News Corp Set To Air 9/11 Documentary Glorifying Bush; Producer Says He’s Not Interested In ‘Facts’ - Polidicks

[url]http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/25/303774/newscorp-911-bush-promo/[/url] [quote]After spending over a decade promoting President Bush, the PATRIOT Act, and the Iraq War, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation appears to be up to the same tricks, this time with an hour-long promotional video about Bush’s leadership during the 9/11 attacks. Although News Corp. is perhaps best known for its Bush cheerleading through its Fox News subsidiary, the Bush documentary is airing on another News Corp. company with a better brand image, National Geographic. The documentary has not aired yet, but is scheduled to come out a few days before the 10-year anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Early reviews of the program, however, paint Bush as a hero who discarded politics and his right-wing agenda once the planes hit the towers. The film also depicts Bush as a leader bent on capturing Osama bin Laden, no matter what: “It’s not one of those moments where you weigh the consequences or think about the politics,” [Bush] adds. ”You decide. And I made the decisions as best I could in the fog of war. I was determined. Determined to protect the country. And I was determined to find out who did it and go get them.” In reality, within hours of the 9/11 plane hijackings, Bush’s Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld began drawing up plans to launch a war in Iraq “even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.” Indeed, Bush aides quickly went to work undercutting the proposed commission to study the events leading up the 9/11, and despite the growing evidence linking the terrorist act with Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda group, Bush never made bin Laden a priority. By January 2002, Dick Cheney told the press that bin Laden “isn’t that big a threat.” The next month, Bush said bin Laden was “not the issue.” Will producer Peter Schnall critically, and accurately, explain to the public Bush’s actions during and after the horrific 9/11 terrorist attacks? In a recent interview about the program, Schnall said he tried not to push “it too far” with the former president, and that he was “less interested in facts than how” Bush “was feeling”: “He would only take it to so far,” Schnall tells Zap2it. “If I had pushed it too far, he might have shut down a bit more, and my goal was to get him to talk about those four or five days. I was less interested in facts than how he was feeling.” News Corp. has a long and complicated relationship with the Bush administration. In addition to promoting the Bush political agenda for two terms on Fox News, former Bush aides have flocked to the corporation as employees (Bush’s top strategist and spokeswoman, Karl Rove and Dana Perino, are among the many Bush admin alumni seen every day on Fox News). Bush’s assistant attorney general Viet Dinh, the “chief architect” of the PATRIOT Act, is an influential board member of News Corp. now overseeing the investigation of the hacking scandal now embroiling the company. But if there’s any doubt that News Corp. isn’t serious about its latest attempt at Bush hagiography, take a look at the publicity effort around the documentary. On Tuesday, Matt Dornic promoted a special viewing of the documentary on the FishbowlDC website. Dornic is a staffer for Quinn Gillespie, News Corp.’s lobbying firm and public relations agency in Washington, DC [/quote]

Bush loves BBQ and the Rangers, what an american hero.

[QUOTE] “If I had pushed it too far, he might have shut down a bit more, and my goal was to get him to talk about those four or five days. [B]I was less interested in facts than how he was feeling.”[/B][/QUOTE] Bleh, nothing new here.

I.. don't understand what the problem is, exactly? Misleading title is misleading.

Ouf, this is terrible. I hate news corp.

When you say these sensationalist things with no bearing on reality, you make us look no better than the folks at Fox. Don't be that guy. Be the better man.

This source is very, very biased. It's kind of hypocritical to criticize Fox New's bias using a source like this.

If he's glorifying Bush then it's obvious he wasn't interested in facts.

I don't get a problem. This is like a mini biography. It shouldn't be about fact unless Bush wanted to make it about facts. There's hundreds of other 9/11 specials about facts anyway, watch one of them. This is more a look into the mind of how he felt he did and what he wanted what he did to look like. I think it could be very insightful. And as much as I hate Newscorp, I have to admit he wouldn't have done a program like this with anyone else, so it's a necessary evil.

Holy shit, this documentary makes a person look like he cares about a tragedy [i]so biased[/i]. How do you make a biased documentary when it's in the eyes of a single person.

it seems more like a documentary about bush rather than 9/11

Source is inherently biased. I wouldn't put much credence into what is in the article. But then again, I'm not the people on here that will circle jerk to anything that makes Bush or Murdoch look like Satan incarnate.

[QUOTE=Ridge;31947246]I'm not the people on here that will circle jerk to anything that makes Bush or Murdoch look like Satan incarnate.[/QUOTE] Yes, continue to imply that Liberal criticism of Bush that occurred in the past was "circlejerking" and that they'll just blindly follow anything that criticizes him.

I've heard about this. I really don't mind. I was surprised when I learned Fox owned NatGeo, but it's not that bad.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31947414]Yes, continue to imply that Liberal criticism of Bush that occurred in the past was "circlejerking" and that they'll just blindly follow anything that criticizes him.[/QUOTE] I'm not referring to liberals, I'm referring to the people on FP like yourself.

[QUOTE=Ridge;31947550]I'm not referring to liberals, I'm referring to the people on FP like yourself.[/QUOTE] I do not "circlejerk" to anything that criticizes Murdoch or Bush. In cases where I feel they deserve criticism, I shall criticize as appropriate. Simple as that.

fog of war while there is no war brilliant

I guess bush's leadership was okay. Wasn't very good before or a while after though. [editline]25th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Elecbullet;31947548]I've heard about this. I really don't mind. I was surprised when I learned Fox owned NatGeo, but it's not that bad.[/QUOTE] partial owner, they don't mess with the content

[QUOTE=Ridge;31947246]Source is inherently biased. I wouldn't put much credence into what is in the article. But then again, I'm not the people on here that will circle jerk to anything that makes Bush or Murdoch look like Satan incarnate.[/QUOTE] let's literally ignore everything in the article. the word "bias" is a magical spell that can be used to make anything we don't like go away. we don't even have to address the content of the article, by simply saying "it sounds biased" we can justify ignoring everything~~~~ this is how people talk about politics in the year of our lord 2011. [editline]25th August 2011[/editline] also lets point out the fact that people on this forum don't like George Bush because that definitely constitutes an argument here on earth and not on, say, the planet Htrae, home of Bizarro Superman

Gotta love revisionist history.

Facts and logics are for dem liberal commie folk. [editline]26th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Sega Saturn;31946160]This source is very, very biased. It's kind of hypocritical to criticize Fox New's bias using a source like this.[/QUOTE] Think Progress is a pretty good news source. [editline]26th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Ridge;31947246]Source is inherently biased. I wouldn't put much credence into what is in the article. But then again, I'm not the people on here that will circle jerk to anything that makes Bush or Murdoch look like Satan incarnate.[/QUOTE] HA! it's funny because Ridge said it and Ridge is a certain breed of annoying Conservative.

He should make a comedy about Bush, I'll always remember bush by how hilarious his speeches were