I just had to take care of my grandmother when I was a kid. I was eight years old, and I had to pay for our dinners with any money I could find because she’d forget her wallet, I’d have to cry in the middle of strange places because she’d wander off and leave me, I had to watch her hit her cat or feel her smack me over the head because she didn’t know who I was, and I had to miss out on my childhood because I was busy taking care of her when my parents were at work. I had to watch over her because no one else could, and she was with me because I couldn’t have a babysitter.
It’s only been a little over a decade. Even though she was losing me, and memories of me, and was terrible and cruel, I still loved her. She was with me for my entire childhood, more than my own parents, so when she died, I almost died too. And then after I broke, my heart felt better. I no longer had to care for an adult, and I was about to start high school.
So here I am, wanting to go to school, wanting to get my own house, wanting to get married, and I might lose my early adulthood to having to take care of my own mother. She was much older when this happened to her own mother. She has a brother who could help her, her brother’s wife and children who could help her, a husband who could help her. She had a career which could pay for the proper healthcare that my grandmother deserved.
I won’t have any of that support.
I don’t have siblings to help me. I don’t have a husband to help me. The rest of the family? Their house was destroyed in a storm. They’re living in a temporary home right now. My one cousin is about to get married. My other cousin is in school, finally.
I can’t take their chances away.
But I can’t do this.
I don’t know what to do.
Every day, my breath leaves and I cry in the bathroom at work. I cry myself to sleep because I don’t know how I’m going to deal with this.
And I want to get mental help for myself. I want to go to therapy so I don’t want to die every day. But if it’s between myself and my mother, I’ll always choose my mother first. Everyone knows that. Anyone that knows me knows that.
I cry every damn day about this. I can see her slipping. I know what it looks like. I’ve seen it. For years I saw the look in my grandmother’s face and heard it in her face.
And my dad. He’s fine mentally and physically for now, but he’s much older… I’m glad that his brain is still intact. But what am I going to do when he passes? I’ll barely be 30.
I feel so damn rushed because of all of this. I feel like I have to have a career now. I have to be married now. I have to so that my parents can be there for those events.
Ugh even now I’m crying as I write this because I am just so scared and I am freaking out.
I’m going to be alone. I’m not going to have a family. They’re not going to be there for me and I don’t know how I’m going to live. I can’t take this. I feel all of this on my back and I can’t carry it alone but I don’t have any help and I don’t know what to do. I don’t want to live anymore but I have to so everyone else can be healthy and happy for the time they have left, but I am just so broken and I can’t stop crying and it hurts to breathe.
When egotistical actors are cooped up together for months on end on a movie set there’s always going to be friction. On the whole though, lavish trailers and massive paychecks help smooth over any niggles. Yet sometimes the angst gets too much for these pampered princes and princesses. They may be actors, but even the most experienced stars can’t hide their genuine dislike of fellow performers.
Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett
The legendary Harrison Ford didn’t take too kindly to whippersnapper Josh Hartnett on the set of ‘Hollywood Homicide’. Ford reportedly referred to Harnett as a "punk", with the young actor retaliating by calling the veteran “an old fart”. As a result the pair barely made eye contact during filming and continuously picked on each other at press junkets. The film flopped. Megan Fox and Michael Bay
Megan Fox shot herself in the foot when she slammed ‘Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen’ director Michael Bay for focusing on special effects and not acting (probably for the best as it starred Shia LaBeouf and, well, Megan Fox). Bay responded with; “That’s Megan Fox for you. She says some very ridiculous things because she’s 23 years old and she still has a lot of growing to do. You roll your eyes when you see statements like that”. He then didn’t cast her in the next ‘Transformers’ film. Whoops.
Patrick Swayze and Jennifer Grey
The two came to despise each other after a massive row on the set of ‘Red Dawn’. When Grey was informed that Swayze would play her on-screen romance in the iconic ‘Dirty Dancing’, she was so upset that she almost pulled out. Eventually though they had a deep heart-to-heart and made friends. Years later Grey broke down into tears on ‘Dancing With The Stars’ as she remembered her time with the late actor.
Bill Murray and Lucy Liu
Comedy actor Bill Murray couldn’t even raise a smile whilst filming ‘Charlie’s Angels’, as he took a serious dislike to Lucy Liu. It was rumored that Murray thought Liu had an out-of-control ego and he refused to make any appearances in support of the movie when it came out in 2000. He also turned down reprising the role in the sequel, ‘Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle’. In retrospect a good call.
Bette Davis and Joan Crawford
The granddaddy of Hollywood feuds - Bette Davis and Joan Crawford absolutely loathed one another. While filming ‘What Happened to Baby Jane?’, Davis actually kicked Crawford in the scene when she pushed her down the stairs. In return, when Bette had to drag Joan off her bed, Joan put on a weighted diver's belt underneath her costume, making her heavier to drag. Naturally, the duo also pitched in with some a-grade bitching. Discussing Davis' hair, Crawfod said: “I don't understand these Poodle cuts on elderly women”. Davis retorted by saying Crawford was “single handedly responsible for the syphilis outbreak in America.” Meow.
Sir Anthony Hopkins and Shirley MacLaine
Anthony Hopkins thought the boisterous Shirley MacLaine was overbearing and was constantly annoyed with her while filming ‘A Change of Seasons’ in 1980. When asked what she was like, he fumed “she was the most obnoxious actress I have ever worked with." Don’t sugarcoat it Ant!
Tony Curtis and Marilyn Monroe
Even though Curtis was rumoured to have had an affair with Marilyn Monroe during the making of ‘Some Like It Hot’ in 1959, he still managed to say that "kissing her was like kissing Hitler". She drove him crazy by continually arriving late for filming and always fluffing her lines. To make matter worse, director Billy Wilder would always use Monroe’s best takes while leaving Tony's choice deliveries on the cutting room floor.
Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes
Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes weren't didn’t exactly see eye to eye by the time ‘Romeo & Juliet’ finished filming. Danes grew tired of DiCaprio's onset pranks, branding him "immature", whilst he found her uptight and prudish. Not exactly star-crossed lovers.
Marlon Brando and Sophia Loren
Sophia Loren was cool and seductive while Marlon Brando was edgy and angry. Inevitably, when the two came together during the shooting of ‘A Countess from Hong Kong’ in 1966, the fur began to fly. A feud broke out after he asked her, right in the middle of shooting a love scene: "did you know you have hairs up your nostrils?" Smooth.
Val Kilmer and Tom Sizemore
This feud during filming of ‘Red Planet’ began when Kilmer got annoyed over a fancy exercise machine Sizemore demanded the production ship from England to the set in Australia. Eventually the two hated each other so much Kilmer would reportedly not come out of his trailer if Tom was on the set. Many of their scenes together were even filmed over shoulders of photo doubles, if we are to believe some reports. Also, Kilmer reportedly refused to say Sizemore's character's name, substituting it for things like "Hey, you!".
Lady Gaga’s JUDAS video is rife with symbolism. But this time the symbolism is blatant, and planted directly by Gaga herself, who directed the video. Some of her old tricks and symbols are here, but she beckons us into a surreal fantasy world that to her quoted from a recent MTV interview “resembles a fresco” .
LADY GAGA JUDAS Subliminal Messages (BACKMASKED/reversed) w/ Subtitles
While I don’t know for sure if a fantasy world of cholo gangs and the guy from Boondock Saints necessitate a fresco, the imagery is crisp, clean, sharp, and powerful. Lets take a look at the video up close.
First Gaga is seen with the 12 disciples in the form of a biker gang. She is Mary Magdalene, (admittedly she explains in an MTV interview) dressed almost as Isis, or the High Priestess, wearing the mystical color of royalty, purple, and headresss. She is smiling and clearly happy to be with, or aligned with Jesus. She stares longingly at Judas as she he rides past them, but still looks committed to Jesus. If you look at Judas as representing the record companies, or who she would betray Jesus, the soul of her own truth and music too, this would be her in an early stage of career looking longingly at what could be a successful future in the form of Judas slowly passing her on a motorcycle. Thomas and Johns jackets are also showed. Thomas, and Judas and Peter are the three apostles who doubted, betrayed and denied Jesus.
When they dismount the bikes, its clear that they are at the feast that Jesus and all his disciples attend the night before Jesus’ crucifiction. In the bible, this is where Jesus is betrayed, and denied by Peter, who make a small cameo in the video as well. At 2:27 She gives “props” to Peter with the lyrics “Build a house or sink a dead body” Peter not only denied Jesus on the fateful night that this video takes place, he also sinks when he trys to walk on water with Jesus, but cant because he loses his faith. The fact that she points to him on this lyric is telling. Peter lost faith in Jesus several times. Gaga is not losing faith, but betraying both her personalities in the video, so perhaps she is making this point clear, That her allegiances are many, but she never, ever loses faith. For to her, only dead bodies sink. The dead, lifeless body of someone who has lost faith. At 2:39 seconds Lady Gaga is seen tugging a golden cord. The golden or sometimes known as a silver cord is best defined as this: In metaphysical literature, the silver cord, also known as the sutratma or life thread of the antahkarana, refers to a life-giving linkage from the Higher self (atma) down to the physical body. It also refers to an extended synthesis of this thread and a second (the consciousness thread, passing from the soul to the physical body) that connects the physical body to the etheric body, onwards to the astral body and finally to the mental body.[1] The cord that connects the higher and lower selves, the astral body to the physical body. She is pulling and tugging on it like she is the master of it. Jesus is very near to where she lets the golden cord back into the air. Perhaps her way is through Magical Catholiscism? Then she is seen quickly after this, hugging and bestowing care and love onto someone, just like Jesus is seen doing earlier in the video, in the same style. A short quick clip showing their love to their apostles and people. Perhaps she is saying that she masters herself so that she may bestow love upon her fans, or perhaps she travels astrally to create the visions for her art. Then at 3:41 she says “king with no crown” as Jesus is looking down. Perhaps saying that Jesus was the king with no crown? The King of man, with no real material crown to speak of. Just one of the spirtual kingdom. Perhaps thats why Jesus is showed looking contemplative here. Then a fight breaks out and she is seen prtoecting Jesus from Judas, whos running around like the kind of drunk maniac you dont want at a party. Her eye makeup at 3:07 is oddly reminiscent of egyptian makeup, which could connototate a connection with the ancient wisdom that was handed to Isis, which ca be viewed as alchemy, and the story of Jesus. That they are both telling us essentialy the same thing. Their is a clear choice between good and evil, and we have both things alive and well in us. This thought reaches its pinnacle in a few moments with the climax of the video. Now things get interesting. At 3:23 Gaga is seen as the duelmaster in between Jesus and Judas. Whats interesting is how she is dressed. Like a member of the church. Even her hat represents the Bishops spiraled staff.
Above is a picture of San Leandro, who was Bishop in the early Byzantine Court. You can see his staff is spiraled, as Lady Gaga’s hat is. Her costume is reminciscent of the Bishopas well. Is she representing the church in this epic climax? The church betraying Jesus’s secret esoteric and Gnostic teachings? She ten takes out a gun, and points it at Judas, smearing him with lipstick. She looks at Jesus in anguish before and after this action. She is showing a switch of allegiance from Jesus, who she comes to defend, and Judas, who she instead of shooting with a bullet, shoots with a kiss, or smear of lipstick. This shows her connection to Judas is in fact solidified and something to cause her grief.
Is Judas her allegiance to her record company, and the duty she must undertake to be the Christ lover to her fans and to complete the higher conciousness of herself through art? We talked above about the golden cord, and Jesus being a driect path way in religious and or magic to channel ones energy into beautiful and creative inspiration and artistic endevour. Is Judas the earthly price she must pay for such things? She immediatley is show in two different positions in water. One is on a rock in an ocean, where she wears gold, which as we’ve seen from my dissection of the “Bad Romance” video represents the solar deity inside oneself the higher power. The higher power is being overswept into the ocean in a kind of reverse baptism, or fall from grace. Her higher self is being submerged into the ocean, swept away by the waves. But is it a negative thing? Please also note the similarity between Oannes, or the Fsh God who is closeley linked with John the Baptist, and whos post Christ symbology grew out of the spiraled Bishops staff we saw earlier in her costumed hat at the Jesus Judas duel. Her gold dress comes to a finlike point, and she is about to be immersed in the ocean. Oannes is an ancient God of Babolyn who brought art to the world. This is akin to the role Lady Gaga sees herself playing out. “Today is the feast day of John the Baptist, who, in Christian tradition, acted as an initiator to Christ through the sacrament of baptism. The name “John” comes from the Hebrew “Yohanen” meaning “from the waters”. The John the Baptist story seems to be an echo of a much older, pagan story – that of Oannes, the fish-headed initiator god of the Babylonians. Nightly, Oannes would rise from the sea and, like other “communicator” gods Djehuti (“Thoth”), Hermes, Wotan, would teach arts, language and sciences. These two figures, Oannes and John the Baptist, share not only a name, but a job description (initiation by water). In the Christian story, it is Jesus who plays the “communicator god” role, but even in the early second century the gospels acknowledge;” “Now the people were filled with expectation, and