Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Path To 911: Urge ABC to Resist Censorship
http://netwmd.com ^ | 9/8/06 | Andrew L. Jaffee

Posted on 09/08/2006 12:10:14 PM PDT by forty_years

"Liberals" are urging ABC to censor its planned mini-series, "The Path To 911," stating, "Accounts of advance screenings indicate that this program places primary responsibility for the attacks of 9/11 on the Clinton administration while whitewashing the failures of the Bush administration." Our Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." I don't see an exemption made for "advance screenings" by leftists. Remind you of the Islamist reaction to the Danish cartoons? Birds of a feather... If the Left doesn't like it, then it doesn't get shown? Is this what we've come to as a society?

Please explain, what is "liberal" about censoring a TV show? Such condescension towards the American people -- the Left's assumption being that Americans are too stupid to decide for themselves what happened on 911. Should the media only dish out negative coverage of Bush, but not of Clinton? Please contact ABC and urge them politely to go ahead with "The Path To 911." Here's a sample letter:

I urge you to resist calls to censor your special, "The Path To 911." Please air the mini-series as-is, and let the American people decide for themselves. 911 was a great tragedy. The last thing our country needs is less information about the event. Thank you.

ABC on-line comment form:
http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html

ABC general comments, including telephone comment line:
77 West 66th Street New York, NY 10023
General Information 212-456-7777 (comment line)
Network News desk 212-456-2700
212-456-4866 (fax) or 212-456-2795 (fax)
Email: netaudr@abc.com
Robert Iger, President
Web: www.abc.com


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 911; abc; censorship; path; pathto911; resist; urge
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-103 next last

1 posted on 09/08/2006 12:10:15 PM PDT by forty_years
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: forty_years

bttt


2 posted on 09/08/2006 12:11:07 PM PDT by shield (A wise man's heart is at his RIGHT hand; but a fool's heart at his LEFT. Ecc 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

Hundred bucks says they cave!


3 posted on 09/08/2006 12:13:50 PM PDT by patriot_wes (Infant baptism - the foundation of an unbelieving and unsaved church.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

Having sent emails to CBS demanding they cancel or heavily edit their "bio" of President Reagan I am having a hard time with this one. It does actually sound like this film has some serious shortcomings in accuracy. Clinton has a lot of real issues that can be attacked. We need to be careful we do not lower ourselves to the tactics of the Libs by supporting false programs. It weakens what is on its own a strong case against his record.


4 posted on 09/08/2006 12:14:53 PM PDT by Calvin Coollidge (The last really great president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forty_years
"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."

Of course that's true, but Congress isn't doing anything in this instance. ABC can show "Path to 9-11" or not. There's no censorship.

I don't like the abuse of the language some people are employing regarding this matter.

5 posted on 09/08/2006 12:15:38 PM PDT by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
TROLL ALERT

Let's see - you signed up four days ago, you are shilling for Clinton's point of view and you can't even spell "Coolidge."

You're pathetically transparent.

6 posted on 09/08/2006 12:17:23 PM PDT by wideawake ("The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge; darkwing104

Trolling Kitty alert!


7 posted on 09/08/2006 12:19:17 PM PDT by roaddog727 (Bullsh## doesn't get bridges built.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge

So we are to let someone else decide for us? Hmmm...


8 posted on 09/08/2006 12:19:22 PM PDT by EBH (All great truths begin as blasphemies. GB Shaw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

LOL. The other name was already taken. And if you want to support the program go right ahead. I hold Conservatives to higher standards than liberals. As for whether or not I am a troll read some of my posts and get back to me.


9 posted on 09/08/2006 12:21:05 PM PDT by Calvin Coollidge (The last really great president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
It does actually sound like this film has some serious shortcomings in accuracy.

How's this for accuracy?:

Bill Clinton on video tape in 2002:

"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

10 posted on 09/08/2006 12:21:33 PM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
Buzz off pal, _I_ am the moderate voice of reason here. I don't like it when a fictionalized acount becomes history either. So I think ABC should run disclaimers to the fact that it is a fictionalization, not hard core history.

Having said that, this response on their part shows how utterly deprived of principles that they are. The Democrats in Congress should be impeached, actually.

11 posted on 09/08/2006 12:21:40 PM PDT by Paradox (The "smarter" the individual, the greater his power of self-delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
The former President husband of someone whom everyone knows to be a candidate for US President trying to intimidate a national network is not quite the passage of a law by Congress - but it is more than just your average private citizen applying pressure.

If there is, God forbid, a Democratic Senate next year with Senator Clinton in a position of even greater power, there are many things she could do to use the power of the federal government to punish ABC.

And that is the real subtext here.

12 posted on 09/08/2006 12:22:01 PM PDT by wideawake ("The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

13 posted on 09/08/2006 12:22:15 PM PDT by fuzzy122 (GBGB [God Bless George Bush] and Our Armed Forces!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
We need to be careful we do not lower ourselves to the tactics of the Libs by supporting false programs.

