Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Because only the CIA know of the Iranian connection, which amounted to one man providing funds. The only ones who know of the link have a good reason to be opposed to going to war, and that's assuming that Javadi wasn't acting alone, and that he provided more than just money. Even if the US President didn't sign off on the plan which would be ruined by declaring war, you don't declare war on an entire country just over a single man. The US would never get UN support since Russia and China would both use their vetoes on any proposal, and without that the number of nations who would follow the US into war after the cluster fuck that was Iraq would be very low. The consequences of the war would be terrible, the US would lose even more of it's standing, it would be caught in yet another long drawn out quagmire that would claim thousands of soldiers lives, give Islamic terrorists more ammunition to use for recruitment and include significant blowback against any US ally in the region. All of which is a moot point as the Iranian connection to the bombing is never commonly knowledge, so the US lacks justification to start a war so it would never even pass congress. For the record, the real 9/11 had people from the Saudi government involved as mentioned by two US senators who got to read the unredacted version and war was never even put on the table.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* A man bombs the CIA, killing a good proportion of its leaders and impacting the United States as almost a second 9/11. Unlike the ''actual'' 9/11, however, the remnants of the CIA trace it back clearly and completely to another sovereign state (Iran) with amazing speed, and the events of Season 3 make that involvement go beyond any doubt well before the end. By the second to last episode, Iran is even ''openly protecting'' Brody (believed to be the bomber) and hailing him on national TV as a hero. Even amidst general war exhaustion, how does this chain of events ''not'' lead to an American declaration of war on Iran once Iran's involvement becomes common knowledge?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** And if they get a lip reader who fucks up it's even worse. But accepting that yes, they may have a lip reader on staff, the whole point of the operation is to keep the team as small as possible to keep it secret that they're investigating a congressman. Everyone on the team already knows each other (except for Quinn who was a mandate from Estes), but none of them know a lip-reader. Bringing one in would increase the risk of the operation being discovered, which would get Estes fired (as he himself admits when Saul gives him the proof that Brody was the traitor) and probably Saul as well, with Carrie getting thrown to the wayside.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 61 (click to see context) from:
*** They're not building a court case there, they're just trying to gather whatever information they can in order to stop a terrorist attack. Even if lip reading isn't always reliable, especially in the latter case the CIA is desperate to get any little piece of evidence possible on the man Roya Hammad is meeting, so you'd think they would try all the methods they can think of. And the CIA should've already vetted some lip reading experts they can use in a case like this, it seems quite unlikely that this is the first time ever they've needed to find out what is said on a videotape with no audio. If you google the words "CIA" and "lip reading", the very first result is [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001877.html a Washington post article]] which confirms that in the real world FBI and CIA do indeed use lip readers "to review surveillance tapes".
to:
*** They're not building a court case there, they're just trying to gather whatever information they can in order to stop a terrorist attack. Even if lip reading isn't always reliable, especially in the latter case the CIA is desperate to get any little piece of evidence possible on the man Roya Hammad is meeting, so you'd think they would try all the methods they can think of. And the CIA should've already vetted some lip reading experts they can use in a case like this, it seems quite unlikely that this is the first time ever they've needed to find out what is said on a videotape with no audio. If you google the words "CIA" and "lip reading", the very first result is [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001877.html a Washington post article]] which confirms that in the real world the FBI and CIA do indeed use lip readers "to review surveillance tapes".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 61 (click to see context) from:
*** They're not building a court case there, they're just trying to gather whatever information they can in order to stop a terrorist attack. Even if lip reading isn't always reliable, especially in the latter case the CIA is desperate to get any little piece of evidence possible on the man Roya Hammad is meeting, so you'd think they would try all the methods they can think of. And CIA should've already vetted some lip reading experts they can use in a case like this, it seems quite unlikely that this is the first time ever they've needed to find out what is said on a videotape with no audio. If you google the words "CIA" and "lip reading", the very first result is [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001877.html a Washington post article]] that says that the FBI and CIA do indeed use lip readers "to review surveillance tapes".
to:
*** They're not building a court case there, they're just trying to gather whatever information they can in order to stop a terrorist attack. Even if lip reading isn't always reliable, especially in the latter case the CIA is desperate to get any little piece of evidence possible on the man Roya Hammad is meeting, so you'd think they would try all the methods they can think of. And the CIA should've already vetted some lip reading experts they can use in a case like this, it seems quite unlikely that this is the first time ever they've needed to find out what is said on a videotape with no audio. If you google the words "CIA" and "lip reading", the very first result is [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001877.html a Washington post article]] which confirms that says that in the real world FBI and CIA do indeed use lip readers "to review surveillance tapes".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** They're not building a court case there, they're just trying to gather whatever information they can in order to stop a terrorist attack. Even if lip reading isn't always reliable, especially in the latter case the CIA is desperate to get any little piece of evidence possible on the man Roya Hammad is meeting, so you'd think they would try all the methods they can think of. And CIA should've already vetted some lip reading experts they can use in a case like this, it seems quite unlikely that this is the first time ever they've needed to find out what is said on a videotape with no audio. If you google the words "CIA" and "lip reading", the very first result is [[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001877.html a Washington post article]] that says that the FBI and CIA do indeed use lip readers "to review surveillance tapes".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Because lip reading isn't a reliable method, it wouldn't hold up in a court, accents would get in the way, and it probably wouldn't pass whatever quality tests the CIA uses. Plus, you don't just "hire" someone to work for the CIA, they have to go through an extensive vetting process that in the real world can take upwards of six months to years in order to qualify for a security clearance that would allow them to see what was being talked about.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* During season 2, there are two occasions when the CIA team watches a conversation through a surveillance camera, but can't hear any audio: when Roya Hamad is talking with Brody in the Congress, and when she is meeting her terrorist contact in the park. In both cases the CIA folks curse the fact that they don't know what the conversation is about due to lack of audio. Why can't the CIA hire a lip reader to go through those tapes?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Going through the list, he couldn't have been a babysitter because Nazir would already have had one considering how often he's out crusading, long before he picked Brody up in Iraq. Nazir is a man who doesn't just do things without a reason behind them, nor is he one to waste an opportunity. By that point he would already have a trusted babysitter, and breaking a US Marine just to have him watch over your kid is not his style, . Ditto bodyguard; Nazir has an entire terror cell at his disposal, with his greatest defence being him not drawing attention to himself; something having a red-headed white guy in Pakistan would do the opposite of. And yes, there is no way to say for certain that Nazir intended for it to happen, the same way that there was no way for Carrie to say for certain Brody had a suicide vest or that he was a terrorist or anything, it's called an educated guess by a woman who has picked apart Nazir's methods for a decade. She was able to figure out that he had suffered a great loss in 2004 and worked back through his entire catalogue of actions to figure out just what he was thinking and building up to. There is no way he couldn't have foreseen that putting Brody and Issa together wouldn't have resulted in a bond forming. So yes, there are lots of different scenarios that could explain how they come close, but the "English Teacher" one is the most credible, simply because it's the only role that Brody could fill that Nazir wouldn't have had an alternative (a native English speaker who could pass on some of the minor details someone else wouldn't have picked up on).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 56 (click to see context) from:
** Working backwards, Brody had an emotional connection to Issa, which could only come about if Abu Nazir expressly intended it. So there had to be a reason for Nazir to have Brody and Issa together for such a long period for the two to form a bond, since Nazir would never just bring Brody to his home and have any form of interaction with his son without there being some kind of reason. That drastically limits the amount of possibilities as to why Nazir would want Brody close to his son; couldn't be ''just'' to break him further since he had already done that pretty well, couldn't be to have Brody act as a babysitter, so that only really leaves a teacher role. Brody doesn't really know a whole lot of things that he could teach to another person, just English (from a native speaker, presumably to pick up all the little details), the American society, and fighting. Nazir wouldn't want a pro-Western view being taught to his son, and Brody's way of fighting is incompatible with Nazir's, so that only leaves the language angle.
to:
** Working backwards, Brody had an emotional connection to Issa, which could only come about if Abu Nazir expressly intended it. So there had to be a reason for Nazir to have Brody and Issa together for such a long period for the two to form a bond, since Nazir would never just bring Brody to his home and have any form of interaction with his son without there being some kind of reason. That drastically limits the amount of possibilities as to why Nazir would want Brody close to his son; couldn't be ''just'' to break him further since he had already done that pretty well, couldn't be to have Brody act as a babysitter, so that only really leaves a teacher role. Brody doesn't really know a whole lot of things that he could teach to another person, just English (from a native speaker, presumably to pick up all the little details), the American society, and fighting. Nazir wouldn't want a pro-Western view being taught to his son, and Brody's way of fighting is incompatible with Nazir's, so that only leaves the language angle. angle.
*** That's still hell of a chain of deduction to make, yet Carrie states it as if it's a fact she already knows, without even trying to probe Brody first to see if she's close to the truth. And why couldn't Brody have been Issa's babysitter? Or, since he was presumably turned to Abu Nazir's cause before he became close to Issa (otherwise Abu Nazir wouldn't probably have let him near to his son in the first place), maybe he could've been working as a bodyguard to Issa and Abu Nazir's family? Also, there's no way Carrie could say for certain Abu Nazir intended Issa and Brody to become so close. Since Abu Nazir presumably has to spend a lot of time outside his home to plan his terrorist acts, maybe Brody and Issa could've connected while he was away, without him ever having planned for that? The point is, there are loads of different scenarios how Issa and Bordy could have become close, and Carrie just happened to pick the right one, with no explanation how.
*** That's still hell of a chain of deduction to make, yet Carrie states it as if it's a fact she already knows, without even trying to probe Brody first to see if she's close to the truth. And why couldn't Brody have been Issa's babysitter? Or, since he was presumably turned to Abu Nazir's cause before he became close to Issa (otherwise Abu Nazir wouldn't probably have let him near to his son in the first place), maybe he could've been working as a bodyguard to Issa and Abu Nazir's family? Also, there's no way Carrie could say for certain Abu Nazir intended Issa and Brody to become so close. Since Abu Nazir presumably has to spend a lot of time outside his home to plan his terrorist acts, maybe Brody and Issa could've connected while he was away, without him ever having planned for that? The point is, there are loads of different scenarios how Issa and Bordy could have become close, and Carrie just happened to pick the right one, with no explanation how.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Working backwards, Brody had an emotional connection to Issa, which could only come about if Abu Nazir expressly intended it. So there had to be a reason for Nazir to have Brody and Issa together for such a long period for the two to form a bond, since Nazir would never just bring Brody to his home and have any form of interaction with his son without there being some kind of reason. That drastically limits the amount of possibilities as to why Nazir would want Brody close to his son; couldn't be ''just'' to break him further since he had already done that pretty well, couldn't be to have Brody act as a babysitter, so that only really leaves a teacher role. Brody doesn't really know a whole lot of things that he could teach to another person, just English (from a native speaker, presumably to pick up all the little details), the American society, and fighting. Nazir wouldn't want a pro-Western view being taught to his son, and Brody's way of fighting is incompatible with Nazir's, so that only leaves the language angle.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* In the 2nd season episode "[=Q&A=]", when Carrie is interrogating Brody, she tells him that they know Brody was teaching Issa English and bonded with him. How exactly did she figure out all that? Okay, she knew that Brody had some emotional connection to Issa, because Brody was repeating his name in his nightmares, but how could she deduce the rest of the story from that, including the fact that Brody was Issa's teacher?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 8 (click to see context) from:
to:
*** There is also the Taqiyya, which allows for a Muslim to hide his faith if the person feels there is danger in openly practising their faith.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**** Also, there is another problem with his insulting Fara's headscarf. Saul's (fake) beef is with Carrie, not with anyone else. There is really no need for him to insult Fara.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 48,49 (click to see context) from:
**** Further UnfortunateImplications: Saul Berenson is a Jewish name.
to:
**** Further UnfortunateImplications: Saul Berenson is a Jewish name.
Jew.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 47,48 (click to see context) from:
*** What makes it especially bad is there are any number of things he could call out a rookie analyst for, if he needed to vent his frustration and show the audience his JerkAss side: shoddy work and not performing up to his expectations would be at the top of the list. Yelling at her for wearing a symbol of her faith as if it were a sign of allegiance to terrorism just makes it look like, beneath the surface, he was a bigot all along, like the guy who resorts to crass racial slurs and remarks in the heat of the moment. Even if he apologizes later, that moment of peering into his true character is never really going to go away.
to:
*** What makes it especially bad is there are any number of things he could call out a rookie analyst for, if he needed to vent his frustration and show the audience his JerkAss side: shoddy work and not performing up to his expectations would be at the top of the list. Yelling at her for wearing a symbol of her faith as if it were a sign of allegiance to terrorism just makes it look like, beneath the surface, he was a bigot all along, like the guy who resorts to crass racial slurs and remarks in the heat of the moment. Even if he apologizes later, that moment of peering into his true character is never really going to go away.away.
**** Further UnfortunateImplications: Saul Berenson is a Jewish name.
**** Further UnfortunateImplications: Saul Berenson is a Jewish name.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Because she had been spying on him for a month and got a good understanding of his personality. She didn't ''know'' that it would have a measurable effect but had a basis to make that decision. Plus, desperate to keep the investigation going.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* In Season 1, I'm starting to understand that Carrie walked into the veteran's recovery meeting to bait Brody on purpose. How did Carrie know it would have any measurable effect to walk into the meeting with Brody?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 47,48 (click to see context) from:
*** What makes it especially bad is there are any number of new things he could call out a rookie analyst for, if he needed to vent his frustration and show the audience his JerkAss side: shoddy work and not performing up to his expectations would be at the top of the list. Yelling at her for wearing a symbol of her faith as if it were a sign of allegiance to terrorism just makes it look like, beneath the surface, he was a bigot all along, like the guy who resorts to crass racial slurs and remarks in the heat of the moment. Even if he apologizes later, that moment of peering into his true character is never really going to go away.
to:
*** What makes it especially bad is there are any number of new things he could call out a rookie analyst for, if he needed to vent his frustration and show the audience his JerkAss side: shoddy work and not performing up to his expectations would be at the top of the list. Yelling at her for wearing a symbol of her faith as if it were a sign of allegiance to terrorism just makes it look like, beneath the surface, he was a bigot all along, like the guy who resorts to crass racial slurs and remarks in the heat of the moment. Even if he apologizes later, that moment of peering into his true character is never really going to go away.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 47 (click to see context) from:
to:
*** What makes it especially bad is there are any number of new things he could call out a rookie analyst for, if he needed to vent his frustration and show the audience his JerkAss side: shoddy work and not performing up to his expectations would be at the top of the list. Yelling at her for wearing a symbol of her faith as if it were a sign of allegiance to terrorism just makes it look like, beneath the surface, he was a bigot all along, like the guy who resorts to crass racial slurs and remarks in the heat of the moment. Even if he apologizes later, that moment of peering into his true character is never really going to go away.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 45,46 (click to see context) from:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to [[spoiler: everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before]]. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic or Farsi language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more frustrating than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
to:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to [[spoiler: everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before]]. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic or Farsi language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more frustrating than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
ignorance.
** It is very strange. I thought it was a [[KickTheDog way of showing us]] that the Langley bombing had caused Saul to, at the least [[TookALevelInJerkAss Take Several Levels In Jerk-Ass]] before the reveal that Carrie wasn't being thrown under the bus in any way she didn't agree to be. Now that it's been revealed that Saul's morality is still at least 90% intact (maybe 100%), the scene only makes sense to me as a RedHerring scene, as until the end of Season 3's 4th episode they wanted us to be wary of Saul. In-Universe, it's hard to justify.
** It is very strange. I thought it was a [[KickTheDog way of showing us]] that the Langley bombing had caused Saul to, at the least [[TookALevelInJerkAss Take Several Levels In Jerk-Ass]] before the reveal that Carrie wasn't being thrown under the bus in any way she didn't agree to be. Now that it's been revealed that Saul's morality is still at least 90% intact (maybe 100%), the scene only makes sense to me as a RedHerring scene, as until the end of Season 3's 4th episode they wanted us to be wary of Saul. In-Universe, it's hard to justify.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 45,46 (click to see context) from:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to [[spoiler: everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before]]. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more frustrating than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
to:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to [[spoiler: everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before]]. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic or Farsi language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more frustrating than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 45,46 (click to see context) from:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more frustrating than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
to:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to [[spoiler: everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before.before]]. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more frustrating than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 45,46 (click to see context) from:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more bizarre than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
to:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more bizarre frustrating than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 45 (click to see context) from:
to:
* In Season 3, a big deal is made of the new analyst girl who comes in wearing a headscarf. She gets some odds looks, even from Saul and Quinn, before Saul eventually comes right out and tells her that her wearing a headscarf is like a giant 'fuck you' to everyone who died at the CIA building shortly before. Now, I can imagine the CIA has its share of bigots who can't tell the difference between Al-Qaeda and a young woman wearing a headscarf...but of all the people to fail on that account, ''Saul''? He's the Middle East division chief at the start of the series, right? He has consistently been presented as a voice of reason and cool-headedness. He must have any number of Muslim contacts, have worked with any number of Muslim agents for their Arabic language skills, have a pretty solid understanding of Middle Eastern culture and (probably) languages. That this speech was put into his mouth, and that he never apologizes for it or acknowledges he was wrong in any way, seems just plain bizarre, far more bizarre than Jessica Brody's anti-Muslim rant in Season 2, because in her case we can at least provide the excuse of ignorance.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7 (click to see context) from:
to:
*** Brody certainly finds it important enough to him to practice his religion, despite having to do it in secret, that he converts the garage into a place for him to worship and presumably goes there every night. All religions have non-practicing or barely-practicing members, but I don't think that's accurate regarding Brody.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 6 (click to see context) from:
to:
*** More likely, Brody isn't that devout a Muslim. There are many Muslims who just don't practice their religion.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Brody's converted to Islam, yet he's drinking beer and champagne, and even frying bacon (although I'm unsure if he ever eats it). He's very strict about the other tenets of the faith, yet this he disregards? Might be to avoid blowing his cover, but surely he could come up with some excuse not to drink?
** Basically he has to maintain his cover, and apparantly (in that I've heard this from the "Obama is a secret muslium <whatever group the speaker doesn't like>" camp) there is an allowance for that sort of thing if the situation is important enough. Considering the stakes he's playing for he probably prays for forgiveness before and afterwards. The non-social situations where he drinks he's going through a rough emotional spot in his life and is drowning his sorrows away, and then probably regrets it when he sobers up.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 5 (click to see context) from:
to:
*** Basically he has to maintain his cover, and apparantly (in that I've heard this from the "Obama is a secret muslium <whatever group the speaker doesn't like>" camp) there is an allowance for that sort of thing if the situation is important enough. Considering the stakes he's playing for he probably prays for forgiveness before and afterwards. The non-social situations where he drinks he's going through a rough emotional spot in his life and is drowning his sorrows away, and then probably regrets it when he sobers up.
