Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ken Burns & Lynn Novick's THE IRAQ WAR

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Ken Burns & Lynn Novick's THE IRAQ WAR

    EDIT: Removed
    Last edited by Johnny Velvet; 05-11-2021, 15:57.

    #2
    Not a fan of the Vietnam series then Reg?

    Comment


      #3
      No, didn’t have BBC4 when it was on. If I have a spare week I’ll probably look to get it.

      Comment


        #4
        We-ell, you gotta remember, they were different times.

        Comment


          #5
          Not a fan of the Vietnam series then Reg?
          I posted on that in the Film and TV forum back on 16 November. Nil thread.

          Comment


            #6
            Right, the 16 hour Vietnam documentary that doesn't even mention that the Gulf of Tonkin incident, official reason for US involvement, was a false flag attack.

            Burns' Iraq series will whitewash that invasion and portray neocons as well-intentioned "Wilsonians" who had good intentions for the people of Iraq but couldn't foresee the challenges, and it was more or less because of bureaucratic mismanagement.

            PBS is far more insidious and destructive than Fox.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by linus View Post
              Right, the 16 hour Vietnam documentary that doesn't even mention that the Gulf of Tonkin incident, official reason for US involvement, was a false flag attack.

              Burns' Iraq series will whitewash that invasion and portray neocons as well-intentioned "Wilsonians" who had good intentions for the people of Iraq but couldn't foresee the challenges, and it was more or less because of bureaucratic mismanagement.

              PBS is far more insidious and destructive than Fox.
              The first two paragraphs make good points then you ruin the post with that ridiculous last sentence.

              Comment


                #8
                Aye I’d really like to see your working there Linus. Sounds a bit like the most blinkered Scottish Nationalist whatabouttery once that tedious irrelevance Salmond took the RT shilling (aye, at least it’s no the BBC ken!). PBS might be a bit shit and old school hairshirt liberal, but worse than Fox? Fox seems to have at least as much responsibility as social media for the coarsening of debate and giving idiots justification in their bigoted idiocy.
                Last edited by Lang Spoon; 23-01-2018, 18:31.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Evariste Euler Gauss View Post
                  I posted on that in the Film and TV forum back on 16 November. Nil thread.
                  I was sure I had seen quite a lengthy thread in Film & TV about the series.

                  Ah yes it was here:

                  https://www.onetouchfootball.com/sho...he-Vietnam-War

                  I guess that EEG missed it.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Lang Spoon View Post
                    Aye I’d really like to see your working there Linus. Sounds a bit like the most blinkered Scottish Nationalist whatabouttery once that tedious irrelevance Salmond took the RT shilling (aye, at least it’s no the BBC ken!). PBS might be a bit shit and old school hairshirt liberal, but worse than Fox? Fox seems to have at least as much responsibility as social media for the coarsening of debate and giving idiots justification in their bigoted idiocy.
                    Fox is very transparent, clumsily pushing their pro-war agenda to the dumber segments of conservative Americans. PBS on the other hand is a lot more subtle in its neoconservative tendencies, that's why it's the more dangerous outlet. PBS' programming was quite good decades ago, but it has gotten gradually worse, much like that of other western public media outlets.

                    Let's take their main long-running documentary program, Frontline. In recent episodes like "Battle for Iraq" and "Hunting ISIS", or their general general coverage of the Mideast, PBS' coverage is outright deceptive, portraying ISIS (or Boko Haram) as organic religious militias. Their coverage of Syria or Iran for instance is a black and white, nuance-free depiction, with virtually no daylight between their editorial position and that of the State Dept or even say, John McCain.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Right, the 16 hour Vietnam documentary that doesn't even mention that the Gulf of Tonkin incident, official reason for US involvement, was a false flag attack.
                      I've never seen it, but from I read about it, people didn't come away with a particularly pro-war or pro-American view.

                      Dangerous subtle propaganda, no doubt.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Countries John McCain has wanted to attack.

                        https://www.motherjones.com/politics...ack-map-syria/

                        I'm not conscious of feeling like this when I watch PBS, but that propaganda is subtle.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          A review.

                          https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0f96732cbca5d


                          Part three also has some informative discussion of internal government debates and relays the deception about the Gulf of Tonkin incident where the attack on a U.S. naval ship was provoked. The film points out that naval officers falsely reported a second attack allegedly because they mistranslated some intelligence signals.

                          However, since U.S. intelligence officers are technically competent, the film could have raised the question as to whether some elements of the national security bureaucracy bent on war may have deliberately skewed the intelligence – something we have seen recently.
                          John Pilger says Burns "promoted [the incident] as true".

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Auberon Waugh could be a vile piece of shit but he saw through Pilger.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Tubby Isaacs View Post
                              A review.

                              https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0f96732cbca5d



                              John Pilger says Burns "promoted [the incident] as true".

                              Bureaucratic/chain of command mishaps are invariably the most common public explanations for events like the Gulf of Tonkin. And for the bigger policy-making picture, it's about unintended/unforeseen consequences by well-meaning or misguided politicians and generals.

                              I've covered Pilger and other points about Burns' Vietnam in the proper thread about the series in the film forum, I didn't catch the irony behind Reggie's first post above, thinking Burns was reallyworking on an Iraq series...

                              https://www.onetouchfootball.com/sho...tnam-War/page2

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Pilger hadn't even seen the episode that covered 1964. He wrote his review after only having seen the first episode, which is the only one he quotes.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by Satchmo Distel View Post
                                  Pilger hadn't even seen the episode that covered 1964. He wrote his review after only having seen the first episode, which is the only one he quotes.
                                  That's appalling.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
                                    That's appalling.
                                    Personally I think he's just pissed because they didn't interview him.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by Tactical Genius
                                      I agree with Linus.

                                      HCM when living in NY was a follower Marcus Garvey and regularly attended UNIA meetings. There are also suggestions he learned alot of his guerrilla tactics from the Haitian war of Independence.
                                      You mean you agree with his assertion that the series doesn't mention the Gulf of Tonkin, even though it does mention the incident.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        No. I agree with him that PBS (and to a lesser extent the BBC). Are much more dangerous than Fox News.

                                        Everyone is aware Fox has a right wing agenda and they do little to mask that.

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          I tried to edit my previous post a s deleted by mistake

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            Fox does loads to mask its stance. Not least, it makes stuff up, literally all the time.
                                            Last edited by Tubby Isaacs; 25-01-2018, 22:47.

                                            Comment


                                              #23
                                              Bureaucratic/chain of command mishaps are invariably the most common public explanations for events like the Gulf of Tonkin. And for the bigger policy-making picture, it's about unintended/unforeseen consequences by well-meaning or misguided politicians and generals.
                                              Linus, a good point well-made, I should have said earlier.

                                              Comment


                                                #24
                                                Originally posted by Tactical Genius View Post
                                                No. I agree with him that PBS (and to a lesser extent the BBC). Are much more dangerous than Fox News.

                                                Everyone is aware Fox has a right wing agenda and they do little to mask that.
                                                It says a lot about Linus that he would attack PBS and the BBC than Fox.

                                                Comment


                                                  #25
                                                  Originally posted by linus View Post
                                                  Their coverage of Syria or Iran for instance is a black and white, nuance-free depiction, with virtually no daylight between their editorial position and that of the State Dept or even say, John McCain.
                                                  John McCain's pretty good on Syria.

                                                  Comment

                                                  Working...
                                                  X