The Whole Truth about Bushs Lies - Movie Review Example

Had just one of the mainstream TV news outlets been willing to gather the sources that speak in the film and present it as a one-hour special, it almost impossible to believe that such support would have continued unabated. The issue of the credibility of the sources in Uncovered versus the credibility of the sources upon which the administration relied to make their case is analogous to trusting the defendant at the trial who was videotaped shooting someone to death versus trusting the fifteen people who caught his crime on camera.

The opening sequence of the film introduces over twenty participants whose jobs range from being former CIA analysts to being former CIA Directors, from Congressmen to magazine editors, from weapons inspectors to Members of Parliament. The point of commencing with such a deliberately undramatic opening sequence is to establish the credentials of the sources and reveal not just a broad range of backgrounds and expertise, but also a broad range of knowledge on the particular subject of building a case for the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as well as the alleged connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin-Laden.

The film is essentially one long devastating undermining of every single justification for going to war and the makers of the film also acquire credibility through the comparison of its sources with those used by the administration. The credibility of the long list of experts makes the credibility of those upon whom the administration relied pale by comparison. The administration used men like Chalabi who were telling them what they wanted to hear simply in order to gain power in a post-Saddam Iraq rather than listening to men who had actually inspected weapons in Iraq like Scott Ritter.

The film is overwhelmingly convincing in presenting the case that the Bush administration was not, as they have claimed, relying on intelligence information they gathered in good faith, but actually engaged in the systemic manipulation of information they had to convince a reluctant Congress and electorate to go along with their plans for invasion. Even more damaging is the parade of evidence that reveals that information found to be contradictory to their thesis was ignored or belittled. What Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War ultimately reveals is that America is still engaged in a completely unnecessary war not only because uncredible sources were used to build the case, but because the media failed to carry out their job of vetting those sources and revealing their entire lack of credibility.