Here it is folks, the letter written by the "team" of lawyers

Woody, and threatening

ABC.

America has about had it with cowardly, ***** liberals who can't take

heat.

Notice how the fuckwit Libby lawyer says, "we haven't been given the
courtesy to view the film".

THAT'S BECUASE NOBODY OWES THESE ***** HEADS OR BILL CLINTON

ANYTHING !!!!!!!!

That's right. Nobdoy OWES Liberal Puke Pinkos ANYTHING !



Spit





September 1, 2006

Dear Bob,

As you know, ABC intends to air a two part miniseries, "The Path to

which purports to document the events leading up to the terrorist attacks

September 11, 2001. ABC claims that the show is based on the 9/11

Report and, as Steve McPherson, President of ABC Entertainment, has said:
"When you take on the responsibility of telling the story behind such an
important event, it is absolutely critical that you get it right."

By ABC's own standard, ABC has gotten it terribly wrong. The content of
this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has a duty
to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely. It is

to mislead the American public about one of the most horrendous tragedies
our country has ever known.

Despite several requests to view the miniseries, we have not been given
the courtesy of seeing it. This is particularly troubling given the
reputation of Cyrus Nowrasteh, the drama's writer/producer. Mr. Nowrasteh
has been criticized for inaccurately portraying historical events in the
past. In response to previous criticism, he has even said, "I made a
conscious effort not to contact any members of the Administration because

didn't want them to stymie my efforts." Indeed, while we have not been

the courtesy of a viewing, based upon reports from people who have seen

drama you plan to air, we understand that there are at least three
significant factual errors:

-- The drama leads viewers to believe that National Security Advisor

Berger told the CIA that he would not authorize them to take a shot at bin
Laden. This is complete fiction and the event portrayed never happened.
First of all, the 9/11 Commission Report makes clear that CIA Director
George Tenet had been directed by President Clinton and Mr. Berger to get
bin Laden (p. 199 & 508-509). Secondly, Roger Cressy, National Security
Council senior director for counterterrorism from 1999-2001, has said, on
more than one occasion, "Mr. Clinton approved every request made of him by
the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against bin Laden and
al-Qaeda."

In addition, ABC's own counter-terrorism consultant, Richard Clarke, has
said that contrary to the movie:

1) No US military or CIA personnel were on the ground in Afghanistan and
saw bin Laden;

2) The head of the Northern Alliance, Masood, was nowhere near the

bin Laden camp and did not see bin Laden; and

3) CIA Director Tenet said that he could not recommend a strike on the
camp because the information was single-sourced and there would be no way

know if bin Laden was in the target area by the time a cruise missile hit
it.

As Clarke and others will corroborate, President Clinton did in fact
approve of a standing plan to use Afghans who worked for the CIA to

bin Laden. The CIA's Afghan operatives were never able to carry out the
operation and the CIA recommended against inserting Agency personnel to do
it. The Department of Defense, when asked by President Clinton to examine
the use of US troops to capture bin Laden, also recommended against that
option.

-- The drama claims that former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
refused to sanction a missile strike against bin Laden without first
alerting the Pakistanis and notified them over the objections of the
military. Again, this is false.

-- Using newsreel footage of President Clinton, the drama insinuates

President Clinton was too pre-occupied with the impeachment and the

matter to be engaged in pursuing bin Laden. This allegation is absurd and
was directly refuted by ABC News consultant Richard Clarke in his book,
Against All Enemies: "Clinton made clear that we were to give him our best
national security advice without regard to his personal problems. 'Do you
recommend that we strike on the 20th? Fine. Do not give me political

or personal advice about the timing. That's my problem. Let me worry about
that.' If we thought this was the best time to hit the Afghan camps, he
would order it and take the heat."

While these are three examples that we are aware of that are utterly
baseless, they are clearly indicative of other errors in the substance and
bent of the film. Indeed, the overall tone in the advertisements we've

for this drama suggest that President Clinton was inattentive to the

of terrorism or insufficiently intent upon eliminating the threat from bin
Laden. Note that the 9/11 Commission Report says:

-- We believe that both President Clinton and President Bush were
genuinely concerned about the danger posed by al Qaeda." (p. 349)

-- "By May 1998 . clearly, President Clinton's concern about terrorism

steadily risen." (p. 102)

-- "President Clinton was deeply concerned about bin Laden. He and his
national security advisor, Samuel 'Sandy' Berger, ensured they had a

daily pipeline of reports feeding them the latest updates on bin Laden's
reported location." (p. 175)

-- "President Clinton spoke of terrorism in numerous public statements.

his August 5, 1996, remarks at George Washington University, he called
terrorism 'the enemy of our generation.'" (p. 500)

We challenge anyone to read the 9/11 Commission Report and find any

for the false allegations noted above or the tenor of the drama, which
suggests that the Clinton Administration was inattentive to the threat of

terrorist strike.

Frankly, the bias of the ABC drama is not surprising given the

and political leanings of its writer/producer, Mr. Nowrasteh, which have
been well-documented on numerous conservative blogs and talk shows in his
promotion of this film. Mr. Nowrasteh's bias can be seen in an interview

gave to David Horowitz's conservative magazine Frontpage, during which he
said:

"The 9/11 report details the Clinton's administration's response - or

of response - to Al Qaeda and how this emboldened Bin Laden to keep
attacking American interests. The worst example is the response to the
October, 2000 attack of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen where 17 American sailors
were killed. There simply was no response. Nothing."

But as Sandy Berger told the 9/11 Commission: "[T]o go to war, a

needs to be able to say that his senior intelligence and law enforcement
officers have concluded who is responsible." And as the 9/11 Commission
report repeatedly acknowledges, the US did not have clear evidence of bin
Laden's connection to the attack on the USS Cole before the end of the
Clinton Administration (p. 192, 193, 195 & executive summary).

While ABC is promoting "The Path to 9/11" as a dramatization of

fact, in truth it is a fictitious rewriting of history that will be
misinterpreted by millions of Americans. Given your stated obligation to
"get it right," we urge you to do so by not airing this drama until the
egregious factual errors are corrected, an endeavor we could easily assist
you with given the opportunity to view the film.

Sincerely,

Bruce R. Lindsey

Chief Executive Officer

William J. Clinton Foundation

Douglas J. Band

Counselor to President Clinton

Office of William Jefferson Clinton

Cc: Ms. Madeleine K. Albright

Mr. Samuel R. Berger

Mr. Richard A. Clarke

Mr. Stephen McPherson

Mr. George J. Mitchell

Mr. John D. Podesta

Mr. David Westin

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States

Here it is folks, the letter written by the "team" of lawyers
representing Woody, and threatening

ABC.

America has about had it with cowardly, ***** liberals who can't take the
heat.

Notice how the fuckwit Libby lawyer says, "we haven't been given the
courtesy to view the film".

THAT'S BECUASE NOBODY OWES THESE ***** HEADS OR BILL CLINTON

ANYTHING !!!!!!!!

That's right. Nobdoy OWES Liberal Puke Pinkos ANYTHING !



Spit





September 1, 2006

Dear Bob,

As you know, ABC intends to air a two part miniseries, "The Path to
9/11," which purports to document the events leading up to the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001. ABC claims that the show is based on the
9/11 Commission Report and, as Steve McPherson, President of ABC
Entertainment, has said: "When you take on the responsibility of telling
the story behind such an important event, it is absolutely critical that
you get it right."

By ABC's own standard, ABC has gotten it terribly wrong. The content of
this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has a duty
to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely. It is
unconscionable to mislead the American public about one of the most
horrendous tragedies our country has ever known.

Despite several requests to view the miniseries, we have not been given
the courtesy of seeing it. This is particularly troubling given the
reputation of Cyrus Nowrasteh, the drama's writer/producer. Mr. Nowrasteh
has been criticized for inaccurately portraying historical events in the
past. In response to previous criticism, he has even said, "I made a
conscious effort not to contact any members of the Administration because
I didn't want them to stymie my efforts." Indeed, while we have not been
given the courtesy of a viewing, based upon reports from people who have
seen the drama you plan to air, we understand that there are at least
three significant factual errors:

-- The drama leads viewers to believe that National Security Advisor
Sandy Berger told the CIA that he would not authorize them to take a shot
at bin Laden. This is complete fiction and the event portrayed never
happened. First of all, the 9/11 Commission Report makes clear that CIA
Director George Tenet had been directed by President Clinton and Mr.
Berger to get bin Laden (p. 199 & 508-509). Secondly, Roger Cressy,
National Security Council senior director for counterterrorism from
1999-2001, has said, on more than one occasion, "Mr. Clinton approved
every request made of him by the CIA and the U.S. military involving using
force against bin Laden and al-Qaeda."

In addition, ABC's own counter-terrorism consultant, Richard Clarke, has
said that contrary to the movie:

1) No US military or CIA personnel were on the ground in Afghanistan and
saw bin Laden;

2) The head of the Northern Alliance, Masood, was nowhere near the
alleged bin Laden camp and did not see bin Laden; and

3) CIA Director Tenet said that he could not recommend a strike on the
camp because the information was single-sourced and there would be no way
to know if bin Laden was in the target area by the time a cruise missile
hit it.

As Clarke and others will corroborate, President Clinton did in fact
approve of a standing plan to use Afghans who worked for the CIA to
capture bin Laden. The CIA's Afghan operatives were never able to carry
out the operation and the CIA recommended against inserting Agency
personnel to do it. The Department of Defense, when asked by President
Clinton to examine the use of US troops to capture bin Laden, also
recommended against that option.

-- The drama claims that former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
refused to sanction a missile strike against bin Laden without first
alerting the Pakistanis and notified them over the objections of the
military. Again, this is false.

-- Using newsreel footage of President Clinton, the drama insinuates that
President Clinton was too pre-occupied with the impeachment and the
Lewinsky matter to be engaged in pursuing bin Laden. This allegation is
absurd and was directly refuted by ABC News consultant Richard Clarke in
his book, Against All Enemies: "Clinton made clear that we were to give
him our best national security advice without regard to his personal
problems. 'Do you recommend that we strike on the 20th? Fine. Do not give
me political advice or personal advice about the timing. That's my
problem. Let me worry about that.' If we thought this was the best time to
hit the Afghan camps, he would order it and take the heat."

While these are three examples that we are aware of that are utterly
baseless, they are clearly indicative of other errors in the substance and
bent of the film. Indeed, the overall tone in the advertisements we've
seen for this drama suggest that President Clinton was inattentive to the
threat of terrorism or insufficiently intent upon eliminating the threat
from bin Laden. Note that the 9/11 Commission Report says:

-- We believe that both President Clinton and President Bush were
genuinely concerned about the danger posed by al Qaeda." (p. 349)

-- "By May 1998 . clearly, President Clinton's concern about terrorism
had steadily risen." (p. 102)

-- "President Clinton was deeply concerned about bin Laden. He and his
national security advisor, Samuel 'Sandy' Berger, ensured they had a
special daily pipeline of reports feeding them the latest updates on bin
Laden's reported location." (p. 175)

-- "President Clinton spoke of terrorism in numerous public statements.
In his August 5, 1996, remarks at George Washington University, he called
terrorism 'the enemy of our generation.'" (p. 500)

We challenge anyone to read the 9/11 Commission Report and find any basis
for the false allegations noted above or the tenor of the drama, which
suggests that the Clinton Administration was inattentive to the threat of
a terrorist strike.

Frankly, the bias of the ABC drama is not surprising given the background
and political leanings of its writer/producer, Mr. Nowrasteh, which have
been well-documented on numerous conservative blogs and talk shows in his
promotion of this film. Mr. Nowrasteh's bias can be seen in an interview
he gave to David Horowitz's conservative magazine Frontpage, during which
he said:

"The 9/11 report details the Clinton's administration's response - or
lack of response - to Al Qaeda and how this emboldened Bin Laden to keep
attacking American interests. The worst example is the response to the
October, 2000 attack of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen where 17 American sailors
were killed. There simply was no response. Nothing."

But as Sandy Berger told the 9/11 Commission: "[T]o go to war, a
president needs to be able to say that his senior intelligence and law
enforcement officers have concluded who is responsible." And as the 9/11
Commission report repeatedly acknowledges, the US did not have clear
evidence of bin Laden's connection to the attack on the USS Cole before
the end of the Clinton Administration (p. 192, 193, 195 & executive
summary).

While ABC is promoting "The Path to 9/11" as a dramatization of
historical fact, in truth it is a fictitious rewriting of history that
will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans. Given your stated
obligation to "get it right," we urge you to do so by not airing this
drama until the egregious factual errors are corrected, an endeavor we
could easily assist you with given the opportunity to view the film.

Sincerely,

Bruce R. Lindsey

Chief Executive Officer

William J. Clinton Foundation

Douglas J. Band

Counselor to President Clinton

Office of William Jefferson Clinton

Cc: Ms. Madeleine K. Albright

Mr. Samuel R. Berger

Mr. Richard A. Clarke

Mr. Stephen McPherson

Mr. George J. Mitchell

Mr. John D. Podesta

Mr. David Westin

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States

Here it is folks, the letter written by the "team" of lawyers representing
Woody, and threatening

ABC.

America has about had it with cowardly, ***** liberals who can't take the
heat.

Notice how the fuckwit Libby lawyer says, "we haven't been given the
courtesy to view the film".

THAT'S BECUASE NOBODY OWES THESE ***** HEADS OR BILL CLINTON

ANYTHING !!!!!!!!

That's right. Nobdoy OWES Liberal Puke Pinkos ANYTHING !



Spit





September 1, 2006

Dear Bob,

As you know, ABC intends to air a two part miniseries, "The Path to 9/11,"
which purports to document the events leading up to the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001. ABC claims that the show is based on the 9/11 Commission
Report and, as Steve McPherson, President of ABC Entertainment, has said:
"When you take on the responsibility of telling the story behind such an
important event, it is absolutely critical that you get it right."

By ABC's own standard, ABC has gotten it terribly wrong. The content of
this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has a duty
to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely. It is unconscionable
to mislead the American public about one of the most horrendous tragedies
our country has ever known.

Despite several requests to view the miniseries, we have not been given
the courtesy of seeing it. This is particularly troubling given the
reputation of Cyrus Nowrasteh, the drama's writer/producer. Mr. Nowrasteh
has been criticized for inaccurately portraying historical events in the
past. In response to previous criticism, he has even said, "I made a
conscious effort not to contact any members of the Administration because I
didn't want them to stymie my efforts." Indeed, while we have not been given
the courtesy of a viewing, based upon reports from people who have seen the
drama you plan to air, we understand that there are at least three
significant factual errors:

-- The drama leads viewers to believe that National Security Advisor Sandy
Berger told the CIA that he would not authorize them to take a shot at bin
Laden. This is complete fiction and the event portrayed never happened.
First of all, the 9/11 Commission Report makes clear that CIA Director
George Tenet had been directed by President Clinton and Mr. Berger to get
bin Laden (p. 199 & 508-509). Secondly, Roger Cressy, National Security
Council senior director for counterterrorism from 1999-2001, has said, on
more than one occasion, "Mr. Clinton approved every request made of him by
the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against bin Laden and
al-Qaeda."

In addition, ABC's own counter-terrorism consultant, Richard Clarke, has
said that contrary to the movie:

1) No US military or CIA personnel were on the ground in Afghanistan and
saw bin Laden;

2) The head of the Northern Alliance, Masood, was nowhere near the alleged
bin Laden camp and did not see bin Laden; and

3) CIA Director Tenet said that he could not recommend a strike on the
camp because the information was single-sourced and there would be no way to
know if bin Laden was in the target area by the time a cruise missile hit
it.

