Archive for movies

Mossad’s Nazi-Crypto-Jew, The Movie

Posted in Etc. with tags , , on March 28, 2009 by The 800 Pound Gorilla
June 18, 2007

When John Le Carré admitted several years ago he was a longtime agent of Britain’s intelligence services, the bestselling spy-thriller writer explained his involvement in the sort of terms you’d expect from someone who had for decades brilliantly captured boys’ spirits with a romanticized vision of espionage. “I really believed at last that I had found a cause I could serve,” Le Carré, then 69, said in a TV documentary, The Secret Centre. “I also longed for the dignity which great secrecy confers upon you.”

If great secrecy can confer dignity, it can also reap a personal harvest of great emotional wreckage. Such is the lesson of The Champagne Spy, a new documentary about one of the Mossad’s most infamous operations.

The setting is the Middle East in the early 1960s. Egypt’s ambitious leader Gamal Abdel Nasser is luring Nazi scientists to Cairo to facilitate the tyrant’s desire to build a nuclear weapon’s program. At around the same time, a dashing millionaire playboy named Wolfgang Lotz (rumored to be an ex-SS officer) arrives in Egypt and sets up a riding school and horse farm that quickly becomes the social nexus of both Egypt’s elite and their new Nazi imports.

Lotz’s real name is Major Ze’ev Gur Arie. He’s a Mossad recruit who was commander of an Israeli infantry company in the 1956 Sinai campaign. Arie’s covert identity – which gives him access to a tantalizing mix of women, wealth and intrigue – proves intoxicating, and ultimately, tragic for the Israeli wife and child he left behind.

That child, Oded Arie, finally chose to share his story (and never-before-seen family footage) with filmmaker Nadav Schirman, whose documentary is winning awards and impressing audiences on the film festival circuit.

I interviewed Nadav (a friend I met years ago during my stint at the Jerusalem Post) as he was getting ready to fly to California for the Los Angeles International Film Festival.

Did you grow up in a family with secrets?

If there were secrets they were well-kept.

I ask because for all the dramatic exceptionalism of the story, all the elements that might appeal to a spy fanboy’s doofus wonderment, Wolfgang Lutz seems emblematic of a certain segment of the post-holocaust generation, particularly those from Israel – the dysfunction borne out of a festering underbelly of familial secrets and suppressed memories, men of great resource simultaneously crippled by their unaddressed emotions, women forced into great sacrifices in the name of country and children, and so on.

For Lotz, it was even worse than what you describe. He was born in Germany in 1921. His father was a gentile, a theatre director, his mother a Jewish actress. As Hitler seized power in 1933, Lotz’s father killed himself and the desperate mother emigrated to Palestine with her son.

She dumped her son in a boarding school (Ben Shemen, with Peres and such) and tried her luck on the Habima stages. An utter narcissist obsessed with her interrupted acting career, she rarely visited him. That’s when he started to love horses.

Lotz, a German immigrant, was never quite totally a Sabra (native Israeli). His friends in the Hagana didn’t trust him completelyhe seemed like an outsider with his Aryan looks, European demeanor and German-tinged accent. That’s maybe why his military career stalled and he left the army at 40, frustrated and of course ripe for the Mossad boys to snatch him up.

Speaking of the damage secrets can wreak, you screened this in front of a group of Mossad agents. Describe to me what happened. It must’ve been fascinating to see their reactions.

No secrets: SchirmanWe screened the film, and afterwards I sat on a panel with the former Mossad psychologist whose job was to evaluate candidates and also treat all psychological hardships that come with the jobthe loneliness, the shock of alternating identities and returning home after a mission.

Imagine, you’ve been 5 years undercover, with an unlimited expense account, living high on adrenaline and adventure. Then, suddenly, you’re in a small Tel Aviv apartment and your wife is screaming at you to change the diapers. It’s a tough transition. In the movie, you see how Lotz did not handle the transition well and suffered a tragic end.

