Apparently there is a Ghost Protocol. When the *stuff* hits the fan the entire array of intelligence, military, covert ops finds itself without any satellite or computer back up. Needless to say, under Ghost Protocol one’s team cannot rely on other covert operators to come to the rescue. One’s team is on one’s own. This is what the latest Mission Impossible segment to the series would have us believe. If one acts in terms of what is right and one fails, the one is deemed a terrorist. If one acts and succeeds, then one is a minor story on FOX News about the local boy making good. Success means concealment in the typical Mission Impossible manner—if you “choose” to accept this mission, and this message will “self destruct” in five seconds. Etc., etc., etc.
In the latest, Tom Cruise and his merry band must prevent a total thermonuclear war which in terms of the plot will once and for all allegedly teach the world the futility of war. According to the “bad guy,” multi-million dead will allegedly be evidence of the stupidity of war. This is what a madman will demonstrate if he gets the right missile codes and bomb satellites and actual nuclear bombs in a row. It is up to Mission Impossible to thwart this humanitarian deed. The simple suitcase nuke is too easy for this version of Lex Luthor. In this case the bad guy has a detailed plan—and if one wanted to be nasty, one might be tempted to call it a 59 point plan.
From Budapest to Moscow to Dubai to Mumbai to Seattle, our merry band will prevent a nuclear war—which if any film student would have objected—was a bit ridiculous. After all, Matthew Broderick almost started WWIII with the stroke of a computer key a mere 20 years prior in the movie War Games. With such prior film knowledge, we are led to believe that while NORAD can track the whereabouts of Santa Claus on Christmas Eve, it cannot track a rogue nuclear missile heading for San Francisco in 2011.
Perhaps the criticisms that the U.S. has been neglecting its basic infrastructure is true. After all this movie highlights growing economies outside the U.S. The U.S. must suck—except for Seattle.
Ghost Protocol allegedly means that one is on one’s own. One is basically disavowed, and the specially and expertly trained are acting in the absence of law—and perhaps in a state of nature they are acting outside of the good. In this movie we see the Secretary of Defense take a bullet to the head. The President, as per usual, is nowhere to be seen because the IMF—not the International Monetary Fund—but the Impossible Mission Force is there to save the day. This force has legislative, executive and judiciary power all in its own hands, and it saves the day.
Behind the scenes there are things that you as the ordinary citizen don’t need (nor do you want) to know. But don’t worry, like Superman, they work for truth, justice, and the American Way.
Much of the critique of “big government”—at least as it comes from Ron Paul types—speaks as if the government has such special, expert operatives who can hang off the Burj Khalifa on the drop of a dime. If they can do that, then they can invent AIDS and build a wall on the border to keep Americans in. If the government can test syphilis on African Americans, then the worst of Alex Jones conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 being an inside job must be true.
Mission Impossible shows that the government has the technology to do some of the most dastardly of things, and they can make it look to be legitimate with a mask that makes it look otherwise.
This is conspiracy theory at it’s weirdest. Look at Alex Jones’ rant in Richard Linklater’s film “Waking Life” to see the alienation to which such thought leads you.
It may be true, as Pete Spilliakos writes, that well meaning conservatives are only turning to Ron Paul due to the insufficient presentation of alternative policies that the “mainstream” Republican candidates have not given. This may be true, but the core of Ron Paul’s supporters follow the Alex Jones line that we live on a Prison Planet and the Jews, the Bilderbergers, the “neocons’, etc. have set us all up for evil machinations that only the Illuminati –or should I say the Impossible Mission Force—can set up.
All this is asinine.
I should add that one should re-watch Brian De Palma’s version of Mission Impossible. Still the best in the series, it deals with real human relationships (and their failure) instead of moving from one edge of your seat action scene to the other. That said, this new Mission Impossible is second best to De Palma’s—which is still a failed movie compared to his best.
If you want to know what Ron Paul really thinks of the U.S. government, then watch Blow Out. Unfortunately what De Palma offers as a playful and philosophical account of the distinction between image and original, Paul takes this distinction with earnest and deadly seriousness.
UPDATE: Just returned from a trip where I was offline, and missed some of the responses. I realize (and should have realized at the time) that I stepped over the line with the expletive. It’s been fixed. All apologies.
December 28th, 2011 | 3:56 am
[...] Ghost Protocol and Ron Paul – First Things (blog) Posted in Ron Paul | Tags: aids, big-government, burj, critique, drop, first-things, ghost-protocol, government, khalifa, protocol, ron paul, the-critique, the-government- /* [...]
December 28th, 2011 | 4:04 am
That’s right! All hail the State!
December 28th, 2011 | 4:40 am
john, are you afraid of alienation because you believe real human relationships are bound to fail? -chad
December 28th, 2011 | 4:41 am
I am a die-hard Paul supporter, and I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I just want to inherit a debt-free country.
So please, tell me more about your political wisdom. Your generation got us into this mess.
December 28th, 2011 | 6:44 am
Photographic proof that Ron Paul is a racist!!!
The presstitute shills and the Neocons are going to pull out all of the stops against RP—now even comparing him to Kim Jong un in one article I just read— and they will come down on him with both feet. I don’t think I’ve ever seen the establishment MSM so scared in my lifetime; It’s because they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
By the way, if you want to see some great pictures of Ron Paul acting like a racist, then check out the following link:
http://www.5k.com/
Please spread these photos around!
December 28th, 2011 | 7:00 am
“…All this is asinine…”
Yeah, that about sums this nonsense article up…
December 28th, 2011 | 8:15 am
[...] won the part in the fourth instalment five months after giving birth to one-year-old Julian …Ghost Protocol and Ron PaulFirst Things (blog)Cruise film leads box officePhiladelphia Inquirer'Mission: Impossible [...]
December 28th, 2011 | 9:10 am
The usual talk about “conspiracy theorists”. Yes we should believe what the government tell us, they never lie do they. By the way – have you found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq yet? Oh look Iraq now has a central bank and interest rates, another nation enslaved under the guise of removing Saddam by spending 3 trillion dollars.
“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes the laws.”
Why don’t you check out who said that.
December 28th, 2011 | 9:20 am
I, for one, welcome our new neocon overlords
December 28th, 2011 | 9:33 am
John, several points,
1. Ron Paul = Ratings
2. The folks here have proven your point. There is something poisonous within Paul’s core group. I just don’t think there are enough of them to matter absent his support among more orthodox conservatives and non-crazy persuadables. People who worry about “neocon overlords” and that “Iraq now has a central bank and interest rates[!?!]” were never going to be an important swing constituency.
I’d also add that we’ve had several thoughtful Ron Paul supporters/people thinking about supporting Paul comment here. They are outnumbered in the sheer number of comments by the nuts because the nuts are nuts and the normal people presumably have lives, but I think the non-crazy percentage of Ron Paul supporters is much higher now that it was this time last year.
December 28th, 2011 | 9:53 am
Wow, what a load of crap! Clearly you won’t be voting for Ron Paul. You deserve whatever warmonger, banker-approved, bozo you DO vote for.
I am not a conspiracist. I am a libertarian because it is the one political philosophy consistent with the Gospel and the fullness of Catholic social teaching. It emphasizes the free will of every individual, and the relationships of human beings in society consistent with the principle of subsidiarity. Please try to explain your political philosophy in terms consistent with Catholic teaching. I’ve heard several attempts, but they all at the end come down to forcing someone to do the right thing. That is not the freedom God has given us. The doctrine of hell teaches that human freedom is so respected by God himself that he allows us even to completely reject him. Should you have less respect for your fellow man?
December 28th, 2011 | 9:58 am
John,
What is asinine is people who ignore the facts of history. Gulf of Ton Kin? Operation Northwoods (signed by the Joint cheifs). But of course, us “crazy” conspirators are imagining these events. Just because our government drafts up a complete operation, and the JCOS sign off on it, they would never do it, right? Because they are so righteous in Washington. John, you are an idiot, if you believe any of the crap you spew.
December 28th, 2011 | 10:09 am
I am a life-long Republican. A veteran. Not a conspiracy theorist.
I am voting for sound money, an end to the empire building overseas and a return to a constitutional republic.
I am voting for Ron Paul.
December 28th, 2011 | 10:18 am
Pete,
I agree. Many Paul supporters have some serious points to make about several issues. You brought up one in your earlier post–monetary policy.
I live in Paul’s district. People around here are not as paranoid as one would be led to believe.
Then again, the Paul fanatics…Well they are fanatics, and they make the core of Paul’s support.
December 28th, 2011 | 10:35 am
John and Pete,
I guess if I want to drive up traffic on my own blog, just post something negative about Ron Paul.
Only you have a high tolerance for nuttiness.
December 28th, 2011 | 10:55 am
Secure a win for liberty today!
http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2011/12/phone-bank-for-ron-paul-and-liberty-today-countdown-to-iowa.html
December 28th, 2011 | 11:00 am
John, Inspired post. If we got paid by the hit, you’d deserve a huge raise.
December 28th, 2011 | 11:05 am
lame.
5 minutes I’ll never get back.
Ron Paul 2012!
Comments are an excuse to collect email address. ATF & FBI are tracking you!
December 28th, 2011 | 11:09 am
Oh snap! John you figured it out!
I’ve got something for you.
You live a small wasted life.
Peace Out Yo!
December 28th, 2011 | 12:03 pm
Anytime a reporter is foolish enough to generalize about a group he obviously doesn’t understand he should be exposed as the blowhard he is. I consider myself a core Paul supporter yet Mr. Presnall obviously knows nothing about what I think or believe. His egomania is sad and shows a lack of critical thinking. I’d prefer not to start another war and Dr. Paul is the only candidate that doesn’t foam at the mouth at the prospect of leading the attack and subsequent war on Iran. I’d like to see our military come home and I think it’s time we stopped subsidizing the economies of other countries capable of protecting themselves. For Mr. Presnall’s life to make sense he obviously believes he can make himself look better by belittling others in a shallow and dishonest one way exchange. What he seems to need is a pat on the back but there’s no room as he’s too busy doing it himself.
December 28th, 2011 | 12:42 pm
It’s ok John. Everything is just fine. Go back to sleep. We’ll save the country without you. Just one question before you leave my radar screen. Do you ever dig deeper than just what’s visible to you? Say hi to newt for me.
December 28th, 2011 | 1:14 pm
“the core of Ron Paul’s supporters follow the Alex Jones line…”
I lol’d.
No citation to support the claim. Pure speculative assertion. Nice. Strawman arguments at their finest.
Surely, it’s impossible that the core of Ron Paul support is from people who think we ought to obey the Constitution!
December 28th, 2011 | 1:51 pm
I am reminded of a joke I heard told by Justice Scalia. A young man was once asked it he believed in full immersion baptism. He replied,
“Not only do I believe in it, I’ve seen it.”
Not only do I believe that Ron Paul trades is poisonous conspiracy theories, I’ve seen it!
Not the least of which is the idea that a border fence with Mexico would be an ersatz Berlin Wall to keep Americans locked in garrison state USA.
So I may be sleeping, but that one I saw while wide awake–and on national TV.
That said, I’m all for following the constitution.
I’ll be gone for awhile. I’m heading off to Paris today.
Thanks for all of the traffic and the comments on this post.
December 28th, 2011 | 6:32 pm
Paul won’t be president for the simple reason that he’s a really old guy. About 7 yrs older than Reagan was at his 1st term. Still, something about him resonates with scores (millions?) of Americans. I suggest two reasons. 1) He takes seriously our Founders warnings about foreign entanglements. 2) He recognizes our country’s fundamental problem – the all-consuming Federal Leviathan. Paul will not budge on these 2 issues & for that is much admired, if not beloved. First Things seems oblivious of the 1st & only barely aware of the 2nd.
December 28th, 2011 | 6:52 pm
Hey! This is First Things! We don’t say “shit” here!
December 28th, 2011 | 11:12 pm
These people don’t deserve the name neocons Strauss would be disgusted. Not even scholars. Great thinkers would weigh both sides of the coin and develop a thesis hidden and transparent. In this case they are both: prejudice. This is neither deep or worth reading. Thanks.
January 2nd, 2012 | 1:08 pm
Please remove the expletive.
January 3rd, 2012 | 12:24 pm
All of the “Mission: Impossible” movies have had some moments of fun, but all have ultimately been failures, not least because they started out by trashing the original TV series on which they were based!
Almost EVERY other movie based on a TV series has given a tip of the hat to the actors and creators of the original series. Not “Mission: Impossible”! Not only did they snub the Sixties cast (not even offering Steven Hill, Peter Graves, Martin Landau, or Leonard Nimoy a cameo), they made Jim Phelps a VILLAIN!
Worse yet, the intricate teamwork of the original IMF was abandoned, and we were left with Tom Cruise as a one-man army.
Absolutely unforgivable. For crying out loud, if Tom Cruise wanted to do a solo action flick, there are countless roles and movies he could have chosen. Why do a “Mission: Impossible” movie if you clearly have no respect for the source material???
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact