You're On My Radar, Now You're Not, And There You Are Again

I will be running through this rundown of things I'm recently impacting, as it all seems quite a bit outside of me, yet in need of reporting at the same time. I'm impacting, but not wielding, in areas where one really wants to wield. What a drag.

SNL Update
Once again fragments from material I submitted for SNL found their way onto the show. This is consistent with what has been going on there regarding me for years and years, though there's no money, no apparent agreement, nothing that would make me legit by a certain very common standard.

Those who have created a database of my material posted at Archive.Org, and regularly update their database by periodically doing a search there, will have noticed exactly two new things added prior to the February 4th Saturday Night Live edition:

Shut Yor Song (published to Archive.Org 1/21/12 GMT)
Death Kills Me (published to Archive.Org 1/28/12 GMT)

They didn't use anything from my "Death Kills Me", however, fragments from "Shut Yor Song" can be found.

The instances where I was an influence this time around can be recognized based on the cumulative context. To make an analogy, imagine each show containing a lottery number digit, and prior to each show I guess the correct digit appearing on that show, for years and years and years. If you contextualized it wrong, and saw things only in terms of one show where I guessed the correct digit, it would seem that I had exaggerated the significance of guessing one digit in a larger lottery number.

• Both the 2.4.12 SNL and "Shut Yor Song" include, as an unexpected event, a celebrity hanging out in an ordinary bar

• Both the 2.4.12 SNL and "Shut Yor Song" include a group of people in a bar who are nonplussed no matter who takes the stage (on SNL, the middle-aged Asian women in the strip bar)

Additionally, in my previous blog I observed how my sketch idea, "Dear Whoever Gonna Blow Up The World," had a major impact on the 1/14/12 SNL by influencing how they discussed the new North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un. At the end of my sketch idea is the image of the Earth seen from outerspace.... exploding. This same image, of the Earth seen from outerspace.... exploding (seen from Newt Gingrich's space station) occurred on SNL's opening sketch on the 2/4/12 show (which was the SNL immediately following their 1/14/12 show).

I submitted nothing for the 2/11/12 show, and nothing of mine could be detected.

Smithers Reborn
Those familiar with my material may know that one of my works that I regard as more significant is "Gosk", which is a 1993 screenplay, two self-produced videos made from the screenplay (Part 1 in 1994 and Part 2 in 1998), a trailer for the videos, and a shooting script for Part 3. I additionally regard "Gosk" as being a significant influence on a great number of well known works by a great number of well known people.

A few may also be aware that "Gosk" originated, in part, from a short story I wrote in 1986, "Claggers and Smithers":

http://www.angelfire.com/blog2/jonathandsteinhoff/page13.html

["Claggers and Smithers" (copyright 1987 Library of Congress, as part of my collection of stories, "Inventing Air"); "Inventing Air" also includes "The Coin That Came In Second," which I have described as leading to Spielberg's "Jurassic Park" following my sending Sean Daniel a copy to give to Spielberg after speaking with Sean Daniel who said not to send it after I described it after he asked me to describe it.]

This brings me to Liam Neeson's frequent references to Smithers on recent talk shows publicizing his new movie, "Grey". Smithers, we learn on each Neeson TV show appearance, is the town used for their film location. In recent blogs (my previous two) I have discussed Neeson, for very particular reasons. Also relevant here is that I believe, and have written about how I believe, that Neeson's wife's death was committed in a manner that involved people who insidiously, deliberately devised a way to intertwine their action with something I had blogged three days before. As bizarre a statement as that is, I see this over and over and over and over over. My premise relates to my often-evidenced secret super-importance in relation to Spielberg (and others, such as McCartney, Sting, the Stones, SNL, etc., etc., etc.), that (as should be expected if one believes the premise) this attracts certain elements seeking this subtle "gateway" that I somehow am (among my million hats), through which they might access the attention of that super-high strata of the world's citizens. Center of the chessboard stuff.

So then, my Smithers-related Neeson update: If one appreciates Neeson's connection to Spielberg, on whom I am an ongoing influence..... if one reads the story "Claggers and Smithers" and also sees the movie "Grey"..... etc., then I think that perhaps someday you (some of you?) may be able to consider that "Claggers and Smithers" was, in its own way, a real influence on "Grey".

And while on the subject of the person who was going to play Lincoln for Spielberg and now is not, happy Abraham Lincoln's recent birthday!

Please Continue Not Blowing Up The World For A Minute
A search of my old blog articles will reveal my repeated contention that, also as the result of my secret super-importance with regard to one of (if not the) most prominently known Jewish persons in the world (Spielberg), Iranian President Ahmadinejad joined the hordes of the well known who make coded references for my "benefit", when he makes speeches of note to the world community. I crazily believe this occurred again yesterday, something worked into his speech.

I will not to attempt to convey the basis of my conclusion here. You would not appreciate why I recognize a deliberate action. This stuff requires people committed to voluminous research of the context that reveals the significance of what otherwise appears invisible. It would be dropping the ball to let people think they had enough information to form a proper conclusion on this important matter, when they do not. Especially at this point in human history, when we are looking at the possibility of a showdown with Iran sooner rather than later.

If These Beatles Could Talk
I've often referred to my influence on The Beatles, and more recently, my great influence on McCartney's latest. That means, there is also a context in which to see this latest Ringo news: Recently, the day before Ringo announced Gregg Rolie (original Santana, Journey member) would be joining his tour, I brought up the name Gregg Rolie while talking with some people, not something that commonly occurs. There being substantial, ongoing evidence that what I say in practically any situation can find its way to the world, I expect I likely deserve a little credit for this one. Also possibly for something Paul said Feb. 9th when receiving his star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame coming from something I said Feb. 8th, only a possibility.

All The News That's Fit To Make You Think I'm Nuts

The Telephone Game
For quite some time now, I have "felt" myself to be in the sites of people involved with "Ripley's Believe It Or Not".... I'm somehow "getting" that they want me to come up with a "Believe It Or Not" dance.... they need me to express in this dance the idea, "you ain't gonna believe this unless you take all kinds of trouble to research how I'm not a liar but worthy of your having great belief in me"..... that I should go through life with many of the important things I might need to say being tinged with a feeling of, "believe it or not". Someday I hope to prove in a soundbite how this feeling has been given to me, and is not of my own device. I just know I can prove it all in a soundbite.

Sorry, I just need to say the kind of stuff contained in the preceding paragraph every now and then. Should you read on, you may possibly see the relevancy for this being one of those every now and then occasions.

I Shot The Walnut
So yesterday I'm on my way to the nut house again (the Somis Nut House in Somis, California, where I get my almonds and walnuts, however, my readers may recall that I prefer to provide my detractors the chance to go, "Yeah, he belongs in the nut house!" at every possible opportunity, thus, I choose my words in a way that helps set up such remarks, it's the least I can do). And I'm right at that stretch where Paul McCartney drove by for my benefit once (see my August 8, 2010 blog, "Stuck In Traffic, Not"). I believe I reported that incident as hard to believe in most respects - it meant McCartney, on whom I have been a huge influence over the years, ran to California all the way from Canada for a day or so, in relation to my email to someone. Not like the new Clapton song about running back to someone's side, rather, more like a billionaire flying in a super-luxury version of first class so why really care about where you're flying to anyway, it's gonna be a fun time. Or so goes the theory. In fact, it was in that same blog that I expressed how I looked up on the Internet where on the globe McCartney was supposed to be, in order to help me evaluate whether I could actually have seen him then. And at some point after that I did a blog article about seeing someone who looked like another person I've been an influence on, Eric Clapton, after which I looked up his whereabouts on the Internet, at which point I learned the siting coincided with the day of Clapton's announcement of his first album in five years - as if someone knew the siting would cause me to look him up on the Internet that one day in five years.

One would also have to read other things I've written about Clapton, in order to more properly appreciate how I would construe this siting (and others) as having been specifically intended for me.

So there is Jerry Seinfeld driving by in his car talking on a cell phone, right in Paul McCartney's spot. Should I add in the fact that the person to whom I had sent that email that led to the August 2010 moment happens to be among those connected in a certain way with when Michael Richards of "Seinfeld" attended my school (CalArts)? Or that Seinfeld on a talk show appearance once talked and talked about introducing McCartney at an Obama thing? Another thing that should also be regarded as related: my Oct. 25, 2009 and Nov. 29, 2009 blogs, which essentially prove my major influence on the "Seinfeld" reunion on "Curb Your Enthusiasm". I've also mentioned in previous blogs how the entire last season of "Seinfeld" was seriously influenced by me as well.

What does it mean? Nothing. It's Seinfeld, it's not supposed to mean anything. The guy who played Uncle Leo on "Seinfeld" just died in Burbank, 50 miles from where I saw Seinfeld, he has a funeral to attend. That's the only sense most people need to make of this stuff.

Head of the Hats
I have often referred to my influence on "Smallville". Without going into detail, recently, shortly after a certain famous person drove by me/looked at me while she was wearing a certain hat, which I construed at the time as having been for my benefit for reasons I also won't go into, an episode of "Smallville" (Feb. 18th) featured the same type hat as serving to keep Green Arrow's identity secret. This episode in general related to Clark Kent coming up with something to wear to keep his identity secret.

I Follow You, Clapton
A recent news story went into a degree of detail regarding the great interest Kim Jong Il's son has in Eric Clapton. (This fact goes into storage until Ahmadinejad and his Steinhoff-mania can be tied in.)

If North Korea Could Please Stay Out Of This, Thank You

Disclaimer
You are not allowed to do any kind of interconnecting between any matters relating to the Iranian president found in the following (which I describe as being in relation to my “theory” in order to lessen the possibility that I will be sent to the loony bin for taking it as fact and not just theory) and matters one may have read about regarding Iran receiving from North Korea assistance towards achieving its nuclear weapons capability ambitions (especially at this point in time when North Korea is about to blow up the world again, South Korea first perhaps, I want to stay away from all that, being shy).

Eleventh Hour Make-Believe Diplomacy
Whether you agree with a theory, disagree with a theory, feel a slightly involuntary urge to laugh in the face of someone because of their theory, or want to go out and kill cats because of a theory (whatever): if the theory results in strange predictions that nevertheless come to pass in spite of how unlikely they may seem…. well, a rational person should certainly take notice of such developments, or at least stop feeling a slightly involuntary urge to laugh in my face, that is, not laugh in the face of a person because of their theory, if such developments occur after they are predicted by a theory.

In my August 28, 2010 blog article (copyrighted Sept. 2010, when I published it at Archive.Org in the fourth volume of my blog articles there), I was particularly explicit regarding a previously-described Steinhoff lexicon situation that I contend has come to involve many in entertainment, a lexicon which is also seeing usage by Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president.

My lexicon “theory” is described by me as likely having to do with my secret super-importance in relation to the work of many, McCartney in many instances, and also the work of Spielberg (see my “Steven Spielberg and the ‘Mall Man’ Factor”, posted at Archive.Org in Dec. 2009). That the world of politics is also in the picture to a considerable degree is ascribed in part to Spielberg being among the WORLD's most prominent/high profile Jewish men; now factor in that Ahmadinejad is someone who publicly announced a wish that the Jewish state of Israel be blown off the map, while he meanwhile is presumed by the West to be developing nuclear weapons capability. So I’m saying I’ve attracted the notice of Ahmadinejad, who, in his more attention-grabbing statements, has been secretly referencing the same lexicon also referenced in much product from the entertainment industry.

The idea that people would be indulging in such a “game” together, one of this variety, would perhaps tend to seem worthy of more serious consideration, were anyone but myself presenting this awareness to you. For, by me being the one asserting this lexicon is built around things I myself have made/have been prominently involved in, it immediately and clearly makes it all incredibly unlikely-sounding and absurd-sounding, however absurd so much in life may be. As I’ve expressed before, it wasn’t my idea for this lexicon to exist, to be brought to the table, to be so much at the center of the chessboard. Yet I recognize that the reporting or ignoring of certain developments should not be predicated so entirely on the degree of mass acceptability one expects such a report to receive. And my vantage point makes the question of reporting or not reporting one of taking responsibility.
In my August 28, 2010 blog article I describe the specific place where Ahmadinejad last left off inserting such an inside-reference. It was with regard to my 1998 “Gosk 2” video (at Archive.Org since Sept. 2005) and with relation to that video’s “hat scene” and things around the “hat scene”. It is therefore a matter of record that I correlated Ahmadinejad’s words to something regarding that section. As to the “hat scene”, we see Vinkalert pondering why things didn’t work out with his high school sweetheart, Gosk, as if to say he wished they had continued together, i.e., gotten married.

And so, how could it fail to jump off the page for me when, on November 21, 2010, Ahmadinejad, with what would obviously be an attention-grabbing statement, announced that he wants Iranian girls to marry at the age of sixteen?

Oliver Hardy Laughter

Just as someone might, with relatively little difficulty, begin with nuclear energy, yet one day find himself to be in possession of a nuclear weapon, so Saturday Night Live has, by starting with the "plank of wood, a 2x4" originated by me (previous blog, 10.17.10) while discussing SNL's (very) timely inside-references to Steinhoff material, somehow found a way to beat my plowshare (well, plank) into a 2x8 (disclaimer- these dimensions are based on a visual approximation):



I believe it clearly contains stuff that can easily be interpreted as a continuation of what started in my previous (10.17.10) blog as an Ahmadinejad "discussion" with SNL. How far that reaches into this videoclip has yet to be resolved, though I see where this could all easily culminate in a three-picture deal, or another sketch, only this time all of the characters get to be sitting down on nice soft chairs.

When You're Ready To Be Serious, Napoleon

Here's a little bit of fun, at least for those who think things that touch somewhat directly on an important moment regarding the Iranian President are a little bit of fun.

In my previous blog, "I Don't Suppose Anyone Has A Videoclip Of Larry King Leading A Conga Line" (9.20.10), one of the things I touched on was the then-upcoming appearance on Larry King of the Iranian President (at that time it was scheduled for Thursday, however, it aired today, Wednesday). I also touched on something I've been making repeated mention of, that the Iranian President has plugged into my secret super-importance in relation to Spielberg (the most prominent living Jewish man) and Paul McCartney (another individual with a non-comparable prominence in the world), by making inside-references that I get but that would not be appreciable by the public-at-large (am I crazy sounding or what?).

In that same 9.20.10 blog article, I also touched on the Eric Clapton album, "Slowhand" regarding something Clapton did in relation to me personally. (I've also described this same thing in other blogs as well, where I get particular about how it was in relation to me.)

I will begin with "Slowhand". It will become relevant to the other thing.

I have a Facebook friends who is not unconnected from the above-referenced thing Clapton did. And there have been a certain number of occasions when this same Facebook friend person has posted something on Facebook in response to things I've posted that touch on him, though in so indirect a manner as to be undetectable to the Facebook public-at-large that his Facebook posting has anything to do with me. Therefore, I paid close attention on September 21st to see if this person had anything in this "mailbox" for me. What I found was that this individual "Liked" something that was posted by a Dr. Wayne Dyer (who has a quarter million Facebook friends) on September 21st:

"At your core, the place where you originate from and return to, there's no one and no thing to judge."

What does this have to do with Clapton's "Slowhand"? The first song (the opening track) on "Slowhand", entitled, "The Core," contains the line, "I'm at my core."

I had specifically been looking to this person's Facebook posting on this precise day for such a reference to what I had posted the previous day, and I unmistakably found it. I recognize that this had also required that Dr. Wayne (quarter million Facebook friends) Dyer be complicit for this to have come about. I have already described in a recent blog how in general this type of thing has been occurring, including the involvement of the complicity/cooperation of non-Facebook friends taking place in conjunction with Facebook friends.

This brings us to today's interview on Larry King with the Iranian President. Such a TV show can be seen as important in relation to the Iranian President, as this is rather significant exposure on a fairly significant American TV show.

On this occasion, I detected no inside-reference on the Iranian President's part intended for my interpretation. However, at the very end of this show, Larry King closed with a reaction to this interview from the editor of Time Magazine:



I am not saying that heretofore no one has ever used the word, "core". But an intelligent person will see that without my pointing that out. I should also point out that a friend at work is a friend of Larry King. Prior to today's Larry King, I described what happened with "The Core" to someone else at work. I can imagine that as one of the ways word could have reached Larry King. I have no doubt, having pre-anticipated something of this kind, that the specific choice of words used at that important moment began with Eric Clapton's "The Core," or to be more specific, my having just referenced the album on which that is the opening track.

Tomorrow the Iranian President speaks at the United Nations. If you're reading this, Mr. Making - Everybody - Nervous - That - You -Won't - Take - Responsibility - For - Seriously - Playing - With - Fire - While - Doing - Nothing - To - Address - The - Problem - When - The - Future - Of - The - Whole - World - Is - At - Stake, just tap your foot in time with Jack Bruce's "Never Tell Your Mother She's Out Of Tune" when you're up there speaking to the world. It will really help me put together my next schpiel.

I Don't Suppose Anyone Has A Videoclip Of Larry King Leading A Conga Line

Nothing extraordinary to report, nevertheless, a few things I consider worthy of mention:

End Of The World, Part 12
Thursday the Iranian President is scheduled to appear Larry King, and Friday will be the season premiere of the final season of "Smallville". No possible connection, unless you've been following my blogs. I will see if this possible connection takes on significance.

Look Both Ways Before Smashing Into Something
Recently someone who may have been Sheryl Crow behaved in traffic a little like the person I recently mentioned in a blog article for having looked like Eric Clapton on the day his new album was announced. You may want to put on the brakes here, go to Archive.Org, search for Volume 4 of my collected blog articles, then search for Sheryl Crow and Eric Clapton there (you may particularly want to note that Crow will apparently be big on Clapton's upcoming new release). But back to the recent traffic thing - I was at the light to the on-ramp to the 134 on my way to work, the light turned green, however, up came Sheryl Crow (or someone one would think of as her) in the on-ramp diamond line and so didn't have to stop. I behaved appropriately, but I always see that protocol as an accident waiting to happen. I'm glad it is incredibly rare when that on-ramp diamond lane car that doesn't stop vies for the road space of the car that did and then got a green light. I first got my driving license by practicing driving in the car of and accompanied by a woman whose image Clapton put on the inside album jacket of "Slowhand" on my account, so it is important for me to assess the driving of these people, you understand. She also knew (knows?) Paul McCartney, who drives well, last I saw, but I believe I digress.

I recently was provided an opportunity to join in on a Facebook discussion that had Will Lee as a participant. Will Lee is part of Letterman's houseband. This is interesting in that a recent blog article of mine referred to Sheryl Crow in relation to Letterman. I had nothing to contribute to that discussion, and for some strange reason I allowed that fact to be the basis for my choosing not to say anything. I do enjoy Will Lee's impression of a person tortured by Dick Cheney that we occasionally get to see on Letterman. Will Lee also played on a Lennon recording. (I imagine this is a digression for those appreciating the generally non-Beatles quality of this blog article.)

Always Place The Fork To The Left Of The Bishop
Recently Regis on Fallon did his usual secret inside reference for my benefit regarding someone I once knew who is also someone to whom Regis once introduced himself. Fallon participated in it (Fallon is a friend of Drew Barrymore, whom I've mentioned in blog articles, recently, in fact) and I think it was quite entertaining all around.

File Under Bulletin Board
I recently noticed that the woman I once knew whose image was on Clapton's "Slowhand" inside album jacket on my account (she's not the one in the photo showing Clapton kissing, that's Linda McCartney) has on her Facebook Info page something I recognize as being part of a line from the title song of my "Enough To Eclipse" CD (available at CD Baby). She seamlessly worked part of my song line into something about something, and you'd never know. Clapton once married George Harrison's ex-wife (could be I'm digressing again). I merely wish to acknowledge something that jumped off the page as far as I'm concerned, and don't believe I'm expressing an opinion.

Why Don't You Pour It In Jar
And finally, this videoclip regarding the Coen Brothers' "A Serious Man" in relation to my 1990/1992 video, "Steinhoff's Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'" (posted at Google Video in 2005, and later posted at Archive.Org) requires an appreciation of the fact that certain ideas can emerge from a collective effect that aren't visible when seen with a piecemeal perspective. You might actually feel I'm dreaming to think this videoclip has anything serious, in response to which I might actually feel you can't be serious to believe I'm dreaming, and there we are, at the beginning of World War III.

Attaching Weight Can Be Fun

Yesterday I believe I was face to face with Sean Daniel, the first person from whom I learned of CalArts, the college I attended. Sean is a good friend of Steven Spielberg and Paul McCartney, and has played an important role in my being a significant influence on both, and on many others as well (that is, from what I can tell Sean has been in this role, although he could be getting his instructions in these matters from McCartney or the Kremlin or the ghost of Abraham Lincoln or whoever). Sean is also one of the co-producers of the Mummy movies (Jim Jacks, one of my Facebook friends, being the other). Sean and I were in our cars and less than half a block from the "Mummies of the World" billboard in Hollywood, the proximity to this being something I discovered after I recognized him. He appeared extremely concerned about something, and I would have to wonder whether my previous blog article on Iran's president might have been a contributing factor. Depending on how much weight one attaches to it, that particular article could be quite a source of serious concern, therefore, you may want to make light of it for that reason alone, as life is too short, etc.

I also saw Jon Stewart yesterday. I may also have seen Rachel Maddow, however, I'm not sure on that. I have at various times been quite a significant influence on both. As a Facebook friend had just posted something about Maddow's MSNBC buddy Keith Olberman, my mentioning this Maddow moment could easily sound contrived to some for that reason alone (I'm sure no one has ever been out to make me sound contrived, and I must accept full responsibility for all the times my words have sounded contrived, it must be something I like to do!).

Relevant to this latest instance of my sounding contrived, I have recently found evidence that some person or persons behind the scenes has been coordinating certain actions of certain Facebook friends of mine, people who presumably have nothing to do with one another. This has on occasion become additionally complicated to the point where it has involved the coordinating of certain Facebook friends of certain Facebook friends to post things, which in turn provide my Facebook friends the opportunity to comment on or like certain postings that were actually made for me to see. For example, a Facebook friend of mine (someone I knew at CalArts) who is connected with Eric Clapton had the opportunity to like a posting his Facebook friend made, causing me to see his Facebook friend's posting. That Facebook friend of a Facebook friend posting happened to use words that are identical to words contained in a song I once did, and the timing of when they made their Facebook postings coincided perfectly with a matter going on in relation to my video for that song (I will not go into further detail, sorry). That Facebook friend of my Facebook friend is himself the Facebook friend of a woman (not my Facebook friend) who is herself the Facebook friend of another one of my Facebook friends (from when I was in high school in Princeon), and this woman did something similar in relation to that Princeton Facebook friend of mine (who is not in the least connected to the Facebook friend person I knew at CalArts). So, a situation involving two of my Facebook friends who aren't connected to one another, and one of each of their Facebook friends who themselves are Facebook friends with each other, all doing things aimed at me (again, I will not go into further detail, sorry again).

As I have mentioned before (e.g., my Sept. 6, 2008 blog article), this type of stuff is nothing new to me. The unfortunate thing for me in this Facebook instance is that, if I keep seeing postings people are aiming at me, I would nevertheless be seen as initiating things without invitation were I to react in any way, as if I'm someone who speaks when not spoken to (ooh, I must be imagining it all). Someday there will be two people, one who telephones the other but never emails him, and the other will be someone who always emails that other person but never telephones him. And a third person will be perfectly able to make the case that one is continuing to send emails to someone who has never sent an email back. And that the other is continuing to phone someone who has never phoned him back. Persona non gratis, I think it's called. A hell of a thing to do to the person in the middle of this U.S. entertainment industry/Iranian President stuff, that is, if you've been attaching any weight to the evidence.

Waiting For The Paint To Dry With All The Time In The World

Preface
This post will be a semi-sketchy attempt to justify the outlandish-sounding assertion I made in my 8.22.10 blog, "So I Says To Myself, Hey, I Don't Want The World Blowing Up, Right?". Specifically, I refer to my statement that the Iranian President, on several headline-grabbing occasions, employed a somewhat secret lexicon to express something in addition to what he appears to have endeavored to express. That this secret lexicon regards someone secretly super-important to Steven Spielberg, who is the most prominent Jewish man alive today. [I refer you to "Steven Spielberg and the 'Mall Man' Factor", posted at Archive.Org.]

In spite of the length of this blog article, as stated above this will only be semi-sketchy, that is, in the sense that I will not include here most of the numerous footnotes/links scattered about the Web, accessible to all, that support my statements. What I will do is indicate, with red font, those statements I am making that I believe can be verified/proven were one to know the footnotes/links, as opposed to non-red, unverifiable statements such as, "I sneezed half-an-hour ago, allergies," a fact I cannot prove to you (though it is not my fault that I cannot prove it to you). The statements you will see here in red font, had I included all of the related footnotes/links with them, would lead you to Web locations like YouTube or Archive.Org, where everything has a visible copyright date, so therefore, things posted there clearly did not suddenly come into being "after-the-fact". As I've stated many times before, this blogsite has the defect of an all-too-malleable timestamp, and I do not hold up the dates that these blogs are posted as being indicative of anything. There are also matters of public record such as news articles to support some of my statements. I periodically post at Archive.Org accumulations of my blog articles (Volumes 1, 2, 3 so far), which thusly makes it possible to pinpoint, to a degree, when certain of my blog articles were written (i.e., if at the end of 2008 I posted all of my 2008 blog articles at Archive.Org, there may not be proof that my Sept. 6, 2008 blog article was specifically written Sept. 6, but this would provide proof that it was written prior to 2009).

I must also preface this semi-sketch with the following example (which I like to refer to as "The "Aby Principle") to illustrate an important point regarding the deductive reasoning involved with cumulative implications (by the way, cumulative implications, if of a particular nature, can be considered valid in a court of law):

The Aby Principle
If I am on a 500-mile road trip, and at 10:49pm I see a personalized license plate that reads, "mccartney", and then at 11:49pm a license plate that reads "ccartney", and then at 12:49am a license plate that reads "cartney", 1:49am "artney"; 2:49am "rtney", 3:49am "tney", 4:49am "ney", 5:49am "ey", 6:49am "y", 7:49am "by", and at 8:49am "aby", cumulatively, something's going on here. Somebody put somebody up to something. So if I say the "aby" license plate is connected to that stuff, it isn't because I think McCartney necessarily has any involvement, and it isn't because I believe "aby" is generally to be associated with "McCartney". It would be because, as a basic point of logic, there is a cumulative implication. My experience of many, many, many years may have made me aware of how to associate certain things - but conveying to you exactly why I've deduced the "aby" car has anything to do with the "mccartney" car might require a WHOLE lot of explaining - that is, my example here may illustrate the concept, but in terms of the actual, specific things I need to describe, the example only barely scratches the surface of how many details might inform an observation of this nature, however unmistakable the implication may be.

So hopefully, in this semi-sketchy approach to this very important matter, those things I (thankfully) feel I am able to verify with footnotes/links (red font) will sufficently balance against those things I cannot, and you will get a.... semi-sketch of what I am saying. I may eventually return with a more complete explanation of those things referred to here in red font, though you might just go through my earlier blogs, archive.org, etc. if you need reassurance that I'm not just pulling things out of the air. And I apologize for not including everything here, footnotes/links and all, however, a degree of energy is required in order for me to track down all of the related links/footnotes, and this task has become quite draining as it is: The idea that the chain of ideas I express here is only as strong as the weakest link, and then the idea that it is MOST important that I correctly convey what I am attempting to convey, instead of dropping the ball, the potential for this to so seriously impact so many - well, to put it bluntly, a rather considerable amount of strength must be summoned to accomplish this.

A Semi-Sketch Of The Iranian President's Secret Little Messages
A lexicon has developed among those artists at the highest level of the entertainment industry. It is built around me and my little videos and other stuff regarding me, because of my secret super-importance in relation to people such as Spielberg, McCartney, Lennon, Tim Burton, Ridley Scott, The Stones, Madonna, SNL, etc., etc., but it might just as easily have been built/based around things more generally known, such as that which is found through reading Greek Mythology, or information accessible through reading a biography of John Lennon's Aunt Mimi, or it could have been based on anything you can think of. But it wasn't based on anything, it happens that it was built around me. I didn't ask them to and I don't get off on it personally, except perhaps the child inside me does. The size of my ego, though you might be inclined to presume from this that it is great, is not predicated on the things directed towards it. No, I do not describe all this out of ego, but rather, it is because I am stark raving mad! (I can't resist an opportunity to be most humorous - no really, that was a joke! I am as sane as, well, a few people)

By way of a secret lexicon, a man can seem to be heard talking about making his rocket go off with his girlfriend when everyone else goes to the movies, but he's really talking about them going at each other's things and doing their business (and I look forward to someday understanding what I just said, if I could just meet the right girl). Hopefully I haven't lost anybody other than myself yet. By the way, the very famous four-letter word we men use when we don't feel like saying we're doing our business with our rockets was itself originated a while back to avoid a direct reference, each of those four letters themselves being the first initial of four separate words.

And yes, I do recognize that followers of the music of aby are capable of getting all helter skelter with their screwy interpretations of so-called intended hidden meanings. However, that is not an intelligent reason for concluding that no one ever conceals their meaning from certain parties, or follows a complex path in order to accomplish this. So clearly, it can take a very discerning mind to make the difficult distinctions between subtle meanings, ambiguities, semi-ambiguities, slightly semi-ambiguities, non-ambiguities, etc. I do not expect that everyone is equally suited to the task, especially when it comes to a particularly high level matter, by which I mean, you are all terrific.

My fellow CalArts alum, Tim Burton, often makes heavy inside-references to me/my material in his work. A CalArts alum woman we both knew is part of that, and also part of some of the things contained in those references.

The TV show "Smallville" also makes heavy inside-references to me/my material. I first noticed that show's references before I learned that producer Sean Daniel, longtime Spielberg friend and the first person from whom I learned of CalArts, who is also someone who is involved with making inside-references to me/my material, was using the "Smallville" writers for his major project, "Mummy 3". I also came to make several other observations regarding "Smallville" in relation to these references. One was that sometimes the cumulative factor required seeing episodes of certain other shows that aired the very same night as the "Smallville" episode in question, TV shows that also had come to make inside references to my material ("Monk" and "Medium"). The other thing with "Smallville" is that they were the only show that led me to wonder what the turn-around time was for them, whether they could possibly get something into an episode 24 hours before air-time. One already knows Saturday Night Live or Bill Maher's show can do this, but I had specific reason, on more than one occasion, to wonder this about this one non-live show, "Smallville", and no other non-live show. I still do not know the answer, but it is clear what caused me to wonder this.

When CalArts alum Tim Burton had a scene in his movie, "Mars Attacks", where a gift to the Martians of white doves is presumably misconstrued and reacted against with serious violence, it was based on an incident involving myself and the CalArts woman I knew who worked for Tim Burton (this same incident also influenced Burton's "Nightmare Before Christmas" and James Cameron's "Titanic", the latter of which she herself worked on). A gift of a mechanical (wind up) bird was involved.

When the Iranian President had a major media event several years ago (November 2007), announcing a major milestone regarding his proceeding with developing nuclear energy, he had the graphic image of white doves as his backdrop. Thoughts of the scene in "Mars Attacks" crossed my mind at the time, as I felt the Iranian President sought to generate the impression that he was some innocent guy whose peace doves were being misconstrued and reacted against with threats of violence. When there already exists in popular culture (such as in a movie scene) something most very similar to an image someone seems to possibly be trying to conjure up, one might consider the possibility that it is deliberately intended in some way - though not necessarily intended to be foremost in our thoughts, as sometimes people exploit things in the backs of our minds (see the nature of the advertising industry for further examples, or political tyrants who have been known to go to extremes to manipulate how they are perceived by the world, such as when they make believe they won their power in a fair election even though we all know he didn't).

My being aware, through experience, of so many incidents in which people intertwine with the above-described lexicon regarding myself, incidents that sometimes involve world leaders, including presidents, I was on special alert with regard to a possible connection here to the "Mars Attacks" scene. The following day, an episode of "Smallville" also did something that immediately brought to mind the exact same incident regarding the mechanical bird and the woman at CalArts. I would have been aware of that similarity even without it having been brought to mind by what happened at the Iranian President's presentation to the media the day before. I noted this in my own inside-reference about a year later, in my Sept. 6, 2008 blog article. I indicated that there was a secret inside-reference I observed that connected the words "Iran" and "Smallville" and "Tim Burton" and "dove" (I included 10 other words as well, which were indirectly related, but the fact that these four words were included (and published at Archive.Org in November 2009 as part of an accumulation of my blog articles), supports my present statement that I was connecting these things no later than November 2009. From this it should be easy to deduce that "dove" in relation to "Tim Burton" was a reference to that "Mars Attacks" movie scene, and furthermore it is no stretch to construe that "Iran" also being put in relation to "dove" in that same Sept. 6, 2008 blog article regarded the November 2007 photograph that I include above. My point is, I had already made this connection prior to what I am about to describe regarding "Iran" and "Smallville" and "Tim Burton".

In Tim Burton's "Alice In Wonderland", released 3/5/10, he again makes inside-references regarding this same CalArts woman in relation to myself. However, more significantly, in "Alice" Burton makes inside-reference to a particular section of my 1998 "Gosk 2" video. In the first "Smallville" episode to air following the release of "Alice", which was titled "Escape," 4/2/10, Season 9, Episode 189 (their previous episode aired 2/26/10), "Smallville" also brought to mind that same section of "Gosk 2". I will be specific here, although, I also plan on doing a videoclip that more clearly illustrates how "Alice" makes strong reference to this section of "Gosk 2", at which time my point will be far more easy to see.

At a certain point in "Gosk 2", Vinkalert suddenly notices that the greenish-blue plastic pail he's been carrying has become purple. Shocked, he drops the pail to the ground, as the Procol Harum song, "Whiter Shade of Pale" is heard. At the end of "Alice", the Mad Hatter drops his sword to the ground in surprise, as if suddenly aware of what it truly is. He shortly thereafter does a special dance that is given great attention by all. In "Whiter Shade of Pale", the song lyrics begin with a description of doing a dance, "We skipped the light fandango." Additionally, the hat scene occurs at this point in "Gosk 2", wherein Vinkalert, lying in the front seat of his car, can only be identified by his hat - his hat is all we see. I cut between different angles of the hat to punctuate what he is saying about things not working out with the girl he knew back when he was in school, much as one would normally cut to different angles of a person's face. The Mad Hatter is the central character in "Alice", therefore, this is the single moment out of all my various works that most directly ties in with the idea of the protagonist of "Alice", The Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp). And cumulatively, alongside all of the other Tim Burton inside-references to me over the years, as well as elsewhere in that movie (see "aby" description above), I believe it should be easy to see that this was in relation to his fellow CalArts alum, i.e., myself.

On the very first "Smallville" episode following the release of "Alice" (4/2/10, as indicated above), we see a silver metal pail that has never been painted. Also in this episode is a story line that involves a painting in an inn, a painting containing paint that shockingly changes by itself.

When I was filming the above-described pail/hat scene for "Gosk 2", I had just finished filming with Robbie Cavolina (who played Vinkalert in "Gosk", and was Joni Mitchell's art director for a number of her album covers, while me, I'm just secretly a major influence on a number of Paul McCartney album covers, see "McCartney and Steinhoff, An Introduction" at Archive.Org) the scene where he's walking with the pail when it was still greenish-blue (clearly the same film location). So, what had to happen, of course, to avoid having to return another day? I had to then and there paint the pail so that in the video it could first be greenish-blue, then shockingly change to purple by itself. I painted the pail purple, and Robbie and I sat around waiting for the paint on the pail to dry, in order to continue (Joni Mitchell and Paul McCartney were nowhere to be seen). This moment was again brought to mind by the "Smallville" episode that featured a totally unpainted pail, and paint shockingly changing by itself on a painting. One could recognize the basis for drawing a correlation due to the cumulative factor regarding "Smallville" so often referencing me/my material. The Tim Burton/Gosk-related "Smallville" episode was their first episode to air following Tim Burton's Gosk-related "Alice". So now it's 4/2/10.

On 4/7/10, the Iranian President grabbed the headlines with his remark, "Mr. Obama, you are a newcomer (to politics). Wait until your sweat dries". This remark was considered odd. It is often the case that when someone is trying to work a lexicon reference into what they say, and/or are bent on being quoted in the headlines, the ostensible (non-lexicon) meaning is expressed in a strained/odd manner.


Paint Things As You Please
It is my carefully considered belief, based on my special experience in such matters, that the coinciding of Tim Burton, "Smallville" and the Iranian President's actions in March/April 2010, all occurring in the same very specific time proximity, is too precise a mirroring of what occurred in 2007 with regard to Tim Burton, "Smallville" and the Iranian President, and therefore should not be presumed a mere coincidence. Somebody put somebody up to something.

I do not venture an opinion as to whether any value must be found in a discovery that the Iranian President was involved in the use of a lexicon at these important moments. I only wish to present my belief that such action did occur, and semi-sketch how I came to this conclusion. Some may regard my assessment as being based on something too flimsy to warrant so serious a conclusion. Some may even think the whole world situation in relation to Iran isn't serious. Some may think DNA evidence shouldn't be taken seriously because that stuff is so tiny you need a microscope to see it. There are people who watch detective shows on TV and think, "That's enough evidence?" I believe there is enough here, and the situation sufficiently important, as to make it idiotic to disregard it. However, many are new to this sort of thing, and I'll try not to judge too harshly those who fail to recognize in this a matter of grave concern.

And as I've indicated in other blog articles, I believe my May 2, 2010 blog article, "Knowing Where To Look," proves that the Times Square "attempted" bombing needs to be seen in terms of some of the key things touched on here.

So I Says To Myself, Hey, I Don't Want The World Blowing Up, Right?

The Beginning
First of all, happy birthday to Ray Bradbury, author of "Farenheit 451", a book that tells the story of a government that burned books as part of its handle on how people should relate to things.

Think Of Adults Talking About Sex When They Don't Want The Child To Get It
I choose today to convey two things that the Iranian President secretly communicated to me, which I expect he did so that I might use my secret super-access to communicate them to pop culture's most super-important. His secret communications were accomplished by the employing of a lexicon of a generally secret nature, which he used in publicly made statements. This lexicon is used frequently by a certain set of people, and in this instance, was used in conjunction with an apparent awareness of my personal knowledge of certain events.

I certainly know how absurd this must sound to the general public, and I don't expect to win any new friends here (I would nevertheless appreciate the men in the white coats being kept at bay, thank you). This is written for those who have the advantage of already knowing that my powers of dissemination are keen in these matters, that I draw from vast experience (did I mention, it also helps to trust that I am sane). The value of this explanation regarding the Iranian President additionally requires that one already be aware of my singular, secret, super-importance over the years in relation to Steven Spielberg, the most internationally prominent Jewish man in the world today, my singular, secret, super-importance over the years in relation to Paul McCartney, and also my secret, super-importance over the years in relation to so many other super-important people in the world, who, through the massive effects of their creative inspiration, have so powerful an influence on the hearts and minds of so many people. Many share the belief that the current nature of things puts the power of certain major pop culture figures very much alongside tremendous political power, irrespective of whether these individuals would wish to exist in a political context (I am not so cynical as to believe their power is limited to occurring in a political context, and would appreciate not being lumped together with those who see everything through that prism).

I'm almost finished with my preface(s) - I hope it is understood that some things require more context-setting than others.

Though there may appear to be a path available to the reader for piecing together the specific basis for the conclusions I've drawn with regard to exactly what was communicated to me, i.e., though it may seem that you can figure out exactly what caused me to believe these specific things were communicated to me by the Iranian President, I am quite certain that, even at best, you would not know more than a part of the story, a part of the basis for my conclusions. You would not have enough facts in your possession to properly refute my conclusions, though you might think so (this statement is of course not meant to be taken as proof that I must therefore be right, I merely wish to state that you are not in a position to use deductive reasoning to determine whether I am right or wrong about having received these communications). Furthermore, the facts that some of you might possibly already have in your possession would likely mislead you into believing you have all the facts that led to my conclusions. This would be unfortunate, given the importance here and the consequential need for my words to be taken seriously. And so, the value of what I write here resides in your ability and inclination to trust in what I say. By now, there are some people who should. This is written for certain people within that set of people. There's a football of sorts here, and I'd like to see it reach the endzone, received by but one person if need be. An important investigation could perhaps be the upshot.

The Middle And The End
The Iranian President has pointed to two moments in two films. Through this, he has demonstrated the desire to solicit support for a position regarding nuclear power in his country. He has relied upon my proximity to the most influential as his means of carrying his message. I will carry his message here, but again, I must emphasize, I do not consider him a sincere person, and liken his approach more to that of the convoluted government in Ray Bradbury's "Farenheit 451", than to that of a world leader seeking a way to make his true and honest feelings known to those who are so influential in shaping popular culture.

The two moments are both contained in films by famed director Tim Burton. My dissemination of the references through the Iranian President's use of a lexicon was assured by his repeatedly drawing from the work of the same filmmaker, a fellow CalArts alumni who knew some of the same people as myself and who has himself made use of secret references known to few (as previously stated, there has come to be a lexicon that is used frequently by certain people). Some of the secret references made by the Iranian President are identical in both instances, further reinforcing my conviction with regard to how to read things. And though both of these secret statements by the Iranian President have an obvious political significance, I would have the same conviction that I had correctly read his secretly made statements even if they had turned out to be on the subject of the old woman who lived in a shoe rather than political matters. He did not have anything to say about the old woman who lived in a shoe, incidentally.

The first is the scene in "Mars Attacks!", where a dove of peace, a gift from our world to the Martians, triggers a massacre of those presenting the dove because it is supposedly misperceived as an act of aggression. The second is the scene in "Alice In Wonderland", where the Mad Hatter finds use of a weapon repugnant because it goes against his nature.

Why would the Iranian President prefer this avenue? He prefers to inject the poison of his propaganda into our reservoir (our most influential), than to be so clearly seen as engaged in propagandizing the world into seeing him as this innocent little lamb. He sees vulnerability/opportunity in the idealism of our most important creative artists.

Nobody Knows The Trouble I've Hallucinated

Yeah, Well I'm The One Who Oughta Be Quarantining You
Some of us look at other people, figure a few things out, and then divide them up into three categories: Beginner, Intermediate and Advanced. It's a weakness, of course, in that we all belong in one group, we're all the same, we all know the same things, have the same background information, the same inclination, willingness and perspective in putting facts together, etc. It's silly that I scored 97 percentile on my college tests and that this can ever make me feel that I'm among stupider people. I get so silly sometimes, it's enough to drive me up the wall.

Don't Put This Section Together With Anything
A while ago someone I know gave me a box of Q-tips. She didn't really give them to me. My group in my company had a Christmas Party and I was the lucky one who received her gag gift. She's an old friend of President Obama, lived a few doors down during the Chicago days. Even before I knew of that relationship, even before Obama was the president, I laughed about the Q-tips.

Isolate This Section As Well
The Iranian President said something not too long ago regarding the American President. Because I'm secretly super-important in relation to Steven Spielberg, the most prominent Jewish man, and also because I'm secretly super-important in relation to Paul McCartney and Saturday Night Live and Ridley Scott and Tim Burton and James Cameron and Sting and Madonna and The Rolling Stones and countless other institutions that wield unimaginable influence over the hearts and minds of Americans and the rest of the world, the Iranian President joins in. Like so many others, he said something in a lexicon that is unknown to almost everyone, a lexicon of which certain individuals have been continually making use. But we're all the same, really, no Beginners, Intermediates or Advanced, and if one of us doesn't get something none of us do.

All Of Five Minutes
In some of my other blog articles I've commented on my influence on Jason Lee's TV show, "Memphis Beat", an influence I've characterized as having grown out of my influence earlier in Jason Lee's career. Such as my originating what became "My Name Is Earl", by sending my Earl-like idea to the producer of the 1995 movie, "Mallrats", Lee's first starring role, a movie which had been named for my video, "Mall Man".

Last night's "Memphis Beat" once again included a few things that, if put together with a few other things, spelled something to those I consider Intermediates and Advanced. As if there actually is such a thing as Intermediates and Advanced, that is, which there aren't, it's just me being some sort of silly, crazy con artist or something. But let's just pretend I'm right, okay, and then I can finish the train of thought and move on to the next subject and finish that and then we can get out early and catch a smoke before our next class.

In my 1993 video, "Mall Man" (do a search at Archive.Org), we have a big shopping mall mogul. In last night's Jason Lee episode we did as well. In "Mall Man" we have someone seeming to be a homeless person who really isn't. Likewise on last night's show. In "Mall Man" we have the idea of a woman getting a special gift for a fiance, but it just isn't for him. On last night's show, likewise. Any of these connections in of themselves, nothing. All of these things on last night's show taken together with "Mall Man", perhaps again, nothing. All of these things put together with what I've been saying in other blog articles regarding Jason Lee and "Mall Man", that is something. Not to the Beginners, but to the Intermediates and the Advanced. And there are those who will hand over the microphone to the Beginners and boost the speaker to full volume for precisely that reason.

A Day In The, Okay, Not A Day Hanging In The Balance
At work, Obama's old friend from the Chicago days was supposed to give me a piece of paper showing she had permission to take a day off, signed by her supervisor. WEEKS ago. Her supervisor already knows she took the day off, the timekeeping system already recorded that she used up her time off. But I still need that piece of paper, it's part of my job, so that I can put it in a drawer and then a box for five years or so until the obligatory period of a potential audit has passed (like that's gonna happen). She laughs when I remind her. That's what happens when you laugh when someone gives you Q-tips. I'm this close to giving up on this and moving on. I'm really divided on this.

You Did Not Just Say That
Two days ago or so Bolton that Bush Administration right-wing/white mustache guy said the Israelis have an eight-day window to attack Iran's nuclear sites, after that, it would release dangerous radiation if they did. I'm left-wing, he's right-wing. He has a white mustache, mine is brown (okay, I'm willing to admit there's a little gray there). We're apples and oranges, therefore, I don't have to think about this.

It's A Small World (And That's Even Without Circumstances Having Yet Reduced It To A Speck Of Dust)
A recent Facebook development in my life has put a certain red wire very close to a certain blue wire. I sure am glad someone else is in the middle of that one. Though it actually has a whole lot to do with me. And yet it doesn't. It touches on a big part of this lexicon business I've been referring to, the part which stretches in the direction of what the Iranian President has been secretly connecting with in some of his headline-grabbing remarks over the past several years. I sure am glad there are enough Beginners in my life to scream in my ear that I'm just being silly about this.

Down The Hatches
Making good progress on my latest video, "Down The Hatch," which is currently in danger of being renamed, "Down The Hatches," and then good luck doing a search for it after you've read it in sketch idea form at Archive.Org, or vice-versa.

Oh Yeah
It took me 45 or so years, but I finally figured out something from John Lennon. I count about 14 major Beatle songs that I was a significant influence on (something to which I've occasionally made reference), and this one belongs in that column. The thing I figured out is, in the Beatle song, "Rain," it's like, emotionally a rainy day versus a sunny day. A year or so later, in the Beatle song, "Penny Lane," Lennon's emotional harmonizing on the word "Blue" in "Blue suburban skies" is like, advocating that the skies are blue. Meanwhile back, "the fireman rushes in from the pouring rain". So, therefore, it's like, a rainy day versus a sunny day.

I bet if I had really worked at it I could have gotten this in only 22.5 or so years. Then again, I hope I never stop being a Beginner, finding things that were always there but are only now exploding off the page in front of me.

Knowing Where To Look

Something which may or may not be of GREAT significance regarding the New York City Times Square bomb in the car incident of May 1st:

• Several days ago I posted my video, "Come On, French Stewart, You Owe Me!" on YouTube. It is a matter of record, therefore, that this video existed Thursday, April 29th.
  

• It is furthermore also a matter of record that my April 29th posted YouTube Description accompanying this video brings my posting of the video into the context of my special concern regarding an enemy of the United States (the Description refers to statements by the Iranian President which I regard as containing inside-references to myself, and which I regard as having been made by him as the consequence of my secret super-importance in relation to the most prominent living Jewish man, Steven Spielberg).
  

• In that video of mine posted on YouTube on April 29th, I emphasize something important that happens in the last episode of the TV show, "3rd Rock From The Sun," which I assert originated with me. I blogged yesterday (May 1st) that the specific material of mine to which I refer there is contained both in my 1993 "Gosk" screenplay posted at archive.org in 2007 (NYC parking space first referred to on page 53, aka page 55 of pdf, then situation develops on page 58, aka page 60 of pdf); and in the shooting script for an unfilmed project of mine, "Gosk 3", which was posted in 2005 on my website. The particular basis for my more specific, blogged statement of May 1st about the "3rd Rock" connection would be self-apparent to anyone who does the research even without benefit of the May 1st blog (though the May 1st blog would tend to make it a bit easier to do the research for those not already knowing exactly where to search).
  

• Therefore, I bring it ALL up on April 29th, and it is verifiable that I bring it all up on that date (in addition to my again bringing it up on May 1st, though when on May 1st is not verifiable in terms of the timeline of the Times Square incident).

• Research would make it factually apparent that on April 29th I was specifically referring to the MOMENT in "Gosk" when the empty Mars Zuns spacecraft lands in a New York City parking space on a crowded New York City street, which then arouses curiosity, which is then followed by people exploring inside it.

• The May 1st bomb in the car in New York City's Times Square incident also involves an empty vehicle on a crowed New York City street arousing curiosity, followed by people exploring inside it.

If there is a real connection to be made here between my April 29th video posting and/or my blog in relation to this bomb, it may nevertheless even then only mean that someone wished to be seen committing a deed that would connect them with Iran, even if they have no genuine Iranian connection. My hypothesis also includes the idea that the perpetrator(s) intended that people would be able to do the last of the above bulleted items and live to tell. In any event, he/they sure messed with that White House Foreign Correspondents Dinner annual fun vibe thing. And with all the tension and gravity surrounding matters that reach the White House, doing something injurious to that annual fun vibe thing is not all that benign.

Dear Letter

Something To Stew Over
I am pleased to announce the posting of my latest video on YouTube, "Come On, French Stewart, You Owe Me!"

I would be even more pleased if this video wasn't connected with my numerous entries into the sweepstakes to see which of my muffled screams will succeed in drawing the necessary attention to the fact that I have been singled out by the Iranian President for including inside-references whenever he has a major statement regarding his nuclear situation. Which the Iranian President is doing because of my secret super-importance in relation to the most prominent living Jewish man, Steven Spielberg (please see my "Steven Spielberg and the 'Mall Man' Factor" video at archive.org).

Oh well, what difference could that make? By the way, the work of mine to which I refer in this new Stewart video in connection with the final episode of "3rd Rock From The Sun" is "Gosk", both the 1993 screenplay and the shooting script for the unfilmed, "Gosk 3".

In The Future All My Troubles Seem So Far Away
A new event has occurred in connection with my observations that someone behind-the-scenes at the Huffington Post website is very much "on" to my secret super-importance (or partially on?):

1. My April 25th blog was titled, "See It In A Different Light".
2. My April 26th blog mentioned that this April 25th blog title was from a Paul McCartney song upon which I am/was a major influence.
3. On April 29th, 2:49pm, I made a comment (as JonathanDS) to a HuffingtonPost article, "Donald Trump Defends Arizona's Immigration Law". My 2:49pm comment was not actually approved/posted by HuffingtonPost for another ten minutes, yet a few minutes before my comment was posted to the world, at 2:53pm, someone posted a comment that included the words, "look into the future". These words are from this exact same Paul McCartney song.

Probably Bill Maher had something to do with it - he occasionally makes inside-references regarding me, and is very much a part of HuffingtonPost. In fact, his most recent article / videoclip on that website, which introduced the idea of an episode of "Lost" including an inside-reference to his pin number, made me think of the time my license plate number was referenced on an episode of "Monk" (please see my November 29, 2009 blog). "Monk" was a show that included inside-references to my material in every episode (please see my "Weekly Monk/Steinhoff" videoclips in earlier blogs and YouTube). Something else that wasn't "lost" on me was the time a while back when, immediately following my blogging a reference to the 1965 magazine photograph that led to my "Endless Voyage" story, Bill Maher's show included a photograph that bore a striking similarity to that photograph.

Wheel Of Making Me Look Like I'm Piecing Together Sentences That Aren't There
ONLY because "Smallville" has very recently included inside-references to my few music videos (as I've described in previous blogs), I believe I might have seen something in yesterday's episode, in this context, that could be seen cumulatively as part of this. However, please first permit me a moment to once again attempt to get across the cumulative concept:

If John Lennon wears a T-shirt in Los Angeles that only has the letter "M" on it; and Paul McCartney wears a T-shirt the next day in London that only has the letter "I" on it; and George Harrison wears a T-shirt the day following that in San Francisco that only has the letter "C" on it; and Ringo Starr a week or two or even three later in Ann Arbor, Michigan wears a T-shirt that only has the letter "K" on it, and you are in on the fact that John, Paul, George and Ringo were once in a group together, you could surmise that the context exists in which Ringo's "K" could be seen as part of a deliberate effort to spell the word "Mick", even though "K" all by itself contains no such implication. And if someone took the basis of your surmisal out of context, and said, "How does 'K' have to necessarily be part of spelling 'Mick'?", or "How does 'I' and 'K' necessarily have to be part of spelling 'Mick'?", or "Why do you think of The Beatles at the same time as the Stones when their music is not really all that similar?", the person saying these things about your surmisal might be out to make you sound like an i-d-i-o-t, or themselves be less smart than a non-idiot.

Back to "Smallville": There were things in last night's episode - the manner of flying; the turning of a wall into fragments (when a chemical was applied to make it shatter-able); a mystery regarding whatever happened to a woman who was taken away - that may possibly have been designed to bring to mind my music video, "Whatever Happened".

Numb With Excitement
Immediately following a recent email I sent to someone I never email, which made mention of Jon Stewart, an inside-reference was made on "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" to someone who automatically brought to mind my email's recipient. And when I followed up that email with another email to that same person to point this out, this time around including mention of Stephen Colbert, "The Colbert Report" immediately made an inside-reference to my email's recipient, as well as an inside-reference to another person who automatically brought to mind my email's recipient. More specifically, Colbert was causing me to think of the few times people have pushed me into the position of bringing in emotion as part of an effort to dissuade someone from using violence. As my recent emails were written on the subject of the above-mentioned matter regarding the Iranian President (nuclear weapons and inside-references to me), I suppose these were meant to be regarded as contributions towards my efforts.

This may possibly lead the "discussion" to this question: Do people naively expect that, once Iran has nuclear weapons, we can then just hang the fate of humanity on our ability to bring in emotion as part of an effort to dissuade? To still be that young and idealistic! It is my belief that such idealism in such an instance as we now find ourselves can only hasten the end of humanity. It is very near to the point where a realistic action to halt Iran from nuclear weapons capability should replace endless efforts to dissuade.

Lose Sleep Over It

Do you believe there exist certain crimes that, if they could be solved, there would then be other crimes, previously unsolved, that would thereby come into a new set of clues and ipso facto become solved as well? This is an obvious statement. It is elementary.

In recent blogs (4.8.10; 4.11.10; 4.18.10) I have discussed a connection I made between certain recent television inside-references to my few music videos, in relation to inside-references to me/my material contained in a recent statement by the Iranian President, about President Obama and with regard to nuclear weapons. The gravity of his involving me in this way is enormous. And he has done this before.

The following still is from my music video, "Dream", posted at archive.org in 2005:


Next is an excerpt from a news story that was on TV today (this incident was also described in an article in today's LA Times, though at the time the article was written it did not yet include the part about sleeping on train tracks):



I have often acknowledged in my blogs how the timestamp on this blog site can be manipulated, which is one reason why I periodically post the text of my blogs at archive.org so as to copyright them/prove they were created prior to certain points in time. I have not yet done that with regard to the above-referenced April blogs. However, the easily demonstrable significance of why I brought up in those blogs my few music videos transends whatever date I chose to write about it. The connection I made in those blogs shows that it was relevant, prior to this April 24th sleeping-on-the-train-tracks news story, for me to bring up in April my few music videos.

Thus, this news story happening to so unmistakably bring to mind yet another one of my few music videos during this same period demands serious attention - it relates to what I said regarding an action by the Iranian President. Consider where an investigation might lead, if one follows my theory. Theories are essential to investigations, they suggest where one should look. What the significance of what one finds might be.

Now someone who doesn't appear to be the non-entity that I appear to me (due to people having ulterior motives to bury my importance) had better step up to the plate. Because on the strength of a long-winded, detailed explanation from me of a theory of what this could be connected to - well, who would begin to listen, if they don't already accept that I am of sufficient influence to have caught the attention of the Iranian President? Burying the truth about my importance has long become the same thing as burying important clues in a matter that may prove most serious of all.

Titanic Importance

In my immediately preceding post (April 8th), I mentioned, among other things, my conclusion that Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show" had "reflected a cognizance of the release of my 'Orders' video". Why did I choose to word this so strangely, outside of the fact that I like to word things strangely?

I chose these words to get across the idea that they are willing to go so far as to acknowledge to me that they know the video was released, yet at the same time they do not seem to feel they actually need to see it. I beg to differ: it is from me, I am unbelievably important, they know this, it is an important release. What's this stuff about sweeping it under the rug? I don't get it. "Avatar" and "Alice In Wonderland" are currently showing major contributions from me, to those in on it. To say the least. It doesn't make sense to pass on my latest work.

Later in this blog I will tell a little Hollywood story I just made up, entitled, "The Covering Their Astors Squad". First though, I would like to attend to a little business, which is to say, present how last night's "Saturday Night Live" also "reflected a cognizance of the release of my 'Orders' video".

In my "In Orders We Trust" (the video), which I completed April 6th and posted on/ copyrighted at Archive.Org April 7th (the comedy sketch itself having been written 5.15.06), I used at the beginning of the video the image of the famous sculpture, "Artemision Bronze", which according to Wikipedia is often called, "The God from the Sea," and "represents either Zeus or Poseidon" (my usage was intended to represent Zeus, and so if you were to see Poseidon in my usage of this image you would be.... well, I put the word Zeus under the image as well, so....). In the thumbnails at Archive.Org for my video, which one can view without viewing the actual video, one will also see my usage of this image ("Artemision Bronze").

I will give you a moment to go to Archive.Org and see for yourself (I provided the link in my April 8th blog, please don't expect me to do everything for you).

In my April 8th blog, wherein I announced the release of my video, I also reprinted the original 5.15.06 email from when I first sent the comedy sketch out to certain people. That email contained, among other things, something that my blogs have occasionally touched on - references to a few of the immense number of timely references to my material on "Saturday Night Live". And with that as the background information, last night's (April 10th) show was no exception - for in Tina Fey's Sarah Palin sketch (which, unfortunately, was only partially successful in erasing from my mind the image of Sarah Palin looking at me as we drove by each other in Santa Barbara last month), Fey ended the bit with an image of Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele in a photoshopped pose quite identical to the Zeus thumbnail posted with my video at Archive.Org on April 7th:



Those who knew, as I did, the near-inevitability of some kind of SNL inside-reference to my newest release, will appreciate my interpretation of why they chose to show Michael Steele this way. And if you wish, I will even apologize for any responsibility I might have for any difficulty you might have in erasing this image from your mind.

I should also say something about tonight's "Simpsons" before relating my "The Covering Their Astors Squad" story.

First, some are aware that the main opening montage of every "Simpsons" (sometimes they use variations so who can say what one will find on any given night), the latest regular opening montage (past two or so years), contains something that began as an ongoing inside-reference found on many "Simpsons" episodes. The inside-reference has to do with a scene from the CalArts film class student film, "Limbo" (1973-1974), wherein someone cannot remove a gorilla mask, while I stand in the background watching. One of the primary "Simpsons" directors, Mark Kirkland, used to live down the hall from me at CalArts, though we didn't know each other. This has not prevented him from joining the throngs of people in show-biz who make inside-references regarding me. These inside-references in certain "Simpsons" episodes to this "Limbo" moment would appear in conjunction with other Steinhoff-related stuff, producing a cumulative effect that made clear the inside-reference, at least to those "inside". So: nowadays their opening montage shows a statue head falling from a statue and landing over the head of someone beneath the statue, basically trapping the person inside the mask. Much like the previously recurring "Limbo" inside-references.

Tonight's "Simpsons" episode ended with Lisa and Bart forming a truce, until their dog commits some blunder, for which Lisa chooses to blame Bart, though there is no apparent basis for her to hold him responsible for what the dog does. And the truce ends as quickly as it was formed. Those familiar with the ending of "In Orders We Trust" (either the 2006 written version or the April 2010 video) need no further explanation to appreciate my conclusion regarding the origin of the "Simpsons" ending.

I seem to have one more thing to describe before relating my "The Covering Their Astors Squad" story.

For somewhat complicated reasons, which I will not detail here, I found the ending of the April 9th "Smallville" to be in relation to me as well. Nor did I choose to detail in my April 8th blog exactly how something the Iranian President recently said was designed to intertwine with the April 2nd "Smallville" as it related to me.

What I will mention here is that it was something he said in relation to President Obama's nuclear treaty, something that was extracted from the rest of what he said and given the headline, because of it being such a from out of nowhere phrasing. I am the one who sees how it was not from out of nowhere, it was an inside-reference, it was from a wish to interconnect with something in relation to me/my material that has recently become relevant through recent doings.

My December 26th, 2009 video, "Steven Spielberg and the 'Mall Man' Factor" (at Archive.Org) demonstrates how tremendously and singularly important I am in relation to Steven Spielberg. It does not take a genius to appreciate that, the way our world is put together, Spielberg is something of an ambassador for the Jewish people, being among the most prominent living Jewish persons in the world. I have previously mentioned in a blog that the Iranian President has endeavored to "intertwine" with me via a show that often references my material, "Smallville" (I mentioned this in a September 2009 blog). I have also mentioned/demonstrated in earlier blogs that the show "Medium" has intertwined with references to my material on the episodes of "Smallville" that aired the same night as certain "Medium" episodes.

Back when a number of inside-references to my several music videos all suddenly began occurring around the same time on various shows, as I mentioned/demonstrated at those times, I also noticed that "Medium" (in their fever episode, which was concurrent with the two-part "Monk" series finale - another show that made innumerable inside-references to my material) included the line, "Another Good Answer" - the title of one of my music videos. It was that same music video of mine wherein I get specific about the fact that, due to my secret importance, terrorists "leave things on my doorstep". That "Medium" episode had the antagonist exploiting people's fear of a cataclysmic (terrorist?) event for personal gain. I include that among the significant number of times when "Medium", or rather, someone with a pipeline to the writers of "Medium", seems to manifest an investment in undermining me with regard to certain concerns I have. My statement that terrorists leave things on doorstep/their statement that causing concern of this kind is a manipulative exploitation for monetary gain.

"The Covering Their Astors Squad"
(a made-up story about a dead person)

Once upon a time someone with a lot of money repeatedly used someone's creative material in the movies he made with famous actress Mary Astor. Mary Astor became very upset at the injustice that might be done to the person with a lot of money, who had been so kind to finance the movies she starred in, for she feared that this person might be thought to be a mean person when he was really just a nice person having fun with the person whose material he used. So Mary Astor became so upset, she came down with a cold. It was chilly outside, and she was playing the part of someone who was in a warm climate, so she had to wear short sleeves, which aggravated her cold, and it looked like the picture might have to be scrapped, and everyone would have to say goodbye to all that this picture would have meant for them. So the studio hired a squad of people to always have blankets on hand, and whenever the cameras weren't rolling, these people in this squad would immediately cover Mary Astor with a blanket. The same thing happened when Mary Astor's relatives appeared in the movie, Astors were everywhere, for these were all people who were found worthy of being in this important picture, though it meant wearing short sleeves in chilly weather. So the squad of people with the blankets became known as "The Covering Their Astors Squad". Unfortunately, the benches they sat on became drenched during a terrible thunderstorm, soaking in the water, and when people sat on the benches the water seeped through to their bottoms. Apparently, they could not cover their asses.

It's swell that people are demonstrating to me a "cognizance of the release of my 'Orders' video", as I stated earlier. To fall short of manifesting that they've viewed the video, however, given the stage I've reached in the world of important releases, is, in certain respects, disturbing, and I do not say this as an artist. I say this because it has "my lawyer told me not to" written all over it.

At this moment in the history of humanity, in the history of the Earth, the Iranian President, perhaps the single individual posing the greatest threat to the world at this time, due to what his present actions could very easily lead to not so far down the road, is trying to intertwine with me/my work, because of my tremendous importance in relation to Steven Spielberg. Spielberg being an important "ambassador" for the Jewish people, for the reasons described earlier in this blog. This plays Spielberg and myself, on a certain level, directly into the matter created by the Iranian President, a matter that springs from the animosity the Iranian President has for the Jewish people, which is behind his efforts to unite the Arab world, through this sentiment, behind his "right" to "blow Israel off the map".

It would be complicated to explain how it has been made manifest to me that the Iranian President is doing this in relation to me, though it is nevertheless something I could explain, to an intelligent person. There are facts to support my explanation. What isn't complicated is the fact that I have earned enough credibility by now to be taken seriously on this to a substantial degree even during the withholding at this time of the complicated explanation.

I believe that my little made-up story about Mary Astor may help to explain to all of you boys and girls a few factors that have impeded the response I demand. Those interfering with following-up on what I've asserted regarding myself in this situation are committing acts that, due to their intended effect with relation to the larger situation, are beyond criminal, and beyond forgiveness, due to the enormity of this situation. I find it unfortunate that the situation requires that I be the heavy to this degree, by having to point this out, but this is scarcely a situation that can be ignored. I find it difficult to think of a matter more worthy of serious attention.