Revisionist History at work...Black Hawk Down

[Jade Falcon]

http://www.peoplesvideo.org/bhd_js.htm

Somali people still defiant

'BLACK HAWK DOWN': PENTAGON WAR PROPAGANDA

By Johnnie Stevens

Hollywood produces bad movies all the time. But "Black Hawk Down" is more than bad. It is a conspiracy by the Pentagon and Hollywood to distort history and demonize the Somali people, right when the administration is considering another invasion of that battered and impoverished African country.

The Pentagon commended director Ridley Scott for rushing the film's release after 9/11. The Motion Picture Association of America arranged a private screening for senior White House advisors. Vice President Dick Cheney attended. So did Contragate criminal Col. Oliver North, as well as a group of U.S. Army Rangers.

"Black Hawk Down" pretends to tell the story of what happened on Oct. 3, 1993, when tens of thousands of Somali people, most of them civilians, fought off an attack by U.S. Rangers and Delta Force commandos in the center of the capital city, Mogadishu.

The heavily armed U.S. troops had come in Humvees and Black Hawk helicopters to try and kidnap Mohamed Farrah Aidid and two of his lieutenants. They intended to take them to a ship anchored off the coast. Aidid was the Somali leader most resistant to U.S. efforts to establish military and economic domination in the area, under the pretext of providing food aid.

The arrogant and racist presence of 28,000 U.S. troops was hated by the Somali people. Sent there originally by George Bush Sr. in December 1992, they had opened machine gun fire on unarmed protesters and flown their helicopters so low over the city that the downdraft pulled the tin roofs off people's houses.

When one of the helicopters sent to capture Aidid crashed near a crowded market and reinforcements were sent in with guns blazing, the Somali people responded in a massive uprising against them.

'SHOOTING AT ANYONE AND ANYTHING'

The 16-hour battle ended in hundreds of Somali deaths-- helicopter gunships fired indiscriminately on the people in the streets and market. Mark Bowden, in his book on which this film claims to be based, wrote: "The Task Force Ranger commander, Maj. Gen. William F. Garrison, testifying before the Senate, said that if his men had put any more ammunition into the city 'we would have sunk it.' Most soldiers interviewed said that through most of the fight they fired on crowds and eventually at anyone and anything they saw."

U.S. forces with their sophisticated weapons have wreaked death and destruction on many oppressed peoples--most recently in Afghanistan. What made this battle different was that it ended in the deaths of 18 elite U.S. Army Rangers, the Pentagon's biggest battle loss since the Vietnam War. This led to a hasty U.S. withdrawal from the country.

The Somalis were jubilant at having defeated these flying death machines. "Black Hawk Down" was really a Somali people's victory over what had been considered the invincible Rangers and Delta Force.

But the film, in the words of New York Times critic Elvis Mitchell, "converts the Somalis into a pack of snarling dark- skinned beasts ... it reeks of glumly staged racism." (Dec. 28, 2001)

That's what the Pentagon wants U.S. audiences to get out of the film. Racism and fear of Third World peoples are being whipped up here as the Bush administration moves to spread its war of domination in Afghanistan to other Third World countries.

But the reaction the film is getting elsewhere in the world is far different.

SOMALIS STILL DEFIANT

CNN reported on Jan. 22 that hundreds of Somalis crowded into an outdoor playground just a mile from the battle site to watch one of the first copies of "Black Hawk Down" to reach their country. "Audience members seemed to take delight in scenes of U.S. defeat. Each time an American chopper went down in the film, the audience cheered. Every time an American serviceman was killed, the audience cheered some more."

Afterward, some of the Somalis criticized the accuracy of the film. But they were proud of the resistance it showed. "As you can see, Somalis are brave fighters," one man said. "If the Americans come back to fight us, we shall defeat them again."

This film was released soon after the Bush administration in November shut down the overseas branches of the Somali-owned Al-Barakaat banking and telecommunications firm, which Somalis living abroad had used to send money home. It was a cruel blow aimed at destroying the Somali economy and bringing the people to their knees in the face of starvation. But two months later, the Somali people have refused to be broken--as their reaction to the film showed.

Several groups in the U.S. are calling for a boycott of this film and see it as evidence of the Pentagon's continuing desire to reinvade Somalia, under the pretext this time of fighting "terrorism."

Larry Holmes of the International Action Center points out that the film "is being linked to new war moves against Somalia, a poor country believed to have unexplored oil reserves."

Activists are particularly angry at the decision to hold the film's Washington, D.C., premiere on Jan. 15--the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. "Dr. King was an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam War. How dare they hold a gala showing of this racist film on the 73rd anniversary of his birth," said Sarah Sloan, a youth organizer for the IAC. The group plans to protest the film and leaflet filmgoers with educational material on what really happened in 1993.

The Somali Justice Advocacy Center in Minneapolis has also called for a boycott of the film. Its executive director, Omar Jamal, was visited by the FBI after the group criticized U.S. policy on Somalia and the shutting down of money transfer facilities here.

I wonder if these people watch the same film that I and many others did.

[Mayabird]

Wow...three sentences and they already claim a Hollywood/Pentagon conspiracy.

What's this talk about a planned invasion of Somalia and possible oil reserves? I haven't heard a damn thing about either.

[AdmiralKanos]

Hollywood produces bad movies all the time. But "Black Hawk Down" is more than bad. It is a conspiracy by the Pentagon and Hollywood to distort history and demonize the Somali people, right when the administration is considering another invasion of that battered and impoverished African country.

Actually, the movie doesn't demonize anyone; the enemy is just that: the enemy. In combat, he wants to kill you, and you have to kill him first. The film does not discuss the politics or background except in passing; it is about the soldiers.

The arrogant and racist presence of 28,000 U.S. troops was hated by the Somali people.

How was their presence intrinsically racist? Were the Somali people not starving to death?

Sent there originally by George Bush Sr. in December 1992, they had opened machine gun fire on unarmed protesters and flown their helicopters so low over the city that the downdraft pulled the tin roofs off people's houses.

Yes, that's so much worse than the effects of the Somalis' own civil war, and I'm sure no one in those crowds was ever armed.

When one of the helicopters sent to capture Aidid crashed near a crowded market and reinforcements were sent in with guns blazing, the Somali people responded in a massive uprising against them.

'SHOOTING AT ANYONE AND ANYTHING'

The 16-hour battle ended in hundreds of Somali deaths-- helicopter gunships fired indiscriminately on the people in the streets and market. Mark Bowden, in his book on which this film claims to be based, wrote: "The Task Force Ranger commander, Maj. Gen. William F. Garrison, testifying before the Senate, said that if his men had put any more ammunition into the city 'we would have sunk it.' Most soldiers interviewed said that through most of the fight they fired on crowds and eventually at anyone and anything they saw."

This part is fucking hilarious. First it says that the people engaged in a "massive uprising", then it says they were peaceful and the Rangers shot at them for no reason. Did the author even try to look for inconsistencies like this before submitting this steaming pile of bullshit?

The Rangers shot at pretty much anything that moved as the battle went on because anyone who approached their position could be reasonably assumed to be hostile. And let's be fair; what lunatic would approach an armed group of US soldiers during a pitched firefight if he was not hostile? What's the motive? Flower delivery?

U.S. forces with their sophisticated weapons have wreaked death and destruction on many oppressed peoples--most recently in Afghanistan. What made this battle different was that it ended in the deaths of 18 elite U.S. Army Rangers, the Pentagon's biggest battle loss since the Vietnam War. This led to a hasty U.S. withdrawal from the country.

The Somalis were jubilant at having defeated these flying death machines. "Black Hawk Down" was really a Somali people's victory over what had been considered the invincible Rangers and Delta Force.

500 casualties vs 18 casualties and a fully achieved mission objective is not a "victory" in any military sense. Their only victory was political.

But the film, in the words of New York Times critic Elvis Mitchell, "converts the Somalis into a pack of snarling dark- skinned beasts ... it reeks of glumly staged racism." (Dec. 28, 2001)

Elvis says so, therefore it's true?

