RIP Sydney Pollack

[Jeff]

And -ahem - Jeff says we can't talk about this anymore. Go figure.

7. All new threads, and existing threads which haven't yet been "threadjacked," are subject to these guidelines.

[IanEye]

Here is an interesting essay that looks at Pollack's "Electric Horseman".
http://www.transparencynow.com/horseman.htm


(i like how this poster lines up the 'fo-fo' in Redford and Fonda's names. The duo are also in an odd position, not quite a '69' - more like a '96' )

I find the essay interesting because in the 'players' section the writer includes himself, and you, the reader/viewer:

The audience depicted in the movie: supporters of the simulation fabricators and then the simulation-busters. Willing to be led. Decent at heart.

The movie: a complex, story-based, simulation, created to appeal to audiences and push a political agenda. The movie is a lot like the reporter: it is a simulation-buster and fabricator of simulations, pushing an anti-corporate message.

Me: Conveying an image of myself as simulation- and meta-simulation-buster who is interested in revealing nuance and complexity, and willing to discuss unpleasant truths in an effort to help liberate the reader. In the image of myself I convey, I am sympathetic to the movie but aware of its own complicity in what it shows, just as the movie is sympathetic to the reporter, while showing her own complicity. I am my own character, conveyed in words, in the unfolding story line of this web site, which aspires to help lead us all out of the realm of deception that is contemporary culture.

You: If I succeeded in my essay, you identify to a fair degree with me and my view, and you aren't insulted by my description of the public because you are certain you know the difference. We're all certain.

_ _ _

Personally, my primary impressions of this movie are based around the presence of Willie Nelson, but that has a lot to do with how much I love Willie Nelson.

Pollack would also go on to produce the Willie Nelson 'road' movie, Honeysuckle Rose.

It was during the production of this movie that Willie Nelson started having sex with Amy Irving, who of course was also having sex with Steven Spielberg.....

[Attack Ships on Fire]

I see Google is Hugh's friend. Indeed the chaarcter of Robau is in the new "Star Trek" movie and played by the actor you mentioned. However, I find your examples of potential KWH for this character around the June 2009 timeframe unconvincing. Casting a Pakanstani actor as a terrorist in "Iron Man" and then as a space hero in "Star Trek" is meant to dual associate a Arabic actor as bad/good in kids' minds? That's weak sauce, man.

I bet that you would try and find a way to link the actor's character to something meant to bolster positive Arabic public sentiment if you learned that the "Star Trek" character is playing the hero figure to the franchise's most well-known hero, James Kirk. I left that piece of non-public nformation out to see what direction your theory would take you. They say that hindsight is 20/20, and when you attempt to prove KWH in movies released in certain time frames where real public figures or events take place, you are doing so through the rose colored glasses of knowing precisely what events occurred and then trying to find order in the chaos of randomness. I don't see any evidence for a psyop meme being prepared for this character yet it's a prime candidate for your theories: it's a character in "Star Trek", he's going to be a hero, the actor is specifically of Arabic nationality, he has a direct connection and huge influence to "Star Trek"'s quintessential hero (whose name you have claimed was selected as part of a KWH psyop back in the 1960s), and this is a Paramount Production, a studio that you believe has deep tentacles into the KWH agenda ("The Firm" came from them as did many other films you use as examples of KWH.)

The bottom line is, Hugh, that your method of analyzing why something is KWH'ed didn't work for this example. I can offer many more examples. Surely if something as evil as Disney (remember parents, it's CIA for kidz!) is psyoping all the time then you should be able to find the smoking gun as to why they changed the name of the heroine from Maddy to Tiana in their 2009 animated release. For your theory to be true there must have been a psyop reason to make that chance, yes? So what's important/not important about those names and how they relate to next year?

The answer is nothing because this kind of crystal ball KWH doesn't exist, plain and simple.

[justdrew]

well,

Rob Au = steal gold

(???)

tied into missing 'reconstruction' funds from iraq/afganistan perhaps? maybe meant to boalster public opinion of Karzi?

I'm not serious, but it's an interesting form of scrying when used to look at the future or hidden past.

[orz]

smoking gun as to why they changed the name of the heroine from Maddy to Tiana in their 2009 animated release.

Well that's pretty obvious I would have thought: http://www.findmadeleine.com/

[Jeff]

I'm not serious, but it's an interesting form of scrying when used to look at the future or hidden past.

That is interesting. And if Hugh only called his free-associating scrying then he might be on to something. But first he'd have to admit to an Associative Universe.

[DrVolin]

ASOF,

To be fair to Hugh, there remains the possibility that someone knows the reason, but we don't yet. You have to keep in mind that historical disciplines rarely generate a predictive understanding of the phenomena they study.

I think the bulk of the instances Hugh points to are thought provoking but probably factually wrong. However, it is not a bad thing to keep psy-ops in mind when analyzing films and books, because there certainly are real instances.

And MacCruiskeen, Faeries wear boots, and you gotta believe me.

[Attack Ships on Fire]

ASOF,

To be fair to Hugh, there remains the possibility that someone knows the reason, but we don't yet. You have to keep in mind that historical disciplines rarely generate a predictive understanding of the phenomena they study.

I think the bulk of the instances Hugh points to are thought provoking but probably factually wrong. However, it is not a bad thing to keep psy-ops in mind when analyzing films and books, because there certainly are real instances.

I have no doubt that psyops has and will continue to be used in film, radio, book and television shows; my problem with Hugh is that he refuses to listen to valid criticism of his examples and incorporate them into his KWH theory. A broken watch is right twice a day, but if one wear it on their wrist and use it to tell the time all day then how often do you get an accurate reading? If Hugh truly thinks that all of his examples have been valid then what good is listening to him or trying to ascertain how much entertainment product has been tainted with psyops? What he's doing could be as harmful to understanding if an octopus does exist behind KWH, and how it operates, as those people injecting themselves into the 9/11 truth movement that advocates extreme ideas such as the planes were holograms or exotic weaponry was used to bring down the twin towers. Vallee has made a strong argument that disinformation is being used to cloud the UFO phenomena. If we were to know precisely how much of what is linked to UFOs was false and then to see how much time, energy and human life was lost in the pursuit of shadows, I bet it would be horrific. Why shouldn't Hugh's take on KWH not be open to the same criticism as other far reaching theories, and why can't Hugh listen to the criticism and use it to find stronger examples?

It's one thing to be fair to someone who is honestly believes in their ideas that may counter your own, but where is the line when you cease to listen to what they preach because they refuse to entertain that their belief is the only accurate one?

[MinM]

I think those were by Sidney Lumet. I always get them mixed up, too. But I bet if prodded Hugh would share how his work too is just one big Mockingbird Op.

Notice that a Hollywood mystery person was reading 'The Firm' as it was written and before it was published.... But Paramount and the NYTimes bestseller list didn't give this treatment to the 1989 Philip Melanson expose on the USG's murder of MLK, did they?

Your reasoning here would be as hilarious as your insights into the psyops which are Chewbacca and Mr Limpet, except that you're declaiming it on the fresh grave of a decent man...

'Criminal Minds' Wins Human Rights Award for Portrayal of Interrogation
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/media/e ... alert/374/


New York – This evening Sam Waterston of Law and Order presented Andrew Wilder, the writer/producer of Criminal Minds, with Human Rights First’s inaugural Award for Excellence in Television, honoring the show’s realistic portrayal of interrogation.

Andrew Wilder is available for interview.

Human Rights First created this award in recognition of the impact pop culture, and TV in particular, has had on the way the general public and our junior soldiers in the field view torture and other human rights issues. At the award presentation during Human Rights First’s annual awards dinner in New York City, Waterston explained the impetus for the award: “Since 2001, there has been a virtual explosion of torture on television. Before 2001, Human Rights First estimates there were fewer than four acts of torture on television every year. Now, there are more than100. And it's not just villains committing these heinous acts - now, good guys are doing the dirty work.”
"Torture on television has a real impact on public opinion and it has influenced the actions of some junior American soldiers in Iraq who imitate the abusive techniques they see on television and in the movies," said David Danzig, director of Human Rights First’s Primetime Torture Project. “Military educators have told us that the popular depiction of torture now presents an enormous training challenge.”

Criminal Minds’ winning episode, “Lessons Learned,” which was written by active duty FBI agent Jim Clemente, demonstrates that the sophisticated use of non-violent interrogation techniques are more likely to yield credible information than abusive ones. The episode presents a twist on the “ticking time bomb scenario” seen on so many TV shows. Instead of torturing a detainee who has information that could stop the detonation of a biological bomb, Special Agent Jason Gideon (Mandy Patankin) talks to him. In the process, he learns more from the suspect in less than 48 hours than CIA interrogators did over weeks, using rougher tactics.

This year’s nominees—Lost, The Closer, Boston Legal, Criminal Minds and The Shield—were reviewed by a panel of judges with wide ranging expertise in intelligence gathering, interrogation and entertainment. The judges include Sidney Lumet, the film director; Ken Bacon, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense; Joe Navarro, a former FBI interrogator and supervisor; and Tony Lagouranis, a former U.S. Army interrogator.

The nominees offer audiences a different view of what happens in the interrogation room than the typical TV formulation that suggests violence and coercion are effective intelligence gathering methods. Some like The Closer and Criminal Minds present an interrogator who “closes” cases without ever resorting to physical violence. Others like LOST and The Shield explore what can go wrong when interrogators turn to torture to get answers.

Along with an increase in the sheer number of scenes of torture, since 9/11, the way torture is shown on TV has also changed, Human Rights First has found. It used to be almost exclusively the bad guys who tortured people on TV. But today, heroes like Jack Bauer on 24 and Sydney Bristow on Alias use abusive interrogation methods regularly. And when the heroes use torture it almost always works.
On many TV shows today, torture is portrayed the same way every time. The hero stabs, punches, shoots, chokes or otherwise abuses a suspect who had been unwilling to talk. Seconds after the abuse begins the captive invariably reveals critical secrets...

viewtopic.php?p=155408#p155408

Sorry to disillusion you but-

'Network' was made as counter-propaganda against the exposure of CIA media.
The bogus decoy concept that "there are no nations, just corporations" was a bone thrown that progressives still chase.

It was meant to protect the National inSecurity State and especially CIA which runs Hollywood.
A former USIA psyops expert named Bruce Herschensohn was about to publish his whistleblowing book called 'The Gods of Antennae.'
Plus CIA director Wim. Colby was giving up the 'family jewels' in closed-door sessions with the (Sen. Frank) Church Commitee and this would be leaked to Carl Bernstein who would write up 'The CIA and the Media' in Rolling Stone 10/20/77.

So the 'corporations rule' meme is cover for the CIA which uses them as fronts and proxy forces.
Even Thom CIA Hartmann uses the 'evil corporations' limited-hangout as his cred prop to infiltrate the Left.

viewtopic.php?p=385408#p385408

Sidney Lumet, Director of American Film Classics, Dies at 86

[JackRiddler]

.

MinM, a PR release about a group of judges for a TV prize who are claimed to command incomparable expertise in intelligence and entertainment (note Boolean operator) doesn't cut much as evidence of Lumet's connections to the spook milieu, you'll have to admit. Although simple existence as a Hollywood macher should be a circumstantial case in itself.

(Criminal Minds sucks, by the way.)

Rest in Peace, Sidney Lumet.

Apropos:

Here's the "offending" speech from Network:

Arthur Jensen: You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won't have it! Is that clear? You think you've merely stopped a business deal. That is not the case! The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance! You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today! And YOU have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU... WILL... ATONE! Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale? You get up on your little twenty-one inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM, and ITT, and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state, Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that... perfect world... in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock. All necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused. And I have chosen you, Mr. Beale, to preach this evangel.

Howard Beale: Why me?

Arthur Jensen: Because you're on television, dummy. Sixty million people watch you every night of the week, Monday through Friday.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

'Network' was loaded with psyops misdirection via decoy associations with keywords, themes, images.

The REAL Howard Beale was the former Australian Minister of Supply who was about to publish a book after retiring from office in 1977.
The potential dirt he could have dumped in his (1976 expected) imminent book included-
> the scam of UK nuke testing in Australia
> the CIA's coup in Australia.

I'd love to get a copy to see what he actually dumped. He clearly 'spooked' the spooks in the Year of Intelligence when CIA dirty laundry was all over the streets.

[wintler2]

'Network' was loaded with psyops misdirection via decoy associations with keywords, themes, images.

The REAL Howard Beale was the former Australian Minister of Supply who was about to publish a book after retiring from office in 1977.
The potential dirt he could have dumped in his (1976 expected) imminent book included-
> the scam of UK nuke testing in Australia
> the CIA's coup in Australia.

I'd love to get a copy to see what he actually dumped. He clearly 'spooked' the spooks in the Year of Intelligence when CIA dirty laundry was all over the streets.

Oz H.Beale was out of the loop a decade before the Whitlam dismissal, and reportedly Menzies left him unawares of planning for UKs nuke tests http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/explor ... -1952.aspx .

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

'Network' was loaded with psyops misdirection via decoy associations with keywords, themes, images.

The REAL Howard Beale was the former Australian Minister of Supply who was about to publish a book after retiring from office in 1977.
The potential dirt he could have dumped in his (1976 expected) imminent book included-
> the scam of UK nuke testing in Australia
> the CIA's coup in Australia.

I'd love to get a copy to see what he actually dumped. He clearly 'spooked' the spooks in the Year of Intelligence when CIA dirty laundry was all over the streets.

Oz H.Beale was out of the loop a decade before the Whitlam dismissal, and reportedly Menzies left him unawares of planning for UKs nuke tests http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/explor ... -1952.aspx .

Point is...the real Howard Beale could have put some dangerous stuff in his book and even gotten offed by Australian spooks.
Just at a time when CIA was getting outed as Murder, Inc. taking out General Schneider etc.

Psyops is pre-emptive and pro-active to prevent worst-case scenario outcomes.

[MinM]

Very interesting interview with Sidney Pollack about the film. From the year 1976.
.....
The little essay by Patrick McGilligan that precedes it makes some interesting points about the limitations of Pollack's (strong) liberal critique. (In 1976, SP still thinks the CIA is necessary and reformable.) One reason McGilligan's criticims are interesting: they don't involve HMW's ridiculous claim that Pollack is a CIA shill and a sinister "keyword-hijacker".

http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlines ... ligan.html

Look again. McGilligan trashes the recent (mid-70s) CIA movies as whitewashes that leave out EXACTLY what I said, Operation Condor.

He writes-
"Heaven forbid that Allende should be mentioned."
EXACTLY. Because that would actually be...Operation Condor!

Sydney Pollack denies any CIA involvement in making 'Condor' and then in the same breath admits that Richard Helms was on the fekkin' set!

[barracuda]

What caused this heinous thread to be bumped, I wonder?

Just for comparison, here's a picture of Uranus: