Revisiting the Sharon Tate pregnancy hoax

I don’t pay much attention to traffic on this site, but did notice a recent uptick and stumbled on part of the reason, a post entitled “We Know Sharon Tate Did Not Die, But Was She Even Pregnant?” That post, from April of 2017, has drawn 29,400 views at this time, and has been the cause of quite a few comments (that don’t see light of day) ridiculing me and questioning my sanity. There have also been a few people commenting who knew either Sharon or her family or lived nearby, thereby testifying that the events of 8/8/1969 were real.

Even with that number of views, more than a hundred per day as I write this, this is a tiny outpost, so that I presume the commenters either stumbled on the work and, since  drenched in our propaganda and the resulting psychotic American state of mind, feel a need to review the horror. Perhaps some are part of that army of basement vigilantes used by Intelligence to monitor the blogs and keep it real.

I am writing this to approach the Tate/Manson affair from a higher angle. It is beyond question, in my mind, that the event was a psyop and that no one died on that night. The LaBianca murders on the following night might well have been copycat, that is, mobsters, seeing the larger hoax at work, used it to solve some of their own problems. They knew police  would cooperate. The murders of Leno and Rosemary Labianca on 8/9/69 have never, in my mind anyway, been solved. Rather, they were troublesome to cops, who decided to merely add them to the Manson psyop, thereby shelving them.

First, credit where due, a 2014 paper from Miles Mathis, at 86 pages now a seminal work on the subject. There will be no reinventing of the wheel here. I thought the question of Sharon Tate’s pregnancy added to that work rather than deriving from it, but let’s be clear: No way would I ever have solved the riddle on my own or known to question it without the MMG paper. My attention was drawn to Mathis by a video on YouTube, amazingly still there even after the great purge. That video has the odor of a rollout to it, a means by which MMG was handed over to a much larger audience than it then had.

I’ll briefly explain that idea – if you will humor me. Otherwise, skip to the line below.

Are you familiar with the work of Mike Bublansky? He has done remarkable research into the WWII battle at Iwo Jima, finding that much if it was fictional.

I just made that up! There is no Bublansky. My point is this: real censorship is really effective. If Intelligence decides we should not see or know about something, we do not see or know about it. If people in power intended that we never know of this Bublanski character, his name would never appear anywhere, not on YouTube, not on a search engine, never on a book shelf.

In a similar manner, if people in power wanted Miles Mathis censored, we would not know his name and his papers would never see light of day. He is meant to be there. It is all above my pay grade, but a tremendous amount of otherwise hidden information has been released via that site. It does no harm, as only people of curious bent will find it. There are not many of us, certainly not enough to pose any kind of threat to power. I recall the (alleged) words of Karl Rove to Ron Suskind in 2004:

“People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community. You believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That’s not the way the world really works anymore. We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you are studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors, and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

That all we are doing, all of us with eyes open and minds alert … we are on skis behind the boat and hanging on, powerless to affect events but smart enough to spot fakery. We are watching history’s actors. It’s a choice we all made. Many of you who come here also spend time at the Mathis site or Josh’s Cutting through the Fog. It is as if we are let in on the game and are being rewarded. We get to know stuff, and it is fun, and we are not harming or threatening anyone. It is all far bigger than us. We cannot stop it or even affect it. (Ron Suskind, by the way, is not a “people like you” type. He was the chosen vehicle to get that message out, nothing more.)

Back to business. Where does Tate/Manson fit in the larger scheme? It was surely part of Cointelpro and Operation Chaos. During the 1960s there was a war in Vietnam, its larger and unstated purpose apparently to move its population into the cities to become part of the labor force that now makes our shirts, socks and underwear. It was a violent undertaking, many lives were lost, some of them Americans.  (Prior to that, Japan had been converted to a major manufacturing center, many of its cities razed. It appears, from my view, all to be part of major restructuring of the world order, masquerading as war on evildoers.)

Meanwhile on the home front the Baby Boomer generation was coming alive. We were the first TV generation, and there was an undercurrent of intelligent activity taking hold, later known as the Antiwar Movement. It started on college campuses, and was dignified and clean-cut at the outset.

Chomsky (red arrow), “leading” a march on the Pentagon, 1967

As with all such currents, leadership was on top of it, monitoring it, and decided it needed to be destroyed. They sent out a cadre of false leaders, people like Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn on the intellectual front, often seen holding signs. Tom Hayden, Jane Fonda, Abbie Hoffman etc., were on duty at ground level. The music scene was infiltrated with a host of “stars” from the Intelligence community, David Crosby and Joan Baez still with us, scores of others like Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin faking their deaths after their shelf life expired. They changed the image of the movement, giving it goofy apparel and saturating it with drugs. LSD was one of the prime movers in destroying young minds. (“Paul” McCartney was used in that regard, to encourage kids to use it. That really sucked, and he’s a tool.)

It was all allowed to flourish, controlled opposition leadership firmly in place. Tate/Manson then destroyed the movement. The Antiwar movement died on 8/8/69, though no one else was harmed in the making of that movie.

Part of the hoax was a gruesome scene in the movie, writers working overtime and having the “Manson Family” remove and kill a live baby from the womb of Sharon Tate. After getting up to speed via the MMG work, I often wondered, since I knew Sharon had not died, what became of her baby. Did it go on to become famous? Did Roman Polanski raise the child in Switzerland? I even thought at one time … just idle speculation … that it became Brad Pitt. (My mistakes over time are legion.)

I realized, as I looked at the photos seen in the 2017 post, that Sharon was not even pregnant, but was made to appear so. Part of the ritual, since it was meant to horrify us down to our socks, was infanticide.

That is how that post came about. But why has it drawn so many views? There lurks in all of us a magnetic attraction to the macabre. I often sit down evenings looking for a movie or TV show to watch, and find that they are almost all are about death and betrayal and murder – mayhem. I am looking for anything uplifting, but most of “entertainment” is meant to depress. It’s discouraging.

Is it us, or is it “them?” Why can we not have wholesome and healthy entertainment? I suspect, probably as we are now constantly subjected to fake mass shootings, that it is all intended to keep us digging in a trench, never looking up and out to see sunshine and feel its warmth. It is all agitprop, and it is meant to keep us in a state of worry, even fugue, hysteria and intellectual epilepsy. The Tate/Manson affair was an earlier version of our current ongoing psyops.

Thus are we governed.

18 thoughts on “Revisiting the Sharon Tate pregnancy hoax

  1. Would rolling up on the 50th anniversary of the ”project’ nicknamed Helter Skelter be a factor in the increased traffic here?


      1. Not to mention the latest Tarantino film, “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood”, wherein he imagines a different ending to the Tate/Manson affair. One where Tate isn’t killed after all.


  2. I was so pissed as I sat there and watched that stupid movie – “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” and it’s stupid ending. The movie “Yesterday” filmed as though it was in an alternate timeline pissed me off as well!


  3. The newspaper in my town puts out a Manson article once a year, claiming he was arrested here, showing photos of handwritten notes, doubt it’s Charley’s handwriting. Oddly in 1993 Marilyn Manson recorded some of his debut album inside the house, not sure how Trent Reznor was allowed to rent the property, Rudi Altobelli manager to stars owned it. I noticed MM hasn’t posted in awhile, maybe he’s on vacation.

    Here’s a link to a video (part1 & 2)which shows some of the inside and outside property:


  4. Mark as I’ve said before you seem to possess an innate talent in understanding and communicating matters of the collective unconscious. This is not a common skill and not something I’ve ever excelled at. Quite the opposite actually. I once put an insomniac to sleep while talking on the phone. She was asleep for 10 minutes before I noticed. That’s my audience in a nutshell. Far as society today and what’s on TV nowadays I agree there’s nothing to choose from. My tenant watches nothing but the macabre. The bloodier and loud shrieks of terror and begging for mercy the better. I can’t relate and don’t respect it either. Tenant is also habitual liar and I believe their tastes and behaviors go hand in hand with messed up childhood and getting worked over as an adult. There is nothing I can do for them nothing makes any difference. I believe TPTB understand the discord caused by slasher betrayal in film either dramatic or comedic and watched due due to boredom and morbid curiosity or just plain having a sick head. In my opinion those shows and movies are for the weak and helpless. Their is nothing good there to learn or see. Again I enjoyed your piece. It’s nice having something to relate to which I find harder each day to encounter.


  5. Its well understood throughout history that the plebs will not react at all and if they did never in a fashionable manner that could do them any good. But rather in learned frivolous ways long dictated to them by their masters such as marching the streets while holding up signs. Therefore the releasing of “information” on various methods does nothing more than to empower said masters thereby leaving the enslaved to be even more hopeless, fearful, and miserable accomplices.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Rico, I have been watching Jerry Seinfeld’s Comedians in Cars Having Coffee. I find him refreshing. He’s self aware, and like most really funny comedians, very intelligent. Many of the episodes are duds (after Eddie Murphy skip the rest of season six). I look for a real connection, as Seinfeld is sincere that his only friends are comics, and those are the only people who interest him. I sensed real harmony between him and John Oliver, for instance, perhaps John Mulaney and Lewis Black too. Judge for yourself. Seinfeld, as I see him, is not terribly affected by wealth and fame. He still eats bad food and sees humor in every folly around him. But he also seems to have been well-connected at a very young age, backstage when he should have been in the audience. The usual mystery abounds.


    1. The Black Dahlia murder, or Satanic ritual, was the end of Hollywood. Stars knew who murdered Elizabeth Short and they kept quiet. A kind of precursor to the Manson murders. I recall in 1969 LA Times connected the Cielo Drive murders to devil worship and witchcraft and after a couple of days, those reports disappeared, and the story turned to a drug deal gone bad.


  7. Gregor(y) bateson, the son of the fella that taught us to say ‘genetics’, taught us to say schismogenesis. Ritual is the narrative device to control said schismogenesis.

    The concept of schismogenesis was developed by the anthropologist Gregory Bateson in the 1930s, to account for certain forms of social behavior between groups. Analogous to Émile Durkheim’s concepts of mechanical and organic solidarity (see functionalism), Bateson posited a symmetrical form of schismogenic behavior that consisted of a competitive relationship between categorical equals (e.g., rivalry) and complementary schismogenesis between categorical unequals (e.g., dominance and submission). Bateson’s specific contribution was to suggest that certain concrete ritual behaviors either inhibited or stimulated the schismogenic relationship in its various forms. In his earlier formulations, Bateson tied the notion to that of ethos”

    …schismogenesis shares the same root(skei) with psience of course.


    1. “The newly unveiled atomic bomb naturally dominated the thinking of the time, and some argued that it made the need for a permanent system of national intelligence peremptory. Gregory Bateson, for example, writing to Donovan from OSS headquarters in the India-Burma theater, forecast that the bomb would shift the balance of warlike and peaceful methods of international pressure. It would be powerless, he said, against subversive practices, guerrilla tactics, social and economic manipulation, diplomatic forces, and propaganda either black or white. The nations would therefore resort to those indirect methods of warfare. The importance of the kind of work the Foreign Economic Administration, the Office of War Information, and the Office of Strategic Services had been doing would thus be infinitely greater than it had ever been. The country could not rely upon the Army and Navy alone for defense. There should be a third agency to combine the functions and employ the weapons of clandestine operations, economic controls, and psychological pressures in the new warfare. But Bateson thought, and he would not be alone, that this third agency should be under the Department of State”


  8. MI-5&6 were already trained in subversion long before. They were taught this from the most powerful, cunning, ruthless evil folk. Their fingerprints (symbology) are seen throughout recorded history. They are TPTB.


    1. Miles Mathis Group. I do not use that term anymore. The implication that MMG made was that Mathis was actually a group of writers, but I have no way of knowing that, and so stopped using the expression.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s