Part two of ABC's 9-11 "docudrama" contained falsified scenes
bolstering Bush
http://mediamatters.org/items/200609130003
Reviews of the first part of ABC's "docudrama" The Path to 9/11,
conducted by Media Matters for America and others, revealed that
the film contained invented and factually inaccurate scenes that
cast the Clinton administration as unwilling to aggressively
combat terrorism. The second half of the miniseries, which aired
on September 11, also contained scenes that were factually
inaccurate -- this time showing President Bush taking aggressive
action there is no indication he ever took.
Part two of The Path to 9/11 contained a dramatic re-enactment
of a September 4, 2001, meeting between then-Bush
counterterrorism adviser Richard A. Clarke, then-CIA director
George Tenet, and then-national security adviser Condoleezza
Rice. In the film, Rice tells Clarke and Tenet:
RICE: Morning, gentlemen. As a result of the August 6 [2001]
Presidential Daily Briefing [PDB], the president is tired of
swatting flies. He believes Al Qaeda is a real threat, and he
wants to consider real action. He specifically asked about the
armed Predator. Where are we with that?
The PDB -- a highly classified intelligence estimate -- for
August 6, 2001, was titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in
US." This scene from the film, however, is factually
inconsistent with the 9-11 Commission report, upon which the
writer and director of the "docudrama" claimed the film was
heavily based.
Bush's reported use of the phrase "swatting flies" had nothing
to do with the August 6, 2001, PDB. As the 9-11 Commission
report noted, Rice testified before the commission that Bush
used the phrase earlier that year:
In early March, the administration postponed action on proposals
for increasing aid to the Northern Alliance and the Uzbeks. Rice
noted at the time that a more wide-ranging examination of policy
toward Afghanistan was needed first. She wanted the review very
soon.184
Rice and others recalled the President saying, "I'm tired of
swatting at flies."185 The President reportedly also said, "I'm
tired of playing defense. I want to play offense. I want to take
the fight to the terrorists."186 President Bush explained to us
that he had become impatient. He apparently had heard proposals
for rolling back al Qaeda but felt that catching terrorists one
by one or even cell by cell was not an approach likely to
succeed in the long run. At the same time, he said, he
understood that policy had to be developed slowly so that
diplomacy and financial and military measures could mesh with
one another.187
The commission also noted that Rice testified that Bush used the
phrase in May 2001, and that Clarke disputed Rice's testimony,
claiming that Bush actually used the phrase in March 2001.
Additionally, both Rice and Bush downplayed the significance of
the August 6, 2001, PDB. In her testimony before the commission,
Rice stated several times that the August 6, 2001, PDB was a
"historical" document and that it contained "no new threat
information." The White House released a "fact sheet" in April
2004, when portions of the August 6, 2001, PDB were
declassified, which stated:
The article advised the President of what was publicly
well-known: that Bin Ladin had a desire to attack inside the
United States. Bin Ladin had stated publicly in 1997 and 1998
that his followers would try to "bring the fighting to America."
Most of the information in the article was an analysis of
previous terrorist attacks by al-Qaida and a summary and
discussion of general threat reporting from the late 1990s. The
draft was prepared by CIA after consultation with an FBI
analyst.
And, as Media Matters has noted, investigative journalist Ron
Suskind, in his recent book, The One Percent Doctrine: Deep
Inside America's Pursuit of Its Enemies Since 9/11 (Simon &
Schuster, June 2006), fleshed out some details regarding Bush's
receipt of the August 6, 2001, PDB. Specifically, Suskind
reported that the "analytical arm of CIA was in kind of a panic
mode" during that month and CIA officials "flew to Crawford
[Texas] to personally brief the President -- to intrude on his
vacation with face-to-face alerts." At the end of one such
briefing, Bush reportedly responded to the CIA briefer, "All
right ... You've covered your ass, now."
In another scene in part two of the miniseries, Vice President
Dick Cheney, after conversing with Bush over the phone
immediately following the crash of American Airlines Flight 77
into the Pentagon, announced: "The president has just given the
shoot-down order":
CONTROLLER 1: You are to establish combat air patrol over
Manhattan.
PILOT: Huntress, please advise. Do we have shoot-down authority?
CONTROLLER 1: Do you know of the rules of engagement?
OFFICER: Stand by.
CHENEY (on phone with Bush): Sir, the fighters are up. But they
-- they want to know what to do. Sir, it may require extreme
measures.
CLARKE: Where's Don Rumsfeld?
CONTROLLER 2: Is that American 77 or United 93 that just hit the
Pentagon?
CONTROLLER 3: I've still got 93 on my screen. About 20 minutes
out of Washington.
CONTROLLER 2: If that plane's headed for Washington, it could be
serious.
