Major Washington Post story on Disney/ABC scandal, exposes two additional major errors in 9/11 depiction

The article was written by Howie Kurtz, the Post's media critic.

First off, Kurtz's piece breaks the news that two more major portions of the Disney/ABC account of 9/11 are simply made up. The first:

Tenet is depicted as challenging Albright for having alerted Pakistan in advance of the August 1998 missile strike that unsuccessfully targeted bin Laden.

"Madame Secretary," Tenet is seen saying, "the Pakistani security service, the ISI, has close ties with the Taliban." Albright is seen shouting: "We had to inform the Pakistanis. There are regional factors involved." Tenet then complains that "we've enhanced bin Laden's stature."

Albright said she never warned Pakistan. The Sept. 11 commission found that a senior U.S. military official warned Pakistan that missiles crossing its airspace would not be from its archenemy, India.

Kurtz also reveals that the tv show's major premise, that Monica Lewinsky somehow played a role in thwarting US efforts to catch bin Laden, is not even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report - the report that Disney/ABC claims is THE basis for the entire tv show:

The Sept. 11 commission found no evidence that the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal played a role in the August 1998 missile strike...

But just as important, Kurtz is sometimes criticized by some on the left who think he has a conservative bias. Whether or not that perception is true, this is one hell of an article from Kurtz, it's incredibly damning of Disney/ABC. But just as importantly, a journalist who is not perceived as having a liberal bias is the one who wrote this story. That makes the piece much more credible. And what's more, the story is in the A section of the paper, giving it even more heft.

The tide has turned. This is now a full-fledged public relations disaster for Disney.

I know that sometimes I enjoy a little hyperbole on this blog, but this time I'm not just posturing to scare Disney. PR disasters are my business. I can smell 'em. I was worried about this campaign a few days ago. I was even worried this morning. But no more. The thing just exploded in the past few hours. The Democrats are now piping mad and fully engaged. The media is on the story and it most certainly won't let go. This is the most exciting 9/11-related story they've got as the 5-year anniversary of the attacks approaches. What's worse for Disney, the spin in these articles and TV shows is decidedly anti-Disney/ABC - Disney/ABC has lost control of the story and the message, and that's when the meltdown begins.

Just look at the past few hours:

• More former Clinton administration officials have weighed in, including Bruce Lindsey. That's a sign that while Bill Clinton may not be saying much publicly about this matter, behind the scenes he's piping mad and has set the dogs loose.
• Editor and Publisher magazine has found even more significant errors in the tv show.
• The Democratic Party issued a vicious letter attacking Disney for interfering with the national elections, and implying quite strongly that Disney may pay a price with their broadcast licenses.
• A Disney/ABC insider's email leaks proving that the intent behind this show is to blame Clinton for everything, and causing Disney/ABC a major embarrassment.
  
• 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste goes on national TV to blast the show.
• A top former Bush counterterrorism official goes on national TV to blast the show.
• The Washington Post writes a damning front-section story on the entire affair for tomorrow's paper.

I'm really feeling good about this. Well, as good as one can feel in the face of blatant historical revisionism about one of the most tragic days in American history. Disney/ABC crossed a line in the sand, and then compounded their mistake - as every evil corporation does - by letting their hubris be their guide (whoever gave Disney/ABC their PR advice better be looking for a new job tomorrow).

I honestly don't see how Disney/ABC can even air this program on television any more. It's become a laughing stock. Read More......

Another major error found in Disney/ABC fictional account of 9/11

Okay, this is getting bad.

One of the most blatant factual errors in the ABC miniseries next week on the 9/11 attacks -- at least in a review copy viewed by E&P; -- is a claim that The Washington Post ruined a valuable form of surveillance of Osama bin Laden by disclosing that the U.S. was monitoring his cell phone calls.

Indeed, that charge has been made -- but the alleged wrongdoer was a different paper, The Washington Times.

Read More......

Executive Director of Democratic Party slams Disney/ABC for "slanderous" fictional TV show about 9/11

This just in from the Democratic National Committee. I have not seen this kind of bitch-slapping coming out of the Democratic Party since the onset of the Bush administration six years ago. This is vicious. Well deserved, to be sure. But absolutely vicious.

