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.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“As these stories continue to break, in the weeks since women have said they were harassed and abused by Harvey Weinstein, which was not the birth of a movement but an easy and highly visible shorthand for decades of organizing against sexual harassment that preceded this moment, I hope to gain back my time, my work. Lately, though, I have noticed a drift in the discourse from violated rights to violated feelings: the swelled number of reporters on the beat, the burden on each woman’s story to concern a man “important” enough to report on, the detailed accounting of hotel robes and incriminating texts along with a careful description of what was grabbed, who exposed what, and how many times. What I remember most, from “my story” is how small the sex talk felt, almost dull. I did not feel hurt. I had no pain to confess in public. As more stories come out, I like to think that we would also believe a woman who said, for example, that the sight of the penis of the man who promised her work did not wound her, and that the loss she felt was not some loss of herself but of her time, energy, power.”
~ “The Unsexy Truth About Harassment,” by Melissa Gira Grant

“To say I knew exactly what I was doing at the outset — what’s that called? I think that would be a lie. Wormwood is something that was figured out as we went along. There was a kind of plan. My sales pitch to Netflix was, ‘I’m going to create the cinematic version of the everything bagel, except no raisins. I don’t like them in bagels. I think raisins are wrong, at least as far as bagels are concerned. But I told them I wanted to do something that combines straight drama, reenactments, archival research, various diverse graphics elements, and on and on and on. It wasn’t going to be documentary business as usual. It was going to be something different. I have suffered for years this idea that interviews aren’t directing and that there’s something really different about real people and actors. Whereas I’ve always believed that it’s really about performance — eliciting a performance, creating a performance on film. That’s true of interviews, it’s true of scripted material, it’s true of reenactments, it’s true of everything. It’s all direction.”
~ Errol Morris