miércoles, 16 de enero de 2013

CIUDAD JARDÍN (THE CITY OF GARDENS / 186 DOLLARS TO FREEDOM)

OPERACIÓN DE APOYO DE INFORMACIÓN MILITAR: PELÍCULA SATÁNICA, ANTIPERUANA, ANTINICARAGÜENSE, ANTICOLOMBIANA, ANTIPACIFISTA.
MILITARY INFORMATION SUPPORT OPERATION: A SATANIC, ANTI-PERUVIAN, ANTI-NICARAGUAN, ANTI-COLOMBIAN, ANTI-PACIFISM MOVIE.


Esta película es maravillosa porque:
This movie is wonderful because:



1) Es claramente satánica dado que hace escarnio de la figura de Cristo y desconoce toda clase de autoridad.

Signos de sus artes negras (o encubiertas):

- 186 como parte del nombre del filme

Número áureo
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BAmero_%C3%A1ureo

"El número áureo o de oro (también llamado razón extrema y media,1 razón áurea, razón dorada, media áurea, proporción áurea y divina proporción) representado por la letra griega φ (fi) (en minúscula) o Φ (fi) (en mayúscula), en honor al escultor griego Fidias, es un número irracional:2
\varphi = \frac{1 + \sqrt{5}}{2} \approx 1,618033988749894848204586834365638117720309...

También se representa con la letra griega Tau (Τ τ),3 por ser la primera letra de la raíz griega τομή, que significa acortar, aunque encontrarlo representado con la letra Fi (Φ,φ) es más común".


http://www.feandft.com/18%20Sacred%20Geometry.htm
"Phi is the specific formative principle expressed mathematically in the ratio: 1=1:1.618, the so called "Fibonacci cycle", better known as: "The Golden Mean". (each number added to the next gives the following number, as in 3-5-8-13-21-34 etc. or multiplied by 1.618 = 0618-1.000-1.618-2.618-etc.). Daniel Winter (U.S.) calls this harmonic: The only permissive path from matter to energy and back. The Mathematical image of the condition of pure self reference". (Implosion technology and Viktor Schauberger)


Phi Beta Sigma
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi_Beta_Sigma
"Although Phi Beta Sigma is considered a predominantly African-American Fraternity, its membership also consists of diverse college-educated men of African, Caucasian, Hispanic, Native American and Asian descent."

PHILADELPHIA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia
"Popular nicknames for Philadelphia are Philly and The City of Brotherly Love, the latter of which comes from the literal meaning of the city's name in Greek (Greek:Φιλαδέλφεια ([pʰilaˈdelpʰeːa], Modern Greek: [filaˈðelfia]) "brotherly love", compounded from philos (φίλος) "loving", and adelphos (ἀδελφός) "brother").[4]"


ARMA MORTAL (LETHAL WEAPON) [1987]. Escena 63:
http://www.screenplay.com/downloads/scripts/Lethal%20Weapon.pdf

RIGGS
I do it real good, you know.

MURTAUGH
Do what?

RIGGS
Kill people ... Only thing I ever
did good. When I was nineteen, I
did a guy in Laos from a thousand 
yards out.
Rifle shot in high wind.
(beat)
Ten guys in the world coulda made
that shot. Huh. Only thing I was 
ever good at.
(pause; then)
Well, see you tomorrow.

MURPHY
Yeah. See you then.


Este guión establece que a la edad de 19 años MARTIN RIGGS hizo algo que solamente diez personas en el planeta podrían haber logrado. Sin embargo, en el filme, la declaración incluye al numero ocho:

http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0002926/quotes
Martin Riggs: I do it real good, you know. 
Roger Murtaugh: Do what? 
Martin Riggs: When I was 19, I did a guy in Laos from a thousand yards out. It was a rifle shot in high wind. Maybe eight or even ten guys in the world could have made that shot. It's the only thing I was ever good at. Well, see ya tomorrow. 
Roger Murtaugh: Yeah, see you. 
[pauses] 
Roger Murtaugh: Hey Riggs! You really like my wife's cooking? 
Martin Riggs: [fixing him] No. See you tomorrow. 

- 66 en la placa del auto rojo sin techo

RI-GG-S

MUR-TAU-GH. 
Horpanebtauy, Hor pa neb tau, "Horus, Señor de las dos Tierras".
Tau = 1,618
Tau = 300 (en el sistema de numerales griegos)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau

MUR-PHY. 
Phi = Fi = 1,618.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi
"In Lacanian algebra, Φ stands for the imaginary phallus and also represents phallic signification. -Φ stands in for castration.[2]"

- 60 mencionado dos veces por "Jesús" (truco similar al del trailer de 'Oblivion' con su protagonista Jack HARPer)

- 2016 en un letrero de fondo amarillo en el interior del ómnibus que aparece al final del filme

Significado:
http://perucine.blogspot.com/2012/02/con-el-diablo-adentro-devil-inside.html

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqNuIzq12o3Y559SxhvGEdbZtRuSN6UUCOzEGkNoz4_EVCAvtk3Zq1BpCiWKU5qCVvaWAoqInwlrWaNuWr6oJTUOx3K091hL67lOZzu8akig_F_oWsPNLho31dp5GUC7G9BX4-WcKPOaY/s1600/MILITANTES+DE+SANTAS+INTENCIONES+NOTA+20.JPG

- Al parecer, aunque hay que verificarlo, el protagonista conoce a su amiga por seis meses. Otros números con significado simbólico tal vez correspondan al pretendido año de la revolución nicaragüense y a la plaza que se menciona como existente en Nicaragua pero habría que analizarlo.

- El caso del número 10,000 es interesante.
En "CIUDAD JARDÍN" (THE CITY OF GARDENS / 186 DOLLARS TO FREEDOM) el número 10,000 es mostrado como negativo porque es la cantidad (en dolares estadounidenses) que se le solicita al protagonista para que sea defendido por un abogado en una situación en la que el protagonista carece de la voluntad de llegar a un acuerdo mercantil de esta naturaleza. Al parecer, la broma para iniciados ('inside joke'), es decir, la referencia cultural para los que administran las operaciones psicológicas de las producciones vinculadas a la Comunidad de Espionaje Estadounidense, es que la cifra 10 representa a Dios.  De aquí que la evitan haciendo referencias al 9 y al 11, omitiendo el 10.

Por ejemplo, en ARMA MORTAL 2 (LETHAL WEAPON 2), el personaje llamado LEO GETZ (representado por Joe Pesci) indica, cuando se acerca a investigar un noveno lugar con los policías protagonistas: "mi número favorito es el nueve". Naturalmente, no es el 10. Y el 11 se usa repetidas veces vinculado a relaciones sentimentales. Por ejemplo, en "ARMA MORTAL" (LETHAL WEAPON) se hace referencia a la esposa fallecida del policía MARTIN RIGGS, quien sufrió un accidente de auto fatal luego de 11 años de matrimonio.


ARMA MORTAL (LETHAL WEAPON) [1987]. Escena 26:
http://www.screenplay.com/downloads/scripts/Lethal%20Weapon.pdf

MURPHY
Sure. He wants the cash. Seen
it a hundred times. He'll come
around.

PSYCHOLOGIST
Sir, with all due respect ... i
think that's a dangerous attitude
to take. Make I remind you that
his wife of eleven years was
recently killed in a car accident
and,

MURPHY
I know all about Riggs, Doc. He's
a tough bastard.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Riggs

En "DURO DE MATAR" (DIE HARD) [1988], JOHN McCLANE (BRUCE WILLIS) declara dentro de un avión que ha sido policía por once años.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McClane

En el episodio piloto de la serie de espionaje "ALIAS" (2001), dentro de un avión el personaje de SYDNEY BRISTOW (Jennifer Garner) le pregunta al personaje MARCUS DIXON (Carl Lumbly) cuántos años ha estado casado [a ella su novio le ha pedido matrimonio recientemente] y éste contesta: "Once años; no, ... doce". Obviamente, no eran 10 años. La misma situación se encuentra en otros filmes. En el que nos ocupa,  que es "CIUDAD JARDÍN" (THE CITY OF GARDENS / 186 DOLLARS TO FREEDOM), el protagonista es interrogado respecto a sus vínculos afectivos y contesta algo semejante a:

"Tengo una novia. Solo una. Con una basta".

Lo cual implica la presencia de la unidad dos veces consecutivas (1-1) :-) .

Podemos pensar que el 10 es la cifra para Dios porque en LOOPER (2012), el pequeño protagonista llamado CID, que presenta "poderes" especiales, tiene 10 años (al menos en las versiones traducidas al castellano que fueron exhibidas en Lima) y es mostrado como un individuo irascible que se encoleriza rápidamente sin poder controlarse y está molesto con su madre. Tal vez podría ser considerado ruin ("jerk", "asshole"):

http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/dick

Además, CID parece ser una referencia al Dios de los encargados de los psicosociales estadounidenses pues CID = DIC. Y DICK es un termino de replana que hace referencia al pene:

http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/dick

Que adoran al falo es sencillo de notar. Hay que dar una mirada al afiche de "OBLIVION" y fijarse sobre qué está de pie el protagonista JACK HARPER (HARPER, parecido pero no exactamente como en HAARP).

2) Es evidentemente antiperuana dado que muestra negativamente a las autoridades peruanas y positivamente a los terroristas senderistas.

3) Es definitivamente antinicaragüense dado que un personaje particularmente negativo es conocido como "Nicaragua".

4) En particularmente anticolombiana dado que el personaje particularmente negativo conocido como "Nicaragua" es de orgen colombiano. 

5) Es decididamente antipacifista en cuanto que promueve las soluciones basadas en la fuerza y el  personaje pacifista es tratado de modo particularmente cruel. 

6) Demuestra la importancia de los filmes pacifistas y católicos de DON LEÖNIDAS ZEGARRA UCEDA pues ellos nos libran espiritualmente del guerrerismo satanista promovido por la Comunidad de Espionaje Estadounidense.

http://www.thecityofgardens.com/

Dos ángeles dedicados a incentivar la veneración de la Santísima Virgen María: la notable actriz boliviana MARIANA LIQUITAYA ZENTENO y el destacado cineasta trujillano DON LEÓNIDAS ZEGARRA UCEDA. Los vemos en el prototipo de la CASA MUSEO LEÓNIDAS ZEGARRA UCEDA mientras nos muestran el reconocimiento denominado PERFIL DE LA VIRGEN, que recibieron por su contribución a la Nueva Evangelización mediante su labor en el filme VIRGEN DE COPACABANA: SU HISTORIA Y SUS MILAGROS (2012).
A la izquierda de la imagen vemos a MONTY FISHER, carismático guionista y productor de "CIUDAD JARDÍN" (THE CITY OF GARDENS / 186 DOLLARS TO FREEDOM). A la derecha, JORGE  LUIS VILLACORTA SANTAMATO, Secretario General Emperador del Partido Marxista - Leninista - Pensamiento Paris Hilton, pregunta los motivos por los cuales el personaje negativo llamado "Nicaragua" procedente de Colombia, no fue llamado "Chile" y tuvo su origen en Puerto Rico.


"A FAVOR DE NICARAGUA. SENTENCIA DEL TRIBUNAL INTERNACIONAL DE JUSTICIA DE LA HAYA EN EL CASO DE NICARAGUA CONTRA USA". Editado por INSTITUTO DE DEFENSA LEGAL / TAREA, Asociación de Publicaciones Educativas, Lima, Abril 1989, 182 páginas.

Página 77:

"122. El Tribunal ha llegado a la conclusión de que en 1983 un organismo del Gobierno de los Estados Unidos proporcionó a FDN un manual sobre las operaciones psicológicas de guerrilla que, aunque desaconsejaba expresamente la violencia ciega contra los civiles, consideraba que debía de hacerse fuego contra los que intentasen irse de una aglomeración, y aconsejaba con fines de propaganda, la "neutralización" de jueces, de funcionarios o de notables locales luego de un simulacro de proceso que se debía desarrollar en presencia de la población. El texto remitido a los "contras" preconizaba también el reclutamiento de profesionales del crimen para ejecutar "contratos" no especificados, y el recurso a la provocación en las manifestaciones de masas para suscitar una reacción violenta de las autoridades y, de esta forma, crear "mártires".


-----------
Publicado por en No hay comentarios:

viernes, 11 de enero de 2013

"ZERO DARK THIRTY": LOS HECHOS BAJO TORTURA (ZERO DARK THIRTY: TORTURING THE FACTS)


Professor, Thomas Jefferson School of Law

Zero Dark Thirty: Torturing the Facts

Posted: 01/11/2013 12:00 pm

On January 11, eleven years to the day after George W. Bush sent the first detainees to Guantanamo, the Oscar-nominated film Zero Dark Thirty is making its national debut. Zero Dark Thirty is disturbing for two reasons. First and foremost, it leaves the viewer with the erroneous impression that torture helped the CIA find Bin Laden's hiding place in Pakistan. Secondarily, it ignores both the illegality and immorality of using torture as an interrogation tool.
The thriller opens with the words "based on first-hand accounts of actual events." After showing footage of the horrific 9/11 attacks, it moves into a graphic and lengthy depiction of torture. The detainee "Ammar" is subjected to waterboarding, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and confined in a small box. Responding to the torture, he divulges the name of the courier who ultimately leads the CIA to Bin Laden's location and assassination. It may be good theater, but it is inaccurate and misleading.
The statement "based on first-hand accounts of actual events" is deceptive because it causes the viewer to think the story is accurate. All it really means, however, is that the CIA provided Hollywood with information about events depicted in the movie. Acting CIA Director Michael Morrell wrote a letter to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in which he admitted the CIA engaged extensively with the filmmakers. After receiving his letter, Senators John McCain, Dianne Feinstein and Carl Levin requested information and documents related to the CIA's cooperation.
The senators sent a letter to Morrell saying they were "concerned by the film's clear implication that information obtained during or after the use of the CIA's coercive interrogation techniques played a critical role in locating Usama Bin Laden (UBL)." They noted, "the film depicts CIA officers repeatedly torturing detainees. The film then credits CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques as providing critical lead information on the courier that led to the UBL compound." They state categorically: "this information is incorrect."
The letter explains that after a review of more than six million pages of CIA records, Feinstein and Levin made the following determination:
The CIA did not first learn about the existence of the UBL courier from CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques. Nor did the CIA discover the courier's identity from CIA detainees subjected to coercive techniques. No CIA detainee reported on the courier's full name or specific whereabouts, and no detainee identified the compound in which UBL was hidden. Instead, the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name, and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program.
In a speech on the Senate floor, McCain declared,"It was not torture, or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of detainees that got us the major leads that ultimately enabled our intelligence community to find Osama bin Laden." McCain added: "In fact, not only did the use of 'enhanced interrogation techniques' on Khalid Sheik Mohammed not provide us with the key leads on bin Laden's courier, Abu Ahmed; it actually produced false and misleading information."
Many high-level interrogators, including Glenn L. Carle, Ali Soufan and Matthew Alexander, report that torture is actually ineffective and often interferes with the securing of actual intelligence. A 2006 study by the National Defense Intelligence College concluded that traditional, rapport-building interrogation techniques are very effective even with the most recalcitrant detainees, but coercive tactics create resistance.
Moreover, torture is counter-productive. An interrogator serving in Afghanistan told Forbes, "I cannot even count the amount of times that I personally have come face to face with detainees, who told me they were primarily motivated to do what they did, because of hearing that we committed torture... Torture committed by Americans in the past continues to kill Americans today."
Torture is also illegal and immoral -- important points that are ignored in Zero Dark Thirty. After witnessing the savage beating of a detainee at the beginning of the film, the beautiful heroine "Maya" says "I'm fine." As he's leaving Pakistan, Maya's colleague Dan tells her, "You gotta be real careful with the detainees now. Politics are changing and you don't want to be the last one holding the dog collar when the oversight committee comes."
Torture is illegal in all circumstances. The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, a treaty the United States ratified which makes it part of U.S. law, states unequivocally: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture." The prohibition of torture is absolute and unequivocal. Torture is never lawful.
Yet despite copious evidence of widespread torture and abuse during the Bush administration, and the Constitution's mandate that the president enforce the laws, Obama refuses to hold the Bush officials and lawyers accountable for their law breaking.
Granting impunity to the torturers combined with propaganda films like Zero Dark Thirty, which may well win multiple Oscars, dilutes any meaningful public opposition to our government's cruel interrogation techniques. Armed with full and accurate information, we must engage in an honest discourse about torture and abuse, and hold those who commit those illegal acts fully accountable.
Publicado por en No hay comentarios:

lunes, 7 de enero de 2013

SENADORA ESTADOUNIDENSE DEL ESTADO DE CALIFORNIA DIANNE FEINSTEIN DECLARA SOBRE "ZERO DARK THIRTY" (FEINSTEIN RELEASES STATEMENT ON 'ZERO DARK THIRTY')

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2012/12/feinstein-releases-statement-on-zero-dark-thirty

 December 19, 2012

Feinstein Releases Statement on ‘Zero Dark Thirty’

New film ‘grossly inaccurate and misleading’

Washington—Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member John McCain (R-Ariz.) today sent a letter to Sony Pictures Entertainment, the studio distributing the upcoming film “Zero Dark Thirty,” the fictional account of the CIA’s 11-year hunt for Usama bin Laden.
The senators described the movie as “grossly inaccurate and misleading,” particularly graphic scenes of CIA officers torturing detainees that “credits these detainees with providing critical lead information” on the courier who led to the bin Laden compound.
The senators wrote: “Zero Dark Thirty is factually inaccurate, and we believe that you have an obligation to state that the role of torture in the hunt for Usama Bin Laden is not based on the facts, but rather part of the film’s fictional narrative. ”
Full text of the letter follows:
December 19, 2012
Mr. Michael Lynton
Chairman and CEO
Sony Pictures Entertainment
10202 W. Washington Blvd.
Culver City, CA 90232-3195
Dear Mr. Lynton:
We write to express our deep disappointment with the movie Zero Dark Thirty. We believe the film is grossly inaccurate and misleading in its suggestion that torture resulted in information that led to the location of Usama bin Laden.
We understand that the film is fiction, but it opens with the words “based on first-hand accounts of actual events” and there has been significant media coverage of the CIA’s cooperation with the screenwriters. As you know, the film graphically depicts CIA officers repeatedly torturing detainees and then credits these detainees with providing critical lead information on the courier that led to the Usama Bin Laden. Regardless of what message the filmmakers intended to convey, the movie clearly implies that the CIA’s coercive interrogation techniques were effective in eliciting important information related to a courier for Usama Bin Laden. We have reviewed CIA records and know that this is incorrect.
Zero Dark Thirty is factually inaccurate, and we believe that you have an obligation to state that the role of torture in the hunt for Usama Bin Laden is not based on the facts, but rather part of the film’s fictional narrative.
Pursuant to the Senate Intelligence Committee’s recently-adopted Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation program, Committee staff reviewed more than 6 million pages of records from the Intelligence Community. Based on that review, Senators Feinstein and Levin released the following information on April 30, 2012, regarding the Usama Bin Laden operation:
  • The CIA did not first learn about the existence of the Usama Bin Laden courier from CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques. Nor did the CIA discover the courier's identity from detainees subjected to coercive techniques. No detainee reported on the courier’s full name or specific whereabouts, and no detainee identified the compound in which Usama Bin Laden was hidden. Instead, the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program.
  • Information to support this operation was obtained from a wide variety of intelligence sources and methods. CIA officers and their colleagues throughout the Intelligence Community sifted through massive amounts of information, identified possible leads, tracked them down, and made considered judgments based on all of the available intelligence.
  • The CIA detainee who provided the most significant information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.
In addition to the information above, former CIA Director Leon Panetta wrote Senator McCain in May 2011, stating:
“…no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means.”
We are fans of many of your movies, and we understand the special role that movies play in our lives, but the fundamental problem is that people who see Zero Dark Thirty will believe that the events it portrays are facts. The film therefore has the potential to shape American public opinion in a disturbing and misleading manner. Recent public opinion polls suggest that a narrow majority of Americans believe that torture can be justified as an effective form of intelligence gathering. This is false. We know that cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of prisoners is an unreliable and highly ineffective means of gathering intelligence.
The use of torture should be banished from serious public discourse for these reasons alone, but more importantly, because it is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, because it is an affront to America’s national honor, and because it is wrong. The use of torture in the fight against terrorism did severe damage to America’s values and standing that cannot be justified or expunged. It remains a stain on our national conscience. We cannot afford to go back to these dark times, and with the release of Zero Dark Thirty, the filmmakers and your production studio are perpetuating the myth that torture is effective. You have a social and moral obligation to get the facts right.
Please consider correcting the impression that the CIA’s use of coercive interrogation techniques led to the operation against Usama Bin Laden. It did not.
Thank you for your assistance on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
Chairman
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Carl Levin
Chairman
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
John McCain
Ranking Member
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
###
-----------
Publicado por en No hay comentarios:

domingo, 6 de enero de 2013

SENADORES ESTADOUNIDENSES FEINSTEIN, McCAIN, LEVIN PIDEN A LA AGENCIA CENTRAL DE INTELIGENCIA ESTADOUNIDENSE LOS DOCUMENTOS PROPORCIONADOS A LOS REALIZADORES DEL FILME "ZERO DARK THIRTY" (FEINSTEIN, McCAIN, LEVIN ASK CIA FOR 'ZERO DARK THIRTY' DOCUMENTS)

 http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2013/1/feinstein-mccain-levin-ask-cia-for-zero-dark-thirty-documents

 

January 3, 2013

Feinstein, McCain, Levin Ask CIA for ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ Documents

Concerned that CIA’s cooperation was inappropriate, potentially misled filmmakers

Washington—Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Senate Armed Service Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Senate Armed Service Committee Ranking Member John McCain (R-Ariz.) have sent two letters to Acting CIA Director Michael Morell seeking information provided to the filmmakers of the film Zero Dark Thirty and clarification of comments made to CIA employees related to the use of coercive interrogation techniques on CIA detainees.
In the first letter, dated December 19, 2012, Feinstein, McCain and Levin stated their concern that “given the CIA’s cooperation with the filmmakers [of the film Zero Dark Thirty] and the narrative’s consistency with past public misstatements by former senior CIA officials, that the filmmakers could have been misled by information they were provided by CIA” and requested “all information and documents provided to the filmmakers by CIA officials.” The film credits CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques as providing lead information on the courier that led to the UBL compound.
The Senate Intelligence Committee’s recently-adopted Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation program concluded that the CIA did not first learn about the existence of the bin Laden courier from CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques and that the CIA detainee who provided the most accurate information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.
The senators sent a second letter to the CIA on December 31, 2012, following a message the Acting Director sent to CIA employees on December 21. In his message, Acting Director Morell stated that “Some [intelligence related to bin Laden’s location] came from detainees subjected to enhanced techniques, but there were many other sources as well.” The senators’ letter asks Acting Director Morell to provide information obtained from CIA detainees subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques and whether such information was provided prior to, during, or after the detainee was subjected to such techniques.
Full text of both letters follows:
 
December 19, 2012
Mr. Michael Morell
Acting Director
Central Intelligence Agency
Dear Acting Director Morell,
We are writing to request information and documents related to the CIA’s cooperation with the makers of the film, Zero Dark Thirty. We are concerned by the film’s clear implication that information obtained during or after the use of the CIA’s coercive interrogation techniques played a critical role in locating Usama Bin Laden (UBL).
As you know, the film depicts CIA officers repeatedly torturing detainees. The film then credits CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques as providing critical lead information on the courier that led to the UBL compound. While this information is incorrect, it is consistent with public statements made by former Director of the CIA Counterterrorism Center, Jose Rodriguez, and former CIA Director Michael Hayden.
The CIA cannot be held accountable for how the Agency and its activities are portrayed in film, but we are nonetheless concerned, given the CIA’s cooperation with the filmmakers and the narrative’s consistency with past public misstatements by former senior CIA officials, that the filmmakers could have been misled by information they were provided by the CIA.
In an unclassified letter you provided to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on May 31, 2012, you wrote that the CIA engaged with the filmmakers “to ensure an appropriate portrayal of the Agency’s mission as well as the dedication of the men and women of the CIA who played a key part in the success of that mission.” The film opens with the words “based on first-hand accounts of actual events,” and according to now publicly released CIA records, the filmmakers met extensively with CIA personnel. Specifically, one publicly released email notes that the filmmakers met with you for forty minutes, during which you provided “substance again.” Another publicly released CIA email states that “As a [sic] Agency, we’ve been pretty forward-leaning with [the filmmaker], and he’s agreed to share scripts and details about the movie with us so we’re absolutely comfortable with what he will be showing.”
Pursuant to the Committee’s recently-adopted Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation program, Committee staff reviewed more than 6 million pages of CIA records. Based on that review, and with prior notification to the CIA, Chairman Dianne Feinstein and Senator Carl Levin released the following findings on April 30, 2012, regarding the UBL operation:
  • The CIA did not first learn about the existence of the UBL courier from CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques. Nor did the CIA discover the courier's identity from CIA detainees subjected to coercive techniques. No CIA detainee reported on the courier’s full name or specific whereabouts, and no detainee identified the compound in which UBL was hidden. Instead, the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name, and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program.
  • Information to support the UBL operation was obtained from a wide variety of intelligence sources and methods. CIA officers and their colleagues throughout the Intelligence Community sifted through massive amounts of information, identified possible leads, tracked them down, and made considered judgments based on all of the available intelligence.
  • The CIA detainee who provided the most accurate information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.
In addition to the information above, former CIA Director Panetta wrote Senator McCain in May 2011, stating:
“…no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means.”
Given the discrepancy between the facts above and what is depicted in the film, previous misstatements by retired CIA officials, as well as what appears to be the CIA’s unprecedented cooperation with the filmmakers, we request that you provide the Committee with all information and documents provided to the filmmakers by CIA officials, former officials, or contractors, including talking points prepared for use in those meetings. Furthermore, we request copies of all relevant records discussing the cooperation between CIA officials, former officials, or contractors and the filmmakers, including records of the meetings that occurred, notes, internal emails, Sametime communications, and other documentation describing CIA interactions with the filmmakers.
Thank you for your assistance on this matter.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
Chairman
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Carl Levin
Chairman
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
John McCain
Ranking Member
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

December 31, 2012
Mr. Michael Morell
Acting Director
Central Intelligence Agency
Dear Acting Director Morell:
In your December 21, 2012, statement to CIA employees regarding the film, Zero Dark Thirty, you state that “the film creates the strong impression that enhanced interrogation techniques” were “the key to finding Bin Ladin” and that this impression “is false.” However, you went on to refer to multiple streams of intelligence that led CIA analysts to conclude that Bin Ladin was hiding in Abbottabad and stated that “Some came from detainees subjected to enhanced techniques, but there were many other sources as well. And, importantly, whether enhanced interrogation techniques were the only timely and effective way to obtain information from those detainees, as the film suggests, is a matter of debate that cannot and never will be definitively resolved.”
In our previous letter of December 18, 2012, we made several points based on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation program that are potentially inconsistent with your press release. Principal among those points was that “The CIA detainee who provided the most accurate information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.”
Accordingly, we would ask that you provide the following to the Committee:
  1. In regards to the Bin Laden operation, what information was acquired from CIA detainees subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques? When was this information provided: prior to, during, or after the detainee was subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques? If after, how long after? Please note whether such information corroborated information previously known to the CIA.
     
  2. Please provide specific examples of information that was obtained in a “timely and effective” way from CIA detainees subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques? When was this information provided: prior to, during, or after the detainee was subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques? If after, how long after? Please note whether such information corroborated information previously known to the CIA.
Thank you for your assistance on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
Chairman
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Carl Levin
Chairman
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
John McCain
Ranking Member
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
###

 ------------------- 

 http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve/?File_id=d5bcc8f1-4ac5-4d25-9371-4f748c225597

 http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve/?File_id=0fecff55-64cc-40f1-a2d2-5496ce9acc48

Publicado por en No hay comentarios:

sábado, 5 de enero de 2013

LA AGENCIA CENTRAL DE INTELIGENCIA ESTADOUNIDENSE (CIA) ALIMENTA A HOLLYWOOD (THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (CIA) FEEDS HOLLYWOOD)

 HOLLYWOOD = PROPAGANDA


Página/12radar
Domingo, 14 de octubre de 2012

http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/suplementos/radar/subnotas/8300-1821-2012-10-14.html

'La mano del amo

Sobre todo a partir de la Guerra Fría, la CIA tuvo influencia y en ocasiones colaboró con muchas producciones de Hollywood. Pero de esta relación circula muy poca información, al punto de que no resulta tan fácil probarla. Aquí, un mapa de quienes investigaron la mano de la agencia en las películas y de aquellos films que recibieron asesoramiento, a veces para imponer un punto de vista, a veces para confundir a los actores.


 Por Mariano Kairuz
“La historia de cómo la CIA se involucró en Hollywood es un cuento de engaños y subversión que parecería improbable si alguien lo llevara al cine”, escribieron los periodistas Matthew Alford y Robbie Graham en un artículo publicado en The Guardian en 2008, a propósito de esta relación (que cualquiera sospecha que existe) entre la agencia de inteligencia y la mayor industria del espectáculo del mundo, pero de la que existe o circula muy poca información. Argo, el film de Ben Affleck, alcanza a sugerirla, pero en última instancia parece limitarla a su propia anécdota, el espectacular rescate de los seis empleados escapados de la captura de la embajada norteamericana en Irán. “El modelo para este tipo de conexión –escriben Alford y Graham–, es la relación abierta, pero raramente publicada, de los lazos entre Hollywood y el Departamento de Defensa.” El caso del Pentágono, que lleva décadas funcionando como “consultor” y proveedor amigable y relativamente barato de vehículos de guerra, escenarios, armas y un largo etcétera a películas de guerra, espionaje y afines, ha sido investigado por David Robb y quedó testimoniado en su libro Operación Hollywood (editado en castellano por Océano y hasta hace un tiempo disponible en saldos en las librerías de la avenida Corrientes). En sus páginas se presenta a Phil Strub, responsable del nexo entre una parte y otra, y se detalla el tipo de condicionamientos que entraña esta colaboración: si un productor quiere contar con la colaboración de la Fuerza Aérea o la Marina para filmar escenas de su película a bordo de, digamos, un portaaviones, el tal Strub debe poder leer el guión antes, juzgar si está de acuerdo con el tipo de retrato que se hace en la película de la fuerza en cuestión y permitirse sugerir cambios cuando no es así. Por eso es que el libro lleva por subtítulo “la censura del Pentágono”. Por otro lado, la académica norteamericana Tricia Jenkins publicó un libro similar sobre el nexo de Hollywood con la CIA, aún inédito en castellano, resultado de una investigación por la que se entrevistó con, entre otros, Paul Barry, el hombre que a mediados de la década pasada se convirtió en el contacto de Langley con California –y el segundo en ocupar este puesto, desde el retiro de Chase Brandon, quien lo inauguró, en 1995–, quien le explicó el origen de su “puesto” burocrático y por qué la CIA fue la última de las agencias gubernamentales –después del FBI, el Servicio Secreto, el Instituto Nacional de la Salud y el Departamento de Seguridad Interior– en “desclasificar” su relación con Hollywood y darle un estatuto formal. “Creo que la CIA tardó en crear este nexo formal con la industria del entretenimiento –decía Barry–, porque culturalmente la Agencia ha estado concentrada en nuestras misiones en el extranjero y la mayoría de nuestro personal trabaja encubierto. Nuestra filosofía parecía indicar que no debíamos prestar mucha atención a la percepción pública de la Agencia, pero eventualmente nos dimos cuenta de que el interés de la industria en la CIA iba a continuar tanto si participábamos como si no lo hacíamos. Entonces decidimos que sería mejor para nosotros intentar trabajar con la industria para ayudar a mejorar la comprensión y la precisión de las historias que cuenta. No hay que subestimar la influencia de Hollywood. Muchos norteamericanos están dispuestos a aceptar el mensaje de Hollywood y muy pocos intentarían hacer ningún tipo de investigación para establecer la verdad. Esto se ve reafirmado por los emails públicos que recibimos: en la mayoría de los casos, Hollywood es la única manera en la que el público aprende sobre la Agencia y los norteamericanos muy frecuentemente dan forma a sus juicios sobre nosotros basándose en las películas. El problema se ve agravado cuando se nos retrata como mercenarios y asesinos. Por más que sé apreciar cierto nivel de licencia artística, nada podría estar más lejos de la verdad.”
Pero Alford y Graham insisten en que, mientras que las intervenciones e “intercambios” del Pentágono y los productores de cine –que han incluido acciones tales como cambiar la identidad de un heroico personaje militar de La caída del Halcón Negro porque en la vida real era un violador de menores de edad o la anulación de un chiste sobre la derrota de Vietnam en una de James Bond–, “por muy moralmente dudosas y escasamente publicitadas que hayan sido, al menos ocurrieron en el dominio público”, no puede decirse lo mismo de las colaboraciones con la CIA, “que hasta hace muy poco fueron directamente negadas por la Agencia; esto es, hasta que en 1996 anunciaron con cierta fanfarria la creación de la Media Liaison Office, supuestamente para funciones estrictamente de asesoramiento”.
Este anuncio contaba con un antecedente: un informe compilado en 1991 por un nuevo departamento del director de la CIA, Robert Gates, que se preguntaba si la agencia no debería ser un poco menos “ocultadora”. El informe reconocía que la CIA había desarrollado vínculos con periodistas de todos los medios –gráficos, televisivos– y que esto les había permitido convertir algunos relatos de fracasos en noticias de éxito y heroísmo, revelando que además, en el pasado, había “persuadido a varios reporteros de posponer, cambiar, detener o incluso desechar historias que podían afectar la seguridad nacional”. El mismo informe admite que ha participado activamente en la revisión de proyectos cinematográficos, de ficción y documentales, a pedido de productores, guionistas y directores, para guiarlos “en términos de precisión y autenticidad”. Es decir, sin manifestar interés alguno en la enorme capacidad de influencia y manipulación de la industria del cine y la televisión. Cosa que Alford y Graham ponen en duda, enumerando solo una parte de la infinita lista de producciones recientes que han contado con expresa colaboración de la Central de Inteligencia: entre ellas, The Agency, miniserie producida por Wolfgang Petersen, coescrita por un ex agente y filmada afuera y adentro del cuartel central de Langley, y en la que un capítulo mostraba a la Agencia salvando la vida de Fidel Castro; o el telefilm con Tom Berenger In the Company of Spies (1999), sobre un agente retirado que vuelve para una última, heroica misión –salvar a unos oficiales secuestrados por Corea del Norte– y para la que CIA ofició una presentación y prestó escenarios y extras; o La suma de todos los miedos, cuarta película de la saga protagonizada por Jack Ryan, del novelista Tom Clancy, quien es un viejo conocido de la Agencia, desde que en los ’80 fue invitado oficialmente a visitar Langley, tras el éxito de su libro La caza al Octubre Rojo. A los productores de La suma de todos los miedos –en la que el nuevo Jack Ryan era nada menos que... Ben Affleck– les dio un tour por las instalaciones de la CIA nada menos que su director, George Tenet. Los títulos siguen y hasta crecen en importancia: Charlie Wilson’s War, con Tom Hanks; El buen pastor, de y con Robert De Niro, etcétera.
La historia de este affaire se remonta largas décadas. Unas cartas descubiertas en la biblioteca presidencial Eisenhower, firmadas por el agente secreto Luigi G. Luraschi, un ejecutivo de Paramount que trabajó para la Junta Psicológica Estratégica (PSB en sus siglas en inglés) de la CIA, revelan el alcance de las intromisiones de la agencia en la industria del cine a comienzos de la Guerra Fría: entre otras aberraciones, Luraschi había cerrado algunos acuerdos para que varios directores de casting pusieran en las películas “actores negros bien vestidos” (incluyendo un mayordomo “dignificado”, con frases en el diálogo destinadas a demostrar que es un hombre libre, en Sangaree, de 1953), o que se quitaran algunas escenas del film Arrowhead (1953) que dejaban una mala impresión sobre el trato que se daba en EE.UU. a los apaches. Todas intervenciones cuyo objetivo era combatir la noción de segregación racial que el enemigo soviético sabía explotar muy bien para relativizar el éxito de la “democracia” occidental. La CIA estuvo también detrás de la compra de los derechos de dos adaptaciones al cine de la obra de George Orwell, el film de dibujos animados Rebelión en la granja (1954) y la versión de Michael Radford de 1984 (1958) en los que se buscó hacer pequeñas alteraciones que ayudaran a demonizar a los soviéticos, así como del intento infructuoso de convencer a Frank Capra de que filmara una secuela de su documental propagandístico de la Segunda Guerra (Why We Fight), pero sobre la Guerra Fría (título tentativo: Why We Fight The Cold War) o de las modificaciones en la primera versión fílmica de El americano impasible (en la que el americano asesinado resulta ser no un fabricante de bombas, sino de juguetes) que llevaron a Graham Greene, autor de la novela, a desvincularse de la producción.
“Pero las verdaderas razones por las que la CIA adoptó un papel de consultor en estas producciones –alegan Alford y Graham–, se ven con nitidez en un único comentario de un ex consejero general de la CIA, Paul Kelbaugh. En 2007, Kelbaugh dio una charla sobre la relación entre Hollywood y la Agencia en una universidad de Virginia, que fue reseñada por un periodista local, quien recordaba que Kelbaugh les había contado sobre su experiencia a lo largo de todo el rodaje de la película El discípulo (The Recruit, 2003) con Al Pacino como un agente veterano y Colin Farrell como el chico nuevo al que recluta. Kelbaugh estuvo ahí a título de asesor, pero su verdadero trabajo era confundir a los autores de la película; o según lo citaba el artículo: ‘No queríamos que Hollywood se acercara demasiado a la verdad’.”
Título: ORWELL SUBVERTIDO: LA AGENCIA CENTRAL DE INTELIGENCIA ESTADOUNIDENSE Y EL RODAJE DE "REBELIÓN EN LA GRANJA". Autor: DANIEL J. LEAB.
Title: "ORWELL SUBVERTED. THE CIA AND THE FILMING OF ANIMAL FARM." Author: DANIEL J. LEAB.

Publicado por en No hay comentarios:
Suscribirse a: Entradas (Atom)