This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:


Last week was the official opening weekend of Dirty Wars: The World is a Battlefield, Jeremy Scahill's first documentary and an abridged version of his new book by the same name. This diary is not going to be a review or critique in the traditional sense. Because I believe most of the of people who will be reading this diary either have seen many of Mr. Scahill's recent interviews or might have already purchased and begun reading the book, there is little need to do a blow by blow detail of the plot. Since I am fortunate to live a brief train ride from NYC, I was able to see the film on opening weekend. It opened in 4 theatres: one in LA; one in DC and two in Manhattan.

For very brief synopsis, the documentary is done in a chronological sequence beginning with Scahill's investigation into the killing of 7 people including Mohammed Daoud Sharabuddin, a police captain, and two pregnant women in Gardez, Afghanistan on February 12, 2010 (U.S. Admits Role in February Killing of Afghan Women) through the killing of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki on October 14, 2011 via drone strike. The film could seemingly be broken into Scahill's two focuses, the Al-Awlaki family and his investigations into the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).

As for the technical aspects of the movie, overall I give it good marks. The editing allows the film to emphasize the important scenes but not slow the pace of the film to a crawl. The narration puts most scenes in context to the overall story and provides both background and Scahill's analysis of the scenes you are viewing. The score I could have done without. The film itself provides powerful emotional responses and doesn't really need to hammer the point home with needless somber or suspenseful music in the background. For those who played detective video games in the 80's and 90's, like Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego, will be reminded of those games with the way some of the figures in the movie are introduced. Usually after first being seen, there is a black and white screen freeze and their name and title appear letter by letter with the sound of a dot matrix printer or typewriter. It makes the film seem more nefarious as if these people are villains in a sniper mission.

Follow me down the rabbit hole for more, but first a word from our sponsor:

Top Comments recognizes the previous day's Top Mojo and strives to promote each day's outstanding comments through nominations made by Kossacks like you. Please send comments (before 9:30pm ET) by email to topcomments@gmail.com or by our KosMail message board. Just click on the Spinning Top™ to make a submission. Look for the Spinning Top™ to pop up in diaries posts around Daily Kos.

Make sure that you include the direct link to the comment (the URL), which is available by clicking on that comment's date/time. Please let us know your Daily Kos user name if you use email so we can credit you properly. If you send a writeup with the link, we can include that as well. The diarist poster reserves the right to edit all content.

Please come in. You're invited to make yourself at home! Join us beneath the doodle...


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

What I'd like to do is focus on some parts of the film that were especially eye-opening for me.

First, a little background. I have been reading Scahill's reporting since his first book, Blackwater, was published when I first became aware of him. I devoured everything and read many of the people he recommended including many correspondents and reporters writing for non-American audiences. He seemed to be well-versed in US national security affairs and war reporting. In my little knowledge of these themes, I thought if Scahill didn't know about it, there was nothing to know. My naiveté would become apparent quickly during the course of watching the film.

After the opening scenes in Gardez, Scahill sets out to uncover who or what was behind the attack in Gardez. After looking at some of the photos taken during the US forces bringing sheep as an apology for committing the killings (U.S. Vice Admiral Apologizes for Afghan Deaths) (some of these photos where never supposed to have seen light), Scahill notices the name of the commander, Admiral William McRaven, and sets out to uncover more about him. Through his investigations including a number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, Scahill finds out about a program called the Joint Special Operations Commend (JSOC).

This was the first bombshell in the movie for me. I had always figured Scahill already knew of JSOC after his investigative reporting of Blackwater. Blackwater had hired many former members of the different elite forces of the military such as the Navy SEALs, the Delta Force, Army Rangers, among others. The fact that Scahill had never heard of them prior to his investigations is incomprehensible to me in light of the celebration of JSOC following the Bin Laden killing. If this part of military operations was so secret that Scahill hadn't even known about it, why would the government unilaterally expose it itself? For all this talk about helping the terrorists evade our security measures, it is beyond me to see how this was in anyway helpful to our national security. I could easily rant about official leaking vis-à-vis the almost bloodthirsty way government officials have gone after whistleblowers in the last decade-plus, but I will save that diary for a different day.

Another eye-opening moment in the movie was when the crew went to Medina Hospital in Mogadishu, Somalia. I always knew how behind third World countries are in terms of many modern aspects of First World life especially healthcare systems. Watching how tried to treat a gunshot victim reminded me of watching a hospital scene of Boardwalk Empire. You never really get a true sense of these places until you see actual footage of it.

In continuation of policies going back an untold number decades, the US continues to fund (money and weapons) and support former enemies and other warlords especially in Somalia. This was very much what happened with Osama bin Laden in the 80's as we supported him and the Taliban in Afghanistan against Russia.  One warlord, Indha Adde (also a former Al Qaeda ally), says he likes the support from the US because "there is no one better to learn war from than the US." Scahill interviews Malcolm Nance, former U.S. Navy Senior Chief, Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) instructor, and expert in prisoners of war and terrorist hostage survival techniques (wikipedia), who says the US's policies in Africa are "mind-boggling." Nance says rather than arming these rebels, we could drop subtle intelligence about Al Qaeda easily ruining their reputation which would quickly diminish their support and crumble their infrastructure.

In the movie Scahill interviews Matthew Hoh, the former Senior Civilian Representative in Zabul Province in Afghanistan. (You can read Matthew Hoh's resignation letter here.) In the interview, Mr. Hoh talks about much of why he resigned his position. He fails to understand why the US continues to pour blood and treasure into what amounts to a 35-year civil war in Afghanistan that seems to have no end. The US is but one more supporting character in a cast of many that have come before to support any number of governments that the people of the country have never wanted. It is only through graft and bribery that these governments stand for however long whatever outside force keeps them propped up. Hoh also questioned why the US was using an elite force to fight against what was quickly becoming a popular uprising against a foreign occupier. Hoh also stated that many times the US would shoot itself in the foot by killing someone who was working with us, such as Mohammed Daoud Sharabuddin. This not only set back the progress we were making but easily blow up in our faces by creating new enemies from supporters.

After the film, Scahill and Democracy Now's Amy Goodman held a short Q&A session with the audience.

One question that was posed to Scahill was why he thinks President Obama has continued and escalated the Bush era policies regarding drone strikes and targeted killings. Scahill points to Obama's lack of foreign policy experience and the pressure from the military and intelligence apparatus. Scahill feels that Obama could have been overwhelmed by said pressure because he was inclined to believe what he was being told insofar that this is the best way to keep Americans safe from terrorism.

He was also asked a question why Congress is silent on the secret wars. Schaill replied that silence from Americans is what breeds silence from Congress. If we, as Americans, are not speaking out in large numbers against these policies, why would our representatives?

The film has so far received mostly positive reviews with most of the negative comments referring to the abundance of Scahill himself being on camera so much especially during interview segments. They feel, and I agree, the interviews would be more powerful without constantly seeing Scahill's expressions. Still the film is powerful, and now even more so in light of the recent revelations from Edward Snowden, since the film itself is exposé of secret government actions.

This weekend the film has expanded to both the metro NYC and LA areas, the Bay area of CA, Chicago and Canada. Next week begins the first openings in Middle American cities as well as further reaches into the areas surrounding the currently places the film is playing. For a listing of all current and future theatres, click this link: http://dirtywars.org/... Some showings may have talk-backs; please refer to the site for information on those. I encourage anyone who is interesting in seeing or hearing the first hand accounts of those involved in these incidents to see the movie no matter your opinion on this issue. As Americans we all have to be fully informed if we are to make decisions on how we, as a country, want to move forward.

Diarist reserves all rights to his original writing only. Community material is not covered by this ©

June 15, 2013

Thanks to tonight's Top Comments contributors! Let us hear from YOU
when you find that proficient comment.

From Steveningen:

In Chrislove's celebration diary of Top Comment's 7th year, cskendrick took time from his own special anniversary to give us the[sic] truly beautiful comment. It was a gift to all of us.
From me, the frantic diarist:
This thread started by HoundDog and especially Richard Lyon's reply. Apparently grammatical mistakes are now sufficient reason to imprison people in Gitmo.

June 14, 2013

(excluding Tip Jars and first comments)

Got mik!

  1) I keep saying: It's a criminal racketeering by Ray Pensador — 161
  2) Filling in the details, knowing what the programs by LaFeminista — 150
  3) That argument ("nothing new here!") is both by Kombema — 118
  4) Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida by xxdr zombiexx — 108
  5) We don't even know about it now by Dallasdoc — 103
  6) This? by david mizner — 97
  7) But we're having it confirmed by greenbell — 96
  8) Since we won't do anything about by soros — 95
  9) So... by gjohnsit — 90
10) Happened to me. Under Countrywide, later by second gen — 89
11) Don't assume everyone who posts on this blog... by dclawyer06 — 87
12) Brit says Private Eye is a pretty reliable source. by ericlewis0 — 86
13) My heart sank when I heard by Lisa Lockwood — 84
14) Thank you Yas by Denise Oliver Velez — 83
15) We could say the exact same thing about Walker... by noise of rain — 79
16) Possibly, but I would say many in congress by LaFeminista — 78
17) It truly is mind boggling. Sometimes I am afraid by mrsgoo — 75
18) The deniers aren't as big a problem... by Meteor Blades — 74
19) The 4th Amendment states the right of the people by Mayfly — 71
20) Knowing... by dance you monster — 70
21) Also, many Americans have memory deficit issues. by KrazyKitten — 66
22) Watering down the issue through by gulfgal98 — 63
23) This gives loan sharks a bad name. by tom 47 — 63
24) The name calling and divisiveness is what by SallyCat — 63
25) Irish need not apply by jgnyc — 60
26) Satellite measurements of methane by FishOutofWater — 60
27) How can anyone pretend... by i understand — 60
28) People, I beg you by xxdr zombiexx — 59
29) Condolences to Stephen and his family. by mrsgoo — 58
30) What Is It With Old, White Republican Men? by snapples — 57
31) Greenwald has long been seen as a bad boy by Richard Lyon — 57
32) Oh, and just remember, it's only a "wiretap"... by bobswern — 57

June 14, 2013

Enjoy jotter's wonderful PictureQuilt™ below. Just click on the picture and it will magically take you to the comment that features that photo. Have fun, Kossacks!

Extended (Optional)

Your Email has been sent.