For Pacifica Radio, September the 20th, 2020.
I'm Scott Horton.
This is Anti-War Radio.
All right, you guys, welcome to the show.
It is Anti-War Radio.
I'm your host, Scott Horton.
I'm the editorial director of AntiWar.com, and I'm the author of the book, Fool's Errand, Time to End the War in Afghanistan.
You can find my full interview archive, more than 5,000 of them now, going back to 2003, at ScottHorton.org and at YouTube.com slash ScottHortonShow.
All right, you guys, introducing Tom Secker.
He's the co-author of the book, National Security Cinema, the Shocking New Evidence of Government Control in Hollywood.
And he wrote this great piece for Shadowproof, Homeland Security in Hollywood, How the Department Controls Its Image on Screen.
Welcome to the show.
How are you doing, Tom?
I'm doing great, Scott.
Thanks for having me.
Really appreciate you joining us on the show to talk about this interesting thing here.
And, you know, I always thought it was funny.
I guess I probably could have guessed.
I don't know if I ever did.
But I always thought it was funny that Homeland Security, you know, other than just running the Border Patrol and that kind of thing, but in terms of all of their anti-terrorism stuff, they're a complete joke, right?
The FBI is in charge of all of that.
And I'm not exactly certain, but I get the feeling that in terms of like social classes of federal cops, that these guys are considered lower scum even than the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
And they're essentially a joke, right?
Every once in a while they put out a release saying, oh, we think Russia may have scanned the server of a voter registration database somewhere, something.
And just everybody rolls their eyes and they're a joke.
But if you turn on, what, HBO and Showtime and ABC and CBS and all the dramas, these guys are at the heart of all the action.
If it wasn't for them, we'd have all been fusion bombed to death by now, probably, right?
Yeah, I mean, that's pretty much it.
I mean, the DHS was set up as a post 9-11 thing for purposes that still aren't even all that clear now, because it's this conglomeration of all these different agencies.
You've got the TSA, you've got FEMA, you've got Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs, you've got all these different, you know, the Coast Guard.
What do these agencies really have to do with one another?
Not a huge amount, to be honest.
I mean, sometimes, OK, you can see a bit of overlap, but so you have people in offices who can liaise with other agencies.
You don't need a whole new department.
And when you look at the DHS, I think it's the third biggest cabinet level department in the whole US government behind the DOD and Veterans Affairs.
So it's like, you know, bigger than the Department of Energy, Department of Education, all these other departments that do.
I mean, you can argue about the validity of those other agencies and what have you, if you like.
But the DHS is enormous.
And yet what do they actually do?
They don't seem to accomplish an awful lot.
And I'll give you one particularly good example of what the DHS is like from quite early on in their existence.
From the summer of 2004, they announced this great big financial buildings plot that, you know, the evil terrorists were going to blow up all the financial buildings in New York.
They're basically going to blow up Wall Street.
And this whole thing was basically a consequence and a response to Cheney's office leaking the name of an al-Qaeda double agent, a guy called Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, who the CIA had flipped and they were using him as some kind of sting operative where he was, you know, emailing al-Qaeda operatives and trying to find out where people are and what they were up to.
And then Cheney's office decided, oh, we need a big, you know, success because we've got this election coming this autumn, you know, in a few months time.
So they got the DHS to basically, they leaked the name and the DHS responded by going, oh, yeah, yeah, this guy was, you know, he was helping us bring down this great big financial buildings plot.
That plot was a complete joke.
There was no explosives.
There were no schematics.
There was no, you know, substantive terrorist plot there.
There were a few people with a bit of criminal intent, but that's about it.
And a couple of years later, Tom Ridge, the director of Homeland Security at the time, wrote a book saying this whole thing was basically a scam and it was part of a plan to help Bush get reelected.
And, you know, that's the kind of level that they're at.
They're little more than a PR agency themselves.
So perhaps it's not that surprising to find they have this very active Hollywood office in order to promulgate and propagate the same kind of images and the same kind of ideas and messages through fictional entertainment as they do through news media and other forms.
Yeah.
Well, you know, even from the beginning, granted, 90 percent everybody was caught up in the or at least a politically interested people were caught up in all the September 11th hype and all that kind of thing.
But there were, you know, quite a few, you know, important writers and others, whoever, regular people, too, who just hated that word Homeland Security.
Since when do we call America the homeland?
Now, what is this weird new speak where they introduce this whole new term that's supposed to replace our country, which is just a plain old word?
You know what I mean?
Like the George Carlin in me just rebels against who gets even just the same way they call it 9-11, 9-11.
To me, it's still just the September 11th attacks.
Thank you very much.
I don't need other people to dictate weird changes in my jargon and vocabulary, you know.
And and Will Grigg, of course, was the brilliant genius who could pronounce it correctly in everything in the original German, as he called it.
And there was, you know, really kind of I think that turned people off.
And also, as you're saying, just the whole idea that, jeez, we're going to consolidate essentially everything outside the Department of Justice and half of even what the DOJ does and put it under this giant new department in this way.
It really kind of was a freaky thing, even for, I think, conservatives who were real Bush supporters.
The creation of the deal, it was seen as a real major step.
But now it's been very normalized now.
They even that was the name I never saw an episode, but I know that that was a show on what HBO or Showtime for many years is just called Homeland.
And it's about how these people are heroes.
If it wasn't for them, we'd all be dead.
And they push that constantly.
So many of these dramas really do center around on the Netflix show The Punisher.
The sidekick lady Madani is Department of Homeland Security.
They make it seem like these people are important at all.
We're relying on them at all.
If you watch TV, that comes up an awful lot is the secondary character who is some kind of homeland security agent.
That's exactly the same thing happens on this show called The Rookie, which I did quite an in-depth study of, which is this big promotion for the LAPD and had lots and lots of support from the LAPD.
And, yeah, and they introduced this girlfriend character for the protagonist.
And, oh, yeah, she's homeland security.
And, oh, yeah, then there's a bio terror attack that they all have to stop together.
And it's, you know, homeland security working side by side with the LAPD.
Look how we all work so well together.
When in reality, the administration of trying to conglomerate all these different departments together.
I mean, like you said, there was opposition to this when it happened.
And part of that was because this was actually the biggest reorganization of the U.S. federal government since the National Security Act in 47, since the whole creation of the Department of Defense and the CIA and a bunch of other stuff.
It was enormous trying to stick all of these things together, and they don't work well together.
Everyone from whistleblowers to authors to journalists has pretty much concluded now this hasn't worked.
These agencies aren't cooperating any better than they were when they were individual agencies with their own patch doing whatever it was they were doing.
And so, yeah, yeah, the way that those characters turn up in these TV shows, it's always that it's always a heroic narrative.
It's always when there's an imminent, you know, horrible threat that's going to wipe out thousands of people and they ride in and save the day.
It's very much cowboys and Indians sort of stuff.
It's very basic, to be honest.
I study a lot of this sort of entertainment propaganda.
And I've got to say, in terms of sophistication, you've got like the CIA somewhere near the top and maybe the Department of Defense.
And then you've got these other departments like DHS who just seem to be like, yeah, yeah, stick in a hero character.
We just want to look heroic and positive and important.
And that's about it.
There's no real thinking behind it.
It's very, very base.
And I guess one could argue, you know, as you said, there are sort of Nazi connotations to the whole notion of the homeland and homeland security.
And I think, yeah, the people running it aren't very bright.
I think they're even more incompetent and useless and generally stupid than the people running the FBI.
I totally agree with you there.
Hey, y'all, here's the thing.
Donate $100 to the Scott Horton Show and you can get a QR code commodity disc as my gift to you.
It's a one ounce silver disc with a QR code on the back.
You take a picture of it with your phone and it gives you the instant spot price and lets you know what that silver, that ounce of silver is worth on the market in Federal Reserve notes in real time.
It's the future of currency in the past to commodity discs dot com or just go to Scott Horton dot org slash donate.
Hey guys, Scott Horton here for expand designs dot com.
Harley Abbott and his crew do an outstanding job designing, building and maintaining my sites and they'll do great work for you.
You need a new website.
Go to expand designs dot com slash Scott and say 500 bucks.
Hey y'all, Mike Swanson is a successful Wall Street trader with an Austrian school understanding of the markets and therefore he has great advice to share with you.
Check out Mike's work and sign up for his list at WallStreetWindow.com.
And that's what you'll get, a window into all of Mike's trades.
He'll explain what he's buying and selling and expecting and why.
I know you'll learn and earn a lot.
WallStreetWindow.com.
That's WallStreetWindow.com.
All right.
So I want to talk about all these, you know, how this works, all the liaisons and the PR agencies and all of that stuff.
But one point I have to bring up real quick, just because it's so important, I think, that I happen to remember from 2002 was no one in the major media would dare to ask the question of what did they know and when did they know it?
And could the FBI and CIA and NSA have stopped this attack or couldn't they have or anything like that?
Until finally Colleen Rowley wrote her letter to the Senate in May of 2002.
And she was the FBI lawyer from Minnesota and they just couldn't ignore that.
So they made a huge story out of it.
So that was like nine months after the attack.
And finally they said, OK, let's look at all these failures of these cops and spies to do their job and all this thing.
And then you have to give Karl Rove the evil genius credit for this, just in a mechanical kind of a way, that he used all of that scandal about, well, geez, they've been in power for eight months.
They might could have stopped that thing if they'd been doing their job.
I don't know, this kind of thing.
And they turned all of that into, boy, do we need a Department of Homeland Security.
They took all that pressure and redirected it into support for this law that created this monstrosity.
And then it was gone.
And that's pretty good stuff, man.
You've got to give them credit in a, you know, evil genius kind of a sorcerer sort of a way there, you know.
Oh, for sure.
That was one of his Dr. Evil moments, taking the fact that, oh, the FBI and the CIA had this horrendous issue with why on earth the CIA weren't sharing information with the bureau.
And why the NSA basically weren't telling anyone anything that they knew about Al-Qaeda.
And he goes, OK, I mean, obviously we can't turn the FBI and the CIA into one agency.
What can we do?
I know.
Let's let's grab FEMA and the Coast Guard and everyone else and just stick them all together.
And that's our new intelligence sharing mechanism.
And definitely no one will be fired.
No one will go to jail.
They'll all just get promoted.
And the whole scandal, the entire pressure of the scandal will be directed into this one thing.
And it just worked.
It's amazing to see.
You know, I remember being impressed in a horrible kind of a way.
All right.
Now, so tell me if I'm working at some, you know, movie studio or TV company out there in Burbank, what happens?
A DHS sends who to come and teach me the facts alive here?
Well, all of these different agencies that make up the DHS all have some form of public affairs office that deals with Hollywood.
But the whole thing has to be run up to the at the chain to the central Homeland Security multimedia liaison office.
So say you want to go and research a script for a movie or a TV show.
You want to go and talk to some people and see around a few facilities and what have you.
You have to sign an NDA, a non-disclosure agreement, so that anything that you learn during those research trips or interviews, whatever it is that you're making, whether it's a fictional thing, factual thing, book, movie, whatever, they have complete control over how much of that you can then use in your finished product.
So if you write anything, even, you know, just one line of dialogue or one paragraph of your book that says something they don't like, they can say, well, you learned this during this process that's covered by the NDA.
So therefore you have to take it out.
You simply don't have a choice about that.
Otherwise, you know, you can end up being sued.
You can end up all sorts of trouble.
So, yeah, then you after that, you say you write your script.
If you then want to film interviews with people or you want to film on location at any of these facilities, you have to sign another contract and you have to submit your script for review by them.
So they go through it line by line and they issue changes.
They want to, you know, take this out, put more of this in.
Then, OK, if you pass that process and you sign the contract and you go and do your filming or whatever, then you have to submit a rough cut of your product or a manuscript of your book or whatever.
And they then go through another review process.
And so they can essentially control more or less everything that's in that book or TV show or movie or whatever it is and completely tailor it to their agenda, to their messaging requirements, to their PR image that they want to put out there.
They essentially have total control.
Hmm.
You know, I think we all kind of have a sense of that.
Boy, you know, there's a lot of influence here, but the line by line approval and things like that.
I mean, this is really like they're just deputizing this entire industry and putting them directly in the employment of the state.
In a manner of speaking, yeah.
I mean, you don't strictly you don't have to go and work with the government on these projects, but it does make it cheaper and easier and you can get access to all sorts of things that are basically unique.
Where else do you go to film CIA headquarters?
You know what I mean?
Where else do you go to film a F-35?
It's just something you can only really do with the government's help.
So once you submit to that process, you are therefore, like you say, essentially becoming a de facto employee of the state.
You're becoming just another PR officer, just another propagandist.
And so what about that show Homeland?
Was that done with in partnership with the government the whole time?
That was a CIA sponsored show.
And yes, the producers were visiting CIA headquarters before the first season was even being written.
