
"Zero Dark Thirty" movie poster (Photo found at Wikimedia Commons)
The Oscar-nominated film Zero Dark Thirty depicting the hunt for Osama bin Laden opened everywhere in the United States this weekend. Coincidentally, the date it opened was also the eleventh year anniversary of the opening of the Guantanamo Bay prison.
Much has been written about the film throughout the past month, particularly how it shows torture helped the US government obtain the information necessary for eventually finding Bin Laden. Less has been written about the vigilantism of the film.
Just over a week ago, film director Oliver Stone appeared on “Up” with Chris Hayes on MSNBC to discuss the “Untold History of the United States” project he produced with Peter Kuznick. During his appearance, he addressed Hollywood mythmaking and said:
Zero Dark Thirty is to me biased (ph) on just on the torture level, but it`s biased among the fact that they don`t even think about the idea of taking the man back alive and wounded back to trial and showing him and dealing with the consequences of what he did. That kind of open discussion would have been very helpful. We would have been like Nuremberg, which [was] very important. It`s one of the best movies actually, Judgment at Nuremberg.
They took the Nazis. They unmasked them. They diminished them and we understood it better. But we never dealt with that. We just killed him, threw his body in the sea and walked away. We never talk about it. There`s no discussion about it.
Was it ever the intention of the CIA, JSOC or the Obama administration to capture Bin Laden alive?
The film leads one to believe there was no meaningful debate over executing Bin Laden in his compound. No scene shows discussion among officials at the CIA or any other government agency prior to the operation over whether to kill or capture him.
Two radar-evading black “Silent Hawk” helicopters carrying SEAL Team Six take off from Forward Operating Base Afghanistan. One of the helicopters crash-lands at Bin Laden’s compound in Abottabad, Pakistan. The other lands without malfunction. At the entrance to the compound, one squad shoots Ibrahim Sayeed, the courier who helped the CIA develop their hunch that Bin Laden was at this location. The other that crash-landed goes into where Bin Laden is hiding through another entrance. (And each one harbors a little to a fair amount of doubt that Bin Laden is actually in this compound.)
Inside, all military-age males are shot on sight, even if they are not holding weapons or firing at the team. Members of the team, who land kill shots, also do not hesitate to pump extra bullets into these men. The women scream and are restrained or held at gunpoint. The children cry and are put in another room.
The team continues to tactically move through the compound killing military-age males they encounter. Abruptly, shots are fired at a man who cannot be seen fully. He falls to the ground. Two team members look at who has fallen to the ground. It is Bin Laden. He never fired at anyone. One team member says, “For God and country, Geronimo, Geronimo, Geronimo.” He pauses and then adds, “Geronimo EKIA.”
SEAL Team Six collects hard drives, digital media and other files from the compound. They put Bin Laden’s corpse into a body bag and load into helicopters as Pakistan authorities are nearing the compound and may discover what happened. The team takes off and, when it lands, the body is identified by Maya (Jessica Chastain), the CIA agent who was 100% sure Bin Laden would be there. And no scene features any official asking whether SEAL Team Six could have taken him alive.
*
Initially, “American officials” told the New York Times that a “firefight broke out shortly after the commandos arrived and that Bin Laden had tried to “resist the assault force.” There is no firefight in the film.
Mark Bissonnette, the SEAL from the team that went on the raid who wrote a detailed account in No Easy Day, claimed on “60 Minutes,” “We weren’t sent in to murder him. This was, ‘Hey, kill or capture.’” Weeks were spent training on a “full-size model of the compound.” They had many chances to “train on a mock-up” for “three weeks.”
None of this appears in the film. One would not know there was this much preparation ahead of time. There is a scene at Area 51, a Nevada Air Force Base, when SEAL Team Six is informed they will be going on a mission to get Bin Laden. There is also a scene with the team playing horseshoes right before the mission is given the final go ahead. Other than that, the audience does not witness any scene, like this one, which Bissonnette describes in his book:
…Bissonnette and his fellow SEALs conducted a nighttime dress rehearsal of the raid, on a mock-up of Bin Laden’s house, for the president’s national security team. As Bissonnette and the other SEALs slid down ropes and stormed the fake house, administration officials like Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stood by and watched through night-vision goggles…
According to Mark Bowden, Obama believed “if we had captured him” he “would be in a strong political position to argue in favor of giving bin Laden the full rights of a criminal defendant if Bin Laden went on trial for masterminding the Sept. 11 attacks.” He would have argued “that displaying due process and rule of law would be our best weapon against al-Qaida, in preventing him from appearing as a martyr.” Yet, Obama “expected Bin Laden to go down fighting.”
On the campaign trail in 2008, candidate Obama said, “If we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable, or unwilling, to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out. We will kill Bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority.” Then, he was not concerned with capturing Bin Laden alive.
The mission was launched without certainty that Bin Laden was actually even in the compound. Obama took law enforcement into his own hands, deciding the benefit of Bin Laden’s elimination outweighed all possible costs.
There is no reason to believe these convenient and baseless counterfactual statements about giving Bin Laden due process. The due process he was to receive was the execution he was duly subjected to in the night raid on his compound.
*
Films are not produced and released in a vacuum. Especially when they present events in history of critical importance that are symbolic to a nation, they take on a power of their own. In this case, Zero Dark Thirty presents the evolution of the use of lethal force by the US government and the movement away from war and occupation of countries to covert/secret operations.
As clear as day, the film is a straightforward presentation of vigilantism. The SEAL Team Six displays no respect for humanity or justice in their act of aggression. It is a targeted killing operation like the targeted killing operations carried out by CIA drones. All military-age males living with Bin Laden are guilty by association, whether they have engaged in violence or terrorist attacks against the United States or not. But it is the type of film that plays to a society that celebrated Osama bin Laden’s execution on the streets of New York…

…in front of the White House…

…at Ground Zero, site of September 11th attacks he was allegedly behind…

…through exaltations of vengeance scrawled on body parts…

…and on the front pages of tabloid newspapers.

The Post’s front page cheered, “Vengeance at last! US nails the bastard!” The first sentence in the Post read, “We finally got the miserable son of a bitch.” That sort of crude reflection does not clash with the hollow treatment Bigelow, Boal and others involved in creating the film gave to the story.
*
Recall, filmmaker Michael Moore said on Piers Morgan’s show after the news of Bin Laden’s execution, when Americans reacted by going out to party:
…We’ve lost something of our soul here in this country…something that separates us from other parts, other countries where we say everybody has their day in court no matter how bad of a person, no matter what piece of scum they are, they have a right to a trial…after World War II, we just didn’t go in and put a bullet to the head of all the top Nazis. We put them on trial…
At sites like the left-leaning Huffington Post, commenters blasted Moore, “I often agree with Michael Moore, but NO WAY on this one!! A trial for Bin Laden would have been a circus and would have cost a fortune. We’ve already spent too much money on these extremist Muslims. The 3000+ people that Bin Laden killed had no chance to live and he shouldn’t either!!” Another commenter wrote, ““There are times to play Mother Teresa to the world, and there are times to blow a quarter of someone’s skull off…….” One more person added, “Second that – justice was properly served ..now can we do the same to KSM and end the drama over him too.” Yet another commenter put it succinctly, “There are evil people in the world for whom there is no remedy but death. He was one of them.”
However, there was one voice in the wilderness—a Huffington Post community moderator, who reflected:
I used to believe, as I was taught in school, that America was different from other countries. We had due process. We had fair trials for people accused of crimes. We didn’t do summary executions. We didn’t torture people. Our system was based on laws and rights and the Constitution.
I used to believe that America was better than other countries- more moral, more just. Maybe I was naive and this was never the case. Anyway, it’s not true today.
Not just in Osama bin Laden’s case, but in thousands of other cases and situations. Poor people and minorities are routinely railroaded in our “justice system”. We invade other countries who have done nothing to us. We bomb innocent civilians. We torture and kill and hate. We leave millions of our own citizens without access to adequate food, shelter, education or medical care.
Most other countries do not do these things. Does Japan act this way? Switzerland? Norway? Costa Rica? Why does America act worse than other countries?
