<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: On Veterans Day	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/</link>
	<description>A blog about political change, among other things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 13:39:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: A Poppy to Remember &#171; UK Student Guide		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-200086</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Poppy to Remember &#171; UK Student Guide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 13:39:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-200086</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[...] On Veterans Day (neoneocon.com) [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] On Veterans Day (neoneocon.com) [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: IgotBupkis		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199721</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[IgotBupkis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:48:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199721</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Beverly, I personally recall it as exceptionally boring, quite pointless, and an example of how to not make a movie -- by making certain that

a) there are no engaging, interesting characters one cares about in the least

b) no one ever makes any kind of positive transformation -- learns something about themself, about life, about those around them, that will hold them in good stead later in life (unrelated side note: One reason I HATE the popular movie &quot;Seven&quot;).

I believe that DeNiro, and, like him, Jack Nicholson, have become talented hacks who phone in their performances at best. In particular I call attention to DeNiro&#039;s crappy mugging through &quot;Analyze This&quot;, wherein I would swear I could read his mind: &quot;They&#039;re actually gonna pay me for this crap! Whatta bunch of maroons!&quot;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Beverly, I personally recall it as exceptionally boring, quite pointless, and an example of how to not make a movie &#8212; by making certain that</p>
<p>a) there are no engaging, interesting characters one cares about in the least</p>
<p>b) no one ever makes any kind of positive transformation &#8212; learns something about themself, about life, about those around them, that will hold them in good stead later in life (unrelated side note: One reason I HATE the popular movie &#8220;Seven&#8221;).</p>
<p>I believe that DeNiro, and, like him, Jack Nicholson, have become talented hacks who phone in their performances at best. In particular I call attention to DeNiro&#8217;s crappy mugging through &#8220;Analyze This&#8221;, wherein I would swear I could read his mind: &#8220;They&#8217;re actually gonna pay me for this crap! Whatta bunch of maroons!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: IgotBupkis		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199709</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[IgotBupkis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199709</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&#062; &lt;i&gt;But sanctions (blockade) forced them to come to actual peace terms in 1919.
Then came WW II and the idea that letting the bastards up easy was a really, really bad idea.&lt;/i&gt;

Ah, you &lt;b&gt;do&lt;/b&gt; realize it was the ruinous terms of that peace treaty that led directly to the collapse of the Wiemar Republic, and thence, without doubt, to the chaos that led to National Socialism coming to power?

Germany was NOT dealing from a position of strength. They gave up claims to vast tracts of land (which were among the first things Hitler took back, and which the allies, attempting to placate, didn&#039;t dispute). agreed to basically re-pay the allies for ALL their war expenses, and essentially agreed to dissolve their army and navy into a minimal force barely able to keep out an overly aggressive Norway.

It was parts of this which led to Germany&#039;s experimentation with other war mechanisms not covered/outlawed by the treaty, which wound up so successful as a part of &lt;i&gt;blitzkrieg&lt;/i&gt; technique.

In summary:
 &lt;b&gt;&quot;ANNNNK!!! &#039;Thanks for playing. You lose. Insert Coin.&quot;&lt;/b&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; <i>But sanctions (blockade) forced them to come to actual peace terms in 1919.<br />
Then came WW II and the idea that letting the bastards up easy was a really, really bad idea.</i></p>
<p>Ah, you <b>do</b> realize it was the ruinous terms of that peace treaty that led directly to the collapse of the Wiemar Republic, and thence, without doubt, to the chaos that led to National Socialism coming to power?</p>
<p>Germany was NOT dealing from a position of strength. They gave up claims to vast tracts of land (which were among the first things Hitler took back, and which the allies, attempting to placate, didn&#8217;t dispute). agreed to basically re-pay the allies for ALL their war expenses, and essentially agreed to dissolve their army and navy into a minimal force barely able to keep out an overly aggressive Norway.</p>
<p>It was parts of this which led to Germany&#8217;s experimentation with other war mechanisms not covered/outlawed by the treaty, which wound up so successful as a part of <i>blitzkrieg</i> technique.</p>
<p>In summary:<br />
 <b>&#8220;ANNNNK!!! &#8216;Thanks for playing. You lose. Insert Coin.&#8221;</b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: IgotBupkis		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199704</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[IgotBupkis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:08:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199704</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&#062; &lt;i&gt;Liberals love to say that violence never solves anything, but they’re wrong, unless they’re referring to violence not seen through to resolution.&lt;/i&gt;

I always like Robert A Heinlein&#039;s riposte to this imbecility:

To paraphrase it: &quot;Really? Why don&#039;t you go ask the city fathers of Carthage what they think of that idea. What? &lt;i&gt;No more Carthage&lt;/i&gt;? I guess violence pretty well settled &lt;i&gt;that&lt;/i&gt; dispute, didn&#039;t it?&quot;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; <i>Liberals love to say that violence never solves anything, but they’re wrong, unless they’re referring to violence not seen through to resolution.</i></p>
<p>I always like Robert A Heinlein&#8217;s riposte to this imbecility:</p>
<p>To paraphrase it: &#8220;Really? Why don&#8217;t you go ask the city fathers of Carthage what they think of that idea. What? <i>No more Carthage</i>? I guess violence pretty well settled <i>that</i> dispute, didn&#8217;t it?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: IgotBupkis		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199701</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[IgotBupkis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199701</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I will once again call attention to an excellent, though fairly long, piece from American Heritage (History) Magazine by John Steele Gordon:

&lt;b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1992/4/1992_4_80.shtml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;What We Lost In The Great War&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;

I assert that, reading this article, one will become aware of how it is that once-sensible Classical Liberalism got perverted into the cancerous, suicidal meme we call PostModern Liberalism.

It should be read, and re-read, by all.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I will once again call attention to an excellent, though fairly long, piece from American Heritage (History) Magazine by John Steele Gordon:</p>
<p><b><a href="http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1992/4/1992_4_80.shtml" rel="nofollow">What We Lost In The Great War</a></b></p>
<p>I assert that, reading this article, one will become aware of how it is that once-sensible Classical Liberalism got perverted into the cancerous, suicidal meme we call PostModern Liberalism.</p>
<p>It should be read, and re-read, by all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Artfldgr		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199632</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Artfldgr]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 13:50:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199632</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Excellent point Rickl!!!   

I never connected and registered that  :)

thanks!!!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent point Rickl!!!   </p>
<p>I never connected and registered that  🙂</p>
<p>thanks!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: rickl		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199560</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rickl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 06:07:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199560</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Oops.  Should read:

...the only years of Roosevelt’s presidency that had five Thursdays &lt;b&gt;in November&lt;/b&gt; were 1933, 1934, 1939, and 1944.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oops.  Should read:</p>
<p>&#8230;the only years of Roosevelt’s presidency that had five Thursdays <b>in November</b> were 1933, 1934, 1939, and 1944.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: rickl		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199558</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rickl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 06:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199558</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Artfldgr:
&lt;blockquote cite=&quot;&quot;&gt; in a couple of weeks we will be celebrating another holiday which is not on the actual day any more either. Thanksgiving. A holiday started by Lincoln. however it wasn’t made ‘official’ until 1941… and while they were at it they moved it back from the last Thursday to the fourth Thursday in hopes that a longer Christmas season would boost the economy.&lt;/blockquote&gt; 

I&#039;ve heard that before, so I decided to check it out.  Using the &quot;cal&quot; function (open a terminal window and type &quot;cal 1941&quot;--without the quotes), I determined that the only years of Roosevelt&#039;s presidency that had five Thursdays were 1933, 1934, 1939, and 1944.  All other years had four Thursdays.

