Oliver Stone

Das Leben von Erfolgsregisseur und Drehbuchautor Oliver Stone lief nicht immer nach Plan, doch am Ende hat er es nach ganz oben geschafft

Oliver Stone

  • Geboren , New York City, New York / USA
  • VornameWilliam Oliver
  • Name Stone
  • Jahre72
  • Grösse 1.83 m
  • Partner Najwa  Sarkis  (1971-1977); Elizabeth  Stone  (1981-1993); Sun-jung  Jung (verheiratet seit 1996)
  • Kinder Sean Ali  Stone  (*1984); Michael Jack  Stone  (*1991); Tara Chong  Stone  (*1995)

Biografie von Oliver Stone

Der US-amerikanische Regisseur, Drehbuchautor und Produzent ist sicherlich einer der begabtesten und erfolgreichsten Filmemacher unserer Zeit. Schon früh war dem jungen Oliver klar, dass er später einmal Filme drehen und Geschichten erzählen will. Mit sieben schrieb er seine ersten Texte, mit neun verfasste er ein 100 Seiten langes Buch über seine Familie und das Leben.

Die Geschichte hinter dem Film "Wall Street"

Dass er als Kind und Jugendlicher in einem wohlhabenden Elternhaus und auf angesehenen Internaten ein privilegiertes Leben geführt hatte, realisierte Oliver Stone, der Sohn eines Bankers und einer Französin, erst, als sich seine Eltern heimlich und überraschend scheiden ließen. Vater Louis hatte zahlreiche Affären, die eines Tages aufflogen und Grund für die Scheidung waren. Kurze Zeit später erlitt Oliver Stones Vater durch schlechte Investments finanzielle Einbußen, die Familie musste kürzer treten. Jahre später sollte Oliver Stone diese Erfahrung in seinem Film "Wall Street" verarbeiten.

Oliver Stone als Soldat im Vietnamkrieg

Nach einem erfolglosen Jahr an der Yale University zog Oliver Stone als Freiwilliger in den Vietnamkrieg. Nach einem halben Jahr im Krieg an der Front, zwei Verletzungen und mehreren Auszeichnungen kehrte er in die USA zurück – mit schrecklichen, aber auch wertvollen Erfahrungen im Gepäck. Seine Kriegserfahrungen verarbeitete Stone später in seiner Anti-Kriegsfilm-Trilogie "Platoon", "Geboren am 4. Juli" und "Zwischen Himmel und Hölle".

Der lang ersehnte Durchbruch in Hollywood

Nach seinem Filmstudium in New York, unter anderem bei Großmeister , versuchte sich Oliver Stone hauptsächlich als Drehbuchautor. Doch seine Bücher verkauften sich nicht gut und so musste er sich seine Brötchen als Taxifahrer und Kopierbote verdienen. Doch sein Drehbuch zu "12 Uhr nachts – Midnight Express" sollte das Blatt wenden. Columbia kaufte das Skript, Stone erhielt dafür 1978 seinen ersten Oscar und hatte seinen Durchbruch in Hollywood endlich geschafft.

Oliver Stone, das Stehaufmännchen

Doch Oliver Stones Erfolg wurde überschattet von seiner Drogenvergangenheit. Vielleicht stieg ihm die lang ersehnte Anerkennung von Hollywood zu Kopf, jedenfalls verbrachte er seine Nächte mit Kokain und wilden Partys. Der finanzielle Ruin nahte, er war am Ende, doch "Platoon", sein erster Film als Regisseur, rettete ihn. Nicht nur, dass der Streifen ein großer Erfolg wurde, er brachte Oliver Stone auch seinen zweiten Oscar ein. Heute muss er sich über finanzielle Angelegenheiten längst keine Sorgen mehr machen und auch seine Kokainsucht ist Vergangenheit, auch wenn gemunkelt wird, dass er sich hin und wieder mal einen Joint genehmigt. Davon mag man halten, was man will, aber der Erfolg gibt ihm Recht: Oliver Stone wurde insgesamt elfmal für den Oscar nominiert, dreimal gewann er und Filme unter seiner Mitwirkung – zumeist mit politischer Botschaft - verzeichnen 37 Oscar-Nominierungen.

Filme von Oliver Stone

1978: 12 Uhr nachts – Midnight Express (Drehbuch)

1982: Conan der Barbar (Drehbuch)

1983: Scarface (Drehbuch)

1986: Platoon (Regie und Drehbuch)

1987: Wall Street (Regie und Drehbuch)

1989: Geboren am 4. Juli (Regie und Drehbuch)

1991: The Doors (Regie und Drehbuch)

1991: JFK – Tatort Dallas (Regie und Drehbuch)

1993: Zwischen Himmel und Hölle (Regie und Drehbuch)

1994: Natural Born Killers (Regie und Drehbuch)

1995: Nixon – Der Untergang eines Präsidenten (Regie und Drehbuch)

1996: Evita (Drehbuch)

1999: An jedem verdammten Sonntag (Regie und Drehbuch) 

2004: Alexander (Regie und Drehbuch)

2006: World Trade Center (Regie)

2010: Wall Street: Geld schläft nicht (Regie)

2012: Savages (Regie und Drehbuch)

2016: Snowden (Regie und Drehbuch)  

Social Media von Oliver Stone

John O’Day tells us how the #MSM, across all political lines, has the cash-strapped US primed for more war, this ti…


Read Pepe Escobar’s take on #Brazil’s election, ‘a clash between democracy and neofascism, civilization and barbari…


Even despite #Kavanaugh's self-satisfied youth, he's made a career out of sanctifying torture, #Guantanamo, and dro…


Extreme reactionaries @realDonaldTrump/@SecPompeo/@AmbJohnBolton have pushed our world to its limit with their desi…


RT @RTE2: Now on #RTE2 @TheOliverStone's biographical take on the life of one of the most controversial presidents in US history; #W https:…


As an infantryman in Vietnam, I saw war's horror on the ground. Apparently, @SenJohnMcCain, dropping bombs, was bli…


.@SenJohnMcCain's warmongering in #Libya, #Syria, and #Ukraine in recent years brought chaos to the Middle East & E…


#MSM obits have ignored @SenJohnMcCain's long legacy of embracing war and 'regime change' throughout the world.


Robert Parry's death Saturday night leaves a giant hole in American journalism. To my mind, he exists now alongside I.F. Stone, Drew Pearson, George Seldes, Gary Webb, and others as seekers of truth at the steep price you seem to have to pay to follow your common sense and your integrity when they are in direct opposition to the tyranny of mainstream media conformity. Parry was in that mainstream at the Associated Press and Newsweek, and quit when he recognized how corrupt our reporting on the Pentagon's Central American wars had become. He went after Reagan's Iran-Contra scandal, which was far worse in my opinion than Watergate (and deliberately ignored BTW by Katharine Graham and her Washington Post; note how she's now being lionized in Spielberg's lame-brained "The Post"). Parry then made the connection to the corrupted election of 1980 when Reagan cynically and traitorously used the Iran hostages to get elected. Parry further investigated the Contra crack connection to the CIA in Central America, as well as the real story behind George H. W. Bush's hydra-headed role in this mess. At Consortiumnews, the website he founded in 1995, he clarified the shoddy reporting on the 2000 election of Bush's son, George W. ('Dubya'), followed by his Administration's Iraq War lies. Parry also provided us with strong counter-narratives in crucial contemporary events such as Ukraine, Syria, the Magnistky Act, and 'Russiagate.' The truth, as Parry often said, is that without an honest history of our country we are lost in an Alice-in-Wonderland void of poor and uninformed leadership. Obama, who should've known better, believed these false narratives about Reagan and ended up victimized by them. Parry also frequently repeated his reports, which may have driven his enemies crazy, but was crucial, I believe, to understanding their complexity. As audiences, we're inundated with the surface of events but seem unable to interpret them correctly; with intelligent, common-sense repetition (not the continual Russia-bashing of NY Times and WaPo), we learn and remember. There's a critical need for Parry's Consortiumnews to continue as a foundation for progressive, independent journalism. I hope, as the years go, you'll follow and contribute to this legacy and come to appreciate its importance in our present condition. Nat Parry, "Robert Parry's Legacy and the Future of Consortiumnews,"


I’m depressed. Bob Parry, founder of Consortiumnews, has been hit with several strokes at a time when we really need him to bring light to this insanity in Washington. Pray for his health. All I’m hearing about is War. The New York Times last week wrote a front-page story about our top military movers and shakers, believing that it’s coming in Korea. It seems it’s become acceptable. I guess, given that we’re all over the world map now with our military operations, and the new Nuclear Posture Review has just been issued by the Pentagon pending certain Trump approval, that more than ever the line between conventional and nuclear arms has been blurred. We’re back to the primitive thinking of the early ‘50s Eisenhower era, where Ike wanted to use nuclear in place of conventional. There’s no political opposition to this madness. I sense resistance to the idea of the US kicking someone’s ass again is minimal. When JFK was President and under enormous pressure from his military to attack Cuba during the Missile Crisis of October 1962, he famously said of the Generals calling for the attack, “If we listen to them and do what they want us to do, none of us will be alive later to tell them that they were wrong.” Just a reminder, but by resisting war at a high cost to himself, Mr. Kennedy wound up being right -- and the world was spared. Trump, unfortunately, lacks the moral fiber of Kennedy. He never fought in a war, but he sure talks and acts like a bully, like Bush did -- but for some reason Trump is scarier, because he’s simply more determined. He’s a man of extraordinary willpower. Even his enemies would grant him that -- but now that he’s staked his ego to ‘taking care of North Korea,’ he’s put himself in the poisonous position of having to act or being seen as backing down. You never want to back a rat into a corner, Putin said in our interview, because the rat has nothing to lose and becomes vicious beyond its ordinary cunning. Back in 2016, I was worried about a World War I situation. It didn’t happen then. I was gladly mistaken, but I’m still praying it won’t happen now. I wish you peace above all and what joy you can have in this New Year. “2018 -- War or No War?” by The Saker, Information Clearing House --


I fully support @LulapeloBrasil, who I believe would win Brazil's 2018 #election, given the chance. The political plot to derail his candidacy must be met with resistance if #Brazil is to restore a democratic rule. Sign here to support Lula:



EYES WIDE SHUT Why is it that two scoundrels like John Brennan and James Clapper are allowed to bluff their way through the highest levels of our Government and Media (@CNN November interview from Jake Tapper) with their paranoid Russiagate accusations? Ironically doing equal damage to their country, in addition to, while they were in office, surveilling, torturing, and drone-bombing our supposed enemies. Below have another gaze at their rap sheet. “Brennan & Clapper: Elder Statesmen or Serial Fabricators” by Mike Whitney The Flynn guilty plea exposes if anything the groveling that goes on in US circles to help Israel get away with just about everything -- from ‘stealing’ our nuclear secrets to now declaring Jerusalem the capital of the country. The ‘victories’ here belong to Netanyahu and Prince Salman of Saudi Arabia -- and stupidity in general. I fear for our upcoming Syria policy. Soon we’ll be saying that we have our troops there in order to prevent Iran from occupying Syrian territory east of the Euphrates. Interesting that this is going on just as Russia is pulling its troops from Syria. Given the power of the AIPAC lobby in Washington, the Las Vegas money of the bellicose Sheldon Adelson, and Netanyahu’s brazen and multiple trips to lecture our Congress, it stupefies me still that our human intelligence allows us to believe Russia has any influence whatsoever in our country. And yet it seems the bigger these people lie, the more our ‘liberals’ believe it. What’s happened to their intelligence? Do you rip up your country’s national interests because you hate the President? No. You resist intelligently. Start with the truth on the election, Syria, and Ukraine.


