A TALE OF DOMESTIC TERROR WINDS UP IN A MUDDLE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00965R000807570037-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 21, 2012
• Sequence Number: 37
• Publication Date: February 9, 1986
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/21: CIA-RDP90-00965R000807570037-8
111.r1 I V1 \1X 11I'ILJ
ARTICLE AP O 9 February 1986
ON PAGE
TV VIEW
A Tale of Domestic Terror
Winds Up in a Muddle
11 -
nder Siege" is about domestic terrorism, and
it's both chilling and muddled. Americans
get blown to bits; the Capitol is hit by rockets.
The principal terrorist says, "My only goal is
to teach - to educate America what it is to
brook, and although he does not look like Ronald Reagan.
he speaks, I think, the way the people who wrote "Under
Siege" - there are four of them - imagine he speaks. Is
Iran responsible for the terrorism? President Holbrook is
firm: "if they've declared war on us, that's what these
bozos will get back." A little later, after the rockets have
hit the Capitol, sending up a plume of smoke and fire from
the dome, we hear President Holbrook at Camp David.
He's terribly angry. "They bombed the Capitol, for crying
out loud," he says. "I don't like it."
In fact, "Under Siege," even though it's trying to be
just as up-to-date as can be, is really a 1960's movie. The
references to the Ayatollah Khomeini, Colonel Qaddafi,
Jimmy Carter and the bombing of American servicemen
in Beirut are a facade. "Under Siege," slick, glossy, with
drumbeats punctuating its score, knows who the enemy
is: It's not the terrorists; it's us. The only real departure
from the 60's is the choice of a hero. He is the director of
the F.B.I., and, as played by Peter Strauss, he is a long
way from J. Edgar Hoover. He is strong on civil liberties,
for one thing, and for another, he can run like a deer. He
chases a terrorist on foot. Up one street, down another; on
a bus, off a bus; chase, chase; pant, pant. Mr. Strauss
catches up with the terrorist on a railrpad track, and when
the terrorist blows himself up with a hand grenade, Mr.
Strauss is knocked off a trestle. Unscathed, he goes back
to work.
Don't think for a moment, however, that "Under
Siege" is only derring-do. It's trying to make a statement.
Terrorism is a complex act, and things aren't what they
seem. When a suicide bomber kills hundreds of soldiers at
Fort Bladenburg, Md., the Director of Central Intelli-
gence (Fritz Weaver) blames Shiite Moslems from Iran.
Then three passenger planes are blown from the sky. The
Joint Chiefs want to act, and so does most of the country.
Only F.B.I. Director Strauss stands in the way. He de-
mands proof that it's really the Shiites.
"He doesn't know how Washington works," the editor
of Washington's most important paper (George Grizzard)
tells the F.B.I. Director's wife (Victoria Tennant). Mr.
Grizzard, an insider's insider, warns her that in Washing-
ton the way to get along is to go along. If her husband
doesn't agree to retaliation, the Administration will hang
him out to dry. Never mind here that a President doesn't
need F.B.I. consent for a foreign operation. A 60's mental-
suffer as so many third-world people suffered so many
times before." That's not the chilling part, however;
what's chilling is that this is a three-hour made-for-TV
movie on a major network, and that at the end of the
movie we're meant to dislike not so much the terrorists as
the United States Government. What's muddled (or most
muddled; a lot of muddle-headedness is on hand) is the
notion of where we can find recourse: A Washington
newspaper will print the truth and this will set us free.
You thought radical chic was dead? You're wrong. It's
only moved over to television.
The movie, on NBC at 8 o'clock tonight, mixes fact
and fiction: a little of this, a little of that, and is the Secre-
tary of State George P. Shultz or E. G. Marshall? He looks
like Mr. Marshall, but early in the movie, or at least until
he begins to get a little crazed, he sounds like Mr. Shultz.
How do you deal with terrorism? "Retaliate swiftly, mas-
sively, immediately," Marshall-Shultz prescribes. And
who in the Cabinet will oppose him? Reasonably well-in-
formed viewers will get this immediately. Who else but
the Secretary of Defense?
"We all know there's no military solution to terror-
ism," the Secretary of Defense says gravely. "Under
Siege" seems to be pulling a fast one here. This Secretary
of Defense may sound like Caspar W. Weinberger, but
he's played by the black actor Paul Winfield. Actually, the
NBC production is falling back on an old Hollywood con-
vention. It is assumed there are not many roles for black
actors, and so in the roles there are, the black actors must
play sympathetic characters. The range for this, how-
ever, has always been limited in popular melodrama,
and, as a rule, the characters are allowed only to be wise
or to be victimized. "Under Siege" has two black actors in
its large cast: Mr. Winfield and Stan Shaw. Obviously,
Mr. Winfield's Secretary of Defense is wise. Mr. Shaw
plays a swell guy who fought in Vietnam, joined the Fed-
eral Bureau of Investigation, and loves his wife and baby
daughter. The Central Intelligence 'Agency shoots him
dead.
And the President of the United States? He is Hal Hol-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/21: CIA-RDP90-00965R000807570037-8
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/21: CIA-RDP90-00965R000807570037-8
ity demands hawks and doves, and outside of the-Secre-
tary of Defense, the F.B.I. Director is the only dove
around. Even Secretary Marshall-Shultz's wife (Beatrice
Straight) has a touch of right-wing nut. The bereaved
mother of a slain-soldier asks her when the madness will
end. "When our honor is restored," she says fiercely. You
can bet she'd invade Nicaragua, too.
Drumbeats and explosions aside, much of this is just
silly. That's O.K. Silliness is not an indictable offense. At
the same time, "Under Siege" is unpleasant, too. The
party chairman tells President Holbrook that unless he
acts decisively - bombs Teheran, presumably - the par-
ty's "biggest contributor" says he won't be nominated for
a second term. So much for the democratic process; the
big contributor assumes it's only money that counts. In
fact, Teheran is not bombed, but the President does some.
thing else. It is clear we are a nation of bullies.
"Under Siege" nails down the point further. The Ira-
nian Ambassador (David Opatoshu) appears on a televi-
sion program that is very much like ABC's "Nightline"
with Ted Koppel. The Iranian Ambassador is civilized;
the Southern Senator who argues with him is a boob.
Later, the Ambassador confronts the principal terror,
(Thaao Penghlis). We get the impression they are but;
deeply motivated. Indeed, we even find out why the tee
rorist murdered hundreds of people: His son died in
bombing by the Shah's secret police. Two cheers now fo.?
moral relativism. Barbarism is not to be condemned; it'
something to be understood. This is a vile idea, but there i
is on prime-time television.
? ? ?
True to itself to the end, meanwhile, "Under Siek.,
winds down with the C.I.A. breaking the law. This is f
lowed by a massive Government cover-up. It seems
propriate to mention here that two of the four people u '~
wrote "Under Siege" are Bob Woodward and Richai :
Harwood. Mr. Woodward shared a Pulitzer Prize at T1-
Washington Post for reporting on Watergate; Mr. Ha
wood is a Post deputy managing editor. In the last sct?r
of "Under Siege," F.B.I. Director Strauss drops an
velope on editor Grizzard's desk. "You want a story
there it is," he says, and goes off alone to the Washingc,r?.
Mall. We have the terrible feeling that he's thinking abo! 1
a television sequel. U
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/21: CIA-RDP90-00965R000807570037-8