The Speech That Killed JFK

 John F Kennedy speaks about the secret societies

The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.

No President should fear public scrutinity of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers-- I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed-- and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First (emphasized) Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution-- not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news-- for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security...

And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of mans deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news-- that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.

New Rulers of the World

THE FILM

The New Rulers of the World is a 2001 Carlton Television documentary film written and presented by John Pilger and directed by Alan Lowery. In the film, "John Pilger shows us the realities of globalisation by taking a close look at Indonesia."

In order to examine the true effects of globalization, Pilger turns the spotlight on Indonesia, a country described by the World Bank as a model pupil until its globalized economy collapsed in 1998. The film examines the use of sweatshop factories by famous brand names, and asks some penetrating questions. Who are the real beneficiaries of the globalized economy? Who really rules the world now? Is it governments or a handful of huge companies? The Ford Motor Company alone is bigger than the economy of South Africa. Enormously rich men, like Bill Gates, have a wealth greater than all of Africa.

Pilger goes behind the hype of the new global economy and reveals that the divisions between the rich and poor have never been greater -- two thirds of the world's children live in poverty -- and the gulf is widening like never before.

The film looks at the new rulers of the world -- the great multinationals and the governments and institutions that back them -- the IMF and the World Bank. Under IMF rules, millions of people throughout the world lose their jobs and livelihood. The reality behind much of modern shopping and the famous brands is a sweatshop economy, which is being duplicated in country after country.

The film travels to Indonesia and Washington, asking challenging questions seldom raised in the mainstream media and exposing the scandal of globalization, including revealing interviews with top officials of the World Bank and the IMF.

INTERVIEWER

John Pilger

INTERVIEWEES

Stanley Fischer – First Deputy Managing Director, International Monetary Fund

Nicholas Stern – Chief Economist, The World Bank

Dr. Susan George – Author, A Fate Worse Than Debt

George Monbiot – Environmentalist

Dr. Vandana Shiva - Environmentalist

Dita Sari – Trade union leader & former political prisoner

Promoedaya Ananta Toer – Author & former political prisoner

Barry Coates – World Development Movement

Guy Taylor – Globalise Resistance

Professor Jeffrey Winters – Northwestern University, USA

Roland Challis – BBC SE Asia Correspondent 1964-69

John Arnold – Chairman, British Chamber of Commerce, Jakarta

FILM REVIEW

"In another in a long line of passionate, wide-ranging and informative reports, John Pilger examines globalization: a process which, he believes, enslaves the many in order to empower the few. It is a deeply impressive, informative, heartfelt piece of journalism, and it proves that the small screen still can, when it has a mind to, bring us the big picture."

Graham McCann, Financial Times

_________________________________

"Pilger's analysis is sophisticated, interweaving Cold War politics and the workings of the World Bank and the IMF, and shows how corporations such as Ford now have bigger economies than South Africa, and the way many countries have been turned into giant sweatshops."

Gerard Gilbert, The (London) Independent

_________________________________

"Globalization is a big subject to tackle and there's no doubt this latest film is a full meal, throwing a lot of factual information at the viewer. That it never feels overwhelming or unfocused testifies both to Pilger's film-making experience and to those political news instincts he developed at the Daily Mirror, in the days when the Mirror really mattered."

Kieron Corless, Time Out

_________________________________

"John Pilger is back with another quietly impassioned report on the insidious nature of globalization. His grilling of an IMF spokesman is beautifully understated, although it doesn't stop the man from spouting absolute rubbish. A must-see for those who think anti-capitalist demonstrations are led solely by thuggish anarchists."

Mary Novakovich, The (Manchester) Guardian

_________________________________

"Any new investigation by John Pilger is going to be an event, and rightly so as his brand of crusading journalism is so rare on the box today...In this compelling hour...he contends that the real power in today's global economy no longer resides with the governments but in the hands of a few huge multinationals...And watching him among the sweatshops of Indonesia, it's hard to disagree."

Jan Jurczak, Daily Express
_________________________________

"Even if you vehemently disagree with most of what John Pilger says, he puts forward a case that needs to be answered."

David Chater, The (London) Times

_________________________________

"A calm, carefully articulated account of the monstrous crimes perpetrated by the heroes of globalization."

Timothy McGettigan, Professor of Sociology, University of Southern Colorado

_________________________________

"A scathing portrait of the way Western commerce has taken over the economy of Indonesia and continues to maintain its grip in a way which prevents the country from ever rising above its poverty."

Doug Cummings, filmjourney.org

Power and Terror in Our Times

NOAM CHOMSKY

Avram Noam Chomsky, born December 7, 1928 is an American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, and activist. He is an Institute Professor and Professor (Emeritus) in the Department of Linguistics & Philosophy at MIT, where he has worked for over 50 years. Chomsky has been described as the "father of modern linguistics" and a major figure of analytic philosophy. His work has influenced fields such as computer science, mathematics, and psychology.

Chomsky is credited as the creator or co-creator of the Chomsky hierarchy theorem, the universal grammar theory, and the Chomsky–Schützenberger theorem.

Ideologically identifying with anarchism and libertarian socialism, Chomsky is known for his critiques of U.S. foreign policy, and he has been described as a prominent cultural figure. His social criticism has included Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), co-written with Edward S. Herman, an analysis articulating the propaganda model theory for examining the media.

According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index in 1992, Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any other living scholar from 1980 to 1992. He is also the eighth most cited source of all time, and is considered the "most cited living author". Chomsky is the author of over 100 books.

 

THE FILM

This enlightening 74-minute documentary is directed by John Junkerman, an American living in Tokyo. It covers a series of talks given in the spring of 2002 by Noam Chomsky, the MIT linguist and political philosopher. There are also excerpts taken from an interview at his office in Cambridge. In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, he put out a book, 9-11 (Seven Stories Press, 2001), which became a surprise bestseller. Since then this diminutive 74-year-old intellectual has been giving speeches all over the country about American power politics, war crimes, and terrorism. Chomsky's perspective is one that has not been heard very often in the mainstream media, outside of the messages of Ralph Nader and Michael Moore. "Everyone's worried about stopping terrorism," he says. "Well, there's a really easy way: Stop participating in it."

One of the most dreadful after-effects of the atrocities of September 11, according to Chomsky, has been the jump-start those attacks gave to the rapid acceleration of militarization and the undermining of democracy. This has been true not only in the United States but also in Israel where an even more harsh and aggressive campaign against Palestinians has moved full speed ahead. This critic of the Bush Administration points out that the "war on terrorism" doesn't make any sense when it does not include the violent military policies of the U.S. Chomsky helps us recall that the United States is the only country that was condemned for international terrorism and then rejected a Security Council resolution calling on states to observe international law. He is referring to the unlawful use of force for political ends in Nicaragua where tens of thousands of people died. Americans should not expect other countries to be held to a standard that does not apply to them.

Introducing Chomksy to an audience, a woman calls him "a voice of reason, conscience and intelligence." In this documentary he provides plenty of historical examples of the danger of power politics and the ease with which the media and the intellectual class have stifled criticism during times of war. Chomsky is zealous in the case he makes against violence, that of terrorist groups and that of armed interventions by nation states into the affairs of others. Whether talking about Nuremberg, the Turkish terrorism against the Kurds, or the thirty-five year occupation by Israel of the Palestinian territories, this committed scholar sets the record straight.

It is easy to see why Chomsky has been championed by peace and justice movements all over the world. He truly believes that civilized dialogue about politics and civic activism has made a difference in American culture. This optimism is something that is desperately needed in these anxious and dangerous times.

The Collapse

THE FILM

Collapse, directed by Chris Smith, is an American documentary film exploring the theories, writings and life story of controversial author Michael Ruppert. Collapse premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September 2009 to positive reviews.

Ruppert, a former Los Angeles police officer who describes himself as an investigative reporter and radical thinker, has authored books on the events of the September 11 attacks and of energy issues. Critics call him a conspiracy theorist and an alarmist.

Director Smith interviewed Ruppert over the course of fourteen hours in an interrogation-like setting in an abandoned warehouse basement meat locker near downtown Los Angeles. Ruppert’s interview was shot over five days throughout March and April of 2009. The filmmakers distilled these interviews down to this 82 minute monologue with archival footage interspersed as illustration. The title refers to Ruppert’s belief that unsustainable energy and financial policies have led to an ongoing collapse of modern industrial civilization.

The film does not overtly take a perspective on the validity of Ruppert’s positions and critics have alternatingly described the film as supportive and as critical of Ruppert’s views. Smith himself, speaking at the Toronto International Film Festival premiere, said that "What I hoped to reveal was ... that his obsession with the collapse of industrial civilization has led to the collapse of his life. In the end, it is a character study about his obsession."

MICHAEL RUPPERT

Michael C. Ruppert (born 1951) is an American author, a former Los Angeles Police Department officer and investigative journalist and peak oil theorist.

Until 2006, he published and edited From The Wilderness, a newsletter and website covering a range of topics including (international) politics, the C.I.A., peak oil, civil liberties, drugs, economics, corruption and 9/11 alternative theories. He is also the author of Crossing The Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil and was the subject of the 2009 documentary film Collapse.

Currently, he is CEO and president of Collapse Network, Inc, and hosts The Lifeboat Hour on Progressive Radio Network.



MEMORABLE QUOTES

“Why has Congress not once lived up to its statutory obligation to review the emergency status? It's been almost four years... And why is Cynthia McKinney the only member of congress in this room?”

__________________

“Since September 11th we have seen the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th amendments to the Constitution abrogated either in whole or in part. What has been done about it?”

__________________

“And what about the right to declare war? The executive branch does not have that right; only Congress is given that power by our Constitution.”

__________________

“the point man in breaking major stories involving government foreknowledge of 9/11, corruption and violations of the Constitution.”

__________________

“It is designed from the ground up for women. Previously, all (chemical dependency) treatment was designed for white males. Every element (of the Boulder facility) is designed for women.”

__________________

“To survive you don't have to be faster than the bear, you only have to be faster than the slowest among you.”

The Story of Power and Powerlessness

THE FILM

We is a fast-paced 64 minute documentary that covers the world politics of power, war, corporations, deception and exploitation.

It visualizes the words of Arundhati Roy, specifically her famous Come September speech, where she spoke on such things as the war on terror, corporate globalization, justice and the growing civil unrest. It's witty, moving, alarming and quite a lesson in modern history.

We is almost in the style of a continuous music video. The music used sets the pace and serves as wonderful background for the words of Ms. Roy and images of humanity in the world we live all in today. We is a completely free documentary, created and released anonymously on the internet.

ARUNDHATI ROY

The first Indian citizen to win the prestigious booker prize and a million dollar book deal has made Arundhati Roy, a celebrity and a tall literary lioness persona. Now in her late-30s, living in Delhi, Arundhati Roy (One of People Magazine's "50 Most Beautiful People in the World 1998") grew up in Kerala, in which her award winning novel "The God of Small Things" is set.

Arundhati Roy (born November 24, 1961) is an Indian novelist, activist and a world citizen. She won the Booker Prize in 1997 for her first novel The God of Small Things.

Roy was born in Shillong, Meghalaya to a Keralite Syrian Christian mother and a Bengali Hindu father, a tea planter by profession. She spent her childhood in Aymanam, in Kerala, schooling in Corpus Christi. She left Kerala for Delhi at age 16, and embarked on a homeless lifestyle, staying in a small hut with a tin roof within the walls of Delhi's Feroz Shah Kotla and making a living selling empty bottles. She then proceeded to study architecture at the Delhi School of Architecture, where she met her first husband, the architect Gerard Da Cunha.

The God of Small Things is the only novel written by Roy. Since winning the Booker Prize, she has concentrated her writing on political issues. These include the Narmada Dam project, India's Nuclear Weapons, corrupt power company Enron's activities in India. She is a figure-head of the anti-globalization/alter-globalization movement and a vehement critic of neo-imperialism.

In response to India's testing of nuclear weapons in Pokhran, Rajasthan, Roy wrote The End of Imagination, a critique of the Indian government's nuclear policies. It was published in her collection The Cost of Living, in which she also crusaded against India's massive hydroelectric dam projects in the central and western states of Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat. She has since devoted herself solely to nonfiction and politics, publishing two more collections of essays as well as working for social causes.

Roy was awarded the Sydney Peace Prize in May 2004 for her work in social campaigns and advocacy of non-violence. In June 2005 she took part in the World Tribunal on Iraq. In January 2006 she was awarded the Sahitya Akademi award for her collection of essays, 'The Algebra of Infinite Justice', but declined to accept it.

MEMORABLE QUOTES

“Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.” 

________________________

“People are so isolated, and so alone, and so suspicious, and so competitive with each other, and so sure that they are about to be conned by their neighbor, or by their mother, or by their sister, or their grandmother. What's the use of having fifty percent of the world's wealth, or whatever it is that you have, if you're going to live this pathetic, terrified life?”

________________________

 “Torture has been privatized now, so you have obviously the whole scandal in America about the abuse of prisoners and the fact that, army people might be made to pay a price, but who are the privatized torturers accountable too?”

________________________

“Do you think that the people of South Africa, or anywhere on the continent of Africa, or India, or Pakistan are longing to be kicked around all over again?”

________________________

“Why not have your nuclear bombs in your briefcase? All of these policies that America upholds, nuclear weapons, privatization, all of these things are going to mutate and metamorphosis into these dangerous things.”

________________________

“I do what I do, and write what I write, without calculating what is worth what and so on. Fortunately, I am not a banker or an accountant. I feel that there is a time when a political statement needs to be made and I make it.”

________________________

“When a symbol unmoors itself from what it symbolizes, it loses meaning. It becomes ineffective”

________________________

“You have come to a stage where you almost have to work on yourself. You know, on finding some tranquility with which to respond to these things, because I realize that the biggest risk that many of us run is beginning to get inured to the horrors.”

 ________________________

“Sometimes I think the world is divided into those who have a comfortable relationship with power and those who have a naturally adversarial relationship with power.”

________________________

“You begin to realize that hypocrisy is not a terrible thing when you see what overt fascism is compared to sort of covert, you know, communal politics which the Congress has never been shy of indulging in.”

________________________

“The fact is that America's weapons systems have made it impossible for anybody to confront it militarily. So, all you have is your wits and your cunning, and your ability to fight in the way the Iraqis are fighting.”

________________________

“It's very, very important to understand that war is the result of a flawed peace, and we must understand the systems that are at work here. You know, we must understand that the resistance movement in Iraq is a resistance movement that all of us have to support, because it's our war, too.”

________________________

“Privatisation is presented as being the only alternative to an inefficient, corrupt state. In fact, it is not a choice at all... it is a mutually profitable business contract between the private company (preferably foreign) and the ruling elite of the Third World”

________________________

The War on Democracy

 DOCUMENTARY BY JOHN PILGER

 

Award winning journalist John Pilger examines the role of Washington in America's manipulation of Latin American politics during the last 50 years leading up to the struggle by ordinary people to free themselves from poverty and racism. Since the mid 19th Century Latin America has been the 'backyard' of the US, a collection of mostly vassal states whose compliant and often brutal regimes have reinforced the 'invisibility' of their majority peoples. The film reveals similar CIA policies to be continuing in Iraq, Iran and Lebanon. The rise of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez despite ongoing Washington backed efforts to unseat him in spite of his overwhelming mass popularity, is democratic in a way that we have forgotten or abandoned in the west. True Democracy being a solid 80% voter turnout in support of Chavez in over 6 elections.

 

ABSTRACT

Set both in Latin America and the United States, the film explores the historic and current relationship of Washington with countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Chile. Pilger says that the film "...tells a universal story... analysing and revealing, through vivid testimony, the story of great power behind its venerable myths. It allows us to understand the true nature of the so-called "war on terror". According to Pilger, the film’s message is that the greed and power of empire is not invincible and that people power is always the "seed beneath the snow".

Pilger interviews several ex-CIA agents who purportedly took part in secret campaigns against democratic countries and who he claims are profiting from the war in Iraq. He investigates the School of the Americas in the U.S. state of Georgia, where General Pinochet’s torture squads were reportedly trained along with tyrants and death-squad leaders in Haiti, El Salvador, Brazil and Argentina.

The film uses archive footage to support its claim that democracy has been wiped out in country after country in Latin America since the 1950s. Testimonies from those who fought for democracy in Chile and Bolivia are also used.

Segments filmed in Bolivia show that for the last five years huge popular movements have demanded that multinational companies be refused to access the country's natural reserves of gas, or to buy up the water supply. In Bolivia, Pilger interviews people who say that their country's resources, including their water and rainwater, were asset stripped by multinational interests. He describes how they threw out a foreign water consortium and reclaimed their water supply. The narrative leads to the landslide election of the country's first indigenous President.

In Chile, Pilger talks to women who survived the pogroms of General Augusto Pinochet, in remembrance of colleagues who perished at the hands of the dictator. He walks with Sara de Witt through the grounds of the torture house in which she was tortured and survived. Pilger also investigates the "model democracy" that Chile has become and claims that there is a façade of prosperity and that Pinochet’s legacy is still alive.

The film also tells the story of an American nun, Dianna Ortiz, who tells how she was tortured and gang raped in the late 1980s by a gang reportedly led by a fellow American clearly in league with the U.S.-backed regime, at a time when the Reagan administration was supplying the military regime with planes and guns. Ortiz asks whether the American people are aware of the role their country plays in subverting innocent nations under the guise of a "war on terror". Former CIA agent and Watergate scandal conspirator Howard Hunt, who describes how he and others overthrew the previously democratically elected government. Hunt describes how he organised "a little harmless bombing". Duane Clarridge, former head of CIA operations in South America is also interviewed.

Pilger traveled through Venezuela with its president, Hugo Chavez, who he regards as the only leader of an oil-producing nation who has used its resources democratically for the education and health of its people. The Venezuelan segment of the film features the coup of 2002, captured in archival footage. The film holds that the 2002 coup against Chavez was backed by rich and powerful interests under U.S. support and that Chavez was brought back to power by the Venezuelan people. Pilger describes the advances in Venezuela’s new social democracy, but he also questions Chavez on why there are still poor people in such an oil-rich country.



American Radical

CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE MOVIE

 NORMAN FINKELSTEIN

Norman Gary Finkelstein (born December 8, 1953) is an American political scientist, and author. His primary fields of research are the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the politics of the Holocaust. He is a graduate of Binghamton University and received his Ph.D in Political Science from Princeton University. He has held faculty positions at Brooklyn College, Rutgers University, Hunter College, New York University, and, most recently, DePaul University, where he was an assistant professor from 2001 to 2007.

In 2007, after a highly publicized row between Finkelstein and a notable opponent of his, Alan Dershowitz, Finkelstein's tenure bid at DePaul was denied.Finkelstein was placed on administrative leave for the 2007-2008 academic year, and on September 5, 2007, he announced his resignation after coming to a settlement with the university on generally undisclosed terms. An official statement from DePaul strongly defended the decision to deny Finkelstein tenure, stated that outside influence played no role in the decision, and praised Finkelstein "as a prolific scholar and outstanding teacher."

AMERICAN RADICAL

THE TRIALS OF NORMAN FINKELSTEIN

“American Radical is a powerful film — brave, bold, incendiary. I highly recommend it!”
– Michael Moore, award-winning documentary filmmaker

“American Radical is a nuanced and powerful portrait of the scholar Norman Finkelstien, one of the nation’s most courageous and embattled intellectuals. It is a reminder that mendacity and timidity, when in the service of conventional beliefs, are more highly prized in most universities that truth. It illustrates that those who unmask the lies of the intellectual elite swiftly become their victims. The power and subtext of this film, however, is not in the wars fought between Finkelstien and those like Alan Dershowitz who seek to destroy him, but in Finkelstein’s powerful fealty to his mother’s suffering in the Warsaw Ghetto and later the Nazi death camps. Finkelstein sees in all who are oppressed his mother’s degradation and pain. This is a movie that is, at its core, about the unshakable bond of love between a parent and a true and faithful son who refuses to forget or compromise.”
—Chris Hedges,auther of " Amercam Fasists "

“’American Radical: The Trials of Norman Finkelstein’ is a cautiously respectful documentary portrait of a political firebrand who presents himself as a beacon of moral truth in the murk of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
—Stephen Holden, New York Times

“Surprisingly entertaining…a compelling portrait of a difficult man.”
—Mark Cohen, The Jewish Daily Forward

“Presents a humanizing portrait of a complex and principled individual…‘American Radical’ deserves to be seen widely as a fascinating introduction to the man and his views.”
—Susan Ryan, Cineaste Magazine

“A fascinating, well-rounded portrait of Finkelstein that simultaneously informs, inspires and infuriates…the filmmakers ride a delicate line, assembling a warts-and-all portrait that shows why Finkelstein is deeply respected and equally reviled.”
—Mark Achbar, director of ’The Corporation’ and ’Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media’

“With impressive restraint, the fascinatingly thorny ‘American Radical’ is less interested in the validity of Finkelstein’s ideas—seriously mounted, if inflammatory—and more in the topsy-turvy life of today’s professional academic. Amazingly, that choice doesn’t result in a boring movie.”
—Joshua Rothkopf, Time Out New York

“A guaranteed argument starter…an engaging portrait of an academic whose work is both fueled and undermined by his vitriolic personality.”
—J.R. Jones, Chicago Reader

“‘American Radical’…presents a more balanced portrait of Finkelstein, who, when his passion doesn’t carry him off on a wave of anger, is shown to be thoughtful, intelligent and deeply melancholy.”
—George Robinson, The Jewish Week

“(Finkelstein’s) conclusions can be debated, his methods can be deplored, but as (‘American Radical’ directors) Ridgen and Rossier take pains to point out, a man so rigorously committed to putting an end to oppression ought not be so easily dismissed, even if coming to grips with such a challenging figure may be finally as difficult as getting to the bottom of the Arab-Israeli conflict itself.”
—Andrew Schenker, Slant Magazine

“A blood-boiling, very good documentary.”
—Mark Keizer, Boxoffice Magazine

MEMORABLE QUOTES FROM THE MOVIE

Norman Finkelstein: [responding to hecklers at a lecture he is giving] Excuse me! Every single member of my family on both sides was exterminated. Both of my parents were in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising and it's precisely and exactly because of the lessons my parents taught me and my two siblings that i will not be silent when Israel commits its crimes against the Palestinians.

---

Norman Finkelstein: [commenting on Alan Derschowitz's new book] I was asked to come in and discuss his new book. I went home and purchased one copy, infact i purchased two copies. I read the book very carefully, i did what someone serious does with a book: I read the text, i went through the footnotes. I went through it very carefully, and there's only one conclusion one can reach having read the book - and this is a scholarly judgment, it's not an ad hominem attack. Mr. Derschowitz has concocted a fraud.

---

Norman Finkelstein: Believe me, sometimes i wonder whether it's worth it. As I like to say, speaking as a devout atheist, thank god that in his almighty wisdom he made us mortal. We don't have to endure it through eternity.

---

Norman Finkelstein: [on being called a self-hating jew] Okay, for argument's sake let's assume it's true. Let's say I have deep identity conflicts. Let's assume it's all true. What's the relevance? The only relevant question is whether what i'm saying is true or false. Let's say Einstein had deep identity conflicts. How does that influence one's judgment about his physics?