Here‘s what I’m like in the morning: unshaven, precaffeinated and pissed off at The New York Times. This time I was set off by Alessandra Stanley’s review of Oliver Stone’s documentary series “Oliver Stone’s Untold History of the United States.” I decided to video my take on Alessandra’s takedown of Oliver. Let me know what you think. I’ll do more if people like this.
VIDEO: Deconstruction of Alessandra Stanley’s Review of Oliver Stone
Comments are closed.
15 Comments.
Comrade Rall is too young to remember, but I’m not. Those who heard the ’60 debate and those who just read the transcripts, all said that Nixon won.
The voters who watched (the majority) said they could not vote for, or trust, anyone with 5 o’clock shadow.
Perhaps Mr Rall should bear this in mind before filming himself with 5 o’clock shadow???
***
The New York Times is the official centre-left mainstream newspaper. The fact that their current ‘centre left’ is to the right of Eisenhower (and probably Reagan) is no longer considered relevant:: based on current US politics, they are centre-left.
And they exist to justify everything the US does.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was NEVER tortured (it is illegal, under US law, to use that word to describe actions authorized by the US president). And his confessions solved the mystery of 9/11, the grassy knoll, the Maine in Havana Harbour, the Whitechapel Murders and mutilations, and the heinous arson at a Roman Imperial concert.
The New York Times is currently running a philosophy column about why every single US war was completely just, and was conducted in a morally pristine manner.
Such is the responsibility of the official newspaper of record.
***
But what to do about this situation?
I have no idea.
@michaelwme, Actually, that’s more like 9 am-the-next-day shadow.
Loved it, TR.
Enjoyed. Not only do I think you should do more of these, but you should always do them as “Pre-Coffee” man.
@gavbrown01: How come pre-coffee is best?
Ted,
I swear, I’ll watch anything that takes Alessandra “Error” Stanley to task, but my schedule won’t permit me to do it right now. However …
… unless the video becomes a LOT racier than the still shot suggests, you might want to crop out that thing that looks like a three-foot dildo on the left side of the screen.
@alex_the_tired: It’s important to let people know where I get my ideas.
I’m glad you’ve seen “Come And See”.
I deal with a Ukrainian at work who was quite impressed that I knew of this film.
@Ted Rall: the slightly disheveled look makes it different from other commentators and adds an edge of amusement to the idea. “Pre-coffee” could be a good marketing idea too
Loved it!
Ted,
I liked the video commentary, even though my computer started to stutter the video toward the end (it always does that; it’s four years old and the punch-card feeder needs replacing). Three points:
1. Alessandra Stanley. I could try to soften this, but what would be the point (and I, too, am still on the wrong side of my first cup of coffee this morning): Ted, you can do better — a lot better — than attacking Alessandra Stanley for writing something stupid. Where’s the challenge?
2. Stanley makes big mistakes in her copy and does not get fired. It is a tiny example of what has gone wrong at the Times. Another example is the corrections page, a continuous litany of trivial mistakes. Yes, Times, you wrote “Opal” when you meant “Opel” in your piece on Brazil that mentioned the car brand exactly once. Big deal. Every piece you’ve written that mentions an unemployment stat requires correction/clarification as to the difference between the U-2 and the U-6. When you do it, I’ll be the first in line to bring rock salt down to the secondary roads in Hell.
Ted, as you point out a couple times, the editors at the Times should have caught some of those errors. They didn’t. I can think of two reasons. First, the editors are scared/tired: why piss off one of the “celebrity” reporters? So you can lose the job that you’re probably going to be laid off from any month now? Second, some of the editors no longer have the requisite experience/confidence to be editors because the industry has shrunk. The majority of the mentors got eliminated in the budget crunch. The institutional memory got a lobotomy.
3. Oliver Stone. How many errors of fact did JFK have in it? Google “errors in JFK.” The film is taken by a remarkably alarming segment of the population, to be a documentary, a pre-Internet form of Pierre Salinger Syndrome. But if you’re going to rake Stanley over the coals (no argument there), Stone’s reputation must also be assessed more fully.
From the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey:
“We underestimated the ability of our air attack on Japan’s home islands, coupled as it was with blockade and previous military defeats, to achieve unconditional surrender without invasion. By July 1945, the weight of our air attack had as yet reached only a fraction of its planned proportion, Japan’s industrial potential had been fatally reduced, her civilian population had lost its confidence in victory and was approaching the limit of its endurance, and her leaders, convinced of the inevitability of defeat, were preparing to accept surrender. The only remaining problem was the timing and terms of that surrender.”
So here’s how the debate goes. Either there was no purpose to drop the nukes, or the purpose was to secure Japan from the advance of Russia.
What needs to be crammed down the unwilling throats of the pro-nuke revisionists is the fact that Japan was already completely hampered and confined and blokaded. There was no productive or war making capacity to speak of. Surender was imminent.
The two dominant schools of history right now are those of us who are willing to look at the documents generated by our own government, and those who would still like to cling to the propaganda. I mean, I don’t see what there is to debate.
Excellent commentary. I would love to see more. Heck, why not a Ted Rall show?
@aaronwilliams135, Thanks. Of course I’d love to do one…the trick is finding someone willing to air it.
I read the book and it is a lot more detailed that the series with references galore.