I think ^(link) therefore I err

Thursday, September 07, 2006

9/11 the movie

From what I understand it's pretty good, though not specifically accurate. Kind of like most docu-dramas....! So people are complaining about parts that are completely inaccurate like:
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."
I'd probably be made too, but do you suppose they would have preferred Sandy Berger in the roll of document thief, putting papers down his pants? That would have been truthful anyway.
This is what cracked me up today though. The Democratic Underground wants to have a campaign of sorts so that:
To counteract the effects the ABC 9-11 movie could have on the midterm elections, I recommend this course of action:
The night of, and the morning after, people will be hitting the internet looking for information on the events as depicted in this movie.

Our biggest opportunity will be to have nearly identical blog posts waiting, then submit them to be found internet wide the morning after the movie. Google and Technorati will pick up on these posts quickly. We can make these entries dominate the first several pages of the search engines.


I find it hard to believe that "people will be hitting the internet" in such numbers that this is going to have any effect. They can dream though!