I recently came up with a most funny concept, I believe, and dutifully sent it off to the two producers who I once knew and who used to always open my emails, Stuart Cornfeld and Sean Daniel. According to Didtheyreadit.com, technology I sometimes use so I know if my emails are possibly being read. Problem with Didtheyreadit.com is that, when received on some computers, I cannot detect whether my emails are being read. I know this because I've received emails in response to emails I've sent that presumably were never opened, according to Didtheyreadit.com. I suppose if you're rich enough and organized enough, you might even know which of your computers is on this "radar" or not, and then determine whether you wish to be picked up on the "radar", depending on the email content (which you could first learn by first opening the email off the radar). Nowadays, sometimes the emails sent to these producers are opened, sometimes not. According to Didtheyreadit.com.
But I digress, that is, if this is about the funny concept itself (and not about someone doing something with it), and so without further digression or ado or whatever that was:
Someone visiting at a friend's house finds that his friend has purchased a "DoggyBarkBark" device. This is a speaker you strap to your dog's neck that produces the bark of a ferocious dog, triggered by the sound of your dog barking. If your little lapdog is barking because it senses an intruder, the intruder imagines that scurrying around somewhere is a ferocious dog. The big problem is that whenever the lapdog hears the ferocious barking, he barks back, thus creating an endless barking situation. Initially the lapdog responds to the friend's visit with a little bark, thus triggering the situation and a shouted explanation from the dog owner. The dog owner explains also that the video that comes with the "DoggyBarkBark" device reassures the owner that their dog will eventually become accustomed to the sound of a ferocious dog barking and not respond. This may not occur for a few months.
That's the version of the idea I sent out to two people who in the past have channeled a huge number of my ideas to people who then make use of them (Daily Show, Colbert Report, SNL, movies, other TV shows, people who create new TV shows, CNN Presidential Election Night Coverage producers, etc.). I simply wish to add to the above version, that perhaps at some point the dog's owner might plug his lapdog's ears with his fingers to stop the vicious cycle. Which succeeds in creating a momentary cessation of barking. Eventually, numerous stops and starts of the vicious cycle of barking puts looks of very serious apprehension into the facial expression of the guest at any occurrence that might potentially set off the lapdog into letting loose with a tiny yelp. Accompanied by deep sighs of relief, too soon, a yelp was coming afterall. I imagine an idea this funny is worthy of, I don't know, at least 45 minutes of screen time. It's very symbolic too, I think, you know, big guns (ferocious dog barking sound) always at the ready to turn things upside down on behalf of seemingly innocuous imbeciles (the yelping lapdog).
Speaking of big guns at the ready to turn things upside down, I have to see the recent news item about Bruce Willis' ski resort burning down as being in relation to my "reopening the investigation" into the death of Princess Diana in several of my recent blogs, "Word To The Wise" and "I Read The Clues Today". While my experience in these matters makes the connection particularly clear to me, I do find there to be one element built into it that has written all over it, "if there's that coincidence then it's all coincidence issue closed no need for investigation all logical deductions are tainted by there being a coincidence in the mix". Sometimes one must even conjecture whether certain apparent coincidences haven't been planted for those stupid enough to regard coincidence as the answer to everything, sure to win an acquittal every time, no matter the crime, no matter the other evidence. The coincidence to which I refer here is that (and by the way to follow this you would need to actually read my blogs referenced here that regard all this): on the one hand I've previously connected Steve Holland with Bruce Willis, and put the "Zig Ski" license plate spotted in 1997 in relation to this due to context (without my knowing at the time of making the connection that Willis owned a ski lodge); and then you have the fact that Bruce Willis owns a ski lodge (according to my research, Willis purchased it in 1996). The big bad coincidence is that Steve Holland's first movie, "Better Off Dead", which I refer to in my blogs on this subject, uses skiing as a significant element. The explanation may be that a mutual interest in skiing is part of Holland in relation to Willis - I don't know.
I would also like to add, as I've stated before, that whoever committed one crime (eg., the assassination of Diana Spencer) was not necessarily involved in any of the others. However, it is clear to me that there was a consciousness on the part of the perpetrator(s) that there would be an apparent connection to be made between the various acts discussed. For all I know, Bruce Willis read my blog and then set fire to his own ski lodge. The perpetrator(s) in Diana's death were trying to create a trail leading to McCartney and/or Harrison from what they left on my doorstep ahead of time - this could increase the likelihood of a few Spartacuses standing up at this point in "our story".
Showing posts with label Sarah Ferguson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sarah Ferguson. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Friday, March 13, 2009
A Word To The Wise
How did it come to be that just hours before Princess Diana was killed in an automobile accident involving a reporter from the French newspaper, La Figaro, I was standing on the spot where the Los Angeles restaurant, La Figaro, named for the French newspaper, once stood? How did an interview with George Harrison in La Figaro come about just three days before? Is there a set of verifiable facts that will unmistakably say certain things to an intelligent person, while being mute or confusing to an unintelligent person?
In this statement, I will be combining information that is easily verifiable as fact with information that cannot be proven which you will have to take on faith, simply because many of the things that happen in this world cannot be proven (will you be able to prove tomorrow that you were sitting down while reading this today?).
The easily verifiable facts alone will ultimately be enough to prove that there is much in what I say.
Part 1 – The Death of Princess Diana
During the last week of August, 1997 I was having a conversation with someone I knew who was also a friend of Blues legend BB King. I described an experience once described to me by Howard Worth, who made the movie, “Raga”, about Ravi Shankar, how George Harrison had come through for him in getting his movie the money needed to complete it. A few days following this August 1997 conversation, George Harrison gave an interview to the French newspaper, La Figaro, and based on my (extraordinary) experiences, I had to wonder if what I'd said hadn’t influenced Harrison to give an interview. The day after the Harrison interview, a paragraph summarizing it was featured in the L.A. Times. It is perhaps relevant that, in 2000, BB King and Eric Clapton made an album together, “Riding With The King”. Eric Clapton is historically known to have been a longtime close friend of George Harrison (despite Clapton’s ultimately causing Harrison’s divorce and marrying Harrison’s ex-wife).
The next day I saw on my way to work a look-alike of someone I knew years before (unless it was the actual person, I could not tell, however, the resemblance, in terms of certain unusual, identifiable features, was obvious). This person was my friend when I attended CalArts, and had for a roommate a woman who worked in the secretary pool for George Harrison’s record company, Dark Horse. George Harrison married a girl from the secretary pool at Dark Horse. Olivia Harrison may actually have been the roommate of my friend, I wish I could say with certainty one way or the other.
As a secretly important person, I have for a long time been accustomed to being followed wherever I go. I thought it might make things interesting to begin this particular three-day Labor Day Weekend (Saturday, August 30th) by going to a place I sometimes went when I was a student at CalArts during the 1970s, the La Figaro Restaurant in Los Angeles, where the menus were formatted like the French newspaper for which the restaurant was named. The restaurant was no longer there. I then made my way to the 5 Freeway and headed south.
I suddenly became aware that on each side of me were two very large vehicles – a truck and a bus. Yet each had something about it that brought to my mind the L.A. Times paragraph of a few days before about the Harrison interview. The truck had the word “Werner” in big letters on the side - the friend whose look-alike I saw a few days before had once given me ticket to see an appearance by the leader of a then-popular cult, Werner Erhardt (in fact John Denver provided Werner Erhardt with a song to debut at the gathering I attended; I was only there out of curiosity). Werner is not so unusual a thing to see on the side of a truck, not in and of itself. The bus had the word, “Oasis” painted on its side - the Harrison interview emphasized Harrison’s dislike of the music group, Oasis. Again, in and of itself, Oasis written on the side of a bus is not something I would have you regard as being so very out of the ordinary. I felt very unsettled by these two large vehicles and made a mental note of what had just happened and how it connected with the Harrison interview. Immediately following this, I was surrounded on all sides by cars with license plates that collectively brought to mind a letter Paul McCartney sent to me in 1978. The letter was on the subject of hiring me, and came under my dormitory door a week after Billy Joel had sat next to me on an airplane. As it was Labor Day Weekend and the reference 1978 letter had been on the subject of hiring me, the idea of being surrounded by cars whose license plates brought the letter to mind sort of seemed to fit, if you’ve ever experienced anything in relation to any of the world’s less conventional billionaires. For the most part I don’t remember what the license plates said specifically; what my new mental note focused on was the fact that the bus and the truck relating to the Harrison interview had been replaced by comparatively benign cars regarding McCartney.
That evening Princess Diana was killed in Paris when her car was surrounded by the cars of reporters chasing her, including a reporter from the newspaper, La Figaro.
Marie Antoinette of Austria married King Louis XVI of France because historically such marriages can create an important bridge between nations of people who might otherwise live in conflict, even war against each other. At the time of her death, Princess Diana appeared poised to enter into a most serious phase of her relationship with an internationally famous Egyptian, Dodi Al-Fayed. In fact, a few days before on the Larry King Show, Dodi Al-Fayed’s ex-fiance appeared as the guest, claiming that Princess Diana had stolen him from her.
If one can imagine people in this world with a fanatically serious wish to prevent a bridge between Arabic people and the Western world, one might see the question of responsibility for the death of Princess Diana as being worthy of scrutiny beyond that which takes place in the tabloids. And those with something serious to add to this discussion should not deserve to be cast into the role of tabloid mongerers.
Part 2 – The Death of the Mother of the Duchess of York
Approximately one year later, on September 19, 1998, Susan Barrantes, the mother of the Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, was killed in what was regarded as (investigated as) a car accident. I experienced a similar series of events on that day as I had a year before.
While driving to San Diego from Los Angeles I saw a few license plates that brought to mind something of personal significance from when I attended CalArts, the word “Ziggy”. Hours and hours later, on the way back from San Diego, I saw a few more license plates that also suggested this word (such as “ZIG SKI”). I also saw license plates that brought Mickey Mouse to mind (CalArts has often been referred to as Mickey Mouse U, owing to the involvement of the Disneys with the school).
Part 3 - The Ziggy Connection
During the 1970s while attending CalArts, a friend of mine, Al Goulder, had a kind of bird that originates from Australia, a cockateel, who was named Ziggy. I took care of Ziggy for him over Christmas break one year. Al Goulder’s roommate was Steve Holland, who went on to make a number of movies. He wrote and directed “Better Off Dead”, made in 1985, which co-starred Curtis Armstrong. In that same year Curtis Armstrong began co-starring with Bruce Willis in the TV show, “Moonlighting”. In 1986 Steve Holland wrote and directed, “One Crazy Summer”, which co-starred Demi Moore, who married Bruce Willis in 1987. Bruce Willis played a character in the TV show “Moonlighting” named David Addison from 1985 to 1989.
September 19th was also the anniversary of Mickey Mouse’s debut, in a cartoon entitled, “Steamboat Willie”. Some are aware (particularly in Great Britain) that Sarah Ferguson created a cartoon character named Budgie The Little Helicopter, named after a bird that originates from Australia, called a budgie.
Part 4 - Why Bruce Willis Is Relevant
On August 31, 2005, the anniversary of Princess Diana’s death, the media carried the story of how Taliban terrorists had taken a soldier hostage (he was killed a few days later), a soldier with the recognizable name of David Addison (the same name as the Bruce Willis character on “Moonlighting”). The following year, on Labor Day Weekend 2006, I saw a car with a license plate that read “ADDISON”, or something similar.
For a long time I have made reference to the fact that the first person from whom I ever learned of CalArts was Sean Daniel, that Sean Daniel (a Spielberg friend) makes inside references to my work in the movies he produces. Sean Daniel produced a movie released on November 14, 1997 starring Bruce Willis entitled, “The Jackal”, which has the Bruce Willis character saying, "You can't protect your women." It related to the assassination of the American First Lady.
Summation
I believe that if the true story behind the John F. Kennedy assassination is that Oswald was sent by the Russian government, the publicizing of such a fact could have resulted in the U.S. being backed into a corner where nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union would not have been particularly easy to avoid.
I believe that if the true story regarding the death of the mother of the Duchess of York is that it was caused by the same people who killed Princess Diana, massive publicizing of this fact would likely serve the purposes of the perpetrators. Furthermore, if the likes of Harrison or McCartney were to appear implicated in one or both of these deaths, again, one would likely have been led to such a conclusion by perpetrators who preconceived such a frameup.
