The Dark Side (Starting tonight on PBS Frontline)

[conjur]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/

coming Jun. 20, 2006 at 9pm (check local listings)

(60 minutes) On September 11, 2001, deep inside a White House bunker, Vice President Dick Cheney was ordering U.S. fighter planes to shoot down any commercial airliner still in the air above America. At that moment, CIA Director George Tenet was meeting with his counter-terrorism team in Langley, Virginia. Both leaders acted fast, to prepare their country for a new kind of war. But soon a debate would grow over the goals of the war on terror, and the decision to go to war in Iraq. Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and others saw Iraq as an important part of a broader plan to remake the Middle East and project American power worldwide. Meanwhile Tenet, facing division in his own organization, saw non-state actors such as Al Qaeda as the highest priority. FRONTLINE's investigation of the ensuing conflict includes more than forty interviews, thousands of pages of documentary evidence, and a substantial photographic archive. It is the third documentary about the war on terror from the team that produced Rumsfeld's War and The Torture Question. (read the press release)


Amid daily revelations about prewar intelligence and a growing scandal surrounding the indictment of the vice president's chief of staff and presidential adviser, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, FRONTLINE goes behind the headlines to investigate the internal war that was waged between the intelligence community and Richard Bruce Cheney, the most powerful vice president in the nation's history.

"A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies," Cheney told Americans just after 9/11. He warned the public that the government would have to operate on the "dark side."

In The Dark Side, airing June 20, 2006, at 9 P.M. on PBS (check local listings), FRONTLINE tells the story of the vice president's role as the chief architect of the war on terror and his battle with Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet for control of the "dark side." Drawing on more than 40 interviews and thousands of documents, the film provides a step-by-step examination of what happened inside the councils of war.

Early in the Bush administration, Cheney placed a group of allies throughout the government who advocated a robust and pre-emptive foreign policy, especially regarding Iraq. But a potential obstacle was Tenet, a holdover from the Clinton administration who had survived the transition by bypassing Cheney and creating a personal bond with the president.

After the attacks on 9/11, Cheney seized the initiative and pushed for expanding presidential power, transforming America's intelligence agencies, and bringing the war on terror to Iraq. Cheney's primary ally in this effort was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

"You have this wiring diagram that we all know of about national security, but now there's a new line on it. There's a line from the vice president directly to the secretary of defense, and it's as though there's a private line, private communication between those two," former National Security Council staffer Richard Clarke tells FRONTLINE.

In the initial stages of the war on terror, Tenet's CIA was rising to prominence as the lead agency in the Afghanistan war. But when Tenet insisted in his personal meetings with the president that there was no connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq, Cheney and Rumsfeld initiated a secret program to re-examine the evidence and marginalize the agency and Tenet. Through interviews with DoD staffers who sifted through mountains of raw intelligence, FRONTLINE tells the story of how questionable intelligence was "stovepiped" to the vice president and presented to the public.

From stories of Iraq buying yellowcake from Niger to claims that 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta had met with Iraqi agents in Prague, The Dark Side dissects the now-familiar assertions that led the nation to war. The film also examines how that stovepiped intelligence was used by the vice president in unprecedented visits to the CIA, where he questioned mid-level analysts on their conclusions. CIA officers who were there at the time say the message was clear: Cheney wanted evidence that Iraq was a threat.

At the center of the administration's case for war was a classified October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate that found evidence of an Iraqi weapons of mass destruction program. But Paul Pillar, one of the report's principal authors, now admits to FRONTLINE that the NIE was written quickly in a highly politicized environment, one in which the decision to go to war had already been made. Pillar also reveals that he regrets participating in writing a subsequent public white paper on Iraqi WMD. "What was the purpose of it? The purpose was to strengthen the case for going to war with the American public. Is it proper for the intelligence community to publish papers for that purpose? I don't think so, and I regret having had a role in it," Pillar says.

For the first time, FRONTLINE tells of George Tenet's personal struggle in the runup to the Iraq war through the accounts of his closest advisers.

"He, I think, asked himself whether or not he wanted to continue on that road and to be part of it. And I think there was a lot of agonizing that George went through about what would be in the best interest of the country and national interest, or whether or not he would stay in that position and continue along a course that I think he had misgivings about," says John O. Brennan, former deputy executive director of the CIA.

Tenet chose to stay, but after the failure to find Iraqi WMD, the tension between the agency and Cheney's allies grew to the point that some in the administration believed the CIA had launched a covert war to undermine the president. The film shows how in response, Cheney's office waged a campaign to distance itself from the prewar intelligence the vice president had helped to cultivate. Under pressure, Tenet resigned. Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, would later admit to leaking key sections of the NIE -- authorized, he says, by Cheney. Libby also stated that the vice president told him that President Bush had declassified the material. Insiders tell FRONTLINE that the leak was part of the battle between the vice president and the CIA.

I've seen Rumsfeld's War but haven't yet seen The Torture Question. I'm sure this will be right up there with other Frontline documentaries in terms of quality. There's none better in America.

Another great documentary on Cheney was done by The Fifth Estate for the CBC:

The Fifth Estate: The Unauthorized Biography of Dick Cheney
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/dickcheney /
Cheney's remarkable life story involves the relentless accumulation of power in every form and regardless of the outcome of this fall's election, he will continue to be one of the most powerful and well-connected men in the world. The fifth estate will show how he accomplished this, what it involved in terms of costs for others and what history's judgement could be.

Watch the Video
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/video_player.html?cheney
Note: This video also shows the LIE involved in justifying the Gulf War in 1991 wherein the U.S. gave fake satellite photos to the Saudis to get them to invite our military into their country. They (the CBC) obtained Russian sat. photos from the same day that did not show Iraqi troops and tanks amassing on the Kuwait/Saudi border. The St. Petersburg Times (FL) and the Christian Science Monitor also have articles discussing these faked satellite photos.

This film also uncovers what was going on in the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans (OSP). They interview Seymour Hersh who wrote Selective Intelligence and also The Stovepipe and they interview Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski who wrote The New Pentagon Papers and worked in the OSP run by Wolfowitz/Feith.


Perhaps this new Frontline documentary will tell us some of what that nearly 2 years overdue Phase II report was supposed to provide. Wonder if they'll bring up Sen. Roberts complicity in being traitors to America?

 

[palehorse]

PBS? biased leftwing crapola?!?! nahhhhh... no way, not them!

bah.

Every penny of our tax dollars that is wasted on this leftist shinola is a roundhouse kick in the balls.

PBS and NPR should be privatized. period.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
PBS? biased leftwing crapola?!?! nahhhhh... no way, not them!

bah.

Every penny of our tax dollars that is wasted on this leftist shinola is a roundhouse kick in the balls.

PBS and NPR should be privatized. period.

Yeah, but it doesn't even come close to balancing out the various RIGHT wing activities we support with huge sums of public money...like your job, for example 😉

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: palehorse74
PBS? biased leftwing crapola?!?! nahhhhh... no way, not them!

bah.

Every penny of our tax dollars that is wasted on this leftist shinola is a roundhouse kick in the balls.

PBS and NPR should be privatized. period.

Yeah, but it doesn't even come close to balancing out the various RIGHT wing activities we support with huge sums of public money...like your job, for example 😉

so you equate adequate funding of our armed forces to one particular party? howso?

would you rather have a strong, well-educated, well-equipped, and well-trained military, or NPR?

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: palehorse74
PBS? biased leftwing crapola?!?! nahhhhh... no way, not them!

bah.

Every penny of our tax dollars that is wasted on this leftist shinola is a roundhouse kick in the balls.

PBS and NPR should be privatized. period.

Yeah, but it doesn't even come close to balancing out the various RIGHT wing activities we support with huge sums of public money...like your job, for example 😉

so you equate adequate funding of our armed forces to one particular party? howso?

would you rather have a strong, well-educated, well-equipped, and well-trained military, or NPR?

"😉" means I'm kidding...jeez, don't they issue a sense of humor to you guys?

I mean, as long as we're talking in broad, sweeping, black and white political stereotypes...making war a lot is certainly a conservative approach to foreign policy. I was just trying to keep within the intellectual tone set by your post.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
PBS? biased leftwing crapola?!?! nahhhhh... no way, not them!

bah.

Every penny of our tax dollars that is wasted on this leftist shinola is a roundhouse kick in the balls.

PBS and NPR should be privatized. period.

There you are! I thought you might keep a low profile until this thread: America losing the "War on Terror" and this thread: What does the US Ambassador to Iraq, Khalilzad, think of the conditions in Iraq? dropped off the front page. Pity though. With your extensive first-hand "Iraq" experience, I'm sure you could shred this obvious disinformation from the U.S Ambassador to Iraq and from over 100 of America's top foreign-policy hands.


Meanwhile, re. the OP, it's an even bigger pity this show isn't broadcast on every network, especially Fox "News". Not that much of the information in it is really new for those who made the effort to educate themselves. It carries a much greater impact, however, when it includes video interviews of people with legitimate first-hand information about the campaign of lies that surrounded Bush's invasion. Cheney knowingly lying about Iraq and al Qaeda? Check. Cheney manipulating intelligence? Check. Losing sight of the real war on terrorism by pulling badly-needed resources out of Afghanistan for Iraq? Check. And that's just in the first half.

Highly recommended. Record it and give copies to your friends. It's no wonder the Bush drones want to cut PBS funding.

 

[conjur]

Just ignore the paleface troll and his usual spewing of completely partisan BS.



As for the documentary:

This is Frontline at its best! It's Downing Street & Phase II in one!

This documentary is providing a 90-min. summary of everything the American public deserves to be told from this administration re: "fixing facts around the policy".

This has shown that Tenet should have cut bait in Dec. 2001 after having routed the Taliban from power. Tenet then fell victim to his close relationship to the president and fell under the PNAC spell and sold the NIE as a "slam dunk".

This has shown from the CIA perspective how Cheney pressured the "right" intelligence to come out.

It has shown Cheney in one of his direct lies ("there is no doubt" Saddam has amassed weapons of mass destruction).

It has shown the aluminum story for what it was, a complete exaggeration.

It has shown the Niger/Yellowcake story for what it was, a complete fabrication.

It has revealed that Powell was kept from knowing that "Curveball" was the single source and that "Scooter" Libby directed Powell what to say in his speech to the UN.


This should be required viewing in every school and every office in every state of the union!


This *should* be what the Senate is providing to us in the form of Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report of the run-up to the Iraq war but that the traitor Sen. Roberts keeps scuttling.

This administration MUST stand before the Hague for its crimes against humanity.

 

[palehorse]

why should our tax dollars pay for broadcasts which are blatantly anti-administration in nature? why should there be ANY political slant to ANY shows broadcast on public radio/TV?!

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and this is regardless of the content of said shows: National Public TV/Radio should be used to display contact and emergency information ONLY! There is no rhyme or reason to broadcasting politically-charged programming on stations funded by our tax dollars. period.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
why should our tax dollars pay for broadcasts which are blatantly anti-administration in nature? why should there be ANY political slant to ANY shows broadcast on public radio/TV?!

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and this is regardless of the content of said shows: National Public TV/Radio should be used to display contact and emergency information ONLY! There is no rhyme or reason to broadcasting politically-charged programming on stations funded by our tax dollars. period.

How is telling the truth displaying "ANY political slant"? Sounds very pro-American and pro-democracy to me.

How about you start holding this administration accountable for their lies -- lies that killed tens of thousands of innocent people (including over 2,500 American soldiers), cost us perhaps a trillion dollars, and increased the danger to America -- instead of whining and making excuses when someone has the balls to expose those lies?

 

[GoPackGo]

So will anyone be surprised when Cheney runs for President?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: palehorse74
why should our tax dollars pay for broadcasts which are blatantly anti-administration in nature? why should there be ANY political slant to ANY shows broadcast on public radio/TV?!

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and this is regardless of the content of said shows: National Public TV/Radio should be used to display contact and emergency information ONLY! There is no rhyme or reason to broadcasting politically-charged programming on stations funded by our tax dollars. period.

