On the "Pathgate" kerfluffle

Following up on my initial post on "The Path to 9/11," I found an interview of Cyrus Nowrasteh, the writer of the film, by (conservative) radio show host Hugh Hewitt.

I've kept a few tabs on liberal commentary regarding the film, and I made my own comments regarding a sequence that features Sandy Berger calling off a special ops mission in Afghanistan aimed at bin Laden.

The interview clears up a few things, and it would be nice if those who were reporting on the issue would educate themselves about it before formulating and publishing opinions.
My opinion, that the Berger episode probably shouldn't be taken at face value, finds support in the interview, on the other hand (I suppose that qualifies as a shameless plug).

HH: There is quite a lot of attention to the fact that we did not take serious action against Osama bin Laden throughout the 90’s, nor in the first 8 months of the Bush administration, where they focused on bin Laden. It was clear from the record that that was the case. As to the specific attempt when the composite character, Kirk, is in the field about to snatch bin Laden, does that have history behind it?

CN: Well, I’ll tell you what it is. Yes, it is a…but it is a conflation, it is a fusing together of a number of different attempts. I have heard, and you’ve got to understand, we’re dealing with classified missions here.

HH: Right.

CN: I have heard that there were as many as nine to thirteen capture and or kill attempts on Osama bin Laden in the late 90’s. And rather than show a dozen straight sequences of trying to do the same thing, and each time failing or lacking the will to execute the action, we sort of did a melding together for one major sequence.

HH: Okay. And there’s also a sequence in which there is a question about whether or not the cruise missile attempt on Osama bin Laden following the bombing of the embassies had been tipped to Pakistani intelligence. Is that based on any particular series of sources?

CN: It was based on a number of sources, yes.

HH: And so you’re confident that we did give Pakistan advance warning that we would be trying to hit him?

CN: Yes.
(hughhewitt.townhall.com)

The warnings given to Pakistan regarding an impending use of Tomahawk cruise missiles are mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report, by the way, along with testimony suggesting that a tip-off from inside the Pakistani government may have allowed bin Laden to escape the effects of the attack.

It will be interesting, once the film is aired and the facts are all on the table, to compare the Democratic complaints about the film's content and the testimony of the historical record.