HOLY BULLSHIT- PATH TO 9/11 BROADCAST WORLD-WIDE BLITZ (Australian Promo)

Whats the buzz in the southern hemisphere?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2081154&mesg_id=2081154

In the leadup to 5th anniversary our television offerings in Melbourne are:

-Last Tuesday night, a dramatisation of the events inside the towers from viewpoint of survivors (and a few non-survivors. Full of meaningful stares and 'Thank God' moments. I think it was meant to be an uplifting insight into the human spirit, instead it came across as corny and sentimental. I kept wanting to slap them and yell 'get the hell out'.

-Sunday/Monday, The Path to 911. I'll be awaiting this with baited breath, especially hearing about the changes (corrections?) supposedly being made at this very moment before it airs in the US. It's being shown on the tackiest, most populist, commercial channel. I wonder if they already have their tape or they will include any last minute edits.

-Monday (on SBS, multiculutal broadcasting) '11"9"01' a 2002 French docu-drama. Don't know much about it.
Tuesday- Cutting edge. Canadian doco 'The secret History of 911'

-911 in Plane Sight will also be shown.

As you can see we have a pretty full dance card and I'll tape as much as I can. In general there is not a lot of buzz about 911, most people I know having moved right on. I will certainly be monitoring Path to 911 with a view to lodging complaints depending on what is shown here.

and then we will judge for ourselves.

Guess what kpete...I'm an Aussie....and Aussies dont take kindly to censorship.

As I posted in Kpete's other thread, we get this turbid grunge on Sunday and Monday, in fact we see it even before Aussie - first in the world as I understand.

Here is a copy of email I sent to local NZ TV Guide mag, you will get the picture from the text! (A modified copy of this was also sent to TVNZ):

"Hi,

Just wondering where you get your articles describing shows from!

Because the 'facts' decribing The Path to 9/11 are wrong. For instance:

Thomas H Kean was Governor of New Jersey (till 1995), NOT New York. That would be George Pataki, since 1999 (and also a Rebublican).

You quote Kean as saying (in part): "We had chances during the Clinton administration to actually get Osama bin Laden..... and didn't pull the trigger."

Wrong again:
"Starting in 1995, Clinton took actions against terrorism that were unprecedented in American history. He poured billions and billions of dollars into counterterrorism activities across the entire spectrum of the intelligence community. He poured billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. He ordered massive federal stockpiling of antidotes and vaccines to prepare for a possible bioterror attack. He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself, ramming through reforms and new procedures to address the demonstrable threat. Within the National Security Council, "threat meetings" were held three times a week to assess looming conspiracies. His National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, prepared a voluminous dossier on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, actively tracking them across the planet. Clinton raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave in the last three years of his tenure. In 1996, Clinton delivered a major address to the United Nations on the matter of international terrorism, calling it "The enemy of our generation."

"......Pervez Musharraf, pointedly refused to do anything to assist Clinton in dealing with these threats. Despite these and other diplomatic setbacks, terrorist cell after terrorist cell were destroyed across the world, and bomb plots against American embassies were thwarted. Because of security concerns, these victories were never revealed to the American people until very recently."

But,
" In Congress, Clinton was thwarted by the reactionary conservative majority in virtually every attempt he made to pass legislation that would attack al Qaeda and terrorism. His 1996 omnibus terror bill, which included many of the anti-terror measures we now take for granted after September 11, was withered almost to the point of uselessness by attacks from the right; Jesse Helms and Trent Lott were openly dismissive of the threats Clinton spoke of."

Didn't pull the trigger? Much more at http://journals.democraticunderground.com/WilliamPitt/84

This programme, written by a long time Republican Party activist, tries to re-write history and throw blame, incorrectly, on the Clinton adminstration using facts that deviate from the 9/11 report, a fact that Kean knows full well. A full roundup of the inaccuracies and comment may be found at:
http://thinkprogress.org/?tag=Path+to+911

Due to the factual errors and intentional twisting of events, the ABC has now committed to screening disclaimers throughout their airing of the mini-series pointing out that it is NOT ACTUALLY what happened in the real 9/11 scenario. Your magazine article says it IS the real story. Presuming the article was supplied by TVNZ, I hope you will also point out to them, as I have, that the ABC have altered their stance - no doubt to avoid a political backlash in the USA over being seen a overtly partisan in the runup to crucial American elections.

We should not be misleading NZ viewers either.

