Brietbart.com and Glenn Greenwald Love/Hate, respectively, movie they have never seen [View all]

[arely staircase]

You can't make this shit up. The latter thinks it glorifies torture and that is shitty (which it would be but I have no idea and neither does Glen Greenwald.) The former thinks it glorifies torture and that fucking rocks (which is fucking nuts but I have no idea and neither does Brietbart.com)

Zero Dark Thirty: new torture-glorifying film wins raves

Can a movie that relies on fabrications to generate support for war crimes still be considered great?

"I have not seen this film and thus am obviously not purporting to review it; I am, instead, writing about the reaction to the film: the way in which its fabrications about the benefits of torture seem to be no impediment to its being adored and celebrated."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/10/zero-dark-thirty-torture-awards

Well, all right then, Glenn

Then there is this sh*t.

“So will the film impact the public’s perception of bin Laden’s death?” writes Breitbart.com’s Christian Toto. “After all, the media gave credit to President Barack Obama for capturing the terrorist leader even though Obama spoke out specifically against enhanced interrogation. … In theory, bin Laden would still be alive and plotting more attacks had Obama’s ‘no torture’ policy been in place.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/critics-on-obama-dark-zero-thirty-84894.html#ixzz2EnaPlXg5

Nevermind the Academy Award winning makers of the film say that they are both wrong.

“Zero Dark Thirty” writer says “it’s misreading the film” to say torture led to bin Laden capture

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/11/zero_dark_thirty_writer_says_its_misreading_the_film_to_say_torture_led_to_bin_laden_capture/

I think I will wait and make up my own mind.