Jump to content
The Education Forum

New Oliver Stone documentary on JFK assassination to premiere at Cannes


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

The people making up and zombie spamming this crap up are political partisans who are trying to foment doubt, and distrust with crazy theories to the point that nobody has any fact based faith in anything anymore,  to incense then batsh-t crazy people to do they're bidding for them. Including new pseudo experts in "plan"or "pan-demics",  vaccinations, climate change, stolen elections, you name it!

 

10 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Yep. I have a friend who got sucked under the tide, and has come to believe the vaccines are a hoax, etc.

 

I do apologize for this response being off topic, but it is in direct relation to disparaging comments made in the thread and continually by most members of this forum on this sub-topic.

Pat, most people who are called "anti-vaxxers" are not saying vaccines are a hoax or are even against vaccines as a concept. This is the "conspiracy theorist" label for vaccine safety advocates. The vaccine story is long and very complicated as you may well know.

In order to slander anyone and everyone that talks about those things, you better know both sides of the argument. If you cannot describe at least the majority of the main talking points those people usually bring up, what are you doing? Your telling anyone who will listen that you are in fact the "expert" because of xyz knowledge you think you have. I've found most people get emotional over some of those topics and literally cannot discuss the information at all. They are unable. Online, typically these people will do a quick filtered google search to locate an MSM explanation for the thing they have never heard before and leave it at that. Imagine where the JFK case would be with that level of thinking/research? Above all else, honest, objective, dis-passionate discussion must take place on all issues, facts either stand up to scrutiny, or they do not. Censoring facts out of existence creates a fantasy world and should be universally rejected.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Since when do documentaries need to be fact checked to get on Netflix? There's more garbage on there and Amazon Prime then almost anywhere.I really don't see how the entire American media structure will be able to ignore this documentary if it goes to Cannes.

Also, Oliver mentioned a documentary on energy. Does anyone know anything about this? Projected release? Talking points? Authors/researchers used? It will be interesting to see if Netflix shuts that down too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be clear. While there are a number of crap documentaries on the assassination available for rental or viewing on Amazon Prime, Netflix is much more conservative as to what they make available. 

I assume this comes as a result of their business models. 

In any event, I suspect what's holding up the release of Oliver's film is not that neither Netflix nor Amazon will make his film available for rental (where he gets paid per rental) but that neither of them is interested in buying the exclusive rights to his film, for which I suspect he is asking a pretty penny.

Thus, the showcase at Cannes, which reeks of "Someone give me some money, please."

Seeing as the vast majority of docs on the assassination produced over the past 7 years have failed to receive much interest  I suspect he's in for some disappointment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat, I agree with you about Amazon.

Interesting take on the Stone documentary. But I would think of all Hollywood directors, Stone would know that making anything (never mind a documentary) about the JFK case in 2020 is not going to be a financial win like his 1991 movie may have been. Either way, I really hope we can watch it soon. With Jim being so central to the content, the potential is extremely high in my opinion.

Edited by Dennis Berube
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Glad I'm finally getting some support on this. Yes the JFKA conspiracy movement has been damaged. But it's not by an establishment lead cabal. Call it the egalitarian quality of the social media age. The people making up and zombie spamming this crap up are political partisans who are trying to foment doubt, and distrust with crazy theories to the point that nobody has any fact based faith in anything anymore,  to incense then batsh-t crazy people to do they're bidding for them. Including new pseudo experts in "plan"or "pan-demics",  vaccinations, climate change, stolen elections, you name it!

The current mania directed against “conspiracy theories” has been led by establishment liberals, beginning in late 2016, and at its root the disdain fingers the JFK research community as somewhat responsible for the state of affairs. Here, from November 2016, is the well-known author Joyce Carol Oates in a Washington Post opinion piece reviewing Aexandra Zapruder’s book, who - after slagging Robert Groden, Jim Garrison, and Dick Gregory - writes:

If Kennedy’s assassination was a tragedy, the aftermath of competing and vociferous conspiracy theorists was a farce, with serious consequences: the undermining of trust in the U.S. government and in authority in general that continues to this day.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/twenty-six-seconds-of-the-jfk-assassination--and-a-lifetime-of-family-anguish/2016/11/16/2b9f1c86-9547-11e6-bc79-af1cd3d2984b_story.html

A few weeks after Oates’ piece, Zapruder followed with her own column in the New York Times where, as she conflates the so-called “pizza-gate” controversies with the JFK assassination, she also picks up on trust and authority:

While early assassination researchers performed a valuable function by making important information public, later conspiracy theorists relied on association and innuendo and cherry-picked details to build increasingly wild narratives.If one outcome of Kennedy’s assassination was a loss of trust in government and the news media, we have now entered an era in which such suspicions have mushroomed into something far more dangerous — a rupture in the very idea of shared truth…Is there any way to reverse this trend? The mainstream news media can’t do a thing. If I learned one thing from trying to understand the Kennedy conspiracy theorists, it’s that it is impossible to dispel the amorphous cloud of suspicion. If you try, you are either a dupe or part of the cover-up — the cloud simply grows to include you.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/10/opinion/sunday/there-are-no-child-sex-slaves-at-my-local-pizza-parlor.html

Direct calls for the censorship of social media followed a year later, led by members of the Senate particularly Mark Warner - demands initiated by the alleged Russian “attack” on America by “sowing chaos” with social media posts, which itself is an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. The social media companies were put on notice that if they did not impose censorship then censorship would be imposed on them. This is easily verified by referring to pubic statements by members of Congress at the time.

Calls to impose discipline and authority over information have continued apace ever since, amplified in the legacy media (i.e. NY Times etc) and frequently voiced by liberal Democrats. Here is Hollywood screen writer Aaron Sorkin in the Times late 2019:

I want speech protections to make sure no one gets imprisoned or killed for saying or writing something unpopular, not to ensure that lies have unfettered access to the American electorate…The law hasn’t been written yet — yet — that holds carriers of user-generated internet content responsible for the user-generated content they carry, just like movie studios, television networks and book, magazine and newspaper publishers.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/opinion/aaron-sorkin-mark-zuckerberg-facebook.html

The law to which he refers is currently being considered in Congress, sponsored by Warner. Rarely, in the dissertations supporting control over speech and opinion, is it acknowledged that the most disastrous and consequential “fake news” of this young century was widely published and disseminated by the US legacy media and endorsed by the US Congress - Iraqi WMD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff, I don't think anybody here disagrees with most of your examples. Of course there's  always the obligatory mention of  "Russia spy  gate". I'm sure the Russians would never think of doing such an awful thing that they could do with so little money and effort, with almost  certain impunity, because after all, It wouldn't be fair, right? I'm sure no investigation by any number of nation sources corroborating would impress you. Fine.  I'm sure it will dog you as your menace, Navalny!    heh heh---Ok enough!

You're quite the crowd pleaser, Jeff. Who here, wouldn't agree about  an article conflating Pizza Gate with the JFKA? But as I sort of said earlier, you're off in your ivory tower about the "intelligentsia". Do you realize how much of America really read that article? My guess is maybe  1%. Do you think those columns are all that powerful, much less to be trendsetting in thought ? Since you've responded to my comments, on the other hand, how many people have been exposed to"pizza gate'. In the tens of millions at least, Jeff! Sean Hannity ran with it for months straight!  A person on this very forum ran with it!  

I'll confess to you the inexcusable Jeff, I read a NYT summary, try to open certain pieces and I'm asked to subscribe and I just move on. Sometimes, when I care enough , which isn't often. I can finagle it through indirect means. Those are my priorities. Whereas you spend a lot of time reading articles about articles. Just different priorities!

What we're talking about is the day to day news reality of living in the U.S. I can see where you might be out of touch being a Canadian. In these 2 posts, the point I'm making includes everything, the poisoning  of fact based reality to the great masses by Social Media, as well as the erudite commentary to  top few % effete that you think so important.

So I guess we can agree about that.

 

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

The current mania directed against “conspiracy theories” has been led by establishment liberals, beginning in late 2016, and at its root the disdain fingers the JFK research community as somewhat responsible for the state of affairs.
 

Trump’s 30,000 lies and the constant right-wing demonization of fair voting processes — which has disenfranchised many millions of mostly Democratic voters — had nothing to do with the current situation?

Facebook and Twitter kicked a bunch of lying-ass Voter Fraud Conspiracy fools off their privately owned platforms?

Good on them.  Screw l - i - a - r - s.

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

The law to which he refers is currently being considered in Congress, sponsored by Warner. Rarely, in the dissertations supporting control over speech and opinion, is it acknowledged that the most disastrous and consequential “fake news” of this young century was widely published and disseminated by the US legacy media and endorsed by the US Congress - Iraqi WMD.

Factually incorrect.  The most disastrous and consequential “fake news” are the bogus rationales for Voter ID laws and voter roll purge programs like the one in Florida in 2000 that gave the Presidency to Bush.

There would have been no WMD lies — or Donald Trump — without all-out Republican voter suppression lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat:

The director of the film does not request a market price.  Oliver was the director, he did not produce the film.  We had a production entity from England, with an office in LA, fund the project.

They are the ones who are on the line who have to get their investment back.  So they will set the price  guidelines. 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Jeff, I don't think anybody here disagrees with most of your examples. Of course there's  always the obligatory mention of  "Russia spy  gate". I'm sure the Russians would never think of doing such an awful thing that they could do with so little money and effort, with almost  certain impunity, because after all, It wouldn't be fair, right? I'm sure no investigation by any number of nation sources corroborating would impress you. Fine.  I'm sure it will dog you as your menace, Navalny!    heh heh---Ok enough!

You're quite the crowd pleaser, Jeff. Who here, wouldn't agree about  an article conflating Pizza Gate with the JFKA? But as I sort of said earlier, you're off in your ivory tower about the "intelligentsia". Do you realize how much of America really read that article? My guess is maybe  1%. Do you think those columns are all that powerful, much less to be trendsetting in thought ? Since you've responded to my comments, on the other hand, how many people have been exposed to"pizza gate'. In the tens of millions at least, Jeff! Sean Hannity ran with it for months straight!  A person on this very forum ran with it!  

I'll confess to you the inexcusable Jeff, I read a NYT summary, try to open certain pieces and I'm asked to subscribe and I just move on. Sometimes, when I care enough , which isn't often. I can finagle it through indirect means. Those are my priorities. Whereas you spend a lot of time reading articles about articles. Just different priorities!

What we're talking about is the day to day news reality of living in the U.S. I can see where you might be out of touch being a Canadian. In these 2 posts, the point I'm making includes everything, the poisoning  of fact based reality to the great masses by Social Media, as well as the erudite commentary to  top few % effete that you think so important.

So I guess we can agree about that.

 

What is plain to see is the concept of “conspiracy theories” as a social negative is not what is really driving the efforts to impose censorship, fact-checking, and vetted approval of information. The powers-that-be are entirely willing and capable of disseminating conspiracy theories of their own should it assist policy directives, just as the legacy media is content to publish the same. Fox News and Brietbart certainly promote asinine factually-incompetent “news”, but on the other hand the past four years of, say, the Rachel Maddow Show has equally been a trip to looney-town. Those problems are widely dispersed.

In practice, what the social media companies are doing, in concert with directive from powerful politicians and elite opinion, is seeking to reduce or eliminate oppositional voices in favour of officially approved information. So, along with crazy “conspiracy theories”, legitimate political groups, antiwar activists, and representatives of designated foreign adversaries, for example, are being removed from social media. Further, an atmosphere of self-censorship has been cultivated - which may be informing a hands-off approach to projects such as the new Stone documentary. The deliberate “manufacturing of consent” for this process has been led by people who should know better, as they have adopted reactionary positions while maintaining they remain enlightened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

So, along with crazy “conspiracy theories”, legitimate political groups, antiwar activists, and representatives of designated foreign adversaries, for example, are being removed from social media. 

What legitimate political groups or anti war activists have been kicked off social media?

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff, do I have a *right* to go on Black Op Radio to bitch about how lame JFKA experts are in regard to JFK’s T-3 back wound?

Since when does the right to free speech include a right to access someone else’s media venue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

What is plain to see is the concept of “conspiracy theories” as a social negative is not what is really driving the efforts to impose censorship, fact-checking, and vetted approval of information. The powers-that-be are entirely willing and capable of disseminating conspiracy theories of their own should it assist policy directives, just as the legacy media is content to publish the same. 

Why the right wing has a massive advantage on Facebook

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/26/facebook-conservatives-2020-421146

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

The deliberate “manufacturing of consent” for this process has been led by people who should know better, as they have adopted reactionary positions while maintaining they remain enlightened.

I can’t think of a position more reactionary than 2020 Voter Fraud Conspiracy.

Neo-Jim Crow.

 

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way to break out of Conspiracy Theory City is adopt the techniques of modern public relations — simplicity and repetition.

This is the tightest, hardest case for conspiracy:

The root fact of this demonstration is JFK’s T3 back wound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Jeff, do I have a *right* to go on Black Op Radio to bitch about how lame JFKA experts are in regard to JFK’s T-3 back wound?

Since when does the right to free speech include a right to access someone else’s media venue?

A podcast such as BOR is not the same thing as social media outlets such as Facebook or Twitter which solely host user-generated content rather than purposely publish content. You seem to be deliberately misrepresenting the issues by consistently comparing these entities to media which are not at all similar. Twitter or Facebook are not the same as and do not function like the NY Times or CNBC.

As to your prior inquiry - the internet features pages known as “search engines”. Search engines can be useful tools in uncovering information. Simply typing queries - such as “antiwar political groups removal social media” - can provide a wealth of information based on the terms of the query. Recently, however, some search engines have changed their algorithms to highlight some information at the expense of other information. So some patience and diligence may be required. Good luck out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...