Customer Reviews

The Power of Nightmares [UMD for PSP]

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This is an important documentary film that covers the time period after WWII to the present, from the United States and Britain to Egypt, Afghanistan and Iraq. The detail and evidence is astonishing, shown far more vividly than can be found in most newspapers or even analytical news magazines. In places it's even surprisingly funny! It describes the rise of aggressive neoconservatism (most particularly in the US), in parallel with increasingly militant Islam in the Middle East. It shows how those political and religious ideologies are actually dependent upon each other to generate fear in the general population, of people trying to live their daily lives under conditions where those extremists have gained control. Also revealed is the likelihood that al-Qaeda does not exist, at least not as the international terrorist organization normally described in English-language news reporting. Although not for those with a short attention span, this film is recommended for everyone of voting age; four stars out of five because as long as this film is, it neglects to mention some actions in US foreign policy, despite the great significance of those events in historical context.

Here's a brief synopsis of this film: a nutcase is a nutcase is a nutcase. And both the neocons and jihadists fit the bill perfectly. There's a definition of insanity currently making the rounds: that it's doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. But that can also be a symptom of just plain stupidity. A much better definition is doing something totally outrageous and expecting a result completely at odds with common sense and historical precedent. Perfect case in point: one of the Islamic jihadists who helped plan the assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat actually believed that seeing the president assassinated would make the people see how corrupt the political system was and they would rise up in rebellion; whereas a sane man would have known that it's precisely in times of national tragedy that people cling all the more tightly to the status quo. Needless to say, this nutcase came in time to see not just the politicians as corrupt but the people themselves. So, too, the neocons set out to destroy Bill Clinton, who they hated; they actually imagined that once the impeachment proceedings began the people would see how corrupt he was and rise up in support of his imeachment. And, of course, they were horrified when the exact opposite happened. Which leads to the most telling piece of both the jihadist and neocon ideology: both believe that personal liberty - individual freedom - is the major symptom of a society's moral decay. Just think about that a moment: these idealogues see an ordinary citizen's freedom to make choices about his or her life as the number one symptom of moral depravity, because it somehow destroys shared social values. At this point, you can simply rest your case; these are people who are about as removed from reality - especially the reality of humanity's continual struggle to gain and keep some measure of freedom - as any madman who ever lived. Both the jihadists and neocons constructed a fantasy world based on the same hyper-exagerated notion of good versus evil; and to make it work they both had to invent an enemy who represented absolute evil. Among the legion of parallels and ironies to be found in this film, perhaps the most ironic is that Osama bin Laden, who appears to be the most sane, most rational of the jihadists. became the very one the neocons demonized.

The only slight reservation I have about this film is its suggestion that ideas play a determining role in the sociopolitical world. Whereas, actually, for every apparent triumph, at least of the neocon ideology, you can plainly see that there are big monied interests who stood to gain from those ideas. And now that those ideas have become counter-productive, they're quickly falling out of favor. Professor Leo Strauss may have been the father of the neocon ideology, but rest assured it was the Rockefellers, Mellons, Astors, Vanderbilts, DuPonts and their business interests that allowed the neocon ideology to attain prominence. And it's those same interests that will relegate the neocons to the historical dustbin now that there's nothing left to be gained from them.

My 5 star rating is for the content only. As others have already adequately reported, this Adam Curtis documentary is excellent and should be seen by all. However, the $22.99 version which I just purchased is the same low quality MPEG4 conversion as the lower-priced products. The video is very grainy and is not even close to the quality of the original BBC-TV production. My advice: Watch this on Google video or YouTube; if you must have the DVD, opt for the cheaper versions. Don't waste your money on the $22.99 edition.

It's criminal that there is no high quality version of this important documentary available at any price. Shame on the BBC for failing to create such a product. Amazon UK offers no version of The Power of Nightmares whatsoever. One really has to wonder if someone doesn't feel threatened by what Curtis has to say.

One would be hard pressed to find a documentary that does a more admirable job of explaining the logic of the conflict between the world created by the American Neoconservative movement and the terrorist ideology running throughout much of the Middle East today. It not only explains the intellectual sources of so much of the wrong-headedness rampant in the world today, but explains the symbiotic relationship between the Neoconservatives under George Bush and the Muslim extremists who have gathered under the banner of Al Queda. The film does a magnificent job of showing how each side has done a marvelous job of distorting and exaggerating the other and done an amazing job of exploiting the fear that their distortions have created.

The documentary rightfully begins by explaining who Sayyid Qutb and Leo Strauss are. Qutb is the Egyptian thinker who articulated theories that Arab culture had to be protected from the selfish individualism that drove Western liberalism. He believed in the creation of technologically developed states that relied upon Islamic law to dictate the norms of political and moral life. His ideas influenced a number of other Arab thinkers, including Ayman al-Zawahiri, who along with his disciple Osama bin Laden is the titular head of Al Queda. The film explains how al-Zawahiri has bizarrely distorted Qutb's extreme ideas to reason that everyday citizens in Islamic countries that support secular, non-Islamacist states, are in fact not Muslims because of that support and therefore can be killed (the film does not discuss the fact that the teaching that non-Muslims can be killed is an aberration in Muslim theology and would be challenged as valid by virtually all of the world's Muslims).

The other intellectual forbearer the film discusses is Leo Strauss, a member of the University of Chicago's Political Science Department. Strauss influenced a number of thinkers with his ideas that political liberalism encouraged selfish individualism (an idea he shared with Qutb). He argued in a series of dense, poorly written volumes that to overcome this individualism a communalism should be encouraged through the promulgation of empowering national myths. He was less concerned that these myths be true as that they be effective. Though not religious himself, he believed that religion could be utilized to energize public consensus. Many of his disciples have also felt that it was legitimate to demonize and distort the threats facing the nation, though it is possible that in some cases they actually believed their distortions. The series traces the history of the Neoconservatives often bizarre distortions of Soviet military might and persistent ascription of sinister purposes that they knew (or could or should have known) simply didn't exist. It then shows how they later post-9/11 employed the same kind of distortion to terrorists, creating an image of Al Queda completely at odds with facts. While there is no doubt that terrorism is a threat and that the people involved in Al Queda are engaged in activities that can only be described as evil, there is also no doubt that there is no international terrorist organization that can be described as "Al Queda." In fact, bin Laden is not a terrorist mastermind controlling a vast network of followers like a puppet master, but merely someone who is a figurehead who has bankrolled terrorist activity. As the film shows, he had little involvement in 9/11 apart from funding it. The plan was not his and he didn't "order" or "approve" it. But the West--in particular the administrations of Bush and Blair--have dramatically distorted and exaggerated the nature of contemporary terrorism. The threat is real, but vastly less so than the Neocons have claimed. Individual terrorist acts can be horrid, as we have all so vividly seen. But a network of terrorists simply does not exist. The complete failure to find any terrorist cells in the United States has proven this.

The parallels the series draws between the terrors the Jihadists inflict on civilians and the intellectual terror that the Neocons inflict on the American people was chilling. Let one feel too comfortable with the idea that at least the Neocons do not bomb American civilians, it should be remembered that they got us involved in a war in Iraq when they knew that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and terrorism. The kind of terror that they inflicted on Bill Clinton, relentlessly attacking with on a vast array of charges that they knew were baseless and unfounded (e.g., when Paula Jones's original lawyers quit, her new team of lawyers were convinced that the sexual encounter Jones's described had never taken place [her description of the president's genatalia, for instance, were dramatically different from that made by his physician], but persisted in the lawsuit for the harm it could cause the president).

I was impressed with the overall accuracy of the events surveyed by the series. There were some points I would quibble with. For instance, if you read extensively about the struggle against communism during the Reagan administration, you will be impressed that Bill Casey was far more concerned with Central America than Afghanistan. In fact, the funding of the Mujahideen was largely in opposition to both Casey and Reagan, who wanted funds for the Contras in El Salvador. This didn't keep Reagan's apologists from claiming responsibility for the downfall of the Soviet Union due to Afghanistan. But the truth is that the funding of the Mujahideen had no effect on the downfall of the Soviet Union, whether the Afghanis were funded by the Reagan administration or by Democratic congressmen. Neither was the Soviet Union brought down, as they believe, by the Afghanis. Interestingly, almost all historians are agreed that the Soviet Union collapsed due to internal instability, except for partisans and Reagan apologists in the United States who want to credit Regan with the downfall of Communism and Afghani resistance fighters who want to credit themselves. European historians and especially Russian historians see any role that Reagan or the Afghanis played as insignificant.

The film ends on a note both hopeful and pessimistic. The fact is that both the Neocons and the Islamacists have failed abysmally in their agendas. In less than two years George Bush will be out of office and most of the Neocons will be expelled from Washington. No current presidential contenders hold to their ideological agenda and given how discredited they are at the moment it is hard to imagine them continuing to hold much ongoing influence. The Islamacists are different. There are many disillusioned Muslims throughout the Middle East. Though a vast terrorist organization does not exist, the widespread discontent persists. That proclivity towards violence will not disappear soon. But the film ends with the idea that while the politics of fear and the manipulation of the public through the use of nightmare scenarios may be coming to an end, what is there to take their place? We no longer believe in big solutions, in the possibility for building a new world. We have become practical nihilists. I personally believe in the old big ideas of the past: freedom, fairness, justice, equally, respect, and compassion. My hope is that these ideas will prove more attractive in the years to come in contrast with the emptiness of what the Neocons offered. And I hope that some similar alternative will arise in the Arab countries.

Note: The notes that follow do not necessarily convey the reviewer's opinion of the accuracy of the film in terms of reality. Rather it demonstrates the ideas that are explored in each episode of the documentary. Some quotes are taken directly from the documentary and are denoted as such.

Overview:

"They [politicians] say they will rescue us from dreadful dangers that we cannot see and do not understand, and the greatest danger of all is international terrorism."

Out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world came two groups:
- Neoconservatives
- Radical Islamists

Part 1: Baby Its Cold Outside

Radical Islam:
Sayyid Qutb arrived in America and believed Americans "to be trapped by their own greedy and selfish desires." Qutb believed American society was going backwards, driven by primitive animal forces and trapped by their desires. Qutb believed this selfish individualism was corrupting America.

Neo-Conservatism:
Leo Strauss, a Chicago philosopher, believed American liberalism led to a life where nothing is true and everything is permitted. "Strauss believed that the liberal idea of individual freedom led people to question everything: all values, all moral truth. Instead, people were led by their own selfish desires and this threatened to tear apart the shared values, which held society together. But there was a way to stop this, Strauss believed. It was for politicians to assert powerful and inspiring myths everyone could believe in...one of these was religion. The other was the myth of the nation, and in America that was the idea that the country had a unique destiny to battle against the forces of evil throughout the world."

Radical Islam:
Qutb wanted Islam to play a major role in Egyptian society in restoring morality. However, he and other members of the Muslim Brotherhood were arrested and tortured by Egyptians trained by the CIA.

Qutb believed Americans lived in a "state of barbarous ignorance," and people did not realize they were infected. Qutb was executed in 1966.

Neo-Conservatism:
Irving Kristol believed the policies of the Great Society were causing moral breakdown. "Strauss explained it was the very basis of the liberal idea - the belief in individual freedom - that was causing the chaos because it undermined the shared moral framework that held society together. Individuals pursued their own selfish interest and this inevitably led to conflict."

The neo-conservatives wanted to unite the people by giving them a shared purpose - that America was a unique nation whose destiny was to battle against evil in the world (i.e. the Soviet Union).

The liberal Kissinger wanted to "form.... a truly global society, carried up by the principle of interdependence." Kissinger wanted peace with the Soviet Union.

Neo-conservative did not want peace with Soviet Union. They allied themselves with Donald Rumsfeld who was Secretary of Defense under Gerald Ford, and Dick Cheney, the president's chief of staff. Rumsfeld claimed the Soviet Union was violating its treaties by building up weapons, even though the CIA admitted this was a "complete fabrication."

Americans like Ronald Reagan engaged in portraying the Soviet Union as evil, wanting to conquer America. The neo-conservatives urged the American people to unite against the Soviet Union.

Radical Islam:
Ayman al-Zawahiri believed that the Muslim people had forgotten their Islamic faith and now followed selfish individualism. Because he believed the people to be as corrupt as their leaders, al-Zawahiri rationalized that Muslim people could be killed. He believed the killings would shock Muslims into seeing reality in a different way - that Muslims would see the truth that Allah is great.

Neo-Conservatism:
Neo-conservatives were mobilizing religion in America for a very different purpose. Neo-conservatives joined with religious leaders because, "It [religious leaders] shared their aim of moral regeneration in America."

Neo-conservatives made an alliance with many powerful preachers, who previously had told their congregations not to become involved in politics. Now preachers like James Robinson told their followers, "I am sick and tired of hearing about all of the radicals, and the perverts, and the liberals, and the leftists, and the communists coming out of the closets. It's time for God's people to come out of the closets, and out of the churches, and change America." Ronald Reagan won the election of 1980.

When Ronald Reagan wanted to talk with the Soviet Union and explain to them how their way was harming their country, the neo-conservatives set out to prove that most terrorism in the world was secretly being funded by the Soviet Union. New CIA head William Casey was sympathetic to the neo-conservative view. "The CIA knew the terrorist network did not exist because they themselves had made it up."

In 1983, Ronald Reagan "signed a secret document that fundamentally changed America's foreign policy. The country would now fight covert wars to push back the hidden Soviet threat around the world."

Radical Islam:
"The neo-conservatives now set out to transform the world." The neo-conservatives now joined forces with the Islamists in Afghanistan. However, with the Soviet Union, the neo-conservatives would need to find a new energy to keep their power.



Part 2: The Phantom Victory

Radical Islam:
CIA's Richard Casey formed an alliance with the Afghan freedom fighters to defeat the Soviet Union military forces.

Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden helped the CIA combat the Soviet Union. Zawahiri believed the western governments were making their politicians gods rather than worshiping Allah.

Gorbachev warned the U.S. that if the U.S. supported the Afghan freedom fighters, when the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan, radical Islam rather than democracy would flourish.

Melvin Goodman said, "I think probably one of the greatest myths of American political discourse now is that actions of the American government [in Afghanistan] were responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union collapsed like a house of cards...It rotted away from within. The economy was rotten. The political process was rotten.

The radical Islamists were convinced that they were the key reason why the Soviet Union in Afghanistan collapsed. The radical Islamists now believed they must collapsed the democratic government of other Islamic nations. Zawahiri and the money of Osama bin Laden joined forces.

The governments in Algeria and Egypt cracked down on the Muslims who wanted to place the Koran at the center of the government. After the crackdown, the radical Islamists were convinced that destroying western values must be done through violence and not democracy.

Neo-Conservatism:
Saddam Hussein had been allied with America in the 1980s. However, after Hussein invaded Kuwait, the neo-conservatives thought overthrowing Hussein and establishing democracy in Iraq would be necessary. George H.W. Bush did not agree with the neo-conservatives.

Once the neo-conservatives knew Bush would not go along with their aggressive foreign policy, the neo-conservatives began a religious crusade to bring morality back to America. This became known as the "culture wars." "Strauss had taught that these myths [war and religion] were necessary to give ordinary people meaning and purpose and so insure a stable society." To the neo-conservatives, religion is an instrument to promote morality.

At the 1992 convention, "George Bush became committed to run for president with policies that would ban abortion, gay rights, and multiculturalism. Speakers who tried to promote the traditional conservative values of individual freedom (William Weld, governor of Massachusetts) were booed off the stage."

Many Republicans who stressed individual freedom voted for Bill Clinton. "The neo-conservatives were determined to regain power, and to do this, they were determined to do to Bill Clinton what they had done to the Soviet Union. They would transform the president of the United States into a fantasy enemy - an image of evil that would make people realize the truth of the liberal corruption of America."


Radical Islam:
The radical Islamists killed, believing that killing would cause citizens to rise up and overthrow the western governments and establish Islamic governments. This did not occur. In Algeria, the militant Islamic groups killed thousands and people because they believed these people had become corrupted.

The generals in Algeria instituted the radical Islamic groups and encouraged the groups to kill even more people. This would cause the remaining people to give the generals more power over the people, since the people would do anything to purchase security.

In Algeria, the radical Islamic groups began to fight one another. Each group thought that the other groups were not radical (pure) enough. The G.I.A. believed that "the whole of Algeria society should be killed with the exception of his tiny band of Islamisists. They were the only ones that understood the truth."

Neo-Conservatism:
"By 1996, politics in Washington was dominated by one issue - the moral character of the president of the United States." Clinton was accused of all kinds of misconduct, most of which was untrue. For example, Clinton did nothing wrong in Whitewater.

Kenneth Starr, a member of the right-wing Federalist Society, headed up the Whitewater investigation. Judge Robert Bork called Bill Clinton a sociopath. Kenneth Starr could not find any evidence of misconduct by Clinton in Whitewater.

Instead of continually pursing Whitewater, the neo-conservatives used William Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky - and that fact that Clinton lied about it - to destroy him.

Radical Islam:
In 1997, Zawahiri and bin Laden formed a new strategy to fight the United States, which they felt had inspired the moral decay in their country.


Part 3: The Shadows in the Cave

Bin Laden recreated suicide bombers to attack western localities. "From beyond his own small group, bin Laden had no formal organization until the Americans invented one for him."

An informant and former associate of bin Laden told the FBI in January of 2001 that bin Laden was "an all-powerful figure at the head of a large terrorist network that had an organized hierarchy of control. The informant also said that bin Laden had given this network a name: Al-Qaeda....It was a dramatic and powerful picture of bin Laden but it bore little relationship to the truth."

"There is also no evidence that bin Laden used the term Al-Qaeda to refer to the name of a group until after September 11th when he realized that this was the term that Americans had given him."

"That bin Laden ran a coherent organization with operatives and cells all around the world, of which he could be a member, is a myth. There is no Al-Qaeda organization. There is no international network..."

After September 11th, President Bush said, "Al-Qaeda is to terror what the Mafia is to crime. There are thousands of there terrorists in more than sixty countries. They are recruited from their own nations and neighborhoods and brought to places like Afghanistan where they are trained in the tactics of terror." The attack of September 11th brought the neo-conservatives back to power in the U.S. government.

In September 2000, Bush said in a debate, "I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into a country and say, `We do it this way and so should you.'" After the attacks, Bush said, "We're going to find those, who, uh, uh, those evil doers."

The Northern Alliance in Afghanistan (who were opposed to the Taliban) "were paid by the Americans for each prisoner they delivered. But the majority of these fighters had never had anything to do with bin Laden or international terrorists."

Tim Russert said, "This [Osama's hideout] is a fortress, a complex, multi-tiered, bedrooms and offices on the top, secret exists on the sides and the bottom, cut deep to avoid thermal detection. A ventilation system to allow people to breath and carry on, the entrances large enough to drive trucks, and even tanks even computer systems and telephone systems. It's a very sophisticated operation."

"But all the forts were small caves, which were either empty or had been used to store ammunition. There was no underground bunker system - no secret tunnels. The fortress did not exist. The Northern Alliance did produce some prisoners they claimed were Al-Qaeda fighters, but there was no proof of this."

"The terrible truth was that there was nothing there because Al-Qaeda as an organization did not exist. The attacks on America had been planned by a small group that had come around bin Laden around the late 90s."

The U.S. found sleeper cells in the U.S. "and asserted that they had just been waiting to strike but in reality, there was very little evidence that any of those arrested had anything at all to do with terrorist plots."

(40 minutes into film) Film explores how Detroit sleeper cell was not a sleeper cell at all. Government used `coincidences' as proof of guilt. In the Buffalo case, the government had even less proof. Likewise, the British alleged Al-Qaeda cells were also proven false.

One captured terrorist told the U.S. that Al-Qaeda was going to blow up soft targets like the Brooklyn Bridge and shopping malls. This terrorist also told his interrogators that the organization had the ability to make a `dirty bomb' and transfer the bomb to the United States. However, a `dirty bomb' (if even real) would not inflict much damage. Yet, the fear it caused, and the false threat it posed, scared Americans.

The U.S. then began to go after Saddam Hussein, believing he was part of the web of terror. The neo-conservatives claimed that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

"Under the preventive paradigm, instead of holding people accountable for what you can prove that they have done in the past, you lock them up based on what you think or speculate they might do in the future, and how can a person who's locked up based on what they might do in the future disprove your speculation." The precautionary principle originated with the Green Party's green movement against global warming, which has never been proven.

They [the politicians] imagine the worse about an organization [Al-Qaeda] that does not even exist.

"In a society that believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda...But the fear will not last and just as promises turned out to be illusions so too will the nightmares, and then our politicians will have to face the fact that they have no visions either good or bad to offer us any longer."

It is unfortunate that this documentary cannot be given a more "proper" release. The free online version is certainly good enough. I think highly enough of the film to want to own a copy. However, the 2008 (22.99) version did appear a little grainy in video quality, and i heard that this version was supposed to be the better of those released. So, i ordered this version in addition to the 22.99 version. I own two DVD players, and it would not play on either one. The DVD itself has a purple color, which i imagine makes it difficult for the player to read, and it eventually gives up with the NO DISC status. My DVD players are just a year or two old, and they are Samsung HD players. While I have not heard great things about Samsung players, I do know that these in particular play every DVD my family watches great. After my attempt to watch this version, i loaded in a movie that did read just fine. If you want to try the version, just be prepared to send it back!

I am a historian, as well as a novelist. I don't consider myself enlightened by any means but I do consider myself a step above many when it comes to seeing through the propaganda that is prevalent in any political system.
I was a student in the middle-east and I could see how demonized many int he region were made by mainstream American politics/media/Hollywood and I understood in 1998 that eventually something was going to snap...
This film does an excellent job of showing how even though the Neo-Conservative movement and the Islamic Fundamentalist movements are two completely different organizations, that they are in fact, based in a very similar belief first seen in 1950's America by two different men, a University Professor and an Egyptian Student in Colorado. The two ideologies are nearly identical, one stays in America and eventually lays the foundation for the Neo-Conservative movement, the other returns to Egypt and becomes part of the infamous Muslim Brotherhood.
At this point, the two belief structures grow further apart, but their core belief remains the same. The liberalism that was becoming prevalent in post-war America was a decadent force on the strength of the nation... and both factions chose to fight against it in their own way... one through a return to Islamic Fundamentals, and the other through a return to Patriotic idealism.
A very interesting look at a process from a very intellectual point of view, not a "chop" film that you would find from the likes of Michael Moore...

Highly recommended...

Century of the Self (Adam Curtis) 2011
The Trap (Adam Curtis) Conspiracy Theory Edition - 2011
Pandora's Box (Conspiracy Edition) Adam Curtis - DVD 1 - 2011
Pandora's Box (Conspiracy Edition) Adam Curtis - DVD 2 - 2011

All of these are amazing Adam Curtis documentaries and if you like when people challenge the status quo then these are for you.

If you like conspiracy theory than you are going to love this documentary by Adam Curtis. In this film he makes interesting connections between the birth of Al Qaeda and the rise of the Bush/Cheney Administration. The use of fear as a weapon on both sides of the coin and how each utilizes it is a main focus.

I found this version on a different website and got it.

The picture quality is pretty good and the sound quality is great.

It looks like this is the cheapest version available on Amazon.

Simply stated, this DVD is spectacular...

I recommend that you BUY DIRECT from Amazon as there are already poor quality rip offs being sold through resellers.

This DVD contains all three episodes of the three part series.

A must own for everyone!