Nazis and Vatican

regarding your page about the Nazis and the Vatican

Pope Pius XI's 1937 encyclical "Mit brennender Sorge," which was drafted by Cardinal Pacelli, was considered by the Germans as a "security threat."

When Cardinal Pacelli was elected Pope on March 2, 1939, "[o]n March 4, Joseph Goebbels, the German propaganda minister, wrote in his diary: 'Midday with the Fuehrer. He is considering whether we should abrogate the concordat with Rome in light of Pacelli's election as Pope.'"

After studying Pius XII's 1942 Christmas message, the Reich Central Security Office concluded: 'In a manner never known before the Pope has repudiated the National Socialist New European Order. ... Here he is virtually accusing the German people of injustice toward the Jews and makes himself the mouthpiece of the Jewish war criminals.'"

"In an interview Father Peter Gumpel stated that Robert Kempner's (former U.S Nuremberg war crimes prosecutor) foreword to Jeno Levai's 1968 book "Hungarian Jewry and the Papacy" asserts that Pope Pius did indeed complain through diplomatic channels about the situation of Hungarian Jews but that any public protestation would have been of no use"

Hitler's foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, a Catholic allegedly claimed at the Nuremberg Trials that he had "a whole desk full of protests" from the pope, and from no other European leader.

"The objections given and the excessive delay in the steps necessary to complete the implementation of the operation, resulted in a great part of Italian Jews being able to hide and escape capture," Eichmann wrote. A good number of them hid in convents or were helped by men and women of the Church.

American Holocaust

As someone who loves America you should read this.

Thomas Jefferson.
In 1807, Thomas Jefferson instructed his War Department that, should any Indians resist against America stealing Indian lands, the Indian resistance must be met with "the hatchet". Jefferson continued, "And...if ever we are constrained to lift the hatchet against any tribe, "

he wrote, "we will never lay it down till that tribe is exterminated, or is driven beyond the Mississippi."

Jefferson, the slave owner, continued, "in war, they will kill some of us; we shall destroy all of them". (Ibid)

In 1812, Jefferson said that American was obliged to push the backward Indians "with the beasts of the forests into the Stony Mountains". One year later Jefferson continued anti-Indian statements by adding that America must "pursue [the Indians] to extermination, or drive them to new seats beyond our reach".
Stannard, David E.
AMERICAN HOLOCAUST. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
pp. 118-121


Tel Aviv is quite close to to Jerusalem!

I think you have to admit that a lot of the time you cannot take these people seriously!

They just want to scare people.

) In rhetoric, they don’t mean to be taken seriously and they don’t understand when we do.

Thus an ultimatum is often not taken seriously and the reality comes as a surprise. Remember the “Mother of all Battles”? Like many other Mediterranean peoples, Arabs don’t seem to mind making a scene in public and have a high blown sense of drama.

Paul Harvey once described how he had spent the Suez Crisis hiding under the bed in his hotel room because of the blood-curdling radio broadcasts, before he learned that Arabs talk like that when they’re arguing over a taxi. “This is my taxi and I will defend it to the death!” “You lie, it’s mine and rivers of blood will flow in the street before I give up my taxi!”

An Arab will scream at you, get into your personal space and sometimes kick dirt on your shoe – and they react with utter surprise when an American up and decks him. “What did I do?” To say the least, this makes negotiations difficult.

Iran the bomb

Iran and North Korea are the two main enemies of the free world today. Both threaten democracies (Israel and South Korea) with extinction. Both are developing nuclear weapons, which they will proliferate to other tyrannies and terrorists


I am not going to bother to defend Iran

but the Holy City contains the Dome of the Rock.

Would even the Iranians be crazy enough to destroy Israel if it meant the loss of such a place?

(no subject)
The Kaiser's Holocaust

David Olusoga,
Casper W. Erichsen


Between 1915 and 1918, there was talk among the Germans in the East of settlement and colonisation 

 The Silent Dictatorship: the politics of the German high command under ... By Martin Kitchen

"the suggestions of the OHL for the removal of Poles and Jews from the frontier strip" 208

(OHL - high command)

Omer Bartov also supports this idea of a German desire to drive out Eastern Jews.

(See Hitler's Army)

Was WW1 just?

the Kaiser was evil as well.

Germany’s Genocide of the Herero by Jeremy Sarkin

It also examines the Kaiser’s role. This study recounts the reasons why the Kaiser likely issued the order and why proof of this has not emerged before now. The book reveals his history of violence and the ordering of brutal actions, even against his own citizens.

Fischer's (at the time considered) scientific actions and torment of the children were part of wider history of abusing Africans for experiments, and echoed earlier actions by German anthropologists who stole skeletons and bodies from African graveyards and took them to Europe for research or sale.[69]

Fischer later became chancellor of the University of Berlin, where he taught medicine to Nazi physicians.[78] One of his prominent students was Josef Mengele, the doctor who made genetic experiments on Jewish children at Auschwitz.[85]

The Kaiser’s Holocaust by David Olusoga and Casper W Erichsen: review

Ian Thomson is chilled by The Kaiser's Holocaust: Germany's Forgotten Genocide and the Colonial Roots of Nazism by David Olusoga and Casper W Erichsen, an impressively researched account of the killing fields of Namibia

By Ian Thomson

1:13PM BST 16 Aug 2010


Joseph Conrad set Heart of Darkness in the ivory-rich Congo Free State, created in the 1880s by King Leopold II of Belgium. Having cleared out African villages, his majesty’s traders herded the homeless into swamps and starved them. A century on, Congo tribes still speak fearfully of “the overwhelming”.

The Belgian monarch’s depredations were mirrored, 20 years later, by those of Kaiser Wilhelm II in German South West Africa. Between 1904 and 1909, the imperial ruler and his subalterns liquidated the indigenous Herero and Nama peoples of modern-day Namibia. This was done in the name of acquiring “living space” for German settlers, and foreshadowed the murderous racism inflicted half a century later by the Nazis on Jews and other “asocials”. So argue David Olusoga and Capser Erichsen in The Kaiser’s Holocaust, a provocative and uncomfortably absorbing book.

According to the authors, the “killing fields” of Namibia presaged not only Hitler’s genocidal madness, but served as inspiration for the dictator’s hoped-for empire in the European east, where Jews and Slavs were seen as “subhuman”. In the previous century, German settlers had been encouraged by the Kaiser to scorn the Judaeo-Christian morality of compassion for the weak and view the African tribes in their midst as metamorphosed apes. (“Exterminate all the brutes!” exclaims Conrad’s European trader Kurtz.)

From this it was a short step to advocating the racial supremacy of Aryans in Nazi Germany. Nazism was not an isolated instance of human infamy, then, but part of an earlier behaviour that went back to Imperial German Africa.

Even by the barbarous standards of Wilhelmine Germany, however, the genocide of the Herero and Nama tribes could not reasonably be termed a “holocaust”. There is something distasteful about appropriating a term peculiar to the Jewish tragedy. The Kaiser’s racial policies in Africa, motivated chiefly by a desire to rival Britain as an imperial power, were horrific, but they were not the assembly-line gassing of human beings. There was an unprecedented moral horror to what the Nazis did.

Hitler’s murder of Jews and Slavs was, the authors concede, “unique” in its scale and industry, yet they manage to find many connections between the Nazis’ murderous social Darwinism and the Kaiser’s barbarism in Namibia. Hermann Göring's father, Dr Heinrich Ernst Göring, served as the first Commissioner of German South West Africa, orchestrating that barbarity, before becoming the Kaiser’s ambassador to Haiti in 1893. The notorious brown shirts worn by the Nazi storm troopers had originally served as uniforms in Namibia.

