"The Good Shepherd" is another rendition of fiction posing as history...as expected.The whole essence of the movie in my view was a typical Hollywood anti-American "lesson."
Of course the CIA (every Libs favorite whipping boy) is portrayed in a bad light wherein murder is common place; the elite snobs of our country - who don't care for "jews and n***ers" - control the American/British intel services; and, that, out of the words of "Yuri," the USSR "...has no spare parts, rust is just painted over, nothing works; it is NOT a threat to the West and never has been and never will be...it is the fear fanned by the military industrial complex of your country which spreads this lie."
Wow, they managed to stick a lot of standard leftist propaganda in there... but then again, Hollywood as had a lot of practice. Why doesn't anyone ever write a book that shows the CIA in a good light? Well, actually they have... but don't ever expect a movie, because that would be, like, a different view.
Like all military types I have had my share of negative opinions against the agency from time to time ... but c'mon ... they have done a lot more right (even if accidentally from time to time) than they have done poorly. (A good book: "First In: An Insider's Account of How the CIA Spearheaded the War on Terror in Afghanistan" by Gary C. Schroen. It would make an excellent movie, too. Great drama from beginning to end.)
One reason that the CIA has such a horrible rep is that their successes go into the vault for 50 years, but their failures hit the headlines the next day. But you can indirectly judge their effectiveness during the Cold War by the effort expended by the Soviet Union to neutralize them.
I think most everybody in the intel community has the same attitude toward the CIA as the Law Enforcement community have for the FBI. They're BIG! The public automatically assumes that anything that happens good or bad is because/related to them. And they believe a lot of that public image. But one thing is mostly true. Working with CIA/FBI Agents and Analysts can be a great experience. They are knowledgeable and helpful and can get thier hands on a lot of info.
So yeah, the movie stinks. It flings a lot of trash at the agency and a dead guy who, on the whole was a better man than a worse one. He wasn't entirely a Bill Donavan Ivy League type guy. He was born in Boise. Like many of them, he did some good and some bad. Tradecraft is more an art than a science, and in the end, a series of misjudgments and paranoia hoisted him on his own petard. It happens."
It's just a shame that Hollywood and those that cheer this kind of stuff believe that a few half-remembered snippets from the evening news and the ability to spell ?CIA? without a dictionary and they think they?re experts on intelligence.
My inspiration for this rant.
Of course the CIA (every Libs favorite whipping boy) is portrayed in a bad light wherein murder is common place; the elite snobs of our country - who don't care for "jews and n***ers" - control the American/British intel services; and, that, out of the words of "Yuri," the USSR "...has no spare parts, rust is just painted over, nothing works; it is NOT a threat to the West and never has been and never will be...it is the fear fanned by the military industrial complex of your country which spreads this lie."
Wow, they managed to stick a lot of standard leftist propaganda in there... but then again, Hollywood as had a lot of practice. Why doesn't anyone ever write a book that shows the CIA in a good light? Well, actually they have... but don't ever expect a movie, because that would be, like, a different view.
Like all military types I have had my share of negative opinions against the agency from time to time ... but c'mon ... they have done a lot more right (even if accidentally from time to time) than they have done poorly. (A good book: "First In: An Insider's Account of How the CIA Spearheaded the War on Terror in Afghanistan" by Gary C. Schroen. It would make an excellent movie, too. Great drama from beginning to end.)
One reason that the CIA has such a horrible rep is that their successes go into the vault for 50 years, but their failures hit the headlines the next day. But you can indirectly judge their effectiveness during the Cold War by the effort expended by the Soviet Union to neutralize them.
I think most everybody in the intel community has the same attitude toward the CIA as the Law Enforcement community have for the FBI. They're BIG! The public automatically assumes that anything that happens good or bad is because/related to them. And they believe a lot of that public image. But one thing is mostly true. Working with CIA/FBI Agents and Analysts can be a great experience. They are knowledgeable and helpful and can get thier hands on a lot of info.
So yeah, the movie stinks. It flings a lot of trash at the agency and a dead guy who, on the whole was a better man than a worse one. He wasn't entirely a Bill Donavan Ivy League type guy. He was born in Boise. Like many of them, he did some good and some bad. Tradecraft is more an art than a science, and in the end, a series of misjudgments and paranoia hoisted him on his own petard. It happens."
It's just a shame that Hollywood and those that cheer this kind of stuff believe that a few half-remembered snippets from the evening news and the ability to spell ?CIA? without a dictionary and they think they?re experts on intelligence.
My inspiration for this rant.
More's the pity because I really like the cast in just about everything else they've ever done.
Facebook
Twitter