It Was Only a Movie

Update: The Frontline program

In the days leading up to the nationwide release of Zero Dark Thirty, the 2012 blockbuster movie about the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden, Sen. Dianne Feinstein was given an advanced screening. How did the then-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, whose investigators were working on their own story about the hunt for bin Laden and the role that torture may have played, react to Hollywood’s depiction?

“I walked out of Zero Dark Thirty, candidly,” Feinstein says. “We were having a showing and I got into it about 15, 20 minutes and left. I couldn’t handle it. Because it’s so false.”

False, in Feinstein’s estimation, because she says the film inaccurately portrays torture as a key tool in obtaining information about bin Laden’s whereabouts. Feinstein recounts her revulsion in a new documentary from Frontline, airing Tuesday night on PBS, about the CIA’s torture program and whether brutal interrogations of detainees helped surface intelligence that led to bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan, where U.S. special operations forces killed him in 2011.

  Daily Beast

I am no Feinstein fan, by a long shot. But good on her for this.  Even if she is just cashing in on the turning tide.

And of course, there's this:

Investigative journalist Michael Isikoff told Frontline that many more people will see Zero Dark Thirty than will read the countless newspaper articles about the CIA’s interrogation techniques. The movie, he thinks, will stand as the dominant narrative for what really happened in the search for bin Laden.

Whatever Happened to the SEAL Code of Silence?

Two former US Navy SEALs that took part in the raid at Osama bin Laden’s compound three years ago have told opposing versions of who ultimately killed the Al-Qaeda founder. The dispute over events is now materializing as both seek the spotlight.

  RT

I wondered if that would happen.

In [self-aggrandizing, glory hound Rob] O’Neill’s version of events, as told to Esquire in 2013, the “point man” in the Abbottabad, Pakistan raid tackled two women as “the shooter” [himself] advanced, killing Bin Laden in another room.

[...]

In ‘No Easy Day’, Mark Bissonnette, writing under the pseudonym ‘Mark Owen’, said the first person to enter bin Laden's room, the “point man,” was the SEAL to kill Bin Laden.

[...]

Bissonnette is scheduled to release next week a second book, titled ‘No Hero’, about his time as a SEAL.

So I wonder if that means he’s claiming the kill himself, or if “the shooter” was a third person. Most likely the former.

Bissonnette’s first book has already drawn ire from the Pentagon. He refused to offer the federal government a draft of ‘No Easy Day’ for legal review, and he is now under investigation for potentially disclosing classified information from the raid. He has said he was frustrated by who could and could not speak of the mission in the ensuing months.

“Everybody and their brother was talking about this,” Bissonnette said, according to NBC News. “How can you be holding it against me?”

Has he not been paying attention?

After an illustrious military career that included dozens of decorations, O’Neill, 38, has since left the Navy and works as a motivational speaker based on his 16 years in the service. He reportedly decided to come forward in public after frustration over the loss of veterans’ benefits, as he did not serve a full 20-year term as is the standard for certain allowances from the service.

Was he unaware of the rules?

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

That's himself.  Whatever happened to the SEAL Code of Selflessness?

Storm Troopers:  The Empire Strikes Again

Isn't This the Sort of Thing That Knocked the Legs Out from Under the Mob?

New generations who sought glory and notoriety? Who broke the codes and rules of the old dons? 

Former Navy Seal Robert O’Neill, the man who actually shot Bin Laden, has left the Seals and is cashing in on his former role by going on speaking engagements. Well-paid ones, no doubt. The Seals organization is not happy.

“We do not abide wilful or selfish disregard for our core values in return for public notoriety and financial gain, which only diminishes otherwise honorable service, courage and sacrifice.”

“All members exposed to classified information have a duty obligation to protect this information, regardless of what may be reflected in the media, accurately or otherwise,” they added.

“We will actively seek judicial consequence for members who willfully violate the law, and place our Teammates, our Families, and potential future operations at risk.”

As for risks of coming forward that do not include the Pentagon’s wrath, [O'Neill's father Tom] said he and his son are not worried about retribution.

“People are asking if we are worried that ISIS (militant jihadist group Islamic State) will come and get us because Rob is going public,” he told the Daily Mail.

“I say I'll paint a big target on my front door and say come and get us.”

  RT

His father also asked what people expected his hero son to do now, work as a Walmart greeter?  God forbid.  That's for the lesser soldiers who lost limbs doing something much less glamorous.

I think it’s safe to say, “Like father, like son.”

Of course, the younger O'Neill is just following in the footsteps of the glory-seeking administration that leaked information about the operation for a Hollywood movie.

...and hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:  November 8

Too Sensitive to Try

Pentagon investigators concluded that a senior Defense Department official who’s been mentioned as a possible candidate to be the next CIA director leaked restricted information to the makers of an acclaimed film about the hunt for Osama bin Laden, and referred the case to the Justice Department, according to knowledgeable U.S. officials.

[...]

The Justice Department received the case involving Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Michael Vickers in September, but so far it’s declined to launch a criminal prosecution, said two senior U.S. officials who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

[...]

Obama’s Justice Department has prosecuted a record number of U.S. officials for leaking secret information to the news media that critics contend shouldn’t have been classified or did no harm to national security. The most prominent case involves the ongoing prosecution of Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who’s accused of providing thousands of secret and confidential diplomatic and military documents to WikiLeaks, the online whistle-blowing organization.

[...]

The Justice Department received the case involving Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Michael Vickers in September, but so far it’s declined to launch a criminal prosecution, said two senior U.S. officials who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

  McClatchy

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

About That Propaganda Film

The conservative government watchdog Judicial Watch released more documents about the Obama administration’s cooperation with director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal, the Oscar-winning team behind “The Hurt Locker” who are currently working on a project, “Zero Dark Thirty,” about the successful mission to kill Osama bin Laden. You can read the documents here.

“These new documents provide more backing to the serious charge that the Obama administration played fast and loose with national security information to help Hollywood filmmakers,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “No wonder we’ve had to fight one year of stonewalling from the administration.  These new documents show there is no doubt that Obama White House was intensely interested in this film that was set to portray President Obama as ‘gutsy.’”

[...]

One June 2011 email from Harf to another CIA colleague, talking about various entertainment projects dealing with Osama bin Laden, stated: “I know we don’t pick favorites but it makes sense to get behind a winning horse…Mark and Kathryn’s movie is going to be the first and the biggest. It’s got the most money behind it, and two Oscar winners on board…”

[...]

One email, from Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Benjamin Rhodes to then-Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Doug Wilson, then-CIA Director of Public Affairs George Little, and Deputy White House Press Secretary Jaime Smith seems to suggest the White House was learning about the CIA’s and Pentagon’s cooperation with the filmmakers late in the game and wanted to supervise:

“…we are trying to have visibility into the UBL projects and this is likely the most high profile one. Would like to have whatever group is going around in here at the WH to get a sense of what they’re doing / what cooperation they’re seeking. Jamie will be POC” — point of contact."

  ABC

Uh-oh. Right at the GOP convention. Ammunition for the GOP. What does the White House have to say about this?

“Nothing in this press release is a surprise,” said White House National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor. “Having a conversation with a journalist, author or filmmaker about what he or she is working on is possibly the most basic, mundane function of a press office, and millions of Americans, including many in government, are understandably proud of our nation’s effort to kill bin Laden.”

Trust Me

If you knew what I know, you'd understand. I just can't tell you. But, believe me.

Newly available CIA records obtained by Judicial Watch, the conservative watchdog group, reveal that New York Times reporter Mark Mazzetti forwarded an advance copy of a Maureen Dowd column to a CIA spokesperson — a practice that is widely frowned upon within the industry.

Mazzetti's correspondence with CIA spokeswoman Marie Harf, on Aug. 5, 2011, pertained to the Kathryn Bigelow-Mark Boal film "Zero Dark Thirty," about the killing of Osama bin Laden, and a Times op-ed column by Dowd set to be published two days later that criticized the White House for having "outsourced the job of manning up the president’s image to Hollywood."

According to Judicial Watch, Mazzetti sent Harf an advance copy of Dowd's column, and wrote: “this didn’t come from me… and please delete after you read.  See, nothing to worry about!”

[...]

New York Times Managing Editor Dean Baquet called POLITICO to explain the situation, but provided little clarity, saying he could not go into detail on the issue because it was an intelligence matter.

”I know the circumstances, and if you knew everything that's going on, you'd know it's much ado about nothing," Baquet said. "I can't go into in detail. But I'm confident after talking to Mark that it's much ado about nothing."

"The optics aren't what they look like," he went on.
  Politico