Not long after Dr Göring had begun to confiscate Herero and Nama tribal lands, Berlin sanctioned the use of concentration camps. The most notorious of these, set up in 1905, was situated on Shark Island near the town of Lüderitz. The enormity of Shark Island has been suppressed and forgotten too long, say the authors. By the time the Konzentrationslager was closed in 1907, thousands had died there due to beatings and forced labour. Though the death toll is impossible to establish accurately (the Germans later burned incriminating documents), the liquidations were carried out so efficiently that by 1908 the Kaiser’s government had wrested a total of 46 million hectares of land from the Africans.

A great deal of the book is devoted to the social Darwinists and eugenicists in late-19th-century Germany who helped to create new values of totalitarian dominance. Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, with its brutally materialist account of nature as bleak survivalism, was made to serve as justification for the extermination of Namibian tribes and, later, for Hitler’s biological anti-Semitism. In a racist age, nature was seen as a competitive market place, where black people were born to be mastered and the fittest survived. Armed with callipers and craniometry charts, the Kaiser’s race engineers were keen to measure the severed heads of Nama tribesmen: handle-shaped ears, prehensile feet and other “apish” stigmata were considered telltale atavisms. Civilisation, according to these pseudo-scientists, depended on the separation of races, not on their harmonious integration.

Impressively researched, The Kaiser’s Holocaust unflinchingly catalogues the abuse of human life in a continent the Kaiser never even visited. Olusoga and Erichsen, with their novelist’s flair for narrative, provide a grimly readable history. If the comparisons between colonial Namibia and Nazism do not always quite convince, the book remains a vitally important addition to the ever-growing literature of atrocity and deserves to be read widely.

* Ian Thomson’s The Dead Yard: a Story of Modern Jamaica won the 2010 Ondaatje Prize and the Dolman Travel Book of the Year Award

The Kaiser’s Holocaust: Germany’s Forgotten Genocide and the Colonial Roots of Nazism

by David Olusoga and Casper W Erichsen


Richard Dawkins calls Blair a war criminal.

He slanders my nation's army as a result.

He never signed a letter for Mugabe or Saddam.


To The President of The United Nations General Assembly, H.E. Father Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, and The Attorney General of the United Kingdom, and their successors in office.
We, the citizens of the United Kingdom and other countries listed, wish to uphold The United Nations Charter, The 1998 Rome Statute of The International Criminal Court, The Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Rule of International Law, especially in respect of:-
1: 1949 Geneva Convention IV: Article 146
The High Contracting Parties undertake to enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any of the grave breaches of the present Convention.
2: 1907 Hague Convention IV: Article 3
A belligerent party which violates the provisions of the said regulations shall, if the case demands, be liable to pay compensation. It shall be responsible for all the acts committed by persons forming part of its armed forces.
We therefore call on you to indict Anthony Charles Lynton Blair in his capacity as recent Prime Minister of the UK, so long as he is able to answer for his actions and however long it takes, in respect of our sample complaints relating to the 2003 Iraq War waged by the UK as ally to the United States of America.
We are concerned that without justice and respect for the rule of law, the future for us and our progeny in a lawless world is bleak, as revealed by recent US declarations about the use of torture and the events of December 2008 in Gaza show.
The following are our sample complaints relating to the Iraq War 2003-2009:
1: Deceit and conspiracy for war, and providing false news to incite passions for war, causing in the order of one million deaths, 4 million refugees, countless maimings and traumas.
2: Employing radioactive ammunition causing long-term destruction of the planetary habitat.
3: Causing the breakdown of civil administration, with consequent lawlessness, especially looting, kidnapping, and violence, and consequent breakdown of womens’ rights, of religious freedom, and child and adult education.
4: Failing to maintain the medical needs of the populace.
5: Despoliation of the cultural heritage of the country.
6: Supporting an ally that employs ‘waterboarding’ and other tortures.
7: Seizing the assets of Iraq.
8: Using inhumane restraints on prisoners, including dogs, hoods, and cable ties.
9: Using Aggressive Patrolling indiscriminately, traumatising women and children and wrecking homes and property.
10: Marking bodies of prisoners with numbers, writing, faeces and other degrading treatment.
11: The use of cluster bombs and other indiscriminate weapons including white phosphorous on “shake and bake” missions.
12: Supporting indiscriminate rocket attacks from F16 fighter planes on women and children in Fallujah in Nov 2004
13: Supporting the shooting up of ambulances and medical personnel in Fallujah in Nov 2004
14: Supporting the expulsion of the entire population of Fallujah save for young men of military age, for a reprisal attack on that city in Nov 2004.
Copy to the Secretary General of The United Nations, Ban Ki-moon
Issued by secretaries to Foundation: David Halpin, MB, FRCS and Nicholas Wood MA, RIBA, FRGS
PO BOX 64656 NW3 9NG (UK
David Halpin, MB, FRCS, Nicholas Wood, MA, RIBA, FRGS, Chris Burns-Cox, MD, FRCP, Joyce Morgan, Sara Wood MA (Oxon), Roslyn Cook, Geoff Evans, Dr. Margaret Evans, Nisar Ali Shah, Michael Culver (actor) and Amanda Culver (artist), Jonathan Cook (Journalist), Euan Donaldson (Film Makers Against War), Dr Nawal Saadawi (writer Egypt), Haifa Zangana (Iraqi woman writer and activist), Mark Steel (journalist, comic), Edward S Herman, Ph.D (Berkeley USA – professor, writer), Mundher al adhami (academic), Rikki Blue (journalist), Noam Chomsky, John Pilger, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, David Edwards, Anabella Pellens (translator Argentine), Sarah Case, Angela Baguena (Barcelona), Jenny Wood (academic), Peter Day, Andrew Goodman, David Miller (Professor of Sociology, Strathclyde),

Richard Dawkins,

Lindsey German, Ben Griffin (former SAS soldier), Dr Kamil Mahdi, Ken Loach, Bruce Kent


WWI good, Iraq bad!"
  • A similar case is here: Poppy marks the sacrifices made by Irish of all creeds, Colum Kenny, 13 Nov 2011, has an odd view of WWI. He makes the case for wearing the poppy, but cautions that: "Wearing the poppy is not made easier by some of the antics that surround it in Britain. ... Poppy culture can be a subtle way of lending credibility to ill-advised adventures in Afghanistan or Iraq by linking them back into the worthier sacrifices of generations in unavoidable world wars."
  • So according to Colum Kenny, WWI was a good war and Iraq was a bad war!
  • I, of course, think the opposite.

  • I think WWI was a futile waste, a pointless war against enemies that were not really tyrannical, while I think the Iraq and Afghan wars are just and noble wars against the great barbaric evil of the age.

  • In fact, I have worn the poppy precisely to support the Iraq and Afghan wars. My only qualms about wearing the poppy are that it might be seen as support for WWI.

Mark, what about the Young Turks?

Mass burnings

Eitan Belkind was a Nili member, who infiltrated the Ottoman army as an official. He was assigned to the headquarters of Kamal Pasha. He claims to have witnessed the burning of 5,000 Armenians.[45]:181,183

Lt. Hasan Maruf, of the Ottoman army, describes how a population of a village were taken all together, and then burned.[46] The Commander of the Third Army Vehib's 12-page affidavit, which was dated 5 December 1918, was presented in the Trabzon trial series (March 29, 1919) included in the Key Indictment,[47] reporting such a mass burning of the population of an entire village near Mush.[48] that in Bitlis, Mus and Sassoun, "The shortest method for disposing of the women and children concentrated in the various camps was to burn them." And also that "Turkish prisoners who had apparently witnessed some of these scenes were horrified and maddened at the remembering the sight. They told the Russians that the stench of the burning human flesh permeated the air for many days after."


Trabzon was the main city in Trabzon province; Oscar S. Heizer, the American consul at Trabzon, reports: "This plan did not suit Nail Bey.... Many of the children were loaded into boats and taken out to sea and thrown overboard."[49] The Italian consul of Trabzon in 1915, Giacomo Gorrini, writes: "I saw thousands of innocent women and children placed on boats which were capsized in the Black Sea."[50] The Trabzon trials reported Armenians having been drowned in the Black Sea.[51]

Hoffman Philip, the American Charge at Constantinople chargé d'affaires, writes: "Boat loads sent from Zor down the river arrived at Ana, one thirty miles away, with three fifths of passengers missing."[52]

Use of poison and drug overdoses

The psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton writes in a parenthesis when introducing the crimes of Nazi doctors, "Perhaps Turkish doctors, in their participation in the genocide against the Armenians, come closest, as I shall later suggest."[53]

Morphine overdose: During the Trabzon trial series of the Martial court, from the sittings between March 26 and May 17, 1919, the Trabzons Health Services Inspector Dr. Ziya Fuad wrote in a report that Dr. Saib caused the death of children with the injection of morphine. The information was allegedly provided by two physicians (Drs. Ragib and Vehib), both Dr. Saib's colleagues at Trabzons Red Crescent hospital, where those atrocities were said to have been committed.[54][55]

Toxic gas: Dr. Ziya Fuad and Dr. Adnan, public health services director of Trabzon, submitted affidavits reporting cases in which two school buildings were used to organize children and send them to the mezzanine to kill them with toxic gas equipment.[56][57]

Typhoid inoculation: The Ottoman surgeon, Dr. Haydar Cemal wrote "on the order of the Chief Sanitation Office of the IIIrd Army in January 1916, when the spread of typhus was an acute problem, innocent Armenians slated for deportation at Erzican were inoculated with the blood of typhoid fever patients without rendering that blood ‘inactive’."[58][59] Jeremy Hugh Baron writes: "Individual doctors were directly involved in the massacres, having poisoned infants, killed children and issued false certificates of death from natural causes. Nazim's brother-in-law Dr. Tevfik Rushdu, Inspector-General of Health Services, organized the disposal of Armenian corpses with thousands of kilos of lime over six months; he became foreign secretary from 1925 to 1938."[60]


Further information: Tehcir Law

Map of massacre locations and deportation and extermination centers

The remains of Armenians massacred at Erzinjan.[61]

Of this photo, the United States ambassador wrote,[42] "Scenes like this were common all over the Armenian provinces, in the spring and summer months of 1915. Death in its several forms—massacre, starvation, exhaustion—destroyed the larger part of the refugees. The Turkish policy was that of extermination under the guise of deportation."

In May 1915, Mehmed Talaat Pasha requested that the cabinet and Grand Vizier Said Halim Pasha legalize a measure for relocation and settlement of Armenians to other places due to what Talaat Pasha called "the Armenian riots and massacres, which had arisen in a number of places in the country." However, Talaat Pasha was referring specifically to events in Van and extending the implementation to the regions in which alleged "riots and massacres" would affect the security of the war zone of the Caucasus Campaign. Later, the scope of the immigration was widened in order to include the Armenians in the other provinces.

On 29 May 1915, the CUP Central Committee passed the Temporary Law of Deportation ("Tehjir Law"), giving the Ottoman government and military authorization to deport anyone it "sensed" as a threat to national security.[31]:186–8 The "Tehjir Law" brought some measures regarding the property of the deportees, but during September a new law was proposed. By means of the "Abandoned Properties" Law (Law Concerning Property, Dept's and Assets Left Behind Deported Persons, also referred as the "Temporary Law on Expropriation and Confiscation"), the Ottoman government took possession of all "abandoned" Armenian goods and properties. Ottoman parliamentary representative Ahmed Riza protested this legislation:

It is unlawful to designate the Armenian assets as "abandoned goods" for the Armenians, the proprietors, did not abandon their properties voluntarily; they were forcibly, compulsorily removed from their domiciles and exiled. Now the government through its efforts is selling their goods… If we are a constitutional regime functioning in accordance with constitutional law we can’t do this. This is atrocious. Grab my arm, eject me from my village, then sell my goods and properties, such a thing can never be permissible. Neither the conscience of the Ottomans nor the law can allow it.[62]

On 13 September 1915, the Ottoman parliament passed the "Temporary Law of Expropriation and Confiscation", stating that all property, including land, livestock, and homes belonging to Armenians, was to be confiscated by the authorities.[33]:224

With the implementation of Tehcir law, the confiscation of Armenian property and the slaughter of Armenians that ensued upon the law's enactment outraged much of the western world. While the Ottoman Empire's wartime allies offered little protest, a wealth of German and Austrian historical documents has since come to attest to the witnesses' horror at the killings and mass starvation of Armenians.[63]:329–31[64]:212–3[65] In the United States, The New York Times reported almost daily on the mass murder of the Armenian people, describing the process as "systematic", "authorized" and "organized by the government." Theodore Roosevelt would later characterize this as "the greatest crime of the war."[66]

Historian Hans-Lukas Kieser states that, from the statements of Talat Pasha [67] it is clear that the officials were aware that the deportation order was genocidal.[68] Another historian Taner Akçam states that, the telegrams shows that the overall coordination of the genocide was taken over by Talat Paşa.[69]

Death marches

An Armenian woman kneeling beside dead child in field "within sight of help and safety at Aleppo."

The Armenians were marched out to the Syrian town of Deir ez-Zor and the surrounding desert. A good deal of evidence suggests that the Ottoman government did not provide any facilities or supplies to sustain the Armenians during their deportation, nor when they arrived.[70] By August 1915, The New York Times repeated an unattributed report that "the roads and the Euphrates are strewn with corpses of exiles, and those who survive are doomed to certain death. It is a plan to exterminate the whole Armenian people."[71]

Ottoman troops escorting the Armenians not only allowed others to rob, kill, and rape the Armenians, but often participated in these activities themselves.[70] Deprived of their belongings and marched into the desert, hundreds of thousands of Armenians perished.

Naturally, the death rate from starvation and sickness is very high and is increased by the brutal treatment of the authorities, whose bearing toward the exiles as they are being driven back and forth over the desert is not unlike that of slave drivers. With few exceptions no shelter of any kind is provided and the people coming from a cold climate are left under the scorching desert sun without food and water. Temporary relief can only be obtained by the few able to pay officials.[70]

Similarly, Major General Friedrich Freiherr Kress von Kressenstein noted that "The Turkish policy of causing starvation is an all too obvious proof… for the Turkish resolve to destroy the Armenians."[33]:350

German engineers and laborers involved in building the railway also witnessed Armenians being crammed into cattle cars and shipped along the railroad line. Franz Gunther, a representative for Deutsche Bank which was funding the construction of the Baghdad Railway, forwarded photographs to his directors and expressed his frustration at having to remain silent amid such "bestial cruelty".[31]:326 Major General Otto von Lossow, acting military attaché and head of the German Military Plenipotentiary in the Ottoman Empire, spoke to Ottoman intentions in a conference held in Batum in 1918:

The Turks have embarked upon the "total extermination of the Armenians in Transcaucasia… The aim of Turkish policy is, as I have reiterated, the taking of possession of Armenian districts and the extermination of the Armenians. Talaat's government wants to destroy all Armenians, not just in Turkey but also outside Turkey. On the basis of all the reports and news coming to me here in Tiflis there hardly can be any doubt that the Turks systematically are aiming at the extermination of the few hundred thousand Armenians whom they left alive until now.[33]:349

Extermination camps

It is believed that 25 major concentration camps existed, under the command of Şükrü Kaya, one of the right-hand men of Talaat Pasha. The majority of the camps were situated near Turkey's modern Iraqi and Syrian borders, and some were only temporary transit camps. Others, such as Radjo, Katma, and Azaz, are said to have been used only temporarily, for mass graves; these sites were vacated by autumn 1915. Some authors also maintain that the camps Lale, Tefridje, Dipsi, Del-El, and Ra's al-'Ain were built specifically for those who had a life expectancy of a few days.[72]


The Panama Deception - the best example of a war Doc. Oscar Winner.

Earthlings - the best Environmental Doc. Horrible but worth sticking with.

It's hard not to talk about documentaries without mentioing John Pilger, whose films are among the most acclamied and revealing docs ever made. Like Michael Moore, Pilger has been accussed of being biased, but whereas Moore's fact abuse have been documented, Pilger has always found to have documented the truth. It was Pilger who visited Cambodia after the fall of the Khmer Rouge, and his grounbreaking documentary on East Timor and the genocide inflicted there was filmed in secret and broadcast at a time when the genocide in East Timor was being ingored by the Western Media.

No One Knows About Persian Cats
 The Guardian

Here is the Iran you don't see in the news bulletins, or in the stately arthouse movies: it's the Iran that loves rock, heavy metal and rap. These are the western-style rockers who may turn out to be the unacknowledged legislators for Iran's pro-democracy movement. Bahman Ghobadi has made a freewheeling, semi-documentary picture about a group of twentysomething Iranian rock musicians desperate to get permission to play a gig in London. It has a weirdly Dick Lester-ish feel to it, but with an undercurrent of desperation. These are people without an obvious political motive — but they are certainly desperate to escape Iran and its stifling atmosphere of censorship. The director himself makes a cameo appearance at the very beginning, and there are some in-jokes targeted at a film festival following. This film may be regarded as a minor work in Ghobadi's career, yet I get the feeling that it is what is personally most important to him.

This is a very interesting doc, becuase it comes so soon after the Iranian put down of the nations youth.

It shows a very different side to Iran then what it's Supreme Leader wants you to see.

Iranian teenagers seem to just want to enjoy music like any one else, and in a totalitarian state doing so is a brave, and very dangerous act of defiance. The film leaves the audience with no delusions that the state could come down harshly on the group, who are all very likeable, and only wish to live in a nation where they have the basic right to play a kind of music that is their own. All teenagers in the West, and I have to include students here, forget that they are lucky to have their freedoms. This makes the doc a must see for other young people.

Nick Broomfield
Biggie and Tupac

Broomfield's film on the other hand played an important role in reopening the case into who killed Biggie.

As For asking 'Who is Biggie?' and 'Who Is Tupac?'

The film reveals a human side to the rap super star. We witness the rapper admitting that he is a momma's boy, and see how his mother campaigned for justice, so that the police would re-invesitgate who shot her son.

We also witness him admit to the absurd side of the Hip Hop industry, and an admission of how surreal and odd the industry was.

He tells of when he was told of the death of his rival and former friend, Tupac,
'I was told he had been shot. And at first I was just like, what again? I mean he was always getting shot. I just assumed this was like the usual deal, you know what I'm saying?'

We  witness a human side to Tupac, a man made famous for a persona of violence, and a character who lived a hard and boody life.

At Baltimore's School For the Arts we watch him put on a wig, and sing high picthed tunes in a girl's voive in an effor to make the class laugh.

This is a world away from the man who would later have bitter conflicts with is co rappers, declare a war between the West and East Coast music scenes, and shows that beneath the tough image was a softer man.

The film is a great example that celebrity is all about persona and brand.

Just as Marlyin Manson is anice, article man, and a world away from a real satanist, Biggie and Tupac were self deprecating and they were real people who were at heart very different from their personas.

The event of War
The Hurt Locker, by Katherine Bigelow, and Children Of Men, by Alfonso Cuaron, both attempt to create as realisitic a version of war as possible. Both also share the same theme of hope, and the idea of redemption admist the carnage as being possible through children.

Children Of Men attempts to create a real experience by using real time scenes. We are with our characters every minute and there is no jump cut away, and no escape. The Hurt Locker uses cuts, but also has long scenes where we follow every action and see every possilbe threat, and are given a view of everything that is going on in the street. Like them ne we view everything with paranoia, wondering who is the terrorist.

The final, long battle scene at the climax of Children Of Men features many refugees in the background. The director is placing us in the same position as them, by placing us in the line of fire with no way out. This is made even more obvious by the fact that this battle is set in a British internment camp.

The Hurt Locker also features a scene where an innocent Iraqi civilian has a suicide vest strapped to him, and another at the start of the film when a random Iraqi man drives into an area the US has sealed off, unkowingly and is almost shot by Sgt James.

War consumes everything, and it causes the death of civilians as well as military.

Both films also feature a star who is killed off quicklyin order to shock the audience and remind them that in war everyone can be killed at any moment. Ralph Fiennes and Julianne Moore appear in small roles in the films and are killed off after a short period of time.

Children Of Men shows a world where no women can give birth, and the first pregnent women for decades is being escorted through a dystopian Britain. The only hope for this world is the infant.

In The Hurt Locker, the protaganist, a bomb disposal expert, is weary of war, and the relentless cycle of death. For him, coming home to his son is a resorative experience as it seems to give him a sense that the war is worth fighting for.

His only remaning trooper also expresses the desire to have a son. When he tallks about his fear of death, he mentions his regret at not having a son.

There is a feeling in both movies that that because the world is so full of sin, only the children, the new born are the ones pure enough to have any hope for. Children Of Men ends with children laughing as the credits role.

The innocence of children is set at odds with the wilingness of the military and the insurgency to target innocent people, and to torture children, and to shoot unarmed old men.

Both films also play on the absurdity of war.

When the main 'villian' in Children Of Men sees the baby, he remarks
 'They are so beautiful' before he fires off rounds at a nearby tank crew, and screams at them
' Bastards!'

In The Hurt Locker, after James disarms a set of bombs, he comes face to face with the man who was about to set them off and kill him and perhaps others.  A moment passes between them, and James nods at the Iraqi and says 'Hi there'.

The basic humanity of the men is in stark contrast to their desire to kill one another, and it shows that in war people do not lose their humanity and this makes the event of War even more horrible.

The Battle of Algiers.

This film was shot like a documentary. It was very rarely shown in France until recently, and the torture scenes were cut in the US and UK.

  • In 2003, the New York Times reported that the Pentagon screened this film for officers and civilian experts who were discussing the challenges faced by the US military forces in Iraq. The flier inviting guests to the screening read: "How to win a battle against terrorism and lose the war of ideas".

  • The only film in Oscar history to be a nominee in two separate non-consecutive years. It was a foreign film nominee for 1966, and then a nominee for screenplay and direction for 1968.

Over the course of three years, a cynical French colonel (Martin) pits his wits against the freedom fighters of Algeria's National Liberation Front.


Based on actual events — although not without its moments of dramatic licence — Gillo Pontecorvo's film chronicles three years of insurrection and repression with such cine-veracity that the producers felt the need to append a caption at the end of the opening titles assuring viewers that `not one foot' of documentary material had been included.
Released just four years after Algeria had secured its independence from France, this technical and dramatic masterclass has lost none of its power to shock and provoke. American critic Pauline Kael compared its propagandist impact with Leni Riefenstahl's The Triumph of the Will and even accused Pontecorvo of being that `most dangerous kind of Marxist, a Marxist poet'. Kael may have had a point about socialist agit-prop being afforded a cinematic and socio-political respectability that has always been denied right-wing film-making. But surely a more useful comparison could be made with Roberto Rossellini's Rome, Open City (1945), which was also made on location, with a largely non-professional cast in a neo-realistic style that owed more to newsreel than studio artifice.
However, Pontecorvo avoids the melodramatics of Rossellini's film by presenting the victims of both the bomb blasts and the reprisals as genuine innocents rather than the faceless casualties of a revolutionary or imperialist cause. Consequently, the lingering shots of unsuspecting individuals before the carnage are every bit as disturbing as those depicting the rebels being tortured by Jean Martin's military. Pontecorvo's sympathies may be evident, but his conviction and condemnation are not devoid of compassion.

Despite winning the Golden Lion at Venice and being nominated for three Academy Awards, The Battle of Algiers was banned in France for five years. It's this contentiousness on which its reputation still rests. But it also has a vigour, a commitment and an intelligence that is absent from too much modern cinema.

The most important piece of political filmmaking since Battleship Potemkin


Log in