The overall purpose of Newsspellcom.org has been to demonstrate that the making of history, and everything one perceives through the conduit of modern media, may be nothing more than a theatrical illusion – a trick of light and sound accompanied by the power of psychological suggestion.

This is how mass consciousness and perception are shaped into specific and prevailing belief paradigms.

Uncomfortable and unfathomable as that realization may be for both loyal readers and the masses in general to face, nonetheless, empirical evidence has been established this is in fact what prevails. But there is also the macro-vision, as it were, one must always consider. What if, this entire three-dimensional existence, the prism through which our collective consciousness perceives light and sound as material reality, is in fact an illusion – perhaps a holographic projection of some kind? What if, through the power of suggestion, it is only that our collective consciousness has somehow agreed, via psychological consensus, into deceiving itself to believe that which is an illusion is material reality?

Reserving an in depth exploration of that speculative premise for another time, one chooses to re-examine another pivotal event in American history – the presidency of Richard Nixon and the infamous and watershed political event known as the Watergate scandal.

Comparatively speaking, the JFK assassination of 1963, and the Watergate scandal that plagued and ultimately meant the demise of an American presidency, had one thing in common – they were both pieces of historical theater in the era of post-truth America.

But, Nixon was not the only character portrayed by a host actor involved in this scripted example of grand historical theater.

The American government is nothing more than a theatrical charade utilized to shield the true clandestine source of political and social policy. Loyal readers shall recall (See: Watergate covered up more sinister crime) it had been revealed the Nixon presidency was a cruel hoax, nothing more than the playing out of a scripted movie, starring a young Hollywood actor cast in the leading role. However, what wasn’t revealed, was that Nixon’s host actor had been cast in another role made to appear historically important or influential. Once again, the trail of this investigation leads one right back to the era of so-called Camelot – the JFK administration.

A key figure in that administration was JFK’s Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara. American history texts credit McNamara with advocating the use of a blockade to stave off the further development of a threatening Soviet military presence on the island of Cuba during the ‘Cuban Missile crisis’. But like JFK and the entire scenario of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the character of Bob McNamara was a fictional hoax.

McNamara’s historical character arc runs oddly parallel to that of another pivotal historical character of that era, Richard M. Nixon.

And both characters, believe it or not folks, were portrayed by the identical host actor.

Before delving into the character of Robert McNamara, one shall again address the often repeated question – why are actors operating under pseudonyms allowed to operate in the guise of high level political positions? Because folks, then as it is now, such a seemingly sinister state of affairs is in fact legal.

The ruling elite Jesuit families who own and operate the corporation of the US need straw men – or as sometimes is the case, straw women – to act as a public shield or legal barrier. Ultimately, this is done to keep hidden the actual architecture of governance never broadcast to the general public on any corporate television network.

Therefore, legally, under the law of uniform commercial code set down by the middle Crown Temple, actors performing under pseudonyms are set up in high level political positions. Though these actors are no doubt coaxed into their roles by the possibility of basking in the spotlight of genuine pubic adoration, and even having their egos inflated at the prospect of observing the characters they portray heralded for posterity in American history texts, an awareness implicitly exists, that should mass approbation turn to criticism, or in the case of McNamara’s character over the perceived injustices in Vietnam, even extreme scorn, their straw person can be removed from the political limelight at any given time should the circumstances of the scripted political charade dictate. But even then, under such circumstances, the host actor is freed to assume the terms and conditions of another agreed upon contract, and can assume the role of yet another straw or character identity.

To the general pubic, this state of affairs may seem inconceivable or perhaps even fantastical. And yet, to the ruling elite families, these sorts of contractual agreements and the inherent obligations therein, represent the standard method of business operation.

Under these prevailing circumstances, even though the actor portraying the historical character is forced to resign, and may be subsequently replaced by yet another willing actor portraying a replacement character, the integrity of the actual governing power structure remains free from legal scrutiny, always remaining comfortable with the notion it shall never be scrutinized, molested or ruptured. To the public however, the popular perception becomes reality; the status quo has undergone significant change, and perhaps for the better.

Indeed, this was the prevailing scenario of the Watergate scandal one shall never find documented by any American history text.

This folks, is how the political status quo is efficiently maintained at the very highest levels, without the masses even suspecting they are being continually hoodwinked by the false political dialectic of Republican vs Democrat.

If one is familiar with the history of both McNamara and Nixon, curious and all-too convenient parallels can be drawn. Nixon’s character first emerged on the American political scene in the early 1950’s as a communist baiting agitator in the house of representatives, hailing from a humble ‘little lemon ranch’ in California. Nixon’s character was soon summoned to the white house to perform in the role of Dwight D. Eisenhower’s vice president (yes folks, even Ike was portrayed by a host actor, but more on that later), where he suffered through his first major political scandal during the ‘Checkers’ affair.

As the curtain drew on the Eisenhower administration, Nixon suffered what appeared to be crushing consecutive poltical defeats at the hands of  JFK and Jerry Brown during respective runs for the white house and the governor’s chair in Sacramento, California. It was after his defeat at the hands of Brown that ‘Tricky Dick’ (the ruling elites that own the media love their crude phallic jests) curtly announced to the press, “You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore”, and seemed to completely shrink from the pubic eye, reportedly locked away for most of the mid to late sixties era in the New York office suites of his political benefactor Nelson Rockefeller, posing in some largely undefined legal capacity, until he would magically, and for no apparent politically expedient reason, reemerge as a viable presidential candidate.

Clearly, when analyzed closely, there seems to emerge a congruence of timelines between the historical characters of Nixon and McNamara.

It was right around this time that Robert McNamara, at the alleged behest of JFK and his brother, attorney general Bobby, was persuaded to abscond from his curiously brief tenure as ‘whiz kid’ head of General Motors to become JFK’s Secretary of Defense. Curious too, that shortly subsequent to the JFK hoax assassination and the swearing in of Lyndon Baines Johnson (See: Actors in history’s grand stage play part I) Nixon’s character, in addition to his undefined role as Rockefeller’s legal council, reportedly began traveling the world to solidify his reputation as a global statesman, while the character of Bob McNamara, continuing on as LBJ’s Secretary of Defense, was also required to travel widely abroad, due to the alleged escalation of the ‘war in Vietnam’.

When necessary, both the scripted war game conflict in Vietnam, utilized as a cover for the commercial looting of natural and human resources in Southeast Asia by the ruling elite Jesuit families, and the hoax ‘cold war’ geopolitical scenario between the US and the USSR, would brilliantly serve as simultaneous covers for the jet setting host actor portraying dual roles as McNamara and Nixon.

Still later, after McNamara’s resignation and his acceptance of the Medal of Freedom from LBJ, the character was once again sent off and out of the American public eye to Switzerland, to preside over the World Bank, while the character of ‘Tricky Dick’ Nixon was free once again to reemerge into the public eye as the Republican nominee for US president.

In other words folks, events were arranged, akin to the scripting of a Hollywood screenplay, so that no one among the general American public would ever suspect anything amiss with regard to the identical host actor portraying both characters – Warren Beatty. While one character was emerging onto the world stage from the left, the other was slipping behind the curtain in a clever bait and switch – exit stage right.

But, what seals the deal in terms of Beatty’s positive identification as the host actor for the characters of Nixon and McNamara, is not merely ear bio-metric analysis, but facial recognition analysis of their spouses.

http://www.gettyimages.com/photos/defense-secretary-robert-mcnamara-and wi…

The rule of thumb here folks, is that most host actors, especially when portraying high profile public roles such as Nixon and McNamara, will often be accompanied by a sibling posing as their spouse. In both cases, Warren Beatty, starring in dual roles as US president ‘Tricky Dick’ Nixon and Secretary of Defense Robert ‘Strange’ McNamara (appropriate middle moniker, huh, folks?), was always accompanied by his sibling, Shirley Maclaine, cast in the role of dutiful and dual spouses.

Barry Diller

Further research into the sordid backstage scripting of both the Watergate scandal and the mythical political career of Richard M. Nixon revealed the involvement of billionaire Hollywood mogul Barry Diller, and connections to Warren Beatty, Shirley Maclaine, and Disney. In many ways, Diller serves as a linchpin in terms of the interlocking relationships connecting the myriad strands of this massive web of monstrous historical deceit played out before the American public.

A perusal of Mr. Diller’s online biographies indicate he is not only one of the wealthiest men in Hollywood, but perhaps one of the most powerful. Not only is Diller credited with the creation of the Fox Broadcasting Company (Fox=666 in standard gematria and the word ‘broadcasting’ is a none too subtle subliminal cue for the broad casting of electronic spells) and USA Broadcasting, but also serves as Chairman and Senior Executive of InterActiveCorp and Expedia Incorporated, as well a prominent member of the Television Hall of Fame.

But things became really interesting folks, when one began to examine Diller’s family lineage, and the royal family connections of his current spouse, Diane von Furstenberg.

Loyal readers may immediately recognize the name of von Furstenberg from a previous installment (See: Actors in history’s grand stage play Part III). Not only was Diane von Furstenberg the host actor portrayed Hollywood actress Natalie Wood, but she also portrayed American popular singer Karen Carpenter. The royal lineage of the von Furstenberg family is quite extensive, and Burke’s peerage and other similar sites all indicate branches of the family line have intermarried with the House of Saxe Coburg Gotha.

But research into Diller’s immediate family also indicates royal connections through the maternal line. Reva Addison, the maiden name of Diller’s mother, happens to be a family moniker richly intertwined with America’s founding, going all the way back to the 17th century, to the establishment of the colony of Maryland. In fact, Reva’s distant relation Colonel John Addison, one of the first settlers of the colony, had three brothers, one of whom was chaplain to Britain’s Duke of Marlborough. Colonel Addison, upon marriage to Rebecca Dent shortly after 1677, came into the ownership of vast land holdings, and established many profitable businesses in the merchant trades, as well as establishing a dominant presence in Maryland’s Prince George County politics.

You see folks, the same families who initially arrived in America as part of a commercial venture operating under royal charter to monopolize the land and the numerous natural and human resources found on the continent, are still owners and major stockholders in every field of commercial endeavor. Once arrived, these families with merchant business interests were quickly able to exploit all of the available resources of the vast American continent and entrench a commercial empire that still exists today.

By 1776, through unscrupulous means made legal, European descendants of royal nobility were able to consolidate vast commercial interests into an American monopoly hidden by joint stock corporate holding shells, a global monopoly as time advanced into the twentieth century they sought to expand with the manufacturing and stage managing of wars and rumors of wars in Europe, Southeast Asia and elsewhere around the globe. Barry Diller and his spouse Diane von Furstenberg are the latter day American representatives of the global commercial empire of the thirteen ruling elite Jesuit royal family bloodlines. With vast media stock holdings, and as a major player at Disney, Diller represents one of the modern day media sorcerers often referred to here at Newsspellcom.org., and has for decades judiciously used his power and influence to make the history Americans read about in their public school and university text books.

It is Diller’s family that is largely responsible for the programming content the American public consumes through all major media outlets and networks. In a very real sense, Diller is not only a modern day media sorcerer, he is also a political king maker, controlling the political and social perceptions of the public through his family’s monopolized control of the mainstream media.

But the real surprise folks, came when one keenly noticed more than a passing resemblance between Diller and that of the late US president, Dwight Eisenhower.

It can now be reported ear bio-metric analysis has revealed a young Barry Diller – through clever application of prosthetics, makeup and other traditional but effective Hollywood camera and lighting tricks – to have been the host actor behind the historical character of US president Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Remember too, that Disney, the powerful media conglomerate intimately connected to Ike’s host actor, Barry Diller, and to the host actor of Walt Disney, Kermit Roosevelt, was employed by the US government to produce war time propaganda and recruiting films.

Yes folks, the implications of this are indeed staggering. But one should always remember the wise words of the famous bard, William Shakespeare:

“All the world is a stage, and all are merely players.”

 

 

6 thoughts on “Watergate covered up more sinister crime (Part II)

  1. A bit off topic but what are your thoughts on bitcoin? As far as I can tell its only ‘real world’ application is as a store of value. They are limiting supply to 21 million…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Frankly, though familiar with the term, I have not adequately researched the topic well enough to intelligently respond to your inquiry. However, perhaps you could provide a brief primer in your return reply. Perhaps, with further research, this topic could become the examination of a future installment. I see where the number 21 would intrigue you, however.

      Like

  2. Bitcoin markets itself as a decentralised currency. Its advocates believe it can eventually overthrow the banking system. Curiously it has received a lot of hype from the mainstream media who would be unlikely to promote something that posed a genuine threat to the banks. In addition the majority of bitcoin is held by a handful of accounts. Presumably they could easily manipulate the market price .

    The idea for bitcoin originally was that the coins could be used for instant payments online and with minimal fees. As time has gone one the fees have increased to the and transaction times have slowed to the point this is now impractical. Basically bitcoin exists now as a digital store of money only. Like gold but imaginary gold. There are altcoins who can transfer money much quicker and for less money.

    Bitcoin was also promoted as being an anonymous coin for use on the dark web but it is also no longer the most anonymous coin.

    My instinct tells me it is a psychological operation of some kind but I don’t know exactly what is going on.

    I am not an authority on the subject of bitcoin by any means so I hope this information is useful.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. On the contrary, I find your brief very informative. From your description, Bitcoin appears to be the replacement of one debt based system of promissory collateral with another. This is by no means a profound revelation, but it has been obvious the ruling elite families have been preparing the masses for the reality of a cashless economic system for a generation or more. The growing pervasiveness of mobile digital technology has more easily facilitated global implementation. And once again, you appear very astute. The fact the bankers have convinced the masses the pieces of worthless debt paper they are holding actually has value rather than existing as a mere unit of promissory debt exchange represents perhaps the greatest psychological operations ever conceived.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. I agree we are heading to a cashless society (and mark of the beast!?), but the technology behind bitcoin is ill equipped to carry out this purpose as fees are so high and transactions take a long time in comparison with rival cryptocurrencies.

    I am wondering if bitcoin is going to be used as a cash grab where they will get loads of investment then crash the maket and usher in their intended chosen coin. Probably along with regulations to ensure the idea of a rival economic system is never again discussed.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Given current global circumstances, the scenario you articulate seems very feasible. Though one requires more study on this subject to adequately come to any definitive conclusions about what Bitcoin’s ultimate purpose may be, intuition indicates Bitcoin may be a transitional step on the way to ultimately implementing and enchaining humanity to a global carbon unit based economy alluded to by political puppets such as Al Gore and others.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s