Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Douglas Valentine's Scathing Review of Jeremy Scahills 'Dirty Wars'

  1. #21

    Default

    It's simply pitiful to see dogmatic blindness presenting itself as righteous indignation.
    The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
    Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14

  2. Default Scahill, Greenwald, Brand articles

    Thanks everyone for reading my articles about Scahil, Greenwald, and Brand, and for talking about them. I think it's always misleading when a messenger's persona is connected with a message. And I would caution everyone not to think they know anything about these three guys; what you know are their fashioned public personas. It's always hardest to overcome our own assumptions. Remember what Yeats said on his tombstone: Cast a cold Eye On Life, on Death. Horseman, pass by!

  3. Default PS - required reading for any discussion about Scahill's assertions about JSOC etc.


  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Valentine View Post
    Thanks for your work. Certainly here at DPF, one of the themes has been the "CIA" as originator of multiple narratives each with their own good guys and bad guys. From the Gravity's Rainbow thread:

    If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
    "We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

    "We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Guyatt View Post

    I have often wondered if the US is ruled by a Cult of Death.




    Or "Cult Of Intelligence" perhaps?



    Watch 'America Declassified' on the Travel Channel for a CIA 'good guy' host.


  6. Default Scahill is on "the other side" (from me) just as Greenwald is for taking money from a billionaire

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Lemkin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Magda Hassan View Post
    I ended up watching this at long last a few nights ago. Doug Valentine is pretty spot on actually.
    All of which brings me to my review.
    Dirty Wars
    Dirty Wars is a post-modern film by Jeremy Scahill, about himself, starring himself in many poses.
    The film owes more to Sergio Leone and Kathryn Bigelow than Constantinos Gavras. Scahill certainly is no Leslie Cockburn: there is no Tony Poe telling how the CIA facilitates heroin shipments; no Richard Secord suing him for unraveling the financial intrigues of the CIA’s secret operators. The CIA is rarely mentioned.
    There is no reference to the Guerra Sucia in Argentina.
    Scahill is no Franz Fanon documenting the devastating psychological effects of racism on society. There are no cameos by Jean Paul Sartre advocating violent retribution on Hollywood, no mingling with the Taliban in their caves as they conspire against their Yankee oppressors at the Sundance Film Festival.
    We get the first taste of his self-indulgent idiocy when he says it is “hard to tell” when the Dirty War began. He does tell us, however, that he is on the “front lines” of the war on terror.
    Scahill (hereafter JS) brags that he wasn’t going to find the front lines in Kabul, although he could have, if he knew where to look. Instead he just looks around furtively on his way to the scene of a war crime. We see a close-up of his face.
    Yep. Very postmodern and with all that limitation and decontextualisation and irrelevance.
    The film ends and I wonder what he could have produced if he hadn’t melodramatized and spent so much time and film on close-ups. I wonder what he could have done if he’d read a few history books.
    Ultimately, the film is so devoid of historical context, and so contrived, as to render it a work of art, rather than political commentary.
    Indeed. It would have been a far better movie with an historical context in which to place the current Dirty War/s. People who don't know that history wont notice though. Nevertheless a powerful work of art and some good storytelling told. Definitely a must watch.
    I'm not saying that DV didn't have some valid points - he did....but I don't think JS is on the 'other side'....and we [the progressive community] have a history or goring our own - while the neo-fascists all march pretty much in lockstep -despite their differences; the reasons, I think, are obvious, but something the left and especially the far-left need to keep in mind and under control. IMHO

    Here's my first article calling out Scahill for his "misinformation" or 'disinformation", if you think there is a difference, let me know. http://original.antiwar.com/douglas-...ecurity-state/ To pooh-pooh my satirical mocking of Scahill, which he deserves, is a way of avoiding his complicity in the lies that enable the Cult of Death. Examine his mis-dis/information.

  7. Default Thanks for posting your article Doug..

    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Valentine View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Lemkin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Magda Hassan View Post
    I ended up watching this at long last a few nights ago. Doug Valentine is pretty spot on actually.
    All of which brings me to my review.
    Dirty Wars
    Dirty Wars is a post-modern film by Jeremy Scahill, about himself, starring himself in many poses.
    The film owes more to Sergio Leone and Kathryn Bigelow than Constantinos Gavras. Scahill certainly is no Leslie Cockburn: there is no Tony Poe telling how the CIA facilitates heroin shipments; no Richard Secord suing him for unraveling the financial intrigues of the CIA’s secret operators. The CIA is rarely mentioned.
    There is no reference to the Guerra Sucia in Argentina.
    Scahill is no Franz Fanon documenting the devastating psychological effects of racism on society. There are no cameos by Jean Paul Sartre advocating violent retribution on Hollywood, no mingling with the Taliban in their caves as they conspire against their Yankee oppressors at the Sundance Film Festival.
    We get the first taste of his self-indulgent idiocy when he says it is “hard to tell” when the Dirty War began. He does tell us, however, that he is on the “front lines” of the war on terror.
    Scahill (hereafter JS) brags that he wasn’t going to find the front lines in Kabul, although he could have, if he knew where to look. Instead he just looks around furtively on his way to the scene of a war crime. We see a close-up of his face.
    Yep. Very postmodern and with all that limitation and decontextualisation and irrelevance.
    The film ends and I wonder what he could have produced if he hadn’t melodramatized and spent so much time and film on close-ups. I wonder what he could have done if he’d read a few history books.
    Ultimately, the film is so devoid of historical context, and so contrived, as to render it a work of art, rather than political commentary.
    Indeed. It would have been a far better movie with an historical context in which to place the current Dirty War/s. People who don't know that history wont notice though. Nevertheless a powerful work of art and some good storytelling told. Definitely a must watch.
    I'm not saying that DV didn't have some valid points - he did....but I don't think JS is on the 'other side'....and we [the progressive community] have a history or goring our own - while the neo-fascists all march pretty much in lockstep -despite their differences; the reasons, I think, are obvious, but something the left and especially the far-left need to keep in mind and under control. IMHO

    Here's my first article calling out Scahill for his "misinformation" or 'disinformation", if you think there is a difference, let me know. http://original.antiwar.com/douglas-...ecurity-state/ To pooh-pooh my satirical mocking of Scahill, which he deserves, is a way of avoiding his complicity in the lies that enable the Cult of Death. Examine his mis-dis/information.
    I hadnt seen this one before. The "left" press never seems to want to go there anymore. The support for the narrative provided by journalists like Scahill helps to maintain the illusion that the CIA doesn't matter that much anymore while at the same time shifting the blame to Bush era policies.

  8. #28

    Default

    Scahill is taking part in Glenn Greenwald's new multi-million dollar "alternative media" venture (funded by eBay/PayPal owner Pierre Omidyar.)

    The Greenwald/Snowden leaks look for all the world like another Pentagon Papers-style limited hangout.

    I wouldn't trust Scahill as far as I could throw him.
    “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.”
    ― Leo Tolstoy,

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kara Dellacioppa View Post


    I hadnt seen this one before. The "left" press never seems to want to go there anymore. The support for the narrative provided by journalists like Scahill helps to maintain the illusion that the CIA doesn't matter that much anymore while at the same time shifting the blame to Bush era policies.
    Yes, I've noticed this about the US. Republicans = bad Democrats = good. While in reality they are just working for the man.

    Quote Originally Posted by R.K. Locke View Post
    Scahill is taking part in Glenn Greenwald's new multi-million dollar "alternative media" venture (funded by eBay/PayPal owner Pierre Omidyar.)

    The Greenwald/Snowden leaks look for all the world like another Pentagon Papers-style limited hangout.

    I wouldn't trust Scahill as far as I could throw him.
    I guess Doug isn't going to get an invite for the new media venture. Which is a shame as he would be a wonderful asset to any media outlet and who knows what he could write with millions of dollars worth of funding to use for travel and research purposes. But would Doug even want to be a member of that line up?
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •