It’s necessary to understand exactly how Avril Haines was promoted to her CIA position (by John Brennan) and what position she was rewarded (?) with soon after Biden took office (Director ODNI [head of entire American intelligence apparatus]).
CEPI and Moderna were working on a vaccine when there were only 600 cases and 26 deaths worldwide from COVID-19.
“John Brennan on Thursday recalled being asked a standard question for a top security clearance at his early CIA lie detector test: Have you ever worked with or for a group that was dedicated to overthrowing the US?”
If I were to say “late Godard” (and that would be my natural, truthful answer), Monsieur Godard would likely point out the merits of his early films…just to annoy me.
If I spoke lovingly of Vivre sa vie, he would probably proclaim that it is shit.
Jean-Luc Godard is a very complex individual.
And I can wholeheartedly identify with that.
A walking civil war.
This film never makes reference to Cahiers du cinéma.
It doesn’t need to.
This film covers a period of time which Wikipedia classifies as Godard’s “revolutionary period”.
When did Godard stop writing for Cahiers?
He never stopped being a critic.
We know that.
And I see his point.
This is shit.
Because we want to invent new forms.
Breathless was like his “I Wanna Hold Your Hand”.
Or his Bolero.
He couldn’t escape it.
Couldn’t lose it.
Must be nice.
But maybe not.
“Play the hits!”
Did politics ruin Jean-Luc Godard?
But it was necessary.
It was his process of growing up.
His process of attaining wisdom.
Trial and error.
But not the last word.
I don’t agree with Godard’s politics.
Perhaps at some point in my youth I did.
But not very much.
Because I never really understood them.
But I too am a revolutionary.
In these days.
After the 2020 election.
You may call me a reactionary.
I don’t care what you call me.
I think George Washington is cool.
I think the United States of America is worth saving.
And the American Revolution has recommenced.
Same goals as the founders had.
Love it or leave it.
Godard did not show up in 2010 to receive his honorary Academy Award.
Good for him.
Give me the old stuff.
Not this new crap.
Perhaps you see where me and Godard overlap?
Too rashes like a Venn diagram…with a particularly-irritated common ground.
The skin is red and peeling.
I scratch my arms.
I’m running out of real estate on my body for these nicotine patches.
You thought it was something more interesting?
Where does the former President of Peru come in?
Pedro Pablo Kuczynski.
Godard’s first cousin.
I too had cousins.
Who are as far off as Peru.
But always close in my heart.
Kuczynski is 82.
Godard will be 90 in one week.
I will be 44 when the Electoral College meets.
Anna Karina died on my birthday last year.
She was 79.
But this film doesn’t deal with the wonderful Ms. Karina.
No, this film deals with another stunning beauty: Anne Wiazemsky.
Wiazemsky died three years ago.
The same year Redoubtable came out.
In the English-speaking world, we know it (ironically) as Godard Mon Amour.
Sounds more sophisticated to have the subtitled film with a more commercial FRENCH product label.
Redoubtable is too vague.
Godard Mon Amour sells itself.
[that’s what the advertising guys must have said]
Godard and Wiazemsky were married for 12 years.
Godard and Karina married for a mere 4.
I’ve never read Mauriac.
I have nothing against Catholics.
I adore Olivier Messiaen’s music.
So it bears mentioning that one of the smartest, most unique artists in the history of the world was a French Catholic [Messiaen].
Which is to say, believing in God does not make you boring.
I believe in God.
The same God.
The Christian God.
God who gave us Jesus.
God who gave us synesthesia.
Combat didn’t like La Chinoise.
De Gaulle withdrew from NATO.
Will Trump win?
De Gaulle supported sovereignty.
The European Union is the antithesis of what de Gaulle wanted.
De Gaulle criticized America’s war in Vietnam.
But that wasn’t enough for revolutionaries like Godard.
De Gaulle wanted Québec to be free from Canada.
If you’ve ever been to Québec, you might see why.
It is unlike the rest of Canada.
Except for New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
But not really.
Île de Chêne?
Starring in a Maoist film directed by Jean-Luc Godard.
And then they married.
Godard was correct.
Au Hasard Balthazar is the antithesis of the Central Intelligence Agency.
But Godard never said that.