How is telling the truth displaying "ANY political slant"? Sounds very pro-American and pro-democracy to me.

How about you start holding this administration accountable for their lies -- lies that killed tens of thousands of innocent people (including over 2,500 American soldiers), cost us perhaps a trillion dollars, and increased the danger to America -- instead of whining and making excuses when someone has the balls to expose those lies?

I would have no problem with the shows themselves if they were run on NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, etc. The problem I have with them is that they are clearly partisan in nature yet MY tax dollars go to funding their production and broadcasting.

I have the exact same objections to shows on PBS/NPR that are PRO-administration, or right-wing in nature. The simple fact is that public radio/TV should NEVER be used to broadcast politically motivated programming.

You're missing the whole point fanboi.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
So will anyone be surprised when Cheney runs for President?

yes. he is not physically fit for 4-8 years of work as a President. I highly doubt that he will run.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: palehorse74
why should our tax dollars pay for broadcasts which are blatantly anti-administration in nature? why should there be ANY political slant to ANY shows broadcast on public radio/TV?!

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and this is regardless of the content of said shows: National Public TV/Radio should be used to display contact and emergency information ONLY! There is no rhyme or reason to broadcasting politically-charged programming on stations funded by our tax dollars. period.

How is telling the truth displaying "ANY political slant"? Sounds very pro-American and pro-democracy to me.

How about you start holding this administration accountable for their lies -- lies that killed tens of thousands of innocent people (including over 2,500 American soldiers), cost us perhaps a trillion dollars, and increased the danger to America -- instead of whining and making excuses when someone has the balls to expose those lies?

I would have no problem with the shows themselves if they were run on NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, etc. The problem I have with them is that they are clearly partisan in nature yet MY tax dollars go to funding their production and broadcasting.

I have the exact same objections to shows on PBS/NPR that are PRO-administration, or right-wing in nature. The simple fact is that public radio/TV should NEVER be used to broadcast politically motivated programming.

You're missing the whole point fanboi.

I believe you're missing the whole point Gomer. How is it partisan to tell the truth?

 

[NJDevil]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: palehorse74
why should our tax dollars pay for broadcasts which are blatantly anti-administration in nature? why should there be ANY political slant to ANY shows broadcast on public radio/TV?!

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and this is regardless of the content of said shows: National Public TV/Radio should be used to display contact and emergency information ONLY! There is no rhyme or reason to broadcasting politically-charged programming on stations funded by our tax dollars. period.

How is telling the truth displaying "ANY political slant"? Sounds very pro-American and pro-democracy to me.

How about you start holding this administration accountable for their lies -- lies that killed tens of thousands of innocent people (including over 2,500 American soldiers), cost us perhaps a trillion dollars, and increased the danger to America -- instead of whining and making excuses when someone has the balls to expose those lies?

I would have no problem with the shows themselves if they were run on NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, etc. The problem I have with them is that they are clearly partisan in nature yet MY tax dollars go to funding their production and broadcasting.

I have the exact same objections to shows on PBS/NPR that are PRO-administration, or right-wing in nature. The simple fact is that public radio/TV should NEVER be used to broadcast politically motivated programming.

You're missing the whole point fanboi.

So talking about a debate that happened is partisan? I feel like NOT mentioning that such a deabte is moreso.

 

[Strk]

Ahh crap, I forgot all about this.

Conjur, I'm blaming you for not posting this earlier! 😉

I'll try and catch it tomorrow.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Strk
Ahh crap, I forgot all about this.

Conjur, I'm blaming you for not posting this earlier! 😉

I'll try and catch it tomorrow.

Should be available online later in the week.


And, btw, re: Frontline (for paletroll)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/us/

Since January 1983, FRONTLINE has served as American public television's - PBS - flagship public affairs series. Hailed upon its television broadcast debut as "the last best hope for broadcast documentaries," FRONTLINE's stature over 23 years is reaffirmed each week through incisive documentaries covering the scope and complexity of the human experience.

When FRONTLINE was born, however, the prospects for television news documentaries looked grim. Pressure was on the network news departments to become profitable, and the spirit of outspoken journalistic inquiry established by programs like Edward R. Murrow's "See It Now" and "Harvest of Shame" had given way to entertainment values and feature-filled magazine shows. Therefore, it fell to public television to pick up the torch of public affairs and continue this well-established broadcast news tradition.

Since its inception, FRONTLINE has never shied away from tough, controversial issues or complex stories. In an age of anchor celebrities and snappy sound bites, FRONTLINE remains committed to providing a primetime venue for engaging documentaries that fully explore and illuminate the critical issues of our times. FRONTLINE remains the only regularly scheduled long-form public-affairs documentary series on American television, producing more hours of documentary programming than all the commercial networks combined.

From producer Ofra Bikel's extraordinary investigations of America's criminal justice system including, most recently, The OJ Verdict, to Martin Smith and Lowell Bergman's sweeping chronicle of America's drug wars; from the 14 reports to date produced by Smith, Michael Kirk, Greg Barker, Raney Aronson and others on the Iraq war and its origins to Helen Whitney's probing biography of Pope John Paul, FRONTLINE gives top-notch journalists the time needed to thoroughly research a story and the time on-air to tell their story in a compelling way.

Credible, thoughtful reporting combined with powerful narrative -- a good story, well-told. That is the heart of FRONTLINE's commitment to its viewers.

Now, quit your damn pity party.

 

[trenchfoot]

it's just too bad that the very people who need to know what really happened don't want to/care to, or at the very least know it but refuse to acknowledge as such. for if they did, maybe we could all move on and make things right. denial, in the face of truth and logic is.....


silly.... really.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: conjur
Just ignore the paleface troll and his usual spewing of completely partisan BS.



As for the documentary:

This is Frontline at its best! It's Downing Street & Phase II in one!

This documentary is providing a 90-min. summary of everything the American public deserves to be told from this administration re: "fixing facts around the policy".

This has shown that Tenet should have cut bait in Dec. 2001 after having routed the Taliban from power. Tenet then fell victim to his close relationship to the president and fell under the PNAC spell and sold the NIE as a "slam dunk".

This has shown from the CIA perspective how Cheney pressured the "right" intelligence to come out.

It has shown Cheney in one of his direct lies ("there is no doubt" Saddam has amassed weapons of mass destruction).

It has shown the aluminum story for what it was, a complete exaggeration.

It has shown the Niger/Yellowcake story for what it was, a complete fabrication.

It has revealed that Powell was kept from knowing that "Curveball" was the single source and that "Scooter" Libby directed Powell what to say in his speech to the UN.


This should be required viewing in every school and every office in every state of the union!


This *should* be what the Senate is providing to us in the form of Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report of the run-up to the Iraq war but that the traitor Sen. Roberts keeps scuttling.

This administration MUST stand before the Hague for its crimes against humanity.

HEHE.

Read the first and last sentence in that post. :wine:

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
So will anyone be surprised when Cheney runs for President?

yes. he is not physically fit for 4-8 years of work as a President. I highly doubt that he will run.

Thats what everyone wants you to believe...

Even Darth Sidious wanted Anakin to think he was weak and helpless.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
I believe you're missing the whole point Gomer. How is it partisan to tell the truth?

the "truth" according to whom, however? you? Conjie? that is the point!

these shows are nothing more than the truth according to PBS, and that is where the problem lies.

Truth is a matter of perspective, and in this case, the documentaries were written, shot, produced, and broadcast from a very leftist perspective which is critical to the current administration and all things Bush. I'm sure that for every "expert" who spoke on camera, you could find one who will/would say the complete opposite.

Hence the entire reason that such programming is innappropriate for public broadcasting paid for with our tax dollars. How would you feel if PBS started broadcasting Pro-Bush propoganda night after night? My bet is that you'd wig out, cry foul, and campaign to have PBS shut down. am I right?

I bet I am.

 

[conjur]

Oh look, nutxo decided to join the troll patrol.



Back ON-TOPIC:


Links to extended interviews
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/interviews/

Observations and Analysis
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/themes/

Cheney's network in the administration
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/etc/network.html

CIA's realignment
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/etc/cia.html

Rumsfeld's and Cheney's paths to power
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pentagon/paths/



Hey, paletroll. If you have a problem with PBS's programming, START A NEW THREAD.

Take your OFF-TOPIC BS elsewhere.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: conjur
Hey, paletroll. If you have a problem with PBS's programming, START A NEW THREAD.

Take your OFF-TOPIC BS elsewhere.

how in the hell is a discussion regarding the partisan nature of PBS considered "off-topic" in a thread about a biased PBS program?

How about addressing my questions and points instead of attempting to scare me off with your usual cache of insults and worthless banter? wouldn't that be a hoot?!

How would YOU feel if every show on PBS was Pro-Bush? here's the hard part: be honest!

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: palehorse74
why should our tax dollars pay for broadcasts which are blatantly anti-administration in nature? why should there be ANY political slant to ANY shows broadcast on public radio/TV?!

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and this is regardless of the content of said shows: National Public TV/Radio should be used to display contact and emergency information ONLY! There is no rhyme or reason to broadcasting politically-charged programming on stations funded by our tax dollars. period.

How is telling the truth displaying "ANY political slant"? Sounds very pro-American and pro-democracy to me.

How about you start holding this administration accountable for their lies -- lies that killed tens of thousands of innocent people (including over 2,500 American soldiers), cost us perhaps a trillion dollars, and increased the danger to America -- instead of whining and making excuses when someone has the balls to expose those lies?

I would have no problem with the shows themselves if they were run on NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, etc. The problem I have with them is that they are clearly partisan in nature yet MY tax dollars go to funding their production and broadcasting.

I have the exact same objections to shows on PBS/NPR that are PRO-administration, or right-wing in nature. The simple fact is that public radio/TV should NEVER be used to broadcast politically motivated programming.

You're missing the whole point fanboi.

I don't see it as left wing. Frontline on PBS had Clinton in cross hairs when he illegally invaded Serbia too. (after congress said no and he did it anyway)

Reporting what happend is called news whether it puts current admin on the defensive or not. Idelogoes will never understand that which is why they have Fox, freerepublic and democratic underground for you guys.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: conjur
Hey, paletroll. If you have a problem with PBS's programming, START A NEW THREAD.

Take your OFF-TOPIC BS elsewhere.

how in the hell is a discussion regarding the partisan nature of PBS considered "off-topic" in a thread about a biased PBS program?

How about addressing my questions and points instead of attempting to scare me off with your usual cache of insults and worthless banter? wouldn't that be a hoot?!

How would YOU feel if every show on PBS was Pro-Bush? here's the hard part: be honest!

It's only partisan in YOUR apologist troll mind.


START A NEW THREAD

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
I believe you're missing the whole point Gomer. How is it partisan to tell the truth?

the "truth" according to whom, however? you? Conjie? that is the point!

these shows are nothing more than the truth according to PBS, and that is where the problem lies.

Truth is a matter of perspective, and in this case, the documentaries were written, shot, produced, and broadcast from a very leftist perspective which is critical to the current administration and all things Bush. I'm sure that for every "expert" who spoke on camera, you could find one who will/would say the complete opposite.

Really? Based on what? Did you even watch the program, or are you desparately flinging chaff out of your flaming tail, hoping to duhvert attention from the fact that you and your feckless king are spiraling in? Why don't you open you mind and learn something instead of brainlessly parroting all your keyboard commando tripe?

Hence the entire reason that such programming is innappropriate for public broadcasting paid for with our tax dollars. How would you feel if PBS started broadcasting Pro-Bush propoganda night after night? My bet is that you'd wig out, cry foul, and campaign to have PBS shut down. am I right?

I bet I am.

Yawn. The truth is the truth. If I want the truth, PBS is often a pretty good source. If I want BushCo propaganda and other lies, there's always Fox and the rest of the MSM. Besides that, I'm already paying for your BushCo propaganda machine called Iraq, and it's costing me a damn site more than the pocket change that goes to PBS. (Fortunately, I chip in a few more dollars on my own.)



By the way, speaking of truths you don't like, are you ever going to bring your extensive "Iraq" insight to the two threads I linked? ROFL!