Taxi to the Dark Side
4/4
Narrated by Alex Gibney
Rated R for Disturbing Images, and Content Involving Torture and Graphic Nudity
"Taxi to the Dark Side" is a documentary, yes, but it is far more disturbing and terrifying than most horror movies. Why? Because it's real.
Alex Gibney, who directed the documentary "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," has used his no-nonsense and no-frills style to examine the torture of detainees by the US government post-9/11. Little by little, he examines every facet of what happened and why.
Without a doubt, the horrors that occurred at Abu Gharib and Bagram were among the most shameful events in the history of our nation. Gibney shows us images, and occasionally videos, of the treatment that these people endured. Insane amounts of sleep deprivation (to the point of inducing psychosis), forced nudity, manipulating the detainee's fears, sensory deprivation (which induced psychosis), forcing them to stand for more than 24 hours. And those are the mild bits. Borderline sexual assault, brutal beatings, forced masturbation, and murder were also used.
Sure, there were a few bad apples like Lyndie England and Charles Granier, and Gibney doesn't let them escape unscathed. But as he uncovers, they were following ambiguous orders. Intentionally ambiguous orders that came straight from the top.
Shortly after 9/11, Dick Cheney wanted results in any way that he could get them, and was determined to venture into "the dark side" (his words) to get them. So he, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and legal advisor John Yoo intentionally created an culture of ambiguity to allow this to happen. For example, they created a series of techniques that were to be used on detainees, but did not tell the soldiers how to implement them. With the pressure of getting results and the stress of being in a war zone, this proved to be an explosive situation.
There is a lot of interview material from a variety of people. Lawyers for the detainees were horrified that these people were denied their most basic rights (including habeas corpus), military officials were outraged at the lack of direction and the fact that their demands for an end to the torture were ignored, and some of the soldiers who took part in what happened explain what they did and why (all of them show a lot of remorse).
Gibney narrates the film, but like in the best documentaries, he does not editorialize or sensationalize. He only explains the minimal background necessary. He lets the information, and his interviewees, to speak for themselves. His methodology is systematic, and he breaks it down into sizable chunks.
The film is apolitical. To be sure, the Bush administration is not shown in a positive light. George W. Bush is let off surprisingly easy; he's shown to be an oblivious buffoon who's only purpose is to be a poster boy. Dick Cheney is portrayed as a Machiavellian tyrant and Donald Rumsfeld as his attack dog. John Yoo is shown to be a sleazebag who advises them how to get around the Geneva Convention. But he lets them speak for themselves. Yoo is interviewed on camera, as are military personnel who support, or at least justify, the policies.
What's really disturbing is that the Bush administration not only knew what was going on, they created a way for it to occur. They also knew that the best way to get information is not by torture, but by talking to the detainees. In a deleted scene, Alex Gibney's late father explains that during World War II, they had the greatest success by talking, and even befriending, the Japanese POWs. It took more time, but they got great intel. And it was correct, unlike the torture of one terrorist who was allegedly due to be on United 93, who's intel led to the invasion of Iraq and a huge embarrassment for Colin Powell (Powell said it was the worst day of his life). They also found a way to protect themselves while leaving the soldiers, who were given almost no training and put in an environment where they were cutoff from normal society and demanded results from people they didn't know or understood. One of the interviewees said it was impossible to get information from someone if they didn't know what the evidence against them was (which was almost always the case...the only thing they knew was that the detainees were terrorists). Studies have shown that almost none of the people detained were terrorists, and those who wouldn't give information were considered troublemakers, and were sent to Guantanamo Bay for more extreme torture.
Gibney also destroys the so-called "time bomb" scenario. While that may make for good drama, he and his interviewees say (an clip of Jack Bauer torturing someone in this instance is shown), but it has never happened. And as one man points out, if a terrorist has gone that far, then he's probably so intent on succeeding that he's willing to die to carry it out.
I think Gibney's father said it best when he said that he and his fellow soldiers felt like the good guys because they were better than the enemy. They didn't sink that low, and the allowed the detainees their basic civil rights. We should hold ourselves to the same standards, or else we become the very thing we are fighting against.
Narrated by Alex Gibney
Rated R for Disturbing Images, and Content Involving Torture and Graphic Nudity
"Taxi to the Dark Side" is a documentary, yes, but it is far more disturbing and terrifying than most horror movies. Why? Because it's real.
Alex Gibney, who directed the documentary "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," has used his no-nonsense and no-frills style to examine the torture of detainees by the US government post-9/11. Little by little, he examines every facet of what happened and why.
Without a doubt, the horrors that occurred at Abu Gharib and Bagram were among the most shameful events in the history of our nation. Gibney shows us images, and occasionally videos, of the treatment that these people endured. Insane amounts of sleep deprivation (to the point of inducing psychosis), forced nudity, manipulating the detainee's fears, sensory deprivation (which induced psychosis), forcing them to stand for more than 24 hours. And those are the mild bits. Borderline sexual assault, brutal beatings, forced masturbation, and murder were also used.
Sure, there were a few bad apples like Lyndie England and Charles Granier, and Gibney doesn't let them escape unscathed. But as he uncovers, they were following ambiguous orders. Intentionally ambiguous orders that came straight from the top.
Shortly after 9/11, Dick Cheney wanted results in any way that he could get them, and was determined to venture into "the dark side" (his words) to get them. So he, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and legal advisor John Yoo intentionally created an culture of ambiguity to allow this to happen. For example, they created a series of techniques that were to be used on detainees, but did not tell the soldiers how to implement them. With the pressure of getting results and the stress of being in a war zone, this proved to be an explosive situation.
There is a lot of interview material from a variety of people. Lawyers for the detainees were horrified that these people were denied their most basic rights (including habeas corpus), military officials were outraged at the lack of direction and the fact that their demands for an end to the torture were ignored, and some of the soldiers who took part in what happened explain what they did and why (all of them show a lot of remorse).
Gibney narrates the film, but like in the best documentaries, he does not editorialize or sensationalize. He only explains the minimal background necessary. He lets the information, and his interviewees, to speak for themselves. His methodology is systematic, and he breaks it down into sizable chunks.
The film is apolitical. To be sure, the Bush administration is not shown in a positive light. George W. Bush is let off surprisingly easy; he's shown to be an oblivious buffoon who's only purpose is to be a poster boy. Dick Cheney is portrayed as a Machiavellian tyrant and Donald Rumsfeld as his attack dog. John Yoo is shown to be a sleazebag who advises them how to get around the Geneva Convention. But he lets them speak for themselves. Yoo is interviewed on camera, as are military personnel who support, or at least justify, the policies.
What's really disturbing is that the Bush administration not only knew what was going on, they created a way for it to occur. They also knew that the best way to get information is not by torture, but by talking to the detainees. In a deleted scene, Alex Gibney's late father explains that during World War II, they had the greatest success by talking, and even befriending, the Japanese POWs. It took more time, but they got great intel. And it was correct, unlike the torture of one terrorist who was allegedly due to be on United 93, who's intel led to the invasion of Iraq and a huge embarrassment for Colin Powell (Powell said it was the worst day of his life). They also found a way to protect themselves while leaving the soldiers, who were given almost no training and put in an environment where they were cutoff from normal society and demanded results from people they didn't know or understood. One of the interviewees said it was impossible to get information from someone if they didn't know what the evidence against them was (which was almost always the case...the only thing they knew was that the detainees were terrorists). Studies have shown that almost none of the people detained were terrorists, and those who wouldn't give information were considered troublemakers, and were sent to Guantanamo Bay for more extreme torture.
Gibney also destroys the so-called "time bomb" scenario. While that may make for good drama, he and his interviewees say (an clip of Jack Bauer torturing someone in this instance is shown), but it has never happened. And as one man points out, if a terrorist has gone that far, then he's probably so intent on succeeding that he's willing to die to carry it out.
I think Gibney's father said it best when he said that he and his fellow soldiers felt like the good guys because they were better than the enemy. They didn't sink that low, and the allowed the detainees their basic civil rights. We should hold ourselves to the same standards, or else we become the very thing we are fighting against.
Comments
Post a Comment