10 September 2006

9/11: First amendment hypocrisy?

If you have been following the news, you probably have read about the controversy surrounding the ABC docu-drama scheduled to air tonight and tomorrow entitled The Path to 9/11. Most of the criticism has come from Clinton administration officials, none whom have actually seen this TV movie yet.

I will hold back any criticism of this drama on my part until I actually see it. However, most of the concerns are over scenes that never took place in real life.

More interesting, though, are the many calls by these very same liberals not to edit out a few objectionable scenes, but to pull the show entirely:
The Democratic National Committee, for one, submitted a petition signed by 200,000 people calling for ABC to drop the "right-wing, factually inaccurate mocudrama."
I do understand that Democrats may have conerns about the factuality of some scenes. However, ABC has clearly pointed out that this not a straight documentary presentation of facts. It is a drama based on the 9/11 Commission Report, and some scenes have been fictionalized. This isn't my opinion, this is what ABC has already said.

But more importantly, this is a free speech issue and amazingly enough for the Democrats, free speech isn't limited by facts or opinions. Within some reasonable restrictions (like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater), you can say whatever you want, even if someone else doesn't believe it to be true. In fact, your free speech doesn't need to be backed by facts. That's why, as distasteful as it is, we allow people like Holocaust-deniers to have their revisionist history opinions. Standing up for free speech means standing up for those you disagree with, not just those on your side of the fence.

I thought Democrats and liberals were for free speech? In this case, it's apparently only when it fits their version of the facts.
Post a Comment