CONTROLLER 3: I know. I know. A whole bunch of people just left
the room. They're making phone calls.
CHENEY: The president has just given the shoot-down order.
However, as Salon.com editor in chief Joan Walsh wrote in a
September 11 article on the film, "the worst lie I haven't seen
critiqued has to do with whether Bush gave the go-ahead for
American fighter jets to shoot down hijacked airliners." As
Walsh noted, Vanity Fair published an analysis of the recordings
from the control room at NORAD's Northeast headquarters from
September 11, 2001, indicating that Bush did not actually give
the order to shoot down the hijacked airplanes; he authorized
military commanders to make the decision themselves, and he did
not grant that authorization until 10:18 a.m. -- 15 minutes
after United Airlines Flight 93 had crashed in Shanksville,
Pennsylvania, and 41 minutes after American Airlines Flight 77
had struck the Pentagon. However, as Vanity Fair also noted,
Cheney and other White House officials would later "recount
sober deliberations about the prospect of shooting down United
93."
In fact, the 9-11 Commission specifically noted that even though
Cheney had testified that he remembered calling Bush to discuss
rules of engagement for fighter jets in the air, there existed
"no documentary evidence for this call," adding that "the
relevant sources are incomplete." Moreover, as Media Matters has
noted, the Commission did cite a number of sources, none of
which supported Cheney's claims. According to the report, those
sources were: "(1) phone logs of the White House switchboard;
(2) notes of [I. "Scooter"] Lewis Libby [Cheney's then-chief of
staff], Mrs. [Lynne] Cheney, and [then-White House press
secretary] Ari Fleischer; (3) the tape (and then transcript) of
the air threat conference call; and (4) Secret Service and White
House Situation Room logs, as well as four separate White House
Military Office logs (the PEOC Watch Log, the PEOC Shelter Log,
the Communications Log, and the 9-11 Log)."
From the 9-11 Commission report:
The Vice President remembered placing a call to the President
just after entering the shelter conference room. There is
conflicting evidence about when the Vice President arrived in
the shelter conference room. We have concluded, from the
available evidence, that the Vice President arrived in the room
shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.The Vice President
recalled being told, just after his arrival, that the Air Force
was trying to establish a combat air patrol over Washington.213
The Vice President stated that he called the President to
discuss the rules of engagement for the CAP [combat air patrol].
He recalled feeling that it did no good to establish the CAP
unless the pilots had instructions on whether they were
authorized to shoot if the plane would not divert. He said the
President signed off on that concept. The President said he
remembered such a conversation, and that it reminded him of when
he had been an interceptor pilot. The President emphasized to us
that he had authorized the shootdown of hijacked aircraft.214
The Vice President's military aide told us he believed the Vice
President spoke to the President just after entering the
conference room, but he did not hear what they said. Rice, who
entered the room shortly after the Vice President and sat next
to him, remembered hearing him inform the President, "Sir, the
CAPs are up. Sir, they're going to want to know what to do."
Then she recalled hearing him say, "Yes sir." She believed this
conversation occurred a few minutes, perhaps five, after they
entered the conference room.215
We believe this call would have taken place sometime before
10:10 to 10:15.
Among the sources that reflect other important events of that
morning, there is no documentary evidence for this call, but the
relevant sources are incomplete. Others nearby who were taking
notes, such as the Vice President's chief of staff, Scooter
Libby, who sat next to him, and Mrs. Cheney, did not note a call
between the President and Vice President immediately after the
Vice President entered the conference room.216
Walsh also noted other problems with the movie's second half:
What does Monday night hold? Another big ABC lie has been that
the second half of the film apportions blame more fairly, laying
out the mistakes of the Bush administration as well. That's only
true if you think Condoleezza Rice is the president. Like
Albright, she comes off as a schoolmarmy, hierarchy-obsessed
smarty-pants more interested in protecting the president -- who
is described as really, really wanting to get bin Laden -- than
protecting Americans. But Bush himself gets off unbearably easy.
There's no reference to his monthlong vacation after receiving
the Presidential Daily Briefing "Bin Laden determined to strike
in the United States." There's no scene showing Rice or Cheney
ignoring the warnings of former Sens. Gary Hart [D-CO] and
Warren Rudman's [R-NH] terrorism commission, as they did.
There's certainly no scene of the president reading "The Pet
Goat" for many painful minutes after he's informed of the attack
on our soil the morning of Sept. 11.
Finally, part two of the "docudrama" retained a scene that had
previously been exposed as factually inaccurate, in which a
major airline disregards security warnings and lets one of the
hijackers board his flight. The film depicts Mohammed Atta, the
alleged ringleader of the 9-11 plot, checking in for his flight
at Boston's Logan Airport at an American Airlines ticket
counter. A security warning appears on the American Airlines
employee's screen. The employee calls a supervisor, who hands
Atta his ticket and allows him to pass, telling the employee
that they will simply keep Atta's checked luggage off the plane
until it is confirmed he has boarded.
