Thursday, 30 January 2014

The Stanley Kubrick Conspiracy - Part 3: Lights, Camera, Moon!

For all the examination of the “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article and the “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary, it is worth remembering that a great deal of strong circumstantial evidence existed long before the notion was ever fully articulated.

For example, Jay Weidner, a researcher who has virtually dedicated his studies to Stanley Kubrick and the global agenda, has plausibly demonstrated that the front-projection process (used so successfully in the "Dawn of Man" sequences of Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”) shares key similarities with some of the abnormalities identified in the Apollo “Moon” footage – such as the clear lines of definition between the rough foreground and the smooth background.

To understand Kubrick’s connection with the agenda elite and the military industrial complex, one must look back at his career as a whole. Kubrick is remembered as being a notorious perfectionist with a meticulous attention to detail. Work on his films was laboured and incredibly lengthy. Actors were pushed to the limits of their ability and patience as (often) scores of takes of one short scene were repeatedly filmed (Tom Cruise was filmed 90 times walking through a doorway in “Eyes Wide Shut”!) until Kubrick was satisfied with the result. It is known that there was no piece of set dressing or background that hadn’t been placed or framed without his prior approval or specific reasoning. The same is also said of his wardrobe choices and actor’s appearances. This should come as no surprise, given that Kubrick began his profession as a photographer – an art that requires a precise knowledge of framing and context in order to be proficient.

Some researchers have claimed that Kubrick became trapped within his profession and that his art became a conduit through which he used allusion and imagery to reveal greater truths that he had come to realise. It is also claimed that his alleged involvement in the Apollo hoax would have abetted these circumstances. However, Kubrick’s disdain for aspects of the establishment was already apparent much earlier in his career.

His quasi-science fiction Cold War comedy, “Dr Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb”, was a definitive satire on the ominous Military Industrial Complex that President Eisenhower had warned the American people about. Kubrick had originally approached the military to be involved in the production. The proposed tone of the script did not go down well with the establishment and support was refused, prompting Kubrick to use his own ingenuity to realise various military aspects of the film (including recreating the interior of the B-52 bomber).

“Lacking cooperation from the Pentagon in the making of the film, the set designers reconstructed the aircraft cockpit to the best of their ability by comparing the cockpit of a B-29 Superfortress and a single photograph of the cockpit of a B-52, and relating this to the geometry of the B-52's fuselage. The B-52 was state-of-the-art in the 1960s, and its cockpit was off-limits to the film crew. When some United States Air Force personnel were invited to view the reconstructed B-52 cockpit, they said that ‘it was absolutely correct, even to the little black box which was the CRM.’ It was so accurate that Kubrick was concerned whether Ken Adam's production design team had done all of their research legally, fearing a possible investigation by the FBI.” See also: "Inside the Making of Dr. Strangelove," a documentary included with the 40th Anniversary Special Edition DVD of the film

The stunning realisation of this aircraft (at least by the cinematic standards of the day) allegedly prompted certain figures in The Pentagon to ask just how Kubrick was getting access to such highly accurate and closely guarded information. Over a few short years, Kubrick became a man with extensive agenda connections. He became so powerful and influential within the Hollywood industry that, by the time he worked on “2001: A Space Odyssey”, he actually banned MGM executives from the set of his film.

Harry Lange
NASA became extensively involved with the production of the film. For over two years, his key NASA/scientific advisors on the film were Frederick Ira Ordway III (a former member of the American Rocket Society, space scientist and author of technical books about spaceflight. He worked with ballistic rockets until 1960, followed by three years at Marshall Space Flight Centre) and Harry Lange & (an illustrator and designer for the Aerospace Industry, as well as the head of NASA’s future projects section - illustrating the ideas of Werner von Braun's team; such as nuclear propulsion, space stations, space platforms, etc.) NASA’s influence over the film became so pronounced that senior Apollo administrator George Mueller and astronaut Deke Slayton nicknamed the film’s production facilities at Borehamwood (UK) as “NASA East” - after seeing all of the hardware and documentation lying around the studio.

