulsy on a limited budget.

 

According to the Independent "The "war on terror" - and by terrorists - has directly killed a minimum of 62,006 people, created 4.5 million refugees and cost the US more than the sum needed to pay off the debts of every poor nation on earth. " "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

 

In the absence of slimy googlmeister mykle, I feel obliged to post a report in honour of his blessing us with the non-appearance of his name on the forum. Isn't it lovely? Anyway, here's Bill Clinton's reaction to the programme; ************************************************************************************* MSN today. Clinton 'furious' at 9/11 programme Bill Clinton is reported to be furious over a US TV programme on the events leading up to the September 11 attacks, which he says misrepresents his pursuit of Osama bin Laden. He has demanded the programme is changed or dropped. The former US president wrote to ABC boss Bob Iger complaining about the network's mini-series The Path to 9/11, according to the New York Post. The newspaper said Mr Clinton refuted fictionalised scenes he claimed insinuated he was too distracted by the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal to care about bin Laden. He was also angered by the suggestion that a top adviser pulled the plug on CIA operatives who were close to catching the al Qaida leader, and he disputed a scene portraying the then-Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, as tipping off Pakistani officials that a US raid was coming, giving terrorists a chance to flee. "The content of this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has the duty to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely," the four-page letter reportedly said. Written by Bruce Lindsey, head of the Clinton Foundation, and top Clinton lawyer Douglas Bond, it accused the drama of "bias" and a "fictitious rewriting of history that will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans". The five-hour series, which dramatises the decade before the attacks, is set be shown on Sunday and Monday nights. It will also be shown on BBC2 in the UK. ABC's entertainment division told the Washington Post a disclaimer would point out it was a dramatisation not a documentary and that it contained "fictionalised scenes." *****************************************************************************************

 

Who needs truth when we have television? "Just gimmie the truth" John Lennon Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org

" I only got bullets" Mark Chapman

 

I didn't see it because I refuse to watch any more footage about 9/11. Al Qaida deliberately chose a highly spectacular method of murder so that they would get as much media coverage as possible. Most terrorist attacks are committed at the beginning of the news day (also commuter time I give you that) so that they get as much PR as possible. (Al Qaida reportedly has a PR dept) I don't believe it was a coincidence that the July London bombers targetted a bus, they knew that you wouldn't have TV cameras down the underground tunnels for a very long time but a bus, symbolic of London and highly visible, would be all over the worlds news channels within seconds of detonation. Surely documentaries like this one just do their job for them time and again. A documentary about resolving issues, about negotiating and about how the US and its allies were looking inwards, not outwardly war mongering - now THAT I would watch.
Good point, Rachel (How you doing, btw? Not seen you around here in ages.) It doesn't matter how often the program makers include the caveat, fictionalised scenes etc., once it's seen on film, it'll be absorbed as fact. I remember having a discussion about the Vietnam war with a friend once. He said, but the evil bastards even played russian roulette with their prisoners! Er, no - that was a film. ~ www.fabulousmother.com
That's a good point, 2Lou. People just do not realise how easily the media can manipulate them and their views. That's why ABC's disclaimer is so disingenuous. I didn't see it either.
Topic locked