Many people have asked me my reaction to this new release of the JFK files. Frankly, I’m flummoxed. I’ve talked to several experts who’ve looked at the materials. I think, at this point, the best I can do is say that – 1. Trump got rolled. I think he truly wanted a release of all files, but as with everything else in the ‘Deep State,’ the Chief Priests told him, ‘You can’t do that’ and cited as cause ‘national security,’ etc; the etcetera going back to 1963. 2. The release was designed to be a mess. The rollout of deleted/undeleted/no longer redacted, and often illegible materials is meant to assure us that ‘you see, there’s nothing here.’ 3. But some ‘stuff’ has come to the surface like scum on a pond; the CIA/Angleton/Oswald file clearly goes back to 1959, and Angleton clearly had a special interest in Oswald. Jeff Morley, who’s written a new biography of Angleton (“The Ghost: The Secret Life of CIA Spymaster James Jesus Angleton,” St. Martin’s Press, 2017) and also works as the editor of JFK Facts, explains Oswald as a ‘marked card’ in the game, i.e. a soldier/pawn to be used as needed, which, to my mind, very well fits the Oswald profile. 4. Oswald in Mexico City remains still a mystery. Was he or wasn’t he there? No photos of him exist. Angleton, it seems, intended for Oswald to go to Cuba and used his stay in New Orleans to gain his bona fides as a pro-Cuba agent. The CIA’s plan was set back when the Cuban Government turned down Oswald’s application for visa. 5. Beyond this matter is the general absence of complete files on key players such as Howard Hunt, William Harvey, David Atlee Phillips (CIA, Mexico), Anne Goodpasture (CIA, Mexico City), and George Joannides (CIA, Miami). These files are unreleased. Overall, there are too too many blank pages. For example, the CIA apparently has 11 pages on Garrison, but 8 pages are blanked out completely. 6. Illegible documents are ‘declassifiable,’ but according to James DiEugenio (“Reclaiming Parkland,” ‘Citizens for Truth about the Kennedy Assassination’), even if these pages were to be put through an OCR machine, they still wouldn’t be recognizable. At other times, ‘NOT BELIEVED RELEVANT’ becomes another category of document. People of great interest such as Earle Cabell, mayor of Dallas in 1963 and brother of Deputy Director General Charles Cabell, the high-level CIA operative who was fired by Kennedy along with Allen Dulles and Richard M. Bissell Jr. after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, is not considered relevant, although he played a huge part in laying out JFK’s motorcade route. Also considered not relevant was Yuri Nosenko, the Soviet spy who defected but had a different view on the assassination than Angleton, who was trying to cover it up. Nosenko was a victim of Angleton’s terrifying mole hunt (see “Wilderness of Mirrors” and Morley’s new biography on Angleton); unfortunately, a screwed-up movie, “The Good Shepherd,” touched on this with Matt Damon and Angelina Jolie, but prevented other movies from being made on this subject. 7. In the same vein, it can be said from this document that the Soviets -- Nikita Khrushchev and the KGB -- clearly thought the assassination was a right-wing coup taking place, with hardline elements coming to power in the United States. This turned out to be unfortunately true, as Lyndon Johnson brought on a new regime with hardline policies all over the world, starting with the military dictatorship in Brazil and most disastrously the sending of 525,000 combat troops to Vietnam. President de Gaulle of France concurred in this view, but was not part of this declassification. I would say overall that this is a disappointing release of information. But as I said in opening, it’s meant to be that way. One loses interest as one is cycled from illegible document to ‘Not Believed Relevant’ document to a less but not entirely redacted document. Anything of value must be weighed in the detail only, and it is those who know detail who can best interpret this ponderous deceit.


No matter what’s in the papers themselves, what really matters is not the Warren Commission’s sloppy trail of evidence, it’s the original facts as they were presented by the Warren Commission. Other than that, this is just a paper chase. And the true investigation of facts can’t get a serious hearing from mainstream media when they keep quoting Gerald Posner, Max Holland, and Michael Beschloss. Jeff Morley is allowed to speak, but has limited his issues to nailing the CIA in Mexico. The best single repository of these facts lies in third-generation researcher Jim DiEugenio’s “Reclaiming Parkland” (Skyhorse Publishing, 2016). I urge you to read it for the big picture. There’s much information here, and some of it is buried in the discussion on the “Parkland” film that came out in 2013 and went away fast, because it wasn’t very interesting. There are other subjects Jim also wanders into, but if you stick to the original evidence -- bullets, autopsy, Oswald, and documentation -- you’ll be amazed by what DiEugenio is presenting. Skyhorse Publishing in New York, which put out the original, has agreed at my urging to republish DiEugenio’s findings, and in this version, Jim will be addressing the whole subject of the original (as well as later evidence) with all the findings to date in the new book. But for the time being, “Reclaiming Parkland” is a must. The definitive book on that day. The JFK files, as Fletcher Prouty warned us a long time ago, are “scenery.”


My Statement on the JFK Files Release: Yesterday, over 3,100 files were supposed to be finally released, 25 years after the JFK Act was passed and 20 years after the Review Board closed its doors. The page count is reportedly in the tens of thousands. But yet the CIA is still trying to hold up the process by claiming they want redactions in these declassified documents, 54 years after JFK was killed. They waited until the last day to file an appeal when they knew 3 months ago that today was the deadline. President Trump should stay true to his word. Declassify everything. Sincerely, Oliver Stone


Pretty significant Hillary DNC revelation here (see Bob Parry below.) It was first reported in the vulturish BuzzFeed in January, but it took this long to make it ‘official.’ The Steele version was suspect rubbish from the beginning, but McCain and Brennan, among others, promoted it, and Hillary of course took it to the max. Major problem with American media -- they like to interpret the ‘facts’ the way they want to reach the conclusion they approve, ie., Russia is responsible for Hillary loss. Diana Johnstone (see below) goes deeper and is dead-on about the meaning of Trump’s election -- how it’s been denied by our ‘guardians.’ The truth in the US has become more and more arduous to decipher. Am going through it again on the Trump release of JFK documents with total media distortion of my 1991 film. I can see why the World Series and sports in general are the rare gems in this media -- 9 batters, 9 innings, 27 outs -- with ties resolved. “What Did Hillary Clinton Know?” by Robert Parry -- “The Harmful Effects of Antifa” by Diana Johnstone --


I’ve been travelling for the last couple of days and wasn’t aware of all the women who came out to support the original story in the New York Times. After looking at what has been reported in many publications over the last couple of days, I’m appalled and commend the courage of the women who’ve stepped forward to report sexual abuse or rape. I’ll therefore recuse myself from the “Guantanamo” series as long as the Weinstein Company is involved.


Two crucial analyses from 2014 are presented below. They come from a ‘grande dame’ of American history who understands just how warped our political leadership has become. Included in her ‘realpolitik’ are Cargill, Chevron, Monsanto, and Hunter Biden. Welcome to the gangster state that is now Ukrania. Also noticed that McCain got his unchecked 700 billion dollar budget for Pentagon through the Senate this week -- with 500 million earmarked for Ukraine. “Washington’s Frozen War Against Russia” (December, 2014) -- “Washington’s Iron Curtain in Ukraine” (June, 2014) --


– How Can We Move Forward with Korea – Below is a highly informed analysis from William Polk, who served as a DOD civilian analyst during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It’s fortunate we still have some old people around who remember. We need to include Russia and China in a broad summit with North Korea. This could be the opportunity that Trump now needs to overcome his gridlock, and would be a gigantic achievement on the order of Nixon going to China. At that point, the opposition of our US Congress and media to any progress in recognizing the fact that Korea is now, like it or not, a member of the nuclear club, would diminish. Sanctions against North Korea, Iran, and Russia would appear to be what they are -- small-minded. “How History Explains the Korea Crisis” by William Polk –


– Summer Thoughts – I was in lovely Sarajevo last week at the Film Festival. Our 4-part documentary on Mr. Putin was singled out with a prize as the audience favorite. Which meant a great deal to me; certainly Bosnians, given their partnership with NATO, have no great love for Russians based on their experiences in the regional civil wars of the 1990s -- but the point is they were open to listening and thinking. Sarajevo has always been a tolerant world center for learning and for caravans of trade dating back to medieval times. Ruled by the Ottoman Empire since the 1400s, and then the Austro-Hungarian, it all came to an end on a street a block-and-a-half from my hotel when, on a late-June day in 1914, the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Empire, and his wife were assassinated by a Serbian anarchist. Within weeks, the great Empires took sides in the dispute -- Russia, France, Italy, and England on one side; Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire on another. Out of that slaughterhouse came World Wars I and II and, I would argue, the Cold War itself, which ended in 1991 with the dissolution of the communist Russian Empire. Which ironically brings us back full-circle to Sarajevo, besieged by Serbian forces from 1993-95 during the civil war following that dissolution. This little street in Sarajevo remains a focus for throngs of tourists -- Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and other -- that I saw taking pictures in all manner of dress and economic background. Sarajevo’s not a rich city, but it works. People mingle, eat kebabs, shop for trinkets, rugs, jewelry. It emits a peaceful charm, and in summer especially for some reason, one recognizes that we as a human race value peace far more than war -- that life -- living -- means more than being right or wrong. Wandering through the crowd, I kept thinking of my own country, the news rife with dissent and anger from Charlottesville. Are we -- The USA -- on the brink of some kind of new civil war? So much hatred, partisanship has been stored up by the ascension of a President unwilling to compromise. A leader who talks still of ‘winning wars’ in a nuclear age strikes me as particularly dangerous. And if you talk to the citizens of what is now Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Macedonia, and Slovenia, you would understand the hopeless viciousness of those wars -- people literally with 3-4 members of their family dead, benumbed, dried out. Amazing to remember that in my youth, Yugoslavia was the average European student’s destination, a $3 a day backpacking adventure through friendly regions -- ethnic tribes, great foods, mosques, synagogues, churches, races of attractive people open to fresh ideas. Their President Josip Tito (1892 – 1980) was the most successful resistance fighter in Europe against the Nazis, and after the war, led Yugoslavia as the first renegade communist to resist Stalin’s orders. He achieved great Third World respect for Yugoslavia as one of the few neutral leaders not to be removed or assassinated by the CIA or the KGB in the ‘50s-‘70s period. He fought practically everyone in his time. He particularly angered the Dulles brothers, but most importantly, proved that Communism was not monolithic as pictured in the West; Americans were rarely aware of this as were Europeans who could travel to Yugoslavia and see for themselves -- but in disregarding Tito’s neutral ways, the American media served the Cold War and the ends of our Empire. There is a current of thought that when Tito died in 1980, the US saw an opportunity to destabilize the region and ‘balkanize’ it into different countries. Economically, the US neglected the region, as it did Russia and Ukraine, playing off ‘strategies of tension’ that would enable American and NATO influence to grow. Today, most of this region is NATO-certified -- with the exception of Serbia. Camp Bondsteel, built in the Kosovo War of 1999, is one of the largest American bases in the world. When NATO bombed Serbia for 78 days, Americans, preoccupied with Clinton’s impeachment proceedings, paid little attention. I point this out because here we are again, embroiled in this senseless animosity toward non-communist Russia over issues such as the expansion of NATO eastward, the buildup of ABM and other missiles in Eastern Europe, US and NATO troop exercises going on along the borders of Eastern Europe, an unstable Ukraine, and numerous unsubstantiated accusations by NATO members of Russian aggression in Europe. A new war is possible, but why is it necessary? If you take the time to read the below essay from Edward S. Herman, which he calls “Fake News on Russia and Other Official Enemies: The New York Times 1917-2017,” you get a sense of this ongoing pattern of telling lies to the world as well as to ourselves. Whether it’s our own Civil War and our slaveholding and Indian-killing past, we might come to understand that as a country, America is still an idea that’s deeply fractured by different beliefs and false perceptions based on a good deal of miseducation. The convergence of materialism, television, sports, the shopping mall, the worship of the dollar, the self-love of military power and nuclear omnipotence are dangerous reasons for a unity that is preventing the emergence of a progressive and enlightened America. Our national security is threatened not by terrorists or Russians or Chinese trade, but by ourselves, by our own lies and dishonesty. When we as progressive historians try to come to terms with the lies, or myths as some prefer to call them, we keep running up against the basic problem of economics. Our history books are chosen for us; high school textbooks are rigorously controlled by California and Texas school boards; texts written by committees that fear the controversies that come with change. I’ve always felt that American history would be truly exciting to an elementary-aged student if it were told with the vigor of truth instead of the fantasy and boredom inherent in the lie. I read Nicholas Monsarrat’s “The Cruel Sea” (1952) when I was about 14 and found it a terrifying description of North Atlantic warfare -- British vs. Nazi U-boats. I picked it up again and read parts. A modest film was made of it, which I watched and which gave me an appetite for, of all things, “Run Silent, Run Deep,” which was always one of my favorite Robert Wise pictures from 1958. A tight submarine war film set in the Pacific, there were some interesting problems with production outlined in Burt Lancaster’s biography, and you will notice the miniature work; and it has an abrupt ending. But it’s masterful work from Clark Gable as a Naval Commander challenged at the most basic level by his Sub-commander (Lancaster) and his crew. As an Old World male, I guess I love the way Gable handles his shaky authority under extreme pressure. He never doubts his essential authority, even when he loses. He has great confidence. I also admire the terseness of the language, especially in view of how everyone these days tries to be so politically correct about everything, apologizing to the extreme. Trump, like many from my generation, hates the ‘pc’ aspects of our present society and is having great difficulty negotiating that wire walk. I’m not a supporter of his any more than I was of George W. Bush, but if he goes, what then? Mike Pence, who doesn’t appear thoughtful or alert, and reminds me most of Gerald Ford and Bush 43, seems more likely to be captured by the neocons and military people. The McMasters and the Mattises will rule him with their plodding, thick-skulled military approach that hasn’t worked since… you can count back to WWII. And please remember, without the Russians fighting the worst of that war, it would’ve had far more painful consequences for our country, and not only in terms of casualties. Steve Bannon was detested by many, but he certainly said some things about our foreign misadventures that needed to be said. Not that the New York Times wanted to hear that, by any means. As you can see from the Herman article below, for the last 100 years, they’ve been dreadfully wrong about major decisions facing our country. At this point, they should probably be severely punished at the very least for the misperceptions that they’ve inflicted on our society, and from which our society has survived with a shrunken soul. I wonder. The Times has always wanted control over how we perceive ‘reality,’ how people should think, and so forth. “All the news that’s fit to print” really means “all the news that’s fit to think.” Aren’t they really the ones who’ve "meddled” in this election with heavily biased coverage? Far more than Russia for sure, which we still wait to see the evidence for -- but as bad as Israel with its AIPAC stranglehold on both our political parties, or the Koch brothers with their billion-dollar network -- or Sheldon Adelson, Saudi Arabia, these the true “deplorables” of this last auction. If we lose Trump, which is obviously what the elite badly want even if they have to blame the Russians for turncoating Trump, we’re going to alienate a good portion of the 60 million Americans who voted his way. What happens then? Is civil war possible? Not physically. I don’t believe we’re the old Yugoslavia. I don’t think the military would go to this war physically. I think it’d be a case of such chaos in the US that military rule would be imposed because it’d be wanted by everyone. The ‘Deep State,’ which is basically in charge now, would be in charge openly. We’d continue as an Empire until we no longer could. The same problems would be there, but mentally, morally, socially, economically, culturally, it’d be a harsh time in which no prisoners, I believe, would be taken. It’d get worse. If Trump doesn’t complete his term, I think so-called “American democracy,” which was always a highly hypocritical concept, but nonetheless a working one, would now be an open failure in history books published in other countries. But, sadly, not here in this one. Also enclosed is “A Ukraine Link to North Korea’s Missiles?” by Robert Parry, in which you’ll find a fascinating, ironic payback for our support of the Ukrainian coup d’état; alongside that, see Parry’s “Neocons Leverage Trump-Hate for More Wars.” Edward S. Herman, Monthly Review, “Fake News on Russia and Other Official Enemies: The New York Times 1917-2017,” Robert Parry, Consortiumnews, “Neocons Leverage Trump-Hate for More Wars,” Robert Parry, Consortiumnews, “A Ukraine Link to North Korea’s Missiles,”


