professorpan wrote:Can you imagine why (I'm quite sure) the movie, 'Mr. North' came out in 1988?
Well, lots of thing with the word "north" come out all the time.
1988, not "all the time." sheesh.
Oliver North and IranContra were a big deal at the time and 1988 was when the ring leader, GHWBush, was campaigning for president.The film was based on an old Thornton Wilder (Our Town) novel.
Yeah, I can use a search engine, too. And did.
Hey, I even watched the movie which is a sentimental fluffy tale of a nice young college grad named Mr. North who is like a Jesus figure teaching children and healing the neuroses of rich people and freeing them from a quack doctor in Newport, RI ca. 1927.
Mr. North unites divided lovers, becomes a town hero,
and everyone wears white all the time. Clean, optimistic, sacred, pure, INNOCENT white.Again, so what? What could this movie possibly do that would affect anyone's impression of Oliver North?
I've been answering your same line of questioning for almost three years now.
It seems you start over from zero every time I post this psy-ops stuff. Gosh, why? Many Americans, especially impressionable youth, have no or little exposure to news and are very susceptible to the many tricks of manipulating their views, of pre-biasing them to positive interpretations of keywords that might otherwise create negative attitudes towards US goverment institutions and values.
This is why there is counterpropaganda which the Pentagon defines as-
"Any action taken to minimize the effect of hostile information."
Most people's brains will follow a path of least resistance of association to avoid disturbing associations so CIA-Hollywood makes sure to build that mnemonic channel to safe harbors. Even actors with a useful last name will have the rails greased for them to exploit their keyword decoy value.
So the US government has specialists writing entertainment scripts that contain propaganda and counterpropaganda to exploit inoculation theory, interference theory, subliminal negative framing of whistleblowers, positive framing of scandals, and other perception management tricks.
Why would a movie studio waste its money adapting and producing a Thornton Wilder novel just to utilize the name "north" in its title, and what would that accomplish?
Movies almost always make tons of money. No risk there.
Digging up a Thornton Wilder piece to go 'Hollywood' in 1988 seems odd to me but given the value of mass marketing a 'Mr. North' that is an all-American Jesus figure wearing white and healing children, it makes perfect sense as a keyword hijacking and meme-reversal counterpropaganda device.
When making movies, playing ball with or just BEING the spooks who can guarantee publicity and positive reviews which make for riches and successful careers is a win-win for all involved.
The majority of Americans who just see the title of the movie as advertising (and certainly those few who actually bought tickets to the happy sappy movie) would then have a positive association for the keyword "North" to displace, compete with, or modify the negative association of Oliver North, the fall guy for VP Bush's narcoterrorist wars in Central America.
I guess "Far North," starring Jessica Lang, was also part of the hijacking? That film came out in 1988, too.
Could be. I haven't looked at it yet. This timing is right.
What are the names of the main characters, the positive or negative framing, and the themes?
Here's how I can generate ("reverse engineer" in manatee-speak) my own keyword hijackings:
Think of something or someone bad the CIA might want to obscure. Let's say it's Gary Webb's investigation into contra/cocaine and the CIA.
Let's see.... type "Webb" and "movie" and "1998" into the keyword-hijacking-investigator's favorite search engine... Aha!
The film "The Leading Man" was released in 1998. The main character's name? Felix WEBB! He's a playwright who has a new play called.... drum roll, please... "The Hit Man!" And the tagline is "Indecent. Immoral. Irresistible. It's the role he was born to play" -- an obvious attempt to besmirch Webb's reputation.
Good find. I think you're absolutely right that 'The Leading Man' is about
Gary Webb even if you don't. But that's not all.
Bill Clinton, too."Indecent. Immoral. Irresistible. It's the role he was born to play"
A 1996 movie full of sexual shenanigans about a charming American actor in London with a leading lady named...
"Hilary Rule?" Yikes. How obvious is that?
Bill Clinton, American's "leading man," went to Londonas a student and he was criticized during his 1996 re-election for protesting against the Vietnam War while he was there.
'Course he was probably a CIA snoop at the time but he can't say that.
This movie is also about
Zapatista "leading man," Subcommandante Marcos, because a guy named Grange wrote a book about him.
And the play within the movie, 'Hitman,' probably is because of the imminent declassification of a CIA assassination manual plus more evidence on JFK and MLK which was piling up on the internet.
Here's how.
You got the dates partly right and left out the name of the other main character,
"Grange" played by Jon Bon Jovi, which opens up the whole south of the border topic even more and tells us the intended audience, too-youth.
First some timeline.
The CIA can see some things coming down the pipes so realize they can prepare before an event happens and why I'll include events over a few years.
'The Leading Man' was probably written 1994-1995 although the names of characters can just be slapped in at the last minute and have even been changed by redubbing a movie after it's in the can. People only say names so many times, only so many frames to redub. That's to explain some flexibility between writing and distribution of product.
It was first released in 1996 and later in the US in 1998.
JFK records started to be released in 1994.
Mexico had an election in 1994.
IranContra was tumbling out of the closet in 1994.
>It was 1996 when Bill Clinton was running for re-election still with Mena in his closet.
>It was 1996 when Gary Webb's news story series on CIA-IranCotnra cocaine debuted.
>
It was 1996 when 'The Leading Man' debuted in countries other than the US.Why 'The Hitman' play within the movie?
>It was since 'JFK' in 1991 and the release of JFK documents starting in 1994 plus the new internet that suspicion of CIA involvement rose.
>It was 1996 that a black ex-FBI agent, Don Wilson, came forward with evidence tying the FBI to the murder of Martin Luther King.
...and afterwards...
>It was 1997 when a judge tried to get the alleged murder weapon finally tested in the King murder.
>It was 1997 when a CIA assassination manual was declassified.
>It was 1998 when Clinton was beginning to put together Plan Columbia and the CIA's c
cover-up from 1996 was coming apart even worse.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/crack.html>
It was 1998 when 'The Leading Man' debuted in the US.The whistleblowing of Terry Reed in 1994 and Gary Webb's research before his 1996 San Jose article series was opening up the CIA-cocaine can of vipers yet again. (Reed got his own hijacking along with L. Fletcher Prouty in 1997 with Jim Carrey's 'Liar Liar.' Not too subtle, ay?)
By 1998 Oliver North was definitely tied to cocaine smuggling despite a 17-month long CIA internal inquiry which first exonerated itself.
But it gets much deeper than that.
How right you are.
Notice the character's first name -- Felix. Ring any bells?
How about Felix Rodriguez -- the CIA officer who not only captured and murdered Che Guevara, but who played a huge role in
SMUGGLING CIA/CONTRA COCAINE!http://www.afrocubaweb.com/felixrodriguez.htm#cbs
[/quote]
You are right, that might well be dilution of the Felix Rodriguez-CIA terrorist association because
this movie's keyword hijacking of "Grange" is about Mexican-Cuban revolutionary history."Felix" is also a non-macho anti-hero male name long associated with fussy neurotic "Felix" in 'The Odd Couple' which can be negative framing of Gary Webb (the movie plot does that heavily).
Here's the CIA-Felix Rodriguez path of association-
Jon Bon Jovi's character in 'The Leading' is named
"Grange."In 1996 Bertrand de la
Grange was working on a book in gestation since 1994 and published in 1997 which denigrated a famouos "leading man," the Mexican Zapatista revolutionary, Subcommandante Marcos.
The book was called 'Marcos, La Genial Impostura
("Marcos, the Inspired Fraud").http://www.organicconsumers.org/chiapas/chiapas_bishop.cfmBy no coincidence, this negative image of Marcos (and Clinton) is
exactly the image presented in compounded duplicate in 'The Leading Man' which is about an immoral if charming actor (Grange as handle on the concept of Marcos) and immoral writer (Webb) in some love quadrangle of deception which becomes included in the script of the play within the movie they are both working on.
Confusion, discrediting, keyword hijacking, the Name Game....that's disinfotainment!
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/leading_man/Notice the meme-reversal in this movie of Webb going from whistleblowing journalist to writer of fiction who keeps changing it to accomodate "the leading man," Gange.
Now I doubt that too many youth are going to read Grange's diss of Marcos.
Ah, but if they are studying to be a revolutionary, they might. And those few are who really matter to the CIA.
There is a rock-star fascination with Che Guevera figures and the CIA works hard against this iconic dynamic. They are still burying Lennon with dirt.
This kind of 'just-in-case-cuz-every-little-bit-helps' planning is done on principle, not because every device by itself is a master stroke of social engineering.
I think the primary targets of 'The Leading Man' are Bill Clinton and Gary Webb and the other things, Grange and Felix, are secondary but reinforcing on principle. Like throwing left-overs into a soup.
That's CIA-Hollywood.
See... I can do it, too, Hughie!
That's the whole point. YES, you can.
There is a formula for counterpropaganda psy-ops.
Anyone can find it if they know the formula-
>negative framing of whistleblowers against the state and its goals
>positive framing of cover stories that hide state crimes and promote its goals
>keyword hijacking
>meme-reversal
Pan, you once joked (sneered) about 'It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World' (11/1963) being a hijacking of M.A.D., Mutually Assured Destruction nuclear war doctrine.
But you were right.
After the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis it would make sense that an effort would be made to subliminally deploy some whistling-through-the-graveyard farce on the topic and then later some ham-handed slapstick like 'Dr. Strangelove' in 1964. Kubrick did consult with Herman Kahn and put a Pentagon-mandated disclaimer in the opening text crawl.
Lots of psy-ops energy after WWII went into keeping the public in a war mentality without scaring them away from it because of nuclear weapons.
Recently a movie came out called 'Delta Farce.' You can imagine why. Blackwater.
If I pointed out a few movies with funny pugs in them and brought up "Dyncorp," would you get the association?
Keep joking if this is what you come up with.
Caught me.