It’s hard to fathom the lives these people lead. On the panel, there was also a former agent who was captured in Iraq, tortured and imprisoned for 10 years. He talked about how it’s really true that everyone talks in the end. He said that the decisive moment during his interrogation and torture was when the Iraqis staged his hanging. They forced him to stand on a stool with a noose around his neck for 20 minutes. He thought he was going to die; he had already made his peace. That’s just a crazy situation.

At the premiere screenings in March at the DocAviFilm Festival in Tel Aviv, about a quarter of the audience was Mossad or former “Office” (that’s how they call it, “the Office”). After the panel, on my way out, I was accosted by dozens of former agents who all wanted to thank me for the film. They were open and talkative, going against everything that governs their professional life. The agents’ responses to the film were touching. It gives them a chance to talk about their bottled up emotions, discuss the personal price they paid for their service.

Jews developed a mythology about the “elite” status of certain Israeli institutions. After being herded en masse to our extermination like helpless kittens, it was a comforting, even necessary, delusion to think of, say, the IDF as invincible or the Mossad as an almost-supernatural gang of Jewish James Bonds. I, personally, reveled in the aggrandizement as a child, reading every military book, listening to every magnificent tale of heroism told by my father and his friends. And I believe it made me stronger, prouder, more confident than my American Jewish peers raised on the nebbishness of Woody Allen.

The deconstruction of those mythologies at the hands of post-Zionist literature, the latest Lebanese war, and movies like yours is a difficult phenomenon to assess. On a nostalgic, personal level I fear what it means for Israel. I’m not suggesting these stories not be told, that agitprop and myth win out over truth. It is healthy, a sign of maturation. What I’m curious about is how it affected you personally. Was it emotional knowing you were part of this effort at deconstruction? Do you think the mythology is indeed dead, and is that a good thing?

Go down, Wolfgang: Arie posing as Lotz in EgyptGood question! I approached the whole spy thing impregnated with James Bond impressions, too. I mean I always dreamt of being a spy. I grew up all over the world. My dad was a diplomat, and as a kid, we went to all these cocktail parties and embassy functions, which where fertile ground for my fantasies.

What I discovered through the making of the film is two things. One, as you can see from Lotz’s story, being an agent is a lonely and confusing job at best. The excitement, adrenaline and glamorous lifestyle seem now to be a thin veil for the grey and lonely work of information gathering. The second thing, which even took me by surprise, is that the Mossad peopleall those around Lotz’s operational unit who I’ve metare like a family. They were once a bunch of idealistic, kind, good hearted Zionists who’ve slowly and sadly become realists. I wish they ran the country.

These are the people who built the myth with their own hands and laid the foundation for Israel. I discovered that what they had and my generation lacks: blind faith and real heartfelt patriotism. Everything has changed. Patriotism has morphed into individualism and opportunism. We have always wanted to be, after all, a Western country. Today you can apply to “the Office” via the web. Just send in your resume. That’s says a lot about what changed. But so should it ? No? Who knows?

Sounds like you’re not terribly optimistic about the changes that have taken place.

Real love for your country is hard to replace. Sitting in his olive grove near Rishon Le’Tzion, I talked to Jacob Nachmias, Lotz’s former Paris operative. We were under the olive trees that his father had planted in the 1920s when it was just fields all around. Jacob fought in every single Israeli war since 1948, climbing in rank, then specializing in intelligence, and eventually dedicating his life to the country he had helped build. For a moment, talking to him, I really felt close to him, to the land, and to a history that part of my lineage as an Israeli.

And then I left Nachmias’s grove, and where there were once fields, there are now highways, industrial parks, shopping malls, noise, pollution.

There is a wrenching moment in the film when Oded passes summary judgment on his father’s life with the chilling words, “He hurt everyone close to him.” In the movie Munich, Steven Spielberg used the emotional price paid by the Israeli agents as a way to deliver a political message about violence’s ceaseless cycle. Is there a message you’re trying to deliver?