So Anne Wiazemsky wrote a book called Un An Après which was published in 2015.
She died two years later.
The same year her book was adapted for film as Redoubtable.
She died of breast cancer.
Less than a month after Redoubtable was released in France.
This film proves that Michel Hazanavicius is a very talented filmmaker.
It proves that he knows his Godard.
But it is flawed.
Aren’t all masterpieces?
Is Redoubtable a masterpiece?
In some ways, yes.
In some ways, no.
It is probably most similar to Sacha Gervasi’s Hitchcock.
Both of them are films of “exorbitant privilege”.
Which is to say, a little out of touch with their subject matter.
Was Pablo Picasso ever called an asshole?
Not if we take Jonathan Richman at his word.
Art contains deeper layers of meaning.
Unless you’re Warhol.
In which case, the meaning MAY be found closer to the surface.
Stravinsky liked this too.
Music has no meaning.
It is just tones.
Little dots on a page.
So we are told.
Jean-Luc Godard and Igor Stravinsky both embraced MANY different approaches to their craft over their long careers.
Because they loved their crafts.
They were addicted.
It was a compulsion.
And, for Godard, it remains so.
Godard married the girl who rejected Robert Bresson.
Do not underestimate the thrill of this.
The thrill of it all.
Bresson was a genius too.
But she was only 18 when Bresson made his advances.
Girls want to live.
Bresson was 65.
Numbers can lie.
Godard and Wiazemsky were only together as man and wife for three years.
Though they were married for 12.
Three years was enough, apparently.
The divorce appears to have been more a formality.
I spoke to Anne-Marie on the phone once.
In exceedingly-broken French.
She was saintly in her patience.
All I wished to convey, as I called Rolle (Switzerland) on my flip phone, was that Godard was my intellectual hero. [it is true] And that his LATE films mattered. That they mattered THE MOST. That he had created beauty. That he had plumbed the depths. I owed it to my master to deliver this message before I (or he) died (God forbid).
I was compelled.
Jean-Luc Godard is my favorite creator this side of heaven.
Even though I don’t agree with his politics.
Bob Dylan is neck-and-neck for this honor.
Dylan is, no doubt, my favorite musician to have ever lived.
Neck-and-neck with Roland Kirk (perhaps).
My favorite jazz artist.
My favorite instrumentalist.
It is never noted that Wiazemsky was in Les Gauloises bleues.
And Godard could be an asshole.
So can I.
So can Trump.
Trump is my ideological hero.
My political hero.
I DO agree with his political philosophy.
And yet, my favorite film director (auteur) remains Godard.
No one is even neck-and-neck with JLG for me.
Brakhage is a distant second.
Welles is formidable.
But they do not hit the mark like Jean-Luc.
Il seme dell’uomo.
Nothing suggestive there.
And then I gave Jacques Demy’s grandson piano lessons.
Or Agnès Varda’s grandson.
More like organ lessons.
You should use Belmondo again.
We see Coutard’s hair early.
Politics entered soon.
Le Petit soldat.
The perfection of Vivre sa vie.
The jaunty, carefree, playful anarchy of Breathless.
And a sadness tied to beauty.
Politics again with Les Carabiniers.
An attempt at commercialism with Contempt.
Equivalent to Nirvana’s In Utero album.
A thorough disdain for the Hollywood system.
And the “tradition of quality” in France.
But something deeper…and more bitter.
Bande à part more like Breathless.
A little like Vivre sa vie.
Down and out in Paris.
Life at the margin of society.
Hazanavicius first really gets going with Une Femme mariée.
Stacy Martin in the nude.
Grabbing the bedsheets.
Brace brace brace.
The resemblance to Charlotte Gainsbourg is striking.
A little Alphaville.
Someone who nibbles Godard’s neck.
The Samuel Fuller scene from Pierrot le fou turned into a fistfight.
Don’t insult me!
A bit of Macha Méril in the hair.
And a bit more of Chantal Goya.
Getting shouted down by a situationist during the May ’68 occupation of the Sorbonne. Lumped in with Coca-Cola.
Things go dark with insults.
On the blink.
Made in U.S.A.
Two or Three Things I Know About Her.
“You ruined my shot!”
Eating Chinese food.
A rather unfortunate outburst directed at a war hero.
