Where can I buy this DVD?
I searched Amazon and they only have the VHS for sale. I remember seeing this DVD when I rented it from Blockbuster years ago and want to buy it for a friend. Can u help me locate a DVD?
Thanks,
Amanda
I am interning for the directors of THE PANAMA DECEPTION this summer; they have a website you can visit to purchase a copy of the film, along with many other documentaries they have produced. Check them out at www.empowermentproject.org.
shareYou work for them? Could you ask them why they made up wild accusations about the US attacking the Commandancis with "secret weapons" or about US troops deliberately destroying poor neighborhoods in Panama city. Ask them if they understand that willful omission of facts is the same as lying. They made some good points about the history of US/Panamanian relations... and then blew their credibility with wild knowingly false accusations... like the US airforce using lasers to burn the Commandancia.
shareHow do you know what weapons were used in Panama? Did you clone yourself and were everywhere the U.S. military was? The real question is why was the U.S. there in the first place. Why does the U.S. have over 700 military bases throughout the world? Why is the U.S. building 14 permanent military bases in Iraq? Why does the U.S. impose their will on other nations so their corporations can exploit their resources? Why has the U.S. become such an imperialist beast?
You missed the point of what I said... allow me to clarify...
I said the film made good points abut US foreign policy and the history of our influence in the region. The film, however, then went on some paranoid conspiracy tangent, particularly alleging the US used experimental laser weapons on the attack on the Commandancia. That showed both lazy research on the part of the film maker as well as gullibility and willingness to believe any theory that made the US look evil.
If you haven't seen the film, this theory about lasers being used on the Commandancia comes from several civilian eyewitnesses how told the film crew they saw, from a distance, beams of red light coming down in the night sky (obviously from an aircraft) and striking and destroying parts of the Commandancia.
How do I know this secret laser weapon story is bulls**t? Because I know military history and am very aware of the operations at the Commandancia that night. What the civilians say they saw makes perfect sense... they just didn't understand what they were seeing. The film makers should have researched this. On the first night of the invasion when US Army Rangers of the 3rd Ranger Battalion were making their assault on the commandancia they were receiving close air support from a US Air Force AC130 Spectre gunship. The AC130 is a prop engine cargo plane refitted as a ground fire support system designed to slowly circle a ground target while being able to fire with precision. It's main support gun as a 20mm Vulcan gatling gun. The gun fires at a rate of 6,000 rounds per minute, ideal for shredding ground targets in an instant. Every fourth round is a red tracer. Tracer rounds leave a color trail, ideal for helping gunners guide their fire at night. At that high rate of fire, the tracers make the gunfire lok like a beam of light and it sounds like a constant roar, instead of multiple shots. To the civilians in the distance, the heavy fire looked like a beam of light.
Here is a link to a page about the AC130 that has a couple of pictures... and also mentions in its histry that it was part of the attack on PDF headquarters (the Comandancia)
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ac-130.htm
The film makers also accused US troops of deliberately attacking and doing more damage in the poor neighbrhoods of Panama city than in the city center, essentialy accusing the US Army of deliberately making war on the poor. The film makers neglect, of course, to mention that it just happened to be in the poor neighborods where Noriega's Battalion Dignidad and the remenants of the PDF put up the heaviest resistance. In Panama City, that was where the heaviest fighting was, so of course that's also where the most damage would be.
Yes, there is imperalism and the US government has done many *beep* up things, but these film makers lose credibility and draw away from the real problems when they chase wild conspiracies... like secret laser weapons.
I honestly couldn't care less what weapons were used by the U.S. military to kill thousands of innocent civilians in Panama. Whether it is done w/ a stick or a heat seeking missile, killing innocent life is wrong.
The bottom line is that this film shows yet another country being assaulted by the U.S. government. We need to stop trying to control every nation that doesn't follow our Constitution to the tee and fix our problems at home, instead of wasting billions of American tax dollars on foreign soil.
Again... you're missing my point. Yes, people need to be aware of American intervention south of the border. I agree. But when a documentary maker starts talking about made up conspiracies about secret laser weapons, he loses credibility and distracts from the real points that need to be made. Documentaries like this are not just meant to be viewed by like minded people with the same beliefs... but also to enlighten people who may have not been aware of the extent of US foreign policy. However, if the film makers decide to deviate from the facts and go off on unsabstantiated conspiracy theories, they're going to turn off viewers they were just starting to win over.
There is enough history and fact to present in a dcumentary about Panama to wake people up and get them thinking... but if the documentarians make unsupported wild accusations or start pushing wild fantastic made up conspiracies, the smart viewer will disregard and then question anything else the documentarian has already shown ,factual or not.
I could make a detailed researched and documented two hour documentary film detailing how lobbyists for various companies have influence over our government... but if I spend even two minutes of that documentary suggesting lobbyists take orders from aliens or free masons, viewers will be turned off and disregard my documentary as a whole, regardless of how much real information I included.
The problem with THE PANAMA DECEPTION is that after making a very good case and presenting a great deal of facts and history, they blew their credibility by making wild unsupported, and sometimes wholey false, accusations.
Brendan3, I recognize that you're attempting to make a point, but upon further research, I find that the premise of your point lacks evidence.
Barbara Trent, director of “The Panama Deception”, states in the film, and I quote, “the U.S. government used new technology to test weapons in Panama, such as the Stealth fighter jet, the Apache helicopter, and laser guided missiles. There are also REPORTS that can’t be explained INDICATING the use of experimental and unknown weaponry.” Is she saying that these reports are fact? No, she is saying that “there were reports …” Trent then had one Panamanian University Professor, Cecilio Simon, state on camera that “we have testimony about combatants who died literally melted with their guns as a result of a laser. We know of automobiles cut in half by these lasers…” He continues briefly further describing these reports from other eyewitnesses.
Then Brenda Trent interviews Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General, in which he states on camera “I think there is a high probability that there was a use of high sophisticated weaponry merely to test it”. He concludes “but above all, there was an excessive use of force beyond any possible justification.”
After Ramsey’s short interview, the film departed from the “reports of experimental and unknown weaponry” and went on to another topic. At no point during this very brief segment did the film categorically state that these REPORTS from EYEWITNESSES were fact. After reading your accusation about this film making “wild unsupported, and sometimes wholey [sic] false, accusations”, I chose to research your accusation for any validity. After reviewing this film again, I find that not only is your accusation false, but it is ironic how you falsely accuse someone of doing the same very thing you’re doing; making wild unsupported, and sometimes wholly false accusations.
A "professor" stating that he heard from someone who heard form someone that soldiers were metlted with lasers is not evidence... it's more wild unsupported accusation. At no time does he say "I saw" or "I observed" Again, there were no lasers... just intense fire from a vulcan fired from an AC130. Conjecture and hearsay does not substitute for fact or genuine research... which had the film makers done genuine research they would have found their answers. It seems they did not want to find the answers because it would conflict with what they were trying to present.
You are right when you wrote regarding the use of lasers and other secret weapons " At no point during this very brief segment did the film categorically state that these REPORTS from EYEWITNESSES were fact." But at no time did they challenge them. They let them stand as facts. If you let someone's assertion of events appear in a documentary and leave it comletely unchallenged, you are presenting it as fact.
Also as I stated before, they made the wildly false accusation that American ground troops deliberately destroyed a poor neighborhood in Panama City, suggesting this was a deliberate act on the part of the military. They left out one glaring major fact... it was in that poor neighborhood that Noriega's Battalion Dignidad and the remnants of the PDF had amassed the largest number of forces and put up the greatest fight in the city. There were parts of the city American troops swept through unopposed... but there was a major battle there. The film makers chose to omit that and rather suggested that the Army wanted to make the poor people suffer and the neighborhood was wrecked for no reason.
Brendan3,
I'm not going to watch the film again to check for the validity of your other accusation in that "they made the wildly false accusation that American ground troops deliberately destroyed a poor neighborhood in Panama City, suggesting this was a deliberate act on the part of the military."
In regards to your comment about Barbara Trent "not challenging the statements of others", we are not stupid, when Trent tells us that "there are also reports that can’t be explained indicating the use of experimental and unknown weaponry", we take that at face value for what it is; testimony from others that has not been proven. Obviously there are 2 sides to any coin, but I don't constantly need someone else's opposing view to tell me that. I can make that decision on my own. Is this film biased? Sure, but guess what, so is virtually everything you see on Television and read in books. It is the individual’s responsibility to carefully decipher through the bias of one's artistic and political expression without reckless interpretation.
With all this said, I agree with the underlying theme of the film, that America needs to be careful when implementing violence over diplomacy. Violence towards another nation should only be used when it is absolutely necessary. In fact Brendan, I also praise Barbara Trent for her courage to speak out publicly against the U.S. government. It is brave Americans like her that help keep America in check. Barbara sacrificed her career for making “The Panama Deception” (look up how many films/TV shows she made after this one). Edward R. Murrow, Carl Bernstein, Bob Woodward, Paul Wilcher, Martin Luther King Jr., Robert Kennedy, Daniel Ellsberg, Abbie Hoffman, Noam Chomsky, Barbara Trent, and other brave Americans, have all risked their lives and careers for courageously trying to tell the world about the other side of America, the one that rarely gets mentioned on TV and in newspapers. Public dissent is often met with crucifixion, but it is important for Americans to get a dose of their country’s dark side, however tiny that dose may be.
With all this said, I agree with the underlying theme of the film, that America needs to be careful when implementing violence over diplomacy. Violence towards another nation should only be used when it is absolutely necessary.
I agree. Please don't get me wrong. Our government needs to be kept in check and our people need to be informed... but with facts, not distortions. The history of our relations with Panama, and Central America as a whole, is so dirty and stained with blood... people need to be enlightened, government needs to be held accountable. But it needs to be exposed honestly. Wild unsubstantiated conspiracy theories thrown in in the mix with other factual items only casts doubt on the facts and questions the credibility of the entire documentary.
Poor research and lies of omission do not help in the search for truth. share