That's what the Pentagon wants U.S. audiences to get out of the film. Racism and fear of Third World peoples are being whipped up here as the Bush administration moves to spread its war of domination in Afghanistan to other Third World countries.

Funny, I watched the film and took no such conclusions away from it, nor was I brainwashed to be a pro-US pro-Bush puppet, as I'm sure many people here can attest.

But the reaction the film is getting elsewhere in the world is far different.

SOMALIS STILL DEFIANT

CNN reported on Jan. 22 that hundreds of Somalis crowded into an outdoor playground just a mile from the battle site to watch one of the first copies of "Black Hawk Down" to reach their country. "Audience members seemed to take delight in scenes of U.S. defeat. Each time an American chopper went down in the film, the audience cheered. Every time an American serviceman was killed, the audience cheered some more."

Wow, what a surprise. I guess that proves the film is totally false

Afterward, some of the Somalis criticized the accuracy of the film. But they were proud of the resistance it showed. "As you can see, Somalis are brave fighters," one man said. "If the Americans come back to fight us, we shall defeat them again."

Chest-beating rhetoric does not prove a whole lot.

This film was released soon after the Bush administration in November shut down the overseas branches of the Somali-owned Al-Barakaat banking and telecommunications firm, which Somalis living abroad had used to send money home. It was a cruel blow aimed at destroying the Somali economy and bringing the people to their knees in the face of starvation. But two months later, the Somali people have refused to be broken--as their reaction to the film showed.

Several groups in the U.S. are calling for a boycott of this film and see it as evidence of the Pentagon's continuing desire to reinvade Somalia, under the pretext this time of fighting "terrorism."

Larry Holmes of the International Action Center points out that the film "is being linked to new war moves against Somalia, a poor country believed to have unexplored oil reserves."

Activists are particularly angry at the decision to hold the film's Washington, D.C., premiere on Jan. 15--the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. "Dr. King was an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam War. How dare they hold a gala showing of this racist film on the 73rd anniversary of his birth," said Sarah Sloan, a youth organizer for the IAC. The group plans to protest the film and leaflet filmgoers with educational material on what really happened in 1993.

The Somali Justice Advocacy Center in Minneapolis has also called for a boycott of the film. Its executive director, Omar Jamal, was visited by the FBI after the group criticized U.S. policy on Somalia and the shutting down of money transfer facilities here.

What a long-winded pile of blather to say nothing more than "Somalis don't like this film". Well, duh.

If you want to know why Somalis are getting a bad rap here in Canada, it has nothing to do with propaganda from our neighbour to the South, nor does it have anything to do with Ridley Scott or Black Hawk Down. It's because the majority of Somalis who came to this country seeking refuge have gotten onto welfare and proudly stayed there. It's not about being black; there are plenty of black people in this country who don't act like that, but the Somalis have largely segregated themselves from the rest of society into little Muslim enclaves, and they have not entered society. If they feel alienated, maybe they should look at that behaviour rather than whining about "Black Hawk Down".

[Stravo]

You know dredging up all those old tired bullshit from Black Hawk Down's initial criticism is just absurd. To those that have issues with a movie that has an all white force fighting and killing and all black force need to look at the FUCKING FACTS.

Fact: Every member of the special forces in country at that time was white or hispanic, no blacks.

Fact: This is Africa, what did they expect to see as the enemy, Sephardic Jews?!

Get over this pathetic bullshit and let it go already. The movie was not propaganda, it showed a flawed plan go straight to hell. It showed the valor of brave men not figthing for their country but for each other just to stay alive. It also showed the barbaric civil war where famine was used as a weapon against the people. A famine manufactured by the SOMALI warlords and not the Americans. SOMALIs were killing SOMALIs before the Americans got there and after we left.

[Howedar]

I'm sure that crowd can find some better accusation to throw at the US. Calling BHD propaganda is absurd.

*EDIT* Post E4

[2000AD]

Fact: Every member of the special forces in country at that time was white or hispanic, no blacks.

There's definately at least one black Ranger in the film (IIRC he's the one near the end that has to shoot a woman because she picks up a gun and starts to aim at them), and during the making-of documentarys on the DVD i'm sure i remember one of the Rangers who had been there and were talking to the actors about what it was like was black

[Jade Falcon]

You know dredging up all those old tired bullshit from Black Hawk Down's initial criticism is just absurd. To those that have issues with a movie that has an all white force fighting and killing and all black force need to look at the FUCKING FACTS.

Were you directing that at me, or just in general?



Saying that the Somalis as a people hated the US troops there seems a massive generalisation, look at the scene near the end where the Rangers return to the airport. The crowd there looks happy to see that the US troops got out. There is no way that I think this film could be construed as propoganda, instead it seemed to show a fair approximation of what actually happened.

[Stravo]

Were you directing that at me, or just in general?

In general at articles much like this one that kept cropping up when the movie came out because it somehow offended PC sensibilites to see blacks and whites fighting on screen.

[RogueIce]

Fact: Every member of the special forces in country at that time was white or hispanic, no blacks.

There's definately at least one black Ranger in the film (IIRC he's the one near the end that has to shoot a woman because she picks up a gun and starts to aim at them), and during the making-of documentarys on the DVD i'm sure i remember one of the Rangers who had been there and were talking to the actors about what it was like was black

I believe the book says there were two black Rangers in the unit.

[Axis Kast]

I can remember getting into plenty of arguments about the movie with kids on my floor in the dorm.

One of them went so far as to insist the movie was a travesty because it did not also list the names of the thousands of Somalis killed.

[Admiral Valdemar]

It seems to be some sort of trend now for certain people to attack a nation's image by going after film renditions of real events and woefully distorting them as propaganda or some such crap. I wouldn't mind, but BHD was anything but that typical garbage Hollywood spews en masse and this only makes the already tenuous argument even more pathetic.

On another note, Doug, is that you with the Jade Falcon avatar?

[Alyeska]

Yes thats Doug.

[Illuminatus Primus]

One of them went so far as to insist the movie was a travesty because it did not also list the names of the thousands of Somalis killed.

We probably don't know most of their names and never will.

[Stravo]

Fact: Every member of the special forces in country at that time was white or hispanic, no blacks.

There's definately at least one black Ranger in the film (IIRC he's the one near the end that has to shoot a woman because she picks up a gun and starts to aim at them), and during the making-of documentarys on the DVD i'm sure i remember one of the Rangers who had been there and were talking to the actors about what it was like was black

I believe the book says there were two black Rangers in the unit.

Correct, page 9 of BHD states that of the 140 man unit only two were African American.

[Master of Ossus]

And the movie clearly shows an black American in action--he's doing what the black Ranger did in the book, and presumably in real life, too.

This article is one of the absolute stupidest editorials I have read in a long time.

[Durandal]

Wasn't the whole point of Black Hawk Down that, once combat starts, politics goes out the window?

[Master of Ossus]

Wasn't the whole point of Black Hawk Down that, once combat starts, politics goes out the window?

If it even had a point then it would go somewhere along those lines. I'm convinced that the film was literally apolitical: it had no message other than to tell a story. It had no point, other than to document what went on in a manner that would make it accessible to people.

[Durandal]

Wasn't the whole point of Black Hawk Down that, once combat starts, politics goes out the window?

If it even had a point then it would go somewhere along those lines. I'm convinced that the film was literally apolitical: it had no message other than to tell a story. It had no point, other than to document what went on in a manner that would make it accessible to people.

That's the impression I got as well. I didn't take any sort of moral lesson from the film. In fact, the only real point I can take from it is that people who've never been in combat can't truly understand the brotherhood and bonding that soldiers experience. As was said in the movie, "It's about the men next to you."

[neoolong]

If you're looking for a message, it's pretty much all the stuff that Hoot says.

[Edi]

If you want to know why Somalis are getting a bad rap here in Canada, it has nothing to do with propaganda from our neighbour to the South, nor does it have anything to do with Ridley Scott or Black Hawk Down. It's because the majority of Somalis who came to this country seeking refuge have gotten onto welfare and proudly stayed there. It's not about being black; there are plenty of black people in this country who don't act like that, but the Somalis have largely segregated themselves from the rest of society into little Muslim enclaves, and they have not entered society. If they feel alienated, maybe they should look at that behaviour rather than whining about "Black Hawk Down".

You got that same problem with them over there too? Finland tends to be pretty accepting of immigrants, but the largest group of them over here are Somalis that came from Russia during the Somali civil war, and they behave exactly the same way. They demand that everybody here bend over backward to accommodate them (their religion, their customs, everything). Any criticism of them is immediately decried as racism, and they can do no wrong. I don't generally approve of using racist epithets on anyone, but I don't mind applying them to the whiners among this group.

On the other hand, there are active, decent people among them who have risen to be leaders of their community and are smart people, and who have worked their ass off to build bridges between Finns and Somali immigrants and who I have enormous respect for. Things are mostly getting better now, fortunately.

But the whole point is that Somalis don't have this shit reputation for nothing, it is generally fully and completely deserved. Hell, the other African immigrants say exactly the same things about them being lazy, shiftless thieves and parasites, so it's not like it was just a racist attempt to cast them in bad light.

Edi

[Darth Wong]

You got that same problem with them over there too? Finland tends to be pretty accepting of immigrants, but the largest group of them over here are Somalis that came from Russia during the Somali civil war, and they behave exactly the same way. They demand that everybody here bend over backward to accommodate them (their religion, their customs, everything). Any criticism of them is immediately decried as racism, and they can do no wrong. I don't generally approve of using racist epithets on anyone, but I don't mind applying them to the whiners among this group.

There must be something about the culture in Somalia which produces this attitude.

[Joe]

Believe it or not, I think Somali immigrants are a problem in certain American cities in the northern states as well, though probably not as widespread as what you're talking about. They're notorious for not wasting any time getting on the welfare teat.

[Edi]

There must be something about the culture in Somalia which produces this attitude.

It's probably got something to do with the way the society there is set up, in the tribal model. Basically every clan for itself and grab as much as you can. They come here, with this attitude, and they find to their surprise that they are given everything they need for free, and they will just shake their heads in wonder and take full advantage of the stupid and naive foreigners. Why work when you don't have to? In their own culture, this kind of thing would probably be a reason for respect, but they don't understand that intentionally milking the system is in our value system contemptible. By the time they do learn this, they will also have learnt to play the race card at every turn and will use that for distraction all the time.

Edi

[Jade Falcon]

I would have said that one other message of BHD was not directed at the US forces in particular, but targetted the sometimes ridiculous restrictions placed on UN peacekeeping forces. While Peacekeepers are usually meant to be nearly neutral this can, and often is taken advantage of.

The two prime examples are the warlord forces that show up at the beginning and snatch the food supplies with one of the militia giving the finger to the UH-60 crew knowing that they can't do anything about it.

Also, it seems the the US forces have to basically practically threaten the Pakistani UN forces to help them in a rescue attempt.

[PainRack]

"You aren't even human anymore" Major Adam Steiner. Nice to see you here Doug.

I would have said that one other message of BHD was not directed at the US forces in particular, but targetted the sometimes ridiculous restrictions placed on UN peacekeeping forces. While Peacekeepers are usually meant to be nearly neutral this can, and often is taken advantage of.

Where is this implied in the movie? Or are you referring to the book and history?

Also, it seems the the US forces have to basically practically threaten the Pakstani UN forces to help them in a rescue attempt.

I won't use the word threaten. More like override. The UN forces certainly didn't display any form of camaderie, they did not ready themselves to rescue the Americans force, even though they must have knew the Americans were taking fire. Even after the US formally requested UN assistance, the UN dilly dallied in setting up a rescue force, although this can be just as equally blamed on the total ineffectiveness of the UN military deterence.