A piece of two hearts? (2)

[Note: Comments have been turned off on this post, accidentally.]

I had an embarrassing evening, a burst of excited energy shared with others followed by “Oops!” I eagerly contacted the other writers and a couple of friends of the blog to tell them that our work on Janis Joplin had disappeared! It had not. It was just buried under many other pieces in the blog search engine.  Following some chardonnay, I realized that I was excited for two reasons – one that someone cared enough to mess with our work, as when my Magic Bulldozer piece on Dennis Washington disappeared.

But the other was that I was going to be able to do the work again. It is the kind of stuff I really enjoy, discovery using my own talent rather than relying on others, and in the Joplin case, also that of our friend Straight. This morning, headache aside, I decided that I wanted to do the work again anyway. I have fresher insight into these matters now than two years ago when the original post, “A Piece of Two Hearts?” appeared.

Continue reading “A piece of two hearts? (2)”

More fake family photos and unusual resemblances


The above photo is the Joplin family. Judging by hair styles, I would guess it to have been taken in the early 1960s, except for “Janis,” of course. She is dressed in a manner that would be more common in the mid-to-late sixties. She has been pasted in to the photo much in the same manner as John Denver in the Deutschendorf family photo in the previous post. With Denver, it was his head on someone else’s body, but in this instance they have superimposed the entire body of Janis over someone else. Otherwise the photo would make no sense. It would be of four people and an empty space. (The sharp lines on Janis, the odd black space between inner left arm and torso are the giveaway, in addition to manner of dress.)

I suggest that Janis Joplin, a set of twins by the way, was given a back story, that her name was not Joplin, that this was not her family, and that in her current Zombie state, her name is also not “Amy Goodman.”

Continue reading “More fake family photos and unusual resemblances”

Total spectrum dominance

We are lied to 24/7, with every image seen on TV, even supposed candid ones, either being staged or reviewed before airing. Television is a social control medium used to hypnotize that vast majority of Americans. But some of us have escaped, and are more awake than those around us.

If you want to get away from censorship, there are many avenues. For instance, there is alternative media. You could go to Alex Jones and his Prison Planet. Alex, who was once Bill Hicks, will tantalize you with lies of a different type, but lies nonetheless, designed to satisfy your curiosity. Conspiracy thinkers tend to be smarter people who notice more detail and think critically. Alex knows this. He very carefully satisfies our yearning to know what is true by plying us with lies of a more intuitive type. Alex is a gatekeeper.

Or, you can get the inside scoop on the Internet from SNOPES. It is designed to catch you when in doubt and set you straight. It prevents you from committing thought crime. If you don’t believe jet aircraft can fly though buildings like knife though butter, for instance, SNOPES will reassure you that indeed they can, and tell you why in detail. It’s is a CIA front.

There is always Wikipedia. It is the go-to source, our modern day Encyclopedia Brittanica. It’s riddled with back door spooks, and craftily constructed so that Intelligence agents can glean real information from it while the rest of us need hip waders to maneuver in the bullshit. It’s a CIA front.

Or you can swill in right wing punditry over at FOX. Bill O’Reilly, like Amy Goodman, is a Zombie, planted there to catch you unaware. The whole of the FOX operation is designed to keep low information people in that state, while at the same time helping them imagine they are well informed.

FOX News content is identical to NPR and PBS but in a different package, the latter designed to reinforce your unstated supposition that you are intellectually superior to those around you. NPR and PBS feed you that cat food, opening up a fresh can every day.

Or, you can go the left wing route. Amy Goodman, a Zombie, is waiting to greet you, and lead you a little further into the rabbit hole, but only a little. She’s a gatekeeper too, just like Jones and O’Reilly. If there is really important truth to unearth, she’ll take you there, almost. Not quite.

Talk radio? It’s an agitated medium, and used mostly to keep you angry and upset. Anger clouds the brain and prevents rational thought processes. Don’t like Rush? There’s Thom Hartmann, a Zombie, is waiting to greet you “on the left,” performing the gatekeeping function. (Thom actually hates liberals and progressives. Say what you will about him, he works hard, as does Goodman. I would not want their jobs, living and breathing as they do with people they loathe.  It sucks to be them, but face it, Janis was skating on thin ice as a blues singer, and Brandon DeWilde (Hartmann) was on his way to daytime soaps as an actor.)

The Internet? The Blogs? Reddit and Quora and all the discussions sites?  If you put something true up at those sites, an automated mechanism appears to be in place to vote you out of sight. Those sites are riddled with spooks and trolls, some paid, most just late night voyeurs shooting from the bushes, guerilla snipers. They’ll leave you fifty shades of confused. Some of these snipers are very mean, others very stupid. None are worth our time.

The answer? Turn off your TV, turn on your brain. Vigilant citizenship is work! It requires thinking. We stumble, make mistakes, keep pushing and burrowing, as learning requires mistakes on the way.

Mistakes should not scare you. If you place trust in someone not worthy of it, it is easily reversed. Further, not knowing the answers is a lovely state of mind. Searching for them is the stuff of real intelligent discontent.

This blog, unlike others, has made real discoveries, come upon new insights, and has done something really odd: it has both searched for and found some truth. I beg you try to find another like it. (If you do, tell me. I will link to it.)

We have only just begun.


PS: I forgot the most important left-wing gatekeeper of all, put there to satisfy those of us of higher-than average capacity for processing large volumes of information, Noam Chomsky. He’s advanced in age now, not putting out books like he used to, but I would bet that if you emailed him (his address can be found online but it would be rude to publish it) you would get an answer within hours. I have done this. He used to spend maybe six hours a day on email, indicating that he doesn’t really have a full-time MIT job, just an office. And that makes sense, as MIT is just an adjunct campus for DOD.

Understanding controlled opposition

Left: Amy Goodman. Right: Janis Joplin

A commenter over at Reptile mentioned that “Amy Goodman” and Democracy Now! were on scene and covering the small uprising by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. As we have shown by strong evidence here, “Amy Goodman” is Janis Joplin reincarnate. Joplin, who was a set of twins, became Goodman, who is a set of twins.

I know how the human mind works, that if we are not supported by authority figures in making these assertions, people will not believe us no matter how strong the evidence. Further, I know how outlandish is seems to claim that someone who was supposed to have died did not die, and that the authority structure around her supported the fakery, including police and Coroner, in her case, Thomas Noguchi. (Noguchi was Intelligence, planted and used to cover the fake deaths of many in Hollywood including Joplin, Monroe, Sharon Tate,  RFK and Natalie Wood. Did you think that if Intelligence has infiltrated all big and medium city police departments, that they would neglect to make sure that the coroner is also under control?)

So what is Goodman doing at Standing Rock? Her job. She is controlled opposition. She has to cover these events, but in such a way that no movement arises, and that we never really get to the bottom of it.

If there is going to be opposition, it is best to control it. That is the whole point. If we had outright censorship, where media was prohibited from covering protesters, people might become aware how thorough and deeply embedded censorship is in our country.

A swift boat to fame

I spent hours yesterday, 2/13, going over Swift photos again, and could not justify the original assertion that she is a twin. As a rule of thumb for this and all other projects under review, if I cannot tell them apart with the naked eye, I cannot claim them to be twins. Mea culpa. Taylor Swift is not twins. However, do see a very interesting photo at the very end!

We just happened to discover that Janice Joplin/Amy Goodman were twins. In their case, they are fraternal. There might have been some plastic surgery on the way, as with twins Paul and Mike McCartney above. But with the Joplin twins there was a wide gap in the talent department – no way could the demure and laid back Joplin we know as “Amy Goodman” have stood on stage and belted out songs as her sister below on the right did.

More to the point, however, is the phenomenon of twins in pop culture. It is far more common than I ever knew to suspect, so common, in fact, that my fellow researcher MH thinks now that twins might be a requirement for the upper echelons of stardom in films and music. He has unearthed a wide variety of twins, twelve sets for sure so far including Joplin, McCartney and Elvis Presley (the latter two first discovered by Miles Mathis). I will unveil the others, but we are slowly working our way up to important ones, ones that frankly, will blow my socks off if indeed they turn out to be matched sets.

Before I unveil today’s set of twins, who are not part of the twelve mentioned above but who are easy one to spot, I have to ask myself the question: Why twins?

Intelligence loves twins because they can be in two places at once, run projects at once from different locations, and step in and out of each other’s shoes.

The Beatles, we know now, were an intelligence project with intense recruiting beforehand, including selection of the McCartney twins to play the part of “Paul,” the cute one. Tyrone, a frequent commenter here, thinks that they were running several sets of the group around Great Britain and Hamburg before finally settling on the four (actually, five) they did. And look what they have done with two Paul’s! They were able to slip each in and out of the role (it is original “Paul” in the movie Hard Day’s Night, and the other twin played “Paul” in the movie Help!, for instance.) They were able to run the “Paul is Dead” psy-op on us, extending the shelf life of the group, and selling millions of clue-laden albums.

With the Elvis project, they were able to have one performing in Las Vegas while the other made crappy movies in Hollywood. So it does offer flexibility.

But if it is Intelligence at work, there must be more to it than money, which is never in short supply for spooks. I imagine that having twins as pop icons is added leverage for managers – if one is sick or loses interest, the other can fill in. Each can have different talents, as with the Joplins. (Original “Paul” was much better at interviews than his brother, Mike, the better musician and the guy we know today as Paul McCartney.) Or if one gets uppity and demands more money, they can divide and conquer.

I can’t fathom out the entire spectacle of twins in politics and entertainment. It is beyond me how they spot them other than to keep track of every set born in the country. They do have that capability – maybe “Twins” is a name on the door of a special-purpose NSA surveillance office. I do know that Elvis was spotted early on, and that there are no photos of the two together, to my knowledge. Just that aspect of twins management takes personnel and effort. They can never appear in public at the same time.

