Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

The Anchoress

Home
Catholic
The Path to 9/11 – obfuscation strewn?

The Path to 9/11 – obfuscation strewn?

Last updated on: March 17, 2017 at 8:10 pm by Elizabeth Scalia

The Path to 9/11 – obfuscation strewn? 2017-03-17T20:10:56+00:00 Elizabeth Scalia

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

One of the things we all used to say about President Clinton was that he never learned that the cover-up was always worse than the scandal. Had he come out straight on Monica Lewinsky and said, “yes, I did it, it’s between me and my wife and it’s none of your business,” the whole story would have disappeared quickly. Same with about ten other scandals surrounding him or his administration.

When it comes to this film, The Path to 9/11, it seems to me Clinton and his pals would be wiser to simply let the thing play, than to do the freak. People will watch the movie, shrug and say, “well, that’s pretty much what we always thought,” and they’d forget about it the next day. By panicking and demanding revisions to the film, and by sending out his usual minions to talk the thing down, Clinton is just making the whole thing a much bigger story. He is creating red headlines on Drudge and turning this film into a national incident. A stupid move. For such a smart man he’s never understood Gertrude’s economy of language in Hamlet when she said, “the lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

He also never seems to understand that it’s not all about him, all the time.

Reader Sean emails: I think we should thank the left for bringing this docu-drama so much attention. If it wasn’t for them I wouldn’t have known it was going to be on since I don’t watch the main stream channels. We should congratulate them on their fine advertising campaign to get this docu-drama the attention it deserves.

So, why are the Clintons freaking out about this movie? Did not Bill Clinton himself say that he regretted not taking Osama bin Laden when he could have? Well, yes, he did, according to Al Kamen in the WaPo:

Clinton, in a February 2002 speech to the Long Island Association, explained that “the United States did not accept a Sudanese offer and take Bin Ladin because there was no indictment,” according to a footnote in the Sept. 11 commission report.

“But the president told us that he had ‘misspoken,’ ” the report said, “and was, wrongly, recounting a number of press stories he had read. After reviewing this matter in preparation for his Commission meeting, President Clinton told us that Sudan never offered to turn Bin Ladin over to the United States.”

So, here’s how it works: Bush has been known to brag that he doesn’t read the newspapers. But Clinton does and, worse yet, actually believes what he reads!

Oh, wait, that’s not the same “Osama opportunity,” as the one they’re discussing in the Path to 9/11, right? Sorry, my bad. The scenario dramatized in The Path to 9/11 sounds more like the one written about by Lt. Col. Robert Patterson in his 2004 Book Dereliction of Duty; The Eyewitness Account of How Bill Clinton Endangered America’s Long-Term National Security, in which he charges “Clinton was soft on terrorism and missed a chance to get bin Laden with cruise missiles.” (Quote from Publisher’s Weekly review at Amazon).

If I remember that story, per Patterson, Berger had operatives on the phone, ready to take out Osama and Clinton, watching a golf game, would not engage and make the decision.

It sounds to me like The Path to 9/11 has created a composite that is representative of the spirit that story but can do no more since it has not – to my knowledge, anyway – ever been verified.

Now, the Clintonistas are huffing and puffing that these sorts of stories should not be dramatized because people like Sandy Berger – a bastion of truthfulness – say they are “not accurate.” And the press is – of course – giving them lots of room.

You know, the press…which just spent three years promulgating the “not accurate” story of Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson (and toward whom David Broder shakes a finger of admonishment for their dreadful role in that story.)

Funny – when the “what if Bush were assassinated” film was all the news (last week!) I recall reading lefty bloggers who were kvelling about “free speech” and “artistic license” and deriding folks on the right (it’s just a dramatization!) for their lack of sophistication, and their “intolerance” for not appreciating the premise.

I have a question…if the Clintonistas arenow going to carry on now about how Bill Clinton was fighting terrorism “every day” and was concerned about it “every day” how come he talked about terrorism so infrequently while he was president? Yes, he “mentioned” terrorism in his State of the Union addresses, but beyond that? No, terrorism wasn’t a subject he liked. From the the 1993 attack on the WTC, (a site he never visited), to the 2000 attack on the USS COLE (an attack he never answered), terrorism seemed to make Clinton uncomfortable and he tried very hard to change the subject. The only terrorist attack he ever seemed to get mad about was the Oklahoma City tragedy…and even then, he used it to make political hay.