all were asking in their hearts whether John might be the Messiah” Again she embraces the water in ecstasy not anguish, and returns to it. Then Jesus Judas and Mary Magdalene all share the tub of the living waters, each playing out their different role. Each battling for the soul of Gaga Magdelene. This part is eerily reminiscent of Bad Romance, when her re birthing from lower self to higher self occurred in a bathtub, after being forced to drink the living waters. this time she is playing in the water, using it to channel both higher and lower sects. She is the medium in between Jesus and Judas, Jesus the highest power, and redeemer of higher consciousness, and Judas the animal, primitive self. The good and the evil, and Gaga in between. Also fire plays a role, like it did in the Bad Romance video, burning in the background, perhaps as a symbol of Jesus’s baptism through fire. she is shown begging for Jesus’s mercy and forgiveness, and is clearly in anguish over her favor with Judas. she is reaching for Jesus while Judas is pouring holy bath water on her sexually posed ass as to say her higher self is with Jesus, but she her earthly body, her sex her fame are all connected and stuck behind with a betrayer and necessary evil. The last part is the most haunting, Gaga dressed in white, clearly reborn after this rite of betrayal and forgivness, is stoned by the public. Outwardly it could be symbolic of any public backlash shes had or would excpect. But what really sticks out is her costume choice. a really interesting spin would be to compare her post reserection outfit, with the post resserection outfit of Lucy from Dracula:
What could she possibly be saying here? Her twisted allegiance to the Judas of the record industry has rendered her a vampire? Remember from my earlier lyrics post “in the biblical sense I am beyond repentence, but in the cultural sense I speak in future tense” The lyrics of the song show that he has made some sort of sacrifice, be it emotional, ritual, occult, mental physical or all of the above, to become famous. She is a “fame hooker prostitute wench” . Is she drawing parallels between her and the risen vampire Lucy from Dracula? Has she risen again as a beautiful twisted piece of evil that is to be destroyed? Or is that just one part of her, that is being destroyed? Or perhaps the public is screaming for her death and WANTS to see her higher, resurrected self destroyed. Clearly the color white of the costume is a symbol of being reborn, especially on the heels of the earlier clips. I liked this video alot and I love Lady Gaga. Thanks to her for keeping pop music interesting and for bringing some definite ancient symbolism back into the limelight!
LADY GAGA JUDAS REVERSED MESSAGES
GaGA Judas and the New Jerusalem?
Why make a pop song about a famous and evil biblical character? On the surface it’s a love song with “dark” undertones but I will try to put it in the light of some symbolism I believe Lady Gaga is privy to, and has used in other videos and songs. Please see my older post “GaGa and the All Seing Eye” for more background. Also please see my previous post to listen to the song “Judas” which I talk about below.
Judas Lyrics
Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas Judas! Judaas Judas! Judaas Judas! Judaas Judas! GAGA [Lady Gaga - Verse 1] When he comes to me, I am ready I’ll wash his feet with my hair if he needs Forgive him when his tongue lies through his brain Even after three times, he betrays me I’ll bring him down, bring him down, down A king with no crown, king with no crown I’ll wash his feet with my hair when he needs, when he comes to me I’ll be ready. It’s important to note that gaga is putting herself in the Christ role, the role that in alchemy, we must put ourselves in to thus crucify the heavy matter or prima material of the soul, and rise again to higher, lighter more spiritual heights. The crucifiction and resurrection are symbolic of killing the unwanted in oneself and rising again as a new superbeing. Lady GaGa is putting herself in this direct biblical role in this song. This has been a theme in her other videos. Bad Romance suggested a spiritual death and awakening transformation through magical means. Or is Gaga putting herself in the role of the new Christ? The Anti Christ? And Just how accurate is that decription in reality? Lets move on…. “Forgive him when his tongue lies through his brain” Sounds to me like a reference to the pineal gland. This gland plays an important part in estoteric folklore and conispiracy theory. Wikipedia: The secretory activity of the pineal gland is only relatively understood. Historically, its location deep in the brain suggested to philosophers that it possessed particular importance. This combination led to its being a “mystery” gland with myth, superstition and occult theories surrounding its perceived function. René Descartes, who dedicated much time to the study of the pineal gland,[25] called it the “seat of the soul.”[26] He believed that it was the point of connection between the intellect and the body.[27] The relevant quotation as to Descartes’ reason for believing this is, My view is that this gland is the principal seat of the soul, and the place in which all our thoughts are formed. The reason I believe this is that I cannot find any part of the brain, except this, which is not double. Since we see only one thing with two eyes, and hear only one voice with two ears, and in short have never more than one thought at a time, it must necessarily be the case that the impressions which enter by the two eyes or by the two ears, and so on, unite with each other in some part of the body before being considered by the soul. Now it is impossible to find any such place in the whole head except this gland; moreover it is situated in the most suitable possible place for this purpose, in the middle of all the concavities; and it is supported and surrounded by the little branches of the carotid arteries which bring the spirits into the brain.[25] (29 January 1640, There is an ancient practice of working the tongue up through the roof of the mouth to accelerate DMT drippage and or use of the pineal gland. Is this what Lady GaGa is referring too? The lyric “A King with no crown” comes right after this. The crown chakra is the yogic reference to the pineal gland. A king who indeed has a crown, a hidden one inside his body. [Chorus] I’m just a Holy Fool, oh baby he’s so cruel But I’m still in love with Judas, baby I’m just a Holy Fool, oh baby he’s so cruel But I’m still in love with Judas, baby I’m just a holy fool, the fool in the tarot represents 0, the beginning of the card, and this signifying gaga as the leader of a new world order? Or is it a reference to the kabbalah? The fool stands on the edge of a mountain, with a dog nipping at its heels. On the precipice between happiness and extreme tragedy. GaGa in later verses will talk of a conflict between Jesus and the demon Judas. Is she in a perpetual Fool state att the edge of a glorious mountain with a dog nipping at her heels? Is this the record industry perhaps herding gaga towards the edge? Or is she talking of the feeling of being the endless number, the zero, the middle of the circle where all things begin and all things end. Why is he so cruel? Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas Judas! Judaas Judas! Judaas Judas! Judaas Judas! GAGA [Lady Gaga - Verse 2] I couldn’t love a man so purely Even darkness forgave his crooked way I’ve learned our love is like a brick Build a house or sink a dead body “I couldn’t love a man so purely”, hints at being united in some sort of ritual or ritualistic event, or holy union. It harkens the purity of esoteric solace with a being. “Even darkness forgave his crooked way”, supposing that the powers of the dark are aiding and a bedding him, and welcoming him into the fold. “Love is like a brick, build a house or sink a dead body.” The prima material of the alchemical self can be used to create a holy structure or do murder. Structures are also used often in Freemasonic symbols as Hiram Abiff was a builder and architect and his story is at the epicenter of Masonic symbolism. I’ll bring him down, bring him down, down A king with no crown, king with no crown [Chorus] I’m just a Holy Fool, oh baby he’s so cruel But I’m still in love with Judas, baby I’m just a Holy Fool, oh baby he’s so cruel But I’m still in love with Judas, baby Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas [Bridge] In the most Biblical sense, I am beyond repentance Fame hooker, prostitute wench, vomits her mind But in the cultural sense I just speak in future tense Judas kiss me if offenced, Or wear an ear condom next time Perhaps the most important part of the song, Gaga is telling us in the most biblical sense she is beyond repentance. Her use of the BIBLE as the specific reference point is interesting because if she were versed in the magical and esoteric arts, the Bible is just one text, amongst many. It is a specific text, with a specific viewpoint and specific stories. The bibles point of view states that Satan, Lucifer, ect are the doers of evil, the enemy, and by aligning herself with them she is, in biblical terms, beyond repentance. According to the bible, Lucifer is beyond repentance and can never enter the kingdom of heaven because he disobeyed God the father and created his own kingdom. In esoteric reference Lucifer if the Morningstar, Venus, or Astarte (in female form) the god or goddess of material and worldly things. One would most certainly make an alliance with this being if entering into some sort of American Corporate ritual order where the elite would be found worshipping a being who has one foot in the hand of material things. She solidifies that idea by stating she’s a Fame hooker, a prostitute wench, alluding to some awful price or initation she’s had to do for the price of fame. Most certainly it could involve sex, especially if you were to look at her being a MK Ultra Monarch project complete with an alter personality. “But in the cultural sense I just speaking in the future tense”, is a key phrase as well, saying that she can only look to the future where now as reward for her price, she has the ear of an entire culture. “Kiss me if I am offensed”, is she again putting herself in the Christ role, to be kissed before being sacrificed, or entering the resurrection phase. Or wear an ear condom next time? This part is truly bizarre, and puzzling. It must mean something very important as it is awkward in placement in the song, and feels like it was forced to be in there. I will have to do more research into ear symbolism, and what other possible meanings of condom she could mean. Also I would love to hear any explanation shes given of the song. I wanna love you, But something’s pulling me away from you Jesus is my virtue, Judas is the demon I cling to “I want to to love you, but something’s calling me away from you”, Is this evidence of her alter personality battling against her original personality which was raised Catholic and thus in debt to Jesus? She feels conflicted about her new allegiance to the dark side, Jesus being her past virtue and savior, but Judas is the demon she clings to. This is yet another exhibition of her split personality which we also see in the beginning of the Born This Way video. The higher self and the lower self in the battle of good vs. evil. We also saw this in the Bad Romance video. I cling to [Chorus] I’m just a Holy Fool, oh baby he’s so cruel But I’m still in love with Judas, baby I’m just a Holy Fool, oh baby he’s so cruel But I’m still in love with Judas, baby Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas Ohohohoh I’m in love with Judas Judas! Judaas Judas! Judaas Judas! Judaas Judas! GAGA
Illuminati Royal Wedding – Kate Gets New Coat Of Arms Complete With Pyramid
Kate Middleton’s family has had a coat of arms designed, which will feature on a souvenir royal wedding programme.
