Kubrick's Odyssey - Secrets Hidden In The Films Of Stanley Kubrick

If there's one reason for watching Jay Weidner's documentary above it's for the explanation of front screen projection used in the Apollo missions staged photography. You can also see it clearly in the photo above along with a typical studio light stand from the period, being used on a set that it's very likely Stanley Kubrick directed. The basis for this claim is also explained in the documentary. 

To this day NASA refuse to take colour photographs of the moon or point a telescope at the Apollo landing positions and show us sceptics the evidence of the landings such as moon buggy and so forth. It's been over 40 years and nobody has ever gone back either. A good thing to do if you don't want people asking awkward questions.

James Bond - How Hollywood Pretends We're The Tortured Not The Torturers

I've been slagging James Bond off ever since Roger Moore mothballed his etching efforts. However since learning that Kubrick filmed the Apollo 11 moon landing and the Bond people did a spoof of it in Diamonds Are Forever it's evident the intelligence douches got one over whoever runs the constructed-reality show at NASA as opposed to dog and pony show they serve up for us.

Usually the British and American intelligence agencies are in lock step over how they keep the gullible public from becoming aware of what really goes on through disinformation, misinformation, killing and torturing and anything they can lay their hands on to keep the people from knowing what really goes on. 

Casino Royale is a full on sympathy ploy by British intelligence who as we now know tortured people in Libya with the assistance of their friend Gaddafi before throwing him under a bus and then letting someone shoot him in this snuff video subsequently put out on the net.

Casino Royale yielded nothing, but I couldn't help but marvel at Bond's testicular torture scene. It's a shame they wont publish the real ones MI6 performed on people with Gaddafi's help. I don't think that particular story arc starts like this:

followed by a brief convalescence..

before getting back down to business again..

Balls of steel that man Bond. What a legend. What a fiction. What a bunch of scummy spies spinning lies for a gullible popcorn eating public.

Jay Weidner - Diamonds Are Forever. But Hollywood Aint.

Jay Weidner is probably one of the more interesting people of his generation. Friends with the likes ofTerence McKenna and John Lash to name a couple of interesting choices, he's got just enough Hollywood connections to have an inside point of view without being tainted by the money and celebrity. 

Conversely he also has a track record of taking a serious interest in the metaphysical issues of the day from life after death to being a well regarded autodidact alchemy scholar. There's a lot more to him than just that but in this interview he and Jeff Rense are borderline cracking up with laughter at the absurdity of NASA back pedalling and graveyard-silence on a fistful of moon landing issues including NASA's hiring of Jim Olson to write a book defending the charges of faking simulating the moon landing. 

We learn here that Jim's requests for NASA Apollo archive material were too sensitive after about six weeks and so the brakes/reverse rocket boosters were put on the project and a severance fee of twenty thousand dollars was paid to bin the book.

Jay and Jeff also talk briefly about the recent no fly zone NASA put around the moon to prevent the Indians and  Chinese taking high resolution photography of the Apollo landings as their own space programmes advance logarithmically. It takes an unusually blunted mind not to question the official story why NASA have never been back. "It's boring" isn't quite cutting it.

Moving on from the moon, Jay also agrees with my pet theory of True Blood as allegory for the Anunnaki/Archons coming out of the closet as I blogged about back here in July. It's very reassuring to know that my wild speculations are also being reached on the other side of the planet and while not proof of claim are at least evidence of similar thinking. There's no question also that it was Jay who taught me to look at what television and Hollywood pump out with a critical eye for agenda and pre-programming/psychic priming.

Like Jay I also think Ron Paul will get a bullet if he ever came close to winning the presidency. It's extraordinary watching the corporate for profit media siding with psychopaths like Perry, Gingrich et al.

More NASA Moon Landing Photo Fakery

I'm so annoyed with myself because I spotted this of my own accord some time ago. I thought how come the earth looks so far away to fly to? The answer is three days but as you can see from the video it's another cut and paste job.

Again, it's a nuanced story. NASA did fly to the moon, but they had to replace the film and photography for reasons we can only guess at. As they haven't been back since and have cancelled any intention of returning and sealed off the moon from anyone trespassing, contravening all space treaties, we can only assume that there is information in the original film and photography they don't want us to see.

Real scientists are asking all the questions. The fake scientist are doing as instructed. It's business as usual.

Jay Weidner On NASA Deception & Dark Sides Of The Moon

An old interview with Jay from 2009, freshly uploaded to Youtube. I'd never heard the Wiesbaden bomb thing before or even Joseph P. Farrell ever mention it. My first question on that would be 'didn't the German Nazis hate the so called "Jew physics"'? I've no time to interrogate it any further than that but comments always welcome.

Update: Original video censored.

@JoeRogan - Recombinant 99%

It's a great piece of recombinant culture video making. Check out my earlier posts on Joe Rogan. He gets it. Corporations don't.

Update 11-12-2023 - Original Video removed. Substitute video he now disavows.

Jay Weidner - Kubrick's 2001 Space Odyssey, Moon Landing & The Archons

This is the first time I've come across Awakentothetruth.com

The interviewer is very pleasant to listen to and so this is a great introduction if you've not come across Jay Weidner's work. Find out why the Archons are envious of us and like our royal family bloodlines, have zero humour, zero empathy and zero art. 

Think about that. Think about what being human means. Think about that flag you wave at Royal Weddings.

Did NASA Reshoot The Moon Landing?

At this stage I can't imagine these Youtube clips would be turning up without the consent of quite powerful individuals. Make your mind up for yourself and dig into the moon tags for a fuller examination of the available evidence.

Lunar Shadows

Responding to comments on the counter-intuitive nature of shadow directions in the Moon Castles & Pyramid post the video creator secureteam10 has provided an explanation which in his defence (I assume it's a he) is also NASA'S explanation for photographic shadow discrepancies  from the Apollo missions. 

I have too many questions now to argue either for or against the veracity of the shadows but this post I wrote is worth reading for a fuller picture.

David Hatcher Childress - Moon Anomalies

I've playfully mocked David Hatcher Childress for his brilliant cartoon voice. If given the chance I'd write a character into Family Guy for him tomorrow. However he's one of the most accomplished researchers in my book and if you watch him regularly on the Ancient Aliens season he always manages to bring something to the table in the short bursts they give their experts unlike some of the more telegenic presenters who could be scripted or have swotted up ten minutes before hand (well that's the impression I get).

So this video caught my eye as it was done some time ago and I've never associated David with lunar anomalies but not only is his presentation seemingly ahead of the game to other researchers I've relied on to date but he nails the critical points that have led me to somewhat awkwardly conclude (not assert, conclude) that the Moon was consciously put into place at a very specific point of orbit around the planet Earth. I along with many many other people are a whole lot more sceptical than the gullible scientific materialists who accept blindly without question that the moon and the sun occupy the same proportionally sized real estate in the sky by coincidence. Furthermore nobody from the established science corner will take me on in a debate. Which is odd because all I know can be learned in half an hour.

Without even going into the numbers which drill down into the subject, or the unique motion for a moon which doesn't rotate but faces the planet from the same side like a giant CCTV camera keeping a perma-eye on things, I don't buy NASA or Wired Magazine's explanation that it's a coincidence. 

P.W. Bridgeman describes a coincidence as what you have left over from a bad theory.

Most people get a little confused about the moon landing debate so allow me to briefly complexify that discussion in order to clear it up. The landings both happened and were filmed separately for reasons I can only guess at. But film it separately they did. More posts on that over here.

Jay Weidner - Kubrick & Those Apollo Moon Landings

A compressed twenty five minutes explaining how Jay Weidner figured out that the moon landings used front screen projection as a film technique (an allegation supported by Hollywood film technicians) and how he put two and two together to conclude that Stanley Kubrick with the help of top NASA scientists like Fred Ordway created the most realistic space scenes though not without leaving clues as to its veracity or otherwise.

Behind The Scenes Of Kubrick's The Shining

The internet is truly awesome. Thirty-five minutes of the making of The Shining filmed by Stanley Kubrick's 17-year-old daughter Vivian Kubrick. For more insights into why the film steered away from Stephen Kings' book, read this post.

Via Open Culture

Apollo 18

Apollo 18 is not my usual fare but after watching Transformers 3 and the overlap with lunar chatter on the net I'm looking forward to seeing what Hollywood has to say about the Moon. 

Update: It's a shit movie but some of the 70's photography is superb.

Kubrick's Attention To Detail

It's frustrating that around the globe hundreds of Kubrick fans laud his attention to detail and yet gloss over the relentless symbolism in his movies confirming his NASA appointment to film the moon landings. Endless debates discussing the lingerie and ignoring the sex. It's the greatest money shot ever missed.

That Eye of Providence as used by Andy McDowell in Clockwork Orange for example. In a world with Eyes Wide Shut I can only encourage fans to Google Jay Weidner and Kubrick to understand the man. Jay doesn't mind a little hyperbole to rile those who fear most the Easter eggs Kubrick dropped into his movies, but his analysis is the authoritative big picture. 

Cut.

Fritz Lang, Werner Von Braun & The Moon Landings

I think this is even more interesting than the first part of the documentary I posted earlier. There's less of a focus on the questionable moon landing photography and more on manipulation of populations through media and film entertainment. It starts off with questions of the Van Allen belts being to dangerous for man to travel through without being irradiated to death but does move on to the whole Soviet and United States manipulation and deceit of space travel. I had no idea of the Von Braun/Fritz Lang connection or that the Soviets too were faking so much stuff.

I'm genuinely confused in a good way trying to fit in both sides motives because intercontinental complicity seems to be a theme I pick up now and again, and I may have to explore much deeper. 

The lie is different at every level isn't it?

British Questions About NASA Moon Landings

The first time I heard about the hoax moon landings I thought don't be ridiculous. I've only given it a day's research now, and had to walk away from it because both sides put forward a pretty good case for fake pictures or explanations for photographic anomalies in an inhospitable environment. Also it get's complicated as some of it may be true and some of it may be illusion for political reasons as those who believe Kubrick was hired by NASA to film the moon landings after his 2001 space oddysey success. I'm going to walk away from this discussion but if it get's you questioning the processed cheese reality of mainstream media that's a good thing but good luck with coming to a conclusion.

The real dark side of the moon is that all the evidence suggests it was put in place and is therefore some sort of artificial satellite. It's size, orbit, position, gravity and density are just too weird for anybody too explain.

Richard Hoagland - (Sous-titres Français)

2 hours and 50 minutes of essential information on hidden lunar secrets with newly posted French subtitles. Well worth listening to the joint author of Dark Mission.

Saving Face - The Space Race (Behind the scenes at Hollywood)

Did Kubrick film back ups of the moon landing in case things didn't work out, leaving NASA embarrassed in the psychologically crucial space race? Here's a paper by Jay Weidner on the topic. I'm sure they did land there at some point but that doesn't trouble me as much as the odd idea I hold that the moon isn't quite what it seems. It's a little too perfect. Precise even. It's like the BMW of celestial bodies. A thing of beauty but slightly terrifying.

2001 Space Odyssey

We were watching 2001: A Space Odyssey last night. I vaguely recall watching it when I was younger but this time round it was such a treat. A lot more fell into place on this viewing as I'm getting a sense for Kubrick as a director and as a person. I'm trying to think who else is as good as him and apart from Lynch there is nobody is there? Funny thing was we both turned to look at each other half way and said 'those look like iPads'.

Now you might think that's a coincidence but Steve Job's amazing streak of success over the last few years has definitely had me wondering if he has had access to those allegations of back engineered gizmos that the UFO crowd swear are largely withheld from us by a self serving elite who accumulate wealth by enslaving our time to a mortgage/debt treadmill before egging us on to ripping each others throats out over oil and destruction through soul draining organised religion and misery. Like that feeling of being disconnected from who you really are. Precariously attached to a marginally differentiated lifeline of drudgery and artifice.

Well of course I'm riffing a bit here because Stanley Kubrick was a very secretive man.  Then there are those allegations of filming the moon landings in case they went wrong and thus potentially losing the U.S. a crucially psychological information war.  Allegedly Stanley demanded a deal that in return for shooting the moon landings he could later do the films he wanted without Hollywood interference. Has anybody got any recommendations for which Kubrick film I should watch next as I'm obsessed with his work now. Also does anybody know the rumour about why he changed the destination planet in 2001 Space Odyssey? It was meant to be Saturn but that was too close to the mark so he changed it to Jupiter. Saturn has that distinctly odd looking moon Iapetus which I've mentioned before was the spark for my synchronicity post and which looks like the death star in Star Wars. Just saying folks. Draw your own conclusions folks. I'm only on the lookout for better questions.

It's the circular parts of Iapetus that merit comment and then on closer look the ridge around the equator is distinctly uniform.

But rather than get bogged down with the differences between man made and artificial. You can leave that to Benoit Mandelbrot. The question I have is why call the moon landing missions Saturn V. What is it about Saturn? Why not call them Neptune 5?

Cosmic Capitalism

 

If survival of the species is a worthwhile game-plan then application of logic can't be harmful.

My thoughts are we have three options:

1. Laissez faire Corporatism/Capitalism/Scientific Materialism

There's enough history to argue that we are no more in control of our destiny, then there is evidence of why we exist in the vastness of the universe, apparently alone. Most of our discoveries are more a case of accidents then purpose-driven discovery, and so the solution is let it unfold without a plan. I have a deep conviction about transition of energy after death and don't fear dying, but it strikes me as odd that those who are least predisposed to this kind of thinking, are most unlikely to openly and vocally champion Capitalism's course of action. If one doesn't believe in life after death why hand over to those who are living?

2. Harmony

This option requires a more immediate and locally self-sufficient discussion on managed population decline. In 50 years with one-family-one-child policies, as China has already shown, we could be in a position to conclude what that harmony means. How the resources are intelligently shared, how much untouched nature is to be contiguous with humans and how to rewire corporations to wean them off addiction to profits.

3. Cosmic Capitalism

The picture of the Chanel logo on the moon was the first visualization that made sense to me.

It never occurred to me until recently that capitalism could be the solution to our problem. Not the mutant strain we are working. Currently capitalism is a shoe scraping cripple for unbiquitous wealth creation. It's the HIV of abundance, a malignant tumor on our collective hope for a better tomorrow. 

What explains the absence of truly awesome visionary branding, selling futures of cosmic   promises with travel or luxury brands (for example) vying with each other right now to brand the lunar surface as a terrestrially inspired vision. I'm talking about a celebration of firm conviction in cosmic capitalism, physically investing in the wealth needed to enable us to eject ourselves from the orbit of an uninhabitable Earth, and leaving behind a spent womb and bruised uterus ready for metamorphic change? A Goodbye-Earth lunar-branding experience, celebrating escape from orbit, and out of this solar system and onto the next.

With capitalism that has vision such as this I can roll with the costs of what is left behind. But the capitalism we have. It has no balls. It's a parasite. It has no future.

What say you?