Favorite

ABC makes a good story 

“The Path to 9/11,” the ABC movie that marinates fact in fiction and blames Bill Clinton for Osama bin Laden, begins with an erroneous scene.

Mohammad Atta gets cleared to board American Airlines at Boston Logan although his check-in causes a warning to pop up on the attendant’s computer screen.

Actually, that had happened earlier in Portland, Maine, where Atta caught a USA Air Express commuter flight by which he was already cleared when he got to Boston. For that matter, the warning in Maine was random and required only that US Airways Express hold Atta’s checked bags for review, which it did.

The facts are powerful enough. Why not be true to them?

We know why. It would cost a few precious seconds of network time to take Atta from Portland to Boston and through a plane change. The teleplay is best served if you put him on the killing jet directly. Your narrative flows more easily.

You excuse yourself with an editor’s note that some scenes represent “composites” or “time compressions.” Those are euphemisms for “some of this is made up.”

When Clinton and his people cry foul, you’re obliged to wonder if the screenwriter, an avowed right-wing pal of Rush Limbaugh, didn’t bedevil them with sloppy details, too.

This is serious business, evoking 9/11 and presuming to tell its story by passing, or at least implying, judgments. You could do it with straight journalism, meaning reporting of facts. Or you could do it like Michael Moore, with a supposed documentary that has a clear and admitted bias and falls under the category of a polemic.

ABC chose neither. Instead it hired a guy with a conservative point of view to write a fictional script performed by professional pretenders that it presumes to air as fact-based.

Fiction ought to be about wholly fictional characters engaging in wholly fictional events — like, say, “West Wing.” That was a liberal Democrats’ show, yes. But it didn’t presume to be about anything that really happened. Any disapproval of the Bush administration was metaphorical.

Putting aside the treatment of Clinton and his people, the political innuendoes of this miniseries are woefully superficial.

In one scene concocted from whole cloth, the mastermind in the 1993 World Trade Center attack is shown at an airport as he prepares to leave the country. He calls someone to claim credit for the truck bomb. Police shout and walk toward him. It turns out they’re concerned about the vagrant behind him.

What’s the point? Is it that the two policemen should have detained this fellow on the basis that he looked Arab? Is that a sufficiently fair and contextual examination of the great American experiment in personal liberty?

Then, as it happens, this bombing mastermind gets found out when a policewoman in the Philippines finds and opens his laptop without a warrant. American FBI agents lament that they couldn’t have done that.

Again, the point is ... what, exactly? Is it that we need to trash our principle of constitutional protection against illegal searches and seizures? Anyway, I rather suspect that American police agencies could have obtained a warrant easily enough.

Finally, what of the film’s underlying indictment of Clinton, which is that he and his administration had a couple of good chances to nail bin Laden, but balked like girlie men?

In one case the Clinton people were concerned about collateral damage to innocent children. In another the Pentagon — not Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, as this detail-challenged film asserts — notified the Pakistani military that a cruise missile soon to be flying toward Osama was not from India. Otherwise, Pakistan might have been inclined to start a nuclear war with its neighbor. Maybe word got relayed to bin Laden.

Those are matters worthy of arguments availing themselves of hindsight’s brilliance. But they’re hardly sufficient reasons for a movie character to ask whether there were any real men left in Washington. That’s at least as unfair as asking whether there are any real truth-tellers left at ABC.




Favorite

From the ArkTimes store

Comments

Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

More by John Brummett

  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • Can we talk? Can we get anywhere?

    Dialogue is good. It would be even better if someone would venture off script every once in a while.
    • Sep 21, 2011
  • More »

More by Max Brantley

Most Shared

Latest in John Brummett

  • Gone to the DoG

    We're now longer carrying John Brummett's column in this space.
    • Oct 12, 2011
  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • More »

Event Calendar

« »

December

S M T W T F S
  1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31  

Most Viewed

  • Gratitude

    Now, more than ever, I find myself thankful for those who resist. Those who remind us of our higher common values. The fact-checkers and truth-tellers. Those who build bridges in communities instead of walls to segregate. The ones who stand up and speak out against injustice.
  • A difference

    How low can a columnist go? On evidence, nowhere near as low as the president of the United States. I'd intended to highlight certain ironies in the career of U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). The self-anointed moral arbiter of the Senate began her career as a tobacco company lawyer — that is, somebody ill-suited to demand absolute purity of anybody, much less Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.).
  • Silly acts, good law

    It was unavoidable that the struggle by sexual minorities to gain the equal treatment that the Constitution promises them would devolve into silliness and that the majestic courts of the land would have to get their dignity sullied in order to resolve the issues.
  • Money talks

    Democratic candidates face a dilemma in Arkansas. To take on the GOP members who are firmly entrenched in the state Legislature and Congress, they will need lots of money and lots of votes. The easiest way to get more votes is to spend more money. Obscene amounts of money. And thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United decision and President Trump's judicial appointments, this will be our reality for a long time. The six Republicans who make up our congressional delegation have stopped pretending to care about their constituents. They vote in line with the interests of big corporations and lobbyists. They know what side their bread is buttered on.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: A difference

    • History is likely to move with light speed in concluding that in late 2017 society…

    • on December 14, 2017
  • Re: A difference

    • Gillibrand is a tough chick, and she knows she is a political whore, like 95%…

    • on December 14, 2017
  • Re: Cats and dogs

    • I miss my wolves. It has been over five years since the last of my…

    • on December 12, 2017
 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation