Cyrus Nowrasteh, who penned the screenplay for the recent ABC miniseries "The Path to 9/11" - widely criticized for factual inaccuracies and concocted or conflated scenes -hit back today at critics, including reporters at The New York Times and Los Angeles Times.
His column, "The Path to Hysteria," appears online today at the Wall Street Journal's site. Its subhed: "My sin was to write a screenplay accurately depicting Bill Clinton's record on terrorism." (emp. added) [..]
"Clearly, those enraged that a film would criticize the Clinton administration's antiterrorism policies--though critical of its successor as well--were willing to embrace only one scenario: The writer was a conservative hatchetman," Nowrasteh writes.
Nowrasteh has publicly referred to himself as a conservative in the past, and his film was marketed very strongly to conservative media while ignoring the liberal side. In today's article he objected to his "grotesque portrayal as a maddened right-winger." [..]
"A New York Times reporter wrote, without irony or explanation, that an issue that raised questions about the director was his involvement in his father's outreach work. In the era of McCarthyism, the merest hint of a connection to communism sufficed to inspire dark accusations, the certainty that the accused was part of a malign conspiracy. Today, apparently, you can get something of that effect by charging a connection with a Christian mission." Read on...
You poor, poor propagandist. Ain't it terrible when people use your own words and actions to judge you? How could the media call you a conservative when all you did was make up scenes for your mini-series which didn't happen, that made Clinton look bad and Bush look decisive and then forward advanced copies of the movie to only conservative outlets? I mean, really, how could they? And I love his drawing of parallels to the McCarthyism of the 50s. The media has been so unfair to him.
I swear, Freud would have had a field day analyzing this bunch.
