The Dreyfus Affair on Trial

Miles Mathis posted a paper I wrote showing that the famous Dreyfus Affair was a manufactured hoax. For those of you coming here from that paper, welcome! Below I have a brief clarification about the goals of the Dreyfus affair plus a bonus outing of another French spook. But first a few preliminaries:

I am a new addition to the blog here along with several regulars who have until now only contributed to the comments section. Mark Tokarski is the captain who prefers to stay out of the limelight. He welcomes thoughtful comments and constructive criticism. But he runs a tight ship, so please be thoughtful and respectful when commenting or you might have to walk the shill plank. (-;

Mark, along with another contributor who goes by straightfromthedevilsmouth (or ‘straight’ for short), has discovered a shocking number of celebrities who we know as a single persona but are actually ‘played’ by identical twins. If you’ve read Miles’s work, you know that Intelligence loves twins, like Paul & Mike McCartney and Elvis & Aron Presley. Well it turns out those ones are just a drop in the bucket. You can find all of the twins uncovered so far in The Honor Roll of Twins on the right sidebar under the Blogroll. We have a working hypothesis that twins can be ‘engineered’ by artificial embryo splitting, but that’s for another day.

Continue reading “The Dreyfus Affair on Trial”

Nothing is real…

…and nothing to get hung about.

Living is easy with eyes closed.

Misunderstanding all you see.

Do you think maybe they were trying to tell us something? Well, my eyes are open. And I’ve accepted Mark’s generous invitation to blog here to try to share what I see from my perspective. I told him I wouldn’t have time to contribute for awhile, but dagnabbit it’s just too compelling. I was previously commenting here under the pseudyonym ‘daddie_o’ but that username is already taken, so now I’m ‘daddieuhoh.’

A little bit about me: I’m a disenchanted academic. My field is in the social sciences. About the 1st of this year, I happened to start watching a documentary called “9-11: The New Pearl Harbor.” The scales fell from my eyes, and I was thrust into a couple of months of intense reading up on many different conspiracy theories, trying to sort fact from fiction. I’m still at it. I’ve come to the conclusion, mainly thanks to others’ research, that much of what we see on TV or read in the newspapers is fake and phony. We’re being manipulated and duped on a grand, almost unimaginable scale. Our thoughts and passions are being molded and orchestrated. So much of the world we think we live in is a sham, a conjob. And so many of the conspiracies we read about are false leads and misdirection. Waking up to this realization was psychologically difficult at first. A bona fide ontological rupture. But I would not trade my newfound perspective for anything. I’m wide awake inside the Matrix, and I’m not going back to sleep.

Continue reading “Nothing is real…”

Titanic musings

My reading slowed to a crawl during our recent European trip, but I did manage to finish a couple of books – each has been a struggle, collections of evidence portending to exciting conclusions. I dutifully struggled through them. Each was intriguing.

Today: The Titanic Conspiracy: Cover-ups and Mysteries of the World’s Most Famous Sea Disaster, by Robin Gardiner and Dan Van Der Vat (1995).

Later down the road: The Thirteenth Tribe, by Arthur Koestler (1976)

_______________

The Titanic: The famous movie starring Leonardo and Kate did not come out until 1998, and of course, in true Hollywood fashion, told us nothing. Worse, all of the scenes involving water in that movie lead to my unwillingness to suspend disbelief: The water temperature that night was 28 degrees Fahrenheit (salt water freezes at a much colder temperature than regular water), and so offered only a few minutes of consciousness to those who went into it.

The authors, Gardiner and Van Der Vat, here take us through a tedious summary of eyewitness testimony and the hearings that were held by the US Senate and British Court of Inquiry, all necessary. They are thorough.

Then they jump ship on us. They lead us with a string of confusing clues that point towards something far more sinister than a massive naval clusterf***. They refuse to follow the evidence because it might lead towards a conspiracy theory. They instead take the trampled path of moral cowardice, concluding that everything went down just as official history says.

A far more enticing scenario, not even far-fetched given what we know of public hoaxes these days: Insurance fraud. JP Morgan, the true owner of the Titanic, had another ship, [a virtual twin named] the Olympic, that had struggled at sea, endured two costly accidents, and cost him a fortune. Damages to the ship appear to have been repairable, but that is not really clear from scant evidence. Morgan was mostly self-insured on that vessel, but fought his way through the British legal system seeking compensation for one incident involving a British navy ship. He lost at every level.

Morgan was in Florence at the time of the disaster. He was scheduled to take the maiden voyage, but backed off claiming ill health. Instead, he was shacked up with a mistress. He also held back some valuable works of art that were scheduled to be shipped aboard Titanic to New York City.

The authors detail how easy it would have been to switch vessels, as it all works out timing-wise. There was very little aboard either ship that directly identified it, and the scant evidence recovered from the deep does little to reassure us – that is, even though two items of hardware can be tied to Titanic, they could have been easily switched as both ships were in dry dock prior to the disaster.

There appears to have been a rescue ship in the area, the Californian, but it sat in the water as the Titanic went down. Was it supposed to be on hand after a deliberate collision with an iceberg? Controversy swills about Californian’s location that night, from eleven to fifty miles away.

Also, there was a fire in one of the [coal] bunkers, allowed to burn even as the ship was in Southampton in the week prior to its voyage and throughout the journey. It was even going on during boat drills to test seaworthiness. Such a fire would not sink the vessel, but would weaken the steel – allowing it to go without remedy seems insane.

I don’t know what is true, of course, but the point is that we need more and better research than these two authors could muster. They got scared off by the old CIA bugaboo from the 1960s, that speculation on anything outside official truth leads to a “conspiracy theory,” and they are just too sane and stable to go that route.

But there is a catch 22: Had they gone that route, given Intelligence control of the publishing industry, the book would never had seen light of day. Self-publishing in 1995, unlike today, was a vanity affair. Maybe the authors came face to face with the censors, and engaged in the noble art of smuggling truth.

Here’s a titillating detail they included but did not investigate:

“The rest of the day [Monday, April 15, 1912] yielded twenty-seven bodies, including one identified as Colonel J.J. Astor, whose initials were on the collar of its shirt. Mysteriously, there was also a handkerchief with the initials “A.V.” as well as $2,440 and £250 in notes plus several gold items (belt buckle, watch, pencil, cufflinks and diamond ring). His estate exceeded $100 million. Many of the bodies had two or more layers of clothing; Astor had a blue serge suit and brown boots with his brown flannel shirt. How strange that Astor, unquestionably on the ship after the last boat left, should turn up dead near a lifeboat. He undoubtedly died in the disaster, but was the body really his?” (pp 163-4)

In fact, Astor’s final minutes of life read like a bad novel – he steps forward and asks to be included on a life boat only 2/3 full, but is denied the request. He stoically accepts the verdict on his life by the lowly Second Officer, Charles Lightoller, and goes to his quarters to release his dog to enjoy a few moments of freedom before they both perish.

I don’t know, that just reads like fiction, you know. What do they call it? Oh yeah … it sounds like bullshit.

Elon Musk, bad actor dude

imageI was reading an article last night about Elon Musk, not one that I am going to link to as it makes some bold assertions that I am not ready to embrace. This photo is troublesome, and I don’t really know why. If PhotoShopped, it’s a good one. They are at some sort of outdoor setting inferring rocketry … that would be the whole point. Musk is now a rocket man. Obama is with him because both are important men. That’s why people want their picture taken with the president. It adds credibility.

But if the SpaceX rocket launches have been hoaxes, and they obviously have, why is Obama lending his name to help make Musk appear real?

Maybe there are no real photos of Obama and Musk together. Maybe this whole thing is fake, just like SpaceX. It is hard to tell, but the whole photo has a fake quality about it.

image

Then there was this … Same thing. Something odd about it … Musk is standing at an angle, like he is about to fall down. But he looks like he is really there – no telltale lines.   The shadow under him makes no sense, but it could just be complicated lighting effects. The face has a dark shadow underneath that we often see when a head is PhotoShopped onto a body. But I cannot say with certainty it is fake. Just appears that way. It could also be one of those cameras they use to make rooms look bigger when renting apartments or selling real estate, except that everything else looks normal except Musk. Note that while Musk is the center of attention and speaking into a microphone, no one is paying him any attention. Most eyes are elsewhere. Maybe they are just bored, like movie extras on a set.
image

Then there is this. It is a nice photo of the guy that plays the part of Elon Musk, most likely a made-up name. His back story is that he came to the US from South Africa in 1981, made a fortune forming and then selling companies that do amazing things like EBay, Tesla, and now SpaceX. It is also said he has five sons. We never see them together. The point of this photo is to demonstrate that the boys are real. That’s them in the background, on the wall. The man has spent a fortune decorating.

Musk 2

Don’t believe he has five sons? Here’s more proof. Here are three trikes and two bikes and a first wife, a beautiful young woman in her (late?) twenties who has obviously not endured five pregnancies. And his dog, and I cannot help it – the dog looks fake!

Elon Musk, the guy doing to fake rocket launches and landings, appears himself to be an invented person. These photos just don’t sell him! There’s no enthusiasm. The whole affair has a plastic feel about it, like he’s a man going through the motions, a bad actor.

Most people don’t trust large corporations, so they try to make them more likeable by putting human faces on them. General Foods became Betty Crocker, Pillsbury the Doughboy, Apple Steve Jobs, Microsoft Bill Gates, Facebook Mark Zuckerberg. All fake personas, actors I imagine, just like Musk. If the idea of the wife, the kids, the trikes and bikes is to humanize Musk, it is not working.

If SpaceX is doing fake work, and Musk is an actor, does this mean that Tesla the car company is a hoax too?  I hope not. It could be that he was inserted into the venture as a public face, and a boring one at that.

Parisians fail to turn out for 1944 liberation

We are staying in a hotel perhaps two block off of Champs-Elysees avenue in Paris (shoms-elay-zay’ I am told is the pronunciation). We are but a few blocks from the Arch de Triumph. It is an imposing piece of architecture.

We were told today that this was where Allied troops marched into the city in triumph in 1944, and where one million people celebrated as the French won the 1998 FIFA soccer cup. Below is a photo of the 1998 gathering, but it is perhaps 999,000 short of a million.

image

So they faked it up a little bit in 1998. That is no big deal. We were told that a million people gathered in Denver to celebrate this year’s Superbowl win. I have not seen photographs, but would bet it was perhaps more like 100,000. That is just how they do things in news – they supercharge these events to make them more meaningful.

I was far more curious about the March of Allied solders into Paris in 1944. So many things about that war were a lie, so I suspected that was a lie too. Here’s a photo:

image
FILE–Thousands of American soldiers march along the Champs Elysees, on Aug. 29, 1944, four days after the liberation of Paris, France. World War II began in September 1939, with Adolph Hitler’s invasion of Poland. Germany surrendered on May 7, 1945. (AP Photo/Peter J. Carroll)

Several things to note about this photo:

  • If it is a “liberation” going on, few French people took notice. Sidewalk spectators on either side of this procession are, as best as I can make out, sparse. It is hard to tell. On the left, a few people appear to be milling in small clusters, but are not much involved with the passing troops. And, those people are tiny compared to  the troops, as if far far distant from the column.
  • The logistics of the march are complicated. Soldiers would have to march up to the Arch, and then around it and then reform the wide marching procession. Only a small swath of the large column would actually go through the Arch. It is not designed for that. (See the photo above for a better perspective, as this photo makes the opening in the arch appear bigger than it is. It is just poor photo pasting.) But all I can see is a straight column of troops and an overexposed sky behind the Arch, as if the troops merely dropped in place from above. The arch appears to be wider due to extension of light, but notice how a straight line descends where the natural wall would be. They monkeyed with it.
  • Oh crap, I am not going to pretend anymore. The photo is fake, military propaganda. Just stand back from it and you will see a a clear line of demarcation across the back of the troops that extends down the sides where the trees blend. That is the cut-off used in the photo, below and inside of which which are troops, above which is the Arch, and outside of which are people in the sidewalk on a normal day, much further away than the superimposed column of troops. This is two photos (at least) pasted together.

The military needed this event, and so manufactured it out of whole cloth.

What at else about World War II is fake? Lots. But I will leave it at that for now.

One last parting shot

Before moving forward here, as will be seen in the post that will come right after this, I wanted to stop and take a look at one of the most maligned characters in the history of terrorism, Mohamed Atta.

I was going to do Osama bin Laden, as many photos of body doubles have been used over the years, especially during the time of the Bush presidency when the agitprop was in high gear. Having body doubles is an indication that the real Osama was an Intelligence agent. He most likely shaved off his beard and put on western apparel and lived peacefully after 9/11, his work done. Perhaps he did a photo-op or two, as CIA and company always knew his exact whereabouts. He was an employee, after all.

Osama 1But photos of Osama have been cleaned up, so that most of them left are of the original spook, the 9/11 guy to the left here. He looks normal there, and this is, as far as I know, the original guy, son of a wealthy Saudi family recruited by Intelligence during the original Afghanistan war in the 1980s to drive the Russians out of that country.

So Osama is gone now. Long live Osama bin Laden! Job well done. He may have died in 2001, but that was most likely misdirection. He may have had bad kidneys too, but in retrospect, that too sounds like misdirection. They needed to him alive in our minds until they were done scaring us with his image ten years later in 2011 with his fake killing.

Atta 1Atta is another story. His face was shown all over the country, on TV news and in newspapers, in all the schools, used to frighten everyone. It is to the right here.

The photo has been heavily doctored, and professionally, a top-notch job! It was meant to enter our subconscious while we were in a traumatized state immediately after 9/11.  It was used to ‘sell’ 9/11 by inserting an evil Krueger-like archetype into our dreams, creating nightmares. (I cannot guarantee I have proportions right in comparisons below, as those evil eyes have probably been monkeyed with, made darker all around to make him that much more sinister.)

atta 2Atta too is Intelligence, so I don’t want to make him out to be a victim. He is still around, most likely. There is no need for witness protection for him, as no one is going to confuse him with the guy on the left here, who is the same man. The original photo from which this is cropped has another man with his around him in warm embrace, all in a good mood as if at a party. The red-eye indicates a casual photo. But notice how the eyes, non-threatening in this photo, are turned to something so sinister in the one above! They are the same eyes. The photo above was made, in part, from this one. However, notice how they shortened and widened the face, so that the ears on the one above almost look like they could be on his cheeks. I have never known anyone with ears that low. It is circus freak stuff!

Atta AttaAnyway, I could not resist putting the two together, even as I don’t know what it means. I guess it only tells me that the photo above, the sinister one, has been seriously monkeyed with, so that the two side by side expose all the distortions that were done to create one of the great fake boogeymen of all time.

Looking back now, knowing everything I did not know on 9/11/2001, but having pushed and pushed forward, it is easy to see how all of the characters of that event were inventions, and how the whole thing was a TV show. Street interviews were filmed in advance, the TV networks all given the same feed, and footage we have of the buildings collapsing probably dummied up. They went down, for sure, but we don’t know how. There were no planes, no hijackers, and researchers are busy now trying to prove up how many of the supposed victims were even real.

All too little too late. The psy-op, one of the biggest of all time, worked.

Mark Staycer fakes being fake John Lennon

John Lennon liked to fuck with us. He was not a liberal or a peacenik, he was not wicked smart or deep. But he did have a crafty sense of theater about him. He knew how cool we thought he was, and handled that aspect of his public personality very well. He never let on who or what he really was.

The movie Let Him Be, which I have here, is a typical Lennon tease. The premise of the movie is that a young Lennon fan (who looks enough like Lennon to be his son) stumbles on a discarded recording showing an older John Lennon alive. He then searches for Lennon in an area north of Toronto where the tape was discovered. He finds a man who looks and sounds like Lennon, but is in the end disappointed. His girlfriend discovers that the Lennon-lookalike does not have bullet wound scars in his back. Therefore, not Lennon.

That’s a nice tease, as it plays with the idea that Lennon was really shot. But what if he wasn’t? I am so inured now the fake death that I imagine he had left New York that day, and viewed news coverage of his death from a safe hiding place and cracked jokes about it.  They can fake death on TV very easily, as people imagine that everything they see on the news is true.

Staycer 2
Mark Staycer

Typical of Lennon, Let Him Be is a switch inside a switch. We are led to believe that a man named Mark Staycer, a Lennon impersonator, is the star of the movie, and that they have fitted him with a face mask to look like him. But deep down, we are to suspect Mark Staycer is John Lennon dressed down so as NOT to look like Lennon.

As I said, Lennon does like to fuck with us. Mark Staycer is not Lennon. He’s misdirection. But there is in the movie a man who look and sounds an awful lot like John Lennon. His name in the movie is Noel Snow, but he is really John Lennon. Yes, Lennon too faked his death. (And no, he was not on the Space Shuttle Challenger that day either.)

But it was difficult to get a straight on shot of Lennon in the movie, as they went to great lengths to camouflage him. There’s nothing useful on the Internet. So I went to the movie, and took a picture of our TV screen as Lennon was singing, behind a large microphone of course. See below the fold for the results.

Continue reading “Mark Staycer fakes being fake John Lennon”

Oops … too late!

It is amazing … I don’t listen to or watch any news, don’t take a newspaper, and yet by 7AM I knew of the latest fake* event in Dallas.

On my way to the gym, a radio sportscaster solemnly lamented that his job shrinks in importance to that of the real fake news people who report these fake events so faithfully.

Then I got on a treadmill and the on-board TV (before I could turn it off) showed cops hiding behind cars, moving from place to place, the usual fake event nonsense. (If cops have to hide behind cars, why is the guy holding the camera not hiding too?)

So folks, please, until you are given incontrovertible evidence, assume Dallas** is fake.
_________________

This just in … the event has been reported on television news. I am too late. People have already swallowed whole even before I sat down here to write.

* Until shown otherwise
** This comes quickly on the heels of Orlando, which was badly botched by the actors. Is its purpose to replace Orlando from our collective consciousness?

What the future holds …

In the coming weeks this blog is going to have some revelations, some shocking, about people who supposedly died who are still with us. The first one will be the hardest, as the lengths that they have gone to in convincing us that John Denver died are extensive. I won’t have a smoking gun there, just a compilation of evidence, but lack of total certainty.  We are only missing a body, a plane, and witnesses. You can judge for yourself.

Perhaps before moving forward on this stuff however, it might help if readers understood the concept of fake death. I don’t quite grasp it myself even as I know it is common. I see in the music business that a dead musician’s collection of work is worth 20X  what it was when he was alive. Elvis, John Lennon, Denver, and recently Prince and David Bowie were probably economically motivated fake deaths. (John Lennon’s death had an added bonus of killing hope, as he was also publicly playing the part of a left-wing leader.)

Others have differing purposes, I suppose. John Belushi, it appears, merely wanted a quiet life, perhaps Robin Williams too. We should respect that decision. Fame can be a hard life. River Phoenix is still around, and I assume Heath Ledger as well. Since they fake-died at young ages, we should look for them in new cloaking.

It is the death and reappearance as someone else phenomenon that I am most curious about. I cannot pretend to understand it, but Bill Hicks (now Alex Jones) and Phil Hartman (Glenn Beck) seem to behave as employees being reassigned from one task to another. I don’t imagine they had the sway or power to decide for themselves to fake die, undergo plastic surgery, and reappear as right-wing icons. That means that in their original careers they were recruited, hired, assigned a certain part, and assured that fame would come to them if they played along.

And this is what is troublesome. It indicates that our celebrity culture is far more manipulated and contrived than we imagine. I know that in music our tastes are not our own idea, but rather given to us for us to imagine we stumbled upon. Apparently the same social phenomenon is at work in acting, comedy, and as we shall see, even political discourse done via TV and movies.

Is it all fake? Probably. I assume that Tom Cruise is gay, for instance, and all his marriages have been beards. I assume the same thing about Brad Pitt and Clooney as well. Bradgelina’s kids are surely hired actors. Are those two merely public beards for an incubator system for future stars? I would assume most famous marriages are fake, even Ellen and Porsha, that they are assigned partners in public and each night go home to separate lovers and homes. Is it like Caitlyn … all for show? Most likely.

That is celebrity culture, but the movement of people who have fake died into political punditry speaks of higher involvement and planning of our daily lives. I don’t for a second believe we have anything vaguely resembling an open society and free exchange of ideas, but prior to discovery of the true origins of Jones and Beck, I never imagined how contrived it all is. On the “other” side of that spectrum, I would imagine Thom Hartmann, for instance, is in real life a right-winger assigned the role of lefty talk show host. Controlled opposition is key. That is full spectrum dominance, even as narrow as our allowed spectrum is.

More fun ahead here. In looking over the blog roll, I see that it is tedious and predictable partisan politics and hashing out and misinterpretation of major staged  “events.” Here it is going to be more fun. I have, for instance, a list of 60 or more “dead” rock stars from the late sixties and seventies whom I assume were either merely retired to desk jobs or obscurity without pay, but perhaps a few of them have been re-purposes to other high-profile gigs.

Stay tuned.

A day in the Colorado Rockies

imageWe’ve been off mountain climbing … At our age, merely walking up trails that lead to mountain tops, called “walk-ups.” We did Mt. Bierstadt today, which at 14,060 qualifies as a “fourteener. I am beat.

Now, if you take this photo and pull up Microsoft Paint, you should be able to merge it with another, crop half the face, and reveal my dark secret: I am Larry David.

I did, however, want to highlight a comment I liked from below from Tyrone – you can tell as he writes that his mind is moving faster than his fingers, and he is dumping ideas as fast as the fingers allow. I found this comment [about the Jim Morrison post below] fascinating.

“Following just the nose in Google images, Sexy Jim seems consistent but Mountain Jim just vibes as another guy, a different actor for a different role, even though the character’s name is the same- I should have thought of this earlier, but the Jim in the Riders on the Storm film is probably just an actor cast for that film- Looking at some of the TV appearances (Sullivan, etc.) there are no shots of the band and the audience together (didn’t watch them all) suggesting their performances were at an earlier date, and probably where there is an edit or dissolve, your looking at a jigsaw of alternate takes with the sound mix carefully synced to the edits to hide them – Lip syncing’s no crime, happens all the time when on a weekly time budget, but one can’t assess whether they could actually play- The chaos at the live events helped mask their suspect musicianship- In the end, these guys were The Monkees without the laffs- A pre-packaged product to sell decadence, like The Stones, but west-coast style- And a prep for the Manson mishigas that brought the whole house down-
PS- It’s a hilarious notion but Rush is too young to have been any incarnation of the twenty something Jim from the 60’s- Rush as Jim may be an attempt to soften the conviction of the Hicks/Jones makeover-“