DECACS, Inc. and all its Initiatives

Archive for the ‘UK’ Category

Crowdfunding, Patreon and YouTube Demonetization (Videos)

I want to talk a bit about the notion that YouTube is demonetizing videos on their platform.
When I started this project, a few days ago, what came to mind most was, why?
I really didn’t have any idea how deep the rabbit hole would be. I searched the investors of Patreon and the Investors of Google (Al Gore?) and the investors of YouTube.
In actuality, YouTube was taken over by Google in 2006. I didn’t join YouTube till 2009, but I had watched some of the videos. The platform was truly archaic compared to what we have now, and certainly the ads were not flying all over the place back then. 

I still believe that everyone in this venture YouTube, Google (Alphabet), PayPal and Patreon are in the same pocket when it comes to their investors. So it would stand to reason they have some complimentary goals as well as major support for and from one another.
Angel Investors are particularly interesting as they can have or gain full reign of your business because they are very, very wealthy and are investing their own cash and/or assets. Looking at the investors of these companies, Angels are all over the place.

This topic is too involved and much more than my talents can review with precision accuracy, but I think it’s important to note that we are not simply dealing with YouTube, we are dealing with Google (Alphabet), PayPal, and Patreon that have a symbiotic relationship with each other and are not necessarily thinking of ways to make the little guy YouTube Creator smile. They are looking for huge returns on their investments! Period!  If advertisers are pulling out, that’s a red flag and investors may jump ship!

YouTube Grew so fast, Google had to get a piece of the action and within  little over 2 years, Google bought YouTube! Since Google was and is the ad giant, NBC, was moved into the host of other advertisers and was no longer the main source of advertising for YouTube.
But now, Google/YouTube is in panic mode with advertisers pulling out left and right. They are afraid that the current climate around “fake news”, hate speech, terrorism, etc. may be broadcasted via YouTube with their ads attached. They don’t want it.
Here’s a list of some of the biggest advertisers who have stopped their spending with Google and YouTube.

“Both ATandT and Verizon may have an ulterior motive to make YouTube look like an untrustworthy spot for marketers because both companies are trying to sell more digital ads in their own networks.” http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2017/03/22/googles-youtube-losing-major-advertisers-upset-with-videos.html

As a result, Google/YouTube has come down hard on all Creators and in some ways indiscriminately though they claim to be manually reviewing videos in addition to adjusting their algorithms.
YouTube is a big part of Google revenues but when you compare it to the other options Google has as a search engine, it’s primary role, and with competition coming in from other Video sites, it’s possible that Google may simply go on this bumpy ride for a while and settle with being somewhere not so close to the top when it comes to a video platform.

It is competing with 75 others and has had its hayday. Bringing in YouTube Red, and streaming TV programs may keep hope alive for YouTube but the regular content creators with smaller pockets will have to be a bit more creative or may get squeezed out altogether.
YouTube had, in the past a couple of options for YouTube Creators to get financial support for their videos. This was happening before they actually went all the way with monetizing videos.

They had “Fan Funding” Which they discontinued Feb. 28, 2017,

“allows users to make one-time donations to their favorite channels and content creators.” https://grin.co/overview-youtube-fan-funding/

They went on to offer “SuperChat,” which works particularly well for live streamers. “here a fan can pay for their comment to be at the top of the list of comments and the Streamer would reap the rewards.” Not too sure how well that will work out over the long haul.

They also had YouTube Contributor option, where you basically paid for ads to “not” show up on your vids but where “customers choose to pay web publishers for their content through Google-Ad network rather than deprive the Publishers of income from advertisements.”
In all actuality, they have the absolute right to do demonetize videos, whenever they choose since they are providing the platform and providing it for free. With 400 vides/minute it has to be a daunting task to catch them all.  So, like back in the day, if one person in class acts up, everybody in the class gets punished.
Yep, we are complaining and we actually think it has something to do with free speech but not really. People tend to paint the “Free Speech” brush a bit far.
With YouTube needing to be bailed out due to Copyright issues, even the “Fair Use Claims” are negligible. Channels are still getting hit hard!
It’s sorta like this, in my house I ask folks I invite into my house to remove their shoes, if they refuse, well, since it’s my house I have the choice of allowing them in or blocking them from coming in. After all it’s my house.
Same thing with YouTube.
On the other hand, say, you got a partner who gives you all the loving you want.. if you know what I mean, then all of a sudden and without warning, the loving dries up. You have had this symbiotic relationship with this person, it was understood that they would deliver, and now, they are reneging. But the bottom line is this, they can!  And that’s the deal with this YouTube demonetizing vids and shutting down channels left and right.
They Can! Why? Because it’s theirs.
Now we got several options, and personally I think YouTube is gonna regret bending under the pressure of their advertisers. In fact, I think even the advertisers are gonna feel the pinch because even though there is enough junk out there to keep people distracted, there are really a lot of folks who want to learn something new, about other stuff than junk. Some people really want to get a wrinkle in their brain.  Not to mention the many creative content makers who make brilliant videos with outstanding content!  And, since the way YouTube goes about determining what is or is not ad friendly, is so vague and broad, you make a video and ain’t no telling whether or not it’s gonna pass the acid test.
But we as creators really do have options. And maybe our co-dependent relationship on YouTube needs to change or even stop in some cases although, if you are streaming videos from your YouTube channel to other platforms, well, you’re still keeping the lines of communications open, sorta like the whole, “let’s be friends” after a break-up when it really means, just in case it don’t work out that maybe we could jump back into the mix again, if you follow me.

Several things are happening with this change.
First, it is censorship. We can dance around it or say it isn’t so “Joe” but it is.
And the genius of it all, is that it will not be blatant in your face censorship, like shutting down channels or grabbing vids of channels, not that they stopped doing that either, but, they have done the insidious, tightening of the purse string censorship.
Like in a relationship.. the one who has the money can open and close that “pocketbook” if you follow my drift.  So, instead of coming straight at you, they take the passive aggressive way of scaring the shit out of you, cause you never know.  It’s 3 days later and a hundred hours of editing later, and you get the knock at the door..
“You have been issued a warrant, we will be arresting your revenues, your video sucks, well not exactly, we suck, well not exactly, our advertisers suck, well maybe not, but anyways, we will fall the way of MySpace if we don’t tow the line. So, we can’t put ads on your videos. Listen, you ain’t the only one who suffers from purse-string madness. So grow up and get over it and next time, be careful, is all.”

Now, folks can go through the changes of starting their own YouTube Platform. yeah, fat chance on that one.  Remember, YouTube was out there, with it’s initial creators, Chad Hurley, Steve Chen, and Jawed Karim,when they worked for PayPal.  Regular folks coming up with a brilliant idea in February 14, 2005. And then Google started sniffing around. Next thing you know, Google gave them an offer they couldn’t refuse, $1.65 Billion dollars in stock. By November 13, 2006, good ole YouTube is owned by Google and we all know what that means.
But we had hope.. we really did.
And we had smooth sailing for a little while…. then it started, politics, economics, politics, economics and politics and economics some more.
I remember when you could work with YouTube in a partnership capacity where you could get “special” annuities if you ran your own ads on your videos or ran ads on other peoples vids etc.  Great Idea, till the corporations stepped in.
Oh Lord, talk about big brother.. well not quite so big but scary big enough anyways.
Then eventually, the ads were like the ones you see on TV. And they spend a lot of money making them ads, let me tell you.

Then came Patreon. In May, 2013 Jack Conte, a popular YouTube artist, founded Patreon.

“Harkening back to old-school patronage, Patreon enables fans and sponsors to support artists and creators. Patrons pledge to support artists and creators on a reoccurring basis for each work created, empowering a new generation of creators the ability to make a living off of their passions.” https://angel.co/patreon

Now Patreon is cool to a point, but you have to put in a lot of work to make it happen, and if you don’t have at least 10 thousand subs on YouTube, forget it.  Besides, Patreon streams from YouTube so if at any time YouTube decides to pull your video or copyright strike it, what can  you do, you cannot upload to Patreon any vids.

Now when it first came out, in 2013, it was kind of clandestine about getting in the mix. In my mind, all I could think of is why would YouTube allow a Platform to gain more notoriety if it meant it would be taking its viewers away from its site.  You follow me? Why would YouTube, bring a tall dark and handsome dude to a date when they look like a nerd and expect you to be still attracted to them, I’m just saying.
So I began to wonder if in fact YouTube and Patreon had made some back room deal. Something along the line of, well as long as you don’t allow up loads.  But is YouTube and Patreon really that separate from one another.
Think about it, folks actually think they are waking up. Folks are making more and more visits to channels that address some serious issues because they wanna wake up, or at least take shorter naps.
YouTube was gonna start losing viewers anyways. Some people have ad block because quite frankly, they are waking up and don’t want to be disturbed by the tripe that some of those ads have.
So, what if YouTube was thinking ahead, or let’s say Google was thinking ahead and since they are in the AD world, they know how it works..  Why not have a what appears to be “not ad friendly” platform and make people pay for it. You see?
Patreon is “not ad friendly”. 

Patreon is into tithing so to speak cause folks gotta pay outa pocket not to mention, they have to sign up in order to do so. Which to me are two strikes against it. Pay outa pocket once a month or whatever and you have to sign up in order to do so. Huh???

Other solutions can be going to other platforms where you can upload your videos and get revenues that way. there ain’t too much competition out there, just yet, but if this keeps up, other platforms will be developed. People will come along to grab the spoils of the YouTube collateral damage and create other platforms that you can upload their videos to.

One interesting thing about YouTube is that all things are in house. You cannot get the email address of your subs directly. So, you have to get your subs to give you their email address so you can let them know when you switch. You can try TubeBuddy and pay for a subscription which offers many tools for YouTube Creators.

Or you can make a video, upload it to YouTube and tell everyone to come where you are now.
Or you can find some other ingenious way, cause YouTube, if it sees folks leaving in droves might snatch your vid down for some unknown reason especially if you have millions of subs.
You can also, just find a more creative way to get your point across.  You know, use some of your passive aggressive skills to work around YouTube warriors.
Watch your title, watch your key words, watch your description. Put love, pancakes, strawberries, apple pie and icecream in the description and key words. Avoid anything that will piss them off. in other words “Self Censor” sorta.
Or we can call a YouTube boycott, for one week, no creators create anything, at all! Nothing.  Since the advertisers want to boycott YouTube, well, the creators can too. 

Ha, that would be awesome, we could “make” YouTube do it our way and fight back by giving them the finger.  LOL, that would never happen, we can’t even get folks to boycott Walmart, but I always say, boycotts are winners in any power struggle.
Bottomline, we YouTube creators or shall I say, we video creators have to be more creative in finding ways to get our videos out there and get them funded.  But first we must read the terms of service before we sign on the dotted line. And who on God’s green earth is gonna read all that stuff or even understand it, you practically have to hire a lawyer to translate!
Meanwhile the begging campaigns go on and on.
If we sell stuff on our videos, that’s even more work.  And a small channel like mine with just a little over 3000 subs, well we don’t even make that much off the adsense anyways.
Unless of course we make videos that are, you know….. non threatening to the advertisers.
We would have to make a whole paradigm shift in our creating to get that pocketbook to open up again.  And if we have any integrity.. well we will eventually become more and more disenchanted, hostile and resentful, and after a while, give it up or find something else to do.
All in all, this thing that YouTube is doing will eventually shift YouTube into the twilight zone, not that it ain’t already there, and it will see its viewership decrease, its revenues’ from ads decrease and other competitors grab up the spoils.
Next thing you know, YouTube will go the way of MySpace.  But of course, these corporate moguls always have contingency plans.  They are gonna push YouTube Red, News outlets and TV shows will start airing their programs on YouTube and the very thing that they were up in arms about and not wanting to advertise will be in their faces.  But maybe not so much, because we all know that mainstream media is scripted. So, it will be safer for YouTube in the long run and maybe even more financially lucrative.
Not sure how that would work though, unless YouTube/Google is asking for a cut of the ad revenues from the News Outlets and TV Shows, cause I doubt if advertisers are gonna pay twice for the same display, but who knows.
The fact is they are already advertising on TV programs, and news channels anyways around similar topics, but I think, since they want a piece of the action, their real plan is to squeeze the little guy out of the way so they can get the big dudes in there that will gain them even more revenues.

In a minute, YouTube will replace television and to me, that is the final goal.  They see that more and more people are going to YouTube for information and entertainment.  They see that more and more folks are streaming YouTube thru their TV’s so why not go all the way?  Haven’t you seen that free trial flash across your device?

There was a time when you had to record from the TV and then upload it to YouTube, eventually, it won’t be necessary.
So Google backed YouTube is playing the passive aggressive role of resistance until we comply.  If not, then they will go for the tall dark and handsome dude who has a much bigger pocketbook than the average YouTube creator has.
And so that ends my two cents on the matter.

I wonder if YouTube will monetize this video, since I figured out their game plan. We shall see..
INTERESTING LINKS

WTF is YouTube’s Demonetization?
HELP!! YOU TUBE WANTS TO KILL MY CHANNEL

YouTube pushes harder to tag videos ‘too offensive’ for ads
YouTube is randomly demonetizing videos
YOUTUBE DEMONETIZING VIDEOS | Media Censorship and The Bigger Picture (Mr. Repzion, Philip DeFranco)

Youtube Responded, But It Gets Even More Confusing…
Patreon
Let’s Talk about Patreon versus Adsense ads
Art Marketing Vlog: Why I DON’T use PATREON

Crowdfunding’s Patreon Takes Aim At YouTube’s Business Model
Patreon is a membership platform that makes it easy for artists and creators to get paid.
FYI – There’s a legal storm brewing in Cali that threatens to destroy online free speech
Patreon
YouTube will no longer allow creators to make money until they reach 10,000 views
YouTube Competitors (35)
AN OVERVIEW OF YOUTUBE FAN FUNDING

Getting Started With Angel Investing
YouTube is facing a full-scale advertising boycott over hate speech
YouTube Hate Videos Haunt Advertisers on Google
History of YouTube

“Both ATandT and Verizon may have an ulterior motive to make YouTube look like an untrustworthy spot for marketers because both companies are trying to sell more digital ads in their own networks.”
YouTube Introduces Super Chat, Phases Out Fan Funding
Sob story from band that lost $11,000 was actually a marketing stunt
Google Has Acquired YouTube

Why Have There Been More Mass Shootings Under Obama than the Four Previous Presidents Combined?

NB Commentary,
Great article, great research and looming question. Why have there been more mass shootings under Obama than the other four previous presidents combined?
THE STORY
We live in a world of short-term memories and long-term memory deficiencies. If the 24-hour news cycle was any indication, Americans appear to be bouncing from one catastrophic mass shooting to the next, with hardly any breathing room. Like this is just a regular occurrence America has learned to endure because… guns. It’s the prevalence of firearms in the hands of the people, the anti-gunners say. Calls to limit, rewrite, redefine, or outright dispose of the 2nd Amendment are rampant.
But no one is looking at the data. If they did, they would realize something is really, really,really wrong here.
No, there haven’t always been so many mass shootings. It hasn’t always been this way. Mass shootings have skyrocketed in this country just in the last seven years under President Obama.
The following was compiled using the database over at Mother Jones on mass shootings in the U.S. from 1982—2015, up to and including the shooting at Umpqua Community College in Oregon on October 1st, 2015. It also includes the Wikipedia lists for mass shootings in the United States by year and postal killings in the U.S.
The following analysis considers the FBI’s definition of a mass murder, which is defined as “a number of murders (four or more) occurring during the same incident, with no distinctive time period between the murders”.
When all incidents where four or more people were shot in a single event are broken out by president going back to Reagan (considering the database only stretches back to 1982), there just so happens to have been a startling increase in mass shootings since Obama, the most pro-gun control president America has had in modern history, took office.
Mass Shootings under the Last Five Presidents
Ronald Reagan: 1981-1989 (8 years) 11 mass shootings
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5
George H. W. Bush: 1989-1993 (4 years) 12 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 3
Bill Clinton: 1993-2001 (8 years) 23 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 4
George W. Bush: 2001-2009 (8 years) 20 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5
Barrack H. Obama: 2009-2015 (in 7th year) 162 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 18
(You can download the full list of names, dates, locations, and numbers of deaths per mass shooting by president prepared for this article here.)
Look at the difference between all other presidents and Barack Obama.
What that looks like on a chart:

Notice anything here? We’re talking about a more than six-fold increase from the number of mass shootings in the eight years Bush Jr. was president compared to the last seven years under Obama, and his 2nd term isn’t even up yet!
Not only that, but the number of mass shootings where the shooter killed eight or more people has also increased rather significantly:

What is going on here?
Obviously this isn’t so easily simplified as more guns in the hands of more crazy people, the way the media likes to spin it. We have more gun laws now than ever before. Less types of guns are legally available to the average citizen than ever before. We also have more “gun-free zones,” zones where, just by the way, most of these shootings happen (because mass shooters do not follow laws or care about zones, obviously). So that’s not it.
We have debated whether or not antidepressant medications are playing a role in these events. Even a cursory glance at the SSRI stories school shootings database would suggest there is some substantial evidence behind this theory. We know that many of these mass shooters were either on psychotropic medications at the time of the shooting, or withdrawing from them.
However, Prozac was approved for use in the United States back in 1987. Antidepressant medications have been around and in widespread use in America for decades now. That factor alone cannot entirely explain all these mass shootings recently.
Not to mention that five out of the 12 deadliest mass shootings in American history have happened not just since Barack Obama became president, but just under his first term as president alone. That’s nearly half.
Something else is going on here.
So… what is it?
After the controversial Sandy Hook shooting, Obama passed 23 gun control executive orders. He continually says wants to do more and he’s frustrated with how limited his powers as mere president are. He continually mentions wishing America’s gun control mirrored that of the UK and Australia, two countries that passed strict, sweeping gun bans following what many have called single mass shooting false flag events which happened just weeks apart in March and April 1996.
Speaking of Australia’s gun control laws after the suspicious Charleston shooting, Obama said:
“It was just so shocking the entire country said, ‘Well, we’re going to completely change our gun laws’, and they did. And it hasn’t happened since,” Obama said, discussing the shooting deaths of nine people at a historic black church in Charleston last week.
The suspicious April 1999 mass shooting at Columbine High School didn’t accomplish nearly the same gun control implementation here in America, although it did happen under another highly pro-gun control president, Bill Clinton. Perhaps one false flag just isn’t enough in a country that has been built upon a Constitution with a Bill of Rights and a 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Perhaps it can only be killed death-by-a-thousand-cuts style.
Now Obama says gun control will be his #1 top issue of focus for the last year of his final term as president.
He says his biggest frustration has been his inability to pass more gun control legislation.
He condemns these “routine” events and calls for more gun control each time another one happens. After the recent Planned Parenthood shooting, he said, “we can’t let this become the new normal… enough is enough.”
But when did it become the new normal? While the 2nd Amendment continues to be attacked each and every time another mass shooting occurs, just realize something: these events were never this “routine” until Obama became president.

Melissa Dykes

Melissa Dykes (formerly Melton) is a co-founder of TruthstreamMedia.com. She is an experienced researcher, graphic artist and investigative journalist with a passion for liberty and a dedication to truth. Her aim is to expose the New World Order for what it is — a prison for the human soul from which we must break free.

Source:  

How Russia is Smashing the Turkish Game in Syria

NB Commentary:
Okay, so somebody done pissed Putin off! Seriously, to say that the US should have known what was going on with the oil smuggling all the way across the water is a bit disingenuous to me. For surely them folks right there on that side of the world should have known about it as well.  With Russia spilling the beans on the corrupted enterprise called “War On Terror” he is showing the hand of all the perps.
So why is Putin all of a sudden being “Mr. Tattle Spill the Beans” on the whole European NATO BS terrorist, kill job that they ain’t really trying to kill?
Could it be that Putin’s Russia is sick and tired of being pushed around, bossed around, threatened with sanctions, blamed for shit they didn’t do and seriously played like a punk? How about the line that has been used over and over again, Protecting our National interests” for certainly the interests of Putin’s Russia is much more endangered by Turkey’s Terrorist than anyone else over here.
Is Putin sick and tired of being sick and tired? And have you seen his approval ratings lately?? Personally, to me Putin is a Mobster who has finally got his time to shine. And the walls will come tumbling down cause last I heard mobsters don’t play. They will give you an offer you CAN’T REFUSE.”
Just change the Name from “Bill” to “Putin” and sing along…

And the questions remain as stated in this Counter Punch article by  Vijay Prashad..

DECEMBER 3, 2015

ISIS Oil

by VIJAY PRASHAD

The Europeans want to solve the refugee crisis. They believe that their bombing will advance their interests. It is likely to increase the displacement in Syria. The Turkish government’s demand for a “buffer zone” is of interest to the Europeans. They believe it is for refugees. But it could just as well be to protect the tankers from the Russian bombing raids. It is precisely what makes Corbyn’s demand so important – to hold a thorough investigation of the ISIS oil pipeline. Such an inquiry must ask the following questions:

1 Who is carting the oil from Mosul to the Turkish border? Who owns those trucks?

2 Who is carting the oil from the Turkish border to Ceylan? Who owns those trucks?

3 How does ISIS oil go through Ceylan, a port owned by the Turkish government?

4 Who owns the ships that cart the ISIS oil out of Turkey and to ports afield?

5 What banks handle the transaction between the sale of ISIS oil and the foreign buyers? Should they also be implicated in the smuggling of ISIS oil?

An investigation along these lines is overdue. It is not enough to accept or dismiss the Russian accusations. These should be used as an opportunity to clarify the actual pipelines for ISIS funding. Bombing the Omar fields in Syria – as the UK has done today – might not be sufficient. It might dust over the evidence of much greater complicity in ISIS oil.”


THE STORY

How Russia is Smashing the Turkish Game in Syria

DECEMBER 3, 2015

So why did Washington take virtually forever to not really acknowledge ISIS/ISIL/Daesh is selling stolen Syrian oil that will eventually find is way to Turkey?
Because the priority all along was to allow the CIA – in the shadows – to run a “rat line” weaponizing a gaggle of invisible “moderate rebels”.
As much as Daesh – at least up to now – the Barzani mob in Iraqi Kurdistan was never under Washington’s watch. The oil operation the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) runs to Turkey is virtually illegal; stolen state-owned oil as far as Baghdad is concerned.
Daesh stolen oil can’t flow through Damascus-controlled territory. Can’t flow though Shi’ite-dominated Iraq. Can’t go east to Iran. It’s Turkey or nothing. Turkey is the easternmost arm of NATO. The US and NATO “support” Turkey. So a case can be made that the US and NATO ultimately support Daesh.
What’s certain is that illegal Daesh oil and illegal KRG oil fit the same pattern; energy interests by the usual suspects playing a very long game.
What these interests are focused on is to control every possible oil asset in Iraqi Kurdistan and then in “liberated” Syria. It’s crucial to know that Tony “Deepwater Horizon” Hayward is running Ug Genel, whose top priority is to control oil fields that were first stolen from Baghdad, and will eventually be stolen from Iraqi Kurds.
And then, there’s the Turkmen powder keg.
The key reason why Washington always solemnly ignored Ankara’s array of shady deals in Syria, through its fifth column Turkmen jihadis, is because a key CIA “rat line” runs exactly through the region known as Turkmen Mountain.
These Turkmen supplied by Ankara’s “humanitarian” convoys got American TOW-2As for their role in preserving prime weaponizing/ smuggling routes. Their advisers, predictably, are Xe/Academi types, formerly Blackwater. Russia happened to identify the whole scam and started bombing the Turkmen. Thus the downing of the Su-24.
The Turkmen fifth column
Now the CIA is on a mission from God – frantically trying to prevent the rat line from being definitely smashed by the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) on the ground and Russia in the air.
The same desperation applies to the Aleppo-Azez-Killis route, which is also essential for Turkey for all kinds of smuggling.
The advanced arm of the “4+1” alliance – Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, plus Hezbollah – is taking no prisoners trying to re-conquer these two key corridors.
And that explains Ankara’s desperation – with a little help from His Masters’ Voice – to come up with an entirely new rat line/corridor through Afrin, currently under Syrian Kurd control, before Damascus forces and Russia air power get there.
Once again it’s important to remember that a gaggle of Turkmen outfits are Ankara’s fifth column in northern Syria.
Most Turkmen live in Kurdish territories. And here’s the ultimate complicating factor; the majority happens to live in the Jarablus region, currently controlled by ISIS/ISIL/Daesh. It’s exactly this area that is cutting the geographic connection between the two Kurdish cantons, Kobani and Afrin.
So imagine a continuous Syrian Kurd control/autonomy/corridor all across the Turkish-Syrian border. For Ankara this is the ultimate nightmare. Ankara’s strategy is to move its Turkmen pawns, with added “moderate rebels”, all across the Jarablus region. The pretext: wipe Daesh off the map. The real reason: prevent the two Kurdish cantons – Afrin and Kobani – from merging.
And once again Ankara will be directly pitted against Moscow.
The Russian strategy rests on very good relations with Syrian Kurds. Moscow not only supports the Syrian Kurd canton merger, but qualifies it as an important step on the way to a new Syria rid of takfiris. Russia will even officially recognize the PYD (Democratic Union Party) and allow them a representative office in Russia.
Ankara regards the PYD and its paramilitary arm, the YPG (People’s Protection Units) as branches of the PKK. It gets curioser an curioser when we know that both Moscow and Washington are cooperating with the YPG against ISIS/ISIL/Daesh.
The predictable All-Out Ankara Freak Out came in the form of Sultan Erdogan declaring the Euphrates a “red line” for the YPG. If they try to move westward to fight Daesh, sending them out of the Jarablus area, the Turkish Army will strike.
It’s absolutely key for Turkey to control this area between Jarablus and Afrin because here is the site of the would-be “safe zone”, actually a no-fly zone, which Ankara dreams of implementing using the 3 billion euros just extorted from the EU to house refugees but also control northern Syria. Turkmen would be in charge of the area – as well as the Azez-Aleppo line, assuming the SAA does not clear it for good.
The case for UEBA
So Ankara is looking at two very unpleasant Turkmen-filled scenarios to say the least.
Turkmen instrumentalized by Ankara to become gatekeepers against the Kurdish YPG; that means a nasty sectarian divide, orchestrated by Turkey, whose greatest loser is the unity of the Syrian nation.
Meanwhile, the SAA and Russian air power are on the verge of total control of Turkmen Mountain.
This will allow the “4+1” to go much deeper fighting against the so-called Army of Conquest and its twin-headed reptile, Jabhat al-Nusra (a.k.a. al-Qaeda in Syria) and Ahrar al-Sham, the whole lot “supported” and weaponized by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
The “4+1” inexorable advance comes with extra benefits; the end of all rat lines in the region, and no more possible threats to Russia’s air base in Hmeimim.
Make no mistake that Moscow will inflict as much pain on Sultan Erdogan as possible.
As Turkish newspaper Radikal quoted him, Prof. Abbas Vali of Bogazici University confirmed, “The PYD was pleased about Russia’s intervention in Syria. An alliance between the PYD and Russia is inevitable. Russia’s bombardment of the radical Islamist groups on the ground will have a huge impact on the PYD operations.”
So no matter which way we look, Turkey and Russia are on a serious collision course in Syria. Moscow will support Syrian Kurds no holds barred as they push to link the three major Kurdish cantons in northern Syria into a unified Rojava.
As for Washington’s “strategy”, it now boils down to the CIA need of a new rat line. That could imply sitting on the – weaponized – sidelines watching Turkmen and Kurds slug it out, thus creating an opening for the Turkish Army to intervene, and the Russian Air Force to prevent it, with all hell guaranteed to break loose.
The fact remains that Sultan Erdogan badly needs a new CIA-secured rat line to weaponize not only his fifth column Turkmen but also Chechens, Uzbeks and Uyghurs. And Bilal Erdogan, a.k.a. Erdogan Mini Me, desperately needs new oil smuggling routes and a couple of new tankers; Russia is watching their every move. The latest news from Russia’s Defense Ministry has struck like a volcanic eruption; the Erdogan family mob was branded as “criminals”, with Moscow presenting only an appetizer of all the evidence it has in store.
So we have the Afghan heroin rat line. The Libyan oil racket (now over). The Ukraine fascist rat line. The Libya to Syria weapon rat line. The stolen Syrian oil trade. The northern Syrian rat lines. Let’s call them UEBA: Unregulated Exceptionalist Business Activities. What’s not to like? There’s no business like war business.
Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007), Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge and Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).  His latest book is Empire of Chaos. He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

The Pretend War: Why Bombing Isil Won’t Solve The Problem

NB Commentary: Is it Real Or Is It Memorex?
You just gotta wonder what all the saber rattling is really all about. Is it about peace? Is it about war? Is it about oil? is it about Israeli Secret Intelligence Service? Is it about Islam? Ironically, they want to have stronger gun laws in Western countries while selling high power weaponry and armored vehicles to the so-called moderate rebels who are trying to overthrow their government by any means necessary and they ain’t peaceful means, by the way! 
Think about that, what would be the US response if, say, Russia sold guns, munitions and armored trucks etc., to the anarchist enclave in the US, or maybe to the New Black Panther Party, or how about a few men who support the Bundy Ranch empire. Heck, sell some guns to the MOORS, or the Sovereignty movement. I quiver to think of the consequence of that kind of meddling in our movements on the ground against a corrupt government!
Then again, when there is buying, isn’t there some selling going on? So where are these rebels getting the money to purchase these munitions? Or is the US and the other 40 countries that are arming the so-called moderates, giving their millions of dollars in munitions away to these sorry fools who get a kick out of pretend cutting off heads while the other drugged up compatriots kill, rape women and children. Now how moderate is that? This is starting to sound like a big fat trumped up hoax to sell more weapons and kill and displace a few hundred thousand in the process.
One thing that is for certain, it has definitely fit into the depopulation agenda of the elite. Why not just get folks fighting each other and that will save us. We will have more space to stretch out and since we will have robotics to take care of our every whim, we won’t need humans at all after a while.
Maybe they are planning to come back like an Egyptian Pharaoh, and reap the benefits of today’s spoils, for surely it will not happen in their lifetime.

Or maybe they are trying to speed it up so it CAN happen in their life time. 
Whatever the case may be, the carnage and destruction is not a pretty picture at all, and somebody needs to rewind the tape back to before Eve gave the apple to Adam.

The Pretend War: Why Bombing Isil Won’t Solve The Problem

The deployment of our military might in Syria will exacerbate regional disorder – and it will solve nothing
By Andrew J. Bacevich
Nov. 28, 2015
Not so long ago, David Cameron declared that he was not some ‘naive neocon who thinks you can drop democracy out of an aeroplane at 40,000 feet’. Just a few weeks after making that speech, Cameron authorised UK forces to join in the bombing of Libya — where the outcome reaffirmed this essential lesson.
Soon Cameron will ask parliament to share his ‘firm conviction’ that bombing Raqqa, the Syrian headquarters of the Islamic State, has become ‘imperative’. At first glance, the case for doing so appears compelling. The atrocities in Paris certainly warrant a response. With François Hollande having declared his intention to ‘lead a war which will be pitiless’, other western nations can hardly sit on their hands; as with 9/11 and 7/7, the moment calls for solidarity. And since the RAF is already targeting Isis in Iraq, why not extend the operation to the other side of the elided border? What could be easier?
But it’s harder to establish what expanding the existing bombing campaign further will actually accomplish. Is Britain engaged in what deserves to be called a war, a term that implies politically purposeful military action? Or is the Cameron government — and the Hollande government as well — merely venting its anger, and thereby concealing the absence of clear-eyed political purpose?
Britain and France each once claimed a place among the world’s great military powers. Whether either nation today retains the will (or the capacity) to undertake a ‘pitiless’ war — presumably suggesting a decisive outcome at the far end — is doubtful. The greater risk is that, by confusing war with punishment, they exacerbate the regional disorder to which previous western military interventions have contributed.
Even without Britain doing its bit, plenty of others are willing to drop bombs on Isis on either side of the Iraq-Syria frontier. With token assistance from Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, US forces have thus far flown some 57,000 sorties while completing 8,300 air strikes. United States Central Command keeps a running scorecard: 129 Isis tanks destroyed, 670 staging areas and 5,000 fighting positions plastered, and (in a newish development) 260 oil infrastructure facilities struck, with the numbers updated from one day to the next. The campaign that the Americans call Operation Inherent Resolve has been under way now for 17 months. It seems unlikely to end anytime soon.

In Westminster or the Elysée, the Pentagon’s carefully tabulated statistics are unlikely to garner much official attention, and for good reason. All these numbers make a rather depressing point: with plenty of sorties flown, munitions expended and targets hit, the results achieved, even when supplemented with commando raids, training missions and the generous distribution of arms to local forces, amount in sum to little more than military piddling. In the United States, the evident ineffectiveness of the air campaign has triggered calls for outright invasion. Pundits of a bellicose stripe, most of whom got the Iraq war of 2003 wrong, insist that a mere 10,000 or 20,000 ground troops — 50,000 tops! — will make short work of the Islamic State as a fighting force. Victory guaranteed.

Fake Video Footage: The West’s Propaganda War on Syria Exposed Once Again

Indeed, the video was a complete hoax – a literal production filmed in Malta, not Syria, and consisting of actors, actresses, and special effects. The UK Mirror in its article, “Footage of Syrian ‘hero boy’ dodging sniper’s bullets to save girl revealed as FAKE,” would finally admit:

Lars Klevberg, 34, from Oslo, devised the hoax after watching news coverage of the troubles in Syria.

He told BBC Trending: “If I could make a film and pretend it was real, people would share it and react with hope.

“We shot it in Malta in May this year on a set that was used for other famous movies like Troy and Gladiator.

“The little boy and girl are professional actors from Malta. The voices in the background are Syrian refugees living in Malta.”

Not the First Time

Source

No sweat.
And who knows? Notwithstanding their record of dubious military prognostications, the proponents of invade-and-occupy just might be right — in the short term. The West can evict Isis from Raqqa if it really wants to. But as we have seen in other recent conflicts, the real problems are likely to present themselves the day after victory. What then? Once in, how will we get out? Competition rather than collaboration describes relations between many of the countries opposing Isis. As Barack Obama pointed out this week, there are now two coalitions converging over Syria: a US-led one, and a Russia-led one that includes Iran. Looking for complications? With Turkey this week having shot down a Russian fighter jet — the first time a Nato member has downed a Kremlin military aircraft for half a century — the subsequent war of words between Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Vladimir Putin gives the world a glimpse into how all this could spin out of control.

The threat posed by terrorism is merely symptomatic of larger underlying problems. Crush Isis, whether by bombing or employing boots on the ground, and those problems will still persist. A new Isis, under a different name but probably flying the same banner, will appear in its place, much as Isis itself emerged from the ashes of al-Qaeda in Iraq………….. 
Read More click here

Andrew J. Bacevich is a retired US colonel, and author of America’s War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History, due out in April.

My Dream – House of Fraser

“cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probatio nulla sit”
The proof lies upon him who affirms, not upon him who denies.

Okay, I know that you all think I am crazy because I am always talking about what I dreamed, yada, yada, yada. But I am going to tell this dream!

I am somewhere, I can’t exactly tell where it is. Maybe a store, a mall, a hotel lobby it seemed to be a combination of all there. And this young man come into the lobby wearing a clearly oversized sear sucker suit.

http://crujonessociety.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/seersucker.jpg
He looked a little bit like this dude in the picture but a little slimmer and the suit was from back in the day and clearly too large for him. He must have thought that I had something to say about it but actually, I remember those suits and thought it quite interesting that anyone would be wearing them now.
He walks over to me and volunteered this information.
“You know, this is one of Bill Cosby’s old suits. He let me have it. He is much taller than I am so the pants are a little long, but he wore this a while back. It’s a Fraser Men’s suit.”
I respond, “Really, I didn’t know that.”
“Yes, Fraser wanted Cosby to wear their suits, it was an endorsement kind of thing.”
“No kidding.”
“Yep, but after a while Cosby wanted to wear more stylish suits. Fraser suits became more stylish over time. But then Cosby didn’t want their endorsement any more, he wanted to wear what he wanted to wear.”
By now this young man is fashionably dressed in a very nice suit that was form fitting and more tailored than the old model sear sucker suits were.

 “I can see that.” I respond
“Well, that’s what put Cosby in trouble. He was going against the agreement. You know, the agreement was that things will keep quiet as long as he wore Fraser suits. You think that’s crazy don’t you, that something as simple as an endorsement will cause the downfall of a person in the industry, right?”
“Well, yeah, who would think that something like that would hurt anyone. You should be able to say yes or no to an endorsement, correct?”
“Nope, not in the industry, you don’t say no to an endorsement. You take the endorsement and keep it moving.
It came out a few years ago, and Cosby made some kind of arrangement with them and things blew over. It came out again and again, Cosby made an arrangement and it died down, but this time, well as you can see, it has gone viral and Cosby is in deep trouble.
This is how it happens. Cosby is at a party, something like this, a gathering or something and there are folks all around. He is dressed rather fashionably and there are young girls all over the place.
One young lady is standing directly in front of him. In fact, she is standing very close to him. Nice looking young lady, I might add.
Cosby puts his hands on the young lady’s waist like so.” He is now demonstrating using me as the young lady in his story.
“One thing leads to another and the young lady and Cosby end up doing what that kind of thing leads to. They go off and no one says anything, but everyone knows cause they are doing it too. You look around and folks are all coupled off with other folks, and ain’t nobody married to them folks cause it ain’t that kind of party.
There are also watchers here. They keep the tabs on all the things that are going on. If any of these folks step out of line, well you know what happens. It just was Cosby’s turn to go down.”
I am incredulous of this story and I quickly remove his hands from around my waist.
“Dude, you got to be making this up, right?”
“Not at all, I ain’t making it up, I am telling you what happened to Cosby and what happens to a lot of them folks if they don’t tow the line. It’s just that simple. In fact, it wasn’t just girls.”
Here he shows me a picture of Cosby kissing a man. It looked like it may have even been him but I couldn’t really make it out in the dream as the face of the other guy was positioned such that it was not discernible.
“Aww, come on dude, Cosby was messing with men too! You must be kidding me, or you are straight up lying.”
“Okay, you can believe what you want to believe, but I am not lying, it’s the truth, that’s all I got to say.”

I woke up before I could ask this dude why he was telling me all this. I decide to look it up, Frazier men’s suits, believing that my dream wouldn’t actually give me the name of something that was really real, I mean even I doubt my dreams sometimes. No matter how many times they show me stuff, information, I just go, okay… But that has been my history with my dreams, I get names and places and stories that turn out to be true. So I look it up and found out that there actually is a line of men’s suits call Frazier, the spelling is FRASER. Not only that, these suits are mad in the UK called House of Fraser http://www.houseoffraser.co.uk/Suits+Tailoring/S213,default,sc.html.

Okay, let me start by saying this shocked me! And then I did a little research on this company.

Well, I wasn’t able to find a direct connection of his endorsements, but I find the endorsements he did make quite interesting.

What does Bill Cosby endorse?
According to our research engine:
Bill Cosby’s major endorsements are reported to include:
Jell-O
Kodak
Ford
Coca-Cola
E. F. Hutton
Walt Disney World
Texas Instruments
Pasted from http://celebrities.findthebest.com/q/149/926/What-does-Bill-Cosby-endorse

In this article:
BILL COSBY, CELEBRITY FASHION, COSBY, MAURY LEVY, MAURY Z. LEVY,PLAYBOY, PLAYBOY INTERVIEW, THE COSBY SHOW
Bill Cosby: The Playboy Fashion Guide Interview
In Playboy magazine and the Playboy Guides (1979-1989) on September 2, 2009 at 4:06 pm
I found that Cosby’s tailor who has made all his suits and fitted him so well for the I Spy series is named Cy Mann and his business is called Cy Mann Clothier, LTD, however it has since been taken over by Sarto Sebastian, and the company is now called Sebastian Tailor… http://www.sartosebastian.com/.

http://www.sartosebastian.com/.

I don’t know what happened at this point to Cy Mann or why his business is no longer operating. I couldn’t find any connection to the House of Fraser or even why Sarto Sebastian took over the Cy Mann Clothier, Ltd. It was a long day with lots of other information but no direct link. I would read the above listed article because it describes Cosby’s propensity towards style and grace in his wardrobe of suits, even though lately he has been dressing more casually. I can only surmise that the dream is telling something about that but not quite sure of the connection to that and this current avalanche of a scandal.

 House of Fraser China deal = http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/10744393/House-of-Fraser-Chinese-tycoon-agrees-deal-to-buy-89pc.html
Current CEO John King = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Fraser
• Chinese conglomerate acquires 89% stake in House of Fraser
http://www.thedrum.com/…/chinese-retailer-acquires-89-stake-house-fraser-48…
• Apr 13, 2014 – House of Fraser executive chairman Don McCarthy will step down from his … “Since we took the company private in 2006, John King and his team … closely with [CEO} John King and his management team to enhance the …

How House of Fraser reclaimed the High Street by (gasp!) listening to its customers
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2645567/How-House-Fraser-reclaimed-High-Street-gasp-listening-customers.html#ixzz3KTzoXDoc 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Last month’s Bafta TV awards saw Judi Dench and Helen Mirren take a back seat as another name stepped into the limelight.
After years of High Street obscurity, the department store House of Fraser staged an almost complete red-carpet takeover.
Sophie Ellis-Bextor, Amber le Bon, Susanna Reid and Kate Garraway, among others, all wore beautiful swishing floor-length bejewelled gowns sold by the store. It was a fashion coup that, overnight, propelled House of Fraser back into middle-class consciousness.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2645567/How-House-Fraser-reclaimed-High-Street-gasp-listening-customers.html#ixzz3KU01F400
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
In 1959, High Street department store group House of Fraser bought Harrods.

Bitter feud

Mr Al Fayed bought Harrods with his brother in 1985

 In 1985 the store returned to private ownership when Egypt-born Mr Al Fayed and his brother Ali bought House of Fraser for £615m, snatching it from mining conglomerate Lonrho.
Mr Al Fayed bought Harrods with his brother in 1985
The takeover bid was bitterly fought as Mr Al Fayed had previously served on Lonrho’s board but left nine months later after a disagreement.
Lonrho’s director, the late Tiny Rowland, took his campaign against the takeover to the Department of Trade who duly held an inquiry.
The subsequent report, issued in 1990, concluded that the Al Fayeds had lied about their background and their wealth.
“We are satisfied that the image they created between November 1984 and March 1985 of their wealthy Egyptian ancestors was completely bogus.”
The public feud between the businessmen appeared to reach reconciliation in 1993 however Mr Rowland later accused Mr Al Fayed of breaking into a safety deposit box held at the store.
This dispute was later settled with Mr Rowland’s wife after his death.
Pasted from http://www.bbc.com/news/10103783

4 Strange, Yet Effective Celebrity Car Endorsements
Mark Frost | Nov 05, 2014 | 0 comments
http://www.automoblog.net/2014/11/05/strange-celebrity-car-endorsements/

Economists Kerwin Charles, Erik Hurst, and Nikolai Roussanov have taken up this rather sensitive question in a recent unpublished study, “Conspicuous Consumption and Race.” Using data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey for 1986-2002, they find that blacks and Hispanics indeed spend more than whites with comparable incomes on what the authors classify as “visible goods” (clothes, cars, and jewelry). A lot more, in fact—up to an additional 30 percent. The authors provide evidence, however, that this is not because of some inherent weakness on the part of blacks and Hispanics. The disparity, they suggest, is related to the way that all people—black, Hispanic, and white—strive for social status within their respective communities.
Pasted from http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/2008/01/cos_and_effect.html>

Big Cosby Endorsements
Criticism[edit]
In 1973, The Village Voice writer Terry Guerin suggested the actor was past his prime. Among the reasons, “making spokesman commercials for such established heels as White Owl cigars and Pan American airlines. He has evolved into a kind of self-parodying sap, the kind of flagrant, perpetual parader Sammy Davis has always been.”[62]
“The Noble Cos,” a 1986 satirical editorial by Edward Sorel forThe Nation, was written as if told by Cosby himself. It echoed the suggestions of other authors that Cosby has become out-of-touch with lower-class African Americans.[63] Cosby said “So this buddy says, ‘I didn’t mind your commercials for Jello, Del Monte, Ford cars … Ideal Toys, or Coca-Cola, although Coke does do business in South Africa … But, Bill, why do commercials for those crooks at E. F. Hutton?’ My buddy didn’t understand my commercials improve race relations. Y’see, by showing that a black man can be just as money-hungry as a white man … I’m proving that all men are brothers.”[64]
To magazine Black Enterprise in 1981, Cosby has defended his numerous endorsements thusly:
In this business, many of us are well paid but we are not all that wealthy. You may read ‘X-number of dollar goes to so and so,’ but remember, everybody takes a cut–the lawyer, the agent, the publicist. If a company comes along and says ‘We’d like you to talk about how much you enjoy wearing this warm-up suit,’ and the money is right, I’m going to do it. Jell-O was a dessert in my house when I was a kid. My mom served Del Monte fruit cocktail when I was growing up. They want to pay me to say I eat these products, well, I eat them. I came out of a lower economic area, and this is money. This is a business … show business. A great deal of our careers depends on keeping ourselves in the public eye. I think performers should take advantage of commercial offers if they’re satisfied with the product.[3]
Pasted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cosby_in_advertising

Bill Cosby had a vile temper, punched out comic Tommy Smothers and was a hard-partying philanderer caught in a love child scandal that almost cost him his marriage, reveals new book

By CAROLINE HOWE FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 11:48 EST, 16 September 2014 | UPDATED: 13:30 EST, 16 September 2014
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2757889/Bill-Cosby-vile-temper-punched-comic-Tommy-Smothers-hard-partying-philanderer-caught-love-child-scandal-cost-marriage-reveals-new-book.html#ixzz3KUi42mtm 

For Bill Cosby, No Escape From the Damage to His Legacy
Pasted from http://variety.com/2014/tv/columns/for-bill-cosby-no-escape-from-the-damage-to-his-legacy-1201360402/

Then after a day of researching on the web I found this little piece that came out November 20, 2014. I had not heard of it and was quite surprised to find it as it related to what was told to me in my dream.

Kirk Cameron.

Another rape allegation has surfaced against famed comedian and actor, Bill Cosby. This time it is from another familiar 80s face: Kirk Cameron.
Pasted from http://www.celebtricity.com/kirk-cameron-files-sex-abuse-charges-on-bill-cosby/

I Spy
“After being appointed Knights Commander of the Most Noble Order of the Scimitar by an Arab king, Alexander Scott jokes to Kelly Robinson, “Well, you just wait till the boys at the Mystic Knights of the Sea lodge hall get a hold of this one.” While not a direct Masonic reference, it illustrates the prevalence of unconscious Masonic fictionalization. Episode: Sparrowhawk. First aired: October 26, 1966. Robert Culp, Bill Cosby. Three F Productions, Sheldon Lenard.”
Pasted from https://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/fiction/obscurities.html

2011 Cosby quote “I don’t feel the need to wear a suit”

But Nana Had Her Dreams!

“Ten years ago there was no social media to speak of, which meant the allegations failed to make their way into the public consciousness. That had all changed by this September, when journalist Mark Whitaker published a biography, Cosby: His Life and Times, which controversially omitted the allegations of sexual assault against its subject. The following month, comedian Hannibal Buress described Cosby as a “rapist” during a stand-up set in Philadelphia; the clip went viral. Inspired by the response to Buress’s routine, Bowman penned her account for the Washington Post, and the story ballooned.”

Pasted from http://www.frasercoastchronicle.com.au/news/bill-cosby-rape-allegations-explained/2461714/

“Some notable living memberz are Hank Aaron (once Major League Baseball Homerun king); Tom Bradley (tv personality); Dennis Archor (once mayor of Detroit); Elvin Big ‘E’ Hayes (NBA Basketball great); Bill Cosby; Jesse Jackson; Earl Graves, Jr. (Black Enterprise); Douglass Wilder (Governor of Virginia); Lynn Swann (NFL Hall-of-Famer), Kweisi Mfume (once head of NAACP), and David Dinkins (once mayor of New York City), to name a few.”

Pasted from http://daghettotymz.com/rkyvz/articles/bouleseries/boule1-3roster/boule1/boulept1.html

Hollywood’s sexual predator problem explodes

By Michelle Malkin  •  May 7, 2014 01:28 AM
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2014
“The same industry that sanctimoniously convenes anti-bullying summits with the Obama White House and falsely accuses conservatives of waging a “war on women” has allowed countless children to be stalked, groomed, beaten, molested and raped on casting couches, in movie trailers, and at drug- and alcohol-drenched parties by Tinseltown predators. The alleged child rape scandal exposed by Egan does not exist in a vacuum:
–Last year, child actor Corey Feldman sounded the alarm on rampant pedophilia in a brave, scathing memoir. He recounted how his best friend and co-star, the late Corey Haim, was sodomized by an older male on the set of their hit film “Lucas.” The boys, fed cocaine by a string of predators, attended parties with Hollywood talent manager and child actors’ repMarty Weiss. Now a registered sex offender, Weiss pleaded no contest in 2012 to lewd acts on a child under the age of 14. The victim, another young child actor, alleged Weiss sexually assaulted him between 30 and 40 times from the age of 11.”
If all of these sickos had been Catholic priests, college fraternity members or charter school teachers, we wouldn’t have heard the end of it. Perhaps the social justice awareness-raisers in the Hollywood left should take a break from pointing fingers at everyone else — and put a stop to the monsters in their own midst.
Pasted from  http://michellemalkin.com/2014/05/07/hollywoods-sexual-predator-problem-explodes/

TY BURR | COMMENTARY
Why did we ignore Bill Cosby allegations for so long?
Pasted from http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/theater-art/2014/11/20/bill-cosby-conundrum-why-did-look-away-long/2YTejl6WfvRkiIIzP5ZMyN/story.html

CHARACTER FLAW
11.20.14
Newsflash: Bill Cosby Is Not Cliff Huxtable
TV Land has canceled The Cosby Show reruns. Is this a mature expression of understandable judgment, or a bid to erase history while conflating fiction and reality?
Pasted from http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/20/newsflash-bill-cosby-is-not-cliff-huxtable.html

BILL COSBY, CELEBRITY FASHION, COSBY, MAURY LEVY, MAURY Z. LEVY,PLAYBOY, PLAYBOY INTERVIEW, THE COSBY SHOW
Bill Cosby: The Playboy Fashion Guide Interview
In Playboy magazine and the Playboy Guides (1979-1989) on September 2, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Pasted from http://mauryzlevy.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/bill-cosby-the-playboy-fashion-guide-interview/

I’m Starting to Wonder if There’s Anyone Bill Cosby  Hasn’t Raped

Bill Cosby To Rape Victim Andrea Constand: “Tell Your Mom You Orgasmed So She Thinks It’s Consensual” (Video) {F}

Bill Cosby’s fall from grace has been swift and hard. He was once one of the most beloved and respected figures in Hollywood.
Now all he may be remembered for is drugging and raping countless women. Does he deserve worldwide shame? Without question he does. Can his image be rehabilitated? That’s highly unlikely.
A 2005 deposition given in a civil suit filed by alleged victim Andrea Constand, paints a picture of a man who is depraved and appears to have no regrets for his actions.

Andrea Constand

Following their encounter, Cosby reportedly told the young woman to “to tell her mom she had an orgasm during sex, to make her mother believe the sex was consensual,” TMZ reports.
The former Jello pudding spokesperson also admitted to giving Constand drugs.
The case was eventually settled out of court in 2006.

A deposition from a 2005 lawsuit has Bill Cosby acknowledging using his fame and drugs to prey upon women

  • The deposition is from a lawsuit filed by Andrea Constand, who accused the comedian of drugging and molesting her 
  • Cosby, 78, denied sexually assaulting the victim, whom he also calls a liar, and other women
  • He also discussed paying off victims through his agent so ‘Mrs Cosby’ wouldn’t find out
  • This deposition could change the stance of several people who have supported Cosby throughout the sexual assault allegations 
Never-before-seen excerpts of a Bill Cosby deposition from 2005 show the formerly beloved entertainer explaining in his own words how he used his fame, fortune and drugs to prey on vulnerable women – and paid them off to keep his wife from finding out.
Interviewed in a Philadelphia hotel over four days by a lawyer acting on behalf of then-30-year-old Temple University employee Andrea Constand, Cosby admitted to lying to his doctor about a bad back to get powerful sedatives which he then gave to women before sex.

NB COMMENTARY:

I have been doing some ground work on this thing with Bill Cosby. I am not sure about what you have said here, except to say, that maybe you just don’t understand much about PTSD. There is no umbrella knee jerk reaction that all who suffer this can be given. So the idea that they would have come forward years ago discounts the way that they are dealing with their trauma or not dealing with it.
While people aged 18 or 19 may be legally considered adults and able to fight in wars they are not physically and mentally mature. In fact, some folks take a long time to become mentally mature for that matter.
In the Hollyweird  business there are all types of scenarios and we all know that wine, women, sex and drugs are a big part of it. Do I have to prove that? Is it hearsay? Yes. By whom? The Hollyweirdos themselves through various venues.
At 18-19 years old, you have been given bucket loads of what it’s like to live high of the hog in Hollyweird. The stars parade before you and you want to be a part of the glamorous life they all seem to enjoy. But they are not privy to the backroom deals, compromises and adulterating things they will have to do to make it to the”Big Top.” The adults around them do, they have heard the stories and seen the movies of the real life downfall of these trend setters. These adults warn their children in many cases. At 18 or 19 who listens to adults? Especially if you have determined that adults have no clue about what is happening in the real world outside of their bedrooms.
How many of these young people, 40 years ago are taught about what “rape” really is? How many of them come from broken homes? How many of them come from poverty and are looking for a way out? How many of them are already accustomed to the life style and know their lines? How many of them think that “giving” your body in exchange for a chance is part of what comes with getting ahead? And finally, how many of them realized they were raped after the statute of limitations? Seriously……. how many women right now, realize they are being raped by their husbands/boyfriends when they say “NO” and are ignored?
All I am saying is that, in certain instances, particularly Hollyweird , it’s not considered rape, it’s consider to be what you do, what is done to you, and what you see happening around you.
In essence, many, many people do this in Hollyweird  and even more people turn their heads the other way, or simply participate. It’s the way of the world in Hollyweird .
Sometimes, the stars are bribed and intimidated into uncompromising situations and they too are victims of the greed and vileness of their handlers. Everybody in Hollyweird  is handled by someone. It’s not right, but it is a weird normalcy. Who in Hollyweird is complaining about the sex trafficking and prostitution and drug rings that go on? Few if any. And when they do, well they become profoundly targeted. I say profoundly because they are all targeted. It’s show business and it’s about the money, fame and notoriety, the glamour and the luxuries, the high life and the status, the conspicuous consumption.
Again, how many of them equated it to rape at that young age? How many of them were raped before they got to Hollyweird? How many of them realized  very late that their rage, insecurities, depressions, suicidal tendencies, anxieties, paranoia, etc. had anything to do with their history of being abused by an authority figure, someone they trusted?
I am a Mental Health professional, and in my experience, I have seen it happen over and over again, where the memory of the traumatic situation is erased, skewed or purposely forgotten, and they ain’t even trying to get into Hollyweird. There is no other pressure around them but family and friends. Now couple that with family, friends and other celebrities who will come down hard on you for even insinuating such a thing about Bill Cosby.
He wasn’t “America’s dad”during the initial alleged incidences, but if you know the pathology, many times, once it is not reported or if reported denied, then it becomes an addiction when it first started off as just sick.
And, HELLO!!! on your Cosby wasn’t powerful back then, you can’t be serious? He was outlandishly powerful with many firsts in this country for any black man during those times. And he had money!!!! Imagine, here we had a culture that would lynch a black man in a heart beat for looking at a white woman, let alone raping her, and he was accepted into the White Aristocracy!! Yep, he was powerful alright, more than you could ever know, unless you are a Black man/woman in America. Black people didn’t just come of age without a struggle or slippery dancing to get into the door. Believe me, he was big in the eyes of many people across racial lines and to have him mentor you or help you get ahead was a great honor! Why? Because he was powerful.
So, in conclusion, I appreciate your perspective on this in that it inspired me to write down mine. Whether the media tries and convicts him or not, is irrelevant. Whether he says yeah, I did it or not is also irrelevant. What is most needed is the rape culture being put on blast, especially in how it is played out in Hollyweird, religious institutions, sports and politics. Powerful people are taking advantage of women, men and children across the board. If nothing else, that needs to be addressed. This episode will encourage more disclosure and education on how folks are supposed to act. Whether it changes the complexion of the lifestyle of the rich and famous remains to be seen, but it’s a step in the right direction and an important hurdle towards the healing. In these situations, all parties are victims!

 After all is said and done, this photo and the comment below sounds quite eery.

Tag Cloud