Pentagon in bed with Hollywood, documents show

Source: RT
July 7, 2017

The US government played a part in producing more than 800 major films and 1,000 TV shows from the 1950’s through the present, according to over 4,000 pages of documents a watchdog group obtained. RT America’s Natasha Sweatte has more on the cooperation between the nation’s media and political capitals.

Hollywood strike? Sounds good!

Source: RT America
February 16, 2017

A bunch of celebrities signed their names on an anti-Trump ad by a group called RefuseFacism.org in the New York Times, and that somehow turned into reports of a “Hollywood strike.” While the strike is fake news, The Resident thinks it sounds like a real good idea.

The Individual Vs. The Staged Collective

individuality
Source: NoMoreFakenews.com
Jon Rappoport
December 26 2016

Trumpets blare. In the night sky, spotlights roam. A great confusion of smoke and dust and fog, and emerging banners, carrying the single message:

WE.

The great meltdown of all consciousness into a glob of utopian simplicity…//

There are denizens among us.

They present themselves as the Normals.

And once again, I find it necessary to return to the subject of The Individual.

This time, I’m prompted by the madness swirling around the film, Vaxxed. I’ve written about the film and the controversy from several angles, but here I want to point out another factor. The CDC whistleblower at the heart of the story is one man going up against The Group.

I don’t call William Thompson an unsullied hero. Far from it. He lied, he committed fraud, he hid the fraud for 10 years, he buried evidence that the MMR vaccine increased the risk of autism in children, and finally, perhaps because he was caught in his own web, he confessed.

But the group, his employer, the grotesque CDC, his fellow scientists—and especially the hideous rotting press, a dumping ground for professional agents, front men, con artists, shysters, wormy night crawlers (and I’m speaking more kindly of them than I should)—have attacked Thompson and the film mercilessly.

Beyond all political objectives in this attack, there is a simple fact: those group-mind liars who have given up their souls will rage against the faintest appearance of one who tries to keep his. And in this rage, the soulless ones will try to pull the other down to where they live.

And somehow, it all looks normal and proper and rational.

In the 1950s, before television had numbed minds and turned them into jelly, there was a growing sense of: the Individual versus the Corporate State.

Something needed to be done. People were fitting into slots. They were surrendering their lives in increasing numbers. They were carving away their own idiosyncrasies and their independent ideas.

But television, under the control of psyops experts, became, as the 1950s droned on, the facile barrel of a weapon:

“What’s important is the group. Conform. Give in. Bathe in the great belonging…”

Recognize that every message television imparts is a proxy, a fabrication, a simulacrum, an imitation of life one step removed.

When this medium also broadcasts words and images of belonging and the need to belong, it’s engaged in revolutionary social engineering.

Whether it’s the happy-happy suburban-lawn family in an ad for the wonders of a toxic pesticide, or the mob family going to the mattresses to fend off a rival, it’s fantasy time in the land of mind control.

Television has carried its mission forward. The consciousness of the Individual versus the State has turned into: love the State. Love the State as family.

In the only study I have been able to find, Wictionary partially surveys the scripts of all television shows from the year 2006, to analyze the words most frequently broadcast to viewers in America.

Out of 29,713,800 words, including the massively used “a,” “an,” “the,” “you,” “me,” and the like, the word “home” ranks 179 from the top. “Mom” is 218. “Together” is 222. “Family” is 250.

This usage reflects an unending psyop.

Are you with the family or not? Are you with the group, the collective, or not? Those are the blunt parameters.

“When you get right down to it, all you have is family.” “Our team is really a family.” “You’re deserting the family.” “You fight for the guy next to you.” “Our department is like a family.” “Here at Corporation X, we’re a family.”

The committee, the group, the company, the sector, the planet.

The goal? Submerge the individual.

Individual achievement, imagination, creative power? Not on the agenda. Something for the dustbin of history.

Aldous Huxley, Brave New World: “‘Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines’! The voice was almost tremulous with enthusiasm. ‘You really know where you are. For the first time in history.’”

George Orwell, 1984: “The two aims of the Party are to conquer the whole surface of the earth and to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought.”

The soap opera is the apotheosis of television. The long-running characters in Anytown are irreversibly enmeshed in one another’s lives. There’s no escape. There is only mind-numbing meddling.

“I’m just trying to help you realize we all love you (in chains).”

“Your father, rest his soul, would never have wanted you to do this to yourself…”

“How dare you set yourself apart from us. Who do you think you are?”

For some people, the collective “WE” has a fragrant scent—until they get down in the trenches with it. There they discover odd odors and postures and mutations. There they discover self-distorted creatures scurrying around celebrating their twistedness.

The night becomes long. The ideals melt. The level of intelligence required to inhabit this cave-like realm is lower than expected, much lower.

Hypnotic perceptions, which are the glue that holds the territory together, begin to crack and fall apart, and all that is left is a grim determination to see things through.

As the night moves into its latter stages, some participants come to know that all their activity is taking place in a chimerical universe.

It is as if reality has been constructed to yield up gibberish.

Whose idea was…

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com

Book Review: Propaganda And Mass Persuasion – A Historical Encyclopedia, 1500 To The Present

propaganda-mass-persuasion-historical-account
TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
December 13, 2016

Propaganda And Mass Persuasion – A Historical Encyclopedia, 1500 To The Present by Nicholas J. Cull, David Culbert & David Welch is broad surveying of a large portion of the propaganda that has historically taken place the last five centuries or so.

For the record, the book has many other contributors than the ones listed above.  The ones listed are only three of the entire group.

In any case, the book is divided alphabetically, which certainly helps, and is footnoted to the hilt, which is greatly appreciated.

Showcased within the book are the smorgasbord of ways propaganda can be used.  Common methods such as television, radio, and media are delved into, while also cursory glances are given to posters, leaflets and other tools used historically.

A wide sprinkling of Individuals, methods, movements, ideologies, movies, countries and more are each given a decent gander within the confines of this piece.

Propaganda And Mass Persuasion exegetes the precise historical periods of some of the largest propaganda campaigns that have taken place.  From World War 1, to World War 2, Vietnam War, and even many other wars, the book delves into how propaganda played a role in assisting and/or countering an opposing side.  Along with this, the book even shows how mass persuasion has been viewed by the establishment, and how it has served a major purpose in pushing particular agendas.

Ultimately, steering vox populi is the main focus of any propagandist, and this book shows why.

In its totality, Propaganda And Mass Persuassion is quite didactic for a neophyte, given its expansive historical range.  That said, given the size of the book, it can only really home-in on certain historical applications with great precision.  Because of that ome areas were somewhat lacking however.

The data set addressed was rather scholarly, although admittedly from an establishment point of view.  Much deeper layers of this topic are only given mere glances, or simply glossed over in their entirety. Simply stated, the book is congealed – or so it feels – to cement official narratives.  Giving you enough scholarly data for it to be legitimate, but not following additional published documents/data sets that that would confect a much larger and complete picture.

It is up to the reader to take cognizance in the lacking breadth and scope of the book.

As a starting point, it’s certainly quite superficially comprehensive, and it certainly belongs in a researcher’s library.  However, the glaring omission of social engineering – which is propaganda’s ultimate goal – are to be looked at quite askance.   That subject alone could be written about at length, and isn’t even given a glance.

If you are a student of propaganda, mind control, social engineering and the like, and happen to get this book, just realize this isn’t the end-all-be-all of sourced material.  There are many books by many great people on Amazon, and countless documents published which go into farther depth than this book has.  Make sure to spend time and search for those in order widen your repertoire and be more able to keenly ascertain when such tools are being used against you, and your kith and kin.

Jay Dyer On Sunday Wire: Covert COINTEL Deception

Source: JaysAnalysis.com
Jay Dyer
August 9, 2016

This week’s edition of THE SUNDAY WIRE is on the road broadcasting LIVE from Austin, Texas. This week’s special guest host Hesher from ACR’s Boiler Room takes the helm to covering the audacious US and international news. In the first hour we’re joined by special guest and 21WIRE contributor, Jay Dyer, author of the new book, Esoteric Hollywood, to discuss the ‘Social Justice Warrior’ propaganda in Hollywood’s new Star Trek blockbuster release, and a deeper look at Tragedy and Hope, as well as the history and present-day manifestations of COINTEL PRO and controlled opposition in both US and European politics and deep state geopolitics.

Strap yourselves in and lower the blast shield – this is your brave new world…

http://www.jaysanalysis.com

http://www.21stcenturywire.com

Atlantic Article on Hollywood Misses Powerful Points About CIA Control

counting-on-yourself
Source: TheDailyBell.com
July 15, 2016

How the CIA Hoodwinked Hollywood Since its inception, the agency has wooed filmmakers, producers, and actors in order to present a rosy portrait of its operations to the American public. –Atlantic

This is a good article by the Atlantic, a neo-con publication that aspires to be a “thought publication.”

This article rehearses the history of the CIA in Hollywood and, in fact, is fairly comprehensive and touches on a number of compelling points.

More;

The CIA has a long history of “spooking the news,” dating back to its earliest days when the legendary spymaster Allen Dulles and his top staff drank and dined regularly with the press elite of New York and Washington, and the agency boasted hundreds of U.S. and foreign journalists as paid and unpaid assets.

In 1977, after this systematic media manipulation was publicly exposed by congressional investigations, the CIA created an Office of Public Affairs that was tasked with guiding press coverage of intelligence matters in a more transparent fashion.

The agency insists that it no longer maintains a stable of friendly American journalists, and that its efforts to influence the press are much more above board. But, in truth, the intelligence empire’s efforts to manufacture the truth and mold public opinion are more vast and varied than ever before. One of its foremost assets? Hollywood.

This is an honest appraisal so far as it goes. As is the article’s conclusion:

With few exceptions, Hollywood has long functioned as a propaganda factory, churning out jingoistic revenge-fantasy films in which American audiences are allowed to exorcise their post-9/11 demons by watching the satisfying slaughter of countless onscreen jihadis.

This never-ending parade of square-jawed secret agents and bearded, pumped-up commandos pitted against swarthy Muslim madmen straight out of central casting has been aided and abetted by a newly emboldened CIA all too happy to offer its “services” to Hollywood.

The article, thousands of words long, still managed to miss some important points, however.

It doesn’t provide us with much in the way of a frame of reference. The control that the CIA exercises over Hollywood is multiplied many times by the control the CIA exercises over the communications industry generally.

At the top of the CIA, executives are responsive to the City of London. Intelligences agencies were manufactured by banking families initially.

Only later on, were their functions laid off onto governments. Now the cash flow comes from tax dollars, but the agencies themselves are still controlled out of the City.

This goes for other countries as well, including Israel, which was created by the City, which still runs it.

It is probably not too much of an exaggeration to say that its spooks run both Facebook and Google – especially given that the CIA invested in both companies when they were just beginning.

Basically, the Atlantic article makes it sound as if the CIA’s control over Hollywood is evolutionary and even voluntary. This is to misstate the way the CIA works.

Surreptitious intel operations have doubtless been in charge of Hollywood since its inception. If anyone doubts that, simply take a look at the movies Hollywood produced in the 1930s and especially in the 1940s.

These days, Hollywood movies have staked their main franchise on superhero movies.

These superheroes fly high in the sky fighting “bad guys” and determining whether or not the world will be safe and function properly.

They are above the law and gratitude is always due to them for their exploits.

The resemblance to the coming implementation of technocracy is undeniable.

In the world, as it is to be, technocrats running vast corporations will make decisions affecting millions. In fact, they already do.

Conclusion: This sort of organization and its privileges will not seem unusual to those regarding them. The parallels to today’s movies will already have desensitized people to what is occurring. This is the fundamental paradigm of modern Hollywood, the basic assertion of control.

Read More At: TheDailybell.com

CIA Ties To Hollywood On Verge Of Being Exposed

hollywood
Source: ActivistPost.com
Clarice Palmer
June 27, 2016

An amendment added to Congress’ annual intelligence spending bill may help the public gain a better idea of the U.S. government’s relationship with Hollywood.

According to VICE News, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-NC), included an amendment to S. 3017 that would require the Director of National Intelligence to submit reports detailing the relationship between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agencies and Hollywood. It would also require 15 other agencies to disclose the nature of their relationships with the film industry. These reports would have to be presented annually to congressional oversight committees.

Between 2006 and 2011, VICE reported, the CIA’s Office of Public Affairs (OPA) had a role in at least 22 of the U.S. entertainment industry’s projects. Some of the productions listed by VICE included the films Argo and Zero Dark Thirty, television shows like Top Chef and Covert Affairs, and documentaries such as the History channel’s Air America and the BBC’s The Secret War on Terror. The book, The Devil’s Light, also had the help of the CIA.

Some of the most controversial findings regarding the relationship between OPA officials and Hollywood insiders were tied to the blockbuster, Zero Dark Thirty.

According to the redacted and previously classified December 2012 CIA report released by Judicial Watch, the CIA granted “‘secret level’ access to the makers of the movie Zero Dark Thirty.” According to VICE, “filmmakers Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal showered CIA officers involved in the operation with gifts and received unprecedented access, which included the disclosure of classified information to Bigelow and Boal by CIA director Leon Panetta.”

While these revealing facts shocked the world at the time of their release, the relationship between the CIA and the entertainment industry actually dates back to the 1950s.

According to an interview with Public Radio International, Tricia Jenkins, author of The CIA in Hollywood, says that the CIA “developed a think tank to fight communist ideology, which negotiated the rights to George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ – getting a talking pig on the screen 20 years before ‘Charlotte’s Web.’” The agency pressed for “line changes in 1950s scripts to make black characters more dignified, and white characters more tolerant” in order to promote “an attractive image of America to a world picking sides in the Cold War.”

Continue Reading At: ActivistPost.com

Beyonce, Justin Timberlake & Other Celeb Paid Millions To Endorse Cancer Causing Junk Foods

Celebrities
Source: NaturalNews.com
J.D. Heyes
June 15, 2016

Once you become a celebrity, especially in the entertainment and sports industries, it’s difficult not to make money. That’s because companies fall all over themselves to ink deals endorsement deals with you; the younger and hotter and more popular you are – a great demographic for many products – the more these companies will want to sign you up and use your celebrity to help them sell products.

Imagine, for instance, signing a $50 million to promote Pepsi products? Or $6 million just to utter three words on behalf of McDonald’s, “I’m lovin’ it”? Beyonce managed the first deal; Justin Timberlake the second.

In fact, a recent study published in the journal Pediatrics described lucrative endorsement deals of 65 music celebrities, most of them hawking some of junkiest of junk foods and unhealthiest of sugary drinks.

Stars like Maroon 5, Britney Spears, Timberlake and others promoted 57 different food and beverage brands that ranged from Pop-Tarts to Pepsi, energy drinks to pizza.

“We found the vast majority of food and beverage products were unhealthy,” said researcher Marie Bragg of New York University, as reported by NPR.

‘Television advertising influences children’

The study did not examine what impact celebrity endorsements had on product consumption rates. However, she pointed to one anecdote that may help define the potential influence of well-known stars, involving rapper Pittbull’s endorsement of Dr. Pepper.

“When Dr. Pepper asked Pitbull to endorse, they got 4.6 million advertising impressions, and sales went up 1.7 percent [among Latinos] — despite declining sales in the overall soft drink category,” Bragg told NPR.

The public broadcaster states further:

As we’ve reported, musicians can influence the thinking — and perhaps the habits — of their young fans. A study published last year found that teens and young adults who reported enjoying hit songs that referenced brands of alcohol (think Kesha and her bottle of Jack) were more likely to drink compared with those who didn’t like these songs.

Also, NPR noted, in reference to food and non-alcoholic drink choices, TV is very influential and that has been well-documented. The Institute of Medicine concluded nearly a decade ago that “television advertising influences children to prefer and request high-calorie and low-nutrient foods and beverages.”

That said, many in the food industry have promised to scale back marketing aimed at kids aged 12 and younger. More than a dozen of the biggest food companies including Coca-Cola. Kellogg’s and McDonald’s have joined the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, which seeks to limit kids’ exposure to unhealthy products.

Now, however, pressure has mounted for companies to curb marketing of many products to teenagers who are in very critical stages of health development. Experts say that the rising incidence of obesity is clear reason to push for these changes since rates among teens are rising exponentially. Bad eating habits early on only leads to bad habits – and premature health issues – later in life, experts say.

“Given that we have a childhood and teen obesity problem in the country, [these endorsements of unhealthy foods] are sending the wrong message to young people, and likely contributing to poor dietary habits,” Bragg told NPR.

Of course using famous people works to sell products – or ideas

TV, film and music stars are part of that equation, given their endorsements.

While Bragg’s study did not assess any link to dietary habits, she nevertheless said that “we do know that exposure to food ads leads young people to overeat products they see.”

Naturally the food industry is pushing back, saying there is a dearth of evidence to suggest that what they’re doing – hiring celebrities to hawk their products – is swaying teens one way or the other. But claiming that negates any logical reason to pay millions to celebrities for their endorsement; if the celebrity isn’t going to help them sell their product, why pay them?

The Partnership for a Healthier America knows that celebrities sell, which is why they are using them to help push a fruit-and-vegetables campaign. The group has endorsements from NFL quarterback Cam Newton, Jessica Alba, Kristen Bell and others.

“We are absolutely taking a play from a playbook that works,” Drew Nannis, chief marketing officer of the partnership, told NPR. He added that it is well-known that celebrities help sell – ideas or products.

Sources:

NPR.org

BBB.org

Pediatrics.org

Read More At: NaturalNews.com