The movie “The Path to 9/11” is getting plenty of attention from the left and members of the Clinton Administration. Some are calling on ABC/ Disney to cancel showing it because of the misinformation, lies and deception incorporated depicting the governments involvement or lack thereof.
I disagree. Freedom of speech must prevail, and those who speak untruths will be exposed, unfortunately it takes time. The type of people who put this movie together have been with us for thousands of years. They have rewritten history dating back to Biblical times, up and through the early days of American history and are now busy at work attempting to repoint the blame for failures that cause people to kill themselves and others flying airplanes into buildings. They are the same people who have made Africans “slaves” and called the American Natives “dumb savages, ” they also produced the Colin Powell presentation at the UN on Feb.5, 2003.
These people are everywhere, they are part of our society and they always have an agenda. They think with the other side of the brain, the side that ignores truth and fact, the side that embraces “belief” and “gut” through the repetition of falsehoods at the expense of others. Timing is key, they are not dumb.
The movie is said to focus most of its attention on the Clinton administration and their activity to destroy Al-Quada or kill bin Laden. Without seeing the movie and relying on historical fact one can safely speculate that the Bush Administration has only a bit part because, President Bush was completely oblivious to the middle-east pre-911 and was not engaged in any activity whatsoever to confront bin laden or his movement. Bush’s absence of activity here, to carry on where Clinton left off is the real story. But how do you film absence?
Kathleen Parker:
The 9/11 Commission determined that Clinton’s 1998 missile attack was not, after all, a wag-the-dog attempt to deflect attention from the Lewinsky scandal. But the commissioners also said that the intense partisanship of the time, “likely had a cumulative effect on future decisions about the use of force against bin Laden.”
It’s real easy to say that
now about Clinton’s missile attack. What is more important was how we felt
then. I clearly remember discussing the missile attack at my family dinner table and I too thought Clinton was really stretching here, that he was willing to do anything to divert attention, and I am a Democrat. The Republicans and some Democrats wondered aloud why the president is chasing some unknown raghead by the name of bin Laden. While politicians, newspapers and the television media blitzed the public about Clinton’s affair, they belittled his decision to bomb some two-bit outfit called the Taliban. The worst information I heard about the Taliban at the time was their destruction of Buddist monuments in the mountains of Afghanistan.
In the late 90’s, Americans viewed this entire episode to strike at bin Laden as non-sense, because the press declared it was. Protecting their own, now the commissioners can say this partisanship had an effect on future (Bush) decisions to use force? But during 1998 in real time, the partisanship to impeachment was to be ignored by Clinton? The 9/11 commission report amounts to an opinion report if not a travesty as the movie will probably show, but that doesn’t stop those from rewriting history because after five years, few know the truth and for their own reason, keep it to themselves.
The movie "The Path to 9/11" chose the 1993 WTC bombing as a starting point for the "path". Since the 1993 bombing failed to accomplish what the airplanes did in 2001, it was the 9/11 terror plot of its day. How can the years before the 1993 bombing largely be ignored?
