View Full Version : Tipton Three film Channel 4 tonight
Heads up for the Michael Winterbottom film ..
The Road to Guantanamo
Even if the title doesn't offer you a clue, it's best to be clear that this isn't the kind of drama to enjoy as you sprawl on your sofa munching Belgian truffles. The Road to Guantanamo is hard, attention-demanding dramatic gruel, a harrowing, polemical retelling of the experiences of three friends from Tipton in the West Midlands who went to Pakistan for a wedding and, after a trip to Afghanistan, were arrested and transported to the US detention centre, Camp Delta, in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. ... more .. (http://www.sdldev.co.uk/backstage/getdata-v3.asp?keyword=road+guantanamo)
on tonight (Thursday) Channel 4 at 9pm
More info, trailers, review and download available from Channel 4 (http://www.channel4.com/film/newsfeatures/microsites/G/guantanamo/download.html).
Heard a sort of a review by Frank Gardner (the BBC's security correspondent) on the radio about this film in which he said though the story is told from the point of view of the Tipton Three - and the film doesnt pretend otherwise - its compelling viewing because of its gritty realism, actually filmed in Afghanistan etc.
As an aside as I understand this is one of the first films that will become simultaneously released at the cinema, on DVD and for download online after it is shown on TV. Interesting idea which should be extended to other films and TV.
Despite my better judgement I'll probably end up watching this. Two hours of grisly footage telling me what I already know (Guantanamo bay is an affront to basic standards of civilisation, lots of innocent people were thrown in there, the illiterate baboons they employ as guards like torturing people) isn't going to be fun, but I am interested how it's presented.
Jimmyboy
09-03-2006, 20:42
Don't know whether to watch this or not. I'm interested to know what happens in there from the horses mouth yet at the same time I'll probably find it frustrating as it's clearly a propaganda film with no desire to be an accurate docu-drama.
Just because it's presented from the prisoners' perspective doesn't automatically make it a propoganda film. And even if it is, there'll be much useful information in there.
Though I have to admit, the level of stupidity required to accidentally walk into the middle of the Afgahn war certainly raises questions.
These guys don't seem very bright, first they don't realise their friend is on the bus even though they were probably sitting together and then they visit Afghanistan, see bombs being dropped, and decide to visit the capital. :nuts:
Whatever the truth, I'm sure having a hard time imagining these muppets as master terrorists!
Jimmyboy
09-03-2006, 21:52
Whatever the truth, I'm sure having a hard time imagining these muppets as master terrorists!
That's exactly what you're supposed to think though.
Could have got some better actors, the US army guy is like a poor Quintin Tarrentino.
That's exactly what you're supposed to think though.
Could have got some better actors, the US army guy is like a poor Quintin Tarrentino.
Rigggggght
It's Quentin Tarantino by the way.
Jimmyboy
09-03-2006, 21:57
Rigggggght
It's Quentin Tarantino by the way.
I was well aware that I spelt his name wrong but thank you for the correction.
It's right by the way.
I was well aware that I spelt his name wrong but thank you for the correction.
It's right by the way.
Riggghhhhht (part two)
Good drama-documentary (rather) by the way.
That's exactly what you're supposed to think though.
Well if they're acting the oscars sure was a travesty this year.
Showing a British officer merrily complicit in torture is sure going to get sections of the great British media wound up tomorrow.
Went to Pakistan for a wedding and ended up with the Taliban in Afghanistan by mistake.
Riiiiggghhhhttt (part three) They've gotta be pulling our plonkers right?
Jimmyboy
09-03-2006, 22:30
Edit...
It would have been better they'd made the film about some of the many unquestionably Afgahn farmers rounded up and flogged to the US for looking Arab, so avoiding distraction from the American/British conduct onto the prisoners' reason for being there. No doubt the producers reckoned the audience would have found it much easier to write them off if they weren't "ours".
Rollo_Tomassi
09-03-2006, 23:04
Showing a British officer merrily complicit in torture is sure going to get sections of the great British media wound up tomorrow.
Interesting to see at the end an Ameican CIA officer has admitted to impersonating the Brit doing that interrogation.
joconnor
09-03-2006, 23:15
Ok I watched it but am still unclear on some of the details.
Can anyone explain why they decided to visit Afghanistan one week after sept 11 so they could get big naan breads?
(they weren't even that big, my local curry house does bigger ones)
weren't they going to a wedding to Pakistan but got lost in Afghanistan - more of a direct route than flying apparently?
Read the Winterbottom interview here:
http://www.channel4.com/film/reviews/feature.jsp?V=3&SV=5&id=154599
Interesting to see at the end an Ameican CIA officer has admitted to impersonating the Brit doing that interrogation.
Yes, interesting twist that.
The (authentic) British accent used in the show is clealy a travesty of accuracy. :lol:
One American actor in the entire test according to IMDB. One higher than I'd have expected.
Can't have been the only one that was a bit confused by the proper British accent. :)
Maybe they meant to say the CIA had found one of the two Americans capable of producing a believable British accent (James Masters was presumably otherwise engaged) but it was pretty confusing.
Best line of the evening had to go to the Marine with the fuzzy idea of the British monarchy. "What you doing, praying like a Muslim? You're British. What about your Queen!" :cuckoo: :eek:
These guys don't seem very bright, first they don't realise their friend is on the bus even though they were probably sitting together and then they visit Afghanistan, see bombs being dropped, and decide to visit the capital. :nuts:
I thought he'd gone for a dump and the bus had left him behind. Having travelled on buses in Pakistan a couple of times I can well imagine that hapenning.
Ok I watched it but am still unclear on some of the details.
Can anyone explain why they decided to visit Afghanistan one week after sept 11 so they could get big naan breads?
(they weren't even that big, my local curry house does bigger ones)
Have to say they seemed to have rushed the early part of the film, perhaps because it happens over only a few days and perhaps they wanted to convey the confusion of how they ended up in Afghanistan.
It was touched on slightly. They attended prayers at a Mosque where the Imam was urging the congregation to go help their fellow Muslims in Afghanistan. Its suggested they should go and offer some help. But I think more than any other reason they went for the "adventure". Afghanistan being a rugged, mountainous, lawless sort of place I can understand why a bunch of teenagers might want to go there.
They actually went there a week before the bombing started (about 5 weeks after 11th Spetember). While it certainly looks foolish (in hindsight) to wander into a war zone perhaps at the time they weren't expecting the war to start at the time they were going to be in Afghanistan.
You would have thought if there were "genuine" terrorists and were outside Afghanistan the last place they would be going would be Afghanistan just as the Americans were going to start dropping big bombs on them.
In any case the point is they could be there for myriad number of reasons, (maybe they were drug smugglers) they should not have been captured and placed in Guantanamo. Essentially the Americans are/were randomly rounding up people (or are being offered them on a plate by militias getting bags of money from the CIA) and placing them in detention camps on some loose assumption they may have passed through some alleged Al Qaida camp. And this is the real problem clearly they can't gather evidence against them for specific terrorism (because they don't have the people on the ground to investigate even if they wanted to) so they make labels and incarcerate them for what they think are essentially pre-crimes. They dont know really what to do with them, hence dropping them into a legal blackhole like Guantanamo. This is no way for a so called civilised society to behave.
It may make some Americans feel better that Bush says they have locked up "the worst of the worst". In reality it does nothing to prevent future terrorism as they don't seem to be able to capture the people that really matter. It gives a false sense of security. At the same time Guantanamo ****** off more people making future terrorism (against the US) more likely.
Interesting article by lawyer Clive Stafford Smith in which he argues the Tipton Three were the lucky ones (luckier than their companion who's probably dead) in the sense that the Americans wanted to prove they were in a video with Osama, which could be easily disproved. Others with vauger accusations against them are not so lucky. (Article (http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,1709506,00.html))
BTW. I thought the film was good and tells an interesting story. The way the interviews were intercut with the drama and news footage was effective.
Even if the US Brit guy was a bit too convincing. ;)
I watched this and I am afraid it has simply reinforced the belief that the Tipton Taliban are pushing a story which stretches credibility to breaking point. We have discussed some of these before, but some of my observations and questions from the film would be...
1 - They were there for a wedding and yet took a trip to Afghanistan after 9/11 at a time when everyone knew an invasion and attack was coming (hope those Nans were worth it ).
2- the Mosque they were shown visiting in Pakistan was a known centre of militancy.
3- Not mentioned in the film last night, but the 3 all gave different reasons for visiting Afghanistan
One said he was going to study computers ?
Another said he went to Afghanisatan to study Arabic ?? the only people speaking Arabic in Afghanistan were the foreign Taliban fighters.
4 - Having decided to leave they apparently accidently arrived in the Taliban stronghold, were in the film every other male had a gun.
5 - they gave a weak reason for claiming to be Pakistani when captured, why not admit to being an innocent British tourist !?
6 - It was a stupid place to be at a time of invasion, however, no one is claiming they were that bright to begin with, (think Monkeydust.)
7 - We know from Feroz Abassi's mother that he attended Finsbury Park mosque and was apparently a security guard there, the connections with the others and that mosque was skirted over.
8 - They were very billigerant - if I was an innocent tourist, I would be telling the first Brit I met, whatever he wanted to know and offering to help, why didn't they ?
9 - all 3 made full detailed confessions, even if they are now denied, why were they not shown in the film ?
10 - they were shown even in the film as being captured in the company of other Taliban fighters, so why the claims that they were innocents grabbed off the streets for money ?
11- the americans had 75,000 prisoners and yet only took 750 to Gitmo - why did they americans at least feel that these 3 were worthy of the trip ?
12 - a significant part of last nights programme was fimled in Iran - just how impartial does that make it ?
so many questions and so few answers from the Tipton 3, I doubt we will have the follow up programme which investigates their claims from a neutral perspective, at least not on channel 4 or the BBC. The 3 are launching a law suit against the americans for a huge amount of money - frankly their defence lawyer, Gareth Pearce (surprise surprise ) could show this film as part of their claim.
I watched this and I am afraid it has simply reinforced the belief that the Tipton Taliban are pushing a story which stretches credibility to breaking point. We have discussed some of these before, but some of my observations and questions from the film would be...
1 - They were there for a wedding and yet took a trip to Afghanistan after 9/11 at a time when everyone knew an invasion and attack was coming (hope those Nans were worth it ).
2- the Mosque they were shown visiting in Pakistan was a known centre of militancy.
3- Not mentioned in the film last night, but the 3 all gave different reasons for visiting Afghanistan
One said he was going to study computers ?
Another said he went to Afghanisatan to study Arabic ?? the only people speaking Arabic in Afghanistan were the foreign Taliban fighters.
4 - Having decided to leave they apparently accidently arrived in the Taliban stronghold, were in the film every other male had a gun.
5 - they gave a weak reason for claiming to be Pakistani when captured, why not admit to being an innocent British tourist !?
6 - It was a stupid place to be at a time of invasion, however, no one is claiming they were that bright to begin with, (think Monkeydust.)
7 - We know from Feroz Abassi's mother that he attended Finsbury Park mosque and was apparently a security guard there, the connections with the others and that mosque was skirted over.
8 - They were very billigerant - if I was an innocent tourist, I would be telling the first Brit I met, whatever he wanted to know and offering to help, why didn't they ?
9 - all 3 made full detailed confessions, even if they are now denied, why were they not shown in the film ?
10 - they were shown even in the film as being captured in the company of other Taliban fighters, so why the claims that they were innocents grabbed off the streets for money ?
11- the americans had 75,000 prisoners and yet only took 750 to Gitmo - why did they americans at least feel that these 3 were worthy of the trip ?
12 - a significant part of last nights programme was fimled in Iran - just how impartial does that make it ?
so many questions and so few answers from the Tipton 3, I doubt we will have the follow up programme which investigates their claims from a neutral perspective, at least not on channel 4 or the BBC. The 3 are launching a law suit against the americans for a huge amount of money - frankly their defence lawyer, Gareth Pearce (surprise surprise ) could show this film as part of their claim.
Sorry to quote your full ramblings and thus spam the forum, but: I'm inclined to agree with you that it sounds rather too fishy to be true. "Oh, I accidentally got on the wrong bus going to Taliban militant terrorist HQ - I thought I was going to Islamabad or something" doesn't quite wash with me either.
However, you might be being a bit harsh on a couple of the points you mention:
1. Were they into Nans? Urgh. MILFs I can tolerate.
2. That mosque may be a known centre of militancy, but known to whom? Maybe not to them. I'm sure that there are some hardcore anti-gay churches in the UK, but as a church-going Christian I don't know which ones they are.
3. Arabic is taught in Afghanistan even though it's not widely spoken, because of the Koran schools. Admittedly it's not an obvious choice of place to learn it, but it's quite believable.
12. I don't think the film was meant to be impartial was it? I thought it was a campaigning film with a deliberate message, like a Michael Moore film but with less lard and beard-crumbs.
manutd123
10-03-2006, 18:18
Saw this last night, pretty awfu what goes on there......
I think that these boys were just young and very stupid indeed, but it is entirely plausible that this could have happened as they claim.
The border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is crossed regularly and is not as distinct as you might think. Passing over to Afghanistan and back can be a day trip for some, as commuters can do Bristol to London every morning.
I hail from North Pakistan and my uncle works in Jalalabad.
Even with the US there, my brother went to Pakistan last year for a few weeks and made a couple of trips to see him up there.
As for claiming to be Pakistani, foreign people are a commodity over there. At the time of war, for them to say they were part of the US/UK might easily be a dangerous predicament to be in. You could understand somewhat stupidly these guys just saying we're not involved in anything, we're pakistanis just come over the border.
The only way you could really understand the situation, i hate to say, is if you understand their mentality, their backgrounds, their lifestyles.
Sure they were very mouthy, perhaps too mouthy. But it's not uncommon to see mouthy Asian boys from wherever always in trouble, always feeling victimised, giving a bit of lip.
And good on them ffs. Given the ordeal they went through, as the guy said, it either makes you keel over or tough under the circumstances.
However their behaviour was, it does not justify the treatment being given to those people now. Animals are treated better. IT is hard to believe in the American model of democracy when their level of torture and mishandling and miscommunication of foreigners is on a par as the worst record in the world.
Everyone believes in a democracy. Well where's the democracy for Guantanamo, where's the Geneva Conventions and where's our humanity. Most of all, where the ****** is the proof?
NO evidence, no charges, no idea.
And let's not forget, before everyone starts saying there's something fishy about these 3, they were set free and they were not prosecuted in the UK either.
There just a bunch of stupid kids, perhaps a bit too stupid for their own good, but clearly not terrorists!
I appreciate you have another perspective on this, but it really does beg a lot of the viewer, as it requires you to believe that they..
accidently went to a militant mosque, that they picked the wrong week to visit Afghanistan (especially with a wedding days away) , that they ended up in the Taliban stronghold...?
Carry on up the Kyhber was more believeable. But just a few thoughts on your considered response...
Saw this last night, pretty awfu what goes on there......
I think that these boys were just young and very stupid indeed, but it is entirely plausible that this could have happened as they claim.
actually it requires you to accept a huge amount of coincidence and some very bad luck.
The border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is crossed regularly and is not as distinct as you might think. Passing over to Afghanistan and back can be a day trip for some, as commuters can do Bristol to London every morning.
Even with the US there, my brother went to Pakistan last year for a few weeks and made a couple of trips to see him up there.
but they didn't go last year, they went one month after 9/11 and in the lead up to an invasion which everyone knew was coming ? again, why do this just before a wedding?
As for claiming to be Pakistani, foreign people are a commodity over there. At the time of war, for them to say they were part of the US/UK might easily be a dangerous predicament to be in. You could understand somewhat stupidly these guys just saying we're not involved in anything, we're pakistanis just come over the border.
but they said they took advice of other prisoners - they were already being held by the americans/british....so why say they were pakistani ? I would be declaring that I am from england and offer whatever assistance I could.
Sure they were very mouthy, perhaps too mouthy. But it's not uncommon to see mouthy Asian boys from wherever always in trouble, always feeling victimised, giving a bit of lip.
Not if they were 'accidental tourists' who just happened to be in the last stand stronghold of the Taliban.....I would have been grateful to have been picked up by the allies in such a case. If I was a volunteer fighter on the otherhand I might be less gratefull.
However their behaviour was, it does not justify the treatment being given to those people now. Animals are treated better. IT is hard to believe in the American model of democracy when their level of torture and mishandling and miscommunication of foreigners is on a par as the worst record in the world.
Actually, we have their version of events and it is an obvious tactic for such detainees to declare they were tortured, especially if they had given a full confession and also to support their multi million pound law suit.
Everyone believes in a democracy. Well where's the democracy for Guantanamo, where's the Geneva Conventions and where's our humanity. Most of all, where the ****** is the proof?
They were captured with other Taliban fighters, what more proof do you think is necessary to hold them? And no that is not likely to be enough for a civillian court of law, but they are not civillians.
And let's not forget, before everyone starts saying there's something fishy about these 3, they were set free and they were not prosecuted in the UK either.
Of course there is something fishy about these 3. It is irrelevent that they were not prosecuted, that is not necessary for captured combatants, as we have discussed before, we didn't put captured Nazi soldiers on trial.
They are a small part of the problem, they were taken out of the game, they are probably unlikely to threaten this country after the 'kick in the pants' they have been given. And before you emphasise that they were only kids.....just how old were the 'kids' who killed 56 on 7/7 ?
I watched this and my opinon amounts to:
liar liar pants on fire.
Chasing naan bread ina war zone! pah, total nonsence. Usual anti-american crap as expected.
9 - all 3 made full detailed confessions, even if they are now denied, why were they not shown in the film ?
Confessions extracted under torture are worthless.
I do agree their reasons for being there are, to say the least, highly suspect, but that doesn't do a jot to justify the barbaric US treatment.
ro_ram_ro
11-03-2006, 00:12
No matter how stupid the guys were, did they kill any one? did they rob anyone? did they cause harm to anyone ? They held probably held views that the majority dont condone, what most ppl haven't commented on is the treatment they received. The torture and abuse was not warranted, and i doubt that it was 100% fabricated from teh reports received from other sources.
The before and after shots of the three men made the impact of what happened most compelling for me.
Confessions extracted under torture are worthless.
I do agree their reasons for being there are, to say the least, highly suspect, but that doesn't do a jot to justify the barbaric US treatment.
but Byron...none of us knows for sure what really happened, however, it is surely justified to cast similar doubt on the claims of torture from these 3, if you also have reason to doubt their claims that they 'came in search of the perfect Nan !?'
especially as we also know that they have launched a multi million pound law suit. My specific criticism of this film is the total lack of impartiality, it was filmed in Iran which should have everyone asking why and that is was clearly as agenda driven as any party political broadcast would be. In short it is surely a sleazy piece of propagandising ?
Chasing naan bread ina war zone! pah, total nonsence.
Exactly.... I live in Tipton and the Naan breads in our local take-away (which is about 2mins away from where these guys came from) are top class......
especially as we also know that they have launched a multi million pound law suit. My specific criticism of this film is the total lack of impartiality, it was filmed in Iran which should have everyone asking why and that is was clearly as agenda driven as any party political broadcast would be. In short it is surely a sleazy piece of propagandising ?
Banus, since you were looking closely at the end credits (and asserting the intention of the film as a propaganda piece), did you notice that the film received UK government funding?
Banus, since you were looking closely at the end credits (and asserting the intention of the film as a propaganda piece), did you notice that the film received UK government funding?
I did, and I want my money back ;)
but Byron...none of us knows for sure what really happened, however, it is surely justified to cast similar doubt on the claims of torture from these 3, if you also have reason to doubt their claims that they 'came in search of the perfect Nan !?'
The accounts of torture have come from multiple sources besides the Three Clowns, and given the US's redefining of torture as "anything that doesn't lead to vital organ failure", more than credible. And in common law it's down to the prosecution to prove they didn't torture a suspect if allegations are made.
especially as we also know that they have launched a multi million pound law suit. My specific criticism of this film is the total lack of impartiality, it was filmed in Iran which should have everyone asking why and that is was clearly as agenda driven as any party political broadcast would be. In short it is surely a sleazy piece of propagandising ?
The Guantanamo scenes ring true from multiple accounts, I've already expressed misgivings about the credulous attitude to the three denizens of Tipton.
anephric
11-03-2006, 22:56
http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/FBI_3977.pdf
It was touched on slightly. They attended prayers at a Mosque where the Imam was urging the congregation to go help their fellow Muslims in Afghanistan. Its suggested they should go and offer some help. But I think more than any other reason they went for the "adventure".
How were they going to help? Just wondering.
Exactly.... I live in Tipton and the Naan breads in our local take-away (which is about 2mins away from where these guys came from) are top class......
I've had one of those, actually half, it was a big bugger. ;) Can't remember the take-away's name..
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.