Skip to main content

Rally 'round, all ye defenders of free speech!

I am talking, of course, about The Path to 9/11. Is it free speech, and the artist can produce whatever he/she wants, or are you going to side with the Democrats, or, more precisely, "former members of the Clinton administration"?

"The content of this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has a duty to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely. It is unconscionable to mislead the American public about one of the most horrendous tragedies our country has ever known," [Clinton Foundation head Bruce] Lindsey and [Clinton advisor Douglas] Band wrote in their letter.


"I haven't seen it, but from everything I've heard it's not down the middle. It's not fair at all. And to have a film that seems to be biased and take one side put on by a network seems to be the wrong thing to do," said [Senator Charles] Schumer [D-NY]. "You can't take a film that's supposed to report on something that's so real and so close and make it into fiction. That's beneath ABC's dignity."

That one of the former Clintonistas complaining is Sandy "How Did This Get In My Pants" Berger is just delicious. This must be farce, these people cannot be serious.

ABC and Disney are explicit in saying this is a fictionalized version of events, using all the standard tools of fiction (e.g., compression, combining characters, etc.). Where are the those left-wing, stalwart defenders of the First Amendment? Where's Larry Flint, et al?

Hark, I hear...crickets!

In contrast, let us not forget Mikey Moore's fabrication, that "documentary" known as Fahrenheit 9/11. All these clowns would have better legs to stand on if they had objected with equal vehemence -- including an attempt to shut down and censor -- to Moore's crap-piece.

But to give Moore his due, if asked he'd probably say, "Go ahead, air it. They can make what they want. Free speech, baby!" There, I've finally said something nice about Michael Moore. I shall not make it a habit!

But not to worry, all you idiotarians out there, ABC may have caved already:

The network has in recent days made changes to the film, set to air Sunday and Monday, after leading political figures, many of them Democrats, complained about bias and alleged inaccuracies. Meanwhile, a left-wing organization has launched a letter-writing campaign urging the network to "correct" or dump the miniseries, while conservative blogs have launched a vigorous defense.

Do love the bit that "many" of the complainers are Democrats, that the organization is "left-wing", and "conservative blogs" have defended the film.

If truly believe in free speech, then Democrats and "left-wing" groups should be engaging in what is known in gaming circles as "stfu". And thus, conservatives would -- and should -- follow suit.

For the record, I don't give a crap what sort of crap you write, film, draw, say, etc. Just don't object if I respond or make a counter-argument. Doing so is not censorship, Dixie Chicks. Attempting to block a broadcast, on the other hand, is.

Update: A FAQ that says it all. Still LMAO at this crowd. And still amazed at the number of people who Truly Believe that all the run-up to 9/11/2001 started shortly after Innaguration Day, January, 2001. The wilfull ignorance is staggering.


Popular posts from this blog

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home.Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes. In Batman Begins, I blamed Katie Holmes. Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal, who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film, at almost two and a half hours, might be a shade long. Having said t…

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

With its release on home video, we come to the unsurprising and yet still bitter disappointment that is Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. Unsurprising, because of a lousy director. Disappointing, because it should have been great. To explain further will involve light spoilers; I will avoid larger giveaways. In a galaxy far, far away, the Empire continues to consolidate its power after the fall of the Republic (see Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith). Toward that end, they are assembling a giant battle station, the Death Star. The Rebel Alliance plots a way of finding out what’s going on and perhaps, in the process, save their collective butts. Rebellious galivanting ensues. All of the elements necessary to craft a good story are here, yet none of them work. The blame lies almost exclusively at the feet of director Gareth Edwards. This is his third film (after Monsters and Godzilla) and his failings as a director stand out in each. The major problems with each film involve the peopl…

Conspiracy (2001)

The Holocaust remains an unfathomable atrocity, the unholy benchmark by which all such are measured. Stalin and Mao both make Hitler look like an amateur when it came to sheer body count, yet the Holocaust remains unique. It seems to boil down to two reasons. First, the Nazis were terrifying in their systematic approach to the slaughter of Jews, driven by their ideological belief that they were acting for the greater good of all mankind. And second, they hunted Jews in any land they conquered; the goal wasn't merely to "purify" Germany, but the world. Few films have captured these points as well as HBO's 2001 film, Conspiracy. On January 20, 1942, a group of senior officials of Nazi Germany met at a lovely house in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee. The purpose of their meeting was to determine the "final solution" for the Jews. The Wannsee Conference developed what is referred to as the Wannsee Protocol. A single copy of the document remains. Conspiracy, drawi…