M h. The paper reports that two of the male constitutes to give him
a White Night two of the White House last year. You want answers?
I think I'm entitled. You want answers? What the truth? You can't
handle the truth? Pretty is? Everyone? Welcome to the Nick Bryant Podcast
Today. My guest is Jay Dyer and he wrote two books called Esoteric Hollywood
and also Esoteric Hollywood Too, which I found to be very edifyed like no
other book before it. His works delve deep into the dark, mysterious undertones
hidden in Tinseltown. After years of scholarly research, Jay Dyer has compiled his
most read essays combining philosophy compared to religion, symbolism, geopolitics, and all
kinds of other dark subject matter. Readers will watch movies with new eyes,
able to decipher on their own as the secret medians of cinema are unveiled.
Jay, how you doing today? I'm doing good? Thank you, Nick.
I know we've been talking for a long time about doing a podcast and
we finally got around to doing it, and I want to have you come
on my channel as well and discuss some of your work. I'll be more
than happy to so you get into a lot of esoteric stuff. I read
esoteric Hollywood too, but you get into a lot of esoteric stuff in your
riding, I think, where you really go below the surface to show an
esoteric occult side. But with these two movies, there are kind of no
brainers as far as the occult side. And you can talk about them in
your esoteric Hollywood too, you say, littered with Masonic and al chemical enter
imagery. The Ninth Gate is a film about a cult initiation as much as
I argued Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut is. So let's talk about The Ninth Gate
and Eyes Wide Shut. Yeah, those are good two pairs. They go
together. They're very close in terms of timeline when they came out in a
few years of one another. There's a lot of similar scenes going on.
So you know, I don't know what type of relationship Kubrick or Roman Polanski
had if they if they knew each other very well, but both scenes,
you know, both films have the themes of sort of a cult initiation,
Satanic groups running and things in the background reaching to very high levels of nobility,
and and you know European dynasties and you know these sort of quests that
the protagonist is on to figure out what's really going on, Who's running this
stuff, What's what's a true Satanic initiation or a true Satanic philosophy? I
think. But but of course they diverge in very distinct ways as well.
They're very different films and other respects. But yeah, I think you probably
couldn't think. I couldn't think of two better examples of you know, accult
Hollywood films other than Ninthgate and I wad Shot. So in the first book,
I devoted think about one hundred and eighty ninety hundred pages to Kubrick,
and I think the first significant essay as the Eyes Wideshut essay. I put
a lot of time and effort into studying that film, particularly about eight or
nine years ago, because I was in college and taking film classes. We
had a class on Oliver Stone. That's actually what kind of introduced me to
a lot of trying day books. I ended up coming across the Senator Forces
trilogy. I read the whole trilogy, and that kind of piqued my interest,
as well as other books i'd read on the connections between Hollywood cults and
intelligence agencies, and there hadn't been a whole lot of mainline literature at that
time. You could really only find a few academics like Tricia Jenkins and Donald
I forget the guy's name, but there's a book called Operation Hollywood, and
those really kind of just scratched the surface when it comes to the Pentagon and
the CIA having kind of liaison offices to Salt on various film projects. But
I really wanted to go deeper into you know, well, it seems like
quite a few of these actors have pretty consistent intelligence connections. Seems like some
famous people in Hollywood have even been spies at a high level, a listers.
Even so, the more that I dove into it, you just it
turns out there's a whole rabbit hole of information about the connection between these realms.
And I think certain movies also are really windows into that world as well.
And these two, these two films are great examples. It's so interesting.
Oliver Stone's kid, Sean Stone, made a documentary about the propaganda that
Hollywood kicks out about the medical industrial complex, and I was interviewed in that
series. Actually it was true documentaries, and I thought it was very elucidating.
So with Kubrick. He's born in the Bronx, does all right as
a photographer, starts to do really well as a director, and he goes
to the UK and kind of lives almost he's very insulated, and I've always
wondered about that. And then he comes out with eyes wide shut. And
what's really interesting about that. The first time I saw it, it was
before I got into the Franklin scandal and all the other crazy stuff that I
write about, and it didn't I just it wouldn't have gotten more than thirty
five or forty on the Tomato meter for me Ron Tomato. But after I
got into Franklin and this other stuff, I went, Wow, he is
capturing a reality that no one has yet captured in the way that he has
captured it. Yeah, I think you're right. I think you know.
I remember hearing about your work many years ago when I heard about other texts
that books that just that discussed similar types of you know, really grewsome subject
matter. And I think in the last maybe even eight years, as more
and more of these types of things came out with Epstein or with Savile in
the UK, we started to see this pattern that you know, this isn't
really conspiracy theory. This is a lot of fact, and it's an unfortunate,
you know way that government's work, which is to utilize compromise and to
be involved in these kinds of high level uh you know, escapades and parties
and whatnot and filming it and all of that. And then so it would
just it just seemed logical to me that if Kubrick has made for example,
underage stuff and compromise, it's actually made that a theme in many of his
films, right going back to Lolita, going back to Barry Lyndon, It
just seemed logical to me that when we dissect something like Eyes White Shot,
we're going to notice the same types of patterns. We're going to see,
you know, the the shop, the costume shop owner. Right, He's
got lely Sobieski there playing the role of this underage girl who seems to kind
of know what's going on in this operation because she's the one that of course
tells Bill Harford to wear an ermine cloak, which signifies nobility to roll to
the upper class in the traditional European ideas, So so she knows what's going
on. We see this with her character as just one example, and yeah,
I think that that's again why it's emblematic of you know, Kubert was
kind of like you said, he he may have been exposed to some of
this upper class stuff so to speak, when he was in the UK,
and then he puts it into this film. People at the time thought the
film was kind of crazy. I remember at the time when it came out,
I was I've always been a film buff, so I remember reading reviews
and it was it was lampooned, and it was just like, this is
is boring, it doesn't make sense, it's irrelevant. But as time has
gone by, I think he's been vindicated that it does make sense. I
agree with that one hundred percent. More and more people that I've talked to
understand eyes wide shut as the occult and various initiation rights are kind of starting
to just merge with the mainstream, or basically on the verge of merging with
the with the mainstream. And then you got into They Live, which is
a very interesting movie and I've always liked it. It's about a guy who
sees reality when he's living in the matrix. Basically, extraterrestrials have taken over
the world, and then they've made everybody Stepford husbands and Stepford wives and Stepford
kids. But this one guy can see it, and you say, of
they live amazingly. Carpenter's film even reveals the core sign up of Hollywoodism that
the narses sistic indulgence of fame and the camera lens can bring fulfillment, probably
demonstrated in the television scene with the woman describing her fantasy of being famous and
thereby attaining meeting in her life. Yeah, I think Carpenter is interesting.
I've always liked John Carpenter's movies. I think the film is an allegory.
I don't as far as I know, Carpenter doesn't believe in any sort of
supernatural or any kind of alien to existence. So I think he's using the
imagery of the alien as kind of a symbolic, allegorical description of the ruling
class and the tendency that they have to undermine us in ways that we wouldn't
expect, even to the point of perhaps even utilizing signals and signals intelligence and
EMFVLF stuff that we don't even know about, probably in the mainstream at a
very high level. And I think there's some truth to that. I'm not
trying to go full crazy person, but I mean there are you know,
military studies research into that kind of stuff. So I think probably Carbenter had
heard of that kind of of a of a weapon that existed or that weaponization
going on, and then he expands it into the consumer culture into uh two,
mass media. And so I've always appreciated directors and writers that use the
medium that they that they use as a means to critique that very medium.
Right, So you know, when we talk about the military industrial complex or
Hollywood being connected to the CIA, excuse me, CIA ME, and mild
complex being connected to Hollywood and music, even what we start to see is
that it's for a reason. It's not it's not just trying to make a
quick book. It's actually a huge part of social engineering. So like at
the beginning of the second book, I cited the National Security Cinema book where
they talked about thousands of declassified hundreds of pages of doc documents that were declassified,
discussing tons and tons of TV shows, hundreds of examples and movies where
you know, the Pentagon, the deep State had had specific messages placed into
those films. So even things as innocuous those Cupcake Wars or Hawaii five.
Oh. I mean, it goes way back. You've got the messaging going
on for the purpose of defending the overall superstructure of the regime. And I
can think even when I was a kid, my dad was in the Navy,
and I remember all the Navy movies that came out in the nineteen eighties,
Top Gun, you know, and there was Navy Seals with Charlie Sheen,
and there's all this Navy propaganda, military Propagain, that was because Reagan
really at that time wanted to beef up America's defenses and the national security state,
right, and he did that on purpose. And there was a lot
of tie in with the Pentagon at that time, between Hollywood and Pentagon at
that time on purpose. So even though we typically think of Hollywood as leftists,
there can also be these phases where there's a lot of militarization military propaganda
as well. And that was kind of an overturning of the previous era of
a lot of you know, Oliver Stone's style films or war films critiquing Vietnam
and war films critiquing you know, apocalypse. Now these kinds of films.
Then you get a shift over to the sort of Reagan Neo Connish era of
Hollywood in the nineteen eighties. And so in other words, these are examples
of what you're talking about with with They Live. That are it's being parodied
in the movie, but these are hard, hardcore, real life examples of
what's in the film. Well, you have a number of examples and They
Live. Now propaganda just permeates everything, and you bring in Everard Bates and
the tactics that he used. Edward Barnees was the nephew of Sigmund Freud,
and actually Sigmund wasn't doing so good, but Edward Burnees Readnicle Sigmund's books and
he thought, you know, I think I could do something with these books.
And he's considered to be one of the founders of modern pr and actually
the United States hired him when we fomented a coup in Guatemala. We wanted
some good PR on that, and so Edward Brene's came to the rescue.
And then you will also get into Michael Lachino, and he was a he
was an American intelligence He was a Satanist and he wrote a book from ssiop
to Mind War, and that book is about not necessarily doing a siop on
your enemy, your enemy's populist. It's about doing a siop on your own
populace so you can make them all believe in war. I mean, And
I just found that pretty fascinating that you would stick Yeah, I forgot in
that essay. You're right, I did stick that in there because it was
a great example of the what what Carpenter's lampooning or satirizing. But it's also,
like you're pointing out, very serious because you know in that essay,
towards the end of it, in the footnotes, uh A Keno and his
co author talk about signals into I mean, like using EM E, M
F E, L F BLF signals to actually alter people's body frequencies. So
this is actually a real thing. I don't know if John Carpenter knew about
that. I just found it interesting that, you know, the film is
about UH signals and what not, TV signals and satellite signals and all of
that, and and how that brainwashes us, and that the h the a
keynote paper, UH just kind of a sort of stating the the Army's doctrine
of psychological warfare at the time and how it would need it needed to transition
over into a lot more what they call in their white papers. There's a
NATO document that came out that we covered, I think a couple of years
ago. In the NATO document on cy war basically said the same thing.
It said, it's time to go beyond thinking about changing people's minds and rather
thinking about changing their actual brains. So the biological chemistry itself needs to alter.
And that included everything from the same types of elf elf stuff to microchips,
et cetera. So yeah, so it's becoming a lot more explicit in
the white papers and the documents as to what they're really referring to. And
I just think that, you know, fiction always has this amazing almost quasi
prophetic element where fiction will, whether it's books or movies, a lot of
times kind of predict the future in a way. I mean, I don't
literally think the predicting the future. I think that, you know, if
you think of somebody like Philip K. Dick, you know, he was
hanging out with a lot of people from Silicon Valley at the time, and
he kind of knew what they wanted to do, and so he would put,
you know, in his fiction what they planned to do, and so
you get this dystopian fiction as a result. And then in that way,
you know, I think fish could be kind of prophetic. I was amazed
that the media and the government sold the Iraq War to eighty percent of Americans
because it was obviously predicated on lies, and those lines were being told almost
they were being exposed almost in real time on the Internet. But yet eighty
percent of Americans wanted thought that Saddam Hussein was connected del Kaida and not various
things. And you talk about and they live that the Pentagon hired pr firm
Bell Pottinger and gave them five hundred and forty million dollars to show what amenace
ISIS was to America. Yeah, a lot of these groups we find out
have been I mean, there's a degree to which the groups are real.
