[Peace-discuss] busloads to the dark side

[John W.]

Did anyone watch Bill Moyers last night?  The subject was another powerful 
documentary film called "Body of War", produced by Phil Donahue, which 
portrays the daily life of a young (27-year-old) man in Kansas City who 
volunteered for the military to "get the bad guys" several days after 9/11, 
was sent to Iraq rather than Afghanistan, was shot five days after arriving 
in Iraq, and is now paralyzed from the "nipples" down.  It graphically 
portrays the human cost of war.  One particularly poignant scene is where 
the young man is sitting in his wheelchair, watching some sort of TV show 
in which our nation's bright and shiny leaders, attired in tuxedos and 
without noticeable physical impairments, are making jokes about Osama bin 
Laden and so on.

Ironically, while the young man and his mother seem to have gained a new 
awareness of American foreign policy, the kid's stepfather still believes 
that we're in Iraq "because we want peace", and his younger brother enlists 
in the military to go get the bad guys in Iraq.

John Wason



At 03:36 PM 3/22/2008, Jenifer Cartwright wrote:

>The really dark side in Taxi to Dark Side and Winter Soldier is not only 
>torture (horrible enough in its own right) but the attitude (among the 
>highest-to-lowest government and military officials) that justifies 
>torture and by extension allows/encourages/rewards behavior that leads to 
>the unspeakable cruelty/sadism shown in both these films. These films are 
>horrible to watch because horrible things are shown AND and because they 
>confirm our worst fears that war (and other dreadful things like slavery) 
>brings out the very worst in people -- even our "brave and noble men and 
>women in uniform" and gives those who might not otherwise behave so 
>sadistically a "reason" to do so... (though you have to wonder about the 
>guys who tho't they might get guidelines in writing for this kind of thing 
>-- no internal yardstick for right and wrong??) while those who set the 
>behaviors in motion avoid the consequences altogether...
>
>It doesn't help that the US us a culture that glorifies violence and whose 
>filmakers (and TV producers) earn billions showing what "good guys" do to 
>"bad guys" -- forget Miranda rights -- in order to protect the weak and 
>innocent (i e all of us).
>
>My 2c worth (along w/ Ricky's) doesn't put this stuff front and center in 
>the MSM where it belongs, unfortunately (not something that resonates w/ 
>the govt and corps who have a vested interest in keeping wars of 
>aggression and empire going, and who do so by keeping the voters in 
>hyper-patriotic mode).
>  --Jenifer
>
>
>Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Catharine and I just saw "Taxi to the Dark Side" last night, so we're 
>still processing
>a lot, but what struck me most was what the convicted torturers had to say 
>about what
>they did. One in particular made it clearest: "I would never do that again 
>without
>something in writing," or words to that effect.
>
>In writing?
>
>We had some other thoughts, but for now I'll just stick to this and one 
>related topic:
>the poll mentioned showing 35 percent of Americans would find torture 
>justified in some
>circumstances. Of course, depending on the wording, it sounds like almost 
>2/3 still
>said torture was never justified - which is encouraging at least - but I'd 
>like to read
>the actual poll questions, results, margins of error, etc. I'd also like 
>to check out
>other polls on similar subjects, to see if they conflict.
>
>But it is still disturbing that so many people would say, 'OK, go ahead, 
>torture.' I
>know we've had our disagreements on this list about "Hitler's Willing 
>Executioners" -
>the big debate is really how broadly the incidents in the book generalize, 
>not whether
>they happened at all - but I think there's something in it, and this 
>documentary
>illustrates what I'm on about.
>
>In "Hitler's Willing Executioners" there are people who commit atrocities, 
>and it's
>clearly not because they fear retribution if they don't, because they 
>exceed their
>orders (whereas others in the book do not follow orders directing them to 
>commit such
>acts, and by the way receive little or no discipline). In historical 
>studies of the
>'Hitlerzeit' there's also the problem of millions of people supporting 
>Hitler (even if
>it was less than the Nazis claimed), maybe without detailed knowledge of 
>what went on
>in the worst camps, but with full knowledge of some pretty bad stuff.
>
>So, I'm reminded of Noam Chomsky's remark that it's a serious question 
>whether what the
>US needs is "dissent or denazification."
>
>This film makes the point that investigations were all focussed downward, 
>not up the
>chain of command. Fair enough, and the evidence presented is damning. However,
>interviewees keep saying over and over that the interrogators were being 
>given no clear
>directions, were being pressured for results, etc., and there's at least 
>passing
>mention of working 16 hour days and living at the Bagram camp and other 
>factors that
>would certainly have worked on the psychology of the interrogators 
>themselves. Will
>this combination of factors produce horrific results? Sure. There are 
>plenty of
>psychological studies that bear this out. And are these guys entitled to 
>consideration
>of these factors? I'd say so. But nobody in the film ever said, for the 
>sake of
>people who may in the future (or present) be dressed up in uniforms and 
>sent in to get
>information from chained up prisoners, 'But it's still wrong to do these 
>things, and
>you are responsible for your own actions - under international law and 
>basic ethical
>considerations.'
>
>The torturers in the film were tried for killing one prisoner, not for the 
>day-to-day
>stuff they did. One of them was richly rewarded, as the film points out.
>
>And how many people, admittedly without detailed information in most 
>cases, will still
>argue that torture is acceptable - or that some of these acts are not 
>torture, which is
>just a dodge? A lot. Maybe not most, but still too many. We have our work 
>cut out
>for us. The fear, the group-think, the widespread social value placed on 
>obedience to
>authority ... these are, I think, what they mean when they say if you 
>can't talk to
>your neighbors about your politics then your opinions aren't worth having.
>
>There are symbols, sure, that people can't get past. The flag, 
>homosexuality, Jesus,
>etc. But if we can't talk to people, human being to human being, about the 
>nightmarish
>brutality being committed in our names, then what hope do we have?
>
>I think we should all be encouraged that this documentary won an Oscar and 
>that it is
>now being shown, at least here and there and with difficulty. I think we 
>can take
>courage from all the work of AWARE and other groups that have challenged 
>the terror
>wars and these related policies like torture, and from the overwhelmingly 
>positive
>response that we get nowadays. The Administration has been forced to 
>respond. The
>leading Republican candidate for president, as conservative and nasty and 
>pro-war as he
>is, is on the Rush Limbaugh's and the Ann Coulter's bad list for breaking 
>ranks on at
>least part of it (the torture). And the Democrats, as sorry as they are, 
>have at least
>had to fight over these issues, each trying to appear moral while loyal to the
>fatherland at the same time.
>
>We are having an effect. And I still think many, many more people are on 
>'our side'
>than the media and the rest of the elite would have us believe. It's just 
>sobering to
>realize how many aren't, and what they believe and will accept. But we 
>have to realize
>it, I think, in order to proceed.
>
>My 2c.
>Ricky
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080322/1ad3d8a4/attachment.html