Clint Eastwood, Morgan Freeman & Matt Damon’s Invictus: Drawing

Parallels Between Mandela and the Canadian Lawyer

Watch trailer

Years ago the coalition drew a historic, professional and human rights

parallel between Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and the Canadian lawyer.

All three were members of the Bar and compelled by the circumstances of

their time and the nature of government in each country – India, South

Africa and Canada – to engage in fundamental reform. There is one critical

difference, however. Unlike the two other Commonwealth barristers, the

Canadian lawyer didn’t accept the challenge volenti. He was forced to in

order to escape an enslaved, torturous hell on Earth.

Hollywood joined the fight against imperialistic authoritarianism and the

proliferation of stealth cognition technologies beginning with ‘Dogville’ and

‘The Manchurian Candidate’. As the diplomacy archive clearly shows, it

regularly contributed to the effort to contain China, fix Canada and eradicate

the 21st century’s Pandora’s Box. ‘Invictus’ is another initiative designed for

these purposes.

The December ’09 released feature drew on this comparison. It was

directed by Clint Eastwood, who garnered a Geo Award for ‘Gran Torino’.

And it was produced by Morgan Freeman, who played Mandela.

The movie contains the lexicon throughout; beginning in true coalition style

with the opening scene. Eastwood et al. wardrobe extras playing rugby in

prison certainty.

Immediately following is a Kidmanesque communiqué that also serves to

describe what happened to Canada in the hands of its political and corporate

leaders and Chinese. As Mandela’s motorcade passes by a coach and a high

school age player are watching the procession of vehicles:

Player: Who is it sir?

Coach: It’s that terrorist Mandela. They let him out. Remember

this day, boy. This is the day our country went to the dogs. [claps] Come, let’s go. Come.

Because the plot revolves around the new President’s desire to use the

national sport for reconciliation purposes -- doing so by winning the World

Cup -- producers continue with a coalition tradition of embedding the

lexicon in sports jerseys (see Chapter 11). An innovation on this approach

is using match scores for the same general purpose of generating

condemnation and red flagging remarks as geo-relevant. In both instances

coalition, Taylor and China identifiers and quantum ratifiers are the lexiconic

constituent of choice.

The issue of what coalition leaders have agreed to do – and stated so many

times on the diplomatic record* – and not yet followed through on haunts

some partners. As Mandela’s in the stands watching a game he’s scripted

to state “Why don’t we do a little work while we watch? We have a lot of

promises to keep”. His secretary’s choreographed to effect a Colbert M.

when responding with “So we do” and an extra behind them a Prince Harry

M. to make sure the point is observed to be made.

The hatred of South Africa’s indigenous population for its oppressors runs so

deep that as Apartheid is being dismantled the rugby association votes to

get rid of one of its major symbols. Mandela shows up at the meeting

where this occurs to make the case for why doing so is not in the country’s

best interests. During the scene Eastwood et al. generate the message that

the coalition will be victorious over Chinada as its predecessor was with

respect to the Soviet Union:

[In prison] I had to know my enemy [audience: Execution M.] before I could prevail; and we did prevail, did we not? All of us have [audience: Z-J M.], we prevailed.

In the car going back to the office he and his secretary exchange views.

Geo-politically relevant is her line “12 votes”, a coalition identifier; and as

she’s doing so brushes his lapel, a Harriet M., a quantum ratifying five

times, which serves to confirm how the issue of quantum continues to be a

promise that has not been forgotten.

A discussion with an aid in his office underscores how critical it is for the

coalition to prevail over the 21st century’s first imperialistic threat. To “It is

very important that we beat Australia” Mandela executes an Erin M. while

his assistant a British Parliamentary M. (to draw attention to Canada’s

Commonwealth status); and that’s followed by the former effecting a

protracted Greenspan M. to underscore the need to be victorious.

The Canadian’s international persona, his supra-celebrity status, and his

coalition-elevated position within Canadian society is highlighted. During a

scene where a sports commentator is filming a segment on the South

African rugby team’s chances to win the World Cup, Eastwood et al. draw on

the lexicon’s lab monkey theme: “[The opposition is] possibly one of the

greatest* international [teams] ever … as dominant as this correspondent

has ever seen”. At the asterisk bananas are visually inserted.

Producers’ clever composition skills are observed during a scene in which

rain has soaked the field. They choreograph a line of field attendants to

push the accumulated water off the pitch, arranging for a coalition

identifying three of them to be in the front. And immediately following is a

locker room scene in which they juxtapose a Taylor Identifier with a

quantum ratifier to draw attention to her high level importance within the

coalition and his confirmed quantum entitlements.