They get funding. Of course, ISIS is sort of the continuation of al
Qaeda and the Mujahideen and so forth. But you know that's in the nineteen
eighties. You know, they were at the White House with Reagan. You
have the Mujahideen freedom fighters. They're being awarded and congratulated by Reagan. There
was movies made at the Bond Films in the nineteen eighties with Timothy Dalton have
him fighting alongside the Mujahadeen. They even have these sort of been lauden esque
characters in the film. I think it's a Living Daylights, but it's one
of the Timothy Dalton installments which Rambo as well. Rambo fights alongside the Mujahideen,
and then of course we get in the very nineteen eighty four fashion,
the flipping oh no, actually there are are enemies, and you know,
we messed up and we did too much. Now now it's blowback and all
this kind of stuff. But yeah, I think a big part of al
Qaeda, Mujahidin and then the creation and rise of ISIS, a lot of
it was pr A lot of it was media played a big role in that.
I mean, obviously there was also I think funneling of aid and support
from Turkey to ISIS throughout the particularly during the attempt to overthrow a SOD.
We saw a lot of Western support for that that failed. But regardless,
you know, it's kind of the same game pattern I think we see with
the CIA funding and aiding and supporting rebels. In fact, I went and
read. One of the talks I did a couple of years ago was Miles
Copeland's book Game of Nations, And in that book, Copeland talks about being
in Egypt and in Syria and basically saying, of course we do false flags.
Of course we fund radical Islamic groups. Like did you think we didn't,
he says, He says, this is one of our greatest tools is
to utilize the Islamic radical for our purposes. There's a old chapter on it,
so yeah, it's pretty prevalent in the literature. So yeah, but
I'd forgotten about that specific amount of money. But that's that's wild. It's
so half a billion dollars. They're really just to help create the image of
ISIS. But and then and then the threats also become the justification for the
salvation that the system offers. So then when they get rid of bin Lot,
and oh we'll see Obama's a hero. He got rid of bin Lad
and they dumped the body at sea, and it's all nonsense in my view.
And even say Hirsh writes a big thing talking about how it was all
seemingly fake and made up. So anyway, long story short, back to
Hollywood and Bernees and all that. Yeah. I remember at the time when
I wrote the second Hollywood book, I wasn't I'd read Bernees and I'd read
Propaganda, but I hadn't gone into Walter Lippmann, hadn't gone deep into the
Tavistock. I'd read Estlin's book from Trying Day. But then I went and
read doctor John Coleman's book on Tavistock was actually really good, and he goes
into the history of how the same Reese Report style of propaganda that they used
against the Kaiser to get World War One, going that the predecessor to uh
this Tavistock was the I forget the name of it, but it's something starts
with a W. But it's like it was the Ministry of Warfare that the
Brits used to start World War One and say that the Kaiser what they called
him, the Butcher, They used the same propaganda calling Saddam the butcher Bagnun
because like they literally just mirrored one hundred year old propaganda from Tavistock or the
predecessor to Tavistock. And that's why as you're pointing out y' all these guys
like Brene's, like Lipmann, they're just borrowing from the techniques of both Freud
and H. G. Wells, who was a big forefather and pioneer of
propaganda techniques. And then you see that that gets used in film. Absolutely.
In fact, Brene has said that the greatest medium of propaganda the world's
ever known is Hollywood. And he even made his uncle's books in Vogue.
Again. I mean, he was a busy guy. And actually, it's
kind of interesting Joseph Gebels was quite fond of reading Burnet's books despite his Jewish
lineage. Well actually and Tavistock individuals who were also Jewish were open about being
fans of Gebels, and they appreciated the type of propaganda techniques that he was
using as well. So there's a lot of cross pollination there in those areas.
Gebels would be if he saw a television today, I mean, that
would be his wet dream, which we'll get into a little bit later when
you talk about when I talk about Poltergeist with Ghostbusters, you brought in something
kind of interesting the government tapping into metaphysical forces, and you mentioned Stargate there
was an mk Ultra subproject that was tapping into psychic abilities and with Stargate.
Stargate was financed for twenty years and then Bill Clinton said it doesn't work,
and the military said it doesn't work. So they ostensibly financed something for twenty
years that didn't work, and now there's no more Stargate. But I believe
that there is a stargate and it's gone black. Yeah, that's interesting because
we just revisited this topic. I hadn't thought about this in many years,
but I got some of my old SRI at Stargate research out the other day
because we did a podcast covering the recent discussion of Gateway Process, which is
another one of these declassified CAIA documents, where they were supposedly delving into a
lot of kind of consciousness techniques and meditation technique and trying to hit to hemi
sync which has merged both hemispheres of the brain, and see what you could
tap into by doing this. And so the guy who ran that was part
of this Esslin connected institute. I forget the name of the foundation that they
were doing this research at, but it was all part of SRI as well,
and a lot of the people at SRI involved in that project, you
know, come up in a lot of the text that Chris has printed at
Trying Day, and that then the Boharics and these characters so also have a
lot of interest in the occult a gnosticism and quantum physics. So it's hard
to know what's real or not real in that whole domain of a cult and
metaphysics and quantum physics and consciousness meditation techniques. I think there's definitely something there
because, as you pointed out, what you get just double bind and the
creation of the First Earth Battalion, and you know, the book that Ronson
writes, Minister at Ghats becomes the George Clooney film. So here we get
another crossover into Hollywood with the very stuff that we're talking about. Because although
I don't I think I mentioned Minister at Goats, I didn't do an essay
on it. You know, Clooney is another character, for example, who
seems to pretty consistently have direct CIE connections, perhaps even working with the CIA,
much like Angelina Joe Lee being a member of the Council on Foreign Relation.
So we see it. We always see these patterns, and if you're
remembering Minister at goats. You know, he's doing all these different techniques the
the George Clooney character, like cloud busting with his mind and he's trying to
he's trying to kill a goat with his mind. But what's what happens at
the end of the movie is that if I recall there, it fast forwards
to present day of Gulf War one and they're in Iraq and they're figuring out
ways to hand out American DVDs and movies to push American pop culture in Iraq.
So again the irony is that the movie becomes a sort of a testament
to the movie itself being propaganda and kind of you know, bringing a full
circle. But yeah, you're absolutely right to say that there's quite a few
of these projects where the government's you know, it's not just SRI and Uri
gell Are and remote viewing. It's it's quite a few things and probably much
more that we don't know about. It's interesting you talked about under Poohich and
he worked at SRI and was was part of startating and he was a notorious
pedophile. He was he was definitely a very depraved individual and he was he
was the guy that founded or discovered Jury Gallop and your his ability to bend
spoons and other things. And but there are accounts of poo Haich being like
a notorious pedophile, and I knew someone that was, well I still know
him, don't really talk too much anymore. I said he was involved in
stargating slright And I said, how did you guys rationalize using Andre Pouharich.
