Our purpose is strictly for educating and providing information that we can use to direct our path toward freedom and reclaiming our nation. We wish to thank those who have contributed, both in money and in contributions on subject matter and pointing out rabbit holes that we can go down. For that, we are eternally grateful and wish you many blessings and joys in your life. We "WILL" prevail.
Vatic Note: A continuation of a 2 part series on Hollywood and their role in the take down of our nation. What a very educational series this has been. I did not know half of what we have presented here. What this confirms is the take over by the khazar zionist bankers of most of our communications system within our society.
Publishing companies for books, News outlets controlled by them, movies to promote and culturally alter our society to their advantage and to our disadvantage, TV and radio to reinforce whatever agenda is up for the month, year or even day.
True, we did not know all this when I started, but we were given a hint in a 1961 speech by JFK, who said he would do what was within his power to stop these internationalists conspiring to take down America. He did just that in 2.5 short years and they killed him for it.
Its how they did it, that is so fascinating and subtle, that makes this so worth the read. Once you see it, you can never look at MSM, movies, TV, or any other source of communications the same way again. They are all owned primarily by the Zionist international bankers. Just like 2008, these zionists manipulated the markets to take control of an industry, and during that year it was the food industry.
Prior, it had been the progressive take over of these communications companies, military industrial companies, and eventually food companies. That gave the powers that be control over banking, war, communications, medical, food and water. That is way too much control over a population, using their survival agenda to manipulate them into accepting a future against their own best interests. Anyway, read and see what you think. You decide, since you will live later, with the decision made today.
How Hollywood Conquered a Superpower – Part II
By Whitewraithe~Pragmatic Witness
Upon arrival in Hollywood, Jewish immigrants immediately changed their surnames to the more affable sounding European last names, which not only obscured their faith but also helped establish them as true Americans.
During Hollywood’s early years the “jewishness” of the dream factory did not appear to be of importance. It was well known that
Affectionately known as “Papa Mayer”, Louis B. Mayer was born Lazar Meir, possibly on July 12, 1884, to a Jewish family in Minsk, in the Russian Empire. His parents were Jacob Meir and Sarah Meltzer and he had two sisters—Yetta, born in 1878, and Ida, born in 1883. Mayer first moved with his family to Rhode Island, where they lived from 1887 to 1892 and where his two brothers were born—Rubin, in April 1888, and Jeremiah, in April 1891. Then, they moved to Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada and Mayer attended school there which he did not enjoy very much.
His father started a scrap metal business, J. Mayer & Son. In 1904, the 19-year-old Mayer left Saint John for Boston, where he continued for a time in the scrap metal business, married, and took a variety of odd jobs to support his family when his junk business lagged.
As a studio boss, Louis B. Mayer built MGM into the most financially successful motion picture studio in the world and the only one to pay dividends throughout the Great Depression. For nine years from 1937, when he earned $1,300,000—equivalent to $20,760,880 today—Mayer was the highest-paid man in the United States.
In 1948, United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. (1948), a Supreme Court decision severed the connection between film studios and the movie theater chains that showed their films (though it would be another six years before Loew’s sold majority control of MGM). The introduction of television and changing public tastes, also reduced MGM’s prestige.
Under instructuion to control costs and hire “a new Thalberg”, Mayer hired writer and producer Dore Schary as production chief. Schary, who was 20 years younger than Mayer, advocated message pictures over Mayer’s preference for “wholesome” films.
By 1951, MGM had gone three years without a major Academy Award, which provoked further conflict between Mayer and Schenck. Believing that Mayer could not turn the tide, Schenck fired Mayer from the post he had held for 27 years, replacing him with Schary. The firing reportedly came after Mayer called New York and issued an ultimatum–”It’s him or me” (or “It’s either me or Schary”, depending on the source). Mayer tried to stage a boardroom coup but failed and largely retired from public life.
A Paradigm Shift is when a significant change happens – usually from one fundamental view to a different view. In most cases, some type of major discontinuity occurs as well.
Thomas Kuhn wrote about Paradigm Shift during the early 1960s, and explained how a “series of peaceful interludes punctuated by intellectually violent revolutions” caused “one conceptual world view to be replaced by another view.”
In laymen terms, Paradigm Shift is a popular, or perhaps, not so popular shift or transformation of the way we Humans perceive events, people, environment, and life altogether. It can be a national or international shift, and could have dramatic effects — whether positive or negative — on the way we live our lives today and in the future.
The precursor to the 1960s paradigm shift were the subtle changes already occurring between the 1940s and the late 1950s with the advent of “film noir.”
Film Noir is a cinematic term used primarily to describe stylish crime dramas, particularly those that emphasize cynical attitudes and sexual motivations.
Hollywood’s classical film noir period is generally regarded as extending from the early 1940s to the late 1950s. Film noir of this era is associated with a low-key black-and-white visual style that has roots in German Expressionist cinematography. Many of the prototypical stories and much of the attitude of classic noir derive from the hardboiled school of crime fiction that emerged in the United States during the Great Depression.
The term film noir, French for “black film,” first applied to Hollywood films by French critic Nino Frank in 1946, was unrecognized by most American film industry professionals of that era. Cinema historians and critics defined the category retrospectively. Before the notion was widely adopted in the 1970s, many of the classic films noir were referred to as melodramas. Whether film noir qualifies as a distinct genre is a matter of opinion.
Film noir encompasses a range of plots: the central figure may be a private eye (The Big Sleep), a plainclothes policeman (The Big Heat), an aging boxer (The Set-Up), a hapless grifter (Night and the City), a law-abiding citizen lured into a life of crime (Gun Crazy), or simply a victim of circumstance (D.O.A.).
Although film noir was originally associated with American productions, films now so described have been made around the world. Many pictures released from the 1960s onward share attributes with film noir of the classical period, and often treat its conventions self-referentially. Some refer to such latter-day works as neo-noir. The clichés of film noir have inspired parody since the mid-1940s.
The Introduction of Television
In 1947, Motorola introduced the VT-71 television for $189.95, the first television set to be sold for under $200, finally making television affordable for millions of Americans. While only 0.5% of U.S. households had a television set in 1946, 55.7% had one in 1954, and 90% by 1962.
By 1960, the television set already was a staple in the American household, further securing the indoctrinating cultural influence from Hollywood’s Jewish studio moguls. As witnessed in THE PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION, the “dream factory” was the primary weapon of the tribe to distract and influence the Gentiles. But instead of sitting in a theater, now the viewer could sit at home and watch the propaganda box until the network signed off. But there was one more advantage to the distraction of the masses through television.
Low Alpha Waves: Causes: Radiant Light
“While watching television, the brain appears to slow to a halt, registering low alpha wave readings on the EEG. This is caused by the radiant light produced by cathode ray technology [CRT, LCDs also?] within the television set [increases serotonin levels?]. Even if you’re reading text on a television screen the brain registers low levels of activity. Once again, regardless of the content being presented, television essentially turns off your nervous system.”
“Psycho-physiologist Thomas Mulholland found that after just 30 seconds of watching television the brain begins to produce alpha waves, which indicates torpid (almost comatose) [slow] rates of activity. Alpha brain waves are associated with unfocused, overly receptive states of consciousness. A high frequency alpha waves [sic] does not occur normally when the eyes are open. In fact, Mulholland’s research implies that watching television is neurologically analogous to staring at a blank wall.
I should note that the goal of hypnotists is to induce slow brain wave states. Alpha waves are present during the ‘light hypnotic’ state used by hypno-therapists for suggestion therapy.” Telly Addicts
“Radiant light, the light of [CRT] cathode ray technology [LCD fluorescent backlights also emit light], produces a dramatic - of all brain activity associated with high energy, alert, healthy, disequilibrium [the term disequilibrium is used here to describe the flexibility of brainwave states?]. Television and VDT viewing take from the brain the best features of its highest non-passive functioning.
McLuhan Studies: Issue 3: Chaos and the Meaning of Electric CultureHollywood has been used to its fullest extent since its inception in the early 20th century. With THE PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION in close proximity they’ve saturated the masses with their version of history, science and philosophy by interpolating events with minute variations undetectable by the average person for over a century.
But Hollywood not only altered the viewer’s perception of history, the ‘dream factory’ literally changed the course of history, especially during the 1960s. Before the 60s, the American population still lived behind white picket fences, loved grandma’s apple pie and on Saturday afternoons fathers’ could still be seen pitching a baseball to their sons in the front yard of any random neighborhood. Of course, life wasn’t that idyllic, but it was awfully close. Then, the decade that would turn America upside down and inside out came in like thunder in 1960.
Post-classical cinema is the changing methods of storytelling in the New Hollywood. It has been argued that new approaches to drama and characterization played upon audience expectations acquired in the classical period: chronology may be scrambled, storylines may feature “twist endings“, and lines between the antagonist and protagonist may be blurred. The roots of post-classical storytelling may be seen in film noir, in Rebel Without a Cause (1955), and in Hitchcock’s storyline-shattering Psycho.
New Hollywood or post-classical Hollywood, sometimes referred to as the “American New Wave“, refers to the time from roughly the late-1960s (Bonnie and Clyde, The Graduate) to the early 1980s (Heaven’s Gate, One from the Heart) when a new generation of young filmmakers came to prominence in America, influencing the types of films produced, their production and marketing, and impacted the way major studios approached filmmaking.
