Identity fraud

AAA Lineup

The progression of personalities through the various mediums has been an ongoing subject of interest on this blog. People, Intelligence assets it appears, or perhaps just members of privileged bloodlines, are given an assignment, for instance, to be a musician. They are given fame and record deals and concert dates. From the outside looking in they appear to be a natural phenomenon. Then, for various reasons (unsustainable career, lack of talent, need to promote new acts, or merely to capitalize on record sales) they fake their deaths. Often they disappear from public view forever, as did Karen Carpenter, John Denver, Prince, Elvis Presley, Kurt Cobain and Michael Jackson, to name a few.

But just as often, we have noticed at this blog, they reappear. Most often they go into the “news” business, or use of a fake but trustworthy persona to disseminate false information. Such people often guard the exits, as with Brandon DeWilde becoming “Thom Hartmann” and Janis Joplin twins becoming “Amy Goodman.” These are “lifetime actors” … that is, they will never reveal to anyone their secret or their real identity. They are permanently frozen in their fake identities.

Kim Philby was by some accounts a Soviet spy working in England, and who was exposed. For our purposes I will ignore the challenge that ferreting out his real life and work presents, and just offer a later-in-life quote from him that is apropos:

“[There] was the liberal smokescreen behind which I concealed my real opinions. One writer who knew me in Beirut has stated that the liberal opinions I expressed in the Middle East were ‘certainly’ my true ones. Another comment from a personal friend was that I could not have maintained such a consistently liberal-intellectual framework unless I had really believed in it. Both remarks are very flattering. The first duty of an underground worker is to perfect not only his cover story but his cover personality.” (Philby, My Silent War, page 201)

Understanding that the people we expose here are Intelligence assets (or agents), and that they will never, under any circumstances, reveal their true identity or admit that they faked their death, is critical to understanding the zombie phenomenon we have uncovered. It is a part of our fake world that we stumbled upon, never imagining the degree to which the world presented to us by electronic media is false. It is as if we are each living The Truman Show.

Part of the facade of our fake reality is the music business. It is not happenstance. There is far more musical talent around than ever makes it big. Those who make it big are not as talented as we are led to believe, and often enough use real musicians (as the Wrecking Crew in the 60s and 70s) in studios or on stage to fake their performances. The supposed Milli Vanilli scandal of 1989 served to reinforce the false impression that when we see performers on stage that they are using their own voices and instruments. That might have been the purpose of that little psyop.

Music is simply too important to be left to chance. It is the tribal beat.  It can inspire people to fall in love, rebel, or to love and hate public personalities and ideas. It shapes our manners and perceptions and forms of dress. It must be and is under state control. No one is granted success in music unless previously compromised, or a member of a bloodline. Once they achieve fame, their songs are handed to them, as are their recording deals and their gigs. They are, of course, as easily taken down as propped up.

A fake musician like Bono, for instance, who cannot read music or play an instrument, and who is a gravelly non-resonating singer at best, owes his fame to power of suggestion and lots of behind-the-scenes support. He’s a fake, but is not alone. It is a big fraternity (sorority) of deceit.

Holly Two 4This is all by way of introducing Buddy Holly, a musician who gained fame in the 1950s and who faked his death on February 4, 1959 at age 22. It was not Holly’s idea to fake his death, and we cannot know the reasons, as no one is talking. But I would guess that he was known to be a marginal talent who could not sustain a long career, and yet was seen as useful for other purposes.

In our original writing on the matter of Buddy Holly, we made the assertion that we was actually a set of twins. I stand by that assertion with the caveat that due to the number and poor quality of photos available of him, that I cannot offer enough evidence … at least by the use of those photos. So my intent here is to back into the Holly twins by means of two other sets of twins: David Geffen/Jeffrey Katzenberg, and Gram Parsons.

Geffen/Katzenberg: They’re so vain

Geffen is the “G” in Dreamworks, SKG, the Steven Spielberg movie company, and Katzenberg the K. Both men are, I assume, false fronts, as both the music and movie business have long been under control of Intelligence, so that no one person has the kind of power these men (including Spielberg) purport to have.


On the left is Geffen, on the right Katzenberg. I was struck by their resemblance to one another back when we were working on the Holly twins, so much so that I speculated that “Holly” had morphed into these two men. Geffen of course has a wider face and nose, and Katzenberg has that square jaw. The most distinguishing feature between them is the smile – Katzenberg most often has a wide grin when he smiles, while Geffen, having a very similar mouth, seldom cuts loose with an unrestrained smile.

This seems a logical starting point, a situation where it is a given that we have two people, so there is nothing to prove regarding their separate identities. Work backward now with me as I try to  explain the odd differences in two people calling themselves “Gram Parsons” and “Buddy Holly”, fictitious names, I assume, for fictitious people.

Ambrose Bierce famously described marriage as “the state or condition of a community consisting of a master, a mistress and two slaves, making in all, two.”  With our six people we have two moguls, two fake musicians, two fake deaths, making in all, two.

The Gram Parsons experience

Gram Parsons has always been a person of interest to us, someone we know faked his death, who we knew was still around, but whom we could not place. Part of the reason for our difficulties is apparent now, that Parsons was a set of twins.

Here is Wikipedia’s account of the death of Gram Parsons:

In the late 1960s, Parsons became enamored with Joshua Tree National Monument (now Joshua Tree National Park) in southeastern California. After splitting from Burrell, Parsons would frequently spend his weekends in the area with Margaret Fisher and Phil Kaufman. Parsons was scheduled to begin another tour in October 1973. Parsons decided to go on one more excursion before this tour. Accompanying him were Fisher, personal assistant Michael Martin, and Dale McElroy, Martin’s girlfriend.

Less than two days after arriving at the Joshua Tree Inn in Room #8, Parsons was discovered unresponsive in his bedroom. Attempts to revive him failed and death was officially pronounced at 12:15 am on September 19, 1973 at Hi-Desert Memorial Hospital.[42] Parsons was 26 years old at the time of his death and the official cause of death was an overdose of morphine and alcohol.[43][44] According to Fisher in the 2005 biography Grievous Angel: An Intimate Biography of Gram Parsons, the amount of morphine consumed by Parsons would be lethal to three regular users and thus he had likely overestimated his tolerance considering his experience with opiates. Keith Richards, a close friend of Parsons, stated in the 2004 documentary film Fallen Angel that Parsons understood the danger of combining opiates and alcohol, and thus should have known better. Upon Parsons’ death, Fisher and McElroy were returned to Los Angeles by Kaufman, who dispersed the remnants of Parsons’ drugs in the desert.

Parsons’ body disappeared from the Los Angeles International Airport where it was being readied to be shipped to Louisiana for burial. Before his death, Parsons stated that he wanted his body cremated at Joshua Tree and his ashes spread over Cap Rock, a prominent natural feature there; however, Parsons’ stepfather organized a private ceremony back in New Orleans and neglected to invite any of his friends from the music industry.[44] Two accounts state that Bob Parsons stood to inherit Gram’s share of his grandfather’s estate if he could prove that Gram was a resident of Louisiana, explaining his eagerness to have him buried there.[45][46]

Parson’s makeshift memorial in Joshua Tree, California

 To fulfill Parsons’ funeral wishes, Kaufman and a friend stole his body from the airport and in a borrowed hearse, they drove it to Joshua Tree. Upon reaching the Cap Rock section of the park, they attempted to cremate Parsons’ corpse by pouring five gallons of gasoline into the open coffin and throwing a lit match inside. What resulted was an enormous fireball. The police gave chase but, as one account puts it, “were encumbered by sobriety,” and the men escaped.[44] The two were arrested several days later. Since there was no law against stealing a dead body, they were only fined $750[47] for stealing the coffin and were not prosecuted for leaving 35 pounds (16 kg) of his charred remains in the desert.

What a crock of …. several things to note there – one, Parsons, a later member of the Byrds and a member of the Flying Burrito Brothers, and who also toured with Emmylou Harris, died of a fatal combination of alcohol and morphine. He was also part of the Laurel Canyon scene, so it might be logical to assume that he, like so many others there, was a substance abuser. I doubt it. Just as I doubt that Janis Joplin was a chronic drunk or drug user, so too for Parsons. They are running a psychological ploy on us, predictive programming. Once it is established by their public behaviors that they are users, death is foreshadowed and a fake death easily pulled off. “Of course,” we say when they die of overdoses. “I saw that coming.”

Secondly note one thing missing in the death of Gram Parsons: A body. They have gone to great lengths to justify there being no body – friends stealing a corpse from LA International, burning it in the desert. The spooks have over-explained here, a huge tell. Parsons faked his/their death/s.

Parsons Geffen

To the left is Parsons, to the right Geffen. Note below how easily all features align, so much so that I think we are dealing here with the same man.


Below are Gram Parsons and Jeff Katzenberg. Note the distinguishing future from their counterparts, the wide and genuine smile.

Parsons Geffen 2

And note how easily they blend, how all features including face are in perfect alignment.


It is my considered opinion that the Gram Parsons twins, fake or over-hyped musicians,  became David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, fake industry moguls.


Buddy Holly – he really did catch a train for the coast!

Below are the Buddy Holly twins, as I see them, and based on that easily distinguished smile and a wider nose for the twin on the right, as the photos are too few and of lower quality.

Holly Twins

Holly Two 4Keep in mind that it could be with both of these photos that they are wearing veneers for teeth. Quite a few photos of the boys showed less-than-Hollywood-perfect teeth. (Note in all these photos that Holly appears a teenager.)

If I am correct in my assessment here, I should be able to line up the Buddy Holly on the left with the less smiley Gram Parsons, also on the left above.


And, using the same Holly photo, I should be able to blend him with David Geffen.


If these are the same two people, and I think they are (though the alignment suffers due to lack of good Holly photos), then Geffen has certainly had an ear tuck, a common Hollywood procedure. (I will take a closer look at ears later.)

We are only left to find Katzenberg in the Holly photos.

Holly Katz Final

Again, I am seeing a Hollywood ear tuck, but strong resemblance.


Again we have an ear tuck, and near perfect alignment of features. The teeth look remarkably alike, given that Katzenberg has had some work done.


The telltale ear

Holly Parsons

Finally, above are photos of a very young Buddy Holly and a very young Gram Parsons, or so the Internet tells me. When I first put these side by side, I thought I was looking at different renditions of the same photo, so close are they. But they are indeed two separate photos. By this time you should know that this is the same person who would in the end become David Geffen. Here’s a gif running these together


That is the expected outcome, near perfect alignment of features. But the ears don’t align – that is angular distortion, nothing more, but note below the ears, side by side:

Holly Parsons ears

That is Parson’s ear on the left, Holly’s on the right. They look identical to me. Ears are said to be as good as fingerprints.

Here are Holly and Katzenberg one more time:

Holly Katz Final

And the ears:

Holly Katz ears

Again, they look identical to me.


Timeline difficulties

This presentation is not without problems – the few and hard-to-work-with Holly photos one, and the other the timelines for the people involved. In fact, with Holly allegedly born in 1936, I am thinking Matt Damon batch thoughts. Perhaps instead of twins/zombies, I am dealing with clones? I will work backward:

Jeffrey Katzenberg was born on 12/21/1950, we are told, and note the 33 in that date. His timeline interferes with neither Holly or Parsons. He is said to have worked for John Lindsay’s NY mayor campaign in 1964, five years after the Holly plane crash. He became an assistant to movie executive Barry Diller in 1974, and in 1984 was brought over to work for Disney. No timeline problems.

David Geffen is said to be seven years older, though I do not see that difference. Born on 2/21/1943, however, he again does not cross paths with Holly, briefly appearing in Explosive Generation in 1961, two years after the Holly crash. (I assume that movie is not something we could view, making his actual participation suspect.) In 1960 he is said to have graduated Utrecht High School with a 66 average, no reason to add that ’66’ that I can see. In 1970 he formed Asylum records, and here we have a conflict, as Gram Parsons does not fake his death until 1973. In 1980 he forms Geffen Records, and in that same year for unknown reasons John and Yoko Lennon choose him to record Double Fantasy, which will be a huge seller after Lennon’s fake death. Yoko said he was the only producer to pay attention to her, which is why John chose him. I do not buy that.

Gram Parsons (Ingram Cecil Conner III) is born 11/5/1946, and like so many rock stars in the Laurel Canyon era, had (or was assigned) a military family background. His parents were Ingram Cecil (“Coon Dog”) and Avis (née Snively) Connor. Coon Dog was some kind of war legend. Parsons is said to have founded the International Submarine Band in 1966, but that band’s album was not released until later years. So that is not a sure date. He was part of the Byrds, a manufactured group formed in 1968, and had various associations until his fake death in 1973. He was accepted to Harvard in 1966 under suspicious circumstances (bad grades), and is said to have missed a whole lot of classes.

Buddy Holly was born in 1936 we are told, and was 22 when the plane crash was reported. All of the photos of him speak of a younger man, perhaps a teenager, but still, we have to overcome ten years to put him in the same range as Parsons, and fourteen for Geffen. We have dealt with timeline problems in the past here, for instance the very old-looking Amy Goodman said to have been born in 1957. So this is not new or insurmountable.

The photos speak of too much resemblance to pass up nonchalantly. Ear alignment is dead on. Facial alignment, eyes, ears, nose are also dead on. Parsons and Geffen/Katzenberg also align in the teeth.

We have learned in this work that Wikipedia is full of false leads and signals. Both Geffen (66% in 60) and Katzenberg (born 12/21) are signaled. Further, the instant careers despite lack of noticeable musical talent speak of young men selected to be stars. Katzenberg and Geffen becoming industry moguls in two industries that are controlled by Intelligence speak of men selected for fame as well. The Lennon connection with Geffen just prior to his fake death is intriguing  – as if Geffen is charmed. Or connected.

I rest my case on the photo work with the knowledge that with these characters, nothing in their present is likely true nor anything in their past. We don’t know their real names, dates of birth, or backgrounds before emerging as public figures. There is a whole division at Langley charged with writing the fake bios for those who have to die young and reemerge with new identities.


Final note: With all photos I set pupil distance at one inch and let the cards fall where they fall. I do not resize skulls, so that alignment when it happens is not by means of monkey business. I have had complaints in the past that it takes too long to progress from one face to the other in the gif’s but I can easily slow them down for anyone interested, or even provide stop screen grabs.

PS: Perhaps I should have started with this:


42 thoughts on “Identity fraud

  1. Amazing work! A Poodle-do and dorky horned-rimmed glasses give way to an Afghan shag, no glasses and finally hairless Chihuahuas in wire rims and contact lenses. One is gay and one isn’t, because “Holly”wood comes in all flavors…erm…


    1. Hello Mark! It’s been a while since I’ve been here (not since the Beatles Fairytale and twin Bowie’s), and I know I missed this analysis by two years, but I just found it.

      I must say that you did a great job putting two and two together. I’ve been saying for years that “The Day the Music Died” was really “The Day the Agents Retired”, but I hadn’t considered that there were Holly twins until reading this.

      This correlates with my current project, which proves that Prince itself was a twin project, because I’ve got dozens of pictures I’m studying that shows how there are two, one with a wider nose, an one with a thinner one. So far, the wider nosed Prince was retired out during the name change to “O+(>”. The pictures that I’ve viewed from that point on 1992-ish to 2016) is the thin-nosed Prince.

      In any event, you did a great job with what you have to work with! Thanks for sharing it with us!


  2. Sorry but I’m just not seeing it. Take those two photos under “the telltale ear”, for instance. You write that you thought you were looking at “different renditions of the same photo”, and I can only ask if you’ve had your lens prescription checked lately. Those are clearly two different people. One has a nose which tilts slightly upward, the other does not. One has a very distinct “cupid’s bow” mouth, the other does not. One has eyebrows that sit virtually right on top of his eye sockets, the other’s brows are a solid inch above his eye sockets. The two photos have entirely different “center of mouth to bottom of chin” measurements, which isn’t the least of the problems. You focus on the ears and state that they look identical to you. Do you not see that in the picture on the left the bottom of the ear is roughly on a line with the bottom of the nose, where in the picture on the right the bottom of the ear is nearly on a line with the top lip? These are two entirely different men.

    And if the argument is that it’s perspective or the like that makes the ears of the two men appear to be at drastically different heights relative to the rest of their faces, then that same perspective problem doesn’t go away simply because one superimposes the ears on top of one another.

    This site has a number of decent analyses, but a distressing number of these kind of “false positives” or bogus assertions. That nose on Parsons must have undergone one hell of a transformation over the years to become the nose on Katzenberg, for instance, changing its shape, size and position relative to the other features of the face. Amazing. I do appreciate, however, that it’s your opinion that they aren’t bogus at all, and it’s a huge step in the right direction that you allow free and open comment on all of the articles posted here. No disrespect is intended, and I assume you value all feedback, regardless of whether it’s in agreement with your conclusion or not. Cheers.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. In overlaying photos I first set the pupils of they eyes at common distance, and then align them on top of one another to see if other elements of the face are in the same realm. Often enough in this project I got misaligned mouths and noses, which is how I could, had I chosen to make a book out of this, shown that the Holly’s and Parson’s were a set of twins. I may yet do that as an addendum.

      However, when I get exact alignment if features, it is telling me something. It is enough to know that fraud was in the offing with the fake deaths of Holly and Parsons, and having as a baseline knowledge that most of our “moguls,” from Gates to Jobs to Branson to Musk to Zuckerberg are actors and phonies. Knowing that Holly was still alive produced a long search to find him. I stand by this work.

      What I found with all my attempts was that when I was on track, the noses fit, and perfectly. Go back now and look at all the gifs, and just focus on the noses, and see what I saw.

      Regarding the specific photo you cite, I also have some insight that others are yet to come upon, that the photos we see are masks, controlled by Intelligence, and often worked over for effect to make non-family members part for family portraits (as with John Denver, Janis Joplin, Taylor Swift and Jim Morrison), or to tweak them to create slight differences. That is why I said with the photo of Holly and Parsons that at first glance I thought I was looking at different rendition stories of the same photo. It turned out not due to ear misalignment, which is caused by head angle. God only knows if you read this blog we have dealt with ear alignment. Straight has even done mathematical calculations to measure the distortion caused by slight movement of the head or camera.

      So I appreciate your criticism, but suggest you are late to the game here and have some catching up to do. Nothing you say sheds new light on the hurdles we face in trying to uncover the lies of our times. i stand by the work.


  3. Mark, I think your unraveling of this particular tangle of twins and zombies is amazing…wow, three lives for these “lifetime actors”. I look forward to any followup (addendum) as mentioned in your reply to Joki. Really great work and I love the “flow chart”!


    1. Thank you Annette. Straight and I go way back on this one. In a piece I wrote before this and took down (it only drew one lame comment, so I figured the piece must be lame too), I wondered why? Why do they recycle people? All I can figure is that they are keeping it in various families, and perhaps add to that that they don’t have enough talent to fill all the slots and don’t want to branch too far away from bloodlines. It is all I can make of it.


      1. and possibly, the job is complete and there is a perfectly good asset(s), still young, with other “talents” and they don’t want to waste all that training…so, a little tinkering here and there and a couple of years out of public awareness and no one is the wiser….until now.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. The people who first put this particular group together for the Buddy Holly leg of the operation are probably dead by now. I wonder how this sort of long con is handed down to new maintenance men when the old guard retires. Katzenberg is a little more public than Geffen, but neither is really approachable and this would beg the question, why use them if possibly detectable since they don’t really do any performing? This risk would then favor the notion that recycled assets who have a good record of discretion are quite valuable within this network of bloodlines.
    Personally, I would add that their possibly illegitimate breeding creates some kind of dependency on the bastard’s part that further cements their loyalty to the operation.
    I guess what I’m pondering is the peculiar mental makeup of such a rare breed. Knee jerk loyalty must come standard, like a photographic memory or the ability to compute large numbers in your head instantly. Probably not all of the bastards have such gifts, but these twins must have been spotted early and were given a lifetime assignment with many complicated adjustments. What youthful indicators those might have been to have them developed for these ops, I have no idea at this point, but if certain basic personality traits in particular combinations appear before the children develop a sense of autonomy, I’d like to know how they create these ferociously loyal, faceless templates. I don’t think its drugs or abuse or “psychic driving” or any of those gothic horrors of mind control legend. There’s a blood thing here that the legitimate offspring take for granted.
    I know there is something here by what is going on around it, but I can’t see it directly. Kind of like Pluto, sometimes an official planet, and sometimes not, but no one has ever seen the damn thing.
    (I don’t buy any of NASA’s cartoons)


    1. We have been knocking on this door for a long time. We could use a breakthrough. I see Bill O’Reilly was “fired” today. He’s too old to be useful in any other role. He’s retired with some indignity. Confusing. He could just step aside.


      1. “He’s retired with some indignity. Confusing. He could just step aside.”

        Could be contractual.
        I imagine it going something like this – Mr. O’Reilly, we’ll give you success, fame and fortune but, on such and such date 25 yrs from now, we’ll be taking back what never truly belonged to you. Agreed?
        Sign here.

        Or maybe he started believing the hype and didn’t want to give it back. A little payback for an over inflated ego perhaps.

        And there’s also the possibility it’s part of a psycological operation. Bill O’Reilly has millions of fans (65+ love him). People trust him. Taking him out in this fashion will force a large portion of the population to re examine who they think they can trust, further sewing the seeds of the distrust we already have for one another.

        I’m kind of hoping it was scenario 2, either way I’m glad he’s gone.



  5. Mark, do you dare answer 3 questions?

    1) How do you explain away the huge differences in the size of the gap between nose and upper lip in these photos?

    2) Why are you showing gifs without your trademark face chops here? Do the face chops reveal differences that morphing gifs obscure?

    3) Occam’s Razor suggests that Geffen and Katzenberg are part of the Jewish power structure of Hollywood. That’s not a controversial statement at all and it is statistically factual. Your argument aims to obscure that simple fact, in amazingly convoluted fashion. “These aren’t powerful Jewish entertainment moguls, they are resurrected Buddy Holly twin actors doing the bidding of U.S. government employees.”???? Seriously? How do you explain Aaron Milchan, billionaire movie producer and acknowledged Mossad asset? Is he really working for F Troop? Or Police Squad? Come on. If these Hollywood moguls are just actors, why are they all members of the richest ethnic group in American society?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. There is no noticeable difference in the gap between nose and upper lip. When you see that, also notice how the ears misalign. It is angular distortion.

      Gif’s are more reliable than face chops, as angular distortion is more obvious. Many of our “twins” bit the dust for that reason, easily seen not to be that by use of overlays. We are slowly improving our techniques.

      The Jewish question is for other people at other blogs. It is a vehicle for hatred, and I want no part of it. And you are warned (see commenting policy) not to broach it again.


  6. Okay, consider that question dropped. I apologize and respect your policy.

    I have a different question. I accept the idea that a lot of things are faked, a lot of prominent people are actors, and that these people are connected in some hidden ways, e.g. they are connected to military intelligence, or to particular bloodlines, or whatever. And that there are “front men” doing the bidding of real controllers who prefer to remain hidden. That all makes sense. And that the goals of the hidden controllers are often sinister. They may tell themselves that they are “maintaining order” or something, but drugging, extorting, and brainwashing the population are not noble activities in my opinion.

    So, as an anti-authoritarian, conspiracy-minded guy myself, I reject the conventional wisdom that most of my fellow citizens embrace: that the medical industry only cares about saving lives, the national security state only cares about protecting Americans, the financial industry just wants to help us save for retirement, the news media just wants to honestly inform voters, “our leaders” would never do that, etc. etc.

    In my view, just like yours, there’s a lot of control and sinister motives and fakery in our society/system. But what I struggle with is where to draw the line between a mental model of the world in which everything is fake and all prominent people are actors controlled by unseen controllers/script-writers at one extreme, or, on the other end of the spectrum, a much larger group of people are “in on it.” Not just aware of it, but actively setting policy. Everyone has a boss of course. But in a hierarchical organization, you need some captains and sergeants making decisions, not just a few generals deciding everything for an army of dumb fake actors.

    So, isn’t it possible that people like David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg really ARE moguls who play a dominant role in Hollywood? They may have hidden bosses who suck some of the money out of the official Hollywood system and into hidden hands. And these bosses may also dictate certain narratives, etc. But it would seem to me more efficient for the controllers if David and Jeffrey were really smart and empowered to make 90% of decisions, and the hidden guys just set overarching policy and lean in once in a while to have Langley or whoever insert a few plot points or trans characters into scripts. If David and Jeffrey are just fake actors, then there has to be an entire huge shadow hierarchy actually doing all the work of making the entertainment industry function, which seems far fetched. And Dave and Jeff aren’t that famous outside of certain circles. Most Americans have never heard of them. Britney Spears is clearly an actor. And I’ll buy that newscasters are too. And maybe Zuckerberg and Jobs and Branson are too. But SOME of these public figures must be wielding real authority. Especially if they are so obviously on board with promoting the destructive narratives and they are at least half related to the bloodlines (your bastard spawn theory). So, this is all a long-winded way of asking, where do you draw the line? Are ALL controllers hidden, or are some of them “capos” operating in plain sight?

    I’d buy that people like David and Jeffrey might have had to do some training/prove their loyalty as actors in their early days, so maybe they really were Buddy Holly. But maybe successful agents eventually become the equivalent of Vice Presidents in the power structure, rather than just continuing as actors.

    The Spielberg inception myth is a little far-fetched. He snuck onto the lot and gave himself an office as a 15 year old punk and just became Spielberg as a result? Maybe that myth is designed to promote Hollywood as a dream factory meritocracy, instead of a place where all the prominent people are already part of the club. Spielberg is probably related to all the right people, was destined for his role all along, etc., rather than scratching and clawing his way to success Horatio Alger style. But. Isn’t it easier to imagine him as, say, the son of a previous generation of powerful Hollywood types who now helps to run the place in his own right rather than as an empty-headed actor fronting for the REAL hidden directors of Jurassic Park?

    Anyway, you get the question. What do you think?


    1. I meant to address your Occam scenario, as it made sense. However, we did not step into that circus looking to make connections. We merely stumbled on it. If we had started out wanting to somehow connect Holly and G&K, then Occam would apply. It was simply a smaller research project from last year that kept getting more interesting. And I was as dumbfounded as anyone knowing what we had found.

      You could well be right that G&K are real, along with Spielberg. I don’t discount that, but am more inclined to think that “moguls” are a way of hiding reality. In technology, it is DARPA that gave us the iPhone, but that does not go down so easy as good old American know-how and genius inventors. Maybe I go overboard, but I tend to think that every mogul is really a frontispiece for a large group effort, a slow release of technology (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Facebook that both serves us and spies on us at once), and a steady flow of propaganda (movies and music) with scripts written by committees and actors provided by bloodlines. Moguls, like politics, is for distraction. The real action is elsewhere. Straight one time tackled the Wachowski Brothers, showing them in action and concluding they were props, and that the movie the Matrix came form some other source.

      Big subject, however, and no good to live on the either/or teeter totter.


  7. Tyrone raises some good points about the obedience of all these spooks/actors/whatever. And he suggests that he doesn’t buy mind control horror stories as the cause, which makes sense.

    Here’s a theory. At the bottom level (say, teen starlets) it really is just obedience, motivated by a combination of fear, greed, and suggestibility. In the middle sort of soldier level (say, CNN reporters), it’s military style obedience–they know how to keep secrets. And, as we’ve established in forums like this, it is much easier for large groups of people to keep secrets for a long time than is commonly believed. But at the higher levels, I suspect that it is full buy-in and commitment to the mission. A belief that they are somewhat Godlike vs. the ordinary human cattle herds they are farming/shepherding/managing/exploiting.

    That world view is hard for us middle class types to understand, because we believe in our own sanctity, humanity, etc. But imagine how you’d feel if you were a rancher raising cattle. Would you be worried that your son might “break ranks” and spill the beans to the cattle about how they are really viewed? No.

    This makes me think that maybe these public figures are direct descendants of the bloodlines, not bastard spawn. (Maybe the more public/lower level actors are from “outer circle” families or branches of families. But still in the club.) Of course they never spill the beans. They are told from birth that they are part of 1000 year old families/organizations who control the world, that they are special, that they are destined to rule. They are told that the human cattle are to be managed and harvested. And they are warned that the dumb cattle in their massive numbers could stampede dangerously if not managed properly.

    So in this theory it’s not like Dave and Jeff are being bossed around against their will and forced to keep their mouths shut. They are part of the fraternity of elites. And even if they aren’t in charge of the fraternity, they are valued members. They don’t have to be obedient to keep the secrets. They are special. And they aren’t tempted at all to dilute their specialness by initiating the hoi polloi into the secrets.


