Post: #101

Seeing that pic now I get why Hollywood starlets have both mannish faces and boyish bodies. They are selected by homosexuals and pedophiles.

(01-24-2016 01:43 PM)MiscBrah Wrote:  This thread makes me think of that girl Daisy Ridley in the new Star Wars movie and how much dick she must have had to take to land such a large role.

WBIASC

Would Bang In A Satanic Ceremony

Post: #102

Damn, Fetty's in on it too!

Post: #103

(01-23-2016 12:37 PM)RoastBeefCurtains4Me Wrote:  

(01-23-2016 05:27 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

(01-23-2016 04:38 AM)loremipsum Wrote:  This thread makes me scared. I've read similar therories and they are all well written.
To be honest mates, all this makes me want to become Christian more than ever.

Before you do that, make sure you know what 'becoming a Christian' actually means. The modern, feminised Church by treating Christ as women's alpha and omega boyfriend whilst singing flaccid love ballads will rarely tell you what the core meaning of Christianity is.

Study the meaning and the gravity of the blood covenant. I don't need to explain the blood covenant to men here because their ancestral memory instinctively knows what blood covenants meant to their tribal ancestors. In the case of Christianity, the blood covenant on offer is with the King of kings.

The appeal of Christianity is to submit yourself to God's will, with the knowledge that he will hear your prayers and guide you. All things work together for good for those who love the lord. You get to walk in the light, renounce evil, and devote yourself to righteousness. You feel the presence of the holy spirit in your life. There is unspeakable joy to be found. Your faith gives you an unshakeable frame.

That's the promise, and I've had a taste of these things in my life. However, it's very hard to sustain, and it's easy to feel that God ought to shield you better from life's difficulties and pain if you walk closely with him.

I will say one of the prime benefits of seeking God with all your heart is to feel fully insulated from the evil of this world. The most it can do is kill you, but if you know that your reward is in Heaven, and know that God will work it all out for good in the end, you can reach a point of accepting this.

I know you mean well, but there isn't any submission in Christianity. That's Islam.

Being Christian means believing that Jesus died on the cross for your sins as well as following his one law: which is to love thy neighbour and love God with all your heart.

There are a few others, but there's no need to derail the thread. Buy a Bible and read the New Testament. Just the New Testament, don't read the old testament yet.

Post: #104

(01-24-2016 01:42 PM)monster Wrote:  

(01-24-2016 10:45 AM)Direct or subtle Wrote:  So I watched, in horror, some episodes of Donovan, in order to know more about the depths of satanism of the Hollywood Left.. and I was not disappointed!!

Once again, the story-plot of Donovan is how Ray's father, John Voigt, used to be a scenario-writer in Hollywood, but had to let his 3 young sons be raped at the same time.. then he gets sent to jail for a murder committed by someone else, and comes back after 20 years, as a Satanist, killing priests and cops, and dragging his "sexual anorexic" son to a gay disco, and abhorrent stuff like that..

Are you sure you're watching the correct "Ray Donovan"?!?! I have been watching it since it the beginning and the story is nothing like that.

Jon Voigt was a drug dealer shit-father to Ray and his brothers, so Ray and his brothers found in the priest a father figure. The priest took advantage and did molest Ray and his brothers. Jon Voigt then goes to prison because he bounces back in the kids life and is set up by Ray for the murder of the priest.

The show then goes into detail about how the molestation really fucked up Ray and his brothers and how they cope with it. The one brother is really fucked up by it internally, and Ray it's what feeds his anger and motivation to get shit done.

I think you may want to go back and rewatch the show if what you got out of it are subliminal satanic pedophiliac messages because it is quite the opposite.

You haven't been paying close enough attention to the show, I'm afraid..

John Voigt was indeed (in the Donovan series) at some point a scenarist for Hollywood (or a film consultant), because you can see him proud of his name appearing in film credits, for a film recorded just before he was sent to jail.

And Ray reveals that Voigt perfectly knew what was going on with his 3 sons being molested (by "priests", sure, the producer couldn't cast Hollywood people directly as molesters- But how else do you explain that Voigt did nothing?..)

And did you see the short moment in episode 3 or 4, when Ray sees his own teenage son inside a baby swimming pool, at a Hollywood party, with a gay movie star with the son in the pool, and Ray does nothing.. I couldn't clearly identify why until I read this thread, actually.. Because the producer clearly alludes at how, to make career in Hollywood like Ray does, you have to sacrifice your sons to pedophiles! Same with Ray's underage daughter who is given to a gun-totting, drugged gangsta rapper (Ray takes the rapper in his car to kill him but changes his mind - why? : cause Rays wants to stay in the Hollywood game, so he sacrifices his children to drugged pedos, just like Voigt sacrificed his own 3 sons (Ray included), years ago in the show...

And remember the scene in the shoe shop, when Voigt gives his educational advice to Ray's son: I quote Voigt with horror, fury even: "it's okay to take a friend's d... in your mouth at school, because it's just a mouth, but don't give your ass because of AIDS".. when I heard that, I could not believe it was broadcast on public television! Abhorrent!

So I'm positive : Ray Donovan is full of satanic and pedo Hollywood themes.. at least the first year, after that I never watched again.

Post: #105

(01-23-2016 03:26 AM)Direct or subtle Wrote:  Satanism in Hollywood is quite well illustrated in the series : Ray Donovan.

It's based in Hollywood, around movie stars and their "helpers", who are paid to hide their various crimes (usually, sexual crimes).

This series is also rife with hate for organized religion, especially Catholicism (murders and tortures of priests are described at length ).

Lots of pedophilia in the series, too : A gay movie star is fond of Ray Donovan's son (they are described sharing a kid's swimming pool ), and Ray can't do anything about it... why?
Another thing: Ray's own father explains in the second or third episode that (I quote) "it's okay for a young boy to take a d... in his mouth, because it's just a mouth, but not in the ass because of AIDS"... Ray's own under-aged daughter is raped by a black gangsta rapper carrying a gun and smoking drugs with his children, and once again, Ray, even though he's a cold-stone killer, can't do shit about it : why?..



Because I think Ray Donovan's hidden story is about how you have to endure pedophilia to make a career in Hollywood.. Just see the series for yourself and you'll see all the satanic messages in it.. And I forgot to mention that the producer is a famous, archi-liberal, anti-Christian Hollywood woman.. who use to live in a "safe house" full of wanted leftist criminals and terrorists!

Not sure if its been pointed out yet but take one guess at that guys background

Post: #106

(01-24-2016 02:00 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  Damn, Fetty's in on it too!

Fetty Wop's hit single, 1738:


17:38 Military Time = 5:38

Matthew 5:38 : "Ye have heard that it hath been said,
An eye for an eye."







http://inception.davepedu.com

Post: #107

Just reading this thread makes me conclude how much the purported "Illuminati" in Hollywood is actually the Anglo Assetati all along. Really, pedophilia horror stories, necrophilia with zombies, zoophilia with ponies, sex as a power play, etc., only prove me correct.

No motherfucking wonder the word "wanker" is a chronological precursor to the n-word, to the point a Scottish guy confirmed this notion to me and a couple of Canadian acquaintances I have practically beg me to stop, especially given the deep Anglo roots of mainstream Canada.

No motherfucking wonder Anglo females can get away with false rape/stalking accusations, while these thirsty simps take such false allegations seriously; I should know, some Anglo girl was making false allegations behind my back. As a bonus, even while Englishwomen were dickriding the Vikings, guess who they blamed for their loss of purity (virginity)?

Post: #108

(01-24-2016 02:34 AM)germanico Wrote:  The money in movie making is not in making successful movies, but in making big-budget movies. By the time the movie hits the theaters, its already paid for. Altough all of Will Smiths latest movies have bombed at the box office, nobody could argue that he is not a money-making star. That is, no potential investor is going to say "OH, Will Smith will be on it? Id better put my money elsewhere"

Thus, the media conglomerates fleece would be producers, whom through some creative accounting are told the movie made nothing, since the movie made nothing we pay no taxes on it, and we ensure that the studio keeps producing while remaining in our jew hands. Go check it. Google it and tell me the name of one big-budget blockbuster (Not Star Wars, that was made to boast that it was the "highest grossing film" without any actual filmaking being involved) that made any money at the box office...

I don't see that. There's a long history of big budget bombs sinking entire studios. What you're seeing in that list is the studio's estimated production budget for each film. This doesn't include advertising and promotion, which is roughly estimated to be between half and equal to the film's budget.

Green Lantern made $219 million on a $200 million budget.
Terminator: Genisys made $446 million of a $155 million budget.
Mad Max: Fury Road made $375 million on a $150 million budget.

All of these returns were considered 'disappointing' by their studios and production on their originally-planned multiple sequels were shut down. (Interestingly, Mad Max's original sequel was supposed to not feature Max at all, and focus on Theron's character, then when the studio balked late last year, George Miller tried to refocus it on Max).

Perhaps if Terminator hadn't been - functionally - a love story between a man and a woman two men; and Mad Max didn't involve a Radical Feminist rewriting the script, resulting in a film that's a Love Respect Story between a man and a woman faux-man, both domestic audiences and the increasingly-important foreign audiences, (where traditional male-female dynamics are still valued), might have turned out to see it or been excited by it, rather than generating the most common response by my mates: "It was pretty ordinary." (Ausspeak for 'nothing special').

As for 'Movie Stars' having drawing power, we're in a transitory age due to Social Media. When everyone can live as a celebrity in their mind via Social Media, genuine 'Stars' are gradually losing their value, and - particularly - the respect of the general public. This is the changing culture where a teenage girl isn't thrilled to be hit on by a movie or sports star any more.

The rising trend in stars oversharing on social media often reveals just how out of touch with reality and broken they are. There's also a huge component of the general population buying into this current Illuminati theory and being actively-repulsed by the offered celebrities.

I suspect we've reached the end of the Star System, much the same way the Studio System ended last century.

I suspect Hollywood is about to change, drastically, and we've been seeing the transition play out over the last few years:

- All movies aimed at Adults will only be made by cable tv and streaming services;

- Star Power is, functionally, dead, and the future will be Big Budget films where it is increasingly-necessary to feature an All-Star Ensemble Cast, combining the limited drawing power of each celebrity's fan base hoping its enough to get all quadrants in the seats, (Avengers, Batman vs Superman, Into The Woods, Suicide Squad). In this way Live Action Movie Making is going the way of Children's Cartoon Movies, where the fact that Katy Perry is voicing Smurfette instead of a voice actor will, apparently, make her fanbase go check it out, (and if you get enough separate fanbases, you might make a good return);

- Hollywood's Output long-subverted, we're seeing the attempted-transition into an outright socialist means of production. If you believe the theory that the Jews control Hollywood, they're in the process of losing that control as things are being said by actors in the last two years that never would have been voiced before out of fear. Whether this results in expulsion, or retention of token figurehead power under threat of blackmail and collective bargaining power remains to be seen.

Expect:

- Much more 'poor little me' whining by Celebrities to prove they're Right On, thus alienating working-class and middle-class audiences carrying Student Debt even further;

- The films being made to get much more blatant about their socialism and intersectionality, thus alienating audiences even further;

- Oscar ratings to steadily decline even further, with the brand power of the award adding little monetary value to a movie's return;

- The continuance of both falling movie attendance and falling cable subs;

- Many more movies not meeting 'expectations'.

Post: #109

(01-23-2016 10:29 PM)NovaVirtu Wrote:  If something like this is really going on, then it lends credence to this idea that the government/whoever can just create Manchurian Candiates who can be "activated" at will and made to perform horrendous acts without remorse.

Example:
Desired End State: Gov wants a disarmed population
Action: Activate Candidate, have him shoot up a mall, school, etc...
Result: Outrage, disgust, public support for firearms ownership wanes.

Not saying they're doing this for sure, (antidepressants + mental illness are more likley the culprit in most cases) but it's hypotheically possible. In either case it isn't working- people are more concerned about gun rights today then ever before.

Please look into the details surrounding the Dunblane school massacre. What transpired sounds exactly like the scenario you just layed out:

Dunblane school massacre

Quote:The Dunblane school massacre was one of the deadliest firearms incidents in UK history, when gunman Thomas Hamilton killed sixteen children and one teacher at Dunblane Primary School near Stirling, Scotland on 13 March 1996, before killing himself.

Public debate about the killings centred on gun control laws, including public petitions calling for a ban on private ownership of handguns and an official enquiry, the Cullen Report. In response to this debate, two new firearms Acts were passed, which effectively made private ownership of handguns illegal in Great Britain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre

There are some odd details surrounding the perpetrator of the massacre:

Quote:There had been several complaints to police regarding Hamilton's behaviour towards the young boys who attended the youth clubs he directed. Claims had been made of his having taken photographs of semi-naked boys without parental consent.

Quote:Evidence of previous police interaction with Hamilton was presented to the Cullen Inquiry but later sealed under a closure order to prevent publication for 100 years.[16] The official reason for sealing the documents was to protect the identities of children, but this led to accusations of a coverup intended to protect the reputations of officials.[17] Following a review of the closure order by the Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd, edited versions of some of the documents were released to the public in October 2005. Four files containing post mortems, medical records and profiles on the victims, as well as Thomas Hamilton's autopsy, remained sealed under the 100 year order to avoid distressing the relatives and survivors.[18]
The released documents revealed that in 1991, following Hamilton's Loch Lomond summer camp, complaints were made to Central Scotland Police and were investigated by the Child Protection Unit. Hamilton was reported to the Procurator Fiscal for consideration of ten charges, including assault, obstructing police and contravention of the Children and Young Persons Act 1937. No action was taken.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre

Does any of this sound normal to you guys? Sounds similar to JFK's assassination and Sandy Hook.

Think of the immense value such an Bourne-esque asset would be to a sociopathic regime. They could override their survival instincts and normal human inclinations to carry out whatever actions their handlers wanted. They would be like a suicide bomber, except much more precise and targeted. They could be deployed against reformers, uncooperative world leaders, and used as leverage to keep people afraid and in line.

Post: #110

(01-24-2016 02:56 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  If you believe the theory that the Jews control Hollywood, they're in the process of losing that control as things are being said by actors in the last two years that never would have been voiced before out of fear. Whether this results in expulsion, or retention of token figurehead power under threat of blackmail and collective bargaining power remains to be seen.

What has happened in the last 10 years is a transition of power from the "suits" to the "artist." Since the creation of Hollywood the industry has been by 100% controlled by powerful "movers and shakers" that come in the form of studio execs, agency runners, pr firm owners, financiers, middleman or a combination of all. This was by no means perfect, but at least there was a general understating of boundaries and more importantly an artists effect on the general public was contained only to the work he was hired for. If an artist stepped out of line, the suits made sure to close every door for the rest of his life.

What has happened in the past decade, for a variety of reasons, is that the "Artist", who normally stays focused on his/her craft, has not only joined the "movers and shakers" rank but has climbed nearly all the way to the top of it. Unfortunately the average artist, though great at his craft, is a fucking idiot, incredibly narcissistic and generally damaged or the less insulting "eccentric." Currently, this means that the INSANE are co-running the ASYSUM.

What's happening to the Tv/Film industry is similar to what happened with the music industry. The "studios" were wiped out and now creative talent who were completely taken advantage of, are now in charge. The "suits" still control the award shows but they no longer control distribution. Anyone can create a label and it doesn't cost very much to set up a sound studio and produce a song.

Hollywood is lucky for 2 reasons.
1: they know what happened the music industry and have taken correct steps to insure they still control distribution and survive the digital revolution.
2: its incredibly costly to put a film together, you need a ton of resources to produce and market.

Despite these advantages the transformation has occurred. With a variety of streamers producing their own exclusive content, there are now more distribution options which favors the artist. The majority of the "suits" know now their place and have adapted to their new role: courting the high level talent no matter how crazy they are. With technology automating the "middle roles", this new dichotomy will only get worse before it gets better.

Post: #111

(01-24-2016 01:43 PM)MiscBrah Wrote:  This thread makes me think of that girl Daisy Ridley in the new Star Wars movie and how much dick she must have had to take to land such a large role.

Funny, I was watching the porn documentary Hot Girls Wanted and then saw this photo. This girl could easily do porn, and the way she is shot in that photo is almost identical to the images in the porn documentary. Very telling.

Post: #112

Damn, for a second there I thought I ended up at the David Icke Forums.

This is pretty damn good thread, props to Roosh for starting it.

Hollywood is what it is and everyone knows what it is, but they still go to the movies, buy DVDs, and watch their televisions after work.

The music game is different, for the comment about not controlling distribution, that comment can't be any further from the truth.

Look up what up happened to J. Prince, Irv Gotti, and Suge Knight after they tried to create distribution channels for the rap game.

The real money in the music business is in publishing and distribution.

Michael Jackson understood that, hell, he said it publicly.

Sure an artist can be independent, and make money doing so, but they'll never get huge and seriously rich without the hand of a big studio.

Artists like Iggy Azalea, Drake, Nicki Minaj, etc. who come out of nowhere to become household names are signing what are called 360 deals -- Drake is in a different spot because he's one of the chosen ones.

That's basically an artist allowing themselves to be pimped out for anything, and their pimp can make money off them for anything they are associated with.

That's why you now see artists connected to so much shit, clothing lines, tv shows, etc. They get some trinkets out of it, and get to remain being famous, but most of the money is being made by other people.

Drake might be worth $75 million, but if he's worth $75 million, his handlers are making nearly a billion dollars off him.

That's just how the game works.

Celebrities are useless, if people didn't care so much, they wouldn't have shit.

Think about the fact that you've been hearing about the same motherfuckers your entire life. Some of these people aren't even doing anything anymore, but the Daily Mail and other media rags keep poppin' up pics, "Oh, look at this washed up bitch from some show that was on 20 years ago, look at her fantastic curves!!"

Post: #113

So I know Leonardo has a lot of fans here (I like his acting myself), but his recent actions of speaking up for climate change goes against his behavior of traveling on private jets and yachts to bang hoes around the world. He must be in the top 0.000001% in terms of fossil fuel usage.

Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation Donates Another $15 Million for Conservation Efforts as His Fight Against Climate Change Continues
http://www.people.com/article/leonardo-d...limination

Quote:While being honored for his philanthropic work at the World Economic Forum in Davos, The Revenant actor and devoted environmentalist, 41, praised the recent progress that's been made in the fight against climate change while pledging another $15 million donation from his namesake foundation for conservation efforts – but stressed the work that still needs be done.

Before this thread, I'd think Leo was just another loony liberal.

After this thread, I wonder if he's been told to fulfill certain agendas in order for having a big role that may win him his first Oscar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aw...emy_Awards ).

So my guess is he got passed around as a child actor, is submitting to god-knows what type of rituals behind closed doors, and is actively shilling for his masters on the environmentalism issue, which is closely aligned to depopulation agenda.

He also has donated money to "support gay rights": http://www.eonline.com/news/410915/leona...dia-awards

And has spoken out like a true feminist:

Quote:"Women have been the most persecuted people throughout all of recorded history, more than any race or religion."

If I was a betting man, I'd say he's going to win his first Oscar this year.

Post: #114

Post: #115

What do you guys think about the new show on Fox about the devil retiring?

Post: #116

(01-24-2016 08:35 PM)lex the impaler Wrote:  What do you guys think about the new show on Fox about the devil retiring?

Is that that show "Lucifer"? Where the devil retires to LA?

I saw the ad, it has all the signs of a one-season wonder. Will not be watching.

Post: #117

Hey guys, looking forward to that new Mel Gibson movie?

Post: #118

Yeah. Seems like they're running out of writing material

Post: #119

I've always thought it was odd that every year it seems like there's a new chosen actress/actor that's thrown in our face everywhere. Last year it was Amy Schumer, previous years it was Jennifer Lawrence and Anne Hathaway. I always wonder if they've made some secret back room deal that allows them to be featured everywhere.

Post: #120

(01-24-2016 08:42 PM)NovaVirtu Wrote:  

(01-24-2016 08:35 PM)lex the impaler Wrote:  What do you guys think about the new show on Fox about the devil retiring?

Is that that show "Lucifer"? Where the devil retires to LA?

I saw the ad, it has all the signs of a one-season wonder. Will not be watching.

It's basically a ripoff of Neil Gaiman's "Sandman". More ageing Baby Boomer "oo, I can say 'poobumfuck' in a church and get away with it" nonsense I can do without.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #121

Probably also applies to politics and Washington DC. Does the sporting world have a casting couch? You either have talent or you dont.

Does this also apply to the book writing game? If you want to become a big author do you need to sell your soul for fame and fortune?

Post: #122

(01-25-2016 12:21 AM)Pride male Wrote:  Does this also apply to the book writing game? If you want to become a big author do you need to sell your soul for fame and fortune?

Big Publishing doesn't want your soul, and does not know how to bring you fame and fortune. All Big Publishing wants you to hand over is the copyright to your work for a minimal sum. With that in hand, it can fuck you over after you're dead just as well as Satan.

As I've said before, Big Publishing -- what I class as the Big Five based in New York -- doesn't actually know how to sell books. 7 out of 10 of their new authors only break even or don't make their money back. And they are not stuck for material: it's estimated for every 1,000 submissions made to a publisher, one will be published. Mind you, that's not the chicken scratchings of five-year-olds. Oh, wait, you thought editors or submissions readers in publishing houses select books on literary merit? Nah. There are so many stories of good, solid writers who are just fucking unlucky enough to get a bitch on her period when she reads their book, or even have a book accepted for publication and then get it rejected because the editor championing the book left the publisher. Or half a hundred other fickle, bureaucratic, mindless reasons.

To make matters worse, you will never get published if you submit to more than one publisher simultaneously, and they take unacceptably long times to actually bother to write back to you (when they do.) Half the time when they do push a new author (as opposed to an established one) the public just doesn't buy.

For this astronomically stupid business model to work, it requires two essential things:

(1) Oligopoly conditions on contracts with new and established writers
(2) Stockholm Syndrome for those writers who actually get a publisher.

(Don't take it from me. Go to John T. Reed's site and see him talk about his experiences in the nonfiction trad-pub world. Go to Joe Konrath's blog and start reading. Konrath had eight novels traditionally published before eventually giving Big Publishing the finger and going down the Amazon and/or self-publishing route. Unlike most large novelists --another case of Stockholm Syndrome-- he's happy to publish the data of his sales and thereby his income, which is in the six figures.)

As said, oligopoly conditions rule the day in contracts with new writers. You're paid maybe ten percent if you're lucky as a new author and you give away a shitload of rights for the privilege. Don't like those terms? Try going to one of the other four of the five, because they all have the same paltry conditions (down to the same contract), and the same difficult-as-fuck conditions to satisfy before you can get control of your books back off them (for example, a common condition is that you can't get your copyright back until your book is out of print. Problem is, e-book versions never go out of print. Therefore you never get the copyright -- arguably the most valuable part of your book -- returned to you.)

It doesn't necessarily get any better for established authors, either. For every Stephen King whose down-homie, aw-shucks bullshit catches a trend and manages to cut through to people with shallow liberal leanings, there are dozens of midlist authors whose income never gets near six figures, and is often damn lucky to hit five. Indeed I would lay you good odds that much of the seeming high income of most "bestselling" authors is an illusion, with certain authors who benefited from irrational public mania for one book (EL James, Dan Brown) the exceptions that prove the rule. I'll bet you good money no bestselling author makes as much money as you think he does.

Why, you might wonder, do more authors not stand up to this bullshit?

Ah so, grasshopper. That's when we get to the Stockholm Syndrome part of it. The Author's Guild earlier this year (i.e. less than 20 days ago) actually published a demand that new authors' book contracts be renegotiated, that they have better terms. The Author's Guild includes a lot of bestselling authors: Stephen King, Dan Simmons, John Grisham, etc, etc. Hooray, you might say, the authors united will never be defeated, etc. Here's the problem: it's the first time in roughly fifty years or more that these guys ever publicly protested against the conditions in new authors' contracts!!!

Before that letter, the principal job of the Authors' Guild was to churn out anti-Amazon screeds and arselicking columns about how they understood publishers had life so hard, especially when they were negotiating with Hachette (one of the Big Five). Amazon (much as I distrust it) is the most dangerous opponent the Big Five have ever faced, because they made a conscious decision to bring down the role of the Big Five as "gatekeepers" of "Serious Literary Fiction". They did this by publishing and supporting e-books and bringing down the price of those books drastically. Amazon allows anyone to self-publish and lets the market sort out who gets sold and who doesn't, and takes a tiny cut in comparison to the gouging of Big Publishing. If you want more Amazon cheerleading, like I said, Joe Konrath's blog provides a pretty compelling case , but the point is: authors as a group shut the fuck up and took the pennies they were given by Big Publishing, big authors or not, because they had no real alternative. And after a while, if you have no other options, you get to like the shithead boss who treats you like crap, because he's the only one who pays you money. Stockholm Syndrome, as I said. Amazon is now providing an alternative, and Big Publishers are running scared as a result.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #123

(01-24-2016 07:08 PM)jariel Wrote:  The music game is different, for the comment about not controlling distribution, that comment can't be any further from the truth.

Look up what up happened to J. Prince, Irv Gotti, and Suge Knight after they tried to create distribution channels for the rap game.

The real money in the music business is in publishing and distribution.

An RVF Challenge: without googling it, name the name of the distribution company Jay-Z, who has flashed Illuminati signs and references on his act, started and failed as an alternative to iTunes just a few months back.

(01-24-2016 08:09 PM)Roosh Wrote:  If I was a betting man, I'd say he's going to win his first Oscar this year.

Might be. If so, what would be your take on Gonzalez Iñarritus Oscar awards? He certainly does not belong to the Hollywood posse, or was groomed by them.

Post: #124

I have a serious love/hate relationship with this thread.

Also, reading some of these posts all by yourself in the darkness of the middle of the night may not be the brightest idea...

Post: #125

(01-22-2016 07:34 PM)Roosh Wrote:  I keep coming across articles and video that suggest Hollywood celebrities including musicians are forced to perform weird hazing and degrading sexual rituals in order to enter the fame club. The casting couch is not just for women, and is not just a one-time thing, and some of the rituals is rumored to be scatological. The initiation is to control the stars and make sure they don't act against Hollywood's agenda. Blackmail is hung over their heads.

The three videos on this page make amazing claims:

https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/2014/05/1...-part-iii/

Video #1, which was uploaded a couple years ago, claimed that Will Smith is gay.





This week, when Jada Smith started a boycott against the Oscars, it was "leaked" that he is gay, identifying the same "sugar daddy".

http://perezhilton.com/2016-01-19-alexis...ty-boycott

You ever wonder why all male Hollywood stars have a bit of gay vibe to them? Supposedly, either they were passed around as child stars or had to get buggered in parties. Will Smith's kid Jaden is already messed up and is wearing dresses.



Remember Dave Chappelle's reason for quitting the show, that a white man laughed weirdly at his race joke? That could be the reason, or maybe they wanted him to perform certain rituals that he refused to do.





Their hand signals:







Here's Lebron James giving off Satanic hand signs (Baphomet horns, all-seeing eye, then 666 symbol at 1:20). He's BFF with Jay Z.





Dave Chappelle came back in 2015 with big comedy gigs, GQ cover, interviews on talk shows. You don't get that kind of promo coverage spontaneously. Maybe he finally gave in?

I'm sure a lot of "Illuminati" claims are bullshit, but it is weird that all the stars give off those hand signals in public and their videos, and Hollywood stars are typically calm like cows and never have any problems with their bosses, producers, etc.

Cult or not, they do consider themselves as part of an elite club. The only question is what you have to give in order to enter it.

Exploitation of child actors is an open secret. Just look at all the child stars that have gone nuts, or gone into major mental issues as they grew up. It is probably their repressed memories coming up and tormenting them. Look at Mckulcay Culkain (sp?) the homealone kid, or the Terminator 2 kid, all of them went nuts and turned to drugs to numb the pain. Pretty obvious they were passed around as kids among the Hollywood sleazebags, with their parents consent I am sure.

Also look at the recent allegations of homosexual sex parties held by Brian Singer (Xmen director) and how quickly it was hushed up.

Ofcourse it's not limited to boys, girls also go through a lot of passing around. Probably happens to them when they are a bit older though, as the sleazejobs seem to prefer boys at a younger age.

Everyone is involved, from Jimmy Saville to Cosby (who got caught in the storm while he is still alive for some reason; probably pissed someone off.)