When true stories are adapted for TV movies they are often dramatized and exaggerated. This is widely known, it's a pop culture joke. "Who's gonna play you in the TV movie?" Everything is bigger, flashier, faster, the actors are always better looking than the real people. Major events in history are often reinterpreted; presented in the way the filmmaker chooses to achieve the desired effect. (Think Titanic, Jack The Ripper, the Civil War, The Passion of the Christ, Tora,Tora,Tora, JFK, Schindler's List... and on and on).
Something "based on a true story" is far removed from a Documentary.
So what, Right?
The problem I'm having here is that this "docudrama" is furthering the confusion and misconceptions about what really happened on 9/11/01. It seems as though this is intentional. It's been pointed out that screenwriter:
This is old news in a way since the movie came out last year, but similar things happen every day. What is important here is that we keep fact separated from fiction, especially revisionist fiction that seeks to hide truth or corrupt what's left of the public mind. Many people don't know what is really happening around them. Much of the media is busy trying to engage the public in argument and debate of false issues. Worse still, it is often the case that neither side's belief is true. People fight bitterly and call each other all sorts of names defending fiercely held positions when all of it is just make believe. It equates to children fighting over cartoons while the parents tackle the real issues that will ultimately shape their lives. You're pro Bugs Bunny and your neighbor supports Mickey Mouse, and you don't see eye to eye. Meanwhile truth goes unnoticed.
Sadly, in this story we never grow up. We don't get to be the "parents". It is that way by design.
Changing gears, and shuffling through some older stuff trying to get it posted, it's more Iraq. Glenn Greenwald had a great post in January about just how right Scott Ritter was about Iraq back in 2002.
Examples of Wingnuttery in the Iraq-false-debate vein from The Poor Man, while you're there you can take your final exam in country music.
Yet another reason to hate the Chinese government. As if more are needed.
Read This: "Where We Are (after Bede)" by Stephen Dobyns.
Last - Watch this short 6 minute film by Darren Williams called Pentagon Strike and compare it to what you remember about that day or what's been told to you since. WaPo says nothing.
Next: Oil Pipelines.
Something "based on a true story" is far removed from a Documentary.
So what, Right?
The problem I'm having here is that this "docudrama" is furthering the confusion and misconceptions about what really happened on 9/11/01. It seems as though this is intentional. It's been pointed out that screenwriter:
(Cyrus)Nowrasteh spoke last year on a panel aimed at bringing a conservative tilt to Hollywood. Conservative talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh received an advance copy of the film and has raved about it on the air.From a letter written by the democratic leaders in the senate:
"That Disney would seek to broadcast an admittedly and proven false recounting of the events of 9/11 raises serious questions about the motivations of its creators and those who approved the deeply flawed program," the senators wrote. "Finally, that Disney plans to air commercial-free a program that reportedly cost it $40 million to produce serves to add fuel to these concerns."The timing of the release of this film, the fact that Disney footed the bill and broadcast it without sponsorship, and that Scholastic Corporation (that's right, the school book company) planned to distribute "Learning Guides" to schools along with copies of the film should make you ask some questions. Like who produced this gem of a picture?
This is old news in a way since the movie came out last year, but similar things happen every day. What is important here is that we keep fact separated from fiction, especially revisionist fiction that seeks to hide truth or corrupt what's left of the public mind. Many people don't know what is really happening around them. Much of the media is busy trying to engage the public in argument and debate of false issues. Worse still, it is often the case that neither side's belief is true. People fight bitterly and call each other all sorts of names defending fiercely held positions when all of it is just make believe. It equates to children fighting over cartoons while the parents tackle the real issues that will ultimately shape their lives. You're pro Bugs Bunny and your neighbor supports Mickey Mouse, and you don't see eye to eye. Meanwhile truth goes unnoticed.
Sadly, in this story we never grow up. We don't get to be the "parents". It is that way by design.
Changing gears, and shuffling through some older stuff trying to get it posted, it's more Iraq. Glenn Greenwald had a great post in January about just how right Scott Ritter was about Iraq back in 2002.
Examples of Wingnuttery in the Iraq-false-debate vein from The Poor Man, while you're there you can take your final exam in country music.
Yet another reason to hate the Chinese government. As if more are needed.
Read This: "Where We Are (after Bede)" by Stephen Dobyns.
Last - Watch this short 6 minute film by Darren Williams called Pentagon Strike and compare it to what you remember about that day or what's been told to you since. WaPo says nothing.
Next: Oil Pipelines.
