Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wall Street Journal)   "Path to 9/11" writer explains that he was unable to tell the story of Clinton's heroic struggle against terrorism because there wasn't one   (opinionjournal.com) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

514 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Sep 2006 at 11:31 AM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



164 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-09-18 11:35:18 AM  
Where is the party of responsibility? Where is the Contract with America? B bbbbbbb. b .b.b but Clinton....
 
2006-09-18 11:37:39 AM  
FTA: I am neither an activist, politician or partisan, nor an ideologue of any stripe.

Which is why your movie was funded by conservative groups, and this very column is appearing in the notoriously conservative WSJ editorials page.

I farking hate it when people try to piss in my face and tell me it's rain.
 
2006-09-18 11:39:47 AM  
Yes, we know Nowrasteh is a partisan hack. That was clear to anyone paying attention to this story.

It goes without saying that there's not a single reference to any of the incidents he was criticized for fabricating for the film. Only the usual Righty babble about oblique "death threats" which are oddly never detailed nor are charges brought.

Congrats to him for pulling one over on ABC. It must of been hell keeping a straight face when they asked him if the stuff he made up really happened.

"Yeah, sure." Snicker, snicker.
 
2006-09-18 11:40:34 AM  
Hey, if you can't trust a partisan hack funded by right wing lunatics to give you the straight story on the Clinton presidency, who can you trust?
 
2006-09-18 11:41:53 AM  
Allow me to save you a few minutes of your time:

"I was 100% right because most of the criticisms were made against me instead of the content."

And yes, he praises Disney/ABC for not pulling the show but makes no mention whatsoever of the scenes that were cut.
 
2006-09-18 11:42:06 AM  
oh, please.

this is on the editorials (excuse me, 'opinionjournal') page and i'm supposed to buy it as 'reality', not 'slanted viewpoint'?

sorry. wrong. please try again.
 
2006-09-18 11:43:02 AM  
For this--for not buckling to threats from Democratic senators threatening to revoke ABC station licenses--Disney CEO Rober Iger and ABC executives deserve every commendation.

I'd like a source for this if possible. Preferably something other than Powerline or LiberalsMustDie.com.
 
2006-09-18 11:45:11 AM  
To them I was an Iranian-American politically conservative Muslim. It is perhaps irrelevant in our brave new world of journalism that I was born in Boulder, Colo. I am not a Muslim or practitioner of any religion, nor am I a political conservative. What am I? I am, most devoutly, an American. I asked the reporter if this kind of labeling was a new policy for the paper. He had no response.

They never have a response. Never.

A question for mrexcess and Blathering Idjut :
Is it remotely possible that he's telling the truth?
Sometimes the truth hurts.
 
2006-09-18 11:45:13 AM  
Abagadro: Hey, if you can't trust a partisan hack funded by right wing lunatics to give you the straight story on the Clinton presidency, who can you trust?

Well, it is in the notoriously evenhanded WSJ opinions page...
 
2006-09-18 11:45:17 AM  
he was unable to tell the story of Clinton's heroic struggle against terrorism because there wasn't one so he made up a bunch of bullshiat that never happened.
 
2006-09-18 11:47:22 AM  
LiberalsMustDie.com is the only true bastion of truth left in this world. Other than the Bible of course.
 
2006-09-18 11:48:42 AM  
sigdiamond2000: I'd like a source for this if possible. Preferably something other than Powerline or LiberalsMustDie.com.

As usual, it's all faux outrage and no substance. The letter from Senate Democrats is here. [pops]
 
2006-09-18 11:49:31 AM  
i wonder why a person who claims to have been incorrectly labelled as right-wing, would then give a lengthy interview to a radical right-wing blog, while tearing into the left-wing, in order to state that he is not right-wing, just "most devoutly, an American"

surely, if he was not politically motivated and wished to make that clear, he could give a less vitriolic interview to a left-wing blog in order to clear up the problem

also, he uses the term 'hysteria' (tfa is titeld 'The Path to Hysteria') to describe the reaction of a couple people who sent him email and then in conclusion (apparently) also the actions of the terrorists who destroyed the twin towers

which seems odd to me, because surely the lesson for america of at-home political hysteria post 9/11 was of the ability of the bush administration to label everything and anything as part of the war on terror

i think that our friend is angling for a job on the right-wing chat circuit, to be honest. i don't think his motivation is political, religious or anything but $$$
 
2006-09-18 11:51:08 AM  
superdolfan1

A question for mrexcess and Blathering Idjut :
Is it remotely possible that he's telling the truth?


Considering that there are people portrayed in the movie who are still alive and were actually present during the events in question that say this guy is just making shiat up, I would say no, he's not telling the whole truth.

But, as The National Review argued so persuasively last week, it's OK to lie all you want about the Clinton administration because Sandy Berger stole documents from the National Archives.
 
2006-09-18 11:51:55 AM  
21-7-b: i wonder why a person who claims to have been incorrectly labelled as right-wing, would then give a lengthy interview to a radical right-wing blog

The Wall Street Journal?
 
2006-09-18 11:52:53 AM  
21-7-b: i wonder why a person who claims to have been incorrectly labelled as right-wing, would then give a lengthy interview to a radical right-wing blog, while tearing into the left-wing, in order to state that he is not right-wing, just "most devoutly, an American"

Sounds fair and balanced to me!
 
2006-09-18 11:53:28 AM  
Fact-checkers and lawyers scrutinized every detail, every line, every scene. There were hundreds of pages of annotations.

"I have fact checkers! I have footnotes!" is Ann Coulter's schtick.

This is just as believable as when Ann says it.

Is his next tactic to play the "I was only KIDDING!" card?
 
2006-09-18 11:53:42 AM  
Sloth_DC: The Wall Street Journal?

opinionjournal.com != Wall Street Journal

Wall Street Journal = level-headed, fact-driven, informative
opinionjournal.com = right-wing soapbox
 
2006-09-18 11:53:55 AM  
21-7-b

i think that our friend is angling for a job on the right-wing chat circuit, to be honest. i don't think his motivation is political, religious or anything but $$$

I agree wholeheartedly. I even predicted this very scenario, if I may toot my own horn.
 
2006-09-18 11:54:54 AM  
sigdiamond2000: I'd like a source for this if possible. Preferably something other than Powerline or LiberalsMustDie.com.

BigTuna: As usual, it's all faux outrage and no substance. The letter from Senate Democrats is here. [pops]

There's some pretty nice veiled threat in that there letter - Kennedy must've gotten his mafia friends to give technical advice. :)
 
2006-09-18 11:56:56 AM  
wow, and farks leftwingers complains about right-wingers being "bots".

funny...
 
2006-09-18 11:57:00 AM  
Well, why couldn't they also tell the story of Bush's heroic struggle against the book, Hop on Pop, that day?
 
2006-09-18 11:58:17 AM  
"I farking hate it when people try to piss in my face and tell me it's rain."

After years dealing with corporations, the Federal Government, and an ex spouse I'm used to getting pissed on, just don't lift my chin and tell me it's for my own good.
 
2006-09-18 11:58:35 AM  
i've seen some absolute garbage written concerning the bush administration's policy, sloth, from both sides, of course, and one of the places where i would expect to find that kind of commentary that bears the least relation to any kind of objective view of the facts is in the opinionjournal.
 
2006-09-18 12:01:42 PM  
submitter: "Path to 9/11" writer explains that he was unable to tell the story of Clinton's heroic struggle against terrorism because there wasn't one

Because even when he launched missiles at a hideout of Osama's, he was accused of wagging the dog by Republicans?
 
2006-09-18 12:02:19 PM  
Sloth_DC

There's some pretty nice veiled threat in that there letter

So it's a "veiled" threat. Gotcha.

Shut........UP

wow, and farks leftwingers complains about right-wingers being "bots".

I'm not a left-winger.

You're honestly telling me you don't think there's anything unusual about the timing/funding of this miniseries?
 
2006-09-18 12:04:16 PM  
wow, and farks leftwingers complains about right-wingers being "bots".

At least the fark leftwingers don't feel the need to assure everyone that "I'm an independant!!!!" while sucking Mr Bush's left nut.

...much like the writer of this OpinionJournal screed does.
 
2006-09-18 12:06:37 PM  
the whole thing is prima facie libel. hope that guy enjoyed his stuff while it was still his.
 
2006-09-18 12:07:04 PM  
surely 'miniseries' should have a hyphen?

i read the article, sig, and looked at the word 'miniseries' and didn't recognize it, and kinda thought it through in my head as min-iz-err-ies and thought i'll have to look that up in a minute. now that i've read your post, i can see that is mini-series :)
 
2006-09-18 12:08:09 PM  
Mr. Nowrasteh wrote the screenplay for "The Path to 9/11."

Liberal Hollywood elite??!?

Seriously, this dude was a writer on Falcon Crest. He has no experience in writing 'the truth', only fiction. I honestly believe he thinks he is non-partisan, but I believe he's incapable of writing non-fiction because he is a douche-bag screenwriter.

/from his 'biography'...His move into directing began on the independent front with 'Norma Jean, Jack, And Me', a zany comedy about a young drifter who washes up on an island and discovers that Marilyn Monroe and JFK are alive and well!
 
2006-09-18 12:10:13 PM  
Is it remotely possible that he's telling the truth?

Only if you haven't read the 911 Commission Report or watched or read about any of those hearings, then yes.
 
2006-09-18 12:10:36 PM  
here we come! with my reading and your image posting, ElPresidente, the sky is the limit!
 
2006-09-18 12:11:50 PM  
Bill_Wick's_Friend: At least the fark leftwingers don't feel the need to assure everyone that "I'm an independant!!!!" while sucking Mr Bush's left nut.

No, but a lot of them feel the need to assure everyone that "I'm an independent!!!!" while repeating the daily talking points from Kos or Moveon. I'd say about 80% of the people (here and elsewhere, both sides of the aisle) are farking sheep who wouldn't recognize an independent if it assraped them.
 
2006-09-18 12:12:11 PM  
21-7-b: i wonder why a person who claims to have been incorrectly labelled as right-wing, would then give a lengthy interview to a radical right-wing blog, while tearing into the left-wing, in order to state that he is not right-wing, just "most devoutly, an American"

It's simple. He is trying to position his political stance as the authentic, "American" position, which therefore makes the opposition not just "left-wing," but somehow anti-American.

It's the usual rhetorical BS.
 
2006-09-18 12:14:26 PM  
CLINTON -----

Developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator of anti-terrorist efforts.

Stopped the Al Qaeda millennium hijacking and bombing plots.

Stopped the planned attack to kill the Pope

Stopped the planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously

Stopped the planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters

Stopped the planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters

Stopped the planned attack to blow up the Israeli Embassy in Washington

Stopped the planned attack to blow up Boston airport

Stopped the planned attack to blow up Lincoln and Holland Tunnels in NY

Stopped the planned attack to blow up the George Washington Bridge

Stopped the planned attack to blow up the US Embassy in Albania

-- Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.). Remember wag the dog?

-- Brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.

-- Did not blame Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after Bush left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively -- and successfully -- to stop future terrorist attacks.

--Named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to TIGHTEN AIRPORT SECURITY. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF TERRORIST FUNDING. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF EXPLOSIVES USED BY TERRORISTS. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA.

-Clinton increased the military budget by an average of 14 per cent, reversing the trend under Bush I.

-Clinton tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism

-Clinton detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries

-Clinton created national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.

-Of Clinton's efforts says Robert Oakley, Reagan Ambassador for Counterterrorism: "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama"

-Paul Bremer, Bushs appointed leader (Civilian Administrator) of Iraq disagreed slightly with Robert Oakley as he believed the Clinton Administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden.

-Barton Gellman in the Washington Post put it best, "By any measure available, Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him" and was the "first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort"
 
2006-09-18 12:15:24 PM  
Sloth_DC: farking sheep

[image from snapsandbytes.co.uk too old to be available]
 
2006-09-18 12:16:07 PM  
superdolfan1

Is it remotely possible that he's telling the truth?

Only if by "telling the truth" you mean "stuck in a hole for the entire duration of Clinton's presidency".
 
2006-09-18 12:17:14 PM  
VulgarMind

You expect the evul liberal media to pick up on every little detail? You're a dreamer.
 
2006-09-18 12:17:21 PM  
No, but a lot of them feel the need to assure everyone that "I'm an independent!!!!" while repeating the daily talking points from Kos or Moveon.

If this happens at all (and, frankly, I don't know which farkers you're talking about and it's not exactly like I'm new here or don't spend much time arguing on these threads) it's rare. On the right wing, however, it seems that easily half of the bush=fanboys feel the need to loudly declare their independance. The Cheney semen on their chins, however, tells a different tale.
 
2006-09-18 12:23:03 PM  
Despite intense political pressure to pull the film right up until airtime, Disney/ABC stood tall and refused to give in. For this--for not buckling to threats from Democratic senators threatening to revoke ABC station licenses--Disney CEO Rober Iger and ABC executives deserve every commendation. Hence the 28 million viewers over two nights, and the ratings victory Monday night (little reported by the media), are gratifying indeed.

Program Rating Share
NFL Football (NBC) 15.1 23
9/11 (CBS, rerun) 8.2 12
Path to 9/11 (ABC) 8.2 12

Truthiness!
 
2006-09-18 12:24:33 PM  
2006-09-18 12:17:14 PM 2wolves [TotalFark] - You're a dreamer.

You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.

/not remotely obscure
 
2006-09-18 12:26:34 PM  
That poor sheep looks dehydrated.
 
2006-09-18 12:29:06 PM  
VulgarMind

But aside from that, what has Clinton ever done for us?
 
2006-09-18 12:29:23 PM  
Jaboobinator

it's sad that the parts of 'faith, family and flag' each seem so effective in pushing rhetoric over truth

the first (in about 1720) british prime minister (there was a paliament before, but no 'prime minister') was a guy named robert walpole (who also built 10 downing street)

at this time there were two political parties: whigs and tories. walpole was a whig who painted all of the tories as jacobites (who sought to start a rebellion) - because some of them were in the early 18th century - and so kept them out of power for decades
 
2006-09-18 12:31:00 PM  
superdolfan1
Is it remotely possible that he's telling the truth?

Given what we factually know about Clinton's attempts on Bin Laden's life, and his prosecution of terrorism generally (see Sudan bombing), no. It's partisan revisionist delusion. Maybe it's true that he hasn't seen any evidence of Clinton fighting terrorism, but that could only be because he hasn't looked.
 
2006-09-18 12:31:19 PM  
Sloth_DC: The Wall Street Journal?

Cripes. You really don't have a clue.
 
2006-09-18 12:34:51 PM  
VulgarMind
- Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.). Remember wag the dog?

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to TIGHTEN AIRPORT SECURITY. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF TERRORIST FUNDING. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF EXPLOSIVES USED BY TERRORISTS. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA.


The whole list was awesome, but these points in particular are deserving of being repeated until one of Fark's lurking neocons dares to address them.
 
2006-09-18 12:35:35 PM  
first, i completely agree and believe in everything that VulgarMind stated.. i cant even remember how many times clinton tried to kill terrorists or destroy terrorist training camps, and each time was critized by republicans, some of these same republicans who are now doing the same thing... second, does anyone remember the PDB (presidential daily brefing) that bush received BEFORE 9/11 that said that terrorists determined to strike inside U.S. using hijacked airplanes as weapons?? and what did bush do?? sit at his ranch in texas, on vacation with his cowboy hat up his arse...
the comment was also right about how bush 1 was not blamed for the first trade center bombing...

and a great timed docu-lie as well.. its getting close to election time, and the republicans are running scared
 
2006-09-18 12:41:52 PM  
VulgarMind: CLINTON -----

Developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator of anti-terrorist efforts.


Arooo? First anti-terrorism policy? No, there were other policies before Clinton.

Stopped the Al Qaeda millennium hijacking and bombing plots.

You mean the Jordanian plot that was stopped by the Jordanian police, or the LAX plot that got disrupted when the guy got nabbed by Customs, or the USS Sullivan plot which failed because the AQ guys flipped their boat, or the USS Cole plot which worked just fine? Which one did Clinton stop?

Stopped the planned attack to kill the Pope

Stopped the planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously


Clinton set the fire that exposed the evidence of the plots above to the Philippine police? Weird.

-- Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.). Remember wag the dog?

Glad those missiles were so effective.

-Of Clinton's efforts says Robert Oakley, Reagan Ambassador for Counterterrorism: "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama"

Wait, I thought you said up above that Clinton was the first President with an antiterrorism policy. How could Reagan have had an Ambassador for Counterterrorism?
 
2006-09-18 12:43:01 PM  
I have always appreciated when people try to tell me that my memory is so shiatty that I don't remember the facts that I lived through correctly. In fact,my memory is polar opposite from "what really happened".

Thank you docu-drama maker! Thank you for pointing out just how retarded me and countless other Americans were about the past. Thank you for pointing out to us that we were all lured by some Democratic Pied Piper, and that we need the sobering Republican truth given so that the evil leftist spell will be broken.
 
Displayed 50 of 164 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.