Standard Antisemitism Is Rightwing and Has Nothing to Offer Me or Any Other Liberal or Progressive Person

Other than the role of Israel in US politics and foreign policy, which is truly malign, as far as any other beefs against Jews that antisemites have, I’m not really into them. Those arguments just don’t resonate with me. I don’t particularly care what Jews do in my country outside of the Israel thing. Who cares!

Antisemitism is rightwing anyway. I get annoyed at Jews’ bullshit, and I like to talk about how they annoy me, but that’s not a matter of hatred. I don’t hate annoying people. They’re not contemptible; they’re just annoying. Two different things.

But as far as the Jews’ bullshit, games, and scams, that’s just them being silly.  All of the rest of us are morons for falling for these silly ethnic games they are playing on us. And if we are falling for their crap, oh well. We deserve whatever we get.

I’m not into Jews’ Endless Victim trip, which is really just Jewish Identity Politics. And I’ll bash Jewish IP on here like I bash any other IP. But I bash all retarded IP’s. Jewish IP isn’t anymore idiotic and nonsensical than all the others. All the IP’s are really the same at the end of the day.

Anyway I don’t hate professional victims. I just think they are complete idiots, and I laugh at them. What sort of a moron spends his whole life wailing about what a victim he is? I hate to use the word, but that’s what a loser does. So all the victim addicts are losers in a sense. They lack the basic pride needed to love themselves enough to not fall into the pathetic victim trap.

Now if your people really are getting fucked over, ok, well, you don’t have much choice. The victim role has been shoved upon you, and owning it is just facing facts.

The classic antisemitic beef has always been rightwing.

I will go over the standard anti-Semitic line as it has been forged for the last 150 years or so, but first I will discuss other things. Prior to that, antisemitism was based on other things.

Some were silly things like Jews killed Jesus. Except Jesus himself was a Jew, and Christians are literally worshiping this Jewish dude as their hero, but never mind that. It’s really sad how many Jews were probably killed for this BS.

Another silly reason was that Jews refused to convert to Christianity. I don’t understand why that’s important at all much, less a reason to kill a man. Obviously this doesn’t resonate with me.

Others were tragic lies like Jews being accused of poisoning village wells during the plague. That’s just made-up BS; it’s not even true. Sadly, many Jews were murdered for this nasty lie.

In the Middle Ages, Jews were often persecuted due to being the visible face of feudal rule. No one saw the feudal lords. The only face of feudal rule your average serf saw were Jewish tax collectors.

Logically, Jews tended to get killed when the usual peasant rebellions took place, except they pretty much deserved it for collecting taxes for the lords, although the Jewish women, children,  old men, and those who were not working for the lords should have been spared. Anti-Jewish pogroms were very ugly things. You don’t even want to know the details.

The modern form of antisemitism is a racial antisemitism which was founded by a German man named Marr in the 1870’s  who founded the Anti-Semitic League. Yep, that’s where we get the term that everyone likes to take apart as being irrational.

Except words and phrases get to be irrational in terms of etymology. Does “You’re pulling my leg literally mean that?” No? Ok, then why say it? In Spanish, you say, “You’re pulling my hair?” Does that make any more sense? Of course not. See what I mean? Words and phrases don’t have to literally make sense. They only have to mean whatever the people who use them say that they mean. #1 rule of a subfield of Linguistics called Semantics.

Oddly enough, Marr had previously married and divorced three separate wives, all Jewish. Hell, that’s probably why he hated Jews right there, ha ha. The general argument of these “new antisemites” or “modern antisemites” was that Jews are anti-nationalists and basically traitors to the homeland. I’m not sure how valid that argument was or is. The Dreyfus Affair is a case in point of this argument.

A lot of Jews fought nobly in World War 1. During Kristallnacht, many Jews put on their WW1 uniforms and went out and stood in front of their shops to try to protect them on the grounds that people would respect the fact that they were patriots. It didn’t work. They got beat up and their stores got burned down anyway. That’s so sad.

There was an argument that a lot of Jews tried to get out of World War 2, but I’m not sure how valid that is. That’s rather low if they did considering that in Europe anyway, we fought on their behalf.

But my father had two close Jewish friends who he met during World War 2.

One man served in the Pacific with my father in Okinawa and then went to China with him after the war. That trip to China was one of the peaks of my father’s life. He talked about it a lot. It was like this wild adventure.

Another served on the European front in Italy and then in Germany with the Liberation. He was there when the death camps were liberated. The US military said that Jewish soldiers didn’t have to go see the death camps if they didn’t want to, but my father’s friend went anyway. It was bad, real bad. No words to describe how bad it was. So two of my father’s Jewish friends served in the war. Doesn’t sound like a lot of them got out of it.

Later, other forms of rightwing antisemitism formed in the 20th Century with these basic arguments.

  1. Jews are Communists and Jews led the Bolshevik Revolution that killed 90 million billion zillion gazillion Russian Christians!!

This one is funny. I supported the Bolshevik Revolution. I’m practically a Goddamned Commie. Jews led the Bolshevik Revolution? Ha ha, thank you very much, Jews! Jews are a bunch of Commies? It’s not true anyway but if it’s true, thank you very much, Jews!

2. Jews push racemixing and are trying to genocide the White race. There’s actually some truth to this. Jews in the US have indeed been trying to make Whites a minority in the US,  or at least some of them have. Some of them have anyway. As one Jew said, “When we get Whites down below 50%, a Nazi government can never come to rise in the US.” See what they are doing? It’s all about self-preservation. They’re not just doing it be evil.

I don’t particularly care about this either than to note that the Jews are engaging in sleazy double standards as usual.

1. Jews all have to marry other Jews and no mixing is allowed or they go extinct.

2. But Whites need panmixia!

So promote racial fidelity for your own group while promoting racial suicide and mixture for  your enemies. Sleazy. But hey, that’s the way they are.

I figure that if Whites are so stupid as to be conned by this by pissant little tribe of humans called Jews (who are no more important than any other pissant tribe like Chechens, Burushaski, Dinka, Tuareg, or what have you) then we deserve whatever they con us into. I have no sympathy for morons. And if we Whites want to mix away and go extinct out of own own free will, which is apparently the case, well then, that’s own choice.

3. Jews promote racial hatred against Whites,  make Whites out to be the bad guys, and promote non-Whites as glorious, perfect people while promoting Whites as devils. Well, that’s awful rich of the Jews to do that considering that they’re obviously White themselves, except they lie as usual and say they’re not.

This is just a stupid Jewish game:

We’re not White (though we are), and we are non-Whites (except we’re not) along with the glorious Browns, Blacks, and Yellows, all fighting the evil White oppressor (which is actually us because we’re White). Except that Jews won’t date or marry these glorious non-Whites they throw themselves in with. Hell, they won’t even live in the same neighborhood with them.

It doesn’t even make sense logically, but a lot of Jewish arguments are like that.

So, more Jewish scamming, double standards, tribal thinking  – the usual crap. But this game is so stupid. I mean if we Whites really cared, we could probably raise a fuss about all this anti-White hatred, except the Jews and their non-White pals call us Nazis when we Whites ask people to please, pretty please not be racist against us.

Well, the Jews are definitely playing a real low game here all right, but I don’t particularly care about White-bashing and anti-White racism. I hardly deal with it, and I just laugh at any non-White who acts racist towards me because, I hate to say it, I actually do feel superior to them deep down inside at that point when they are bashing my race.

But I can see why any racially aware White person, certainly a White nationalist, would have a huge beef against Jews. They have a right to that beef because from these Whites’ POV, Jews are definitely screwing over their people.

Except I’m not a racially aware White or a White nationalist, so I don’t care.

4. Jews promote civil rights, feminism, gay rights, tranny rights, and all sorts of other civil rights stuff to weaken the moral fiber of White society so the Jews can take over and out-compete the Whites. Well, all of those movements were good ideas at least in  theory, so good on the Jews. And I doubt if they did it to weaken us. They probably just did it out of a strong sense of social justice, which Jews have had for a long time now, and that is very noble of them.

The argument also says that Jews promote these divide and conquer movements among Whites while sparing their own kind. Well, that’s not true. Jewish society is full of some of the worst feminists of them all. And it didn’t use to be, but gay and lesbian Jews are on just about every corner. I assume there are plenty of Jewish trannies too, as Jews seem to go in for anything sexually perverse for some reason.

But then you have (((George Soros))) who goes around to White Gentile countries promoting all of these rights moments, including a truly insane feminist group called Femen, which is his baby. Femen is raising the usual Hell that femikooks anywhere raise, mostly in Eastern Europe. On the other hand, when Femen tried to set up a chapter in Israel, (((Soros))) refused to fund it.

Now I am very suspicious of this man!

His game:

White Gentile societies need the most divisive radical feminism to turn the men and women against each other (Why do they need this?), while we Jews wouldn’t dare subject our own people to this divisive bullshit.

Ok, this is the sort of thing that the Elders of Zion do in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Promote all this junk for their enemies to divide them while sparing their own kind.

So congratulations Mr. (((Soros)))! You succeeded in being a living example of the worst anti-Jewish stereotypes of all! In fact, you appear to have walked right out of the pages of the Protocols, one of the most anti-Jewish books ever written! Brilliant!

Jews act out the worst anti-Jewish stereotypes and then they are shocked! Shocked! When antisemitism logically follows that. They create antisemitism, then they scream and yell about it. That’s dumb, but that’s not a reason to hate them. That’s just these foolish Jews bringing in down on themselves. Why should I hate someone for being self-destructive?

In general, I don’t care that Jews push all these SJW movements, but Mr. (((Soros)))’ behavior is extremely uncool. At any rate, (((Soros))) is not even good for the Jews. The guy’s a one man Antisemitism Manufacturing Plant in the form of a human.

Another thing I want to point out is that the SJW’s are on autopilot now. I doubt if feminism, gay rights, civil rights, tranny rights, and whatever else rights need Jews to push their causes anymore. All the US Jews could take off for Israel or the moon tomorrow, and I am pretty sure that these movements would charge right ahead. That’s because the leadership and bases of these movements is swarming with Gentiles.

5. Jews own the media. Yeah, they do, sort of. And they took it over on purpose. Not to be evil but to protect themselves. And the consequence of this Jewish media is…? What? Other than the Israel-firster stuff, not much.

Further, I do not think the media needs Jews anymore either. The other day, I saw a Canadian paper formerly owned by (((Izzy Asper))), an Israel-firster billionaire who was also a real ratfuck, as you might expect. The paper, The  National Post, is now run by Gentiles.

Well, if you go read that paper, you would think that (((Asper))) never left because the paper reads exactly like it did when (((Asper))) ran it. Still a full-blown Israel-firster paper, but now the Israel-firster articles are all written by Gentiles!

I have seen other papers go from Jewish to Gentile ownership, and not one single thing changes. So I think there is just a “media elite” politics in North America which is shared by all owners, editors, and writers for the MSM, Jews and  Gentiles both. They both push wild SJWism, bash Whites, uphold non-Whites as glorious, and are fanatical Israel-firsters.

6. Jews own Hollywood. Yes, and? Granted, it’s not very democratic, but Hollywood is not nearly as Jewish as it used to be. Many directors and producers now are Gentiles. The Jews still own a lot of the studios, but Gentiles have been forming their own studios lately – Coppola is an excellent example.

Supposedly Jews use Hollywood movies and TV (which is still very Jewish, granted) to push the same stuff – SJWism, anti-White propaganda, reverence for glorious non-Whites, etc. Except Hollywood doesn’t really go along with the Israel-firster stuff, and a number of directors don’t even go along with US imperialism.

And once again, the Gentile directors and producers push all the same themes that the Jewish ones do.  There is a Hollywood elite that has a similar politics shared by both  Jews and Gentiles.

7. Jews make porn. They do. But there are an awful lot of Gentiles making porn now too, right? The industry used to be extremely Jewish in the 1970’s and 80’s – now it is much less so.

But let’s try a thought experiment. All the  US Jews take off for Israel, the moon, Atlantis, wherever. No more Jews. You think the porn industry will go under? Hell no. All the outlets owned by sleazy Jews will be immediately taken over by sleazy Gentiles. Isn’t that obvious? And the Gentiles in porn push all the same sleazy crap: racemixing, Blacks cucking Whites, or whatever.

7. Jews are aggressive, rude, tight, and don’t like non-Jews. A lot of them are. This is particularly the case with the Orthodox and Super Jews like you find in Israel. The more “Jewish” the person is, the more they act in this “Jewy” way. The more assimilated the Jew is, the less they act that way. A lot of Jewish men can definitely be pretty aggressive. The women seem to be less so. After all, they are females.

But that’s not really important. Anyway, exactly how many people actually hate Jews because they are like this? Hell, I know wild Judeophiles who laugh and openly admit that the Jews are obnoxious. And these are people who love Jews.

I’ve also read thousands of antisemites on the web over the years. I haven’t found one yet who actually hated Jews because a lot of them are not real nice. So few if any people are actual antisemites for that reason. I’m sure Jews will call these people antisemites, but they all everyone that.

As far as my opinion goes, at the end of the day, this is just not important. That’s just the petty sociological behavior of a single ethnic group.

Lots of ethnic groups have funny ways of behaving, both good and bad. In many cases, ethnic behavior isn’t important as long as they don’t break the law or seriously disrupt society. Being annoying is nothing. I’m not going to hate some whole race of humans because a lot of them act annoying. That’s a petty issue. It’s hardly a reason to hate a whole ethnic group or race. I imagine most people who feel that Jews act this way feel the same way.

It should be clear now that standard antisemitism is rightwing and has always been rightwing. There’s nothing here for liberals, Leftists, or progressive people.

Harry Nilsson “Everybody’s Talkin'”

Harry Nilsson, “Everybody’s Talkin'” 1969 (Soundtrack to Midnight Cowboy

A truly great song. Just heard Iggy Pop, of all people dammit, cover this song. It was really good, much better than I ever would have thought. I guess a great song is like a classic fairy tale. It’s pretty hard to ruin it, and most don’t even try, thank God. And probably even when they ruin it, you can still see and here the glints of greatness blinking in the well-intentioned ruins. Some things are just too great to kill.

The movie itself is out of this damned world too. Hard to believe this movie and song is from half a century ago. No way! Is it reality or a fever dream? Wake me up when it’s over!

Remastered version from 1989. Dig it, baby, dig it.

Hollywood and Las Vegas: Two Fun but Cruel Towns

Polar Bear: As far as Hollywood as a gay mecca, Eyes Wide Shut is the closest most will see of it, but there are always VIP orgy gatherings. Kat Williams, Richard Nixon, and others have walked into some gay shit. Spirit cooking parties, Bohemian Grove, etc. are on record. I don’t believe they’re all gay, but gay sex is part of the rituals.

The music industry is highly involved in this stuff too. Check out Celine Dion promoting transgender baby clothes.

Any A-list star with long lasting fame has done some rituals. Don’t do the ritual? Go make low budget movies. If you don’t play ball, you’re a one-hit wonder or an underground artist.

I am afraid that Polar Bear is onto something here. I was around that place for many years. Hell, I practically lived there on weekends. It’s a blast but it’s insanely fagged out and so degenerate it almost makes you want to puke. And I’m a libertine!

Hollywood is a mean, vicious town. It literally eats people alive, chews them up, and spits them out when it’s done with them. Las Vegas is another cruel town. It also eats people alive and bulimically vomits them out when it’s done. Neither town gives a damn about you – or anyone, really.

Both towns are all about money and the nice things that money can buy, like everything in the world, including humans for sex – sex which is pretty much pump and go to the club to grab a new one. There’s narcissism everywhere in  Hollywood. Hollywood literally breathes, eats, sleeps, and even shits narcissism. Narcissism is the gas, Hollywood is the engine. No narcissism, no Hollywood.

Both towns are predatory, with the rich preying on the poor suckers filled with the naive hope of fame or riches in both places. Both cities seem soulless and post-Christian or possibly never even Christian in the first place, as in heathen.

Both Hollywood and Vegas are in a race for the bottom behavior-wise, and no one gives a damn in either place. No one gives a damn about what? Anything. No one gives a damn about anything.

A lot of people move to Hollywood and LA to party their brains out for a while and then die. LA is literally a suicide trip for a lot of people. If narcissism is the gas for the Hollywood engine, nihilism is the exhaust.

Check out Sunset Boulevard in cinema, Nathaniel West or John Rechy in literature, or the Eagles, X, and the Germs in music for more. LA’s right on the edge of the sea after all. One earthquake and it all falls into the surf. LA is literally the end of a continent, and after you spend some time there, it really feels like it. It’s a lot of fun if you can take it, but it’s basically a stone evil town with pretty much zero morals about anything.

“Jackie Brown” (1996)

Watching the movie, Jackie Brown, by Quentin Tarantino. Another Tarantino flick. First Reservoir Dogs, next Pulp Fiction, and then Jackie Brown. The acting in particular is out of this world, especially two Black auteurs, Samuel Jackson and Pam Grier (Grier is out of this world – not sure if I have seen her before).

Here.

If you have seen these movie, see ya in the comments.

Reservoir Dogs (1992)

Reservoir Dogs (1992).

Quentin Tarantino’s first film, an indie. After that came Pulp Fiction only two years later. It’s hard to imagine that he’s produced a better movie since than either of these, although many of his subsequent movies have been very good. I recently watched this on the Net for the first time and it was out of this world. The dialogue was great, the plot was perfect and in particular, the acting was simply amazing.

There is a lot of very explicit violence in this movie though, so it’s very hard to take. But I like Tarantino’s take on violence. The old violence in movies was sanitized. Tarantino makes lethal and non-lethal violence seem gross, disgusting, nauseating, sickening, blood and guts and all that splattered all over.

Shot bodies react just as bodies do when shot – absolutely fling backwards at a very fast speed. People stagger off to finally drop. Dying takes a while for some and is disgusting and  horrible to watch.

You watch sanitized violence and it seems like violence is not so bad. We kids used to play army. If you got shot, you fell down like in the movies. But it was all sanitized, like the violence in the movies. That makes it too clean and it makes violence more likely.

When you see how sickening real violence is, blood and guts splattered all over, people wheezing and gasping in death throes, it’s so sickening and repulsive that it seems like the last thing you would ever want to do. It’s hard to imagine anyone but a sadist getting aroused or jazzed up by Tarantino’s grotesque and sickening violence.

Normal people will want to vomit or walk out of the theater. And in fact, at initial showings at the Cannes, many viewers did walk out on this movie, including famous directors. But even the walk-outs said the movie was very good.

Well recommended. Have you watched it yet? Do.

Watch online.

Dick Dale, “Miserlou”

Speak of the Devil. What do you know, Miserlou itself, rising from the ashen surf.  This version the famous one from 1962 by Dick Dale and the Deltones.

He didn’t really write this song. it’s actually called “Misirlou”. It’s origins are in the late days of the Ottoman Empire, possibly with Greeks and Armenians living in Anatolia and Arabs living nearby in the northern Levant and Mesopotamia. I believe the origin is probably with Greek musicians, possibly Pontic Greeks living in Anatolia. Hence, this joyous song sprung right up from the blood-drenched soil of genocide.  Perhaps the song represents a rebirth?

The earliest known version is by a Greek band from 1927. In the early 20’s, it was played by Greek, Arab, and Jewish musicians. There are also Turkish, Iranian, and Indian versions of the song. It does sound like belly dancer music if you listen to it, no?

From the “Pulp Fiction” soundtrack, which was of course one of the greatest movies of the past half-century or so. This is probably Tarantino’s swan song. The bisexual man John Travolta was incredible in this movie. I really didn’t know he had it in him. I thought he would play his Saturday Night Fever character the rest of his life. Another great movie by the way. From the late 1970’s, the ultimate disco movie.

Samuel Jackson was incredible too. One of the finest Black actors up there. I swear he’s as good as De Niro and Hoffman.

Janice Fiamengo, “The Monstrous Male Gaze”

This male gaze nonsense is truly idiotic. I am a Leftist, but once again, why should the men of the Left or anyone on the Left have to go along with this rank nonsense? It doesn’t even make sense, and that’s aside from the blatant pathological man hatred from which it springs.

I never knew much about where this silliness came from. The originator of this theory is a woman named Mulvey, a film theorist, who came up with this in the mid-70’s. I had had no idea where this batty idea came from.

Janice has some photos of her here, and all I could tell is that she was quite homely. Of course there’s nothing wrong with that, but have you ever noticed how many feminists are homely, fat, or both? Think that’s a coincidence? Think again.

I invite you to come up with your own explanations – mine are obvious: they’re homely and/or fat, so men are rejecting and not very nice to them, so they start hating men and move into feminism as a logical destination from the man-hating highway.

Mulvey is also – surprise! A lesbian! How did you guess? The percentage of major feminist figures who are out and out man-hating dykes is shocking. Lesbians are only 1% of women, but lesbians or one type or another are ~1/3-1/2 of major feminist figures.

That shows you right there that feminism is a completely abnormal movement and it doesn’t represent most women at all and therefore it has no right to bear the banner of the women’s rights movement. Any proper women’s rights movements would mirror the female population. In other words, in a sane women’s rights movement, 1% of activists would be lesbians. Right?

Anyway this Mulroney came up with this theory not because it is such a profound theoretical truth. Instead as with most things, its origins are quite mundane if not insipid. Mulvey was sick and tired of being triggered every time she saw straight couples making out in the films she watched ans studied.

And this lies at the heart of another painful truth about feminism: feminism has always been about hatred for heterosexual relations, especially heterosexual male sexuality. Straight women get off the hook as feminists just say they are brainwashed, but in general, feminists think that heterosexuality is crap at best and nearly demonic at worst. So feminism has in a sense been a jihad against heterosexual sex.

Some prominent feminists have actually come right out and admitted that. See Andrea Dworkin. And she’s not the only one.

We see this hatred of heterosexual sex again in the insane #metoo movement which has now potentially outlawed all straight flirting. Its corollary in the anti-sexual assault movement has now potentially outlawed all touching between straights and all straight dating. The corresponding rape hysteria movement, ongoing for decades in feminism dating back to Brownmiller and her ilk, potentially makes all heterosexual sex rape.

I doubt if this is accidental. It’s part of feminism’s war on heterosexual sex. If you notice that ~40% of major feminist theorists have been man-hating lesbians with an extreme hatred of heterosexual sex, the #metoo nonsense starts to make sense – they are trying to drive men and women apart and make it more difficult for heterosexual sex to occur. Obviously if you hate heterosexual sex, this is a great thing.

I also notice an awful lot of lesbians are fat and/or homely. I have no idea why this is either, as many gay men are quite handsome if not extremely handsome. So whatever it is, it’s not related to homosexuality per se.

In fact there’s probably not a lot of things that male and female homosexuality have in common. They’re like ducks and geese, similar but also completely different. The only thing they have in common is a lack of interest in the opposite sex, a strong interest in their own sex, and I would add, a tendency to imitate heterosexual sexual relations (which they supposedly despise) in their relationships.

The Marriage of Drug, Black, and Jazz Cultures in the Earlier Days of Jazz Music

The jazz underground has always been associated with Black people and drugs even from its early days in the 1920’s.

The drug back then was mostly marijuana which was widely demonized back then because it was mostly used by Blacks and Hispanics. Whites who used it were more or less White niggers or wiggers so to speak.

The Pot Makes You Violent Bullshit

My Mom has believed this garbage her whole life. She keeps bringing it up. She got infected with this propaganda way back as a girl. This shows how strong propaganda is and how it has the potential to override all reason.

This is where the myth the crazed psychotic violent pot crazed murdering maniac comes from – the fact that most pot users were either city Blacks or low-skilled Mexican workers. These people were considered to be violent types – and they are more violent than Whites. They also used pot, so it was assumed that the pot and violence went together except that it didn’t and if anything it probably calmed them down.

There were also a few notorious cases in which unstable pot smokers went wild and committed some savage murders. The relationship of pot with these cases is unknown but back then, few people smoked pot, but one thing was for sure – almost all criminals, even White criminals, smoked pot. In fact it was seen as a drug of criminals which is why a lot of people didn’t want to use it.

The completely serious movie (now a so bad it’s great movie) Reefer Madness is emblematic of the anti-pot propaganda of the time.

A man named Henry J. Anslinger headed the Drug Enforcement Agency back then, and he had some sort of a hard-on for pot for some crazy reason. He led the anti-pot campaign in the US for many years starting  in the 1930’s. He was more of a brainwashed (and racist) fool than anything else, but he damaged the lives of a lot of innocent pot smokers.

Of course anyone who has smoked pot knows that it calms you down. I knew Jack Herrer, a famous post activist.

He told me that when he was in jail and prison, prisoners who smoked pot always calmed down a lot and became less aggressive and violent. He said some of the wardens even turned a blind eye to pot use for his reason. In fact, the passivity that this drug causes is one of its biggest problems, as people get lost in their bong hits and become apathetic as the world passes them by.

This amotivational syndrome is mostly an issue for teenagers and young adults and it is quite common among young potheads. However, I have hardly ever met an adult past age 23 who had amotivational syndrome, as most even very heavy pot-smokers develop the work ethic needed to survive in our society by that age.

Teenagers and young adults are notoriously apathetic and poorly motivated as it is, since they have not yet been beaten over the head with the Reality Stick of Life. Encapsulate such a young person in a perennial cloud of pot smoke, and it just makes the laziness and lack of guidance, direction, and purpose typical of this age group all the worse.

Anyway, the jazz scene lingered in mostly Black and rather sleazy nightclubs in ghettos where nevertheless a lot of lowlife White types who lived my sort of lifestyle liked to go to slum it up on weekends. White men have been slumming it up forever. There is a cool element to it as long as you do not get too taken in by it.

Ghetto Drugs and Non-Ghetto Drugs

Cocaine and heroin were also pretty widely widely used in this scene – cocaine all the way back to the 1920’s, when we were already getting warnings about the insidious nature of this drug. Heroin was always around too, as it’s always been in the ghettos. It got more popular in the 1950’s and many great Black jazz musicians become junkies.

Psychedelics were never popular, as not only were they not around then, but also people in the ghettos and barrios of big cities have never been big psychedelic fans.

Psychedelics actually do expand your awareness and exaggerate whatever environment you are in. This is great for self-exploration if you have a fairly cozy life, but if your life blows for any reason, you might just have a bad trip.

I kept a hit of strong LSD in my refrigerator for two years until I finally felt that my head was perfectly clear and sane enough to take the stuff. The importance of what is called set and setting is extremely important for drugs like this.  Psychedelics are not escapist drugs – they are the opposite.

As Blacks and Hispanics in city ghettos and barrios are usually living anywhere from a hardscrabble to nightmarish existence, the last they want to is to take a drug that makes that very existence about 10 times as powerful as it is.

On the other hand, PCP  was popular in the Black and Hispanic communities, but it is not a psychedelic per se, as it is more of an anesthetic – it was originally an animal tranquilizer, and people used to refer to it as “elephant tranquilizer,” which was exactly what it was used for.

Yes, that stuff was actually used to literally knock out massive elephants. Now think about a drug that is strong enough to put an elephant on its ass and try to imagine what it will do  to a comparatively puny human.

The PCP experience can be profoundly weird, but I suppose it is also a form of escapism, as when you use PCP  you are basically traveling to another  planet right here on Earth. Going all the way to another planet while never leaving your own is about as powerful as escapism gets, I would say.

Happy 50th Birthday Midnight Cowboy

Midnight Cowboy starring Jon Voight (possibly the best of his career) and Dustin Hoffman in two of their finest roles ever. Released in 1969 to rave reviews.

One of the greatest movies of all time. Very popular with hipsters. I first heard of it from some of the local street guys, macho punk hustler pot and acidhead types, the first time I ever smoked pot, in 1973. It was a traumatic situation that I will not go into.

But I do remember one of those macho punk hustler delinquents told the other one that Midnight Cowboy was on the TV and to come inside and watch it. That’s what it was. A cult hipster hippie movie from the 1960’s with its own special unique charm. The movie had a bit of homosexuality in it, but that wasn’t enough to scare of these tough street punks.

If you have never watched this movie, you don’t know what you are missing.

And the final scene is sad as Hell. Really, the whole damn movie is sad as Hell, come to think of it.

Happy Fiftieth Birthday, Easy Rider

Take the world in a love embrace!

I’ve always loved Steppenwolf. That’s one group of badass motherfuckers from the 1960’s. So was that movie too, by the way. One of the best hipster, outsider, hippie, and road movies ever  made. Basically giving the finger to the Establishment all the way, even at this late date, like all of us good rebels always should.

Full version here:

Lyrics:

Get your motor runnin’
Head out on the highway
Lookin’ for adventure
And whatever comes our way

Yeah darlin’ go make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space

I like smoke and lightning
Heavy metal thunder
Racin’ with the wind
And the feelin’ that I’m under

Yeah darlin’ go make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space

Like a true nature’s child
We were born, born to be wild
We can climb so high
I never wanna die

Born to be wild

Born to be wild

NB: I never knew what this song was all about. I thought it was just about being a bad boy, which is my lifetime vocation from age 16-on. The only reason I do this rebel crap is that women eat up. Plus I still hate authority. I’m still rebelling against my father, the cops, the school authorities, my bosses, and all the rest of the jerkoffs who tried so foolishly to control and tame me.

Alt Left: Do Men Enjoy Hurting and Terrorizing Women?

To radical feminists, it is an article of faith that all or almost all men enjoy male violence against women. They either like it when other men are violent against women or they are violent against women themselves. They also enjoy portrayals of violence against women in literature and film.
I beg to differ. I’ve been a man most of my life. I don’t get off on violence against women. Never have, never will. I saw a movie with a long rape scene in it once and it was one of the most horrible things I have ever experienced. I never watch rape porn. Just to experiment I searched hard on the Net for rape porn recently.
It is actually very hard to find, contrary to the radfem lie that it is everywhere and easily accessible. Most large porn sites like Xhamster and Pornhub have policies against rape porn and few if any porn movies portray rape or even hardcore BD/SM. Hardcore BD/SM is a specialty niche in porn. However, I remember back in the 1970’s in the golden age of Porn that rape scenes were very common in porn and hardcore BD/SM was too.
Anyway, I found a site that had rape porn. It’s hardcore porn with rape scenes in it. I tried to watch two of them but never got to the one minute mark. It was utterly horrifying and repellent. Just the screaming of the woman revolted me almost physically and I had to turn it off. It was just horrible.
Most men probably don’t get off much on male violence against women at all. Most of the men I have known do not get off on portrayals of violence against women in film or reports of such in the news. I’ve never known one man who enjoyed rape scenes in cinema or rape porn. Most men I have known think violent rape is literally sickening. In fact, most men that I have known  react with extreme outrage to news reports of violent crimes against women, especially violent rape, torture and homicide. The reaction is along the lines of, “Don’t put him in the jail. Put him under the jail.”
I’ve never met a men who reacted with pleasure to news that a man beat up a woman. Most are outraged by such behavior. Men do joke sometimes about killing out of control crazed psychobitches, but we are not serious about it. A man will be discussing his insane psychobitch girlfriend and one man who say very casually, “Just kill her.” This causes uproarious laughter but it’s not said in a serious way. The man who said it and the man with the crazy woman both act like this is not a serious option.
And to be completely honest, men say they same thing about crazy, hyper-aggressive, hostile and combative men. I took a three-day trip recently with a relative. It started off good but it degenerated into utter Hell pretty quickly. When I came back, I said to some family members, “Boy, I’m sure glad that trip ended when it did. If it went on much longer, I would have had to kill him.” This prompted a big round of laughter. Men joke about killing any extremely hostile and belligerent person, even an old lady. But I have heard women say similar things about extremely combative women who are driving them crazy.
I am sure there are men out there who like to read about violence against women in the news and watch it on screen either in cinema or in porn. I’ve just never met one, and I’ve met a lot of men. Obviously some men enjoy hearing about violence against women, but it’s a minority. The tendency of a man to get off on violence against women is wrapped up in masculinity.  The more masculine the man, the more likely he is to enjoy violence against women. However, sexually violent media, especially violent pornography, probably makes more men interested in violence against women by showing it to men, repeating it to where it becomes normalized, and then priming the pump so to speak.
Another radical feminist article of faith is that we love it that women are afraid or even terrified of us. Supposedly we have created this Patriarchy of Terror to keep women and line and we like it this way.
I doubt if most men think it’s cool that women are terrified of us. I will admit that it’s good in a way because they are a lot less hostile and aggressive when they are afraid of us. When women are afraid of us, they act nicer and more feminine and are more deferential to us, which is the way you are supposed to act around any potentially violent creature. But I have never thought once in my life, “Boy, it sure is great that we men set up this Terror Dictatorship over the women!”
On the other hand, most of us men would rather women be a lot less afraid of us because then we could get more sex. So many times you try to approach or talk to a woman, and she takes off because she’s afraid of you. We would love it if you could walk up to a woman walking on the street after dark and have a pleasant conversation with her.
And a lot of us get really sick and tired of being treated like killers and rapists all the time. It really gets on our nerves.

Alt Left: Robert Stark Interviews Ashley Messinger about Retro-Futurism

Good stuff. Ashley Messinger is a new thinker from the UK who identifies with the Alt Left, in particular Brandon Adamnson’s Left of the Alt Right wing. It used to be called Left Wing of the Alt Right, but Brandon recently changed it to the Left of the Alt Right as he says he has abandoned the Alt Right for good and his Alt Left tendency is now completely outside of the Alt Right and more a part of the Alt Left proper.
Messinger is quite an intellectual and he can be dry and ponderous as such folks often are. But he is very smart and he has a lot of very interesting ideas. Messinger seems to be some sort of White Nationalist Lite along the lines of Adamson. Messinger even takes Adamson’s mild views further as he proposes a mostly White state that could be as low as 70% White but would include high IQ folks of certain other select races. Still not what I want, but it’s getting closer to a multicultural society or at least a White society with prominent minorities. There is a lot of talk below about all sorts of forms of Futurism, which I find fascinating but I know little about. I admit I am not a Futurist as I am a stick in the mud fogey. They discuss new genres of literature, films, architectural styles, musical genres. Fascinating stuff. Check out this interesting new Alt Left thinker.
Download here.

Robert Stark talks to Ashley Messinger about Retro Futurism

Robert Stark and co-host Brandon Adamson talk to returning guest ASHLEY MESSINGER. Ashley is based in the UK and writes for Brandon’s AltLeft.com. You can also find Ashley on Twitter.
Topics:
A continuation on the topic of a “redpilled” SWPL culture and it’s viability.
The implicit Whiteness of progressive causes such as Environmentalism, Effective Altruism, and Transhumanism.
The importance of being technologically advanced in contrast to gun culture and “Becoming a Barbarian”..
Creating city-states based on shared interest.
BiopunkBiomorphism, and vertical gardens.
Brandon’s interest in 70’s Retro Futurism (ex. Logan’s Run).
Steampunk, Urban Fantasy literature, and the technology of Victorian England.
Decopunk; the film Dark City.
The lack of vision in new architecture and urbanism.
Roman Archeo-Futurism.
80’s Retro-Futurism, Cyberpunk, and Fashwave.
The Bearer of “Trad” News.
Hip to the Moon: Brandon Adamson Drops Out to Conquer the Stars.
Robert’s Journey to Vapor Island; Roger Blackstone’s “Neon Nationalism.”
The Man in the High Castle series; the alternative society portrayed and the Retro-Futuristic architecture.
Whether fascism was anti-modern or about creating an alternative modernity.
Ashley’s review of the film Call Me by Your Name.
Age of consent laws.
The film The Crush starring Alicia Silverstone.

Robert Stark Interviews Author Ray Harris

First Stark broadcast I have run in some time now.
This man Ray Harris is a true intellectual. Stark suggests that he also may be considered Alt Left, and I would agree with that.
A lot of interesting discussions going on here with a lot of it centering on nudity, social nudity, and our very nutty hangups about nudity. The Anglophone world is extremely uptight and Puritanical about social nudity in contrast to most of Europe. Germany and Spain in particular are quite wide open about this subject. There is also a lot about nude minors being portrayed in art. In recent years, the controversy has been mostly about naked teenage girls in movies.
Most of these movies were produced in Europe. Louis Malle’s Pretty Baby features a nude 12-year-old Brooke Shields. This clip is out there on the Internet for all to see because nudity is not necessarily child pornography. You can have all the pictures of naked kids all you want I guess.
Nudism sites certainly do, and they are all over the Net. They show humans including minors of all ages, wandering about in the nude on beaches, forests, etc. It’s honestly not very erotic, and the younger teenage girls are not as hot as you would think. They mostly appeared underdeveloped to me, and I wasn’t very into them. Of course the naked kids are not arousing at all, and I fail to understand why we flip out about this stuff. I mean, I can’t think of anything less interesting than a naked kid of either gender. So why do we have a heart attack every time we see one!? I mean it’s a naked human being. Is that evil or something? Color me mystified. What the Hell’s the matter with you hysterical  Puritans anyway?
Of course I have seen the Pretty Baby clip, and I must say, I can’t see why anyone would be turned on by 12 year old Brooke naked in her shower. I watched it and I thought, “Lame,” and “Why would anyone get turned on by that?” Nevertheless, the hysteria rages on out of control, burning minds to a crisp all over the land.
There’s a long history of painting naked minors, especially females, and in centuries past, it was quite common to paint young naked children. I believe Harris says it’s not done much anymore because artists are too paranoid.
The work of photographers Jock Sturges, David Hamilton, and Bill Henson is gone over. These are modern photographers whose work focuses on naked teenage girls.
Henson likes them real young, like age 13. I’ve seen some of that, and it’s not a turn-on at all. In fact, it’s a huge turnoff. You want to look away because you are thinking a girl that young is too young to be sexualized. It’s not erotic to me in the slightest. Instead it is shocking and weird. They have no bodies at all, no tits to speak of, their bodies look like boys’ bodies (I call females like that “sticks”), and at this point of my life, they really look like little girls. They’re not little girls anymore, but they look like they are.
I think we need laws to keep men and 13 year old girls from having sex. These girls need to be protected from us men, and we men need to be protected from ourselves. It would not be right for this to be legal. That’s practically a little girl.
Hamilton and I think Sturges focus on teenage girls, so that’s a lot more promising. Hamilton’s shots are in outdoor locations, often in groups. The photography is spectacular, and the girls are very beautiful.
On the other hand, at least Hamilton focuses like Henson on young teenage girls. I think most of those girls are 13-15, but correct me if I am wrong. I would have to loved to have looked at them earlier in adulthood because girls that age turned me on a lot more when I was younger like 18-30, but at my age, they just seem too young. It’s too much of a young girl. They’re not even much of a turn-on. Physically they are somewhat of course, but then they seem like too much of a young girl, and they are so underdeveloped and girlish, and that part of it is a turnoff and wipes out the physical part.
I know they are not little girls, but even 16 year old girls are starting to seem like little girls to me now. They are perfectly developed, but it just seems like way too much of a girl, and they seem very immature. I see them, and I think they are in junior high. I figure they are in 7th or 8th grade. I ask them if they are in junior high, and they get offended. Anyway, yes, I have seen Hamilton’s stuff and it is all over the Net if you want to go looking for it, and I assure you that it is all 100% legal. After all, nudity is not child porn. I’ve already seen it, and I have no desire to go looking for it again.
I forget Sturgis’ focus, but I think it was young teenage girls also.
I also worry about these men. What’s with the obsession with 13-15 year old teenage girls? I don’t get it. Sometimes I wonder if these guys’ sexual interests are completely OK. It’s not normal to be obsessed with young teenage girls. You are getting into hebephile territory, and hebephiles are not normal.
This subject has aroused some of the worst lies and libels about me of all. I have tried to address these lies, but I just dig the hole deeper. This is all based on some retarded thinking that people of normal intelligence always engage in. It’s called, “If you write about it, then you do it,” or “If you write about it, then you are one.” There’s also, “If you talk about it, then you do it,” and “If you talk about it, then you are one.” All of these are logical fallacies. Take this arguments to your Logic professor and see what he says.
These are examples of very stupid ways of thinking and almost 100% of the population with average intelligence thinks like this all the time. Now you see why people like me think people of average intelligence are retarded.
The Robert Lindsay Brush Fire about this matter was set off long ago. The fire is 0% controlled and is expected to rage into the foreseeable future. As long as that’s the case, I figure I will pour gasoline on the flames and sit back and watch the devastation. It’s rather entertaining to be a social arsonist. If you can’t beat em, join em.

Robert Stark Interviews Author Ray Harris

Paradise-Reclaimed
Cover of Ray Harris’ newest science fiction novel.

Robert Stark and co-host Pilleater interview writer Ray Harris. He is based out of Australia and is the author of Paradise Reclaimed which is available on e-book.
Link here.
Topics:
Ray’s science fiction novel Paradise Reclaimed about the story of the first interstellar colony.
Warnings about dystopia on Earth and creating a utopia from scratch.
Transhumanism, the idea of both genetic and social engineering, CRISPR Gene Editing, and the influence of Julian and Aldous Huxley.
Ecotopia, Solar Punk, Soleri’s Arcosanti, and combining the primitive and futuristic.
How we have the technology to advance civilization, but corporate and political corruption stands in the way.
Aldous Huxley’s Novel Island.
Jungian archetypes.
The upcoming sequel to the book The Golden City about the colonists returning to Earth after being isolated.
Social nudity, it’s place in the book’s space colony, and whether our aversion to it is rational.
The historic of social nudity, attitudes in Europe and Japan, and the Freikörperkultur Movement in Germany.
Different cultural attitudes towards sex in America, Europe, and Japan.
Developmental vs. chronological age.
The history of attitudes towards sexuality in the West, age of consent laws, and how they affected the arts.
Nudity in art; French Rococo painter François Boucher’s Leda and the Swan; works by Edgar Degas, Vincent van Gogh, and Jean-Honoré Fragonard.
Japanese Shunga art.
The debate about what is art and what is erotica.
Controversial nude photographers Bill Henson, Jock Sturges and David Hamilton.
The film Louis Malle’s Pretty Baby (1978), Eva Ionesco, and Natalie Portman in Léon: The Professional.
If you enjoy the hard work that goes into this website, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site. Donations are the only thing that keep the site operating.

Robert Stark Interviews Rabbit about Futurism

Here.
Great interview. Rabbit is now a regular co-host on Stark’s program, which is great because it gives the Alternative Left more publicity. Also it seems to imply that Stark himself is identifying as Alt Left! Yay! And maybe more of Stark’s guests will start identifying as Alt Left. Wow, looks like we could really start to grow a movement here. I have noticed that Stark’s guests have become more Third Positionists or even “Alt Left-like” in recent months. It’s a great trend!
Really cool interview with Rabbit. Rabbit and Stark discuss me in the last 10 minutes of the show. Rabbit says he thinks that I am afraid to take much of a stand on race because I am afraid of being called a racist. You know what? He is right! I do not want my Alt Left wing to be associated with any sort of real, hardcore racism at all. Forget it. On the other hand, race realism, cultural critique and just straight up honest talk about race is fine.
If it’s just SJW’s calling me racist, I don’t care because they call everyone racist who doesn’t buy the lunatic Cultural Left line on race. And the modern anti-racist movement can burn in Hell. That said, racism does exist and at some point, you are just being a flat out nasty, ugly racist. That sort of thing is wincingly repellent and unacceptable in my book.
Rabbit’s Alt Left wing is much bigger on race, especially being pro-White, than I am. Rabbit for all intents and purposes is some sort of a leftwing White nationalist, or at least he is not afraid to hobnob with such folks. That’s fine for him, but I am going to have to pass. I am not into primarily emphasizing race and I am not a White nationalist. If you are more into being Alt Left in a ore explicitly pro-White sense, then  maybe you want to identify with Rabbit’s wing. Sadly, he does not have a comments section.
In his favor though, I will say that I think Rabbit is a brilliant thinker and a fine writer, and he’s doing something that has needed to be done for a long time.
To me, Alt Left means more left on economics and moderate on social issues (in between the insane Cultural Left and the regressive social conservatives). However, I would still accept people who are economically left and socially conservative. That actually describes a lot of the working class right there and we need to quite turning these people off and shoving them towards the Republican Party.
Rabbit blogs at AltLeft.com
Topics include:
Filippo Tommaso Marinetti & Italian Futurism.
Marinetti’s Manifesto of Futurism.
How Futurism emphasized speed, technology, youth, and violence, and objects such as the car, the aeroplane, and the industrial city.
How Hitler’s exhibition on “degenerate art” included Marinetti and other futurists’ work.
Italian Futurism’s connection to fascism and how that led to its marginalization.
How despite that, Italian Futurism had a major influence on culture, art, and architecture, including Cubism and Art Deco.
Antonio Sant’Elia and his Futurist urban vision which inspired the films Metropolis and Blade Runner.
Constantin von Hoffmeister’s National Futurism.
Guillaume Faye’s Archeofuturism.
Transhumanism.
A Short Trip through the Long View.

Cuba’s Major Innovations

Santo Culto writes:

But the USSR could live without the West for most of its years. There are no excuses for creativity and wisdom.

Cuba for example has great territory, good natural resources, not to mention they could manage population growth. There are so many things they could do. The only explanation for not doing is that the Communists are too stupid to think of it. It is very psychopathic to think about the well-being ‘of the people’ and scare away the most creative people (specially the problem-solvers) when they take power in a nation.

Zbigniew Brzezinski is right in saying that communism eliminated the creative classes via exile or extermination from the former Soviet Union.

The USSR’s innovations in weaponry were legendary.

I know someone who owned Soviet products, and he told me that they were very well made. He still had an excellent radio that lasted 40 years. They often produced good products that lasted a very long time.

  • Cuba has made tremendous innovations in agronomy and biotechnology.
  • Cuba has more agronomists per capita than any other nation. They have also made some dramatic innovations or organic farming lately.
  • Cuba is now a world leader in biotech.
  • Cuba made dramatic innovations in the mining and manufacture of nickel.
  • Cuba also made major innovations in the planting, harvest, and manufacture of sugar cane.
  • Cuba has the best educated population in Latin America.
  • Cuban medicine is some of the best in Latin America. In fact it is so good that very rightwing rich people from all over the continent have been flying there for years to have sensitive operations done that they did not trust their own native doctors to do.

Few Cubans were exiled. Some writers and maybe artists and musicians were.

Cuban art, cinema, and literature are now very good. Cuba has always had some of the most fantastic musicians on the continent.

Few dissidents have been killed, and none have been killed since 1970. Even now dissidents are mostly left alone. Last time I checked there were 250 dissident groups on the island. Most are very small.

At the moment, some of the most prominent dissidents are openly funded from abroad and go to the US to give anti-government speeches. They run their own blogs that publish every day and have a large following, mostly off the island.

The most famous one is a young woman with her own blog who gets written up a lot in the media. She is a drama queen. Recently she was carrying on and on about how horrible the system was because it was impossible to get Blu-Ray disks on the island. This is the sort of thing that she bitches about. She gets arrested from time to time, and they typically put her in jail for one or two days and then release her. What a monstrous dictatorship they have in Cuba!

The dissidents are very unpopular in the island and have almost no support. Most people want change but support the present government, especially after recent reforms.

Naked 12 Year Old Girls Are Evil

If you ever want to see a naked 12 year old girl, here’s how to find one. Go look up the video of the scene with Brooke Shields in Pretty Baby. It’s on the Net. For some reason apparently it’s not child porn yet. Brooke is working or living in some whorehouse and someone walks in on her in the bath. She stands up and tries to cover herself up with a bath curtain.

This video scene is considered very underground and it’s much whispered about as some sort of “hard to believe it’s legal” shock video on the Net. But a funny thing happens if you go and watch it, which you can do, perfectly legally too I might add.

You watch it and you think, “Wow. Is that all it is? Why is everyone so excited about this. This is nothing. This is bullshit. This is stupid. Why would anyone get turned on by this?”

That’s because even though it’s Brooke Shields, yes, to any normal man who sees that video, it doesn’t look like much anything. You can’t see a whole lot and there’s not much to see anyway. She has no breasts. No body hair. Her body is shaped like a stick. The long legs are nice because that’s starting to look like a woman, but the rest is just a joke. It’s not exciting. It’s not a turn-on. It’s actually stupid. You watch it, shrug your shoulders and say, “Meh? What’s the fuss?” Because there’s nothing even slightly erotic about that video.

I will confess to something now. Some put a link to what has to be classed as “child porn” in my comments section. They uploaded it to Youtube and linked to the Youtube video on my site. I followed it to Youtube, was disturbed and wanted to check out just what this highly dubious and maybe illegal video was that this guy linked to. He said he shot the video in the back of a bar in Colombia, and the girl was 12 years old.

So I watched. It’s a 12 year old Colombian girl doing a striptease in the back of the bar. The camera angle is pretty lascivious, so that’s legally child porn. She seems to be enjoying herself as she is doing this striptease. She’s finally all the way naked, and there’s not much there. Her breasts are there, but they are so small it is ludicrous. Nothing attractive. Her body is stick-like. She has a little girl face, and she acts like a kid. She has a tiny bit of pubic hair, but they’re shaving that off now anyway.

After she does her little show, she gets in the shower and washes off. A teenage boy maybe 14 years old joins her in the shower. Later they retire to a bed where they mess around a bit but don’t have anything resembling sex.

I watched it and the whole time I was thinking, “This isn’t even erotic. This girl doesn’t even turn me on. Why would anyone get turned on by this?” and most importantly, “Why is this evil? Why is this horrible? Why is it sick, vile and diabolical?” because that is what everyone tells us “child porn” is.

The video is not sick, evil, diabolical, horrific or awful. Mostly it’s just boring. You’re lucky if you can stay awake.

But more importantly, there is absolutely nothing wrong with what this girl is doing. Yes, she is doing a striptease. At that age, her sex drive may well be coming on, and surely teenage girls probably like to do stripteases in their bedrooms? Or for their boyfriends? Or with their girlfriends? Is that evil? Why is a pubertal girl doing a striptease and obviously having a blast “evil?” How did she get harmed by doing this striptease? We need to know this because anti-CP folks insist that this girl was obviously “harmed” by this video. How did the video hurt her? How did the striptease hurt her? Was the striptease harmful in some way?

Why is it evil to show a 12 year old girl in a shower? 12 year old girls get in the shower every day, right? Is that evil or something? Is it sick? It’s “sick” for 12 year old girls to take showers? Why? Did this girl get hurt by taking a shower (because anti-CP folks say she got hurt by this filming so apparently the shower was harmful)?

Yes, she plays with the boy in the shower. A couple of pubertal kids having some sex fun.Yes, later they retire to the bed and mess around sexually a bit, like 12-14 year old’s do all over the damn world every single day. Is it “sick” for her and the boy to mess around in the shower? Is “sick, evil and horrible” for them to play around in bed? Why? Was she harmed by playing with the boy in the shower or the bed (because anti-CP folks say she got hurt)? How? How did messing with the boy hurt her horribly, perhaps irreparably?

Ok, so after I watched the video, what did I do? I reported it to Youtube as child pornography, as is my duty as a citizen. I checked back in a day, and it was gone.Then I banned the idiot who put that on my page and blasted him in the comments for putting CP on my website. He apologized profusely and soon circumvented the ban. I let him stay because he promised to be good.

But I was still disturbed. Yes I watched it, determined it was CP and turned it in, but did I break the law by doing just that? Once you see it, you break the law, right? Ok, so how is anyone supposed to turn this stuff in ever, considering that by merely seeing it they are committing a serious crime?

Are there not anti-CP groups who range around the net finding CP and reporting it? Indeed there are, and I have been to some of these pages where  you can sometimes follow their links to what they call “CP” (really just naked young girls). But everyone in that vigilante group had to look at that page in order to turn it in, right? Did they break the law by looking at the page, even though they had to in order to turn it in?

Society acts like a video of a naked 12 year old girl is the most evil thing on the planet, and anyone who sees one is a diabolical pedophile scum. We all must be shielded from the Satanic evil videos of naked 12 year old girls, the sickest, most vile, most disgusting and perverted and twisted photography on Earth!

Can someone explain to me why society is so freaked out about this sort of thing? There’s nothing to get excited about, there’s nothing even to get interested in, but if some man glimpses this ultimate abyss of boredom, we act like he needs to be shot on site, beaten to death or sentenced to 50 years in prison? What for? For looking at one of the least interesting things known to man? What’s wrong with people?

I do not think this sort of thing should be legal, but is is really sick, evil, horrific, monstrous, diabolical, and vile? Why? It’s a naked girl. So what? Is that a bad thing?

Greatest Comic Series Ever?

This city is afraid of me…I have seen its true face. The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout “Save us!”… and I’ll look down and whisper “No.”
They had a choice, all of them. They could have followed in the footsteps of good men like my father or President Truman. Decent men who believed in a day’s work for a day’s pay. Instead they followed the droppings of lechers and communists and didn’t realize that the trail led over a precipice until it was too late. Don’t tell me they didn’t have a choice. Now the whole world stands on the brink, staring down into bloody Hell, all those liberals and intellectuals and smooth-talkers… and all of a sudden nobody can think of anything to say.
Walter Joseph Kovacs/Rorschach

While we are at it with the superlatives, how about greatest graphic novel ever too?

Robert Stark Interviews T. J. Parsell

Here.
T.J. Parsell is an author, filmmaker, and human rights activist dedicated to ending sexual violence in prison and ending the practice of sending juveniles to adult jails and prisons. His passion stems from the years he spent in prison as a teenager and young adult.
This interview discusses T.J. Parsell’s experience in prison, the U.S. prison system and its defects, racial realities inside prison, and his current film project.

Robert Stark Interviews Dick Smothers, Jr.

Here.
Richard Smothers is actually a good friend of mine. A girlfriend and I had lunch and then dinner with him a while back when he stopped by my town. He is also a sometime commenter on this blog. He is also the son of Dick Smothers of the famous Smothers Brothers.
Here are the list of topics:

Robert Stark interviews former porn star Dick Smothers Jr.

Topics include:

  1. Growing up the son of Dick Smothers of the Smothers Brothers and how he had a fairly normal childhood.
  2. Why being a porn star was not his main dream growing up.
  3. His rock band Kamikaze and his 80′s tribute band.
  4. Why he likes to create what he performs.
  5. The corporate environment of the music franchise.
  6. Why there’s more independence in the porn Industry.
  7. Why the porn industry resembles the publication industry rather than the film industry.
  8. How his first porn debut was in a Showtime softcore series My First Time.
  9. The softcore genre.
  10. His preference for couples scene and the genres he refused to act in.
  11. Abusive and degrading genres of porn and how girls are often coerced into those films.
  12. How guys like Max Hardcore harm the industry.
  13. How the porn industry includes both kind and abusive individuals.
  14. His appearance on Howard Stern’s show.
  15. Luke Ford and his observations on individuals in the industry.
  16. People who are traumatized or have long term psychological problems from porn.
  17. Dating women in porn.
  18. A dominatrix film he refused to act in.
  19. Why he was considered straight-laced by the standards of the porn industry.
  20. Why he wanted to be a positive male representative of the industry.
  21. The interview with Reuters were he said he wanted to be the Orson Wells of porn.
  22. Why there needs to be more creativity in porn.
  23. How porn becoming more accessible has harmed the profits of the industry.
  24. Why there’s a mean streak in America and how that influences its porn.
  25. Why he left the industry.
  26. The AIDS Scare and how the industry is regulated for STD’s.
  27. The types of men who act in porn.
  28. The culture of narcissistic celebrity culture in America.
  29. His advice to someone looking to get into porn.

"A Cup of Tea"

Looks like some folks are trying to raise money for a short film called A Cup of Tea.
Looking over the photos and the storyline, I like it already. The part of Italy where the film will be shot is in Liguria, near Genoa in the far northwest of Italy. This particular part of Liguria is in the La Spezia area, a particularly beautiful part of Liguria. And within La Spezia, this particular stretch of coastline is called the Gulf of Poets. This area is pretty much the French Riviera stretched to the east into Italy, or the Italian Riviera if you will.

The Gulf of Poets, La Spezia region, Liguria, Italian Riviera.
The Gulf of Poets, La Spezia region, Liguria, Italian Riviera.

It is very beautiful indeed, but to be honest, the coast of Croatia, Corsica, Sardinia and Greece do not look a whole lot different. That whole part of the world is fantastic. One reason Liguria is so beautiful is because in this region, the mountains come crashing down right to the sea. A bit to the west just over the French border is the city of Nice. It seems like a great place to retire, or even to visit!

"The Apartment"

This is a short movie which is actually starring a friend of mine named Yossi Rosenberg. His friend Josh Freed made the movie. It’s about Yossi trying to get a roommate for his apartment. A girl named Terri ends up moving in and after a while, she ends up being Yossi’s girlfriend. This doesn’t seem to last long and she breaks it off with him. Then Yossi catches her kissing his roommate and best friend in the living room and he loses it. Terri takes her stuff and moves it out of Yossi’s room and into Ivan’s room. A short while later, Yossi evicts both of their asses. Ivan and Terri take off and go get an apartment and move in together.
Interesting story. Any comments on this soap opera here. I was thinking, in terms of PUA/Game theory, what do you have to say about this story from a PUA/Game point of view?
 

Bigfoot News October 14, 2013

Wildlife conservation organization has had the body of an Orang Pendek for 17 years! The Wildlife Conservation Service out of New York is a conservation organization that works to protect habitat and wildlife all over the world. One of the places they work is Sumatra. In Sumatra, one of the places they work is the Barisan Mountains in southern Sumatra.
There is a large national park here. Here they try to save the Sumatran tiger, the Sumatran rhinoceros, the Asian elephant among many other species. There is a team of tiger biologists working in this area who have been working here for quite some time. Apparently these tiger biologists came across the body of an Orang Pendek somehow. Either it was shot by the team or else they got in from local villagers – this much is not certain.
Although it may seem amazing that they have been sitting on this body for 17 years, this is apparently the truth. These people are tiger biologists, and all they want to do is study tigers. They wanted nothing to do with a “hairy man.”
They felt that this creature was radioactive, and it was buried and not dealt with for a long time due to political reasons. There were concerns that their funding might be affected or cut off if they were to come out with this new great ape. Furthermore, they did not have the faintest idea what it is. The truth is that they and others have spent the last 17 years studying this thing and trying to figure out exactly what it is. They plan to publish their findings in 2016, but that assumes that they will get through peer review.
One might think it odd that they sat on this body for 17 years, but if you recall, the team working on the Olinguito worked on this animal for 10 years before finally bringing their findings forward in a scientific journal. That is, they discovered that it existed 10 years ago and then it took 10 years after that to get their findings together in a publishable format to bring it to the scientific world. You see it can take some time to bring a new species to science.
Adam Davies, the British explorer who is also working on trying to find the Orang Pendek, stated that he had never heard that anyone had a body, and he said he is pretty well connected. However, my source told me that the WCS biologists are hiding this species not only from Davies from from the world as a whole. I asked my source what would happen if someone called the WCS to see if this story is true, and he said they would probably deny it.
The Orang Pendek is most probably a hominid, possibly related to Homo Floresiensis or Flores Man on the island of Flores. Flores Man seems to be a very early Erectus or possibly a very late Australopithecine. Many think that the Orang Pendek is some sort of an ape or pongid such as an orangutan which also lives in the area. However, it is bipedal and only Homo is bipedal. It is unlikely that any of the great ape lines outside of Homo (chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans) have evolved bipedalism.

Some say that Orang Pendeks are just misidentified gibbons, but I doubt if this is true. There are gibbons that live in the area also, but villagers insist that the two are different creatures.
Some say that Orang Pendeks are just misidentified gibbons, but I doubt if this is true. There are gibbons that live in the area also, but villagers insist that the two are different creatures.

My source is a scientist who studies DNA. He told me that he saw three photos of the Orang Pendek on a WCS computer at a WCS office and was told that the body was acquired in 1996. He also learned something of the back story on the body. He told that there was no way that the photos of the creature could possibly be obtained. As a scientist, I consider him to be an extremely credible individual.
Very nice drawing of an Orang Pendek.
Very nice drawing of an Orang Pendek.

Bigfoot photos from Brenda Harris. Harris is apparently out of the Navajo Reservation in New Mexico and she has worked closely with JC Johnson on Bigfoot samples. In June, she revealed a photo of a possible Bigfoot, probably taken on the Navajo Reservation. The photos are below.
The real photo from Brenda Harris, probably from the Navajo Reservation.
The real photo from Brenda Harris, probably from the Navajo Reservation.

Same photo zoomed in. This photo is very odd, but the size and shape looks a lot like a Bigfoot. In addition, Harris' contacts are probably good and I doubt if there are a lot of sophisticated hoaxers on the Navajo Reservation.
Same photo zoomed in. This photo is very odd, but the size and shape looks a lot like a Bigfoot. In addition, Harris’ contacts are probably good and I doubt if there are a lot of sophisticated hoaxers on the Navajo Reservation.

More on the Matilda photos. One thing you will notice about the Matilda photos is the dramatically protruding lower jaw. In the video, the whole face moves and the muscles in this jaw and mouth area can be seen very well. Now in order for this to be a person wearing a mask, that person would have to have a jaw that is as prognathous or protruding as Matilda’s. Such humans are rare or nonexistent. Otherwise the wearer’s face will not fit properly into the mask and efforts to move the face inside the mask will not look realistic.
In addition, Matilda has an underbite, quite a large one at that. It moves when she opens and closes her mouth. I would think that would be very hard to do with a mask. The person wearing the mask would have to have the same underbite as Matilda’s to make it look realistic.
Interview with a Hollywood special effects expert. According to special effects expert Doug Hudson, almost all Bigfoot hoaxes use only 3-4 different masks and costumes. Custom masks and costumes are few and far between. The only ones I have seen were in hoaxes perpetrated by independent movie directors and Hollywood special effects experts. Even the best of these hoaxes looked nowhere near as good as this Matilda footage.
Most of them were easily identifiable as hoaxes. I have also seen quite a few Bigfoot suits and masks that have been used in Bigfoot movies. They are all quite obvious, and I have yet to see a mask or costume in a Bigfoot movie that looks anywhere near as good as this Matilda footage. If the Matilda footage is a hoax, it is the finest fake Bigfoot footage ever done, surpassing anything done in any Hollywood Bigfoot movie and beyond any Bigfoot hoaxes done by movie directors or special effects artists.
Hudson also makes the claim that just the raw materials alone for a custom Bigfoot suit and mask would run you $10,000 and to purchase one from a special effects guy would cost $40,000. The masks and suits used in the hoaxes and movies above probably cost between $60-80,000 to produce and would probably require at least 100 man-hours. Idiotic human garbage in the comments threads and on skeptard sites like JREF have been calling those figures ludicrous and laughing at them. Hey, they didn’t come from me. Take it up with Doug Hudson, the expert!
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBMOaajH8UU]
I consider this expertise far beyond Roger and Sissy, the owners of the property. In addition, they did not have the savvy nor the means to purchase custom Bigfoot suits and masks from Hollywood special effects people.
Therefore, I do not believe the Matilda footage is hoaxed.
Problems with the Kentucky footage. An expert from the Smithsonian I consulted told me that the main thing that bothered him about the Matilda footage was the nose. He stated that Bigfoots all have noses that look human, and Matilda’s nose looks canine. However, recall that Justin Smeja’s description of the young Bigfoot at the Sierra Kills stated that the juvenile had a nose like a Boxer dog. The nose may be somewhat canine in the young Bigfoots but only develop a human form when they mature. And keep in mind that Matilda was immature.
The Sleeping Bigfoot footage is good, but the expert I talked to said that the hair could be either real fur or fake fur. This is because it is very tousled and tangled. Tousled, tangled fur can look a lot like fake fur. He also said that the fur did not look like that of any known animal.
In addition, some think that Adrian Erickson is somewhat gullible. For instance, Adrian thought that Fraud Standings hoaxed Bigfoot tiki dolls were real Bigfoot footage. Adrian was ready to buy Fraud’s footage until his friends stopped him. Adrian simply lacks the expertise to determine hoaxed from real Bigfoot footage, in general.
In favor of the Sleeping Bigfoot footage. It is said that this footage is either a carpet, a dog or a human wearing a suit. However, keep in mind that Dennis Pfohl notes that the creature was breathing only 6 breaths per minute. A dog breathes at the low end no less than 10-15 breaths per minute. Furthermore, dogs’ bodies do not go up and down when they breathe like this thing. Could it be a human in a suit? It is very hard for a human to naturally breathe only 6 breaths per minute.
It can be done with a lot of practice, but bottom line is it is just not normal. Perhaps if you gave a human some morphine, their breathing might go that low. Furthermore, human’s bodies do not slowly go up and down when they breathe the way the creature’s do. Another argument is that it is Hollywood special effects. However, Roger and Sissy did not have the means or the savvy necessary to pay a Hollywood studio to create a fake breathing carpet.
Complaints about the owners of the Kentucky property. Roger and Sissy, owners of the property, have been described as being “somewhat shady,” “crazy,” and “opportunistic” by some of the Bigfooters who were aware of them. I am not sure how much of this is true and how much is not. However, I do know that at least the man was able to go through money pretty quickly.
Young Bigfoots may have grooming claws. From Justin Smeja comes word that the juvenile Bigfoot he shot had a grooming claw on its thumb. Some ape and monkey species have grooming claws. You can see one in the photo below.
lemur claw
This lemur has a grooming claw on its thumb. The baby Bigfoot was also said to have a grooming claw.

Dr. Brian Sykes Bigfoot DNA project will air on British TV on Patty Day. Patty Day is October 20. October 20, 1967 is when Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin shot the famous Patty footage at Bluff Creek, California. Is it interesting that he is going to release his earthshaking DNA data on Patty Day? Hmm.
Todd Neiss reports Sykes has “blockbuster findings.” Neiss runs some sort of a Bigfoot research organization in Oregon. He recently stated that although he has been sworn to secrecy, the Sykes DNA study has some blockbuster findings. We have been hearing this sort of thing for a long time now, and it sounds very promising.
Sykes has acquired samples of purported Yeti and Orang Pendek material. A source has just informed me that Sykes has acquired purported Yeti hair and purported Orang Pendek hair. Should be most interesting to see if these samples are valid, how they come back DNA-wise. Adam Davies reports that the Orang Pendek sample comes from him. They are from either an Orang Pendek, a tapir or a tiger. Those are the three animals that he and Cliff Barackman were tracking at the time in Sumatra last year.

Bigfoot News October 2, 2013

Dr. Melba Ketchum and Adrian Erickson dual release Ketchum’s DNA paper and Erickson’s video at a press conference! It was covered on local news in Dallas and other places and and on an ABC news blog. It was also covered on Fox News.
A 3-minute news video of the press conference including shots from Erickson’s footage, is available at some of the links above. You can also see it on Scott Carpenter’s superb blog here.
The press conference is being ripped to shreds all over the Bigfoot community, but I do not think this is valid. Also there is a lot of commentary about whether or not the photo of Matilda was someone wearing a Chewbacca mask. I have no idea if that is a Chewie mask or not. One thing is for sure, the Erickson Project, including Adrian, Dennis Pfohl and Dr. Leila Hadj-Chikh, are not hoaxers. They did not hoax anything in the course of the project.
However, my understanding that is that the “Chewie” videos were taken by the wife of the husband and wife team that owned the property and were not taken by the Erickson team.
You can see some good night footage of a Bigfoot walking in the woods on the news clips, and in my opinion, that clip is excellent, and it is a real Bigfoot. Look closely at how it walks exactly like Patty in the Patterson film. That must have been taken by the Erickson team, probably by Pfohl. There were no trespassers on that property ever as it is well fenced. Furthermore, in the night footage, the trespasser would have had to have been walking in a very thick and deep woods in the middle of the night with no flashlight!
There is other footage, taken in the daytime, of a large adult Bigfoot slowly moving through the woods. That is also excellent footage, and I think that is a real Bigfoot. That also must have been taken by Dennis. If it was taken by the EP, then that is a real Bigfoot for certain. If it was a hoax, someone would have had to have put on a Bigfoot suit and walked around that property day and night hoaxing Pfohl and the rest of the team. The EP doesn’t hoax, and no one was hoaxing them on that property.
Kentucky project researcher was within arm’s reach of a Bigfoot! On the Kentucky project, at at least one point, one of the people working on the Erickson Project ended up within arm’s length of one of the large adult Bigfoots. He was so close to it that he could have reached out and touched it. Unfortunately, I am not allowed to reveal more about this incident.
Dr. John Bindernagel saw a Bigfoot at the Kentucky property. I believe he saw it in the daytime. Bindernagel says he either saw a Bigfoot or a human running around in a Bigfoot costume. There were no trespassers on the property ever, and there were certainly never any trespassers running around the property with Bigfoot suits on. Obviously, Bindernagel saw a real Bigfoot.
Truly unfortunate coverage of the Erickson Project conference around the Web. Of course it is to be expected that the execrable Sharon Hill of Doubtful News would trash it to Kingdom Come. However, our own Bigfoot blogs have also been tearing it to pieces.
Are Erickson and Ketchum enemies? I have reported in the past that these two were fighting for quite some time. The nature of that warfare is old hat by now and is not particularly interesting anymore. However, reports on Facebook groups are saying that the two hate each other and that Erickson acts like he is not too happy to be sitting next to Ketchum by looking at his body language. I agree that his body language looks uncomfortable, but I doubt it is because he was seated next to Ketchum, who he no doubt elected to sit next to.
My understanding is that Ketchum and Erickson have somehow made up and at the moment, they get along with each other one some sort of level. I can tell you for sure though why Erickson was uncomfortable at the conference – he didn’t want to be there in the first place. I have been reporting for some time now that Adrian is sick and tired of all things Bigfoot, and that opinion is ongoing. Erickson looks uncomfortable because he is sick and tired of everything related to Bigfoot and wishes it would all just go away. Bit late in the day for that.
Many hits coming in to the site from the ABC news blog story. Apparently from a link via the comments to the post, but with 5,000 comments, I was unable to find the one that was linking to me.
Contentious Rhettman Mullis quote appears on Facebook. In Dr. Matthew Johnson’s Bigfoot Facebook group, the following post appeared on September 13, 2013:

Was at Dr. Johnson’s dinner last Friday. Rhettman Mullis spoke about the Sykes study. Said the DNA study is on track for, I believe, a March announcement. Warned us to ignore any and all speculation until then. The legal gag order everyone involved is under is draconian. Anyone leaking would essentially kill the project. So ignore anything that doesn’t come from Sykes himself. Unlike · 1 · 6 hours ago Sep 13 From Team Sasquatch USA September 13 Dr Johnson’s site.

A friend of mine notified me about it and I wrote it up on the site. However, Mullis became very angry with me and ordered me to take down the libelous post. Soon after I published this Facebook post above, it was removed from Johnson’s group, followed by a bizarre tirade by Johnson accusing me of making the whole thing up. I didn’t make the whole thing up. It was a post on his group.
Mullis insists that he never said such a thing. Fair enough.
The following are the possibilities of what occurred.

  1. Mullis said the study will be delayed, but caught huge heat when his comment was reported and he was ordered to shut me up and deny he made the statement. In my opinion, Mullis, like many top Bigfooters, does lie sometimes. Specifically, he engages in “denial-lying,” which many in the community do. Someone will report something and then the denial liars will angrily insist that they never said such a thing or the thing that was reported is not true.
  2. Mullis never made the statement. Well then why did someone who was obviously at the dinner say he did?

At the moment, there is no good hard evidence that Sykes study release will be delayed until March. Someone said Mullis said it would be delayed, but Mullis denies making the statement. Prior reports said that the Sykes study will be released in mid-October.
We do not know when the Sykes study will be released. However, looking at how Erickson and Ketchum rushed into their press conference on October 1, 2013, one would assume that they knew Sykes was going to publish soon and were trying to beat him to the punch. A good guess is that the October 15 publish date is still on.
Interesting Scott Carpenter report on the contentious Justin Smeja Sierra Kills case. Scott has an interesting take on Justin’s Sierra Kills story. It rings true with many people, possibly even including me.
Timbergiant video gets cheers. I talked a very good friend of mine who is an expert on Bigfoots (he works at the Smithsonian on the displays) and asked him about the Timbergiant video. He was raving about it. He said, “That is definitely a Sasquatch.” I asked him why and said because of the way the hair was laying, the texture of the hair. He is able to identify these things simply by the way that their hair looks, and he is a total expert on animal hair as per his job. I agree with him, and I think that Timbergiant  really did shoot a real Bigfoot in this video.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLJP-zlmXzE&feature=youtu.be]
Sasquatch Ontario videos get kudos. This same fellow from the Smithsonian also gave raves to Sasquatch Ontario’s videos. Lately the Bigfoot community at large has generally rejected his videos as hoaxes. However, my friend said he did not think the fellow was hoaxing. I asked him why and he pointed to the Bigfoot hand print that SO found. He said, “That is exactly how a Bigfoot hand print looks. I can’t see how he faked that.” He even liked the much-derided vocalizations.
I told him about the gifts that SO claimed that the Bigfoot gave him, including a tiny intricately weaved object made out of reeds. My friend said, “Well you know, Albert Ostman was the first to report that Sasquatches weave. Remember that they wove the beds that they lay on.” This is correct. The Bigfoots in the Ostman story did indeed weave their own beds. I agree with my friend, and I doubt that this fellow is hoaxing, though he is a subject of much ridicule in the community.
All of his videos can be seen on his channel here.
First report on Hank’s penis! Hank is the Bigfoot that Rick Dyer probably shot and killed in San Antonio, Texas, on September 6, 2012. There have been many descriptions of Hank’s body, but we have not yet had any descriptions of Hank’s penis. I have received many mails from female and gay male Bigfooters telling me that they were dying for this lurid information. I recently spoke to two persons who have seen the body, and they both gave identical descriptions of Hank’s penis. Here it is:

Hank’s penis was a sight to see. It was 10 inches long, huge, black and ugly as sin.

Well, there you have it, folks. The news you have all been waiting for!
Video below related, actually not really. For entertainment purposes only.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmU1nr8D7XU]
Rick Dyer selling sponsorships for his Bigfoot tour in 2014. Dyer is selling sponsorships for his US tour when he will tour the country with Hank. One question though is what if the Bigfoot on tour is not really Hank but instead is a replica of a Bigfoot. Rick is selling sponsorships on the basis that the tour is of a real Bigfoot, but if it is a fake instead, one would assume that anyone buying a sponsorship could sue him for fraud.
After the Shot DVD has a gorilla hand on it. Dyer’s After the Shot DVD is said to include 40 minutes of HD footage of Hank the Bigfoot’s dead body. However, on the reverse of the DVD is a hand that looks like it could be a Bigfoot’s hand. Unfortunately, a clever blogger has discovered that that is a hand of a gorilla taken off the Internet. So Dyer has a gorilla hand on the back on his DVD which he says has footage of a real Bigfoot. That does not exactly inspire confidence in the DVD!
Adam Bird’s review of Shooting Bigfoot premiere in the UK.

SHOOTING BIGFOOT: OUR OPINION

Since September 2012, a story has dominated the Bigfoot community, whether you believed in it or not. Love him or hate him, Rick Dyer has been the name everyone has been talking about. A video appeared online that showed an alleged Sasquatch filmed from about twenty feet away, from inside a tent. A lot of people were impressed with the footage, ourselves included. It featured a Bigfoot with a large head set on high shoulders, with a coned head, large dark eyes, thick neck muscles and hair surrounding an ape-looking face. It was a very good video, there was no doubt about that.
But soon enough the name of Rick Dyer, the man behind 2008’s infamous ‘Bigfoot in a freezer’ hoax was associated with this video. Many in the Bigfoot community hate Dyer with a solid passion. But instead of doubting this realistic looking footage, we gave Dyer a chance; a second chance. Through our original page Bigfoot: The Evidence, we supported him, backing him all the way, alongside Facebook/Find Bigfoot.
Soon after Dyer claiming that this video was shot during the making of Shooting Bigfoot, British director Morgan Matthews’ feature length documentary about men who hunt for Bigfoot in the US. Dyer then claimed that the Bigfoot in his film footage was dead, and that it was he who had shot and killed it.
People were quite rightly skeptical about this tale. After all, Dyer had said back in 2008 that he had a Bigfoot body, and that turned out to be nothing more than a $99 costume filled with animal organs and entrails! But when prominent online skeptic Musky Allen, whom I had been friends with for sometime, became involved and Dyer invited him out to Vegas to view the actual dead body, things got more exciting.
Musky Allen indeed went to Vegas and he confirmed the body was real. We were now convinced that Rick Dyer was telling the truth. Shooting Bigfoot was said to feature clear HD footage of the Sasquatch that was shot.
The documentary was released in April 2013 to an expectant audience. But what was promised wasn’t delivered. We did not see full footage of a Bigfoot, nor did we see it being shot. Many of Dyer’s supporters were disappointed. The more the story went on, the more it became obvious that this seemed to become all about Dyer making money. Memberships into Team Tracker, Dyer’s Bigfoot creation, costing hundreds of dollars, were offered, as well as promised insights into the dead body.
But then not long after the documentary was released, Stacy Brown, Florida Bigfoot researcher, came forward with pictures of a costume that resembled closely the Bigfoot in Dyer’s tent footage. This was sort of the final straw for us and we, under our new group name ‘BIGFOOT: BELIEVERS ONLY’, decided to turn our back on Dyer and his tales. It was becoming more and more obvious that this was a hoax.
Then it was announced that Shooting Bigfoot was to premiere in Edinburgh in June 2013. We knew we had to see the night-vision footage that Morgan Matthews had filmed of the Bigfoot that Dyer claimed he shot. So Adam and Paul arranged to spend the weekend at Edinburgh to catch the UK premiere. That brings us now to today.
We went to the premiere and were surprised and excited to see that the director of the film, Morgan Matthews, was at the showing and that he would be doing a question and answer session at the end of the documentary. The film itself is not a pleasant one for a Bigfoot believer and enthusiast to watch. In fact it can feel quite brutal at times.
Matthews’ sole purpose was to make the Bigfoot community, and all those who have had the privilege to actually see this magnificent creature with their own eyes, look foolish, irrational and downright dim-witted and unintelligent. This is pretty much obvious because of the fact that he picked characters such as Dallas and Wayne, who may not come across as the most intelligent of individuals, instead of other respected researchers such as Cliff Barackman.
The film is beautifully made, no doubt about it. Morgan Matthews spent a lot of times with the people featured in the documentary, including Rick, Dallas and Wayne and Tom Biscardi. But the main theme of the film, that people who research and believe in Bigfoot are just slack-jawed, redneck types of characters, still keeps hitting you square between the eyes and leaves a distaste in the mouth. You cannot help but feel insulted personally, so much so that Paul almost left early.
But the most important part was seeing the footage of the alleged dead footage and the actual shooting itself. This part of the film is right at the end, within the last ten minutes.
The first sign of something is when Matthews is in his tent and something is making vocalizations outside. Suddenly something, or someone, crashes the sides of the tent, scaring Matthews. He jumps out and Rick is creeping out of his tent, gun in hand. In the glare of the gun’s light beam we see a retreating figure. We see high shoulders and a bowed head, covered in hair. Rick takes over in pursuit, Matthews shouting him to come back. We then hear shots being fired and Matthews goes into panic mode, shouting and screaming for Rick to stop shooting.
Next thing we see is a very quick glimpse of the creature as it rushes at Matthews, lashing out and grunting in anger with its’ right arm. Matthews falls to the ground and we hear another gunshot ring out in the darkness. Matthews is then helped to his feet by Rick, who is demanding to see the footage. But Matthews, angry at Rick, refuses and they argue back and forth. We then cut to Matthews showing the injuries that were inflicted during the attack.
And that is how the documentary ends and the controversy begins. And to our opinion on the actual footage.
At one point the tape is rewound and we get a view of the face of the Sasquatch, the same picture that was illegally circulating around the net a couple months ago. This picture does no justice to what can be seen watching the film. What we see is an ape-looking face, with a heavy brow ridge set over deep eyes which move. The nose is human like, just not as pronounced.
There is a receding hairline, with dark hair swept back over the back of a rounded skull. A long upper lip is turned down over the mouth. We could almost be looking at a cross between a chimp and a human. On first glance this thing looks extremely real. To see the eyes moving in the sockets, it did make you take a deep breath. But on looking back at the visualization emblazoned in your mind, you can start to see that this could be a very good make-up job.
When you see the couple of fleeting glimpses of the back of the creature, it does not look particularly tall. The creature looks wide but not out of the realm of human height. We have discussed it over and over. The fact is that it is very difficult to come up with any conclusions based entirely on the footage alone. Does the Bigfoot in the footage look real? In our opinion, yes it does.
But…that does not mean it is real. It just means it could be a very real looking suit. But there is more. Afterwards there was a question and answer session with Morgan Matthews. At one point during the session one lady asked about the Bigfoot attack and Matthews’ opinion. He states that at the time it happened, Matthews instantly came to the conclusion that it was a man in a suit that attacked him, not a real living and breathing Sasquatch.
He also insinuated (but did not outright accuse) that Dyer was hoaxing this whole dead Bigfoot tale. Our conclusions are that it is very hard to make a decision on what we saw. But our gut instinct tells us that this is a hoax, despite the footage and how good it looked, in our opinion. We really really do hope that Rick Dyer proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Bigfoot exists. But based on all the evidence, we do not think he has a dead Sasquatch in his possession. We hoped we are proved wrong and remain open-minded but we find it very unlikely…

Accusation that I am part of the “Rick Dyer Bigfoot Hoax.” I am seeing this more and more, that I am “part of the hoax.” What is amazing is the sheer number of folks who have been accused of being “in on the hoax” by now. And now I am too.
What is fascinating is not even one of the people who are “in on the hoax” have yet to come forward and confess. Bigfoot hoaxes typically consist of only one person, possibly two, but generally no more than two. And usually the hoaxers come forward fairly quickly or they are busted somehow. This Dyer “hoax” is amazing because of the sheer number of players said to be involved and not one of them has come forward yet. Further, the skeptics have not yet proven that this is a hoax, and the story is going on one year now. I edited out many misspellings.

Michael J. Littrell put this in a perspective that even you IDIOTS should be able to understand .Lets not forget that Robert Lynsey started this HOAX on or about Dec 12-2012. How long did it take Richard Traylor Chuck Dyer to come out with his part…. (let the pawns get it out there first) Hmmm. Robert Lynsy is just another player in this HOAX like Musky ( who the fuck is he ??)& all the rest …sung to the tune of the opening of Gilligan’s Island.. Robert, hope you got paid upfront !! SQUATCH IS REAL …THIS SHIT AIN’T..

Very stupid anti-Bigfoot article published in a “science” publication. This typical skeptic nonsense makes the astonishing claim that the existing evidence for Bigfoot makes it even more likely that it does not exist. The fact that there have been 40,000 sightings in the US must mean that they are relatively common. If they are so common, it ought to be relatively trivial to capture good photo, video or other evidence of them, in particular, some sort of a body. That no evidence has been forthcoming when it should have considering the massive number of sightings makes it exceedingly unlikely that this thing exists. Well, that is certainly some creative theorizing!
I am writing too many Bigfoot posts. As you can see, I am slowly turning into a Bigfoot. This is getting embarassing. Maybe I should cut down on the Bigfoot reporting.

Bigfoot Bob: The transformation.
Bigfoot Bob: The transformation.

Bigfoot News September 30, 2013

Happy birthday to me. Thank you very much!
Justin Smeja stirs furor over pro-kill post on Facebook. On a Bigfoot Facebook group, Suzy Matiash asked Justin Smeja what his position was on the pro-kill/no-kill debate in the community. Justin left a lengthy answer that said he was still pro-kill. He was then promptly tossed from the group by Suzy because the group has a strict no-kill policy for posters.
Cindy Bowers did a great job of writing this up on the Crypto Crew blog.
Recently Justin Smeja was asked a tough question by Suzy Matiash, administrator of the Facebook group Bigfoot Community.
The question was:

Mr. Smeja, I mean this question with no malice toward you. But this is a no kill group. And given the chance, would you kill another Sas? Or have you changed your views and would not do it again.

Justin answered:

I believe Bigfoots are some sort of people – a wild man or archaic human if you will. They are not just some other animal to be hunted like deer – its immoral. They are intelligent.
For the greater good of the species whether it be in life or death or even extinction, I will pursue killing one. I do not love the species or the individuals. I feel it’s wrong to take a Sasquatch’s life, but who among us does everything right? You worry about the person you see in the mirror, and I’ll take care of me.
I will try to kill another Sasquatch to prove their existence.
The truth is most in the Bigfoot community are liars, especially when it comes to the subject. They preach this no kill gospel and pretend to be disgusted by the thought of killing one publicly, but behind closed doors I’m often (very often) approached by these same individuals – many of whom are highly respected pillars in the community – with a new strategy, location or idea on how to kill one. They often even offer to help fund an expedition to bring back a dead one.
Derek Randles was never like that. He always hated the idea of killing one. I respect him for that. He’s a better man than I am.
I’m not here to play politics, to be politically correct or to save face. I’m not looking for a place in the Bigfoot community. When I research, I often have a rifle, and if I see one, I will most likely shoot it. However, I also often research with no rifle at all. Make what you will out of that. My only goal is proof to validate my story.
This is a stupid argument – to kill or not to kill – if you’re that worked up about it, you have too much time on your hands. DNA is no longer good enough. Especially in this field. Let’s just assume that I know more about DNA results findings and protocols then 98 percent of you. I’ve worked first hand with countless labs and doctors on this subject over the last 3 years. If a body’s drug in by a researcher tomorrow, the blood of that individual is partly on Melba’s hands. It is because of her that we need a body. We need a body, not a sequence.
The truth is I waver back and forth and some days I’m 100% no kill. I’ve lost more sleep on the subject because of my actions then any of you. But I’ve made peace with my actions other than the occasional nightmare.

Rick Dyer will get $27 million on January 1, 2015. Late the other night on his show, when hardly a soul was listening, Rick revealed that his investor has not given him any money at all yet (hence the continuous grubbing and hucksterism), but that Rick will receive $27 million on January 1, 2015 if he delivers the body to the new owner (probably the casino owner) “completely intact.” That means he has to keep the body intact for all of 2014, during which the first half of the year will be spent touring with the Bigfoot body and the second half of the year will not. But Rick will retain possession of the body during the non-outing portion of the year.
This sets up a very interesting scenario. Suppose someone – haters, skeptics, rivals or anti-kill activists – damaged the body by say removing the head and whisked the head off somewhere. Then Rick Dyer would not receive his $27 million. In fact, he would not receive one thin dime.
New owner may be Steve Wynn. He’s one oily, slimy Vegas casino owner. He recently hosted a morbid exhibit on the Titanic. A source who went to that exhibit said it was very disturbing. He’s just the fellow to host a morbid and tacky Bigfoot body display.
Criticism of Rick’s 19th Century “dead body on tour” sleazefest. This sort of thing was popular maybe 200 years ago. One wonders how many creatures have been revealed to science by traveling side shows, but actually there have been a number of them, mostly around 200 years ago. The problem is that what was acceptable in the 1800’s is now incredibly tacky to say the least.
Personally, I am not too happy that this dead body is going to be trucked around by a bunch of ghoulish profiteering capitalist hucksters. It is slimy, disreputable and morbid. Suppose I died tomorrow, and some people bought my corpse from someone else, embalmed it, and then trucked it around the country as a freak side show attraction. This is more or less the same thing.
Here are some of the comments that I received complaining about how the body is going to anything for a buck capitalists instead of the government, a museum or a university where it belongs.

If there was a Bigfoot body it should be going to a museum of natural history not some freak show tour with RD and then some tacky casino!! I don’t have a problem with a Bigfoot tour, but not in flea markets and gun shows.
If this thing is a relict hominid, it should be displayed with dignity, a la’ the Treasures of Egypt tour or the tours of great artists, something like that. But as something akin to a carnival sideshow…terrible.
Frankly, I am mostly a no-kill mindset. But, if one is killed, then science needs to be involved, to find out just exactly BF stands within our human family, and then try not to hurt them any more than have been hurt.
If there is a casino owner involved, he could very well be Steve Wynn. He hosted the Titanic exhibit at the Bellagio. I do have to say, I saw that exhibit and it gave me the creeps.

The “Christopher Noel lied” accusation. Via Randy Filipovic, who seems to be getting more and more shrill lately to the point where it looks like he is going off the deep end:

Chris Noel’s opinion means squat. He destroyed any credibility he had when he asked Steve Kulls to lie.

Noel responds:

When Kulls maliciously outed the identity of my friend Jack Barnes, I wrote him and told him to post a retraction saying he’d been mistaken, to try to correct his immoral act. Then Kulls promptly posted our PM conversation with the headline Christopher Noel Wants Me to Lie!!!!! Delightful fellow.

I agree with Noel. I am tired of all of these malicious outings. People are entitled to a bit of privacy. Noel did the right thing to ask Steve to retract his story and say he was mistaken in order to protect Jack’s identity.
Why so many awful people in Bigfootery? A commenter, new to the game, asked me in the comments why there were so many horrible people in Bigfootery. Here is my response:
Although I do not think the Dyer story is a hoax, Dyer is himself a hoaxer; not only that, but he is a serial hoaxer! He was hoaxing in a major way as recently as May 2012 and he has hoaxed even in the course of this story (Bigfoot baby hoax). In addition, he has lied shamelessly all through this nevertheless true story, and even before the story, his track record shows that he is a pathological liar.
The problem is not Rick Dyer. The problem is the fringe nature of the subject. The fringe nature of Bigfootery means that a very large number of those attracted to it will be jerks, idiots, scumbags, nutcases of all types and varieties, criminals, thieves, liars, con-men, narcissists and sociopaths.
Hopefully once we get this thing proven a lot of the sane and decent humans will come rushing in as it will be as mainstream a subject as studying gorillas, chimps or even wolverines or mountain lions. The general public will flood in which there are plenty of good folks mixed in with the bad, and in particular the science crowd will move in, most of whom are cautious, decent, fair-minded, emotionally controlled folks.
There are so many out and out horrible people in this field that I would not advise anyone to get into it. It is actually a somewhat dangerous hobby. Why are Bigfooters so horrible? I think it is because many of them are simply fanatics. Fanatics tend to be horrific human beings. Or at least their behavior is horrific. Their monstrous behavior stems from their fanaticism.
Morgan Matthews’ clever wording. Matthews has been virtually speaking in riddles about his movie Shooting Bigfoot for some time now. But a commenter notes something very interesting:

Its interesting as there is nowhere in that interview with MM where he denies there is a real Bigfoot in his film. He apologizes for the incorrect rumors that he is in possession of a Bigfoot body or that he personally moved the body and that the film contained footage of a dead Bigfoot. He makes a particular point of not having footage of a dead Bigfoot in his film.

Morgan Matthews makes the following correct statements which nevertheless have interesting possible explanations in back of the weasel words. Morgan’s statements in normal text, explanations in italics following.

  1. I am not in possession of any Bigfoot body. But maybe someone else is!
  2. I did not personally move any Bigfoot body. But maybe other folks did!
  3. The film does not contain footage of a dead Bigfoot. But maybe it contains footage of a live one!

What sort of a person is Hank Williams III? I believe that Hank Williams III is the owner of Rick Dyer’s dead Bigfoot, Hank. But what sort of a person is HW3? This music video of his may give us some clues:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkzSyvCl9ic&feature=youtu.be]
That video is called Three Shades of Black. It is full of all sorts of dark, evil and even Satanic imagery. Obviously this fellow is deep into the bad boy game and he is trying to give off the impression that he is “badass” or even “evil.”
A commenter wonders what sort of person would hire another person to kill a fellow hominid and then ghoulishly retain the body. First a commenter posted the video above and asked, “Is this guy evil or what?” To which the other commenter responded:

Eh? Well, which is it? Either it’s “This guy is evil enough to pull the strings of Rick Dyer (to intentionally ridicule the Bigfoot community with a vast hoax)” or “This guy is evil enough to pay for a Bigfoot hit-man and demand a Bigfoot body?”

I would say the latter, no?
Rick Dyer steps down as President of Team Tracker. More of Rick’s wild, impulsive and unpredictable behavior. In this case, he is stepping down as president of his group, apparently to spend his time getting ready for his roadshow. In his place, Frank Cali will step in as President. I think Frank will be a lot easier to get along with. Frank has said that he will not tolerate TT members badmouthing either me or Christopher Noel on his show. Frank will take over the running of some of the shows. The shows should be a lot more sober and serious with Frank at the helm.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_FZNVT1b9o]

Save the White Race!

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExQgBgm9Z-I]
The problem with the White nationalists and White supremacists screaming about White genocide and saving the White race from extinction is that to be completely honest, there really is nothing much left to save anymore.
Back in the hippie era, we thought we were creating a whole new era of mind expansion and liberation. Instead we got mind reduction, idiocracy and a race to the bottom via the depravity of ghetto and anticivilizational culture. We were wrong to promote drugs and unlimited license. Woodstock was one thing, but from the soil of Woodstock inevitably grows something like this.
What White race? There’s nothing left. Look at the video.
White people RIP!

Saul Landau, Presente!

Comrade Saul Landau has died. He wrote a lot of great articles on Cuba, which is mostly what I remember him for. His views of Cuba were not starry-eyed, and he really told it like it is. He also made a number of movies, none of which I have ever seen. He was a great man.
Below is a fairly decent article from the horrific New York Times. I was expecting a hatchet piece, but apparently that was not to be.

Saul Landau, a determinedly leftist documentary filmmaker and writer whose passion for asking what he called “the most intrusive questions” yielded penetrating cinematic profiles of leaders like Fidel Castro and Salvador Allende, died on Monday at his home in Alameda, Calif. He was 77.
The cause was bladder cancer, his daughter Julia Landau said.
Mr. Landau aspired to marshal art and literature to illuminate social and political problems, and his point of view was almost always apparent. In the 1980s, he wrote essays berating the administration of Ronald Reagan for trying to depose the leftist government in Nicaragua, and recently he urged the United States not to become involved in Syria.
He said he saw no difference between documentary and fictional films. In both, he said, a director manipulates light and sound to put across a vision. “One has to simulate reality,” he said in 2005 in an interview with The Capital Times in Madison, Wis. “The other one says, ‘Here’s reality,’ whether it is or isn’t.”
Mr. Landau emerged from the roiling New Left politics of the 1960s to make more than 40 documentaries, including six about Mr. Castro. One of them, “Fidel,” released in 1969, was a rare intimate look at the Cuban leader. It shows him arguing with a finger-wagging peasant woman, visiting his nursery school and playing baseball and striking out.
“I found Fidel a sympathetic figure and a hell of a good actor,” Mr. Landau told The Washington Post in 1982.
His most acclaimed film was “Paul Jacobs and the Nuclear Gang,” which he directed with Jack Willis in 1980. With cinematography by Haskell Wexler, the documentary, broadcast on PBS, told of the cover-up of health hazards from a 1957 nuclear-bomb test in Utah. The film won an Emmy Award and a George Polk Award.
The title referred to Mr. Landau’s friend Paul Jacobs, a journalist who died of cancer — believed to have been caused by radiation exposure — before the film was completed.
Other films by Mr. Landau portray poverty in big-city slums, the destruction of indigenous Mexican culture, the inner workings of the C.I.A., torture in Brazil and life inside a San Francisco jail. Most have a leftist political edge that some saw as propagandistic, but Mr. Landau characterized the films as educational.
“All my films try to teach people without preaching too hard,” he said. “I try not to be too tendentious.”
Mr. Landau released two films relating to Mr. Allende, the Chilean who had become Latin America’s first democratically elected socialist president the year before. One was an interview with Mr. Allende.
The other film, “Que Hacer!” (1970) — the title is a translation of the title of Lenin’s book “What Is to Be Done?” — is a fictional movie, a playful spy story with music concerning a C.I.A. case officer in Chile. There are two casts: a Chilean one directed by Raul Ruiz and an American one directed by Mr. Landau and Nina Serrano, his wife at the time. Country Joe McDonald performed and produced the music. The film won awards at film festivals in Cannes, Venice and Mannheim, Germany.
Orlando Letelier, Chile’s ambassador to the United States, invited Mr. Landau to screen it at the Chilean Embassy in Washington, and they became friends. A few years later, Gen. Augusto Pinochet overthrew the Allende government and imprisoned Mr. Letelier.
Mr. Landau worked with other international supporters to win Mr. Letelier’s release and to arrange a job for him at the Institute for Policy Studies, a left-wing research organization in Washington Mr. Landau had joined in 1972. In 1976, Pinochet agents used a car bomb to kill Mr. Letelier and another institute worker. In 1980, Mr. Landau and John Dinges published a book about the case, “Assassination on Embassy Row,” documenting the Pinochet government’s ties to the killings.
Mr. Landau was at least as prolific a writer as he was a filmmaker. He wrote 14 books and thousands of newspaper and magazine articles and reviews.
Saul Irwin Landau was born on Jan. 15, 1936, a few blocks from Yankee Stadium in the Bronx, and grew up playing stickball in the streets. His father was a pharmacist who had fled pogroms in Ukraine to come to New York in 1920. His mother was a teacher.
As a youth, Mr. Landau once abandoned school to hitchhike across America. When he returned, his mother urged him to take the test for the academically elite Stuyvesant High School. He passed, and went on to perform brilliantly there.
The summer after he graduated, he met Ms. Serrano at a camp in the Catskills, where he was the fry cook and she the drama teacher. Ms. Serrano, who became a published poet, encouraged his interest in leftist politics and a bohemian lifestyle, according to their daughter Valerie Landau.
Ms. Serrano also accompanied Mr. Landau when he went to the University of Wisconsin. When a dean found out that they were living together, he threatened to expel Mr. Landau (Ms. Serrano was not a student then) if they did not marry. They did.
At Wisconsin, Mr. Landau got involved in a so-called Joe Must Go club, which advocated the recall of Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin over his demagogic attacks on people he accused of being Communists.
After earning bachelor’s and master’s degrees in history at Wisconsin, Mr. Landau became a researcher for C. Wright Mills, the sociologist, traveling with him to Western Europe, the Soviet Union and Cuba.
Moving to Northern California with Ms. Serrano, he worked toward a doctorate at Stanford but did not complete the studies. In San Francisco, they gravitated to the Beat poets and the emerging New Left movement. Mr. Landau joined Students for a Democratic Society and helped organize the leftist magazines Ramparts and Mother Jones.
He also joined the San Francisco Mime Troupe, for which he wrote a parody of a minstrel show, “A Minstrel Show, or Civil Rights in a Cracker Barrel.” Performers in the show, which satirized racial perceptions, appeared in blackface. The show traveled to New York and elsewhere.
“Through the entire evening there is really nothing to laugh at, no matter how funny it is,” Richard F. Shepard wrote in The New York Times. “There is the ominous theme of what hypocrisy and oppression breed.”
In 1966 Mr. Landau got a job as a reporter at KQED-TV, San Francisco’s public television station, and a year later went to Cuba to make a news documentary. Mr. Castro liked it, and invited Mr. Landau to return to do an in-depth documentary about him. Mr. Landau’s marriage to Ms. Serrano ended in divorce. Besides his daughters Valerie and Julia, he is survived by a son, Greg, and two other daughters, Carmen and Marie; his second wife, Rebecca Switzer; seven grandchildren; and four great-grandchildren.
“You want to do what you can while you’re on this earth,” Mr. Landau said in 2006. “Otherwise the alternative is to go shopping.”

Bigfoot News September 6, 2013

Anniversary of the day Rick Dyer shot and killed a Bigfoot in San Antonio, Texas. This is the 1-year anniversary of the most famous deed in Bigfoot history. And yes, I do now believe that Rick killed a Bigfoot on that day.
The following events are true beyond a reasonable doubt:

  • A Bigfoot was present with Rick and Morgan in San Antonio.
  • Rick shot the Tent Video of the Bigfoot earlier in the day. You can hear Morgan whispering in the background to wake him up.
  • The Bigfoot came back later than night to eat more ribs.
  • Rick saw and came out with his gun. Morgan came out of his tent with a camera. They both chased the Bigfoot.
  • Rick shot live bullets and the Bigfoot.
  • The Bigfoot ran into Morgan and knocked him over.
  • At some point, Rick shot and killed the Bigfoot. The details are unclear.
  • Video of the dead Bigfoot was later shot with Rick’s cell-camera that night or early the next morning. More on that later!

However, what happened after that? I am much less sure. Does Rick have the body? Does anyone have the body? Who knows? Maybe Rick took the body and set it on fire. Maybe he ground it up and sold it as horsemeat to a pet food factory. Maybe he stores it in his freezer and has carnal knowledge with it once in a while. Maybe the whole story about it being stored at a US government research lab is true. Anyway, I haven’t the faintest idea what happened to that body after it was shot. The story gets much murkier after that, and few if any things are proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Video of Hank the dead Bigfoot exists! On September 7, 2012, a strange video appeared on Youtube. It was private and needed a password to get in to see it. Only a few people close to Rick Dyer were invited to see it. Rick sent out invites with the words, “What do I do now? Give me some advice?” The video was very short and was shot on Rick’s cellphone either late at night or early the next morning. The video showed Hank, shot dead, lying on the ground. I know one person who saw this video and they have been 100% convinced that this story is true ever since. Unfortunately, I cannot give you their name.
A strange message from Morgan Matthews to Loren Coleman of Cryptomundo (italics mine).

To all at the Cryptomundo team, We are contacting you from Minnow Films Limited, the production company responsible for the “Shooting Bigfoot” documentary. The reason we are contacting you is we have seen that photographs that were illegally obtained in the movie theater have been uploaded onto your website. I also understand that you may intend to upload clips of the film that were also obtained illegally.
Whilst we appreciate your interest in the film and are very aware of the importance of this footage to the Bigfoot community, uploading this material nevertheless breaches our copyright. We will not take action with regard to the uploading of the photograph, but we would have to take action if any clips are uploaded. Could I therefore request, on an amicable basis, that you do not upload or otherwise publish any of our copyright material? Thank you very much for your co—-operation. Minnow Films

Ok, if this is nothing but than a 2-bit fraud or a joke, why would it have any importance whatsoever to the Bigfoot community? It wouldn’t. But if it was some of the Bigfoot footage ever shot (which it is) would it have any importance to the community? Well of course it would.
Shooting Bigfoot still in production? This oddity was found on the Minnow Films website. As you can see, Shooting Bigfoot is listed as “still in production.” In addition, the title is only a working title and has not been decided on yet. Why is that? I thought the movie was done filming. Is it common for a movie, when it is done filming, to be listed as still in production? Why would it be? What director would make a movie, release it for awards and then go back and re-edit it or produce it again. Why would they do that unless it was, for example, a documentary that was going to change the course of history, which this movie may possibly do?
Dr. Brian Sykes project due to be released in 6 weeks? This is what I have heard, that they are done with all their testing and are going to release their findings in about 6 weeks. No one knows what they have found yet. More here.
Three videos from the movie Dead Bigfoot. The movie has apparently been finished. This is a documentary by Ro Sahebi. It stars Justin Smeja and Bart Cutino among others. Ro is a great filmmaker and it should be quite nice!
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdFhtGcDmVk]
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1kfN1bjBYU]
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owKQ3wUegH0]
I now own some Bigfoot hairs. I have my very own Bigfoot hairs, gathered in the Northern Peninsula of Michigan. I also have a magnified photograph of the hairs. They look like human hairs, but they are different in some interesting ways. They are kinky and curly, almost like pubic hairs, and similar to some of the other photos that have been floating around.

The Fabulous Stains, "Join the Professionals"

From the 1982 hit movie, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Stains.
This is a version of the song by the all-girl band The Stains. Lead singer is actress Diane Lane in a very early role.
Scene at the mall where the girls steal the boys’ hit song and perform it in their own band:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwYkyz7AFrg]
They go onto to great fame with their ripped off song. Those little sluts! Closing credits for the movie:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEjRg22yFBE]

The Looters!

The Looters are not a real band. They only appear only in a movie, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Stains! released in October 1982. Although it got poor reviews, this has evolved into a minor cult hit. It starred Diane Lane and Laura Dern in early roles along with British tough guy Ray Winstone, along with Fee Waybill of the seminal band The Tubes. Paul Cook and Steve Jones from the Sex Pistols and Paul Simonon of the Clash appear, along with Winstone on lead vocals, as a band called The Looters. They are actually pretty damn good! Directed by the great Lou Adler and written by famous screenwriter Nancy Dowd.
Lead guitar – Steve Jones!
Drums – Paul Cook!
Bass – Paul Simonon!
Vocals – Actor Ray Winstone!
Join the Professionals
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZYlhBJ1pM8]
La la la
That great Jones Cook sound!
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1b1gzxoXe0]
Don’t Blow it All
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxqcZ9ylvlc]