No need for lengthy deconstruction here. I just want to make three quick points about three films.
All The President's Men
Ah, the seventies. I have a soft spot for American cinema from that period. And this film is about as good as it gets. Despite a complete absence of gun fights, car crashes and slaughtered innocents, the suspense is total. The closest thing to this lately is Fincher's Zodiac which might just be the ultimate seventies film ever made, ha ha.
All The President's Men perhaps did more to establish the myth of the press as tenacious truth-seekers than any other film. And three cheers for the concept. But can anyone imagine the process we see in this flick taking place today? Ha ha ha ha. Fat chance. He we are in amongst crimes and misdemeanours that make whatever CREEP was up to look like a Country Women's Association lamington drive (there's an Australian reference for you). The media of today would no more uncover these crimes than they would cut their own heads off. Because that's what they'd have to do, so complicit are they. The publisher of the Washington Post, heroized in this film, was a founding member of WHIG, the White-House Iraq Group. This war is their war.
Thus we're forced to look back at the good old days when the media was honest and true. Or were they? A handful of years before Watergate, Israel had attempted to sink the USS Liberty with all hands. The purpose of the effort was for the US to nuke Cairo. The Israelis were forced to come up with excuses that were such complete bullshit that an investigation only a fraction the size of this movie's would have seen angry crowds throwing molotov cocktails at the Israeli embassy. But it never happened. The media was as perfectly corrupt then as it is now. And so the question is - Whom did it suit to have Nixon deposed? Had he, like JFK, decided to go against the wishes of the Fed? Who knows? But rest assured that Nixon's media assassination only happened because it was sanctioned from above.
Tomorrow Never Dies
Does anyone remember the plot of this flick? I'd forgotten it too. But there it was on the telly and before I could change the channel, my jaw had hit the floor.
Did somebody say USS Liberty just now? Believe it or not, this plot pivots precisely on the Liberty story. The opening scene involves nothing less than the false-flag sinking of a British Destroyer with the loss of all hands. Of course the Israelis of the Liberty affair are re-imagined here as masterful blonde ubermenschen rather than as hapless keystone cops who failed at sinking the most lightly armed ship in the US Navy. Even the Israeli's abysmal machine-gunning of the Liberty's lifeboats is here reproduced as a successful coup de grace slaughter of all survivors.
And thank God for that! No need for a corrupt President and Secretary of Defence to step in and shut down a counter-attack. No need for a senior admiral (and father of a later presidential candidate) to threaten the survivor/witnesses with death. No need for the US Navy to subvert two hundred years of tradition and fail to hold a Congressional inquiry. 'Rogue elements' aside, government in cinema is corruption-free.
And the villain? It's Rupert Murdoch! Here imagined as a non-Jewish Englishman by name of Carver. Mind you, the crypto part of Murdoch's crypto-Jewish nature is nearly airtight, so no biggie. Apparently 'Carver' has undertaken this false-flag in order to, a) sell more newspapers and, b) gain satellite rights to China. Ha ha ha ha. The cart goes before the horse. Fuckers like Murdoch don't start wars to gain media control. They use their media control to start wars. And God forbid we should ask for whom.
Speaking of which, does anyone remember Spectre, the villainous super-organisation of the earlier Bond films? They were a supra-national criminal collective with seemingly limitless resources hell-bent on the subversion of nation-states. Who could they possibly have been, apart from international banking? Seriously. Perhaps even this depiction was too close to the bone. Best we disappear them utterly and replace them with an unlikely arse-about, nonsensical media villain. Pay no attention to the organ grinder! Look at the funny monkey!
Good Night And Good Luck
What's to be done about the abjectly partisan Jewish media? There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the concept of a media per se. The potential of the media to be a force for good and to enlighten the populace is inarguable. The problem with the media is that it (provided it's under complete control) gives those who control it a god-like ability to misrepresent reality. Mass-murderers become plucky under-dogs. Their innocent victims are villainous non-humans who deserve whatever they get. And we send bazillions of dollars to the self-same murderous sons-of-bitches. Hell, my PM just congratulated them on sixty years of 'success'. Sure enough, the power of the media is such that none may stand against it.
What's to be done? How might one decapitate this evil apparatus? Is that even possible? Way back when, wikipedia used to have at the bottom of each page - in amongst such categories as '1957 births', 'Irish Americans', and 'left-handed people' - another similar category of 'Jewish directors'. This list was a complete mindfuck. No wonder it's gone now. On reading the list one had to ask if there was anyone in Hollywood who wasn't Jewish. And as I've said before, the news is no different. So impossibly frequent are Jewish commentators telling me how to view the topic-du-jour (usually Muslims) that it's perfectly unsurprising to find a Jewish reporter interviewing the Jewish subject of the story, with comments from various experts, all Jewish. Wow.
Does anyone imagine a purge of Jewish control of the Hollywood/ media combine would ever succeed if titled as such? Not in a million years. Sure enough, if one had the cojones to attempt such a thing, subterfuge would be the weapon of first resort. What if, in the hysterical climate of the fifties, one was to dress such a campaign in a mantle of 'anti-communism'? Communism in America, just like communism in Russia, was pretty much a Jewish affair. An anti-communist campaign in Hollywood would almost precisely target Jews. If you wanted to do something about Jewish domination, it'd be that or nothing.
With this in mind, how are we to view Tail-Gunner Joe? If I was to posit him as being less about communist control of Hollywood than about Jewish control, would the argument fall at the first hurdle? If it held up, might we wonder at the horns that have been painted on him by the Hollywood/media combine over the decades? It's a thought, sure. But such thoughts may not be countenanced. There is only one way to think. And the 'subversive' Good Night And Good Luck fits the bill nicely, thanks very much.