A Place Where You Can Forget

The Movie, Men With Guns ends on a hopeful note. Our travelers find the *unfindable* Cerca del Cielo, a respite from the hardships of the world, and their discovery feels like a fresh start.

Dr. Fuentes, earlier described their hidden destination in terms that make us think of utopian destinations like Shangri-Las. Fuentes says, "Cerca del Cielo is a very special place, where the air is like a caress, where gentle waters flow, where wings of peace lift the burdens from your shoulders. A place where you can forget. A place where each day is a gift and each person is reborn. When the characters in this movie finally discover this wonderful place, we share a sense of calm.

The young soldier has found salvation. His new exodus as a healer is a rebirth, where his past does not matter. We get a sense that the young girl has found peace, even imagining that maybe the girl and the soldier will find happiness in their hideaway from the world. We can imagine a happy future, where the young soldier is a doctor and the girl is his wife, perhaps building a life filled with meaning and purpose. We can even imagine the soldier giving Conejo a home, and a place in this world, a world that has pushed him out and rejected him, transformed through the magic of Cerca del Cielo into a world where he is a treasured member of a loving household. Then Conejo would be working side-by-side with the young soldier, an assistant to the new healer, and maybe a later partner. In our mind's eye, it's easy to allow our hopes and dreams guide our predictions for their future.

The reality is probably not nearly so romantic. We can't help but reminisce about the banana people, peaceful people who hid in the trees, much like those souls who hide in Cerca del Cielo. We are reminded how the banana people got caught in the open and were gunned down from a helicopter and how the survivors were taken away. Cerca del Cielo feels like Shangri-la, but it is only a temporary respite from the world and will not remain isolated. If an inexperienced doctor and his rag-tag band can find Cerca del Cielo, then we know it's only a matter of time before the ugliness of the world reaches their remote hideaway. Whether we like it or not, it is likely that those souls who hide in Cerca del Cielo will fall to the same fate as every other town we have visited along the way. The likelihood of Conejo reaching adulthood is not particularly promising. Instead, as a healer's assistant, he will probably be one of the first to fall.

In the case of the Horman family versus the United States of America:

Please let the record show that the body of Charles Horman was found entombed following allegations that he was murdered by members of the Provisional Government supported by the United States of America. This Provisional Government detained, tortured and executed Mr. Horman with the consent and cooperation of the United States officials involved in the creation of the Provisional Government.

Much of the evidence has been destroyed, and even the body was shipped back to the United States in a manner that made autopsy nearly impossible. The Horman family was faced with numerous obstacles in their quest for answers, with the State Department failing to provide the protection and security guaranteed to every American, at home and abroad. It is my intention to show that this failure was a deliberate and systematic breach of justice and not a string of incompetence representing the best argument the defense brings to deny culpability.

Charles Horman was witnessed by many of the people involved with the coup asking questions and taking notes. He was able to link the US personnel that were working behind the scenes to launch the coup and establish the Provisional Government. He was taken away in the middle of the night by members of the Provisional Government, and his whereabouts were not disclosed to his wife or later to his father. His only crime was his ability to act as verification for acts undertaken by the United States Government that they wanted deniability for. Charles Horman was a liability to the US Government, not to the Provisionals. As a US Citizen, the Provisional Government would not have dared to execute him without the express permission and consent of the US officials that were backing their bid for power.

Charles Horman was nothing to the Provisional Government. They had no reason to detain him, torture him, or execute him. The only party that would benefit from Horman’s death was, in fact, the US State Department and their covert operations team. They are criminally liable for collusion to murder a US Citizen, a first degree criminal offense.

In addition to conspiring to murder Horman, the State Department deliberately created confusion and set up roadblocks to prevent the Horman family from being able to discover what happened to Charles Horman. They were told that he was “probably in hiding”, when he was, in fact, executed three days after his arrest. They allowed his wife and his father to continue clinging to the hope that he was alive, rather than giving them closure by releasing his body for burial. Instead, they held his remains until no possibility of autopsy existed, and allowed the family to endure unknown pain during the months of waiting.

The U.S. Government owes the Horman family and all American citizens more than an apology for what has happened here. They have failed in their duty to the American public, they have failed the Horman’s, and worse, they have deliberately damaged our ability to believe in our government.

Down To The Square

Even today, issues of gender that we frequently take for granted in the United States remain issues of equality that challenge China’s move towards modernization. As a thirteen year old girl living in China in 1989, a period of time in China where the waves of Cultural Revolution, even though they felt far removed, were still licking the shoreline. Although the currents of change were already in motion, 1989 was not the year of change for China. If anything, Tiananmen Square was a disturbing event. The recoil from that event was a reassertion of Party control. Although the years following 1989 represent a period of great economic growth and remarkable change, the Party, even in the present post-modern era, continues to hold to dated ideals.

Like many of my peers, I would have certainly felt a desire for reform. But, a desire for reform and the desire for my own security and that of my family would have taken precedence. A young girl growing up, hearing stories about beloved friends and family who vanished into thin air, I would have taken those stories to heart and maintained a healthy suspicion of the Party. To me, the idea of dissent would feel like a suicide mission.

The conflict between self and family preservation and my feelings that it was time to demand change would be compelling enough to dissuade me from actually taking action. Where I might join my compatriots in spirit and soul, I would have to consider my family and my own future and wellbeing. Duty to family is a significant cultural feature. Willingness for self-sacrifice would be balanced with my duty to family. I may be willing to risk myself, but I’d be gambling my family’s security.

In retrospect, as someone looking back from the year 2009, hindsight is 20-20. Where the entire world stood in solidarity with “Tank-man” in 1989, elevating the unknown man to hero status, numerous reports state that Tank-man was arrested, tortured and executed.

Although Tiananmen Square inspired China’s government towards reform, most of the reform has been economic, and the class division, the division between “haves” and “have-nots” is still a disturbing reality. This sharp class division has created a growing schism within the country. Daily riots and public disorder speak to the Party’s inability to meet the needs of her people.

After 1989, China needed wealth and a wider financial base, and certainly many Chinese families enjoyed this wealth and a move into the postmodern world. However, the division was even more sharply demarcated than before, and the “have-nots” were even worse off than before the Cultural Revolution.

While the West may like to believe that there was real reform, the reforms inspired by Tiananmen Square were bittersweet and empty victories for most Chinese families. Economic progress with Chinese Characteristics is creating the problems facing China today.

Although Mao’s little red book promised gender equality in China, “Women represent a great productive force in China, and equality among the sexes is one of the goals of communism. The multiple burdens which women must shoulder are to be eased,” the rhetoric of equality in China, like the gender equality promised through the Communist Manifesto were less than ideal when applied in practice.

Scenes from Zinat

When we first meet Zinat, she’s running a medical facility. The facility appears to be designed to meet the needs of females. That isn’t particularly surprising, considering that Iran is very polarized along gender lines. But, barging into her clinic, there was a male, and he insisted on going first. The females there, patiently waiting their turn, told Zinat to let him go first. They obediently submitted to male dominance. This obeisance to gender dominance sets the tenor for the entire film. It also sets up dichotomies and parallels.

The woman who submits by telling Zinat to let the male go first loses her child because she leaves the clinic. She has paid the ultimate price for her obeisance to tradition. Later, Zinat saves a child’s life by breaking with tradition. The message is quite clear. Blind obedience to tradition is the path to death.

There were several elements to that first scene to consider. First, a male stepping into a female facility would have been a violation of social taboos. It would fall just short of rape in terms of social unacceptability. The women reacted to this clear violation by consenting. The scene is strange to me because I know people from Iran, and I know that they are very particular and guarded when it comes to sexuality and gender. For the women to consent to this violation is to allow this man to culturally rape them. In this scene the clinic becomes a uterine metaphor, and the violation feels very much like rape.

When we watch this movie, Zinat “THE DOCTOR”, we tend to weigh and measure her from our Western perspective. The idea of this young girl, who looks to be maybe twenty-five, seems preposterous, especially from our cultural perspective, where the tag that reads “MD” is the product of eight to twelve years of rigorous study. It’s difficult to picture Zinat as a doctor because of her extreme youth and simplicity.

In the scene where a child is dying from epiglottitis, Zinat catches us off guard because she knows exactly what’s going on, and she knows exactly how to save the child. So, there she is, performing surgery in the field with what tools she has on hands, and in one fell swoop she is no longer some young simpleton, she’s competent and capable, and we have to re-evaluate our earlier bias of her. We see a sharp dichotomy between formal Western medicine and the traditions of medicine in the Middle East. As we weigh modern medicine against traditional medicine, we are also inspired to re-evaluate how this message can extend into a broader sphere.

It’s compelling that Zinat saves the child using traditional practices. In doing so, the movie embraces tradition. At the same time the movie is embracing tradition, it is also setting tradition up as a major antagonist. It is tradition that saved the child, but it is also tradition that would have allowed that child to die. The traditional practices held Zinat to her home and her role as a wife. Her husband did not want her to be a doctor; he just wanted her to be his wife. He and his mother were slamming doors and windows to prevent a woman from asking for Zinat’s assistance. Zinat’s home became a prison.

If I were to rewrite the ending of the movie, I would have Zinat’s husband take the classes he needed to be a physician, and he would run the clinic together with Zinat as equals and partners. It would help their community by allowing them continued access to medical care. It would also work as a cultural model where gender roles and marriage would become a partnership. Sometimes through example, sweeping cultural changes are made possible.

Martyrs and Mayhem

Kaled’s suicide speech

“We’ve triad all possible means to end the occupation, with political and peaceful means. Despite it all, Israel continues to build settlements, confiscate land, Judaize Jerusalem and carry out ethnic cleansing. They use their war machine and their political and economic might to force us to accept their solution; that either we accept inferiority of we will be killed. As a martyr, I am not afraid of death. This is how I will overcome their threats and emerge victorious over their military and political force. Let me die as a martyr.”

Said’s suicide speech

“A life without dignity is worthless. Especially when it reminds you, day after day, of humiliation and weakness, and the world watches cowardly, indifferently. If you’re alone, faced with oppression, you have to find a way to stop the injustice. They must understand that if there is no security for us, there will be no security for them either. It’s not about power. Their power doesn’t help them. I tried to deliver this message to them, but I couldn’t find another way. Even worse, they’ve convinced the world and themselves that they are the victims. How can that be? How can the occupier be the victim? If they (Israel) takes the role of oppressor and victim, then I have no other choice but to also be a victim, and a murderer as well.”

Commentary:

In the film, a woman named Suha advises against the use of violence as a legitimate tool for dissent. Suha says that there are many ways to protest, specifically suggesting the use of words/rhetoric to bring about change. The dichotomy between rhetoric and violence is a compelling point. Because where most of us would admonish the use of violence, when words fall on deaf ears, what options remain if conditions are untenable? What solution is acceptable when the misery is now?

I think history speaks for itself. It is not violence that changes the world. Violence may provide a brief respite, but the use of rhetoric has the potential to change the way men think. I would tend to agree with Suha when she admonishes violence in favor of change through ideology and diplomacy. I think the lure of violence is that the abruptness of an emergency suggests that it might provide an equally abrupt change.