The I think it was the third season actually premiered at Langley at CIA headquarters.
They had a special screening of it.
Since then, the producers have given numerous interviews where they've talked about how they have these meetings when they're writing first writing each season.
They have these meetings in this old CIA club in Georgetown where they invite people in from CIA, FBI, White House, State Department, Pentagon, you name it.
And they all say, you know, what are the kind of ideas that you're interested in?
What do you think is going to be happening over the next 12 to 18 months that we could incorporate into this?
And this seems to have an enormous amount of impact, to be honest, on what they end up writing, because you say you've never watched that show.
I've watched all every season of it and every episode of it multiple times because I'm kind of fascinated by the particularly the CIA dimension of what the hell's going on in Hollywood.
And the number of times they either preempted things that then appeared in the news two, three weeks later or hit on something literally right as it was happening in the news and right as it became a big story when no one was talking about it a month earlier than that is astonishing.
And you have to wonder, I mean, partly this is that's what they're trying to do with that show.
That's part of their brand is, you know, it's like ripped from the headlines kind of drama.
But at the same time, it's sort of this is is very strange that on this very high level show, you know, it's great production values, very sort of good.
I was going to say, like South Park, you can understand how they put a new one together by Wednesday.
They're often reacting to something, right?
Yeah, they stitched together something in two or three days because it's all animated.
You can't do that with a great big drama where you're filming in three different continents to make this thing.
So they must know about some of this stuff beforehand.
So tell me about Marky Mark here.
He really is a huge part of this industry, right?
Yeah, Marky Mark turns up in an awful lot of government supported projects.
Lone Survivor is a very big one.
Big D.O.D. supported story about a real life Navy SEAL operation from, I think, 2005, 2006.
And the movie was made 2013.
The I do actually have a document that from the military that describes it as a two hour infomercial for U.S. Special Forces.
That's how kind of cynical they are about this stuff.
He also turns up in Patriot's Day, the movie about the Boston Marathon bombing from 2013.
Film was three years later, I think, and the Deepwater Horizon film from the same year.
Both of those were DHS supported movies.
And you make a couple of good points about the way that those movies frame both of those issues in the article here.
Yeah, sure.
It's all about, as you said at the top, it's all about heroism.
It's all about, you know, the brave government agents who are coming in to save the day.
And the notion that anyone screwed up here or possibly worse, that there was some kind of corruption or some kind of small scale conspiracy, or at least there was some secret deal going on, whatever.
None of that makes it into these narratives.
It's all just a sort of heart pounding, real time story of heroism and rescue and the manhunt for the bombers and that kind of thing.
The notion that, oh, the government failed the people here in a huge, dramatic way that cost lives and caused massive environmental damage or anything like that.
It's just swept out of the script.
Well, and that would have made for a good movie, too, right?
Like the real story here is Putin's government tried to warn about these guys.
And then, as Trevor Aronson has documented, the not just the FBI, but the Boston FBI was in the middle of entrapping some idiot in one of these evil fake stings for a little PR move.
And therefore they weren't doing their real job, which is exactly as me and Trevor Aronson had both predicted on this show for years and years and years.
You're going to see successful attacks.
And we're going to find out that these cops are chasing their tail on one of their own made up little plots while something big happens right under their nose, which is exactly what happened.
Which, if you wrote that scene for the movie where Marky Mark says, dang it, if only those cops in the other office hadn't screwed me on this or something.
Right.
A little extra conflict for the movie between departments.
But no, sorry.
It makes for a good story.
I mean, it's not just it's a terrible reality, of course, but people who die and for the loved ones and everything.
But in terms of human drama on on screen.
Yeah, of course.
That's a fantastic story.
That'd be great to watch.
A lot of people arguing about, well, you knew this and you didn't tell me.
And, you know, this is this is the essence of drama.
Why couldn't you make a film like that?
Well, because if you go to the government, they review your script and tell you what you can and can't write.
It just doesn't make it in.
Crazy.
And so I'm actually curious now whether you had anything to do with this.
But I saw a documentary years ago, 20 years ago now, 15 years ago or something, maybe about how the movies had all.
I'm not so sure about TV, but certainly the movies had always portrayed the cops as Keystone cops at best or corrupt bad guys.
You know, five o'clock shadows and whatever.
Always until it was Dirty Harry and then the French connection.
Both came out in the 70s, both portraying the corrupt, dirty cop as the hero for who has to break the law because the stupid, wimpy liberals have changed the law to let the criminals get away with everything.
And so the the real alpha males know that man's got to do what a man's got to do.
And the badge is really just the color of law for these guys to go out.
And what happened was all the cops started getting laid and all the everybody fell.
All of a sudden treated the cops like they were just great from these two movies.
And they went, man, this is huge.
We have to get on this.
And they that was really the impetus for them to begin to create these liaison relationships with Hollywood.
They came to realize just how important even one movie can be for changing the entire image of what it means to be law enforcement and all of this stuff.
And so, you know, next thing you know, they're putting out cops and cut out all the bad stuff and show you all the at least tolerable stuff, I guess.
And let a thousand fake stories bloom about hero cops risking their lives to save innocent people and this kind of thing.
Certainly the rogue agent or the rogue cop hero character, the sort of lovable rogue cop, if you like, that's something.
Yeah, yeah, you're absolutely right.
I don't know the documentary you're talking about.
But yeah, yeah, there was this trend with you either had sort of straight up PR for the police like Dragnet or you had that kind of dirty cop.
You can't really trust them.
They're up to no good.
They're just, you know, a bully with a badge kind of image.
And then suddenly something changed.
And I don't think either of those two movies in particular had any like police department support that they may have done.
But yeah, yeah, yeah.
We have seen increasingly, certainly in the major cities, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, some others.
Those police departments have Hollywood offices and it's all about manipulating their image through a more popular medium.
I mean, more people watch these shows and watch these movies than watch the news.
So you can have a bad news story.
You can have the news actually report a case of police brutality or corruption or whatever it is.
But because people, less people are watching that and even half of the people who are watching that news broadcast then are flipping over the channel and watching something that tells them something completely different.
Or in this case tells them that, oh, no, they were actually justified in doing that because they're keeping us safe.
So you'd want some, you know, hard nosed, you know, willing to do anything type who's fighting on your side.
Aren't you glad they're on your side so that you don't have to do it?
And that's very much also something that happens with a lot of these CIA supported movies.
It's not that the CIA look wonderful and like kind, loving, protective people.
It's almost like they're a necessary evil that we live in such a dangerous and complex world.
Aren't you glad that the CIA is there to take care of all of this so that you don't have to worry about it so much?
Meanwhile, who made it so dangerous and complicated?
Never you mind.
Just like thank God the cops are here to protect us from the riot that they caused by killing some innocent guy.
Now, so I'm sorry, me and my commentary.
Tell us about the forthcoming TV series, Coyote.
OK, so this is being produced by some of the same people who made Breaking Bad.
It's very, very, very, very popular TV show, Breaking Bad, that was heavily supported by the DEA, the Drug Enforcement Agency.
Now, some of the same people are making this show called Coyote, which is set on a similar kind of.
I didn't know that about Breaking Bad.
No, no, most people don't.
It's actually they are actually credited at the end of most episodes, the DEA.
But most people seem to have missed this.
They just seem to have not noticed that, you know, this government agency is supporting this enormously popular TV show seen by tens of millions of people all over the world.
Yeah, well, they feature prominently in it.
And of course, it's his very reasonable and ultimately heroic brother in law, who's the DEA agent, right?
Yeah, yeah.
And when you look at the DEA's contracts with Hollywood, one of the stipulations is that you're not allowed to portray wiretapping or electronic surveillance, which probably explains why it is that Hank never taps anyone's phone or spies on anyone electronically because he's got all the reason in the world to.
I mean, we see him do things that are like, you know, he's bending the rules a little bit.
He puts a GPS on his car.
That's allowed.
OK, yeah, yeah.
But listening to Jesse's phone.
I mean, if he taps Jesse and Walt's phone, he busts the whole thing in season one.
I mean, but no, no, no.
We can't portray DEA agents listening to your phone calls.
And I'm fairly sure that's one of the reasons why that plot point just never appears in that show.
Anyway, the same people are now making a similar sort of thing with Michael Chiklis, the guy who starred as Vic Mackey in The Shield, one of the genuinely good cop shows out there because it actually portrays an almost ridiculous amount of police corruption.
And this is going to be some, you know, border drug smuggling, people smuggling drama.
And it's I'm not actually sure when it's coming out.
But it hasn't come out yet.
It's I think it's due out either this year or next year.
And they went to the Homeland Security to ask them for some help making this.
And they actually convinced them.
The Homeland Security's Hollywood office convinced the producers to change that central character, the protagonist of the show from I think he was going to be a DEA agent.
And they says, oh, no, no, no.
Make him Homeland Security investigations.
Make him HSI because then he's our hero rather than their hero.
And this must have necessitated quite a profound rewriting of the script.
So, I mean, if your character is supposed to be working for this one agency and it's, oh, no, no, no, no.
Now he's got to be working for someone else and he's got a whole different set of bureaucracy to deal with and human relationships and all of that.
But the producers still said, yes, they said, oh, yeah, it was so keen to get your support and get your help to make this thing that, yeah, we'll completely rewrite our protagonist for you.
That's the extent to which they can affect these scripts.
It's not just a little scene here or a bit of dialogue there.
It can be like the whole shape and characterization of the show.
And I bet at the U.S. Navy right now, they're just dying for Top Gun 2 to come out.
And that was the biggest thing in the world for them back in the 1980s for their recruitment.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, Top Gun 2, when it comes out, it's probably coming out next year.
Now, I guess it keeps being delayed.
It's going to be a massive movie.
That's going to be, you know, a billion, maybe two billion at the box office.
And it's going to be a huge Navy recruitment and PR project.
Essentially, those producers first got in touch with the military, the U.S. military about Top Gun 2 10 years ago before they'd even written the script for this second film.
They were already in touch with them and already in some kind of negotiation with them.
And the contract that the Navy ended up signing with those producers, Jerry Bruckheimer and the rest of them, basically says you need to weave in talking points about naval aviation and the future of aviators versus drones and all of this kind of thing.
And, you know, that's in the contract itself, telling them we're not only going to review your script and maybe correct a bit of dialogue or change this or that.
We're actually going to give you talking points that we want you to put into your movie.
Right.
So that kid on that 70s show where he says, yes, he is the three branches of government, corporate, military and Hollywood.
Pretty much.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, like I say, an enormous number of people watch these products far more than read books, certainly far more than listen to radio shows or anything.
And so they are the perfect vehicle for the government and other centers of power to get their agenda across to people and to try and shape perceptions and shape people's attitudes and mentalities, their emotional reactions to things, what they emotionally react to and what they don't.
All of this sort of thing is deeply affected by these, you know, 200 million dollar pieces of I don't want to call them art, but they are ultimately, I guess.
And the government has latched on to this and all the different branches.
This is the kind of important takeaway for me is that all the different branches of government have some kind of role in the government, in Hollywood.
They have some kind of relationship with the industry, but the ones that have the most impact on script content and on movie content and all the rest of it are the branches of the security state.
We're talking the police, the military, the intelligence agencies, DHS.
They are the ones who are the most proactive and the most aggressive at using Hollywood to advance their agenda.
And I would argue, and I'm imagining you'd agree with me, those are the most dangerous parts of government.
Those are the ones that cause the most suffering and chaos rather than, you know, the Bureau of Land Management.
Yes.
You know, there's problems with all parts of government.
Yeah, those guys are pretty bad, too, actually.
Yeah, well, I sort of stopped myself halfway through the sentence there.
No, you're absolutely right.
And of course, they're the most dishonest agencies, too.
The intelligence agencies and the police and the military, of course.
And every time they either screw up or do something horribly bad, they're the ones who are out there lying about it.
And all of these Hollywood producers are out there helping them lie about it.
And that's a real deep problem, I think, not just for you, you know, you in America, but for everyone, because we're all watching this stuff.
I probably watch more American movies and TV than I watch British.
So you know what I mean?
And that's the way it is.
All right.
Well, that is Tom Seker.
He runs SpyCulture.com, is the co-author of the book National Security Cinema, and he wrote this great piece for Shadowproof.com.
Homeland Security in Hollywood.
How the department controls its image on screen.
Thanks very much for your time.
Thank you.
All right, y'all.
And that has been Antiwar Radio for this morning.
Thanks very much for listening.
I'm your host, Scott Horton, editorial director of Antiwar.com and author of Fool's Errand, Time to End the War in Afghanistan.
Again, find my full interview archive, more than 5,000 of them now, going back to 2003, at scotthorton.org.
And I'm here every Sunday morning from 8.30 to 9 on KPFK, 90.7 FM in LA.
See you next week.
