Paul Haggis, Bigotry & CRASH
by James Jaeger

Paul Haggis recently directed an independent feature called CRASH. He also wrote the story and co-authored the screenplay. The idea behind the movie is that individuals wandering around society, though not directly connected, can affect each other in profound ways even though they only CRASH into each other randomly. The context of bigotry is used to make the point. For example, a bigoted white policeman molests a black woman and later ends up saving her life when he answers the call of duty in an automobile CRASH. Thus a "bad" guy ends up doing "good". On the other hand, another white policeman, watching the same event, is abhorred by the bigoted policeman's act, yet, later in the movie, he ends up killing an innocent man as a result of his paranoid intolerance. Thus Haggis uses acts of bigotry to illustrate the interplay of cause and effect and the idea that a "bad" person can do acts of "good" and a "good" person can do "bad" acts -- a valid and honorable theme.

In CRASH, we have an ensemble chock full of Blacks, Whites, Latinos, Iranians, Asians and Persians (with their explicit or implicit respective religious heritages) all CRASHING into each other and demonstrating how complete strangers can change each other's lives to the degree they are tolerant or bigoted, good or bad. But nowhere in this film is any mention of Jews crashing into anyone. Nowhere is it shown that Jews also CRASH into Blacks, Whites, Latinos, Iranians, Asians and Persians and profoundly effect THEIR lives -- especially in Hollywood where CRASH is set and Jews comprise a dominating minority in the Los Angeles area. In CRASH, Jews are non-existent when illustrating the negative effects of bigotry, yet Jews in LA and Hollywood, according to researchers, also dominate the movie industry. The subtext of this glaring omission in CRASH is that Jews play no part in being involved in bigotry or intolerance. Unfortunately this is all too familiar a theme for those who have had the courage to look into the history of Hollywood, Jewish victimology and/or the facts in connection with MPAA studio domination for over 90 years. (See WHO REALLY CONTROLS HOLLYWOOD at

The myth put out by the Jewish-dominated studios is always that Jews are the good guys, Arabs or Christians are the bad guys. Jews don't control anything, WASPS control everything. But even as the truth leaks out -- that Jews do in fact dominate almost every aspect of Hollywood from the top -- one can watch with amusement how the industry's defense machinery moves into "handle" the PR situation. It does this almost automatically by secreting apologist entertainers and comedians (many of them Jewish) to dismiss the whole idea as a joke. Their strategy is: make a joke out of "Jewish domination of Hollywood" and the public will eventually a) laugh-off and devalue the issue, b) reject the reality and eventually, c) become bored of the entire subject, leaving Hollywood, once again, free to vilify other ethnic groups and continue with its overt or covert social and political agenda. Social and political agenda?! Nonsense, say the Hollywood apologists such as Jack Valenti, former head of the MPAA, "movies are merely entertainment."

So more specifically, why is this relevant? It's relevant because CRASH tows the Hollywood company line. You can be sure Paul Haggis would never have been able to get his work financed or released in Hollywood if it included Jews in the ensemble or inferred in any way that Jews were also bigoted. Look at what happened to Mel Gibson with THE PASSION when the Hollywood insiders and sympathetic organizations, such as the ADL, became overly paranoid that Jews of 2,000 years ago were being criticized. Thus CRASH represents yet one more film that ALIGNS with Hollywood's socio-political agenda. And agenda is: make movies that tell the stories that an elite group of insiders agree with and want told to the exclusion of almost all other stories and themes. (See HOW THE MOVIE WARS WERE WON and WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON IN HOLLYWOOD, the former available at and the later available at both by John W. Cones)

Thus, in HOLLYWOOD as in CRASH, stories that only pretend to support diversity are told whereas stories that could cause REAL diversity are avoided. In other words, Hollywood gives lip service to diversity -- through films like CRASH -- but in actuality has no intention of exploring or effectuating real diversity. And the proof of this is that real diversity in the top executive echelons of the MPAA studio/distributors is almost non-existent and has been that way for almost 100 years. This dominating minority in the executive echelons is comprised of liberal, not-very-religious, Jewish males of European heritage. The films it finances and/or distributes continue to emphasize the homosexual-lesbian agenda, Zionism, uncritical support for Israel and endless Holocaust movies to perpetuate the myth of Jewish victimology. Stories that favor liberal politics also flourish. Stories and filmmakers (such as Michael Moore) that call for gun "control" by misconstruing Constitutional principles are championed. Stories that bash and invalidate the nuclear family unit or stay-at-home mothers thrive. Stories that divide or poke fun at the Christian community, invalidate its history or attempt to dilute and eradicate is holidays, beliefs and/or values are financed and released by Hollywood insiders with abandon. Stories that disdain pro-lifers and capital punishment are favored. Stories that portray fathers as drunk, womanizing profligates and women as artificially aggressive aliens are financed seemingly without question. Stories that portray Jews as the saviors of society, good and warm-hearted regular guys, sages or geniuses beyond the comprehension of the goyim are pumped out of the Hollywood studios as fast as humanly possible.

All this is relevant to CRASH because, early in the history of the Film Industry Reform Movement (FIRM), when John Cones and I were trying to relate the above relevancies (around Spring of 1998), Paul Haggis briefly CRASHED the FIRM Discussion Forum. He thereupon called John Cones a "racist fuck" whose writing "is so obviously biased against Jews that it is nauseating." (See FIRM Archives of May 2, 1998 c/o Privately he warned me to "don't go down that road James." He warned me that the mention of Jews, in connection with criticizing the studios or Jewish domination in Hollywood was bigoted, if not anti-Semitic. In effect he was telling me that I would never work in this town again if I dared to point out that Jews weren't all like they were portrayed in the movies. That Jews are capable of affecting people in negative ways, just as he dared to point out that non-Jews do the same in CRASH. In effect he was saying that it's okay the MPAA studio/distributors are dominated by Jewish bigots but it's not okay for the streets of Los Angeles to be dominated by Black, White, Latino, Iranian, Asian or Persian bigots. Paul was implying that that, even though Jewish executives basically call the shots as to where hundreds of millions of dollars will be spent, on WHAT movies and with WHAT themes, I should ignore all this because it couldn't possibly have any significance. The idea that bigoted Jewish executives that dominate arguably the most powerful communication channel yet devised, the feature motion picture, who CRASH into almost all people of all cultures -- is irrelevant. To me, it's disconcerting that Paul feels completely comfortable using Blacks, Whites, Latinos, Iranians, Asians and Persians to tell HIS story about the liabilities of bigotry, while avoiding any mention of the very ethnic group that is in a position to cause the greatest harm to society THROUGH bigotry: the network of Hollywood Jews that dominate the MPAA studio/distributors. This is the same group that, if it diversified its top most executive echelon, would also be in the position to cause the greatest GOOD to society THROUGH the remedy of bigotry.

On another level, Paul's film exemplifies the same old tactics Hollywood films, and Hollywood apologists, use over and over: display plenty of diversity on-screen in the CAST (and at the Academy Awards), but make no mention of the LACK of diversity behind-the-scenes in the EXECUTIVE SUITES.(2) Why doesn't Paul write a feature that is set in the executive suites of say Warner Bros. or Paramount where the dominating minority is properly and accurately acknowledged as Jewish? Then let's see a bunch of Black, White, Latino, Iranian, Asian and Persian filmmakers CRASH into them with their movie projects. Let's see how tolerant the Jewish studio executives are when a non-Jewish filmmaker wants to tell a story that's not in alignment with the socio-political agenda of the dominating Jewish Hollywood minority. For instance, a story from a Palestinian filmmaker who wants $50 million to film her perspective on the conflict in Israel. Or a picture where an Asian writer get to tell his view of Pearl Harbor or Hiroshima? Or a German who gets to tell his story about what the Jews did to antagonize the German people to the point of genocidal insanity. Or a Jew who worked for Josef Stalin gets to tell his story about the dictator's "warm fuzzy side."

Let's see a movie that depicts 10 non-Jewish screenwriters wandering all over LA trying to sell THEIR stories to 10 Jewish studio executives who disagree with their socio-political views even though their screenplays are well-written, reasonably budgeted and packaged with engaging new acting talent. Hey, it's all just "mere entertainment," put out to "satisfy market demands" and "make money" so why would the two dozen or so Jewish studio executives have any back off on financing and distributing such a picture? It would be interesting to see how THIS cast CRASHES into each other and the Jewish executives that control the financial strings. Let's follow THIS cast around the streets of LA and into the offices of the bigoted studio executives to see how these interactions play out. Let's see a movie that invokes the REAL parties to bigotry, even mass-bigotry, not just the USUAL characters that provide window dressing for Hollywood's charade at the Oscars to "show" the world that diversity is alive and well in Hollywood. Diversity is NOT alive and well in Hollywood where it counts most. That's the reality. The superficial bigotry Paul Haggis is addressing in CRASH, has, as its SOURCE, the bigotry that exists in the executive echelons of the MPAA studio/distributors.(3)

(1) Jews are considered foremost a RACE and secondarily a RELIGION. About 50% of Jews agree with this and 50% vehemently disagree with it.

(2) Paul, remember the Behind-the-Scenes Club you and I and a few others started when we were in Scientology? You have known me since 1979 so you should KNOW I am not a bigot. How many times did you ever hear the word "Jew" come out of my mouth (books or writings)? Never. I had the same training you did at Celebrity Center were we were encouraged to respect people of all racial, ethnic and religious backgrounds. But, when it comes to observing one of the most obvious things about Hollywood: that the studios are dominated by liberal Jewish males -- it seems you were absent for the lesion or you are simply "NOT-ising" the entire situation in Hollywood. You can say I'm just sour grapes at your success, but I'm not. You won't do anything to eradicate bigotry on the streets until and unless you confront and eradicate it in the studios. I'm very happy for your success and I wish you more, but please, don't invalidate what John Cones and I are trying to do with FIRM when we are trying to point out the obvious bigotry and resulting discrimination in Hollywood, and its effects at all levels, both in and out of motion picture stories. For you to do that, especially after making a movie like CRASH, makes it look like you're a hypocrite (or a "racist fuck," to use your own words). Makes you look like you're not-ising Jewish bigotry while using an entire cast of other ethnic groups to make the point that THEIR bigotry may be CRASHing society.

(3) Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand you are half-Jewish. If this is true, how does this factor into your general success in Jewish-dominated Hollywood and the fact that you avoid mentioning Jews in CRASH? While advancing in your TV and film career, did you tend to mention more that you were half Jewish OR that you were a Scientologist (especially at meetings with Jewish studio and/or network execs)? I suspect I already know the answers to these questions because I have had some personal experiences in connection with the matter. I usually found that when I openly discussed my involvement with Scientology with Jews in the film industry, I was shunned on future productions whereas I was almost always asked back on other productions. One time, while on the set of one of my productions, I walked by a sign posted on the circuit-breaker box where my Jewish gaffer had tied in for electricity. The sign read: "Danger, high voltage, stay away. Scientologists welcome." Did the MPAA studio/distributors ever discriminate against you because they may have known you are a Scientologist. Seems like they may have (even after you dedicated decades of your life and service to their affiliated TV networks) otherwise you wouldn't have had so many production companies and distributors involved in CRASH and the copyright would NOT be held by a NON-studio entity. All ample situational evidence to allege that the MPAA studio/distributors discriminate in their hiring practices as stated above. And if this were not true, you would routinely find top studio executives that were Blacks, Whites, Latinos, Iranians, Asians, Persians, Muslims, Christians, and yes, even Scientologists.

4 March 2006

If you agree with at least 51% of this article, please forward it to your mailing list. The mainstream media may or may not address this subject, thus it's up to responsible citizens to disseminate important issues
so that a healthy public discourse can be pursued.

Don't forget to click on the below link to watch FIAT EMPIRE - Why the Federal Reserve Violates the U.S. Constitution
so you will have a better understanding of what fuels many problems under study by the Jaeger Research Institute.

Permission is hereby granted to forward, quote, excerpt or publish all or part of this article provided nothing is taken out of context and the source URL is cited. For articles written by James Jaeger, you are welcome to credit yourself as author, provided you at least get this information out. If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, go to however, before you do, please be certain you are not suffering from Spamaphobia as addressed at

Source URL:

| Home Menu | Mission | Balanced News | Movie Publications |
| Jaeger Research Institute |