Here’s what passes for a “fair and balanced” review of “The Path to 9/11″ from that librul New York Times:
In 2001 President Bush and his newly appointed aides had ample warning, including a briefing paper titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.,†and they failed to take it seriously enough, but their missteps are not equal. It’s like focusing blame for a school shooting at the beginning of the school year on the student’s new home room teacher; the adults who watched the boy torment classmates and poison small animals knew better. (It’s safe to assume that any future mini-series about American foreign policy will not delve flatteringly into Mr. Bush’s march to war in Iraq.)
If the new homeroom teacher is the one who gets the memo from the local police, warning that Bobby Jones has many guns and is saying he plans to bring them to school sometime in the next month… is that responsibility clear enough for someone who works at the Times?
UPDATE: Liberal Oasis has more on this half-assed review, and so does SusanG at Daily Kos.
Am I the only one who recalls that in the early days of the Bush Administration they were only concerned with “state sponsored” terrorism? And poor Osama didn’t have a sponsor.
[...] Quote me: “All mini-series Photoshop the facts.” Maybe not. The Path to 9/11 continues on the path to hell. [...]