"The whole gospel of Karl Marx can be summed up in a single sentence: Hate the man who is better off than you are. Never under any circumstances admit that his success may be due to his own efforts, to the productive contribution he has made to the whole community." — Henry Hazlitt
Obama, the master of class warfare has sunk to a new low in his bid for reelection. Now the anointed one wants to use the heroics of the military, specifically the Navy SEALs, to bolster his popularity. This man knows no shame. He has already used the deaths of the 25 SEALs position himself as a caring, patriotic commander-in-chief by taking the White House photographer to the site of the returning caskets of the SEALs killed in Afghanistan when the Defense Department specifically prohibited, at the requests of the families, that no photos be taken. But, Obama, always the freebooter, could not let this opportunity go to waste. He had his photo taken in semi silhouette with strong backlighting saluting the out of frame caskets. How emotional. This was our commander-in chief paying tribute to the fallen SEALs.
But this won’t be enough next October. This photo will be forgotten by then so Obama needs a bigger splash to portray his leadership. What he really wants is a full length feature film telling the story of how the SEALs, under Obama’s brilliant and courageous leadership, brought down Osama bin Laden. To this effect the Obama administration has given Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal carte blanch to make a film about the take down of bin Laden. The film is scheduled to be released in October of 2012 — how coincidental!
Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal's movie about the Black Ops hunt for Osama Bin Laden is set for release next year. Columbia Pictures, which acquired the domestic distribution rights to the film earlier this week, says the untitled movie will come out at the end of 2012.
Bigelow and Boal each won a pair of Oscars for producing, directing and writing last year's best picture, "The Hurt Locker."
New York Rep. Peter King is right to be concerned when he saw a drip, drip of sensitive operational details emerging since the May 1 killing of Osama bin Laden. Magazines and newspapers had information that, as head of the House Committee on Homeland Security, he knew was supposed to remain secret.
The published details he's worried about include: the name of the courier who was followed to the compound in Pakistan, that retired Pakistani military officers were recruited by the CIA to man an observation post near the compound, where the FBI got a DNA sample from a bin Laden family member, the capabilities of our satellites, the base the helicopters used in Afghanistan and how they evaded Pakistani radar, the names, bases and training sites used by units on the mission, the number of SEALs involved, the weapons and equipment they carried, which Al Qaeda plots we learned of from data seized in the compound, which may tell Al Qaeda which plots we do not know about.
King notes that at least five Pakistanis were arrested after the reports surfaced.
Fox News reported on August 10, 2011:
“The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee sought an investigation Wednesday into the Obama administration's cooperation with award-winning filmmakers working on a movie about the hunt for Osama bin Laden.
Rep. Peter King, (R-N.Y.), said too much information already has leaked out about the Navy SEALs raid that killed bin Laden in Pakistan in May, and Pentagon officials have cautioned against discussing details of the mission.
"Nobody in the intelligence world or the military is going to give out that kind of information unless they're told to from above," he told me. He called the leaks "an inside job" and added that the failure of the administration to probe the sources "shows they are involved."
King asked the inspectors general of the CIA and Defense Department to determine what consultations occurred in the Obama administration about providing Hollywood with access to covert military operators and clandestine CIA officers.
The picture will be directed by Kathryn Bigelow and the screenwriter will be Mark Boal, 2009 Academy Award winners for "The Hurt Locker."
The White House ridiculed King's request, saying the moviemakers will not receive any sensitive information.
Press secretary Jay Carney told reporters, "When people, including you in this room, are working on articles, books, documentaries or movies that involve the president, ask to speak to administration officials, we do our best to accommodate them to make sure that facts are correct. That is hardly a novel approach to the media.
"We do not discuss classified information. And I would hope that as we face the continued threat from terrorism, the House Committee on Homeland Security would have more important topics to discuss than a movie."
He said information provided about the raid was focused on President Barack Obama's role and it's the same information given to anybody writing about the topic.