  8. Last thought. When I accuse the elites of treating the rest of us like human cattle it makes them sound like they are total abusers. But it’s worth remembering that ranchers don’t hate their cattle. They view them as assets. They feed them, they soothe them, they agitate them when necessary, they try to get them all moving in the same direction, they fence them in, etc etc. This sounds a lot like what our controllers do to us via the media. They are managing us, they are whispering into our ears (“git along, little dogies”). Both to maximize their financial yield from the herd, and to control us “for our own good” so we don’t stampede and trample them or each other.


  9. Now the REALLY last thought. The controllers are aided by a huge army of useful idiots. When the controllers push, say, global warming hysteria, or gender-bending, or whatever, millions of people eagerly amplify the message because it makes them feel like “good people” to support such “liberal” causes. It’s even easier for the controllers to do their work without exposure or opposition when a lot of the controlled are cheering and celebrating the “progress.”


    1. I tend to harmonize with everything you’ve said here, and don’t have much to add. I have to get on another computer, but I wanted to share something I picked up from Jon Hamer having to do with some sort of structure built in Georgia.


    2. Frak, This video by Stephan Molyneux addresses all of the the human farming controls mentioned in your reply. I am having it start at just under 2 minutes because there were some brief scenes of animal cruelty.
      The Story of Your Enslavement


  10. The ‘ten commandments’ literally set in stone, to be found on the [Georgia] Guidestones are:

    1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
    2. Guide reproduction wisely – improving fitness and diversity.
    3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
    7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
    8. Balance personal rights with social duties.

    Cited in John Hamer, the Falsification of History, P378 – interesting book. I look at these ten commandments, and other than the mass genocide aspect of #1, a minor detail, don’t have much problem with them.

    You’d have to read the book to get a better view of the origins and purposes of the Guidestones. It’s weird.


    1. If we reflect deeper on #2, it presents some serious moral, ethical implications. “Who” or “what” is going to guide the fitness and diversity as related to reproduction? As some may recall, scientist Richard Dawkins so kindly announced that babies with down syndrome should be aborted. I guess Denmark listened because they are headed to making down syndrome extinct in their country due to selective abortion.


      1. And to comment on a few of this commandments as well:

        #3 reminds me on some “Socialist” countries of mixed nationalities, e.g. Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union. Forbidding native languages in favour of that of the majorities was common praxis. Like the US had been dealing with the native indians. When reading “living new language”, just think “New Speak”.

        #4 I’d just like to refer to another post here about psychatric fraud. The background is drugging the population to root out defiance.

        For #5 finally (for today), I’d like to remind anyone that EVERY action of the Nazi’s in Hitlers Germany was LAWFUL, i.e. covered by official and valid laws.
        I’ts always the ruling class or their high-seated puppets that provide the “proper” interpretation of the law texts.


      1. Really, I don’t, but I remember the pure form kool-aid laced LSD that uncloaked my blinded eyes to the woop woop alerts by sheeple like Tyonemmccloskey!


  11. Warning, we have a severe thought patrol alert, call in all members of the group think program, and lets get this rascal before he reveal our fraud!




  13. If you meant Wycliffe Grousbeck and his wife Emilia Fazzalari, then I do think that could be a possibility. Just taking a quick look and comparing a few photos…hmmm…there are a lot of similarities. Maybe Mark will take a more in-depth look at those two? Brando/Bardem, too.;_ylt=A0SO80sxxapZhYkAbdlXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByNWU4cGh1BGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw–?p=Emilia+Fazzalari&fr=yfp-t-s#id=11&×250.jpg&action=click


  14. Whilst reading this my memory was jogged to conversations I had with the late seminal R&B singer Nappy Brown. He had been on package shows in the fifties with Holly and others. On several occasions he told of Buddy Holly being “Mother’s (nickname for Little Richard Penniman) Boy”, of course meaning they had a homosexual relationship. He provided some details about it., establishing that this Buddy Holly was indeed at least bisexual, probably homosexual. Women were sometimes part of the shenanigans. This would be consistent with the Geffen character’s homosexuality.


Leave a Reply


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

Google photo


Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s