I seem to be at the part of the wheel where I can only faintly-sorta-kinda point to verifiable references by others to me/my material, as opposed to, say, my references to the "Simpsons" season finale (my blogs of May 18th and 23rd), where you would have to be partially stupid to feel no real evidence of Steinhoff inside-references was offered.
Oil Painting Leak
In the very beginning of my May 23rd blog ("Can't Say For Certain Whether Or Not Oliver Twist Would Have Wanted More Of This"), I build upon what I construed as a possible inside-reference by Paul McCartney to the Beatles song "Paperback Writer", a song which I was an influence on. Evidence that I was reacting to the idea of the song "Paperback Writer" on May 23rd may be found by going to my YouTube posting of May 23rd, "Notes From The". The video there relates to too many pages to read in connection with McCartney. As we all know, "Paperback Writer" contains the line, "It's a thousand pages," meant to express the idea of too many pages.
We then see that just three days later on May 26th Paul McCartney gave an interview to the Telegraph, wherein he discusses well known artists in connection with his purchase of their works. Should you at this point take the trouble to go to my January 10, 2010 blog (also posted/copyrighted at archive.org in Volume 3 of the collected texts of my blogs), in the section entitled, "The President, Terrorism and Baby Oil?", you will see that I bring up "Paperback Writer" specifically in connection to Paul McCartney's purchase of the works of artist Francis Bacon. I should or should not perhaps add that the May 26th McCartney interview includes someone saying that, in telling anecdotes, McCartney isn't good at self-editing, which I believe could possibly be there to bring to mind endless pages/a thousand pages.
His Master's Void
This one is for those who recall evidence presented in previous blogs that Russell Crowe movies are sometimes found to contain inside-references to me/my material. On this basis, I consider it legitimate to ask people to take my word on something difficult to prove to the public-at-large. And by "difficult to prove to the public-at-large," what I mean is, people only started posting videos in 2005 (evidencing in 2005 at least something regarding how long ago such videos were made), so videos I made before 2005 cannot be proven to the public-at-large as having been made before that, as I didn't post them until 2005, and they received no theatrical release. (As for those who saw my videos prior to 2005, you do have proof of their being made before 2005 - perhaps someone needs to give you a calculator?)
Specifically, my "Gosk 1" video (1994), which can be found at archive.org, has Clerp all excited about a threat to the spacecraft that he sees on the monitor, a meteor in the distance. After dramatically steering around the perceived (by Clerp) threat, Jerp expresses that he didn't see anything at all, but Clerp replies with, "Oh yeah, it was coming right at us." In the 2003 Russell Crowe movie, "Master and Commander," someone sees a threatening ship through a telescope, however, the Russell Crowe character sees nothing through the telescope, and expresses this to the person who said he saw it. The person who said he saw the threatening ship reaffirms his assertion, he is sure he saw something.
In and of itself one would not have to regard this as a reference to "Gosk 1", however, one's perspective should be informed by the context: there are a number of significant references to my material in Russell Crowe movies (particularly the ones he made with Ridley Scott, and also Ridley Scott movies that don't have Russell Crowe acting in them, though this Russell Crowe movie was not directed by Scott).
Am I Read
Without going into endless detail, I believe that, following my making a reference to Don Rickles in a comment to a Huffington Post article (as JonathanDS), he in turn made an inside-reference for my benefit in his Letterman appearance several days ago. It tied in with the inside-references for my benefit whenever Philbin is on Letterman in relation to a woman I knew to whom Philbin once introduced himself. Further on this same subject, while eating lobster today in a restaurant, I saw someone who brought a certain JH to mind, which is someone I think of in connection with a certain LW, which connects back to the whole Philbin and Letterman thing, and to lobster.
Hickery Dickery Tusk
I seriously do not know if that was Kiefer Sutherland who drove by me today, wearing sunglasses in an expensive silver car. This could be most significant, it being that my May 26th blog suggests, at least to those who have been paying me serious attention, that the final seven or so "24" episodes, which were about Jack Bauer's emotional involvement with a woman possibly causing him to cease to be the ultra-responsible Jack Bauer, began with my Jack Bauer suggestion for "SNL". As mentioned, I cannot say it was necessarily he, however, if it was and I were to make no acknowledgment here of any kind of having possibly noticed him, it would be an act of omission, or whatever that form of irresponsibility is called.
Real Time Is On My Side
And finally, I believe Bill Maher has on his past several "Real Time" shows been making little references to little things I've included in HuffPost comments. It is nothing new for Bill Maher to include me in some way, but I don't know if I need to go into detail each time.
Showing posts with label Bill Maher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Maher. Show all posts
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
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?):
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.
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?):
- My April 25th blog was titled, "See It In A Different Light".
- 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.
- 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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