– Mid-Summer Anger – Congress passed its beloved Russia sanctions last week by a vote of 419-3! The Senate followed with a vote of 98-2!! I guess ‘American Exceptionalism’ includes the vast stupidity inherent in having two giant oceans to distance us from the rest of humanity. With all the Apples and Microsofts and computer geniuses we have in our country, can we not even accept the possibility that perhaps our intelligence agencies are not doing their job, and maybe, just maybe, are deliberately misleading us to continue their false-flag war against Russia? Or for that matter, that Russia itself may not be that invested in screwing up our vaunted democracy with such sloppy malware as claimed? Especially in view of the strong statement put out by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, a group of reform-minded veterans throwing a dose of acid on the infamous ‘Brennan-Clapper Report’ of January 6, 2017. With this report alone (see below), much less the overt lying and leaking that’s been going on, both James Clapper (‘We don’t do surveillance on our own citizens’) and John Brennan (‘Drones and torture? None of our business') should be investigated as thoroughly as Michael Flynn, Jared Kushner, Trump’s son, etc. What’s happened to Elizabeth Warren, Barbara Lee, or any of the people who’ve displayed some independent thinking in the past? Have they actually read this report? Somebody out there in DC, please explain to me this omission of common sense. Are the Washington Post and the New York Times so powerful that no one bothers to read or think beyond them? It seems the TV stations in this country take their copy from them. I accept the US decline. That’s a given -- after all, compare our broken-down New York subway system with Moscow’s, as well as many other cities’ pristine and impeccable services. These sanctions, which I pray Europe can independently judge and discard, are as dumb as giving out medals to Generals who keep losing wars. I still have this image burned in my brain of Petraeus with his 11/12(?) rows of ribbons, many looking like Boy Scout badges, surrounded by adoring Congressmen as he lied his way through his foreign policy testimony. Never mind that any moment now a Dr. Strangelove-type incident can occur -- with less reaction time, say 15 minutes, compared to the 1960s 2/3 hours. We are truly at the edge as Mr. P pointed out in the documentary I made. Such Roman arrogance, such blindness, calls out for another Vietnam, another Iraq. We’re screaming for some Karmic Boot up the ass. Destroying our pride would be a favor that the gods could do us. I can go on -- but I’m angry as you can tell. So what’s the point of going to the windows and screaming, even if I were on television? Read the report below from Sanity Inc. and pray another August (1914) passes without the war Congress, Media, and the Military-Industrial Complex are literally dying for. I now fully realize how World War I started. People in power never really thought it would happen, and when it did, thought it’d be over in weeks. You should know the rest of that history. It doesn’t end well. “Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence,” Consortiumnews,


It’s taken me longer than I’d planned to read all 700+ comments on the June 27 post on “The Putin Interviews.” So many comments were inspiring, well thought-out and articulate -- and, in many cases, complex. The responses were a mix of nationalities and locales, and the roles in society varied. It gives me a sense of community in this world of people who think along the same lines, namely one that has a love for peace and, to a realistic degree, of justice. I appreciate this dialogue. In a follow-up vein, I’m posting my ‘Nation’ Q&A of June 12 with Ed Rampell; it’s the most comprehensive I’ve given on the “Putin Interviews” -- the whys, hows, and several of my personal conclusions. I’ve never quite seen it discussed in such detail before. I’m also putting up my co-author on “Untold History” Peter Kuznick’s comments on the interviews. Kuznick is more of a skeptic than I am on Mr. P. Therefore, it’s interesting to read his thoughts questioning the man. I remember when Peter felt strongly that Putin was behind the Democratic hack. Now, no longer. Follow his reasoning and think about his reservations. Finally, Jeremy Kuzmarov (Huffington Post, June 26) gives us one Russian’s take on the series. Ed Rampell, The Nation, “Oliver Stone Talks to ‘The Nation’ About His New Documentary ‘The Putin Interviews,” Edu Montesanti/Peter Kuznick, Telesur, “Oliver Stone Praised as ‘Peacemaker’ for Talking to Putin,” Jeremy Kuzmarov, Huffington Post, “Spirit of McCarthyism Seen In Attacks on Oliver Stone’s ‘Putin Interviews,’”


“Ukraine on Fire,” the documentary I co-produced with Igor Lopatonok on the untold story of the 2014 Ukrainian coup d’etat -- the story that Western media has largely ignored -- is available online from June 27 at our website, On July 17 the film can be seen on additional outlets, such as iTunes, Hulu, and Amazon. The film demonstrates that there was an illegal coup d’etat in February 2014 by Ukrainian nationalists and American supporters that did not reflect the will of the large ethnic Russian minority in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea. “Ukraine on Fire” makes a fine companion piece to “The Putin Interviews” and shouldn’t be missed.


I’m enclosing for your comments some thoughtful reactions to the film. Too many notices, I thought, were politically motivated and/or hateful of Putin to an extreme degree, picturing him solely as a villain without a soul. It’s truly, in our time, something out of Orwell’s “Hate Week.” How does this help the world’s situation? Is it Russia that is disbalancing it or is it truly the United States? Why is it that these types of people in media power are against any kind of improvement in relations between our countries? In any case, Showtime was very pleased with the results, and the series continues on Showtime Anytime. I’m now in France where there’s been a ton of coverage, and we’re on France 3 beginning last night. We were on Sky in England and Germany, and in September will be on RAI in Italy. More to come. Also enclosed are a few words spoken by me at Bob Parry’s event in Washington two weeks ago honoring the memory of Gary Webb. Variety: “TV Review: Oliver Stone’s ‘The Putin Interviews’” -- The Guardian: “The Putin Interviews review – first Oliver Stone loses. Then the gloves come off” -- The Guardian: “Oliver Stone on Vladimir Putin: The Russian people have never been better off” -- Forbes: “In Latest Interview with Oliver Stone, Putin Airs It Out on Neocons, Hillary” -- Forbes: “In Final Oliver Stone Interview, Putin Predicts When Russia-US Crisis Ends” -- The New Republic: “Natural Born Buddies: The Shared Ideology of Oliver Stone and Vladimir Putin” -- The Duran: “25 things revealed about Vladimir Putin by Oliver Stone in the Putin Interviews” -- Salon: “Oliver Stone’s Putin Puzzle: An evil genius who made history, or a shrewd, small-minded nonentity” -- Consortium News: “Oliver Stone Receives Gary Webb Award” --


Part 4 of #ThePutinInterviews tonight. What do you think? Analyses, observations, and perceptions of our acting all welcome. 😀


Part 3 of #ThePutinInterviews airs tonight at 9pm ET/PT. You can stream Parts 1 and 2, now on Showtime Networks:


Tell me which poster you like more and why. UPDATE: Poster A (on the left) is the winner!


Who's the enemy?


“The Putin Interviews” “The Putin Interviews” is a 4-hour audacious climax to my strange life as an American filmmaker. Released in the heart of the Second Cold War, advocating for peace, it comes out on June 12th on Showtime in the US -- and in several other countries including UK, Germany, France, and Italy, in roughly the same June time period. This film comes against a frightening background wherein the US is sleepwalking into a situation where it becomes more and more likely that Russia will react. Which is precisely what so many angry American neocons and Hillary-wing Democrats seem to want! Why? Is it really worth it to push the world closer to the nuclear precipice for this anger? Is it Trump they hate or is it truly the Russians? And why have they conflated these 2 issues? According to the first enclosed article by Conn Hallinan, Washington and the Pentagon have been very methodical about reaching this stage of thinking. What he’s describing is terrifying. The outgrowth of what Obama, our Nobel Peace Prize winner, started in 2009 was the beginning of a process of modernizing our entire nuclear arsenal; it was without doubt the most dangerous and mistaken policy of his ill-fated tenure. Hallinan is describing a new ‘First Strike Option,’ which consists of a limited strike on Russia with our new modified ‘superfuze’ missiles to knock out Russia’s land-based silos. Read this scenario to believe it. Only Strangelove would. In our documentary, Putin makes it quite clear for the viewer what we have wrought with the ABMs (anti-ballistic missiles) in Eastern Europe. It has wrecked the sense of parity that had existed for so long. See the map in the film and study the stranglehold the US has put on Russia with our nuclear arsenal, and you’ll begin to understand how you might feel if you were Russian. Pierre Sprey and Chuck Spinney round out the nuclear picture in their article. In another 2 articles, Mike Whitney, an American Cincinnatus, examines the geopolitics and fate of the Russian/US encounter -- and the American determination to block ‘A Greater Europe.’ He outlines brilliantly the growing desperation and unreasonableness of US sovereignty. Stephen Cohen, in his conversation with John Batchelor, soberly reminds us of the basic US allegations against Russia and Putin in particular. And he also reminds us how we came back to this weird place in time again (circa 1945-54), wherein 6 of these allegations pass as evidence. Shades of Joe McCarthy. Daniel Lazare, in “The Scandal Hidden Behind Russia-gate,” examines the lies of CrowdStrike and the Atlantic Council. In all the outing of people around this issue, why haven’t we investigated John Brennan, ex of the CIA, for leaking the original Flynn story? Why haven’t the MSM linked Vault 7 to this man and his little lapdog James Clapper? I always disliked their visages alongside Obama as he was launching his drone campaigns, torture denials, etc. But Brennan’s is truly a face that belongs up there in Orwell’s literature, a face of extraordinary hostility and ugliness -- in other words, the face of war. Conn Hallinan, “America’s New Nuclear Missile Endangers the World,” Counterpunch, Pierre Sprey and Chuck Spinney, “Sleepwalking Into a Nuclear Arms Race with Russia,” Counterpunch, Mike Whitney, “Will Washington Risk World War 3 to Block Emerging EU-Russia Superstate,” Counterpunch, Mike Whitney, “Putin’s New World Order,” Counterpunch, Stephen Cohen, “Kremlin-Baiting President Trump (Without Facts) Must Stop,” The Nation, Stephen Cohen, “Might Neo-McCarthyism Mean War vs. Russia?” The Nation, Daniel Lazare, “The Scandal Hidden Behind Russia-gate,” Consortiumnews,


“So It Goes” I confess I really had hopes for some conscience from Trump about America’s wars, but I was wrong -- fooled again! -- as I had been by the early Reagan, and less so by Bush 43. Reagan found his mantra with the “evil empire” rhetoric against Russia, which almost kicked off a nuclear war in 1983 -- and Bush found his ‘us against the world’ crusade at 9/11, in which of course we’re still mired. It seems that Trump really has no ‘there’ there, far less a conscience, as he’s taken off the handcuffs on our war machine and turned it over to his glorified Generals -- and he’s being praised for it by our ‘liberal’ media who continue to play at war so recklessly. What a tortured bind we’re in. There are intelligent people in Washington/New York, but they’ve lost their minds as they’ve been stampeded into a Syrian-Russian groupthink, a consensus without asking -- ‘Who benefits from this latest gas attack?’ Certainly neither Assad nor Putin. The only benefits go to the terrorists who initiated the action to stave off their military defeat. It was a desperate gamble, but it worked because the Western media immediately got behind it with crude propagandizing about murdered babies, etc. No real investigation or time for a UN chemical unit to establish what happened, much less find a motive. Why would Assad do something so stupid when he’s clearly winning the civil war? No, I believe America has decided somewhere, in the crises of the Trump administration, that we will get into this war at any cost, under any circumstances -- to, once again, change the secular regime in Syria, which has been, from the Bush era on, one of the top goals -- next to Iran -- of the neoconservatives. At the very least, we will cut out a chunk of northeastern Syria and call it a State. Abetted by the Clintonites, they’ve done a wonderful job throwing America into chaos with probes into Russia’s alleged hacking of our election and Trump being their proxy candidate (now clearly disproved by his bombing attack) -- and sadly, worst of all in some ways, admitting no memory of the same false flag incident in 2013, for which again Assad was blamed (see Seymour Hersh’s fascinating deconstruction of this US propaganda, ‘London Review of Books’ December 19, 2013, “Whose sarin?”). No memory, no history, no rules -- or rather ‘American rules.’ No, this isn’t an accident or a one-off affair. This is the State deliberately misinforming the public through its corporate media and leads us to believe, as Mike Whitney points out in his brilliant analyses, “Will Washington Risk WW3” and “Syria: Where the Rubber Meets the Road,” that something far more sinister waits in the background. Mike Whitney, Robert Parry, and former intelligence officer Phil Giraldi all comment below. It’s well worth 30 minutes of your time to read. Lastly, I enclose Bruce Cumings’s “Nation” analysis of North Korea, as he again reminds us of the purposes of studying history. Can we wake up before it’s too late? I for one feel like the John Wayne veteran (of war) character in “Fort Apache,” riding with the arrogant Custer-like General (Henry Fonda) to his doom. My country, my country, my heart aches for thee. Mike Whitney, “Will Washington Risk WW3 to Block and Emerging EU-Russia Superstate,” Counterpunch, Mike Whitney, “Where the Rubber Meets the Road,” Counterpunch, Phil Giraldi, “A World in Turmoil, Thank You Mr. Trump!” Information Clearing House, Robert Parry, “Did Al Qaeda Fool the White House Again?” Consortiumnews, Robert Parry, “Neocons Have Trump on His Knees,” Consortiumnews, Robert Parry, “Trump’s Wag the Dog Moment,” Consortiumnews, Robert Parry, “Mainstream Media as Arbiters of Truth,” Consortiumnews, Mike Whitney, “Blood in the Water: the Trump Revolution Ends in a Whimper,” Counterpunch, Bruce Cumings, “This is What’s Really Behind North Korea’s Nuclear Provocations,” The Nation,


Here are more reasons to disbelieve our media. Major Wikileaks release on CIA last week (see the ZeroHedge article below) is again misunderstood. Without a population that’s aware of Wikileaks and what it achieves, we’re far more lost in this modern world. When are we going to recognize that the CIA is not what it seems? Harry Truman, who founded it in 1947, wanted to peel it back in 1963 after Kennedy’s death. He realized the malignancy he brought into the world. And it’s truly a cold world, and the CIA has made HUGE mistakes since World War II. (See “Untold History”). Also last week we had Fareed Zakaria’s and Rachel Maddow’s latest screeds (she does go on!) on Russia’s pal Donald Trump. What mental whores these people have become, going to the lowest level of stupidity to get their larger ratings. Apparently the New York Times is very excited about Maddow’s ratings. You can sense we’re reaching deeper into our civilization’s decline into a swamp of fear, based on paranoid misperceptions such as these. Robert Parry, “Fresh Doubts about Russian ‘Hacking’” Consortiumnews. Andrew Levine, “Trump and Russia: Would It Matter if There Actually is a There There?” Counterpunch. Jason Ditz, “Wikileaks Releases Docs Detailing Mass CIA Hacking,” Tyler Durden, “Wikileaks Unveils ‘Vault 7’: “The Largest Ever Publication of Confidential CIA Documents”; another Snowden emerges,” ZeroHedge.


I’d like to share with you my speech of a few days ago accepting the Laurel Award for Screenwriting at the Writers Guild Awards dinner. It’s a great honor to be added to a 70-year-old group that includes Ben Hecht, Billy Wilder, John Huston, Paddy Chayefsky, Joseph Mankiewicz, the Epsteins, among many others. My friend Jimmy Woods (“Salvador,” “Nixon,” “Any Given Sunday) introduces me at 6:22. At a time when the political conversation seems to be only about Trump, I believe we’re missing the bigger picture -- our indifference, ignorance or whatever it is, to a System that creates wars around the globe. On that note, the truly bad news for us -- and a lot of other countries -- is who’s taking over as National Security Advisor to Trump. Condi Rice and Susan Rice pale beside General H.R. McMaster (a Kubrickian name), and Pentagon war dog to the bone. Read about his strategy for Eurasia in the article below by Mike Whitney in Counterpunch. Trump clearly seems now defeated by the power of the intel agencies and the media. Even psychotic John McCain wholeheartedly approves of this man. Also am enclosing an article regarding “Ukraine on Fire,” the documentary I co-produced about the coup there in 2014. Given the state of our media’s honesty, I don’t know if you’ll ever get to see this in the US, but we’re trying. See James DiEugenio, “A Documentary You’ll Likely Never See,” Consortiumnews. I wonder still -- did anyone from the US media or the TV networks ever follow this story in any way from the Russian-speaking Ukrainian point of view? What I saw at the time were shallow dismissals of what they called ‘conspiracy theory.’ It doesn’t seem like a basic effort was ever made to investigate. This has become a key point in the ongoing clash between our civilizations. For dessert, look at “German Intel Clears Russia on Interference,” by Ray McGovern, Consortiumnews, and “The Horrors of John McCain,” by Jeffrey St. Clair & Alexander Cockburn of Counterpunch.