‘How to Blow Up a Pipeline’ Director Claims That A High Level “Counterterrorism” Official Helped With The “Eco-Terrorist Thriller”

Edward Ongweso Jr. Twitter

Katie Rife tweeted, “Well, put me on the (green) bandwagon for How To Blow Up A Pipeline. Nonstop tension, provocative ideas, and riveting performances make Daniel Goldhaber’s followup to Cam the must-see thriller of the fall.”

Katie Rife (@RifewithKatie) Twitter Account

Beyond these praises from mainstream sources, the director of the movie (the aforementioned Daniel Goldhaber) said on video that someone within the U.S. armed forces provided assistance with the film. “There is a technical advisor, credited as anonymous, who’s somebody who’s very high up in counterterrorism in the United States military.”

Here’s a snippet from the Q&A where this is mentioned. https://t.co/xHzkDCO1A8 pic.twitter.com/hE4wCaQUqo

— Davide Mastracci 🤌🏼🍂 (@DavideMastracci) September 11, 2022

RELATED: ‘Wednesday’ Star Jenna Ortega Wants Her “Latina Character” “To Represent My Community”

Goldhaber continued, “He requested to remain anonymous but who we worked with [sic] both to get everything accurate and also to make sure that we weren’t doing anything dangerous by putting anything in the movie; it was kind of both things.”

Did a government official really work on this film? Doesn’t it seem like someone ought to check on that?

People might argue that Goldhaber mentioned something that sounds like the advisor was supposedly trying to keep things safe. Maybe—a lot of what he says in the sound bite is unclear in meaning.

Or maybe the entire video adds further context to what Goldhaber meant. (Except for it doesn’t; I forced myself to sit through the whole thing).

RELATED: “A League of Their Own” Star Talks about How She & ‘One of My Best Friends’ Performed Lesbian Scenes for Series

Ultimately, though, what Goldhaber said about having a military counterterrorism advisor on an “eco-terrorist thriller” is entirely irrelevant because nothing will come of it. No one is going to care about it and I’m certainly not going to waste time raging about it.

After all, none of this is controversial to those who rule us. Everything about the movie is perfectly fine with them, or even outright laudable.

Malm’s nonfiction book has fared just as well, with Respectable People treating it as legitimate and noteworthy. Vice published “The Limits of Peaceful Protest in a World That Is Burning” in September of last year.

The New York Times mentioned the book at least three times in 2021: once in January, once in July, and once in December. The July mention was an opinion piece by Ezra Klein titled, “It Seems Odd That We Would Just Let the World Burn.”

The New Republic devoted an article to it in May 2021. And The New Yorker covered it in a Sep. 2021 podcast.

Again, the ruling class deems all of this perfectly legitimate. Kind of like how Call Jane, the dramatized story of “a group of women who secretly helped others to obtain [abortions] illegally in 1960s Chicago,” is perfectly legitimate.

As always, complaining about any of this is worthless. The only thing to do is to start writing stories that play by the same rules—with protagonists who act similarly but in service of an entirely opposite agenda.

Currently this is still an option. And so we might as well do so while we still can . . . even if we have no shot of getting American military counterterrorism officials to act as our technical advisors.

NEXT: The Daily Beast Freaks Out Over The Terminal List, Calls It An “Unhinged Right-Wing Revenge Fantasy”