The First Neoconservative Propaganda: A Review of The Steel Helmet

[Down1]

Samuel Fuller’s excellent movie The Steel Helmet (1951) was called “a Right-wing fantasy” by the Communist paper, The Daily Worker. The America First/anti-Communist Right called for, and got, an FBI investigation into its Jewish director, Samuel Fuller, after they saw the movie and disliked aspects of it. This 1951 movie about the Korean War is indeed unsettling for many. The unsettling aspects arise from something that was new in 1951, but only now can be fully understood; The Steel Helmet is the first work of neoconservative propaganda.
http://www.counter-currents.com/2017/03/the-first-neoconservative-propaganda/


http://www.counter-currents.com/2017/03/the-first-neoconservative-propaganda/

[Jerrylynnb]

This article was written by one C. F. Robinson.

I was reading some of his other articles and came across one about the Sioux wars in the 1860's, found here:

http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/11/welfare-terrorists/

In this article, which I was finding to be very interesting, I read the following:

"The attacks on September 11, 2001 merely made apparent to all Americans the existence of the deadly reality of Islamist hostility."

He was trying to draw a parallel between the Sioux uprising and the alleged Islamic "uprising", and, his offhand reference suggesting that he believes that those three buildings in NYC were destroyed by the action of Islamic terrorists, was enough for me to stop reading.

Anyone gullible enough to not see that those buildings were demolished is probably spewing forth nonsense in any other subject matter he explores. Even though his writing is interesting, I have to treat it as FICTION being passed off as FACT, so read his work with a careful eye - likely he is taking liberties with his own ideas about facts from the past, and you can't know which ones he has thoroughly researched, or, which ones he has swallowed with childish gullibility, like his falling for (and promoting) the "Islamic Terrorist" fantasy about 9/11.

Causing any building to collapse down upon its own footprint is a highly technical program that requires a massive amount of skilled study and planning, and review by other highly paid technical experts. Just coming up with a demolition plan could easily be a huge expense, and that is even before a single stick of dynamite is purchased. Just the plan is a huge expense, and then there is the defense of the plan before the building permit committee and the many, many agreements, and governmental procedures that must all be followed to the letter. Anyone setting out to demolish any building would be a spendthrift NOT to take full advantage of the original demolition plan submitted (and already paid for) and accepted ALREADY with the original building permit. The demolition plan for the Towers was probably classified as restricted access, so, anyone seriously investigating the demolition of the Towers needs only get access to the list of recipients for that original demolition plan. Number one on that list would be Larry "Pull It" Silverstein, who would have necessarily had access to the original building permit (with the original demolition plan contained therein) as the then 99-year lease holder.

Any modern pundit who can't see this isn't worth listening to, except as entertaining fantasy, if that entertains you.

Over and out (as per C. F Robinson)

[Down1]

No the article is good.
That is kind of a mellow site that never talks much about the JQ.

He was making an analogy about normie awareness imo and nothing more.