Thanks for your time"

I think TVNZ may be on our side, though - they are showing Mike Moore's "Fahrenheit 911" at 9.35 tonight (Saturday) ;-)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I don't think either Path to 9/11 or F9/11 would be the ideal way to go.

Path has already had to reshoot two scenes after sustainable objections
that statements made in those scenes were, to be blunt, lies (and could
therefore be subjects of legal action we can safely assume).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/08/AR2006090801576.html?sub=AR

And while Michael Moore's heart might be in the right place, he's just
a tiny little bit hysterical at times, and not the best person to give
a sober, objective viewpoint.

And should any country be screening a documentary that has been decried
as "180 degress from the truth" by the ABC's own consultant, Richard
Clarke - who as the former head of counter-terrorism to President
Clinton is in a position to know? We are subjected to all manner of
hype and manipulation by our elected leaders and their sycophantic
media barons, so when we know in advance that something is a lying
propaganda piece, we should reject it.

Why do I find myself wondering where you came from?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It's a long way down the line for anyone with an interest in 911 to still be so ignorant of the various streams of thought and theory of 911 events to be relying on what is served up on commercial TV five years later to confirm their opinions.

IMHO a far better approach is to watch, read and listen to everything (well, as far as it is possible....). Opposing viewpoint or not, factually correct or not. At least you can speak with some knowledge about what you are opposing.

I will watch Path to 911, partly because the sub-text will give information - about the motives of those who produced and financed it, what their role in the propaganda machine is.

Although there is near mass-hysteria among DU'ers in the lead-up to this piece being aired in the U.S., here in Oz (and presumably in NZ)it is a much lower key affair. Since all we know about Path is what we have read on the net from US sources, I believe it is an excercise in futility to try to prevent the program being aired here. Sure, you can write to Channel 7 but if they give a rat's arse I will be very surprised.

I believe Ozzies and Kiwis are at heart far more laconic and patient than the average US DU'er. There are plenty of people who will be all over any inaccuracies like a bloody great rash - AFTER the airing. Think Media Watch, Chaser, Crikey ....there must be more but can't think of them off the top of my head. I predict it will air to an audience who is either part of the choir, or like myself and Sonnabend, pre-primed and knowledgeable, able to pick up the BS. And the Choir - lol, who fucking cares what they think. Leave 'em to their steady diet of Murdoch news, Packer Tv and Naomi Robson.

My prediction? It will be aired in it's original form blaming Clinton. Very few in Oz or NZ will care and it will be a total gimme for the boys at Chaser.

from reputable sources.

The electoral successes of Bush, Blair and Howard to date are very
largely a result of people not bothering to check facts with sources
that are likely to give them an objective viewpoint. Path to 9/11
is not going to matter as much here as it is likely to do in the US,
but blaming Clinton for something that was entirely the responsiblity
of the Bush Administration gives ammunition to those who support Bush's
warmongering, including those in our own country. Bush can then paint
himself as the only credible warrior against terrorism, while those who
oppose him will be seen as supporters of Osama.

And we don't support Bush in any way, do we?

Those are the people I call 'the Choir', as in preaching to, and the triad of Terrormongers are well aware of who their audience is.

Matilda, take it as given than I am totally opposed to the political style of those three, how would you suggest I deal with the airing of Path to 911?

/snip:
"The series is being re-edited by American network ABC after former US president Bill Clinton and other Democrats complained the series wrongly implied Mr Clinton was inattentive to the Islamic militant threat that led to the September 11 attacks.

A TVNZ spokeswoman said the broadcaster would run whatever the ABC sent to them.

She said she understood there was a disclaimer on the programme saying it was a dramatisation, not a documentary.

TVNZ already had a version of the programme, but if it received another one before the screening time tonight, that would be run instead."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3792620a11,00.html

TVNZ is NZ state-owned main FTA channel, as discussed elsewhere they screened Mike Moore's Fahrenheit 911 on Saturday night - so someone in their programming has their finger on the button! There's been quite a few people here applying pressure as well:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/9/0939/22298

I was wondering if countries outside US would get re-cut versions.

and thought it was a "heap of crap". He knew nothing about it in advance, but this 20-year old
was aware enough to see it straight away for what it was.

My earlier posts were concerned with the tone of a certain poster who has now left us.

Your son sounds like a very intelligent young man.

Can't remember what I watched instead on Sunday but I watched the Simpsons on Cable followed by Media Watch and Denton and Al Gore on Monday during that timeslot

Apparently, according to David Dale's Tribal Mind blog in the SMH online, it didn't rate that well among the general public either.