Is it going to pre-empt LOST?

Well, it's not gone unnoticed:Clinton admin angered by depiction

I wonder if they can sue for defamation of character, etc. Might be a good way to set the record straight in the public forum.

Excerpt:
"Albright said she never warned Pakistan. The Sept. 11 commission found that a senior U.S. military official warned Pakistan that missiles crossing its airspace would not be from its archenemy, India.

• "The Path to 9/11" uses news footage to suggest that Clinton was distracted by the Republican drive to impeach him. Veteran White House counterterrorism official Richard A. Clarke, who also disputes the film's accuracy, is portrayed as telling FBI agent John P. O'Neill: "Republicans went all out for impeachment. I just don't see the president in this climate willing to take chances."

O'Neill responds: "So it's okay if somebody kills bin Laden, so long as he didn't give the order. . . . It's pathetic." The Sept. 11 commission found no evidence that the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal played a role in the August 1998 missile strike, but added that the "intense partisanship of the period" was one factor that "likely had a cumulative effect on future decisions about the use of force against bin Laden."

ty

Its not the subject matter I have a problem with, its the misrepresentation of facts.
...
Public outcry is not censorship, its my right and responsibility as a concerned citizen. Censorship is generally practiced by governing bodies, be it ABC's internal censor or the U.S. government, and is not necessarily a bad thing.
...
Revisionist history is not subjective if the accepted truth (the report by 9/11 commission) is rewritten by a hack teevee writer trying to spice up his plot.

Just for clarification, I was saying that I disagree that letter writing campaigns are some form of censorship. They are not. I say go for it.

The problem with saying censorship is not necessarily a bad thing, when linking that with the US Government of any government, is that there is too much of a fight over who is going to censor what. Something I may think is fine to censor you may not and vice versa. So what you are doing, by applying pressure to ABC and Disney, is the way to go.

Accepted truth is alos in the eye of the beholder. My accepted truth on various subjects will undoubtedly vary from yours, and experts in any given field will also vary widely in what they consider an accepted truth to be. The accepted truth is that 19 highjackers in airplanes brought down tthe towers. There is a somewhat significant group of people - no mental midgets, though somewhat misguided perhaps - who think it was a government conspiracy. They do not subscribe to the accepted truth.

The truth is out there.....there are just too many who don't want the truth to be found and will distort it by any means. And I don't just mean on this subject.

Gn2Dlnd,

Perhaps you'll feel better by taking some action.

Maybe a letter to the Federal Election Commission, asking why ABC is giving a $40 million wet kiss to the republican party 60 days before midterm elections. Made me feel better, I tell you what.

Or perhaps a call or letter to the Federal Communication Commission, the entity that licenses ABC and its affiliates? A few hundred complaints may not make all that much difference once re-licensing time rolls around... but a few hundred thousand? Maybe ;)

If you're still fired up after that, why not call your local ABC affiliate and let them know you will be contacting their advertisers.

These people (Disney) understand money. Talk their language to get their attention.

Aha, but there are no advertisers for this program.

Not THIS program

ALL programs

Isn't George Mitchell still with Disney?

Yes, he's still Chairman of the Board of Directors