Her father Michael commissioned the heraldic design to mark his daughter’s marriage to Prince William on 29 April. It features three acorn sprigs, one for each of the Middletons’ children: an idea Miss Middleton suggested. Royal experts say the coat of arms – which cost £4,400 to make – marks the increased social status of her parents and her potential as a future queen. Thomas Woodcock, Garter Principal King of Arms, from the College of Arms in the City of London, helped the Middletons with the design. He said the oak tree was a traditional symbol of England and a feature of west Berkshire, where the family have lived for 30 years. Mr Woodcock said the gold chevron in the centre of the coat of arms signified Miss Middleton’s mother, Carole, whose maiden name was Goldsmith.
Illuminati Royal Wedding – Kate Gets New Coat Of Arms Complete With Pyramid!
One way to make a statement on the red carpet? Wear an attention-grabbing magenta leopard-print frock! Both celebutante Paris Hilton and "Slumdog Millionaire" actress Freida Pinto donned the same stunning Marchesa dress for different events. Question is ... who wore it better?
Paris Hilton in Riverside, California, February 26, 2011. Frederick MA. Brown/Getty Images
Freida Pinto in Toronto, Canada, September 13, 2010. Charley Gallay/Getty Images
Celebrity heiress Paris Hilton rocked the Marchesa Resort 2011 dress in February for the launch of her “Passport” fragrance collection in Riverside, California. The starlet, who will soon headline the reality series “The World According to Paris,” accessorized with simple nude pumps and a wavy, side-swept ‘do.
Way back in September 2010, Pinto wore the same gown for a dinner to celebrate the premiere of her film “Miral” at the Toronto Film Festival in Canada. Freida paired her one-shoulder satin organza dress with purple Ferragamo pumps and a black-and-silver studded clutch. The dress suits both ladies beautifully, but Freida’s dark tresses and gorgeous skin tone really make the dress pop, and her color-coordinated heels are the perfect accessory. For me, Ms. Pinto wins this battle hands down.
Dollar Bill Reveals 21st Century Illuminati Agenda
A Brief History of The Future by Jacques Attali (2006) outlines the elite’s agenda for the 21st Century.
A French Jew (he recently told the European Jewish Congress the world’s Jewish population needs to rise to 200 million), Attali is a high-level technocrat working to fulfill the New World Order. Jacques Attali has a varied CV. For ten years he worked as an adviser to former French President Francois Mitterrand. In 1980, he started the European program Eurêka (a major European program on new technologies that invented, among other things, the MP3). In 1991, he co-founded the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. He is also at the origin of the higher education reform, known as LMD, designed to bring all European degrees into line. He has published over 50 books, selling over 6 million copies worldwide. They include an adoring biography of banker Siegmand Warburg. He has also written a glowing account of Karl Marx, arguing that Marx was a free-marketeer who favored capitalism as a stepping-stone to his Communist ideal and predicted globalization as we know it today (i.e. the New World Order). In ‘A Brief History of The Future’ Attali predicts that this century will unfold in three distinct phrases. 1. Super-empire = an era of privatization where corporations rule the day. He writes, “money will finally rid itself of everything that threatens it- including nation states, which it will progressively dismantle.” The market will become the world’s only recognized law. A system of power whose ‘structures remain elusive but whose goal is global.’ 2. Hyperconflict = super-empire will implode and there will be a period of worldwide chaos. Starting about 2030, Attali foresees ‘devastating wars, pitting nations, religious groups, terrorist entities, and free-market pirates against one another’. 3. Hyperdemocracy (2060)= Exhausted by wars and social upheavals the world public will welcome with open arms ‘the creation of a democratic world government.’ It will be a collectivist system, with everyone working towards the ‘common good.’
Illuminati Sexuality
In the future, people will no longer bond and create families. ‘The couple will no longer be the principal base for life and sexuality. [People] will prefer to choose, in full transparency, polygamous or polyandrous loves.’ The driving force of this trend is technology that frees youth from parental control. The first was the radio, which allowed the young: ‘To dance outside the ballrooms and therefore be free of parental supervision- liberating sexuality, opening them to all kinds of music, from jazz to rock, and thus announcing youth’s entry into the world of consumption, of desire, and of rebellion.’ A media-dominated culture will create an egocentric populace who ‘will be loyal only to themselves.’ With lovers failing to mate for life, ‘the world will be no more than a juxtaposition of solitudes, and love a juxtaposition of masturbations.’ The elite goal is to remove love from sex so that they control reproduction. Attali writes that in the twentieth century, society ‘sought to evacuate the reproductive role of sexuality by making motherhood artificial, by using increasingly sophisticated methods- pills, pre-mature labor, in vitro fertilization, surrogate mothers.’ In the future, society ‘will even go so far as to dissociate reproduction and sexuality. Sexuality will be the kingdom of pleasure, reproduction that of machines.’ Future generations ‘will manufacture the human being like a made-to-measure artifact, in an artificial uterus, which will allow the brain to further develop with characteristics chosen in advance. The human being will thus have become a commercial object.’
Surveillance
Attali paints a picture of a surveillance society that would make the Stasi wince. Even our washing machines will be conspiring against us, while the ‘packaging of food products, clothing vehicles, and household goods will become “communicative.”‘ We will live with untrustworthy robots. ‘Domestic robots will become universal in daily life. They too will be constantly connected to high-output grids in nomadic ubiquity. They will function as domestic help, as aids for the handicapped or aged, as workers and as members of security forces. In particular they will become “Watchers.”‘ All our data will be collected by public and private security firms. The main form of surveillance will be portable entertainment devices. The embryo of this today is the iPhone that sends data to the NSA. ‘The unique nomadic object will be permanently traceable. All the data it contains, including images of everyone’s daily life, will be stored and sold to specialist businesses and to public and private police.’ By 2050, these machines will have evolved into what Attali calls ‘self-surveillance machines’ that will allow everyone to monitor his own compliance with the norms. We will monitor our consumption of water, energy and raw materials. We will even have the ‘opportunity to measure, permanently or periodically, the parameters of [our] own body.’ ‘Electronic bugs, worn subcutaneously, will ceaselessly register heartbeat, blood pressure, and cholesterol. Microprocessors connected to various organs will watch their functioning as compared to the norms.’ Living insecure and chaotic lives, we will be dependent on insurance companies for security. These companies will make sure their clients ‘conform to norms to minimize the risks … They will gradually come to dictate planetary norms (What to eat? What to know? How to drive? How to protect oneself? How to consume? How to produce?)’ These companies will be ruthless. ‘They will penalize smokers, drinkers, the obese, the unemployable, the inadequately protected, the aggressive, the careless, the clumsy, the absentminded, the spendthrift. Ignorance, exposure to risks, wasting, and vulnerability will be considered diseases.’ Prisons ‘will be gradually replaced by long-distance surveillance of a person under house arrest.’
Immigration
Immigration flows will expand and submerge nation states. ‘Great Britain will become a major host country, especially for citizens of Central European countries. The latter will in their turn welcome Ukrainian workers, themselves replaced by Russians, themselves replaced by vast Chinese populations.’ Resistant countries will learn that a population inflow ‘is the condition of their survival.’ In a sinister passage, Attali speaks of third-world hordes engulfing the West. ‘Ever more numerous masses will hurl themselves at the gates of the West. They already number hundreds of thousands every month; that figure will increase to millions, then tens of millions.’ The United States will be the most popular destination and ‘In twenty years, the Hispanic and African-American populations will almost constitute a majority in the United States.’ Nomadism will also become the norm in the West, ‘more and more people will leave one country for another: there will soon be more than ten million of them switching countries every year. Our main incentive will be money, but many will leave because they are disgusted by their homeland. ‘They [will] no longer want to depend on a country whose tax system, legislation, and even culture they reject. And also to disappear completely, to live another life. The world will thus be increasingly filled with people who have become anonymous of their own free will; it will be like a carnival where everyone – ultimate freedom! – will have chosen a new identity for himself.’
Future Of The US
The dollar will remain dominant until at least 2025, when foreign backers will start abandoning it and ‘the credit pyramid, based on the value of American housing, will collapse.’ The US will then start disintegrating, with violence and chaos ensuing. Attali states, ‘it will not be tomorrow’s Africa that will one day resemble today’s West, but the whole West that could tomorrow evoke today’s Africa.’ The US will then have to redesign its government to regain control. ‘The United States could then become a Scandinavian-style social democracy, or a dictatorship – and even perhaps one after the other. It would not be the first time such a surprise occurred: the first leader to apply the principles required to emerge from the crisis of the [last depression] was Mussolini; the second was Hitler. Roosevelt only came third.’ As chaos and violence engulfs the world, Christianity and Islam will strengthen. The Bible belt region in the Southern US will mobilize and could dominate US politics. ‘The United States could then around 2040 fall prey to a theocratic temptation, explicit or implicit, in the shape of theocratic isolationism in which democracy would be no more than a shadowy presence.’ This Christian movement could be used in a war against a mobilized Islam, which would presumably weaken and discredit both religions. An international Christian alliance ‘could well form alliances here and there with secular pirates and traffickers in arms, women and drugs.’ This alliance will ‘stand face to face against Islam – and the struggle will be relentless. They will defend Christians in countries where they are a minority, as in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Syria.’ Before the end of century the US will be disintegrated and under the authority of a collectivist world government.