Ordway and Lange created an elaborate network of establishment and industry connections to assist the production of the film. In his piece, “2001: A Space Odyssey in Retrospect” Ordway explains, “we relied heavily on advice and material provided by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and by a considerable number of private companies and universities… I found myself visiting General Electric's Missile and Space Vehicle Department near Philadelphia on Discovery propulsion; the Bell Telephone Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey, on deep space communications; the Whirlpool Corporation at Benton Harbor, Michigan on food equipment to be used aboard Orion III and Aries IB; Honeywell, Inc. in Minneapolis on a variety of vehicular controls; and IBM in Armonk, New York, and its Eliot Noyes contractor in New Canaan, Connecticut, on all our computer sequences. Cooperative arrangements made from our New York base were later continued throughout production at the M-G-M British Studios in Borehamwood, England.”

The involvement of Bell Labs and IBM is particularly interesting given their agenda connections. Both worked extensively on synthetic speech research. “One of the more famous moments in Bell Labs' synthetic speech research was the sample created by John L. Kelly in 1962, using an IBM 704 computer. Kelly's vocoder synthesizer recreated the song "Bicycle Built for Two," with musical accompaniment from Max Mathews. Arthur C. Clarke, then visiting friend and colleague John Pierce at the Bell Labs Murray Hill facility, saw this remarkable demonstration and later used it in the climactic scene of his novel and screenplay for 2001: A Space Odyssey, where the HAL9000 computer sings this song as he is disassembled by astronaut Dave Bowman.”

The spelling of the name “HAL” is notably only one letter removed from “IBM”.
According to Ordway, it was Arthur C. Clarke (who co-wrote the screenplay of the film with Kubrick) who was responsible his and Lange’s involvement in the film.

Clarke had extensive connection with those in the highest levels of NASA – including a close friendship with former Nazi and NASA rocket scientist Werner Von Braun. According to researcher and author William Lyne, “In August 1949, von Braun was made an honorary member of the British Interplanetary Society, through his friend, Arthur C. Clarke.” (William Lyne, "Pentagon Aliens", 3rd edition, 1999, pg. 115)

One further point of note, that has somehow embellished the Kubrick / Apollo connection, is the use of three super-fast 50mm lenses (Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/0.7 - developed by Zeiss for use by NASA in the Apollo moon landings) in the filming of Kubrick’s 1975 film “Barry Lyndon”.

“For the many densely furnished interior scenes, this meant shooting by candlelight, a feat difficult enough in still photography, let alone with moving images to capture. For months they tinkered with different combinations of lenses and film stock to make this possible, before getting hold of a number of super-fast 50mm lenses developed by Zeiss for use by NASA in the Apollo moon landings. With their huge aperture and fixed focal length, mounting these was a nightmare, but they managed it, and so Kubrick's vision of recreating the huddle and glow of a pre-electrical age was miraculously put on screen.”

The use of three of these incredibly rare and valuable lenses (apparently only ten were ever made) has raised a few eyebrows. Moreover, the fact that he was in possession of equipment used to document the “Moon landing” has further compounded his connection to Apollo 11. However, Kubrick acquired the lenses during the production of “Barry Lyndon”, after they were no longer being used by NASA (the lenses were all-but sold by the agency to private parties.) Additionally, the lenses were designed for still photography and had to be extensively modified for motion picture filming.

In Part 4, I will examine the notion that Kubrick's film "The Shining" holds many clues to his potential involvement in the Apollo hoax.
Keep Shining Folks!

Kubrick Related Articles:
Updates, 6th Annual British Exopolitics Expo & More Stanley Kubrick Apollo Fakery -
Foxes, Saturn, Kubrick, Doctor Who and The Singularity -
A Movie About Kubrick Faking the Moon Landing? -
Stanley Kubrick - Updates -

Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One -
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two -
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics -

The Stanley Kubrick Conspiracy - Part 2: Kubrick on the Moon

According to the Clavius website, the first mention of Stanley Kubrick and his possible involvement with the Apollo cover-up appeared in 1995 on the Usenet newsgroup - The Clavius group have dedicated themselves to sceptically debunking all notions of an Apollo cover-up (meaning that they are not exactly the most unbiased or objective source of reference material!), however the time frame they refer to does seem to tally. There are no apparent references to Kubrick and the Apollo cover-up before this time period. Using, I have trawled through archived early-internet pages and cannot (at least not yet) find the original "1995" source of the Kubrick connection. The earliest Usenet item I have been able to find dates from June/July, 1996 and can be found HERE & HERE
This item uses (word for word) the text that appears in the article referred to on the Clavius website. I have, therefore, had to unfortunately consider the validity of Clavius’ date reference in their reposting of the article that allegedly kicked-off the Kubrick connection. The article is entitled “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax”.
Here is a section of the alleged original Usenet article:

“In early 1968, Mr Kubrick was secretly approached by NASA officials who presented him with a lucrative offer to "direct" the first three moon landings. Initially Kubrick declined, as 2001: A Space Odyssey was in post-production at the time, but NASA sweetened the deal by offering to allow Mr Kubrick exclusive access to the alien artefacts and autopsy footage from the Roswell crash site. NASA further leveraged their position by threatening to publicly reveal the heavy involvement of Mr Kubrick's younger brother, Raul, with the American Communist Party. This would have been an intolerable embarrassment to Mr Kubrick, especially since the release of Dr. Strangelove. Kubrick finally relented, and for sixteen months he and a special effects team led by Douglas Trumbull worked in a specially-built sound stage in Huntsville, Alabama, "creating" the first and second moon landings. This effort resulted in hundreds of hours of 35 mm and video "footage" of the Apollo 11 and 12 moon missions.”

The article claims that astronauts were launched via the Saturn V rocket into Earth orbit for several days and then returned on schedule. Meanwhile, Kubrick's footage was “broadcast” as the “live from the Moon” images. Kubrick allegedly did the same with Apollo 12, but declined to work on Apollo 13. The article claims that a “director” called “Randall Cunningham” was responsible for Apollo 13. In an article entitled “Lunar Lunacy”, Colette Bancroft made an astute and slightly amusing observation: “Randall Cunningham. Never heard of him, can't find him on the Internet Movie Database, but . . . sounds like Richie Cunningham . . . who was played by Ron Howard, who directed Apollo 13… the 1995 movie, not the 1970 mission. I think.”

There are some clear flaws in the “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article. For starters, Kubrick never had a brother called “Raul” (let alone one who was involved with the American Communist Party.) It is interesting that those researchers who were the earliest to begin discussing the Kubrick paradigm, also cited this “brother Raul” – indicating that they may have read this early article. Fortunately, most of these researchers quickly became aware of the non-existence of “Raul” and ceased referring to this aspect. However, it is still slightly worrying that certain researchers cited this as factual, before taking the time to evidentially prove or disprove the claim. I am also a little wary of the reasons cited for Kubrick’s involvement (access to extraterrestrial artefacts). If Kubrick did participate in a cover-up, it is much more plausible that he was granted carte blanche to direct however and whatever he wanted (with full studio backing, financing, promotion, etc.) for the rest of his career– which is exactly what he did, at least until his final film anyway.
Interestingly, Wikipedia has a page dedicated to debunking “conspiracy theories about the Moon landing”, with a section highlighting the Kubrick connection. The page cites the “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article as the probable origin of the Kubrick connection. The page also notes that the article has since “been quoted as in earnest by Clyde Lewis.”
 It is odd that Wikipedia cite this individual alone and nobody else. Why? Clyde Lewis (born Louis Clyde Holder) is a peculiar character. He has championed his self-styled “conspiracy theorist” personae with all the grace and solemnity of a game show host. He has also had a long-standing connection with a number of individuals in the mainstream media / entertainment industry. To my mind, he raises some of the serious concerns that I have about other similarly high-profile figures in the alternative knowledge arena (such as Alex Jones), leading me to suspect that Lewis may be an agenda-steered purveyor of disinformation. &
Lewis appears to have been one of the first individuals to publicly state that Kubrick was involved in the Apollo 11 cover-up. He was also one of the earliest people to use direct quotes from the “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article. This has prompted some people to suggest that Lewis himself may have authored the original article. If this is the case, then it is possible (emphasis on that word!) that Lewis is the original source of the “Kubrick faked the Apollo footage” hypothesis – a disturbing thought!

In October 2002, the William Karel directed “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary film was aired on French TV channel Arte. The film “seemingly” supported the idea that the television footage of the Apollo 11 “Moon landing” was faked and recorded in a studio by the CIA, with help from Stanley Kubrick. The film included “interviews” with notable agenda players such as Donald Rumsfeld, Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, Vernon Walters and Apollo astronaut Buzz Aldrin.

However, investigation of these interviews revealed that they were actually carefully edited from existing interviews that had no connection to Kubrick or the faking of the Apollo 11 footage.

The official presentation of the film says: “Filmmaker William Karel pursues his reflection on the relation of the United States with image, cinema and their capacity to produce ‘show’. What other story can lend itself to such an examination but the space conquest, a war of image and show more than anything else. What if it was just a huge hoax initiated by the two great powers? Between lies and truths, this film mixes actual facts and others, completely trumped-up. Playing with irony and lie, its purpose is to entertain and raise the question of the use of archive, which can be made to tell whatever you want.”

Whatever one makes of the mockumentary, there is a certain irony to this exercise in contextual dissembling – given that it is something the mainstream media appears to do on a daily basis. Tellingly, the film exercises techniques that have been the hallmark of certain media psyops – such as the 1938 “War of the Worlds” broadcast.

It is curious that the film also contains interviews with Kubrick’s widow Christiane – who discusses the Kubrick / Apollo connection in a far more “realistic” context than the other featured interviews. We really do need to ask why she became involved. The most interesting and detailed parts of the film are contained in her interviews. If, as some people have suggested, the film was a CIA exercise in debunking, was Christiane a willing and witting participant? If she was referring to something other than the Apollo hoax and the footage was used out of context, I would like to know what she was actually referring to…

The “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article and the “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary may suggest that the whole Kubrick / Apollo connection has been orchestrated as a metaphorical “wind-up” or practical joke. If this is true, the joke would have to have had a gestation period of decades before coming to fruition. There appears to be no mention of it until the last five years of Kubrick’s life and yet the “clues” always seemed to be there. Was Christiane Kubrick complicit with this by taking part in the “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary? Was Stanley Kubrick “seeding the clues” (over several decades) to a complex and sick prank, rather than revealing his involvement? Whilst I tend to doubt that Kubrick was complicit in a career spanning elaborate practical joke, we cannot fully discount the possibility.

There are worrying indications that Kubrick was at least partial to this way of thinking. Kubrick had a number of doppelgangers. However, he and his family always maintained that they were unsanctioned. One such individual was Alan Conway. He “became known for impersonating the film director Stanley Kubrick. Conway and his wife were travel agents with offices in Harrow, Muswel Hill and London… Kubrick's lawyer found out that there was someone impersonating him and, when he informed Kubrick of the impostor, Kubrick was said to be fascinated by the idea. Stanley Kubrick's wife, Christiane, was less taken with the idea, as she later reflected ‘It was an absolute nightmare. (There was) this strange doppelganger who was pretending to be Stanley. Can you imagine the horror?’” Apparently he wasn’t a very good impersonator though!

The “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article and the “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary have done much to muddle the notion of Kubrick’s possible involvement in the Apollo cover-up. If Kubrick’s involvement was real, then these pieces are certainly convenient for those agenda players wishing to prevent researchers from getting too close to the truth.

As a bizarre postscript to this blog article, I feel it is worth mentioning the theory that “2001: A Space Odyssey” was also utilised as part of the agenda-driven drug related counter-culture of the late 1960s. It is important to note that this phenomenon has a clear overlap with the work of NASA and the state-sponsored mind control paradigm (respectively).

Kubrick certainly had contact with a number of the agenda players within this scene. For example, Alfred Hubbard (who allegedly introduced Kubrick to LSD) was a key player within the CIA’s LSD distribution network. It is also curious that members of the 60s counter-culture began experiencing incredible highs through a combination of watching the “Stargate” finale sequence of “2001: A Space Odyssey” and a generous supply of LSD! Viewing figures allegedly skyrocketed, following this “revelation”, prompting theatres to repackage the film with the tagline: “The Ultimate Trip”. The tag has remained with the film till this day.

Another related theory surrounds the connections between Kubrick and the psychedelic, trippy tunes of progressive rockers Pink Floyd. There is an apparent correlation between the track “Echoes” (taken from their 1971 album “Meddle”) and the Stargate sequence in that they are both 23 minutes long, and changes in the music seem to follow changes in the images. However, despite claims that Kubrick made the film with Floyd’s music in mind, it is obvious that the band were still in their Syd Barrett / “See Emily Play” / “Arnold Layne” phase at this point and had yet to experiment with album-spanning, audio operas. It is entirely possible that the band was inspired by “2001: A Space Odyssey” and designed “Meddle” to fit the “Stargate” sequence, after the fact.


Roger Waters (bass player and key songwriter with Pink Floyd) revealed a significant connection with Kubrick when recording his later solo album “Amused to Death”. The album (released in 1992) was inspired by the book “Amusing Ourselves to Death”, an excellent work by Neil Postman that observed the dark nature of the mainstream television media. The album also featured scathing criticisms of the first Gulf War and George Bush Senior.

Waters stated in an interview with Rockline on 8 February 1993 that he wanted to use samples of HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey on the album. Stanley Kubrick, the director, turned him down on the basis that it would open the door to many other people using the sound sample. Others think that Kubrick refused because Pink Floyd had not allowed him to use music from Atom Heart Mother in his film A Clockwork Orange… There is a backmasked message on Amused to Death that appears in the song "Perfect Sense Part 1", in which Waters' backmasked voice says, ‘Julia, however, in light and visions of the issues of Stanley, we have changed our minds. We have decided to include a backward message, Stanley, for you and all the other book burners.’

Waters has had a long fascination with the larger agenda scope and certain esoteric issues. I have always found it curious that Floyd’s classic album “Dark Side of the Moon” (A “Moon” nod to Kubrick maybe!?) synchronises so well with the esoterically crucial film “The Wizard of Oz”. The person accredited with “discovering” this synchronicity described how "I have never said that I sat down and synchronized the whole movie before this. I've merely stated that back in 1979, when I was in high school, I fell asleep with Dark Side on the turntable, playing side two continuously. When I woke up, The Wizard of Oz was on TV — the Scarecrow was dancing that insane dance while the album was playing 'The lunatic is on the grass.' It was the funniest damn thing I had ever seen."

Just who is the identity of this person who allegedly “discovered” the now infamous mash-up of Floyd and Oz? Why, none other than the previously mentioned Clyde Lewis! The man who some believe kicked-off the whole Kubrick / Apollo 11 connection. What are the odds of that, eh!?

In Part 3, I will look at some of the more curious connections between Kubrick and the Apollo cover-up.
Stay tuned!

Kubrick Related Articles:
Updates, 6th Annual British Exopolitics Expo & More Stanley Kubrick Apollo Fakery -
Foxes, Saturn, Kubrick, Doctor Who and The Singularity -
A Movie About Kubrick Faking the Moon Landing? -
Stanley Kubrick - Updates -

Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One -
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two -
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics -

Wednesday, 29 January 2014

The Stanley Kubrick Conspiracy - Part 1: Tales from a Paper Moon

Science fiction’s portrayal of covered-up or faked space missions dates back many decades. In the February 1955 issue of “Galaxy Science Fiction” magazine, author James Gunn published a story entitled “The Cave of Night”. The story deals with a manned mission to Mars which goes awry, stranding an astronaut with no hope of rescue. The climax of the story is shocking, utilising the notion of fakery to portray an erroneous perception of the outcome of the mission.

The plot of the 1969 movie “Marooned” also involved a manned mission to the Moon going wrong - failure of a re-entry rocket leaves the occupants of the lunar capsule stranded in space. Although there is no cover-up inherent to the plot, the original script called for the “suggestion” that a story would be created to perpetuate the notion of a heroic attempt to rescue the astronauts, should they have perished. The film received full support from NASA, including the use of Cape Kennedy for interior and exterior location filming.
“Capricorn One” (1978) went much further than “Marooned”, featuring a plot that utilised Hollywood trickery and gimmicks to fake the first manned space flight to Mars. In the film, the astronaut crew are removed from their rocket and driven to a film set in the desert to record fake footage of their planetary touchdown. Bizarrely, this film also received full support from NASA – which is strange given how NASA has generally avoided supporting Hollywood productions that cast the agency (or fictional agencies with a resemblance to NASA) in an unflattering light (see: NASA’s refusal to support Spielberg’s “Close Encounters of the Third Kind”). The film was directed by Peter Hyams, who would go on to helm “2010: The Year We Make Contact” (the sequel to Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”) six years later.

The film “Sneakers” also featured a character (played by Dan Aykroyd) who mentions the Apollo cover-up - including "this LTX71 cancellable mike is part of the same system NASA used when they faked the Apollo moon landings."

More recently, the film “Apollo 18” used the ‘lost footage’ plot device (popularised by films like “The Blair Witch Project”) to posit the notion that NASA carried out secret manned missions to the Moon. In this case, the “Apollo 18” mission (involving NASA astronauts landing on the Moon in 1974) was covered-up following the discovery of an extra-terrestrial insect-like organism on the Moon – an organism that subsequently kills the “Apollo 18” astronauts. Interestingly, the film shows the astronauts discovering a dead cosmonaut (along with a Soviet landing module) on the lunar surface – suggesting that, like NASA, the Soviets were also conducting clandestine missions and cover-ups.

The reality of this latter concept has been studied by a number of researchers and is known as the “Lost Cosmonaut” paradigm. Whilst the evidence of Soviet space cover-ups isn’t as obvious as that of NASA, at least one account has been evidentially verified. Valentin Bondarenko was a would-be cosmonaut whose death during training was covered-up for decades by the Soviet government.

In 1960, the science fiction author Robert Heinlein wrote an article for Pravda describing how (whilst in the Vilnius region of Soviet-occupied Lithuania, May 15, 1960) he was told a Red Army cadet that the USSR had launched a man into orbit that day. The account was denied by officials later the same day. Heinlein elaborated on the story in a speech he gave at the XIXth World Science Fiction Convention Seattle in 1961.

“A Russian cosmonaut is circling the Earth!’ All the other cadets nodded agreement to everything he said and sometimes added details. I congratulated them on their country’s wonderful scientific achievement--with a frozen smile and a sick feeling in my stomach. We talked a bit more about it, then they went on up the hill and we went down. That afternoon, we tried very hard to buy a copy of Pravda. None were available anywhere… We did listen to the Voice of Moscow--Mrs Heinlein told me that it did report the rocket--but just as one of the Sputnik, no mention of a passenger. That evening our guide joined us to go to the ballet--and she immediately told us that the cadet had been mistaken; it was not a rocket ship with a man in it--just a dummy. The cadet had misunderstood. Well, perhaps so… but, if so, then all those dozen or more cadets were mistaken exactly the same way.”

Another science fiction luminary and who has expressed views about the Apollo cover-up is Canadian novelist Margaret Atwood. Atwood authored the dystopian novel “The Handmaid's Tale” – a story that addressed such concepts as population reduction, female fertility and ecological disaster. In a 2009 interview, Atwood questioned the technology of the 1960s, why man hasn't landed on the Moon again, and mentioned the shadow discrepancies as well as the radiation belts.

Perhaps the most unusual (non-science fiction) movie to allude to the Apollo cover-up is the James Bond film “Diamonds Are Forever” (1971). “While investigating multimillionaire recluse Willard Whyte's Tectronics Space Centre outside Las Vegas in the Nevada desert, his cover blown, James Bond (Sean Connery) finds it necessary to make a hasty exit. Finding himself in an artificial moonscape complete with trainee astronauts, Bond dashes for a nearby Moon Buggy vehicle and crashes out of the centre and into one of the 007 films' most famous chase scenes.”

Although I am slightly digressing for a moment, it is worth noting the larger esoteric significance of James Bond. Bond’s creator Ian Flemming has a documented connection with the British Intelligence Community, which in turn has connections with the occult - remember that the occult also appears to have been prevalent in agencies like NASA. Bond’s roots lie with John Dee - a sixteenth century mathematician, astronomer and navigator. Dee was an imperialist and devoted consort of Queen Elizabeth I. He was a student of philosophy, alchemy, divination, the occult and an associated freemason. He was also instrumental in the then-version of what we would now call MI5 and his code-name was 007! John Dee was Ian Fleming’s inspiration for James Bond.

Many of the designs on “Diamonds Are Forever” were conceptualised by Oscar-winning Production Designer Ken Adam. Adam was born into a German Jewish family that fled the Nazi Regime in 1934 to settle in England. Adam was a close friend of the legendary filmmaker Stanley Kubrick and worked on many of his films (he famously designed the “War Room” set featured in “Dr Strangelove”), with one notable exception: “2001: A Space Odyssey”. Adam once described how he was asked by Kubrick to join the production of the film. “I found out that he had been working with experts from NASA for a year on space exploration and all that sort of thing. And the moment I saw that, I thought, not for me. Because I could only function properly with this very powerful computer-like brain of Stanley by knowing as much visually about the subject matter as he did, because then I could justify departing from the visual reality that he knows.”

