Why do some people, years before they "become famous", show up on our television screens? What is the process at work that selects one person over another? Sometimes there's nothing mysterious about it- it's simple nepotism from one of the "connected" media insiders, arranging things for a sibling, a child or a relative. But other times it's a lot weirder than that- a bell ringing reoccurrence of a certain person, from a very young age.
Some researchers make a lot out of the child abuse / music industry factory that churns out abused starlets who follow the same meteor-like trajectory from jailbait star to burnt out mother to freeze dried cautionary tale. I think that it's pretty well proven that the paedophile network exists, that like Terry's extraordinary work on Son of Sam, it is proven that the network interlocks with Satanists who run organised crime and with Organised Crime that exploits the trappings of satanic cults. I also think, given the now proven pedophilia network - because it is not isolated people, they all knew eac hother- in the media that is time to wonder why some children seem to get air time over others. The most extraordinarily ugly and talentless people are pushed so incredibly relentlessly for such a pointlessly long time, it begs a question. It can't all just be the Melbourne media mafia or jewish family members in the echelons of the television stations or any of the other quietly acknowledged reasons why some people are superglued in front of TV consumers eyes like a particularly unattractive test pattern.
For different reasons, we see the perenniality of the gatekeeper.
The gatekeeper needs to work both sides of the fence, as I have pointed out before it was exquisitely renedered by Bud Flowers in They Live- an apparent hobo, outspoken but reassuring... Turns out to have been on of "them" all along, a traitor to his own people. His justification: everyone sells out and everyone wants a taste of the good life.
They Live is one of those must-see films that, when people bother to "must-see" it, the dialogue whooshes over their head. Most key scenes are packed not only with symbolism, but with dense text, as though the film maker, John Carpenter, was concerned to pack every single message he could into every line. Rewatching it, and "reading" the dialogue, makes for a very interesting experience.
Some researchers make a lot out of the child abuse / music industry factory that churns out abused starlets who follow the same meteor-like trajectory from jailbait star to burnt out mother to freeze dried cautionary tale. I think that it's pretty well proven that the paedophile network exists, that like Terry's extraordinary work on Son of Sam, it is proven that the network interlocks with Satanists who run organised crime and with Organised Crime that exploits the trappings of satanic cults. I also think, given the now proven pedophilia network - because it is not isolated people, they all knew eac hother- in the media that is time to wonder why some children seem to get air time over others. The most extraordinarily ugly and talentless people are pushed so incredibly relentlessly for such a pointlessly long time, it begs a question. It can't all just be the Melbourne media mafia or jewish family members in the echelons of the television stations or any of the other quietly acknowledged reasons why some people are superglued in front of TV consumers eyes like a particularly unattractive test pattern.
For different reasons, we see the perenniality of the gatekeeper.
The gatekeeper needs to work both sides of the fence, as I have pointed out before it was exquisitely renedered by Bud Flowers in They Live- an apparent hobo, outspoken but reassuring... Turns out to have been on of "them" all along, a traitor to his own people. His justification: everyone sells out and everyone wants a taste of the good life.
They Live is one of those must-see films that, when people bother to "must-see" it, the dialogue whooshes over their head. Most key scenes are packed not only with symbolism, but with dense text, as though the film maker, John Carpenter, was concerned to pack every single message he could into every line. Rewatching it, and "reading" the dialogue, makes for a very interesting experience.
