Stanley Kubrick approached many controversial subjects within the context of his films. He often alluded to the power and corruption of the elite, as well as the mechanisms used to maintain their power. A common theme in his films, such as “A Clockwork Orange” and “Eyes Wide Shut”, is the notion of state sponsored, often trauma-based, mind control. Before I look at these films in a little more detail, it is important to establish some generic details regarding the mind control subject.
There exists a documented history of state sponsored mind control instigated by (although far from exclusively) the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The CIA came into being, into 1947, as a direct result of the work and influences of The Tavistock Institute - specifically the CIA’s precursor - the OSS.
Thomas Powers, “The Man Who Kept the Secrets: Richard Helms and the CIA”, New York: Alfred A. Knopf 1979.
The CIA was forbidden from having any domestic police or internal security powers and was authorized only to operate ‘overseas’. In many regard, this rule of thumb was disregarded from the outset. Early examples of the agency’s involvement with mind control experiments include: Project Bluebird – believed to have been officially formed to counter Soviet advances in brainwashing. The extent and success of early forays is a little uncertain, although the mainstream belief has always been one of a “varied success rate” and “poor initial test results.” If this was the case, then it certainly didn’t stop the practice; in fact it flourishedhttp://www.wanttoknow.info/bluebird10pg
From the earliest stages, it appears that these projects aimed to study methods ‘through which control of an individual may be attained’. Experimentation included ‘narco-hypnosis’ which involved the use of mind altering drugs and hypnotic programming. Specialised teams were created in the CIA to travel all over the world, using newly developed interrogation and programming techniques. The practice also involved a variety of narcotics (heroin, sodium pentothal, marijuana, LSD, etc.)
Some degree of disclosure of these operations came to light in 1975 when the existence of MKULTRA was exposed by the Church Committee of the US Congress, and a Gerald Ford commission to investigate CIA activities within the United States. According to Wikipedia, “Investigative efforts were hampered by the fact that CIA Director Richard Helms ordered all MKUltra files destroyed in 1973; the Church Committee and Rockefeller Commission investigations relied on the sworn testimony of direct participants and on the relatively small number of documents that survived Helms' destruction order.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra
"An Interview with Richard Helms" (Central Intelligence Agency – 05/08/2007):https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol44no4/html/v44i4a07p_0021.htm
FOIA MKULTRA Document Archive:http://www.abuse-of-power.org/foia-mkultra-document-archive/
Various Freedom of Information (FOI) requests eventually resulted in a small number of documents being released. MKULTRA came into being (apparently) on 13th April 1953 – although a number of insiders give an earlier date. CIA documentation describes MKULTRA as an ‘umbrella project’ with 149 ‘sub-projects’. These sub-projects include illegal and unsolicited testing of drugs, altered states of consciousness, and implementation of electronics components. Some experiments also involved “remote activation and control” of living organisms.
The phenomenon of state sponsored mind control programming does not begin and end with MKULTRA though. Although MKULTRA is perhaps the most well-known and documented, a myriad of project names (official and unofficial) have surfaced over the years, begging the question of just how far reaching these practices go.
Whilst it is believed by many that the overall goal of these projects was to brainwash individuals to become couriers and spies, some alleged accounts of extreme programming (such as Cathy O’Brien and Brice Taylor) involved examples of physical and sexual abuse and torture, as well as being subjected to occult and ritualistic ceremonies and practices. They loosely referred to their conditioning as “Monarch Programming”.
http://www.trance-formation.com/index.htmhttp://educate-yourself.org/mc/nwomcbturireview.shtml
There are claims that the practice encompassed out of body experiences, and time / space travel. It is also believed that (in some cases) the E.T. contact / abduction phenomenon is a result of some aspect of these programmes. Some victims alleged that part of their programming was conducted at NASA facilities.
There is also an area of study which analyses the behaviour and associations of people who occupy the public stage. Dave McGowan, author of “Inside the Laurel Canyon”, presents a compelling argument – which connects various “agenda players” to famous individuals (artists, musicians, actors, etc.) who lived in or frequented the Laurel Canyon region of California from the early 1960s onward. These connections include many hallmarks of the mind control phenomenon and counter intelligence operations of the period, as well as ritualistic and occult practices.http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/
As a little aside, I found it interesting to discover that one particularly notable denizen of the Laurel Canyon region during this period was science fiction author Robert Heinlein. Heinlein was dubbed one of the “big three” – himself, Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke. His book “Stranger in a Strange Land” (1961) was hugely influential with many connected to the Canyon scene. (Riggenbach, Jeff. "Was Robert A. Heinlein a Libertarian?" - Mises Daily, June 2, 2010. Ludwig von Mises Institute.)
It is possible that much of what has been “disclosed” regarding mind control research may actually be a cover in itself – hiding techniques and practices that are unfathomable to the average person. These may encompass the deeper corners of the energy paradigm or extreme levels of consciousness and reality. Although some researchers have posed this hypothesis, it currently resides somewhat within the domain of speculation. Never the less, there are some worrying pointers that deserve our attention. Often times, research and development of technology from the likes of Lockheed Skunkworks and DARPA (Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency) – groups with an intricate association to the energy cover-up, for example - are baffling to say the least. Over the years, various agenda-driven agencies and groups have developed techniques such as “trans-cranial magnetic stimulation”, “microwave effects on the blood brain barrier” and “synthetic telepathy”.
On December 19th, 1971 – less than four years before the spectre of MKULTRA mind control first crawled into the mainstream spotlight - Stanley Kubrick unleashed “A Clockwork Orange” upon the American viewing public. It was released in the UK on January 13th, 1972. The film squarely tackled the paradigm of “free will” versus “state control” – in this case, the morality and dynamics of state sponsored behavioural modification and trauma-based mind control. The film’s science fiction trappings and futuristic settings are also mildly dystopian in nature.
“Alex (Malcolm McDowell), the main character, is a charismatic, sociopathic delinquent whose interests include classical music (especially Beethoven), rape, and what is termed "ultra-violence". He leads a small gang of thugs (Pete, Georgie, and Dim), whom he calls his Droogs. The film chronicles the horrific crime spree of his gang, his capture, and attempted rehabilitation via controversial psychological conditioning.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clockwork_Orange_(film)
The film, adapted from Anthony Burgess' 1962 novella of the same name, presented a disturbing and violent image of a dystopian, future Britain. Kubrick, writing in Saturday Review, described the film as: "...A social satire dealing with the question of whether behavioural psychology and psychological conditioning are dangerous new weapons for a totalitarian government to use to impose vast controls on its citizens and turn them into little more than robots." http://seriouslyforreal.com/celebrities/a-clockwork-orange-1971-2/
In many regards, Kubrick played with the subconscious of the viewer. Malcom MacDowell’s narration of the film forced the viewer to become unwittingly sympathetic to the central protagonist. This is unsettling, given that the character is an inherently unsympathetic, guiltless, and violent psychopath, rapist and murderer. In fact, the design and tone of the film depicts an overall landscape that is largely metaphorically devoid of humanity. Such aspects underline Kubrick’s skill as a subtle and subversive director and storyteller.
The central concept of the film (and novella) is rooted in the notion of behavioural psychology (see: research of psychologists John B. Watson or B. F. Skinner’s eponymous “boxes” and the practice of “operant conditioning”) and made manifested via the films’ deux ex machina: “The Ludovico Technique”. As is usually the case, the suggestion of this technique existing outside the narrative framework (in other words, “in the real world”), was dismissed as being nothing more than a “parody” of Aversion Therapy treatment –“in which the patient is exposed to a stimulus while simultaneously being subjected to some form of discomfort. This conditioning is intended to cause the patient to associate the stimulus with unpleasant sensations in order to stop the specific behaviour.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aversion_therapy
The work, upon which “The Ludovico Technique” was based, connects closely with the activities of those involved with The Tavistock Institute and Stanford Research Institute. A number of insiders have stated that “Ludovico” bears a striking resemblance to less publicised techniques once practiced by the CIA. Moreover, some state the technique (name and all) is a real one.
There is much controversy surrounding “A Clockwork Orange”. The realisation of the film was marred by the original state of Burgess’ novella, which originally included a final “hopeful” chapter to the story – where “free will” is shown as having triumphed over state intervention. The 21st (and final) chapter was omitted from the editions published in the United States prior to 1986. The UK version included the final chapter. It is often said that Kubrick allegedly based the film on the US version of the novella (leaving the film with a stark climax) and that he had been previously unaware of the original ending to the story. This was instrumental (perhaps intentionally) in creating a tone that manifested an infamous notoriety to the film. Following release, the UK press seemingly associated a number of instances of violent crimes to the film, claiming that individuals had aped the mannerisms and behaviour of Alex and his gang of Droogs. There was a fierce backlash against the film, often prompted by UK Parliamentary figures, mainstream media watchdogs and the various arms of censorship in the UK.
However, the origins of this furore seem to be mired in speculation. It is uncertain if there really ever were any crimes committed that were purely inspired by the film itself. In the 1999 UK documentary: “Return of a Clockwork Orange”, Robin Duval (then Director of the British Board of Film Classification”) said, “There were allegations it had invited or stimulated some yob gangs. What we don’t know, at this distance, is how true that was. I mean, there’s a… as a regulator – over a very long period of time – one thing I have learned is that it’s not uncommon for somebody who finds themselves in the dock to say ‘well guv’, it’s not my fault, I saw this movie or TV programme and I was lead to it by what I saw’… and it’s quite possible that there was an element of that with ‘A Clockwork Orange.’” (1999 UK documentary: “Still Tickin': The Return of A Clockwork Orange” - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2107788/combined
The producers of this documentary attempted to interview Edward Heath and Jack Straw (both allegedly, according to some researchers, may have helped in some manner to encourage the aforementioned ‘public outcry’), but they declined.
In the end, the film was withdrawn from circulation in the UK and it is from here on that the story becomes decidedly strange. For many years, fingers were pointed in numerous directions blaming all and sundry for the effective “banning” of the film. Even the then Home Secretary of the Conservative Government, Reginald Maudling, was alleged to have played a part.
Minister Demanded Clockwork Screening - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/677288.stm
Furthermore, the whole affair seemed to stoke the fire of film censorship and classification, perhaps even playing a part in the eventual “video nasty” controversy of the early 1980s. It is known that many VHS “pirate” copies of the film were brought into the UK from France, where the film ban was not in place. The “video nasty” phenomenon itself was a decidedly murky affair, involving thinly veiled attempts by the UK government to police the burgeoning home video market, and playing a significant role in the legacy of 21st century copyright laws. It has also been claimed that the whole paradigm was actually an experiment in social engineering: designed to generate a cultural backlash that would actually encourage individuals to embrace greater degrees of depravity and violence in television and film. It is possible that Kubrick was utilised to further any and all of these agendas. However, there is no way to know this for sure.
After Kubrick’s death in 1999, it was reiterated by his family and associates that Kubrick himself was responsible for withdrawing the film. According to film critic Alexander Walker, Kubrick was visited by Hertfordshire police, warned about “the power of the film”, and how “real Droogs could turn up on his doorstep” to threaten his wife and children. It has even been suggested, by some sources, that it was the police who decided that a measure was needed to diffuse “public negativity” toward the film. Thus the decision to pull the film was made. 1999 UK documentary: “Still Tickin': The Return of A Clockwork Orange” - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2107788/combined
In the history of film, it is almost unheard of for the director to withdraw their own film. It only ever really happens if the film is a flop and, even then, the decision is usually made by the studio financing the film. “A Clockwork Orange” was a critical and commercial success, garnering numerous awards and lining the financial pockets of Warner Brothers very nicely. Britain, after America, has always been a key source of box office income for Hollywood. Are we to assume that Warners Bros. simply asked no questions and agreed to the ban? Any film maker that can achieve such a feat must carry a lot of clout in the industry. However, this is Stanley Kubrick we are talking about!
In the late 1970s, Anthony Burgess was interviewed about the negative reaction to the film. He maintained that he had been held partly responsible by critics. However, Burgess firmly blamed Kubrick - specifically citing the non-inclusion of the final chapter of the book as the cause. “I became associated with violence because of the film. If a couple of Nuns were raped in Berwick-on-Tweed, I would always get a telephone call from the newspaper… ‘Mr Burgess, what do you think of this?’ They would never telephone you Stanley… because you keep out of the way!” 1999 UK documentary: “Still Tickin': The Return of A Clockwork Orange” - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2107788/combined
The film remained withdrawn until Kubrick’s death. Almost three decades maintaining the “ban”, is a long time to allow public animosity to die. It was revealed by close friends that just before his death, Kubrick had discussed ending the ban with Warners, Of course, his untimely death followed and Warners decided to re-release the film anyway. A number of researchers have alluded that this may have, in some fashion, added to the oddities that surround his death. As with most of his films, “A Clockwork Orange” not only makes thematic nods to the world of hidden global agendas, it also utilises visual cues. Provided one understands the relevance of secret society symbolism, the significance of the subtle pyramid shape on the brick wall of the prison yard (precisely as Alex is recruited for “The Ludovico Technique”) or the semblance of pyramid motifs and the “Eye of Horus” in the movie’s publicity posters becomes clear.
Despite all this, perhaps Kubrick’s greatest folly was yet to come. When it did, however, it would turn out to be his last.
To be continued...
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-1.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-2.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-3.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-4.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-5.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-6.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-7.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-8.html
Kubrick Related Articles:
Updates, 6th Annual British Exopolitics Expo & More Stanley Kubrick Apollo Fakery - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/updates-6th-annual-british-exopolitics.html
Foxes, Saturn, Kubrick, Doctor Who and The Singularity - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/foxes-saturn-kubrick-doctor-who-and.html
A Movie About Kubrick Faking the Moon Landing? - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/a-movie-about-kubrick-faking-moon.html
Stanley Kubrick - Updates - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/stanley-kubrick-updates.html
Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html
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. http://tangentonline.com/old-time-radio/1180-the-cave-of-night
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. http://www.debate.org/reference/marooned
“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. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capricorn_One
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. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_18_(film)
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. http://www.jamesoberg.com/usd10.html
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.”http://web.archive.org/web/20090522083740/http://www.firearmsrights.com/rah1961.htm
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.http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/23/margaret-atwoods-just-wondering-about-that-silly-moon-landing-hoax/
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.” http://www.007magazine.co.uk/moonbuggy/moon_buggy.htm
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. http://www.examiner.com/article/john-dee-007
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.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/3561380/Ken-Adam-the-man-who-drew-the-Cold-War.html
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”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75I_6uPtZCg
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 (Guardian.co.uk – Wed 18 Aug 2010) http://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/aug/18/stanley-kubrick-christiane
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.” http://www.richplanet.net/detail.php?dbindex=209
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!
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-1.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-2.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-3.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-4.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-5.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-6.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-7.html
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-stanley-kubrick-conspiracy-part-8.html
Kubrick Related Articles:
Updates, 6th Annual British Exopolitics Expo & More Stanley Kubrick Apollo Fakery - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/updates-6th-annual-british-exopolitics.html
Foxes, Saturn, Kubrick, Doctor Who and The Singularity - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/foxes-saturn-kubrick-doctor-who-and.html
A Movie About Kubrick Faking the Moon Landing? - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/a-movie-about-kubrick-faking-moon.html
Stanley Kubrick - Updates - http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/stanley-kubrick-updates.html
Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html