So I went to Wikipedia and found this:
&lt;blockquote cite=&quot;&quot;&gt; Thanksgiving in the United States was observed on various different dates throughout history. By the mid 20th century, the final Thursday in November had become the customary day of Thanksgiving in most U.S. states. It was not until December 26, 1941 however that President Franklin D. Roosevelt, after &lt;b&gt;pushing two years earlier&lt;/b&gt; to move the date earlier to give the country an economic boost, signed a bill into law, with congress, making Thanksgiving a national holiday and settling it to the fourth (but not final) Thursday in November.&lt;/blockquote&gt; 

So he tried to do it in 1939 when it might have done some good, but after that, there wasn&#039;t really any point to it.  A lot of his policies seem to have been based on whims, like the way he earlier fixed the price of gold by just making up whatever number sounded good at the moment.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Artfldgr:</p>
<blockquote cite=""><p> in a couple of weeks we will be celebrating another holiday which is not on the actual day any more either. Thanksgiving. A holiday started by Lincoln. however it wasn’t made ‘official’ until 1941… and while they were at it they moved it back from the last Thursday to the fourth Thursday in hopes that a longer Christmas season would boost the economy.</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;ve heard that before, so I decided to check it out.  Using the &#8220;cal&#8221; function (open a terminal window and type &#8220;cal 1941&#8221;&#8211;without the quotes), I determined that the only years of Roosevelt&#8217;s presidency that had five Thursdays were 1933, 1934, 1939, and 1944.  All other years had four Thursdays.</p>
<p>So I went to Wikipedia and found this:</p>
<blockquote cite=""><p> Thanksgiving in the United States was observed on various different dates throughout history. By the mid 20th century, the final Thursday in November had become the customary day of Thanksgiving in most U.S. states. It was not until December 26, 1941 however that President Franklin D. Roosevelt, after <b>pushing two years earlier</b> to move the date earlier to give the country an economic boost, signed a bill into law, with congress, making Thanksgiving a national holiday and settling it to the fourth (but not final) Thursday in November.</p></blockquote>
<p>So he tried to do it in 1939 when it might have done some good, but after that, there wasn&#8217;t really any point to it.  A lot of his policies seem to have been based on whims, like the way he earlier fixed the price of gold by just making up whatever number sounded good at the moment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Beverly		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199546</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beverly]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 04:20:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199546</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[From &lt;b&gt;The Strategy Page,&lt;/b&gt; which has movie reviews from an American, not Leftist, perspective: 

“Anti-CIA movies tend to follow a fairly predictable pattern. The film makers usually &lt;b&gt;take pains to avoid showing any of America’s real world enemies,&lt;/b&gt; because to do so might imply that the CIA, by spying on those enemies, serves a legitimate and important function. So the trick, for most of these movies, is to avoid showing any sort of outside enemy, and have the adversary be someone inside the Agency, or inside the American government. A rogue CIA agent, or faction, makes a much better, and safer, villain for this purpose than a foreign spy ring or terrorist group. 

&lt;i&gt;The Good Shepherd,&lt;/i&gt; an ambitious (and very long) anti-CIA movie directed by Robert DeNiro, takes a different, and more subtle tack. The movie purports to tell the story of the founding of the Agency , as seen through the eyes of a fictional operative named Edward Wilson (Matt Damon). Since the CIA was formed for the purpose of combating a real adversary in the very real Cold War, DeNiro can’t completely avoid showing the enemy. (Although he gives it a good try.) Instead, he focuses on showing the corrupting effects of secrecy on his main character, over a period of twenty years. 

Edward Wilson (Matt Damon) is recruited by the FBI while still a student a Yale in 1939 to spy on a pro-Nazi professor. He is also inducted into the Skull and Bones society, where he meets other young men from wealthy and prominent families, many of whom will later become his CIA colleagues…. When the war in Europe breaks out, Wilson is approached by a Gen. Bill Donovan (Robert DeNiro) who is forming a foreign intelligence service, and needs the “right sort” of men. “No Jews or Negroes”, DeNiro explains, “And as few Catholics as possible. And that’s only because I’m Catholic.” [NEVER HAPPENED: they just “made” Donovan a racist.]

… The names have all been changed, not to protect the innocent, but because the facts have been changed as well. 

… The Good Shepherd dramatizes a number of real life events, but &lt;b&gt;repeatedly changes or omits facts in order to show America and the CIA in the worst possible light.&lt;/b&gt; One instance involves the harsh interrogation and torture of a Soviet defector obviously based on Yuri Nosenko. DeNiro’s version of the tale omits the fact that Nosenko was treated badly because he was caught repeatedly lying to his CIA handlers, raising suspicions that he was a Soviet plant. (Which may not excuse, but at least explains.) After the Bay of Pigs invasion, DeNiro has the CIA director (William Hurt) stepping down because of hidden Swiss bank accounts. In fact, President Kennedy fired Director Allen Dulles over the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion , not for financial sleaze. Wilson is assured by a defector that Soviet power is an illusion, that the Soviet Union is a “bloated, rotted cow.” &lt;b&gt;The Cold War, according to DeNiro, was a sham foisted on an unwitting public.&lt;/b&gt; 

Perhaps the most outrageous distortion in the movie is a brief subplot that has Wilson helping British intelligence threaten and eventually kill a loyal, highly capable senior officer simply because he is homosexual, and the British fear he may be compromised. &lt;b&gt;This never happened.&lt;/b&gt; Showing American intelligence officers involved in the persecution and murder of homosexuals is politically correct. &lt;i&gt;Showing British intelligence being betrayed by homosexual traitors such as Guy Burgess and Anthony Blunt would not have been.&lt;/i&gt;

 Spotting the smears and distortions in The Good Shepherd could make a fairly entertaining drinking game. … DeNiro depicts many of the Agency’s founders as a bunch of overprivileged, overconfident frat boys out of their depth. 

The Good Shepherd plays like a cross between the Godfather movies and an Oliver Stone conspiracy flick. At nearly two hours and fifty minutes, it’s hard to sit through. It’s never boring, just very long and often mendacious. …Anyone wanting the truth about the men who founded the CIA, and the Agency’s early years, will not get it from this movie.

http://www.strategypage.com/moviereviews/default.asp?target=The%20Good%20Shepherd]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From <b>The Strategy Page,</b> which has movie reviews from an American, not Leftist, perspective: </p>
<p>“Anti-CIA movies tend to follow a fairly predictable pattern. The film makers usually <b>take pains to avoid showing any of America’s real world enemies,</b> because to do so might imply that the CIA, by spying on those enemies, serves a legitimate and important function. So the trick, for most of these movies, is to avoid showing any sort of outside enemy, and have the adversary be someone inside the Agency, or inside the American government. A rogue CIA agent, or faction, makes a much better, and safer, villain for this purpose than a foreign spy ring or terrorist group. </p>
<p><i>The Good Shepherd,</i> an ambitious (and very long) anti-CIA movie directed by Robert DeNiro, takes a different, and more subtle tack. The movie purports to tell the story of the founding of the Agency , as seen through the eyes of a fictional operative named Edward Wilson (Matt Damon). Since the CIA was formed for the purpose of combating a real adversary in the very real Cold War, DeNiro can’t completely avoid showing the enemy. (Although he gives it a good try.) Instead, he focuses on showing the corrupting effects of secrecy on his main character, over a period of twenty years. </p>
<p>Edward Wilson (Matt Damon) is recruited by the FBI while still a student a Yale in 1939 to spy on a pro-Nazi professor. He is also inducted into the Skull and Bones society, where he meets other young men from wealthy and prominent families, many of whom will later become his CIA colleagues…. When the war in Europe breaks out, Wilson is approached by a Gen. Bill Donovan (Robert DeNiro) who is forming a foreign intelligence service, and needs the “right sort” of men. “No Jews or Negroes”, DeNiro explains, “And as few Catholics as possible. And that’s only because I’m Catholic.” [NEVER HAPPENED: they just “made” Donovan a racist.]</p>
<p>… The names have all been changed, not to protect the innocent, but because the facts have been changed as well. </p>
<p>… The Good Shepherd dramatizes a number of real life events, but <b>repeatedly changes or omits facts in order to show America and the CIA in the worst possible light.</b> One instance involves the harsh interrogation and torture of a Soviet defector obviously based on Yuri Nosenko. DeNiro’s version of the tale omits the fact that Nosenko was treated badly because he was caught repeatedly lying to his CIA handlers, raising suspicions that he was a Soviet plant. (Which may not excuse, but at least explains.) After the Bay of Pigs invasion, DeNiro has the CIA director (William Hurt) stepping down because of hidden Swiss bank accounts. In fact, President Kennedy fired Director Allen Dulles over the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion , not for financial sleaze. Wilson is assured by a defector that Soviet power is an illusion, that the Soviet Union is a “bloated, rotted cow.” <b>The Cold War, according to DeNiro, was a sham foisted on an unwitting public.</b> </p>
<p>Perhaps the most outrageous distortion in the movie is a brief subplot that has Wilson helping British intelligence threaten and eventually kill a loyal, highly capable senior officer simply because he is homosexual, and the British fear he may be compromised. <b>This never happened.</b> Showing American intelligence officers involved in the persecution and murder of homosexuals is politically correct. <i>Showing British intelligence being betrayed by homosexual traitors such as Guy Burgess and Anthony Blunt would not have been.</i></p>
<p> Spotting the smears and distortions in The Good Shepherd could make a fairly entertaining drinking game. … DeNiro depicts many of the Agency’s founders as a bunch of overprivileged, overconfident frat boys out of their depth. </p>
<p>The Good Shepherd plays like a cross between the Godfather movies and an Oliver Stone conspiracy flick. At nearly two hours and fifty minutes, it’s hard to sit through. It’s never boring, just very long and often mendacious. …Anyone wanting the truth about the men who founded the CIA, and the Agency’s early years, will not get it from this movie.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.strategypage.com/moviereviews/default.asp?target=The%20Good%20Shepherd" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.strategypage.com/moviereviews/default.asp?target=The%20Good%20Shepherd</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Beverly		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199541</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beverly]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 04:06:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neoneocon.com/2010/11/11/on-veterans-day-3/#comment-199541</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Here&#039;s that movie: &lt;i&gt;The Good Shepherd.&lt;/i&gt; Vile filth about our men, and upwards of a thousand lies.

&quot;De Niro had not directed another film until 2006&#039;s The Good Shepherd, which starred &lt;b&gt;Matt Damon&lt;/b&gt; and Angelina Jolie. The Good Shepherd depicts the origins of the CIA [er, NO], with Damon portraying one of the top counter-intelligence agents during World War II and the Cold War. De Niro has a small role as General Bill Donovan, who recruits Damon&#039;s character into the world of counter-intelligence.&quot;

What is it with that jackass Damon? does he think it&#039;s cute to shi* where you eat? And De Niro played Donovan as a brute. Filthy liars. I was actually twisting in my seat as I watched all the lies on the screen. Sickening.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s that movie: <i>The Good Shepherd.</i> Vile filth about our men, and upwards of a thousand lies.</p>
<p>&#8220;De Niro had not directed another film until 2006&#8217;s The Good Shepherd, which starred <b>Matt Damon</b> and Angelina Jolie. The Good Shepherd depicts the origins of the CIA [er, NO], with Damon portraying one of the top counter-intelligence agents during World War II and the Cold War. De Niro has a small role as General Bill Donovan, who recruits Damon&#8217;s character into the world of counter-intelligence.&#8221;</p>
<p>What is it with that jackass Damon? does he think it&#8217;s cute to shi* where you eat? And De Niro played Donovan as a brute. Filthy liars. I was actually twisting in my seat as I watched all the lies on the screen. Sickening.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
