[Anyone] The Truth about Charlie Wilson's War?

totem at laplaza.org totem at laplaza.org
Tue Jan 15 11:45:09 MST 2008


> > 
> > 
> > > Tom Hanks' Charlie Wilson Movie: An Imperialist Comedy  By Chalmers Johnson, 
> Tomdispatch.com
> > > Posted on January 8, 2008, Printed on January 14, 2008
> > > http://www.alternet.org/story/73010/    
> > >   I have some personal knowledge of Congressmen like Charlie Wilson (D-2nd District, Texas, 
> > 1973-1996) because, for close to twenty years, my representative in the 50th Congressional 
> District 
> > of California was Republican Randy "Duke" Cunningham, now serving an eight-and-a-half year 
> > prison sentence for soliciting and receiving bribes from defense contractors. Wilson and 
> Cunningham 
> > held exactly the same plummy committee assignments in the House of Representatives -- the 
> > Defense Appropriations Subcommittee plus the Intelligence Oversight Committee -- from which 
> they 
> > could dole out large sums of public money with little or no input from their colleagues or 
> > constituents. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Both men flagrantly abused their positions -- but with radically different consequences. 
> > Cunningham went to jail because he was too stupid to know how to game the system -- retire 
and 
> > become a lobbyist -- whereas Wilson received the Central Intelligence Agency Clandestine 
> Service's 
> > first "honored colleague" award ever given to an outsider and went on to become a $360,000 per 
> > annum lobbyist for Pakistan. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   In a secret ceremony at CIA headquarters on June 9, 1993, James Woolsey, Bill Clinton's first 
> > Director of Central Intelligence and one of the agency's least competent chiefs in its checkered 
> > history, said: "The defeat and breakup of the Soviet empire is one of the great events of world 
> > history. There were many heroes in this battle, but to Charlie Wilson must go a special 
> recognition." 
> > One important part of that recognition, studiously avoided by the CIA and most subsequent 
> > American writers on the subject, is that Wilson's activities in Afghanistan led directly to a chain 
of 
> > blowback that culminated in the attacks of September 11, 2001 and led to the United States' 
> current 
> > status as the most hated nation on Earth. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   On May 25, 2003, (the same month George W. Bush stood on the flight deck of the U.S.S. 
> > Abraham Lincoln under a White-House-prepared "Mission Accomplished" banner and 
proclaimed 
> > "major combat operations" at an end in Iraq), I published a review in the Los Angeles Times of 
the 
> > book that provides the data for the film Charlie Wilson's War. The original edition of the book 
> carried 
> > the subtitle, "The Extraordinary Story of the Largest Covert Operation in History -- the Arming 
of 
> the 
> > Mujahideen." The 2007 paperbound edition was subtitled, "The Extraordinary Story of How the 
> > Wildest Man in Congress and a Rogue CIA Agent Changed the History of Our Times." Neither the 
> > claim that the Afghan operations were covert nor that they changed history is precisely true. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   In my review of the book, I wrote,
> > >   
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   
> > >   "The Central Intelligence Agency has an almost unblemished record of screwing up every 
> 'secret' 
> > armed intervention it ever undertook. From the overthrow of the Iranian government in 1953 
> > through the rape of Guatemala in 1954, the Bay of Pigs, the failed attempts to assassinate Fidel 
> > Castro of Cuba and Patrice Lumumba of the Congo, the Phoenix Program in Vietnam, the 'secret 
> war' 
> > in Laos, aid to the Greek Colonels who seized power in 1967, the 1973 killing of President 
Allende 
> in 
> > Chile, and Ronald Reagan's Iran-Contra war against Nicaragua, there is not a single instance in 
> which 
> > the Agency's activities did not prove acutely embarrassing to the United States and devastating 
to 
> the 
> > people being 'liberated.' The CIA continues to get away with this bungling primarily because its 
> > budget and operations have always been secret and Congress is normally too indifferent to its 
> > Constitutional functions to rein in a rogue bureaucracy. Therefore the tale of a purported CIA 
> > success
> > >  story should be of some interest.  
> > >     "According to the author of Charlie Wilson's War, the exception to CIA incompetence was 
the 
> > arming between 1979 and 1988 of thousands of Afghan mujahideen ("freedom fighters"). The 
> Agency 
> > flooded Afghanistan with an incredible array of extremely dangerous weapons and 
> 'unapologetically 
> > mov[ed] to equip and train cadres of high tech holy warriors in the art of waging a war of urban 
> > terror against a modern superpower [in this case, the USSR].'  
> > >     "The author of this glowing account, [the late] George Crile, was a veteran producer for the 
> CBS 
> > television news show '60 Minutes' and an exuberant Tom Clancy-type enthusiast for the Afghan 
> > caper. He argues that the U.S.'s clandestine involvement in Afghanistan was 'the largest and 
most 
> > successful CIA operation in history,' 'the one morally unambiguous crusade of our time,' and 
that 
> > 'there was nothing so romantic and exciting as this war against the Evil Empire.' Crile's sole 
> measure 
> > of success is killed Soviet soldiers (about 15,000), which undermined Soviet morale and 
> contributed 
> > to the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the period 1989 to 1991. That's the successful part.  
> > >     "However, he never once mentions that the 'tens of thousands of fanatical Muslim 
> > fundamentalists' the CIA armed are the same people who in 1996 killed nineteen American 
airmen 
> > at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, bombed our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, blew a hole in 
> the 
> > side of the U.S.S. Cole in Aden Harbor in 2000, and on September 11, 2001, flew hijacked 
airliners 
> > into New York's World Trade Center and the Pentagon."   
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Where Did the "Freedom Fighters" Go? 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   When I wrote those words I did not know (and could not have imagined) that the actor Tom 
> > Hanks had already purchased the rights to the book to make into a film in which he would star 
as 
> > Charlie Wilson, with Julia Roberts as his right-wing Texas girlfriend Joanne Herring, and Philip 
> > Seymour Hoffman as Gust Avrakotos, the thuggish CIA operative who helped pull off this caper. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   What to make of the film (which I found rather boring and old-fashioned)? It makes the U.S. 
> > government look like it is populated by a bunch of whoring, drunken sleazebags, so in that 
sense 
> it's 
> > accurate enough. But there are a number of things both the book and the film are suppressing. 
As 
> I 
> > noted in 2003, 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   
> > >   "For the CIA legally to carry out a covert action, the president must sign off on -- that is, 
> > authorize -- a document called a 'finding.' Crile repeatedly says that President Carter signed 
such 
> a 
> > finding ordering the CIA to provide covert backing to the mujahideen after the Soviet Union 
> invaded 
> > Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. The truth of the matter is that Carter signed the finding on 
> July 
> > 3, 1979, six months before the Soviet invasion, and he did so on the advice of his national 
security 
> > adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, in order to try to provoke a Russian incursion. Brzezinski has 
> > confirmed this sequence of events in an interview with a French newspaper, and former CIA 
> Director 
> > [today Secretary of Defense] Robert Gates says so explicitly in his 1996 memoirs. It may surprise 
> > Charlie Wilson to learn that his heroic mujahideen were manipulated by Washington like so much 
> > cannon fodder in order to give the USSR its own Vietnam. The mujahideen did the job but as 
> > subsequent
> > >  events have made clear, they may not be all that grateful to the United States."  
> > >     
> > >   In the bound galleys of Crile's book, which his publisher sent to reviewers before publication, 
> > there was no mention of any qualifications to his portrait of Wilson as a hero and a patriot. Only 
in 
> > an "epilogue" added to the printed book did Crile quote Wilson as saying, "These things 
happened. 
> > They were glorious and they changed the world. And the people who deserved the credit are the 
> > ones who made the sacrifice. And then we fucked up the endgame." That's it. Full stop. Director 
> Mike 
> > Nichols, too, ends his movie with Wilson's final sentence emblazoned across the screen. And 
then 
> > the credits roll. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Neither a reader of Crile, nor a viewer of the film based on his book would know that, in 
> talking 
> > about the Afghan freedom fighters of the 1980s, we are also talking about the militants of al 
> Qaeda 
> > and the Taliban of the 1990s and 2000s. Amid all the hoopla about Wilson's going out of 
channels 
> to 
> > engineer secret appropriations of millions of dollars to the guerrillas, the reader or viewer would 
> > never suspect that, when the Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, President George 
> > H.W. Bush promptly lost interest in the place and simply walked away, leaving it to descend into 
> one 
> > of the most horrific civil wars of modern times. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Among those supporting the Afghans (in addition to the U.S.) was the rich, pious Saudi 
Arabian 
> > economist and civil engineer, Osama bin Laden, whom we helped by building up his al Qaeda 
base 
> at 
> > Khost. When bin Laden and his colleagues decided to get even with us for having been used, he 
> had 
> > the support of much of the Islamic world. This disaster was brought about by Wilson's and the 
> CIA's 
> > incompetence as well as their subversion of all the normal channels of political oversight and 
> > democratic accountability within the U.S. government. Charlie Wilson's war thus turned out to 
have 
> > been just another bloody skirmish in the expansion and consolidation of the American empire -
- 
> > and an imperial presidency. The victors were the military-industrial complex and our massive 
> > standing armies. The billion dollars' worth of weapons Wilson secretly supplied to the guerrillas 
> > ended up being turned on ourselves. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   An Imperialist Comedy
> > >   
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Which brings us back to the movie and its reception here. (It has been banned in 
Afghanistan.) 
> > One of the severe side effects of imperialism in its advanced stages seems to be that it rots the 
> > brains of the imperialists. They start believing that they are the bearers of civilization, the 
bringers 
> of 
> > light to "primitives" and "savages" (largely so identified because of their resistance to being 
> > "liberated" by us), the carriers of science and modernity to backward peoples, beacons and 
guides 
> > for citizens of the "underdeveloped world." 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Such attitudes are normally accompanied by a racist ideology that proclaims the intrinsic 
> > superiority and right to rule of "white" Caucasians. Innumerable European colonialists saw the 
hand 
> > of God in Darwin's discovery of evolution, so long as it was understood that He had 
programmed 
> the 
> > outcome of evolution in favor of late Victorian Englishmen. (For an excellent short book on this 
> > subject, check out Sven Lindquist's "Exterminate All the Brutes.") 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   When imperialist activities produce unmentionable outcomes, such as those well known to 
> anyone 
> > paying attention to Afghanistan since about 1990, then ideological thinking kicks in. The horror 
> > story is suppressed, or reinterpreted as something benign or ridiculous (a "comedy"), or simply 
> > curtailed before the denouement becomes obvious. Thus, for example, Melissa Roddy, a Los 
> Angeles 
> > film-maker with inside information from the Charlie Wilson production team, notes that the 
film's 
> > happy ending came about because Tom Hanks, a co-producer as well as the leading actor, "just 
> > can't deal with this 9/11 thing." 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Similarly, we are told by another insider reviewer, James Rocchi, that the scenario, as 
originally 
> > written by Aaron Sorkin of "West Wing" fame, included the following line for Avrakotos: 
"Remember 
> I 
> > said this: There's going to be a day when we're gonna look back and say 'I'd give anything if 
> > [Afghanistan] were overrun with Godless communists'." This line is nowhere to be found in the 
> final 
> > film. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Today there is ample evidence that, when it comes to the freedom of women, education 
levels, 
> > governmental services, relations among different ethnic groups, and quality of life -- all were 
> > infinitely better under the Afghan communists than under the Taliban or the present 
government 
> of 
> > President Hamid Karzai, which evidently controls little beyond the country's capital, Kabul. But 
> > Americans don't want to know that -- and certainly they get no indication of it from Charlie 
> Wilson's 
> > War, either the book or the film. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   The tendency of imperialism to rot the brains of imperialists is particularly on display in the 
> > recent spate of articles and reviews in mainstream American newspapers about the film. For 
> reasons 
> > not entirely clear, an overwhelming majority of reviewers concluded that Charlie Wilson's War is a 
> > "feel-good comedy" (Lou Lumenick in the New York Post), a "high-living, hard-partying jihad" 
> (A.O. 
> > Scott in the New York Times), "a sharp-edged, wickedly funny comedy" (Roger Ebert in the 
> Chicago 
> > Sun-Times). Stephen Hunter in the Washington Post wrote of "Mike Nichols's laff-a-minute 
> chronicle 
> > of the congressman's crusade to ram funding through the House Appropriations Committee to 
> > supply arms to the Afghan mujahideen"; while, in a piece entitled "Sex! Drugs! (and Maybe a 
Little 
> > War)," Richard L. Berke in the New York Times offered this stamp of approval: "You can make a 
> movie 
> > that is relevant and intelligent -- and palatable to a mass audience -- if its political pills are
> > >  sugar-coated." 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   When I saw the film, there was only a guffaw or two from the audience over the raunchy sex 
> and 
> > sexism of "good-time Charlie," but certainly no laff-a-minute. The root of this approach to the 
> film 
> > probably lies with Tom Hanks himself, who, according to Berke, called it "a serious comedy." A 
few 
> > reviews qualified their endorsement of Charlie Wilson's War, but still came down on the side of 
> good 
> > old American fun. Rick Groen in the Toronto Globe and Mail, for instance, thought that it was 
"best 
> > to enjoy Charlie Wilson's War as a thoroughly engaging comedy. Just don't think about it too 
much 
> or 
> > you may choke on your popcorn." Peter Rainer noted in the Christian Science Monitor that the 
> > "Comedic Charlie Wilson's War has a tragic punch line." These reviewers were thundering along 
> with 
> > the herd while still trying to maintain a bit of self-respect. 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   The handful of truly critical reviews have come mostly from blogs and little-known Hollywood 
> > fanzines -- with one major exception, Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Times. In an essay 
> subtitled 
> > "'Charlie Wilson's War' celebrates events that came back to haunt Americans," Turan called the 
film 
> > "an unintentionally sobering narrative of American shouldn't-have" and added that it was "glib 
> rather 
> > than witty, one of those films that comes off as being more pleased with itself than it has a right 
to 
> > be." 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   My own view is that if Charlie Wilson's War is a comedy, it's the kind that goes over well with 
a 
> > roomful of louts in a college fraternity house. Simply put, it is imperialist propaganda and the 
> > tragedy is that four-and-a-half years after we invaded Iraq and destroyed it, such dangerously 
> > misleading nonsense is still being offered to a gullible public. The most accurate review so far is 
> > James Rocchi's summing-up for Cinematical: "Charlie Wilson's War isn't just bad history; it feels 
> even 
> > more malign, like a conscious attempt to induce amnesia." 
> > >   
> > >     
> > >   Chalmers Johnson is the author of the Blowback Trilogy -- Blowback (2000), The Sorrows of 
> > Empire (2004), and Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic (paperbound edition, 
January 
> > 2008).
> > >   
> > >   � 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
> > > View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/73010/
> > >        
> > > ---------------------------------
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



-- 






More information about the Anyone mailing list