A Phil-for-an-ill Blog

September 26, 2008

Independence Day (1996)


– What is Predictive Programming?
– Alan Watt – Predictive Programming; Theory and Practice
– Vyzygoth Interviews Phillip and Paul Collins – Invoking the Beyond (Predictive Programming)

Independence Day serves as the ground of comparative analysis, because I argue that the mind searches knowledge and experience in order to understand new phenomena. In this context, the sample from the film Independence Day provides the narrative qualities that embody the paradigmatic character of the situation and images of the events of September 11th.Elliot Gaines:2002

… as we were going across the street, we were not terribly far from the World Trade Center building, the south tower. As we were cutting across a, a quarantine zone actually, the building began disintegrating. And we heard it and looked up and started to see elements of the building come down and we ran, and honestly it was like a scene out of Independence Day. Everything began to rain down. It was pitch black around us as the wind was ripping through the corridors of lower Manhattan.
(Ron Insana, a reporter for MSNBC and firsthand witness to the collapse of the World Trade Center). Elliot Gaines:2002

For a decent synopsis visit the corresponding Wikipedia page. As already alluded to with the above quotes, there are some very potent predictive programming elements in this one, so read on.

Alien Attacks vs 911 Terror Attacks

Let’s first address the parallels between the attacks of the alien invader, as portrayed in the movie Independence Day (ID) and the attacks on US landmark buildings on September 11, 2001.

Fiction Reality

In the fictional setting of ID the attacker from outer space destroys the White House, the Empire State Building in New York City, and a skyscraper in Los Angeles. In the real-life setting of September 11 2001, terrorists destroy the WTC towers, damage the Pentagon and if the hijacked plane, which in all likelihood was heading for Washington DC, had not been downed over Pennsylvania, the White House might also have been hit. Hence the parallels between the two attacks, one fictional and one real, are clearly discernible.

Immediately following September 11 2001, the media began their nauseating barrage of showing us various footages of disintegrating WTC towers. Those who have watched ID thus have had ample opportunity to recognize the destructive real life events being similar to the fictional ones as portrayed in the movie. Therefore, by virtue of this kind of recognition and familiarity gained from fictional imprinting, the witness is led into accepting a context of response similar to the one as presented in ID. In the movie, a clear identification is made of the enemy and a clear distinction is made between forces of good, that being the world in general and the US in particular, and forces of evil, that being the alien invader from outer space.

So when the real attacks happened, those who have watched ID are inclined to also adopt this dichotomous and uncompromisingly gung-ho mindset of good vs evil. This type of response was further reinforced when the government, most notably Bush himself, immediately following the terror attacks, began to spur the public into start thinking in pure black and white terms of good versus evil. That this technique of moral coercion left no room or time for careful and honest deliberation and reflection became dramatically clear with slogans such as, “you are either with us or you’re with the terrorists.”

To the left we see the inhuman and un-human fictional enemy, who simply wants every human “to die”, flanked to the right by two supposed real-life enemies of the United States: Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

But the movie went further than just persuade the viewer to adopt a simple binary paradigm of good versus evil. By virtue of the extra terrestrial nature of the besieger, the movie could afford for the protagonists (which is roughly the entire world) to show no mercy whatsoever for the imposing antagonists, the hosile space alien hordes. After all, we have this regrettable but nonetheless clearly present tendency to hardly care for the wellbeing of animals so why would we care for other-worldly beings who are out for our blood anyway? As such, through movies such as ID, the (American) viewer is prepared to rationalize any debasement or demonization of any future inimical adversaries, threatening the integrity of the United States. Or, in the parlour of the Collins brothers, ideational spores have been planted, in this case spores of pure and unadulterated hatred for an enemy perceived to be demonic. So when the real attacks of September 11 took place and the media almost immediately began fingering Osama Bin Laden and later on also Saddam Hussein as being the likely culprits, it would take little effort for the government, proudly flanked by its favorite lapdog: the mainstream media, to not only succeed in gathering sufficient public support for the ensuing retaliatory military campaigns, but to also manage to debase and demonize any one party labeled a “terrorist”. Never mind for a minute that it has never been established through rigorous procurement of evidence that either Osama Bin Laden, with his presumed terrorist outfit known as Al-Queda, or Sadam Hussein had even any remote thing to do with the 911 attacks.

Therefore, it already has become apparent that the predictive programming embedded in ID lies in its preparatory function of provoking a desired public kneejerk response and foster the primitive mindset on how to deal with any real future terror attacks, recognizable to the ones depicted in the movie. Note that ID was made in 1996, a convenient five years ahead of the September 11 attacks so as to leave plenty of time for the viewer to assimilate the various programming elements present in the movie.

The Fictional President vs The Real President

In the movie the President of the US manages to escape just prior to the alien attack on the White House. In real life, President George Bush just so happens to also not be in the White House during the time of the 911 attacks. As you can see on the above picture he is most busy ‘reading’ from an upside-down held (!) children’s book to a group of children in some unimportant primary school situated in some unimportant town or city in Florida. Isn’t it convenient for the Prez to be out of town at that particular date?…. In addition, as I already indicated before, if it weren’t for the downing of the hijacked plane over Pennsylvania on that fateful September day, the parallels between fiction and reality would have even been stronger.


In the movie the President just so happens to be a veteran cold-war era fighter pilot. In real life, George W Bush also happens to be a veteran cold-war era fighter pilot. Although, truth be told, Bush’s flight record must have been purely uneventful as he was safely stationed at non-combative posts in the US for the entire duration of his service to the air-force. Hence, so much for the real-life presidential heroism although the movie programs the viewer with the opposite sentiment.

In the movie we see the President giving an improvised but nonetheless vigorous pep-talk, supported of course by a characteristic and dramatic musical score, to an all too receptive and patriotically inclined makeshift audience.

In real life we could all watch how George Bush addressed the bewildered and shocked citizens of NYC in the early stages of the aftermath of 911. In the movie as well as in real life, these seemingly improvised speeches by the President can be interpreted as preludes to the retaliatory military actions that would ensue. Again, fiction conveniently prepared the public to accept, without grudging, the type of military actions their leadership would take when the real thing would transpire a few years down the line.

“I’m a combat pilot, I belong in the air.”

In the movie, by an act of sheer bravery (read: reckless lunacy), the President decides to jump into a fighter jet and joins the fight with the aliens in the most literal sense of the word. Let’s tiptoe around the question of whether this particular action was also a particular sensible one because, as with most propaganda work, this is not really important as it is the gesture that counts rather than feasibility.

In real life, we all remember the scene in which President George W Bush lands in a jet onto an aircraft carrier supposedly after the successful conclusion of the Iraq war on May 1st 2003. With a strong tacit reference to fictional scenes of the heroic ID President, this action may easily be interpreted as being a blatant PR stunt serving to bolster the image of George Bush as the heroic saviour of the US against the evil and extremely threatening Iraqi forces.

Again predictive programming came in awfully handy to pull off this act of media hocus pocus. BTW Would it be a stretch to suggest that the accentuation of Bush’s codpiece serves to emphasize his masculinity?

Aliens, Fictional or Real?


According to the movie, space aliens have visited planet Earth no later than 1947 with the occurrence of the Roswell incident. The movie therefore reinforces the idea that UFOs are manned by aliens rather than humans. However, as far as I can tell, the public has never enjoyed the possibility of reviewing any real evidence for the existence of alien manned spaceships visiting Earth. On the other hand, I personally know two insiders, one former US Combat Specialist and highly decorated War Veteran and one Italian ex-military Intelligence agent, high level Freemason and current Grandmaster of the Ordo Illuminatorum Universalis, who both reject the idea of alien manned space craft in favor of mere human engineered and human piloted space craft. Both maintain that the concepts of space aliens and alien manned UFOs are part of a cleverly designed but deceptive propaganda cover to hide behind the existence of ultra-secret man-made and man-piloted military craft. Both gentlemen including yours truly, can be contacted on this page.

This interpretation is also supported in the following article:

Area 51

The creation of Area 51 began in April of 1955, when a Lockheed test pilot, Tony LeVier, searched for a remote site to test the U-2. Grooms Lake is chosen as the location for the runway. By August of 1955, the U-2 makes its first flight from Grooms Lake. That was only the beginning for test flights from Area 51. In April 1962, the first A-12 Blackbird was tested at Groom Lake. February 1982, the F-117A Stealth fighter takes off for the first time. All other test flights have not been released to the public, but that doesn’t mean they don’t occur. However, they are, in no way, shape or form, alien test flights. Nearly all of the evidence that supports the alien spacecraft theory, is without backing, or solid information. Also, the US government played on the UFO theories to hide their own testing plans. Today, Area 51 is the home to the latest top secret aircraft: the Aurora, among others Many of these aircraft, past and present, are able to perform incredible feats in the sky. Some so unbelievable, that they could be mistaken for alien spacecraft by fanatics of extra-terrestrials. [emphasis mine][Ref1][Ref2]

Also it should be noted that none other than the late William Cooper, who initially in his work did promote the idea of the existence of aliens and alien-manned space craft, during the later stages in his life “recanted his UFO-oriented beliefs, asserting that they were in fact part of the Illuminati plot to subjugate the United States.”

Here is what Cooper had to say about the alien scare:

“When I saw Operation Majority while serving in the Navy I believed the alien threat was real just like everyone else. It was not until I had performed many years of research that I was able to fully understand exactly what it was that I had seen. It was extremely difficult for me to believe that my government and the United States Navy had used me, especially since I had dedicated my life to government and military service. Most government and military personnel cannot and will not believe such an idea.” [Cooper]

For more pictures of the Nazi “Haunebu” flying discs, check out Google.

