DECACS, Inc. and all its Initiatives

Archive for the ‘documentary’ Category

The Great Culling: Our Water Official Full Movie

Finding the original poster of this video took a minute, but I prefer sharing the original rather than what someone uploaded.

It is becoming increasing clear that the US is and has been and will probably continue to be a huge NWO experiment. If it works here it can spread all over the globe, all will fall in line and make the Globalists job a lot easier. When I first heard about the ill effects of Fluoride in the water, I stopped using it, but seriously, it is actually in almost anything that needs water to produce, from fresh organic veggies and fruits to the ultimate processed foods, even bottle water.

Towards the end of this video they do offer some solutions at least to minimize the impact of Fluoride in our bodies, but for goodness sakes, whatever you do, stop using toothpaste stating that you should keep it out of the reach of children. Warning, that should be enough to scare you away from ever allowing into your house. At least, it’s an easy way to minimize it.

You can also package up your toothpaste and mail it back to the company and let them know you do not appreciate them selling you a product that is potentially poisonous to the point of it being ingested you may need to call poison control.

It’s something to think about, folks and it’s something that you can be proactive about in the way you purchase. We do realize that we literally have no control over what they put on a label. We also know that the strange bedfellows are ubiquitous, but at least take that tiny step to control what goes into your body and the bodies of the little people who look to us for safety and security.

Shocking Documentary: The Creation Of HIV/Aids. [FULL]

Shocking Documentary: The Creation Of HIV/Aids. [FULL]



NB Commentary: But they do know how it came about. they know who created it and why. It was bio-warfare, created in the laboratory. It has killed many in its wake and has filled the coffers of the pharmaceutical companies.

It was first experimented on white gay males who had Hepatitis and was believed to cure them of that disease. It did not and instead spread. Once they saw the impact of it spreading they decided to take it to Africa and blame it on the “Green Monkey”. It moved out of the realm of being a disease that only gay males would come down with as straight females, prostitutes, drug users, wives of preachers, political figures and entertainers became infected and died.

It became a death sentence for anyone who could not afford the expensive drugs to cure it. Thus many people in impoverished areas of Africa, China, India became infected and lost their lives.

HIV is the actual problem. So when folks decided to explore cures for it, and came up with viable immune strengthening programs, they were ostracized, called stupid, and black balled, pardon the pun. I personally know a woman who was curing folks in a hospice with green foods, juicing, fasting, etc. and she even wrote a pamphlet and she was pushed out of her job.

There was a Dr. Boyd Graves who went to the UN with his documentation on this infection and he received a horrendous response from the Powers that be who did not want his research to become public.

There have been African doctors from the continent who have been silence when they discovered cures. And there has been huge amounts of money made off the suppression of the true information and viable cures of this infection.
HIV-AIDS was a geopolitical economic ploy of subjugation, manipulation and assassination.

I want to watch this video, but after hearing that statement two minutes in, I had to stop it and write my comment. I will continue and I hope that it will redeem itself with more pertinent and factual information.

The Smoking Gun of AIDS: a 1971 Flowchart
by Boyd E. Graves, J.D.
December 6, 2000
In 1977, a secret federal virus program produced 15,000 gallons of AIDS. The record reveals the United States was represented by Dr. Robert Gallo and the USSR was represented by Dr. Novakhatsky of the diabolical Ivanosky Institute. On August 21, 1999, the world first saw the flowchart of the plot to thin the Black Population.

The 1971 AIDS flowchart coordinates over 20,000 scientific papers and fifteen years of progress reports of a secret federal virus development program. The epidemiology of AIDS is an identical match to the “research logic” identified in the five section foldout. The flowchart is page 61 of Progress Report #8 (1971) of the Special Virus program of the United States of America. We today, challenge world scientists to discussion of this document find.

We believe there is a daily, growing number of world experts who are all coming to the same conclusion regarding the significance of the flowchart. Dr. Garth Nicolson has examined the flowchart as well as other top experts from around the world. It is time for Dr. Michael Morrissey of Germany to examine the flowchart and report to the world. In addition, we have now examined the 1978 report. It is heresy to continue to further argue the program ended in 1977.  Read more: http://www.boydgraves.com/flowchart/

Dr. Boyd Ed Graves 7.7.52 – 6.18.09

Dr. Boyd Ed Graves International AIDS activist lawyer dies age 57
(San Diego, CA) – Human Rights activist and HIV/AIDS advocate American lawyer Dr. Boyd Ed Graves died Thursday at the University of California San Diego Medical Center. Dr. Graves was 57.
Dr. Graves’ two decades of human rights’ work, judicial activism and research on behalf of people living with HIV/AIDS, catapulted him into the world spotlight earning him both international acclaim for his bravery and dedication as well as criticisms for his controversial conclusions about the man-made origins and purpose of the HIV/AIDS virus. 
, U
Known by “Ed” to his friends and family, Dr. Graves was a dynamic and patriotic individual who dedicated his professional and personal life to the disabled, disenfranchised and the fair daily existence of men and women worldwide. Read More here: http://boydgraves.blogspot.com/
Proof The Unites State Created The HIV/AIDS Virus  

EXPOSED !
In 1969 the US government developed a biological agent [ AIDS ] that  would have a devastating effect on the human immune system and for which there would be no effective treatment at the time.  
Military biological warfare research became officially connected to VCP research on October 18, 1971, when President Richard Nixon permanently joined the Army’s biowarfare research laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland, with the National Cancer Institute. The army lab was renamed the Frederick Cancer Re-search Center. 
Scientists in the VCP wanted to learn how to use animal viruses to make cancer – and how to force “normal” human cells to become cancerous by subjecting them to various animal viruses one of which would be HIV/AIDS. A primary task was the large scale production of cancer-causing viruses and suspected cancer viruses to meet research VCP needs on a continuing basis. Special attention was given to primate viruses (the alleged African source of HIV and the KS virus). Another goal was the production of “human candidate viruses.” Candidate viruses were defined as animal or human viruses that might cause AIDS and KS cancer in humans. 
Biowarfare scientists had a keen interest in animal herpes “helper viruses” / AIDS (1978 VCP Re-port;p 54). Chimps (who purportedly carry the ancestor virus of HIV) were extensively used by the VCP because there would be no official testing of cancer viruses on humans. 
A 1972 VCP Report (p. 262) emphatically states: “Since man will not be used as an experimental recipient, it is necessary to gain proof of oncogenicity by other means.” How that “proof” would be obtained was never made clear. 
With its close ties to military biowarfare research it is conceivable that the VCP undertook covert human testing of suspected cancer-causing viruses. 
The U.S. military has a long history of secret human experimentation on unsuspecting citizens. (Google: secret human experimentation + military). It’s a proven fact that Gay men were used as guinea pigs to test the effects of these viruses? Read More here: http://www.silentcures.com/USA-Created-AIDS.html
Colloidal silver destroys all types of virus including the AIDS virus
Newspaper Article written by Marvin Robey
The Herald of Provo Utah, February 2, 1992, ran an article on page 1, D1, in which a member of the administrative staff of Brigham Young University by the name of Daryl Tichy has been successfully experimenting with colloidal silver in the treatment of AIDS, along with warts and parvo virus in a dog. “Tichy said he had the material [colloidal silver] tested at two different labs; results showed the solution killed a variety of pathogens, including the HIV virus.” Tichy then states, “I don’t have a doubt in my mind.” He says he has not been able to obtain funds to continue his research.
This should not be a surprise, considering what other researchers have been telling us. There is much more evidence to support Tichy’s conclusion. Extensive evidence points to the fact that colloidal silver destroys all types of virus including the AIDS virus and greatly enhances the immune system in general. Colloidal Silver supports the T-cells in their fight against foreign organisms in the blood. It virtually forms a second immune system, actually protecting and defending the T-cells, as well as doing their work for them. It is strongly suggested by research scientists such as Dr. Gary Smith and others that silver ions are essential to the immune system.
In “Use of Colloids in Health and Disease”, author Dr. Henry Crooks says colloidal silver is highly anti-viral. In laboratory tests he found that “all fungus, virus, bacterium, streptococcus, staphylococcus, and other pathogenic organisms are killed in three or four minutes. In fact, there is no microbe known that is not killed by colloidal silver in six minutes or less in a dilution as little as five parts per million.” Dr. Crooks tells us there are no serious side effects whatsoever from high concentrations. Research scientist Dr. Gary Smith reports that he has noticed a correlation between low silver levels, sickness and immune deficiency. He found people who have low silver levels tend to be frequently sick and to have innumerable colds, flu’s, fevers, and other illnesses. The research of Dr. Gary Smith would seem to support the belief that colloidal silver is an entirely natural healing agent. Read More Here: http://www.silentcures.com/USA-Created-AIDS.html


Uploaded on Nov 30, 2008
“World War AIDS: The Third World War,” is Dr. Graves’ second book on the issue of the true origins of HIV/AIDS and the patented cure, Tetrasil. The book begins with a compelling review of the 2002 U.S. General Accounting Office review into the formerly secret U.S. Special Virus Cancer Program (1962-1978), follows Dr. Graves’ experience with the U.S. Patented Cure for AIDS, Tetrasil; documents his 2007 journeys of hope in to AIDS ravaged African countries, and ends with Dr. Graves’ 2008 lawsuit appeal for “full AIDS disclosure’ now his second appearance before the United States Supreme Court. “World War AIDS” is a must read for any victim or survivor of the U.S. Special Virus Program, and all medical and policy professional working to treat the same. Dr. Graves says, “At long last, we have within our reach a world once again without HIV/AIDS!” Sourcehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFkoRlZYTRA

"Venus Noire" ("Black Venus") Film & Review

“Venus Noire” 

(“Black Venus” – Controversial Hottentot Venus Film)

Part 1

Part 2

It’s been over a year since I saw Venus Noire (Black Venus) at the New York Film Festival in the fall of 2010, and it never received a stateside release; actually I’m not sure it got much of a release outside of the international film festival circuit and a few European territories.
So I’m betting most of you have never seen French/Tunisian filmmaker Abdel Kechiche’s problematic though worth-watching Saartjie “Sarah” Baartman, otherwise derogatorily known as the Hottentot Venus film, which starred newcomer Yahima Torres in the title role.
The subject matter certain isn’t one that will attract audiences to the theater en masse; and the fact that the film is almost 3 hours long, with subtitles, likely didn’t exactly make potentially interested American distributors salivate at the film’s box office potential.
But if you’re in Los Angeles during the month of February, and you’re at all interested in seeing the film, here’s your shot! It’s either now, or you wait for a stateside home video release (though it’s on DVD in parts of Europe and Canada; just not in the USA). 
But I’d recommend a theatrical viewing.

It’s a challenging work, and one that I’m sure will piss a lot of people off, not only because of its content, but also the manner in which it’s handled by the director. It’s just something you should see for yourselves.
I wrote a lengthy review of it last year, after I saw it; and, as I said in that write-up, I was left with conflicting thoughts on the film. Unfortunately, I never got to see it again, even though I wanted to. I’ll be at the PAFF this year, so I just might see it again on the big screen, if my schedule allows for it
In the meantime, below you’ll find my initial review, as well as a trailer for the film, a clip from it, and an interview with star Yahima Torress…

And finally here’s my 2010 review:
 So there I was waiting for the subway train after my screening of Venus Noire (Black Venus), and what did I see plastered almost all over one of those ubiquitous tunnel newsstands? Covers for various magazines, many unabashedly featuring the barely covered-up plump bottoms of predominantly black women in seductive poses – 2 dimensional images of voiceless bodies, objectified, exotified, envied, denigrated, and more; depending on the viewer.
And with that picture, Obvious Guy asks, so, really, has much changed in the 200 years since Saartjie “Sarah” Baartman found herself victim of the same kind of mixed gaze? Of course, there’s the perceived independence, and even false sense of power and control some might claim those in the present-day wield over their spectators (an illusory brand of feminism as I’ve heard others suggest), and they aren’t introduced in cages by a man carrying a whip (well, actually, some are), and Saartjie’s experiences were more direct and literal; but, frankly, the similarities can’t be ignored. I even considered that Saartjie’s torment was strictly race-based, and a result of its time; but I was able to dismiss that notion in realizing that there still certainly exists a racial “otherness” that precedes and influences the various gazes I mentioned above. For example, I still (unfortunately) hear stories about enthralled white women asking black women if they can touch their hair, ignorant of the sensation the request itself provokes.
The film opens in 1815, France, some time after Saartjie’s death, as a French academic, addressing what look like his peers, with a physical mold of Saartjie’s body on display, makes his scientific and historic case for why her “species” is inferior to theirs. The lengthy opening lecture is met with applause from his audience of all white men. The matter-of-fact nature of the entire sequence is revelatory in that it shows just how ignorant, yet assured of themselves these leaders of the world were, and helps explain their callous treatment of their perceived inferiors – a trend that continued long after they themselves perished.
Following that opening sequence, we travel back in time, 5 years, to 1810, London, some time after Baartman had been taken from Cape Town, with promises of wealth, via exhibition, in Europe. And so the tragic tale of the “freak show attraction” known as the Hottentot Venus began…
Like those women on the magazine covers, Saartjie is mostly mute throughout the film, her body language representative of her thoughts, and clearly, she isn’t exactly cherishing the spectacle that’s being made of her physical self – much of it some will find difficult to watch, as it should be. Writer/director Abdellatif Kechichemakes sure of that, with numerous scenes running quite lengthy – possibly 10 minutes or more in some cases.
Given the style in which the film is made, it felt almost like a documentary. Kechiche does little to distract from the narrative; the performances from the entire cast are realistic (you believe them), including Yahima Torres(as Baartman), Andre Jacobs, Olivier Gourmet, Elina Lowensohn, Francois Marthouret, Michel Gionti, andJean-Christophe Bouvet; there’s virtually no soundtrack (any music heard occurs naturally within the scene); the mostly hand-held camera moves but, oddly, you forget that it’s there – partly due to the stark nature of the physical settings, and also of the subject matter itself; you may feel guilty enough to look away, but you can’t.
In reading some early reviews of the film before I saw it, I expected to be turned off by what some seemed to suggest would be gratuitous on the part of the director. But I didn’t feel what they felt, and I do wonder if the reactions to Venus Noire will be similar to a film like Precious (a story about a character whose physical self was also arguably a character in its own right), in that they will be separated along color lines. I could certainly make sense of a white film critic being made uncomfortable by the inhumane treatment Saartjie endured; her captors are white. And as I’ve already suggested, one can’t help but see connections to the present-day race- and sex-based prejudices that still exist. There’s a reason (amongst many) that films that center on whites-as-saviors-of-“others” continue to be produced. They like to see themselves in that light. Rarely do we see stories told that detail the inhumanities whites have dished out intently and indiscriminately on the darker-skinned “others” across the world, without retribution. In a way, it’s like a revision of history.
But no one comes to save Saartjie here; she lives a brutal life, and dies just as punishingly, with the film not necessarily making it clear who we are supposed to point our fingers to, for blame.
Although, I felt numb to it all, and I wonder if my reaction would mirror those of other people of African descent. By most accounts, I should have been appalled, disgusted, and completely turned off by Kechiche’s lengthy scenes showing all the horror that Saartjie endured before her early death. But, little of it actually disturbed me.
In thinking about it further, I realized that it wasn’t necessarily because the filmmaker had failed in creating moments within the film that would elicit specific reactions out of me (although, who am I to say what the filmmaker intended); I felt numb because, again, as I eluded to above, we have and still are so bombarded with similar parades of images of women’s bodies (specifically black women’s bodies), accentuating specific attributes, whether still or moving, that what I saw on screen, as revolting as it was, seemed almost, dare I say, “ordinary” to me.
From music videos, to magazines… however, less obvious and even deceptive are those studies, surveys, investigations into the so-called black experience that suggest an “otherness;” different, and thus must be observed and studied like monkeys in a cage. Whether it’s CNN’s redundant, surface “Black In America” series, the recent article about how black people use Twitter, or more direct, scientist claims that people of African descent are less intelligent than whites, and so on.
I’ve rallied against most of these ideas and occurrences on this blog and elsewhere, and will continue to do so. However, the point here is that this long-standing, continuous assault on our senses, all suggesting an inferiority as the basis for marginalization of a group of people, have had an effect on how I react to similar instances (real or fictional). Numb – which can be a dangerous place to be, because it could lead to a lessened desire to act against like injustices.
Saartjie doesn’t speak very much in the film, as I already stated; usually only when spoken to; we don’t really get a sense for how she feels. Certainly, as I said above, her body language leaves little doubt that this isn’t the kind of life she thought she would be leading, or that was promised to her by the man who brought her to Europe (he lied, telling her and her slave owner that she’d essentially be a song and dance act, not the circus freak show he would eventually convince her to be); but I would have liked to hear her wrestle with her predicament; here she is, seemingly a willing (coerced) participant in an act, sharing in the benefits afforded by the booty (no pun intended), though unequally, with her captors; but struggling to come to terms with the truth of who (or rather what) she is to the ignorant, yet curious and enchanted audience that pays to watch her perform. To contemporize it, think of the strippers who are “trapped” by the money they earn used to feed, house and clothe themselves, but who struggle with the impact the work they do has on their lives, and the perception others have of them. Not exactly the same thing as what Saatjie endured, but I’m trying to make sense of what I felt was one of the film’s notable deficiencies. We see Saartjie through the eyes of her captors and the audiences that pay to see her – as a lottery ticket, and a spectacle respectively – but we get few glimpses into the mind of the woman that the body belongs to.
From the film, we know she despised her treatment, she’s outright defiant in moments, and the filmmaker does attempt to humanize her, giving her some 3-dimensionality; and I never once felt like he was being exploitative; but, as is, it’s still questionable just how much control she really had over her predicament (although we know that she was a slave). In the film, she remains something of a mystery, and I can’t say whether that was all intentional on the filmmaker’s part, as, I’d guess, he tried to piece together a personality based on limited availability of information, written by others about her.
There’s also that saying about the the presence of mental shackles even in the absence of tangible ones.
Director Kechiche’s film isn’t a lecture on the matters it documents. Each scene is presented “as is,” without any obvious commentary, you could say. It’s neither what I’d describe as a call to action. You are simply witness to an ugly injustice, an accomplice even, and your reaction to it is just that… your reaction, based on your own life experiences, which will also determine what you choose to do about whatever it is you felt, assuming you’re inspired to act in any way.
Don’t go into this looking for a biopic of Baartman, as you will be disappointed. It’s more a document of a very specific part of her life, that which she’s most known for. And despite the title of the film, she instead feels like one of several equal players in this tragedy, instead of its star center. There’s also what I’d call a disconnect between the filmmaker and the material. Like I said, he doesn’t necessarily take sides. In fact, the film played out more like a series of filmed news reports.
It does take a few creative liberties, however, the script remains fairly close to the true story of Saartjie Baartman. At almost 3 hours in length, some editing could have been done to trim it a bit, without losing its substance; and that running time makes it a tough sell for audiences outside of the expected art-house crowd – especially here in the USA.
Although, I certainly hope it does receive a wide enough release. I’m curious about global reactions to the film. I suspect most aren’t at all familiar with Saartjie Baartman’s story, or are even aware of the derogatory “Hottentot Venus.” In a way, I actually envy those who’ll be seeing the film ignorant of the real-life story it’s based on. Most importantly, it means that one is less likely to spend time comparing the film’s details to what they know of the historic figure the characterization is inspired by. I can only imagine what their reactions would be, but I expect sharply contrasting sets of opinions.
I’m left with conflicting thoughts on the film, and I wasn’t even sure how I would review the film. I feel like I could write volumes on the experience I  had watching it. But maybe that’s all a good thing. I think a second viewing might be helpful in clarifying my thoughts. If anything, it’s not a film one walks out of the theater and immediately forgets. Other reviews I’ve read thus far have expressed concern about the film being hard to watch – not because it’s a bad film, but due to the contemptible scenarios Baartman lived through as explicitly documented in the film. As I’ve said before, the subject matter is already controversial enough, that any film made about Baartman will find it impossible to escape controversy. Kechiche’s handling of it is obviously crucial, and I’d say he handles it better than I expected. It certainly should inspire further discussion, especially with regards to contemporary correlations.

Tag Cloud