Hollywood Libs Push Boycott of ‘Zero Dark Thirty’

According to Hollywood, investigations of  Hollywood communists is one of the worst blights on America’s record. Over and over again, like a child picking a scab, Hollywood revisits the horrid days of McCarthyism. In The Majestic, Jim Carrey plays a writer dragged up before McCarthy on charges of communism; in The Way We Were, Barbra Streisand plays a Marxist whose politics damages her husband’s screenwriting career; in Good Night and Good Luck, Hollywood relived the saga of Edward R. Murrow attacking Sen. Joseph McCarthy. Tinseltown can’t get enough of reliving how the right supposedly violated its First Amendment principles in order to persecute the poor little Soviet fellow travelers who were throwing their weight around in the industry.

But when it comes to today’s liberals persecuting non-liberal thought in Hollywood, Hollywood doesn’t bat an eyelash.

Take, for example, director Kathryn Bigelow of Zero Dark Thirty. Bigelow is no right-winger – when she made The Hurt Locker, many on the right were upset at what they perceived to be an anti-military bias. But now, the left wants a full-scale awards season boycott against Zero Dark Thirty. Why? The movie depicts American intelligence utilizing harsh interrogation techniques – techniques harsher than those actually used – in order to obtain information about Osama Bin Laden.

This challenges the left’s contradictory view of torture: either torture is so brutal that its immorality outweighs the gains obtained, or torture doesn’t work at all. Bigelow’s film depicts brutal torture – placing terrorists in boxes, hanging people from chains, waterboarding with buckets – but it also shows that the intelligence gathered was valuable in finding Bin Laden. And Hollywood can’t handle that.

So actor David Clennon, who is a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, launched a campaign to stop Zero Dark Thirty from receiving any awards. Wrote Clennon:

I’m a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. The Motion Picture Academy clearly warns its members not to disclose their votes for Academy Awards.  Nevertheless, I firmly believe that the film Zero Dark Thirty promotes the acceptance of the crime of torture, as a legitimate weapon in America’s so-called War on Terror. In that belief, following my conscience, I will not vote for Zero Dark Thirty in any category … I cannot vote for a film that makes heroes of Americans who commit the crime of torture.

Now Clennon has been joined by Martin Sheen and Ed Asner. Sheen, who has long been an ardent leftist – President Josiah Bartlet! – says he opposes any awards for Zero Dark Thirty. Asner, who declared himself an open socialist long ago – even as he rakes in cash from voice work in films like Up! – said, “I would like to condemn the movie.” According to the press, both actors want voters to “factor in matters of conscience when casting awards votes.”

And yet Hollywood has no problem feting movies that excuse Nazism (The Reader), fete Communism (Reds), and create sympathy for pedophilia (Little Children).

While those in Tinseltown like to claim that their ultimate god is the almighty dollar – an odd defense from a group of folks who consider themselves to be leftists – the truth is that they are cause-driven ideologues. And it’s astonishing how little non-liberal content it takes to turn Hollywood against you. Originally, Zero Dark Thirty was slated to be a sycophant session for Obama as bin Laden-killer. Then it was great. But when Bigelow produced an accurate depiction of the role of enhanced interrogation techniques – even as a side point in the main story – the left turned on it. And then the left claims, ridiculously, that there’s no bias in Hollywood.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • http://www.adinakutnicki.com AdinaK

    Hollyweird at its most mendacious, deeply in bed with leftist political power centers – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/10/14/hollywood-lib

    Exposing their out-sized, unbridled hypocrisy is paramount. Michael Moore, Oliver Stone etc etc, are you listening?

    Adina Kutnicki, Israel – http://adinakutnicki.com/about/

  • Tan

    Hey, if these filmmakers, speakers, etc, want to boycott Zero Dark Thirty, they can go right ahead, because what we should be doing is boycotting them back for falsely blaming the NRA/law-abiding gun owners for Sandy Hook and for being hypocrites. These Leftists are telling us that we can't have school security or have a firearm to protect ourselves, and yet they get to keep their guns in their movies they make (not to mention their security guards they hire for protection). And now they are telling us that we can't have certain content in the movies we make, but they themselves can all of that in their films. I'm not saying that showing torture in a film is cool, but what I'm saying is that this is another example of Leftist hypocracy. This is why Socialism/Communism doesn't work, and it will never work. Someone with full power can tell people what to do, but they think that those things don't have to apply to themselves. It's the same with these Leftists in Hollywood. It also reminds me of the whole Islam vs Islamophobia double-standard situation: the Qur'an can say about violence and marrying children, but when it comes to critics of Islam saying it, then they are told to not speak about those things or else. Let's get this straight, this political war with the Left is never going to end until Armageddon. That's how determined the Left is. They will never give up their selfish, rotten, and wicked ways because they think that they themselves can do no wrong. I guess that's what they mean when they say, "History repeats itself."

  • welldoneson

    The left's stupidity, of calling it a crime when our guys do torture, but dismissing, denying, and even excusing it when done by those who have declared themselves our enemy, does not begin to describe their wild-eyed behavior in any debate. Their hilariously contradictory assertion that torture provide no useful info AND gives our already-committed enemy some kind of more intense commitment reminds us they are voices to be ignored.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "…gives our already-committed enemy some kind of more intense commitment reminds us they are voices to be ignored."

      It only gives our enemy a means of getting our treasonous leftists mobilized. That's it.Look how they behave. Everyone is familiar with an eye for an eye. They know they can't actually expect better treatment from anyone and they don't. The leftists only expect us to go easy on the enemies of the USA. The enemies of the USA can torture our soldiers and get cheered on by leftists.

      That's just how demented they are.

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    WOW! The left engaging in McCarthyism.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    "Hollywood Libs Push Boycott of ‘Zero Dark Thirty’"

    This is amazing because I can assure anyone that this film already was highly polished from a political correctness standpoint. I'm betting that few enemies have any problem with the film, other than protesting the historical event. The only people it offends is Democrats because they think it empowers the Republicans somehow by failing to attack them strongly enough. It doesn't directly attack conservatives, but I suppose they think all films should, if at all possible.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    "This challenges the left’s contradictory view of torture: either torture is so brutal that its immorality outweighs the gains obtained, or torture doesn’t work at all. Bigelow’s film depicts brutal torture – placing terrorists in boxes, hanging people from chains, waterboarding with buckets – but it also shows that the intelligence gathered was valuable in finding Bin Laden. And Hollywood can’t handle that."

    It's no defense to depict reality if it goes against the leftist dogmas.

  • gm1953

    I don't get it. They had no problem giving academy to a convicted child rapist who fled to france to avoid his prison sentence!

  • Stephan

    What would Israel say about a revisionist 9/11 movie?

    • stern

      How is your question in any way relevant to the article?

    • Indioviejo

      You mean like the one Spielberg did on the Mosad disposal of the Munich Massacre terrorist? Leftist are criminals, you know.

    • Parenthetical Phrase

      Your question is ridiculous. The World Trade Center and the Pentagon are in the United States — or weren't you aware of that? What happened on 9/11 (then and in Benghazi were acts of terror (and war) against the US not Israel. You sound like one of those obsessed nut jobs who finds a way to bring Israel into everything. I think you've been listening to Alex Jones too much. Take a breather, pal. You're sounding like some lunatic imam in Egypt or Saudi Arabia.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "You sound like one of those obsessed nut jobs who finds a way to bring Israel into everything. "

        He forgot to articulate the silly "false flag" accusation. Most Muslims and their dupes hold that one in reserve and then claim just about every offensive military action was false flag Israeli, and before that was funded and ordered by "Jewish bankers."

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "What would Israel say about a revisionist 9/11 movie?"

      I don't' know, but I hate revisionist liars. What's your point? One might understand you implying that Zero Dark Thirty is revisionist. If it is, it was revised in order to lean to the left and towards "global unity" by not making the USA the good guys. We're just the strong ones, not the righteous ones. We're crass and we're powerful only because of all the gold we stole from our colonies.

  • Demetrius M

    I was in the army and have watched the Hurt Locker multiple times and don't see an anti-military message. I saw a very detailed look at EOD and life in Iraq which both had good and bad elements to it. Yes, the lead character is overzealous by nature, but I have seen a few like him. I did not leave with the impression that EVERYONE in the military is an image of him. A very thoughtful film in my opinion.
    Perhaps someone who also served in Mesopotamia from '03 onward can clue me in.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "I was in the army and have watched the Hurt Locker multiple times and don't see an anti-military message. I saw a very detailed look at EOD and life in Iraq which both had good and bad elements to it. Yes, the lead character is overzealous by nature, but I have seen a few like him. I did not leave with the impression that EVERYONE in the military is an image of him. A very thoughtful film in my opinion."

      It's not "anti-soldier." It makes war look pointless. It was not that bad. I'm not complaining personally, but that would be my understanding of the claim. Compared to most films today, it's not anti-war in relative terms. It's very subtle and I don't have any problem understanding your opinion either.

  • ruby

    The left also bashed “The Stoning of Soraya M”. Even though that still happens in the middle east and women are routinely abused and oppressed there. They have the nerve to say “who are we to judge”.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "The left also bashed “The Stoning of Soraya M”. Even though that still happens in the middle east and women are routinely abused and oppressed there. They have the nerve to say “who are we to judge”."

      Any film that fails to uphold their multicultural vision for the future Utopia will be attacked. They know that any and all films have propaganda value and their aim is to make sure as much goes their way as they can possibly control. They will always, and I mean always defend vile cultures if that criticism has any chance at all in slowing down their delusion-based objectives.

  • watsa46

    The rich and or famous can pretend to be anything. Just like Putin!

  • Western Canadian

    McCarthy had nothing to do with hollyweird, he was strictly involved with trying to remove communists from sensitive positions in government/military areas….. People should not perpetuate lies about him (he was eventually proven to be right) by using a dishonest phrase.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "McCarthy had nothing to do with hollyweird"

      Not directly. How is it McCarthy's fault that the Soviet Communist Party put so much effort infiltrating it?

      • Western Canadian

        Pity Reagan wasn’t immortal….. I’m a Canadian, and I miss him.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "Pity Reagan wasn't immortal….. I'm a Canadian, and I miss him."

          He was certainly a force for the goodguys for most of his life.

  • Dave Templeton

    Watching people jump out of windows and off ledges of the Twin Towers was torture for the victims and the people watching. Muslim terrorists should receive the same fate. Water boarding is not torture for them, it is less than they deserve!

    • objectivefactsmatter

      " Water boarding is not torture for them, it is less than they deserve!"

      Waterboarding is not classic torture. It can be tolerated with training. We should not waterboard citizens or uniformed, legal soldiers. Unlawful combatants don't deserve the same level of protections, but some guidelines are needed. I have no problem with any incident I ever heard about us doing to unlawful combatants. As far as I know, we erred on the side of caution. We should not lower ourselves to the level of the jihadis, and we certainly have not done so. We still need to respond to an enemy with a strategy that ensures victory.

      These are my thoughts on why I feel no qualms about what we've done to this point. We've been too concerned about rights they don't have and don't deserve.

  • Indioviejo

    Stop with the McCarthy analogy, it is unfair. Sen. McCarthy was proven right by the Venona Papers! Don't do the leftist any favors.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Stop with the McCarthy analogy, it is unfair. Sen. McCarthy was proven right by the Venona Papers! Don't do the leftist any favors."

      I agree with you. Scare quotes should always be used for "McCarthyism" by anyone who knows the facts of history concerning McCarthy and his investigations.

  • Indio Viejo

    Zero Dark Thirty is a good movie if it riles the Communist Hollywood film industry. Anything they oppose must be good. What is wrong with a nasal cleansing compared to the mutilation perpetrated by Muslim savages on their prisoners? Or the Communist excruciating torture of American POWs in Korea or Vietnam? Just read John McCain's war Memoirs from before he became a Rino.

  • http://frontpagemag johnnywoods

    The more these “lefties” condemn this movie the more I want to watch it:)

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "The more these "lefties" condemn this movie the more I want to watch it:)"

      It's OK, but you'll see that they're getting to be even more ridiculous than ever. The film is mostly balanced, but leans slightly left. I suppose because it was starting to get feted, that might have been part of what drove their irrational need to attack the film. They worried that it might lead to patriotic feelings even without an overt message of patriotism. It contradicts the false narratives that leftists have put so much effort in to constructing. It uses a lot of facts to tell the story, which of course puts it in conflict with Hollywood leftists when telling any story related to any war with the USA or the West for that matter. War stories MUST BE used to indoctrinate strongly. This one is very weak in it's leftist indoctrination. For example, the USA isn't "right" or a "victim," it's just angry and cynical and wants to win. It isn't too villainous though, so this is a lost opportunity for the left. That's why they're so angry.

  • Ghostwriter

    Probably,they're afraid that most Americans would like seeing Muslim terrorists getting beat up. THAT would be something I'd love to see in ANY movie.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Probably,they're afraid that most Americans would like seeing Muslim terrorists getting beat up. THAT would be something I'd love to see in ANY movie."

      This is a good point. They can't verbalize all of their objections for fear of actually promoting the film. Let me put it to you this way; virtually any leftist will empathize with the Muslims who are angry about depicting the "mosque" full of jihadis in Star Wars.

  • TORTURE the horror

    Bigelow’s film depicts brutal torture – placing terrorists in boxes, hanging people from chains, waterboarding with buckets – but it also shows that the intelligence gathered was valuable in finding Bin Laden. And Hollywood can’t handle that."

    Brutal torture as in worse then applying cattle prods, putting knifes under people's fingernails etc. I think other countries do brutal torture much better that US but has the movie depicted our version worked just as well. Besides movies containing the brutal actions of gangsters get celebrated with awards with out a hint of condemnation. You have to love Hollywood liberals, like all leftists they make the rules to fit their ideology with out regard for the reality or inherent contradictions.

  • pyeatte

    Zero Dark Thirty was a great movie worthy of an Academy Award and best picture. So was Argo.

  • patron

    "I cannot vote for a film that makes heroes of Americans who commit the crime of torture"

    I'm more concerned about the real people Hollywood actually tortures by subsidizing the Mexican drug cartels and the porn industry.

  • Len_Powder

    David Clennon: "In that belief, following my conscience, I will not vote for Zero Dark Thirty in any category…"

    Mr. Clennon suggests, by his comment, without probably being aware he is doing so, that his "conscience" is something that cannot be ignored or violated. But my "conscience" is not the least violated by the movie. So Mr. Clennon's conscience and mine are diametrically opposed. Are we both in the right, so to speak, even though we contradict each other completely, because we are responding to our "conscience"?

    Or, is his conscience superior to mine or he superior to me? Why does he rest the superiority of his opinion on his conscience? What makes him think that his conscience is infallible and a perfect guide? The answer, of course, is that he feels he was specially endowed by some force he can't even identify to be superior to all human beings in matters of "conscience". This is a characteristic or assumption that he shares with his Emperor Obama and many other Leftists. If his conscience tells him that abortion is moral then it must be. If his conscience tells him that gay couples should be treated equally with heterosexual couples then who can doubt this stance? If he decides that Obama is the greatest President that ever lived how can ordinary mortals question that ? And so on and so forth.

    Essentially, a Liberal's conscience has replaced Almighty God as a source of infallible laws and rules. Only his conscience matters, not yours, for reasons not explained. For reasons the Left cannot explain even to themselves they feel morally superior to anyone who does not share their values, beliefs, assumptions, proclivities, policies, etc.

    If they think that dogs should eat cat food or oil wells should be replaced by windmills then like a Pharaoh of Egypt they state "so let it be written, so let it be done." Is it any wonder they are enthralled by their cult leader Obama, their Pharaoh, their Messiah, their Buddha, their Jesus, their Savior?

  • mlcblog

    Clennen is a putz.

  • fanlad

    Seems most hollywood types have a clean conscience with the murder of innocent unborn babies, much less with the torture techinques that do not kill.

  • Jake Tobias

    Good movie. Go see it. Knowing liberals were protesting it, made it an even more enjoyable experience. And go see "Argo." An even better movie. Except for that damned opening narration. Insane.