That statement is so utterly stupid that I'm having trouble finding the words to say to you.

Other than to suggest that by stating this you have lowered yourself to their level.

14 posted on 09/08/2006 12:24:09 PM PDT by airborne (Fecal matter is en route to fan! Contact is imminent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge

It is actually two different things.

With Reagan, the lefties were portraying not policy but a condemnation of the man in the form of a hit piece.

With Pathway to 9/11, the lefties(they are Democrat donors but you won't see that anywhere) are portraying events and policies, not the people. This isn't a hit piece. This is facts about an event filled in with the usual dramatizations of the events leading up to 9/11.

Funny thing though. The Clintonistas are not bitching about the content. They are bitching about little things like slamming the phone down. There is a reason for that.

By removing Berger slamming down the phone, you have to change the content of the phone call. That's what the libs are trying to do. Destroy this production based on piddly things so that the content gets altered along with it.

By any chance, did you read Ann Coulter's book, Godless? Notice how no one in the RAT party criticized the fact that Coulter called them godless? They criticized her reference to four attention seeking sows with a political agenda.

By condemning Coulter, they tried to remove the content from being scrutinized.


15 posted on 09/08/2006 12:25:28 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Mediacrat - A leftwing editorialist who pretends to be an objective journalist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
It does actually sound like this film has some serious shortcomings in accuracy.

It does. Richard Clarke comes across like Bruce Willis, rather than Liberace

16 posted on 09/08/2006 12:27:05 PM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
Would threats from Goverment officials to revoke broadcasting rights of a media outlet be "attempted censorship"?
17 posted on 09/08/2006 12:27:24 PM PDT by xhrist ("You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body. " - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
As for whether or not I am a troll read some of my posts and get back to me.

OK

Liberaltarians support smoking dope..." Rubbish. I don't know a single Libertarian who supports smoking dope.

Really?

18 posted on 09/08/2006 12:27:48 PM PDT by airborne (Fecal matter is en route to fan! Contact is imminent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: patriot_wes

What'a gamble...


19 posted on 09/08/2006 12:28:33 PM PDT by johnny7 (“And what's Fonzie like? Come on Yolanda... what's Fonzie like?!”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

OK. Thats actually a pretty reasoned argument (as opposed to the foaming at the mouth comments elsewhere). I will withdraw my comment pending a closer look at the issue.


20 posted on 09/08/2006 12:28:52 PM PDT by Calvin Coollidge (The last really great president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
but Congress isn't doing anything in this instance.

This letter from democratic Congressmen sounds like an implied threat to me:

"Presenting such deeply flawed and factually inaccurate misinformation to the American public and to children would be a gross miscarriage of your corporate and civic responsibility to the law, to your shareholders, and to the nation. The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events. We urge you, after full consideration of the facts, to uphold your responsibilities as a respected member of American society and as a beneficiary of the free use of the public airwaves to cancel this factually inaccurate and deeply misguided program.

Why bring up the fact that ABC's broadcast license is bestowed or withheld at the whim of the government? Any other reason than an implied threat?

I think not.

21 posted on 09/08/2006 12:29:39 PM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: airborne

Yes... Really. Oh and if your going to post my comments please post the whole thing. Not an out of context snip.


22 posted on 09/08/2006 12:29:54 PM PDT by Calvin Coollidge (The last really great president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
The former President husband of someone whom everyone knows to be a candidate for US President trying to intimidate a national network is not quite the passage of a law by Congress - but it is more than just your average private citizen applying pressure.

Did President Clinton lose his right to free speech? If only average private citizens have free speech, how high a level can a person reach before he no longer has free speech?

If there is, God forbid, a Democratic Senate next year with Senator Clinton in a position of even greater power, there are many things she could do to use the power of the federal government to punish ABC.

Your imaginary punishments a year from now are not censorship. In a year, no one will remember this program. Heck, I hope I'm still in the running for my football pool Sunday night. Go Colts! Cover the spread! Like the overwhelming majority of Americans, I am unlikely to watch the program.

23 posted on 09/08/2006 12:31:05 PM PDT by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

Thanks for the e-mail address. I wrote and I hope all Freepers do.


24 posted on 09/08/2006 12:32:25 PM PDT by conservative blonde (Conservative Blonde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forty_years
"Accounts of advance screenings indicate that this program places primary responsibility for the attacks of 9/11 on the Clinton administration while whitewashing the failures of the Bush administration."

That's blasphemy. The media is suppose to be whitewashing the failures of the Clinton administration like they have been doing for the last 14 years.

25 posted on 09/08/2006 12:32:35 PM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
Having sent emails to CBS demanding they cancel or heavily edit their "bio" of President Reagan I am having a hard time with this one.

Three major differences:

1) Reagan was totally disabled at the time and not far from death's door. (If Clinton was suffering from a fatal disease, there might be some merit in not wanting this shown. - of course one could argue that Clinton IS suffering from a disease)

2) The Reagan movie WAS shown - albeit on Showtime instead of CBS - but it still was shown without "edits".

3) No Republican congressmen sent implied threats to CBS about their broadcast license.

26 posted on 09/08/2006 12:35:43 PM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

To late!The media reports they are making the changes.


27 posted on 09/08/2006 12:37:33 PM PDT by INSENSITIVE GUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge

Posted by Calvin Coollidge to ghostmonkey
On News/Activism 09/03/2006 1:02:13 AM EDT · 34 of 220

Clearly you have no clue what Marxism is about and your just tossing the word around as sort of pejorative. SO let me adress some of your points. You use the term "Liberaltarians." Thats very clever. Did you think of that all by yourself?

Modern day liberals (as opposed to the classical use of the term) support large governments that tries to tell people how to live their lives. I see no difference between either of the two parties currently in Washington on this point except which aspects of our lives you want to regulate. And one other minor difference. Democrats support big government and high taxes to pay for it. Republicans support big government and big debt to avoid paying for it.

"Liberaltarians support smoking dope..."
Rubbish. I don't know a single Libertarian who supports smoking dope. I (and most libertarians) do believe however that you have a God given right to be stupid if you wish, as long as society doesn't have to pay for your stupidity.

"...murdering unborn children..."
Thats a tough one. Many Libertarians do support that. I do not. To me abortion violates the most basic of libertarian principals. Your rights end when they intrude on someone else's. The Right to Life being foremost among those rights.

"... the homosexual agenda..."
Again your ignorance betrays you. We do NOT support any such thing. We believe that we (and you) have no right to impose our morality by legislation on others. What someone does in private with another consenting adult is between them and God. Its none of my business. And frankly its none of yours either. When the homos try to force by law or government action acceptance of their perverted (thats my private opinion) lifestyle on me or you or anyone else we oppose them.

"...destroying the moral foundations of the country..."
By which you mean the morals that you happen to think everyone else should abide by. Enough said.

"...judicial activism (provided that it benefits the liberaltarian agenda)..."
LMAO!!! Exactly how many libertarians have been appointing judges in this country? The only judicial activism that I have seen is by a court that has over the last half century been hell bent on aggrandizing the powers of the government to promote the interests of whichever of the two political parties happens to have been naming Supreme Court Justices. If you believe otherwise please give specific examples and not a lot of hot air.

"...illegal immigration..."
I have never met a Libertarian who supports illegal immigration. But if they did they are as entitled to their opinion as you are. Thats another difference between libertarians and GOPers and DU types. When we don't agree with you we will tell you but we won;t call you names generally or resort to childish tantrums. In fact we strongly believe in your right to spout your foolish invective.

"You also have the little matter of the two articles I posted where liberaltarians openly cheer for demonrats, and say that they prefer the company of liberals to conservatives."

Well actually you said Marxists not Democrats. And while you may equate the two (another example of your ignorance) I do not. As for preferring the company of one or the other thats one man's opinion. I generally am more comfortable around Republicans (excepting those in public office) since we tend to share the same outlook on things culturally politically much more so than Democrats. But to each their own.



Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies


28 posted on 09/08/2006 12:37:55 PM PDT by airborne (Fecal matter is en route to fan! Contact is imminent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: patriot_wes

They are going to cave soooooo deep Osama will be able to hide there! Hillary, Bill, and the Demstreet Media are all digging together on this one!


29 posted on 09/08/2006 12:39:09 PM PDT by outofsalt ("If History teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: airborne

Yep. Those are my words. I stand by them.


30 posted on 09/08/2006 12:40:05 PM PDT by Calvin Coollidge (The last really great president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge

Nice try for a dim plant.

LLS


31 posted on 09/08/2006 12:41:00 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tokra

Your points are good. See my 20


32 posted on 09/08/2006 12:41:37 PM PDT by Calvin Coollidge (The last really great president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

Should the network choose to change its tactics or pull the program based on Democrat whiners, that will pretty much be the end of that network on my television.


33 posted on 09/08/2006 12:41:59 PM PDT by AbeKrieger (Liberals are the Mongol herds destroying America from within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

Already got forwarded an email appeal from moveon.org to petition the networks to cave in.


34 posted on 09/08/2006 12:42:22 PM PDT by weegee (Remember "Remember the Maine"? Well in the current war "Remember the Baby Milk Factory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Harry Reid saying that their "license" may be in jeopardy IS a threat.


35 posted on 09/08/2006 12:43:12 PM PDT by weegee (Remember "Remember the Maine"? Well in the current war "Remember the Baby Milk Factory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: weegee

I added this text: "American families are watching the actions of ABC network very closely. My decision to watch programming and support your sponsors depend ENTIRELY on the actions taken by your network over the next 4 days."


36 posted on 09/08/2006 12:45:34 PM PDT by AbeKrieger (Liberals are the Mongol herds destroying America from within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: All

www.vote.com sends your vote on the movie to ABC.
Last I checked 84 % voted for showing the movie.


37 posted on 09/08/2006 12:45:59 PM PDT by hubno (hub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

Just listened to that horse's @ss O'realy carrying water for Bubba...."they can't show it if the Clintonistas say it isn't true"

What a rageing crock of sh*t!


38 posted on 09/08/2006 12:48:03 PM PDT by newcthem (Brought to you by the INFIDEL PARTY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge

As other poster notes, the Reagan smear was a trashy attempted character assassination of an honorable man on death's door, and this covers the run-up to a very serious war that is controversial (wish it weren't). Those of us grassroots people who acted against it targeted the advertisers, who I assume made their concerns kinown to the network. Here we have a National Socialist Rat leadership threatening ABC. Top down this time. We need to have these issues exposed for the good of the country.


39 posted on 09/08/2006 12:51:37 PM PDT by Ilky Hucktar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
It does actually sound like this film has some serious shortcomings in accuracy.

I think the accuracy considerations have come with the heightened attention. Historical figure X did not actually say Y. Quite a different circumstance than a Reagan documentary that I understand was scathingly pointed from beginning to end.

Even if all the tweaking possible got done, the Left in this country will still be up in arms over the mini. This is because what they believe is the truth is not the truth. They believe with all their tiny hearts that Clinton Administration inaction is blameless, and all evil comes from the Bush Administration. Their being so wrong is what makes their protests not on the same par with the protests of the Reagan thing.

40 posted on 09/08/2006 12:52:22 PM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge

Democrat for Censorship


41 posted on 09/08/2006 12:52:51 PM PDT by PajamaTruthMafia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
Did President Clinton lose his right to free speech?

No, he's using it right now in a very irresponsible fashion - a fashion which is a veiled threat to other people's freedom of speech.

As another poster pointed out, the Senate minority leader is now threatening their broadcaster's license.

42 posted on 09/08/2006 12:54:07 PM PDT by wideawake ("The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
hey new guy,

Awful fair minded of you to be cautious here...you sound like a tepid moderate.

Personally, notwithstanding the liberal bias of ABC, I will not be watching the show...

Two reasons:
It has already characterized itself as "fictionalized."
If it is redacted to suit the dims, that in and of itself makes it a lie.

43 posted on 09/08/2006 12:55:01 PM PDT by Positive (Nothing is sadder than to see a beautiful theory murdered by a gang of brutal facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
Yep. Those are my words. I stand by them.

And I stand by mine.

44 posted on 09/08/2006 12:56:18 PM PDT by airborne (Fecal matter is en route to fan! Contact is imminent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
they are talking about pulling licenses of the stations that air the program
45 posted on 09/08/2006 12:57:26 PM PDT by bdfromlv (Leavenworth hard time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge

IB4TZ!

Having NOT sent emails to CBS on the Reagan bio, I had absolutely NO problem telling Mickey Mouse and his friends not to cave.

Might I suggest "Dereliction of Duty" by Lt. Col. "Buzz" Patterson for the true story of Clinton and bin Laden. The man was ONLY carrying the nuclear football for about 2 or 3 years in the mid-90s.


46 posted on 09/08/2006 1:00:38 PM PDT by ssaftler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: patriot_wes

million says they cave..ABC is in bed with the Liberal Dems ..We all know that ..It's fine ot slander Bush day in day out .But , His Highness Klinton..NEVER...He will rewrite his own history and the sheep will follow.


47 posted on 09/08/2006 1:00:51 PM PDT by sonic109
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: forty_years

Thanks for the info. I just sent them my email. I urge everyone to do the same.


48 posted on 09/08/2006 1:01:05 PM PDT by jaycee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airborne

Wonderful thing about a free country. Ain't it?


49 posted on 09/08/2006 1:03:35 PM PDT by Calvin Coollidge (The last really great president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Coollidge
Newt Gingrich was on Greta Van Susteren last night. He stressed the fact that this movie was fiction. Then he said was is at the heart of the issue: "If the Clinton Administration had been as aggressive about going after Bin Laden as they have against this movie, we would have been better off today."

It is this central failure of the Clinton Administration that could have prevented that fateful day on September 11th. It is one element of the overall failure of the Clintoon Administration to take Islamo-fascist terrorism seriously. It almost make one wonder if somehow the Clinton Administration and the DemonRATs were on the take from the states that sponsor terrorists.
50 posted on 09/08/2006 1:04:44 PM PDT by jonrick46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson