http://www.iraqforsale.orgThe Premise
A reason for concern
As the brilliant 2003 documentary “The Corporation” demonstrates, corporations are inhuman, legally individual entities that, if human, could be diagnosed as psychopathic. Their responsibility is not to the public at large, nor to adhere to any basic moral code, but solely to maintain a bottom line, regardless of human cost. They have gained a frightful level of power in our daily lives and our weakening democracy. This point is raised in Barry Levinson’s “Man of the Year” by Robin William’s character, who comically suggests that members of Congress should begin wearing sponsorship patches on their suits, as done by drivers in the ad-saturated NASCAR market.
Robert Greenwald’s newest documentary, “Iraq for Sale,” attacks the widening role of corporations in war, with particular concern for their increasingly unsupervised influence in matters traditionally held by the governmental-supervised military, from engineering to armed security to prisoner interrogation. It should disturb anyone when the process of war is outsourced to an entity that is primarily responsible for profit maintenance and not human worth – or even victory.
Last month, Peace Economy Project held the sold-out St. Louis premiere of “Iraq for Sale,” with Greenwald in presence at a Tivoli screening following a buffet reception at the Regional Arts Commission. They held another screening this past weekend.
Greenwald is best-known as the prolific director of recent progressive documentaries including “Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism” and “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price,” but his work also extends to fiction film-making, such as his 1997 “Breaking Up” with Russell Crowe and Salma Hayek.
The Film
An emotional call to action
While numerous companies profit from war, Greenwald focuses on the four largest offenders: Halliburton, Blackwater, CACI and Tritan. The film consists of interviews with U.S. soldiers, activists, disillusioned employees, concerned whistleblowers and grieving families who all have relevant, poignant stories to tell.
Many will dismiss Greenwald’s film as liberal propaganda without even viewing the film. Yet, regardless of one’s political persuasion, the people featured in the film deserve to be heard. Unlike Greenwald’s “Uncovered: The War in Iraq,” his new documentary is unconcerned with political questions of our reasons for being in Iraq. It focuses solely on how the war is being managed, and argues quite effectively that the greed involved in the private outsourcing of war has led to rampant waste and fraud and ultimately caused frustration and death for both U.S. troops and private citizens.
Among the stories chronicled in the film, interviewees explain how incompetent translators were hired without proper checks, civilians took part in prisoner torture without any repercussions and truck drivers were sent unknowingly through active war zones without any cargo (so that the government could be billed more).
The disillusionment of soldiers who train Iraqi civilians to perform tasks that used to be their own jobs is eye-opening. Knowing that the civilian contractor is being paid exponentially more, why not leave the military and join the corporation? You will get much better pay and do the same exact thing. You can even join the private army of Blackwell (founded by an ex-Navy SEAL) and still go around shooting people, if that’s your thing.
This fact echoes the one useful aspect of the “Star Wars” prequels: Senator Palpatine and his Storm Troopers. It is dangerous to allow the formation of a private, elite army controlled by those with ties to a ruler that is grasping for additional executive power, even when it is in the name of safety in a time of dire national danger.
The end of the film features footage of the filmmaker’s attempts to contact the corporate heads for their point of view. I asked Greenwald if he made any attempt to contact everyday workers that were sympathetic with their corporations to present opposite viewpoints of the disillusioned workers he interviewed. “I did not make an effort,” he said. “I wanted those who set the policy, not good workers.” None of those policy makers were willing to be interviewed.
Greenwald produced the film under a tight schedule using donations from over 3,000 individual supporters of his work, and he has adopted a distribution strategy that relies upon the personal involvement of concerned audiences, instead of an impersonal theatrical release. The film is available on DVD from www.iraqforsale.org, and Greenwald believes that word-of-mouth advertisement and organized community screenings will facilitate discussion and positive action by everyday people toward stopping war profiteering.
The Future
Hope and your role
I pray that my particular screening experience was an aberration.
Judging by the film’s Web site, it may have been. Many people have become actively involved in the issue and in Mr. Greenwald’s work. The challenge of curbing corporate influence is certainly large, but as Greenwald notes, “we must begin somewhere. one step at a time.”
He also notes that while it is useful “to preach to the choir” and give informative tools to those that are sympathetic with his positions, the film has also drawn “many people who don’t agree with [him], and whose eyes are opened.”
For his part, Greenwald is currently focused on the guerilla distribution of “Iraq for Sale” yet plans to continue both documentary and fiction film-making. “There are many important stories to tell,” Greenwald said.
For those of you that are interested in seeing the film or in taking action, The Social Justice Center of Washington University (sjc.wustl.edu) will hold a screening on Nov. 1, cosponsored by the Wash. U. Peace Coalition. The location is to be determined, but check out their site for news.
The Screenplay
Frustration and futility realized
I must personally confess skepticism as to how much positive action is possible for the issues raised in “Iraq for Sale,” although my view is biased by particularly negative experiences at the screening.
While I found the film engaging, informative and technically well-made, I found the audience of progressives disturbingly immature. Entering into the Regional Arts Commission to pick up tickets, I suddenly felt like I was at the political geek equivalent of a Star Trek convention. The man in front of me wore a T-shirt displaying reasons why George W. Bush is a criminal. He displayed it vocally to anyone who would listen, with a bellicose pride amidst the reassuring safety of his progressive compatriots. All around me, people wore similar garb, like a Trekker would don his own unique Klingon or Federation uniform and makeup.
If you’ve ever been inside the Regional Arts Commission, you know the entryway is not conducive to large crowds. Yet it was here that people lined up to get tickets, browsed the art displays, got into the buffet, mingled and were interviewed by a film crew.
No tickets were sold ahead of time, although one could call ahead for tickets and leave a message on the Peace Economy Project answering machine as a form of reservation. Confusion over what the line was for, if tickets were still available and if reservations were actually made all contributed to one of the most poorly run fiascos I have ever witnessed.
The film crew was present to make a promotional feature on the documentary screening. While queuing up, a woman picked people out to interview. The line slowly moved forward toward the table we all hoped was selling tickets. Two impatient people behind me grew apprehensive that two interviewees in front of me were stalled in line. After all, there was now three feet of empty line space; so the impatient pair just cut ahead of us. Another man pointed out to them that this was rather rude, but they just scoffed an unspoken “F-U, buddy.”
We all eventually learned the buffet was sold out – but film tickets were still available. The queue suddenly disintegrated into a mass of people rushing the table en masse to either purchase film tickets or check on their reservation. A man next to me complained how badly things were being run to the woman behind the sales table. She looked like she cared about as much as a Halliburton executive does about those who criticize the company. After he left, she rolled her eyes at his audacity to complain about their ineptitude.
My disappointment with the crowd increased at the Tivoli where it was screened. Before the film, various activists perused the aisles with petitions and voting publicity material. A woman next to me refused to sign a petition. She seemed to care about the issue, and I was curious about her refusal. My confusion was apparent in my eyes, for she immediately sighed and explained herself.
“This is the same thing all over again that we had to deal with for Vietnam. It’s sickening. All the protesting and petitions didn’t do a lick of good then – and they’re not going to now. I already served my time and saw all the good [sarcastic] it did,” she said.
After the film, Greenwald took questions from the audience. Most questions had little to do with the film, but were thinly-veiled soap box tirades of frustration.
“Wake up! You people need to learn that Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin!” shouted the woman representing the Progressive Party.
Greenwald tried to emphasize that the situation was not hopeless – that we can still exert influence through the election process, particularly the upcoming midterms. He pointed out that the information on Congressional voting on the subject of war profiteering was readily available. Yet, his voice seemed overwhelmed by the audience’s continued outrage and personal agendas.