Posted on 09/09/2006 9:03:27 AM PDT by finnman69
On Friday evening, Bill Clinton's lawyers sent a new letter to ABC chief Bob Iger demanding that ABC yank "The Path to 9/11." We've obtained a copy of the letter, and it reads in part: "As a nation, we need to be focused on preventing another attack, not fictionalizing the last one for television ratings. `The Path to 9/11' not only tarnishes the work of the 9/11 Commission, but also cheapens the fith anniversary of what was a very painful moment in history for all Americans. We expect that you will make the responsible decision to not air this film." Full text of the letter after the jump.
Dear Bob,
Despite press reports that ABC/Disney has made changes in the content and marketing of "The Path to 9/11," we remailn concerned about the false impression that airing the show will leave on the public. Labelng the show as "fiction" does not meet your responsibility to the victims of the September 11th attacks, their families, the hard work of the 9/11 Commission, or to the American people as a whole.
At a moment when we should be debating how to make the nation safer by implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, "The Path to 9/11" calls into question the accuracy of the Commission's report and whether fabricated scenes are, in fact, an accurate portrayal of history. Indeed, the millions spent on the production of this fictional drama would have been better spent informing the public about the Commission's actual findings and the many recommendations that have yet to be acted upon. Unlike this film, that would have been a tremendous service to the public.
Although our request for an advance copy of the film has been repeatedly denied, it is all too clear that our objections to "The Path to 9/11" are valid and corroborated by those familiar with the film and intimately involved in its production.
-- Your corporate partner, Scholastic, has disassociated itself from this proect.
-- 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean, who served as co-executive producer on "The Path to 9/11," has stated that he raised concerns about the accuracy of several scenes in the film and that his concerns were not addressed during production.
-- Harvey Keitel, who plays the star role of FBI agent John O'Neill, told reporters yesterday that while the screenplay was presented to him as a fair treatment of historical events, he is upset that several scenes were simply invented for dramatic purposes.
-- Numerous Members of Congress, several 9/11 Commissioners and prominent historians have spoken out against this movie.
-- Indeed, according to press reports, the fact that you are still editing the film two days before it is scheduled to air is an admission that it is irreparably flawed.
As a nation, we need to be focused on preventing another attack, not fictionalizing the last one for television ratings. "The Path to 9/11" not only tarnishes the work of the 9/11 Commission, but also cheapens the fith anniversary of what was a very painful moment in history for all Americans. We expect that you will make the responsible decision to not air this film.
Sincerely,
Bruce R. Lindsey Chief Executive Officer William J. Clinton Foundation
Douglas J. Band Counselor to President Clinton Office of William Jefferson Clinton
|
Translation: Bash Bush not clinton like good little Nazis.
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Just now getting here and catching up ..this is really starting to give me the creeps.
Because then he will look like he's trying to hide something by always being on the defense and the media would eat it up
He takes his job seriously and won't allow himself to be distracted by these BS stories about him
Also .. President Bush was a history major in college .. he knows that history will be told about him in the future and about presidency and his legacy
History will tell of a strong leader .. unlike that of Clinton and Carter
This is the legal equivalent of the troops massing on the border.
The clintons are marching their lawyer soldiers as intimidation.
This is not just for ABC this is a shot across the bow of anyone who intends to cit to it.
The clintons are reminding the WIMPS of the sunday morning talk shows to SHUT UP about this.
Any show that does not discuss this on sunday has officially jumped the shark.
“You will be honored with the Clinton/MSM version. Now get back onto the reservation and enjoy the show.”
Did you possibly err in posting this to me?
There are lots of outstanding cases against the Clinton's that have been going on for years. Check out the Judicial Watch website.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/litigation.shtml
[ALEXANDER et al. v. FBI, et. al. - Judicial Watch is representing the plaintiffs in a class-action suit filed by White House employees of the Bush and Reagan administrations whose FBI files were wrongly accessed by the Clinton White House. The White House and FBI are being sued under the federal Privacy Act, while the individual defendants B Bernard Nussbaum, Craig Livingstone, Anthony Marceca and Hillary Clinton are being sued for common-law tort of invasion of privacy.]
The president has won two presidential elections without "smashing heads".
In other words, no one will every forgot and will make sure nothing in the future appears on the TV screen that is a historical treatment.
Mansoor Ijaz testified to the 9/11 Commission behind closed doors, not to the public. What were the details of THAT testimony?
Sickening, isn't it ... .
That's what I always think too. But it seems the Clintonistas will appear to risk all credibility and even legality to get their wishes, and then all they ever get if caught are hand-slappings. So over-the-top reactions are worth it to them even for tiny gains (think rolling-on-the-floor tantrums from a 4-year-old to get a small lollipop).
Sadly, you are probably correct.
"-- 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean, who served as co-executive producer on "The Path to 9/11," has stated that he raised concerns about the accuracy of several scenes in the film and that his concerns were not addressed during production. "
Totally opposite of what I heard him state 3 days ago on TV.
I wonder how they got a copy of this letter.
"I’m with the other FReepers that think something fishy is going on here. I can’t see why ABC would air something that would clearly help the Republicans. Methinks that this is a set up."
My response was to the mind numbed. It was to you in jest, as you get it....This is a set up.
Mansoor Ijaz's testimony would be the strongest indictment of the "issue them a traffic summons" approach to terrorism the Clintons employed.
Thus it must be kept from the public.
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.