Sony was hacked this month. Nobody knows
who did it.
It started off with some juicy revelations
in the media that Sony’s hack had revealed several interesting conversations
with Sony insiders talking about Angelina Jolie. “Spoilt brat” and “minimally
talented” were apparently two terms used to describe her. The articles
instantly got worldwide attention. Blame was put on North Korea, for
purportedly hacking the company’s email system in retaliation for making a film
about its President’s assassination.
North Korea denied it had hacked Sony, but
said whoever did it had done a “righteous deed.”
Obama stepped in, and said North Korea was
responsible. He added it wasn’t an act of war but cyber -vandalism.
The media went crazy, printing article
after article showing how North Korea was an odious human rights violating
state. They said America had bowed down to North Korea by canceling screenings.
It appeared serious military action against North Korea would become likely, if
the hawks had their way.
North Korea’s entire Internet network went
down. Somebody had clearly hacked it.
North Korea's leader came out and called
Obama a “monkey from the tropics.” He also said the America was responsible for
the Sony hack.
The film “The Interview” was released
online, and in select theatres. It became one of the biggest grossing films
that week.
The series of events that occurred leads a
connect-the-dots person to conclude that the hack may have been internally
engineered by the US national security apparatus, in conjunction with Sony’s
insiders, including the director of the film, perhaps the actors, as well as
the producers and the marketing department.
This brings up the very serious issue of
Hollywood’s collaboration with the US’s national security agencies. How close
are these ties? How far do people think they can go with different tactics of
false flag and diversion in the US’s obviously no-holds-bar wars against
different nation states?
In the case of Hollywood, it is quite clear
that the scripts of everything from historical to mythological films have had
input from the military-industrial complex. Funding may also be provided by the
same agencies—to what extent, this remains unclear. It is also clear that
actors, individually, may have relationships or pal-ly friendships with other
individuals working within the Deep State. Ben Affleck, for instance, is
clearly close to the CIA. His film “Argo” won the Best Film Award, not because
it was a good movie, but because the military-industrial complex has
infiltrated Hollywood so deeply there is no longer a peer-reviewed, meritocracy
at work, but merely the same old shite of propoganda passing for creative
works, as in Nazi Germany. Remember Goebbels? Good old Leni? Right, this is the
same stuff, people.
There might even be a certain amount of
bravado and sense of prestige working for one’s country. This is all very well
and good when the cause is good. But when the country has veered off track so
vertiginiously, as the US has, and whose internal working are now a matter of
deep concern for the rest of the world, working for this apparatus may not be
as glamorous as people may think, at first. Witness the 80,000 people who came
out in opposition to Ben Affleck’s next role, as Batman. They simply disliked
the idea of seeing him as Batman. If Affleck though “Argo” would jump him onto
to superstardom, he was about to find out the power of the masses to destroy a
career with a simple “refuse and resist” campaign. (Incidentally, I didn’t
watch “Gone Girl” because Affleck was in it.)
Imagine if the US had supported a film that
showed the assassination of a Western power, and then played out a complicated
set of maneuvers to blame the same country for a crime committed within the US,
most likely by its own security apparatus? This would violate a lot of
international laws. But somehow, it is considered to be okay in the case of
North Korea. Sure, North Korea has a lot of prison camps—but so does the USA,
if you could the millions of adult men who spend their time in jails which spin
a hefty profit for the corporations that run them. Incidentally, the
prison-industrial complex and the military-industrial complex seems to be
deeply intertwined.
It also appears a lot of idealistic young
actors may get caught in the subtle web of the security apparatus, without
realizing it. For instance, Django Unchained. On the surface, a very good film
about slavery and freedom. But then, China banned it. Why would China ban
Quentin Tarantino? Because if you watch it again, the underlying subtext, in
some horrifying way, is still white supremacy, and what happens to people who
oppose the entitlement of white people to enslave other people. Anybody who
watches this film walks away with a creepy feeling that while this may be about
history, perhaps it may be about the present as well. Leonardo Di Caprio, one
of my very favorite actors, may have fallen into the liberal trap of agreeing
to do a film he saw as anti-slavery—when in fact the subtext runs very much in
the opposite direction. Clearly the main character walks away, free. But many
others don’t. And the chill you feel watching this film is the chill of knowing
that the mentality of slave-holders very much runs contemporary banking, economics,
international relations, as well as domestic governance within the USA. Slavery
hinges on the notion the slave can have no freedom, and this underlies the very
underpinnings of new military research being done in the USA. The Brain
Initiative done funded by the White House, in which brain-to-net scientific
experiments are being done to download people’s thoughts onto the web, forever
destroys the individual’s right to privacy by making his thoughts available to
government surveillance.
How deeply does the culpability run? Do
filmmakers know when they get approached by a friendly group of men with a
funny idea about North Korea, and deep pockets, that they may be working for
the military-industrial complex? That the aim may not be just to bring about
“freedom” to those who resist it, but that there may be a deeper, more sinister
reason that keeps Hollywood churning out one film after another, glorifying the
supremacy of the racist, military-industrial state?
Comments