Jimmy Carter says it was 90% the Canadians in Argo...
- Thread starter Twister
- Start date
I haven't seen the OP's link but originally I thought Argo was a complete fabrication and didn't see it. Then I saw Carter on Piers Morgan show and he conceded that that behind-the-scenes operation was kept secret but that they gave the Canadians all the credit. So was that fake movie-making covert operation real? Was it kept under wraps back then?I was wanting to see this movie out of patriotism but now that I've learned it's historically inaccurate and doesn't pay proper tribute to the Canadian contribution I have no interest in seeing it.
And I'm glad Ben Affleck won't win an Oscar for Best Director.
How much credit should Canada actually get, and how much of the secret operation attributed to the release of the hostages?
(OK, now I will check that link).
What happened to your poll... turning danmand on us?I really think it's time for a banning. Permanent banning.
OTB
I haven't seen the OP's link but originally I thought Argo was a complete fabrication and didn't see it. Then I saw Carter on Piers Morgan show and he conceded that that behind-the-scenes operation was kept secret but that they gave the Canadians all the credit. So was that fake movie-making covert operation real? Was it kept under wraps back then?
How much credit should Canada actually get, and how much of the secret operation attributed to the release of the hostages?
(OK, now I will check that link).
Okay. I checked the link. Actually only saw the tail end of that interview on TV but now have seen the full version here. All good of Carter to set the record straight.
OK: Canada specifically John and Zena Sheardown, and Ambassador and Mrs. Taylor, kept the six American Diplomats alive and hidden for 79 days, and that is of great importance.I haven't seen the OP's link but originally I thought Argo was a complete fabrication and didn't see it. Then I saw Carter on Piers Morgan show and he conceded that that behind-the-scenes operation was kept secret but that they gave the Canadians all the credit. So was that fake movie-making covert operation real? Was it kept under wraps back then?
How much credit should Canada actually get, and how much of the secret operation attributed to the release of the hostages?
The Government of Canada provided real Canadian Passports and cover identities for them.
Tony Mendez and the CIA invented a cover story if the Iranians phoned or even sent agents to check on the production company for "ARGO" there was a actual office and real people - so the entire "fake movie-making covert operation" was entirely real. Tony Mendez was the CIA's expert on exfiltration and had gotten many people out of very nasty situations - from what I've read this wasn't nearly the diciest of them.
Recusing Amercians asses trapped in a country hostile to them because the US government screwed the people over (and Americans wonder why Iran hates them).Loser. What's Canada good for?
OK: Canada specifically John and Zena Sheardown, and Ambassador and Mrs. Taylor, kept the six American Diplomats alive and hidden for 79 days, and that is of great importance.
The Government of Canada provided real Canadian Passports and cover identities for them.
Tony Mendez and the CIA invented a cover story if the Iranians phoned or even sent agents to check on the production company for "ARGO" there was a actual office and real people - so the entire "fake movie-making covert operation" was entirely real. Tony Mendez was the CIA's expert on exfiltration and had gotten many people out of very nasty situations - from what I've read this wasn't nearly the diciest of them.
Thank you very much. I heard Carter explain that Tony Mendez was there for only 1.5 days. He also said that the movie wasn't correct in that the movie gave the CIA more credit than it deserves.
It is I believe a fairer statement to say that the movie doesn't give Canada enough credit, rather than that it gives Tony Mendez and his associates too much credit.Thank you very much. I heard Carter explain that Tony Mendez was there for only 1.5 days. He also said that the movie wasn't correct in that the movie gave the CIA more credit than it deserves.
Perhaps it is different people hearing different things, but I honestly don't believe President Carter was stupid enough to say that the CIA had too much credit as opposed to Canada wasn't given enough credit. Then again it was James Earl Carter, Jr. speaking.
Look at that interview by Piers Morgan. It think Carter said they gave the CIA all the credit or most of the credit when the Canadians did 90 or 98 per cent of the planning.It is I believe a fairer statement to say that the movie doesn't give Canada enough credit, rather than that it gives Tony Mendez and his associates too much credit.
Perhaps it is different people hearing different things, but I honestly don't believe President Carter was stupid enough to say that the CIA had too much credit as opposed to Canada wasn't given enough credit. Then again it was James Earl Carter, Jr. speaking.
All the credit and too much credit may be a matter of semantics, but semantics can be important.Look at that interview by Piers Morgan. It think Carter said they gave the CIA all the credit.
Are you vying to be TERB's Canadian Americanson?Recusing Amercians asses trapped in a country hostile to them because the US government screwed the people over (and Americans wonder why Iran hates them).
Now don't fall into the George Galloway - Gryfin trap. . . .He isn't calling you a "worthless piece of excrement" as your fellow American refers to us Canadians, he is merely offering a reason why your nation is hated by many Iranians.
Besides which, I've several times posted that Americanson has acted over the top.
Galloway has everything to do with the fact that you like he seem unable to grasp dual nationality.Galloway has nothing to do with the fact that the US propped up the corrupt Shah for years.
Not much other than “It adheres to the spirit of the story.”Has anyone heard what Tony Mendez has to say?
http://www.npr.org/2013/02/16/172098605/argo-what-really-happened-in-tehran-a-cia-agent-remembers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21504409
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...7bb2b0a-13f4-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_blog.html
So the next time we stick our necks out (and in danger) to save our neighbours, we insist on the movie rights.
I thought the movie was great and certainly well written. If they had just closed the successful recovery of the hostages with CIA jubilation and mutual handshakes - it would have been great. Sadly - they made a huge point that the Canadians would get the glory when the CIA had done all the work and taken all of the risks. At no point in the dialog of the CIA agents at the end of the movie was even the smallest of an acknowledgement given to Canada. It was that deliberate put down that I thought sucked.
Oh, well ... it's not the first time that history is distorted for some American flag waving movie nor will it be the last.
I thought the movie was great and certainly well written. If they had just closed the successful recovery of the hostages with CIA jubilation and mutual handshakes - it would have been great. Sadly - they made a huge point that the Canadians would get the glory when the CIA had done all the work and taken all of the risks. At no point in the dialog of the CIA agents at the end of the movie was even the smallest of an acknowledgement given to Canada. It was that deliberate put down that I thought sucked.
Oh, well ... it's not the first time that history is distorted for some American flag waving movie nor will it be the last.
Thanks for satisfying my curiosity.So the next time we stick our necks out (and in danger) to save our neighbours, we insist on the movie rights.
I thought the movie was great and certainly well written. If they had just closed the successful recovery of the hostages with CIA jubilation and mutual handshakes - it would have been great. Sadly - they made a huge point that the Canadians would get the glory when the CIA had done all the work and taken all of the risks. At no point in the dialog of the CIA agents at the end of the movie was even the smallest of an acknowledgement given to Canada. It was that deliberate put down that I thought sucked.
Oh, well ... it's not the first time that history is distorted for some American flag waving movie nor will it be the last.
Strictly as a film, I didn't enjoy it very much. It was way too cliche ridden, over calculated and tittering on melodrama. The actual drama was way too forced and knowing it was historically inaccurate didn't help.
It felt like some early 80's two part NBC mini-series with Richard Chamberlain as 'The Hero'.
It felt like some early 80's two part NBC mini-series with Richard Chamberlain as 'The Hero'.
Strictly as a film, I didn't enjoy it very much. It was way too cliche ridden, over calculated and tittering on melodrama. The actual drama was way too forced and knowing it was historically inaccurate didn't help.
It felt like some early 80's two part NBC mini-series with Richard Chamberlain as 'The Hero'.
I can't see how it deserved 'Best Picture' other than making an American audience feel good about an important part of their history. Despite that, I will see it, and probably will be entertained (I like Affleck and his movies).
If you had to choose Best Picture, which film would that have been?
