It really is not possible to correctly characterize something as propaganda unless you have actually experienced it. If it is a book/article, you must read it and then compare it to the available facts. You must actually make some effort to determine if the available facts match those presented in the book/article and if the book/article has made an effort to present something reasonably even-handed or, at the very least, is supported by some sort of logic.

It is quite laughable to call a movie propaganda when one has not seen it. If the movie is reviewed, one cannot correctly call the review propaganda unless one verifies that it correctly presents the movie. To do that, you have to view the movie.

Some propaganda is a lie. Some lies are just lies. Not all propaganda presents lies. Propaganda can simply be an organized presentation of ideas slanted to the purpose of causing a certain reaction in the reader/viewer/listener. Often a knee-jerk or emotional reaction is desired.

Just as there is a little larceny in all of us, there is a little propaganda in many forms of communication. It is too tempting for writers, speakers, directors, and politicians, and so on not to use it. This is not all bad. Sometimes it is quite exciting and powerful. Sometimes it urges us to make changes that we actually need to make.

It is only when we leave our brains on the threshold and enter the house of understanding with only our emotions as guide that we tend to fall victim to propaganda.

_____________________________________________________________

It is very dangerous to have torture codified into our laws. People must torture at their own peril and face legal consequences for their missteps if they get caught or if the court of public opinion is not properly grateful for the information they extract. The reason we must keep it that way is not so that the terrorist who has planted a yet-to-be-detonated bomb goes unquestioned, but rather so that we don't have a bunch of idiots running amok placing bags over the heads of naked people and terrifying them with dog attacks; so that we don't have the Vice President of the United States of America singing the praises of waterboarding on a Sunday morning talk show; so that there is some reasonable due process for all prisoners; however we may wish to characterized their detention.

It would be nice if internationally we could salvage some vestige of dignity and some shred of decency, wouldn't it? Otherwise, if we don't, when we most need it who will have our back?

Army Col. Stuart Herrington, a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon in 2003 -- long before Abu Ghraib -- to assess interrogations in Iraq. Aside from its immorality and its illegality, says Herrington, torture is simply "not a good way to get information." In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no "stress methods" at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the "batting average" might be lower: "perhaps six out of ten." And if you beat up the remaining four? "They'll just tell you anything to get you to stop."

A good question for the Salon crowd to consider is how can any religion who believes its god-given duty is to dominate humankind ever be sated?

-- Victoria L.

Actually, that would be an even better question for the Pope.

Mike Pace;

If you want to call truth telling and self awareness "America-bashing," that's your right.

American liberties are hardly UNPARALLELED ( caps yours. )

If you're frightened because you think there are Islamists from the other side of the world who are driven to come here and start cutting heads off us all, you should see a psychiatrist. You're crazy.

If you think Jihadist Islamists are conservative in the usual sense, you're pretty silly. They're radical extremists, not conservatives.

Bush isn't conservative in any good sense of the word either. He's a radical extremist too. But you knew that, right?

--------------------------------------------------------------

"Tiberius" ( not the real Tiberius, of course ):

I called it propoganda and that's what it is. Why are you so childish that you can't admit that?

No problem. I admit it. You called the article propaganda.

Propaganda is factually false, the article is factually correct, ergo your proclamation is bull.

AND you're no Tiberius either.

Nyah nyah nyah....

Kind of a meandering review that seems to wallow in self-absorbtion on locale rather than content of the film. Was it that distracting?

" ... ships him to San Francisco to get him off the bottle. Not exactly the city I would choose for that purpose, but never mind."

"... (Virtually the whole film was shot in Winnipeg, Manitoba, which does not resemble either Buffalo or San Francisco.) I'd need a Buffalonian to judge the authenticity of Kingsley's accent here, ..."

I haven't a clue what the following implies. Again, was this a style or motif you were distracted away from the story?

"... pretty much fake in what I assume to be deliberate and self-aware fashion."

Maybe a little more backstory about the reason why Frank is shipped off, what gang he works for, what the dynamic of the warring factions in Buffalo is about. But, no, we get the following.

"I guess when your older boyfriend is a hit man, you come away from the relationship with some real-world skills.

Eh, some times you got it, some times not. At least, we agreed this is a good flick.

All the best.

Bush and crew will never be prosecuted. They have too much power and are connected to people with too much money. These are the people whose interests they really serve. I predict the scandal of war profiteering will be alive long after these immoral opportunists have left office with their spoils, only to be replaced by other immoral opportunists.

It is the rest of us who pay with blood and treasure.