ARTICLE BY: Phil Jonkers + Steve Johnson

The movie industry has long used Hollywood (Wood from the Holly tree used in magic wands) to manufacture their illusions and distractions, to create their myths and false stories and of course primarily to launch their predictive programs on an unsuspecting public.

The purpose of such predictive programming is to make a scenario more acceptable subconsciously to the viewer or person before an event, so when the event occurs, it is widely accepted without much critical questioning.

I cite for example in this blog posting the Independence Day movie with Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum as a precursor to the Sept 11 events and how the imagery we witnessed already existed and set into acceptance by the films release in 1996. Five years ahead of 9-11.

Fiction as a Precursor to Fact - A brief Overview

“Thus, “science fiction” is a means of conditioning the masses to accept future visions that the elite wish to tangibly enact. This process of gradual and subtle inculcation is dubbed “predictive programming.” Hoffman elaborates: “Predictive programming works by means of the propagation of the illusion of an infallibly accurate vision of how the world is going to look in the future” (205). Also dubbed “sci-fi inevitabilism” by Hoffman, predictive programming is analogous to a virus that infects its hosts with the false belief that it is:

* Useless to resist central, establishment control.
* Or it posits a counter-cultural alternative to such control which is actually a counterfeit, covertly emanating from the establishment itself.
* That the blackening (pollution) of earth is as unavoidable as entropy.
* That extinction (‘evolution”) of the species is inevitable.
* That the reinhabitation of the earth by the “old gods” (Genesis 6:4), is our stellar scientific destiny. (8)”

~Phillip D. Collins
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NewAge/Sci.htm

Independence Day serves as the ground of comparative analysis, because I argue that the mind searches knowledge and experience in order to understand new phenomena. In this context, the sample from the film Independence Day provides the narrative qualities that embody the paradigmatic character of the situation and images of the events of September 11th.Elliot Gaines:2002

… as we were going across the street, we were not terribly far from the World Trade Center building, the south tower. As we were cutting across a, a quarantine zone actually, the building began disintegrating. And we heard it and looked up and started to see elements of the building come down and we ran, and honestly it was like a scene out of Independence Day. Everything began to rain down. It was pitch black around us as the wind was ripping through the corridors of lower Manhattan.
(Ron Insana, a reporter for MSNBC and firsthand witness to the collapse of the World Trade Center). Elliot Gaines:2002

For a decent synopsis visit the corresponding Wikipedia page. As already alluded to with the above quotes, there are some very potent predictive programming elements in this one, so read on.

ALIEN ATTACKS vs. SEPT 11 ATTACKS

Let’s first address the parallels between the attacks of the alien invader, as portrayed in the movie Independence Day (ID) and the attacks on US landmark buildings on September 11, 2001.

LEFT: Movie world ---------------------- RIGHT: Bush World

In the fictional setting of ID the attacker from outer space destroys the White House, the Empire State Building in New York City, and a

skyscraper in Los Angeles. In the real-life setting of September 11 2001, terrorists destroy the WTC towers, damage the Pentagon and if the hijacked plane, which in all likelihood was heading for Washington DC, had not been downed over Pennsylvania, the White House might also have been hit.

Hence the parallels between the two attacks, one fictional and one real, are clearly discernible.

Immediately following September 11 2001, the media began their nauseating barrage of showing us various footages of disintegrating WTC towers.

Those who have watched ID thus have had ample opportunity to recognize the destructive real life events being similar to the fictional ones as portrayed in the movie.

Therefore, by virtue of this kind of recognition and familiarity gained from fictional imprinting, the witness is led into accepting a context of response similar to the one as presented in ID. In the movie, a clear identification is made of the enemy and a clear distinction is made between forces of good, that being the world in general and the US in particular, and forces of evil, that being the alien invader from outer space.

So when the real attacks happened, those who have watched ID are inclined to also adopt this dichotomous and uncompromisingly gung-ho mindset of good vs evil.

This type of response was further reinforced when the government, most notably Bush himself, immediately following the terror attacks, began to spur the public into start thinking in pure black and white terms of good versus evil.

That this technique of moral coercion left no room or time for careful and honest deliberation and reflection became dramatically clear with slogans such as, “you are either with us or you’re with the terrorists.”

To the left we see the inhuman and un-human fictional enemy, who simply wants every human “to die”, flanked to the right by two supposed real-life enemies of the United States: Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

But the movie went further than just persuade the viewer to adopt a simple binary paradigm of good versus evil.

By virtue of the extra terrestrial nature of the besieger, the movie could afford for the protagonists (which is roughly the entire world) to show no mercy whatsoever for the imposing antagonists, the hosile space alien hordes.

After all, we have this regrettable but nonetheless clearly present tendency to hardly care for the wellbeing of animals so why would we care for other-worldly beings who are out for our blood anyway?

As such, through movies such as ID, the (American) viewer is prepared to rationalize any debasement or demonization of any future inimical adversaries, threatening the integrity of the United States. Or, in the parlour of the Collins brothers, ideational spores have been planted, in this case spores of pure and unadulterated hatred for an enemy perceived to be demonic.

So when the real attacks of September 11 took place and the media almost immediately began fingering Osama Bin Laden and later on also Saddam Hussein as being the likely culprits, it would take little effort for the government, proudly flanked by its favorite lapdog: the mainstream media, to not only succeed in gathering sufficient public support for the ensuing retaliatory military campaigns, but to also manage to debase and demonize any one party labeled a “terrorist”.

Never mind for a minute that it has never been established through rigorous procurement of evidence that either Osama Bin Laden, with his presumed terrorist outfit known as Al-Queda, or Sadam Hussein had even any remote thing to do with the 911 attacks.

Above: A vehicle on 12th Sept. 2001 shows the apparent bloodlust in NY citizens.

Therefore, it already has become apparent that the predictive programming embedded in ID lies in its preparatory function of provoking a desired public kneejerk response and foster the primitive mindset on how to deal with any real future terror attacks, recognizable to the ones depicted in the movie.

Note that ID was made in 1996, a convenient five years ahead of the September 11 attacks so as to leave plenty of time for the viewer to assimilate the various programming elements present in the movie.

The Fictional President vs The Real President

In the movie the President of the US manages to escape just prior to the alien attack on the White House. In real life, President George Bush just so happens to also not be in the White House during the time of the 911 attacks.

As you can see on the above picture he is most busy ‘reading’ from an upside-down held (!) children’s book to a group of children in some unimportant primary school situated in some unimportant town or city in Florida. Isn’t it convenient for the Prez to be out of town at that particular date?….

In addition, as I already indicated before, if it weren’t for the downing of the hijacked plane over Pennsylvania on that fateful September day, the parallels between fiction and reality would have even been stronger.

( - Is it just me, or does Bill Pullman look like a lot better smarter President? - Editor )

In the movie the President just so happens to be a veteran cold-war era fighter pilot.

In real life, George W Bush also happens to be a veteran cold-war era fighter pilot.

Although, truth be told, Bush’s flight record must have been purely uneventful as he was safely stationed at non-combative posts (Texas Air National Guard  pilot who went AWOL ) - Ed.) in the US for the entire duration of his service to the air-force. Hence, so much for the real-life presidential heroism although the movie programs the viewer with the opposite sentiment.

In the movie we see the President giving an improvised but nonetheless vigorous pep-talk, supported of course by a characteristic and dramatic

musical score, to an all too receptive and patriotically inclined makeshift audience.

In real life we could all watch how George Bush addressed the bewildered and shocked citizens of NYC in the early stages of the aftermath of 911.

In the movie as well as in real life, these seemingly improvised speeches by the President can be interpreted as preludes to the retaliatory military actions that would ensue. Again, fiction conveniently prepared the public to accept, without grudging, the type of military actions their leadership would take when the real thing would transpire a few years down the line.

“I’m a combat pilot, I belong in the air.”

In the movie, by an act of sheer bravery (read: reckless lunacy), the President decides to jump into a fighter jet and joins the fight with the aliens in the most literal sense of the word. Let’s tiptoe around the question of whether this particular action was also a particular sensible one because, as with most propaganda work, this is not really important as it is the gesture that counts rather than feasibility.

In real life, we all remember the scene in which President George W Bush lands in a jet onto an aircraft carrier supposedly after the successful conclusion of the Iraq war on May 1st 2003.

With a strong tacit reference to fictional scenes of the heroic ID President,

this action may easily be interpreted as being a blatant PR stunt serving to bolster the image of George Bush as the heroic saviour of the US against the evil and extremely threatening Iraqi forces.

Again predictive programming came in awfully handy to pull off this act of media hocus pocus.

BTW Would it be a stretch to suggest that the accentuation of Bush’s codpiece serves to emphasize his masculinity?

Self-sacrifice

In the fight against the aliens the movie shows a scene in which one of the fighter pilots selflessly lays down his life and, in the wake of his self-sacrificial action, manages to drag down and destroy one of the major alien spaceships.

Actions such as these, where the few worthily sacrifice themselves for the good of the many, serve to impart the notion to the gullible viewer that when facing the enemy, it is sometimes necessary to make that ultimate sacrifice. Stated differently, there’s no shame in getting killed for a cause touted worthy enough.

However, the phenomenon of self-sacrifice, by virtue of its neutrality, is also a double-edged sword. Namely, self-sacrifice can also be highly effective if perpetrated by the ‘other side’. The face of the other side of the coin was shown with the terror attacks of 911 in which supposedly 19 Arab hijackers supposedly sacrificed their lives for what they supposedly considered to be a worthy cause of dying for. I use the word ‘supposedly’ because I think the government edition of the explanatory account as to what happened on September 11, 2001, is similar to the reasons the US government promoted for starting the invasion and subsequent take-over of Iraq, a pack of lies.

Nonetheless, movies such as ID serve to rationalize and, to some extent, soothe the misery accompanying the events where US soldiers getting maimed or killed during defensive or retaliatory actions aimed at thwarting so deemed inimical forces.

The movie scene featuring a romantic dramatization of self-sacrifice came in quite handy the moment the first casualties of the Iraq war came about and references were most welcome which could serve as culturally established ‘band-aids’ to help rationalize the losses and/or injuries sustained.

References:

I highly recommend the following two expert articles, both of which were inspirational to this write-up, on the conditioning imposed on the public by Independence Day. Start with 1, which can be regarded as an introductory article compared to 2, which is clearly written for an academic audience.

1. The Semiotic Deception of September 11th – by Phillip D. Collins ©, Dec. 31st, 2004
   http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/
2. Commentary/Semiotic_Deception.htm
3. THE SEMIOTICS OF MEDIA IMAGES FROM INDEPENDENCE DAY & SEPTEMBER 11TH 2001- Elliot Gaines
   http://web.archive.org/web/20030426192215
4. /http://www.wright.edu/~elliot.gaines/Indeday.htm
5. The Collins Brothers expand on the link between ID and the September 11 attacks (excerpt from a 2007 Vyzygoth interview, video by yours truly):

IN CONCLUSION:

A further analysis including the "Alien" aspect of AREA 51 which is included in ID4 can be found online on my webpage devoted to this topic at:

http://southeastasianews.org/id4_and_911.html

IMDB Reference for ID4:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116629/

Jeff Goldblums laptop computer BRIEFLY shows the countdown to the timed attack JUST as they barely escape destruction at the Whitehouse: The number shown speaks as a reminder what this post is all about: