It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
@chrisisall, I understand where your coming from & good on you for taking action to change your life, I hate bullies, whoever they are.
What I'm getting at is what @acoppola is saying it's not individuals who are affected but whole nations.
Bond is my idea of 'intelligent moderation'- go when the go will achieve something; "Stuff my orders" when it's clearly ordered action based on fractured intel.
;)
"What's life without work?" (Jubal Early)
The 'nice' thing to have done would be to keep Professor Dent covered and wait for the police to arrest him but no - 'youve had your six'.
In OHMSS M is very unhappy with Bond as 'licence to kill is useless unless you can set up the target'. Not sure that would be thought of very well by the EU these days if it all came out that the British intended to execute a Swiss citizen (I'm assuming Ernst had a Swiss passport in Piz Gloria).
One of the things I love about SF is the Tennyson scene where you have this naive, lefty MP (not sure its deliberate but she is a ringer for Cherie Blair) who has never set foot outside her middle class Islington bubble lecturing M. M retorts with the immortal line 'how safe do you feel?' and then as the threat becomes very real Bond runs down Whitehall as the symbolic protector of the kingdom.
I for one sincerely hope we have people who are licenced to kill and men and women who, like Bond, are willing to sacrifice their souls and the chance of a normal life by doing distasteful things to protect us.
I am firm believer in law and order but these days it is necessary to go beyond that and into the 'shadows' as M puts it. You only have to see the legal farce with Abu Hamza to know that these people are laughing at us with our human rights etc.
We should be more like Mossad and take the fight to them while they are sleeping in their beds.
MI6 may be depicted as a less trustworthy, infallible institution, in line with current public distrust of the establishment, which reflects the mentality of the depressed post credit crisis world we live in, and Bond himself remains on board, despite being shot by his own side, he returns to the fold, rather than rebelling against it like Jason Bourne
But I'm not sure how you define neo fascist espionage as opposed to communist espionage, or capitalist espionage, or Zionist espionage… Perhaps espionage is inherently "neo fascist"?
Here is a public-domain copy of Johnson's famous newspaper article from 1958:
When you analyze Fleming's novels, his character of James Bond exhibits all the psychological traits of an ardent neo-fascist. With each passing decade, the Bond producers has attempted to strip these traits from the character, but they still exist...
According to Professor Ross Stagner's Fascist Attitudes study, political scientists have identified seven characteristics that collectively manifest in individuals predisposed towards fascism or authoritarian-supporting behavior. Consider these seven characteristics in terms of James Bond if he were an actual, real individual:
1.) "nationalism" [ex. Bond's fanatically excessive nationalism is readily apparent]
2.) "imperialism" [ex. Bond often longs for a return to British Empire's glory days]
3.) "militarism" [ex. Commander Bond's over-glorification of the British military]
4.) "racial antagonism" [ex. Bond's dislike of "Chigroes," "half-castes," "strange races," etc.]
5.) "anti-radicalism" [ex. Fleming was anti-left. He said Martin Luther King was a Communist agent]
6.) "class consciousness" [ex. Fleming's/Bond's upper-class snobbery is indisputable]
7.) "a strong-man philosophy of government" [ex. Bond's political opinions in Thunderball]
Furthermore, Prof. Henry Dicks asserted in Personality Traits and National Socialist Ideology that an individual predisposed to national socialist ideology also exhibits sadism, class-based condescension, and a deferential attitude towards authoritarian superiors [i.e. "M"]...
Sound like any famous character we know?
Thanks, chaps.
As a Jew, I like the way the Israelis have redefined being a Jew. With all due respect to the memories of the six million who were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust, including my own relatives, prior to the Six Day War the image of the Jew was of the lamb being led to the slaughter. The Israelis changed that image. Amazing that Mossad was able to penetrate Iranian security and assassinate several of their nuclear scientists.
Gotta give respect to Mossad. Bloody brutal people, surpassing even the KGB/FSB.
Interesting. I actually think this approach would really have suited Brosnan - sleazy corrupt Bond.
and i disagree with the point that the series as gone too sinister. If they wanted to keep things looking as real as they can then i do not think the films are sinister enough who knows how the real MI6 operate but i bet in war time all sorts of in human methods are used despite what the media tells us about Mi6 not using torture to get information i do not believe that for start if its true no idea but that's not my point my point his how people think MI6 would operate is how its put on screen and is far from how they really do. But i believe that the bond films are tame compared to how it's really done well i hope that is the case when it comes to keeping the country safe i hope the MI6 go a lot further then questioning someone in a glass case.
But anyway without me going too far of topic i feel that trying to keep it real is the right direction to go in and not too sinister at all
No matter what you say, you are less free and more restricted than you were 11 years ago. One of your founding fathers said when you should not trade freedom for security. Well that is exactly what is happening now.
You are treated like a potential terrorist when you go to the airport. The TSA has great powers over you even if you are innocent. You cannot refuse a strip search for instance if they demand it. Even if you are child.
It has nothing to do with intelligent moderation. Have you not heard about some of the TSA horror stories? Post 9/11, government has had the ability to gain greater powers over it's citizens. What is the Patriot Act about?
And what is your definition of Intelligent moderation?
It's a fine line, and one that most seem unable to walk in Human history. Dissolving personal American freedoms in favour of corporate-style military control of the populace. Plus the Nazi-like freedom to do what is deemed necessary to protect the 'homeland'.
History clearly teaches us nothing, and logic is relegated to academia and fans of Star Trek.
Nice one. Indeed being British, I can see already my government is hard at work creating more blowback for future generations in the Middle East. Sometimes I question decisions made by politicians that are blatantly asking for trouble.
The empire is still clawing for survival. For every solution we create way more problems.
We want to arm rebels in Syria having already helped them in Libya whilst at the same time being told that the home security measures are taken to protect us from these people. Huh? Politicians obviously assume that too many of the population are not very clued up and are more aware of what happens in movies or soap opera than the world around them.
Only time will tell whether Western policy in the middle east is massively naive or part of a first vital step towards democratising and normalising politics in that region. At the moment it could go either way although on-going crisis seems the most likely outcome.
I think the problem is that the West is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. If we stand by and do nothing, we provide amunition to those in the Middle East who say that we have no interest in real democracy because we fear widespread democratically elected Islamist governments. If we support the various rebel groupings and try and steer them towards constitutional and democratic objectives we risk being seen as old-school colonial meddlers.
I don't personally think there's a simple answer.
There is no simple answer like you say but the west is playing with fire. When we backed the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan the side effect is it cost the USA trillions in dealing with the fallout. We may have ended The Soviet Union but at a terrible cost to our way of life.
These rebel groups are not about democracy. They are so fundamentalist that they will ethnically cleanse any groups that they see as non-believers. Our media is hiding this fact but watch Russia Today and they show a different side of the conflict. It is shocking and human rights are abused beyond belief.
Ghadaffi was visited by Tony Blair in 2004 and he helped the west with it's efforts against Al-Qaeda. It is not secret that some of the rebels in Libya and Syria fought against our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. You can check it for yourself.
Fundamentalists do not want democracy any more than a dictator does. We are being sold a big lie and our interventions are causing huge misery for innocent civilians.
Sadly the west is causing a blowback that they may not be in a position to deal with years down the line. The UK has cut back it's military and Afghanistan is a can of worms we have not been able to put the lid back on.
Also by helping these rebels who hate Israel with a vengeance, I question how our actions will cause stability in the region. It takes the smallest event for all hell to break loose. Look what happened to the Israeli Embassy in Egypt last year.
I sound cynical and am, but I have read up about the history and our aims in that region are at best short term advantage for a long term bill that so far we have no idea how bad it will get.
At some point the cycle has to be broken. It might take decades but eventually these societies will grope their way to some kind of normality. Hopefully.
Thanks @Getafix I would love nothing more than true democracies in that region. But here is the contradiction to the so called western aims.
It is no secret that the Saudis as well as Bahraini's are the USA's and the UK's allies. They are as undemocratic as they come and it is plain to see that we have no intention of changing the status quo. The Saudis oppress but it is kept out of our media and blatant evidence our interventions are not about installing democracy.
We deposed many secularists in that region. Saddam who was our buddy for years had a secular regime. Christians said Iraq was great for all religious denominations. Not any more. Saddam was not a good man but then again with the nutters out there, who is?
Egypt under Mubarack a man who we kept in power, had a great relationship with Israel. Well, since his removal the hostility to Israel has shot up.
I would prefer a secularist approach in that region but once you implant religious nuts, then the Taliban will look reasonable in comparisson.
What you have going on there now is a war between Sunni's and Shia Muslims. The Saudis being Sunni as well as the Qatari's and Turks are more than happy to see the Shia influence in the region removed. Bashar Al Assad the Syrian President is from a Shia faction and being Iran's biggest ally is the reason why the west wants his removal.
But this will start a sectarian conflict which could last centuries. Once it explodes is there enough political water to put the raging fire out.
Me personally, would prefer the UK to concentrate on building it's economy and minding it's own business. If you remember the riots last year that were horrible, it seems clear to me that we should sort the scum bags out in our society first.
Wow! How do you get Coronation Street out there as I remember it is one of your guilty pleasures? :)
There is a very simple answer, stop meddling in other nations politics, stop playing world police, how many times do we in the western democracies have to have our hands bitten by those we try to help to realise this policy is not working.
I think that SKYFALL made the entire British establishment seem like a bunch of scum gabs. MI6 was all-knowing and sinister, the MP's were all "Save the world but do it cheaper" and Bond seemed, to me anyway, a bit naff as he failed in his mission, AGAIN!
For me Bond isn't neo-facist but he can be establishment and overtly bureaucratic, most notably in THE SPY WHO LOVED ME and THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, in him stating that he kills who his government want him to and when he offers Stromberg money not to launch the missiles.
We always seem to help those that bite the hand that feeds. I guess Daniel Craig was right when he said politicians are "sh*theads!". Unfortunately the biggest price is paid by the men and women in the military. Show me one modern politician who has done military service? They always seem to think they are above it.
I take your point on board though. A lot of decisions made by people like Tony Blair seem to be made with little or no concern for the lives of our armed forces, and less still for the lives of the people in the countries where we're meddling!
Anyone in high office like a Tony Blair or David Cameron has never put themselves in the line of fire. Or any recent USA president. I spoke to an ex-Afghanistan veteran who had less than kind words about politicians and who said he was disillusioned with our aims in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He said it was not clearly thought out and will create us more enemies in future the longer we stayed. Unfortunately our military always take the brunt of hostility unlike the politicians who get to retire and make a financial fortune on their inside knowledge as in working for large corporations.