King said his staff has spoken to CIA officials who were upset about any cooperation with the movie-makers. Among the things he asked the inspectors general to investigate were:
Any consultations within the administration on the advisability of providing Hollywood executives with access to covert military operators and clandestine CIA officers to discuss the raid.
Whether a copy of the film would be submitted to the military and CIA for pre-publication review to determine whether special operations tactics, techniques and procedures, or intelligence sources and methods, would be revealed.
Whether filmmakers attended a meeting with special operations personnel and CIA officers, and whether any such attendance was balanced against the duty to maintain cover for these operatives.”
On November 20, 2009, President Obama flew to Osan Air Base in South Korea to speak to American troops. As many of the troops took pictures, Obama remarked, "You guys make a pretty good photo op."
But this was already a pattern for Obama.
When he made a surprise visit to Iraq several months earlier in April 2009, he ensured that everyone who had voted for him was placed up front and given a camera. The event had to be staged just so.
Last week, Obama continued that pattern by first telling the press and families of the 30 U.S. Special Operations troops who died in a Chinook transport helicopter trying to rescue their comrades that, when he visited Dover to be present as their caskets come home, he would not allow the press in and then by reversing himself without telling the families so that the press could take a picture of him in a solemn salute "honoring" the troops. A picture that was immediately distributed nationwide. The opportunity for the opportunist was just too delicious to turn down.
Obama's biggest photo op, of course, was the Bin Laden killing, when we were suddenly treated to "war room" photos and inside scoops about his "gutsy call." (The fact that no nincompoop, even Himself, would have been stupid enough to turn down this prospect didn't enter at all into the calculation about Obama's abdominal content quality.) In fact, Obama's "gutsy call" was a gutless call, especially considering he delayed the mission so he could think about whether to pursue it, then lied about the orders he gave afterward (it was Leon Panetta who issued the final orders while Obama hid under the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office). Anyone surprised? Didn't think so.
The observation from Gateway Pundit was:
"Seems like a very cautious, feckless, indecisive individual delaying and delaying on critical decisions and then attempting to sound heroic when he finally does what he's being paid to do. That's our Obama."
The only thing that wasn't screwed up about the mission was the mission itself, which was planned and operated not at all by Obama, but by our nation's finest. Of course, that didn't stop Obama from claiming all sorts of credit in his speech, where he reminded Americans ad nauseum that he had personally ordered the mission. Congratulations, sir. But may I remind you that's your damn job.
Photo ops are one thing. Exploiting the deaths of our valiant US troops for personal, political gain is quite another.
There is more. The press reported widely last week about the concern of many that the Obama Administration would give access to classified information regarding the Navy SEALs to famed director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal, who stood behind the anti-military Iraq war film The Hurt Locker. How could they not? Without such access, there could be no even-near-true depiction of that operation. The film would be just another fictional action-adventure flick like Charlie Sheen’s “Navy Seals”. Not surprisingly, the resulting movie, Killing Bin Laden, is scheduled just in time for the November 2012 elections — it’s scheduled to hit theaters in mid-October.
The shocking part of this story isn't Hollywood's support for Obama. (This was already well documented in Ben Shapiro's scorcher of a book, "Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How The Left Took Over Your TV" where Mr. Shapiro was able to seduce Hollywood directors, actors and producers to admit that there is indeed left-wing bias in what they create.) Hollywood otherwise had already made clear that they love Obama for a variety of reasons, including the fact that he attempts to kick cash back to them on a regular basis (as written about in Primetime Propaganda, an interview with Ben Shapiro). It's also no surprise that they're suddenly turning into pro-military advocates, just in time for the presidential election. There hasn't been a pro-war movie out of Hollywood this decade. Now, they're exploiting the Bin Laden killing in the same way the Obama Administration exploited the deaths of our fallen heroes at the ceremony bringing their remains home: as a cheap promotion for Obama's personal gain.
The most disgusting part of this story is the Obama Administration itself. How can our Commander-in-Chief, of all people, betray our military in this stomach-churning way? All the other photo ops were just that: photo ops. No one was hurt, except the image of the military, which was now being exploited for partisan political gain. No one was put in danger.
Now, our me-first — troops-last president has crossed the line. He's now using dead bodies of true American heroes to help him win his own election, and he's also potentially putting our other active-duty troops in danger because of the classified content sure to be released to the public with "Killing Bin Laden." After all, this is the same untrustworthy director from whom the Department of Defense severed ties during the filming of her other military movie (Hurt Locker) because she violated agreements with them when as reported in the Wall Street Journal:
“The military had mixed feelings about Ms. Bigelow’s Oscar-winning film “The Hurt Locker,” which told the story of Army units that defuse roadside bombs. Then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates praised the movie as one of the most accurate in showing the realities of war in Iraq. But the Pentagon had pulled support for the movie during filming, claiming the filmmakers had not shared the entire script with them, and filmed some incidents in secret.”
But the need among liberals to prop up Obama is dire. As New York Times Columnist Maureen Dowd (a fan of Obama's) reported:
“The White House is also counting on the Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal big-screen version of the killing of Bin Laden to counter Obama's growing reputation as ineffectual. The Sony film by the Oscar-winning pair who made "The Hurt Locker" will no doubt reflect the president's cool, gutsy decision against shaky odds. Just as Obamaland was hoping, the movie is scheduled to open on Oct. 12, 2012 - perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost to a campaign that has grown tougher.
The moviemakers are getting top-level access to the most classified mission in history from an administration that has tried to throw more people in jail for leaking classified information than the Bush administration.
It was clear that the White House had outsourced the job of manning up the president's image to Hollywood when Boal got welcomed to the upper echelons of the White House and the Pentagon and showed up recently - to the surprise of some military officers - at a C.I.A. ceremony celebrating the hero Seals [sic].”
Does it get any more revolting than this? I wonder how the fallen heroes' families and children feel about it? Did the Commander-in-Chief care enough about their unspeakable tragedies and unimaginable sacrifice to ask them? I'd say no, because opportunists take every opportunity to advance themselves but certainly not to empathize with anyone else. To hell with everyone else, even those who fought and died for Obama's ability to advance as far as he has in our country. Screw them.
Mr. Obama, to quote one of the Republican candidates for president, "We need leadership, not showmanship" and you have flunked the test.
No surer sign of Obama's pathologically sick egocentrism can be found than this. He won't release pictures of Bin Laden's body to the world, but he'll presumably show them to film producers who want to see him re-elected. He won't allow the American public to get the straight story on the Bin Laden mission, but he'll allow two of his favorite Hollywood friends to do so. And maybe, if we're lucky, he'll wait until just before the election to tell all of us the full story, the same way he waited three years to release his birth certificate, just to manipulate a frustrated and sincere citizenry for his own amusement.
American citizens have a moral obligation to boycott both the film and Obama's "welcome home" photo, stealthily shot beyond the knowledge and permission of our grieving troops' families. At the very least, we need to make one point clear to Hollywood and to Obama: the exploitative film's release must be pushed off until after the election.
If it truly is as "apolitical" as Obama and his allies claim, then they shouldn't have any problem with the film's more seemly — and decent — release date.
There is a photo of Mr. Obama and his lapdogs, with Obama's feet carelessly slung on top of a desk. The desk that is defiled, not only by his supercilious attitude but by his dirty shoes, is none other than The Resolute Desk, built from the timbers of the HMS Resolute. She was a ship of the British Royal Navy that was trapped and then abandoned, but later rescued by an American Whaler and returned to Queen Victoria. The grateful Queen made a gift of the desk to President Rutherford B. Hayes, and it is considered a national treasure and an icon of the presidency. Is it any wonder that the same president who would tramp on such a national treasure, as if it were a pesky bug, would also step on the valiant national treasures who died for his right to sit there?
Obama will never understand that those things worth dying for are what make our lives so rich. Rather, he is an impoverished and hollow man, not deserving of the office of President of the United States.