HMW, what's your take on this?

by **NewKid** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:00 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>How much of this does Katie Holmes actually know? Does she know about the rituals in the desert with Jack Parsons? <hr></blockquote> <a href="http://sinisterforces.info/blog/index.php?/archives/31-Disturbing-Behavior-and-Sinister-Forces-Katie-Holmes-Wake-up-Call.html" target="top">sinisterforces.info/blog/index.php?/archives/31-Disturbing-Behavior-and-Sinister-Forces-Katie-Holmes-Wake-up-Call.html</a>

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 3:12 pm

NewKid, I appreciate your serving up this stuff with a flag for me to find but I'm kind of curious what your own take is on the analysis of media I pour out. Seems you agree with some but not all. (A thread title for the rest of RI's readers would be helpful again.) Ok, I grab my psycho-raquet and return the serve with this quick reading on that film with Tom Cruise's unfortunate wife starring as a victim of high school mind-control- I notice that not only is the chief villain who is weaponizing the minds of students a *teacher, but he is also a guidance counselor which can be seen as similar to a *psychologist. CIA interrogation manuals suggest that asking a subject about their teachers is a good way to open up prime motivational issues to determine a working personality type. Teachers and psychoanalysts bring out a person's primal issues related to authority, survival, and self-esteem that are first experienced through their parents. Psychoanalysts actually devote a large part of their own education to dealing with 'transference,' the drama built into the doctor-patient relationship where they become the authority figure in the process and experience the surrogate hostilities meant for others in the patient's life. Preventing the understanding of psychology and sabotaging education is a key goal of fascism which hides its most effective methods of control with either feeble limited hang-out self-help books or promotes the irrational and mythic polarized view of good and evil with violence as the ultimate 'decider.' Both capitalism and militarism are propagated with stealth social Darwinism in cultural artifacts. I had a long talk with a Scientologist recently and he agreed that the government controls media and induces a sense of chaos but he also demonized psychologists while unable to justify his attitude. Key principle of psychological warfare: People need visible targets for their frustrations. So inflaming tensions from childhood by demonizing teachers fits the usual fascist tactic of demonizing the middle class intelligentsia and create a wedge between them and the masses. 'Breakfast Club' anyone? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 6/18/06 2:55 pm

by **professorpan** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 7:18 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>So inflaming tensions from childhood by demonizing teachers fits the usual fascist tactic of demonizing the middle class intelligentsia and create a wedge between them and the masses. 'Breakfast Club' anyone?<hr></blockquote> John Hughes = tool of the fascist Illuminati. My god, it doesn't get any funnier than that!

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:03 pm

Straw men and paper tigers are not funny. Not while media is used to support torture, slaughter, and eugenics. Maybe you find mass mind control techniques funny, PP. I don't. Controlling the masses through their cultural consumptions, especially while young, is a socialization process that is eons old. And media viruses don't all look like Leni Reifenstahl's 'Triumph of the Will' or 'Top Gun.' What are the themes I always point to? Strong capable men. + Weak or absent women. + Boys proving manhood by fighting = War is Good and Moral. Hey, Professor Pan. Check this out. I just saw the huge poster at my local Video Mart- <img src="http://z.about.com/d/movies/1/0/X/h/7/annapolisposter.jpg" style="border:0;"/> Have you gone to see 'Annapolis' yet? http://www.thezreview.co.uk/comingsoon/a/annapolis.htm <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Annapolis Premise/Synopsis: Monday 26th July 2004: Annapolis Update: Fast and the Furious star Jordana Brewster is to star opposite James Franco in Annapolis for Walt Disney Studios. Justin Lin is directing the film about a boy from the wrong side of the tracks whose dream of attending the U.S. Naval Academy becomes a reality. Brewster would play an upper classman who helps Franco's character train in the ring as the two fall for each other, even though it is a violation of academic policy. <hr></blockquote> http://www.thezreview.co.uk/reviews/a/annapolis.htm<blockquote>Quote:<hr>.... For the first twenty minutes, “Annapolis” tries ever so hard to be a recruitment video which made me shocked that the US Navy didn’t endorse the film. Dreamy eyed Franco trying to find some sort of dramatic footing tells the audience that the reason he is going to Academy is because he promised his dead mother. .... I also liked the film’s boxing scenes but without drama to back it up all you really get is the stench of two sweaty men beating each other senseless. If you are going to make a movie about boxing would you ever think to set it in a Naval Academy? Furthermore, if you are going to make a movie about a Naval Academy and even title the film after it then why not focus on the skills, training and endurance a cadet has to go through. Then have the film’s hero prove his abusive commander wrong through respect in training not by beating in his enflamed ego.  “Annapolis” to make a long story short, is a renter. Get it on video and enjoy it that way but be warned there is a lot of cheese in here and in some parts you might even be finding yourself saying, “Huh?”. <hr></blockquote>

by **Joe Hillshoist** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 11:39 pm

>>I had a long talk with a Scientologist recently and he agreed that the government controls media and induces a sense of chaos but he also demonized psychologists while unable to justify his attitude.<< James Hillman might be able to help your scientologist acquaintance out. Lets have a look at some aspects of the Breakfast Club. The crim and the princess. all it takes is a bit of aristocratic pussy and the crim will moderate his behaviour. Repress his individuality to get the object of desire. His object of desire is a societally acceptable cliche. Masculinity gets the girl. (the two most physically adept males are the ones in the breeding zone). And for the "alternative" girl to become acceptable breeding stock, sshe has to moderate her individuality and conform to acceptable ideas of attractiveness. Who she is isn't as important as what she becomes, Emilio's squeeze. Teachers are evil bitter twisted arseholes. Lets face it the biggest bullshit meme in that whole filum is that the dude who is supposed to be "the criminal" turns up for detention. Remeber that one one kids, if you are the "bad guy" just turn yourself in for punishment and get the pretty rich chic.

by **professorpan** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 11:45 pm

Hugh -- is there any film or television program that isn't brimming with social control memes and content designed to create little fascists? Can you think of a single one?

by **Joe Hillshoist** » Sun Jun 18, 2006 11:54 pm

PP, you could try "the Chaser" crew or the boys from "fat Pizza." Dave Shapelle maybe. What about "Thats my Bush" Antone remember that? All societies brainwash children into their worldview, its a matter of what you think of the society.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:08 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>is there any film or television program that isn't brimming with social control memes and content designed to create little fascists?<hr></blockquote> Search up and read the history of what the military calls 'Strategic Influence.' You'll get the picture. In 'mainstream media,' some are worse than others but it is all pointed in the same direction. That's the thing about Total War, it is total. The propaganda industry that whipped Americans up for WWI kept going and turned the same vicious red-baiting campaign against this country's colleges and universities from 1918 on. And the US won, right? That didn't just happen in Germany with the 'who stabbed us in the back?'-theme. Exactly the same thing that happened after WWII with Joe McCarthy and Nixon and again after the Vietnam War when 'liberal' was made a swear word. So this use of media to stir up ill will in the service of the state is almost 100 years old and, yes, damn near total immersion anti-therapy unless you only read banned books and don't consume the corporate swill cooked up for the masses. Even the venting against fascism in Doonesbury, the Daily Show, Saturday Night Live, etc. serves the purpose of maintaining the status quo as a steam valve and maintaining the illusion of a free society. The military has therapeutic 'de-briefings' for front line troops who experience 'extreme engagements' and it helps the soldiers get right back to the fight. Same idea for civilians. Everything learned about the individual in stress is institutionalized, usually using media. Media is war by other means.

by **professorpan** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:24 am

So... Either by overt manipulation, coercion, or cluelessness among the participants in the industry, every film and television show is embedded with memetic programming and adheres to rigid rules of fascist propaganda? Can you even entertain the possibility that, while certain films and TV shows have been influenced by Mockingbirds, that not all entertainment programming is a product of CIA manipulation? Is it possible that you might be seeking out evidence to buttress your beliefs, while ignoring any evidence that contradicts them?

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:33 am

Of course only MOST of the programming is poison. Some just makes money or keeps you watching for later. And much of the poison is subtle. Some meant to innoculate you against the truth. You might want to check out this new 'reality game,' SABOTAGE. <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=4812.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...4812.topic</a>

by **professorpan** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:16 am

Your confirmation bias is getting the best of you. As I suggested in another thread, please consider the way scientists attempt to reign in confirmation bias -- by seeking evidence that contradicts their theories. It's easy to keep finding evidence to support a pet theory -- in your case, the theory of total and complete control over the minutiae of every piece of entertainment in the mediasphere by fascist behaviorists. Right-wingers pick apart the content of popular entertainment and find hidden humanist/liberal content, while fundamentalist Christians find hidden messages designed to lead the faithful astray and into the grasp of Satan. I've known conservatives who have found abundant evidence of a hidden agenda promoting Communism. All of those people are convinced they are right. All of them can point to "irrefutable" evidence. If you are so convinced of the truthiness of your theories, consider listening to the evidence some of us (your doubters) have offered. Better yet, seek contrary evidence yourself, if only as an intellectual exercise. It may be uncomfortable, but it is a much better way to monitor your emotional ties to a particular belief system which may be acting as a barrier to honest, disciplined research.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:18 am

Uh...what 'evidence' have your presented besides "don't be rediculous"? And this thoughtful response to my thread about the 'reality show' called Sabotage- <blockquote>Quote:<hr> And sometimes a reality show is just a piece of witless, derivative crap.<hr></blockquote> While I appreciate your effort to warn me away from 'conspiricism' (read much Chip Berlet?) and "emotional ties" blocking "honest, disciplined research," I'm done with being patronized and razzed with nothing coming from you except that you claim to know writers and low-level technicians in the movie industry as if that were even relevant. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Right-wingers pick apart the content of popular entertainment and find hidden humanist/liberal content<hr></blockquote> And they are right. That exists, too. Frequently to cloak the fascist themes nested inside like a Trojan Horse. One more time in case this helps- Forget the title of Jack Black's movie 'Nacho Libre' and the dirty war in Mexico. Forget them. Start fresh. Can you do that? Try. Here are two levels of themes in a movie working at once: 1)Masked pro-wrestler earning money for orphans = "heartwarming liberal humanist content." 2)Secret identities and fighting are moral acts, for your kids= "surveillance and war are just and moral things. Join the army or CIA." See? Both things at once, humanist AND fascist. Not too complicated, is it? Add the situation in Mexico and the jailed Nacho Del Valle and you have more than an excuse to make a coupla bucks and a coupla laughs. You have a themed psycho-political event. I've been researching 12-18 hours a day most days since 9/11 in an effort to somehow save lives and keep children from going through hell. I gave up a lucrative career to do more for other people after seeing the bodies in Fallujah so I feel less than gracious about your condescension even though you probably mean well. (Compassion fatigue is rare with me but happens.) And no, I'm not in some emotional state justifying a theory, I'm researching exactly how and why people believe what they think they believe and who affects them how.. This includes evolutionary brain science, anthropology, history, psychology, the arts, media, gender studies, military doctrines, etc. I've done more reading in the last three years than many do in a lifetime. And like a detective I examine means, motive, and opportunity along with theory, precedent, and decades of evidence. I have a large collection of propaganda items (books, records, movies, video games, for adults and kids) which illustrate the black science in 'hard copy.' This is exactly the "honest, disciplined research" you urge me towards. But how would you know me except by a few posts on a board? You wouldn't. So skip the psychoanalysis until you have more to go on yourself. These topics combine in the history of elite control of behavioral science and media as proscribed by the Revolution in Military Affairs. Do you know much about RMA? Check it out and tell me about it. Love to hear your views on substance. Really. I know many bright skeptical people who now see what I see after resisting the very idea as incredible. Once the basic concepts were outlined by me they then saw exactly the same things on their own. Only those who won't look or have their own emotional committments to a less complicated world remain angrily 'skeptical.' Yes, angrily. People want to own their beliefs and attitudes and don't want to accept that large-scale manipulation is the backdrop to their American life. So I make lots of allowances for how few see what I see and I try to present as much evidence of patterns as I can; I'm used to the uphill push convincing others. But not the rudeness. That's usually from the professional 'Clarkies' at DemocraticUnderground trying to distract, diffuse, and demoralize those who know their boy's crimes and fascist associations and point them out with documentation. So if all you are going to do is follow my posts with jeers or condescension, save everyone the wasted bandwith. If you care to offer more, please do. I welcome substantial discourse when it happens. 'Getting it right' is worth it. And that is what I am emotionally committed to. . Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 6/19/06 3:07 am

by **Joe Hillshoist** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:23 am

Hugh i have been reading your posts and the last few comments, and I have a couple of issues. 1. I live in a different country, (Australia) and tho it appears similar on the surface there are many differences in the world views that shaped our cultures. So here are a couple of shows (I movie one tv show) that I found liberating or that appealed to me cos they expressed some aspects of my person. (I know we were all laughing at Bush when he was elected, but I have seen neither hide, nor hair of TMB since sept 11). Fight Club Thats my Bush If you feel you have the time I'd appreciate hearing your take on them.

by **NewKid** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 11:05 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>NewKid, I appreciate your serving up this stuff with a flag for me to find but I'm kind of curious what your own take is on the analysis of media I pour out. Seems you agree with some but not all. <hr></blockquote> Your general thesis is quite obviously correct. In fact, I should say that I think that it is settled beyond per adventure that Hollywood and the entertainment media are every bit as manipulated as the news media is, if not more so. As for specifics that you raise, in many cases, I really have no idea. On Nacho Libre, for instance, I really don't have the slightest clue about that situation. It strikes me as a bit farfetched at first glance, but it's certainly conceiveable at least. (I would note too that it's certainly no less plausible or bizarre than believing satanic or occultic rituals may summon ultraterrestrial beings or entities from another dimension.) I think the only debate here is in the particulars, which movies, tv, programs, etc. None of us has personal knowledge, so there's a high degree of speculation involved, and I think it's just a matter of assessing probabilities based on the evidence. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=newkid@rigorousintuition>NewKid</A> at: 6/19/06 9:23 am

by **rain** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 11:07 am

HMW, cream for your coffee? <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/PBS_Frontline_Inside_battle_between_Cheney_0617.html">www.rawstory.com/news/200..._0617.html</a> "We also have to work, though, sort of the dark side, if you will," Cheney added. "We've got to spend time in the shadows in the intelligence world." "A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies, if we're going to be successful," Cheney continued. "That's the world these folks operate in, and so it's going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective...'

HMW, what's your take on this?

HMW, what's your take on this?

Re: HMW, what's your take on this?

Re: HMW, what's your take on this?

ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati."

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&quo

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

Re: ProfPan: "John Hughes a tool of the illuminati.&

re:John Hughes .. a tool

Who is online