The Path to "9/11!!!!!!"

Tonight ABC will run the first half of their two-night series, "The Path to 9/11." As most of you know by now, there's something rotten in the state of Burbank.

ABC marketed the series as an historically accurate "docudrama," including partnering with Scholastic Inc. to produce accompanying materials for schoolkids. Turns out, the film is actually a slanderous right-wing smear campaign to blame Bill Clinton for 9/11 while exonerating George Bush for his failures. Since the filmmakers could not establish such charges on the basis of any factual record, they invent scenes to show Sandy Berger and Madeleine Albright dithering about whether they could go after bin Laden--even refusing to attack when a CIA agent calls to say he's got Osama in his sights and that they should send the missiles--and then claim that pervy Clinton was so distracted by Monica that he couldn't protect the nation. Of course, none of this actually happened, as the 9/11 Commission Report clearly shows. Clinton was obsessed with bin Laden, telling his people to do whatever they had to, politics and scandal be damned. They never had a clear shot or even reliable intelligence about his location. And if anyone's to blame for the poisonous partisanship of the late-1990s, it's the GOP Congress, who were waging an unpopular impeachment over trivial matters, and who attacked any tough moves Clinton made as "wagging the dog." Meanwhile, Bush and Condi Rice are portrayed heroically, despite the infamous August 6 memo, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in US."

Except for Fox News, the movie has been almost universally denounced. Counterterrorism experts, including Roger Cressey, who worked for both presidents, have called it a malicious fiction, and 9/11 commissioners Jamie Gorelick and Richard Ben-Veniste have slammed its distortions. Prominent scholars, including Arthur Schelsinger, Jr., and Sean Wilentz co-signed a letter assailing the film's view of history. FBI agents who were asked to advise the film quit after their criticisms of the script were rejected. Even the movie's star, Harvey Keitel, has said that he had big concerns about its accuracy during filming, concerns that were ignored, and that ABC shouldn't run it unless they fix all the problems, which appear to be major. Lawyers for Bill Clinton have demanded that ABC pull it altogether, and his spokesman called it "despicable." Even some conservatives, like Bill Bennett, have argued that ABC should back down.

It could be argued that ABC (and Disney, who made the film) was just sensationalizing events for dramatic effect. But worrisome facts undermine that naive view. First, there's the pedigree of the film's writer/producer and director, both of whom are conservative activists. The director was trained by a "Christian" film school purportedly trying to take over Hollywood from within. Wasn't there a commandment about "bearing false witness"? I forget. Probably not important. Second, the film was aggressively pre-marketed to right-wingers. Hundreds of copies were sent out to the blogs and to radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh. Advance screenings were done for wingnut groups so they could start a buzz, which they did. ABC wanted to generate a "Passion of the Christ" effect. At the same time, however, ABC refused repeated requests by Clinton administration officials to examine the script. Third, when called out on the film's errors, ABC incongruously claimed that (a) the film is a drama, not a documentary, so accuracy is unimportant, and (b) the film is based on the 9/11 Commission report. ABC's last-minute attempt to alter the film in minor details (surely driven by their legal department) is not encouraging.

Put all this together and what you've got is a maliciously planned and executed slander campaign designed to curry favor with the reigning GOP. I don't know if Clinton, Berger, and Albright are planning to sue, but they should. The evidence of "actual malice" and "reckless intent" are obvious and already well-documented. ABC has essentially given the GOP an unreported $40 million campaign contribution during an election year, and they need to get dragged over the coals for it. If there are no consequences, those bastards will do it again and again.

But enough about the evil ABC. What really burns me about this incident is something else. Even before I'd heard about the film's warped history, I cringed when I saw the ads. Just like I do any time I see 9/11-related footage on TV. Not because of the event itself, its violence and brutality, its assault on the "American idyll." No. It's that whenever I hear "9/11" a little voice in my head says, "Here we go again. More scripted patriotism. More Bush hero-worship. More Democrat-baiting." What angers me is how 9/11 became "9/11!!!!!": an endless campaign of right-wing fear-mongering designed to reap political gain from a national tragedy that affected all of us.

Under the guidance of Cheney and Rove, Bush took an event which should have been a nationally-unifying call to arms and turned it into a partisan war whoop. He's never understood that the enemy was actually al Qaeda. For him, that's ancillary. What really matters is crushing Democrats. And that's why his "War on Terror" has failed at every turn. Bush cast scores of patriotic Americans into the wilderness, with "9/11" as their scarlet letter, the mark of their ostracism. Any questions about his policies were labelled as "weakness on terror," and "giving comfort to the enemy." Rather than seeking consensus, he's used the deaths of almost 3000 Americans in NY, DC, and PA as a wedge issue to confuse his critics and divide the nation. So that now, when I hear "9/11" I can no longer mourn. I just stew.

Well, fuck you, George Bush. We're comin' for your lickspittle boys in November. And when we win Congress, get ready for investigations. You've spent a lot of time hiding your crimes and corruption from the American people, we're plenty pissed off, and we demand justice. 9/11 will rally us. Just not in the way you wanted it.