por Brandon Smith
20 Febrero 2013

del Sitio Web Alt-Market 

traducción de Adela Kaufmann
Versión original en ingles

 

 

 

 

 

El primer error peligroso que la persona promedio hace es la suposición de que "el mal" es una especie de concepto subjetivo o "gris".

 

Nos gustaría creer que todo comportamiento destructivo y malicioso no es más que un producto de un ambiente malo, mala educación, o psicosis mental. Desviación en el nombre equivocado de "ganancia" o "status" a menudo es más aceptable para el público, siempre y cuando exista una razón podamos fácilmente entender y comprender.

 

Lo que asusta al americano promedio hoy en día no es la acción abominable de la criminalidad, sino que es la criminalidad sin razón fácilmente definible.

 

Lo que asusta al ciudadano común la posibilidad de que algunas personas hieran a otras, porque mamá y papá los "maltrataban", o porque tienen una deficiencia psicológica que nubla su juicio, sino porque plena y conscientemente DISFRUTAN haciendo lo que hacen.

 

Nuestra sociedad está desesperada por poner excusas para los monstruos de nuestra era, tal vez porque prefieren no entretener la posibilidad de que hay un lado oscuro de la humanidad en su conjunto, que si no se controla, podría tomar el control de una manera deliberada y calculada. 

Por ello, los mayores crímenes de nuestro tiempo son a menudo ignorados por el público.
 La idea, por ejemplo, que los financieros internacionales y las elites políticas a propósito crearían disparidad económica, caos social, guerra mundial a partir del deseo del poder centralizado y un sentido alterado de superioridad es simplemente demasiado para muchos de manejar.

 

Sin duda, estos acontecimientos terribles en toda nuestra historia moderna son simplemente el resultado de una coincidencia al azar y el error humano... ¿verdad? 
 

Desafortunadamente, este no es el caso. 

 

De hecho, la mayoría de las catastróficas políticas culturales y  tragedias pueden remontarse directamente de nuevo a un grupo particular de personas, que utilizan sus posiciones de influencia para el mal propósito, ya sabiendas crean calamidades, no sólo en beneficio propio, sino para ganancia de su "clase social". 

En el Movimiento de la Libertad, a menudo nos referimos a este grupo como "globalistas" o "elitistas".

 

Ellos impregnan las altas esferas de nuestra nación, y que de hecho tienen una cultura que es totalmente independiente y dispar de la nuestra. Si uno estudia su literatura, sus iniciativas y sus motivos, descubriría otro mundo, impulsado por metas extravagantes y una marca aún más extravagante de fervor religioso.

 

Éstos son algunos de los rasgos de carácter y las creencias que hacen a estas personas fáciles de identificar...    

 

 

 

 

Xeno-fascismo 

Los Elitistas globales tienden a verse a sí mismos como una raza aparte del ser humano, una clase superior con facultades superiores, y así, nacidos para "gobernar" sobre el resto de nosotros. En sus escritos, a menudo adoptan las enseñanzas de la República de Platón, y el concepto de los "Reyes Filósofos".

 

Ellos creen que algunos hombres y mujeres que están dotados de una predisposición genética para el liderazgo, y que la persona promedio no tiene la inteligencia para determinar su propio destino. Ellos ven al resto de la humanidad como un lienzo en blanco, y a ellos mismos como los artistas. Debemos ser "moldeados" y nuestras dicotomías sociales deben ser manipuladas. 
 

En realidad, no son más inteligentes que el resto de nosotros.

 

Por el contrario, ellos heredan posiciones de riqueza e influencia, y automáticamente asumen que esto los hace superiores.

 

Su capacidad para moldear la sociedad se deriva enteramente de su extenso capital y su total falta de moralidad. Si ellos no estuvieran en la parte superior del 0,1% de los ricos del mundo, serían tratados como delincuentes comunes por su conducta, pero por desgracia, en nuestra época, el dinero compra a menudo un indebido respeto.

 

Imagine un club privado de John Wayne Gacys o Charles Manson, excepto con el 80% de la riqueza del mundo a su disposición y los medios para comprar una buena publicidad e inmunidad legal.

 

Eso es esencialmente con lo que estamos tratando... 

"Gradualmente, mediante la cría selectiva, las diferencias congénitas entre gobernantes y gobernados se incrementarán hasta que se conviertan en especies casi diferentes. Una rebelión de la plebe se convertiría en tan inconcebible como una insurrección organizada de ovejas contra la práctica de comer carne de cordero". 
- Bertrand Russell

El Impacto de la Ciencia en la Sociedad (1953) págs. 49-50

 

 

"Hablando de un futuro de sólo unos decenios, un experimentador en el control de inteligencia afirmó:"Preveo un tiempo en el que dispondremos de los medios y, por tanto, inevitablemente, a tentación de manipular el comportamiento y el funcionamiento intelectual de todas las personas a través de la manipulación del medio ambiente y la bioquímica del cerebro. " 

- Zbigniew Brezinski

Between Two Ages - America's Role in the Technetronic Era - 1970
 


 

 

Búsqueda de la Conciencia Cero 

Los elitistas que creen que la
conciencia es un obstáculo para el éxito, en lugar de una virtud que vale la pena.

 

A sabiendas y deliberadamente abandonan su brújula moral porque lo ven como una restricción artificial, un obstáculo que hace que les hace más difícil de conseguir lo que quieren. La conciencia, sin embargo, nunca desaparece completamente en nadie.

 

Con el fin de conciliar la mentalidad miserable con esa distante  y molesta sensación de culpa, dicen que sus acciones son,

"Por el bien de la mayoría".

Ellos desesperadamente quieren creer que están sirviendo al futuro de la humanidad, y que debemos "apreciar" su mano que guía, a pesar de que  las cosas que hacen parecen mucho más odiosas que útiles.

 

Ellos se dignan a llamar a esto "amor duro". 

Asimismo, tratan de evitar el hecho de su propia disfunción, tratando de provocar criminalidad en otros.
 Si pueden convencer a las masas de que la moralidad es "relativa", y que el bien y el mal están sujetos a "interpretación", si pueden convencernos a que ignoremos nuestras propias voces interiores que son innatas, entonces su monstruosidad eventualmente podría considerarse normal, incluso preferible.

 

Porque en un mundo de relativismo moral, el hombre con conciencia se convierte en el criminal, el marginado, y las elites se convierten en los héroes que siempre quisieron creer que son. 

Mientras tanto, a menudo se recurre a la fantasía y teatro, envolviéndose en un sistema de creencias y jugando el papel del "santo".

 

La máscara rara vez sale hasta que crean que su posición de poder está asegurada. 

"Ahora soy un católico como antes y siempre lo seguiré siendo." 
- Adolf Hitler 

 

 

"¿De verdad creen que las masas serán cristianas de nuevo? ¡Tonterías! Nunca más. Esa historia ha terminado. Nadie va a escuchar de nuevo. Sin embargo, podemos acelerar las cosas. Los predicadores cavan sus propias tumbas. Ellos traicionan a su Dios a nosotros. Ellos traicionan cualquier cosa por el bien de sus miserables puestos de trabajo e ingresos... "
- Adolf Hitler
 

 

"La décima regla de la ética de las normas y los medios es que se hace lo que puede con lo que se tiene y se reviste con argumentos morales... la esencia de los discursos de Lenin durante este período era,

'Ellos tienen las armas y por lo tanto, estamos a favor de la paz y de la reforma a través de las urnas. Cuando tengamos las armas, entonces será a través de la bala.'

Y así fue." 
- Saul Alinsky

(Barack Obama enseñó la filosofía amoral de Alinsky como organizador en Chicago. Hillary Clinton hizo de Alinsky el tema de su tesis de licenciatura)


 

 

Promover el Colectivismo 

Los principales globalistas no son necesariamente los propios colectivistas.

 

De hecho, a menudo pivotear lejos hasta el otro extremo del espectro en una forma aberrante de individualismo. Como se mencionó anteriormente, pueden incluso ver la conciencia como una restricción de su libertad personal, y se rebelan contra ella como si se rebelasen contra la esclavitud.

 

Lo que no entienden es que la naturaleza inherente de la conciencia es un don, uno que hasta ahora ha mantenido a la humanidad lejos del borde de la destrucción total de sí misma, al menos en este punto. No es una prisión. Más bien, es la protección de nosotros mismos. 

El ideal de una locura elitista de "individualismo puro", sin auto-disciplina es un asunto privado que rara vez se discute.
 En público, constantemente promueve el estilo de vida colectivista y amonestan el individualismo en la gente común como "egoísta" o "narcisista". 

 

La gente suele confundir el "colectivismo" con "comunidad".

 

Esto es causado por una falta de comprensión, así como una falta de experiencia.

  • La comunidad es una reunión voluntaria de personas con fines de ayuda mutua.

     

  • El Colectivismo es la reunión de las personas mediante la amenaza de la fuerza o la pérdida, con el propósito de consolidar el poder en manos de unos pocos. Es el acto de destruir el individualismo en nombre de la "protección de grupo".

En Estados Unidos hoy, tenemos un sentido real de comunidad desapareciendo, mientras que las "ventajas" del colectivismo son cantadas a los cuatro vientos por las elites globales. 

Si la población puede estar convencida de que estén desprovistos de cualidades intrínsecas y características, y que su entorno es la totalidad de su existencia, entonces van a entregar todo el poder a cualquiera que les prometa los mejores entornos posibles.

 

Es decir, cuando no tenemos fe en nuestro propio individualismo y auto-responsabilidad, automáticamente buscamos protección, por lo general de un gobierno niñera o dictadura.

 

Este proceso de autodeterminación desgarrador de la población tiene un objetivo final definitivo: Gobernanza Mundial y dominio total. 

 

Los poderes del capitalismo financiero tenían otro objetivo de largo alcance, nada menos que crear un sistema mundial de control financiero en manos privadas capaz de dominar el sistema político de cada país y la economía del mundo como un todo.

 

Este sistema sería controlado de manera feudal por los bancos centrales del mundo actuando en concierto, mediante acuerdos secretos alcanzados en frecuentes reuniones y conferencias. 

 

El ápice de los sistemas habría de ser el Banco de Pagos Internacionales en Basilea, Suiza, un banco de propiedad privada y controlado por los bancos centrales del mundo que eran ellos mismos corporaciones privadas.

 

Cada banco central... trataba de dominar su gobierno por su capacidad para controlar los préstamos del Tesoro, manipular bolsas extranjeras, influir en el nivel de actividad económica en el país, e influir en los políticos cooperativos mediante ulteriores recompensas económicas en el mundo de los negocios. 
- Carroll Quigley

CFR miembro, mentor de Bill Clinton, de " Tragedy And Hope " 

 

 

"En el próximo siglo, las naciones tal como las conocemos serán obsoletas, todos los estados reconocerán una autoridad única y global La soberanía nacional no era tan buena idea después de todo.". 
- Strobe Talbot

Secretario Adjunto del Presidente Clinton de Estado, citado en Time, 20 de Julio de 1992.