Kubrick is often cited as the likeliest candidate to have filmed fake footage of the Apollo 11 Moon landing. Some researchers have suggested that a deal was struck between Kubrick and certain agenda players sometime in the mid/late 1960s. It is known that the production history of “2001: A Space Odyssey” overlapped the era of NASA’s Apollo program and that NASA collaborated extensively with the film’s production team. The film was released in 1968, over a year before the Apollo 11 mission. The film’s narrative also featured a cover-up (a story is perpetuated about the spread of a fictitious virus, prompting a quarantine of a lunar base) to hide the discovery of an extra-terrestrial artefact – the Tycho Monolith – on the Moon, and a subsequent mission to the planet Jupiter with a “secret” agenda.

In 1997, a number of “Apollo Hoax” researchers appeared as guests on Jon Ronson’s Channel 4 discussion show “For the Love of Lunar Conspiracies”. The show was one of a series that “examined” subjects often attributed to the hidden-global-agenda players. The guests on this episode were David Percy, Mary Bennett, Barry Reynolds, Matthew Williams, Andy Thomas and Marcus Allen. The guests predominantly discussed the then-prevailing evidence of a cover-up. At one point, Percy discussed the scene in the Bond film “Diamonds Are Forever”.

Percy: “It’s a James Bond movie and people say ‘what’s that scene doing in there!?’ He walks into this lab and they’re going to the Moon and he says, ‘I’ve come to inspect your radiation shields!’ The next thing he does, he walks out of the lab into a Moon set with astronauts poncing around and phoney backgrounds to it…”
Bennett: “…And a studio above it”
Percy: “That’s right. A complete studio… (Inaudible) he’s being chased out of the set. So you have a connection in a James Bond movie of a lunar set and a statement just prior to it: ‘I’ve come to inspect your radiation shield!’ Isn’t that interesting?”
Ronson: “And these movies were made for a purpose then?”
Bennett: “Well the… certainly all movies are made for a purpose. One is to entertain; two is to make money… or possibly the other way around. One is the product of the other.”
Ronson: “Or are they also made for a slightly more sinister purpose?”

Bennett: “I don’t think James Bond is made for a sinister purpose. I think we have a, erm… possibly… there’s a zeitgeist in artists that they’re going to pick up the general energy of what’s going on and scriptwriters who are very close to the edge of things are going to incorporate it in all work, as anybody does – a painter, writer, whatever. They’re caring about things and, as you know, in repressive societies you can get a lot said in fiction or in entertainment that you can’t actually say straight out. And just because America is not labelled a communist society, it doesn’t mean to say that it’s a democracy either.”
Percy: “But, in some cases, you can have a situation where things are done to confuse…”

The conversation quickly turns into a discussion of Hollywood’s perception management of the ET/UFO subject and no further mention of the lunar fakery subject in movies is made.  It is interesting that there is no mention made of Stanley Kubrick throughout the discussion. Given the nature of the subject, I am surprised his name wasn’t mentioned at least once. It is possible that Kubrick’s possible involvement was discussed, but never made the final edit. Alternative knowledge researchers who have participated in “conspiracy hit-pieces” for the mainstream media have regularly described how they have been, on occasion, interviewed for several hours - with only a few minutes of the interview footage ultimately being used in the final edit.

However, Jon Ronson is a life-long fan of Kubrick; he has written numerous pieces about the filmmaker. He even conducted an interview with Kubrick’s widow, Christiane, for an article published in The Guardian newspaper in 2010.
“After Stanley Kubrick” by Jon Ronson ( – Wed 18 Aug 2010)

Interestingly, researcher and host of the popular “Richplanet TV” show, Richard D. Hall, has alleged that Ronson may be connected to, or an asset of, the British intelligence establishment. Here is a quote from his article “MI5 Exposed”:

“Ronson is another close associate of John Lundberg who runs Jon Ronson’s website. Ronson is the author of ‘The Men Who Stare at Goats’ and producer of many UK television programmes which have essentially debunked people like David Icke and Alex Jones. If there is going to be a mainstream documentary about an “alternative view”, it is often given to Ronson because he’ll make sure that truth and objectivity are the last things on the agenda. His recent book ‘The Men Who Stare at Goats’ is quoted by Colonel John Alexander, who the book is about, as being ‘based on about 5% reality and 95% hokum’, yet this hokum was made into a Hollywood film which therefore makes the film another piece of disinformation. Ronson’s close association with John Lundberg, along with the complete lack of truth seeking in both his writing and programme making makes us believe that Ronson is part of the MI5 psy-ops operation.”

It is possible that the reason why Kubrick’s alleged connection with the Apollo Hoax wasn’t discussed in Ronson’s show was because there was next to no awareness of the possibility in 1997. Whilst researching the “Kubrick connection”, I have attempted to identify who originated the story and when it first became publicly known. This has been incredibly difficult. I have watched, listened to and read as much material relating to Kubrick as I can lay my hands on. Although Kubrick’s knowledge of esoteric, alchemical and occult subjects (and the allusions, made to these subjects, in his films) has been examined for several decades, there appears to be no mention of Kubrick in relation to the Apollo cover-up prior to the mid/late 1990s… at least as far as I am currently aware of. It is possible that Percy, Bennett, et al, were unaware of the connection in 1997.

In Part 2, I will examine the origins of the Kubrick / Apollo Hoax paradigm...
Stay tuned folks!

Kubrick Related Articles:
Updates, 6th Annual British Exopolitics Expo & More Stanley Kubrick Apollo Fakery -
Foxes, Saturn, Kubrick, Doctor Who and The Singularity -
A Movie About Kubrick Faking the Moon Landing? -
Stanley Kubrick - Updates -

Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One -
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two -
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics -

Tuesday, 28 January 2014

Edgar Fouche - Disclosing Secret Technologies

Andrew Johnson has recently uploaded extensive interviews with Edgar Fouche on his youtube page. Here are the details from his website :

"Over the last few weeks, I have been in contact with Edgar Fouche and he kindly offered to do a series of video interviews over "Oovoo" (like Skype but it allows easier video recording). I must've recorded about 4 or 5 hours with Ed and I have broken down the sessions into 10-20 minute segments.
Feel free to read on below, and share these links as you wish.

Full Playlist:
or individual links
Part 1 - Ed's Early Life
Part 2 - Early Life
Part 3 - Top Secret Aircraft Systems
Part 4 - Trip to Area 51
Part 5 - 1999's Technology in use in 1979
Part 6 - Flying Triangle Sightings
Part 7 - Working in Area 51

Part 8 - Decision to Disclose
Please view the parts in order to get the full story!

I first came across Edgar Fouche in 1999 – speaking in a UK UFO documentary called “Riddle Of The Skies”. Ed only appeared on the screen for a few minutes and, partly because of the way the information was presented in this documentary. I hadn’t really “taken in” the huge significance of what he was disclosing to the world at that time. Edgar Fouche was disclosing information regarding what he had seen in a number of secret projects – or “black programmes”.

In the 1960’s, having completed his High School education Ed was drafted from college during the Vietnam conflict.  Ed  was selected for the US Air Force Pararescue field and then, following an injury, retrained as an electronics and cryptographic specialist. His continually growing skills and knowledge in these and other areas lead him to gain a top secret “crypto” clearance. He then spent about 20  years in the US military and another decade working for defence contractors.

Ed worked with many people – across many levels of the military – and gained many awards for the high standards of his work. His reputation meant that his skills were often sought after by the people high up in his chain of command. As Ed will explain, all these factors lead him, in the mid-late 1970’s, to work, for some short periods, in  top secret facilities in the Nevada Test Site – known as Area 51. This brought him into contact with some advanced digital technology – which, as part of his work, he held in his hands. Also, he communicated with many people in or connected to the US military, that he came to know and trust. Over time, they gave him their own accounts of incredible technologies and programmes that they had witnessed or worked on.

In the early 1990’s, with the help of a few close friends, even though they knew that they would be putting themselves at risk of reprisals, the decision was made that they would disclose to the world what they knew – that the US government had been covering up the development of advanced, potentially world-changing technologies. Ed collected together many documents to back up what he was presenting. Some documents were extremely sensitive and therefore had names or dates blacked
out or deleted.

After years of careful research, interviewing, writing and preparation, Ed made his first disclosures in 1998, at a number of public presentations – including MUFON and IUFOC events in the USA. Ed had also written down much of the information in the form of a book, also published in 1998, which was co-authored by well known author Brad Steiger. The book was called “Alien Rapture – The Chosen” and it used Ed’s life as a “canvas” on which was “painted” the information he was disclosing. Due to the legal advice he received,  most of the characters and scenarios in the “painting” are presented as fictional, but essentially, they are based on real people and true events. The only thing in his book that was fiction was the 'Alien Agenda.'"