Yeah, he's such a malignant character. And this guy said to me,
well, we knew there was something weird about him. And with Cloney,
it's kind of interesting. You have Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, you have
Syriana, and then you have Michael Clayton, which really show some amazing truths,
right, but then he does a U turn and doesn't seem to be
making movies about stuff like that anymore. Yeah, that's a good point.
I did like Michael Clayton. I thought that was good sort of critique and
exposing corporate power. And then Siana, I want to say, that's based
on a Robert Bayer book, and that would mean then that you know,
that's kind of this supposedly critical side of the CIA, which which Bear is
kind of a similar character where every now in he'll say is really kind of
revealing things, and then help be back on CNN touting the you know,
Russia runs Trump narrative, which is all nonsense in my view. But yeah,
so it's hard to know with some of these characters, like what where
they're come. But you know, with Clooney again, you know, you've
got tons and tons of people who that's more speculative in his case, I
don't think it's outlandish, but quite a few people in Hollywood have been actually
you know, CIA assets, and I think that speaks to really the where
I'm going to take things in the third book I'm working on, Sir Calywood.
Three is I'm going to focus a little more on hard cases and evidences
of people who you know, were Hollywood spies who did work with the OSS.
When I was writing the first two books, you know, there's a
lot of information that wasn't even out yet, and so you know a lot
of books, biographies get written and things get declassified since you you know,
you're writing stuff eight ten years ago, and you learn a lot more about
it and you realize, oh, actually, you know, there's been Affleck
in an interview saying that Hollywood and the CIA are flip sides of the same
coin. Here's you know, information that comes out about this studio is actually
up front for running intelligence operation. You know, all these kinds of crazy
stories that come out, all of which are true. But yeah, I
mean it's it's sort of like once you see it, it's like, well,
how did I never see that? Of course, of course the CIA
is using all these Hollywood people. Of course, you know you've got people
like going back to Julia Child or the first TV chef, She's comes out
of the OSS and people think, well, why would that be, Well,
it's because it's called culture creation. So you mentioned Burne earlier. Uh
brene is, I mean, that's that's really what a lot of these groups
do, is they want to create, grow, and steer culture. And
then it makes perfect sense why they would have, you know, assets in
Hollywood. And let's jump to a clockwork Orange and the drugs. You said
something pretty interesting that Alex he was the head drug who was on the homicidal
side, and that you pointed out and this was a Kubrick film, and
you pointed out that he had endured sexual abuse very early on, and ultimately
he went through government sponsored mind control give us some insights into a clackwork orange.
Yeah. Actually I forgot about that scene where they show Alex and his
sort of government CPS handler agent guy showing up, and it's very clearly implies
that there's sexual something going on there in that scene where he's standing in his
white e tidies there with the CPS guy or whatever that guy's supposed to be.
Yeah, this is a near future dystopio in the UK where basically we
have these sort of street gangs running wild. You've got the parental middle class,
upper class people. They're all sort of oblivious to what's going on that
they really don't care. Alex's parents are totally out to lunch. They're just
sort of mesmerized by the TV, the game shows and whatnot. And Alex
is just sort of this one. He's just sort of a creature of pure
inner animalistic passion. Basically, he just sort of wanders around the town sleeping
with whoever he wants. But for some reason he has this fixation on Beethoven
h and he's always playing Beethoven. And after a brutal rape event with him
and his gang, he ends up and put into this program which is called
the Ludovico method. And to me this really just smacks of again ultra.
Its macks of reprogramming and imprinting and the actual fact a lot of the MK
ultra experiments were done with various prisoners. So we had cases in Kentucky not
far from me, where they were experimenting on people in prisons. We had
people in military prisons and confinement that were experimented on. So I think there's
some truth to this. And actually I read a book a couple of years
ago about projects in Australia. It's something I never even heard about. Some
guy wrote a little internet online book is a well written book about M culture
projects that were done in Australia that hardly anybody knew about. So M culture
actually wasn't just a US based or even a Canada based or it was actually
particularly it seems to be places within the Queen's Commonwealth, with which I think
is suspicious. So a lot of Canada, Australia, America and UK projects,
but a lot of the stuff that we that you read about in what
what appears to be uh in culture related projects in Australia also seem to match
up very closely to Ludovico method type of stuff. But yeah, so the
idea is, can we can we engineer out of the you know, wild
teenage criminal, his basic animalistic nature and turn him into this sort of just
controlled pacifist character, right, And what I like about the film, and
I think probably the point of the book too, is that you think that
this is done for under the auspices of, you know, reducing crime.
But as we pointed out earlier with the methodology of a Kino, that research
and development of that technique in that study is not just about reducing crime.
It's about how to take those techniques and turn it on the population to make
sure the population is docile and controllable. That's the key point here. And
and you know, and I think Chris has the same idea. I never
understood Vietnam until I started trying to understand it from that perspective. And if
you read Douglas Valentine's book on Vietnam, he makes the point that really Vietnam
wasn't even about research and development for warfare, it was about how to manage
population and control population. And that's kind of the ending thesis because then he
transitions over into the Bush era and how the Bush Ran Contrast stuff and the
School of Americas and all that was the development out of the Vietnam sciops programs.
So I think the same thing's going on here with what Burgess and and
clukoral Orange is talking about is that these are these are these are It's an
artistic portrayal of the techniques that are done for the excuses of reducing crime and
helping society or whatever. But it's all just for control. What's interesting about
Valentine's book about Vietnam the Phoenix program. We're training people, Our government is
training Americans to be serial killers, right, I mean, it's I don't
know how else you can put it. And there was a movie called Apartment
Zero and it was about South African mercenary and he was quite fond of killing
people. And then and then all the wars dried up, at least the
ones that he could be part of, so he returns. He goes to
London and lives with somebody, and then he starts killing people because he had
learned to enjoy it. And my uncle he died last year. He was
in Vietnam, and he and I had a number of talks about Vietnam.
And he felt really guilty about Vietnam, and I said, al, you
were put into a situation, and a highly abnormal situation, and that's a
normal response, is you want to kill somebody, I mean they're trying to
kill you, they're killing your friends, of course you're going to want to
kill them. And he died last year and I went to La and married
him, and I saw he had painted paintings of g I's standing over dead
children. And at that point I realized, now I know why he just
could I mean, he couldn't shake it. It haunted him his entire life.
Yeah, really really sad, and we were very close, but he
kept that from me. I just like I said, I didn't find out
about it until he died. Yeah, I didn't really understand movies like Apocalypse
now, you know, like I was telling you earlier, I grew up
in the eighties, so I didn't really experience or know that kind of stuff
from you know, sixties, seventies and so forth. But you know,
when I was in high school, I really got into film and became a
movie buff. And I watched Apocalypse. Now back in high school, I
did, but I didn't really understand it or know what the point of it
was. After reading Valentine's book and then going back and watching you know,
Apocalypse, now it makes a lot more sense than I can understand. You
know, You've got not just LSD, but you got this sort of like
people going like Colonel Kirks going nuts, and but he makes sense in the
in the light of a Phoenix program idea, now I do. I'm not
saying that he's supposed to be the Phoenix program. I don't know, but
definitely in the film you get a lot of elements of what was experimental psychological
warfare at the time of Vietnam, like well Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket, for
example. You have the idea of it being filmed live time. That was
the first war that was that was filmed. They would send the transmissions of
the war live, which was a new I think that was a new experiment
in social engineering to to show to the domestic population war in lifetime. You
get, you know, the playing of Wagner as the helicopters are coming over
the horizon. That was another experiment in psyops to villagers who'd never heard something
like this. So and then, of course, as you pointed out,
you know, you've got this this training of and probably profiling of like like
we've said, like you know, the CIA being involved, even corporate consultants
going over and being involved. It was a run out of Michigan University,
Michigan State, which is odd. And then they're they're basically consulting on finding
serial killers to go and murder and put corpses in the most you know,
offensive terrorizing way, particularly with the eye of God and nails in the third
eye there to freak out the Buddhists and whatnot. So, yeah, you
basically were any people to be serial killers. This is kind of wild,
this is nuts. And then you find out, you know, you dive
deeper into people like William Colby and his whole background and his role in Gladio
and the whole fiasco Operation Gladio. I mean, all this stuff for me
just kind of came unraveled with you know, being sort of a GOP Navy
family raised by GOP Navy family. You know, after nine to eleven,
I pretty much just sort of gave up all that kind of stuff because you
see, you see that these big families are all kind of in the same
crime syndicates, right, So it's not like, well, I'm gonna switch
from the Bush Family to I like the Bill you know, I like Bill
Clinton. Now, well they're all involved in you know, the same stuff.
So for me, the good part of all that was that, you
know, this kind of broke the left right paradigm for me back around the
time of you know, two thousand and three. But that's biographical data.
We were talking about the movies Apologize I got all fun to We're talking about
Vico Method, and we were talking about I like, but you know what,
Yeah, that's the thing is a lot of movies actually have this theme
of the uh, you know, the crazy Vietnam Vet, and that's a
kind of a joke that people do, and I don't I don't mind the
joke. But there turns out the reason for the crazy Vietnam Vet is that
the military was trying to find crazy guys right to tournament into serial killers.
And my uncle was just a runner of the milk kid from the Midwest.
I did well in high school, very smart, and what he was turned
into obviously was pretty horrific. You tangle twin Peaks, which I find interesting,
and you address a number of the occult teams in Twin Peaks, and
some of them jump right out at you, but you focus on Jack Parsons
when you talk about Twin Peaks. Give us some background about Jack Parsons aka
the Beast. Well, he was a prodigious rocketeer and scientists, I guess
you could say. And of course the jet Propulsion Laboratory is sort of his
baby. It's it's it comes from his work. He was into the occult
and for a time was involved in the circles of Croley, the Oto and
various lodges out in California. And his specific plan was this idea that you
could meld science with full on you know, occultism and kind of produce these
big ritual workings. And one of those, I mean, I think all
rockets are also kind of like in his mind, like sending the rocket into
space is like this you know, phallic sort of seminal transmission where you're impregnating
the universe or something like that. But he also had this idea of the
Babylon working, which was to re enact or actually create the apocalypse. So
for Crollians and people in that sphere, they tend to think that John's apocalypse
at the end of the Book of the Bible is this sort of coded magical
text that you can invoke through some sort of ritual working. So Parsons was
involved in I think an incestuous sort of ritual working at one point, and
then there was another incident where he thought he could create a homunculus, and
so he really seemed to want to take these occult ideas and put them into
practice. Probably people have heard of l Ron Hubbard and I think it was
was it l Ron Hubbard stole Marjorie Cameron from Jack Parsons, right, so,
and some money too, Yeah, yeah, okay, yeah, I'm
trying to remember all these details. But yeah, but what's interesting about Parsons
is that he seemed to take everything that you would think is science and kind
of give it this esoteric alchemical meaning. So, you know, the idea
of splitting the me or something like that. I mean, this is not
Parsons, but you know, people who have that attitude would think that it's
like a ritual working where you're releasing the energy and perhaps even opening a portal.
And the reason that relates so that you have this this idea that Parsons
thought he might could open up some sort of dimensional spiritual portal, and I
remember when I was watching Twin Peaks, I didn't actually I wasn't actually sure
that that's what Mark Frost and David Lynch had in mind. So I wrote
a pretty speculative essay that I put in I think the first Hollywood book about
Twin Peaks, because I'd noticed throughout the series I had to watch it a
couple of times to really understand what was going on, because it's a pretty
sophisticated kind of deep thing there, with a lot of philosophy and a lot
of esoteric stuff. And it's also a satires because David Lynch is kind of
making fun of soap operas, which were really popular in the early nineties.
But then when you watch it, it's like, well, there's this really
weird kind of esoteric stuff going on too. I wonder what that's all about.
And I first encountered the idea that it might be something deeper in the
centersor Force's trilogy, where there's a discussion of David Lynch in one of the
chapters, and so I thought, well, let me just dive deeper into
this and see what I can come up with. And I noticed in some
of the scenes that you know, actually put ritual magic schiguls up there on
the board where Cooper is doing a lot of his investigation work. And so
I wrote an essay basically saying that I think this probably relates to the Babylon
working of Parsons and Crowley and this kind of stuff. And then Mark Frost
puts out this big fat book on the history of Twin Peaks and says all
of that. So I'm not saying that Mark Frost read my essay. Maybe
he did, I don't know, but I just thought it was funny to
be vindicated because literally, in the Twin Peaks history book by Mark Frost,
I mean, he goes into Crowley, he goes into the Parsons, he
goes into the Babylon working, he goes into all of that, saying that,
yeah, that's really what we were drawing from when we did the mythology
of Twin Peaks. So, yeah, another example of esoteric Hollywood's ohto,
that's what Jack Parsons embraced. He was a croleide and and he helped develop
rocket engines, as Jay was saying, and he was a fairly nasty piece
of work. But there's a crater on the moon named after him, Yeah,
a crater named after an Alison appolyte. And then he took in a
very I think shell shocked l Ron Hubbard, and Elron stole his wife and
some money too, and oh and I forgot Parsons also sold the secrets to
Israel. Yes, he got in trouble for that and what he had his
top security clearance revoked like five times for I mean, you know, he's
a he's a guy that's quite fond of black magic. I could see,
you know, that could rub certain people wrong. Although I'm I mean,
he always got a security client's bank, so it's kind of interesting. Yeah,
but I find it interesting that he after el Ron Hubbard stole his wife
and money, that he blew himself up. Yeah. Wasn't this in this
humunculous experiment or what he thought was going to create some kind of space being
or something. I forget what he thought it was going to do, but
it ended up blowing up? Right? Or do you do you think there
was something else like he was he was killed or I don't know, I
could see a guy like that, well he was, I mean, he
was a genius with those types of chemicals. I mean, without a doubt,
he was way ahead of everybody. Did he kill himself or was it
something going awry? I do not know, but I can see how a
guy like Jack Parsons could have a lot of enemies and what a better way
to get rid of him than to blow him up? All he works on
chemicals. Well he got blown up. Convenient and I don't subscribe to that,
but it's a possibility. Let's get into Poultergeist and it's director Toby Hopper.
You said some very interesting things. And again we've got a connection with
Alistair Crowley because the television, the cathode ray that was designed, and the
television plays a central part in Polterge, a central piece of it's an essential
piece of poultry Poultergeist, and and it was developed by someone who is also
in The Gold Guy, right, which which probably was. So we've got
some heavy duty occult stuff going on there. Give us tell us about Poultrygeist
and what Toby Hooper was trying to get at. Yeah, if I remember,
If I remember, the screenplay is Spielberg and it specifically mentions the beast,
but you don't really hear that if you're watching the movie. I had
to go look up the screenplay to see what what what the original attention was.
And so the critique there, I think is that television is the means
by which you would have a sort of spiritual toxifying of the youth, in
particular because it's the little girl that's really transfixed by the TV, and she's
she's the one that's really having the experiences with you know, the dead and
the spirits and the demons by the TV, and and the rest of the
family and particularly the parents, they don't even notice. They're sort of oblivious
to what's really going on because we have the story that it's built on an
Indian burial ground or something like that. But I really think that's secondary to
the point of, you know, the the movie is really about, again
similar to what we find and they live, except that it's pointing out,
maybe maybe even in a revelation of the method way that the real way that
the society and the youth will be sacrificed to the beast. I think is
what I said, is via the toxic culture that would come through mainstream media,
through the TV. And you were talking about the Goldandawn, it was
Crooks William Crooks. The Crooks Tube is the origin of the of television.
And that's a guy who was in the Golden Dawn, which is Curly's a
first magical group before he started the the OT or before he joined the OTO.
He didn't start it, but he joined. H yeah, yeah,
yeah, so so yeah, that was my reading of Poultry, guys.
I' watched it in a long time, went back and watched it and you
know, took a lot of notes and paid close attention to it when did
a bunch of research on it and kind of what the screenplay was originally intended
to be. So sometimes movies go in a different direction than what the screenplay
has, right, So sometimes there'll be stuff like the Beast, you know
that's in the screenplay, that's not that doesn't really come out of the movie.
But it makes a lot more sense when you know that what's interesting the
television becomes the vortex, the wormhole. Well, and what did Levey say,
right? LaVey said that trying to paraphrase him of something like every home
would have a satanic altar and that would be the TV. He said something
like that. Yeah, and you get into MK ultra at that point.
Again, you talk about John Lilly's work with children as far as being able
to make tomatons out of children, and he actually wrote a book about it.
Yeah, he's got a book called What's Up over Here? It's Programming
and meta Programming in the Human Biocomputer. And actually bought that because I didn't
think that. I was skeptical. I thought surely he wouldn't put that in
the book. Man, it's almost unreadable. If you try to read the
book, it just most of it doesn't make any sense. I have no
idea what he's talking about. Which that could be that I don't know the
science of what he's trying to talk about, or it's just he was so
tripped out on LSD that he didn't know what it was. I could go
either way. But there is a chapter towards the end where he does talk
about doing this with children, and he claims he was able to sort of.
He talks about it as if everything is a program. So he's basically
saying the human mind is like a biological computer, and that there's these base
layer programs that run like which are your drives, like to eat, to
sleep, and then there's other layers and programs that have been tacked on.
Maybe through genetic memories. I'm going from I haven't looked at the book in
many years, but something like that, Like maybe he thinks there's genetic memories
that evolved and are in your programming through your ancestors, and then there's things
that you encountered in your life that the program that imprinted you. And he
thinks that through a lot of LSD and then reprogramming, kind of like you
and Cameron did with the reimprinting, you can wipe the slate and kind of
create a new being by tinkering with their base programs. And this is interesting
because there's something to this. I don't know a whole lot about this field,
but I was watching the famous Jordan Peterson course a couple months ago,
the one that he did that he's had up online for a long time.
It's his full psychology personality course. It's I don't know, twenty thirty lectures
and about four or five lectures. Then he actually gets into this and he
uses a very similar type of menal. I'm not saying that he does what
Lily does. I'm just saying that there's something to this because he starts talking
about base your programming that is how the human mind functions and so forth.
So I think there's something to this, and that leads me to think that
Lily is talking about something legitimate. But a lot of the book is like
I said, it's really just the the terminological baggage is just who knows what
he's talking about. But it's it's a real book. It's crazy. I
mean, it's like wow, but it should. I don't guess it's that
far fetched though. If we know that Alfred Kinsey, you know, he
did this kind of stuff to kids, So I don't guess it's that far
fetched that Lily would be involved in doing this kind of stuff. Subproject went
thirty six talks about giving a life for a shock to children. And then
you've got Loretta Bender. She was a famous psychiatrist at Melview and she was
dosing children for weeks on end. I mean, well, there you go.
There's another example. Yeah, so it's not fun. That is youngest
five or six. Wow, she would dose them for months and she was
being uh the Human Ecology Fund, which was the CIA front, So who
knows. I mean, these are examples that we know about what the CI
has done to children. Yeah, and most of that mk Altra documentation was
destroyed, destroyed, right, but it really shows how sadistic they were,
how sadistic they were to children. And I just, uh, when I
started reading about this type of stuff made me very very angry that that there
was no lines. I mean, there's no moral lines. Yeah, it's
like a mad science thing, right, like Mangola's idea of science or you
know, there's a lot of parallels with well thing back to like didn't Skinner
Skinner put his daughter in a box? Didn't he because he thought he could
program his daughter. It wouldn't surprise me, but there's some story about him
like putting his putting his kids in his Skinner box to reprogram them. So
you write that Hollywood, with all points where are confronted by phony dialectics,
which are essentially false paradigms of opposition, and they are almost always wrong,
maintaining only a piece of the puzzle. And when you write about that,
you write about individualism versu the collective, and you talk about Hollywood trying to
destroy the individualism and make everyone a part of the collective consciousness of the propaganda
that's being produced in Hollywood. Could you explicate that a little bit. I'm
trying to remember that. I think that's in the context that when I was
talking about B for Vendetta and how bper Vendetta is about, you know,
anarcho individualistic rebellion, but the the way it's presented in the story is kind
of like, yeah, but in reality, we're all collectively Guy Fox or
something like that. And so I think I was just trying to point out
that, in my view, anarchism has a long history of being a tool
as well for intelligence operations and false flags. I think in one of the
British intelligence writers, maybe Conrad, you know, there's this discussion of where
the I think it's British intelligence does a false flag with anarchists or something like
that. So that was kind of what I was getting at the same idea
comes up in the Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes. This the part two where these
anarchists engage in these bombings. But it turns out it was actually Moriarty who
in the story actually kind of appears to be a British and he's like an
Oxford professor or Cane British and he's working with military Dove complex to arm difference
both sides the war for World War One. In the Robert Downey Junior Jude
Law Guy Ritchie version of Charlot Combs. I always thought that part two of
Charlot Combs is pretty revealing in that regard to But yeah, That's what I
was getting at, was just that when the movies give you even the idea
of something like the rugged individual or the anarcho individual, even that's really just
kind of a corporate, fraudulent type of rebellions. It's an inauthentic rebellion,
I guess, is what I was trying to get at. And you're right.
Both cultic groups and government agencies have the desire for control, and particularly
the control of thought. And one of the most effective groups to achieve this
is through childhood manipulation, which we're just talking about. And I've got a
quote here that I that I liked. There are many many There are many
many problems for positing ultimate reality or the absolute as an impersonal force. If
ultimate reality is impersonal and chaotic, then all localized of ads, phenomena,
and objects are also devoid of any ultimate meaning. Language, mathematics, logic,
et cetera. Are thus also annihilated as merely mental fictions or at best
some cosmic force we do not understand. These are servants of chaos and the
abyss. So basically what you're saying is that there you can look at come
at reality one of two ways, metaphysically or materially, And if you come
at reality materially, then everything loses its meaning. Yeah, if all reality
is reduced to is pure matter reductionism, then ultimate reality is impersonal and other
things would follow from that too, Like in philosophy there's fancy words like the
world of the universe would be disteleological. That just means that there's no telos
or purpose to it. Everything's just sort of random chaos. So if everything's
random chaos, then it follows from that that, well, my life is
also chaos. This week is chaos, today's chaos. My argument is our
discussion today is chaos. So essentially kind of it becomes a form of nihilism
ultimately, And yeah, I think I was trying to argue that nihilism is
sort of the end result of a lot of revolutionary anarcho philosophy. Right,
So the same would apply to communism as well, Right, So I'm not
just just saying that revolutionary philosophy in terms of anarchists are problematic, but also
socialism, collectivism. All revolutionary philosophies kind of have this this issue with whether
the actually makes sense and has a purpose or a goal. And you know,
if you read Brave New World, he kind of says, well,
all the revolutions were for this, for Brave New World. So well,
wait a minute, I thought revolutions were about freedom and humanity. No,
no, they're actually anti freedom and they're antihum. So so it's like revolutions
kind of seem to go in that uh, irrational disteleological direction. And I
was pulling from an argument there that doctor Phil Cherrard and father Dimitri Steniloi,
a famous Orthodox theologian. They kind of make this point that certain religions posit
and impersonal absolute and if if all reality is impersonal, if the absolute is
just a force or impersonal, then you would have this sort of nihilistic end
result. What would you call, Well, you've got like hardcore atheism,
but then you've got deism, which basically says that God made a watch and
this is the watch. There are Buddhists, like they're about of Buddhism doesn't
believe in a God, but they believe in karma. But to me,
if you're going to believe in karma, you're believing in something metaphysical and incomprehensible,
which I think could easily substitute for God. And actually am manual Kant,
that's one of his arguments for the existence of God is karma, and
of course he doesn't call it karma. But so I like your take on
that. Yeah, there's areas of Kant that I like. For example,
I believe in what I think is the best sort of logical philosophical argument for
God's existence is the transcendental argument for God's existence, and it has some parallels
and overlap with Kant in that Kant did a lot of transcendental arguments. He
didn't, however, do the transcedental argument for God because Kant thought that all
the transcendental categories were purely mental, and so they're kind of mental structuring features
that you impose on the world for the raw sense data that comes in.
I'm not a Hegelian, but one interesting thing that Hegel did was he took
that insight from Kant and he said, it doesn't really make sense to think
that these categories are grounded in the human mind, because the human mind is
finite, and there's a pretty serious problems and cons of you. For example,
Kant couldn't ever know if other minds operate the way he thought the mind
worked, because other minds would be, for example, in the realm of
the numena that goes outside of what Kant thinks you can know the phenomena.
So Hegel says a better move would be to say that the structuring categories or
the transcendental categories that make knowledge possible are grounded in the divine mind. Now,
I don't believe in Hegel's view of God or his political philosophy. I
just specifically think that that move that he made is a possible solution to one
of the problems in CONT's view. And so the transcendental argument for God is
basically saying that the transcendental categories that talks about have to be the case for
knowledge to even be possible, and that God's existence is the very thing that
would make knowledge possible. So that's the move I would agree with. As
for Buddhism, I'm not super studied in Eastern philosophy, but I think that
a lot of Eastern philosophies tend to kind of fall over into basically viewing reality
typically as something illusory, or they tend to sort of embrace a lot of
contradictions at times. So to me, that would kind of just negate whether
they have the ability in an epistemic sense to justify knowledge. So I always
put a high value in my argumentation on whether the knowledge that we have or
the knowledge claims can be epistemically justified. And typically, uh, I've never
I had one interaction with a Buddhist gay maybe three years ago, we had
a discussion on a podcast, but it's not it's not a field I've interacted
with a lot, But typically they don't really care about the kinds of things
that people in Western philosophy are looking for, like justified true belief. I
think most Buddhists said, well, we don't really, we're not really interested
in doing that. I read Hegel as an undergrad, and we're he'd completely
lost me was absolute spirit hovering over Prussia. Yeah, I definitely think that
his overall, his system is ridiculous. So I don't want to give the
impression that I'm a Hegelian. I just thought that one move that he makes
to critique con is an interesting insight. It actually works for people who do
believe in uh in philosophy, it's theology. It's called divine conceptualism, and
this is an approach where reality is grounded in the divine mind. Basically is
what that's all about. So with Kant, you had the rationalists and they
said that truth can be deciphered within, and then you had the empiricists who
said that you can only decipher truth by measuring by external experience. And they
were at odds with each other. But Emmanuel Kant brought them together and he
said that we have twelve categories of reason, and that we have this we
called it intuition of space and time, and that these twelve categories of reason
have to align with the space and time, and that's how we ultimately discern
truth. So he was able to bring the rationalists and the empiricists together.
And a lot of people have argued that so cont is basically saying, and
I don't know how many categories and pure reason there are, but it sounds
like I'm sure that I believe that humans are hardwired. And that's one of
the things that Kant is driving now and an Eastern thought. In many Eastern
schools, humans are hardwired. Plato, humans are hardwired. And we had
Chomsky come out and say that humans are hardwired for language, which was kind
of revolutionary because it completely overturned what we thought was tabula rasa. But when
we get into mathematics, I've got, you know, I'm kind of our
mathematics a truth. There is mathematics a truth. I'm a little bit torn
with that because I believe, I mean, the Fibonacci sequence shows up a
lot of places in nature, so obviously that is mimicking reality, the Fibonacci
sequels. Now, with Kant, he would say he had what's called an
a priori synthetic argument, And what he meant by that is such truths are
known a priori since they apply with strict and universal necessity to all objects of
our experience, what without having been derived from that experience itself. So Kant
would say that when you're measuring the hypotenuse of the right triangle, a escort
plus b s cort equals c squord. He would say that that because that's
always going to be that way. He would say that we have knowledge of
that within ourselves and that it is a constant truth. And here is my
problem with kant and mathematics those when you get into Euclidean geometry, you've got
wonderful equations that are really simplistic and elegant, like the pythagora in theorem maysquare
scored equals scored. But then Einstein came along with general relativity and he showed
that straight lines are only in the minds of humans, that they do not
exist in reality. And Euclidean geometry is predicated on straight lines. So what
are we to make of that. Well, one way that you could kind
of bypass that whole discussion about the status of geometrical objects or whatever would be
to talk about universals and universal claims. Right, So, for example,
to say, like all straight lines only exist in the mind as a straight
line would be a universal claim. So, even though perhaps Einstein wouldn't be
interested in revisiting these kind of medieval discussions, the fact that people don't want
to revisit those tops which doesn't mean that they're not underlying the possibility of predication.
So I think that this just brings us back to questions of uh,
you know, the existence of universals, which I think that language I always
already the language requires it. So we need we need metaphysics, we need
universals, we need universal categories, and we can't escape those things by you
know, the Kantient move to psychologize it, or the skeptical move to basically
say that there's only particulars like David Hume or something like that. All of
those positions end up being kind of destructive to the possibility of having knowledge.
So so I would just say that we can broaden the question beyond the status
of math or geometrical objects to return it to the question of universals. And
there have to be universal categories. The only way to have a universal is
to say that there's a divine mind that houses the universals. I would agree
with that. It's interesting. I wrote a book that or a co author
of a book that run in Kantian thought, and there were two other co
authors, and they weren't really familiar with Khan. So I was the guy
that kind of carried the water on that one. And I didn't realize you
were a philosophy guy until today, So I just knew of you as kind
of the you know, the journalist guy that writes about well, I am
somewhat multi dimensional, but Kanty is. If you look at his critigue of
Peer Reason, I mean it's a t KO in the first like five pages.
For most people, it's probably the most esoteric book ever written, except
for maybe James Joycean's Wake. But I became a kantient to a certain degree.
I mean, I see where his thought is problematic. But I rated
Kant into this book that we wrote and what was interesting and which kind of
gives you an idea that you know, I have pretty good working knowledge of
kind. And I was going out with a woman who had the Critique of
Pure Reason on her bookshelf. Wow, And I started to page through it
and I started to read it, and then I realized, you know,
if I continue to read this book, I will not know con I'm more
amazed that you were dating a woman that was in the I've never heard of
of a woman at the cont That's interesting. So, Jay, I really
want to thank you for coming on the Nick Brian podcast. You've been a
great guest. Thank you. Yeah, I want to have you on and
we can get into some of your work as well. I didn't mean to
to uh, pigeonhole you as one dimensional. I just didn't know that you
those other topics I didn't. I don't mind being pigeonholed, doesn't me too
much. Have yourself a great night, all right, Thank you, Nick,
appreciate it. Have a good night. Take care. Jay,