Alert: VERY IMPORTANT POST on the media - NOT TO BE MISSED

[blm]

Posted by zbdent in the Media Forum, but deserves every eyeball on DU because THIS is how the GOP plans to game the terror issue thru November - with the media reinforcing their LIE that Democrats can't handle terrorism because Clinton ignored the problem.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=109x27174

Excerpt:


ABC:

8 YEARS OF SIGNS

8 YEARS TO PREVENT AMERICA'S DARKEST HOUR

BASED ON THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT

DUE TO SUBJECT VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED
THE PATH TO 9/11
a television movie event
sunday september 10th 8/7c

[bryant69]

1. I think this will be a theme

But not a major theme - it doesn't seem like it gets them much. Plus, isnt the obvious come back not to defend Clinton but simply to say "Bush has been President for nearly 6 years now - should't we be focusing on what he's doing instead of dredging up Clinton?"

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[blm]

3. The reality is that it will be DEMOCRATS can't be trusted on terror issues

that will be the most prominent theme, and these doculies will be used to push home those lies. Wanna bet there will be a couple terror alerts or events in the next couple months to blow this up even bigger?

It all comes down to WHO has the media in their pocket to promote the lies they need the public to believe.

[bryant69]

4. I'm sorry - I didn't intend to offend you

But you are right it does feed into Democrats can't be trusted on terror.

We probably disagree on how tightly the Republicans control the media.

Bryant

[blm]

8. Didn't offend me at all. I'm taking the opportunity to be more pointed

so there is no mistake about what is happening.

[liberalmike27]

18. I too

I noticed this also, especially after seeing the Path to 9/11 commercial last night, flag blazing in the commerical in the background. The title is obviously biased right.

I've contended for some time that in the final rush up to elections the media turns especially right-wing, and this election is no different. It isn't just politicians but by omission, and special selection of topics too. These shows, as well as the general tone just represent how easily Americans are brainwashed. I can't help but think of the Dean scream being played 3000 times. Don't think we are impervious, as my Mobile Dean group dropped from about 60 back to the original 12 or so after that month. Nothing anecdotally that has ever happened to me shows the influence of the brainwashing corporate media than this event.

[Crazy Dave]

5. I've already heard Newt Gingrich say twice in one segment...

...that Iran is "an evil dictatorship".

Sound familiar? Lied twice in one segment and I'd be shocked if many would believe it. Ahmadinejad, like it or not was elected.

[Dhalgren]

9. Ahmadinejad is not the head of government in Iran.

The Head of government is the Supreme Jurisprudent, Ali Khamenei. He is not elected. I do not think, however, that you can call Iran a "dictatorship", it is a parliamentary theocracy...

[Crazy Dave]

11. Thanks for the correction

I thought that Ahmadinejad was an elected official. Just haven't done enough homework on that but agreed, Iran is not a dictatorship.

[Dhalgren]

15. Ahmadinejad was elected, as were all of the members of Iran's

parliament. And, by all standards, Iran's elections are open and free. It is just that the office that holds the power equivalent to the US President in Iran is the (unelected) Supreme Jurisprudent. It is a relatively complicated arrangement and I have to give Juan Cole the credit for explaining it in such a way that even I could understand it. :hi:

[bryant69]

22. Could one call Mussolinis Italy a dictatorship?

Or Hitler's Germany? Both raised to power through parlimentary means.

Bryant

[Dhalgren]

24. Elections in both Italy and Germany during the fascist period

were not open and free. By all accounts, Iran's elections are both open and free. Iran has multiple political parties and their elections appear to be above board. Granted that the mullahs are not subject to election, but, then, that's the nature of a theocracy. The mullahs arise through the processes of the religion and the decisions of the current mullahs - so not exactly a western-style democracy, but not a totalitarian dictatorship, either...

[bryant69]

25. Can women vote in Iran?

I'm not in favor of invading Iran, I should point out.

Bryant
Check it out --> htp://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Dhalgren]

26. Yes. Women can vote and hold elected office. Here's an

article from the BBC, back in 2000, discussing the odd sort of government that Iran has (odd in western eyes). It is complicated and the west doesn't like complicated...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/619419.stm

[PATRICK]

27. Our breaking off of talks

open threats and Iraq invasion AND intrusive support of political opposition has in fact swung elections toward the mullahs. Setting aside the exotic differences in culture and religion, politically we have driven the result away from internal moderation and by external and internal threat have created that effect that always endangers democracy in the best of systems.

That bad habit is at work now in Venezuela, also isolated EXCEPT through internal political ops conducted to back up a US backed "opposition" party. The sort of crap in the Ukraine praised by the more idiotic leadership of our own duped party collapsed inasmuch as it was based on our interference and selfish goals.

Now both the secret ops and the political support for "democracy" lie in absolute tatters because of its disdainful abuse at the hands of this administration for whom such games are amusing toys, not long range policy. Not much will be left of practical or moral influence upon the world for positive results in democratization. That is very intentional in a way too, by this treacherous administration.

[JHB]

31. Let's not forget Newt pushed for Iraq, too

He was on that Defense advisory board with Richard Perle and someone else: and they pushed for the invasion.

[Crazy Dave]

2. It's the same strategy as....

"The Clinton Recession" that GW supposedly inherited. Even in the second term I still hear that in discussions and on the news channels.

[peekaloo]

6. Is it just me or has the Alphabet network shifted HARD right since

Jennings died?

I know they were water carriers before but lately with "Charles" Gibson being promoted to the high chair and the demise of Nightline they're just outright disgusting in their * crotch sniffing.

[blm]

10. Disney Corp. jockeying for position as fascists' top propagandist.

.

[kskiska]

7. I hadn't heard an outcry or warnings by the accusors during those 8 years

Where were they - and the Republican Congress? Sounds like Monday morning quarterbacking.

[snappyturtle]

13. Good point! nt

[ThomWV]

12. Republican Congress: 1996-2006, Ten Full Years

Every time Clinton tried to take action against terrorist the Republican Congress cut him off at the knees claiming it was all just cover for his other indescressions.

Need I say more?

[snappyturtle]

14. Another good point!

Now, if I can just remember these last good points when I meet up with a repuke spitting out its vile!

[newspeak]

16. Right on!!!

I remember when they attempted to pass legislation to track terrorist money and the MEPUBLICAN congress voted it down---they can point the finger all they want cause I have a very long memory!!!! I also remember when the OK City bombing occurred, and the media was in propaganda mode right out of the gate, could hardly wait to blame it on someone in the ME--turned out to be one of our own home grown terrorists. A man, by the way, who was ex-military, was accepted in special ops but then said he turned it down, was adamant the he alone did the deed (did not want anyone else implicated) and believed history would one day show him to be another American hero like Nathan Hale. Now, I wonder who was feeding him the bull shite!!!

[librechik]

17. Here's some ammo to fire back:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1975019

Lots of info here about Clinton on terror

[MagickMuffin]

19. Orrin Hatchetman called Clinton's terrorism: A PHONY ISSUE

We need to hit them with the FACTS....

Hatch blasts 'phony' issues

Republican leaders earlier met with White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta for about an hour in response to the president's call for "the very best ideas" for fighting terrorism.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, emerged from the meeting and said, "These are very controversial provisions that the White House wants. Some they're not going to get."

Hatch called Clinton's proposed study of taggants -- chemical markers in explosives that could help track terrorists -- "a phony issue."

"If they want to, they can study the thing" already, Hatch asserted. He also said he had some problems with the president's proposals to expand wiretapping.

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, said it is a mistake if Congress leaves town without addressing anti-terrorism legislation. Daschle is expected to hold a special meeting on the matter Wednesday with Congressional leaders.


http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/

Also as I recall Clinton brought to justice the people responsible for the first attack on the WTC.
And when they mention the Cole attack that happened in October of 2000. He wasn't in office but a few months after that, and I don't recall Mad king Boy George doing anything about that!

And like Coulter stated the other day Osama is Irrelevant!

[mike_c]

20. this is just the sort of hysteria that Rove wants....

This is a classic advertising strategy. Everytime the dems say "No, we're not soft on terror" or otherwise try to counter the ploy directly they simply reinforce the meme. It's counter intuitive-- peoples' natural response is to object-- but it's a HUGE mistake.

The way to counter this is to UNDERCUT it. It's based on keeping the fear and hysteria level high, so if dems can damp down the fear this meme will have no power. Please please please understand this. Protesting that Clinton was strong on terror, the republican congress is at fault, etc will only increase the spin cycle and do more damage to the dems. It works for the republicans.

Dems have to get out an alternative message, thus taking attention away from the republican spin. Hopefully, a message that eases peoples fears about terrorism rather than focusing on them or stoking them. That is the ONLY effective way to counter this tactic! If dems help to keep voters attention on terrorism the republicans will OWN that issue!

[blm]

23. They already do BECAUSE tactics like this were never confronted by Clinton

for FIVE FOCKING YEARS now.

[mike_c]

34. Confronting them is playing right into Rove's hands....

Dems have to CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

[blm]

35. Instead of turning your boat right into the attackers?

Clinton HAS been silent on this for 5yrs already.

The media is going to ramp up even more on this the next few months, and you want every Dem who is confronted by the attack during THEIR campaign to shrug it off and change the subject? How do you think that shrugging off the terror issue will be spun?

[mike_c]

36. yes-- look, having fun with metaphors is one thing...

...but I'm serious about the psychology underlying this republican strategy. This is understood pretty well by folks who study the psychology of advertising, and before you react to trivialize that, remember that advertising is best thought of as behavior modification-- and it obviously works.

Here's an example. Let's say Proctor and Gamble advertises Really Great Soap. Johnson and Johnson has a competing product, say Fantastic Soap. What you're suggesting is that J&J counter P&G's product advertising by buying airtime for the message "Really Great Soap sucks!" You will NEVER see this happen, at least not by people who know what they're doing, because doing so just reinforces the brand ID of Really Great Soap. It's like free publicity for your competitor's product.

Instead, knowledgable advertisers try to CHANGE THE SUBJECT as much as possible in order to build a different brand ID for their competing product. J&J talks about Fantastic Soap as though Really Great Soap doesn't exist. Trying to counter the competition's advertising claims directly is a recipe for disaster.

Rove knows this instinctively-- he knows that if he just gets the dems talking about terrorism they will be propagating his message for him, because repubicans have brand ID control of the terrorism issue. And before you think dems can take it away from them, don't-- that is VERY hard to do and probably cannot be done at all, certainly not if the republicans don't want to relinquish it. Every time a dem talks about terrorism in the same context that republicans have already been identified with terrorism-- fear, national security, who's strong or weak on terror, the WOT, etc, that candidate is carrying water for the republican party. Dems need to change the subject AWAY from terrorism.

on edit-- I hear what you're saying about the media-- that's the REAL challenge dems face. Changing the subject against the tide of the media din about "terra terra terra!"

[blm]

37. Which is why only BILL CLINTON can call the press conference WITH a power

point presentation that explains it THOROUGHLY and EXHAUSTIVELY.

It would be a pretty damn hard act to follow since BushInc doesn't have the credibility anymore with the PEOPLE and we know the facts aren't on his side.

The Democrats and their candidates shouldn't HAVE to be stuck dealing with question after question about what Clinton did or did not allow.

[mike_c]

39. I'm sorry-- if he does that, it will be a disaster, IMO...

All he'll be doing is keeping the issue on the front burner, right where the republicans want it.

[KansDem]

21. They can cry "Clenis, Clenis, Clenis" all they want...

But it still doesn't change the fact that Bush was in the White House on 9/11/01, and...

(in no particular order...)
1) He let OBL escape at Tora Bora
2) He let OBL's family escape US before they could be questioned
3) He declared war on a country that had nothing to do with 9/11
4) He is on good relations with OBL's family
5) He ignored warnings that OBL was going to attack
6) He exposed US intelligence operation that was tracking terrorist activity in mid-East
etc, etc, etc.

[bvar22]

28. The Republicans spent $500Billion in Iraq, but let N.O. drown,

The Republicans sold major US Ports ports to Arab dictators, Bin Ladens Family.

[mike_c]

40. hey blm-- THIS is what I'm talking about, although this...

...has the drawback of being negative rather than positive. But at least it changes the subject to Bush's failures-- failures that stand alone for the most part-- rather than trying to compare the dems to repubs on the terrorism issue. Still, a better strategy would be to change the subject altogether-- that would put the repubs on the defensive and put them in precisely the situation Rove has the dems in now with the terror issue.

[blm]

42. We'll see - I hope Clinton steps up and ANSWERS the lies.

Answering the swifts appropriately didn't work, because the media didn't LET the appropriate response BE heard.

Two years later, the Dem party can't AFFORD for Clinton to be 'appropriate" or measured - he needs to swing a heavy hammer and do it by commanding a press conference. That's something few can do in DC or NY - he can.

[Liberal Dose]

29. What other productions can be attributed"UHP Productions, Ltd."?

Seems like they just crawled out of the woodwork. Strange that such an important project would be trusted to an unproven production company. Try as I might, I can't find anything about UHP except "The Path to 9/11."

http://abc.go.com/specials/pathto911.html

The 9/11 Commission Report instantly became a national bestseller when it was published in July 2004. Writer Cyrus Nowrasteh (The Day Reagan Was Shot) uses this historic document as the basis for a powerful story with action as gripping and far reaching as the source material itself. Shot in Toronto, Morocco, New York and Washington, DC, actors portray the famous and infamous, along with the formerly anonymous and often heroic people thrust onto history's stage. Beginning with the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and ending on the morning of 9/11, the miniseries draws on detailed information from the Report and other sources to take viewers on an unforgettable journey through the events that presaged that fateful day -- to understand what went right and wrong, and what can be learned from this crucial eight-year period.

Former ABC News anchor John Miller, now the FBI's Assistant Director of Public Affairs, was also a consultant on the project. His book, The Cell, co-authored with Michael Stone, was optioned by ABC for use in the teleplay. In addition, The Relentless Pursuit by Samuel Katz was also optioned.

The Path to 9/11 is executive-produced by Marc Platt (Empire Falls). The producers are Hans Proppe (Anne Frank) and Cyrus Nowrasteh (also the writer); and Governor Thomas H. Kean (Chair, The 9/11 Commission) is senior consultant. The director is David L. Cunningham. The miniseries is a production of UHP Productions, Ltd., and will be distributed by Touchstone Television.

:shrug:

[blm]

30. Formed ONLY for this project, apparently.

.

[JHB]

32. You COULD actually link to it...

http://abc.go.com/movies/thepathto911/index.html

The description doesn't sound quite as "talking point" as the headline.

[blm]

33. Am pointing to another DUers post in a forum that doesn't get much traffic

.

[Joanne98]

38. FU ABC!

[midnight]

41. Wrong.... Madeline Albright warned the public when transition

was going on that the world had changed since Jr.'s Dad was in office. Bush was briefed in his daily briefings that terrorists were plotting an attack. It appears from Downing street memo's that they were counting on this attack. Does anyone remember the timeline of events that occured between the warnings, and Downing Street Memo. It seems to me that those two three pieces of info. would clarify the falsehoods that blame Clinton.