The Path to 9/11

ABC alters 9/11 show under pressure

ABC has in recent days made changes to it's film "Path to 9/11" (set to air Sunday and Monday) after leading political figures, many of them Democrats, complained about bias and inaccuracies. Meanwhile, the Center for American Progress Action Fund has launched a letter-writing campaign urging the network to "correct" or dump the miniseries. As of Wednesday it had collected 25,000 letters asking ABC to either correct or cancel the miniseries. "The miniseries presents an agenda that blames the Clinton administration for the 9/11 attacks while ignoring numerous errors and failures of the Bush administration," the center said in a news release.

ABC unleashed a promotional blitz in the last week for this new "docu-drama" and has thrown its corporate might behind the two-night production, billing it as a public service, a TV event, and to quote the ABC tagline, "based on the 9/11 Commission Report". That's false. "The Path to 9/11" is actually a bald-faced attempt to slander Democrats and revise history right before Americans vote in a major election. Does anyone else smell the stench of Karl Rove on this one? Put together by right-wing conservative writers, the film relies on the old GOP playbook of using terrorism to scare Americans. It mocks the truth and dishonors the memory of 9/11 victims to serve a cheap, callous political agenda. It irresponsibly misrepresents the facts and completely distorts the truth.

After a screening of the first episode in Washington last week, some audience members attacked the film's depiction of the Clinton administration's pursuit of Osama bin Laden. Among those unhappy was Richard Ben-Veniste, an attorney and member of the 9/11 commission. Richard A. Clarke, the former counterterrorism czar, has criticized the movie for suggesting that the Clinton administration was in a position to capture Bin Laden in 1998 but canceled the mission at the last minute.

After much discussion, ABC toned down, but did not eliminate entirely, a scene that involved Clinton's national security advisor, "Sandy" Berger, declining to give the order to kill Bin Laden, according to a person involved with the film who declined to be identified because of the sensitivities involved. "That sequence has been the focus of attention," the source said, adding: "These are very slight alterations."

In addition, the network decided that the credits would say the film is based "in part" on the 9/11 commission report, rather than simply "based on" the bestselling report, as the producers originally intended.

ABC, meanwhile, is tip-toeing away from the film's version of events. In a statement, the network said the miniseries "is a dramatization, not a documentary, drawn from a variety of sources, including the 9/11 commission report, other published materials and from personal interviews." Not to mention, biased conservative opinions. . .

The statement adds: "The events that lead to 9/11 originally sparked great debate, so it's not surprising that a movie surrounding those events has revived the debate. The attacks were a pivotal moment in our history that should never be forgotten and it's fitting that the discussion continues."

None of ABC's moves is likely to quell the debate, however.

UPDATE: Read more on this over at Blognonymous.