From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2015-02-03 11:07:09
Attachments : Good to see this posted – I think the website is a popular one… An Exclusive interview with Carl James Carl James is a terrific writer, in the book we read “Science Fiction and the hidden global agenda” we found an incredible story which is able to provoke thousands of STORIES and above all it is able to push the human intelligence and its essential instinct to go deep in things, facts, figures and hypothesis, no matter what will be the consequences. Carl James is a real hero of speculation and side thinking. Q1/ You literally have thunderstruck the reader with a book brilliantly documented and incredibly compelling. “Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda” is an essential and unique book, a fundamental text which decodes not only the movies but the whole industry which produced from scratch this specific and very successful kind of cinema of our modern times. What was your main inspiration or trigger, if you prefer, in writing this provocative book? A1/ First of all, I just want to say thank you for taking the time to read “Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda” and for your appreciation of the all the hard work that went into writing it! I”ve been a lifelong fan of science fiction and always taken a keen interest in the workings of the Hollywood system. Additionally, I”ve long been fascinated by cover-ups, hidden agendas and various global machinations. Over the past few years, my research into the latter has thrown up a myriad of names, groups and institutions historically involved with clandestine affairs that appear to overlap with many aspects of Hollywood. These individuals and bodies are often mentioned in books dedicated to the workings of cinema yet they appear almost inconspicuously as if the authors had no knowledge of the sinister dealings that said individuals and bodies were so often involved with. As a fan of film and a researcher of alternative knowledge, I was staggered by the implications and wondered how many other people had made the same connection. I was surprised that the subject wasn”t widely discussed and not particularly researched in any comprehensive way. I felt that this needed to be addressed – for the benefit of alternative researchers and fans of cinema alike. I think the book was pretty much born at that point. Q2/ Film critics are blind in comparison to the reading you made of classics movies and international renowned authors (Star Wars, 2001, Clockwork Orange, Philip K. Dick, The X-Files, Rod Serling and many others) Very often these arch famous movies/series are the subject of tons of books filled with the bragging and ranting scribbled by gazillions of so called critics and they seem totally unaware of the real purpose of these contents and also they seem to ignore the fact that a director is not simply a “director”; specially the ones which manage this kind of content in that global extent.Do you think that this kind of analysis you made could be an essential way to see and to tell about movies? Could it be a final tool to enfranchise the audience to the secrecy of the media industry? (For the reader: let’s consider that the quarterly “Le Cahiers du Cinema” in France during the fall of the fifties created a new kind of cinema dismantling the old one with a new kind of analysis (language) … Luc Besson (in the 70ies) was among them, Godard and Truffaut were in that trench in the early years of that adventure.) A2/ The huge companies and corporations that control mainstream Hollywood also have a sizeable control of the print media (book and magazine publishers, etc.) so I”m not surprised that very little ever really gets exposed about the darker workings of Hollywood. A number of independently published books have covered the subject to some degree and there is a lot of information out there on alternative knowledge websites and forums but the information is very disparate and disorganized. There is also a huge amount of disinformation and speculation thrown in with the facts that muddy the waters. I learned this throughout the lengthy process of researching my book. Sadly, I think we are still a long way off from a paradigm shift in the way the majority view the reality of the media industry. I would be humbled if I thought that my book contributed to a positive shift, but I suspect it is not the case! That said, my approach to the matter is, without sounding immodest, not a bad way to go about it. Perhaps a better way to expose the system and what it presents is via the very same medium – i.e.: films and documentaries. I am actually looking at ways to translate some of the information in my book into a series of documentaries for such a reason. I have been heartened by a few attempts by others in recent years – such as the fascinating but quite flawed Kubrick documentary “Room 237” and Jay Weidner”s excellent “Kubrick”s Odyssey” series. However, these efforts often receive low-key exposure or are independent in nature. The trouble is that the mainstream media industry is currently just too damn insulated for individual filmmaker mavericks to affect any real change. In reality, the alternative media is largely just as (if not more so) distorted. When we exchanged notes before this interview, you gave some very good examples (such as the effect that the quarterly “Le Cahiers du Cinema” had on the sea-change in French cinema) when innovative analysis had a discernible influence on the medium. However (and I hope I don”t sound too cynical) I don”t think we live in such times anymore. I suspect that any shift will be a long and protracted realization prompted by various diverse factors. The evidence is out there but it gets little mainstream exposure and the majority of people are taking a long time in waking up to the implications. Q3/ George Lucas, Ridley Scott, Robert Wise, Gene Roddenberry, nobody is “innocent” inside an industry where the economic aim is in fact secondary in comparison to the main plan which is the global influence, the seeding of the brains with specific images, icons, symbols.In a single line: the target, more than the wallets, are the brains and the perception management of the audience. But for what reason “a hypothetical and individual” Master of Puppets doesn’t want to unveil to the people this kind of knowledge? A3/ I actually believe that money is still one of the predominant driving factors in the Hollywood system. Nevertheless, we cannot underestimate the huge psychological effect that television and film has on the masses. There is more than enough evidence showing that the media mechanism is a labyrinthine web of social engineering, perception management and predictive programming, whilst simultaneously creating a fictitious world of distraction and triviality… “Bread and Circuses” as social engineer and author Aldous Huxley put it. It is also now becoming clear that both television and cinema were originally created to serve such a purpose. For example, many of those people involved in the pioneering days of television had close ties to social engineering outfits like The Tavistock Institute. Much like a “handler” for a mind control victim, the media generically handles the masses – steering perceptions wherever they are required to go. There are additionally a myriad of agendas that dictate this steering. For example, Gene Roddenberry was primarily steering mainstream perceptions of NASA, by extension the Military/Industrial Complex that surrounded it, and generic scientific “innovation”. He was involved with all kinds of other perception steering as well but the aforementioned seem to have been his target line. Alternatively, George Lucas” “prime mover” was to develop complex and obscure portrayals of esoteric and occult doctrines that could be reinterpreted by the masses. I have yet to uncover how fully complicit these individuals were or how much they truly knew but it is known that they were, to coin a phrase, “on the payroll”. I find it telling that the etymology of Hollywood labels like “director” (for example) connects to words such as “architect” (master builder, director of works, even “archon”), to “guide”, “regulate”, “govern”, “steer” and even “control”! Paradoxically, the “Hollywood director” or “producer” role appears to act as an “intermediary” for a hidden and higher authority with an agenda all their own. This perhaps explains why Hollywood directors, producers and writers rarely come forward and truthfully explain their creative “motives”. I suspect that one or two may have tried – such as Stanley Kubrick – but only in a limited and analogous fashion… at least as much as they were allowed to get away with! Q4/ Reading your book is clear that the whole industry of the Collective Imaginary is strictly in the mangles of only two countries, UK and US, the French tried very much to impose their Jules Verne-Touch but the power expressed by that tandem stopped any kind of French revancisme. The Germany is lastly a financial partner to produce big American Sci-Fi Movie in Babelsberg Studio and Roland Emmerich is the king of that “middle earth” sited in the heart of EU.The Military Complex controls and manages all the technologies which are used to create the “miracles” we see on cinema; recently Digital Domain clearly admitted that its first client is not Hollywood but the Army. What do you think about the fact that essentially the majority of the audience totally ignores this outstanding but gloomy backstage? A4/ The major US film/television producing studios and the Military/Industrial Complex have always shared a close association. For example, as I note in the book, CBS co-produced television shows with Westinghouse Electric Corporation which largely functioned on Department of Defense contracts. Westinghouse and CBS were effectively one and the same entity. The same is also historically known of General Electric and NBC. Nowadays, the Military/Industrial Complex has its tentacles spread out globally controlling vast swathes of the world”s mainstream media. On a peripheral level, this seems to serve a generic “pro-Western” political/cultural/military propaganda and recruitment agenda (the military aspects are explored in David L. Robb”s insightful book “Operation Hollywood”) but I suspect this is only the tip of the iceberg. I have to wonder – given the connections to false flag events, state-sponsored mind control experimentation, the cover-up of advanced technology and free energy, the secret space program, etc. – what else they use the mainstream media for. Many people seem to have accepted the role that the military plays in influencing the content and themes of films and television programs as completely harmless. Maybe that is ok if one thinks that the notion of an all-pervasive war/killing machine entity is perfectly acceptable under any and all circumstances! I do not. In my mind, there is a clear conflict of interests that needs to be recognized by everybody. Q5/ In the chapter about Star Trek I read about the Club of the NINE, its ancestral origin and the relationships which bound Gene Roddenberry, Andrija Puharich the Stanford Research Institute and all the others actors, directors, writers and supporters of that TV Show, it’s is evident one thing: ALL THEM WERE LINKED EACH OTHER LIKE SPIDERS OVER A WEB and what we finally enjoyed was not simply a “Series” but a fictitious representation of what they secretly done and/or believed in the real world. Even the Star Wars scenario you depicted so riveting is a huge weave which connects Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker) to Montauk Experiments on sounds and then George Lucas to Lookout Mountain Studio in Laurel Canyon. The readers will be astounded by all that but can you tell us the personal feeling you had discovering this occult structure related to movies apparently harmless and sold to us as a simple and spectacular “entertainment”? A5/ I have to say that I was very disheartened upon discovering these particular connections. I have always had a special love of all things Star Trek and Star Wars related. As a kid, I (like many others of that age, I suspect) loved to kick back and lose myself in reruns of Captain Kirk or chase around the neighborhood with a broom-handle pretending to be a Jedi! Both Roddenberry and Lucas were friends with CIA and Military/Industrial Complex types who dabbled in MK Ultra mind control research, CIA-backed drug experimentation of the masses, psychic warfare, and free-energy research… the list goes on and on. Not only that, it is apparent that some of what they learned from their time with these folks had a profound creative influence on their work. I watch very little TV and film these days (apart from when I am doing research) but the effect of these franchises is exposed in their power to still tempt me in! I often find myself being drawn back to the odd episode of Star Trek or one of the Star Wars films, but I have to watch them objectively. I notice the agenda themes and symbolism throughout. However I find it very unnerving that, if I don”t concentrate, I am quickly sucked into the narrative and general ambience and quite easily lose sight of the reason I am watching. That, to me, suggests perhaps a hypnotic or subliminal effect… which is a worrying consideration. These franchises are huge with a mass appeal and following. Most people maintain they are harmless and convey a generally positive message. But what if there is something subversive, perhaps even dangerous, getting through without us knowing? What better way to convey it to millions of attentive and accepting fans. I have given a number of presentations on this subject (specifically Star Trek) that have been very well received. (See: The Star Trek Agenda – Pt 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz6NkjxNWJA & Pt 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2gYH2GKIGM ) Q6/ What is amazing in your writing is the simplicity you implemented in order to easily inspire the reader in doing a personal journey and to dive into the occult universe of the sci-fi. Usually the non-fiction books about this topic are so much overloaded of information so the reader will be puzzled at the end. Instead your book has the unique feature to inform, to analyze and above all to open to the reader the hidden universe of the media industry. Is this the springboard for a new book? A6/ Thank you! I often write what I would like to read myself. In that spirit, I try to live by the motto: “treat people as you would want to be treated yourself.” I don”t have time for speaking down to people, insulting their intelligence or trying to tie them up in nonsensical logic. If it looks like a dog and barks like a dog, then it probably is a dog! That is how I try to put evidence out there… the stuff that speaks for itself. I leave it up to others to debate what breed the dog is! The research is an ongoing thing and I am always gathering new evidence every day. Such is the nature of the media; as it creates new output, there is always more subversion to expose. I am currently compiling some material on the Back to the Future films and the ongoing Doctor Who television series that I will be posting on my blog in the near future. I have already gathered a wealth of new evidence relating to Stanley Kubrick that is not in the book so I suspect that a revised and updated edition will be on the cards at some point soon. As for a book with a completely new subject matter; who knows! I would very much like to examine the actual physiological and psychological effect of watching film and television. I think it would make a great “guidebook” to create awareness whilst watching the medium. I have done quite a bit of research into this already but the actual process of assembling it into book form is very time consuming and somewhat daunting. I work full time as a therapeutic activities coordinator for the elderly. I also write, produce and perform music of my own, in a band, and for other musicians on evenings and weekends. Add to this what little time I have remaining to do my research and write a few blog articles and you can see that I have precious little spare time! The idea of publishing another book is tempting though. I try never to say “never”! Q7/ Very Last question: your favorite Sci-Fi Movie? A7/ 2001: A Space Odyssey. I don”t think that will ever change despite how much my perspectives and understanding of the world have. Kubrick, for all his faults and agenda involvement, was a genius. He knew how to layer subtext in a way that evaded the senses of those who were watching him closely. The film is more than just classic science fiction. It is a commentary on illusion and perception. It examines both the profane and the profound. A lot of people don”t realize how important it is. It says much without obviously saying it. This is actually true of most of Kubrick”s films. It is a shame that there aren”t more films made in the manner he made his. Mariano Equizzi The Truth Seeker”s Guide – http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/ Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda (several links for purchase or to download a free pdf version can be found here) – http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/science-fiction-and-hidden-global-agenda.html Your rating: 4.50 / 5 5 4.50 of 5.00 based on 2 ratings – See more at: www.filmring.com/car…