Zero Dark Thirty completely lacks such honest reflection.
Yes, at the end of the film, Maya looks like the soul in her has been completely sapped by this operation. But, Bigelow and Boal adopt a post-9/11 view and choose to not be critical of what played out and how culturally society has transformed. What about the countless people who died in wars since the September 11th attacks? What about the loss of civil liberties? How about the increased perception that government will act unethically and betray the rule of law but that this is justifiable because we are targeting bad men who hate America? What about how this reinforces the idea that people suspected of horrific acts of terrorism do not deserve to answer for their crimes in a court of law but rather deserve a bullet to the head? And how about the unquenchable bloodlust and thirst for revenge not just among Americans but the political class tasked with determining US policies?
Upon considering these questions, it is impossible not to conclude that this film is the kind of production that greatly pleases the national security state especially because it does not question what they do. Both Bigelow and Boal have displayed great reservation when asked to explain their depiction of torture. They would probably laugh at someone who suggested, as this review has, that the film normalizes the increased use of targeted assassination operations by the US government. Trailers for the film presented the film as the story of how it really happened, but, faced with criticism, they claim they had a right to engage in artistic license. So, in that respect, the level of access the CIA and other agencies gave to the filmmakers and the trust which officials gave to them paid off.
There is no attempt in this film to make a larger comment about all the country has done in the name of ensuring Bin Laden did not attack us. Nor does it take a moment at the end to give viewers an introspective conclusion with characters asking if this “it”—the point when the War on Terrorism may finally be coming to an end. Though troops may have pulled out of Iraq and will pull out of Afghanistan eventually, there are thousands of bases all over the world that are “leap pads” for the American empire to launch incursions or covert operations into any country whenever necessary. But, the codification and entrenching of policies that have put America on a path to permanent war are not questioned.
This is the hunt for Bin Laden told with information from officials in government, who have no objection to America’s increased reliance on secret war or covert operations. Bigelow and Boal wanted the information necessary to tell the version of the story that they believed to be true in a way that would garner them high praise. The CIA gave them that while at the same time manipulating them into presenting torture tactics used to create learned helplessness in prisoners as part of the timeline of events that eventually led to Bin Laden. They showed the NSA intercepting communications and the dolly shot past hardware with wires and cords popping out is made completely innocuous and acceptable. A scene shows a video screen with imagery from a drone striking a target and Maya looks on coldly, completely numbed by the lethal use of force.
The filmmakers played their part. They were given access and what Americans are flocking to this weekend is nothing that would alienate the officials they collaborated with and nothing less than a conventional story of revenge on an American enemy.




50 Comments

AND, lot’s of money too, Jose Rodrequez notwithstanding.
Meanwhile, those that DO tell the truth are prosecuted with the full power and weight of the entire USG wrath. Only in the NEW AMERIKA.
However, there IS a reason. And it’s fucking ugly.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/08/are-raising-generation-deluded-narcissists/
ps..I won’t be seeing this contemptible film. I already know the truth.
Since this film is pure propaganda, I have no plans on seeing it or even watching a trailer.
sorry, i just stumbled in from the reality-based community, and in the reality-based community, movies are not reality.
did i miss the part where “zero dark thirty” was labeled a documentary?
as for the option of taking bin laden alive, for what? were you planning on rehabilitating him and putting him back into society? (wait! THERE’S a movie!)
In the “reality based community” you speak of, war crimes such as torture, rendition, and the murder of civilians we are not at war with are good things. Nobody needs a lawyer, and reporters are jailed, tortured and held for years without trial. Go piss up a multi-stranded hemp product you ignorant ass hat.
Thanks Kevin, this macho and murderous part of our culture is sickening.
John
In other words: even in death, Bin Laden won. He achieved his goals, as he had stated them.
And we all have to live in the Hell our “leaders” helped him create – willingly enough, most of us.
Exactly; thinking the same thing. Could not pay me to watch this movie.
Obviously someone really wanted it made…:(
Hey, 24 was a hit for how many years? We’re saturated in that kind of fiction. Always have been: look at some of the earlier centuries most popular narratives, a snapshot of the national weltanschauung at any point in time. Kind of disgusting, truthfully. Some great but disturbing, and sometimes remarkably disturbed, storytelling.
Remember that this film was originally scheduled to be released last October, right before the election, and is based on White House leaks of classified information. If Obama had wanted bin Laden alive, one would assume that some indication of that would have been shown in the film. But would a trial have killed at the box office? Or the polls?
Link.
I know that I am in the minority here, but I don’t even think it was obl, and that is why there was no attempt to take him alive or actually show his body for id. I think that he died long ago in the mountains (Tora Bora) from his sickness. He was allowed to escape because if he were caught, the “reason” for the “war on terror” would have been ended.
As for this movie, I will never see it nor willingly watch a trailer. It is nothing but propaganda to lead the way to more and more restrictions on civil liberties.
Very good, reflective post, Kevin. Thoughtfulness is quickly disappearing in our society.
Artistic license is quite a thing. No one needs any training to get it, and anyone can have it. Think of this, a person who wants to cut dead skin and nails has to have training and get a license. But artistic license? No responsibility to anyone or anything. (I say this as an artist.)
Whatever is wrought from the portrayal of “real events” as cinema or novel or other mass distributed work, the artists can step back and say whatever they want about what they have done. The truth however, is more difficult.
To fight for the truth, in retrospect, is a much harder slog, and whatever harm is done by a not-truthful story, well, good luck packing that up and putting it away.
Thanks I’m with you on those points and Thanks Kevin.
I’m with you, Bear. I don’t think it was OBL. It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that Al Qaeda and OBL had nothing to do with 9/11 or terrorism against the US in general. Just as I am not surprised to see indications that several of the so-called 9/11 terrorists have been seen since 9/11.
It was a hit job, pure and simple. They didn’t want a trial probably because they were afraid of the Faux Newz, TGOPer, Republican noise machine. That plus they didn’t want to really examine all crap involved. Just a nice clean hit, dump the corpse, and come home to a hero’s welcome.
meanwhile, the phony ‘War on Terror’ goes on and on and on . . . just like they want. After all, what’s a foreign policy without a good Boogie Man? It was the Commies from the late 40s through the early 90s. Now, it’s ‘Terrorists’, whoever they feel like defining as such. Could be those Muslim brown folks, ecology activists, climate change activists, 99 Percenters, OWS, or anyone who challenges the MOTUs. Anyone except white power, right-wing gun nuts.
I’m not going to believe that you actually bothered to read what I methodically explained. You scanned through and then wrote your opinion down without regard for the rule of law.
Perhaps, you think everyone in Guantanamo who needs to be prosecuted for crimes but has not yet should be executed by a firing squad, hung or killed by lethal injection. It would save money. We’re spending a lot of money to give them something that resembles justice. However, the 9/11 victims may get to hear some truth like how KSM and the others conspired together to commit 9/11.
Wouldn’t it be nice for the 9/11 victims if Osama bin Laden had been put on the stand and forced to answer for what he had done? Maybe he would not have cooperated but wouldn’t it have been great to make him seem impotent to all violent extremists of the world?
I also tend to think that it wasn’t Bin Laden that was found at the compound. But wouldn’t some member of the U.S. team, including anyone on the ship from which he was “dumped” into the ocean, know the truth and spill it? Maybe they killed a guy who looked close-enough, and even the soldiers thought it was him? End result being, it sure worked political “magic for the masses”. All Hail Obama, Slayer of Justice.
Thanks for your take on this Kevin. (BTW,nice photo of you and friends I came across @twitter)
Thank you KG … so much about OBL now is so little about OBL — it is all about what the ( WH -CIA -Pentagon ) and Bush/Obama want/need to lie about and tell lies about.
Bush and Obama not the good guys in so much about post 2000 and post 9/11/2001 bogus/ginned up GWOT — which was/still is not about being honest.
Bush killed and Obama is killing many innocent humans. A honest statement. When did Bush and when does Obama tell us any what was/is and any whys in honest ways?
Seems so much about OBL was/is myth making done to sell dishonesty.
This still seems to be so.
Yes, but Kevin, TBogg and the other boggers are all A-okay with this kind of thing and think folks like you are whiny liberals….so move along now….
This is a blisteringly good piece you’ve written (sarcasm off now!). I hope it garners a few more than a couple of dozen comments. I fear it won’t. Even here, priorities are elsewhere (like pulling up cats – incidentally I have a cat and absolutely love them but still….)
Book Salon up with Leigh Ann Wheeler’s How Sex Became a Civil Liberty hosted by Nancy L. Cohen
Kevin,
Congrats, and on “two levels.”
I have been posting here at the FDL for a number of years, and I recall when you starting posting, and thusly, I knew you had a forthcoming and excellent career in the Journo Biz. And this “vigilantism” is another of your stellar exemplars.
I find this article fascinating, especially from the perspective of future historians. Thusly, America’s history of ‘vigilantism’ and seen from the perpective of a Native American, is not new. However, when applying the Construct of a Human Rights Abuse, these historians of the future, are easily going to recognize and write voluminously of this Construct for a Human Rights Abuse.
Therefore, today’s “leaders” in or out of government are not going to find favor with the establishment of a Hall of Shame in the Capitol Mall in which various marble plaques listing these Charlatans and for their refusing to recognize that President Jimmy Carter had it correct in the late 1970s, and as such, we, Native Americans and Chicanos have a great fondness for Carter. Moreover, the then “majority” of the 2030s and 2040s, i.e., “racial and ethnics” will reflect that America’s Agenda of Human Rights, was crafted by the then Coretta Scott King and the then, Arizona Governnor Raul Castro.
And our recent national behavior as well as to today’s behavior, the “dark” stain on America’s Character cannot and will not be denied. Thusly, future historians will have carte blanche and far beyond what is found or practiced in today’s Fourth Estate.
Jaango
Are you being purposely naive about how movies, video games, TV shows affect the way people, especially young people, see and react to the real world? Especially in a post-literate culture where so many USans no longer read history, images take on power from their visceral connection to us.
Are you also unaware that the FBI NEVER listed the 9/11 terrorism as one of bin Laden’s many terrorist crimes because the FBI never had hard evidence of his connection to 9/11?
The Nazis committed many and more horrific crimes than all Muslim terrorists combined ever could, yet the remaining Nazis were put on trial for their crimes. Why not bin Laden?
And why not even show his body, as Che Guevara’s was put on display after his execution?
There is so much “fishy” about this entire Obama propaganda effort, now ably reinforced by Amerika’s own Leni Reifenstahl, Kathryn Bigelow, that needs investigation, but, like 9/11 itself, such a true investigation will never occur.
while i was busy pissing up a multi-standed hemp product (as you suggested)a thought occured to me, john: you’re apparently the type of movie-goer/theatergoer/book reader who thinks “oedipus rex” is advocating for mother-fucking and father-killing.
by all means, let’s ban or censor all plays/movies/books that depict things or dramatize issues john doesn’t personally agree with.
negro, please…it’s a fuckin’ movie, and frankly, it’s sparked a lot of good discussion here, not including your philistinism and inability to distinguish fact from fiction. as a favor to you, i’ll pass your criticism on to sophocles. that guy could learn from your political correctness.
Re: #4, #8, #15
BINGO! It’s an exercise in heaving from all directions to get people to wet their pants. A Hollywood “action flick” is disallowed, unless. . . fill in the blank.
I’d suggest we calm down and reconsider the purpose of going to the cinema (if a purpose remains nowadays). Then, use a sieve. Or try Sundance and its congested anthill, where you can catch the flu beginning in a few days.
Go to Helen Hunt (the place *and* the person) for anything worthwhile in cinema. Actually do try “The Sessions” as a salve from the sensitive cranks. There’s no exploitative agenda there either from the screen, or the viewers, or the reviewers. I tried hard to find something to get mad about, failed, and figure they won’t make money. But it’s a good movie.
I think President Obama and White House Democrats were more afraid of how Republicans, Faux News and right-wing rant radio hosts would turn a “captured-alive” bin Laden into a partisan political circus, especially in the year and a half before President Obama sought re-election.
The reason I think this is simple. Look at how Republicans, those on Capitol Hill and their right-wing media puppets, have responded to attempts to close Guantanamo or even hold terrorist trials inside the United States (not counting, of course, the hundreds that have already been held). IOW, where would bin Laden have been held awaiting trial, and would this high-profile trial have even been held inside the U.S.?
So, I believe the kill-order involving bin Laden was more to stop Republicans from turning his incarceration and trial into a political football during Obama’s re-election campaign, just as bin Laden’s burial at sea was meant to stop al Qaeda followers from turning any bin Laden burial site on land into a shrine.
good point.
why, if there hadn’t been all those violent videogames in the ’20′s and ’30′s, we’d never have had those murderous nazis.
grimfees and PillBilly@16, I didn’t want to say too much more because the prevailing sentiment here is that those of us that don’t believe the official line (see 9/11 Truth controversy) on whatever happens must be nutty and uninformed. Jane does not want this site to become a hotbed of arguing over possible conspiracies. There are enough actions by our “leaders” that are fairly open to criticism and, for the most part, they are not weighted with conspiracy theory baggage.
Thanks, jaango. Appreciate your thoughts.
Thanks for the praise. I wanted to write about the film but did not want to simply restate what had already been said about the torture in the film. So, I decided to describe another important aspect.
> inability to distinguish fact from fiction
If the account is supposed to be so fictional, why not set it in France or Brazil, in the 1970s? The point is, the effort was made to turn fiction into fact. It worked on you, which admittedly is not difficult.
Good point.
Because everybody knows that’s the only way to create murderous Nazis.
I’ll file that under DUH. What that one neuron between your ears fails to register is the fact that the producers of this film, claim in both the TV ADVERTISEMENTS and various TRAILERS, in BIG BOLD LETTERS..”THE UNTOLD TRUTH”, which kinda suggests that it is indeed based on reality, which, given a later statement by the same producers that the film is not a documentary suggest they are either bald faced liars, or someone who produced film text for these advertisements/trailers didn’t get the fucking memo. Either way, for those imbeciles who see the film that didn’t get the memo either, may get the idea the film is indeed a documentary. Which for all intents and purposes, produces the exact result the producers were given access to CIA for in the first place. Propaganda. Now fuck off dimwit.
This is a quaint notion that the Repugs are to blame for OBLs murder. I don’t know if you realize that the Dems helped to block the closing of Gitmo or are they also so weak that they can’t make their own decisions.
The next time i’m pulled over for speeding i’ll plead that the Repugs were chasing me defense.
I agree with what you’ve said, and would add that a live capture of Bin Laden would have added some measure of danger to the mission, and was therefor thrown out. Any increased danger to the unit will be avoided. All very clinical and, though I might not agree with it, understandable.
(“ps..I won’t be seeing this contemptible film. I already know the truth.”)
right-o. god forbid you should, y’know, actually look at the evidence and know what you’re talking about.
and i always find “fuck off, dimwit” so persuasive to any elegant argument. so, hey, ya teally convinced me there.
by the way, there is no “THE UNTOLD TRUTH” in trailers or ads for ZD30. the wording is “THE UNTOLD STORY.”
but as you can’t seem to understand the difference between “the truth” and “a story,” i understand your confusion.
Kevin,
This is an excellent meta analysis of the American zeitgeist.
I smelled a massive PR job the minute that 9/11 started and those in powers were going to milk the myth they laid out for all they could. They unleashed the sadists in our midst and they rushed in to kill… kill for the sake of killing when they couldn’t understand why they were killing. Patriotism is way to abstract a reason to kill.
I don’t believe in censorship, but I don’t bother with Hollywoood anything… It’s pure capitalist garbage with no redeeming value and it’s driving the stupidity of Americans lower and lower. Those who participated in the hagiography really need to understand how much hard this sort of movie is doing.
Thank you Kevin. You are a treasure.
Agree.
Not producing the body is telling. It all looked like a staged made for TV event… real like imitating fiction which was a fiction to be imitated.
They do create their own reality… and then fictionalize it.
Our Truman show!
We executed the man pure and simple. The rational was that he was a enemy combatant, no need for a trial or due process MFer , this is war and our guys we’re on the battle field. I think it’s that simple. Same if we’d parachuted into the Reich-stag and took AH etc. Of course the real question is War with whom? Terror is a tactic so being at War with a tactic is like being at War with a substance like Cocaine or Pot. All these so called Wars are just excuses in my mind to go after all of the above. Back in the 19th century the War was against anyone designated as a hostile Indian and various figurehead Indians ( wooden Indians) like Geronimo, Crazy Horse, Sitting Bull etc. were the Bin Laden’s of that era. They were killed, captured imprisoned & tortured and the War went on till all of the Indians, not just the hostiles were put in camps ( reservations) and had their children taken from them to be converted to Christianity and made faux white people. I think the same kind of energy ( manifest destiny aka Imperialism + racism) is at work here. This is a War against Islam, good luck to us on ever winning that one. Great excuse though to occupy half the planet and wage war forever, isn’t it.
> Any increased danger to the unit will be avoided
Please. The least dangerous path for the unit of Manly American Deathdealers was to not fly into Pakistan to murder a patsy. Oh wait — we’ll never know now if he was a patsy, will we? Or if they got the right guy. Remember that doing the right thing is not always easy, and some girlymen prefer to take the easy way out. Which is totally understandable, right?
I hope you continue to read my posts. You really do post quite amusing comments.
While I saw Judgment at Nuremberg I cannot say I’ve seen Zero Dark Thirty. However, a casual observance of this country tells me all I need to know about ” The New Americans “. Raised on a special diet of sports fanaticism, cheap violence, misogyny, racism, homophobia, caveat emptor, police state overreach, a two-tiered legal system, corrupt law enforcement and a crumbling economy; why should torture surprise anyone. Americans will torture for pleasure, no extra charges. 4% of American teenagers attempt suicide. Today, more enlisted personnel die from suicide than conflict. Mass murders are everywhere. Pick your poison. We’re a sick, twisted bunch. And our moral and traditional guides, cultural and political emissaries of ” peace on earth and good will to men ” are an even sicker bunch. There all a bunch of hoodwinkers, bamboozelers, grifters and swindlers. That’s why I won’t pay to see Zero Dark Thirty. I’ve seen directors and their wartime propaganda, masked as storytelling, way to many times before. But I did like Judgment at Nuremberg.
Sands of Iwo Jima?
Thanks for posting this honest and reflective piece. I wonder how many people remember that there actually was a court case in the US District for Southern District of New York encaptioned USA v. Usama bin Laden?
http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html
Many of the charges have been since disproven but this indictment was issued in 1998. The idea being that the guy was, after all, accused of criminal acts and was wanted as a fugitive from justice. That was before we conflated him into a combination of Satan, Hitler, Stalin and Genghis Khan, like some supernatural monster. The justice system has a way of putting human dimensions on our enemies and our problems. Was our country better off for the summary trial and executions of John Wilkes Booth and his fellow assassins?
How about Won’t Back Down this year? But war films? Let’s be auteur here. Eastwood, Milius, Hawkes, Capra, Spielberg, Ford, Preminger, etc. Those and more all dabbled in the black arts, boogey and bagmen storytelling. For love of country and a paycheck. Propaganda may, indeed, be in the eye of the beholder. But, no director or film company went broke waving the ol’red, white and blue. Movies with the anti-hero, no ” good guys ” approach, were the films that captured my generations’ attention. We’re all more mercenary than we’d like to admit-IMO.
Just like the bounty hunter in another movie, “Django Unchained.” “Wanted: dead or alive” means one thing only.
First, how the hell does ZD30 show “torture works”. Torture is the tick tick tick way to get answers fast before the bomb goes off. It was obviously an 8 year fuse on that time bomb….
President Bush authorized torture to get bin Laden before he ran for reelection. It failed Bush in his first term, so by the time he was running in 2004, bin Laden no longer mattered to him.
If Jack Bauer in the first two episodes of FOX “24″ tortured a bunch of people, and then for the next five seasons spun his wheels, and then only after he’s fired and the new guy in the ABC series 25 looks at intel and sat recon and goes in to get the bad guy, “24″ would be called pointless and boring, and “25″ gripping.
Anyway, war is about killing the enemy. You never put the enemy on trial, the due process was Congress declaring war. Congress declared global war on individuals. That means that the President is responsible as Commander in Chief of a global war on individuals by killing them, because war is about killing. We the People in 2001 declared endless global war on individuals. There are no trials in war, just killing. There are no judges in war, just killing. There are no juries in war, just killing.
If you object to endless global war on individuals then make sure the next Congress represents your no war view and will repeal the 2001 declaration of endless global war on individuals.
“Anyway, war is about killing the enemy. You never put the enemy on trial.”—Never? Read history ever?
The Nazis were put on trial. Japanese war criminals were put on trial. Societies hold trials or truth commissions after wars to learn what pushed men to commit atrocities, to unmask them (as Stone said). They hold truth commissions so people can have a full accounting of what led to war and then, perhaps, (ideally) prevent it from happening again.
Congress gave authorization for combat operations in Afghanistan that the Bush administration and Obama administration have both conflated as an authorization for force anywhere in the world because we’re America and can do whatever we want with our empire. That does not make it appropriate, just or right.
Finally, did you see the film? I don’t think you did. Anyways, usually a film shows the progression of events in a story from beginning to end. If not linear, then at least you can see a cause and effect relationship. So, detainees are tortured at black site prisons by CIA interrogators. They provide information under threat of torture. That is used in the pursuit of further intelligence that ultimately leads to Bin Laden. That is how the film shows torture works.
Kevin, I think that you misunderstood mulp (or perhaps I did) but I believe mulp means that during the actual combat conditions these things don’t occur. Obviously, the winners can put the losers on trial, and the judgments are predetermined, but, at least, look impartial. That was when we had nation against nation wars with confrontations. What we have now is totally chaotic in terms of the old paradigm: generally guerilla warfare or assassinations or “wars” against some concept. These latest should probably be treated as criminal offenses, not war. It is better for the govt to keep people upset and kill the purported bad guys, even if you have to redefine who is the bad guy in a ludicrous way. Also, there is no messy trial problems of showing that the govt was actually the one in the wrong.
(“I hope you continue to read my posts. You really do post quite amusing comments.”)
be careful what you wish for.
and you’re right, kevin, sorry, i read your thoughtful piece on ZD30 neither carefully nor thoughtfully, but reacted only to reactions to it.
i’ll do better next time, and go right to the mother-piece first.
I’ve seen Zero Dark Thirty only once, and I wasn’t scrutinizing it super-carefully. With that caveat in mind, I got the impression that the message viewers come away with depends to a large extent on the agenda they go in with.
From what I recall, the movie does imply that some of the key intelligence that led to Bin Laden’s location was extracted after torture. From what little I have read about the actual story, that is apparently untrue. If so, that’s a reprehensible and indefensible implication in a docudrama purporting to be an account of the true story. Far too many Americans learn their history from fiction and docudrama for this not to be dangerous, particularly with respect to beliefs about torture. (I’m sure that lots of Americans who saw U-571 firmly believe that we Americans, not the Brits, captured the Enigma machine and codebook that allowed Bletchley Park to crack the German naval code in WWII — despite that movie’s explicit written disclaimer!)
Apart from that, however, I thought Zero Dark Thirty was rather neutral in its approach. As someone who is opposed to US vigilantism, I inferred self-doubt and pain at his own loss of humanity in at least one of the interrogators; I felt free to wonder whether the maniacal, decade-long mission of vengeance was worth all we sacrificed for it; I felt uncomfortable with many of the assassinations; and I saw emptiness rather than relief in the protagonist once the mission was accomplished. I imagine that pro-vigilantism viewers would instead infer a clear vindication of their beliefs.
In short, apart from its apparent misrepresentation of torture as having been productive and useful, I thought Zero Dark Thirty was more nuanced than some critics — many of whom haven’t seen the movie — would have you believe. Just my two cents’ worth…