Entertain

Post 13 (18 Aug. 2011)

Happy Endings

Timely Movie And TV Views And Reviews

The Entertainment Page has not had a new post for quite a while. That’s because it’s gotten very hard to be “entertained” by what the movie industry and tv industry produce for us.

I imagine that many of our readers here on the Equal Party USA website feel the same way. We see the propaganda, the lies, and it poisons our “entertainment” experience.

Well, maybe there’s a light at the end of that tunnel. I’m not sure, yet. Anyway, I’d like to share some recent experiences with movies and tv programming, including a couple of happy endings.

Hotel TV

In July 2011 I did a little traveling to get my new passport and to pay a first-time visit to the main coffee-producing region of VietNam (yes, I’m still living in VietNam). I don’t have a tv at home, so when I stay in hotels, I watch some cable or satellite tv.

One of the things that struck me was the glorification of lying. For examples, the Tim Hutton show Leverage. Hutton is the lead character, who is supposed to be a very charming liar. And there’s Chuck 3. And, and. I had to ask, rhetorically, “Does any show not have a supposedly charming liar?”

On the crime procedurals, there are always lying witnesses. Of course, the bad guys lie. But they also have “innocent” liars who are supposedly lying for good or understandable reasons.

And then there’s the flat-out propaganda. For example, NCIS-L.A. had a good-guy character say that a shooter in Los Angeles was from a “Somali Al-Qaeda” cell in Los Angeles. In the past, I’ve cited similar examples in CSI (Vegas) and other shows. Jews own those tv companies and approve the scripts and love to demonize Muslims, Islam, Russians, occasionally Chinese, and others, but virtually never jews and judaism, of course. By the way, for readers who need a reminder, Al Qaeda is nothing but a creation of the Mossad-CIA Rothschild-jew network.

Hoax news

At our level of knowledge, we see the news reports and videos as laughably transparent shams. Example, I clicked to a report, probably on CNN, showing hooded “rebel” fighters in whatever country. These shrouded “rebels” were being interviewed by a sock-puppet tele-journalist.

Click.

Home-Run Derby

I grew up on baseball. I was an undefeated pitcher (4-0) in my senior year of high school when our Engadine High School team in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan won the league championship, summer 1975.

So, in the hotel, I think it was ESPN who had the Major League Baseball home-run derby, televised live. The absurd glorification of these players of mere games forces me to hit Mute. I used to watch the great Michael Jordan and team win basketball championships with the sound off. Really. I couldn’t stand the likes of Marv Albert, even though I was ignorant of jews at that time, along with most other announcers.

So, it was Chris Berman, I think, at the home-run derby who accompanied nearly every swing of the bat with superlatives so that there was no language left for the outstanding hits. On the sweetest swats, he had to merely repeat, double repeat, and throw in nonsport absurdities to try to elevate his adjectival phrases.

And then there are the many sports announcers who use present-tense (not so bad) and even future-tense! to describe what already happened. I can’t stand that. For example: We just saw a swing and miss, a strikeout. We know it already. And the announcer says, “And he will swing and miss for his second strikeout today.”

Click.

Who’s not a jew?

Again, a little background. I lived in North Hollywood in metro L.A. for four months. I was in my twenties at the time and lived with my sister. Her soon-to-be-ex husband was a small-time movie producer, and he asked me to be his driver. I drove him in my little car to meetings and, as I recall, a couple of parties. (By the way, even at that level, the producers and directors referred to common actors as “cattle.” I have since wondered inconclusively if that ex-brother-in-law is a jew.) Also, I went alone to a few famous clubs — including an utter dive (to see the Replacements) that had been glorified by Rolling Stone magazine. I also drove as a messenger for Music Express company, and handed packages to Kim Carnes of “Betty Davis Eyes” fame and other people like that. Anyway, what I’m saying is that I have some inside knowledge that I now combine with my newer knowledge.

The cliche of wannabes being waitresses, waiters, messengers, drivers, etc., is true. The so-called “Whites,” like me, along with various minorities, were all over the place. They were, and I guess still are, trying to catch a break into show business. But they’re not the chosen. Instead, usually they are nothing but “extras.” That’s a big part of the reality in Hollywood that’s unknown to the dreamers and celebrity worshipers mentally kneeling in front of their home TVs.

So, as I sat in the hotel and watched pieces of shows and movies, I thought: “How many of those major (and supporting) actors/actresses are not jews?” The answer to that would generate the short list. To ask how many are jews would generate the longer list, I’m sure. And I asked, “How many of those lead characters could be members of my extended family?” I think that’s a useful question because I am a member of a majority or plurality ethnicity. There ought to be majority or plurality representation of nonjews. But I’m sure there’s not.

People watch tv, just as I did many years ago, completely ignorant to the fact that they’re watching nearly all jews. Why is that important? Because it’s yet more evidence that jews promote their own to the exclusion of all others. More, and more, and more. Everywhere.

Happy endings

After returning from my little trip, two of my recent torrent downloads were major motion picture releases in 2011: The Adjustment Bureau, starring Matt Damon, and Source Code, starring Jake Gyllenhaal. I first became aware of Damon by way of the Bourne movies, which I thoroughly enjoyed. My prior awareness of Gyllenhaal was nearly nil.

Both films are romantic thrillers. Both require the normal suspension of disbelief for movies that involve impossible actions, such as magic doorways (Adjustment Bureau) and a kind of time travel (Source Code).

Both movies have their doses of propaganda, of course. That’s a given. The major dose from The Adjustment Bureau is all in one little speech by a villain. He runs through a list of major atrocities in recent history, including the world wars, and his speech is designed to support the major lies of our lifetimes about those atrocities. In Source Code, the major dose of propaganda is the ultimate villain being a white, lone-nut, bomb-building American. Of course, one guy can’t do what he did. It would take a network, a conspiracy, reaching to high levels, for sure. But that lone-nut nonsense is standard propaganda in movies, on tv, and in all the major news media in our deceitful real world since at least the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, when I was 6 years old.

I like to think that that kind of propaganda is losing its effectiveness, not only on me but on most people. Ok, maybe that’s wishful thinking, but a person can hope.

Of the two romantic thrillers, I found the love story of Adjustment Bureau too much of a stretch. Matt Damon’s character put the big hurt on his supposed wonderwoman too many times. And the action with magic doors and the walking Men With Hats got a bit tiresome. Yet, I enjoyed the double experience of going along for the ride while eyeing it with critical thinking.

Of the two movies, I found Source Code the more satisfying. The plot surprised me a couple of times toward the end (remember, we’re suspending disbelief in the premise), and the romance was convincing. The right emotional strings were pulled.

So, two happy endings, with Source Code being the happier.

Wrap

Thanks to the two movies I selected, it’s nice to be able to say that entertainment was had. Oh, by the way, I should add that I never watch a movie without first reading one or more reviews. I don’t want to waste my time. I want to be entertained. Usually, I get what I expect.

But we really ought to behead that anti-American monopoly in Hollywood spewing lies, nonsense, and deliberately dumbing-down the nonjew population of the USA and the world. We really ought to.

Platform.

Comments are welcome, as always, at the bottom of this page.

=party

________________

Post 12 (31 Jan. 2011)

What Does Redford Know, And When Did He Know It?

And Lincoln Gets Shot Again

The famous actor and director Robert Redford is using the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, as Hollywood has done and will do again.

I haven’t seen the movie, haven’t seen a trailer for the movie, but I have read this one article:

http://blog.movies.yahoo.com/blog/495-redford-talks-about-the-conspirator

(The article comes with a trailer video embedded, but I didn’t agree to let them store data on my computer, so the video wouldn’t play.)

And based on that little article, I’m going to make a prediction. Yes. Why not? It’s safe. Just as I predicted that Oliver Stone’s sequel to Wall Street would repeat the main propaganda and protect the top criminals, I can safely predict the same about Redford’s new movie.

The question is whether Robert Redford knows any of the truth behind the creation of the Civil War, the murder of Lincoln, and the subsequent cover-up. The obvious follow-up question would be, Why isn’t any of that truth in the movie?

But first, here’s the major-media writer and Redford telling what the movie is about.

As you no doubt learned in grade school, Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by famed actor John Wilkes Booth in a box seat at Ford’s Theatre. Booth was eventually tracked down and killed in a burning barn in Virginia.

In the aftermath of the assassination, the government rounded up scores of suspects. Eight people were ultimately tried and convicted in a military tribunal. One was Mary Surratt, whose son was Booth’s right-hand man and who ran a boarding house where Booth and company met to plan the attack. …

“There was no guarantee she was involved. They were not able to prove it,” said Redford. “She was stoic in the defense of herself. And they put her in a military tribunal, which should have been a civic trial.”

Enter Frederick Aiken, a decorated Union officer. Through politics, fate, and dumb luck, he ended up with the career-killing assignment of representing one of the most hated people in America.

“The story was about this man having to defend this woman he didn’t want to defend, who went from not wanting to have anything to do with it to totally believing that this was an unjust situation. That to me is what the film’s about,” said Redford.

The lengths to which the government went to ensure a conviction were, even in this post-9/11 world, shocking. There were patently partial judges at the tribunal, flagrant jury tampering, and ultimately a presidential directive.

Was Redford conscious of any resonances between this historical case and modern-day America when he made the movie? Redford grew cagey.

“This is tricky territory. When I got the script, I thought, uh oh. There are obvious parallels with how this country is today. We’re not making something up here to make a political point. It’s there. It’s up to the audience to find it and say ‘Wow, how have we progressed? Have we? Or are we repeating ourselves?’ But I can’t talk about that.”

“The Conspirator” opens on April 15.

All such articles in the media repeat propaganda — to keep Americans in line. And all movies repeat propaganda in order to be allowed to be funded, shot, assembled, scored, released, and distributed from a major company to theater chains around the country.

What the article says

The article, written by a probably ignorant star-struck person who needs a paycheck like anybody else, says “Booth was killed in a burning barn in Virginia,” as if that’s absolute truthful fact. In fact, it’s not. It’s unproved. I’ve done a lot of reading, and there’s a lot of evidence that says the fire was a distraction and a destroyer of evidence as Booth escaped.

Look into Booth’s past, his family, see who he worked for, who his brother worked for, who he associated with, who funded their acting companies.

Also, the article says that the military man who got the job of defending Surratt got the job “through politics, fate, and dumb luck.” That is never true. Never. In high-profile cases, no lawyer, no defender, no prosecutor gets their jobs that way. They are chosen because they have already proved their loyalty to the criminals or as a test to confirm their loyalty. Their job is to limit the exposure of truth while achieving their bosses’ desired outcome of conviction or failure of conviction.

What Redford says

Redford is quoted as saying: “The story was about this man having to defend this woman he didn’t want to defend, who went from not wanting to have anything to do with it to totally believing that this was an unjust situation. That to me is what the film’s about.”

Oh, I want to attack the lack of logic in that statement, but that’d be too nitpicky.

So, what we have is a movie telling a story about this man’s recognition that the American legal system was corrupt. And maybe the new president had something to do with it.

And then Redford says that the movie obviously has a point to make about our country today: “We’re not making something up here to make a political point. It’s there. It’s up to the audience to find it and say ‘Wow, how have we progressed? Have we? Or are we repeating ourselves?’ But I can’t talk about that.”

Isn’t that nice. Redford wants us to believe he’s a truthteller, “not making something up here.” He wants us to believe he knows higher truth that supports his movie, but he’s not putting that truth in the movie nor saying it in the interview. And in case we want to know the truth he knows, he closes that door: “I can’t talk about that.”

Why can’t he talk about that? Because he’s not wealthy enough yet? Because his personal or business stuff is more important than using his public-provided platform to educate the American public?

What does Redford really know, and when did he know it? Did he know it before he made the movie?

What Redford and his movie won’t say

The foreign bankers, especially from London, never gave up on owning their colonies. From their tools named Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr to their fight against Pres. Andrew Jackson to their murder of President Lincoln, the foreign bankers always conspired to take control and increase their control of their former colonies.

Redford and his movie won’t touch the foreign bankers who took control and still have control, just as Oliver Stone and Michael Moore don’t touch them. Just as everybody allowed fame in the media won’t touch them.

Surely by now, Redford knows that. He knows who owns Hollywood. He knows who owns the movie distribution companies. He knows who owns the theater chains. He knows who owns the big talent agencies and the big advertising agencies. He knows who owns the media.

Redford probably didn’t know much when he became a famous actor. But when he started directing movies and attempted to own movies, he surely learned. And then what was his reaction? Did he oppose or cooperate?

Some will say that he opposed, that he went “independent,” in faraway Utah, establishing his Sundance film festival for “independent” films.

Yeah, like Michael Moore is “independent.” Read about Sundance now. What’s “independent” about it?

Redford is still a darling in the major media. Case closed. And his movies still get made, advertised, distributed, and shown in theater chains across the country.

What does Redford know, and when did he know it?

He’ll never tell.

A mega-wealthy mega-star in the United States of America, telling American history in movies. You know, it may be defensible to produce fiction that pushes propaganda. Maybe. (No, not to me.) But producing movies of supposed “truth” that push propaganda about our history — that’s indefensible.

And that’s not “entertainment.” That’s lying. That’s lying to keep the supreme liars in power.

The supreme liars are the supreme bankers, the Rothschilds. They are self-described “Jews.” They are foreigners. Yet, they own the place.

=party

________________

Post 11 (7 Nov. 2010)

Randy Quaid Transcript

Legal Facts Support Actor’s Allegations

This is another case of my thinking, “Somebody ought to do it.” So I did it.

I transcribed famous actor Randy Quaid’s public statement in Vancouver, Canada, on 28 October 2010. Yes, he and Dennis Quaid are brothers.

Two links among several that I viewed:

• http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1237867/pg1
• http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/960.html

Following the transcript, I offer other facts, links, and observations, including the related story of Michael Jackson.

TRANSCRIPT: The speaker is Randy Quaid. (My comments are in parentheses.)

All right, I’m going to read a, uh, read a statement, and afterward turn it over to my attorney, Catherine Sas for any questions you may have. Um, (several seconds pause). Help! (pause). That’s not the statement. (a few people chuckle/laugh).

For the past 20 years, my wife, Evi, and I have been the victims of criminal activities perpetrated by a small network of individuals who are out to destroy us personally, professionally, and financially. This network of individuals is manipulating the banking system and the criminal justice system for the purposes of sabotaging our credit and our credibility.

Three of these individuals are Hollywood lawyers and a business manager, all of whom I hired 20 years ago to handle my legal and business affairs. They are Alan Watenmaker, my former estate planner; Warren Grant, my former business manager; and Lloyd Braun, my ex-attorney.

These three, along with a few others whose professional services I have engaged over the years, have conspired together to steal my property, my money, and with the aid of specific individuals at two major studios — Bruce Berman certainly being one — have gained access to my royalties revenue streams.

These people have been able to do these things through the creation of a phony probate file, phony living trusts, secret bank accounts, fake loans, bogus corporations, smear campaigns, and false arrests of my wife and me.

They have been aided and abetted in their schemes by the entertainment division of City National Bank’s Roxbury branch in Beverly Hills. This particular branch is a major financial hub for the entire Hollywood industry. With the cooperation of certain individuals within City National’s entertainment division, business managers, lawyers, and agents have been able to misappropriate my assets, life insurance policy, and royalties through various client trust accounts and bogus loans taken out in my name without my knowledge.

The president of the bank’s estate planning division told my wife that the bank prefers dead actors because they don’t get in the way.

These former employees of mine have further reached out to their relatives and contacts in Santa Barbara County to take civil disputes and turn them into criminal complaints against us. To be clear, we did not defraud an innkeeper, and we did not trespass on our own property.

Up until a year ago, Evi and I had never had any run-in with the law whatsoever. We are not criminals nor are we fugitives from justice. Nor are we crazy. We are simply artists and filmmakers who are being racketeered on.

We believe there are — to be a malignant tumor of star-whackers in Hollywood. How many people do you know personally who have died suddenly and mysteriously in the past five years? I have personally known eight actors, all of whom (7-second pause, apparently to suppress emotion), all of whom I have worked with and was close to: Heath Ledger, Chris Penn, David Carradine among them (names spoken shakily, apparently from grief).

I believe these actors were whacked. And I believe that many others, such as Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, and Mel Gibson, are being played to get at their money.

In the meantime, many a celebrity’s image and marketability is being co-apted — co-opted and destroyed. Google helps out by keeping the negative stories near the top of a celebrity’s webpage because it’s the negativity that brings in the advertising revenue.

In my own case, my ex-attorney Lloyd Braun has joined this tribe of bottom-feeders by creating his own celebrity-gossip website. What is wrong with that picture? When your own attorney starts defaming you, who do you turn to to defend you?

Lloyd Braun also claims to have come up with the idea of The Sopranos, so he’s obviously familiar with the ways and means of organized crime.

Unfortunately, my brother Dennis has made matters worse by buying a house from Mr. Braun on property Braun originally bought with money he embezzled from me. I recently discovered, much to my surprise, that Dennis is also on the deed to my Santa Barbara property. This is also the work of Mr. Braun further confounding the valida– the validity of the transfer of my fully furnished property in 1992 to Mr. Bruce Berman.

I have earned approximately 40 million dollars throughout my career. I have profit participation in some of my films.

I am being embezzled from by this monstrous ring of accountants, estate planners, and lawyers who are mercilessly slandering me and trying to kill my career, and I believe murder me, in order to gain control of my royalties.

I wish to return to only one thing: work. For the past 40 years, I have successfully worked in Canadian productions, and I would like to announce my availability and desire to do so immediately — legally, of course.

And now I’d like to turn it over to my brilliant and honest Canadian attorney, Catherine Sas, for questions you may have.

(I haven’t seen a video of the Q&A session.)

END of TRANSCRIPT

It’s all related

Here is a pdf file of a lawsuit the Quaids filed against Braun in April 2010. There seems to be nothing frivolous nor crazy about it.

Here is a CourtHouseNews.com article from August (before anybody was saying “crazy,” right?) that gives you names, dates, and other info you’ll never see in the major media. Here is a quote from that article:

Quaid says his case has a few “striking similarities” to the situation Michael Jackson was in before his death.

“Aside from the fact that we both used the same law firm to do our wills and trusts, one of Jackson’s music attorneys was David Braun, Lloyd Braun’s father. David Braun resides in Santa Barbara County where Jackson had a series of legal troubles brought on by false accusations before his death.”

In regard to Michael Jackson, if you don’t yet know that he thought he had pulled one over on the criminals “managing” him, then you don’t know why he was poisoned to death. Here is a good source, with video of Jackson naming names.

And here is another video. Wait for the minutes of Jackson speaking. I hope when you see and hear Jackson speaking what the major media will never show you, you’ll make a judgment about who’s telling the truth. Click. Note: This video includes what I think is nonsense about backward recordings and ghosts, and it talks of the generalized “illuminati” which is a spooky name for a Rothschild organization. Don’t let that stop you from watching and listening to the great clips of MJ.

(Note for newbies: The Rothschild international banking family were the wealthiest family on the planet 100 years ago. Now, moreso. The group of top males of that family is the common, ultimate enemy of all decent people in the USA and the world. Search this website for explanations and links. Or read a Eustace Mullins book — linked on our Links Page.)

Remember, the media were trashing Jackson for years. Now, with him out of the way, the owners of the media and of Jackson’s recordings (ultimately, same owners) are advertising his greatness and making a killing off his popularity. See how that works?

A company named BermanBraun is the namesake of Gail Berman and Lloyd Braun, so says the NYTimes here.

• Gail Berman’s background includes presidencies at Paramount Pictures and Fox Broadcasting, where her credits include the show “American Idol.” (Her husband is/was Bill Masters. I don’t know if she is related to Bruce Berman.)
• Braun previously led divisions of Yahoo and the Walt Disney Company, where his credits include the idea for “Lost” at ABC. Previously, he represented high profile clients such as Larry David (Seinfeld show, and his own show) and Howard Stern (radio trash posing as American freedom advocate). And of course, Randy Quaid, among others.

• The websites http://Wonderwall.msn.com/ and Glo.com are BermanBraun properties.

The bottom line

It looks like Randy Quaid is the one telling the truth as he knows it. But apparently he doesn’t know who he’s dealing with. He’s striking very high in the media-banking network of the Rothschilds by his naming Jew henchmen at the top of major corporations and Hollywood banking — as the CourthouseNews article linked above shows.

Running to Canada is not going to save him. As we’ve said, Canada is a subsidiary of the Rothschild empire. Canada never even tried for full independence from the City of London. The USA has tried but failed.

It’ll be interesting to see how they neutralize Quaid. Yes, it’s that simple. He can’t win. When he sees the light, if ever, they may give him a chance to fall in line with his tail between his legs. Meanwhile, they bleed him of his money in court and destroy his reputation. If he doesn’t eventually fall in line, he’s done — either as a star or as a breathing human.

Nobody, alone, can win. No small group can win. That’s why we, The EQUAL Party, propose the combination of a Core Group and nationwide Write-In Voting as a Solution set. See our Core Group page for more.

=party

________________

Post 10 (1 Oct. 2010)

Ebert in Stone

Reviewer Sleeps With Director on ‘Wall Street,’ Again

As you may know already, Roger Ebert, the famous movie reviewer, either refuses to learn or refuses to share.

There’s no other choice.

In conjunction with our two articles below (on this Entertainment page) about Oliver Stone and Roger Ebert, and in conjunction with our article The Big Picture, I personally informed Ebert about money and the control of it. I put comments on his blog. And he replied to one of them, though apparently dismissively.

And now, with the release of director Oliver Stone’s Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, our most famous and probably beloved reviewer has shown that he is set in stone. His review.

The best Ebert could do was to say that “the thieves who plundered the financial system are still mostly in power, and congressional zealots resist efforts to regulate the system.” Ebert’s “mostly in power” is a lie. “Totally in power” would be the truth. And “congressional zealots” should be “the White House and Congress of complicit criminals and willing puppets.”

And Ebert closes his review with this:

“But it’s a smart, glossy, beautifully photographed film that knows its way around the Street (Stone’s father was a stockbroker). I wish it had been angrier. I wish it had been outraged. Maybe Stone’s instincts are correct, and American audiences aren’t ready for that. They haven’t had enough of Greed.”

That’s a buttload of disinformation there. Every sentence of it. Apply your critical-thinking skills to every word and phrase, to what’s said, to what’s implied, and to what’s missing.

Thus, our “pre-review” of the movie stands. (See below, Post 3 from April 2010.)

Since I believe Ebert to be a person of intelligence and fully capable of learning the simple truth about money in our country and the world, I conclude that he refuses to share. He refuses to inform. He refuses to apply knowledge of the criminal control of money to his review of this high-profile money movie.

Sure, he has his reasons. His reasons may be interesting, but they are not important. He got his riches from entertainingly mis-informing and under-informing us. He could sum up a little bravery and spill some vital truth that Americans critically need. But no, he continues to completely obey the rules of the criminal media’s mis-information game.

So, this is likely the last time I’ll write about him. Adios, Roger the dodger.

As an aside, look what the medical monopoly has done to him. You’d think he would read Eustace Mullins — especially Murder By Injection — and screw up a little anger about it all. But, nope.

Polished

And then there’s Oliver Stone. He puts on a good show, doesn’t he? In a similar way to other disinformation agents of the Fake Left — such as Michael Moore, Ralph Nader, Daniel Ellsberg, Jesse Ventura, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Bill Moyers, The Nation, The Progressive, and more — director Stone plays his own role like the best of those he directs.

Recently, Stone made a big splash on the Left by talking about the “independent” leaders in South America and Central America who he included in his previous movie released this year.

But now, it’s clear that all those leaders who live beyond a year as dissident “independents” are in fact complicit.

The best example is probably Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela. The great actor Sean Penn shilled for him last year. And I bought it. Yes, I was still suffering from my mis-education and from the dis-information in the media that I’ve been brainwashed by since — since — yeah, since I was born. You, too, dear readers.

As Chip Tatum made clear, no lone hero of any country, especially a relatively little country, can oppose Rothschild control and live to tell about it. Example: Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua was neutralized — in his case not killed but scared shitless into submission — by a fatal missile attack on a beloved relative of his. But the Rothschilds like the massacre method, too. Poland’s newly resistant leadership paid the price by pre-planned plane crash. (Here’s a story by the Rothschild-owned Reuters news agency back in April about the crash. Note the mere whisper about banking. This is better. Scroll down to “Polish Plane Crash.”)

Back to Venezuela’s Chavez. Yeah, I know, Chavez suffered a coup in Caracas and then was quickly restored by popular demand. Now, it’s obvious that, basically, it was one of two things:

1. a real coup, during which Chavez sold himself to the devil. This scenario clears Penn.
2. a stunt to buy “integrity” and international stature for Chavez.

If it wasn’t one of those, he’d be neutralized by now. Plane crash. Land mine under his jeep on any of those jungle roads. Drug-induced heart attack. A “vaccination” of cancer. Or a doctor-attended death for any trumped-up reason, a la Michael Jackson. (Yes, Michael Jackson, the facially freaky but otherwise great entertainer. See this.)

Oliver Stone has a helluva catalog of films. We were so starved of truth, we thought his films were great. From Salvador, to Born On The Fourth Of July, to Wall Street, and JFK.

Well, he was outdone by one video by Indira Singh, or one good video interview by Eustace Mullins, or the big video rant by Splitting The Sky (his Native American name) post 9/11.

So, let’s be done with Ebert and Stone. We know they’re complicit propagandists — but entertaining ones! — and we can use them for just that: entertainment. They’re enjoying their riches, sleeping on the sidewalk of Wall Street and playing distant second-fiddles to the money masters — who are the common enemy of all decent Americans and all decent people in the world.

Wall Street is but a stepping stone from the American branch of the Rothschild empire to London, their headquarters for more than 200 years. We are not independent of the Rothschilds’ Bank of England, despite our 200 years of flag-waving. Nor is any other national bank on the planet.

Hollywood will never go there. Not until the next American revolution.

=party

________________

Post 9 (16 Sept. 2010)

Warren Zevon, Howard Zinn, and Jesse James

‘Keep On Riding Till You Clear Your Names’

Warren Zevon was a great American songwriter, singer, and rocker. Werewolves of London was a big hit for him, and he wrote hits for others, including the raucous Poor Poor Pitiful Me popularized by Linda Ronstadt.

Recently, I was using an Internet Way Back Machine, seeking to catch yet another pretender in contradictions between convictions then and now, when I stumbled upon an old Zevon song: Frank and Jesse James.

If I had heard that song years ago, I would have thought that Zevon was making a mistake, romanticizing outlaws who were certainly bad. Such romanticizing is not unusual in our corrupted culture. But because of my recent self-education, I realized that Zevon truly knew something I didn’t: We’d been lied to about Jesse James.

Here’s an important verse in the song. You may recall that Appomattox was the location of the signing of the agreement to officially end the Civil War in 1865. Jesse James and his older brother Frank had been born in Missouri and so had fought for the South.

After Appomattox they were on the losing side
So no amnesty was granted
And as outlaws they did ride.
They rode against the railroads,
And they rode against the banks,
And they rode against the governor.
Never did they ask for a word of thanks.

If you don’t already know it, the top bankers owned the railroads, and they owned some governors, too. They owned the governor who served the bankers by hiring Robert Ford to murder Jesse James and then immediately pardoning Ford after his conviction of the murder.

These facts are easy to find on the Internet now, despite the flood of hogwash generated by the complicit and the ignorant for more than a hundred years.

Here is one of many sources for the murder and pardon. It also includes the later acquittal of Frank James.

This is a useful brief bio on Jesse James, though lacking in the most important facts of murder for hire and pre-planned pardon.

Yes, indeed, the railroads and the banks

Who knows exactly now about Jesse James’s motivations? Nobody. But if you care to look into it, you’ll see he had some valid reasons to fight the power — the corrupt, murderous power. Goons had burned the family farm, shot off one of his mother’s arms, and murdered his stepfather.

After the Civil War, the banksters were greatly expanding and solidifying their iron-fisted control of the railroads. The “people’s historian” Howard Zinn had a good handle on that. Here’s an excerpt from the late Howard Zinn’s book A People’s History of the United States:

The first transcontinental railroad was built with blood, sweat, politics and thievery, out of the meeting of the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads.

The Central Pacific started on the West Coast going east; it spent $200,000 in Washington on bribes to get 9 million acres of free land and $24 million in bonds, and paid $79 million, an overpayment of $36 million, to a construction company which really was its own. The construction was done by three thousand Irish and ten thousand Chinese, over a period of four years, working for one or two dollars a day.

The Union Pacific started in Nebraska going west. It had been given 12 million acres of free land and $27 million in government bonds. It created the Credit Mobilier company and gave them $94 million for construction when the actual cost was $44 million. Shares were sold cheaply to Congressmen to prevent investigation. This was at the suggestion of Massachusetts Congressman Oakes Ames, a shovel manufacturer and director of Credit Mobilier….
(pages 248-9)

Please allow me to explain that Credit Mobilier was a mega-bank from Europe, where banking was (and is) controlled by the Rothschilds. The Rothschilds and their henchmen in Europe were using giant railroad projects to sink governments into further indebtedness or corruption with them. At the same time, the Rothschilds were doing it here in the USA, too. As Zinn said above, Credit Mobilier had a Congressman on the board of directors — one of many corrupted government officials doing dirty deeds for the Rothschild octopus, same as now. (I’ve provided an important link at bottom about the founding of Credit Mobilier.)

Also, the Pinkertons — misnamed a “detective agency” — were contractors of the federal government and corporations. The Pinkertons were like Blackwater (now named Xe, with subsidiaries), or like a pre-CIA operating throughout the country. No kidding. Read this.

The great series Deadwood on HBO a few years back is good for a somewhat fictionalized but valid education on the history of the USA of post-Civil War growth and murderous greed. Deadwood the series seemed poised to go to the heart of the matter, following the money through banking and especially mining, when the series was canceled. Yes, at the peak of its popularity, Deadwood was canceled. Uh huh, who owns Hollywood? The excuse was that the show was too expensive to produce. And what about the promised final episode or two to give the series a proper finale? More lies. Lies to buy time and let the uproar subside and fade away.

Let’s return to Zinn for a nugget more about the banksters and railroads. By the way, Zinn never went to the top of the money chain. Why? He was either sincerely or complicitly pushing Socialism, another divisive creation of the Rothschilds and their henchmen, as was Communism, Marxism, and now “radical Islam.” Anyway, here’s Zinn:

By the 1890s, most of the country’s railway mileage was concentrated in six huge systems. Four of these were completely or partially controlled by the House of Morgan, and two others by the bankers Kuhn, Loeb, and Company.

(p. 349)

Don’t forget that when Morgan died in 1913, ironically the same year as the fraudulent enactment of the Federal Reserve Act, it was revealed that Morgan really owned only a small percent of his vast holdings. That’s because, as has been documented by others (one of many), Morgan fronted for the Rothschilds, who owned the rest. Likewise, the banksters Kuhn, Loeb, and Company, and every other big financial firm you can name. Yes, Rockefellers, too, the Rothschilds’ Number One front in our country.

Excitable Boy

So, Warren Zevon had it right.

However complicated the actual circumstances may have been, Frank and Jesse James were riding against the banksters’ destruction of normal Americans’ lives in their heinous iron-railed roll through cities and towns and across the prairies and the plains.

Here, in honor of the late Warren Zevon, are the lyrics to the song.

Frank And Jesse James

Written By Warren Zevon
published by Warner-Tamerlane/Darkroom Music BMI, 1973

On a small Missouri farm
Back when the West was young
Two boys learned to rope and ride
And be handy with a gun

War broke out between the states
And they joined up with Quantrill
And it was over in Clay county
That Frank and Jesse finally learned to kill

Keep on riding, riding, riding
Frank and Jesse James
Keep on riding, riding, riding
‘Til you clear your names
Keep on riding, riding, riding
Across the rivers and the range
Keep on riding, riding, riding Frank and Jesse James

After Appomattox they were on the losing side
So no amnesty was granted
And as outlaws they did ride
They rode against the railroads,
And they rode against the banks
And they rode against the governor
Never did they ask for a word of thanks

Keep on riding, riding, riding
Frank and Jesse James
Keep on riding, riding, riding
‘Til you clear your names
Keep on riding, riding, riding
Across the prairies and the plains
Keep on riding, riding, riding
Frank and Jesse James

Robert Ford, a gunman
Did exchange for his parole
Took the life of James the outlaw
Which he snuck up on and stole
No one knows just where they came to be misunderstood
But the poor Missouri farmers knew
Frank and Jesse do the best they could

(chorus again)

=

Listen to an intimate live recording of Zevon performing the song. Jackson Browne sings backup. Click on song Number 6 in their playlist on the right.

Here’s a link to the founding of Credit Mobilier. Scroll down almost two-thirds to the paragraph beginning with “Across the border in France….” You’ll see that the Rothschilds had “previously” employed the Perieres brothers who founded the Credit Mobilier bank well before the U.S. Civil War.

When we’re learning the truth, history is a lot more interesting, isn’t it?

=party

________________

Post 8 (30 July 2010)

LIBRARY = TORRENT

Sharing Is Sharing, Right?

We can go to the library and borrow (for free or nearly so) books, music CDs, and movie DVDs. We can take them home, enjoy them, maybe share them with family and friends, maybe copy them, and return the original physical copy to the library.

The library could put all that on the Internet and share everything more quickly and easily (with people who have Internet access). Sharing is sharing, right?

What’s the difference between the library sharing everything for free and torrent sites sharing everything for free?

(What’s a torrent? Basically, it’s a big file, like a whole CD of music or a whole DVD movie. With special software that’s free on the Internet, we can quickly access torrent sites and download anything they provide a link to, for free. That’s what we call “file sharing.” The major media call it “illegal file sharing,” and “peer-to-peer file sharing.” For example, depending on the speed of the Internet service between you and the computer where the file is, you can get a whole 30-minute tv show in  10 minutes. If you have slow service, it’ll take a lot longer.)

What’s the purpose of the library, after all? It’s to share everything it has with as many people as want it. In theory, we get a better-informed population that way, a more equal society.

What’s the purpose of the free torrent sites? The same as the library. Case closed, right? Yes.

It gets even better. Many torrent sites don’t store those files of music and movies in their own computers. The don’t “have” the files. A library actually has the stuff. Many torrent websites don’t have anything but links to people’s computers all over the country or the world where the file you want actually is. Those people are sharing it with you, not the torrent site. Actually, the torrent site is only sharing a little information, sharing a mere link.

Complaint 1: The corporations will lose sales.

Who cares? It just means their current “business model” has died. By the way, that business model is underpaying artists, overcharging for products, and overpaying themselves. Their original purpose was to convey art from artists to buyers. But they took control of the whole shebang. Since then, they have dictated who can and can’t be a national artist, which kinds of music can and can’t get wide exposure, and many artists are told which words and songs they can and can’t sing and sell.

Complaint 2: The artists who created the art will lose money.

This is the only worthy complaint. It’s the only issue we need to figure out.

Declaring file-sharing Americans to be criminals is not the answer.

Secrecy in contracts and courts is how the artists continue to get screwed by corporations and dishonest managers. Abolishing secrecy in contracts and courts will restore fairness.

Artists can then make well-informed decisions about who to sell their souls to, or not.

________________

Post 7 (23 June 2010)

Liam Neeson’s Taken

Thumbs Down On Roger Ebert’s Review

Note: This is a sidebar to the Homepage post about Roger Ebert and The Big Picture.

The action-thriller movie Taken released in early 2009 uses implausible yet exciting action to visually and physically engage us as it educates us — exposes us — to a true horror. The true horror is that international intelligence agencies engage in crimes of child smuggling for sex service to wealthy powerful perverted politicians, dictators, and corporate kings.

That said, the movie, starring Liam Neeson, played it safe. Taken is set mostly in France, involving government and intelligence personnel in the network of crime. The movie could have been set here in the USA, where we know these crimes occur. Also, if set in the USA, the movie could have taken the plot into the White House.

From Omaha to the Oval Office

True story: the Franklin Scandal in Omaha, and its link to a multi-state child-prostitution and child-porn network. Girls and boys. From the 1980s till today. There’s no reason to think it ended. The FBI convicted a fall guy, a mid-level boss, and they convicted an actual female victim of “perjury” in order to tie up the case, covering up all the higher connections.

You can search it: “Franklin Scandal” or “Johnny Gosch,” who was a victim of it and lived to tell about it. Watch and listen to his mother explain what she learned about it. Watch segments from tv news reports on the “alleged” crimes.

Furthermore, we know our former FBI boss was a closet cross-dressing homosexual his entire adult life. J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover hired his lover as his right-hand man at the FBI, and they colluded with and protected the biggest organized crime figures of the day. This is all published fact.

Further yet, we know our CIA has been running drugs and heroin since the Vietnam War. Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North was doing it for the CIA, Vice President Bush, and President Reagan in the 1980s. North and cohorts were cooking cocaine in Honduras and bringing it by plane-loads to the USA. They did it in concert with Israel’s Mossad, and they sold it here in the USA. These are published facts.

In the 1980s, one of the regular destinations for plane-loads of cocaine was Arkansas when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas. Deliveries were made to the Little Rock Air Base and the infamous Mena base. Do you remember the real Clinton? Sexual harassment cases while governor, with state troopers helping to provide girls for him, and then sexual play in the White House with Monica Lewinsky? Financial crimes and murders to cover them. When we say the word “Clinton,” we should automatically think “a conspiracy of crime.” Not theory. Fact.

Enter critic

Yes, the movie Taken could have quite properly been set in the USA. But Roger Ebert, my favorite movie critic, said the movie is “preposterous.” Was Roger Ebert really so ignorant?

And in reference to the movie’s wealthy clubs of abusers of trafficked girls, Ebert asked: “Since every member would be blackmailable, how could they survive?” The answer is a two-parter.

Part 1: Obviously, it’s in the interest of every person of high standing who is involved to keep the secret. They don’t blackmail each other because they all serve a higher master. The lessers, the worker bees, are compartmentalized. Fear and money are their incentives to keep their secrets. If they don’t, they’re dead.

Part 2: The higher master — real Commander In Chief — at the top of the power pyramid in our country and the world likes to use these criminal networks to compromise the generals and colonels.

That’s how J. Edgar Hoover ruled his sub-kingdom we call the FBI. He entrapped politicians in sexcapades, etc., and kept the evidence. He was dictator-for-life of our FBI partly because he had the dirt on politicians — receipts, photos, tapes. (Also, Hoover must have had protection from on high, which is another story.)

The CIA does it too, as it did with Sen. Gary Hart in his bid to be president, which was sunk by the hired-hand Donna Rice putting herself on Hart’s lap. A fatal photo opportunity, politically, in that era. Barack Obama has been ushered in, we just don’t know yet what his past dirt is. But it doesn’t matter because his current dirt — treason involving the wars and the CIA — is plenty.

Also, please allow me to add this: We have a law on the books called Misprision of Treason. It says that if an American citizen knows that an act of treason was committed, he or she must report it to our government. If you don’t report it, you’re guilty. Obviously, Obama (and every other president in our lifetimes) is guilty of Misprision of Treason.

Both Bush presidents were already in on the network of crime before they became presidents. So, they followed their leader. Who’s the leader?

As I’ve said before, the current male head of the Rothschild family banking empire is their leader. He’s the de facto owner of Israel, so he’s the de facto owner of Israel’s infamous Mossad intelligence agency. And he’s the de facto owner of the Bank of England. And he’s the de facto owner of our Federal Reserve Bank. If you don’t know this already, it’s because you don’t have the time, or the patriotism, or the drive, or something! to go beyond the censored newspapers and tv and read it for yourself in various books or on various websites quoting those books along with other sources. But if I’m your first, well, gosh, I’m blushing.

And now, back to our show: The Taken.

Scene again

There’s a scene in the movie that Roger Ebert singles out on his way to saying the movie is “completely unbelievable.” That’s ignorance talking — I hope. Because if it’s not ignorance, it’s complicity with our government’s propaganda.

In the scene, the hero dad gets an impressive and detailed analysis about who the criminals are based on a tape recording of their speech and the content of a brief conversation. The dad is “ex” CIA (although a CIA operative can never truly be “ex”), and his CIA pal provides the results of the analysis. The basic facts are quite plausible. Only an extra detail or two might be a stretch.

The fact is that the CIA in real life has detailed information on almost countless individual thugs, groups of thugs, and networks of thugs. One reason is because our CIA has human assets in those groups, often using those groups to commit CIA crimes. Inside the USA, both the CIA and FBI do that. The FBI had one or more agents in the group that helped Timothy McVeigh play his minor role in the Murrah Building bombing in Oklahoma City. Full knowledge, full complicity. They murdered the brother of Jesse Trentadue as part of the absurd aftermath of that crime, and Jesse Trentadue continues to fight for the truth. Do a search on him if you don’t believe me. And if you search him, you’ll get to read the FBI memo showing that the current head of our Department of Justice, Eric Holder, has been a cover-up man for the treason of Oklahoma City.

Wow, eh?

Cut!

Am I writing a movie review, or a book, or what? What I want to say, in conclusion, are two things.

1. A movie review ought to take into account the truth and educational value of a movie. In this case, my favorite movie reviewer was wrong to slam Taken as “preposterous.”
2. We need to raise the level of what “the best” entails in the USA. As far as I know, Roger Ebert is our best movie critic/reviewer. But as an American citizen who reviews many movies that attempt to provide the truth in somewhat veiled and relatively safe ways, our best reviewer ought to raise his game.

Our country is in this hell-hole because We The People aren’t getting the truth from the sources we’ve been conditioned to trust. Who’s your favorite famous news broadcaster? You’re not getting the truth from her or him. Your getting censored information and half-truths, and often bald-faced lies. Who’s your favorite politician? Who’s your favorite political analyst? What’s your favorite newspaper? Who’s your favorite teacher/professor? Almost certainly, they never go beyond the Democrat-Republican circus.

We all need to raise our game. If we don’t, we’re not going to get our democracy back.

________________

Post 6 (16 June 2010)

Comedians, Singers, Banksters

Vigilant American Connects Chilling Dots

.

These people have more in common than I’d ever thought:

Dave Chappelle the comedian, Michael Jackson the singer-dancer-composer, Britney Spears the singer, and Anna Nicole Smith the ?

And there are more where they came from.

Before we get to the main feature of this story, let’s think about some vital background that we know already. Here’s just a quick flash through recent history. All proven. Documented in Congressional investigations — back when they really did good though prematurely truncated investigations — and in CIA documents, FBI documents, testimony, and investigative reports.

1940s: WW2 medical experimenters not only in Nazi Germany committed every kind of “experimental” crime on prisoners, soldiers, and populations in their sick-minded pursuit of “knowledge” and methods of controlling people. Propaganda, drugs, you name it.

1950s onward: The CIA and others have tested poisons and “drugs” on unsuspecting individuals and populations, resulting in many deaths, including the murders of insiders. CIA employee Frank Olson was a victim. President Ford officially apologized to his family after the proof came out in the 1970s.

1960s onward: Henry Kissinger, a German Jew born in Germany in 1923, entered the USA as a “refugee” in 1938. Soon he was in the military, in military intelligence, enjoyed a meteoric rise, and came to be a fixture in the White House for decades. As Kay Griggs told us, Kissinger has, at the same time, been a homosexual abuser of young men in the military (this sentence’s info is not “documented” though, is it?). Kissinger is a war criminal many times over. He’s a participant in the abuse-control regime employed by our military and intelligence agencies in service of the Rothschild agenda. Yet he’s always protected, he’s always chums with the Rothschild-bankster-henchmen in every conquered country.

1970s: Two Congressional investigative committees led by Pike and Church uncovered the tips of various programs and operations of secret drug trafficking, testing, and related murders, along with evidence about the assassinations of the 1960s. And those investigations were shut down before they could do much damage.

1980s: Reagan-Bush Promis spy software and the October Surprise against Pres. Carter. An insider said about 50 people were murdered to keep all that under wraps, some of them falsely judged to be suicides. Danny Casolaro, investigative reporter, got the goods on them and became another victim in 1991.

1990s: The Franklin Cover-Up: the drugging, sexual abusing, and murdering of boys and girls from Colorado to Washington DC, and certainly internationally since the Pope has covered many a man’s rear.

2000-present: Kenny Johannemann and many more related to 9/11. Since then, we have the related mind-numbed “terrorists” such as the flying Christmas Scrotum-Sizzler of 2009. Gee, who are they, again, who constantly brainwash us to say “Never Forget”? As Americans, we must apply that directive to 9/11, along with “never forgive.” Why? Because they never stop.

Yikes, is this really an entertainment article? Umm — yes.

The Vigilant Citizen

The researcher-writer of VigilantCitizen.com has a particular interest in the secret organizations among the wealthy in government and entertainment. The Vigilant one does a fine job of connecting the secret to the public — entertainers, videos, architecture.

However, he uses the term “illuminati.” He ably explains why. But I don’t get into that. The secret organizations surely exist. But I think to delve into that is a distraction from the hard facts of crimes in government, banking, and other businesses that are all linked at the top. There’s no need to get into their private superstitions and such. The crimes we can see are enough to drive us to overthrow them.

So, when you read “illuminati” written by the VigilantCitizen, just think of the moral-free ethics-free operators in service of the Jewish-bankster Rothschilds. They are real people, with real jobs, who get into positions for entertainers as agents, special assistants, handlers, “best” friends, doctors, or even spouses.

You will see and hear clear examples of their corruption and psychotic control of entertainers.

Click here for the chillingly entertaining article, with videos of the celebrities letting out a little truth. Here’s the full URL: http://vigilantcitizen.com/?p=3925

Also check out the About page. The picture alone is worth the click.

I’m not saying you should believe everything on the VigilantCitizen website. But besides some speculation, there are hard facts. Facts are facts.

It’s entertainment. It’s education. It’s edu-tainment.

Comments welcome, at bottom of page.

________________

Post 5 (31 May 2010)

24: TV Thrill Is Gone

But Jack Will Be Back

.

It’s funny, but when I wrote the first post for this Entertainment Page back in April (“24: Thrills for what Ailes ya”), I didn’t know 24 was about to off itself.

If you’ve read that post already, you know that I enjoyed the show, yet I reached the conclusion that 24 is propaganda. Propaganda always has a purpose or purposes. Based on that fact, we could make some predictions:

• The U.S. government will continue to instigate trouble with Russia and China to pre-validate future overt actions against those two countries. If you don’t know it yet, the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are mostly about securing oil and gas resources away from Russian and Chinese control. Also, the wars were about controlling the banks of Iraq and Afghanistan. Next, the Bank Of Iran?
• A female presidential candidate will be fully backed by the banksters. Hillary Clinton is a capable and fully compromised tool for them already. And on the Republican side, take your pick.
• Terror attacks will continue. They will continue to be “false-flag” attacks, of course. Both fail-by-design attacks and successful (but modest) attacks will be self-inflicted on us to keep us cowering while our dictators keep siphoning our Liberty and Property to themselves.

Well, how did those predictions work out for me?

1. Correct.
2. Debatable. The female president was knocked off her pedestal in the final few episodes, thus tarnishing the idea of a female president in 2012 or 2016. But we can argue that she was duped by the Nixon-like ex-president, and in the end she put herself back on a pedestal (albeit a short one) by announcing her mistakes and her resignation.
3. Correct. One example is the recent New York SUV Fizzler.

We’re told that 24 is dead as a tv series but that Jack Bauer, our hero, will continue battling the criminals. He’ll do so on the big screen. So, we’re not finished yet.

Since 24 is propaganda, let’s consider two more aspects of it.

1. Here’s a very important point. The show is/was preconditioning people to accept drones in the USA, first for surveillance. Of course, later, they’ll be weaponized. Interestingly, in the final episode, the character of President Taylor threatened that the drone in New York was weaponized with missiles. Was she bluffing in order to get the men to release Jack?

Drones may already be in use, secretly, in the USA. Here’s a Houston, Texas, local tv report on drone testing back in 2007. That’s three years ago. A lot can happen in three years. Besides, drones have been fully tested already — in the Middle East.

2. Final point: 24‘s villains remain U.S. politicians and Russian leaders. And the United Nations smells like a rose. That’s a disappointment. A show based on reality would expose the U.N.’s thorns.

The thorns of the U.N. are grown by the Rothschild international bankster family supreme. The Rothschilds established the U.N. and they own Israel. They’ve made the U.S. into their war machine. That explains why Israel has suffered zero consequences from the many resolutions against them in the U.N. that have been passed by the majority — the small countries. The majority is powerless because the Rothschilds established the Security Council as supreme, and it takes only one veto vote by any one of their henchmen on the Security Council to block all action.

So, where will 24 go next? Who will they praise? Who will they blame? How will they try to poison our brains?

I’m looking forward to it. Are you?

Comments welcome, at bottom of page.

________________

Post 4 (11 May 2010)

Luxury

Hey, Stones, Who Is ‘You’?

I’m working so hard, working for the company.

I’m working so hard to keep you in luxury.

The lines above are the basic chorus of one of my favorite all-time songs by the Rolling Stones: Luxury. For a song to be one of my favorites, it has to have music that grabs me, and then as I figure out what the lyrics are, the song has to be sensible and somehow important to me.

Musically, Luxury has many aspects to praise.

• The guitar riff upon which the song is built is an engaging, circular riff with a little influence from reggae, because many of its strikes are on upbeats rather than downbeats.
• The vocals are sung and harmonized with a pleading quality, keeping the melody suspended at the end of each line rather than ending downward on a root note or tonic.
• The drumming is a departure for such a driving rock song: There’s no snare slam on every 2 and 4 beat. Yet, as always, the drums provide powerful punctuation both stabilizing and propelling the rhythm section of this living-legend band. On the 2′s and 4′s, there’s usually a drum kick with a rim knock atop it. And hand drums, perhaps congas, further spice the pace.
• The lead guitar forcefully and emotionally reflects the melody of the riff and vocals as well as wailing on its own in lamenting the main character’s plight and pleading for relief.

Lyrically, it’s the first-person expression of a working man’s plight, overworked and underpaid in the pursuit of happiness while never achieving it.

• The man tells us that he works for a refinery, makes a helluva lot of money for “the Texans” but very little for himself.
• He want basic things for himself, his “woman” (likely his wife), and his “daughter.”
• He’s proud that he works hard, that he can’t be called lazy, and that he thinks about the world, too.

Since I first heard this song when I was a teenager, I thought the chorus had a quirk in regard to point-of-view. Who is “you”? In the verses, he talks about his woman/wife in the third person. But in the chorus, in the lines quoted at the beginning of this essay, the man says he’s working to keep “you” in luxury. I always thought it an odd shift in point-of-view that nonetheless was referring to the woman/wife.

It’s amazing how a new worldview can bring new takes on many things.

Now, it make perfect sense to me to see “you” as the boss of bosses — the boss of those “Texans” of the oil refinery. Of course, now I know that the boss of bosses is the male Rothschild at the head of the international bankster family supreme.

Did the writers of the song mean that? We always have to “give the authors their due,” as my journalism professor Earl R. Hutchinson taught us. It means that we must grant that the artist thought of everything there is to think of in regard to content and subcontent of the art. Of course, that begs debate of just what the artists could possibly have been aware of at the time of creation/performance of the work of art.

So, in this case, did the writers of the song Luxury mean for the interpretation of “you” to be the boss of bosses in our world? I want to answer Yes. The knowledge that the Rothschilds controlled the bank of England was known among a minority of Brits since World War 2. That truth has always been better-known in the Stones’ homeland of the U.K. than in the U.S.A., as evidenced by various books and government communiques published in Europe. So, let’s say Yes.

By the way, who was it, really, who decided on that wording exactly? Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, and/or their greatest though temporary lead guitarist Mick Taylor? In those days, as Mick Taylor complained after quitting the band, the Glimmer Twins (Jagger and Richards) usually didn’t allow writing credit for anybody but themselves.

When you listen to this great song, consider the progression of the chorus — or actually, the de-progression, the diminishing of the chorus. Early in the song, every chorus is finished, ending with the shall-we-say reason for working so hard: “to keep you in luxury.” But by the end of the song, the reason is gone, the “luxury” is gone, and the chorus gets no further than “working … harder! harder!”

‘Time’ is now

Luxury can be found on the Rolling Stones’ classic album It’s Only Rock ‘N’ Roll, from which the title song was the big hit and achieved the most fame and acclaim. In fact, it’s an album nearly full of outstanding songs.

The final song is Fingerprint File, a tune that tells you the Rolling Stones were well aware of intelligence-agencies’ illegal surveillance of them. They wrote that song when half the people alive today weren’t even born yet. It’s history. It’s fact. Yet too many Americans have yet to fully believe it.

Also on this candidate for greatest album is another of the standout songs of all time: Time Waits For No One. Folks, time isn’t waiting for us. If we want a true representative democracy and an age of prosperity while we’re still alive, we’d better get started.

See our Action and Core Group pages.

=

Comments welcome — at bottom of page

________________

Post 3 (28 April 2010)

Oliver Stone

Wall Street: A Road Not Taken

.

The great American director Oliver Stone has often pulled back the curtain a little on government and corporate corruption.

Do you remember Salvador? CIA crimes. And Platoon? A total war crime. And Wall Street? “Greed is good” was so well said by the suave Michael Douglas in a slick movie that millions of Americans decided that the villain of Wall Street was actually right. Oops, art gone wrong.

JFK, the movie. Was it great? Yes. At that time, no other studio movie had ever come close to exposing the facts — hard facts — that the American hero Jim Garrison had uncovered. Among the facts: Oswald didn’t fire a shot. He was a patsy. Absolute involvement in the cover-up included LBJ (president), J.Edgar Hoover (FBI director for life), CIA, and –. Well, the movie didn’t take that next step.

Now, the next step could be taken by Oliver Stone in his new Wall Street sequel. It’s scheduled to open in September (2010).

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps could go up the ladder of power — wealth is power — to the source of our national woes. This movie could tie all the previously mentioned Oliver Stone movies together. It could be a historic, world-changing document.

You think I exaggerate?

War in Salvador. War in Vietnam. Wall Street’s funding of wars and massive crimes of fraud and economic manipulations, causing booms and crashes from which they always profit. Who is at the top of that profit pyramid. There, at that pinnacle, resides the source of our national woes. The Rothschild banking family, the bankster family supreme in the world for the last 100 years, is at the top of that profit pyramid.

If that’s an outrageous idea to you, then I apologize for being so blunt. But if you don’t like it, try to disprove it. Do some research yourself. You might start with the history of international banking, when the USA was still young.

So, Oliver Stone has this opportunity of a lifetime, of an era. He surely has the intellect to uncover the truth. I did it, and I’m not the first. Far from it. So, Stone surely can, and I’ll bet he did. Does he want to unveil the brave and bold truth? I don’t know. Does the new movie unveil the brave and bold truth?

Absolutely not. I haven’t seen any advance clips, and I haven’t read any leaked scripts. But I know who controls the major movie companies and distribution companies. And some other interesting tidbits can be found on Wikipedia here (as of 29 April 2010): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_2

Get a load of this

• The movie giant 20th Century Fox controlled the making of the film and will control distribution. If you know what that means, you’re laughing out loud already. ‘Nuff read, eh?
• Writers of the movie include Allan Loeb and Stephen Schiff. If you know about the Rothschild banksters’ history, your laughter is now punctuated by colorful cuss words. I don’t mean to slam these guys merely because of their family names, and I haven’t investigated their origins. But those two family names are infamous in banking history as henchmen in the USA for the Rothschilds. Don’t delude yourself thinking that maybe these writers, Loeb and Schiff, have stunning insiders’ knowledge and put that knowledge in the film. No chance. Besides, the overseers would not allow a scene to be shot from such a script.
• According to an old statement by producer Edward R. Pressman, the new film’s locations would be New York, London, Dubai, and an Asian country. No mention of Israel, the country created by and owned by the Rothschilds.
• Oliver Stone is quoted as saying that the Federal Reserve is an important location in the film. That’s nice. But will the movie reveal for the first time in a major motion picture the actual owners of the Federal Reserve? Not a chance.

Will Oliver Stone’s Wall Street sequel be entertaining? Almost certainly.

Will it be the popular art that Americans need? Will it unveil the ultimate criminal source? Certainly not.

The real Wall Street leads to the Rothschilds. But for the big-screen Wall Street, that’s a road not taken.

________________

Post 2 (18 April 2010)

Real Time with Bill Maher

Comedian Gags Jesse Ventura

.

The poignant comedian Bill Maher can be so true while funny that I celebrate in laughter. Example: Maher said on one of his Real Time shows on HBO in March 2010 that after the long health-coverage circus the pharmaceutical companies conducted with Obama and Congress, we have won “the right to buy health insurance.” So right.

But on his show a few weeks later (in April 2010) with Chris Rock, he and Rock talked as if real health reform had been passed — Hail To Obama. Ridiculous.

Meanwhile, Maher is on the right track with food and medicine. Admirable and brave.

But on the crime of the century (so far), 9/11, Maher’s head is in the sand. How can that be? He’s smart enough. Is he afraid of losing his gig on HBO? Is he afraid that the obvious facts about 9/11 will force him into a position against Israel’s government?

Interestingly, Maher had Jesse Ventura on his show (16 April 2010). Jesse Ventura — a former Navy Seal, famous wrestler-actor, and former governor of Minnesota — is strong on 9/11. Very strong. He has said he’ll never write for the HuffingtonPost again because they censored him. Meanwhile, Maher has banned 9/11 from his show. He likes to insult 9/11 questioners. He certainly would have lost a debate with Ventura.

So, did Ventura agree not to talk about 9/11 on Maher’s show? Obviously, absolutely, yes. Nine minutes of conversation without a mention of 9/11. In fact, Ventura’s new book, the title of which Maher merely mentioned once, is full of famous true conspiracy crimes in U.S. history, including 9/11. Maher didn’t touch a single one of those proven conspiracy crimes. Yes, they discussed other interesting subjects — the voting system, for one. But 9/11 is the most important issue of our time.

You can easily imagine the decision by Ventura when mulling whether to be gagged by Maher. His agent would have said: We really want to be on Maher! But 9/11 is verboten. So, Ventura thought: I can blow off Maher like I’ve blown off Arianna Huffington, or I can agree to Maher’s prohibition and get a lot more exposure for the book I’m selling.

His book is important, no doubt. But you can see how prohibitions work so easily in major media, even with Bill Maher and Jesse Ventura. A book full of important facts was totally shut out.

Oh, well. Both of them have been brave already. Ventura far moreso than Maher, of course.

Bill’s bastion

Anyway, Maher is a comedian. A very good comedian, but not great. Every time you push a less-than-great comedian into a corner, he or she trots out their ultimate defense: I’m a comedian! I tell jokes.

That means that even when telling us “it’s true” and “no kidding,” the comedian can later say, “It was a joke. I’m a comedian!”

Well, let’s accept that defense. But let’s not accept that those comedians are our saviors or torch-carriers or leaders. If it’s only joking, it’s not leading.

George Carlin. I don’t remember him using that defense/excuse. Do you? George Carlin was a great comedian.

Notes:

Jesse Ventura’s book is titled: American Conspiracies: Lies, Lies, and More Dirty Lies that the Government Tells Us.

Ventura’s tv show on the cable channel TruTV, Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura, is preparing for its second season. The packaging is corny, but the content is great. Videos of the first season are easily found by a quick web search.

________________

Post 1 (14 April 2010)

24

Thrills for what Ailes ya

Jack Bauer, our hero, fights conspiracies of terror in episodic fashion, in 24-hour “days,” each “day” equaling a season of the series.

Claims from many sides have been made about the effects of 24 on the national psyche — as if we have one psyche. Examples:

• 24‘s first president, the African-American David Palmer character, helped prepare many color-concerned voters to accept Barack Obama.
• The Bauer character, played by Kiefer Sutherland, under pressure of time running out, occasionally uses torture to quickly get vital information — and this supports the pro torture “enhanced techniques” crowd in the USA.
• 24‘s constant state of terror parallels and supports the constant state of terror that our actual presidents have continually declared for a decade already.

The Fox network hosts 24. Considering who owns Fox (the “founder” is Roger Ailes) and considering who “owns” the owner of Fox, suspicions of 24 as a tool of propaganda are justified.

I’d like to suggest other influences that 24 certainly has on at least a portion of the viewership. By the way, I enjoy watching the show. I buy into the Bauer character, so I experience the thrills, and I enjoy analyzing the show as I watch, reflecting on plausibility, relation to reality, and possible effects on the variety of viewers.

Points of Influence

* 24 stays well away from reality in regard to villains. The conspiracies seem to top out inside the USA, China, Russia, or in fictitious countries resembling countries currently demonized by our leaders.

Reality would dictate a villain to be Israel, owned by the Rothschild bankster family supreme. Thus, the top male Rothschild is the director of the criminal Mossad. The Mossad is Israel’s version of our own criminal CIA. By the way, this point related to Israel is not about ethnicity nor religion: It’s about who performs heinous crimes in the world and in the USA. (See our “Nugget” on the USS Liberty for starters.)

So, 24 is further misleading the majority of viewers to believe that our enemies include China, Russia, and countries resembling Iran. (I would need another whole webpage to explain the depth of meaning in that last sentence! Let’s move on.)

* 24 suggests that the terror conspiracies that originate outside the USA could not succeed without frequent aid from some corrupt American politicians and agents.

That’s a good message. It’s true. If our FBI, CIA, NSA, and all the others weren’t so busy serving the criminal elite, they could put their talents to effectively dismembering all “terror” organizations — including their own terror departments.

* 24 shows both plausible and extremely unlikely acts of “terror” — whether or not they are carried to fruition.

That’s not good. The under-informed viewer may think all acts of terror are equally plausible and terrible.

For example, it’s plausible to gas a lot of people in a mall. But the gas would dissipate quickly. Also, it’s plausible to suicide-bomb a crowd or selected leaders. But it’s extremely unlikely to bring to fruition the detonation of a “dirty bomb” of nuclear material here in the USA — not without 9/11-type inside help.

No segue!

As I’ve written this piece, the early suspicion has grown to a conclusion: 24 is a production of propaganda. By that, I mean the show is written to support our criminal-infested government’s agenda.

Thus, predictions can be proffered. If 24 is propaganda, then we’re being set up for further manipulation, such as the following:

• The U.S. government will continue to instigate trouble with Russia and China to pre-validate future overt actions against those two countries. If you don’t know it yet, the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are mostly about securing oil and gas resources away from Russian and Chinese control. Also, the wars were about controlling the banks of Iraq and Afghanistan. Next, the Bank Of Iran?
• A female presidential candidate will be fully backed by the banksters. Hillary Clinton is a capable and fully compromised tool for them already. And on the Republican side, take your pick.
• Terror attacks will continue. They will continue to be “false-flag” attacks, of course. Both fail-by-design attacks and successful (but modest) attacks will be self-inflicted on us to keep us cowering while our dictators keep siphoning our Liberty and Property to themselves.

What do you think?

And consider this: What will we never see occur on 24? Your answers to that question will tell as much as our answers about what we do see.

+

I can’t help mentioning this: The original Rothschild family name was Bauer. In the 1700s in Frankfurt, Germany, Mayer Amschel Bauer changed his name to Rothschild. Is this a 24 coincidence?

.

All posts by James Laffrey