“In retrospect, Americans should have correlated the WW II and post-war sightings of flying spheres, saucers, and cylinders to the wondrous technology of National Socialist Germany.
It is an understatement to say that our government has deliberately misled us on the UFO question.”
– from Robert J Lee’s “Fascinating Relics of the Third Reich” (www.netowne.com/naziufos) [as quoted here]

So, the question remains, where do these enigmatic and wondrous craft originate from? It turns out that exotic anti-gravity technology had already been developed in Nazi Germany and culminated in the design of several types of “flying saucers” and “foo-fighters”. Now, it is quite well documented that a good portion of Nazi scientists immediately after the war were imported into the United States through an international intelligence operation known as Operation Paperclip.

Hence, it is reasonable to assume that with the influx of unemployed Nazi scientists into the US also in came the technology to manufacture flying saucers. In order to successfully keep the public in the dark of the existence of such craft a cover is needed. This is where little green men from Mars come in awfully handy since you can always blame them for any sightings that may be the result of what really are man-made and earth-bound but nonetheless highly classified space craft. As such, most people won’t suspect the existence of secret man-made spacecraft and therefore a technological and, on the basis of the maxim that “knowledge is power”, an advantage is maintained relative to a nosy but ever tragically under-informed public.

An additional motive for “invoking the beyond” as the Collins Brothers would call it, and that is in this case the invocation of space aliens threatening the very survival of the human race, is to corral all nations together into one unified uniformly acting entity with the aim of launching a concerted effort of how to successfully deal with the extra-terrestrial existential threat. In other words, the promotion of a alien invader threatening the safety and security of the world helps in the establishment of an overarching and dictatorial form of global government. This notion was already promoted in the 1980s by none other than former US President Ronald Reagan (see appendix), entirely coincidentally I’m sure.


In the fight against the aliens the movie shows a scene in which one of the fighter pilots selflessly lays down his life and, in the wake of his self-sacrificial action, manages to drag down and destroy one of the major alien spaceships. Actions such as these, where the few worthily sacrifice themselves for the good of the many, serve to impart the notion to the gullible viewer that when facing the enemy, it is sometimes necessary to make that ultimate sacrifice. Stated differently, there’s no shame in getting killed for a cause touted worthy enough.

However, the phenomenon of self-sacrifice, by virtue of its neutrality, is also a double-edged sword. Namely, self-sacrifice can also be highly effective if perpetrated by the ‘other side’. The face of the other side of the coin was shown with the terror attacks of 911 in which supposedly 19 Arab hijackers supposedly sacrificed their lives for what they supposedly considered to be a worthy cause of dying for. I use the word ‘supposedly’ because I think the government edition of the explanatory account as to what happened on September 11, 2001, is similar to the reasons the US government promoted for starting the invasion and subsequent take-over of Iraq, a pack of lies.

Nonetheless, movies such as ID serve to rationalize and, to some extent, soothe the misery accompanying the events where US soldiers getting maimed or killed during defensive or retaliatory actions aimed at thwarting so deemed inimical forces. The movie scene featuring a romantic dramatization of self-sacrifice came in quite handy the moment the first casualties of the Iraq war came about and references were most welcome which could serve as culturally established ‘band-aids’ to help rationalize the losses and/or injuries sustained.


I highly recommend the following two expert articles, both of which were inspirational to this write-up, on the conditioning imposed on the public by Independence Day. Start with 1, which can be regarded as an introductory article compared to 2, which is clearly written for an academic audience.

  1. The Semiotic Deception of September 11th – by Phillip D. Collins ©, Dec. 31st, 2004
  3. The Collins Brothers expand on the link between ID and the September 11 attacks (excerpt from a 2007 Vyzygoth interview, video by yours truly):

    Movie Independence Day Prelude to September 11 Attacks 1of2

    Movie Independence Day Prelude to September 11 Attacks 2of2

  4. Other relevant videos:

    George W. Bush at Ground Zero – September 14, 2001

    Mission Accomplished

    Thule – Vril – Paperclip

    Ronald Reagan – Threat of Aliens among us

My other analyses (oldest first, newest last):

Children of Men (2006)
300 (2006)
28 Weeks Later (2007)
Soylent Green (1973)
Johnny Mnemonic (1995)
The Kingdom (2007)
The Invasion (2007)
Shoot em Up (2007)
John Rambo (2008 )
I, Robot (2004)
Cloverfield (2008 )
Conspiracy Theory (1997)
Starship Troopers 3 – Marauder (2008 )
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008 )
Code 46 (2003)
Equilibrium (2003)
Gattaca (1997)
Minority Report (2002)
V for Vendetta (2005)
Things to Come (1936)
Swordfish (2001)
Independence Day (1996)
Death Race (2008 )
Bee Movie (2007)
The Happening (2008 )
Cyborg Girl – Boku no kanojo wa saib?gu (2008 )
Transformers (2007)
Survivors (2008 ) – BBC TV Series – Part 1of6
Survivors (2008 ) – BBC TV Series – Part 2of6
Survivors (2008 ) – BBC TV Series – Part 3of6
The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)
The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008 )
I Am Legend (2007)
Robocop (1987) – Promoting the Militarization of Police
Dark Knight (2008) – Excusing the Rude & Stoic Strongman Crime Fighter

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.