And his wife.
These are the things we do.
When we’re young.
What is striking is the humor in Redoubtable.
The broken eyeglasses.
The slipping shoes.
And their replacement.
I must give credit to Louis Garrel.
He really does convey the mania and eccentricity of Godard.
While Stacy Martin is very good here, it is a shame that Hazanavicius chose to lovingly evoke every detail of Godard’s life…except Wiazemsky’s red hair.
Wennerström could have been executed by firing squad for treason because, after all, there was a war on (the Cold War).
War on Terrorism.
Was the end declared?
Instead, he was given a life sentence (which was later commuted to 20 years).
What country do Bernie Sanders, AOC, et al. most want to copy?
Replicate their “democratic-socialist” utopia?
And I get it.
It is an alluring trick.
Sweden is a beautiful country.
The land is beautiful.
The women (with cans of General Snus in the back pockets of their tight bluejeans) are beautiful.
Even rednecks like me could be fooled.
By the façade.
The “Nordic model” countries (with their literal female models in tow).
Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and (chiefly powering the Left’s zeitgeist) Sweden.
But Norway has a shit-ton of oil.
But I see it.
Walk down the cobbled streets of a small Danish town and you too may be swayed by the seeming utopia.
America is not a Nordic country.
And as Nordic countries (particularly Sweden) attempt to mimic AMERICAN leftist policies (think immigration), they see their homogenous utopias ripped apart.
There are reasons certain forms of government work IN CERTAIN PLACES.
There are factors.
America, at this point in its history, cannot whole-cloth adopt the Swedish system.
And any leftist with a brain knows this.
But it doesn’t prevent American leftists from dangling the Swedish carrot (fish?) in front of the noses of their moronic acolytes.
And, as alluded to earlier, it is meant to draw the weak-minded “across the aisle”.
“Come on over. Everything will be just like Sweden. Not the current Sweden, of course, but…you know: the old Sweden.”
Two years after Wennerström’s life sentence was commuted to 20 years, he was paroled.
He had only been in custody for 10 years.
10 years for sharing 20,000 secret documents with the Soviets concerning Swedish air defenses, clandestine Swedish bases, etc.
This was the Swedish custom.
Serve half your sentence and get paroled.
Initial sentence could have been death [treason] (Cold War).
Actual sentence was life.
Sentence commuted to 20 years.
Cut in half (10 years) by parole.
That’s Sweden (in the early ’70s) and, perhaps, quintessential Swedish policy.
The “Nordic model”.
No justice, really.
No defense, really.
No state secrets, really.
No sovereignty, in actuality.
About as robust a defense apparatus as an IKEA bed.
Which is to say.
Interesting that Sweden is not a part of NATO.
What if the big, bad Russians (who have 20,000 secret documents pertaining to radar, strategy, mobilization plans…) actually were to invade Sweden?
Those are old documents by now, of course.
But the Russians have a very easy sell to potential Swedish spies.
“Don’t worry. There’s no declared war. This isn’t the Cold War. No treason. No firing squad. If you get life in prison, it will probably be commuted to a paltry 20 years. And you’ll be paroled after 10. If you even get caught.”
Great deterrence, Sweden!
Back to the “Nordic model”…
Guess who ARE members of NATO?
Denmark, Iceland, and Norway.
Finland, right on Russia’s doorstep, are (like the Swedes) not members of NATO.
For more examples of Sweden’s liberal (lax) justice/prison apparatus, see the case of spy Stig Bergling.
Sentenced to life (like Wennerström).
Fled to Moscow during a conjugal visit (you can’t make this shit up!).
Voluntarily returned to Sweden seven years after his escape.
And was PAROLED three years later.
Again, this was DURING the Cold War.
Bergling’s arrest was a full 15 YEARS after Wennerström’s.
In other words, this was the next generation (same shitty policies) of spies being slapped on the wrist.
Bergling was parolled in 1997.
Ahh, that liberal paradise…Sweden.
Unlike Switzerland, it has no natural defenses (mountains) to guarantee its continued paradisal existence.
Swedish Air Force.
Convicted of spying for Poland [Soviet bloc] during the Cold War.
Sentenced to a mere six years in prison.
Paroled after three years.
Which brings us back to the brilliant (I mean it!) Swedish storyteller Stieg Larsson…himself a committed leftist (going so far as to train guerrillas in Eritrea in the firing or mortars).
What of Vanger?
ASEA (the now-defunct General Swedish Electrical Company Limited) removed the swastika from their logo in 1933.
The company’s swastika logo had been used since the late-19th century.
What if it’s a similar sound?
In Swedish, “catches”.
Like in a cage?
In closely-related Danish, “prisoners”.
Like in cages?
What if a letter is missing?
In Swedish, “pregnant”.
Like, pregnant with meaning?
[svan, btw, means “swan” in Swedish]
Like Leda of Greek mythology?
Zeus, in the form of a swan, raped Leda (a woman) who became pregnant and gave birth to “the most beautiful woman in the world”: Helen of Troy.
And around whom does this mystery revolve?
The hauntingly-beautiful Henrietta (Helen?) Vanger.
Who had been been repeatedly raped by her father and brother.
[it is true that the Swedish equivalent of Helen would be Helena or Elin, but the initials match]
How did Larsson come to settle on this name Vanger?
Some have suggested Wagner.
Perhaps even Wegner.
Wolf, in Swedish, is “varg”.
Vargar, in Swedish, is “wolves”.
Now we are getting somewhere.
But we must flesh out the story.
We are looking for three Swedish Nazi brothers.
I believe the fourth (the good guy) was invented by Larsson.
Three Swedish Nazis?
How about Birger, Gunnar, and Sigurd Furugård?
They founded the Swedish National Socialist Farmers’ and Workers’ Party in 1924.
It’s a good fit.
The good guy might just be IKEA founder Ingvar Kamprad.
By “good”, I mean that he was a member of the Swedish SSS (Svensk Socialistisk Samling [National Socialist Workers’ Party…basically Swedish Nazis]) at age 17 and before that, at age 16, a member of the fascist New Swedish Movement WHO LATER DECLARED (in 1994) that his membership in the latter was the “greatest mistake” of his life. His association with the SSS wasn’t publicly revealed until 2011 (at which time he made no further comment on having been a part of these types of groups).
So maybe Ingvar Kamprad wasn’t the good guy after all?
Did Larsson meld the Furugårds (Nazis) and Kamprad (a successful business man…and Nazi) into the amalgamation we know as the Vanger family?
So “far right” (says Wikipedia) that they were fucking socialists!?!
This is exactly what Pieczenik is talking about in the above video.
Fascism coming from the Left.
Kamprad started off with fascism (New Swedish Movement) and a year later went full-Nazi (National Socialist Workers’ Party).
You can’t take that word out of there.
And Antifa started as “anti-fascist” [against the Nazis, but FOR communism].
And they remain communist (leftist) and have devolved, ironically, into a fascist organization themselves (at least in America…where their tactics are indistinguishable from those of Hitler and Mussolini’s respective gangs [Sturmabteilung/SA/Braunhemden/Brownshirts & MVSM/Blackshirts/squadristi]).
BTW…IKEA was founded by a 17-year-old Ingvar Kamprad.
Yes, that’s right: he is confirmed in the above link to have been a member of the SSS [essentially the Swedish Nazi party] that very same year.
As for Lisbeth, look no further than the alleged Norwegian witch Lisbeth Nypan.
“blotches on its back”.
From mythology to the real life fire salamander (Salamandra salamandra).
Frigidity (able to extinguish fire).
But also “a product of fire”.
Wizards and warlocks.
Disappearance of the Beaumont children (on Australia Day).
Church of Satan formed by Anton LaVey.
Moors murder trial.
Five children (between the ages of 10 and 17) murdered in and around Manchester between 1963 and 1965. At least four were sexually assaulted.
Killer (Ian Brady) read Mein Kampf and books on Nazi atrocities.
Gertrude Baniszewski found guilty of murdering and torturing Sylvia Likens in Indianapolis. Paroled in 1985 [American justice failure].
Charles Whitman kills 14 people with a sniper rifle from above the UT-Austin Tower (after killing his wife and mother).
Those who have shed their cares. Effudit curas. Shed cares.
Who? Qui. Those who.
Dabat olim. Once gave.
Once gave what? A shit.
Idem populus. The same people.
Ah! People. The people.
It is from Satura X. The 10th Satire of Juvenal. You might see it as Satvra.
Lanx satura. Full scale.
A full scale. Full-scale.
It was the Toronto Hearings. The International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001.
You’ll get a lot of stuff.
For instance, David Ray Griffin.
I have long appreciated his scholarship in the field of 9/11 research.
His books are part of my library.
You’ll also get the excellent Kevin Ryan (who lost his job at Underwriters Laboratories for questioning the fraudulent “science” of NIST [National Institute of Standards and Technology]). UL worked with NIST on their reports regarding the cause of collapse of the World Trade Center buildings (all three of them). Ryan seems to have found any involvement in this unconscionable and thus spoke up. Just like Dr. James Tracy (for his Sandy Hook research), Ryan’s job employment with UL was terminated.
You’ll meet hearing panelist Ferdinando Imposimato (honorary President of the Supreme Court of Italy).
Imposimato was one of those who got to the bottom of Operation Gladio.
And so staged bombings have been with us awhile.
Mr. Imposimato uncovered the secrets of the “years of lead” in Italy.
The “strategy of tension”.
He uncovered that it was NATO intelligence (with a leading role played by the CIA).
Anything to keep the communists from coming to power.
So much so that the weapons caches of “stay behind networks” were put into service. Italy bombed and terrorized its own people. And blamed it on the Red Brigades.
To sway popular sentiment.
“Don’t vote for the communists!”
What a murderous, cynical solution to a phantom problem.
People cynically sacrificed to prevent some greater perceived threat.
And that’s exactly what 9/11 was.
That was the mechanism.
You will meet Richard Gage. Founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
A very articulate, serious person.
Same goes for Kevin Ryan.
Check their science.
Follow their logic.
Observe the duplicity of NIST and their politically-motivated fudging of numbers.
It is astounding!
You’ll meet Peter Dale Scott.
What an astute personality! Former English teacher at UC-Berkeley.
Famous for research on “the deep state”.
You may not want to believe it, but sticking your head in the sand won’t make it go away.
You’ll meet Graeme MacQueen. A Harvard Ph.D.
Matthew Witt. Professor at the University of La Verne.
People putting their reputations on the line.
Smart, studied people who have sensed (and proven to their own satisfaction through the scientific method) that 9/11 was something far different from that which was presented.
How does news become history?
Once something is reported as news, is it then history?
There are very serious questions surrounding 9/11.
I cannot name all of the figures in this documentary, but ponder these:
-Cynthia McKinney (one of the only trustworthy politicians to have emerged in recent memory)
-Lance deHaven-Smith (a Florida State professor whose contribution to this documentary is priceless)
-Jonathan Cole (whose questions get at the heart of the mythical 9/11 “state crime against democracy” [a term coined by deHaven-Smith])
-David Chandler (whose beard is as impressive as his mathematics qualifications)
I highly recommend this documentary to all who value what remains of liberty. As the filmmakers make clear, many scourges of humanity can be traced back to the false narrative which followed quickly on the heels of the 9/11 events.
Judge for yourself whether the evidence presented supports the hypotheses of these researchers. As is no doubt evident, I concur with most of their conclusions regarding this sad event.
When we dig into history we must wade through many boring reams of paper.
If, for instance, your FOIA request is granted, you might be inundated with a fecundity of information which makes comprehension initially prohibitive.
But we dig anyway…because we are human.
Once in awhile, a decent man or woman will tell us we have the right to know the truth.
If we find their ethics convincing, we might respect them for such a statement.
And so such is the milieu surrounding the story conveyed in Francesco Rosi’s Salvatore Giuliano.
I was tired.
And so I watched and watched and watched…and things became slower.
Nothing seemed to be happening.
It was like a particularly painful silent film.
But the sound eventually makes itself indispensable.
It is the sound of strange relationships.
Like the Mafia and the CIA.
Like the Cubans and the CIA.
Like the Mafia and the Vatican.
Like the P2 Masonic lodge and Operation Gladio.
These strange relationships.
What can we prove?
Should we cower forever beneath the hulking torts of libel and slander?
What balance of justice is there between the free speech of the impoverished and defamation?
I have nothing worth taking.
There’s a reason Palsgraf sued the Long Island Railroad Co. and not the man with the newspaper-wrapped box of fireworks.
Seeking a remedy at law (as opposed to a remedy in equity).
Such a strange language.
We don’t speak this way other than in legal circumstances.
Today, when Scalia strangely bites the dust…we remember his own supposed connection to the Propaganda Due lodge.
And Salvatore Giuliano. A real personage.
It all seems so reminiscent of the “strategy of tension”…Operation Gladio…the “anni di piombo” (Years of Lead)…
And I’m sorry to say that Wikipedia seems pruned and poised to mislead on these subjects. While the contributors have made certain that Daniele Ganser is profusely maligned, I find Mr. Ganser’s research and writing on the above subjects far superior to the damage-control tone of Wikipedia.
It is the same sort of failure (this damage-control tone) which pervades the potentially groundbreaking Wikipedia page on “9/11 conspiracy theories”. Some very important (rich) people have much at stake in keeping the (false) narrative constrained to a very tight frame.
Compare, for instance, the Wikipedia articles on “9/11 conspiracy theories” (don’t even bother reading the whitewashed main article on 9/11) and “flat earth”. There is no urgency to conceal in the flat earth article. The same, sadly, cannot be said for the “9/11 conspiracy theories” travesty.
And what does all of this have to do with Salvatore Giuliano?
Well, my friends, sometimes our enemies have very colorful histories.
Consider, for instance, Osama bin Laden.
The U.S. Republican presidential candidates (particularly the deplorably daft Marco Rubio) are (while no worse than their opposing party) willfully ignorant concerning 9/11.
Rubio and company (the six remaining Republican presidential candidates) have bought hook-line-and-sinker every bit of repugnant narrative which has emanated from the U.S. federal government since day one: 9/11/01.
How closely did we work with Osama during Operation Cyclone?
Charlie Wilson’s War doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface.
And what was the nature of the relationship between the CIA and the Pakistani ISI?
The much-maligned Michael Ruppert seems to have been right on the money in describing a confluence of oil, drugs (opium), and geopolitical chess when tracing the cui bono of 9/11 to the bonanza of Afghanistan. Of course, Iraq would soon follow.
And so what of Thierry Meyssan’s claims regarding the translation of the words al-Qaeda from the Arabic to the English as “the base” or “the database”? Such a translation seems entirely plausible when considering Osama’s coursework of business administration at King Abdulaziz University in Saudi Arabia. It is, therefore, a strange mesh of false jihad (for show) and organizational acumen. It seems that the billions (before adjusting for inflation) which flowed from the CIA to the mujahideen were, at least to some significant extent, used to fund Osama’s organization in Afghanistan during the Soviet war (1979-1989).
This is usually the place at which the spin doctors attempt to interpolate the concept of blowback. The idea that we “abandoned” Osama after we were done with him. But I don’t buy that for a second. He was too valuable. He was, literally, an investment.
Michael Ruppert said in his excellent tome Crossing the Rubicon that (to paraphrase) “the CIA is Wall Street”.
Ah, but I keep leaving Salvatore Giuliano in the dust.
Mostly because I don’t want to spoil it.
This is an essential film, but it is a lot of work for the piece of meat.
I can’t say on first viewing that it is little.
To truly appreciate this film one would need a significant knowledge of Italian history in the 20th century. I barely caught the Garibaldi reference (and he died in 1882).
Strange alliances. Corruption. Italy. Sicily.
And the Communists who peacefully organized on May Day to petition the government for assistance with running water and electricity (in 1947). (!)
The century would go badly for socialists in Italy. And that was no accident. They have NATO to thank for many problems. But they also have their own security services to blame as well.
Such a fear of communism. Like today. Such a fear of Islam.
And sadly, covert operations done in the coldly-utilitarian spirit of “the ends justify the means”…
But pay particular attention to the effort needed by the police (or was it the carbinieri?) to place the body (habeas corpus) in a convincing sprawl for a chalk outline. Yeah…whoops! Once again, the “death” of bin Laden is instructive.
It takes great lengths to hold no one accountable for internal weaknesses in such massive crimes.
And so perhaps with Salvatore Giuliano, the more apt metaphor is Lee Harvey Oswald (or, closer still, Jack Ruby).