--- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> > wrote: > > > > Well, believe it or not, I fell asleep partway > > through and missed about an hour of it. I'd > > be surprised if they don't measure a huge drop > > in viewers after the first hour. The film is > > not well paced at all. > > > > The worst misrepresentation--the scene where > > Sandy Berger refuses to order the takedown of > > Osama bin Laden--was edited a bit toward the > > end, but hardly enough to change the scene's > > impact. > > > > In fact, they never got anywhere near close > > enough to bin Laden to kill him, nor did > > Berger ever refuse to authorize any operation > > against him. > > > > It didn't appear to me that the scene with > > Madeleine Albright (with her name still > > misspelled) defending her warning of the > > Pakistanis was changed at all. > > > > In fact, she never warned the Pakistanis of > > the missile strike on bin Laden, and the > > meeting in the scene never took place. > > The film's misrepresentation is that her > > warning to Pakistan allowed Pakistan to > > warn bin Laden in time for him to escape. > > > > All the other misrepresentational scenes that > > have been pointed out were still in the film. > > > > One I haven't seen discussed involved an aide > > to George Tenet busting into a meeting her > > boss is holding after the embassy bombings and > > hysterically accusing him of responsibility for > > the bombings, on the basis that he hadn't given > > Berger the authority to kill bin Laden when he > > had the chance (i.e., the wholly invented scene > > described above, which never occurred--neither > > the chance to take bin Laden down nor, of > > course, Berger's refusal to approve it). > > > > One particularly nasty touch: the famous clip > > of Clinton saying "I did not have sexual > > relations with that woman" is immediately > > followed by a shot of the Washington Monument. > > > > Clinton is repeatedly portrayed as being unable > > to properly pursue al Qaeda because he is > > distracted by the Lewinsky matter, another > > right-wing invention. > > > > The film is reasonably well produced, but it's > > a truly filthy piece of right-wing propaganda > > that deserves every bit of the vilification > > that has been directed at it. The disclaimer > > is a joke; it reads like a bit of legalese > > ABC added as a prudent afterthought to what is > > essentially a truthful presentation, which, of > > course, it is not. > > > > > Gee, how territle it must have been that millions saw it, eh Judy?
Yeah, really territle. > Because, unlike you, people can't think for themselves and they > should be protected from horrible propaganda. I guess you missed my post quoting the Providence Journal, eh? > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