In fact, as the 9-11 Commission report described on the first
page of its first chapter, the security warning actually
occurred as Atta was checking in for his flight in Portland,
Maine. But Atta flew US Airways Express from Portland to Logan
Airport, where he transferred to American Airlines Flight 11,
which would later crash into the North Tower at the World Trade
Center:
Atta and [suspected hijacker Abdul] Omari boarded a 6:00 A.M.
flight from Portland to Boston's Logan International Airport.1
When he checked in for his flight to Boston, Atta was selected
by a computerized prescreening system known as CAPPS (Computer
Assisted Passenger Prescreening System), created to identify
passengers who should be subject to special security measures.
Under security rules in place at the time, the only consequence
of Atta's selection by CAPPS was that his checked bags were held
off the plane until it was confirmed that he had boarded the
aircraft. This did not hinder Atta's plans.2
Atta and Omari arrived in Boston at 6:45. Seven minutes later,
Atta apparently took a call from Marwan al Shehhi, a longtime
colleague who was at another terminal at Logan Airport. They
spoke for three minutes.3 It would be their final conversation.
Between 6:45 and 7:40, Atta and Omari, along with [suspected
hijackers] Satam al Suqami, Wail al Shehri, and Waleed al
Shehri, checked in and boarded American Airlines Flight 11,
bound for Los Angeles. The flight was scheduled to depart at
7:45.4
From part two of The Path to 9/11:
AMERICAN AIRLINES EMPLOYEE: Mr. Atta -- one-way, non-stop to Los
Angeles. No return.
ATTA: Yes.
AMERICAN AIRLINES SUPERVISOR (handing tickets to Atta): Thank
you.
ATTA: Thank you.
EMPLOYEE: CAPPS warning. Should he be searched?
SUPERVISOR: No. Just hold their bags till they board.
Contact:
ABC ABC News
ABCNews
7 W. 66th St.
New York, NY 10023
Contact:
ABC Entertainment
Contact
Part two of ABC's 9-11 "docudrama" contained falsified scenes
bolstering Bush
http://mediamatters.org/items/200609130003
Reviews of the first part of ABC's "docudrama" The Path to 9/11,
conducted by Media Matters for America and others, revealed that
the film contained invented and factually inaccurate scenes that
cast the Clinton administration as unwilling to aggressively
combat terrorism. The second half of the miniseries, which aired
on September 11, also contained scenes that were factually
inaccurate -- this time showing President Bush taking aggressive
action there is no indication he ever took.
Part two of The Path to 9/11 contained a dramatic re-enactment
of a September 4, 2001, meeting between then-Bush
counterterrorism adviser Richard A. Clarke, then-CIA director
George Tenet, and then-national security adviser Condoleezza
Rice. In the film, Rice tells Clarke and Tenet:
RICE: Morning, gentlemen. As a result of the August 6 [2001]
Presidential Daily Briefing [PDB], the president is tired of
swatting flies. He believes Al Qaeda is a real threat, and he
wants to consider real action. He specifically asked about the
armed Predator. Where are we with that?
The PDB -- a highly classified intelligence estimate -- for
August 6, 2001, was titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in
US." This scene from the film, however, is factually
inconsistent with the 9-11 Commission report, upon which the
writer and director of the "docudrama" claimed the film was
heavily based.
Bush's reported use of the phrase "swatting flies" had nothing
to do with the August 6, 2001, PDB. As the 9-11 Commission
report noted, Rice testified before the commission that Bush
used the phrase earlier that year:
In early March, the administration postponed action on proposals
for increasing aid to the Northern Alliance and the Uzbeks. Rice
noted at the time that a more wide-ranging examination of policy
toward Afghanistan was needed first. She wanted the review very
soon.184
Rice and others recalled the President saying, "I'm tired of
swatting at flies."185 The President reportedly also said, "I'm
tired of playing defense. I want to play offense. I want to take
the fight to the terrorists."186 President Bush explained to us
that he had become impatient. He apparently had heard proposals
for rolling back al Qaeda but felt that catching terrorists one
by one or even cell by cell was not an approach likely to
succeed in the long run. At the same time, he said, he
understood that policy had to be developed slowly so that
diplomacy and financial and military measures could mesh with
one another.187
The commission also noted that Rice testified that Bush used the
phrase in May 2001, and that Clarke disputed Rice's testimony,
claiming that Bush actually used the phrase in March 2001.
Additionally, both Rice and Bush downplayed the significance of
the August 6, 2001, PDB. In her testimony before the commission,
Rice stated several times that the August 6, 2001, PDB was a
"historical" document and that it contai