Diaphanous disguises on the road to Damascus

The Slog identifies another servant of the Antichrist, reviews some blatant bank arse-covering, and leaves the MSM behind on the Suella Braverman story

Do you ever get the sense of being in a movie? I don’t mean the cliché about dystopian nightmare, I mean one genre or another.

I get it more and more – under the heading of what, seventy odd years ago, was called Film Noir, and starred people like Ray Milland and Sterling Hayden. It wasn’t future-fi or even sci-fi; rather, it was the creation of a secretly different present-day reality that couldn’t be easily dismissed once you left the cinema.
That was what made it all the more terrifying…and makes today’s Netflix output shallow, suspicious and well – frankly – seriously Third Rate.

The now largely forgotten character actor Fred MacMurray starred in the film that first got the ‘noir’ soubriquet, Double Indemnity (1944) – dark because it involved the idea of an upright insurance investigator being corrupted by the woman (Barbara Stanwyck) whose claim he was hired to contest if necessary.

Today, it stands as an excellent marker of how what’s left of our Western/Anglo-Saxon “culture” wouldn’t see what the point of Double Indemnity was. Its examination of temptation over restraint seems to them hopelessly tame.

Wikipedia describes Netflix as a distributor and creator of cinema features and TV series that are “over the top”. I suppose one man’s over the top is another’s tunnel undermining all standards of decency, caring, normality and – ultimately – tribal empathy.

But all in all, in the context of 21st century ‘is it a bird is it a plane is it a nuclear bomb?’ there is something about the output that forces the investigating commentator to wonder what the person in charge there is about.

This is where the first problem starts, because if you use Google, Edge, msn or others among the usual suspects, whatever form of words you use is immediately translated by the AI bots into output “They” want you to watch.

There were two Netflix founders, and both have – predictably – broadened their horizons. But you’ll have to employ Brave, Opera and other browsers to rise above that pretty obvious attempt to sell-and-obfuscate in one less than subtle dead-end.

The requirement here is to seek out the person whose bit-of-a-giveaway title is Chief Content Officer. Its at this point you discover this Netflix person is also these days co-CEO of the company.

The gentleman concerned is Ted Sarandos. He is the chief content officer and is often referred to as “the most powerful person in Hollywood”.

He openly bows to the NWO bollocks about “the normalisation of life”, which he thinks “very important”. What Netflix actually does is normalise behavioural darkness. And be in no doubt: its the new form he wants to normalise, not the old.

Sarandos claimed in an email obtained by Variety that “We have a strong belief that content on screen doesn’t directly translate to real-world harm” adding “Adults can watch violence, assault and abuse – or enjoy shocking standup comedy – without it causing them to harm others.”

There goes that fine old chestnut ‘We’re just following the science’…when of course, what Sarandos is really doing is legalising the sale to suit his own book. He may have ‘a strong belief’ in the tosh above, but there’s a mile-high stack of reports going back half a century telling us that he’s talking out of his tradesman’s entrance.

Advertising uses various media to change peoples attitudes and behaviour: I have forty years of professional counsel experience in that field, and trust me, if advertising didn’t achieve that goal regularly, clients wouldn’t do it. For seventy years, advertising told people it was just fine to smoke cigarettes, so they did – despite the Himalayan range of evidence to show it would probably kill them. They harmed not just themselves but the family around them, and left millions of families minus a breadwinner.

Every year, retailers, manufacturing concerns, banks and yes, governments, spend billions of dollars explaining why we should or shouldn’t do something. During Covid19’s first incarnation, it seemed doubtful that anyone could develop a vaccine against a virus that quickly, so the government used television to overcome their common sense in the shape of leading expert vaccine authority Michael Caine. That caused a lot of harm to “others”. Biden, Fauci, Macron, Trudeau and Co all went on television and said the unjabbed should be vilified, which they duly were. That was a pretty clear case of using an entertainment medium to persuade knuckle-draggers to do harm to a lot of people.

As long ago as 1936, Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will and Goebbels-funded The Eternal Jew told Germans it was their duty to kill Untermenschen and “finally” get rid of “the Jewish menace”. One was a documentary, the other a drama – and both worked.

The other thing Sarandos is attempting to do is screen movie after movie normalising near-future horror, climate disaster, alien invasions, dystopian totalitarians and rising ocean levels. That appears to be very socially useful on the surface, but all it does is add more credibility to yet more Gates, Davos and Green tosh. It has New World Order written all over it, and this was finally confirmed when, under pressure, Netflix brought in the Reuters Fact Checkers (itself a risibly Orwellian term) to say there was “little in the way of content imbalance compared to other studios”. It’s crazy: all one has to do is read the Netflix output to be certain that their conclusion was balderdash.

Overall, it’s just more Wolf dressed as granny. The same applies to seemingly anodyne stuff that large institutions send us these days: new energy meters turn out to be 24/7 spy-bots, and astonishingly powerful Smartphones are camouflaged electronic tags about to fulfil a third, far more sinister function – the only way to get your digitalised money out of the bank, food rations from the shops – or national do-nothing benefit to keep you happy with nothing. (In case you hadn’t noticed, the last of those abominations is already being trialled in Wales).

As for felling trees along the path of making future bank withdrawals, this interesting little email appeared on my gmail radar this morning: as Disguised Intent goes, it has pretty much the full set. Needless to say, the underling is mine:

The opening represents a classic “our chief concern is” lie about why this is happening. We’re helping you stay safe. This is all for your protection and motivated entirely by our philanthropy.

In this case – given the very clear NWO progress of megalomanic ambition outlined over several months in these columns – the Disguised Intent is so bloody obvious it scarcely needs elucidation. But briefly from 1 to 3:

*How exactly would my bank know that the recipient of my largesse was behaving unlawfully, and how would that conclusion be arrived at – by the CID at the Met Police, by the rusty AI tin man who has no right brain, or by person or persons as yet unknown? Given that every last bank I have dealt with can’t tell a minor scam from a giant clam, I have serious doubts. I just think that, to slip into American constitutional argot here, this is wide open to the bank concerned “taking the Fifth”…leaving the shafted depositor baffled.

*Define “safety reasons” that might allow a bank to ‘block access to your account or stop deposits and withdrawals’ that could morally override the need (for example) to pay for my daughter’s funeral, a tax judgement against me requiring instant payment or arrest leading to long jail sentence, a Sterling to DollarsUS conversion because Liz Truss has skipped bail to Argentina taking the entire Treasury contents with her, or my release having been kidnapped by the Gambian Fishermens’ Liberation Front? Sorry folks, but this codicil is a coach and horses wide open invitation to roger every customer’s rim with any kind of feeble excuse.

*How is any App going to “establish” with even 7 per cent of certainty that my card or my cheque book [??] has been stolen? Why can’t they just ring my eternal Smartphone and ask me/tell me to check my wallet?

You are seeing the near future my friends, and it irks.

And finally, allow me to bask in a little bit of David v Goliath victory. Tuesday on Twitter – as Jeremy Bloodaxe began cutting a swathe through people and policies in a bid to please his EUNATONWO masters, it seemed to me that Suella Braverman was the obvious next victim….she being (to my mind) a good egg genuine Brexiteer keen to stop the Davos strategy of flooding our tiny country with aggressive males pretending to be refugees. So I tweeted:

Yesterday, she was fired on the basis of “a technicality” – this being that she refused to kowtow to the treachery of See You Next Tesday Man. Yes, I feel vindicated and no, it didn’t take a genius to foresee the outcome.