Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Reading a bio of legendary cartoonist Jack Kirby recently (“Kirby” by Mark Evanier) and was reminded of his character “Big Barda”:
Big Barda is a warrior of the New Gods. Raised on Apokolips as a servant of Darkseid, she fell in love with Mister Miracle and escaped with him to the planet of New Genesis. Originally she had been a member of the Female Furies, a deadly squadron of female killers, and trained as their leader underneath the cruel mistress Granny Goodness. Now she fights against the forces of evil, tempered with the strength of her upbringing and her love. She has also been a member of the Justice League and Birds of Prey. Big Barda was created by Jack Kirby as part of his epic Fourth World saga. She first appeared in Mister Miracle #4. (1971)
(from dc.wikia)
(This drawing appears to be penciled by Kirby and finished by contemporary artist Bruce Timm.)Jack Kirby based Barda’s physical appearance on Lainie Kazan, who had recently appeared topless in Playboy.[2] Mark Evanier, Kirby’s assistant on the Fourth World comics, has stated, “Jack based some of his characters (not all) on people in his life or in the news… the characterization between Scott ‘Mister Miracle’ Free and Barda was based largely—though with tongue in cheek—on the interplay between Kirby and his wife Roz.”[3] Big Barda was ranked 75th in Comics Buyer’s Guide’s “100 Sexiest Women in Comics” list.[4]
(from wikipedia)
(kirby pencils inked by Vince Colletta)Kazan in her prime:
Lainie Kazan today(?):
…
I don’t know, maybe she’s just a large woman with bad plastic surgery late in life.. But seems kind of questionable to me, in light of the EGI hypothesis/ premise.Kirby, incidentally, drew most women in a very masculine, “powerful” looking manner (of course he drew everything “powerful,” famously.) They were softer and more curvy than the males, but the forms were large and imposing.
Kirby and wife Roz:
Kirby is presented to the public as a visionary, and a dynamo of productivity- the “king” of American comics. He founded or reinvigorated genre after genre (and blended genres into new forms). The current wave of superhero movies would not exist without his “world building” skills (if he is as claimed). Though the movies mostly lack his 70s/ 80s melancholy and pensive qualities, his Orwellian sense of foreboding, and spiritual awe, sense of cosmic wonder.
Strangely (to me), his earlier work, while remarkably prolific and creative, seems relatively pedestrian in its themes and ideas. Then a shift happens (I could be wrong, I’m not that deep into it) in the 60s/70s, and the work takes a huge jump into seeming to have a rich awareness of occult symbolism, archetypes, and cultural commentary. If speculating wildly, did he have an epiphany? Or, did he become the front/ mouthpiece for some occult secret society, that enlisted him to front its ideas? Or, was he studying all along, and only able to express himself in his 40s-60s? (I would welcome anyone more expert in the occult to offer clues to his work. There is a website along those lines that analyzes some of his early work as related to Crowley and the promotion of UFOs, I forget the name.)
Of course that is off topic to EGI, just something I wonder about.
I watched “Trading Places” (1983) a few nights ago. No huge revelations or anything, but there were some interesting EGI/ Fakeologist aspects. Jamie Lee Curtis seems obvious enough in retrospect, in light of EGI research, but then they underline it (esoterically) in the scene where she (playing a prostitute) takes Dan Aykroyd (fallen blue blood) to her apartment.
First her apartment door is marked “7” as they enter (see p.8 of this thread with the 7/ Zayin information). Then as they exchange dialogue for a bit, she has this line (which is said with emphasis and with camera in close up): “I’ve saved 43 grand, and it’s in T-bills, earning interest.”
So again the 7 (4+3), and “T-bills” perhaps to induce a subconscious squirm for anyone dimly aware that Jamie Lee may be Jamie He.
—
The title “Trading Places” may play on this somewhat, as many other women in the movie look a bit transgender. The bar floozies Murphy takes back to his pad for instance.—
The climax of the movie takes place in the World Trade Center, and the close of the previous scene, and open of that one, is very coded in hindsight. Aykroyd and Murphy descend down an escalator with three 9’s prominently displayed in signage. Then they pull up in a cab marked with lots of 11’s or numbers that add to 11 or 9.As they walk across the plaza, Aykroyd gives an odd speech, telling Murphy it will be “carnage” in there, with “blood on the floor” and like phrases.
—
The DVD extras show an old British interview with the actors. Curtis seems rather clueless, though reveals that the studio hated her, and Landis fought for her. Not sure what that indicates exactly. Aykroyd is asked what he’d do if he lost his status like his character. He tries to be droll (but smirks too much so it falls apart) by saying he could fall back on his manual labor skills, and he’d “drive truck,” (like this is some working class expression he’s familiar with, is the implication.) Murphy declares at one point that entertainers should have no message, no moral, just entertain. Because movies are so powerful, could do so much damage… Maybe he doesn’t realize what is being embedded in the subtext of his movies.Interesting, thanks for explaining. I agree they seem “bought in,” “well-adjusted” to this cultural or religious practice (assuming that’s the case.) I have been a little skeptical of the “control mechanism” view because neither side (the individual nor their class) would want to expose that to public view. Certainly not repeatedly.
Conkers- I agree with you, many of those are very suggestive of EGI. Some of the BBC ones are ambiguous (to me), although I do find them questionable. Meg Foster does indeed look pretty blatant.
Not sure what you mean about elites “operating at a high level” while inverted?
Interesting that you mention John Taylor Gatto. He’s one of the main reasons I started looking at alternative / independent media, and questioning mainstream narratives. His book “The Underground History of American Education” made a big impact on me, and really rearranged my worldview.
It would be strange to think that he was part of some even deeper agenda. Although easier to consider now, having become more attuned to the function of gurus as gatekeepers and limited hangouts than I was at the time. (Miles Mathis wrote one of his best papers, I think, on this: “What I Finally Learned”.)
I can now imagine that perhaps Gatto’s critique of schooling could be part of laying the groundwork for the next phase of the overall “business plan.” Or perhaps he represents a faction within the elites that has some agenda like that. Thus he can tell you “the truth” in a limited way, in order to advance the “Problem – Reaction – Solution” formula. Perhaps.
Terran Downvale- Thanks for responding to my question about how they manage to raise children like this, and seemingly not meet with major psychological issues or fallout.
I checked out your page regarding the Peter Pan scripting in the news cycle around the Pulse nightclub shooting. Again as you say, the mind boggles to think that the scripting could be that artful — some of the examples you show would suggest a Kubrick-like level of attention to detail, and subtle symbolism. If so, they are very far beyond us indeed. Maybe through bad schooling and bad food and water (which they avoid?) they can just run rings around us… I’m not sure of that level of scripting yet, but open to considering it.
(Also, just a thought, I would find a regular blog (like Google’s free blogger.com) an easier format to read than Google Hangouts.)
UNreal- Brezinski always did look odd to me (without realizing what might be the cause), but then when I see his “wife” — well, that’s very persuasive to me that you’re correct. And looking more closely at Brezinski himself, I can see the subtle signs of EGI.
The scripting of his name as you suggest adds another layer, although it also raises more questions. Are political/ policy types such as Brezinski and Kissinger “writer-actors”? I.e. they really plan policy, even as they play a role? Or are they mostly only front men (actors) for some unseen planners? Maybe it’s not that significant in the grand scheme of things, just kind of curious.
*****
Meanwhile, I continue noticing many suspect “entities” elsewhere, during my own web browsing and research. I almost think I may have struck an EGI motherlode (so to speak) in fact… Maybe I’m mistaken, but what I came across seems beyond beyond fishy.I was reading about historian/ feminist Eileen Power, and looked her up, just wondering. And of course, she’s quite the typical “feminist”:
It gets much better though. Her Wikipedia shows she went to the Oxford High School, a very elite all girls’ school founded 3/11 1875, with 29 girls (=11) and 3 teachers.
It appears to be a very spooky institution, and perhaps a hotbed of MTF EGI as well. Looking over their list of headmistresses, and notable alumnus, (including a childhood friend of Eric Blair/ George Orwell, and the girl that inspired the Alice in Wonderland character), virtually all of them are either blazingly obvious, or at least questionable.
A few alumnus:
Charlotte Mendelson, novelist
Miriam Margoyles, actress
Rose Macaulay, novelist (Macaulay Culkin connection? Also, appears to be a case of Victorian era EGI, some of the photos are so masculine there’s almost no pretense.)
Jacintha Buddicom (Orwell childhood friend)
Dame Maggie Smith (actress. Note brow ridge with age.)
Martha Lane Fox (entrepreneur. Very passable in many pictures, still suspect.)
Sian Edwards (conductor)
Mary Warnock (Philosopher, Oxford headmistress. Again, not trying too hard are they.)
What’s it all mean? I wonder… That the big question I guess. What the *#% are they up to.
UNreal has provided some good suggestions, talking about their ancient occult practices or mystery religions. Perhaps it’s a blend of religion, sexual/ cultural practices, and social control? Very strange how they jealously guard it as a great secret. Although now it seems to be bubbling up into the mass consciousness. Perhaps they are preparing the way to be more open about it? Either because they want to, or maybe they see they will be forced to eventually?
And this is just what we can see, somewhat, on the surface… If they’re doing this, what else are they doing, behind closed doors. “Eyes Wide Shut” is actually just like a more grown-up frat party or something, compared to inverting gender on a large scale, and promoting those entities to a global public… And scripting it all as a grand pseudo-reality stage-play.
Yeah, I thought that too, Oreskes is so blatant that maybe it’s noticed even by people who aren’t looking for it. In the youtube video of her TED Talk, the audience has kind of strange expressions… But maybe that’s just the natural smug expression of TED Talk attendees.
*****Assuming this to be so extensive as you hypothesize, I wonder what the technique is by which children would accept it, and seem to mostly do well psychologically, to grow up as seemingly healthy (albeit EGI) adults. Are they told “we’re different than the plebes, this is how we behave, it’s a secret” etc.
Maybe it would almost need a fictional example/ treatment, for those of us outside that world, to see how it could function in practice, the nature of the acculturation involved.
If you think “Uncle Buck” was bad, you should avoid Candy’s deservedly more obscure movies with less famous directors. One of them is a comedy about Candy as a mind-controlled assassin (a la Manchurian Candidate), but almost unwatchably bad.
*****
Listening to NPR (I’m a radio/ podcast addict) and I heard a TED Talk called “Why We Should Trust Scientists.” Nauseated by the “logic” of the talk, I looked up the speaker, Naomi Oreskes. Lo and behold, what do I find but (to me) a kind of blatant EGI person…
She is a Harvard historian of science, who promotes the global warming agenda through books and talks. Oreskes comes from a word meaning “walnut,” so perhaps that is our linguistic clue they like to give us.
This is Irwin Oreskes, her father (a professor):
Oreskes, who died on Friday in Manhattan, was a member of the City University of New York doctoral faculty in biochemistry until his retirement from Hunter College in 2003.
He was a beloved teacher and mentor to generations of students.
In 1970, Oreskes founded the college’s Medical Laboratory Sciences Program, the largest clinical technology program in New York state. That program was one of the building blocks for the School of Health Sciences, which opened in 1974 at the Brookdale Health Science Center. Oreskes served as the school’s dean for several years.
Hi UNreal, thanks for your reply. Good to see I may be developing this skill based on your research here, able to apply it to new cases.
From reading that NPR article you linked though, I see the red flags you mention (somewhat—I have a similar sense that the church is a kind of intelligence agency, or confidence racket, or something suspect anyway.)
But his general backstory seems persuasive enough. If he is an “elite,” we would have to suppose the story is either fabricated; or “real” but only a temporary “role” he played to give him later credibility.
* * *
Another case that struck me recently: I was watching the movie “Uncle Buck” (Directed by John Hughes, stars John Candy) and the two supporting actresses (a “mother” character and Candy’s girlfriend) both seemed very mannish.Their characters were written as unpleasant, and I wondered if Hughes had cast them so that their hidden-gender qualities would subliminally make them more obnoxious to viewers, perhaps.
Although, if transgender celebrities are widespread, they are also being cast for roles intended to be very appealing, of course.
Amy Madigan
Elaine Bromka
Elaine Bro’ mkay?
Thanks Unreal, narrator, Ab for all this fascinating research.
After absorbing these ideas, of course I’m noticing it more (or its possibility) in media I come across. So for example, our local free weekly newspaper here in Birmingham, Alabama had a piece on some local boys(?) made good— a music group called St. Paul and the Broken Bones. Their frontman Paul Janeway jumped out at me as a possible FTM transgender.
His body shape and proportions, gestures, small teeth, etc. seem suspect to me. Would be curious what other eyes make of it. Maybe he’s just an effeminate man?
You must be logged in to post a comment.