The films they made were part of the studio system, and these individuals were not “independent filmmakers”, but they introduced subject matter and styles that set them apart from the studio traditions that an earlier generation had established ca. 1920s-1950s. New Hollywood has also been defined as a broader filmmaking movement influenced by this period, which has been called the “Hollywood renaissance”.
James Bond – 007
In 1962, Ian Fleming’s 1958 spy novel, DR. NO, was adapted for the big screen and made movie history. It also set the bar for every subsequent film about espionage and spies and created the “secret agent” genre. Starring Welsh actor, Sean Connery as Bond, and Swiss/American actress, Ursula Andress as Honey Ryder, it was the first of 23 successful Bond films.
Many of the iconic aspects of a typical James Bond film were established in Dr. No: the film begins with an introduction to the character through the view of a gun barrel and a highly stylised main title sequence, both created by Maurice Binder. Production designer Ken Adam established an elaborate visual style that is one of the hallmarks of the Bond film series.
A number of Hollywood film studios did not want to fund the films, finding them “too British” or “too blatantly sexual”. The producers offered Dr. No to Guy Green, Guy Hamilton, Val Guest and Ken Hughes to direct, but all of them turned it down. They finally signed Terence Young who had a long background with Broccoli’s Warwick Films as the director. Broccoli and Saltzman felt that Young would be able make a real impression of James Bond and transfer the essence of the character from book to film.
Young imposed many stylistic choices for the character which continued throughout the film series. Young also decided to inject much humour, as he considered that “a lot of things in this film, the sex and violence and so on, if played straight, a) would be objectionable, and b) we’re never gonna go past along the censors; but the moment you take the mickey out, put the tongue out in the cheek, it seems to disarm.”
Bond was the first movie character I remember that was portrayed as the stereo-typical late 20th century man. The “sexual revolution” that was about to ensue in America had already been playing out in Britain. Thinking back on this era I can only imagine that the men of the day were given ‘carte blanche’ to obtain as much carnal knowledge from every woman they met as was possible.
The Bond films, although discreet and with a little slapstck comedy thrown in, were inundated with sex and sexual innuendo. Although Bond was a bachelor he bedded every woman he encountered, except for Moneypenny, M’s secretary. Basically, Bond was a whore, but a lovable one.
You couldn’t blame him because women threw themselves at his feet. And you knew what was about to happen when Bond closed the bedroom door, or pulled a curtain; one would have to pretty ignorant if they could not interpret the signals between a man and a woman, especially in the heat of passion. In any given Bond film, there are at least a half dozen women he engages in sex. And they don’t necessarily have to be single either.
What kind of role model is Bond? In the 19th century he would have been considered a “cad.” A cad is someone who behaves in a dishonorable or irresponsible way toward women.
Bond’s creator, Ian Fleming, also appeared to have an irreverence toward women with the distasteful gaggle of overtly sexual names for his female characters called “Bond Girls.” A Bond girl is a character (or the actress portraying a character) who is a love interest of James Bond in a film or novel.
Bond girls occasionally have names that are double entendres or puns, such as Pussy Galore, Plenty O’Toole, Xenia Onatopp, or Holly Goodhead, and Honey Ryder, to name a few. They are considered “ubiquitous symbol[s] of glamour and sophistication.” However, I disagree with that assessment. In the 1960s even as the culture was experiencing its paradigm shift, in middle-class society these women would have been seen as “loose” or “cheap” lacking morals and Christian values. Most middle-class men, especially church goers would consider them unclean and would feel nothing except maybe distain.
James Bond films, although, filled with action, adventure, and beautiful women hacked away at America’s fading morality and Christian values with the equivalent of Thor’s Hammer. With every release of a Bond film and over time, men changed their attitudes toward women in that they provided less respect and further expected every women to submit to their advances no matter how subtle, and if they failed the men just moved on.
By the time I came of age, there were very few decent young men. Most guys were deliberately guarded, or psychologically unavailable. But they had been raised watching James Bond films; so if they treated girls with less respect the guys were considered “cool,” when in reality they were anything but.
The counterculture movement had a significant effect on cinema. Movies began to break social taboos such as sex and violence causing both controversy and fascination. They turned increasingly dramatic, unbalanced, and hectic as the cultural revolution was starting.
This was the beginning of the New Hollywood era that dominated the next decade in theatres and revolutionized the film industry. Films of this time also focused on the changes happening in the world. Dennis Hopper‘s Easy Rider (1969) focused on the drug culture of the time. Movies also became more sexually explicit, such as Roger Vadim‘s Barbarella (1968) as the counterculture progressed.
The 1960s were also about experimentation. With the explosion of light-weight, affordable cameras, the underground avant-garde film movement thrived. Canada’s Michael Snow, Americans Kenneth Anger, Stan Brakhage, Andy Warhol, and Jack Smith. Notable films in this genre are: Dog Star Man; Scorpio Rising; Wavelength; Chelsea Girls; Blow Job; Vinyl; Flaming Creatures.
Significant events in the film industry in the 1960s:
- Removal of the Motion Picture Association of America‘s Production Code in 1967.
- The decline and end of the Studio System.
- The rise of ‘art house‘ films and theaters.
- The end of the classical hollywood cinema era.
- The beginning of the New Hollywood Era due to the counterculture.
- The rise of independent producers that worked outside of the Studio System.
Leaders of the Pack
In September 1993, The X-files premiered on the FOX Television Network and it was the first sci-fi drama that openly proclaimed the ‘jewishness’ of a leading character. Special FBI Agent Fox Mulder was portrayed by Jewish actor David Duchovny with Special FBI Agent Dana Scully portrayed by Gillian Anderson.
Scully, who also is a doctor, was not just a Christian but a devout Catholic to boot. Together they investigated X-Files: marginalized, unsolved cases involving paranormal phenomena. Mulder believes in the existence of aliens and the paranormal while Scully, a skeptic, is assigned to make scientific analyses of Mulder’s discoveries that debunk Mulder’s work and thus return him to mainstream cases.
Early in the series, both agents become pawns in a larger conflict and come to trust only each other. Mulder’s character is a tenacious steamroller in his quest to prove the existence of extraterrestrials, and further prove, that during childhood his sister, Samantha, was taken by the Greys.
He allows no interference and cannot rest until his mission is completed. In a subtle form of brainwashing The X-files lightly demonstrated that Christians would be better served if they followed the Jews, and that “might versus right” regardless of the damage that might happen, who it may hurt, injure or even kill.
To date, in most television crime dramas there is a Jewish leading character. Example: CRIMINAL MINDS initially starred Jewish actor, Mandy Patinkin, as Special Agent Jason Gideon and co-creator of the Behavioral Analysis Unit.
After Patinkin’s departure later in the series, actor Thomas Gibson who portrays Aaron “Hotch” Hotchner, another Jewish character, now leads the BAU.
The No. 1 crime drama in America is based on the military’s Naval Criminal Investigative Service, or N.C.I.S., which is led by former Marine Gunnery (Gunny) Sargeant LeRoy Jethro Gibbs brilliantly portrayed by former California surfer, Mark Harmon.
The most bizarre aspect of the program is that a member of the primary team is a Mossad liaison officer and assassin, Ziva David, who just happens to be the daughter of the Mossad’s Director in Israel. Gibbs also considers Ziva like a daughter. Now talk about some chummy propaganda!
Is this even remotely probable in our current reality? I would speculate that it is, and further, quite possible that Hollywood is preparing the American public for another inevitable transition as speak, which is what Hollywood does best.
NCIS and the majority of American crime dramas continue to perpetuate the lies and falsehoods of September 11, 2001, which resulted in the ‘War on Terror’, and the mass audience swallows these suppositions without hesitation or question.
With the blessing of the criminal, corrupt government in D.C., the most infamous day in American history is being covered over by a mountain of untruths, then promoted on the academic pages of new history books to unsuspecting, innocent students.
The American public is suffering from not only a cultural assault on their value system, but a psychological assault as well from the harmful effects of television technology. The television is pure poison to the entire body. Therefore, tune out and turn on to safe, reliable sources for the truth as represented by this blog.
Moreover, Hollywood has continued it’s form of subtle influence preparing each successive generation to accept lies as truth and falsehood as reality. According to Paul Fromm, Canadian Freedom Activist and speaker, “everyday we awaken in a world of false images created by the script writers in Hollywood and New York city.” Literally, we actually live in The Matrix envisioned in the 1999 blockbuster film of the same name, where virtually nothing resembles the truth as it’s perceived.
Mr. Fromm also has a solution for this dilemma, which will be taught for the first time at the Soldiers of the Cross Training Institute.
No. 1 – Recognize that there is a conflict between the Jewish tribe and humanity.
No. 2 – We must train ourselves to know their history, philosophy, and strategy of this enemy if we are to conquer them in the arena of ideas.
No. 3 – Mobilize ourselves into a force for freedom.
Source: An Opportunity To Train Tomorrow’s Leaders
As a nation we were conquered a long time ago without a revolution, without storming the congressional offices and without one shot being fired. The problem remains that not one American witnessed the nation’s fall into the hands of an enemy that we barely knew even existed.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.