Hubby got me hooked on watching NASA tv this morning, observing the astronaut outside the space vehicle doing his work while floating in space. That takes an incredible amount of courage from where I sit. Hubby was watching while going about his pre-work stuff this morning. He was up around 3:00 and watching shows he's taped - like Deep Space 9 - and computing. He is preparing to go to Wyoming. Lucky him.
So what was all the tortured cries from the Clinton people all about anyway concerning the "Path to 9/11" movie? I watched the whole thing and I don't get it. ABC lost their committment to the original script and edited out some scenes, about 30 minutes worth it looked like to me. But if their administration was there the eight years leading up to the attack on our soil and the new Bush administration was there for 8 months, after being delayed in the transition due to Al Gores's temper tantrum over recounting the recounts, then who would have more "blame" if that is what the story concerned? Just common sense. All these points were brought out in the written report put into book form from the 9/11 Commission. I bought the book, I read it. It's all there. I guess the Clinton people assumed the largely apathetic American people would never bother to educate themselves on the history of terror attacks affecting this country.
I found it interesting that the fringe of the left who are so quick to label President Bush and his administration with the Nazi label were so adamant about banning this movie from being shown on network t.v. Wow. And, President Clinton, again asserting himself onto the stage, had his lawyer write to ABC and demand it not be shown. Again, wow. I saw none of this outrage towards Michael Moore and his movie. If the Clinton people are just all about honesty, doesn't honesty apply to both sides?
Those who ridiculed President Bush for finishing up with the young children in Sarasota, Florida while reading a book to them and not causing them undue panic, are they the same ones who Jamie Gorelick was referring to when she said the ABC movie shouldn't be shown to protect the children? If she was so concerned with protecting the children she would have never thrown up the wall between the CIA and FBI preventing them from working together on terrorism issues.
Where is the left in demanding the movie to be distributed in this country with the theme of President Bush's assassination not happen? This movie, made by a Brit, is centered on the assassination of a sitting President, photoshopped with his head on an actor's body, and how the evil U.S. prosecutes his alleged killer. Not bothering to deal with anything but taking a swipe against our justice system. It smacks of incredible arrogance. Oh, those intellectual Brits...
And on the flip side of Brits, how cool was it so see Margaret Thacher with V.P. Cheney and Mrs. Cheney yesterday at the Pentagon's 9/11 remembrance service? She is one incredible woman.
"We're all lucky to be here today and able to say what deserves saying, and if you say it a lot, it won't make it common and so unheard, but known and absorbed." - Peggy Noonan