Filmmakers, Obama administration say bin Laden movie is not a campaign ploy

georges

Moderator
Staff member
Filmmakers, Obama administration say bin Laden movie is not a campaign ploy
from http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...n-bin-laden-movie-not-campaign-161144802.html

Filmmaker Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal responded Wednesday to accusations that their movie on the capture of Osama bin Laden is a ploy to boost the president's re-election campaign.

The New York Times op-ed columnist Maureen Dowd wrote on Sunday that the Obama administration is granting the filmmakers access for the president's electoral benefit. "Just as Obamaland was hoping, the movie is scheduled to open on Oct. 12, 2012--perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost to a campaign that has grown tougher," Dowd wrote."The moviemakers are getting top-level access to the most classified mission in history from an administration that has tried to throw more people in jail for leaking classified information than the Bush administration."

Bigelow and Boal, who collaborated on Oscar-winning film The Hurt Locker, disputed the suggestion Wednesday in a joint statement issued to Entertainment Weekly, the Hollywood Reporter, and elsewhere.

"Our upcoming film project about the decade long pursuit of Bin Laden has been in the works for many years and integrates the collective efforts of three administrations, including those of Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama," in addition to the Department of Defense and the CIA, they say. "This was an American triumph, both heroic and non-partisan," they said of the mission, "and there is no basis to suggest that our film will represent this enormous victory otherwise."

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), the chairman of the House Homeland Security committee, yesterday called for an investigation into the claims of access and classified information being shared for political benefit.

"The Administration's first duty in declassifying material is to provide full reporting to Congress and the American people, in an effort to build public trust through transparency of government," King wrote in a letter to Defense Department Inspector General Gordon Heddell and CIA Inspector General David Buckley. "In contrast, this alleged collaboration belies a desire of transparency in favor of a cinematographic view of history."

The White House directly disputed King's accusations Wednesday and said no classified information has been released. "The claims are ridiculous," White House spokesman Jay Carney said during his press briefing. Carney added that when writers and filmmakers ask to speak with administration officials, the White House simply tries to oblige and ensure accuracy.

Filmmaker Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal responded Wednesday to accusations that their movie on the capture of Osama bin Laden is a ploy to boost the president's re-election campaign.

The New York Times op-ed columnist Maureen Dowd wrote on Sunday that the Obama administration is granting the filmmakers access for the president's electoral benefit. "Just as Obamaland was hoping, the movie is scheduled to open on Oct. 12, 2012--perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost to a campaign that has grown tougher," Dowd wrote."The moviemakers are getting top-level access to the most classified mission in history from an administration that has tried to throw more people in jail for leaking classified information than the Bush administration."

Bigelow and Boal, who collaborated on Oscar-winning film The Hurt Locker, disputed the suggestion Wednesday in a joint statement issued to Entertainment Weekly, the Hollywood Reporter, and elsewhere.

"Our upcoming film project about the decade long pursuit of Bin Laden has been in the works for many years and integrates the collective efforts of three administrations, including those of Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama," in addition to the Department of Defense and the CIA, they say. "This was an American triumph, both heroic and non-partisan," they said of the mission, "and there is no basis to suggest that our film will represent this enormous victory otherwise."

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), the chairman of the House Homeland Security committee, yesterday called for an investigation into the claims of access and classified information being shared for political benefit.

"The Administration's first duty in declassifying material is to provide full reporting to Congress and the American people, in an effort to build public trust through transparency of government," King wrote in a letter to Defense Department Inspector General Gordon Heddell and CIA Inspector General David Buckley. "In contrast, this alleged collaboration belies a desire of transparency in favor of a cinematographic view of history."

The White House directly disputed King's accusations Wednesday and said no classified information has been released. "The claims are ridiculous," White House spokesman Jay Carney said during his press briefing. Carney added that when writers and filmmakers ask to speak with administration officials, the White House simply tries to oblige and ensure accuracy.


"We do not discuss classified information. And I would hope that as we face a continued threat from terrorism, the House Committee on Homeland Security would have more important topics to discuss than a movie," Carney added.

Philip Strub, the Pentagon's director of entertainment media, confirmed to CNN that he had a single meeting with Bigelow and her team, but added "we go to great lengths not to reveal classified information." Pentagon spokesman Col. David Lapan said Bigelow's team had other Defense Department meetings of the type the Pentagon apparently provides to established filmmakers on a regular basis.

Even some critics on the left--who view King's protest through a partisan lens--say this flap could be a good thing for transparency.

"Regardless of King's opportunistic motives, his move finally creates the possibility for a more comprehensive look at how our government as a whole--whether under Democratic or Republican administrations--now regularly and systemically uses taxpayer resources to suffuse our popular culture with 'cinematographic' militarist ideology, and uses those same taxpayer resources to try to prevent anti-militarist messages from being aired," writes the liberal writer and talk radio host David Sirota in Salon.

