http://iraqforsale.org/Supposedly uncovers the connections between corporations making a killing in Iraq and the decision makers who allow them to do so.
Has anyone seen this film or desire to do so? Has anyone heard anything critical about the film?
13 comments:
The artist/activist set in Fort Point, Boston has run this film for free at some Cafe.
The lovely irony in that is that these are the same citizens of the world who cry about the corporate interests buying up the property that their art cannot sustain.
See? No-Name Corporations will eat the planet while devouring kittens and putting artists and Saladin wanna-bes out of commision.
So sad! Gimme some of that Ali Shariati!
Linky....
http://www.tws-net.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/795hlmvk.asp
I’m curious to see the film, but I’m also required to avail myself of any well researched criticism that’s available on it.
I’m of the same opinion as DizyD that political documentaries, particularly those of the far left, tend to be more sensationalistic and very biased, slanted towards an audience that already “gets it”, and is looking for further emotional affirmation of their views. With such works, the presentation of facts is willfully selective to particular a point of view. Evidence which supports a preconclusion is emphasized; countervailing evidence is conveniently left unaddressed or dismissed.
I have no doubt that there is corruption and mismanagement by the corporations contracted to supply services/materials in Iraq, and I think that should be a concern of any taxpaying citizen. I have no objection to a call to action that reveals waste corruption or fraud. Several questions emerge when putting the question of corruption in historical context:
Knowing that in all wars (and in civilian endeavors for that matter) there have been elements of corruption and greed, is the supposed profiteering in Iraq on a greater, lesser, or comparable scale?
Does the fact that corporations are financially benefiting from the war compromise the original justifications for the war?
I wonder if “Iraq for Sale” addresses the first question to any degree, and it’s an answer in the affirmative to the second question that I suspect is an underlying political message of the movie.
It’s not a new theory, and its origins can be found in Marxism: foreign policy is run by the military/industrial complex. Politicians, defense contractors, and the Pentagon work in collusion for the maintenance of power and financial gain while selling the public on imperial wars that aren’t in their interest. Franklin D. Roosevelt somehow allowed the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor; Lyndon Johnson conspired to get us into in Vietnam; and now Bush, Cheney, and the neo-cons manipulated intelligence to get us into this war in Iraq for their buddies in Halliburton and the oil industry.
Never mind that this theory doesn’t explain our involvement in Afghanistan.
Ted Kennedy gave the conspiracy expression when he publicly stated that he believed “President Bush and his cronies cooked up this war about WMD’s on his ranch in Texas, probably just to mislead us.”
A selective fact: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Ted Kennedy, Sept. 27, 2002
Anyways, not having seen the movie, I’ll reserve judgment to an educated guess on its message.
Speaking of the rush to judgement...
http://www.deathofapresident.com/
This movie calls itself "enlightening".
Ah, Tom, cool. Now the secret identity is revealed!
So, my question is...
What was the significance of Michael Moore sitting next to Jimmy Carter at the Democratic National Convention back in '04?
It was for the purpose of "diversity".
A follow up to DizyD's article giving perspective on the Islamic intellectual world:
http://muslimsforasafeamerica.org/?p=48
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/09_05_06ahmadinejadletter.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH4SzjwO9UU
This is the only place I know where to put things of interest. You need to post more often if you want to be one of those popular bloggers, Mr. House of Bob.
This...
Presidential hopefuls:
The Hoover Institution has been hosting Presidential hopefuls. The latest visitor was Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney who spoke to, and received questions from, the Senior Fellows yesterday. For about one hour, he heard some tough inquiries, answered without notes, kept his cool, and talked analytically rather than in platitudes. I was impressed, and came away thinking that being a conservative governor in Massachusetts must have sharpened his debating skills and given him insights about dealing with the therapeutic mindset. I don’t know what he thought of us, but most of us thought him quite impressive.
Mitt Romney is an idiot. If he becomes president of the United States, there will be an exodus out of the US as there was in MA during his time as Governor. What has he done? Is MA improved since he has been governor? Now he wants to be president. Give me a break. On a more serious note: his connections to the mormon religion will kill his chances. Not that it should, I just think it will. Should this be an issue when dealing with choosing presidents? It's an issue that has been debated for years. Has America changed enough for it not to matter? (Obviously, Islam is a different story) What do you people think?
"On a more serious note: his connections to the mormon religion will kill his chances. Not that it should, I just think it will. Should this be an issue when dealing with choosing presidents?"
Anti-Catholic bigotry in American politics was at least somewhat overcome with the Kennedy family.
Is Romney really an "idiot" ? If so, then when Deval Patrick, the Dukakis of today gets in, what shall we call him?
Iraq may be a military headache, but it's a contractor's dream
Tuesday, November 14
LONDON — Assymetrical warfare has plagued the efforts of highly-trained military forces there but Iraq has emerged as a huge market for private military contractors.
A new study said Iraq has become the focus in the growth of the private defense services market.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said companies have replaced the U.S.-led military coalition in Iraq in logistics and support services.
"The privatization of defense services and support is drawing new kinds of suppliers into military contracting," SIPRI said in its annual survey, according to Middle East Newsline.
"This has been made apparent in Iraq, with companies taking on support roles that in the past the armed forces would have undertaken."
The survey said a huge growth area in Iraq has been site protection provided by private contractors. The institute said site protection has been regarded as an expansion of the arms industry, which has created new companies to fulfill the demand.
"These developments have resulted in marked changes in the arms industry and further changes can be expected," the institute said.
SIPRI said sales by the 100 largest defense companies rose by 15 percent during 2004 to $268 billion. The institute said 63.3 percent of sales were conducted by 40 U.S. companies; and 29.4 percent by 36 West European companies.
Post a Comment