As Clarke and others will corroborate, President Clinton did in fact
approve of a standing plan to use Afghans who worked for the CIA to capture
bin Laden. The CIA's Afghan operatives were never able to carry out the
operation and the CIA recommended against inserting Agency personnel to do
it. The Department of Defense, when asked by President Clinton to examine
the use of US troops to capture bin Laden, also recommended against that
option.

-- The drama claims that former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
refused to sanction a missile strike against bin Laden without first
alerting the Pakistanis and notified them over the objections of the
military. Again, this is false.

-- Using newsreel footage of President Clinton, the drama insinuates that
President Clinton was too pre-occupied with the impeachment and the Lewinsky
matter to be engaged in pursuing bin Laden. This allegation is absurd and
was directly refuted by ABC News consultant Richard Clarke in his book,
Against All Enemies: "Clinton made clear that we were to give him our best
national security advice without regard to his personal problems. 'Do you
recommend that we strike on the 20th? Fine. Do not give me political advice
or personal advice about the timing. That's my problem. Let me worry about
that.' If we thought this was the best time to hit the Afghan camps, he
would order it and take the heat."

While these are three examples that we are aware of that are utterly
baseless, they are clearly indicative of other errors in the substance and
bent of the film. Indeed, the overall tone in the advertisements we've seen
for this drama suggest that President Clinton was inattentive to the threat
of terrorism or insufficiently intent upon eliminating the threat from bin
Laden. Note that the 9/11 Commission Report says:

-- We believe that both President Clinton and President Bush were
genuinely concerned about the danger posed by al Qaeda." (p. 349)

-- "By May 1998 . clearly, President Clinton's concern about terrorism had
steadily risen." (p. 102)

-- "President Clinton was deeply concerned about bin Laden. He and his
national security advisor, Samuel 'Sandy' Berger, ensured they had a special
daily pipeline of reports feeding them the latest updates on bin Laden's
reported location." (p. 175)

-- "President Clinton spoke of terrorism in numerous public statements. In
his August 5, 1996, remarks at George Washington University, he called
terrorism 'the enemy of our generation.'" (p. 500)

We challenge anyone to read the 9/11 Commission Report and find any basis
for the false allegations noted above or the tenor of the drama, which
suggests that the Clinton Administration was inattentive to the threat of a
terrorist strike.

Frankly, the bias of the ABC drama is not surprising given the background
and political leanings of its writer/producer, Mr. Nowrasteh, which have
been well-documented on numerous conservative blogs and talk shows in his
promotion of this film. Mr. Nowrasteh's bias can be seen in an interview he
gave to David Horowitz's conservative magazine Frontpage, during which he
said:

"The 9/11 report details the Clinton's administration's response - or lack
of response - to Al Qaeda and how this emboldened Bin Laden to keep
attacking American interests. The worst example is the response to the
October, 2000 attack of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen where 17 American sailors
were killed. There simply was no response. Nothing."

But as Sandy Berger told the 9/11 Commission: "[T]o go to war, a president
needs to be able to say that his senior intelligence and law enforcement
officers have concluded who is responsible." And as the 9/11 Commission
report repeatedly acknowledges, the US did not have clear evidence of bin
Laden's connection to the attack on the USS Cole before the end of the
Clinton Administration (p. 192, 193, 195 & executive summary).

While ABC is promoting "The Path to 9/11" as a dramatization of historical
fact, in truth it is a fictitious rewriting of history that will be
misinterpreted by millions of Americans. Given your stated obligation to
"get it right," we urge you to do so by not airing this drama until the
egregious factual errors are corrected, an endeavor we could easily assist
you with given the opportunity to view the film.

Sincerely,

Bruce R. Lindsey

Chief Executive Officer

William J. Clinton Foundation

Douglas J. Band

Counselor to President Clinton

Office of William Jefferson Clinton

Cc: Ms. Madeleine K. Albright

Mr. Samuel R. Berger

Mr. Richard A. Clarke

Mr. Stephen McPherson

Mr. George J. Mitchell

Mr. John D. Podesta

Mr. David Westin

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States