Betraying your military is the worst thing to do:mad::hairpull:
 
At this point it's his only success and even that's a fading memory.
 

Ace Boobtoucher

Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
It'll be an Obama Administurbation festival on film. Excellent. At least when that douche Michael Moore Made his propaganda films he was honest about his intent vis-a-vis George Bush.
 
They were going to make the movie whether Obama said okay or not. Are you kidding? this movie is about making dollars. I'd be pretty surprised if it paints the Obama administration in an entirely positive light.

It will be interesting to see where they start the story of catching Obama. With Clinton? Fail. With Bush? Fail. With Obama? Win.

Wait, what? Oh, that's right, it was under Obama's administration that he was caught and killed. I guess that doesn't matter for Obama haters, as it was clearly GWB's intelligence that lead to his capture...years after he left office...during an ongoing war.

Yeah. That's going to be a really clear line to draw. This film is going to be unbiased, factual, and there will be absolutely no propaganda in either direction. Awesome!
 
Yeah, this movie will help re-elect Obama! I'm not a total Obama lover, but the GOP needs to come up with something better. It's the same shit, when "Obama" killed Bin Laden...come on!
:facepalm:
 

LukeEl

I am a failure to the Korean side of my family
I want to audition for the role of out of place Eurasian guy # 2
 
I didn't go through much of the story but as long as there was no compromise of sensitive details...it's just another political movie.

How many anti-O movies have been put out? How many books and movies chronicling Bush's war on terror, 'response' to 9-11, etc. were put out by him (personally) and others seeking to enhance his image?

It's politics....ergo, if there were someone from the other side in office what would be different other than the names?:cool:

I would be curious to go back in time to see what the comments were from some here regarding the outing of Valerie Plame.:o

You know, just to see what the consistency meter says...:o
 
Obama will be played by Samuel Jackson, there will be lots of shouting and people will wish Sam Jackson really was the President.
 
At this point it's his only success and even that's a fading memory.

I don't know why people consider it to be Obama's success. The military leaders and troops are the ones that got the job done.

so release it in Dec 2012....

who the fuck really releases movies in October? Either it is the Summer or the Thanksgiving / Christmas holiday season

I agree. If it isn't politically motivated, why would they release it just before the election?

The thing is, is this movie going to paint Obama as some kind of hero? Are they going to say that it was because of his brilliant leadership that we found him? Even if you give Obama credit for killing bin Laden, it still didn't stop the war. So what would this accomplish? Does it justify the war? A war Obama didn't even start.

I feel like they're burning the candle at both ends here.
 
I don't know why people consider it to be Obama's success. The military leaders and troops are the ones that got the job done.

Commander in Chief is the civilian commander of the armed forces. They typically have to get his okay for special things like getting Bin Laden as to 1. Avoid a Military Dictatorship and 2. Keep in him the loop as to what's going on so that decisions can be made politically etc...

He didn't pull the trigger but no president has. No politician has on anything. If you follow your logic on that point why do we give a shit about Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson when they never marched into battle?

In the words of blondie ""You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig. "
 
Betraying your military is the worst thing to do:mad::hairpull:

Who's betraying their military?

Under Obama the military:

1) Has mostly exited Iraq. Casualties there have become few and far between.
2) Has been given a large boost in numbers and material in Afghanistan.
3) Has experienced a huge boost in morale as a result of 1) a reinvigorated and better defined mission in Afghanistan, and 2) the successful execution of mass murderer Bin Laden.
4) Will be coming home to a new and improved GI bill.
5) Has a president who's focused on creating a jobs initiative for veterans.
6) Has a Commander In Chief who visits the remains of their honored dead at Dover Air Force Base, something George Bush never did.

Betrayal? Not even close. This president has been great to the military.
 
I don't know why people consider it to be Obama's success. The military leaders and troops are the ones that got the job done.

For the same reason some of you attribute the failure of Operation Eagle Claw a failure for Carter and 'winning' of the Cold War an 'accomplishment for Reagan.:facepalm:

Obama had options and he made the decision which guaranteed OBL's demise wouldn't be left to chance of lesser options but it was the option with the most risks. It was in the high 90 pct. successful....that should speak for itself if you know anything about this stuff.

Faux (Pas) "News"?
 
If you follow your logic on that point why do we give a shit about Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson when they never marched into battle?
For the same reason some of you attribute the failure of Operation Eagle Claw a failure for Carter and 'winning' of the Cold War an 'accomplishment for Reagan.:facepalm:
I don't credit them for anything accomplished on the battlefield. But if I follow your logic, Bush should get credit for the fact that we went overseas in the first place. And for getting Hussein.

The war is not over, so what has Obama accomplished?

Faux (Pas) "News"?
You really are a troll, old man. You're trying to bait me, but I told you, I don't have cable, and don't watch Fox News. I don't even know why you assume I'm a republican. When have I stated that?
 
Top