 

 

 

La "Noble Mentira" 

Los elitistas son muy firmes sobre la idea de la "mentira noble", el uso de la mentira para alcanzar un "objetivo positivo".

 

En su opinión, los ciudadanos comunes no tienen capacidad para comprender el panorama político y social, y por lo tanto, debemos estar mintiéndonos para obligarnos a hacer lo que es mejor para nosotros mismos. Por supuesto, su versión de lo que es mejor para nuestra cultura siempre parece incluir, ante todo, lo que es mejor para ellos. 
 

La mentira noble es una falacia lógica de proporciones épicas, y muchas veces me pregunto si los elitistas globales secretamente dudan de su legitimidad, o si realmente compran en su propia basura. Si tiene que mentir a la gente con el fin de conseguir que se acepten sus ideas, entonces debe haber algo terriblemente mal con sus ideas.

 

Ideas con vitalidad y honestidad no necesitan ser "vendidas" al público a través de engaños, la verdad adquiere una vida propia.

 

Sólo las filosofías destructivas necesitan una base de mentiras con el fin de echar raíces. 

 

"Estamos en la actualidad trabajando discretamente con todas nuestras fuerzas para arrebatar esa fuerza misteriosa llamada soberanía de las garras de los estados nacionales locales del mundo. Todo el tiempo estamos negando con nuestros labios lo que estamos haciendo con nuestras manos."
- Profesor Arnold Toynbee

en un discurso antes de junio 1931 el Instituto para el Estudio de Asuntos Internacionales en Copenhague.
 

"Nuestro trabajo es dar a la gente, no lo que ellos quieren, sino lo que decidimos que deben tener." 
- Richard Salent

ex presidente de CBS News, Bill Clinton: Amigo o Enemigo

 

 

 

Reducción de la Población 


Una de las piezas centrales de la religión globalista es el concepto de 
reducción de la población.

 

No sólo se ven como una especie separada con un maquillaje genético superior y una propensión a la gobernación, también ven al resto de nosotros como cucarachas y "comedores inútiles", un rebaño que necesita ser "sacrificado". Lo más gracioso de los reduccionistas de la población es que siempre quieren que otras personas mueran para salvar el planeta.

 

Nunca ofrecen su propia vida como sacrificio por el "bien mayor". Esto es porque ellos asumen que son "muy importantes" (aparentemente porque piensan que son inteligentes), mientras que muchos de nosotros somos "prescindibles". 

Por supuesto, hoy en día la sobrepoblación es un mito sobrevendido que ha sido desacreditado en muchos círculos científicos.
 La expansión de la población tampoco es necesariamente una mala cosa. Una mayor población significa más mentes que trabajan en más problemas. Se impulsa el avance tecnológico y nos fuerza a través del imperativo de supervivencia para inventar métodos más eficientes de producción.

 

De hecho, existen ventajas para el crecimiento. 

Al final, sin embargo, las elites globales no se preocupan por la Tierra.
 Ellos no creen en la reducción de la población porque quieren reducir la contaminación, nuestra así llamada "huella de carbono", salvar a los pobre animales en peligro de extinción, o incluso para proteger los recursos naturales.

 

Quieren reducción de la población porque primero, son eugenistas que ven a algunas personas como genéticamente inferiores a otras, y segundo, porque una población sacrificada es más fácil de dominar.

 

Una vez más, menos mentes trabajando significa menos problemas resueltos, y menos personas moviendo el bote cuando el estado abusa del poder. 

"Una población mundial de un total de 250-300 millones de personas, una disminución del 95% respecto a los niveles actuales, sería lo ideal." 
- revista Audubon, entrevista con Ted Turner, 1996 

 


"Un programa de esterilización de las mujeres después de su segundo o tercer hijo, a pesar de la dificultad relativamente mayor de la operación comparada con la vasectomía, podría ser más fácil de implementar que tratar de esterilizar a los hombres ...

 

El desarrollo de una cápsula a largo plazo de esterilización que puede ser implantada bajo la piel y ser retirada cuando se desea el embarazo abre posibilidades adicionales para el control de la fertilidad coercitiva.

 

La cápsula puede ser implantada en la pubertad y podría ser extraíble, con permiso oficial, para un número limitado de nacimientos." 
- John P. Holdren

(Asesor científico del Gobierno de Barack Obama) 

 


"De todo el espectro de la personalidad humana, una cuarta parte está eligiendo trascender... Una cuarta parte está lista para elegir así que, siguiendo el ejemplo de otro... La cuarta parte es resistente a la elección.

 

No están atraídos por la vida en constante evolución. Una cuarta parte es destructiva. Nacen enojados con Dios... Son semillas defectuosas... Siempre ha habido semillas defectuosas.

 

En el pasado se les permitía morir de una "muerte natural"... Nosotros, los ancianos, Hemos estado esperando pacientemente hasta el último momento antes de la transformación cuántica, para tomar medidas para cortar esta corrompido y corruptor elemento en el cuerpo de la humanidad. Es como ver  crecer un cáncer...

 

Ahora, a medida que nos acercamos al enorme cambio de la criatura humana a co-creador humano - el ser humano que es heredero de poderes divinos - esa destructiva cuarta parte  debe ser eliminada del cuerpo social. No tenemos otra opción, queridos míos.

 

Afortunadamente, amados míos, ustedes no son responsables de este hecho, nosotros lo somos. 

 

Nos encargamos del proceso de la elección de Dios para el planeta Tierra. Él selecciona, nosotros destruimos. Somos los jinetes del caballo pálido, la Muerte. Hemos venido a traer la muerte a aquellos que no pueden conocer a Dios... Los jinetes del caballo pálido están a punto de pasar entre ustedes.

 

Los grises cosechadores que separarán el trigo de la paja.

 

Este es el período más doloroso en la historia de la humanidad ... " 
- Futurista Barbara Marx Hubbard

(Que aparece en la película "THRIVE", una pieza de propaganda colectivista falsamente presentada como un ataque contra el establecimiento elitista ... en otras palabras, oposición controlada)
 


 

La fuente de nuestro dolor 

Ahora, los globalistas no son la única fuente de nuestro dolor social.

 

Nosotros cargamos con cierta responsabilidad. Cuando no estamos atentos, cuando negamos nuestra propia ignorancia y nos negamos a aprender, cuando nos mentimos a nosotros mismos, cuando atendemos a los deseos personales superficiales en lugar de tomar en cuenta el futuro, abrimos la puerta para al diablo, por así decirlo.

 

El mal, como la conciencia, reside en todos nosotros. 

Dicho esto, los globalistas no son personas terribles en un sentido aleatorio.
 Ellos han construido toda una cultura de desviación. Están organizados malignamente, y este es un problema que debemos enfrentar en breve.

 

Los hombres buenos se definen, no sólo por su adhesión a la voz interior de la verdad, sino también por su voluntad de actuar cuando la verdad se ve amenazada.

 

Debemos educar a otros, y cuando llegue el momento, nos pondremos en peligro a quitar la calaña globalista, antes de que destruyan todo en un furioso fervor elitista...

 

 

“One of the most pervasive trends in 21st century western culture has become somewhat of an obsession in America. It’s called “Hollywood history”, where the corporate studio machines in Los Angeles spend hundreds of millions of dollars in order to craft and precisely tailor historical events to suit the prevailing political paradigm.” (Patrick Henningsen, Hollywood History: CIA Sponsored “Zero Dark Thirty”, Oscar for “Best Propaganda Picture”)

Black Hawk Dawn, Zero Dark Thirty and Argo, those are only a few major recent productions showing how today’s movie industry promotes US foreign policy. But the motion picture has been used for propaganda since the beginning of the 20th century and Hollywood’s cooperation with the Department of Defense, the CIA and other government agencies is no modern trend.

With Michelle Obama awarding Ben Affleck’s Argo the Oscar for best movie, the industry showed how close it is to Washington. According to Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich, Argo is a propaganda film concealing the ugly truth about the Iranian hostage crisis and designed to prepare the American public for an upcoming confrontation with Iran:

Foreign policy observers have long known that Hollywood reflects and promotes U.S. policies (in turn, is determined by Israel and its supporters).   This fact was made public when Michelle Obama announced an Oscar win for “Argo” -  a highly propagandist, anti-Iran  film.  Amidst the glitter and excitement, Hollywood and White House reveal their pact and send out their message in time for the upcoming talks surrounding Iran’s nuclear program [...]

Hollywood has a long history of promoting US policies.   In 1917, when the United States entered World War I, President Woodrow Wilson’s Committee on Public Information (CPI) enlisted the aid of America ’s film industry to make training films and features supporting the ‘cause’.  George Creel, Chairman of the CPI believed that the movies had a role in “carrying the gospel of Americanism to every corner of the globe.”

The pact grew stronger during World War II […] Hollywood ’s contribution was to provide propaganda. After the war, Washington reciprocated by using subsidies, special provisions in the Marshall Plan, and general clout to pry open resistant European film markets […]

As Hollywood and the White House eagerly embrace “Argo” and its propagandist message, they shamelessly and deliberately conceal a crucial aspect of this “historical” event.  The glitter buries the all too important fact that the Iranian students who took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran , proceeded to reveal Israel ’s dark secret to the world.  Documents classified as “SECRET” revealed LAKAM’s activities.  Initiated in 1960, LAKAM was an Israeli network assigned to economic espionage in the U.S. assigned to “the collection of scientific intelligence in the U.S. for Israel ’s defense industry” (Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich Oscar to Hollywood’s “Argo”: And the Winners are … the Pentagon and the Israel Lobby)

For a real account of the Iranian hostage crisis, a CIA covert operation, Global Research recommends reading Harry V. Martin’s article published in 1995: The Real Iranian Hostage Story from the Files of Fara Mansoor:

Fara Mansoor is a fugitive. No, he hasn’t broken any laws in the United States. His crime is the truth. What he has to say and the documents he carries are equivalent to a death warrant for him, Mansoor is an Iranian who was part of the “establishment” in Iran long before the 1979 hostage taking. Mansoor’s records actually discount the alleged “October Surprise” theory that the Ronald Reagan-George Bush team paid the Iranians not to release 52 American hostages until after the November 1980 Presidential elections [...]

With thousands of documents to support his position, Mansoor says that the “hostage crisis” was a political “management tool” created by the pro-Bush faction of the CIA, and implemented through an a priori Alliance with Khomeini’s Islamic Fundamentalists.” He says the purpose was twofold:

Zero Dark Thirty is another great silver screen propaganda piece which spurred outrage earlier this year. It exploits the horrific events of 9/11 to present torture as an effective and necessary evil:

Zero Dark Thirty is disturbing for two reasons. First and foremost, it leaves the viewer with the erroneous impression that torture helped the CIA find bin Laden’s hiding place in Pakistan. Secondarily, it ignores both the illegality and immorality of using torture as an interrogation tool.

The thriller opens with the words “based on first-hand accounts of actual events.” After showing footage of the horrific 9/11 attacks, it moves into a graphic and lengthy depiction of torture. The detainee “Ammar” is subjected to waterboarding, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and confined in a small box. Responding to the torture, he divulges the name of the courier who ultimately leads the CIA to bin Laden’s location and assassination. It may be good theater, but it is inaccurate and misleading. (Marjorie Cohn, “Zero Dark Thirty”: Torturing the Facts)

Earlier this year the Golden Globe awards made some analysts criticize Hollywood’s dark “celebration of the police state” and argue that the real Golden Globe winner  was the military-industrial complex:

Homeland won best TV series, best TV actor and actress. It IS a highly entertaining show which actually portrays some of the flaws of the MIIC system.

Argo won best movie and best director. It glorifies the CIA and Ben Affleck spoke with the highest praise for the CIA.

And best actress went to Jessica Chastain of Zero Dark Thirty, a movie that has been vilified for propagandizing the use of torture.

***

The Military Industrial Intelligence Complex is playing a more and more pervasive role in our lives.  In the next few years we’ll be seeing movies that focus on the use of drone technology in police and spy work in the USA. We’ve already been seeing movies that show how spies can violate every aspect of our privacy - of the most intimate parts of our lives. By making movies and TV series that celebrate these cancerous extensions of the police state Hollywood and the big studios are normalizing the ideas they present us with - lying to the public, routinely creating fraudulent stories as covers for what’s really going on. (Rob Kall cited in Washington’s Blog, The CIA and Other Government Agencies Dominate Movies and Television)

All these troublesome Hollywood connections have been examined in an in-depth report Global Research published in January 2009: Lights, Camera… Covert Action: The Deep Politics of Hollywood. The article lists a great number of movies in part scripted for propaganda purposes by the Defense Department, the CIA and other government agencies. It is interesting to note that this year’s Oscar-winning director Ben Affleck cooperated with the CIA in 2002 as he starred in The Sum of All Fears.

Authors Matthew Alford and Robbie Graham explain that compared to the CIA, the Department of Defense “has an ‘open’ but barely publicized relationship with Tinsel Town” which, “whilst morally dubious and barely advertised, has at least occurred within the public domain.” Alford and Graham cite a 1991 CIA report revealing the sprawling influence of the agency, not only in the movie business but also in the media where it “has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation.” It was not until 1996 that the CIA announced it “would now openly collaborate on Hollywood productions, supposedly in a strictly ‘advisory’ capacity”:

- See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/screen-propaganda-hollywood-and-the-cia/5324589#sthash.gbCbru1N.dpuf

“One of the most pervasive trends in 21st century western culture has become somewhat of an obsession in America. It’s called “Hollywood history”, where the corporate studio machines in Los Angeles spend hundreds of millions of dollars in order to craft and precisely tailor historical events to suit the prevailing political paradigm.” (Patrick Henningsen, Hollywood History: CIA Sponsored “Zero Dark Thirty”, Oscar for “Best Propaganda Picture”)

Black Hawk Dawn, Zero Dark Thirty and Argo, those are only a few major recent productions showing how today’s movie industry promotes US foreign policy. But the motion picture has been used for propaganda since the beginning of the 20th century and Hollywood’s cooperation with the Department of Defense, the CIA and other government agencies is no modern trend.

With Michelle Obama awarding Ben Affleck’s Argo the Oscar for best movie, the industry showed how close it is to Washington. According to Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich, Argo is a propaganda film concealing the ugly truth about the Iranian hostage crisis and designed to prepare the American public for an upcoming confrontation with Iran:

Foreign policy observers have long known that Hollywood reflects and promotes U.S. policies (in turn, is determined by Israel and its supporters).   This fact was made public when Michelle Obama announced an Oscar win for “Argo” -  a highly propagandist, anti-Iran  film.  Amidst the glitter and excitement, Hollywood and White House reveal their pact and send out their message in time for the upcoming talks surrounding Iran’s nuclear program [...]

Hollywood has a long history of promoting US policies.   In 1917, when the United States entered World War I, President Woodrow Wilson’s Committee on Public Information (CPI) enlisted the aid of America ’s film industry to make training films and features supporting the ‘cause’.  George Creel, Chairman of the CPI believed that the movies had a role in “carrying the gospel of Americanism to every corner of the globe.”

The pact grew stronger during World War II […] Hollywood ’s contribution was to provide propaganda. After the war, Washington reciprocated by using subsidies, special provisions in the Marshall Plan, and general clout to pry open resistant European film markets […]

As Hollywood and the White House eagerly embrace “Argo” and its propagandist message, they shamelessly and deliberately conceal a crucial aspect of this “historical” event.  The glitter buries the all too important fact that the Iranian students who took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran , proceeded to reveal Israel ’s dark secret to the world.  Documents classified as “SECRET” revealed LAKAM’s activities.  Initiated in 1960, LAKAM was an Israeli network assigned to economic espionage in the U.S. assigned to “the collection of scientific intelligence in the U.S. for Israel ’s defense industry” (Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich Oscar to Hollywood’s “Argo”: And the Winners are … the Pentagon and the Israel Lobby)

For a real account of the Iranian hostage crisis, a CIA covert operation, Global Research recommends reading Harry V. Martin’s article published in 1995: The Real Iranian Hostage Story from the Files of Fara Mansoor:

Fara Mansoor is a fugitive. No, he hasn’t broken any laws in the United States. His crime is the truth. What he has to say and the documents he carries are equivalent to a death warrant for him, Mansoor is an Iranian who was part of the “establishment” in Iran long before the 1979 hostage taking. Mansoor’s records actually discount the alleged “October Surprise” theory that the Ronald Reagan-George Bush team paid the Iranians not to release 52 American hostages until after the November 1980 Presidential elections [...]

With thousands of documents to support his position, Mansoor says that the “hostage crisis” was a political “management tool” created by the pro-Bush faction of the CIA, and implemented through an a priori Alliance with Khomeini’s Islamic Fundamentalists.” He says the purpose was twofold:

Zero Dark Thirty is another great silver screen propaganda piece which spurred outrage earlier this year. It exploits the horrific events of 9/11 to present torture as an effective and necessary evil:

Zero Dark Thirty is disturbing for two reasons. First and foremost, it leaves the viewer with the erroneous impression that torture helped the CIA find bin Laden’s hiding place in Pakistan. Secondarily, it ignores both the illegality and immorality of using torture as an interrogation tool.

The thriller opens with the words “based on first-hand accounts of actual events.” After showing footage of the horrific 9/11 attacks, it moves into a graphic and lengthy depiction of torture. The detainee “Ammar” is subjected to waterboarding, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and confined in a small box. Responding to the torture, he divulges the name of the courier who ultimately leads the CIA to bin Laden’s location and assassination. It may be good theater, but it is inaccurate and misleading. (Marjorie Cohn, “Zero Dark Thirty”: Torturing the Facts)

Earlier this year the Golden Globe awards made some analysts criticize Hollywood’s dark “celebration of the police state” and argue that the real Golden Globe winner  was the military-industrial complex:

Homeland won best TV series, best TV actor and actress. It IS a highly entertaining show which actually portrays some of the flaws of the MIIC system.

Argo won best movie and best director. It glorifies the CIA and Ben Affleck spoke with the highest praise for the CIA.

And best actress went to Jessica Chastain of Zero Dark Thirty, a movie that has been vilified for propagandizing the use of torture.

***

The Military Industrial Intelligence Complex is playing a more and more pervasive role in our lives.  In the next few years we’ll be seeing movies that focus on the use of drone technology in police and spy work in the USA. We’ve already been seeing movies that show how spies can violate every aspect of our privacy - of the most intimate parts of our lives. By making movies and TV series that celebrate these cancerous extensions of the police state Hollywood and the big studios are normalizing the ideas they present us with - lying to the public, routinely creating fraudulent stories as covers for what’s really going on. (Rob Kall cited in Washington’s Blog, The CIA and Other Government Agencies Dominate Movies and Television)

All these troublesome Hollywood connections have been examined in an in-depth report Global Research published in January 2009: Lights, Camera… Covert Action: The Deep Politics of Hollywood. The article lists a great number of movies in part scripted for propaganda purposes by the Defense Department, the CIA and other government agencies. It is interesting to note that this year’s Oscar-winning director Ben Affleck cooperated with the CIA in 2002 as he starred in The Sum of All Fears.

Authors Matthew Alford and Robbie Graham explain that compared to the CIA, the Department of Defense “has an ‘open’ but barely publicized relationship with Tinsel Town” which, “whilst morally dubious and barely advertised, has at least occurred within the public domain.” Alford and Graham cite a 1991 CIA report revealing the sprawling influence of the agency, not only in the movie business but also in the media where it “has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation.” It was not until 1996 that the CIA announced it “would now openly collaborate on Hollywood productions, supposedly in a strictly ‘advisory’ capacity”:

The Agency’s decision to work publicly with Hollywood was preceded by the 1991 “Task Force Report on Greater CIA Openness,” compiled by CIA Director Robert Gates’ newly appointed ‘Openness Task Force,’ which secretly debated - ironically - whether the Agency should be less secretive. The report acknowledges that the CIA “now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation,” and the authors of the report note that this helped them “turn some ‘intelligence failure’ stories into ‘intelligence success’ stories, and has contributed to the accuracy of countless others.” It goes on to reveal that the CIA has in the past “persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold, or even scrap stories that could have adversely affected national security interests” [...]

Espionage novelist Tom Clancy has enjoyed an especially close relationship with the CIA. In 1984, Clancy was invited to Langley after writing The Hunt for Red October, which was later turned into the 1990 film. The Agency invited him again when he was working on Patriot Games(1992), and the movie adaptation was, in turn, granted access to Langley facilities. More recently,The Sum of All Fears (2002) depicted the CIA as tracking down terrorists who detonate a nuclear weapon on US soil. For this production, CIA director George Tenet gave the filmmakers a personal tour of the Langley HQ; the film’s star, Ben Affleck also consulted with Agency analysts, and Chase Brandon served as on-set advisor.

The real reasons for the CIA adopting an “advisory” role on all of these productions are thrown into sharp relief by a solitary comment from former Associate General Counsel to the CIA, Paul Kelbaugh. In 2007, whilst at a College in Virginia, Kelbaugh delivered a lecture on the CIA’s relationship with Hollywood, at which a local journalist was present. The journalist (who now wishes to remain anonymous) wrote a review of the lecture which related Kelbaugh’s discussion of the 2003 thriller The Recruit, starring Al Pacino. The review noted that, according to Kelbaugh, a CIA agent was on set for the duration of the shoot under the guise of a consultant, but that his real job was to misdirect the filmmakers, the journalist quoted Kelbaugh as saying [...] Kelbaugh emphatically denied having made the public statement. (Matthew Alford and Robbie Graham, Lights, Camera… Covert Action: The Deep Politics of Hollywood)

During the Cold War the CIA’s Psychological Strategy Board (PSB) agent Luigi G. Luraschi was a Paramount executive. He “had secured the agreement of several casting directors to subtly plant ‘well dressed negroes’ into films, including ‘a dignified negro butler’ who has lines ‘indicating he is a free man’”. The purpose of these changes was “to hamper the Soviets’ ability to exploit its enemy’s poor record in race relations and served to create a peculiarly anodyne impression of America, which was, at that time, still mired in an era of racial segregation.” (Ibid.)

The latest award-winning movie productions show that the Manichean view of the world put forward by the US foreign policy agenda has not changed since the Cold War. The Hollywood-CIA alliance is alive and well and still portrays America as the “leader of the free world” fighting “evil” around the world:

The interlocking of Hollywood and national security apparatuses remains as tight as ever: ex-CIA agent Bob Baer told us, “There’s a symbiosis between the CIA and Hollywood” […] Baer’s claims are given weight by the Sun Valley meetings, annual get-togethers in Idaho’s Sun Valley in which several hundred of the biggest names in American media - including every major Hollywood studio executive - convene to discuss collective media strategy for the coming year. (Ibid.)

- See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/screen-propaganda-hollywood-and-the-cia/5324589#sthash.gbCbru1N.dpuf

“One of the most pervasive trends in 21st century western culture has become somewhat of an obsession in America. It’s called “Hollywood history”, where the corporate studio machines in Los Angeles spend hundreds of millions of dollars in order to craft and precisely tailor historical events to suit the prevailing political paradigm.” (Patrick Henningsen, Hollywood History: CIA Sponsored “Zero Dark Thirty”, Oscar for “Best Propaganda Picture”)

Black Hawk Dawn, Zero Dark Thirty and Argo, those are only a few major recent productions showing how today’s movie industry promotes US foreign policy. But the motion picture has been used for propaganda since the beginning of the 20th century and Hollywood’s cooperation with the Department of Defense, the CIA and other government agencies is no modern trend.

With Michelle Obama awarding Ben Affleck’s Argo the Oscar for best movie, the industry showed how close it is to Washington. According to Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich, Argo is a propaganda film concealing the ugly truth about the Iranian hostage crisis and designed to prepare the American public for an upcoming confrontation with Iran:

Foreign policy observers have long known that Hollywood reflects and promotes U.S. policies (in turn, is determined by Israel and its supporters).   This fact was made public when Michelle Obama announced an Oscar win for “Argo” -  a highly propagandist, anti-Iran  film.  Amidst the glitter and excitement, Hollywood and White House reveal their pact and send out their message in time for the upcoming talks surrounding Iran’s nuclear program [...]

Hollywood has a long history of promoting US policies.   In 1917, when the United States entered World War I, President Woodrow Wilson’s Committee on Public Information (CPI) enlisted the aid of America ’s film industry to make training films and features supporting the ‘cause’.  George Creel, Chairman of the CPI believed that the movies had a role in “carrying the gospel of Americanism to every corner of the globe.”

The pact grew stronger during World War II […] Hollywood ’s contribution was to provide propaganda. After the war, Washington reciprocated by using subsidies, special provisions in the Marshall Plan, and general clout to pry open resistant European film markets […]

As Hollywood and the White House eagerly embrace “Argo” and its propagandist message, they shamelessly and deliberately conceal a crucial aspect of this “historical” event.  The glitter buries the all too important fact that the Iranian students who took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran , proceeded to reveal Israel ’s dark secret to the world.  Documents classified as “SECRET” revealed LAKAM’s activities.  Initiated in 1960, LAKAM was an Israeli network assigned to economic espionage in the U.S. assigned to “the collection of scientific intelligence in the U.S. for Israel ’s defense industry” (Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich Oscar to Hollywood’s “Argo”: And the Winners are … the Pentagon and the Israel Lobby)

For a real account of the Iranian hostage crisis, a CIA covert operation, Global Research recommends reading Harry V. Martin’s article published in 1995: The Real Iranian Hostage Story from the Files of Fara Mansoor:

Fara Mansoor is a fugitive. No, he hasn’t broken any laws in the United States. His crime is the truth. What he has to say and the documents he carries are equivalent to a death warrant for him, Mansoor is an Iranian who was part of the “establishment” in Iran long before the 1979 hostage taking. Mansoor’s records actually discount the alleged “October Surprise” theory that the Ronald Reagan-George Bush team paid the Iranians not to release 52 American hostages until after the November 1980 Presidential elections [...]

With thousands of documents to support his position, Mansoor says that the “hostage crisis” was a political “management tool” created by the pro-Bush faction of the CIA, and implemented through an a priori Alliance with Khomeini’s Islamic Fundamentalists.” He says the purpose was twofold:

Zero Dark Thirty is another great silver screen propaganda piece which spurred outrage earlier this year. It exploits the horrific events of 9/11 to present torture as an effective and necessary evil:

Zero Dark Thirty is disturbing for two reasons. First and foremost, it leaves the viewer with the erroneous impression that torture helped the CIA find bin Laden’s hiding place in Pakistan. Secondarily, it ignores both the illegality and immorality of using torture as an interrogation tool.

The thriller opens with the words “based on first-hand accounts of actual events.” After showing footage of the horrific 9/11 attacks, it moves into a graphic and lengthy depiction of torture. The detainee “Ammar” is subjected to waterboarding, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and confined in a small box. Responding to the torture, he divulges the name of the courier who ultimately leads the CIA to bin Laden’s location and assassination. It may be good theater, but it is inaccurate and misleading. (Marjorie Cohn, “Zero Dark Thirty”: Torturing the Facts)

Earlier this year the Golden Globe awards made some analysts criticize Hollywood’s dark “celebration of the police state” and argue that the real Golden Globe winner  was the military-industrial complex:

Homeland won best TV series, best TV actor and actress. It IS a highly entertaining show which actually portrays some of the flaws of the MIIC system.

Argo won best movie and best director. It glorifies the CIA and Ben Affleck spoke with the highest praise for the CIA.

And best actress went to Jessica Chastain of Zero Dark Thirty, a movie that has been vilified for propagandizing the use of torture.

***

The Military Industrial Intelligence Complex is playing a more and more pervasive role in our lives.  In the next few years we’ll be seeing movies that focus on the use of drone technology in police and spy work in the USA. We’ve already been seeing movies that show how spies can violate every aspect of our privacy - of the most intimate parts of our lives. By making movies and TV series that celebrate these cancerous extensions of the police state Hollywood and the big studios are normalizing the ideas they present us with - lying to the public, routinely creating fraudulent stories as covers for what’s really going on. (Rob Kall cited in Washington’s Blog, The CIA and Other Government Agencies Dominate Movies and Television)

All these troublesome Hollywood connections have been examined in an in-depth report Global Research published in January 2009: Lights, Camera… Covert Action: The Deep Politics of Hollywood. The article lists a great number of movies in part scripted for propaganda purposes by the Defense Department, the CIA and other government agencies. It is interesting to note that this year’s Oscar-winning director Ben Affleck cooperated with the CIA in 2002 as he starred in The Sum of All Fears.

Authors Matthew Alford and Robbie Graham explain that compared to the CIA, the Department of Defense “has an ‘open’ but barely publicized relationship with Tinsel Town” which, “whilst morally dubious and barely advertised, has at least occurred within the public domain.” Alford and Graham cite a 1991 CIA report revealing the sprawling influence of the agency, not only in the movie business but also in the media where it “has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation.” It was not until 1996 that the CIA announced it “would now openly collaborate on Hollywood productions, supposedly in a strictly ‘advisory’ capacity”:

The Agency’s decision to work publicly with Hollywood was preceded by the 1991 “Task Force Report on Greater CIA Openness,” compiled by CIA Director Robert Gates’ newly appointed ‘Openness Task Force,’ which secretly debated - ironically - whether the Agency should be less secretive. The report acknowledges that the CIA “now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation,” and the authors of the report note that this helped them “turn some ‘intelligence failure’ stories into ‘intelligence success’ stories, and has contributed to the accuracy of countless others.” It goes on to reveal that the CIA has in the past “persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold, or even scrap stories that could have adversely affected national security interests” [...]

Espionage novelist Tom Clancy has enjoyed an especially close relationship with the CIA. In 1984, Clancy was invited to Langley after writing The Hunt for Red October, which was later turned into the 1990 film. The Agency invited him again when he was working on Patriot Games(1992), and the movie adaptation was, in turn, granted access to Langley facilities. More recently,The Sum of All Fears (2002) depicted the CIA as tracking down terrorists who detonate a nuclear weapon on US soil. For this production, CIA director George Tenet gave the filmmakers a personal tour of the Langley HQ; the film’s star, Ben Affleck also consulted with Agency analysts, and Chase Brandon served as on-set advisor.

The real reasons for the CIA adopting an “advisory” role on all of these productions are thrown into sharp relief by a solitary comment from former Associate General Counsel to the CIA, Paul Kelbaugh. In 2007, whilst at a College in Virginia, Kelbaugh delivered a lecture on the CIA’s relationship with Hollywood, at which a local journalist was present. The journalist (who now wishes to remain anonymous) wrote a review of the lecture which related Kelbaugh’s discussion of the 2003 thriller The Recruit, starring Al Pacino. The review noted that, according to Kelbaugh, a CIA agent was on set for the duration of the shoot under the guise of a consultant, but that his real job was to misdirect the filmmakers, the journalist quoted Kelbaugh as saying [...] Kelbaugh emphatically denied having made the public statement. (Matthew Alford and Robbie Graham, Lights, Camera… Covert Action: The Deep Politics of Hollywood)

During the Cold War the CIA’s Psychological Strategy Board (PSB) agent Luigi G. Luraschi was a Paramount executive. He “had secured the agreement of several casting directors to subtly plant ‘well dressed negroes’ into films, including ‘a dignified negro butler’ who has lines ‘indicating he is a free man’”. The purpose of these changes was “to hamper the Soviets’ ability to exploit its enemy’s poor record in race relations and served to create a peculiarly anodyne impression of America, which was, at that time, still mired in an era of racial segregation.” (Ibid.)

The latest award-winning movie productions show that the Manichean view of the world put forward by the US foreign policy agenda has not changed since the Cold War. The Hollywood-CIA alliance is alive and well and still portrays America as the “leader of the free world” fighting “evil” around the world:

The interlocking of Hollywood and national security apparatuses remains as tight as ever: ex-CIA agent Bob Baer told us, “There’s a symbiosis between the CIA and Hollywood” […] Baer’s claims are given weight by the Sun Valley meetings, annual get-togethers in Idaho’s Sun Valley in which several hundred of the biggest names in American media - including every major Hollywood studio executive - convene to discuss collective media strategy for the coming year. (Ibid.)

- See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/screen-propaganda-hollywood-and-the-cia#sthash.jeLGSrQz.dp