The Path To 9/11 - made for TV movie

Chat about anything and everything... (well almost anything) Whether it be the front porch or the pot belly stove or news of interest or a topic of your liking, this is the place to post it.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#41 Postby Lindaloo » Sat Sep 09, 2006 10:35 pm

Brent wrote:I just was flipping channels and caught a Colonel on FNC who worked under Clinton(the nuclear football from 1996-1998). He has seen the movie and said it was actually very kind to Clinton but was pretty hard on President Bush(especially Condi Rice).


Ah good ole ABC, told y'all. :D
0 likes   

User avatar
stormtruth
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 651
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 4:15 pm

#42 Postby stormtruth » Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:32 am

Lindaloo wrote:
Stratosphere747 wrote:Documentary/dramatization....

Either way, misinformation will continue to be presented and many of those watching will no doubt say "I knew it" when in all actuality, they know little to anything at all, with respect to the events leading up to "The Path to 9/11."

Sadly the general American public feeds off this kind of sensualistic type of movie making.


I have the ability as do most people to decipher which is truth and which is fiction. Please do not pass judgement on me.

artist, you are speaking of a few on here that stated Michael Moore's film was free speech. lol. Guess the same rules do not apply to middle ground?


If they do show this one on tv then they are really opening the door to showing Moore's film on tv as well or new films that are based on some of the wilder conspiracy theories. Maybe that is ABCs secret goal -- to make all sorts of 911 docudramas over the years to make $.
0 likes   

User avatar
southerngale
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Posts: 27418
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 1:27 am
Location: Southeast Texas (Beaumont area)

#43 Postby southerngale » Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:47 am

Lindaloo wrote:
Brent wrote:I just was flipping channels and caught a Colonel on FNC who worked under Clinton(the nuclear football from 1996-1998). He has seen the movie and said it was actually very kind to Clinton but was pretty hard on President Bush(especially Condi Rice).


Ah good ole ABC, told y'all. :D


I don't know how you comment on this without being political, hmmm...I'll try. When ONE has the chance to kill a terrorist leader and one CHOOSES not to, it is very hard not to put blame on that one when said terrorist leader later commits despicable events to innocent people.
0 likes   

User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#44 Postby Lindaloo » Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:02 pm

stormtruth wrote:
Lindaloo wrote:
Stratosphere747 wrote:Documentary/dramatization....

Either way, misinformation will continue to be presented and many of those watching will no doubt say "I knew it" when in all actuality, they know little to anything at all, with respect to the events leading up to "The Path to 9/11."

Sadly the general American public feeds off this kind of sensualistic type of movie making.


I have the ability as do most people to decipher which is truth and which is fiction. Please do not pass judgement on me.

artist, you are speaking of a few on here that stated Michael Moore's film was free speech. lol. Guess the same rules do not apply to middle ground?


If they do show this one on tv then they are really opening the door to showing Moore's film on tv as well or new films that are based on some of the wilder conspiracy theories. Maybe that is ABCs secret goal -- to make all sorts of 911 docudramas over the years to make $.


As I said, Moore is just downright pathetic. His film is based on nothing but pure hatred. I commend the network for not showing how much an American can truly hate their own country.
0 likes   

User avatar
stormtruth
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 651
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 4:15 pm

#45 Postby stormtruth » Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:15 pm

Lindaloo wrote:
stormtruth wrote:
Lindaloo wrote:
Stratosphere747 wrote:Documentary/dramatization....

Either way, misinformation will continue to be presented and many of those watching will no doubt say "I knew it" when in all actuality, they know little to anything at all, with respect to the events leading up to "The Path to 9/11."

Sadly the general American public feeds off this kind of sensualistic type of movie making.


I have the ability as do most people to decipher which is truth and which is fiction. Please do not pass judgement on me.

artist, you are speaking of a few on here that stated Michael Moore's film was free speech. lol. Guess the same rules do not apply to middle ground?


If they do show this one on tv then they are really opening the door to showing Moore's film on tv as well or new films that are based on some of the wilder conspiracy theories. Maybe that is ABCs secret goal -- to make all sorts of 911 docudramas over the years to make $.


As I said, Moore is just downright pathetic. His film is based on nothing but pure hatred. I commend the network for not showing how much an American can truly hate their own country.


Oh, I didn't think it had anything to do with Americans hating their country. It was more about Iraq and big business than 9/11.
0 likes   

User avatar
P.K.
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 5149
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: Watford, England
Contact:

#46 Postby P.K. » Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:16 pm

Right well the start states it is a dramatisation and some scenes have been fictionalised, only 15 minutes in so far though.
0 likes   

User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#47 Postby Lindaloo » Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:27 pm

One American's view, stormtruth, ONE.
0 likes   

User avatar
Tstormwatcher
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 3086
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:31 pm
Location: New Bern, NC

#48 Postby Tstormwatcher » Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:35 pm

southerngale wrote:
Lindaloo wrote:
Brent wrote:I just was flipping channels and caught a Colonel on FNC who worked under Clinton(the nuclear football from 1996-1998). He has seen the movie and said it was actually very kind to Clinton but was pretty hard on President Bush(especially Condi Rice).


Ah good ole ABC, told y'all. :D


I don't know how you comment on this without being political, hmmm...I'll try. When ONE has the chance to kill a terrorist leader and one CHOOSES not to, it is very hard not to put blame on that one when said terrorist leader later commits despicable events to innocent people.


Or when another one lets said terrorist go by focusing on one nation that had nothing to do with said attack.
0 likes   

JTD
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 1558
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:35 pm

#49 Postby JTD » Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:39 pm

Beyond scary. :eek:
0 likes   

User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#50 Postby Lindaloo » Sun Sep 10, 2006 3:26 pm

Tstormwatcher wrote:
southerngale wrote:
Lindaloo wrote:
Brent wrote:I just was flipping channels and caught a Colonel on FNC who worked under Clinton(the nuclear football from 1996-1998). He has seen the movie and said it was actually very kind to Clinton but was pretty hard on President Bush(especially Condi Rice).


Ah good ole ABC, told y'all. :D


I don't know how you comment on this without being political, hmmm...I'll try. When ONE has the chance to kill a terrorist leader and one CHOOSES not to, it is very hard not to put blame on that one when said terrorist leader later commits despicable events to innocent people.


Or when another one lets said terrorist go by focusing on one nation that had nothing to do with said attack.



If ONE had taken out the other then we would not be in this mess. :wink:

But yeah, ONE down, several to go. :D
0 likes   

GalvestonDuck
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 15941
Age: 57
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2002 8:11 am
Location: Galveston, oh Galveston (And yeah, it's a barrier island. Wanna make something of it?)

#51 Postby GalvestonDuck » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:21 pm

I don't want to get political here, but I'm gonna say it -- There are no commercials breaks in this broadcast, are there? :lol: :wink:
0 likes   

GalvestonDuck
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 15941
Age: 57
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2002 8:11 am
Location: Galveston, oh Galveston (And yeah, it's a barrier island. Wanna make something of it?)

#52 Postby GalvestonDuck » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:35 pm

Tstormwatcher wrote:Or when another one lets said terrorist go by focusing on one nation that had nothing to do with said attack.


What does that have to do with the movie? The two are not related.

However, that doesn't mean there isn't a focus on both. It's called multi-tasking. Some leaders can do that -- focus on more than one issue at a time. Last time I checked the news, there were still efforts in place to find those responsible for 9/11, which is what this thread is about. The MSM focuses on one more than the other -- until it's time for the anniversary.
0 likes   

Brent
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 38101
Age: 37
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 10:30 pm
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Contact:

#53 Postby Brent » Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:26 pm

GalvestonDuck wrote:I don't want to get political here, but I'm gonna say it -- There are no commercials breaks in this broadcast, are there? :lol: :wink:


Nope and it sucks in a way because everytime I get up to do something I end up missing something. :lol:

I am loving this... really damaging, but we already knew about everything's that happened so far.
0 likes   
#neversummer

User avatar
x-y-no
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 8359
Age: 65
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL

#54 Postby x-y-no » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:38 am

Well, it appears that ABC edited out the part about Sandy Berger being directly on the phone with "Mike" in Afghanistan and hanging up on him ... but the left the whole rest of the nonsense in.

So you all do understand that that whole sequence is pure fantasy, right?

Neither Massoud nor the CIA were ever on the ground in the vicinity of bin Laden's camp in Afghanistan. They absolutely never had a visual sighting of him. The idea of a raid carried out by Massoud was considered, but it was nixed by George Tenet long before it was ever put into motion on the basis that it had very low probability of success. Neither Sandy Berger nor anyone else at the White House had any part in the decision. Therefore, absolutely nothing like the tense conversation where forces were on the ground waiting to grab bin Laden while White House officials dithered ever took place.

All of this is in the 9/11 report, which this docudrama claims to be based on. And many thousands of people wrote and emailed ABC with these corrections after the first reviews of the film appeared on the net. So there's no way they don't know they're lying about this.


Personally, I think this issue is too serious to accept such deliberate re-writing of history. But apparently ABC and Disney feel otherwise.

I shall not be watching ABC or any ABC affiliate, nor anything produced by Disney, for the forseeable future.
0 likes   

User avatar
j
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4382
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 1:21 pm

#55 Postby j » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:42 am

I watched it and besides having to stomach Arabs running around squaking like chickens with their heads cut off the entire movie, I enjoyed it. I thought they did a pretty good job of "implying" ONE was preoccupied with having sex with ML to give UBL the attention he deserved.

Although..I would have left in all the edited snips and let the people watching draw their own conclusions. After all, we are intelligent beings.
0 likes   

User avatar
x-y-no
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 8359
Age: 65
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL

#56 Postby x-y-no » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:35 am

On second thought ... I may need to watch one more night of ABC programming before I stop viewing them forever. I want to see if they include a scene showing George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld giving the order for forces to stand down in Tora Bora, with a flash to Bin Laden walking away unscathed toward the territory of our good old ally, Pakistan.

Because it turns out that the CIA has videotape of bin Laden making his escape ...

Intelligence officials think that bin Laden is hiding in the northern reaches of the autonomous tribal region along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. This calculation is based largely on a lack of activity elsewhere and on other intelligence, including a videotape, obtained exclusively by the CIA and not previously reported, that shows bin Laden walking on a trail toward Pakistan at the end of the battle of Tora Bora in December 2001, when U.S. forces came close but failed to capture him.
0 likes   

User avatar
x-y-no
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 8359
Age: 65
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL

#57 Postby x-y-no » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:44 am

southerngale wrote:I don't know how you comment on this without being political, hmmm...I'll try. When ONE has the chance to kill a terrorist leader and one CHOOSES not to, it is very hard not to put blame on that one when said terrorist leader later commits despicable events to innocent people.


Fair enough.

But what specific chance are you talking about, how realistic was that chance, what was the choice made and who made it?

You can't be talking about the event depicted in the film, because that never happened.
0 likes   

Brent
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 38101
Age: 37
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 10:30 pm
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Contact:

#58 Postby Brent » Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:39 am

Drudge:

FOOTBALL RATINGS DOUBLE ABC '911' FUSS FILM... MORE... 15.1 RATING/23 SHARE FOR NBC 'SUNDAY NIGHT' FOOTBALL EASILY BEATS CONTROVERSIAL ABC 'PATH TO 9-11' 8.3 RATING/12 SHARE AND CBS '9-11' DOCUMENTARY 8.2/12... DEVELOPING...
0 likes   
#neversummer

User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#59 Postby Lindaloo » Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:11 am

I believe Bin Laden is dead. Second, he probably got killed when we bombed the mountains.

Do you think those terrorists are going to admit "Hey the US killed our leader?" Um no!


93 WTC Bombing
98 African Embassy Bombing
USS Cole
Hijackers training in our flight schools.


Look at the year and then who is to blame? :roll:
0 likes   

User avatar
stormtruth
Category 2
Category 2
Posts: 651
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 4:15 pm

#60 Postby stormtruth » Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:28 am

There were definitely some invented moments in that ABC movie. They should have just followed the 9/11 commission report. There also seem to be people missing like Janet Reno -- although they did mention her name. I wonder who is playing Ashcroft in part two? Maybe ABC made a composite character out of them -> Janet Renocroft :-)

Speaking of dead terrorists I think one thing we can all agree on is that it would be really great if we could kill Ayman al-Zawahri -- he makes so many annoying audio and video tapes! :grrr:
0 likes   


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests