Sun-Times critic Elfman “once sat in a car forever waiting for [his] mom to come out of a grocery store,” but that was nothing compared to the five hours he presumably spent watching "The Path to 9/11," set to run Sunday and Monday on Channel 7 in Chicago and nationwide on ABC.
So what’s the problem? If it’s so dull, why did 25,000 people write to compain? That many people could be wrong. Consider how many vote Democrat in Cook County alone. But wrong enough to demand changes in or pulling of the show, which hasn’t aired yet? The word must be out, not that it’s dull but that it’s very threatening to Democrat self-esteem. Can Elfman feel threatened also? To how many shows has he given zero stars? Is this his all-time worst docudrama? It’s tied anyhow, at least.
He’s on record before this as excusing pre-9/11 officials as “flawed people committing errors”? Or is this his maiden foray into geopolitics? Who does he think he is, Brad Pitt? He did read a recent New Yorker article, anyhow. Give him credit for researching the matter to that extent. However, he might go beyond this effort, assuming he has time before his next deadline, and look at Power Line’s listing of what happened before 9/11 to deliver a sense of urgency even to flawed people.
There is no doubt about the fact that the terrorist menace grew and became increasingly obvious during the Clinton administration. To note just a few highlights:
* January 25, 1993: Mir Aimal Kansi, a Pakistani, fired an AK-47 into cars waiting at a stoplight in front of the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in Virginia, killing two CIA employees.
That’s for starters. Thirty-four incidents later, the Power Line list closes:
* October 12, 2000: AL Qaeda bombs USS Cole with explosive-laden speedboat, killing 17 US sailors and wounding 40, off the port coast of Aden, Yemen.
Between 1993 and 2000, everyone who was paying any attention knew that the threat from Islamic terrorism was grave and getting worse. The catastrophic losses that occurred on Septimeber 11, 2001, could just as easily have happened in 1993, when the first plot to destroy the World Trade Center was carried off successfully, but the terrorists had miscalculated the effect of their explosives, or in 1995, when the plot to destroy eleven American airplanes in flight was thwarted by counter-intelligence work in the Philippines. What did the Clinton administration do in response to this grave threat? Essentially nothing. Worse, Clinton tried to sweep the problem under the rug, lest it disrupt the surface calm and prosperity for which he was eager to claim credit.
However Path to 9/11 portrays the Clinton administration, it can be no worse than the reality.
Hand-held cameras aside (Elfman objects to their use in the film), can this be what makes Elfman a defender of the flawed?