The Men Who Stare At Goats : Secret Missions, Movies, and Propaganda, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 20 times

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 07:27 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by jdl79
I believe this movie is most likely a propaganda piece. The movie and book are both based on the adventures of Jim Channon. If you are unfamiliar with this man one should google First Earth Battalion and/or his name. Think Blackwater for the UN.

The First Earth Battalion: Dare to Think the Unthinkable, Ideas and Ideals for Soldiers Everywhere

Quote from : The First Earth Battalion: Dare to Think the Unthinkable, Ideas and Ideals for Soldiers Everywhere

In 1979, the Peoples’ Republic of China publicly reported that several thousand of its children aged 8-14 were capable of telepathy, clairvoyance, X-ray vision, or psychokinesis.

Having already heard about this program, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency (NSA), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Lawrence Livermore Laboratories, and the US Army were simultaneously pouring billions of dollars into their own similar research.

First Earth Battalion

Quote from : Wikipedia : First Earth Battalion

The First Earth Battalion was the name proposed by Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Jim Channon, an American soldier who had seen service in Vietnam, for his idea of a new U.S. military to be organized along New Age lines.

Such a battalion was never formed.

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 07:33 PM by A Fortiori

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by A Fortiori
SKL,

I really love all the information you threw out. In particular this thread as Jon Ronson has always been one of my favorite "writers". THEM: Adventures with Extremists was funny but fair.

For months he lived with extremists to the left and right, and he admits that when he started he had some preconceptions that were softened, if not changed entirely by the end of the whole adventure. He is even friends now with the Weavers (Ruby Ridge) and Alex Jones.

It will take some time to watch all of the videos, but I will. Thanks for sharing.

Wow, that's interesting that's he be-friended Randy Weaver and Alex Jones.

I wonder how that came into being.

Was it because of any connections or due to his book, or what?

I always try to provide as much information as possible and let the conversations begin and the education level increase, because I learn just as much from others as they learn from me.

He spent time with all of the extremists, but you can tell his affection level for the Weavers was the most high. He even took their side which he states was surprising for him. As for Jones, he was with him during the Bohemian Grove sneak in. I had never heard of Alex Jones until Jon Ronson, actually, and it was THEM that made me want to find out more about him.

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 07:50 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by A Fortiori

He spent time with all of the extremists, but you can tell his affection level for the Weavers was the most high. He even took their side which he states was surprising for him. As for Jones, he was with him during the Bohemian Grove sneak in. I had never heard of Alex Jones until Jon Ronson, actually, and it was THEM that made me want to find out more about him.

Why does that not surprise me in the least?

If you like this thread you will like the one below as well :

Are You "Right-Wing Fringe", or "Left-Wing Fringe" and How Will They Push You

It is based around these movies as well as events that transpired around me.

Arlington Road Trailer

YouTube Link

Arlington Road

Amazon Review :

It's easy to understand why Arlington Road sat on the studio shelf for nearly a year.

No, the film isn't awful; rather, it's an extremely edgy and ultimately bleak thriller that offers no clear-cut heroes or villains.

In other words, Hollywood had no idea how to sell it.

Director Mark Pellington's underrated directorial debut, Going All the Way, suffered the same fate, essentially because the filmmaker's presentation of suburban America often shifts dramatically within the same film.

Characters are usually miserable and bordering on meltdown, no situation is straightforward, and things usually end badly.

Arlington Road begins as an astute study of suburban paranoia.

Michael Faraday (a face-pinched Jeff Bridges, who spends most of the film on the brink of tears) is a college professor who teaches American history courses on terrorism.

He's been a conspiracy freak since his wife, an FBI agent, was killed during a botched raid that feels like a thinly fictionalized reference to the Waco tragedy.

After saving the life of his next-door neighbor's child, he initially befriends the family (Tim Robbins and Joan Cusack), but soon believes the husband is a terrorist.

The first half of the film mocks Faraday: he has no real evidence and is not the most stable of protagonists. Despite the fact that it was government paranoia that got his wife killed, Faraday repeats the same type of behavior.

Pellington shifts gears in the second half, however, and for awhile, it seems that the film has simultaneously sunk into a cheap, high-octane brand of Hollywood entertainment and undermined its own point.

