Skip to main content

Tom the Dancing Bug.

BE THE FIRST ON YOUR BLOCK to see Tom the Dancing Bug every week!  Members of the elite and prestigious INNER HIVE get the comic in their inboxes at least a day before publication -- and much, much MORE!  

Please click HERE for information.  Thank you.

Originally posted to Comics on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 06:50 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Ah yes, the "Exception" that somehow... (13+ / 0-)

    seems to be the magic way to extract information because "There's NO TIME!!!!"

    Funny how the "exception" seems to be used all the time... because there's always an emergency that "requires" it.

    /snark

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 06:57:52 AM PST

  •  Are they angry that the movie implied torture (7+ / 0-)

    worked or are they angry that the movie exposed our use of torture in a graphic way so that the American public would be shocked out of their stupor on the subject, inquiring minds want to know.

    •  The former, I'd think (6+ / 0-)

      because there's no way in hell that the American public is going to be shocked out of their stupor on this subject . .. .  that would have happened long ago if an option.

    •  The problem with torture is that (5+ / 0-)

      anyone will tell you anything that they think you want to hear in order to get it to stop.  It still works great in fantasy fiction as far a ratings and I keep thinking of the TV show 24 and how they had an agent whose sole expertise was torture which they even used on their own employees; who then then go back to work 30 minutes later.

      •  Fortunately, other shows are better sometimes. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TKO333

        Burn Notice had a line something like, “The problem with torture is that it only gives you the first lie that will make the pain go away.” Of course, that's the functional problem, not the moral problem, but even hearing that much on television was pretty nice.

        Not to say that undoes 24, but still.

        Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
        Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
        Code Monkey like you!

        Formerly known as Jyrinx.

        by Code Monkey on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 03:05:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Who's Angry? (11+ / 0-)

      I'm angry that the government used my money and my legitimacy to run this immoral program.

      If the movie was going to shock the American public out of their stupor it would have shown how fruitless this torture was and would have ended with the people doing it being discovered and put on trial. That would be truly shocking!

    •  Gee (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      filby, rbird, timelad, lotlizard

      I wonder which?

      This is the disingenuous tack taking by the ZDT filmmakers and their supporters.

      It's not working.

    •  I thought the torture scenes were (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mumtaznepal, Mindtrain, eztempo

      shocking. The effect on the audience in the theater was palpable.

      I'm puzzled by the controversy as to whether the movie legitimized the use of torture or not.  Frankly, I thought the results of the brutal interrogations depicted in the film were ambiguous. And anyway, does it matter? Torture is wrong regardless of its effectiveness.

      Victory is sweet-November 6, 2012

      by al23 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:28:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It seems to be in the eye of the beholder- (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mumtaznepal

        Some thoughtful people see that the torture was in fact shocking and that ultimately no useful information came out of it.

        Some other thoughtful people see that the torture has a horrifying entertainment element and will be attractive to simple minds.

        Simple minds are attracted to the simplicity of the solution- torture until you get what you want.

        There are probably more nuances yet.

        •  I disagree (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Code Monkey, TKO333, Armando, lotlizard

          I disagree.

          I just watched it, and there's a man tortured for a long time at the start of the film, I mean it's not just a quick scene but goes on and on. Then this same man is being given tea and food by the interrogator, but when he doesn't say enough, the interrogator says "Listen i can go eat with some other dude and hang you back up to the ceiling" and the man immediately starts naming names, including the name of Osama Bin Laden's courier, which we all know is what led to finding him.

          The head of the CIA interrogation program said this gives a wildly false impression, that waterboarding was used very early on and yielded nothing, that he told them that, that he got information finally by building trust (not by threatening to start torturing people again after doing so earlier) and that the hanging from the ceiling and the rest was taken from the stories of the abuse in Iraq by military guards, not the CIA at all.

          No "simple mind" was required to think that was being portrayed was "torture got us Bin Laden". It's up to each individual to know whether this is true or false of course, but the criticisms of the movie for depicting something that was false as if it had actually happened are perfectly valid.

          •  I saw the movie too, and disagree with you :-) (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Mindtrain, Ray Blake

            I thought it was pretty clear in the movie that torture of all of the involved yielded nothing.

            Yes, courier names were given, but the significance of that wasn't put together until nearly a year later by the CIA agent.

            The most interesting line of the movie was the lead actress being introduced to torture her first arrival in the middle east, and her subsequent dedication to finding bin Laden after the murder of her friends (CIA agents) in a terrorist attack.

            "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

            by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:24:21 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Lost me (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Code Monkey, eztempo, Armando, lotlizard

              I don't understand, what is it you don't agree with?

              "Yes, courier names were given, but the significance of that wasn't put together until nearly a year later by the CIA agent."

              So what?

              By "were given" I assume you're referring to the scene I described, which is very definitely showing a man giving up the courier's name because of the threat of torture. After showing him being tortured for a long part of the film.

              So watching the film, someone who knew nothing from other sources would think okay, torture, and then threatening to do it again, led to learning the courier's name. The attention that the woman, Maya, shows, asking him to repeat the name, at the particular moment is clearly meant to show the significance.

              This is what critics are complaining about, and they're right.

              •  Maybe I'm misunderstanding your posts, but I (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                al23, Ray Blake

                didn't think the movie implied torture worked at all.

                Yes, the line when they were eating, when torture was threatened again (where the lead prisoner was eating) to me showed that it wasn't the torture that got results. Torture didn't result the courier name being given.  And the name being given was only a small piece of the puzzle, not an "aha, we have it!" moment.  

                The CIA agent put the courier names together a year later, and figured out alias were being used by the brothers.

                You may disagree, and that's fine.  

                I have no problem with liberals who have actually seen the film giving their own assessments of it, based upon our common "liberal" viewpoints.

                "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

                by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:50:50 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  That scene (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              lotlizard

              is clear that torture worked.

              I do not understand how you can say it did not

      •  Agree. I finally saw the movie last week. I (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mindtrain, al23

        thought the opening (a black screen where the telephone calls to 911 from victims inside the burning Twin Towers played) was beyond exploitative and shocking.

        The movie then segued pretty quickly into the overly-long torture scenes, where were of course offensive (that our government did this) and I think the audience caught on to that right away (I live in a conservative red state)

        But the torture didn't lead, in the movie, directly to bin Laden.  That connection wasn't really made, other than the lead CIA agent looking at DVD of multiple torture scenes, and seeing all of the tortured mentioned one name as a courier.  (If one picked up on that)

        But the wasted movie time spent torturing one man in gory, long detail, didn't lead to bin Laden. That was clear in the movie.

        To me (who knew the truth, and came with the preconceived idea that the torture was bad and useless) it seemed the whole first hour of the movie was gratuitous and aimless, a good metaphorical description of Bush going for bin Laden (yes, talked about not pursing him in the mountains)

        The heart-rending 911 calls, followed by the too-long torture scenes, seems all gratuitous and useless to me. Then, the movie got interesting.

        Yes, the audience was shocked by the torture scenes.  Hopefully it changed a few minds about allowing our government to act like this.

        "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

        by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 12:52:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thought of something else ... the raid on bin (0+ / 0-)

          Laden's house.  

          It showed the Seals putting two bullets into each target male shot and lying unconcious on the floor to ensure they were dead.

          The audience gasped at that.

          Two women were also accidentally shot in the raid, they didn't do that to them, and one of the Seals asked about one of the unintended victim women ("she's still alive now, but she'll bleed out").  

          They also herded the crying children into on room, kept telling them "It's okay" and giving them toys (no, it's not okay, strange men with guns who just shot their parents)

          Anyway, thought how they handled the raid was food for thought (the loss of life of the innocent bystander) and probably very accurate, from what I've read in the news.

          Opening with the playing of the 911 victims last calls to their family, and to 911, was to set the stage for the violence that followed in the search for bin Laden.

          "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

          by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:02:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You must have missed a scene (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Armando

          See my comment above.

          •  Nope. I just came out with a different (0+ / 0-)

            interpretation of that than you did, I agree with as23's thoughts after seeing the movie.

            That's what good movies do - engender thought and discussion.

            "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

            by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:35:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh I agree with that (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Armando

              about thought and discussion. What I don't understand is this: You really watched the scene I described above, and didn't think it was portraying torture getting results? How?

              •  The male CIA agent in the scene you discuss, who (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Mindtrain, al23, Ray Blake

                did the torturing, later refuses to torture a different prisoner for Maya.  

                Thus, yes, I think the film does NOT glorify torture.

                There is far more nuance and depth to this film than liberals who have not seen it can appreciate.  Especially in the emotional movement of the lead character, Maya.

                This is a very disturbing film, because it portrays our country in all it's ugliness (waterboarding, politicizing the hunt for bin Laden) to our very best (the Navy Seals bravery, dedication of agents, the difference between Bush and Obama presidencies).

                The film should be seen by all for exactly that reason.  It is very emotional.

                BTW - did you notice the "shift" in the film (towards success and positivity, lack of aimlessness) when it shifted from Bush to Obama administrations, even though little to no focus was on the top political movements?

                 I didn't see this film for a long time, as I was debating whether I wanted to give my money to a film that could be depicting torture as good (according to some reviews).

                I decided to make up my own mind.   I was very glad I saw the film.

                 Many liberal comments about it, from those that have not seen the film themselves, are simply wrong.

                "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

                by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 02:05:34 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  The opening torture scene is 10 minutes long (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mumtaznepal, al23

          And except for a single instance of waterboarding (which fails completely), there's no other infliction of pain. What's awful about the scene is the wretched appearance of the detainee, and the verbal hammering of the CIA agent. When we return to this black site, the detainee's pants are removed and a dog collar is put around his neck. He's dragged over to a cage, lifted inside, and still refuses to give them information about a pending attack, in fact he taunts them. After the attack takes place, the agents con him into believing the attack failed, which is why he talks over lunch. So the torture didn't work, but the deception did.

          I never liked you and I always will.

          by Ray Blake on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:29:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  That Movie Should Be Ignored (6+ / 0-)

    First of all, we should not be using the movie's name. When you do that, you provide additional advertising for them.

    Second, I want to know what information the CIA provided these people. We need to examine this information to see whether any of it implicates others in these crimes.

    Third, the issue of the Bush war crimes is never going to go away until the people responsible are brought to justice. When is Congress or the Justice Department going to take action on this?

    It's time we held officials accountable for these crimes. More on Dkosopedia at Prosecuting Officials for Crimes.

  •  another winner! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, vcmvo2, filby

    I was sure that the hero always prevails due to torturing the witness.

    "Kossacks are held to a higher standard. Like Hebrew National hot dogs." - blueaardvark

    by louisev on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:13:44 AM PST

  •  Torture is only useful to dictators (7+ / 0-)

    It is repulsive to me how torture seems to have been deemed effective by so many.

    Sick.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    Many experts argue that torture is an unreliable means of obtaining useful information.[9] However, many states have used torture not to extract information, but as a means of terrorising their populations or specific communities.
    BTW, we have signed and ratified the United Nations Convention Against Torture.  But of course this was back in the 1980s.  We have "evolved".

    And let's not forget John Yoo's contribution during Bush 2;

    The memorandum then concludes that severe pain necessarily be pain associated with "death, organ failure, or serious impairment of body functions,"

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:20:32 AM PST

  •  I saw it-- because of its 'supposed' depiction... (9+ / 0-)

    of events as a 'realistic' or 'actual' chronology leading to the assassination/capture of UBL.

    its assertion that torture by the US was successful in procuring information- which was widely debunked.

    and even if it had been successful, the flagrant display of such means is shameful regarding our moral high ground as perceived by other nations.

    depictions of injustice in other movies regards either a reenactment of known or believed historical events, or an accepted aberration of events that are recognized by the many as fictional. this movie made no assertion that torture was fictional- the way the movie unfolded- it strongly intimated the contrary.

    although i boycott everything from restaurants to tv stations- i did see the movie last night and felt that the extended torture scenes were morally repugnant. it bothered me.

    i don't expect agreement from all parties- this is just my personal take on it.

    People who say they don't care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they don't care what people think. -George Carlin

    by downtownLALife on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:23:52 AM PST

  •  I'm Sure Zero Dark Thirty gets Cheney's vote (6+ / 0-)

    "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

    by muledriver on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:31:22 AM PST

  •  I refuse to go see it (7+ / 0-)

    It's just more war/torture porn of the type we endured during the Bush years and then later made into a TV show "24"

    Torture does not work. The director was not courageous at this late date pointing out that waterboarding was used. It was not successful.

    It sickens me that as we are winding these so-called wars down that we have to once again get into the whole grotesquerie involved in prosecuting those wars.

    I think we need far less of the jingoistic, xenophobic depiction of torture and of course who it was done to. I don't see a dialogue here, as director Bigelow put it, just more sensationalism and revving up our let's kill all the brown people and take their oil kind of narrative.

    I hope the Oscars ignore it.

    In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God ~RFK

    by vcmvo2 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:34:19 AM PST

    •  Golden Globes selected Argo as best movie but (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lyvwyr101, mumtaznepal, eztempo

      Jessica Chastain did win best actress for Zero Dark Thirty.  

      Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

      by wishingwell on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:22:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I know (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cassandracarolina

        I think that it's a bogus award. The story is a fantasy not reality.
        I saw a whole bunch of movies with great females roles. I can't judge Chastain because I won't see the movie, she did a great job in the Help last year.

        So Best Actress for this? I don't know. I think if people want to know more about the actions that led up to finally getting OBL they need to read "The Forever War" by Dexter Filkins, a Pulitzer Prize winning book. It sickened me to read it, but at least it gave me real facts, history & perspective. I could not put it down.

        Bigelow and others argue that this is the real story, I doubt it.

        In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God ~RFK

        by vcmvo2 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:46:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I saw all the movies mentioned. I was happy Argo (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cassandracarolina, vcmvo2

          won, it was excellent (my second favorite movie this year tied with Lincoln, and vastly underrated)

          Jessica Chastain was excellent in Zero Dark Thirty.  She deserved the win.

          "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

          by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:13:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I think this is one of the funniest (8+ / 0-)

    examples of Tom the Dancing Bug I've seen in years -- love that Life of Pi panel. Thanks, Ruben.

    You can't second-guess the Ineffable. - Good Omens

    by asterlil on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:39:43 AM PST

  •  The Real Torture... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, lyvwyr101, lirtydies, eztempo

    ...is having to watch this crap after shelling out $15 for ticket, god knows what for parking, and an Ivy League education's worth of credit card debt for a small popcorn and a Coke.

    •  Go to a matinee, and forget the popcorn. nt (0+ / 0-)

      "Everything can be found at sea, according to the spirit of your quest" Conrad

      by Captain Marty on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 12:56:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I Was Talking About the Matinee... (0+ / 0-)

        ...and I didn't say anything about the anxiety that I might be shot by some crazy ass wingn...excuse me, proud young patriot and 2nd amendment devotee. But it's just as well, I'm over 50 and I read so they don't make movies for me and if you say anything about that crap with Judy Dench and a bunch of old British movie stars moving to India I will beat the taste out of your mouth with my cane. Now that I've got all that off my chest, it's time for my laxative. Oh and BTW, what's the "nt" for?

        •  Where are you that matinees are $15??? (0+ / 0-)

          nt means "no text" so you don't have to open the message to find an empty space.

          If you have a spouse or lover, go see "Amour" (since you are old and all). I'm not going to that Judy Dench thing either unless I'm feeling particularly benevolent towards my wife some night.

          And do your patriotic duty and carry your Glock so you can pop that proud young patriot before he pops you.

          "Everything can be found at sea, according to the spirit of your quest" Conrad

          by Captain Marty on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:55:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Stupid (6+ / 0-)

    Anyone who watched the movie would know that it doesn't imply that torture was essentially in extracting information that lead to OBL's capture. The detainee only gave up the courier's name once he was treated nicely, and the information is later corroborated by detainee Hassan Ghul without any torture (that one's based on fact).

    Depicting torture in this movie is not wrong because it actually happened. Seems to me that people hating on this movie are only doing so because they haven't seen it or because they are idiotic 9/11 truthers who think the US govt was behind 9/11.

    •  Kathryn Bigelow begs to differ (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wishingwell, lyvwyr101, eztempo

      Also well, just about everybody.

      •  Begging to differ (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Captain Marty, mumtaznepal

        Possibly you ought to go take a more careful look at the film. This is about the best take on it in print.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

      •  Armando, I saw the film, and I agree with everyone (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mindtrain, Ray Blake

        else here in this thread who also saw the film (except for one viewer) that the movie does not imply torture worked.

        "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

        by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:39:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Armando, Left academic film scholars do not (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mumtaznepal

        support in any way the HYSTERIA surrounding this film. They disagree completely with the "pundit" class who are basing their reading of the film on a complete absence of even a reference to cinematic form. If you cannot coherently refer to the formal properties of a work of art (particularly film), you are not competent to judge it. What is happening with this film is shameful and the Left will one day come to ask how it bought into this hysteria.

        I am sighing right now. I bust my ass to educate people, but there is nothing I can do when people believe in irrational and unreal things. And that is what has happened with this movie.

        You do not get to make up your own "facts" in the "reality-based" community. But that is exactly what has happened with this film.

        Saying "everyone agrees with me" is a fallacious argument. Especially when all of those people have no knowledge of film criticism. If they did, they would not say the hysterical things they are saying about this film. The answers are all in the movie itself. But you can't see it because you are reading it as narrative (and, when that fails, people are just making things up out of thin air, as nearly every pundit has done). Movies are not narratives. And pundits are not scholars. In this case, they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. It is a very sad day in the US when the Left embraces this level of ignorance (and seems proud of itself for having done so). I am actually scared because it means the lack of education and basic knowledge in the U.S. is really this bad ...

        I strongly suggest you educate yourself with real critical work on film, not "pundit" work. A good place to start is in the latest issue of Film Comment: "Some Ways Into Zero dark Thirty" by Larry Gross. There are many other articles from people who actually know film criticism.

        http://www.filmcomment.com/...

        •  Saying everyone agrees with (0+ / 0-)

          is not my point.

          It is actually to refute the assertion made in the comment I respond to.

          I strongly suggest you stop with the condescending "real critical work on film nonsense.

          You well know that the critics have come to the same conclusions.

          Not that that is dispositive anyway.

          •  Armando, have you seen the film yourself? Or are (0+ / 0-)

            all your judgments coming from reading the opinions of others and see advertising clips from the film?

            "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

            by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 04:32:21 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Let me ask you this (0+ / 0-)

              Do you think the opinions of anyone else - say Steve Coll, are worth discussing?

              The funny thing to me is I can just read your accounts of the movie and other accounts offered ON THIS THREAD, (and of course the now well known clip of the "lunch" where the detainee gives up the name) and say that what you and others who deny that torture is portrayed as being efficacious is in fact, with out a shadow of a doubt, portraying torture as working.

              A link to the scene -  a civilized lunch.

              •  So you have NOT seen the film. (0+ / 0-)

                Fine.

                I'll weigh your comments about it's actual content with that knowledge - that you haven't seen it - in mind.

                This is a reality-based community.  Why don't you go actually see the movie, and get back to us with your opinion of what it depicts or does not.

                "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

                by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 04:54:46 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  "Treated nicely" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Armando
      The detainee only gave up the courier's name once he was treated nicely
      Here's the line of dialog from the interrogator "treating him nicely"

      "Listen i can go eat with some other dude and hang you back up to the ceiling"

      And at this, right away, out comes three names, one of whom is Al Kuwati, Bin Laden's courier.

      People are tying themselves into knots trying to dismiss the criticisms, but it's not working, sorry.

  •  I have no intentions (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell

    of seeing this torture-excusing piece of crap film.

    One of the reviewers said the film opens with a detainee being savagely beaten: and our dewy-eyed heroine turns to her colleague and says:

     "I'm fine with that."

    People may friggin' be "fine with that"---but I'm not---and the fact that it was done in my name---with my tax dollars--- is not a selling point from which anyone with any common decency should be realizing either accolades--or a profit.

    I don't give a shit about artistic license--- or a cinematic exploration of the psyche----or any other psycho-babble attached to it.

    Glorifying torture--and promoting the sad psycho-sexual fantasies that thrive on it------- is a sickness---and the only cure is a strong moral stance---not a contract---an award---or a hefty profit.

    There should be no profit of any sort realized through torture.

    Won't contribute---won't applaud.

    Although I did vote for President Obama---and I voted for him twice---I am not happy with his White House on this subject---either---and do not hesitate to tell him so----and I have written--called--commented and emailed on this subject.

    There is neither glory nor patriotism in torture.

    If you torture: all there should be---there---is a jail cell waiting for you.

    The Onion says----scholars have discovered---the Mayan word for "Apocalypse" in fact---translates more accurately as: "Time of pale obese gun monsters."

    by lyvwyr101 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:53:16 AM PST

  •  This is frickin' hillarious (6+ / 0-)

    Best comic I have seen for a very long time.  

    Zero Dark Thirty creeps me out in a big way - not the scenes of violence, but the implicit acceptance of the utility of torture.  Even though Katheryn Bigelow denies it, read this review in the NY Review of Books and tell me if it isn't true:

    http://www.nybooks.com/...

    If you are debating with yourself whether Zero Dark Thirty is subtle propaganda or art, realy, read that link.

    “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

    by ivorybill on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:54:52 AM PST

    •  Or, don't read any reviews of the movie, and go (0+ / 0-)

      see it yourself.

      "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

      by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:25:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think Lincoln and Argo will get most of the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, mumtaznepal, eztempo

    Oscars if the Golden Globes are any indication. Those 2 movies seemt to get the share of the awards, well except for best actress. Apparently Jessica Chastain who got the Golden Globe Sunday for her role in ZD Thirty is the frontrunner for the oscar.

    Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

    by wishingwell on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:25:50 AM PST

  •  This is great! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, mumtaznepal

    Especially the last two panels; genius.  If there's one way to make waterboarding funny, it's to add it to characters in a lifeboat on the Pacific.

    Before elections have their consequences, Activism has consequences for elections.

    by Leftcandid on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 08:40:53 AM PST

  •  Asdf (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101, lirtydies, mumtaznepal

    Um.......

    I think the exception is that 3 of the other 4 are fictional stories. :D

    Sadly, everything Communism said about itself was a lie. Even more sadly,, everything Communism said about Capitalism was the truth.

    by GayIthacan on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:23:16 AM PST

  •  A Movie of This Sort ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lyvwyr101

    made in another country would rightly be labeled propaganda. In this country, it leads to exclamations of "USA! USA! USA!" and "HELL Yeah!" from its target audience.

    "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything even remotely true." -- H. Simpson

    by midnight lurker on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:30:10 AM PST

    •  I don't know about that. I live in a deep red (0+ / 0-)

      state, and the audience (middle aged men and women, mostly men) was very disturbed (properly so) by the torture scenes.  

      The movie wasn't pro-torture propoganda in the least.  That's simply not accurate to my viewing of the film.

      "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

      by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:28:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  But what do they walk away with? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        eztempo, Armando

        I can easily see someone being disturbed by the torture scenes, but deciding it was worth it in the end if it got bin Laden. People are very good at compartmentalizing this sort of thing, and filing it under “things I'm glad I don't have to think about.”

        Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
        Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
        Code Monkey like you!

        Formerly known as Jyrinx.

        by Code Monkey on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 03:11:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The movie is not a "cheering squad" movie for (0+ / 0-)

          getting bin Laden.

          It is a pretty matter-of-fact expose of all the good and bad involved in the 10 year effort.  It makes the United States look pretty ugly several times.

          "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

          by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 04:36:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  A friend of mine just sent me contact info- (0+ / 0-)

    for the Motion Picture Academy of Arts and Sciences-

    http://www.oscars.org/...

    I would guess they're going to be petitioned as well.

    The Onion says----scholars have discovered---the Mayan word for "Apocalypse" in fact---translates more accurately as: "Time of pale obese gun monsters."

    by lyvwyr101 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:09:07 AM PST

  •  I have almost never been more angry (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    al23, mumtaznepal

    with liberals than with their misguided and off-base critique of this film.    I will just say that this film certainly does not glorify torture, suggests that torture ultimately is not worth it and that there are better ways to receive results, and even at the end suggests whether the time and energy we took to assassinate bin Laden was worth it at all.  

    Depiction in film is not endorsement, characters supporting something does not equal the director supporting something, I'm stunned that this has even become an issue.  This is not a rah-rah USA movie like 24.  It is chilling to me the lengths liberals have gone to trash this film just to stomp out debate on this important subject as if they're afraid that people won't believe we have the right position.  This is a movie that asks questions of the audience and helps bring this important subject into the spotlight so we can better address that dark period in our history.

    •  The fact that this "liberal" reaction is so strong (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eztempo

      tells me that for many, the message that "torture doesn't work" was buried too far down in the plot for many viewers to infer it. Were there scenes showing interrogators finally getting the information they need by befriending their subjects, as actually happened? Was the contrast in results highlighted? If not, then the uneasy-to-offended "liberal" reaction has a strong basis in reality.

      •  SPOILER ALERT (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        al23, mumtaznepal

        Yes, some information is revealed by befriending a terrorist who had previously been tortured and the movie does suggest that his prior torture plays some role in him releasing the information but I truly believe the film ultimately asks whether or not torture is worth it at all because the information comes from other sources as well.  

        As Michael Moore said: "I'm sorry, but anyone who claims that Zero Dark Thirty endorses torture either hasn't seen the move or wasn't paying attention."  https://twitter.com/...

        Or Andrew Sullivan who also has defended the film against these accusations and says: "The critical clue comes from traditional intelligence - a data point friendly countries gave to the CIA in the wake of 9/11 and then took a few years to percolate up to the analyst who saw its salience."

    •  Thank you, krenicky - accurate and true, well said (0+ / 0-)

      "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

      by mumtaznepal on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:29:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Your comment makes me sooo angry!!! (0+ / 0-)

      Actually it doesn't.

      It amuses me that you think we re to just accept your view and leave it at that.

  •  The best never tortured (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eztempo

    Scharff, the master interrogator for the Luftwaffe, never used torture.  The Ritchie Boys never used torture.  They used trickery and deception, but most of the time just plain old kindness did the trick.

    British Intelligence had its greatest interrogation successes not through torture but by taking advantage of a fundamental human need.  They'd interrogate prisoners, then sent them back to their cells.  But the cells were shared with other prisoners...and the cells were bugged.  Like clockwork, the prisoners would talk about the very things the interrogators wanted to know.

    The meek not only inherit the earth, they've convinced everyone to tell them every secret thing.

    Tell me what to write. tellmewhattowrite.com 'To know what is right and to do it are two different things.' - Chushingura, a tale of The Forty-Seven Ronin

    by rbird on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 01:05:47 PM PST

  •  The torture thing is interesting - whether or not (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando

    Bigelow intended it, that the film has had whatever effect it has had proves that it was not an entirely successful depiction of torture as a problem.  

    I suspect some of the heat stems from how closely the government worked with the filmmakers - it is hard not to look at this as a propaganda effort of some ilk.  It is hardly unprecedented for the government to provide insider info to filmmakers who want to do them proud - but it is still a little chilling that information that is not fit for FOIA requests from the ACLU or Charlie Savage is fit for $15 at the multiplex.

    Moreover the film seems to indicate that there was never any real serious consideration to capturing OBL alive ... which is interesting in its own right.

    •  The lead actress last night said, on Letterman, (0+ / 0-)

      that Bigelow chose NOT to work with the government.  If they had given the government script approval, the government will cooperate, loan you real helicopters, etc.

      They chose not to work with government and give them any access or approval of script.  Shot the movie WITHOUT government help.

      "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

      by mumtaznepal on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 03:32:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  entirely expected response - though the (0+ / 0-)

        truncated Q&A at the DC premiere for instance lends an air of unnecessary suspicion in that case.

        David Sirota certainly covered this territory - http://www.salon.com/... ...

        There is a lot of documentation involving consultation between Bigelow and folks "who know things" http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/...

        Especially if they had access to things which the government has denied folks like the ACLU (and knowing how fanatical this White House is on secrecy in pulling back the curtain) - there is no chance that they'd admit it in public.

  •  "Whence" means "from where". (0+ / 0-)

    Or is discussing the grammar of a political cartoon not the done thing?

  •  If ZDT was unambiguous we would not be discussing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mumtaznepal, Ray Blake

    it. Chris Hayes says the film is unambiguously pro-torture. Michael Moore says anyone who says this either hasn't seen it or wasn't paying attention. Same on this site.

    If you haven't seen it, see it and then decide. It isn't an extended version of "24", nor will it be endorsed by Amnesty International. It is a very well made film, and disturbing, and Jessica Chastain is excellent.

    I can't think of a more accurate film depiction of the US response to 9/11 than this one. These things were done in our name.

    Just remember, it's drama not documentary.

    "Everything can be found at sea, according to the spirit of your quest" Conrad

    by Captain Marty on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 02:33:16 PM PST

    •  The problem that has many of us (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Armando

      upset is the historically incorrect assertion that torture wasn't just something that happened during the search for Bin Laden but that it was something necessary in the search for Bin Laden.  If the message of the film is that it shows torture is ugly... but that it was a dirty job that somebody had to do to save us from the turrists...  Then it's a bad step backwards for this country.  This is basically the position that Dick Cheney has been taking from the very first week after 9/11 with his "Turn to the dark side," language.  

      If, as one review I read, this film is a good thing because it will let us "debate" the rightness or wrongness of torture, then we've really sunk ourselves into a moral pit.  It's not a debatable point.  It's a crime under the Geneva Convention.  It's practicality might be worthy of a different film, not one that purports to justify the use of torture on the basis of 9/11.

      •  I didn't get from the film that torture was (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mumtaznepal, Ray Blake

        necessary and I was looking for that implication. What I got was that torture was used, and failed. Other methods worked. I also understand that the portrayal in the film can be interpreted other ways.

        This film has renewed the debate about torture right or wrong. There is no ambiguity for me - torture is wrong, illegal, immoral. Always.

        There is some value for me that we have been graphically reminded through this film of what was done in our name. Too many Americans want to conveniently forget this.

        "Everything can be found at sea, according to the spirit of your quest" Conrad

        by Captain Marty on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 03:51:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Too many Americans are proud of the torture. (0+ / 0-)

          Not just trying to sweep it under the rug, but actually proud of doing it.  

          There's Hannity's take on the film.  They think it's a shame it's not getting MORE honors.

          As far as reopening the debate... Reopening WHAT?  It's always been a war crime.  We've gone from "It's not torture, it's enhanced interrogation," which was just a lie, to the point where we are now supposed to debate whether what is clearly torture is the normal response to 9/11 and that it helped find Bin Laden?  That's not reopening anything.  That's sliding backwards.

          Here's what Kathryn Bigelow said about her film:

          Torture was, however, as we all know, employed in the early years of the hunt. That doesn't mean it was the key to finding Bin Laden. It means it is a part of the story we couldn't ignore ... Bin Laden wasn't defeated by superheroes zooming down from the sky; he was defeated by ordinary Americans who fought bravely even as they sometimes crossed moral lines, who labored greatly and intently, who gave all of themselves in both victory and defeat, in life and in death, for the defense of this nation,"
          "FOUGHT BRAVELY EVEN AS THEY SOMETIMES CROSSED MORAL LINES."  That's Dick Cheney's argument in a nutshell.  That's the defense that people like Yoo will use when they finally face justice.  "We were fighting bravely even as we sometimes crossed moral lines."

          There's nothing brave about torture.  Sooner or later, it will once again be American soldiers that are being tortured by some foreign power, and when they torture our soldiers, they'll use crap like this as their guide.  

          When that day comes, do you think anybody will dispassionately say, "Well, this is just reopening the debate."

          •  Adversion to torture is covered within the film, (0+ / 0-)

            by the people doing the torture - and choosing not to any more.

            Again: torture is in no way "glorified" in this film.

            Seriously - there is a lot for liberals to take from this film, and much for progressives to like about how it depicts what happened after 911 under Bush.

            Most importantly, that bin Laden was not caught via torture, but by an aggressive, persistent agent that used her brain to put two and two together and pursued OBL for years.

            This film is deep and nuanced, and very disturbing emotionally for what it shows of our country.

            I highly recommend progressives see it.

            "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

            by mumtaznepal on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 03:37:25 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I also think the debate on whether torture (0+ / 0-)

              works or not misses the point and can backfire. Torture is immoral, it violates the Geneva Conventions, regardless of whether it is ever effective in any way. If the lynchpin of the argument against torture is that it isn't practical, i.e. it doesn't get results, then the corollary is that if torture has ever worked at any time, then it's excusable. Does anyone really believe that torture has never provided useful intelligence?  

              I never liked you and I always will.

              by Ray Blake on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 06:02:56 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  In all the furor about whether the film (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mumtaznepal

          implies that torture was effective, what's lost is the fact that it clearly showed that the CIA in fact engaged in torture. It's a very unfavorable depiction, and primary perpetrator leaves Pakistan because he can't take it anymore himself.

          I never liked you and I always will.

          by Ray Blake on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:06:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  "...it clearly showed that the CIA in fact engaged (0+ / 0-)

            in torture..."

            We already all knew that, everybody on the right and on the left.  The narrative that this film seems to present is the following.

            1. We are attacked on 9/11.  9/11 is bad.

            2. We tortured a bunch of bad guys.  It was bad torture.  We didn't like doing it, but oh well, you had to have been there.

            3. Because of all the information gathered while we were doing everything we could (including torture) to find Bin Laden we found him.

            4. Bin Laden is killed.  Everybody who died on 9/11 is avenged.

            It's a tough job but somebody's gotta do it!

            A lot of people are going to look at this narrative (which is false, according to Feinstein and McCain) and say, oh torture is nasty, but I guess the people who do the torturing for us know best.  I'd hate to be in their shoes.  Besides, 9/11.

            That's the way this "reopening of the debate" is initiated.

            •  9/11 was evil. Don't you think? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mumtaznepal

              2. The film doesn't indicate any of those things. The one guy we see tortured is sympathetic because of his predicament. However, a lot Democrats think Al-Qaeda is bad news. Self included. Torture is self-defeating, though it has worked on me. (I'm divorced now.)
              3. I know it's hard to believe, but the film isn't about torture. It's, as you say, a story about information gathering. Torture ceases to be a factor early on in the film.
              4. Actually, Bin Laden is killed, but there's no indication of any kind that 9/11 is avenged. It's not a happy ending.

              Why insist on making the film something that it isn't?

              I never liked you and I always will.

              by Ray Blake on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:08:07 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  We knew that, but do most American know that? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mumtaznepal

              Does our government admit that? And Feinsten and McCain are freakin' war hawks. Why throw your lot in with them?

              1. 9/11 was evil, don't you think? You're not going to defend AL-Qaeda are you?

              2. The film doesn't say any such thing. In fact, the guy we seeing being tortured is sympathetic because of his plight. Bigelow doesn't try to justify anything. It happened, that's the facts.

              3. It's not a film about torture. That ceases to be a factor fairly early in the film. As you say, it's a film about information gathering. An yes, the information eventually led, after ten years of failure, to Bin Laden. The film does leave it as an open question whether that pursuit was worth it.

              4.Bid Laden is killed, but there's no sense of 9/11 being avenged. Not at all. It's not a happy ending.

              So why misrepresent what's on the screen?

               

              I never liked you and I always will.

              by Ray Blake on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:17:59 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Dumbo, your narrative isn't what the film puts out (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ray Blake

              at all.  Not even close.

              "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

              by mumtaznepal on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 03:38:26 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  The film doesn't even indicate that torture was (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mumtaznepal

        necessary. The film is matter-of-fact about events. There's no celebration when Bin Laden is killed, in fact we barely see him. There's no heroic hail of bullets, in fact the Seals don't know they got him until they check with Maya. What bothers liberals perhaps is that the film doesn't explicitly judge, it presents evidence but ultimately defers judgement back on the audience. The last line of the film couldn't make this more clear. This is what was done in our name.

        I never liked you and I always will.

        by Ray Blake on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:13:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  From Steven Coll's review of it (0+ / 0-)

          for New York Review of Books:

          http://www.nybooks.com/...

          “The film creates the strong impression that the enhanced interrogation techniques…were the key to finding Bin Laden,” Michael Morell, the acting CIA director, wrote to agency employees in December. “That impression is false.” Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein and the two senior members of the Armed Services Committee, Democrat Carl Levin and Republican John McCain, coauthored a letter calling the movie’s version of recent counterterrorism history “grossly inaccurate.” The senators said the film’s flaws have “the potential to shape American public opinion in a disturbing and misleading manner.”
          Heroic hail of bullets?  What does that have to do with anything?  You seem to totally and willfully misunderstand the objections raised here.  It could be the best film ever made, and I'd still object to this on principle at this time.  If the film punts the ball on the issue of the evil of torture and does not even accurately inform people about the failure of torture to collect intelligence in this case, then it's a problem.  

          From later in Coll's review, he writes:

          There can be no mistaking what Zero Dark Thirty shows: torture plays an outsized part in Maya’s success...

          [...]

          In virtually every instance in the film where Maya extracts important clues from prisoners, then, torture is a factor. Arguably, the film’s degree of emphasis on torture’s significance goes beyond what even the most die-hard defenders of the CIA interrogation regime, such as Rodriguez, have argued. Rodriguez’s position in his memoir is that “enhanced interrogation” was indispensible to the search for bin Laden—not that it was the predominant means of gathering important clues.

          •  Feinsten and McCain again (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mumtaznepal

            They're pissed because it shows the War on Terror in a negative light. Both are Mideast war hawks. I've seen the film twice. You should at least see it once if you care so much about it.

            I never liked you and I always will.

            by Ray Blake on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:24:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I have a cataract in one eye and no money... (0+ / 0-)

              haven't been to the movies in many years now, and wouldn't shell out to see this one just to argue about it.  I suppose I'll see it when it hits cable.  In the meantime, the consensus of the reviews that I have read don't paint this film in a very glowing light for people like me whose single biggest gripe about the Bush years was his making us all complicit in torture.  I think making an "objective" film about torture that doesn't "take sides" on the issue is troubling.  I appreciate everybody's first amendment rights, the importance of separating out politics when evaluating art, yadda yadda...  I acknowledge all that, and say, this can be an artistically great film and still be the moral equivalent of a flaming bag of shit on the porch.  And based on that, I hope that if this film is as described by Coll and by Andrew Sullivan that it gets dumped on at the Oscars.  
               

          •  It's a shame you refuse to see the movie based (0+ / 0-)

            upon the reviews that agree with your opinion, rather than the progressives here that have actually seen the film and tell you, from our progressive viewpoint, that's not what we got out of the film at all.

            See it yourself.  Use your own mind.

            "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

            by mumtaznepal on Fri Jan 18, 2013 at 03:40:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Fine, I'll download a torrent of it. (0+ / 0-)

              It's the only way I'll ever be able to see it.  And then I'll write a diary about it.

              You still fail to see the point, which is a political one, and not an artistic one.  I totally concede it could be the greatest film ever made and that that's besides the point if people are coming out of that film with the impression that we got Osama bin Laden by "taking off the gloves" and torturing bad guys.  That's ALREADY the narrative that much of the country will enter the theater believing.  If it's not just leaving that impression intact but reinforcing it (not with you) then that's a problem for us all, one that might cement a distorted view of torture that the truth won't be able to remedy.

              Looked up another review just now, Time Magazine:

              The 9/11 attacks instantly created a new world disorder, changing the face of the enemy from cranky tyrants to a stateless ascetic with the dream of crippling infidel America. Al-Qaeda’s coup also rendered the old book of counterintelligence ethics obsolete. Bribes and blackmail were still permitted, but no gentlemen or ladies needed enlist in the war on terror. The stakes were too high, as Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal, the director and writer of The Hurt Locker, document in their powerhouse thriller Zero Dark Thirty. “I want targets!” shouts George (Mark Strong), a high-level CIA official, to his agents in the field. “Do your f—in’ job. Bring me people to kill.” At this time, Leon Panetta (James Gandolfini) is the CIA director, and Maya has been working for years to locate Mr. Big — to bring in the head of Osama bin Laden...
              Read that, especially what's in bold.  You can probably make yourself feel better about the film by saying you're the one who interpreted the film correctly because you used your own mind and to hell with everybody else.  But that's Time Magazine's interpretation.  And it's typical.  
  •  Torture in film... (0+ / 0-)

    Come now, who didn't sob buckets when they genitally tortured and anally raped Bambi's mom?  

    Speaking of that. I got a cup of coffee to go at CoffeeBean&TeaLeaf the other day and they asked me if I wanted it WITH or WITHOUT plug.  Plug, I asked?  Yes, that little hole at the top of the cap that allows hot coffee to spill on you while your driving now has an optional device you can insert

    We've actually reached a state in our nation's slide into depravity where coffee cups come with their own butt plugs.  I'm too impressed to be morally outraged.

  •  Posting from Italy (0+ / 0-)

    Went to Isernia, Rocchetta de Alta, Napoli and now Rome.

    To me the showers and the elevators seemed like torture - as well as the lack of central heating in most places.

    However, the people are charming, the food is better than can be imagined and the beauty of Italy is absolutely captivating.

    One of the places I stayed at:

    When I return I'll write a diary about it.  I saw some interesting things that are relevant to this forum.  I believe I should be able to communicate the experience to Kossacks in a way that should be an entertaining read.  

    Are there no prisons? No workhouses?

    by meatballs on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 03:33:16 PM PST

  •  Haven't seen the movie... (0+ / 0-)

    ...but I hear that Jack Bauer is the SEAL that shot bin Laden between the eyes with a crossbow bolt from a horse's back?

  •  A couple of Camus quotes (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Blake
    Torture has perhaps saved some, at the expense of honor, by uncovering thirty bombs, but at the same time it arouses fifty new terrorists who, operating in some other way and in another place, will cause the death of even more innocent people. Even when accepted in the interest of realism and efficacy, such a flouting of honor serves no purpose but to degrade our country in her own eyes and abroad.
    . . . it seemed to me harmful and indecent to condemn terrorism in the company of those who are not bothered by torture.

    It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America. - Molly Ivins

    by se portland on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 07:18:17 PM PST

  •  yeah, but... (0+ / 0-)

    ...what do youse think of the cartoony there?

    "...o' her ragged hair was shinin' red white 'n blue, all 'n all the children were screamin' why surely madam you must be dreamin'. you couldn't have done this if you knew what you were doin'..."   don van vliet
Click here for the mobile view of the site