I met a man in our local gym from Los Angeles, retired now, having worked decades in the music business back there. He told me one morning that he had developed, in days of more primitive technology, a way for aspiring young musicians to make their own demo tapes renting his equipment. I asked him if he spent some tedious days and hours listening to mediocre performances, and he said no. There is tons of talent out there, and those tapes were mostly quite good. But to make it in the music business takes more than that. “You also have to get lucky,” he said.

More than that, I would add, you have to be related to wealthy families, be part of a bloodline. Then, even without talent (are you listening, David Crosby?), you can have a career.

I used to work for a very wealthy old woman in my early career whose daughter was Stockard Channing. She played a lead role in Grease, worked on Broadway, and even had her own short-lived TV show. I was curious how she made it, as her mother certainly had no talent. I was told by a person whose name and face I’ve long forgotten that Stockard merely had the time and money to wait, train, and be selected for parts, as her wealthy background gave her a foot in the door. Who else has that?

That is food for thought. As we continue to work twins here, we can further explore the phenomenon. It is pervasive.

Here is a set of twins that was so easy to spot I could do it without running faces side-by-side: Taylor Swift. She’s an Intelligence creation, possibly talented, but certainly not the one writing her songs, which do not sell nearly as much as claimed. She’s a manufactured star, but then as we are learning, not only are they all manufactured for us, they are all related too. Swift comes from a line of Merrill Lynch presidents and eastern prep schools.* No grueling coffee shop gigs for her – she had a foot in the door the day she slid down the right birth canal.

It is easy to see that Taylor One on the left has a longer face, and that these are probably identical twins. Taylor Two on the right has a more square face, and a slightly less upturned nose. But honestly, who is going to spot this unless looking for it? They very much resemble one another.

So, setting their pupils at exactly one inch apart and splitting the faces, I get this:

Swift Swift

And the differences are readily apparent. Taylor Swift is twins. Which one performs? Given the wealthy background and prep school education, I would venture that both perform, as did the McCartney boys. Next time you see her performing, check out the chin, a little longer on one. That is the easiest way to tell them apart.


Update: Taylor is not a twin, but who is she really?


This is said to be a photo of her and her mother. Problem however – that appears to be a mannequin. Somebody’s joke? Or is she, like others in the music business, not really a member of the family whose name she bears?

True faces

We have established below that Janice Joplin did not die, and beyond that, is actually a set of twins. We call them Twin One and Twin Two, since we do not know their real names. Twin One, the more laid back of the two, became Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now! Twin Two was the singer we all knew who fake died in 1970.

If you are confused about how such a hoax can be played on us by a show that professes to represent the “other” or “left” side of our political spectrum, you need merely understand the concept of “controlled opposition.” Goodman and the whole show is a Ford Foundation enterprise, and is part of full spectrum dominance of our opinions. We are allowed to have disagreements, even agitated ones. In fact, such disagreements are encouraged, just as Democrats and Republicans go at it. It enhances the perception that we think for ourselves. But Democracy Now! is a gatekeeper enterprise, “…this far, no further.”

Just as Thom Hartmann manages progressive Democrats,  Bill O’Reilly right-wing Republicans, Charlie Rose and company the ‘thoughtful’ PBS/NPR set, and and Alex Jones the conspiracy-minded folks, Goodman is managing those who eschew party politics. They think they escaped by following her.

Imagine that Intelligence is running a restaurant. Sit wherever you want. It provides a waiter for every table.

The question I left hanging in the other post was what happened to the second Joplin twin. I was going to go hunting for her this week, but MH, sharp and observant as ever,  saved me the trouble. Twin two became … Amy Goodman Two. Each steps in as Amy, though Twin One by far dominates that role. Twin Two shows up now and then.

Intelligence loves twins, as we saw with the twin Elvis’s and the McCartney boys. MH has given me a list of 37 (and counting) prominent people that he suspects to be twinned. It is all shocking to me, but he is making his case. As we firm up our research, we will expose them.

Twin Two SingingAbove are the Joplin/Goodman twins in their former and reincarnated form. As can be seen, Twin One might be considered more demure and attractive, where twin two, the singer, was a little more emotive.

Goodman Two Joplin Two

The two on the right are easily seen to be the same person, as shown here.

Below is something interesting. It is a painted poster using Twin Two:

Joplin Janis Two 7

The caption reads

“I really do think that if for one week in the United States we saw the true face of war, we saw people’s limbs sheared off, we saw kids blown apart, for one week, war would be eradicated. Instead what we see in the US media is the video war game. Our mission is to make dissent commonplace in America.”

You go girl! You go, Twin Two! We need for you to tell us all about showing true faces.

Here is a composite of the painting above and Twin Two. Obviously the photo was the basis of the painting. Twin One was busy using her true face to do the show, no doubt.

Goodman Two Joplin Two 2