MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Leon Panetta Acknowledging The “Enhanced Interrogration Techniques” That Led To Finding Bin Laden

This footage was posted by a hater of liberals, it seems. But that doesn’t make what Panetta admits, at the time of the events, false.

Panetta does say, at the end of this interview, that there may have been better ways to get the intel. But he doesn’t deny that “enhancer interrogation” was used and that some fo the bin Laden information came from those who were interrogated.

3 Responses to “Leon Panetta Acknowledging The “Enhanced Interrogration Techniques” That Led To Finding Bin Laden”

  1. spassky says:

    Saw ‘ZD30′ today.

    I can’t believe actual critics are getting their intellectual panties in a twist about the early interrogation scenes. As you have said David, it is incredibly condescending to say the average viewer can’t read between the lines and realize that this is depicting a culture of torture, which inevitably has to be regarded as a piece of the puzzle in terms of getting the intel that led to UBL.

    That being said, I’m surprised that politicians on the right are actually making a big deal about this (McCain I’m assuming just rolled of his heated back pad and decided he wanted to be in the spotlight for a day or two). While perhaps they’re making a play at calling hypocrisy on the left-leaning film community (I’m sure they have a battle plan involving the spin they’re putting on the Newtown tragedies) and the officials that (supposedly) enabled them to make this film, there is just one thing I cannot get past: The only way to somewhat legitimize the advanced interrogation techniques of the past decade is to make it seem as if they led to the intel which led to UBL. McCain goes on and on about how torture makes us seem in the eyes of the world, but newsflash you old fucktard: everyone in the entire world knows we tortured detainees (and probably most assumed it before abu ghraib etc), so why not make it seem like we actually got somewhere with it but realized it was a bad and corrupting technique?

    And now I realize I just said the word “fucktard” referring to John McCain. And I apologize for that.

  2. Mike says:

    McCain was tortured while a POW. He’s been extremely anti-torture ever since. It’s one of his few good traits. It’s also why it’s so important for him that torture not be shown to have worked.

  3. tbunny says:

    It would be shocking if no information came out of torture, given how much of it was done. I mean they rounded up and blacksited thousands of people. Along with the small amount of legitimate info they got, they got blood on their hands and millions of hours of human anguish, which I’m sure was satisfying to important people who appear on Sunday talk shows.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog


Quote Unquotesee all »

“We now have a situation where audiences very often prefer commercial trash to Bergman’s Persona or Bresson’s L’Argent. Professionals find themselves shrugging, and predicting that serious, significant works will have no success with the general public. What is the explanation? Decline of taste or impoverishment of repertoire? Neither and both. It is simply that cinema now exists, and is evolving, under new conditions. That total, enthralling impression which once overwhelmed the audiences of the 1930s was explained by the universal delight of those who were witnessing and rejoicing over the birth of a new art form, which furthermore had recently acquired sound. By the very fact of its existence this new art, which displayed a new kind of wholeness, a new kind of image, and revealed hitherto unexplored areas of reality, could not but astound its audiences and turn them into passionate enthusiasts.

Less than twenty years now separate us from the twenty-first century. In the course of its existence, through its peaks and troughs, cinema has travelled a long and tortuous path. The relationship that has grown up between artistic films and the commercial cinema is not an easy one, and the gulf between the two becomes wider every day. Nonetheless, films are being made all the time that are undoubtedly landmarks in the history of cinema. Audiences have become more discerning in their attitude to films. Cinema as such long ago ceased to amaze them as a new and original phenomenon; and at the same time it is expected to answer a far wider range of individual needs. Audiences have developed their likes and dislikes. That means that the filmmaker in turn has an audience that is constant, his own circle. Divergence of taste on the part of audiences can be extreme, and this is in no way regrettable or alarming; the fact that people have their own aesthetic criteria indicates a growth of self-awareness.

Directors are going deeper into the areas which concern them. There are faithful audiences and favorite directors, so that there is no question of thinking in terms of unqualified success with the public—that is, if one is talking about cinema not as commercial entertainment but as art. Indeed, mass popularity suggests what is known as mass culture, and not art.”
~ Andrei Tarkovsky, “Sculpting In Time”

“People seem to be watching [fewer] movies, which I think is a mistake on people’s parts, and they seem to be making more of them, which I think is okay. Some of these movies are very good. When you look at the quality of Sundance movies right now, they are a lot better than they were when I was a kid. I do think that there have been improvements artistically, but it’s tough. We’ve got a system that’s built for less movies in terms of how many curatorial standard-bearers we have in the states. It’s time for us to expand our ideas of where we find our great films in America, but that said, it’s a real hustle. I’m so happy that Factory 25 exists. If it didn’t exist, there would be so many movies that wouldn’t ever get distributed because Matt Grady is the only person who has seen the commercial potential in them. He’s preserving a very special moment in independent film history that the commercial system is not going to be preserving. He’s figuring out how to make enough money on it to save these films and get them onto people’s shelves.”
~ Homemakers‘ Colin Healey On Indie Distribution