Even now, terrorism is barely a blip on his radar. He has lately declared that “Global warming is the biggest challenge we face.” During his Clinton Global Initiative he identified four issues of grave and immediate concerns for the world – poverty, religious differences, governance in developing countries and global warming. Notice the world terrorism ain’t there. His final policy paper on national security, submitted to Congress, never mentioned Al Qaeda.

In December of 2001, National Review’s Byron York took a look at terrorism throughout Clinton’s time in office and declared that on this issue Clinton has no clothes

Dr. Sanity says: “…to be perfectly honest, I don’t think that Hollywood offers any special insight into reality; objectivity; or that people from that neck of the woods have much sense to begin with. Hence I factor that into my assessment of whatever I happen to be watching.” HALLELUIAH, EXACTOMUNDO! DING, DING, DING, she gets the prize. That’s EXACTLY right. The majority of people take everything they see from Hollywood with a grain of salt – people can and do think for themselves. Only a Clinton-type would think the public incapable of doing so, and thus try to ensure some control over what they may think. Pat Santy is brilliant!

Mac’s Mind links to a letter to ABC written by a few Democrats demanding accuracy in the film.

I have no memory of them demanding accuracy of Michael Moore’s Farenheit 9/11. Then again, I have no memory of anyone trying to shut that film down, either.

Instapundit remarks succinctly that all of this carrying-on by the Clintons simply makes them look like they have something to hide. Seriously. Imagine if Bush freaked out everytime someone printed something that didn’t make him look sterling, or you know, suggested, President Bush should be killed.

Come to think of it, I don’t think the Bushies made half the stink over a film dramatizing Bush’s assassination that these Clintonistas are making. Hmmmmm.

Alexandra suggests that the left claims indoctrination as a right and points to some very unedifying spin and intimidation/suppression tactics from the left over all of this.

That kind of militant rhetoric, based on utter deception, did however do the trick. Scholastic Books was cowed into silence, leaving a blank page, where before over 100,000 high school teachers had been made aware of its resource series for educators to use when discussing the ABC docudrama with students and parents…

I think the left has been very comfortable with believing it owned all media for a long time.

Blue Crab Boulevard is rather amazed at the rancor of Sandy “Pants” Berger.

Ed Driscoll writes, astutely:Imagine the howls from the left–not to mention the laughter on the other end of the phone line–if Karl Rove called up the president of ABC and asked him to censor a television show critical of the Bush administration. Exactly right. Ed also wonders: …considering whom the chairman of ABC’s parent company is, it should be very interesting to watch how much of their way [the Clintonistas] get.

Kobayashi Maru calls the Clinton move “imperial” and tells Clinton to grow up.

Conservative Yankee calls it the muzzling of free speech. And you have to admit, if the Bushies had made a fuss over the snuff film, they’d be accused of it, too.

Michelle Malkin notes that the usual minions are rousing the usual crowds into helping the Clintonian obfuscation of The Path to 9/11. They’re going to Google Bomb the topic.

Siggy says this entire episode can only have happened in a dumbed down America

Harold at Called as Seen writes:

I find it very telling when someone doesn’t like a message… and then threatens the messenger. And make no mistake about it, this letter is a threat. Congresswoman Slaughter’s decision to have a part of this letter is doubly hypocritical…Slaughter was a major supporter of the “Hush Rush” Act back in the 1990s. I guess her idea of meaningful discourse doesn’t include anything to the right of the CBS Evening News or the New York Times.

More here:
Clintonistas Clueless, Here
What are you doing on 9/11
Friday Night Round-up: Clinton’s not used to not controlling media.

Bride at every wedding...

Dumb Democrat moves

TV/Pop Culture/Music

Previous Post

September 7, 2006

2006: A choice between control freaks?

Next Post

September 7, 2006 Ahmadinejad needs a Giuliani to face

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category "Remaking" Ourselves 'Remaking' America 9/10 Mindset 9/11 trials Abortion ACORN Adoration Advent Advent 2008 Advent 2009 Advent 2010 Alternative Energy Alternative Media America American Catholic Church American Church American Genius Ameridolatry ANCHORESS BOOKSHELF Anglican-Roman Reconciliation Answers & Questions Anti_Semitism Archbishop Hilarion Ayn Rand Bad Mass Barack Obama Baseball Benedict Benedict & Islam Benedict in UK Benedict XVI Benedictine Bill Whittle Birth Control Blogs and Blogging Blogs and Blogging Bloodless Coup Bobby Jindal Bookchat Breitbart Bride at every wedding... Bride at every wedding... Buckley Bullies Bush Bad? Bush Good Buster Capitalism Catholic Fiction Catholic Vocations Catholicism Celibacy Chaput Charitable Stuff Chesterton Chile Chris Christie Christians in Exile Christine O' Donnell Christmas Christmas Gift Ideas Church Hates Science? Church hates women Communion of Saints Compline Conclave 2013 Confession Constitutional Stuff Conversion Crisis & Opportunity Critical Thinking Crooks and Liars Crucible of Faith Cuba Culture of Life Culture of Life/Death Culture of Treason? Dancing Death Dialogue re Islam Dick Meyer Divorce and Remarriage DOJ Domestic Terrorism Dominican Order Don't try me too high Dowd Dumb Democrat moves Dumb GOP moves Economic woe Education Egregious Harry Reid Elder Son Elder Son's Sweet Girlfriend Elderly Election '10 Election '12 Election '16 Election 2004 Election 2006 Election 2008 Election 2010 Election 2016 Elena Kagan Elitism Embryonic Stem Cell Research End Times? English language Enhanced Interrogation Erosion of Rights Eucharist Euthanasia Exorcism Extraordinary Synod Facebook Faith Faith and Reason Faith Friday Faith Perspective Faithful Friday Fascism Again Fascism in America Fatima FCC Feminism Film First Things Forgiveness Fr. James Martin Francis and Islam Francis in America Frassati Fred Thompson Free Speech? Freedom of Worship FutureChurch Global Pandemic GOP Congress Haiti Head Covering Health Care Here and Queer Hermits Heroes Hitchens Holy Spirit Holy Week '09 Holy Week '10 Hoo-Hah & BS Hoo-Hah & BS Icons Illegal Immigration In The Arena Interviews Interwebz Iran Uprising Iraqi Christians ISIL ISIS Islamic State Islamification/Islamofascism Islamification/Islamofascism Isra-El It's all about me! Me! ME! James Burke Jerry Lewis Jesus Christ Joblessness John Boehner John McCain John Paul II John XXIII Juan Williams Just Words Katrina/Rita King is a Fink Latin Mass Leadership Lectio Divina Lent Lent '08 Lent '09 Lent 2010 Lent 2011 Limbaugh Listen to Lizzie Litigious Society Liturgy Liturgy of the Hours Mainstream Media Manliness Marriage Mary Media Excess Medical Merton Michelle Obama Mighty John O' Connor Misc. Miss Ella Missionaries Mitt Romney Monasticism My brother S My Irish Aunties Mystic Monks Nanny Statism Nature NEA Neri New Media Newman Noonan Notre Dame NPR Stuff Nun News Obama Bad? Obama Good? Obama White House Oil Spill Online Retreat '08 Online Retreat Days Oratory Orthodoxy Our Hillary! Parenting Passionists Patheos Patheos Book Club Patrons Paul Ryan Penance Penn Jillette Philosophy PJTV Podcasts Poetry Politics-free zone Pop Culture Pope Emeritus Pope Francis Prayer Predictions Priesthood Pro-Life Public Sector Unions Purgatory Questions about Catholicism Quotes of the Day Quoting the News Race in America rants Recipes Remarried Catholics Reposts by request Retreat thoughts Rome Rudy Giuliani Russia Saints Sarah Palin Scandal Scott Brown SCOTUS Scriptural stuff Secularism Send in the clowns Serving up hot links Sexuality Sherrod Shroud of Turin Sisters and Nuns Social Entrepreneurship Social Media Social Security Socialism doesn't work Sports and Faith Stem Cells Strange Gods Suffering Synod Tea Parties Tea Party Terri Schiavo The 9/11 Commission The Catholic Answer The Constitution The Desert The Fourth Estate The Pelosi The Perpetual Adolescents The Rosary Third Party? Timothy Dolan Touch of evil TSA Tsunami TV/Pop Culture/Music TV/Pop Culture/Music Twitter Uncategorized Unemployment Unintended Consequences US Military Vaginal Musings Vatican Vespers video faves Vile Joe Biden Voter Fraud War by Litigation War on Terror War, What it good for? Why can't weeee be ... World Youth Days Year of Faith Year of the Priest

Select a Month August 2016 July 2016 April 2016 March 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "It is more blessed to give than to receive"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Jesus Peter Solomon Paul