WINDOW TO A WORLDVIEW

PATH TO 9/11


I've just watched about 20-30 minutes of the Path to 9/11 film on the internet. And it will more than likely be the ONLY footage that I watch of the film. (I'll be jonesing on some Sunday Night and Monday NightFootball while this crap is playing.) The section I saw began with what is purportedly one of the most inflammatory scenes, wherein Sandy Berger is a big pussy who can't pull the trigger when bin Laden is in the special forces' sites. Of course, as we all know, this is pure fantasy, and I'm not writing this entry to discuss and dissect a scene that has been discussed and dissected to death all throughout the internets.
What I'm writing about is the generalized impression that I got that I'm almost certain pervades the entire film even though I've only seen half an hour. It's been said before, I cannot think of a more apt description for this garbage: a Republican's wet dream. Psych majors could write papers on this film because it gives such an incredible glimpse into how their minds work. This film is about how director David Cunningham and writer Cyrus Nowrasteh wish and pray things had gone down. It is an open examination of many right-wingers' worldview: Bill Clinton = Bad. That's it. Their loathing for all things Clinton permeates every scene I viewed. In just the short amount of time that I watched, they mentioned Monica Lewinsky and Clinton's libido four times as being the reason why bin Laden is still alive today. Oh, and speaking of a right-winger's wet dream, did you know that there's a scene where the footage of Clinton is projected onto a screen at an al Qaeda training camp and the screen is subsequently shot at several times - sort of a Clinton assassination fantasy. After the shooting the crowd of evil terrorists shout "Clinton is Satan!" over and over. Funny, I don't remember hearing about that scenario in the 9/11 Commission Report. Why do I get the feeling that when the filmmakers were sitting around making up this scene they had huge smiles on that faces like, "Hey, how about at the al Qaeda training camp we have a projection of Clinton on a screen and then one of the terrorists can shoot at it a bunch of times?""Then they could yell something like 'Clinton is the devil!'""Dude, that would be freakin' awesome!! High Five!!!"
Another thing that really grabbed me about the footage I watched was that, once again, those in the Bush camp (read: the filmmakers) view things in moral absolutes - right or wrong, black or white. The film paints the principals (in the scenes I've watched that would be Albright and Berger, though I think I recall Tenet catching some flak) as totally ineffective and indecisive boobs who lack the gravitas to get shit done. "Pull the trigger, you panty-waists!!" is what I half expected some of the underlings to yell out. You can see how the lower characters despise the powers-that-be as they just ooze with contempt for their bosses. They know that if the higher-ups just had the requisite balls to get the job done, then everything would work out hunkydory. Remember, in wingnut world, the simplest answer is always the right answer to any situation, even if it turns out to be the wrong answer.

I've used a variation of the following statement by Al Franken twice before and I'm going to keep using it as long as it continues to be applicable: the biggest mistake Bush and his cronies have made in their dealings in the Middle East is their propensity to apply simple answers to complex problems. The makers of Path to 9/11 suffer from this same malady.