‘A man of great appetites’: what’s it like to be a dictator’s personal chef? 53%

By Andrew Lawrence0%

6/9/2026, 3:00:49 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Unattributed Quote, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 53% saturation with 560 hits. Analysis detected 2,806 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,056 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 51.9% and a BS Rank of 53% (10,292 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 53.00% of the article peer group.

Kim Jong-il loved pepperoni pizza. 
Saddam Hussein couldn’t resist a fish barbecue. 
Idi Amin reportedly had the capacity for an entire roasted goat. 
The menus may have differed, but the appetite was the same. 
For history’s most notorious strongmen, the dining table doubled as a stage for power. 
For the cooks who served them, every meal came with extraordinary stakes. 
“It goes back to Hannah Arendt’s banality of evil a bit,” says director Andrew Neel. 
“These everyday things that are beloved to us, like food, can take on an entirely different dimension within the context of a dictatorship.” 
In his latest film, How to Feed a Dictator, which premieres at the Tribeca film festival this week, five private chefs recount their intimate experiences serving some of the world’s most feared dictators and the ever-present dangers that came with the job. 
Based on the 2020 book by the Polish journalist Witold Szabłowski, the 95-minute documentary probes the fraught terrain between morality and survival, asking viewers to consider the choices these chefs made  and the choices they never really had. 
Structurally, the film is something of a tasting menu, serving up sobering morsels of human atrocity within the trappings of a decadent cooking show. 
It makes for especially uneasy viewing on an empty stomach. 
Much like the menu on offer, the perspectives vary wildly. 
We meet Keo Samoun at the unkempt gravesite of her former boss, the Cambodian dictator Pol Pot, laying out a spread of fish, fruit and rice for a man she still regards almost as a god. 
Famed pizzaiolo Ermanno Furlanis, by contrast, recalls the terror of making pies for Kim Jong-il  his life under surveillance, his passport under guard, the state apparatchik who barged into his kitchen to ensure the olives on one pizza were spaced just so. 
No chef is as tormented by their service as Ugandan Charles Otonde Odera. 
He describes his early days working for Ugandan despot Idi Amin as life-changing  a poor villager scraping by one day, and the next driving a Mercedes, supporting eight wives, and living in extraordinary comfort as Amin terrorized and brutalized the local masses. 
For all the chefs, comfort was the trade. 
By most measures, theirs was a great gig  logic that can excuse almost anything. 
“Saddam’s chef got a car every year,” Neel says. 
“That phrase, ‘it was a great gig,’ I think, actually runs the world. 
Like, ‘It was just business.’ 
 
It wasn’t until Amin’s second wife, Kay, was found dead in the trunk of a car, amid rumors he had her killed for taking a lover, that Odera began to reconsider the bargain. 
“I missed my low wages from before,” he says in the doc. 
“At least my heart was at peace.” 
Odera characterizes Amin as “a man of great appetites” who appeared to delight in how speculation of his supposed cannibalism upset Uganda’s British interlopers, reinforcing the image of a ruler beyond both convention or restraint. 
(Amin famously denied the hearsay, insisting human flesh was “too salty”.) 
Odera remembers being ordered to cook a human heart, with Amin telling him that eating someone’s heart prevents their spirit from haunting you. 
His career took another dark turn when one of Amin’s children suffered a stomach ache after a meal, an innocuous incident that nonetheless earned the chef a death sentence. 
As Odera shares these harrowing memories, he prepares a roasted goat with a team of cooks. 
In How to Feed a Dictator, images of animal butchery and state-sanctioned violence are deliberately paired. 
One can only imagine the discomfort of the crew filming all this sumptuous food, caught between the sensory pull of what was in front of them and the carnage it was set against. 
“The food does get cold when you’re designing for shots, and we didn’t get to try everything,” Neel says. 
But he does offer praise for Samoun’s fish dip, a Pot favorite, and for masgouf  the grilled carp dish that Hussein reportedly could not live without, and which ultimately helped lead US forces to him after his regime was toppled in 2003, when he was found in a spider hole in the desert. 
For those who may wonder what stops a chef from playing the hero and poisoning a dictator, the film implicitly makes clear: the thought never occurs. 
Entry into a dictator’s inner circle requires a level of deep trust that also ensures distance from those on the outside. 
“There was plenty of food where I was,” says Furlanis, recalling how his Italian grocery orders would arrive in the Hermit Kingdom within days. 
When he suggested sharing some of his food surplus with starving North Koreans  many of whom were reportedly subsisting on grass and tree bark  his offer was swiftly rebuffed. 
“A cook only needs to cook,” says Odera, the Ugandan chef. 
“There is no other story.” 
Samoun, Pol Pot’s former cook, simply cannot reconcile the man who arranged her marriage, paid for her wedding and gave her away with the architect of a genocide that killed an estimated 1.5 to 3 million Cambodians in four years. 
In the film’s most charged moment, one of Neel’s translators challenges her account, recalling his own experience of being beaten and tortured by the Khmer Rouge. 
“She wasn’t really answering the question,” Neel recalls. 
“And I said to [the translator], because I knew his history, ‘You need to tell her what happened to you.’ 
Everyone wants to be respectful. 
Everyone wants to forget things, even the people who went through it. 
This is the awful lineage that dictatorship leaves: people who were brutalized by the regime living their lives next to people who benefited from it.” 
Neel did give some thought to including Donald Trump in his film  even though, “to be clear, he is *not* a dictator,” he says. 
“He wants to be one, but he’s not. 
I did find a chef who cooked for him before he got elected. 
But after Trump got elected, the chef disappeared. 
He wouldn’t talk to me anymore. 
Why? 
He was probably scared of hurting his job. 
He probably had a great gig.” 
How to Feed a Dictator is premiering at the Tribeca film festival and is seeking distribution 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.4%Andrew Lawrence: 1.1%the Guardian: 3.7%Confirmation Bias4.4%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.4%Andrew Lawrence: 2.7%the Guardian: 3.1%Availability Heuristic8.4%This article: 4.0%Andrew Lawrence: 2.1%the Guardian: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic4.0%This article: 8.2%Andrew Lawrence: 4.8%the Guardian: 1.0%Hindsight Bias8.2%This article: 1.2%Andrew Lawrence: 0.3%the Guardian: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias1.2%This article: 13.6%Andrew Lawrence: 11.3%the Guardian: 6.1%Framing Effect13.6%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.5%Andrew Lawrence: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.5%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.6%the Guardian: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%Andrew Lawrence: 1.3%the Guardian: 2.1%Pessimism Bias5.1%This article: 53.0%Andrew Lawrence: 16.4%the Guardian: 10.4%Negativity Bias53.0%This article: 2.3%Andrew Lawrence: 1.4%the Guardian: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias2.3%This article: 3.9%Andrew Lawrence: 1.0%the Guardian: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error3.9%This article: 1.5%Andrew Lawrence: 0.6%the Guardian: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias1.5%This article: 0.5%Andrew Lawrence: 0.1%the Guardian: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.5%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.4%Andrew Lawrence: 0.9%the Guardian: 3.2%Halo Effect3.4%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.9%Andrew Lawrence: 2.0%the Guardian: 1.2%Recency Bias7.9%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 2.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.7%Andrew Lawrence: 2.1%the Guardian: 3.8%Appeal to Authority5.7%This article: 8.4%Andrew Lawrence: 2.1%the Guardian: 1.7%False Dilemma8.4%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 15.7%Andrew Lawrence: 9.7%the Guardian: 6.3%Hasty Generalization15.7%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 9.0%Andrew Lawrence: 4.7%the Guardian: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion9.0%This article: 5.7%Andrew Lawrence: 1.4%the Guardian: 0.9%Begging the Question5.7%This article: 14.7%Andrew Lawrence: 4.9%the Guardian: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.7%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 1.9%Andrew Lawrence: 0.5%the Guardian: 0.4%Burden of Proof1.9%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.3%Andrew Lawrence: 0.8%the Guardian: 0.4%Composition/Division3.3%This article: 23.8%Andrew Lawrence: 5.9%the Guardian: 3.1%Anecdotal23.8%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 12.6%Andrew Lawrence: 3.1%the Guardian: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)12.6%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 21.1%Andrew Lawrence: 7.8%the Guardian: 1.6%Unattributed Quote21.1%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.9%the Guardian: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 9.7%Andrew Lawrence: 3.6%the Guardian: 10.4%Biased Writer Voice9.7%This article: 6.2%Andrew Lawrence: 1.5%the Guardian: 1.8%Indoctrination6.2%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 3.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Lawrence: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 10.1%Andrew Lawrence: 2.9%the Guardian: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…10.1%

1056 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers34%attributed speech693writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 15 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageCharles Otonde Odera • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 9 words • 100.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageCharles Otonde Odera • 12 words • 0.0% coverageCharles Otonde Odera • 7 words • 0.0% coverageCharles Otonde Odera • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageCharles Otonde Odera • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 54 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageErmanno Furlanis • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageCharles Otonde Odera • 11 words • 0.0% coverageCharles Otonde Odera • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 8 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 20 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 5 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 8 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 8 words • 100.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 8 words • 0.0% coverageAndrew Neel • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Charles Otonde Odera

95%flagged-word coverage
136 attributed words37% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Unattributed Quote+3.8 ptsWriter: 21.9%Charles Otonde Odera: 25.7%25.7%Attempt to Sell a Product -15.4 ptsWriter: 15.4%Charles Otonde Odera: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-11.4 ptsWriter: 11.4%Charles Otonde Odera: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-9.4 ptsWriter: 9.4%Charles Otonde Odera: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.