Why do so many so desperately wish to be entertained?
What grand appeal is there for those content to live and die vicariously through celluloid heroes while like children, they sit sheltered in the dark from the dangers of the outside world, in utter thrall before the imaginary, but comforting world of the silver screen?
Could it be, the darkness of the theater serves as a welcomed reprieve, perhaps even a psychological womb for those anonymously huddled together in desperate escape, while collectively hoping the light shed upon them from the mammoth silver screen will bring order to the world they’ve been conditioned to perceive as cold, unforgiving, and unpredictably chaotic?
The celebrity icons featured upon the silver screen – whether cast in the roles of heroes or villains – become worshipful, iconic vessels, mirror-like images upon which the masses project generalized idealizations, consisting of their fearful insecurities or perceivable virtues.
Marlon Brando represented one such icon who, for decades, generations of movie critics and audiences held in the highest esteem. Nevertheless, is it possible the name Marlon Brando was yet another pseudonym created to mask Hollywood’s rampant nepotism?
This installment shall connect this Hollywood legend with another actor and television star alleged to have recently died and with the current Russian Premiere, Vladimir Putin.
Stay tuned, folks.
The emergence of Marlon Brando’s Hollywood image into public consciousness brought with it a new approach to the craft of screen acting called “the method”.
What set the process of method acting apart from the more traditional, classically oriented approach to assuming roles was the incorporation of the “art of experience” as opposed to a mere reliance on physical and vocal training. The method theory of acting was primarily developed and introduced to the West by theater practitioner Konstantin Stanislavski, who believed that an actor should, both sympathetically and indirectly, mobilize conscious thought and will in order to activate other, less controllable psychological processes – such as emotional experience and subconscious behavior.
Essentially, the process of method acting did for the theater what the American art form of Jazz did for music, it transformed artistic expression and allowed for personal interpretation and improvisation. However, the following quote from Stanislavski not only provides a glimpse into his own perspective on the theory of method acting, but perfectly illustrates the definition of the phenomenon of the actor based reality as it relates to the post-modern milieu:
“When I give a genuine answer to the if, then I do something, I am living my own personal life. At moments like that there is no character. Only me. All that remains of the character and the play are the situation, the life circumstances, all the rest is mine, my own concerns, as a role in all its creative moments depends on a living person, i.e. the actor, and not the dead abstraction of a person, i.e., the role.”
What Stanislavski describes became known as the “Magic if”, where one imagines oneself in a fictional setting and acting upon the envisioned consequences. It is interesting to note, that many of the host actors that portrayed some of the most famous and iconic Hollywood personalities while operating under famous pseudonyms, were all students of Stanislavski’s method theory of acting – Ann-Margaret AKA Marilyn Monroe, Ronald Reagan AKA Leo Kirch, Robert DeNiro AKA Lyndon Johnson and Lucille Ball AKA Queen Elizabeth II.
Early on in his theater career Brando too, became a student of Stanislavski’s ‘method’ through Lee Strasburg’s Actor’s Studio, established during the era of the mid-twentieth century in New York. By the time of Brando’s appearances in such iconic roles as Streetcar Named Desire, The Wild Ones, and On The Waterfront, Stanislavski’s theory was being put into wider practice by both Hollywood’s most established stars and many screen acting hopefuls.
One finds it terribly ironic Stanislavski would make mention of “the dead abstraction of a person”, for as loyal readers who have bothered to read the author’s series of installments entitled How Crown Temple Rules America, they are well aware that, legally speaking, a ‘person’ is a fictional entity, a corporation which can be taxed and, as in the case of a host actor portraying a ‘real-life’ character under a pseudonym, has been legalized by a birth manifest and is therefore eligible for social security and retirements benefits.
This scenario, it turns out folks, precisely defines the Hollywood character of “Marlon Brando”, a moniker which is heavily coded with hidden occult and masonic references: (MAN/666/RAM/masonic/occult Baphomet/ANO/ASS=reference to masonic ritualized sex magic/BRAND=reference to the acquisition of global power through commercialism/merchant banking/trade=Satanism/O=mark of the beast).
Marlon Brando was a character portrayed by a host actor, who in turn, assumed other identities that became readily identifiable and subsequently, became renowned and even revered by a great majority of the general public. Brando’s host actor is related to the same genealogical bloodlines that have dominated Hollywood since its inception as the entertainment capital of the world. But before conducting further research into Brando’s host actor, one shall delve into one of Brando’s more widely known, Hollywood concocted character modifications. Suffice to say, now that Brando has been identified as yet another product of the actor based reality and, armed with the knowledge and insight provided by research into Konstantin Stanislavski’s method theory of acting, the psychological process of how the phenomenon of the actor based reality is maintained in the modern age can now be laid bare.
But now folks, while attempting to study the following so-called Brando impersonation performed by a very young Burt Reynolds in greater depth, one question arises: is this really an example of an impersonation, or is it an example of Brando portraying a parody of himself while veiling his identity in the disguise of another Hollywood characterization?
Take note too, that Brando, while in the guise of his character modification of Reynolds impersonating Brando, he both describes and satirizes Stanislavski’s “method” theory of acting while simultaneously putting it on display during the course of this ironic and amusing parody:
In supposing that most of one’s loyal readers may have already arrived at the inevitable conclusion Reynolds and Brando are indeed one and the same, it turns out that consensus is conclusively supported by the results of voice, facial recognition, as well ear biometric evaluation and analysis.
Now armed with this information, let’s accurately label the previous performance observed in the video sample displayed above for exactly what it is: an audacious display of the prevailing actor based reality in plain sight and an outright mockery of the general public’s naivete. Of course, by now, those who have visited Newsspell on a regular basis are quite well aware of how the International Masonic Brotherhood, the front for the Jesuit Order which controls Hollywood, abundantly revels in mocking the majority of the general public while they brazenly commit their monstrous criminal schemes in open view.
When one sought to examine Reynold’s official biographies, it was learned his long-term spouse had been former television star (CBS network sitcomWKRP in Cincinnati) Lonnie Anderson (SON=lucifer, eastern star of the morning/worshipful object of Masonic Brotherhood/Jesuit Order/ANO=ass/masonic sex magic ritual/EL=Biblical Elohim/fallen angels/L+ie=LIE). Extensive facial recognition and voice analysis indicates Anderson is a modification of Academy-Award winning actress Sally Field, Reynold’s co-star in Smokey and the Bandit, a 1970’s Hollywood action/comedy production which also starred the late comedian Jackie Gleason.
Regarding Anderson’s 1980 appearance on the Tonight Show starring Johnny Carson AKA JFK alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald (shortly, there shall be an additional installment concerning Carson and a Beatles connection) loyal readers should note that the entire televised “conversation” is likely not only scripted, but heavily laced with masonic markers and occult references. For example, when Anderson first arrives onstage, she mentions the date of 1976 (32/2 3’s=33/high-degree Scottish Rite Freemasonry). Next, she mentions not only starring in a sketch with Orson Welles (See: Howard Hughes: Man of mystery revealed (Part II) but she also alludes to the fact her hair has been dyed blonde from brunette, which is a subtle clue Anderson is the character modification of Sally Field. Moving onward to approximately 1:44 in the video, while making a reference to the role Carson portrayed in the Welles’ skit, Anderson positions both of her hands into the sign of the triple 6.
Then, Anderson begins discussing the subject of bells.
Research reveals that the etymology of the word bell is in fact connected to and derived from the ancient God of Fire known as Baal or Lord and Master. But folks, Anderson’s occult references soon transform to numerological codes. Anderson goes on to reveal what appear to be amusing anecdotes from her experiences in various beauty pageants as a teenager, both at the age of 15 (6/33) and at age 14 (77/twin lightning charges of Lucifer/angelic transformation). From there, Anderson claims that shortly after graduating from college, she served a three month stint (EE=33) as a high school teacher in classrooms populated with students aged 16 (7/Zayin the Kabbalah mind weapon) before finally taking someone’s advice she should go to Hollywood.
Now honestly folks, how many high school teachers have ever endeavored to quit their job to start afresh in show business, moved to Hollywood and, within the remarkably short span of just one year, found themselves starring on prime time television?
The odds are remarkable slim – unless of course – you’re a member of a prominent merchant banking family owning major stock in Hollywood, that is.
In the early decades of the twentieth century, John Pierpont Morgan was the patriarch of a powerful family of merchant bankers. During this era, Morgan’s influence over America’s economic endeavors was second only to that of John Davison Rockefeller AKA the late Abraham Lincoln, but old John D. was not the only one who had his shot at sitting upon America’s highest throne at Pennsylvania avenue. Like John D. and his notorious con man of a father, William Avery Senior, Morgan made a fortune during America’s Civil War, when he notoriously became involved with a massive scam that came to be known as the Hall Carbine Affair. Reportedly, Morgan wittingly financed the purchase of 5000 surplus rifles at a cost of less than four dollars, which were then sold back to the US government at a profitable cost of 22 dollars each. But Morgan was also noted for the rather unusual anatomical structure of his nose, which reportedly not only appeared overly bulbous, but the texture of Morgan’s nasal epidermis was said to have featured an even more unusual purplish tint. Because of this, the renowned banker would not allow unsolicited photographs to be taken of him, reportedly, some claimed, upon pain of severe verbal or even physical retribution. Given that Morgan was a rather ursine man at just over six feet in height, needless to say, he was assured to be never bothered by any photographers who may have resembled Hollywood Paparazzi.
That’s right folks, for his role in helping to profiteer from America’s so-called Civil War, Morgan was awarded a cat bird seat at America’s most famous address, Pennsylvania Avenue, starring as the 26th (2 6’s=12/21/777 joker code) president of the US corporation.
How exactly does Morgan tie-in with Lonnie Anderson AKA Sally Field, the long-time spouse of Burt Reynolds AKA Marlon Brando? Well, Sally Field’s father was Hollywood actor/comedian Jonathan Winters. Jonathan Harshman Winters was a descendant of Valentine Winters, founder of the Winters National Bank in Dayton, Ohio, which is now part of JP Morgan Chase.
Jackie Gleason (SON=Lucifer/symbolic object of Jesuit/masonic adoration/LE=EL/biblical Elohim/G=7/Zayin, the Kabbalah mind weapon):
Though it is claimed Winters hailed from a middle-class family and, that his father was a small-time insurance agent, one can well imagine that families or relatives of such families emanating from mere middle-class backgrounds hardly possess the financial wherewithal to finance the establishment of investment banks. Once again, this is a case of official biographies handing the public a rancid pile of deliberately misdirected propaganda. In examining the official biographies of Sally Field, one discovers a military connection originating from her alleged father’s side of the family, Richard Dryden Field. Of course, as loyal readers have discovered, such military connections have, invariably, always seemed to have turned up during the course of one’s research into a vast array of Hollywood celebrities and other renowned figures in the music and entertainment industries.
Not surprisingly therefore, one’s research has managed to make a rather interesting discovery concerning Jonathan Winters.
Get this folks – ear biometric, facial recognition, and voice analysis have conclusively demonstrated that Winters also portrayed renowned actor/comedian Jackie Gleason, the very same Jackie Gleason that co-starred in the 1970’s Hollywood action/comedy movie Smokey and the Bandit along with his daughter, Sally Field and her spouse, Burt Reynolds AKA Marlon Brando. When it comes to maintaining the impenetrable integrity of the phenomenon known as the actor based reality, one can always rest assured such secrets are always kept among close family members.
YOU LOOK ODDLY FAMILIAR, COMRADE?
Everyone is no doubt familiar with the propaganda shoveled by the MSM concerning the recent presidential election and alleged election “hacking” from what amounted to unnamed and ultimately phantom Russian agents. This sort of half-baked propaganda smacks of the sort of Operation Mockingbird styled refuse peddled by low-level agents toiling away in CIA’s basements while seated at their half-lit cubicles in Langley, Virginia, bleary-eyed from staring all day and night into columns of data spilled out over high-definition computer screens.
Furthermore, in a most recent installment, one brought to the attention of loyal readers the fact that during America’s alleged, decades-long “cold war” with the former Soviet Union, there was likely great cooperation between the two countries at the highest levels, most likely between KGB and CIA, and between the American State Department and its Soviet counterpart, the Politburo.
In his rather lengthy tome on the subject of the former Soviet Union, entitled Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, renowned scholar Anthony Sutton details that not only was the Communist uprising in Russia soon after the turn of the twentieth century heavily financed by prominent merchant banking families such as the Rockefellers, but as well the establishment of CIA in 1947.
Based upon this information – which can be corroborated elsewhere in any number of similar scholarly tomes – is one to assume, that the international intelligence octopus, in order to not only better conceal the consolidation and monopolization of all human and natural resources, but also to keep clandestine the fact all nations are merely corporate franchises existing under one global umbrella, is still not solely working on behalf of the ruling elite, thirteen Jesuit families and, could not very easily install any puppet they wish to appear as Russia’s chief executive officer?
Before answering in the negative, one should merely consider that, while taking into account and adjusting for various photographic lighting distortions, hair piece and stippling concealments, extensive ear biometric and comparative facial recognition examination of slews of images have once again confirmed that Burt Reynolds AKA Marlon Brando has in fact portrayed Russian Premiere, Vladimir Putin’s host actor.
When examining the following images and performing comparative sight analysis, keep in mind that for decades, Reynolds has been renown for wearing a hair piece and, that various forms of eye wear can often serve as a deliberate ocular distraction in helping to inhibit identity confirmation of a character’s host actor.
In part II coming soon, there will be more revelations concerning both Sally Field and Hollywood legend Marlon Brando, one of Hollywood’s most adept players in the post-modern phenomenon known as the actor based reality.