Arlington Road, though, possesses a stunning ending that's a real gut punch, one that may leave you needing a second viewing to catch all of its smartly executed setup. --Dave McCoy

I am so glad you brought up Randy Weaver, because I disagree with the Amazon review above, in that the movie Arlington Road reminded me not of Waco, but of Ruby Ridge, with the character that Jeff Bridges plays, Micheal Faraday, think about the name Michael Faraday, where they close him in a black box operation, to suppress the information he is allowed to have, and direct him along the lines of Timothy McVeigh into an Oklahoma City Bombing type event.

EXECUTIVE ACTION Trailer

YouTube Link

Executive Action

Amazon Review :

As JFK-conspiracy movies go, Executive Action is distinguished by being one of the earliest and one of the best.

This speculative drama draws together some of the theories floating around in 1973 and lay them out in dry, unadorned fashion.

At the center of the conspiracy is a group of right-wing muckymucks who quietly plan the assassination of the president (thanks to their fears about Vietnam, civil rights, and whatever else might be handy).

Burt Lancaster is the most prominent name in the cast, although the film gets much of its gravity from the weathered presence of Robert Ryan, the superb character actor who died not long after completing the project.

Will Geer and John Anderson are also in on the plot.

Scripted by Hollywood pro (and former blacklistee) Dalton Trumbo, the film is unrelentingly grim, but there's something about its very flatness that makes it that much eerier.

Oliver Stone would take the opposite approach in his pinwheeling JFK, but this simple accounting is just as creepy. --Robert Horton

These movies fit in well with the topic at hand, not about The Men Who Stare At Goats, but about the Hollyowood adaption of events, and spin factor through propaganda.

Sure makes you think about these events though that's for sure.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 07:59 PM by Jakes51

Hollywood can be a useful tool for propagandists. One of the greatest propagandists was a student of Tinseltown, and we know just how effective he was in rallying a nation over the edge.

YouTube Link

Now, the video above was some years ago, but I think the propaganda is even worse today than then. Just look at some of drivel the MSM is spewing as legitimate coverage when just about anyone can see sides being drawn throughout.

When objectivity, a core tenet of journalism dies, propaganda is born out of the confusion. Check out this blatant example of propaganda by the so called, "Professional Journalists."

This video has been shown on ATS, but I think it is a fine example of propaganda in professional journalism. The reporter is showing one side of the particular protest, by only showing the most unruly portion of the crowd. Playing off the left right paradigm. They are clearly trying to stir up condemnation for the concerned citizenry, by going out of their way to only show the most outrageous, and, thus, rallying support for one particular view. If that is not propaganda then I don't know what is? I am sure she could have found stable minded subjects to interview, but conveniently chose the quote-unquote "rabble-rousers." Watch the video below and you will see.

YouTube Link

Murrow is rolling over in his grave at the sorry state of journalism in the modern age by those who consider themselves of his ilk. In a free and open society, why do we settle for shoddy and self-censured coverage of our government and leaders?

However, they had ought to enjoy the free open society they are tasked with defending through objectivity and fair play, because by picking sides in their professional endeavors, they are only enabling those that would take away their rights if given the opportunity over time.

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 08:14 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

reply to post by Jakes51

I could not agree with your assertions more, Jake51.

Propaganda was a large part of Goebbels manufacturing of Hitler and the Third Reich.

I believe that Joseph Goebbels learned firsthand watching Hollywood in action.

It is sad that as well we (our Government, not you and I) used it during WWII.

It is almost as if they got hooked on it like a crack addicted baby.

The problem with that is they never realized, or never gave a damn that they left that propaganda button turned up on high volume, and possibly that has some to do with the fact that the counter-culture got so deeply imbedded and upset with the American Government during the 60's and 70's after Kennedy's assassination.

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 08:37 PM by chiron613

I read the book, which was presented as factual and not humorous. Well, the author did have a sense of humor, but he presented his material as factual. I found his book believable, since I'd encountered other descriptions of US efforts to use remote viewing and other "psychic" techniques.

I definitely plan to see this movie. Even if it is presented as a comedy, I am confident that there will be much information in it that is true. With such a bizarre subject matter, I cannot see how it could be presented as straight non-fiction. There are just too many grotesque episodes to try to show them all as dead serious. A little bit of humor would allow them to show us what's been going on, while allowing us to kind of laugh it off.

Still, I often wonder that the people who have access to weapons and explosives, can be involved in some of these strange experiments.

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 08:43 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

reply to post by chiron613

Yes, I can see how the seriousness of the nature of the project might throw some off.

But, by making it so humorous, are they going to ruin the serious nature of it?

This would give them a means of discrediting these events as anything serious, and thereby make it look like a complete waste of money, and like our tax-money was thrown down the drain completely, instead of anything serious coming out of it like what transpired.

I will still see it but will wait to see if it is good or just spin.

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 08:56 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

You see most people would not realize that movies like The Patriot was loosely based around the man named Francis Marion, also known as the Swamp Fox.

The Patriot (2000) - DVD (Extented) Trailer

YouTube Link

Amazon Review :

Aimed directly at a mainstream audience, The Patriot qualifies as respectable entertainment, but anyone expecting a definitive drama about the American Revolution should look elsewhere.

Rising above the blatant crowd pleasing of Stargate, Independence Day, and Godzilla, director Roland Emmerich crafts a marvelous re-creation of South Carolina in the late 1770s (aided immeasurably by cinematographer Caleb Deschanel), and Robert Rodat's screenplay offers the same balance of epic scale and emotional urgency that elevated his earlier script for Saving Private Ryan.

Unfortunately, Emmerich embraces clichés and hackneyed melodrama that a more gifted director would have avoided.

Instead of attempting a truly great film about the most pivotal years of American history, Emmerich settles for a standard revenge plot with the Revolutionary War as an incidental backdrop.

Quote from Wikipedia : The Patriot

The Patriot is a 2000 epic war film directed by Roland Emmerich, written by Robert Rodat, and starring Mel Gibson and Heath Ledger.

It was produced by the Mutual Film Company and was distributed by Columbia Pictures.

The film mainly takes place in South Carolina (and was entirely filmed there) and depicts the story of an American swept into the American Revolutionary War when his family is threatened.

The protagonist, Benjamin Martin is loosely based on real Continental Army officer Francis Marion and other Revolutionary War figures.

Disney's Swamp Fox

YouTube Link

Quote from : Wikipedia : Francis Marion aka The Swamp Fox

Francis Marion (February 26, 1732 – February 27, 1795) was a military officer who served in the American Revolutionary War.

Acting with Continental Army and South Carolina militia commissions, he was a persistent adversary of the British in their occupation of South Carolina in 1780 and 1781, even after the Continental Army was driven out of the state in the Battle of Camden.

Due to his irregular methods of warfare, he is considered one of the fathers of modern guerrilla warfare, and is credited in the lineage of the United States Army Rangers.

I bring it up quite for the fact that this thread is about propaganda in movies.

If you look at the difference between the Disney version and the Hollywood version, they portray two different aspects of the propaganda genres used, one a wholesome and family oriented version, and the other which was closer with Mel Gibson portraying the ghost of a man who snuck through the woods and murdered many men in the name of freedom, one of America's first freeom fighters.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 09:48 PM by jdl79

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

I can't believe wikipedia is sourcing FEB as a defunct project. Accordimg to Channon himself FEB is alive and well. Maybe not in the sense of the Army Project, but a paramilitary, they definitely are.

At a recent press conference Jim Channon confirmed the four missions of the proto-mythical First Earth Battalion. He stressed that the main reason the unit exists is to profess the positive visions for the future for Armed Forces of the Planet and those independent global members who aspire to the warrior monk archetype. He reviewed the following mission elements:

firstearthbattalion.com...

reply posted on 24-10-2009 @ 09:50 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

reply to post by jdl79

Well, it might not be quite that accurate.

Do not forget that Wikipedia is edited by civilians and I can just see someone from the military slipping in and editing it as a deniability factor.

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 05:44 AM by djvexd

Actually I tend to think it is moved more to a dark comedy genre in order for more people to swallow the information. If it was a pure drama, more people would not even touch it because of the fact that alot of people still think that PSI abilities even exist or it is for the realm of charlatans and hoaxers. This way more people will let down thier disbelief barriers and soak up more of the tale. JM2C

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 07:06 AM by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by djvexd
Actually I tend to think it is moved more to a dark comedy genre in order for more people to swallow the information. If it was a pure drama, more people would not even touch it because of the fact that alot of people still think that PSI abilities even exist or it is for the realm of charlatans and hoaxers. This way more people will let down thier disbelief barriers and soak up more of the tale. JM2C

You may be right about that because of the disbelief factor of the topic as well as people not necessarily understanding the topic, the dark comedy might be a way to open them to the possibility of it as well as impress upon then the events as they unfolded.

I do however feel the timing of the making of this movie is suspect with everything else that is going on in this world and the mass amount of psychological attacks all the rest of the Hollywood movies have been making lately due to varying factors from former President Bush, the War on Terror, and the current President Obama.

The trend of all the movies that have been coming out in the last ten years alone is suggestive of indoctrination towards accepting the war, and as well that aliens exist, and the seemingly innocent re-creation of the Third Reich a lot in movies as if they are almost suggesting that the Fourth Reich is right around the corner.

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 12:23 PM by DimensionalDetective

S & F

I must sheepishly admit to being ignorant till just the past couple of years of Hollywood being in on the psy-ops and brainwashing front, as the mainstream media outlets are.

I must also admit a certain sadness overcame me when I began becoming aware of this, as cinema was always one of my great loves, ever since I was a young boy. I could get lost in a good movie, it was like stepping out of the stresses of life into another world of imagination. There are still films which slip through that encompass this freedom of imagination and creativity, without the sublimenal programming or "steering", but they seem to be becoming much fewer and far between anymore. Sigh...

I think you guys are likely right that this film may well be propaganda and disinfo, to DISCREDIT this particular subject, and get the "tee-hee" factor of ridicule and dismissal put into the public's mind, so that no one takes it serious or inquires into THEIR OWN abilities (which is CERTAINLY something the TPTB don't want).

Great thread and info as usual SKL.

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 02:34 PM by Orion65

reply to post by DimensionalDetective

I agree, but it doesn't make movie watching any less enjoyable for me. The difference is now I can "see".

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 03:19 PM by clay2 baraka

I read the book last year. It was a great read. The book delves into the evolution of non-conventional warfare from Vietnam to the present day.

The metamorphosis is striking. The book illustrates how idealistic notions of bloodless warfare evolved into our present-day "advanced interrogation" techniques. This was the second book I have read by Jon Ronson, the first being "THEM." What I love about his writing style is that he has an uncanny knack of finding the absurdity that can often be found in very dark subject matter. I can see why this would lend itself as material for a comedy film.

I personally am very interested in how this movie turns out. Thus far, I have seen no mention in the theatrical trailers of the serious side of the book. . The dark side of the subject matter, namely enhanced interrogation.

If the movie turns out as merely a goofy comedy, it would be a great injustice to the research done by Ronson and to the subject matter itself.

We'll see in a few weeks. . .

I would like to add that Jon Ronson, oddly enough, is the journalist who accompanied Alex Jones' foray into the Bohemian Grove. . Ronson came out of that trip with a much different take on the Grove than that of Jones!

[edit on 10/25/2009 by clay2 baraka]

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 03:39 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

reply to post by DimensionalDetective

Thanks for the compliment, DD.

Glad you stopped by, haven't seen you on one of my threads in quite a while.

I agree about the psyops in movies lately and I have had a more difficult time watching them without watching specifically for the psyops, making the movies a little less enjoyable, but at the same time, it makes it entertaining to see if I can catch all the innuendos, psychic laced lies, and Government propaganda.

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 03:40 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by Orion65
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

I agree, but it doesn't make movie watching any less enjoyable for me. The difference is now I can "see".

That's the way I'm looking at it now as I stated in the last post.

I see them in everything now, it is not just the movie, but the titles as well.

As well the plot twist is a tad different watching for the psyops now.

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 03:44 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

reply to post by clay2 baraka

I have to wonder if the comedy being thrown into the movie was the only reason if might have been declassified and let into the mainstream. Or if the fact that so many details are changed that they think people cannot put two and two together and figure out just what the topic is about or who the people were.

Or, if they just don't care anymore, because the different movies that are coming out now seem to be more and more of the previously classified materials.

reply posted on 25-10-2009 @ 05:00 PM by Internet Explorer

I'm a big fan of Jon Ronson's books and have to say I'm disappointed this is getting the standard hollywood comedy treatment... viewing the trailer makes it look like Just Another Comedy Movie™

Definitely worth reading the book though, it's highly entertaining... as is his other book Them.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 07:06 AM by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by Internet Explorer
I'm a big fan of Jon Ronson's books and have to say I'm disappointed this is getting the standard hollywood comedy treatment... viewing the trailer makes it look like Just Another Comedy Movie™

Definitely worth reading the book though, it's highly entertaining... as is his other book Them.

I agree with you there.

The Hollywood take on this is that it was so humorous and so insane, it cannot have really happened, so laugh it up tax-payer and buy the movie ticket, and waste more money as fast as possible because Congress can't waste it fast enough.

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^