No message except for the one that each person takes home with him. I hope never to be as didactic in my filmmaking as you suggest. A film is more of an exploration, a window onto another world.

How did you find the project?

The project found me. As always, no?

A friend gave me an old book, The Champagne Spy, which we’re actually now adapting into a feature screenplay. Anyway, it was Lotz’s exploits in Cairo written by himself. Just the name of the author turned me on: Wolfgang Lotz! What a name! After reading it, I said “This can’t be true. The man was a real life James Bond: Cairo, horses, parties, women, missiles in the desert…”

Spy kid: Oded Arie and his dadI tried to get the rights but all the publishers told me the same thing: “Rights reverted to author; author dead; your problem.”

Then one day, I’m sitting next to the pool where my son is taking swimming lessons. Next to me, there’s an older man and he asks me what I do. I tell him I’m trying to make a film about Wolfgang Lotz.

“Oh yeah?” The old man perks up. “How’s it going?”

Not good, I said. The man is dead and I can’t find any family he may have left.

“Maybe I can help you,” he says. I give him my number, not really thinking much of it.

Then, two weeks later I get a phone call from the man. He said: “The man you’re trying to find is Oded Gur Arie. He’s Lotz’s son. He’s coming to Israel next week. His number is so and so.” Beeeep. He hangs up.

Then I met Oded, and he tells me his father told him he was a spy when Oded was only 12 and that he never told anyone that, or anything else about his experience, until today. And then! Then, Oded shows me the old 8 millimeter videos he had shot of his dad’s secret visits to Paris. That’s when I knew the film had chosen me.

Were there any negative reactions to the film in Israel?

Not yet. People love it here. The film is nominated for “Best Feature Documentary” in the Israeli Academy Awards and in the Israeli Documentary Forum.

Israeli film seems to be experiencing a golden moment. Any explanation?

Israeli films are winning major awards in every single festival this year (Berlin, Sundance, Tribeca, Cannes). I think the work of the Israeli Film Fund, the work of the three or four film schools and of the L.A.-Tel Aviv partnership programs are paying off. We’ve got a new generation of talent and it’s going to be exciting to see what will be produced in the next few years.

The above article can be found at: From Israel With Love

Also read

TIME magazine

November 23, 1970

The Champagne Spy
Egyptian generals and Cabinet members in the early 1960s knew Wolfgang Lotz as a wealthy German horse breeder with an engaging habit of sending champagne and other lavish gifts to well-placed friends. They thought of him as an ex-Wehrmacht captain in Rommel’s Afrika Korps who later made a fortune in Australia. Some whispered that he was actually a former lieutenant colonel in Hitler’s dread SS who had joined Egyptian intelligence.

To the astonishment of his Egyptian friends, the rusty-haired Lotz was disclosed in 1965 to be an Israeli spy. Lotz’s explanation was persuasive enough to save his life. He joined the Israelis, he said, because they had threatened to reveal his Nazi past to the Bonn authorities. Besides, there was the convincing detail that he was uncircumcised. The court let him off with a 25-year sentence, and only three years later Lotz and his German wife Waldrud were turned over to the Israelis in an exchange of prisoners. Along with nine Israeli captives, the Lotzes were swapped for more than 4,000 Egyptian prisoners, including nine generals.

Last week Israeli officials allowed the full extent of Lotz’s subterfuge to be revealed by official sources for the first time. Far from being an ex-Nazi soldier, Lotz was a Jew, an Israeli citizen and an officer of Israel’s army. He was born in Germany in 1921, to be sure, but emigrated to Palestine with his Jewish mother in 1933. He later spent seven years in the British army (including four in Egypt, where he learned fluent Arabic). He served in the Sinai campaign of 1956 as the commander of an Israeli infantry company.

Radio in a Boot. In 1960, Lotz turned up in West Berlin, where he applied for and received West German citizenship. A year later, he arrived in Egypt, set up a riding school and horse farm, and began impressing important people by giving away tape recorders and cameras, refrigerators and washing machines.

Through his new friends in the Gezira Sporting Club, Lotz was able to set up a stable in the Abassiye Garrison and get a permanent pass to the camp. Later he trained his horses at a practice race track beside the armor depot near Heliopolis. All the while, he was relaying his gleanings back to Israel on a tiny transmitter he kept in a riding boot. Through German friends, he established that Egyptian rockets were not an immediate menace because their guidance systems were unreliable. He also learned that the Egyptians’ HA-300 jet interceptor­a great worry to the Israelis at the time­was a dud.

Lotz’s greatest accomplishment was his verification that the Shaloufa rocket site, near Great Bitter Lake on the Suez Canal, was a genuine base and not a dummy. Posing as tourists on a fishing trip, the Lotzes drove toward the camp and managed to get themselves arrested. “I was afraid they would simply send us away,” says Lotz. “Fortunately, they took us straight into the base.” Once there, Lotz talked the commandant into calling his old friend Brigadier General Fuad Osman, a highly placed Egyptian intelligence officer. The conversation, as Lotz recalls it:

Osman: Rusty, do you want to rot in jail, or will you pay up with a bottle of champagne?

Lotz: Egyptian or French?

Osman: Now don’t act like a Jew. French champagne, of course.

As Lotz entered a party a few days later, the brigadier shouted: “Here comes the Israeli spy who tried to get into our rocket base.” Everyone laughed, including Lotz. He had already reported to his Israeli colleagues­who still refer to him as “the champagne spy”­that the Shaloufa base was being made ready for Soviet missiles.

In 1965 the Egyptians rounded up a number of West Germans as a precautionary measure before a visit by East German Boss Walter Ulbricht. When the police searched Lotz’s home, they discovered that he had been spying for the Israelis. Since the 1968 prisoner exchange, Lotz has lived modestly in Tel Aviv as an Israeli air force major. He has grown paunchy despite his daily riding, and sometimes admits that he misses the high life in Cairo.

The above article can be found at: The Champagne Spy

Mossad’s Nazi-Crypto-Jew, The Movie

Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics, and the Creation of the Superhero

Posted in Media Watch with tags , , , , , on September 25, 2008 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

The Jewish Daily Forward
March 19, 2008

The history of comics has been big recently, and there’ve been a number of books and articles about it. Because so many Jews were there at the creation of both the comic book and the great superheroes who served as the main attraction, you have to ask the obvious question: What, if anything, does it mean that the industry was so heavily populated by Jews?

Your answer to this will depend on what you think “comic books” really do. In “Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics and the Creation of the Superhero,” Danny Fingeroth seems to assume that the most important comics tell tales of superheroes. He is mostly interested in what he calls “The Golden Age” — from 1938 until the end of the Second World War — when caped crusaders and men of steel patrolled the streets of Gotham City and the skies of Metropolis. Fingeroth, a former comics editor at Marvel, also gives due attention to the “Silver Age” of the 1960s and beyond — the heyday of oddball heroes, like Spider-Man and The Fantastic Four. Unfortunately, the narrative he constructs leads him to breeze over what happened to the comics between the golden and the silver ages, to the fact that after the war, comic book buyers got bored with the squeaky-clean defenders of the innocent. They were more interested in Wonder Woman’s breasts.

As David Hajdu points out in “The Ten-Cent Plague: The Great Comic Book Scare and How It Changed America,” overt sex sold, horror reigned and the villains stole the stage from the superheroes. Magazines suddenly sported racy titles, like “Crime SuspenStories,” “My Secret Life” and “The Crypt of Terror.” These, too, were created by Jews. As far as Hajdu is concerned, you need to look at the whole industry — at both “Superman” and “The Crypt of Terror” — to understand what the comics mean. Hajdu demonstrates that the comics’ particular meanings and their particular forms of Jewishness cannot be divorced from their specific — and distinct — histories.

Fingeroth admits that it’s “hard to tell” where the comics themselves are properly Jewish. It probably is. Superman presents a relatively easy case: Jules Feiffer has argued that the Man of Steel really came “from the planet Poland,” while Gerard Jones, in his excellent 2004 book “Men of Tomorrow: Geeks, Gangsters, and the Birth of the Comic Book,” suggested that Superman quite literally embodies the Jewish immigrant’s dilemma (he has to pretend he fits in, while knowing that he has special, unseen and potentially unappreciated powers). The “secret” of Superman’s success also rests on the fact that his is the dilemma of every geeky and not-so-geeky kid. A hero on the inside, he’s prime bully bait on the outside. So Superman’s dual identity fits a number of important bills. DC Comics, Superman’s publisher, profited from all of them.

But what about Batman? Hardly an immigrant and definitely not Jewish. And the rest of that alliterative and hardy crew of caped and costumed heroes who bashed the bad guys all through the early 1940s? Again, hard to tell. Nevertheless, Fingeroth wants to tell. The trouble is that he has to hyperextend in order to tease out what he calls “shreds of Jewish meaning” from the superhero comics. Unfortunately, that’s all they are: shreds.

According to Fingeroth, some heroes are stand-ins for Moses, some for survivors. Because comics script writers were ambivalent about not being professionals themselves, they created heroes who were established professionals in their day jobs. (Sorry, Mom.) You get the idea. Perhaps the oddest of Fingeroth’s claims is that Captain America’s writers were particularly Jewish in that they wanted every story to be “universal.”

In “The Ten-Cent Plague,” Hajdu makes the interesting case that postwar comics were the first shot in a coming youth revolt. By the early 1950s, cities were banning comics. Prodded by their parents, kids were burning them. The Senate was investigating them. Hajdu indicates that the sex and mayhem stories that caused such a ruckus represented the flip side of the superheroes’ adventures. He suggests that we see them as expressions of a particularly Jewish — though likely unconscious — mistrust of assimilation, of its enforced conventions and unavoidable authority. So if DC’s Superman appealed to the nerd in all of us, the sleazy comics peddled by companies like EC spoke to an inchoate but increasingly independent youth culture.

This new buying public of rebels without a cause — the same kids who would turn Elvis into a superhero of a different kind — scared the daylights out of their parents. Even though there was no overt proof, psychologists, politicians and the chief crime fighter in the land, J. Edgar Hoover, claimed that reading comics led directly to juvenile delinquency. In 1954, psychologist Frederic Wertham published his most famous work, “Seduction of the Innocent,” which made it sound as if he wanted to protect our children from the pernicious influence of the comics. But Hajdu makes an excellent case that the anti-comics brigades wanted protection from our children. The seduced, it seems, resembled other paranoid fantasies of the Cold War: all those fifth-columnists in the State Department and the communist dupes in the schools, those invasive germs in the kitchen and the brainwashed automatons lurking in the streets.

While Hajdu explicitly refuses to draw a parallel between McCarthyism and the attacks on the comics industry, they are linked by a common fear of contagion and subversion. And, though Hajdu won’t go this far, it would be fair to guess that there was more than a touch of latent antisemitism in the comic book affair. The Catholic Church, the American Legion, towns without many Jews and towns with too many Jews all ganged up on the comics. Jewish comics editors and publishers like Bill Gaines (hopped up on amphetamines and aggression) came up before televised committees of such manifestly upright, proudly non-Jewish lawmakers as Estes Kefauver and Robert C. Hendrickson (and, as Michael Chabon shows in “Kavalier and Clay,” the Jews did not come out so well). In an era when the most famous American traitors were a pair of down-at-the-heel communist Jews, it’s hard to imagine that the great comics scare was not a sideshow in the even greater Red Scare.

Hajdu’s book winds up in the mid-1950s with the exemplary case of EC’s Mad magazine. Mad’s caustically anarchic humor — sometimes gross, and often puerile — matched up Jewish snarkiness with adolescent rebellion. It was a hit. Having incurred the anger of the powers that were, EC turned Mad into a “real” magazine, upped its price and found a different distributor. EC and Mad lived to fight another day.

In the glory days of the depression and World War II, millions of people read about Superman, Batman and the scores of other superheroes who rode in on their cape-tails. Though a lot fewer people now buy comics, Fingeroth is right to say that these heroes still saturate our culture — if mostly at the movies. In the final chapter of “The Ten-Cent Plague,” R. Crumb is quoted as saying that he never got over “Mad.” We have never gotten over Superman, either.

For better and for worse, the comics, cranky and grandiose as they frequently are, really do express the various fantasies of American Jews. What’s more — and this is absolutely critical to their success — they seem to reflect the fantasies of everyone else. Of course Jews and non-Jews sometimes dream of different things, but that might be the most important point. The comics can mean so much because they can skillfully coordinate so many dreams.

The Ten-Cent Plague: The Great Comic-Book Scare and How It Changed America
By David Hajdu
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 448 pages, $26.

David Kaufmann, cultural critic for the Forward, teaches English at George Mason University.

This article can be found at

Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics, and the Creation of the Superhero

“Hollywoodism: Jews, Movies and the American Dream”

Posted in Media Watch with tags , , , , , , on September 3, 2008 by The 800 Pound Gorilla

For anyone who disputes the fact that Jews run Hollywood, this obscure little documentary film is a must-see.

“Hollywoodism: Jews, Movies and the American Dream” is a mainstream production and therefore contains a number of exaggerations and falsehoods. It does, however, make one important concession: namely, that Hollywood — and the industry it spawned — was “largely the product of six movie studios… run for over 30 years by a group of Jewish immigrants” with “strikingly similar backgrounds.”

The 1hr/42m film goes on to explain how these studios, under exclusively Jewish ownership, spent the next several decades using their new medium to create an artificial “American Dream.” As the narrator explains in the introduction: “This is the story of the founders of Hollywood; the story of the idea that became their America — and ours.”

Quoting a host of Jewish film experts, “Hollywoodism” answers the contentious question of Jewish influence on the movie industry straight from the horse’s mouth: as Author/Historian Aljean Harmetz states: “I’m not sure that there was an ‘American Dream’ before the Jews came to Hollywood and invented it.”

Based on Neal Gabler’s best-selling book, An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood, the film tells the story of a small group of Jewish immigrants who transformed the technological novelty of moving pictures into the most influential art form of the twentieth century.Adolph Zukor, founder of Paramount, Carl Laemmle of Universal; Louis B. Mayer, of MGM; William Fox of 20th Century Fox, and Harry Cohn of Columbia; were all immigrants (or children of immigrants) who reinvented themselves as Americans. In the process, they transformed America.

“Modern America first saw light on a Hollywood screen,” the documentary begins. “It was largely the product of six movie studios, established in the 1920s, and run for over 30 years by a group of Jewish immigrants” with “strikingly similar backgrounds.”

The moguls — virtually all of them Jewish — included Harry Warner of Warner Bros., born in Poland; Samuel Goldwyn of MGM, also born in Poland; Carl Laemmle of Universal Pictures, born in Germany; Louie B. Meyer of MGM, born in Russia; Adolph Zukor of Paramount Pictures, born in Hungary; and William Fox of 20th Century Fox, also born in Hungary. Harry Cohn of Columbia Pictures was born in New York to German-Jewish parents.

Author/Critic Neal Gabler states: “All of these men who founded Hollywood were born within a 500-mile radius of one another — and all of them wound up within 15 miles of one another in Los Angeles.”

The Jazz Singer (1927), starring Al Jolson, epitomizes in cinematic terms the conflict of the Jew in America. The elderly cantor of a synagogue on the Lower East Side of New York City assumes that his only son will follow in his footsteps and retain the orthodox traditions. But the son would prefer to be an entertainer and goes against his father’s wishes. Years pass and Jakie Rabinowitz, the cantor’s son, has become Jack Robin, a nightclub singer. The crisis comes when the elder Rabinowitz cannot sing the “Kol Nidre” on Yom Kippur and the congregation pressures the young jazz singer to fill in for his father. But Jack’s Broadway opening happens to be the same night.

As Gabler describes this situation: “Jack’s quandary is that he can bring Judaism to show business, but he cannot bring show business to Judaism Ö which is to say that Judaism cannot be reinvigorated or revitalized in America or by America. It is alien to it.”

The Jazz Singer has a happy ending. Jack’s producers allow his Broadway premier to be postponed a night so he can sing the “Kol Nidre” in the synagogue. Then, in his show business triumph, the young Jewish entertainer appears in blackface, “one minority disguised within another,” singing “Mammy” to his mother seated in the enthusiastic audience. The son of the immigrant gets the best of two worlds.

The film explains how, in the late 19th century, these men immigrated to the USA from Eastern Europe, where Jewish populations allegedly faced persecution at the hands of the Russian czar. No doubt exaggerating the extent of Jewish suffering, the narrator explains how, “without warning, death could come crashing down on the defenseless schtetls, reminding the Jews that, as a people, they were permanent outsiders — vulnerable and powerless.”

The future founders of Hollywood came to America with little money, “but they brought with them a new vision of America,” the narrator states. “Hollywood was a dream, dreamt by Jews fleeing a nightmare.”

In 1912, after a brief stint in New York (where, according to the film, the movie business was “monopolized” by bad-guy Thomas Edison), this small band of determined Jews set up shop in California, where they met with instant success. By 1920, they had established their own film studios and began producing hundreds of movies every year.

Interestingly, “Hollywoodism” — while stating that the moguls first came to America “with little money and few belongings” — does not explain how these monumental business ventures were initially financed.

[The 800lb. Gorilla poses this thought: perhaps the six studios, all set up simultaneously by Jews of “strikingly similar backgrounds,” were all financed by the same source — i.e., Rothschild — from the very beginning. This certainly appears to have been their modus operandi in most other industries, where so-called “competitors” are actually controlled by the same forces from behind the scenes.]

By the 1920s and 1930s, “seventy-five percent of all Americans went to the movies at least once a week,” the film explains, while movie houses had become “temples of the new Hollywood religion — Jewish values made kitsch.”

“Actors became the gods and goddesses of the new American religion. And where there are new gods there must be new idols, so the studio heads began a movie guild with the lofty title of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences,” the film explains. “It was Meyer’s brilliant idea to create the Oscars, where the movie moguls could honor themselves by giving each other awards. In this way, they went from being a group of immigrant Jews to award-winning American producers.”

The Jewish moguls, however, did more than just establish a superficial and self-serving Hollywood cult (which has never boasted more devotees than it does today). According to sources quoted in the documentary, they also used their new medium to create an American “mass culture” based on self-gratification and consumerism — that which would later become known as the “American Dream.”

“I’m not sure that there was an ‘American Dream’ before the Jews came to Hollywood and invented it,” Author/Historian Aljean Harmetz states in the film. “What you had…was an idea of freedom, but you didn’t have what we have today, which is a popular culture that creates dreams — a dream factory.”

[For more on the transformation of America into a gratification-based society through the medium of advertising — also at the hands of a small clique of East European Jews — see Adam Curtis’ brilliant, four-part BBC documentary, “Century of the Self.”]

Film Critic Gabler states: “They created their own America — an America which is not the real America… But ultimately, this shadow America becomes so popular and so widely disseminated that its images and its values come to devour the real America.”

“The grand irony of all Hollywood is that Americans come to define themselves by the shadow America that was created by Eastern European Jewish immigrants…,” Gabler adds. “One could say that the American Dream was really founded in Eastern Europe.”

“Hollywoodism: Jews, Movies and the American Dream” — Download it HERE

“Hollywoodism: Jews, Movies and the American Dream”