| Source: thenewamerican.com |
Since the release of Angelina Jolie's anti-Serb propaganda movie, new moments in her relationship with the Serbs, with politics and with the truth occurred. I wasn't the only one that called for a boycott of the movie and while I still think a boycott is a valuable public relations tool and an effective pressure tactic, this movie and its author came to be seen as much more than offensive Hollywood creatures deserving of a boycott. The movie bombed, deservedly, since it sucked, according to most reviews. It made $175,000 in four weeks and it played in 18 theaters. To give you an idea of how horribly it really fared with American audiences, Pina, a German documentary about a dance choreographer, released in 10 American theaters, made $645,000 in the same time period, plus $11 million internationally. Hell, someone named a movie We Bought a Zoo and it made $67 million domestically, in the four weeks it's been out. Now, I'd like to claim just a little bit of credit with my call for a boycott, but I'm afraid the movie tanking had nothing do with me or with any other Serbian pundit or an activist condemning the movie - it was all Angelina.
While I do not think she ventured into directing her debut planning to lose millions of dollars, looking at her post-release behavior, I began to believe that she didn't make the movie to make money, to break even or to gain foothold in the directorial world. Angelina Jolie is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the pre-eminent American foreign policy designer organization whose large membership is a who's who of the American political establishment, including Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney, Wesley Clark, William Cohen, Madeleine Albright and other names familiar to the Serbs. While the CFR membership doesn't disqualify her from making a good movie, we have to wonder about her role and purpose within the think-tank. I mean, the CFR has been decisively directing the course of American foreign policy since 1919 and its founders, namely Walter Lippman, had espoused all the ideals that could be summarized into a tendency to advocate for centralized global governance. In other words, the political globalization that is in full swing was a brain child of, among others, the CFR founders.
How does Angelina Jolie fit the picture? She's a UN Good Will Ambassador and that's about as much politics as she's dipped her toes in. But you don't become a member of the CFR for shits and giggles. Just look at the list I linked to above. Yes, you pay to get in, but you'd expect a Hollywood actress to pay for an entry into an exclusive country club, to buy an island in the Caribbean or to sip martinis on Roman Abramovich's yacht. Jolie said recently that her heart and her interests are on foreign policy issues. In the same article in San Jose Mercury News she said that "among the experts she consulted while making the film were Richard C. Holbrooke, the architect of the Dayton accords that ended the conflict in December 1995; Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander; and foreign correspondent Tom Gjelten, who covered the Balkan wars for National Public Radio." She missed to mention Christianne Amanpour in this breath, but why nitpick? Need she say more, though?
So, yes, forget the $13 million spent, it's peanuts. No money has been made? Oh, well. With this movie, the CFR and Angelina Jolie launched a PR campaign against the Serbs, without profit considerations, without artistic merit, without regard for the truth... Walter Lippmann, the founder of the CFR, was infamous for his stoic disregard and disdain for truth and accuracy in public discourse, and the organization has never betrayed those founding principles. Jolie is faithful to them as well, as she puts herself into the overt service of anti-Serb propaganda.
We can conclude that this movie is neither a random nor an isolated attempt at reminding the world that the Serbs are maniacal rapists and murderers. It is safe to say that the forces that declared us "murderous assholes" are still heavily engaged in defamation of the Serb nation. To what specific purpose, does it make a difference? Maybe to shut Milorad Dodik up, maybe just to please their Islamic friends by currying a small favor, who knows? The truth is, if this propaganda campaign is an overture into a larger anti-Serb assault, we are already few steps behind. Serbs should have prepared for this about 15 years ago, when the first movie unjustifiably showing us as terrorists came out. (By the way, George Clooney is a CFR member as well.) If we have, we might have been ready and able to try and counter the lies now. Since we haven't begun establishing counter balance 15 years ago, we get Angelina Jolie strutting her "blood and honey" in front of our faces. It is hardly ever too late to start countering propaganda, but, honestly, it is getting later and later with every vitriolic attack that passes as an effort at defending human rights. And the Serbs haven't progressed beyond the Milorad Vucelic information era.
9 comments:
Ah, but to be entirely fair, Vučelić is actually doing some good in Serbia now (his weekly being a voice of reason among the madness).
But I get your point: there is no organized effort to combat this sort of propaganda. And there should be.
There's a tiny little problem of the quisling regime in Serbia itself doing everything to destroy resistance and help Serbophobes everywhere. That needs to be fixed first, before anything else can become more than a holding action.
The fact that anyone takes Angelina Jolie seriously in a political forum is completely baffling to me. She is an overindulged celebrity who naively scrapes the surface of pet foreign "projects" of hers, makes some sort of obvious statement about it, and then moves on to the next one.
The problem is that so many average Americans actually think that she is some sort of serious "face" for the U.N.
To me, it just solidifies my long standing belief that the U.N. is a joke and a sham.
That is the whole point. She has to be taken seriously because she's on a mission as an agent of the powerful CFR. If you look at her as a Hollywood ditz, you'll miss the real effect of her movie. She's not some Hollywood star that took up humanitarian causes for snobbish or benevolent reasons - she is an agent of the American foreign policy.
And there should be, regardless of Belgrade, regardless of the difficulties posed by Serbia's non-participation in its own defense... Can we find ways?
Yes there are ways. Since the Serbs are being attacked by a variety of Western backed alliances (NATO, EU, NGO's, CFR, etc.,), the opposition parties, entities, etc., MUST align themselves with the BRIC's. No more of this Non-aligned movement nonsense.
That would be a decision made at the government level. What are the ways common people can organize themselves to counter the propaganda? There are a lot of freelancers out there, some doing good, some playing into the hands of the likes of Jolie, but there's no organized, strategic effort. Common Serbs have the same obligation towards Serbdom as Boris Tadic. He's got more power, but until we've done what's in our power, we can't say we are much better than him. History will judge us both.
At the government level??? No, not at all. It's actually quite simple & all you have to do is look at recent history. Does OTPOR ring a bell??? It's time to run the old OTPOR GAG on the regime in Beograd. If one looks hard enough, one may find funding from a NGO or two run by some of our Russian cousins.
Yes, on the government level. How else would you propose to change national policies? First, a movement or a party has to get in the government.
Otpor is an example of that, although not an adequate one. Otpor helped the people interested in changes become the government.
Otpor wasn't a mass movement or even a grassroots movement, but a CIA-organized and trained group of activists that used direct action to expedite the events that helped turn the popular opinion against Milosevic. Kostunica beat Milosevic, not Otpor, but Otpor did aid the effort. Otpor, however, was a CIA-financed operation and as such, it was not organically Serbian and it was not truly patriotic since it worked for a foreign government hostile to Serbia.
I'm not saying their tactics weren't something to consider and apply and I get your point there, but, again, Otpor didn't change the foreign or domestic policy, they played a role in changing the regime with another regime. What I'm talking about in my post is changing the attitude before any of that can take place.
If you are able to get Russian funding, let me know.
What I am referring to is is the type of tactics to use against the regime. As far as getting Russian funding, Aleksandar Vasilevich Konuzin can point you in the right direction.
Post a Comment