⁣This documentary follows Aubrey Marcus and company through a powerful Ayahuasca ceremony at Spiritquest Sanctuary in Peru. Under the guidance of Don Howard and his team of ayahuasca shamans, Aubrey and his tribe experience deeply vulnerable transformational experiences. This beautifully cinematic journey is directed by Mitch Schultz, the director of DMT the Spirit Molecule, with an original soundtrack by Poranguí.

Aubrey first began speaking about Ayahuasca on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast in 2011. Since then he has appeared in dozens of other documentaries and media outlets commenting on Ayahuasca. The documentary seeks to help the viewer answer the following questions for themselves:

What is Ayahuasca?
What is it like to take Ayahuasca?
What visions do you have while on Ayahuasca?
What emotional breakthroughs occur during an Ayahuasca ceremony?
Should I take ayahuasca?

Let me know your thoughts in the comments?

⁣This documentary from Jeff Orlowski explores how addiction and privacy breaches are features, not bugs, of social media platforms.
That social media can be addictive and creepy isn’t a revelation to anyone who uses Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and the like. But in Jeff Orlowski’s documentary “The Social Dilemma,” conscientious defectors from these companies explain that the perniciousness of social networking platforms is a feature, not a bug.

They claim that the manipulation of human behavior for profit is coded into these companies with Machiavellian precision: Infinite scrolling and push notifications keep users constantly engaged; personalized recommendations use data not just to predict but also to influence our actions, turning users into easy prey for advertisers and propagandists.

As in his documentaries about climate change, “Chasing Ice” and “Chasing Coral,” Orlowski takes a reality that can seem too colossal and abstract for a layperson to grasp, let alone care about, and scales it down to a human level. In “The Social Dilemma,” he recasts one of the oldest tropes of the horror genre — Dr. Frankenstein, the scientist who went too far — for the digital age.

In briskly edited interviews, Orlowski speaks with men and (a few) women who helped build social media and now fear the effects of their creations on users’ mental health and the foundations of democracy. They deliver their cautionary testimonies with the force of a start-up pitch, employing crisp aphorisms and pithy analogies.

“Never before in history have 50 designers made decisions that would have an impact on two billion people,” says Tristan Harris, a former design ethicist at Google. Anna Lembke, an addiction expert at Stanford University, explains that these companies exploit the brain’s evolutionary need for interpersonal connection. And Roger McNamee, an early investor in Facebook, delivers a chilling allegation: Russia didn’t hack Facebook; it simply used the platform.
Much of this is familiar, but “The Social Dilemma” goes the extra explainer-mile by interspersing the interviews with P.S.A.-style fictional scenes of a suburban family suffering the consequences of social-media addiction. There are silent dinners, a pubescent daughter (Sophia Hammons) with self-image issues and a teenage son (Skyler Gisondo) who’s radicalized by YouTube recommendations promoting a vague ideology.


This fictionalized narrative exemplifies the limitations of the documentary’s sometimes hyperbolic emphasis on the medium at the expense of the message. For instance, the movie’s interlocutors pin an increase in mental illness on social media usage yet don’t acknowledge factors like a rise in economic insecurity. Polarization, riots and protests are presented as particular symptoms of the social-media era without historical context.
Despite their vehement criticisms, the interviewees in “The Social Dilemma” are not all doomsayers; many suggest that with the right changes, we can salvage the good of social media without the bad. But the grab bag of personal and political solutions they present in the film confuses two distinct targets of critique: the technology that causes destructive behaviors and the culture of unchecked capitalism that produces it.

Nevertheless, “The Social Dilemma” is remarkably effective in sounding the alarm about the incursion of data mining and manipulative technology into our social lives and beyond. Orlowski’s film is itself not spared by the phenomenon it scrutinizes. The movie is streaming on Netflix, where it’ll become another node in the service’s data-based algorithm.

REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0....9/09/movies/the-soci

Watch PART 1 (One) here => ⁣https://vajratube.com/v/SXRrCw
⁣After a long summer of feasting, their bodies stately and plump, the emperor penguins of Antarctica begin to feel, toward autumn, a need to march inland to the breeding grounds "where each and every one of them was born." They are all of a mind about this, and walk in single file, thousands of them, in a column miles long. They all know where they are going, even those making the march for the first time, and when they get there, these countless creatures, who all look more or less the same to us, begin to look more or less desirable to one another. Carefully, they choose their mates.

This is not a casual commitment. After the female delivers one large egg, the male gathers it into a fold of his abdomen, plants his feet to protect the egg from the ice below, and then stands there for two months with no food or water, in howling gales, at temperatures far below zero, in total darkness, huddled together with the other fathers for warmth. The females meanwhile, march all the way back to the sea, now even more distant, to forage for food, which they will bring when the spring comes, if they know it must. When the females return to the mass of countless males, they find their mate without error and recognize the cries of chicks they have never seen.

"March of the Penguins" is simply, and astonishingly, the story of this annual cycle. It was filmed under unimaginable conditions by the French director Luc Jacquet and his team, including the cinematographers Laurent Chalet and Jerome Maison. There is not much to choose from in setting up their shots: On the coldest, driest and (in winter) darkest continent on Earth, there is snow, and there is ice, and there are penguins. There is also an ethereal beauty.

Although the compulsion to reproduce is central to all forms of life, the penguins could be forgiven if they'd said the hell with it and evolved in the direction of being able to swim to Patagonia. The film's narrator, Morgan Freeman, tells us that Antarctica was once a warm land with rich forests that teemed with creatures. But as the climate grew colder over long centuries, one lifeform after another bailed out, until the penguins were left in a land that, as far as they can see, is inhabited pretty much by other penguins, and edged by seas filled with delicious fish. Even their predators, such as the leopard seal, give them a pass during the dark, long, cold winter.

"This is a love story," Freeman's narration assures us, reminding me for some reason of Tina Turner singing "What's Love Got to Do With It?" I think it is more accurately described as the story of an evolutionary success. The penguins instinctively know, because they have been hard-wired by evolutionary trial and error, that it is necessary to march so far inland because in spring, the ice shelf will start to melt toward them, and they need to stand where the ice will remain thick enough to support them.

As a species, they learned this because the penguins who paused too soon on their treks had eggs that fell into the sea. Those who walked farther produced another generation, and eventually every penguin was descended from a long line of ancestors who were willing to walk the extra mile.

Why do penguins behave in this manner? Because it works for them, and their environment gives them little alternative. They are Darwinism embodied. But their life history is so strange that until the last century, it was not even guessed at. The first Antarctic explorers found penguins aplenty, but had little idea where they came from, where they went to, and indeed whether they were birds or mammals.

The answers to those questions were discovered by a man named Apsley Cherry-Garrard, in one of the most remarkable books ever written, The Worst Journey in the World (1922). He was not writing about the journey of the penguins, but about his own trek with two others through the bitter night to their mating grounds. Members of Scott's 1910-1912 expedition to the South Pole, they set out in the autumn to follow the march of the penguins, and walked through hell until he found them, watched them, returned with one of their eggs. Cherry-Garrard retired to England, where he lived until 1959; his friends felt the dreadful march, and the later experience of finding the frozen bodies of Scott and two others, contributed to his depression for the rest of his life.

For Jacquet and his crew, the experience was more bearable. They had transport, warmth, food and communication with the greater world. Still, it could not have been pleasant, sticking it out and making this documentary, when others were filming a month spent eating at McDonald's. The narration is a little fanciful for my taste, and some of the shots seem funny to us but not to the penguins. When they fall over, they do it with a remarkable lack of style. And for all the walking they do, they're ungainly waddlers. Yet they are perfect in their way, with sleek coats, grace in the water and heroic determination. It's poignant to watch the chicks in their youth, fed by their parents, playing with their chums, the sun climbing higher every day, little suspecting what they're in for.

REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.rogerebert.com/rev....iews/march-of-the-pe

⁣ibiru conspiracy theories about the end of the world have been circulating online for more than two decades, with the latest dubious prophecy predicting the apocalypse - September 23, 2017.
Planet X, or Nibiru, refers to a mythological planet in our solar system that will supposedly crash into Earth and wipe out the human race, however it has been consistently dismissed by Nasa and other experts as an internet hoax.
Despite absolutely no scientific evidence to back up the suggestions of a rogue planet getting rapidly closer to Earth, myths about Planet X continue to be perpetuated online.
Of course, this isn't the first time time harbingers of doom have predicted the end of time; Nasa also had to deny the existence of Nibiru in 2012.
Throughout history there have been similar claims, but thankfully none of them so far have been proved correct.
How did conspiracy theories about Planet X start?
Online chatter about Nibiru began back in 1995 when Wisconsin native Nancy Lieder created the alien-conspiracy website ZetaTalk.
Ms Lieder claims to be a conduit for aliens from the Zeta Reticuli star system, 39.17 light years from Earth, who have warned her about the Nibiru catastrophe.
The conspiracy theory hasn’t gone away, with so-called Christian numerologist David Meade claiming Planet X is heading in our direction.
Meade believes October could see the start The Rapture and a seven-year tribulation period of widescale natural disasters.
Why September 23?

It has been claimed an unusual celestial arrangement mirroring signs from the Bible’s Book of Revelation, September 23, will signal the start of the end of the world.
However, the EarthSky blog notes there will be “nothing unique” about the sun, moon and planets on the date.

“In the past 1,000 years, this same event has happened at least four times already, in 1827, 1483, 1293, and 1056,” explains astronomer Christopher M. Graney.
Haven’t we been here before?

Mars, with Earth visible in background CREDIT: Getty
This isn't the first time the apocalypse has been predicted:
1844
American Baptist teacher William Miller first shared publicly his belief in the coming Second Advent of Jesus Christ in 1833, predicting he would return in the year 1843.
The Millerites were his followers and Millerism became a national movement, however when Jesus didn’t arrive, October 22, 1844, became known as the Great Disappointment.
1997
Twenty years ago, 29 members of Heaven’s Gate, a UFO religious millenarian group, committed suicide with the aim of boarding a UFO they believed was hiding behind the Hale-Bopp comet before the supposed end of the world.
2003
Planet X was also supposedly discovered by the ancient Sumerian people and was meant to hit Earth in 2003, but never arrived.
“This catastrophe was initially predicted for May 2003, but when nothing happened the doomsday date was moved forward to December 2012 and linked to the end of one of the cycles in the ancient Mayan calendar at the winter solstice in 2012,” say Nasa.
2011
The end of the world was also supposed to arrive on 21 May 2011, with Christian doomsday prophet Harold Camping predicting the Rapture would begin at 18:00 in each of the world's time zones, wiping out nay-sayers with rolling earthquakes as believers ascended to heaven.
2012
Nasa had to debunk an ancient Maya prophecy theory about the world ending back in 2012.
The Mayan connection “was a misconception from the very beginning,” astrophysicist Dr. John Carlson said at the time.
“The Maya calendar did not end on Dec. 21, 2012, and there were no Maya prophecies foretelling the end of the world on that date."
2015
Chris McCann, leader and founder of the eBible fellowship, said the world would be engulfed and destroyed by a great fire on October 7.
McCann said he was "surprised" by the outcome and wrote a blog post entitled: "A response to being incorrect with the prediction that, in all likelihood, the world would end on October 7."
What does Nasa say this time?

Nasa is confident the world won't end CREDIT: AFP
Nasa has definitively dismissed wild theories about Nibiru as pseudoscience, issuing a number of statements denying its existence.
“Various people are ‘predicting’ that world will end on September 23 when another planet collides with Earth,” say Nasa.
“The planet in question, Nibiru, doesn't exist, so there will be no collision. The story of Nibiru has been around for years (as has the 'days of darkness' tale) and is periodically recycled into new apocalyptic fables.”
They add: “Nibiru and other stories about wayward planets are an internet hoax. There is no factual basis for these claims. If Nibiru or Planet X were real and headed for an encounter with the Earth … astronomers would have been tracking it for at least the past decade, and it would be visible by now to the naked eye. Obviously, it does not exist.
“Eris is real, but it is a dwarf planet similar to Pluto that will remain in the outer solar system; the closest it can come to Earth is about 4 billion miles.”
Nasa fake news and the days of darkness tale
A fake news story being widely shared online suggests Nasa has confirmed Earth will experience 15 days of complete darkness in November 2015.
Another fake news video claims that Nasa has found Nibiru and confirmed it is heading straight for us.
Debunking website Snopes explains the “days of darkness” tale is a “bit of fake news lifted from an older viral rumour”
They say that it “had already been around the online block several times before,” adding, “it has long since become an evergreen online hoax — a jape that is typically resurrected a few times a year by dubious websites that simply update the time span for the alleged ‘period of darkness’ and send it winging around the internet again.
What do other experts say?
Nick Pope, who used to investigate UFOs and other mysteries for the Ministry of Defence, says “Nibiru doesn't exist”.
He adds: “The world won't end on September 23. Shame on the people promoting this hoax in the name of evangelical Christianity.”
Mr Pope told The Telegraph: “I'm certain Nibiru doesn't exist because if there really was a rogue planet heading for Earth, due to hit on Saturday, it would be visible to the naked eye by now.
“Furthermore, astronomers would have been aware of its presence for years, both through direct observation and through gravitational effects on other planets in the solar system.”
Why are some people so keen to promote this conspiracy?
“The people promoting this prediction seem to be doing so because of religious belief, tenuously linking the recent eclipse with Biblical passages, including one from the Book of Revelations,” Pope says.
“I suspect the reasons include self-publicity and the desire to promote their particular brand of evangelical Christianity.”
Is there anything we should be worried about?
“All this isn't to say that there aren't some existential threats out there, but if people want to worry about something, they should probably worry about North Korean missiles, or about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, not about Nibiru,” Pope adds.
“There have been countless previous predictions of the end of the world. Self-evidently all these predictions were false. September 23 will pass without incident, just as we safely negotiated all the previous dates that had been put forward as doomsday.”

⁣The original Zeitgeist was actually not a “film”, but a performance piece, which consisted of a vaudevillian style multi-media event using recorded music, live instruments and video. The event was given over a 6-night period in New York City and then, without any interest to professionally release or produce the work, was “tossed” up on the Internet arbitrarily. The work was never designed as a film or even a documentary in a traditional sense - it was designed as a creative, provoking, emotionally driven expression, full of artistic extremity and heavily stylized gestures. However, once online, an unexpected flood of interest began to generate. Within 6 months over 50 Million views were recorded on Google Video counters. Suddenly “Zeitgeist” the event, became “Zeitgeist: The Movie”.
Zeitgeist: The Movie (2007) is a treatment on Mythology and Belief in society today, presenting uncommon perspectives of common cultural issues.
Chapter 1, “The Greatest Story Ever Told”, presents historical data relating to the astronomical/astrological origins of the Judeo-Christian theology (which can be extended to Islam as well), along with the understanding that these respective stories, beliefs & traditions are really an adaptation-extension of prior Pagan beliefs.
Chapter 2, “All the World’s a Stage”, presents a controversial view of the events of Sept. 11th 2001. It describes how the event has been transformed into a sacred, near religious act and to challenge the orthodox view, regardless of the quality of the contrary arguments, is considered blasphemy and rejected.
Chapter 3, “Don’t Mind the Men Behind The Curtain “, presents a shotgun tour through the subjects of Central Banking, War Pretexts, Banking Panics, the Military Industrial Complex, Media Culture and ultimately the mental neurosis and deadly addiction known as “Power.” The central theme is how society is often misled when it comes to certain pivotal historical events, what those events serve in function, along with how the overall social conditioning patterns we see today function to create values and perspectives which support and perpetuate the static, established order/power structure, as opposed to fluid social change and productive evolution for the betterment of the society as a whole.

⁣Graham Hancock is an English author and journalist, well known for books such as “Fingerprints Of The Gods” & “Magicians of the Gods”. His new book "America Before" comes on out April 23. http://grahamhancock.com/

⁣A blockbuster documentary that lays out the COVID lie like none other that I’ve seen. Uninformed Consent tells the story of how friends, neighbour's, employers, and family have been turned against each other due to government policies demonising individuals for their medical choices.

An in-depth look into the Covid 19 narrative, who's controlling it, and how it's being used to inject an untested, new technology into almost every person on the planet.
The film explores how the narrative is being used to strip us of our human rights while weaving in the impact of mandates in a deeply powerful story of one man's tragic loss.
Hear the truth from doctors and scientists not afraid to stand up against Big Pharma and the elite class who profit from mandates.

Written & Directed by Todd Harris, Matador Films.

⁣This is a non profit project, the aim is to have all anti-propaganda information in one place connected to one map, helping people understand the big picture.

The map is based on that created by The World Economic Forum, our platform will be populated by the general public as well as experts in the field, with a self regulating model.
It's time we stick to facts, and have a scientific and methodical approach in creating real change in the world.

Disclaimer: We DO NOT receive any revenue from YouTube, and we give away all copyrights, so you are free to use the content and share it.

REOURCE: The Mirror Project

⁣Based upon Theosophy (the Secret Doctrine) this documentary focuses on the evolution of consciousness over millions of years while revealing the secret chronology of human history from ancient Lemuria and Atlantis to our current root race, while following the natural cyclic deluges between races.

⁣"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration."
- Nikola Tesla

In this video we explore everything from the ancient knowledge of the magnetoelectric universe and how everything takes shape as torus fields, to how sound and magnetism is connected and how religions have common teachings of creation and sound.
A massive thank you to the speaker, Michael Tellinger for dedicating himself to this revolutionary and inspiring work!
Please check out and support his work over at his youtube: @michaeltellinger
Also check out his website: https://www.michaeltellinger.com

⁣There is no doubt that the covid-19 pandemic has been planned and successfully implemented in most countries around the world.
- How could it come to this?
- How is it possible that 90% of the population fell for such a fake game?
- Who spent the money on this project?
- Who has benefited most from this massive scam?

⁣Why do we never believe them? For centuries, the global elite have broadcast their intentions to depopulate the world - even to the point of carving them into stone. And yet… we never seem to believe them.
The Stew Peters Network is proud to present DIED SUDDENLY, from the award winning filmmakers, Matthew Skow and Nicholas Stumphauzer.


They are the minds behind WATCH THE WATER and THESE LITTLE ONES, and now have a damning presentation on the truth about the greatest ongoing mass genocide in human history.
Want to know more? Visit https://diedsuddenly.info/


This documentary was made possible by Goldco. Protect your wealth by investing in precious metals, and use THIS link to receive up to $10,000 in free silver for qualified accounts: https://link.goldco.com/DiedSuddenly


The Stew Peters Network would not be possible without the loyal and endearing support of all our sponsors. There is something for EVERYONE!

⁣What’s it like to be cajoled, threatened and blackmailed by a sexual predator who has power, history and society on his side?

Untouchable: The Rise and Fall of Harvey Weinstein (BBC Two), directed by Ursula MacFarlane, is a film of halting testimonies, long pauses, lips pressed tightly together and eyes filling with tears. Of women struggling to articulate what they have left unsaid sometimes for decades, and what has gone unsaid by our sex – en masse – throughout history, until now.
You probably know the basic story – by osmosis if nothing else - so heavily was the media mogul’s eventual fall covered when the weight of evidence finally became too much for a man of even his resources to withstand.

It shows the uniformity of the women’s responses to suddenly finding themselves in terrifying situations

MacFarlane tells the story well. She gives due recognition to the journalists, especially Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor, who broke the story in the New York Times, and Ronan Farrow’s gathering of 13 witness accounts in the New Yorker after painstaking investigations. But, like Dream Hampton’s Surviving R Kelly, Untouchable prioritises the victims’ stories (regardless of their personal celebrity or lack thereof – here “names” such as Rosanna Arquette simply slip in next to those without public profiles) and fills in the perpetrator’s to explain his relative power or position at the time. As with the R Kelly film – thought to have been instrumental in the R’n’B star’s latest arrest on federal sex trafficking charges – a pattern of predatory behaviour emerges, painted stroke by painful stroke by those who found themselves first charmed and cajoled by one version of Weinstein, then confronted with a very different one behind closed doors.

Whether we should be profoundly glad, deeply sad or simply exhausted to be living in a time where “examination of the lives of serial sexual predators unmasked after years of hiding in plain sight” is on the verge of becoming a recognised TV genre, let alone one taking up the slack left by uninterested police and legislative forces, I leave to you to decide. But we are where we are. Which is, waiting to see who gets their Jeffrey Epstein production off the blocks first.
Beyond a specific modus operandi – Weinstein’s involved hotel suites, towelling robes, forcible massages, volcanic rage and threats such as: “Do you really want to make an enemy of me for five minutes of your time?” – as an insight into one man’s apparent prelude to rape or assault (Weinstein denies all claims), such documentaries render a more valuable service in demonstrating, relentlessly and unavoidably, two things.

The first is how perfectly our world is built for predators to function. Of Weinstein’s staff who admit they knew something – something – was happening, a common refrain is that they assumed “some sort of agreement” had been reached between the would-be actors and the mogul. If you live in a society that already believes in the casting couch, because the concept of young women as more-or-less sexual resources to be exploited is so embedded in the psyche, half your work – to normalise your predilections, to secure complicity – is done. With the likes of the gossip columnist AJ Benza out there – “You put a light on the porch,” he says of Weinstein’s power, “you’re gonna get a lot of moths” – the world is yours to do with as you will.


The second, perhaps even more valuable, service it renders is to show the uniformity of the women’s responses to suddenly finding themselves in terrifying situations, and how far they deviate from “common sense” or “natural” expectations (words defined almost entirely by men, who have least need of them). They don’t fight. They compute their chances against a much taller, heavier opponent (“He’s huge, you know,” says Hope d’Amore, who worked for him in the early days and says she was assaulted in 1978) and they go still. “The freeze thing kicks in,” says the actor Caitlin Delaney. “You just want it to be over.” They maximise their chances of survival (“I felt leaving would be worse,” says actor Erika Rosenbaum, when she saw a smashed and bloody toilet seat in his bathroom) and try and leave in other ways instead. Actor Paz de la Huerta remembers “hovering over my body” as, she says, Weinstein raped her. “I definitely went somewhere else,” says Delaney. Rosenbaum remembers hoping that if she kept still enough she would somehow disappear.
Almost every woman watching will understand. Some men will, too. If these films add to their number, maybe we can begin to change the world.

REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.theguardian.com/tv....-and-radio/2019/sep/

⁣A documentary featuring Steven Greer, apostle of the alien-visitation disclosure movement, has tantalising "sightings," but reveals that ET obsession is now the mother ship of conspiracy theory.
Supporting actors: Adam Michael Curry, Joe Martino, Jan Harzan, Dr. Russell Targ
Producers: Dr. Steven Greer, Grant Ibrahim, Jim Martin, Philip James
Studio: 1091
Rating: Not Rated
Content advisory: Drug use, foul language, violence
In the old days, you would check in on an alien-visitation shlock-TV documentary (or an episode of “Unsolved Mysteries”) all to catch those grainy home-movie glimpses of alien spaceships. On that score, “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” is nothing less than an all-you-can-eat banquet of UFO porn. There are vintage clips of “sightings” shot in 8 and 16mm, but most of them are from the home-video and cell-phone-camera era, all tagged with important-sounding datelines.


CE5 event, March 16, 2017, Newport Beach, Calif. (five shimmering green lights in the sky!). CE5 Event, Sept. 21, 2019, Vancouver, B.C. (purple lights ringed like an X-ray of bottom teeth!). There are shaky-cam videos of glowing discs that hover and vanish into the ether and what look like a pair of suns that appear on an ocean horizon. There are mysterious lights, sometimes three (in a triangle), sometimes five (in a cluster), or 10 in the shape of a V. As always, these you-are-there images cast a spell, though the most spine-tingling element is often the reactions of the people shooting the video, who always say something like “Ho-lee shit” in a way that makes it sound like they’re witnessing the uncanny.


Of course, after you’ve seen 30 or 40 of these clips, they begin to acquire a certain more-is-less quality. Look, it’s one more set of lights hovering in the sky! One more saucer-shaped thingy! Another blip, another blob, another fuzzy pulsating orb, another streak of light too crooked to be a comet trail. Are these really alien ships? Or are they close encounters of the WTF kind?
“Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” is the third documentary, following “Sirius” (2013) and “Unacknowledged” (2017), to be centered around Dr. Steven Greer, the apostle of the alien-visitation “disclosure” movement. “Unacknowledged” was a kind of extraterrestrial manifesto, and it’s a movie that can suck you in and give you that down-the-rabbit-hole experience, so that as you watch the footage and scan the hidden government documents and hear the testimonials, you may find yourself on the precipice of feeling that you…believe. In “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind,” we see Steven Tyler on “The Joe Rogan Experience,” repeating to his host, “You’ve got to see ‘Unacknowledged,'” as if watching that movie would change your life. And that, in a way, is the point of all UFO porn: to provide a conversion experience. (I was blind, and now I believe in ETs!)


But “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” treats alien visitations as a given. That is, it totally takes for granted that there’s a technologically advanced, mystically benevolent world of extraterrestrial beings, light-years beyond ours in development and consciousness (though they still walk on two legs and have big bulgy heads like the Martians in ’50s sci-fi movies), who for all their cosmic distance from earth still had enough concern to show up in 1947 to save us from the specter of the nuclear age.
Taking this as undeniable fact, “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” is a conspiracy documentary built around the thesis that the “national security state” has concealed it from all of us. It has kept these close encounters hidden in the darkness — and just as deceptively, it has advertised, through the mainstream media and Hollywood movies, the notion that if life beyond earth exists, it must surely be hostile. More “War of the Worlds” than “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial.” The national security state has done all this for its own world-dominating purposes. “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” is two hours of fantasy propaganda attacking reality-based propaganda. It can make your eyes widen and your head hurt at the same time.
With his pockmarked face and broad shoulders, Dr. Steven Greer, who was born in 1955 (and claims to have seen a flying saucer when he was nine), is like a ’70s computer nerd played by John Waters with a touch of Guy Pearce. He’s compellingly articulate, with a thousand points of information and a kind of name-dropping “I was at this meeting at the CIA…” cockiness that lends his statements a patina of authority. With his books, films (this one, like “Unacknowledged,” was directed by Michael Mazzola), and his privately curated group sighting tours, he’s become the science-whiz P.T. Barnum of alien visitation, a role he seems to relish all the way to the bank.
Does he believe everything he says? Part of the strange psychology of our time involves people with vast platforms stating things that aren’t true as if they were true, and doing it often enough that they believe it themselves. When Greer chokes up into an “Oprah” moment and weeps on camera at the thought of all the people on his team who’ve either committed suicide or been assassinated (yes, he says this), you’re seeing a man who will go the extra mile to sell his snake oil. Steven Greer seems sincere and intelligent, but he’s also got a prattling-on-at-the-mouth touch of New Age narcissism, and the narrative he spins is so extreme that you either buy it or you don’t. I’ve always watched those clips of sightings feeling as if alien ships could be real (though what I tend to think is: they’re some form of defense craft), yet Greer, in his way, does a version of what Trump does, taking the fake-news accusations that were once leveled against alien believers and projecting them onto the skeptics. If, like me, you’re not a believer, then you’re perpetuating the lie. You’re part of the conspiracy.
And as “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” makes clear, the mythology of alien visitation has become the mother ship of all conspiracy theories, mutating with the times, soaking up other conspiracies like a sponge. The new alien theology is a hydra that keeps sprouting new (paranoid) heads.


There was the original incident, and cover-up, at Roswell. (Several raging military figures who claim to have been there testify, in the movie, that they saw the alien bodies.) There’s the idea — and this goes back to the stories of George Adamski, the founding voice, in the early ’50s, of the alien-contact movement, and also to the classic 1953 movie “The Day the Earth Stood Still” — that aliens have arrived, and they’ve come to be friends, but the government can only see them as a hostile force.


To that idea, Greer now adds a layer of deep-state treachery, claiming that it’s all an underground plot that even the U.S. president has no power over. And this is all linked to the environmental movement — or, in fact, to the systematic squelching of it. One key reason for the cover-up, you see, is that the aliens possess technology that could solve the energy crisis with the snap of an ET finger, nixing the need for oil or even solar panels. (It would all happen with advanced alien tech magic, lending new meaning to the phrase “little green men.”) But naturally, the American fossil-fuel complex will have none of this. Believe it or not, even the death of Marilyn Monroe has been glommed onto the conspiracy. According to Greer, the reason Marilyn was “killed” is that, in the midst of her affairs with JFK and RFK, she was about to say something in public about the government’s alien secrets.
What’s more, remember all those stories in the ’80s about alien abduction — all the folks who looked like future Trump voters who claimed to have been taken aboard alien spaceships and probed while under a state of hypnosis? According to the movie, that’s now part of the conspiracy. The abductions, it turns out, were all staged as an act of counterintelligence. Richard Doty, a sleazy-impish retired agent of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, claims that it was his job to hoax UFO researchers (there’s a whole documentary about Doty, entitled “Mirage Men”), in part to make them look like wackjobs.


In the ’70s, people got off on the sheer wish-fulfillment awesomeness of close encounters, the whole religious “Whoa!” factor of it. But what the science-fiction-is-real circus of “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” is selling is the dream that aliens could save us from the darkness of America. They’ve become sci-fi versions of Jesus crossed with Noam Chomsky. (And does this movie, as it implies, really think that the Russians or the Chinese would be any more humane about it? Vladimir Putin would eat an alien for breakfast.) The movie is predicated on a kind of emotional formula in which deep-state secrecy equals cover-up, and if there’s a cover-up then there must have been something to cover up. The film works like a drug, or maybe the cakes Alice eats in “Alice in Wonderland.” It says to its audience: Experience this movie, and it will clear your mind of the disinformation, laying bare the glowing nugget of revelation under the conspiracy.


But as it goes on, this all becomes a marketing hook for an increasingly flaked-out fantasy. In the midst of his anti-government screed, Steven Greer slips in that there have been many, many extraterrestrials captured and killed, and that in the desert of Arizona “there’s an underground facility where there are nine different ET craft that are there with all the autopsy bodies.” His proof? “There’s a man on my team who used to work in that facility.” He goes on to compare the aliens who’ve visited the earth to Gandhi. And that’s before the movie, in its windy second half (ESP, the physics of teleportation, aliens as mystical avatars of a one-universe consciousness), threatens to become a quantum version of “Koyaanisqatsi.”


The ultimate oddity ­of “Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind” is that it pushes a rabidly pro-environmental, anti-corporate, flower-child agenda, yet it does so with the kind of huckster aggression that has allowed left-wing conspiratorial thinking to mutate into right-wing paranoia. Put another way: The belief in alien visitation, as presented here, is actually congruent with the Trump agenda — the idea that America could be restored in one fell swoop by an acceptance of the otherworldly saviours who are already in our midst. That sounds, in its way, distressingly familiar: a promise to fix the world with fairy tales.

Resource: https://variety.com/2020/film/....reviews/close-encoun

⁣The film documents Becker's rise to near-stardom, following him from the first time he touched a guitar as a five-year-old to when he was drafted into The David Lee Roth Band as lead guitarist at the age of 19. In 1990, this was considered perhaps the most coveted rock guitar gig on the planet, as Becker would be following in the footsteps of acclaimed guitarists Eddie van Halen and Steve Vai, both of whom played with David Lee Roth as lead guitar player. It was shortly after that Becker was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, more popularly known as Lou Gehrig's disease, and given just 3 to 5 years to live. Becker was able to finish the recording of Roth's third full-length studio album A Little Ain't Enough but was unable to make the tour due to his physical decline.

Despite his diagnosis, Becker continued to write music even after losing all the ability to move and speak. Becker would go on to write and record two full-length studio albums Perspective (1996) and Collection (2008). Becker communicates exclusively via an eye pattern chart invented by his father, artist and poet, Gary Becker.

Although the film examines Becker's physical decline and his missed shot at rock superstardom, the film is a positive account of Becker's strength and survival for the past 22 years of his life.

The film makes extensive use of Becker's family archives through photographs, Super 8mm film and VHS footage. The film features interviews with Becker's family and friends as well as notable guitarists Joe Satriani and Steve Vai.


<img src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/91nMvT2XrLL._AC_SY741_.jpg" alt="Poster" />

Buy Original DVD <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/Jason-Becker-Not-Dead-Yet/dp/B009CSVQ7C" target="_blank" >here</a>

⁣The true history of the anti-government extremist terrorist group's century of violence. Focusing on the group which has caused nationwide rioting and violence, The film – which undermines the mainstream media’s depiction of the group as “just an idea” – has already been censored by YouTube and Vimeo.


Please share with your friends, stream to your FireTV stick using Silk and host a watch party to discover the truth about this deadly organization.


RESOURCE: https://puresocial.tv/antifa-r....ise-of-the-black-fla

⁣Dark To Light - The Great Awakening by EyeDropMedia.com
Dark to Light is a visual journey through darkness into the light. As we continue watching the greatest show in history and welcome in a new earth together...always remember - 'Where we go one, we go all'.

⁣Dr Rashid Buttar, brytyjsko-amerykański lekarz, który był odpowiedzialny za uświadomienie milionom ludzi prawdy o Big Pharmie i globalistycznej agendzie, został znaleziony martwy 18.05.2023.


Miał 57 lat i cieszył się wyjątkowo dobrym zdrowiem. Szykujcie się na turbulencje roku 2025!


Sławik Kraszennikow 1983-1993
Później wrócą wszystkie choroby, o których ludzie już zapomnieli. Jedna choroba pojawi się bez nazwy, od której będzie mnóstwo trupów na ulicach i nikt nie będzie ich chował. Będą po nich pełzać robaki i wokół będzie panował smród. Sławoczka powiedział: „Mamusiu, ludzie będą iść i umierać w ruchu, ponieważ zupełnie nie będą mieć energii. W naszym mieście będzie tak samo”.

⁣https://www.askdrbuttar.com/

⁣25 years after the mysterious death of princess Diana of Wales.
⁣Twenty five years ago Princess Diana’s car crashed inside the Pont de L’Alma tunnel in Paris France. Her lover, Dodi Fayad, died upon impact along with the driver. And even though Diana survived, it took about 40 minutes to get her from the car to the ambulance. The Official story was that they were trying to free her from the car, but several witnesses say that Diana was conscious and unobstructed. Photographs show that the backseat of the car was undamaged. And witnesses were pleading with the police to open the door and help her. Once in the ambulance, it took about 40 minutes for them to choose a Hospital. And when they finally set off, the ambulance drove at a snails pace and made several stops. Taking about 40 minutes to drive less than 4 miles.


Doctors were turned away. Witnesses were strip searched. Cameras were confiscated. No evidence was gathered. No blood samples were taken. And by 3am the entire scene was sprayed down with high pressure water hoses. Mercedes wanted to study the wreckage to see why it failed so badly. But they were denied. Diana‘s body was taken by the Royal family. Who had her reproductive organs removed before burying her remains. All 17 cameras along the route of the crash were mysteriously turned off. And all radio police frequencies went down. Witnesses were assaulted and threatened. And there was no investigation. Until the inquest ten years later. Which is when most people learned that Diana had penned a note in 1996 saying that someone was going to kill her in a car accident. This note was concealed for 6 years.

⁣"Rolling Thunder Revue: A Bob Dylan Story" is one of the most frustrating Martin Scorsese films as well as one of the most out-of-character. Decades in the making, in a way, this is an engaging but disorganized and long-winded (two hours, twenty minutes) account of the time in 1975 that Bob Dylan, nine years on from his motorcycle accident, convened a vagabond caravan of musicians, poets, reporters, photographers, money men, and hangers-on to tour the United States in the lead-up to the country's Bicentennial celebration. The tour was a bust, financially and in terms of cultural impact—or at least that's how Dylan, 78 at the time of this film's streaming premiere, remembers it, while cautioning Scorsese and the viewer that he barely remembers anything at all. Nevertheless, the Rolling Thunder Revue rejuvenated Dylan as a musician, in the manner of Elvis Presley's 1968 "comeback" special. And it generated enormous amounts of tour footage, some of which is reproduced here, within a highly conceptual framework, by Scorsese.

The issue of authorship is nearly as central to this movie as the story of Dylan roaming the United States, driving his own tour bus and performing in small- and medium-sized halls, accompanied by the likes of Joan Baez, Ramblin' Jack Elliot, Roger McGuinn, Scarlet Rivera, Joni Mitchell, Ronnie Hawkins, and (in one of his final filmed appearances) Sam Shepard. Scorsese, who over the course of his long career has essentially stamped certain American rock acts, including Dylan, The Rolling Stones, and The Band with "Property of Martin Scorsese," is the credited director, naturally. And as edited by Damian Rodriguez and David Tedeschi, the film bears many Scorsesean hallmarks, including surprising transitions from one idea to the next, and sequences that have been cross-cut in order to provoke questions and create sensations rather than serve up fixed meanings or answers.

But once you look at what the thing actually is, what it's made of, and how the pieces have been arranged, things get curiouser and curiouser. The film is woven around footage shot during the tour by real-life Chicago cameraman Howard Alk (1930-1982), who was hired by Dylan to make a project that somehow never got turned into an actual feature film. The footage has been re-contextualized by Scorsese and presented as the work of European filmmaker Stefan Van Dorp, a nonexistent person played by Argentinean performance artist Martin von Haselberg (husband of Bette Midler, briefly glimpsed in 1975 footage). In interviews, Van Dorp talks in the cliched "high culture" cadences of a mid-20th century moneyed WASP, and speaks on camera of his subjects and collaborators (excluding Dylan and a few others) in an exasperated, withering manner.

Other fictional or questionably involved characters enter the narrative as well, including Paramount Pictures CEO James Gianopulos as the tour promoter; actor Michael Murphy as nonexistent Congressman Jack Tanner (whom he played in two projects for the late Robert Altman); and Sharon Stone, costar of Scorsese's "Casino," as herself, telling the story of how she attended one of the Rolling Thunder Revue concerts as a 17-year-old in the company of her mother and was invited to join the caravan.

Is Scorsese trying to create his own, epically scaled answer to "This is Spinal Tap" or "Zelig"—a mock documentary integrating the real with the fictional, prompting audiences to question the distinctions between them? Maybe. "The Rolling Thunder Revue" starts with a snippet of a silent-era George Melies film of a magic trick and returns to it later, as if to signal that an aspect of illusion is built into the project. The collision of verified events and never-before-discussed anecdotes (some of which, like Congressman Tanner's friendship with President Jimmy Carter, are obviously fabricated) undermines the veracity of everything in the story, like the anecdote about Rivera supposedly taking Dylan to see KISS and inspiring him to don Kabuki-inspired facepaint.

And to what end? What you're seeing, for the most part, are real events that happened in real places to real people, and which therefore have archival value. Even if one were to thread up unedited footage at random, the images and sounds would still tell us a lot about the culture and emotional temperature of the U.S. circa 1975. The concert footage (much of which concentrates exclusively on Dylan, regardless of assurances that the tour was a democratic endeavor) is riveting, showcasing inventive re-arrangements of many Dylan classics, including "Simple Twist of Fate," "A Hard Rain's Gonna Fall," and "The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll."

In comparison to the material that stands on its own, the absurd touches feel glommed-on and pointless, and much of the time, they don't work. When the Van Dorp character prattles about how he wanted to show "the contrast between the excesses of the people on the tour and the dissolution of society [in] the land of pet rocks and Slurpees from 7-Eleven," it's like being forced to listen to a reading of a satirical short story by a fiction writer who understands the dictionary definition of satire but never figured out what, exactly, he intended to make fun of. The culture itself? The popular art form that tries to respond to the culture? The mentality of the artist mocking other artists trying to respond to the culture?

This is a documentary, and at the same time, it's also a prank or a joke. But it's not particularly funny when it's plainly trying to be. Why? Maybe because it's lumpy and unfocused, meandering from absurdism to poker-faced sincerity (as in self-contained sections about the plight of Native Americans and the fate of one of Dylan's real-life subjects, wrongly imprisoned boxer Rubin "Hurricane" Carter). Or maybe it's because when you think of Scorsese, one of the great living American filmmakers, a lot of different words and phrases spring to mind, but "goofy" and "wry" and "light touch" aren't among them.

The unsung hero in all this is Alk, whose footage gives the movie its artistic and historical nucleus. He was friends with Dylan from 1963 on, and worked with him on several movies, including "Eat the Document," "Hard Rain" (also about the Rolling Thunder tour) and Dylan's semi-improvised, self-directed "Renaldo and Clara" (where a lot of the footage comes from). Aficionados of analog-era, fly-on-the-wall nonfiction camerawork will admire the intelligence that Alk brings to every composition and camera move—assuming it's Alk's work that we're mostly seeing here, and it's impossible to know for sure, since Scorsese never identifies the footage that way, and lets us believe that "Van Dorp" shot all of it, because that's the joke. There are instances where he even seems to have dubbed Dylan and other real-life personages addressing Alk as "Van Dorp."

Meanwhile, Alk's unobtrusive artistry shines through anyway—as in a lovely moment where Dylan and Ginsberg visit the cemetery where Jack Kerouac is buried, and the camera briefly sneaks away from the two men swapping Kerouac quotes to wander over to the writer's grave site, perfectly framing the rectangular headstone to create a frame-within-a-frame.

At one point, Van Dorp gripes about an obsequious Rolling Stone reporter, real-life journalist and gadfly Larry "Ratso" Sloman, stating that "he didn't want anyone else with vision around." This feels like a self-deprecating joke on Scorsese's own status as an auteur who puts his name on nonfiction projects partly comprised of archival footage created by others. But erasing credit for another artist's work—even an obscure one, even inadvertently, and even in the service of satire and conceptual art—is a dicey business. It backfires here, contributing to the current national malaise wherein facts are provisional and nothing can be trusted anymore, and making the project feel insensitive to the hard-won achievements of real people without whom it would not exist. Buried beneath layers of metafictional tomfoolery is a moving film about an anonymous artist whose achievements remain unrecognized, even by people ideally positioned to throw a spotlight on them.

REVIEW RESOURCE: https://www.rogerebert.com/rev....iews/rolling-thunder