US - The Path to 9/11

I watched the show last night and note that it was devastating for the Democrats. I had already watched these unedited clips and therefore had seen some pretty damning stuff. The version shown by the BBC was heavily edited but even so, both my wife and I were very angry at the Democrats when it ended. Not that that's anything new for me but I can tell you I was a lot angrier after watching the program.

Hot Air has a side by side comparison of the edited and unedited versions of the opening scenes.

Glenn watched it and has some thoughts as well as some from others, including this email:

"I didn't watch it, but let me make a bet with you. Over the next couple of weeks the networks will do so many stories "debunking" the show that I'll feel like I have to see it just to get a fair look at all the facts. And I won't be the only one. Look for this to be a huge seller on DVD for just that reason. Oh, and Sandy Berger will be on television alot over the next couple of weeks as well which will lead to booming business for the blogs willing to take another look at his pants stuffing incident. Becuase the networks sure won't. The Democrats have a huge problem here. The problem is that people are beginning to wonder what the hell they're hiding. With the AP thing and the Rueters photos thing and the Rathergate thing and the Eason Jordan thing and the Censorship for access thing and the staged photos thing the networks have the same problem. Look for some surprises come November."

Watch also for people to say this is all pre 9/11 and who can say the Republicans would have done any better. Maybe there's a small grain of truth in that, but look at what the Republicans have done since compared to the Democrats. Here's a comment I left to someone who had those kind of thoughts.

Maybe but think about this. What have the Democrats been doing since 9/11? The Democrats are against the NSA wiretap program, the SWIFT bank program, rendition, Gitmo, and the Patriot Act. All Republican programs and all proven effective in the war on terror.

In respect to the Democrats attempts to stifle free speech and ban the film, Glenn notes this:

If they'd kept their mouths shut, this would be about the terrorists, which would be bad enough. Now it's about the terrorists and the Democrats.

UPDATE

Seems my wife and I aren't the only ones that were angrier after watching the film. Glenn has this email from someone in New Zealand.

Seeing all the attacks of the 90s laid out and dramatized (with a couple of screwed-up attempts to get Bin Laden thrown in) was kind of shocking, even for someone who is already familiar with the facts. I understand why the Clinton people do not want this to air. About the two disputed scenes: Berger does not slam down the phone but he comes of very very badly anyway. The scene with Albright doesn’t look to have changed at all (from descriptions I heard earlier). I tend to share Lileks’ (and your) view about pre-9/11 actions getting a pass, but I must say, seeing one incompetent act after another does make me angry with the Clinton Administration. I imagine it might have the same effect on other viewers.

It will indeed.