Particularly stunning is a paragraph buried in the middle of the open letter that can only be read as a direct threat against Disney/ABC's access to the airwaves:

ABC is trying to use of the airwaves -- airwaves owned by you and me, and loaned to broadcasters as a public trust -- to slander Democrats and sell a slanderous, irresponsible fraud to the American people, and they're shamefully doing it just weeks away from Election Day.

If Disney/ABC doesn't fully appreciate the enemy it is creating in the Democratic party, then heads need to roll at that firm because if I were a shareholder, I'd be considering a suit in a jiffy.

Does a major national broadcast network want to stain itself by presenting an irresponsible, slanderous, fraudulent, "docu-drama" to the American public?

Not if you and I have the last word -- but either way, we're about to find out.

The ABC television network -- a cog in the Walt Disney empire -- unleashed a promotional blitz in the last week for a new "docudrama" called "The Path to 9/11". ABC has thrown its corporate might behind the two-night production, and bills it as a public service: a TV event, 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.

The miniseries, which was put together by right-wing conservative writers, relies on the old GOP playbook of using terrorism to scare Americans. "The Path to 9/11" 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.

ABC/Disney executives need to hear from the public and understand that their abuse of the public trust comes with a cost. Tell Walt Disney CEO Robert Iger to keep this right-wing propaganda off the air -- we'll deliver your message:

http://www.democrats.org/pathto911

This story is breaking quickly. The bias of the "docudrama" only became known when ABC began circulating previews recently. Less than two weeks ago, 9/11 Commission member Richard Ben-Veniste confronted a lead writer of "The Path to 9/11" after watching the first half of the miniseries at a screening, but most of what we know amounts to bits and pieces because ABC chose to screen the miniseries to conservative bloggers and right-wing media outlets exclusively. Almost none of the Democrats portrayed in the film have even been asked for their thoughts.

But we still know enough, thanks to news accounts and crack research, to fact check "The Path to 9/11" as a biased, irresponsible mess. Here's what you need to know:

Richard Clarke -- the counterterrorism czar for the Clinton administration, now himself a consultant to ABC News -- describes a key scene in "The Path to 9/11" as "180 degrees from what happened." In the scene, a CIA field agent places a phone call to get the go ahead to kill Osama Bin Laden, then in his sights, only to have a senior Clinton administration official refuse and hang up the phone. Sandy Berger, President Clinton's National Security Advisor, called the same scene "a total fabrication. It did not happen." And Roger Cressey, a top Bush and Clinton counterterrorism official, said it was "something straight out of Disney and fantasyland. It's factually wrong. And that's shameful."

Another scene revives the old right-wing myth that press reporting made it impossible to track Osama bin Laden, accusing the Washington Post of blowing the secret that American intelligence tracked his satellite phone calls. In reality, responsibility for that blunder -- contrary to "The Path to 9/11" -- rests with none other than the arch-conservative Washington Times.

The former National Security Council head of counterterrorism says that President Clinton "approved every request made of him by the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against bin Laden and al-Qaeda," and the 9/11 report says the CIA had full authority from President Clinton to strike Bin Laden. Yet chief "Path to 9/11" scriptwriter Cyrus Nowrasteh, a friend of Rush Limbaugh, says the miniseries shows how President Clinton had "frequent opportunities in the '90s to stop Bin Laden in his tracks -- but lacked the will to do so."
ABC asked only the Republican co-chair of the 9/11 Commission, Tom Kean, Sr., to advise the makers of "The Path to 9/11". The producers optioned two books, one written by a Bush administration political appointee, as the basis of the screenplay -- yet bill the miniseries as "based on the 9/11 Commission Report."

This is a picture of bias -- a conservative attempt to rewrite the history of September 11 to blame Democrats, just in time for the election.

Tell Walt Disney president Robert Iger that you hold his company responsible -- and that this community demands that ABC tell the truth:

http://www.democrats.org/pathto911

ABC is trying to use of the airwaves -- airwaves owned by you and me, and loaned to broadcasters as a public trust -- to slander Democrats and sell a slanderous, irresponsible fraud to the American people, and they're shamefully doing it just weeks away from Election Day.

The Walt Disney Corporation could have given Americans an honest look at September 11. Instead, the company abandoned its duty to the truth -- and embraced the fiction known as "The Path to 9/11."

But ABC isn't the only company pushing this gross revision of history. ABC has enlisted the reputable education and children's entertainment company Scholastic, Inc. to send 100,000 letters to high school teachers, urging them to show students "The Path to 9/11". Scholastic has also created a discussion guide for teachers to use to encourage students and their families to watch this irresponsible fraud and then discuss it in school. The discussion guide does not in any way point out the concerns and criticisms that have been raised about the validity and accuracy of the film.

We've got to stop this now.

ABC/Disney must face an accountability moment. You can ratchet up the pressure on ABC by sending your own letter to Walt Disney CEO Robert Iger -- tell him to keep this propaganda off their air.

http://www.democrats.org/pathto911

We'll keep you up to date as this story evolves.

Thank you,
Tom

Tom McMahon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee

Read More......

HP chairwoman spied on cell phone records of board members

This is the issue I brought up last January when I bought General Wesley Clark's phone records to prove the point that this problem was real, and a problem. Well, since that time the House unanimously passed legislation to fix the problem. The Republican controlled Senate, however, hasn't done squat.

Oh well, what's a little illegal spying in Soviet America.

Can we turn the beacon of hope back on again, please? Read More......

Disney/ABC insider tells conservative blogger that 9/11 film was intended to "blame Clinton"

Conservative blogger Hugh Hewitt published the following email he received, apparently from a Disney/ABC insider.

What is particularly astounding is the open derision for President Clinton by this Disney/ABC insider, and equally appalling is Disney/ABC's seeming desire to have the movie be an intentional slap at Bill Clinton, period.

The Disney execs met all through the weekend - unheard of in this business - debating what changes would be made and what concessions should be given. Here is what looks to be the conclusion....

- The message of the Clinton Admin failures remains fully intact...

But the blame on the Clinton team is in the DNA of the project and could not be eradicated without pulling the entire show....

....underline just how far out or touch and scared the Clinton Admin is about the revelation of the facts as portrayed in this project. Is it just that Clinton is continuing to re-define his legacy? Or is it his fears for this election cycle and 2008? Or both?

Thanks for getting the word out. It's made a significant difference in getting this broadcasted as it should be.

Someone at Disney/ABC needs to be fired, and then, come next January, we need some congressional subpoenas issued to Disney/ABC about their blatant attempt to influence the US elections on behalf of the Republicans.

More from ThinkProgress. Read More......

Disney/ABC flat-out REFUSED to provide Pres. Clinton, Madeleine Albright and Sandy Berger copies of its 9/11 "docudrama", tho GOP bloggers got copies

Interesting behavior for a company that has a lot of business before Congress - a Congress that is expected to turn Democrat (at least in one house, maybe both) in about 8 weeks.

Republican bloggers, Disney/ABC is happy to give them complementary advance copies of its error-riddled TV show about September 11. But when the actual people slandered in the tv show ask to see advance copies, Disney/ABC says no.

I have a law degree. And you enter very interesting legal territory when someone expresses concern about the veracity of your TV show and you refuse to provide them with a copy in advance, yet provide copies to others. Okay, I'm being too polite. Albright wrote Disney/ABC and told them, flat-out, that the malfeasance they attribute to her is absolutely untrue. Disney/ABC has refused to even respond to her. (Sandy Berger wrote Disney/ABC as well.)

By doing this, Disney/ABC is making it impossible for Clinton, Albright or Berger to correct any errors (read: defamation) in the show before it airs. That's negligent on the part of Disney/ABC, and it certainly suggests malice as well - i.e., the opposite of a good faith effort to get the story right, or in this case, an affirmative desire to keep the story wrong.

I hope Clinton, Albright and Berger sue the hell out of Disney/ABC when this show airs. Read More......

President Bush on terror: grasping at straws (or straw men)

I imagine it's increasingly difficult for Republican strategists to exploit the war on terror for political gain. On the one hand, past elections demonstrate the potential for Republican success from a fearful electorate and a focus on national security (and/or foreign policy). On the other, how long can you continue to say that your party is making gains in a war if you can never say you've won it? Apparently somebody decided to solve the problem: just say we're safer . . . but not safe. The interesting thing about a word like "safe" is that you can always keep moving towards it without ever getting there. Hooray for Republican electoral prospects! The only problem would be if Americans got wise to the act.

[O]pinion polls suggest an increasingly skeptical public. In a CNN poll conducted Aug. 18-20, 52% of Americans said the war in Iraq distracts from fighting terrorists.

Uh oh . . . that's not going to be good for the meme that Democrats are soft on terror. So, what's scarier than terror by itself? Something that might distract people from the massive strategic mistake of Iraq? Ooh, ooh, I know: Hitler!

Bush said that ignoring the words of the terrorists themselves -- as the world once ignored the words of Lenin and Hitler -- risks underestimating their intent.

Didn't Hitler, like, try to take over a big part of the world? I bet those crazy terrorists, who don't control a single tank or fighter jet or destroyer let alone the state apparatus to establish governance, have talked big, too, just like Hitler did. But of course, no sane individual could possibly imply that the capabilities are in any way similar, right? Surely no one would be so spiteful, so malevolent, so intellectually dishonest, as to imply that terrorists have any chance of taking and holding territory, just to defend a set of failing policies?

President Bush, quoting from terrorist documents captured in Afghanistan, Iraq and Britain, said today that Al Qaeda and its allies were intent on global domination and creating a "radical Islamic empire" that stretches from Spain to Iraq.

I will now light myself on fire. Read More......

Karl Rove: "I change constitutions, I put churches in schools"

NY Daily News

"'You're not such a scary guy,' joked his guide. 'Yes, I am,' Rove replied. Walking away, he muttered deliberately and loudly: 'I change constitutions, I put churches in schools.'"

And people wonder why the country is so badly on the wrong track. Read More......

My trip to the Post Office to pick up my Disney/ABC video

Disney/ABC says they're not censoring distribution of their error-riddled TV show about 9/11, i.e., only giving it to right-wingers. Great. I posted my PO Box on the blog yesterday and asked for a copy. Today I went to the Post Office to check my mail and see if my copy arrived.

Check out my vlog entry and find out if the mouse is a liar... Read More......

Four incoming US House committee chairs call on Disney/ABC to fix error-laden depiction of 9/11

Things are getting interesting now. With Dems expected to take back the House, you now have four incoming House Democratic committee chairmen demanding Disney/ABC fix their error-riddled soap opera about September 11. This changes the political calculus significantly for Disney/ABC.

Conyers and Leading House Democrats Demand Accuracy in ABC 9/11 Film

Congressman John Conyers, Jr., joined by Reps. John Dingell, Jane Harman, and Louise Slaughter, today called on ABC to fix the inaccuracies in its mini-series The Path to 9/11, before its scheduled airing on September 10th and 11th. A copy of the letter from the four ranking Democratic Members follows.

Mr. Robert A. Iger
President and CEO
The Walt Disney Company

Dear Mr. Iger:

We are advised that ABC is scheduled to air a two-part mini-series entitled "The Path to 9/11" on September 10 and September 11. While we have not yet seen this program, news reports raise serious questions about its accuracy. Therefore, we request that the inaccuracies described herein be addressed immediately and that the program be thoroughly reviewed and revised for accuracy before it airs.

Among our concerns about the program are the following: first, it reportedly contains a scene in which Sandy Berger, the National Security Adviser to President Bill Clinton, declines to give Central Intelligence Agency operatives the authority to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden, and in which those operatives are outside a house where Bin Laden is located. This account has been expressly contradicted by Richard Clarke, a high-ranking counterterrorism official in both the Clinton and Bush Administrations.

Second, the film reportedly contains a scene in which the Central Intelligence Agency declines to share information about the 9/11 hijackers with the FBI and ascribes that failure to the so-called "wall," limiting information sharing by the Department of Justice in certain circumstances, and established by the Department of Justice in an internal memorandum.

This scene is puzzling at best, and inaccurate at worst. According to a Republican Member of the 9/11 Commission, former Senator Slade Gorton, the "Department of Justice guidelines at issue were internal to the Justice Department and were not even sent to any other agency. The guidelines had no effect on the Department of Defense and certainly did not prohibit it from communicating with the FBI, the CIA or anyone else."

These two examples alone create substantial doubt about the overall accuracy of this program. September 11th is a day of mourning and remembrance for every American. We do not believe that it is appropriate for it to be tainted by false assertions of blame or partisan spin.

To avoid that occurrence, we urge you to review this film and correct these and other inaccuracies. We appreciate your prompt attention and reply to this time sensitive matter.

Sincerely,

Representatives John Conyers, Jr., John Dingell, Jane Harman, Louise Slaughter

Read More......

Bush quotes bin Laden. Great. So where is he?

Bush can't have it both ways. If Osama bin Laden is the next Hitler, Stalin and an evil akin to Slavery (all things he and his staff have alleged in the past week), then where is he? Why hasn't Bush caught him in 5 years? (Five years was more than enough time for us to get Hitler.) Why did Bush say a few years ago that he doesn't think much about Osama, he isn't that important?

And just last year, why did Bush secretly shut down the special CIA unit designated to go after bin Laden?

If Osama is Hitler and important enough to mention in a presidential speech, then where the hell is he, and why doesn't Bush seem to care?

Dan Froomkin at the WashPost.com has more:

The spectacle of the president of the United States extensively quoting Osama bin Laden to bolster his controversial policies during political season deserves notice, and reflection.

By all rights, President Bush ought to be embarrassed that the al Qaeda leader who masterminded the September 11 terrorist attacks remains at large almost five years later.

But Bush yesterday let bin Laden share his bulliest of pulpits, giving the mass murderer precisely the attention he craves and endorsing his extreme view that a Third World War is under way.

Here's the text of Bush's speech.

Mentioning bin Laden so much couldn't help but remind listeners of Bush's failure to capture or kill him. But the risk was easily offset by the fact that bin Laden remains the most effective bogeyman out there, and job one for the White House in the run-up to a potentially crippling mid-term election is to scare the hell out of people.

Read More......

Bush to blame for 9/11 workers respiratory ailments

The media misses the ball again today in their reporting on the new study showing that 70% of those who helped out at Ground Zero after the Twin Towers came down now have new or more severe respiratory problems.

Roughly 70 percent of nearly 10,000 workers tested at Mount Sinai from 2002 to 2004 reported that they had new or substantially worsened respiratory problems while or after working at ground zero.

But what the media fails to mention is how the Bush White House, and Giuliani's city hall, lied to the American people and the people of New York City about the air quality around Ground Zero in the days following the attacks.

I remember this little detail, why doesn't the NYT or any other newspaper? Context, people, context. You have the facts. Report them. Don't just report today's facts, remind us of yesterday's - put the entire story in context. Jesus, is it that hard to tell the whole truth?

And I quote the conservative NY Post (link is behind a pay firewall):

An Environmental Protection Agency memo claims city and federal officials concealed data that showed lower Manhattan air was clouded with asbestos after the World Trade Center collapse.

And officials sat on the alarming information even as they told the public it was safe to return downtown, the internal memo says.

Testing by the city Department of Environmental Protection showed the air downtown had more than double the level of asbestos considered safe for humans, claimed federal EPA environmental scientist Cate Jenkins, who supplied the memo to The Post.

The data, which Jenkins says she culled from state records, appear damning.

On the day after the attack, the memo claims, city test results from the corner of Centre and Chambers streets and from the corner of Spruce and Gold streets showed asbestos concentration at about twice the level considered safe by the EPA.

The city did not release this information to the public, Jenkins says.

The next day, Sept. 13, city tests were "overloaded" with asbestos in the air ? so much that the lab could not conclude precise amounts ? along Church Street.

Again, the information was withheld, the memo claims.

When the city published the test results for the weeks following 9/11 on its Web site in February 2002, there were 17 instances where the data was either understated or left blank, Jenkins asserts in her report.

"New York City could wiggle out of the [claim of] concealment, because they weren't making any explicit statements about data at the time," Jenkins told The Post. "But the EPA can't wiggle out of this. They said the air was safe at the same time they were coordinating data with the city."

To drive her point home, Jenkins compares statements made by the EPA on the same day test data was showing dangerous levels of asbestos.

On Sept. 18, then-EPA administrator Christie Whitman said the public in lower Manhattan was not being exposed to "excessive levels of asbestos."

That same day, city testing data, some of which was later made public, showed asbestos levels 50 percent higher and more above what her agency considers safe, the memo states.

Read More......

Another sneak preview from Disney/ABC's Mickey Mouse version of the September 11 story

(Stroke of genius for Disney/ABC to dub the show in the original German for full propaganda effect.)

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: The image above, while intended to be reasonably accurate, is a composite constructed from a variety of sources. We suspect Bill Clinton will be just as upset about the image as Osama bin Laden and Walt Disney, thus assuring its fair and balanced nature. Read More......

Bush anti-terror official: Disney/ABC Sept. 11 show is “something straight out of Disney and fantasyland. It’s factually wrong. And that’s shameful.”

On last night's Scarborough Country, via ThinkProgress:

SCARBOROUGH: Roger, let me begin with you. There are points of this docudrama that are more drama than fact. But talk about Bill Clinton and the central premise by ABC that he should have done more to get Bin Laden.

CRESSY: Joe, it’s amazing, based on what I’ve seen so far is how much they’ve gotten wrong. They got the small stuff wrong such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed instructing Ahmed Rassam to carry out the millenium attacks. Then they got the big stuff wrong, this fantasy about how we had a CIA officer and the Northern Alliance leader Ahmed Massoud looking at Bin Laden and they breathlessly call the White House to say we need to take him out and the White House said no. I mean it’s sheer fantasy. So, if they want to critique the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, based on fact, I think that’s fine. But what ABC has done here is something straight out of Disney and fantasyland. It’s factually wrong. And that’s shameful.

Read More......

E&P; reviews Disney/ABC fictional account of Sept 11. Show drops "My Pet Goat", claims Bush responded to Presidential Daily Briefing vigilantly

The show is an utter lie. E&P; reports that Disney/ABC even got the timeline about United Flight 93 wrong. The show is wrong. It's not what happened. How in God's name can Disney/ABC show this thing on television and have the nerve to call it accurate? They're sending it to 100,000 school teachers, even though it's inaccurate.

You have to read E&P;'s summary of the show. It is 100% Clinton bashing and 100% pro-Bush. Which isn't surprising when ABC hires 3 Republican partisans to create and oversee the entire show.

This movie is a political contribution to the Republican party from Disney/ABC. Someone needs to sue them now. Read More......

Condi Rice equates Iraq war critics to people who didn't want to free the slaves

Or something. Her comments don't even make sense, let alone are laughable from a woman who hasn't exactly been Rosa Parks the last six years.

"I'm sure there are people who thought it was a mistake to fight the Civil War to its end and to insist that the emancipation of slaves would hold," Rice tells Essence. "I know there were people who said, 'Why don't we get out of this now, take a peace with the South, but leave the South with slaves?'"

So we now have the Bush administration trying to equate the Iraq war to World War II and the Civil War. Neither of those cute analogies are working, so what's next? Iraq war critics would have surrendered the Alamo?

Pathetic.

Not to mention, a more apt analogy would be the North's decision to liberate the slaves by attacking Canada. Read More......

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Watched Frist on the Today show...he's sounding a bit unhinged...that seems to be pretty standard for the GOP this year. Read More......

White House "strongly supports" Rummy

Good for them. Too bad support for Rummy among the rest of the country is waning, even among Republican candidates who have to explain themselves to voters this fall. Read More......

Leaked memo not enough - Labour wants public response from Blair

Now why would his own party not trust him? Probably for the same reason why most of the country disapproves of him, I suppose. He brought the party back to power and has plenty of positives but the longer he stays, the harder it is going to be for Labour to win down the road.

Opponents claim that at least 80 Labour MPs are ready to go public with a call for Mr Blair to quit, with another 40 sharing that view privately. Critics said only a "bankable public statement from his own lips" would quell the open rebellion.

Read More......

Good God, now Bush is comparing Iraq to the Soviet Union

So we've had the Nazis, the Civil War, and now Lenin. I'm sure I'm missing some other absurd comparisons as well.

"History teaches that underestimating the words of evil and ambitious men is a terrible mistake," the president said. "Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. The question is: Will we listen? Will we pay attention to what these evil men say?"

What this idiot doesn't understand, or chooses to ignore, is that regardless of how evil the enemy, the problem isn't that the American people don't understand the dangers we face. The problem is that the American people have finally understood that we have an incompetent buffoon in charge of tackling said danger. And no amount of prattling about Lenin or Hitler is going to quell people's concerns that Bush is simply not up to the task. Read More......