Thursday, September 07, 2006

Sorry, Conservatives, Fahrenheit 9/11 and ABC's "Path to 9/11" Are Not The Same

Regarding Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore's searing indictment of the Bush administration's handling of 9/1l, Iraq and the fight against terrorists, many conservatives have been making comparisons to this documentary in their defense of ABC's planned docu-drama, The Path to 9/11. Yes, America is, thankfully, the land of freedom and free speech. But the key difference here is that Moore made a privately-financed film which people had the option to pay to see if they so chose. To the contrary, ABC broadcasts over the public airwaves, which is a privilege, not an entitlement. That's why there's equal-time and other FCC guidelines they must adhere to. Though they might like to in effort to further a partisan agenda, these networks like ABC do not get to arbitrarily use our public airwaves for self-serving political purposes.

And on a related note, just where exactly is the big, bad dreaded "Liberal Media" we keep hearing about from conservatives? This week's ABC controversy is just another example of how the media is clearly anything but liberal.


Anonymous said...

Democrats are weak. The democrats will lead us back to the days of book burning to protect their elites.

Clinton sucks Monica's nuts!

Anonymous said...

Wow, Anonymous above sure shows how immature he/she is. Forget the truth, win at anycost is your motto.

Remember the Reagan movie CBS was going to show? Conservatives jumped all over it and CBS pulled it.

Why would ABC tarnish their reputation by putting on something filled with lies on the 5 year anniversary of 9/11.

I hope those who will be libeled by this movie full of lies sues ABC.

Avedon said...

You left out one other major difference between F911 and The Path to 9/11 - Michael Moore's film, no matter what you think of his analysis or conclusions, is not full of falsehoods.

Right-wingers did try to say Moore had been wrong about the flights to remove the bin Laden family and other Saudis from the US before they could be properly interrogated, but his statement came from The New York Times and turned out to be correct. No other falsehood has been found in the film.

Moore made a documentary and what he showed was what really happened. Path to 9/11 made stuff up because it sounded good to right-wingers who wanted to believe that it was Clinton, and not Bush, whose negligence resulted in thousands of unnecessary deaths in 2001.

Jeany said...

Andy — I'm afraid your point is inaccessible to most of those to whom you're speaking. It involves a cognative process called critical thinking, which requires intellectual curiosity and a natural inclination to test one's own beliefs. It would certainly never arise naturally out of this group. I think of it as a habit of belligerent ignorance, and it's a cancer on our nation and the world.

-jf said...

and senate democrats have threatened to pull abc's broadcast license if they air this film.

be proud of yourselves, progressives. this is who you are. smug and proud of the state's power to censor speach you do not approve of

Jeany said...

Dear James — Putting the 9/11 Commission report through the Disney pornolizer is not protected speech. If ABCDisney wants to present a flattering fantasy based on the report to film, that's OK with me, as long as we have truth in advertising. If they think lovingly rimming Bush will get them a favorable hearing in front of a friendly Republican congress, they are entitled to pursue their goals of world domination of media, just not on the public airways.

There's a qualitative difference between an open polemic that consumers pay to see and propaganda on the public airways. I submit that if 60% of Americans still think that Iraq was behind the 9/11 attack, this pornolized version of the 9/11 Commission Report would certainly be taken as factual history something close to that number. I'm sorry that you are offended by my statement that a significant percentage of Americans are hopelessly stupid, but a series of polls and repeated election of idiots like Bush have made me mean and harsh.

Lick your own balls, I can't stand the stink of 'em. If that makes me an elitist, that's just fine with me. I have some standards.

Anonymous said...

Dear Jeany,
Touche. You got me good. Your 2nd post made much more sense than the first. I totally understand your frustration with Bush and the idiots who elected him. Sorry about the "balls" quote, That really wasn't necessary.

Jeany said...

HA! OK then, apology accepted. I thought that what I was saying was perfectly clear, where did I go wrong?

To tell the truth, I'm almost 60, and very few of my age cohort, or even younger people I've worked with in recent decades, display the kind of ignorance I'm talking about, so when I read the PIPA reports on the impact of media on public knowledge and attitudes, I feel like I've gone through the looking glass. The only one I know who believes in the Great Bush is my mother, and she's severely demented. But I was talking to a friend earlier today about this crockumentary, and he said "some people, as soon as they see this thing it will be absolute, irrefutable fact to them forever; it will be history."

I guess what informs my elitist notion that there is a slice of the population pie that doesn't think (in the normal meaning of the word) is listening to the right wing callers to Randi Rhodes and Sam Seder on Air America. Some of these folk are in holes as deep as a football field is long, and they simply don't recognize it, and just keep digging. When I look at voting trends and polling data, it seems like 20% of the population might be in that group, and it scares the shit out of me. I don't know how to talk to them or about them without appearing to be elitist, and if you have any suggestions, I'm all ears. It's as if they take their politics the same way they take their religion, totally on faith and without question. I don't, and wrt religion, I don't have to talk about it, but politics affects all of us.

Anonymous said...

Jeany, there will always be stupid people. It's a fact of nature. The scary part is that some perfectly IQ normal folks still think that Bush is "God" and the GOPys are the twelve disciples.

No matter how much factual information is presented to them, they will defend their own stupidity. While you have standards and so do I, so many of the rightwingers are so desperate to come out on top, they will sacrifice their dignity and intelligence to appear correct.

It's nice to have someone else bring up the idea of critical thinking. It is patently absent in most of the rightwing posts.

Anonymous said...

I live in a small town in a Red State that reflects exactly everything Jeany is afraid of. So am I. My analysis is that the problem is the need for conformity. It's not unlike the usual high school environment. It's important to be "popular" to survive; and, in this town it's important for all to agree in order for business to proceed. It takes very little to be shunned here. A cousin told me that no matter your religious beliefs in behooves one to attend a particular denomination n this state in order to succeed in business. And, we know what those preachers are teaching from the pulpit. If it's like this in all small towns all over the country I see no solution to mass ignorance and herd thinking.

Jeany said...

When did this need for conformity come to dominate the red state rural landscape? Is this the reason the winds of change are blowing in from the west, because the frontier is 100 years closer to people living there, that some are still capable of independent thought?

I grew up in small town and rural Indiana (albeit a university community), and just never experienced that pressure to conform. Either i was oblivious to it, or this is new since the mid-60s. I mean, no one was putting out that it was OK to be a wierd as you wanted to be, but I don't remember independence being a cause for ostracism. I've been an urban dweller since, until very recently, and if there's pressure to conform, it's at the intersection of economics and conspicuous consumption, especially for families with children.

VIPER1 said...

First and foremost F9/11 is nothing but falsehoods and lies, manipulated footage and cherry picked comments, a real piece of propagandist bullshit.

The trouble with the path to 9/11 is that it squarely distributes the blame across party lines and the LeftyFascists that are screaming dont really want the truth to be told. Besides we all know Clinton was nothing more than a Liar to begin with, and that seacow wife of his is just as bad.

They will show it because it falls in the parameters of a little thing called the First Amendment, perhaps some of you morons have heard of it?

Sucks when your own tactics come back to haunt you dosent it.

Anonymous said...

Viper -- The First Amendment does not mean the freedom to lie about others and hurt their reputations. Slander/libel is a crime and the people responsible for the crime of slandering Berger, Clinton and the others will be defeated in court. God Bless America for its freedom and its judicial system.

Anonymous said...

Welcome to the Blog! If you haven't learned what it's like here, you are about to.

You seem to be challenging the liberal herd mentality. Challenging the herd on this site will definitely result in personal attacks. Be prepared to be called (among other things) a GOP spinster, koolaid drinker, hick, stupid, racist, chickenhawk, liar, nazi, hitler, etc..

Don't worry, the liberals may have the numbers on this blog, but they are missing the rational thought. Welcome to the site and I look forward to reading your posts.

Anonymous said...

Hoorah -- Congratulations Larry on finding your soul mate. Why don't you and Viper start chanting your Republican mantras on a Repubican blog and leave this one for the elite? There nobody will be old meanies and hurt your feelings by name-calling. Here we just don't think of you Republicans as sensitive -- you know, because of the torture, the slaughter of civilians, the lies, the harm to the poor and sick, Katrina -- etc. etc. etc..

The Ostroy Report said...

Larry, thank you for welcoming VIPER to the blog. He, like you, and all other Republicans, are welcome here, as I've said many times. An intelligent discourse requires varied opinions. But I find your advice to VIPER a bit ironic: "Challenging the herd on this site will definitely result in personal attacks."

Have you bothered to actually read VIPERS' initial posts here? Here's a few of his pearls:

"Another blog devoted to moonbat douchebags and thier conspiratorial vitriol, you make me sick...Free speech is for all sides asshat."

"I am so sorry, did you whining little moonbats say something?"

"You should also be tried for treason and sedition taken out and hanged publicly as well."

"A little thing called the First Amendment, perhaps some of you morons have heard of it?"

If anyone needs lecturing on waging personal attacks, I think it's VIPER.

You guys can all treat each other however you like. But I think it might be more pleasant if those with differing opinions be a bit more accepting, tolerant and interested in what others have to say. Does mean you have to agree. I must say, with the way people treat each other on a message board, no wonder the country's a polarized mess.

Dave Splash said...

FYI - Disney refused to distribute "Fahrenheit 9/11" upon its initial release because they feared the conservative backlash. I think this shows where Disney/ABC's politics truly lie.

Second, Fahrenheit 9/11 and Path to 9/11 are different in another way. Fahrenheit uses real footage, real quotes, etc. You might not agree with the conclusions he draws or the juxtaposition of images, but real people are not played by actors. Path to 9/11 uses actors playing actual people and viewers are led to believe that the dialogue accurately reflects the real conversations these folks had.

If the right-wingers that made Path to 9/11 had really wanted to make a "dramatic" film, not an historical one, they would have changed the names: maybe Secretary Jones or President O'Connor, etc.

The two films are not alike, and the parallel is 100% false.

Anonymous said...

Andy Ostroy,

Caught a link to your blog entry on reddit. Your title is good but your argument is rather incomplete.

I wrote a long comment entry on reddit about his very recently you may want to read it and enhance your posting.

Also you may want to put a reddit widget into your blog template so you can see its score.

Anonymous said...


The above link did not get through your comment submission process, sorry.

Here it is again minus the larger thread.