Text 7961, 123 rader
Skriven 2006-09-08 22:47:00 av Robert E Starr JR (8430.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Is it just me ...
=============================
  * * * This message was from Carl to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *   
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <DYCdnddfTO2jaJzYnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@comcast.com>
@REPLY:
<4501a094@news.cadence.com><0001HW.C12721EB03E24F24F0407530@news.verizon.net>

"Amy Guskin" <aisling@fjordstone.com> wrote in message 
news:0001HW.C12721EB03E24F24F0407530@news.verizon.net...
>>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 12:55:52 -0400, Charlie Edmondson wrote
> (in article <4501a094@news.cadence.com>):
>
>> Carl wrote:
>>
>>> "Bill" <beastmachinery@msn.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1157663790.545785.140210@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>> or is this shades of ISN?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14718803/?GT1=8506
>>>>
>>>> Clinton officials protest ABC's 9/11 miniseries
>>>> ABC stands by 'dramatization,' despite demands not to air it
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I remember the outrage from the right over the biased movie on Reagan
>>> starring James Broland. A lot of people claimed censorship at attempts 
>>> to
>>> stop it from being broadcast.  I also remember how many people defended
>>> Oliver Stone after his reported highly fictionalized account of Nixon. I
>>> thought that "Reagan" should have been shown on CBS at the time, so I 
>>> think
>>> this should be too.
>>>
>>> I also think that the inevitable biased fiction from Hollywood about 
>>> Bush
>>> and Cheney in a few years that someone will make to retaliate should be
>>> shown.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if it's done mostly as a matter of political masterbation, 
>>> to
>>> offend the other side, or to try to affect the long term legacy of
>>> whichever
>>> political figure is being "Dramatized."
>>>
>>> Carl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Well, over on tvguide.com, they have had some interviews with folks, and
>> the producers/writers think a lot of this is pride.  Folks don't want to
>> be reminded of the mistakes that they made (and, both admins had plenty
>> of them) and so are complaining "We weren't THAT stupid!" even when, in
>> hindsight, they were.  You just hate to be made to look bad. <<
>
> Of course it's pride, and an unwillingness to look bad...on the part of 
> those
> producers and writers.
>
> Fact checkers have already noted several places where the film outright
> distorts the truth.  The _truth_, not _a_ partisan truth.
>
> From the NY Times article yesterday:
>
>>>In their letters, dated Tuesday, both Mr. Berger and Ms. Albright object 
>>>to
> scenes in which they are shown adding obstacles to efforts to capture or 
> kill
> Osama bin Laden. In particular, Ms. Albright said a scene in which she
> refuses to support a cruise missile strike against Mr. bin Laden without
> first alerting the Pakistani government was untrue. Ms. Albright (played 
> by
> Shirley Douglas) also said the suggestion that she had alerted the 
> Pakistani
> military to an imminent strike was ³false and defamatory.²

Apparently is was a "Senior State Department official," not Ms. Albright,
and they knew the Pakistanis were going to leak the information.  They 
planned
to tell the Pakistanis several hours later when it was too late to do 
anything about it, but
someone's incompetence won out.

> ³Sept. 11 is not Oentertainment,¹ it is reality,² Ms. Albright wrote Mr.
> Iger. ³Before you air your broadcast, I trust you will ensure you have the
> facts right.²

>
> Mr. Berger (played by Kevin Dunn) said a scene in which he is shown 
> refusing
> to authorize a strike to kill Mr. bin Laden in Afghanistan ³flagrantly
> misrepresents my personal actions² and will serve ³only to grossly 
> misinform
> the American people.²
>
> Mr. Berger¹s character is also seen abruptly hanging up during a 
> conversation
> with a C.I.A. officer at a critical moment of a military operation. In an
> interview yesterday with KRLA-AM in Los Angeles, Cyrus Nowrasteh, the
> mini-series¹ screenwriter and one of its producers, said that moment had 
> been
> improvised.
>
> ³Sandy Berger did not slam down the phone,² Mr. Nowrasteh said. ³That is 
> not
> in the report. That was not scripted. But you know when you¹re making a
> movie, a lot of things happen on set that are unscripted. Accidents occur,
> spontaneous reactions of actors performing a role take place. It¹s the job 
> of
> the filmmaker to say, OYou know, maybe we can use that.¹ ²<<

Hmmm. Given the Clinton administration's ability to parse words like "is"
Mr. Berger (than man that was caught stealing top secret documents)
is objecting to the term "slam down the phone?"

Perhaps he just gently set it down?  ;)
                                                
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)