In my write-up “You are not my judges,” I said, “I think men, women, old people, children, eunuchs, sluts, animals – they all have genuine problems.” I don’t know how could I forget teenagers. They have some serious issues & those issues if not tackled properly may acquire the shape of demons later on & fighting your demons is always a big problem. However, I shouldn’t be forgiven for one thing – I didn’t mention that feminists & chauvinist too have problems. In fact, their problem should be everyone’s problem; that is the problem.
I was accused of using the judgmental word slut in my writing. Although the word eunuch too was there in that sentence, but how can any feminist notice that? First of all, relevance is the main thing. At least to me, it is. My topic had nothing to do with sluts. But on my note, I was painted as someone who doesn’t feel sorry for prostitutes. Isn’t it strange people who advocate about judgmental words can be so judgmental themselves! But that’s okay.
“The prostitute has the advantage, not only that she is available at a moment's notice, but that, having no life outside her profession, she can remain hidden without difficulty, and the man who has been with her can return to his wife, his family, and his church with unimpaired dignity. She, however, poor woman, in spite of the undoubted service she performs, in spite of the fact that she safeguards the virtues of wives and daughters and the apparent virtue of church-wardens, is universally despised, thought to be an outcast, and not allowed to associate with ordinary people except in the way of business.”
Bertrand Russell
I mentioned this passage in one of writings a couple of months ago. Now even if I use the word prostitute or whore, would that change the meaning? It’s the business of flesh. Women are available in the market as commodities & they are being used & then nobody gives a damn. Most importantly, by talking shit & dancing on irrelevant stuff, can we provide respect to these women in the society? The answer is pretty obvious. Still if some people want to bang their heads against the wall, they are most welcome.
Anyway I have been thinking about eunuchs. They too are being forced to lead the same sort of life as sluts. When they are little, some elder eunuch castrates them & so they become a part of the clan. Yeah some are also born that way. They too are humans. They too are suffering. Just like sluts, we can’t feel sorry for each & every eunuch though. But everyone has a story. If we take interviews of say 100 prostitutes & 100 eunuchs & they give honest answers, are we going to feel the same way about them? It’s just a question, but I think it’s a pertinent one.
Yesterday I was talking to my friend on the phone & I mentioned that almost 10 years ago, some of my friends went to Heera Mandi (Diamond Market). I too wanted to go there, but my mom didn’t allow me. My friends saw that even 14 year old were in this business, which is quite depressing, to say the least. We all know that many are forced into this profession & we do feel sorry for them. Again some are born there but some choose it.
However, we are also aware of these high-class prostitutes. In rich families too there are characters who charge men & they have it for fun…I think I should use the word lust here. Even if it sounds judgmental, this is the only word I could think of. Nobody calls it judgmental when we use it for men. Anyway, some practice this profession for good money. I do feel sorry for a lot of things, but I don’t feel sorry for such women. And I have been thinking that we may feel sorry for every calamity & misfortune, but are we going to change anything by feeling sorry? Again the answer is no. So I really don’t see the point as to why people want everyone to feel sorry for a situation that we can’t even alter.
I have also met people who say that prostitution is the oldest institution. Why do people want to put an end to it? Everyone is entitled to their views. There are some who say that sluts are sexually liberated women, but when they hear of any woman who sleeps with men, they can’t help calling her a slut. We also know that people sleep to go ahead (it happens everywhere, not just the film industry), now some feminist would also want us to feel sorry for these women. According to them, men are responsible for all the badness in this world.
I really don’t have time to fix the blame on anyone. I have seen that people just want to confuse others. I don’t even think the plight of sluts or eunuchs even matters to them, it’s just that they want to act weird or something. The thing is…I don’t see any solution at all. And all I know is that different people suffer in different ways in different places. Everyone has a story & that story could be tragic. How can you tell that the misery of one is greater than that of another?
Darbie Sha is what you all know, but pretend that you don’t know at all. Now that’s bad. Anyway, she’s in love with her satin sheet. Every morning she tells it, ‘Charmed to meet you baby.’ Actually she prefers pouring her ideas into the heads of idiots. You know there are so many times we don’t remember what’s missing in our lives, but someone is always there to remind us of it. Yeah, she’s one of those…and Lady Baji is literally reduced to dirt when she befriends her.
******
In the book, ‘Waiting for the Calamity’ by Muntazir, it’s written in very clear words that for many years, people of Cameristania waited and waited in vain. When the town was hit by the tsunami for the first time, they all came out to help and donated as much money and stuff as they can. Later on, they go around hurting people with their words and deeds as usual.
******
The rest of the book is available online at the following links:
