Roll Call Members Present: All Members Present With Exception Of: Members Excused: R: Fill & Download for Free

The question seeks 5 best movies. I will list 25 in my list in descending order.When I started making the list, I did not realize how difficult this is going to be. 'Why should this flick make it to the list and why that one should be left out' was a question that I cannot answer till now. Ultimately, just a gut feeling decided. I have used the following yardstick in the given order of importance:My own reactionUniversal Critical AcclaimEntertaining capabilityGenerally liked by others tooBe it as it may, most films listed here will make it to anybody's favourite list with possibly just some change of places. To check out these 25, click on the pictures (best seen on PC or tablet). But first, and a usual, I must mention those which I like very much. So here are the "Honourable Mentions" or my next 50 (in no particular order) that just failed to make it to my list:25. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the GalaxyMany would be surprised to find this movie in my list of top 25 displacing quite a few iconic flicks mentioned above. The reason is that this is an incredibly funny movie based on the book of same name by Douglas J Adams. But it is not the usual brand of slapstick. It is classic British old style - a la P G Wodehouse style. The original book itself is a classic. I was very sceptical when I saw the movie - will it do justice to the witty, tangential writing? But I was relieved. The book is very long and hence the movie had to deviate from the book a little bit. The two-hour limit puts severe constraint on the director but he managed to retain the soul of the author. It makes it to my list because it's unique, genuine humour and all round good performance. If you want the "Answer to The Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything", then you must watch the movie. The answer will leave you in splits, and, no, it is not philosophy that is preached. It will be pointless for me to explain the plot. It cannot be touched upon here. It is a film that should be seen. But it may require quirky mind set to appreciate the humour.About the Guide: Don’t leave the Earth without it.24. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) StoneWhy should a ‘sort of trivial’, kiddie-stuff movie be in this list? Simply because, this is the movie that started the franchise. Even so many years later, it remains as lovable and watchable as when it was released. There came subsequent HP movies but none could capture the magic, if you excuse the irony. Perhaps it was because it faithfully followed the book so closely. With the exception of the second HP movie (CoS) and the seventh (TDH-Part 1), all other movies were a big let-down.Several things could have gone wrong with the movie. It was a completely different concept. Does the director wish to make it a movie for the children or teens or elders? The writer (J K Rowling), when selling the rights to the story for making films, insisted on a condition – the whole star cast must be all British. How to make the magic fantastic as well as believable at the same time? And the greatest challenge of all – who would play the three main child characters? Thankfully director Chris Columbus came top on all counts.The British actors such as Maggie Smith, Richard Harris and Robbie Coltraine came out good. But the best was certainly Alan Rickman playing the dangerous and slimy Professor Snape. The CGI was just right and did not feel going overboard at any time. The movie (as the book) introduced wizard games – Quidditch. Now is it volleyball or rugby or basketball? There is a chess game with life-size, deadly pieces, a room filled with flying keys, a pit of tendrils, and a dark forest where a loathsome creature threatens Harry but is scared away by a centaur. And the dark shadows of Hogwarts library, cellars, hidden passages and dungeons, where an invisibility cloak can keep you out of sight but not out of trouble.This movie brought forth the freshness of youth and even though the child actors were fairly wooden (at that time). It was like the expectation of the ecstasy to come after the gentle climb the roller coaster. Too bad the roll down was not as exciting. The franchise and JK Rowling is so popular that I need not go into the details of the movie. This is one must watch film.23. The Usual SuspectsThis is one movie that is an anti-climax. Over half or perhaps three fourth of the movie, you are being entertained but there is nothing spectacular about it. When the climax arrives, you are just stunned. The actors were finely tuned and well controlled by the director with Stephen Baldwin as the biggest surprise. Kevin Spacey played a part slightly out of character for him, but he was excellent at it.I refuse to say more about the plot other than its central theme revolves around a character known as Keyser Soze. This guy is likened to the devil in the movie, but the closest character in fiction would be Professor Moriarty from Sherlock Holmes. As the movie unfolds, it is not clear whether Keyser Soze exists or if he is just a figment of imagination. Moreover, for those who might be inclined to believe in him (as Agent Kujan does sometimes), it is even less clear who he might be. An enigma wrapped in an enigma as they say. This conundrum alone was worth the price of admission.The ending makes the show. This is a "who-done-it" movie, a thrilling suspense. Just watch it.22. The Silence of the LambsCan you imagine a horror film that has no gore, no gushing blood anywhere, no supernatural/evil beings, no special effects except perhaps some background music, and almost nil violence? Well, here it is. Just plain dialogues and viewer's imagination is at work. It won the five "Oscars" – Best Film, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, and Best Screenplay nearly a year after it was released. This is a real achievement because usually movies released post-November hog the limelight of the event held in February.The heart of this unnerving suspense movie is a terrifyingly intimate relationship between a sociopathic genius (who makes the most notorious Nazi butchers seem like saints), and a dedicated career woman (who, for all her drive and ambition, is as pure as a nun). It's a queasy, mesmerizing journey into the darkest recesses of the human mind. The film manages to be both seductive and repulsive at the same time. It's perhaps the film's most unsettling quality that Hannibal, with all his seething brilliance and cutting wit, is an oddly appealing character.While Anthony Hopkins receives most of the (well-deserved) praise for his chilling portrayal of incarcerated serial killer "Hannibal 'the Cannibal' Lector", it is Foster's performance that holds the movie together. The fear she shows just behind her eyes makes her outward courage all the more interesting and vulnerable. This is the perfect way to play the part because it explains Lector's interest in Clarice. Her only bargaining chip in getting Lector's help is to let him 'feed' on her innermost secrets and fears in exchange for his brilliant insights into the psychotic mind. The title of the movie comes from these exchanges and is very poignant.21. GoodfellasMartin Scorsese is the king of crime thrillers. You have to see the movie to see how brilliant it is. Every frame, every voice-over, every song - it all comes together at the exact right moment to create the perfect film experience.The movie begins with the background monologue:"As far back as I can remember, I've always wanted to be a gangster." - Henry HillGangsters are all around us. Everyone knows it, but not everyone wants to accept it. "Goodfellas" is based on true events. It explores the lives of gangsters, chronicling the events through the eyes of Henry Hill (Ray Liotta), who gets involved with the Mafia at a young age and continues his "career" throughout the film. This film makes you really understand and feel what makes the American mafia so compelling; in the eyes of a kid, who was unfortunate enough to grow up in a tough neighbourhood, those gangsters are rock stars. Live fast, die young - but when you die, it ain't gonna be of a glamorous suicide or drug overdose - the ending will be brutal, ugly and sad. And it may very well be one of your best friends that will blow your brains out. Storytelling with impeccable pacing, this is what it's like when a master composer conducts his masterpiece. All hail the king; the most versatile and talented filmmaker of his generation: Martin Scorsese.20. Les MisérablesBreath-taking! Simply breath-taking! No other words to describe this musical magnum opus. Based on the fiction written by Victor Hugo, this book has been made into a film quite a few times. My review is based on the latest version released in 2012. But first a warning to those who are contemplating to see it - this is an out and out musical.In its near 2.5 hours, there may not be more than 5 minutes of spoken words - everything is musical. The plot is simple. After 19 years as a prisoner, Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) is freed by Javert (Russell Crowe), the officer in charge of the prison workforce. Valjean promptly breaks parole but later uses money from stolen silver to reinvent himself as a mayor and factory owner. Javert vows to bring Valjean back to prison. Eight years later, Valjean becomes the guardian of a child named Cosette after her mother's (Anne Hathaway) death, but Javert's relentless pursuit means that peace will be a long time coming. It is the music that brings goose bumps all the time. The very first song "Look down" is the crown amongst all.19. No Country for Old MenWhile out hunting, Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) finds the grisly aftermath of a drug deal. Though he knows better, he cannot resist the cash left behind and takes it with him. The hunter becomes the hunted when a merciless killer named Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) picks up his trail. Also looking for Moss is Sheriff Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), an aging lawman who reflects on a changing world and a dark secret of his own, as he tries to find and protect Moss.The first note of excellence must be directed at Spanish actor Javier Bardem. He is more well-known these days because of the main bad man (Rodriguez) that he played in the Bond flick "Skyfall". Javier has cemented himself as the leader in portraying a psychopathic killer and has perhaps surpassed that of Anthony Hopkins in his 'Silence of the Lambs' Hannibal Lecter role (something that I thought would never happen). Ruthless, unforgiving, sociopath, and in desperate need of a new hair style, Anton Chigurh (Bardem) is flawless. Every time he showed up on-screen one can feel chill run through the bones. Absolutely perfect! But not only that, Josh Brolin and Tommy Lee Jones play their part superb.If you have not seen this movie, then please do.18. 12 Angry MenAn excellent courtroom drama with a unique twist! Instead of following the trial itself, the viewer has a unique chance to observe the events behind the closed doors of a jury room. The film begins with the end of the trial. The jurors retire to deliberate the case. A preliminary vote is taken and the result is 11:1 in favour of the guilty verdict. Eleven jurors have raised their hands to convict a young man of killing his father. Only Juror #8 has doubts. At first even he does not truly believe the young man to be innocent but notes (rightfully) that the case for the defence might have been presented in a more convincing manner and that the boy might be given the benefit of a doubt. Since the boy is to be executed if found guilty his life is now in the hands of the jury and juror #8 reasons that the least they could do is talk about the case a bit. As time goes on some of the jurors change their minds and find that there is perhaps enough reasonable doubt not to convict the young man after all. But not everyone is easy to convince.The film's greatness lies in its bringing-together of twelve different men who have never met each other before and the interaction of their characters as each man brings his own background and life experiences into the case. Thus, we have the hesitant football coach (Martin Balsam), the shy, uncertain bank clerk (John Fiedler), the aggressive call company director (Lee J. Cobb), the authoritative broker (E.G. Marshall), the self-conscious slum dweller (Jack Klugman), the solid, dependable painter (Edward Binns), the selfish salesman (Jack Warden), the calm, collected architect (Fonda), the thoughtful, observant older man (Joseph Sweeney), the racially bigoted garage owner (Ed Begley), the East European watchmaker (George Voskovec) and the beefcake advertising agent (Robert Webber) who has plenty of chat and little else.Very few courtroom dramas can match this film.17. The Good, The Bad, The UglyI can hardly add anything to a film that is iconic and favourite of so many - especially the guys. But let me give it a try anyway. Sergeo Leone gave us some films of the same genre which were known as "Spaghetti Westerns" and "Man with No Name Trilogy". The trilogy began with "A Fistful of Dollars", continued to "For a Few Dollars More" and finished with "The Good, The Bad, The Ugly". Easily the last one is the best of the lot.The story is riveting. There is not a single dull moment. The movie is very long by Hollywood standards (nearly 3 hours), but Leone's direction is so good that you will love the fact that you can enjoy this movie for three hours. When it comes to the three main characters, it is simply difficult to choose. Clint Eastwood plays the "man with no name" and is nicknamed 'Blondie' by the others. Lee Van Cleef is incredible as "Angel Eyes." It is the part he was born to play. I am tempted to pick Eli Wallach as the best who is perfect as Tuco. He really shines in this movie. Some people say he steals the show, and I can see why they think so. I think that Clint Eastwood has the least strong presence in the movie.This movie is hypnotic. It's operatic. It's sad. It's funny. It's gritty. It's violent. It's art. It's action. It's pure entertainment. The music is perfection. The way the music drives this movie is absolutely amazing. The musical genius of Morricone and the incredible direction of Sergio Leone is a combination that will probably never be equalled. The theme song will forever be etched in your brain. In fact, it probably already is, even if you haven't seen the movie! The scene where Tuco runs through the graveyard with the song "Ecstasy of Gold" is pure poetry. And the showdown at the end with that great music- just incredible!16. Star Wars Episode V - The Empire Strikes BackIt is extremely rare that the second instalment of the trilogy trumps to be the best of the lot. In case of the "Star Wars" trilogy, this happened. The first instalment of the trilogy (Ep. IV) introduced one of the most iconic villains of Hollywood - Darth Vader. We see him as an evil, heartless and cruel man. That movie itself was iconic and introduced us to space adventure like never before. This flick took it further.It has all the great qualities that the original Star Wars has: great effects (at the time of its release), appealing characters, and lots of spellbinding action. It also has eliminated some of the problems that plagued the first: the storyline is tighter, and goes much deeper into character development. The performances are terrific, especially by Harrison Ford as Han Solo, and Billy Dee Williams as Lando Calrissian. George Lucas and director Irvin Kershner will always be remembered for the spellbinding battle sequence at the beginning between the rebels and the evil galactic empire - the snowspeeders vs. the Imperial AT-AT walkers. The music by John Williams is great especially the "The Imperial March (Darth Vader's Theme)". The conclusion, with a lightsabre duel between Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker, is truly one of the most suspenseful and dramatic scenes in the entire series. This is a truly wondrous film, and serves as a constant reminder that just because a movie is expensive and a blockbuster doesn't mean that it has to be shallow and two dimensional. This film will undoubtedly entertain viewers of all ages from start to finish.15. The Lord of the Rings TrilogyI have included the entire trilogy as one massive film at this position. This is because it is not possible to split one from the other. What can I really write more that is not already written? Peter Jackson has been very faithful to the JRR Tolkien classic and the entire series is breath-taking and spellbinding.14. Modern TimesThis episodic satire of the Machine Age is considered Charles Chaplin's best "silent" film. Charlie Chaplin stars as an assembly-line worker driven insane by the monotony of his job. After a long spell in an asylum, he searches for work, only to be mistakenly arrested as a Red agitator. Released after foiling a prison break, Chaplin makes the acquaintance of orphaned gamine (Paulette Goddard) and becomes her friend and protector. He takes on several new jobs for her benefit, but every job ends with a quick dismissal and yet another jail term. During one of his incarcerations, she is hired to dance at a nightclub and arranges for him to be hired there as a singing waiter. He proves an enormous success, but they are both forced to flee their jobs when the orphanage officials show up to claim the girl. Dispirited, she moans, "What's the use of trying?" But the ever-resourceful Chaplin tells her to never say die, and our last image is of Chaplin and The Gamine strolling down a California highway towards new adventures.The word 'genius' is maybe overused for Charlie Chaplin. But what can one do? There are no other words to describe him.13. Lawrence of ArabiaAs one of challengers to the definitive epic of the cinema's history, "Lawrence of Arabia" is one of the finest productions and makes a strong case as the best movie ever made.The titled character (Oscar-nominee Peter O'Toole in his career-defining role) dies in a freak motorcycle accident in the early-1930s in his homeland of England. In spite of being honoured by the nation, many knew nothing of him. Some loved him, others despised him, but no one seemed to know the man at all. Flashbacks immediately start as we meet the character during World War I. He is a lieutenant assigned to mundane duties, but suddenly he is thrust into a greater role in North Africa. He is to assist a Saudi Arabian Prince Faisal (Alec Guinness). The goal is to fight off the dreaded Turkish regime that poses a threat to the Arabs. If the Turks take over this land in Africa, what will it mean for the English?I will not go into the details of the story. The film deals with a slice of history that really did not seem that important back during World War I, but the situations in the Middle East now are greatly due to T.E. Lawrence's acts nearly a century ago. Did leading the Arabs to freedom make the world a safer place? This is the main question that Lean's film raises. Guinness' character is someone who changes almost immediately near the end of the production and it is a somewhat frightening foreshadower of things to come. A monumental milestone in film-making that stands so tall against all the other great productions of all eras. It is another breath-taking film. Am I running out of adjectives?12. Alien"In space, no one can hear you scream".This is the tag line of the film. But in the theatres people were gasping and screaming.While most space sci-fi films (Star Wars, Star Trek, 2001, etc.) dealt with space adventurism in somewhat romantic fashion, this movie introduced us to the other side of space - the chill and horror that may be waiting for us. The commercial vessel Nostromo receives a distress call from an unexplored planet. After searching for survivors, the crew heads home only to realize that a deadly bio-form has joined them. Then begins the cat and mouse game. The Alien is not just another being - it is super intelligent and powerful. As one of the crew members, an android named Ash (Ian Holmes) describes it - a perfect being.Many consider this movie’s successor "Aliens" directed by James Cameron to be better. But I think that 'Alien' deserves far more accolades for the sheer originality of the concept. Director Ridley Scott's well-honed talents of pacing and editing create a tense atmosphere that superbly conveys dread and fear of an unknown, unseen evil entity.11. Pulp FictionNo 'top-list' can be complete without a Quentin Tarantino in it. QT established himself with this film. He then became known for his disjoint style of presentation in reverse chronological order. QT became known as another genius.“Pulp Fiction” is extremely violent in an outrageous way. The script is snappy with witty give-and-take dialogue, written mainly by Quentin Tarantino himself. The movie is starred by an intriguing hand-picked array of actors who deliver those well-written snappy lines. This film oozes inspired casting, of actors who either played against type or at least became offbeat and edgy in ways in which we hadn't hitherto known them.Then, QT mesmerizes us through the editing process, by telling the story in a maximum non-linear way, out of time, reducing the film to a series of seeming disjointed non-sequential vignettes, each vignette featuring the aforementioned snappy dialogue delivered by the aforementioned hand-picked edgy actors. It is only after watching the entirety of the movie, and reflecting back on it, does the gestalt emerge for the viewer. It leaves you spellbound and wondering what hit you. There is much more to enjoy in director/ writer/ co-star Quentin Tarantino's anthology movie about small-time, pea-brained crooks in L.A. Their tales all start slowly and then zigzag into outlandish twists. The two strongest stories involve Travolta, with long limp hair, taking his gangster boss's wife (Thurman) to dinner while the big man is out of town; and Willis, as a boxer who has been paid to take a fall, deciding instead to take the money and flee with his girlfriend (moon-faced Maria de Medeiros, who talks with erotic dreaminess of blueberry pancakes).The entire cast, like Tarantino, seems to revel in sloshing around in this muck, the knowingly hip distillation of several generations' worth of film noir, cheap crime novels and indifferently shot television shows. Travolta, charmingly dim, gets unexpected laughs from the slimmest bits of comedy, whether trying to answer the intercom while coked up or making his voice childishly tiny for the line, "Bacon is good. Pork is good." Samuel Jackson, as Travolta's partner, is perhaps the standout, frighteningly intense whether he's about to shoot a rival through the head or convinced that he has just witnessed a miracle. Despite the drugs, the blood, the language, the grit, Pulp Fiction is fundamentally light-hearted (R).And, it may take more than one viewing to get there. Lastly, by topping it all off with a snazzy soundtrack, QT put the icing on the cake. Add all that stuff together and you get Pulp Fiction.10. Downfall'Downfall' is not strictly Hollywood but I have included it here nonetheless. The story is of the last days of Hitler. It is a German film and available with English subtitles. The reason I came across it was because of the numerous parodies that were floating on the net like this one. I liked them so much that I knew I had to see the movie.I did not expect too much. Surprisingly, the movie is very sensitive and expertly handled. So much so that you start feeling sorry for the monster. Well, sort of that you would feel for a rabid dog about to be put down. Is it a mistake to see him, after all, not as a monster standing outside the human race, but as just another human being? I can't say. This is what makes this movie a brilliant film that starred a brilliant actor - Bruno Ganz."Downfall" takes place almost entirely inside the bunker beneath Berlin where Adolf Hitler and his inner circle spent their final days, and died. It ventures outside only to show the collapse of the Nazi defense of Berlin, the misery of the civilian population and the burning of the bodies of Hitler, Eva Braun, and Joseph and Magda Goebbels. For the rest, it occupies a labyrinth of concrete corridors, harshly lighted, with a constant passage back and forth of aides, servants, guards, family members and Hitler's dog, Blondi.Against the overarching facts of his personal magnetism and the blind loyalty of his lieutenants, the movie observes the workings of the world within the bunker. All power flowed from Hitler. He was evil, mad, ill, but long after Hitler's war was lost he continued to wage it in fantasy. Pounding on maps, screaming ultimatums, he moved troops that no longer existed, issued orders to commanders who were dead, counted on rescue from imaginary armies.That he was unhinged did not much affect the decisions of acolytes like Joseph and Magda Goebbels, who decided to stay with him, and commit suicide as he would. "I do not want to live in a world without National Socialism," says Frau Goebbels, and she doesn't want her six children to live in one, either. In a sad, sickening scene, she gives them all a sleeping potion and then, one by one, inserts a cyanide capsule in their mouths and forces their jaws closed with a soft but audible crunch. Her oldest daughter, Helga, senses there is something wrong; senses, possibly, she is being murdered. Then Magda sits down to a game of solitaire before she and Joseph kill themselves. (By contrast, Heinrich Himmler wonders aloud, "When I meet Eisenhower, should I give the Nazi salute, or shake his hand?").To describe more about the film will be injustice. You must watch it yourself.9. The Dark KnightRarely are sequels better than the original. I made this statement with "The Empire Strikes Back" - I make it again for this flick. Usually the slide starts with the second movie itself and in case of planned trilogies, invariably what happens is that the middle instalment is the 'most boring' one. It happens because it is neither here nor there (Back to the Future Trilogy, LOTR Trilogy, and many others). 'The Dark Knight' is not just an exception. It is an exception of exceptions.It is stupendous. It became extremely successful - something that Warner Brothers were not expecting. WB was expecting to make money with 'Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince' that was scheduled to be released later that summer. But this movie made so much money that WB pushed the HP6 release to next year 'to even out things' and have a bankable blockbuster for the next year.Christian Bale plays such a well-rounded Batman and Bruce Wayne, qualities that none of those who have donned the cowl before him have pulled off. Bale has a particular slurring lisp that serves him quite well, charmingly for Bruce Wayne and threateningly for Batman. Countering him is Heath Ledger, who plays such a scary and creepy Joker that I found it impossible to NOT have chills half the time I saw him on screen. It is Heath Ledger who stole the complete show. But all in all, it is the genius of Christopher Nolan who handled the whole film like a genius that he is. Bury Jack Nicholson’s Joker. The new joker has arrived and set fresh standards. The bar is much higher now. Usually super heroes films will probably not make it to a top-something list. But this one is again one more exception.8. InceptionOne of the best films ever produced in the last ten years. Christopher Nolan will make it to all-time great movie maker. What a story! What imagination! What a portrayal! What originality! On the last attribute, over the last decade, all people are making are comic book super heroes, remakes, sequels and such, 'Inception' brings a breath of fresh air. Nolan blurs the distinction between dreams and reality so artfully that Inception will be called a masterpiece for years to come.What is the most resilient parasite? An Idea! Yes, Nolan has created something with his unbelievably, incredibly and god-gifted mind which will blow the minds of the audience away. There is only one word to describe the cinematography, the set designs and the special effects, and that is exceptional! You don't just watch the scenes happening, you feel them. The movie is a real thrill ride. The action scenes are well picturized and the music by Hans Zimmer is electronically haunting. Never, in the runtime of the movie, you will get a chance to move your eyes from the screen to any other object.This is a flick that you will enjoy watching again and again.7. The Godfather - Part IIThe second instalment of the trilogy starts where the first one left off. The film traces two parallel stories. The young new Godfather, Michael Corleone, is seen making his way big and to the top of the crime world. The parallel story is that of his own father when as a young immigrant from Sicily, he struggles to make his own way to the top. In a sense the movie is both a prequel and sequel.The Godfather Part II is not just a movie about the mafia; it is a movie about a man's life long struggle. Michael controls a vast empire that is constantly slipping out of his hands. He grows increasingly distrustful and paranoid, and even shows signs that he hates his own life. Michael almost seems to resent the fact that he is a natural born crime lord, a man who puts the family business ahead of everything. The great Don Michael Corleone can never come to terms with one simple fact.... his father's empire was built on love and respect, Michael's empire is built on fear and violent treachery.The acting performances are outstanding, hence three supporting Oscar nominations for acting guru Lee Strasberg (Hyman Roth), Michael Gazzo (Frank Pentangeli) and Robert De Niro (young Vito Corleone). Duvall, Keaton, Cazale and Talia Shire all provided first rate performances but it is the performance of Al Pacino which steals the show, expertly portraying Michael as a cool, calculating, suspicious Don Corleone.The end is what surmises the whole era of Michael Corleone. He is sitting on his garden chair, his face now a creased mask of implacable hatred. He has exacted vengeance on all his enemies. He is reminiscing. And then we suddenly cut back 20 years to the fresh-faced young Joe College, still capable of a boyish grin, startling his brothers over the dinner table by announcing he's joined the army, and stoutly defending his patriotism. It's a stunning narrative flourish: mysterious and moving. See this movie. It is three-and-a-half hours very well spent.6. To Kill a MockingbirdHarper Lee's Pulitzer Prize-winning autobiographical novel was translated to film in 1962. Set a small Alabama town in the 1930s, the story focuses on scrupulously honest, highly respected lawyer Atticus Finch, magnificently embodied by Gregory Peck. Finch puts his career on the line when he agrees to represent Tom Robinson (Brock Peters), a black man accused of rape.'To Kill a Mockingbird' is a different kind of movie. Sure, it touches upon 'white vs. black' issues but the difference is that it looks at the problem from the eyes of a child (Atticus' daughter). It's in the innocence of a child's world overshadowed by the evil that adults do.The two kids in the movie are six-year-old Scout, the narrator of the story, and her 10-year-old brother Jem. They live in a dusty, deprived Alabama town, where their father Atticus Finch is a lawyer. In the long, hot summer of 1932, Scout and Jem scamper around town, getting into scrapes and playground fights, and becoming increasingly fascinated by the dilapidated house at the end of the street and its scary unseen occupant.However, the sunny mood darkens when Atticus has to defend a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman. The courtroom scene, witnessed by the children from the gallery, is one of the best in the movies, as Atticus demolishes the prosecution case with thrilling ingenuity - not that what happens subsequently reflects any kind of justice.Gregory Peck won an Oscar for his performance as the immovably decent and wise Atticus. Just as impressive are Mary Badham (who had no acting experience) as Scout and Phillip Alford as Jem. Their naturalness and honesty in the roles are a joy. The film won two other Academy Awards and was nominated for eight, including Best Picture.The movie focuses on that gut instinct of right and wrong, and distinguishes it from just following the law. Even the titular quote: "Shoot all the blue jays you want, if you can hit 'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a mockingbird" is in itself an allegory for this message. Being in itself a generic message, the idea of 'doing what's right' obviously has a different meaning depending on when and where you're reading the book or watching the movie.5. The Shawshank RedemptionIn the year 2002, I was in USA all alone and looking ahead to a boring weekend. I dropped in the local Blockbusters Video. I chanced upon the DVD of this movie. I knew nothing about it and as I found nothing more interesting, I picked it up. Boy, what a movie!The plot and theme is very straight-forward - a prison escape. There are many movies on these themes. So what is special about this movie? The fact is that it handles the human relations very delicately. The director has paid utmost attention to details. The Shawshank Redemption defines a genre, defies the odds, compels the emotions, and brings an era of artistically influential films back to Hollywood. The marvellous cast of this film will dazzle you with some of the most convincing performances you will witness in a film. While both Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman shine as Andy and Red, respectively, the true spectacle of acting lies within the plethora of amazing supporting actors who easily disappear into their roles. Most noticeable of these, the veteran film star James Whitmore, who portrays the elderly Brooks Hatlen. Brooks, a man incarcerated for an unmentioned crime for so long that he finds himself attached to the Shawshank and the daily life he has lead. Each of these actors show a true dedication to their art, and a focused purpose in their motivations, creating a convincing setting that never once caters to anything unbelievable.'The Shawshank redemption' encompasses friendships, hardships, hopes, and dreams. And what is so great about the movie is that – it moves you, it gives you hope! Even though the circumstances between the characters and the viewers are quite different, you don't feel that far removed from what the characters are going through.4. The Godfather, Part I“I will make him an offer he can’t refuse”- this is the most famous tag-line of all times.I will say here again – I will make you an offer you can’t refuse – watch this film.No list of favourite movies can be complete with including this iconic movie. Some critics consider this as "glorification of crime". This is because it tells only one side of the story and then we begin to sympathize with the characters who are essentially evil. But then such feelings - sympathy or disgust - must be put aside when looking at the movie purely as a movie.As a movie, it is quite flawless. One way to look at the movie is to find what is bad with the movie and I guess everyone will have to think hard to make just 3 attempts. The acting from everyone involved is great, Marlon Brando comes across perfectly as the head of the family, and James Caan and Al Pacino are excellent as his sons. The soundtrack by Nino Rota is also very memorable, bringing back memories of the film every time I hear it. The plot has to be excellent for it to get ten out of ten, and it is, it's far from predictable and the film is the definition of a great epic.The film is pretty shocking in the way every death occurs almost instantaneously, and as it spans ten years so many different things happen and every minute of it is great entertainment.3. All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)Once in a while, there will be a movie that will strike you hard in your solar plexus and leave you completely out of breath. For some moments, you will be wondering what happened. 'All Quiet on the Western Front' is such a movie. This movie looks at the tragedy of war.The movie starts with a bunch of high school going kids. They are ‘psyched’ into joining the defence of their fatherland during World War I. What results is terrible mayhem and calamity. The movie shows the intense suffering of the bunch kids from Germany who joined to fight in War. Erich Maria Remarque traces the fate of all the kids who slowly loose each other. The irony of war cannot be starker when Paul, the hero, is stuck in a ditch with an injured enemy soldier. Paul realizes that he does not hate his enemy and desperately wants the soldier to live. In the final scene, Paul is back on the front lines. He sees a butterfly just beyond his trench. Paul smiles and reaches out towards the butterfly, but becoming too exposed, he is shot and killed by an enemy sniper. The final shot shows the 2nd Company arriving at the front for the first time, fading out to the image of a cemetery.P/s. This one is not shown in the movie but if one reads the book, it will leave her/him devastated and miserable. On the last day of the war, Germany has lost and surrendered. The corporal on the front comes back reports to his Major, "All quiet on the Western Front, Sir".2. CasablancaIt's a movie that brings nostalgia, goose bumps and a lump in the throat. I must have watched it at least 20 times. The plot and story is really no great shake. It is a romantic story of two (Rick and Ilsa) in the background of the war (WW-II). They are planning to marry and agree to meet at the railway station. Ilsa fails to show up leaving Rick dejected and angry. A couple of years later, Rick, a bitter man having a total cynical view of life, runs a cafe in Casablanca. As fate would have it, he runs into his former lady love, who is now married. The married couple is trapped and now Rick must choose between his love for a woman and helping her Czech Resistance leader husband escape the Vichy-controlled Moroccan city of Casablanca to continue his fight against the Nazis.There is some mystique in this film. An unknown quality that one can't easily place. It is romantic and haunting, something that will grow on you. Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman make the movie unforgettable. The quotes are unforgettable like "Here is looking at you, kid". A B&W classic of all times.Whenever I see this movie, I mutter to myself – "Play it again, Sam".1. Ben HurIt is not just any film. It is possibly the greatest movie ever made. It is not just any movie –it is a magnum opus. It is not a story –it is a spectacle. It is not just any spectacle – it is a spellbinding one.With a running time of three and a half hours, Ben-Hur is one of those films that definitely takes it’s time to tell a story. It presents memorable characters, gorgeous production design, lavish costume design, beautiful cinematography, sweeping music, and timeless themes. As someone who has seen this film as a re-release in a theatre, I could not help but be as marvelled by it as older folks who had seen it back in 1959.Some believe that William Wyler's box-office smash is no match for the 1925 silent version, but there's no denying that the race that forms the famous climax is one of the most iconic sequences in Hollywood history - a thousand-strong force toiled for a year to construct the 18-acre chariot arena, which was eventually filled with 8,000 extras. The film, in all, used over 300 sets, 40,000 tons of sand (for the chariot track).Ben-Hur's days in slavery are vividly captured in two powerful sequences. One involves him and other slaves fighting extreme thirst, as their Roman masters greedily drink water themselves and give some to their horses but not their slaves. The other takes place on a warship where slaves, including Ben-Hur as slave #41, are pulling oars in the galleys, to a rhythm established by a Roman beating a block with hammers. The torture becomes excruciating when the hammers come down at a faster pace, forcing the slaves to row faster to the point of collapse. This is a scene that will surely wrench your gut.It won 11 Oscars. Two other movies (Titanic and LOTR: The Return of the King) have equalled its feat of 11 Academy awards, but neither of the other two won all the three top coveted awards - Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor in a Leading role.Source and copyright of images: Google and various studios.

It was interesting to see Jennifer Griffin of Fox News confirm that Trump has repeatedly insulted American servicemen and women by calling them “losers” and “suckers.” On the record, Trump has called America’s top generals “pussies,” “dopes” and “morons.” Let’s think about that for a second. If Trump thinks and speaks that way about America’s highest-ranking generals, what can we expect him to think about the lower ranks? This is why the reports that Trump called American soldiers “losers” and “suckers” rings true for me …These and similar statements have been confirmed by Fox News national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin, the Associated Press, Department of Homeland Security former chief of staff Miles Taylor, senior Newsweek and AP News military and national security correspondent James LaPorta, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and others. LaPorta, a former Marine, said he doubted the initial report, found it shocking, and thus launched his own investigation, only to be told by his sources that it was correct. And while Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton said he was not in the room to confirm these particular comments, he pointed out that no one who knows Trump would find them out of character: “I haven’t heard anybody yet react to say, ‘That’s not the Donald Trump I know’.” (I have provided exact quotes, confirmations and links below.)We know from things Trump has said in the past, on the public record, that he detests many people and is not shy about insulting and berating them, so as shocking as these new revelations are, they are not surprising. Rather, they are part of a longstanding pattern for Trump (see “THE PATTERN” below.)Trump "has repeatedly disparaged the intelligence of service members, and asked that wounded veterans be kept out of military parades," multiple sources told The Atlantic. According to The Atlantic, Trump also described Americans who lost their lives fighting for their country in France during WWII as "losers" and "suckers." I will provide the full quotes below, but will first establish a rather obvious pattern, then consider WHY the draft-dodging Trump would say such detestable things. Is Trump such a narcissist that he only admires people he finds physically attractive? Do vets' missing limbs offend Trump so much that he wants them kept out of parades?THE PATTERNTrump has made it very clear that in his eyes the only "good" women are young "beautiful pieces of ass" with large breasts, like his daughter Ivanka. Trump has also made it very clear that he has no respect for women he considers unattractive, even disparaging the looks of Angelina Jolie and Heidi Klum. (The Donald has YUGELY & BIGLY high standards!) Trump has also made it very clear that he has no respect for the handicapped, by mocking a disabled reporter before the eyes of an astonished world. And this perverse disregard for people who don't meet Trump's superficial standards for perfection extends to veterans, from grunts to generals:Trump has even called our highest-ranking generals losers! As Bob Woodward just revealed in tapes made on the record, Trump called our top generals “pussies.” During his first presidential campaign, Trump publicly insulted them as a group, saying, “I know more about ISIS than the generals do.” During a meeting at the Pentagon in 2017, Trump berated our top generals: “I wouldn’t go to war with you people, you’re a bunch of dopes and babies.” Trump called Afghanistan a “loser war” and told the assembled generals “you don’t know how to win anymore.” In other words, Trump called our highest-ranking generals “losers.” Trump called Jim Mattis “the world’s most overrated general.” Trump also blasted Mattis as “not tough enough” then in his incredible egotism said “I captured ISIS!” as if he had done it personally. (Of course much of ISIS remains at large, and uncaptured.) Senator Tim Kaine called Trump’s attack on Mattis “delusional” and praised the former U.S. Central Command leader as “one of the finest public servants I have ever worked with in 25 years of public life.” A Military Times poll found that nearly 84 percent of troops had a favorable view of Mattis and among officers the figure was almost 90 percent. In any case, if Trump thinks and talks like that about generals, what should we expect him to think and say about ordinary soldiers? But these horrendous insults are just the tip of an enormous iceberg (more follow). Thus these new quotes ring true for me.Future US president George H. W. Bush was the Navy’s youngest pilot when he earned his wings a few days before turning 19, but he was a “loser” to the draft-dodging Donald Trump because his plane was shot down.Pilots who get shot down, like John McCain and George H. W. Bush, are "losers" to Trump. Three sources told The Atlantic that Trump had described Bush as a "loser" because his plane was shot down during World War II. Bush was the youngest Navy pilot when he earned his wings a few days before turning 19. Flying a Grumman Avenger TBM torpedo bomber into the teeth of the Japanese fleet at age 19 sounds pretty damn heroic to me. How about you? And the US Navy agreed. For his 58 combat missions, Lieutenant Bush was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for bravery and three Air Medals. And Bush was hardly a “loser.” In the mission where his plane went down, Bush and his crew encountered intense antiaircraft fire. While starting the attack, Bush's plane was hit and his engine caught on fire. Bush still completed his attack, released his bombs and scoring several damaging hits. Bush and his crew then bailed out. Unfortunately, only Bush survived. He was rescued by the submarine USS Finback. During the month he remained on the Finback, Bush participated in the rescue of other pilots. Yeah, pretty effin’ heroic, pardon my French. What was Trump doing at age 19? Playing it safe, ducking the draft, working on his tan, fighting his “personal Vietnam” against venereal diseases?BTW, such statements by Trump go WAY back in time. When Mark Bowden was writing his article about Trump for Playboy magazine in November 1996, he traveled with Trump on his private jet to Mar-a-Lago. This is what he observed:“What was clear was how fast and far one could fall from favor. The trip from “genius” to “idiot” was a flash. The former [military] pilots who flew his plane were geniuses, until they made one too many bumpy landings and became “fucking idiots.” [This sounds like a personality disorder called “splitting” in which, like a baby, the person with the disorder judges everyone else by how they make him feel at the moment. Feel-good things are “perfect” while feel-bad things are “evil.” Thus a baby can see his mother as an angel one minute, and as a witch the next, if she withholds something he wants. People with this disorder don’t see shades of grey: everything is black or white, perfect or evil. Trump has called himself a “perfect person” more than once and claims to have “no faults” and to never bear any responsibility for anything he does that goes wrong. If he is perfect, anyone who contradicts or otherwise displeases Trump is the opposite of perfect, and that can explain why he reacts so badly to criticism, even when the criticism is warranted. It also explains why Trump calls people who displease him “losers” even when they are not at fault. McCain and Bush were not responsible for getting shot down. McCain was not responsible for getting captured. But these things make Trump unhappy and he lashes out at the source of his unhappiness. Ditto for soldiers with missing limbs that he doesn’t want in his parades. Ditto for war dead whose graves he would rather not visit, especially when his hair might get wet.]Continuing Mark Bowden’s account:The gold carpeting selected in his absence for the locker rooms in the spa at Mar-a-Lago? “What kind of fucking idiot . . . ?” I watched as Trump strutted around the beautifully groomed clay tennis courts on his estate, managed by noted tennis pro Anthony Boulle. The courts had been prepped meticulously for a full day of scheduled matches. Trump took exception to the design of the spaces between courts. In particular, he didn’t like a small metal box—a pump and cooler for the water fountain alongside—which he thought looked ugly. He first questioned its placement, then crudely disparaged it, then kicked the box, which didn’t budge, and then stooped—red-faced and fuming—to tear it loose from its moorings, rupturing a water line and sending a geyser to soak the courts. Boulle looked horrified, a weekend of tennis abruptly drowned. Catching a glimpse of me watching, Trump grimaced. [Bowden went on to explain that Trump became the only person he interviewed who tried to bribe him not to mention what he had seen with his own eyes.]POWs like John McCain are not heroes because Trump only likes uncaptured soldiers. Captured soldiers are "losers" to Trump. While Trump has claimed that he never called John McCain a “loser,” he most certainly did, in a 2015 videotaped interview with Frank Luntz — the same interview where Trump insisted that McCain was not a war hero. (I have provided a link to the interview at the bottom of this page.) Trump had also made negative remarks about McCain being captured in a 1999 interview with Dan Rather, questioning why he had been called a hero, so this was obviously not some sort of fluke. Trump continued to disparage McCain after his death, saying, "We sent him on the way, but I wasn't a fan of John McCain.” Trump even insinuated that McCain was in hell and seemed to be happy with that prospect: "And sometimes, you know, we had a little hard time with a couple of them, right? Fortunately, they're gone now. They've gone on to greener pastures — or perhaps far less green pastures. But they're gone. I'm very happy they're gone." [In other words, Trump is very happy that McCain went to his grave and, hopefully, to hell.]According to the Washington Post, Trump told senior advisers that he didn’t understand why the U.S. government placed such value on finding soldiers missing in action because they had performed poorly and gotten caught and deserved what they got, according to a person familiar with the discussion.Being mutilated and/or losing limbs is worse than being captured, so wounded warriors are even bigger "losers" to Trump.Trump finds mutilated soldiers embarrassing and wanted to keep them out of the 2017 Fourth of July parade, saying the inclusion of "wounded guys" is "not a good look" and that "Americans don't like that." As Marc Clamage pointed out: “Donald Trump, in case you hadn’t noticed, is a quivering bundle of neuroses. One of them is mysophobia, the pathological fear of contamination and germs. [Remember how Trump freaked out when Hillary Clinton took a potty break during a debate?] … The dead, the injured, the deformed, the disfigured—Donald Trump is repulsed by them. He keeps his interaction with injured or disfigured veterans to a minimum and, being incapable of empathy, he is angered by the response they elicit in him. Since he is also not too bright, he assumes others share his visceral response. [This is why he said wounder warriors a “not a good luck” and “Americans don’t like that.] When he calls American soldiers losers and suckers, he expects you to agree with him. Donald Trump is severely impaired—mentally, morally, and emotionally.”Getting killed is even worse than being captured or mutilated, so what Trump said about the American war dead in France actually fits this grotesque pattern.Trump's aversion to wounded veterans is nothing new. During the first Republican presidential debate, Megyn Kelly quoted what Trump had said about other women, calling them "pigs," "dogs" and "disgusting animals." Trump earned a well-deserved public spanking for attacking Kelly, when all she had done was QUOTE him, and the endlessly petulant Trump decided to skip the next debate. Trump’s excuse? He claimed to "love" our vets so much that he preferred to do a benefit for them. This "Trump love" sounded very dubious to me, so I decided to do some independent research. What I discovered was that Trump had repeatedly tried to get New York City mayors to keep vets from selling patriotic wares on ritzy Fifth Avenue, even though this was their right by New York law. The Donald didn't "love" vets; in reality he didn't want to see them, or smell them. When New York mayors refused to deny vets their legal rights, the huffy Donald built giant concrete columns outside Trump Tower to keep wounded warriors from standing anywhere close to his expensive baubles.Former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, a Vietnam War veteran and two-term Republican senator, told ABC News "This Week" co-anchor Martha Raddatz that if Trump's reported comments are "real, it's beneath the dignity of any commander in chief. Truly they're despicable." Hagel said that while the report was based on anonymous sources, the remarks fit with a pattern of previous statements and actions. He cited Trump's past comments about the late Sen. John McCain as well as three former military general who served in his own Cabinet: former Secretary of Defense James Mattis, former national security adviser William McMaster and former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. He also accused the president of using veteran and active-duty troops as political "props." "Let's go back and look at Mr. Trump's words himself coming out of his own mouth starting in 2016 with what he said about John McCain and what he continued to say about McCain," Hagel said. "How he degraded the service of Gens. Mattis and McMaster and just recently Gen. Kelly. The history of this president over the last three and four years is pretty clear." Hagel also pointed to Trump's decision not to go to a 2018 ceremony at a military cemetery in France to honor America's war dead. Trump claimed he was unable to attend because of weather. "Every other leader went. Every other leader drove. The leaders of France, Germany, Canada," Hagel said. "And you can go through a litany of past things that he said from his mouth, actions that he's taken and it corroborates really the Goldberg article in The Atlantic.'"The weather and traffic did not keep Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, German Chancellor Angela Merkel or French President Emmanuel Macron from attending gravesite ceremonies that day. Only Trump failed to honor America’s war dead. Why? Apparently because he was worried about his hair and didn’t see any need to honor “losers” and “suckers.”THE WHYSo what does Trump really mean? In my opinion, what Trump really means is this: "I was smart to dodge the draft and send other men to fight and die in my place in Vietnam. Anyone who fights and dies for his country, or gets wounded, is a moron, a fool, a loser, a sucker."WHAT DO VETERANS THINK ABOUT TRUMP’S INSULTS?Jeff McCausland, a retired U.S. Army colonel and former member of the National Security Council, wrote: “We want to believe our commander in chief wouldn’t say such incredibly offensive things. But we also know, deep down, that it’s likely he did. Because he has before.” Upon reading the Atlantic article, I was angry. Sadly, I was not surprised. These allegations are consistent with numerous other comments and actions made by Trump over the past three years that, taken together, demonstrate a clear pattern of disrespect toward the military. Even before he was elected in 2016, Trump argued that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. was “not a war hero.” He later described McCain, as well as President George H.W. Bush, as “losers” for being shot down in combat. Trump even resisted lowering the flag over the White House when McCain died. In a Pentagon meeting in the summer of 2017, Trump blasted senior military leadership in front of junior officers and civilians as “losers” and a “bunch of dopes and babies.” In the aftermath of this meeting, then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson reportedly referred to the president as a "moron." The list goes on. Former Defense Secretary and retired Marine Gen. James Mattis observed that Trump used troops as political props for a photo op in Lafayette Park. Trump criticized Gold Star families and reportedly told the grieving wife of a soldier killed in combat that he “knew what he signed up for.” The president has also denigrated and directly interfered in court-martial actions against soldiers accused of war crimes. These are not gaffes, nor are they the blunders of a man who simply lacks empathy. Rather, they reveal the president’s basic lack of understanding of the military — and even bigger than that, his lack of understanding of the concept of “service.” This is a man who, in a 1997 interview with Howard Stern, bragged about how avoiding sexually transmitted diseases in the 1960s and '70s was his own “personal Vietnam.” Trump is, at his core, a figure born of privilege who views people not as individuals, but as pawns. This transactional worldview explains the fact that he simply cannot fathom why anyone would volunteer to serve. It is incomprehensible to him. In Trump’s mind, nothing is worth doing without the possibility of a significant monetary reward or boost in status. As Goldberg noted, after then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joe Dunford had delivered a White House briefing, Trump asked aides: “That guy is smart. Why did he join the military?”One of Trump's "losers" and "suckers" is 95-year-old WWII veteran Harvey Hafter, who spoke with evident pride of serving his country on a PT Boat, then let the Demander-in-Chief have it with both barrels: "Boy is he a loser! What has he done? Other than screw up, and that's exactly what we called them in the Navy: a Foul-Up, Top to Bottom. He can't insult us and get away with that kind of nonsense! Who does he think he is, that Draft Dodger? He's a coward! And I'd call him so to his face! I wish he were here right now! I'm five-foot-six. I weigh 135 pounds soaking wet. And I challenge him. Any way he wants: pistols, swords, fists. Any way he wants, 'cause that kind of an insult, I won't stand for it! And neither will any other service person. Who does he think he is? Whatever chance he had of getting a vote from me is gone. I want someone who's calm, quiet and not a Loud-Mouth, an Empty Barrel. I want Joe Biden. That's it."Listen to this pistol of a 95-year-old veteran call Trump the coward he is and ask “Who does Trump think he is?” https://t.co/Z5gJEkSBtc— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) September 6, 2020THE ORIGINAL QUOTESHere is what Trump said and did, as reported by The Atlantic in an article by editor-in-chief and award-winning journalist Jeffrey Goldberg:When President Donald Trump canceled a visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018, he blamed rain for the last-minute decision, saying that “the helicopter couldn’t fly” and that the Secret Service wouldn’t drive him there. Neither claim was true.Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain, and because he did not believe it important to honor American war dead, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day. In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed.THE CONFIRMATIONSJennifer Griffin of Fox News has confirmed that Trump called veterans LOSERS and SUCKERS:Jennifer Griffin tweeted:Two former senior Trump admin officials confirm .Jeffrey Goldberg reporting that President Trump disparaged veterans and did not want to drive to honor American war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery outside Paris.President Trump's staff explained he could cancel (his visit to the cemetery), but he was warned, 'They (the press) are going to kill you for this'." The President was mad as a hornet when they did.When asked IF the President could have driven to the Aisne-Marne Cemetery, this former official said confidently: "The President drives a lot. The other world leaders drove to the cemeteries. He just didn't want to go."Regarding Trump's July 4th military parade, during a planning session at the White House after seeing the Bastille Day parade in 2017, the President said regarding the inclusion of "wounded guys" "that's not a good look" "Americans don't like that," source confirms.The main gist of the report has also been confirmed by the Associated Press:The allegations were first reported in The Atlantic. A senior Defense Department official with firsthand knowledge of events confirmed some of the remarks to The Associated Press, including the 2018 cemetery comments.The defense official said Trump made the comments as he begged off visiting the cemetery outside Paris during a meeting following his presidential daily briefing on the morning of Nov. 10, 2018.Staffers from the National Security Council and the Secret Service told Trump that rainy weather made helicopter travel to the cemetery risky, but they could drive there. Trump responded by saying he didn't want to visit the cemetery because it was “filled with losers,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss it publicly.According to The New York Times, the Defense official who confirmed the report in The Atlantic also said that on Memorial Day 2017, Trump had gone with his chief of staff, John Kelly, to visit the Arlington Cemetery gravesite of Kelly's son, Robert, who was killed in 2010 in Afghanistan, and said to Kelly: “I don't get it. What was in it for them?"The Atlantic, citing sources with firsthand knowledge, also reported that Trump declined to support the August 2018 funeral of John McCain, a decorated Navy veteran and POW, because he was a “loser.” Trump reportedly told his senior staff that “We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral.” Trump was also upset that flags were flown at half-staff for McCain, saying: “What the f—k are we doing that for? Guy was a f—king loser.” In 2015, early in his presidential candidacy, Trump had publicly blasted McCain, saying “He’s not a war hero.” Trump added, “I like people who weren’t captured.” Even after McCain’s death, Trump continued to attack him posthumously. The New York Times verified that Trump resisted supporting an official funeral and lowering flags after John McCain’s death, citing McCain as “a Vietnam War hero whose military service he [Trump] had disparaged.”The Atlantic said Trump also referred to former President George H. W. Bush as a “loser” because he was shot down by the Japanese as a Navy pilot in World War II.The New York Times also said:“Moreover, people familiar with Mr. Trump’s private conversations say he has long scorned those who served in Vietnam as being too dumb to have gotten out of it, as he did through a medical diagnosis of bone spurs in his heels. At other times, according to those familiar with the remarks, Mr. Trump has expressed bewilderment that people choose military service over making money. Some also recalled him asking why the United States should be so interested in finding captured soldiers, a comment made in the context of Mr. McCain, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Another former official said Mr. Trump often expressed discomfort around people who had been injured, although he has held events with wounded veterans.”The New York Times also said:“While Mr. Trump demanded that allies knock down the article, aides recognized that few senior military officers were willing to openly defend the president.”According to The New York Times, while John Bolton could not confirm the quotes in question because if they had been made he was not present at the time, “Mr. Bolton added that the reported comments were not out of character for the president. ‘I haven’t heard anybody yet react to say, That’s not the Donald Trump I know.’”Personally, I believe John Bolton is telling us that these are indeed the kinds of disparaging remarks Trump makes about our servicemen and servicewomen.James LaPorta, a senior correspondent for Newsweek covering national security and military affairs, tweeted that he had confirmed the Atlantic reporting: “A senior Defense Department official I just spoke with confirmed this story by @JeffreyGoldberg (Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) | Twitter) in its entirety. Especially the grafs about the late Sen. John McCain and former Marine Gen. John Kelly …”Sarah Blake Morgan tweeted: “My colleague, ⁦@JimLaPorta⁩, confirming ⁦@TheAtlantic⁩’s reporting - including Trump’s cemetery comments in both France and Arlington’s Section 60.”Miles Taylor, who was chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security, has disputed Trump’s assertion that he lowered the flags for Mr. McCain without complaint. Taylor said that he received calls from the White House complaining that the department had ordered flags lowered. “The president is upset, this has gone out too soon and he doesn’t want it to happen,” he quoted a White House aide telling him. “I was then asked, ‘Would you guys be able to rescind the directive?’” Mr. Taylor said in an interview. He said he resisted, and ultimately White House aides pushed Mr. Trump to keep the flags lowered. But it was made clear that the president “won’t want them down, and he’s angry.” Taylor said that he found the episode “astounding and disgusting.”According to the Washington Post:Trump also couldn’t comprehend why some of the high-ranking military men serving in his administration such as [John] Kelly and former defense secretary Jim Mattis would choose that path. He regarded their rank as a sign of accomplishment, but also of squandered earning potential. “You seem like fairly talented guys — why would you do that? You don’t make any money,” Trump said, according to the former official, who added of Trump: “Everything is transactional to him.”According to Political Wire:Fox News Confirms Trump Disparaged VeteransSeptember 4, 2020 at 4:32 pm EDT By Taegan GoddardTwo former senior Trump administration officials confirmed to Fox News that President Trump regularly disparaged veterans.According to one former senior Trump administration official: “When the President spoke about the Vietnam War, he said, ‘It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker’.”He added: “What’s in it for them? They don’t make any money.” [This sounds very much like what Trump reportedly said to John Kelly when they visited his son’s grave.]Explained the source: “It was a character flaw of the President. He could not understand why someone would die for their country, not worth it.”THE REBUTTALSThis from Politico:Senator Tammy Duckworth homed in on a different detail from The Atlantic’s report: the president’s request during a 2018 White House planning meeting for a military parade that the celebratory event not include wounded veterans such as amputees. “Nobody wants to see that,” Trump allegedly said.Duckworth insisted that Trump’s remarks do not “diminish the sacrifices of wounded soldiers who gave up their limbs, like I did, for all Americans — including him.”“I’d take my wheelchair and my titanium legs over Donald Trump’s supposed bone spurs any day,” she said, referring to the medical exemption that granted Trump a deferment from being drafted into military service during the Vietnam War.Also featured on the Biden campaign call was Khizr Khan, the Gold Star father whose son was killed in Iraq in 2004 and who has feuded with Trump since addressing the Democratic National Convention in 2016. On Friday, however, he leveled what appeared to be his most forceful and personal condemnation of the president yet.“Words matter. The words we say are a window into our souls — of how we see the world and our place in it,” Khan said. “When Donald Trump calls anyone who places their life in service of others a ‘loser,’ we understand Trump’s soul.”Khan went on to describe Trump’s life as a “testament to selfishness,” contending that the president is “incapable of understanding service, valor and courage. His soul cannot conceive of integrity and honor. And let me say very loudly and clearly so America can listen: His soul is that of a coward.”Pennsylvania Rep. Conor Lamb, a Marine veteran and the final Biden surrogate to participate in Friday’s press call, was more reluctant to discuss Trump’s reported remarks, instead explaining the historical and symbolic significance of the Battle of Belleau Wood to the U.S. Marine Corps.Many of the Marines killed in that battle are buried at the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery, which Trump declined to visit, and the three-week World War I conflict is widely regarded as “if not the most, certainly one of the most important battles in Marine Corps history,” according to Lamb.“That battle and that burial ground deserve the utmost respect and veneration to any American,” Lamb said, but “for a president to pass up the opportunity to pay his respect at that site, it’s just a tragedy regardless of what was said or wasn’t said.”Several of Lamb’s fellow House Democrats who also served in the military similarly criticized Trump in a conference call with reporters on Friday. The group of lawmakers included Reps. Gil Cisneros and Ted Lieu of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Elaine Luria of Virginia and Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey.“I was incredibly proud to serve our country. I didn’t do it because I was stupid or a sucker. I did it because I love this country,” Sherrill said, adding: “I don’t think he’s fit to be the president of the United States.”THE AFTERMATH … SO FARTrump is trying to get Jennifer Griffin fired ... This per Rolling Stone:On Saturday morning, following a late Friday night tweet from the president calling on Fox News to fire her, the network’s national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin told host Neil Cavuto that Trump did indeed use the sort of language The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg said the president had.After being asked about The Atlantic’s framing of Trump’s comments, Griffin told Cavuto that she double-checked with her sources this morning and they reconfirmed both Goldberg’s reporting and her own.“Well, I circled back with my source this morning and he firmly said this was not a one-off,” Griffin said, adding that Trump “used, according to my source, he used ‘suckers’ and that term repeatedly to describe McCain and anyone who went to Vietnam.”Griffin continued, “He always described — according to the source — Vietnam vets as those who couldn’t get out of it. And he would often say to his advisers when they suggested that he would go to visit the war dead, ‘What is it about you guys and guys who get killed?’ So, he used ‘losers.’ That’s a big part of the president’s vernacular. I think anyone who’s been around him knows that.”A recent poll by the The Military Times shows Joe Biden leading Trump with 41 percent to 37 percent among active-duty troops, a “stark departure from the military’s longstanding support for Republicans and a danger sign for the president.”Barely 15 hours after the original Atlantic article was published, VoteVets, a veterans organization that has long been critical of Trump, released an online ad featuring the parents of troops slain in Iraq and Afghanistan, each one declaring that their son or stepson was not a “loser” or “sucker.”Trump is now trying to claim that he really wanted to attend the graveside ceremony, after all. But he has been caught in an obvious lie. Trump said he "called home, I spoke to my wife and I said, 'I hate this. I came here to go to that ceremony.'" But Melania Trump was in France with him, so he obviously didn’t “call home.”THE ARTICLE AND RELATED LINKSHere are links to the Atlantic article and associated links:Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’Fox News confirms the Atlantic account:Trump calls John McCain a “loser” and says American POWs are not heroes because he only likes soldiers who don’t get captured:THE END

I hope more is forthcoming. And I think we are already seeing a very clear pattern emerging that goes back to long before Trump became president. Here are the results of my research on the matter …THE PATTERNThis is why the reports that Trump called American soldiers “losers” and “suckers” rings true for me …On the record, Trump has called America’s top generals “pussies,” “dopes” and “morons.” Let’s think about that for a second. If Trump thinks and speaks that way about America’s highest-ranking generals, what can we expect him to think about the lower ranks?Trump has also made it very clear that in his eyes the only "good" women are young and "beautiful pieces of ass" with large breasts, like his daughter Ivanka. Trump has also made it very clear that he has no respect for women he considers unattractive, even disparaging the looks of Angelina Jolie and Heidi Klum. (The Donald has YUGELY & BIGLY high standards for other people, not so much for his obese self.) Trump has also made it very clear that he has no respect for the handicapped, by mocking a disabled reporter. And this perverse disregard for people who don't meet Trump's superficial standards for perfection extends to veterans, from grunts to generals:Trump has even called our highest-ranking generals losers! As Bob Woodward just revealed in tapes made on the record, Trump called our top generals “pussies.” During his first presidential campaign, Trump publicly denigrated them collectively, saying, “I know more about ISIS than the generals do.” During a meeting at the Pentagon in 2017, he berated our top generals: “I wouldn’t go to war with you people, you’re a bunch of dopes and babies.” Trump called Jim Mattis “the world’s most overrated general.” Trump also blasted Mattis as “not tough enough” then in his incredible egotism said “I captured ISIS!” as if he had done it personally. (Of course much of ISIS remains at large, uncaptured.) Senator Tim Kaine called Trump’s attack on Mattis “delusional” and praised the former U.S. Central Command leader as “one of the finest public servants I have ever worked with in 25 years of public life.” A Military Times poll found that nearly 84 percent of troops had a favorable view of Mattis and among officers the figure was almost 90 percent. In any case, if Trump thinks and talks like that about our generals, what should we expect him to think and say about ordinary soldiers? But these horrendous insults are just the tip of an enormous iceberg …Future US president George H. W. Bush was the Navy’s youngest pilot when he earned his wings a few days before turning 19, but he was a “loser” to the draft-dodging Donald Trump because his plane was shot down.Pilots who get shot down, like John McCain and George H. W. Bush, are "losers" to Trump. Three sources told The Atlantic that Trump had described Bush as a "loser" because his plane was shot down during World War II. Bush was the youngest Navy pilot when he earned his wings a few days before turning 19. Flying a Grumman Avenger TBM torpedo bomber into the teeth of the Japanese fleet at age 19 sounds pretty damn heroic to me. How about you? And the US Navy agreed. For his 58 combat missions, Bush was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for bravery and three Air Medals. And Bush was hardly a “loser.” In the mission where his plane went down, Bush and his crew encountered intense antiaircraft fire. While starting the attack, Bush's plane was hit and his engine caught on fire. Bush still completed his attack, released his bombs and scored several damaging hits. Bush and his crew then bailed out. Unfortunately, only Bush survived. He was rescued by the submarine USS Finback. During the month he spent on the Finback, Bush participated in the rescue of other pilots. Yeah, pretty effin’ heroic, pardon my French. What was Trump doing at age 19? Playing it safe, ducking the draft, working on his tan?BTW, such statements by Trump go WAY back in time. When Mark Bowden was writing his article about Trump for Playboy magazine in November 1996, he traveled with Trump on his private jet to Mar-a-Lago. This is what he observed:“What was clear was how fast and far one could fall from favor. The trip from “genius” to “idiot” was a flash. The former [military] pilots who flew his plane were geniuses, until they made one too many bumpy landings and became “fucking idiots.” [This sounds like a personality disorder called “splitting” in which, like a baby, the person with the disorder judges everyone else by how they make him feel at the moment. Feel-good things are “perfect” while feel-bad things are “evil.” Thus a baby can see his mother as an angel one minute, and as a witch the next, if she withholds something he wants. People with this disorder don’t see shades of grey: everything is black or white, perfect or evil. Trump has called himself a “perfect person” more than once and claims to have “no faults” and to never bear any responsibility for anything he does that goes wrong. If he is perfect, anyone who contradicts or otherwise displeases Trump is the opposite of perfect, and that can explain why he reacts so badly to criticism, even when the criticism is warranted. It can also explain why Trump calls people who displease him “losers” even when they are not at fault. McCain and Bush were not responsible for getting shot down. McCain was not responsible for getting captured. But these things make Trump unhappy and he lashes out at the source of his unhappiness. Ditto for soldiers with missing limbs that he doesn’t want in his parades. Ditto for war dead whose graves he would rather not visit, especially when his hair might get wet.]Continuing Mark Bowden’s account:The gold carpeting selected in his absence for the locker rooms in the spa at Mar-a-Lago? “What kind of fucking idiot . . . ?” I watched as Trump strutted around the beautifully groomed clay tennis courts on his estate, managed by noted tennis pro Anthony Boulle. The courts had been prepped meticulously for a full day of scheduled matches. Trump took exception to the design of the spaces between courts. In particular, he didn’t like a small metal box—a pump and cooler for the water fountain alongside—which he thought looked ugly. He first questioned its placement, then crudely disparaged it, then kicked the box, which didn’t budge, and then stooped—red-faced and fuming—to tear it loose from its moorings, rupturing a water line and sending a geyser to soak the courts. Boulle looked horrified, a weekend of tennis abruptly drowned. Catching a glimpse of me watching, Trump grimaced. [Bowden went on to explain that Trump became the only person he interviewed who tried to bribe him not to mention what he had seen with his own eyes.]POWs like John McCain are not heroes because Trump only likes uncaptured soldiers. Captured soldiers are "losers" to Trump. While Trump has claimed that he never called John McCain a “loser,” he most certainly did, in a 2015 videotaped interview with Frank Luntz — the same interview where Trump insisted that McCain was not a war hero. (I have provided a link to the interview at the bottom of this page.) Trump had also made negative remarks about McCain being captured in a 1999 interview with Dan Rather, questioning why he had been called a hero, so this was obviously not some sort of fluke. Trump continued to disparage McCain after his death, saying, "We sent him on the way, but I wasn't a fan of John McCain.” Trump even insinuated that McCain was in hell and seemed quite happy with that prospect: "And sometimes, you know, we had a little hard time with a couple of them, right? Fortunately, they're gone now. They've gone on to greener pastures — or perhaps far less green pastures. But they're gone. I'm very happy they're gone."Being mutilated and/or losing limbs is worse than being captured, so wounded warriors are even bigger "losers" to Trump. Trump finds mutilated soldiers embarrassing and wanted to keep them out of the 2017 Fourth of July parade, saying the inclusion of "wounded guys" is "not a good look" and that "Americans don't like that."Getting killed is even worse than being captured or mutilated, so what Trump said about the American war dead in France fits this grotesque pattern.Trump's aversion to wounded veterans is nothing new. During the first Republican presidential debate, Megyn Kelly quoted what Trump had said about other women, calling them "pigs," "dogs" and "disgusting animals." Trump earned a well-deserved public spanking for attacking Kelly, when all she had done was QUOTE him, and the endlessly petulant Trump decided to skip the next debate. Trump’s excuse? He claimed to "love" our vets so much that he preferred to do a benefit for them. This "Trump love" sounded very dubious to me, so I decided to do some independent research. What I discovered was that Trump had repeatedly tried to get New York City mayors to keep vets from selling patriotic wares on ritzy Fifth Avenue, even though this was their right by New York law. The Donald didn't "love" vets; in reality he didn't want to see them, or smell them. When New York mayors refused to deny vets their legal rights, the huffy Donald built giant concrete columns outside Trump Tower to keep wounded warriors from standing anywhere close to his expensive baubles.THE WHYSo what does Trump really mean? In my opinion, what Trump really means is this: "I was smart to dodge the draft and send other men to fight and die in my place in Vietnam. Anyone who fights and dies for his country, or gets wounded, is a moron, a fool, a loser, a sucker."WHAT DO VETERANS THINK ABOUT TRUMP’S INSULTS?Jeff McCausland, a retired U.S. Army colonel and former member of the National Security Council, wrote: “We want to believe our commander in chief wouldn’t say such incredibly offensive things. But we also know, deep down, that it’s likely he did. Because he has before.” Upon reading the Atlantic article, I was angry. Sadly, I was not surprised. These allegations are consistent with numerous other comments and actions made by Trump over the past three years that, taken together, demonstrate a clear pattern of disrespect toward the military. Even before he was elected in 2016, Trump argued that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. was “not a war hero.” He later described McCain, as well as President George H.W. Bush, as “losers” for being shot down in combat. Trump even resisted lowering the flag over the White House when McCain died. In a Pentagon meeting in the summer of 2017, Trump blasted senior military leadership in front of junior officers and civilians as “losers” and a “bunch of dopes and babies.” In the aftermath of this meeting, then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson reportedly referred to the president as a "moron." The list goes on. Former Defense Secretary and retired Marine Gen. James Mattis observed that Trump used troops as political props for a photo op in Lafayette Park. Trump criticized Gold Star families and reportedly told the grieving wife of a soldier killed in combat that he “knew what he signed up for.” The president has also denigrated and directly interfered in court-martial actions against soldiers accused of war crimes. These are not gaffes, nor are they the blunders of a man who simply lacks empathy. Rather, they reveal the president’s basic lack of understanding of the military — and even bigger than that, his lack of understanding of the concept of “service.” This is a man who, in a 1997 interview with Howard Stern, bragged about how avoiding sexually transmitted diseases in the 1960s and '70s was his own “personal Vietnam.” Trump is, at his core, a figure born of privilege who views people not as individuals, but as pawns. This transactional worldview explains the fact that he simply cannot fathom why anyone would volunteer to serve. It is incomprehensible to him. In Trump’s mind, nothing is worth doing without the possibility of a significant monetary reward or boost in status. As Goldberg noted, after then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joe Dunford had delivered a White House briefing, Trump asked aides: “That guy is smart. Why did he join the military?”One of Trump's "losers" and "suckers" is 95-year-old WWII veteran Harvey Hafter, who spoke with evident pride of serving his country on a PT Boat, then let the Demander-in-Chief have it with both barrels: "Boy is he a loser! What has he done? Other than screw up, and that's exactly what we called them in the Navy: a Foul-Up, Top to Bottom. He can't insult us and get away with that kind of nonsense! Who does he think he is, that Draft Dodger? He's a coward! And I'd call him so to his face! I wish he were here right now! I'm five-foot-six. I weigh 135 pounds soaking wet. And I challenge him. Any way he wants: pistols, swords, fists. Any way he wants, 'cause that kind of an insult, I won't stand for it! And neither will any other service person. Who does he think he is? Whatever chance he had of getting a vote from me is gone. I want someone who's calm, quiet and not a Loud-Mouth, an Empty Barrel. I want Joe Biden. That's it."Laurence Tribe on TwitterORIGINAL QUOTESHere is what Trump said and did, as reported by The Atlantic in an article by editor-in-chief and award-winning journalist Jeffrey Goldberg:When President Donald Trump canceled a visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018, he blamed rain for the last-minute decision, saying that “the helicopter couldn’t fly” and that the Secret Service wouldn’t drive him there. Neither claim was true.Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain, and because he did not believe it important to honor American war dead, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day. In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed.THE CONFIRMATIONSJennifer Griffin of Fox News has confirmed that Trump called veterans LOSERS and SUCKERS:Jennifer Griffin tweeted:Two former senior Trump admin officials confirm .Jeffrey Goldberg reporting that President Trump disparaged veterans and did not want to drive to honor American war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery outside Paris.President Trump's staff explained he could cancel (his visit to the cemetery), but he was warned, 'They (the press) are going to kill you for this'." The President was mad as a hornet when they did.When asked IF the President could have driven to the Aisne-Marne Cemetery, this former official said confidently: "The President drives a lot. The other world leaders drove to the cemeteries. He just didn't want to go."Regarding Trump's July 4th military parade, during a planning session at the White House after seeing the Bastille Day parade in 2017, the President said regarding the inclusion of "wounded guys" "that's not a good look" "Americans don't like that," source confirms.The main gist of the report has also been confirmed by the Associated Press:The allegations were first reported in The Atlantic. A senior Defense Department official with firsthand knowledge of events confirmed some of the remarks to The Associated Press, including the 2018 cemetery comments.The defense official said Trump made the comments as he begged off visiting the cemetery outside Paris during a meeting following his presidential daily briefing on the morning of Nov. 10, 2018.Staffers from the National Security Council and the Secret Service told Trump that rainy weather made helicopter travel to the cemetery risky, but they could drive there. Trump responded by saying he didn't want to visit the cemetery because it was “filled with losers,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss it publicly.According to The New York Times, the Defense official who confirmed the report in The Atlantic also said that on Memorial Day 2017, Trump had gone with his chief of staff, John Kelly, to visit the Arlington Cemetery gravesite of Kelly's son, Robert, who was killed in 2010 in Afghanistan, and said to Kelly: “I don't get it. What was in it for them?"The Atlantic, citing sources with firsthand knowledge, also reported that Trump declined to support the August 2018 funeral of John McCain, a decorated Navy veteran and POW, because he was a “loser.” Trump reportedly told his senior staff that “We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral.” Trump was also upset that flags were flown at half-staff for McCain, saying: “What the f—k are we doing that for? Guy was a f—king loser.” In 2015, early in his presidential candidacy, Trump had publicly blasted McCain, saying “He’s not a war hero.” Trump added, “I like people who weren’t captured.” Even after McCain’s death, Trump continued to attack him posthumously. The New York Times verified that Trump resisted supporting an official funeral and lowering flags after John McCain’s death, citing McCain as “a Vietnam War hero whose military service he [Trump] had disparaged.”The Atlantic said Trump also referred to former President George H. W. Bush as a “loser” because he was shot down by the Japanese as a Navy pilot in World War II.The New York Times also said:“Moreover, people familiar with Mr. Trump’s private conversations say he has long scorned those who served in Vietnam as being too dumb to have gotten out of it, as he did through a medical diagnosis of bone spurs in his heels (Did a Queens Podiatrist Help Donald Trump Avoid Vietnam?). At other times, according to those familiar with the remarks, Mr. Trump has expressed bewilderment that people choose military service over making money. Some also recalled him asking why the United States should be so interested in finding captured soldiers, a comment made in the context of Mr. McCain, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Another former official said Mr. Trump often expressed discomfort around people who had been injured, although he has held events with wounded veterans.”The New York Times also said:“While Mr. Trump demanded that allies knock down the article, aides recognized that few senior military officers were willing to openly defend the president.”According to The New York Times, while John Bolton could not confirm the quotes in question because if they had been made he was not present at the time, “Mr. Bolton added that the reported comments were not out of character for the president. ‘I haven’t heard anybody yet react to say, That’s not the Donald Trump I know.’”Personally, I believe John Bolton is telling us that these are indeed the kinds of disparaging remarks Trump makes about our servicemen and servicewomen.James LaPorta, an ex-Marine and senior correspondent for Newsweek covering national security and military affairs, tweeted that he had confirmed the Atlantic reporting: “A senior Defense Department official I just spoke with confirmed this story by @JeffreyGoldberg (Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) | Twitter (Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) | Twitter)) in its entirety. Especially the grafs about the late Sen. John McCain and former Marine Gen. John Kelly …”Sarah Blake Morgan tweeted: “My colleague, ⁦@JimLaPorta⁩ (https://twitter.com/JimLaPorta)⁩), confirming ⁦@TheAtlantic⁩’s (https://twitter.com/TheAtlantic)⁩’s) reporting - including Trump’s cemetery comments in both France and Arlington’s Section 60.”Miles Taylor, who was chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security, has disputed Trump’s assertion that he lowered the flags for Mr. McCain without complaint. Taylor said that he received calls from the White House complaining that the department had ordered flags lowered. “The president is upset, this has gone out too soon and he doesn’t want it to happen,” he quoted a White House aide telling him. “I was then asked, ‘Would you guys be able to rescind the directive?’” Mr. Taylor said in an interview. He said he resisted, and ultimately White House aides pushed Mr. Trump to keep the flags lowered. But it was made clear that the president “won’t want them down, and he’s angry.” Taylor said that he found the episode “astounding and disgusting.”According to the Washington Post:Trump also couldn’t comprehend why some of the high-ranking military men serving in his administration such as [John] Kelly and former defense secretary Jim Mattis would choose that path. He regarded their rank as a sign of accomplishment, but also of squandered earning potential. “You seem like fairly talented guys — why would you do that? You don’t make any money,” Trump said, according to the former official, who added of Trump: “Everything is transactional to him.”According to Political Wire:Fox News Confirms Trump Disparaged VeteransSeptember 4, 2020 at 4:32 pm EDT By Taegan GoddardTwo former senior Trump administration officials confirmed to Fox News that President Trump regularly disparaged veterans.According to one former senior Trump administration official: “When the President spoke about the Vietnam War, he said, ‘It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker’.”He added: “What’s in it for them? They don’t make any money.” [This sounds very much like what Trump reportedly said to John Kelly when they visited his son’s grave.]Explained the source: “It was a character flaw of the President. He could not understand why someone would die for their country, not worth it.”THE REBUTTALSThis from Politico:Senator Tammy Duckworth homed in on a different detail from The Atlantic’s report: the president’s request during a 2018 White House planning meeting for a military parade that the celebratory event not include wounded veterans such as amputees. “Nobody wants to see that,” Trump allegedly said.Duckworth insisted that Trump’s remarks do not “diminish the sacrifices of wounded soldiers who gave up their limbs, like I did, for all Americans — including him.”“I’d take my wheelchair and my titanium legs over Donald Trump’s supposed bone spurs any day,” she said, referring to the medical exemption that granted Trump a deferment from being drafted into military service during the Vietnam War.Also featured on the Biden campaign call was Khizr Khan, the Gold Star father whose son was killed in Iraq in 2004 and who has feuded with Trump since addressing the Democratic National Convention in 2016. On Friday, however, he leveled what appeared to be his most forceful and personal condemnation of the president yet.“Words matter. The words we say are a window into our souls — of how we see the world and our place in it,” Khan said. “When Donald Trump calls anyone who places their life in service of others a ‘loser,’ we understand Trump’s soul.”Khan went on to describe Trump’s life as a “testament to selfishness,” contending that the president is “incapable of understanding service, valor and courage. His soul cannot conceive of integrity and honor. And let me say very loudly and clearly so America can listen: His soul is that of a coward.”Pennsylvania Rep. Conor Lamb, a Marine veteran and the final Biden surrogate to participate in Friday’s press call, was more reluctant to discuss Trump’s reported remarks, instead explaining the historical and symbolic significance of the Battle of Belleau Wood to the U.S. Marine Corps.Many of the Marines killed in that battle are buried at the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery, which Trump declined to visit, and the three-week World War I conflict is widely regarded as “if not the most, certainly one of the most important battles in Marine Corps history,” according to Lamb.“That battle and that burial ground deserve the utmost respect and veneration to any American,” Lamb said, but “for a president to pass up the opportunity to pay his respect at that site, it’s just a tragedy regardless of what was said or wasn’t said.”Several of Lamb’s fellow House Democrats who also served in the military similarly criticized Trump in a conference call with reporters on Friday. The group of lawmakers included Reps. Gil Cisneros and Ted Lieu of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Elaine Luria of Virginia and Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey.“I was incredibly proud to serve our country. I didn’t do it because I was stupid or a sucker. I did it because I love this country,” Sherrill said, adding: “I don’t think he’s fit to be the president of the United States.”THE AFTERMATH … SO FARTrump is trying to get Jennifer Griffin fired ... This per Rolling Stone:On Saturday morning, following a late Friday night tweet from the president calling on Fox News to fire her, the network’s national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin told host Neil Cavuto that Trump did indeed use the sort of language The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg said the president had.After being asked about The Atlantic’s framing of Trump’s comments, Griffin told Cavuto that she double-checked with her sources this morning and they reconfirmed both Goldberg’s reporting and her own.“Well, I circled back with my source this morning and he firmly said this was not a one-off,” Griffin said, adding that Trump “used, according to my source, he used ‘suckers’ and that term repeatedly to describe McCain and anyone who went to Vietnam.”Griffin continued, “He always described — according to the source — Vietnam vets as those who couldn’t get out of it. And he would often say to his advisers when they suggested that he would go to visit the war dead, ‘What is it about you guys and guys who get killed?’ So, he used ‘losers.’ That’s a big part of the president’s vernacular. I think anyone who’s been around him knows that.”A recent poll by the The Military Times shows Joe Biden leading Trump with 41 percent to 37 percent among active-duty troops, a “stark departure from the military’s longstanding support for Republicans and a danger sign for the president.”Barely 15 hours after the original Atlantic article was published, VoteVets, a veterans organization that has long been critical of Trump, released an online ad (VoteVets on Twitter) featuring the parents of troops slain in Iraq and Afghanistan, each one declaring that their son or stepson was not a “loser” or “sucker.”Trump is now trying to claim that he really wanted to attend the graveside ceremony, after all. But he has been caught in an obvious lie. Trump said he "called home, I spoke to my wife and I said, 'I hate this. I came here to go to that ceremony.'" But Melania Trump was in France with him, so he obviously didn’t “call home.”THE ARTICLE AND RELATED LINKSHere are links to the Atlantic article and associated links:Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’ (Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’)Fox News confirms the Atlantic account:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yARDlneN_5ETrump calls John McCain a “loser” and says American POWs are not heroes because he only likes soldiers who don’t get captured:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1dVtwfVXx0OTHER RELATED INFORMATION AND LINKSAs our nation faces its greatest national crisis since World War II, we need to heed the wisdom of highly-esteemed Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. In all his hard-won political wisdom Lindsey Graham explains who we should vote for in the coming presidential election. Lindsey Graham knows both candidates intimately. Fortunately, it's a no-brainer!If you see The Donald, duck, because he’s trying to kill you and your children in order to get reelected president!Trump does seem like a cartoon character … Bob Woodward used 18 “perfect” phone calls to turn Trump into his own Deep Throat. Don the Con shot himself in both feet, handed the Smoking Gun to the elderly Fudd, then hobbled off on the bloody stumps, still hoping to get reelected!The news that Trump knew the coronavirus was deadly in late January and revealed it to Bob Woodward in early February, and yet chose to deliberately lie to the American people is shocking, but not surprising.We can seek to understand why Trump said what he said and did what he did, but that doesn’t change the fact that what he did was a crime and that he was an accomplice in the deaths of over 100,000 Americans, with the death toll rising on a daily basis.Why would Trump lie with so many lives at risk? Trump is an egomaniac and he always wants to appear personally cool, calm and confident. Trump wants to project strength like his heroes Putin and Lil Kim. Those are odd role models for an American president, but Trump slobbers over them like a lapdog begging treats from its master. So we know how Trump wants to be seen himself.Trump worries more about his hair, polls and public image than he does about the lives and health of 330 million Americans. So he decided to “play down” the pandemic in order to look “strong” and get reelected. Saving lives was not Trump’s personal priority.Bob Woodward used 18 “perfect” phone calls to turn Trump into his own Deep Throat. Don the Con shot himself in both feet, handed the Smoking Gun to the intrepid reporter, then hobbled off on the bloody stumps, still hoping to get reelected!This is Trump’s coronavirus record as it now stands:(1) Trump has admitted deliberately lying repeatedly to the American people while 195,000 Americans went to their graves.(2) Trump has admitted that young people are susceptible to the coronavirus while publicly lying that they are immune or virtually immune. One of Bob Woodward’s most stunning revelations is that Trump knows “plenty” of young people are susceptible to the coronavirus. Not just a few, not just a very tiny percentage, but “plenty” of young people. Trump said so himself — in person, on the record, on tape. While Trump was claiming publicly and confidently that children were practically immune or “almost immune” to the virus, he told Woodward in a March 19 phone call: “Just today and yesterday, some startling facts came out. It’s not just old, older. Young people too — plenty of young people.” In April, even as he began to urge and even tried to force the country to reopen with bellicose statements and tweets, Trump told Woodward, “It’s so easily transmissible, you wouldn’t even believe it.” If we put “easily transmissible” together with “plenty” of young people, the prospects for aggressive school re-openings become very problematic, if not downright terrifying. If adults are struggling to stay safe in close quarters, what can we expect from children?(3) Trump is trying to force 76 million American school children to do for nine months what he and his super-rich swampland donors, with all their resources, couldn’t do for a few days at the canceled convention.(4) What kind of man forces children to do what he can’t do himself? Trump is like the captain of a ship throwing children overboard to save his own neck and job.Is this evil con man the person we want deciding what happens to 76 million American school children? If a vaccine will be ready in a few months, why not save their lives and those of their teachers, families and friends? Why not wait just a bit longer, for everyone’s sake? The reason for Trump’s haste is obvious: he cares more about getting reelected than he does about 76 million children and the people they come in contact with. That makes him a monster. Do we really want a monster in the White House?Anyone who votes for Trump could be an accomplice in the murders of large numbers of American school children and their families, friends, teachers and other school workers.WHO’S NEXT?Trump loudly berated the World Health Organization for downplaying the asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 … but that is exactly what he did himself, as he revealed in taped conversations, on the record, with Bob Woodward.In a May 18 letter to WHO officials, Trump wrote:"On March 3, 2020, the World Health Organization cited official Chinese data to downplay the very serious risk of asymptomatic spread, telling the world that 'COVID-19 does not transmit as efficiently as influenza.' It is now clear that China's assertions, repeated to the world by the World Health Organization, were wildly inaccurate.""Many lives could have been saved" had the WHO warned the world earlier, Trump wrote. Later that month, he announced that the U.S. would withdraw from the global health agency.Of course, Trump was guilty of the same crimes as China and the WHO, if his allegations against them were correct. In any case, he knew the truth no later than Feb. 7, when on the record, in a taped interview with Bob Woodward, Trump revealed that he was fully aware of just how infectious and deadly the coronavirus really was. As Trump lectured the WHO, “many lives could have been saved” if he had told the truth as soon as he knew it himself.Here we have Trump admitting in his own words that he allowed many people to die whose lives could have been saved. How many lives could Trump have saved by telling the truth and acting faster and more decisively?Trump Could Have Saved Over 150,000 American LivesHere's a sobering fact: the USA has only 4.25% of the world's population yet at times has had around a quarter to nearly a THIRD of confirmed coronavirus deaths. That's a staggering disparity. How did the world's richest nation, with legions of medical experts and some of the finest medical organizations on the planet, end up with a death rate up to seven times higher than expected if its government had merely been average in its response? Epidemiologists Britta L. Jewell and Nicholas P. Jewell have said that 90% of US coronavirus deaths could have been avoided if social distancing had begun on March 2, when Trump had two months of information and warnings about the coronavirus but continued to publicly insist that it was "totally under control." Researchers at Columbia University concurred, saying that Trump's two-week delay in mitigation, from March 1 to March 15, had multiplied the U.S. death toll by a factor of six. By May 3, the price of that delay was more than 50,000 lives. The Columbia University researchers came up with a very similar 84% overall percentage of total lives potentially saved. At the 200,000 death mark, two different teams of researchers are telling us that Trump could have saved around 168,000 to 180,000 lives. And we're not out of the woods, thanks to Trump. "The fall could be incredibly gruesome," said Yale School of Medicine epidemiologist Gregg Gonsalves, explaining that the Trump administration largely squandered the summer months, leaving the nation no better protected than it was in June. "Somebody's going to have to explain it to me, ten years from now, why they would make all these bad choices." According to Wikipedia, American combat deaths for the Korean, Vietnam, Gulf, Afghanistan and Iraq wars combined are under 100,000. The coronavirus has now killed many more Americans than all those horrors together, and the death toll continues to rise. Trump likes to call himself a "wartime president" but in reality he gave our greatest enemy easy access to our ports and airports when he failed to shut them down until it was far too late.Trump is far more guilty than the WHO and he is convicted by his own words. He knew that what he was doing was wrong and would result in lives being lost that could have been saved. How is this not premeditated murder on a gargantuan scale?SNAPSHOTS: IT’S UNANIMOUS — EVERYONE AGREES — TRUMP IS AN IDIOT!What the people who know Trump best have said about him …“F-king moron!” Secretary of State Rex Tillerson“An idiot, unhinged.” General John Kelly“An idiot and a dope.” General H.R. McMaster“Dumb as shit, idiot.” Gary Cohn (economic adviser)“Idiot.” White House chief of staff Reince Preibus“He’s an idiot.” Sam Nunberg“He’s like an 11-year-old child.” Steve Bannon“Trump has the understanding of a 5th or 6th grader.” General Jim Mattis“A complete idiot.” Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin“The dumbest goddamn student I ever had.” William Kelley (Wharton Professor)“An empty vessel when it comes to the constitution and rule of law.” Scott Pruitt“Like a child.” White House deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh“Pathological liar, utterly amoral, serial philanderer." Ted Cruz“A jackass.” Lindsay Graham“Dishonesty is Trump’s hallmark.” Mitt Romney“Morally unfit, unethical, untethered to truth.” FBI Director James Comey“A racist, misogynist and bigot.” Omarosa Newman“Eventually he turns on everyone.” Michael Cohen (Trump’s lawyer and “fixer”)“A supreme sexist, thinks he’s God.” Barbara Res, Trump Co. executive"Disloyal, actual retard." Ann Coulter“Trump is one of us.” David Duke of the KKKSecretary of State Rex Tillerson called Trump a “f-king moron” as reported by NBC News. The comments came after Tillerson had a meeting at the Pentagon with members of the White House national security team and Cabinet officials.Defense Secretary General Jim Mattis said Trump had the understanding of “a fifth- or sixth-grader” according to accounts of Bob Woodward’s book that were published by The Washington Post. The comments came after a National Security Council meeting on Jan. 19 in which Trump questioned why the government was using resources to maintain a U.S. military presence on the Korean Peninsula. Mattis told Trump that presence was necessary “in order to prevent World War III.”White House chief of staff General John Kelly called Trump an “idiot” and “unhinged,” The Post reported. NBC News first reported in May that Kelly had referred to the president as an idiot multiple times, in addition to making several remarks “insulting the president’s intelligence and casting himself as the savior of the country.”Trump’s first White House chief of staff Reince Preibus also called him an “idiot.”National security adviser General H.R. McMaster called Trump a “dope” with the intelligence of a “kindergartner.” At a dinner in July 2017, McMaster mocked Trump, also calling him an “idiot,” BuzzFeed News reported.Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin called Trump an “idiot” according to Michael Wolff.White House chief of staff Reince Priebus called Trump an “idiot” according to Michael Wolff.Trump economic adviser Gary Cohn said Trump was “dumb as shit” according to Michael Wolff.Sam Nunberg said “He’s an idiot!” on live TV.Omarosa Manigault Newman, the highest-ranking African-American staffer in the West Wing, claimed in a book published earlier this summer that Trump is a “racist, misogynist and bigot.” In her book, “Unhinged,” Manigault Newman said she witnessed Trump use racial epithets while describing presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway’s husband, George Conway, who is half Filipino.White House chief strategist Steve Bannon said Trump was “like an 11-year-old child,” according to Vanity Fair. He also said that Trump had “lost his step” and that he was “sick of being a wet nurse to a 71-year-old man.”Barbara Res, a former executive vice-president of Trump Organization, called Trump a “supreme sexist” and also said “he thinks he’s God.”Working with Trump is “like trying to figure out what a child wants”—White House deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh“The White House has become an adult day care center”—Republican senator Bob Corker of Tennessee“Morally unfit to be president,” “unethical” and “untethered to truth”—former FBI director James Comey, who also compared the US president to a mafia boss.“Less a person than a collection of terrible traits”—Trump’s former chief economic adviser Gary Cohn.Someone who “sucks up and shits down”—former Fox News chief and Trump confidant Roger Ailes.THE END