What I believe is the value of what is reported here, therefore, is that there could be clues that could lead to the actual perpetrators, in spite of where they might want the clues to lead, and perhaps, eventually, this could prevent some future terrible event. I caution against playing into the hands of the perpetrators. Was the Barrantes death ever investigated with an eye towards the possibility of a clue that might unravel a huge mystery? No, it was thought an accident. Was the Addison death ever investigated as containing the potential to ultimately lead to the solving of the true cause of the death of Princess Diana? No, it was assumed to be a random Taliban killing. Deaths are investigated in accordance with certain preconceptions regarding what occurred. In the absence of certain theories about a murder, the investigation follows a more limited course. Correlatingly, the information here could lead to new information. I have been reluctant to present my information because it could alert the perpetrators to more perfectly bury the trail of real information. And attaching value to what I present first requires accepting the premise that my doorstep is a place where things of this significance might land.
I have often tried to demonstrate that I possess the personal credibility required to be believed as the type of person whose doorstep these clues would wind up on. Apparently my credibility is seen as too opposite to the interests of the likes of Spielberg and McCartney for anyone to come forward and admit that my doorstep would indeed become a likely repository of such information. I have other information. It is useless if my premise is not appreciated. Why would these clues be left for me? When did I ever prove my importance in relation to McCartney, Spielberg and others? The coverup of my importance has for some time now become a significant part of the coverup of things that the world needs investigated.
In this statement, I will be combining information that is easily verifiable as fact with information that cannot be proven which you will have to take on faith, simply because many of the things that happen in this world cannot be proven (will you be able to prove tomorrow that you were sitting down while reading this today?).
The easily verifiable facts alone will ultimately be enough to prove that there is much in what I say.
Part 1 – The Death of Princess Diana
During the last week of August, 1997 I was having a conversation with someone I knew who was also a friend of Blues legend BB King. I described an experience once described to me by Howard Worth, who made the movie, “Raga”, about Ravi Shankar, how George Harrison had come through for him in getting his movie the money needed to complete it. A few days following this August 1997 conversation, George Harrison gave an interview to the French newspaper, La Figaro, and based on my (extraordinary) experiences, I had to wonder if what I'd said hadn’t influenced Harrison to give an interview. The day after the Harrison interview, a paragraph summarizing it was featured in the L.A. Times. It is perhaps relevant that, in 2000, BB King and Eric Clapton made an album together, “Riding With The King”. Eric Clapton is historically known to have been a longtime close friend of George Harrison (despite Clapton’s ultimately causing Harrison’s divorce and marrying Harrison’s ex-wife).
The next day I saw on my way to work a look-alike of someone I knew years before (unless it was the actual person, I could not tell, however, the resemblance, in terms of certain unusual, identifiable features, was obvious). This person was my friend when I attended CalArts, and had for a roommate a woman who worked in the secretary pool for George Harrison’s record company, Dark Horse. George Harrison married a girl from the secretary pool at Dark Horse. Olivia Harrison may actually have been the roommate of my friend, I wish I could say with certainty one way or the other.
As a secretly important person, I have for a long time been accustomed to being followed wherever I go. I thought it might make things interesting to begin this particular three-day Labor Day Weekend (Saturday, August 30th) by going to a place I sometimes went when I was a student at CalArts during the 1970s, the La Figaro Restaurant in Los Angeles, where the menus were formatted like the French newspaper for which the restaurant was named. The restaurant was no longer there. I then made my way to the 5 Freeway and headed south.
I suddenly became aware that on each side of me were two very large vehicles – a truck and a bus. Yet each had something about it that brought to my mind the L.A. Times paragraph of a few days before about the Harrison interview. The truck had the word “Werner” in big letters on the side - the friend whose look-alike I saw a few days before had once given me ticket to see an appearance by the leader of a then-popular cult, Werner Erhardt (in fact John Denver provided Werner Erhardt with a song to debut at the gathering I attended; I was only there out of curiosity). Werner is not so unusual a thing to see on the side of a truck, not in and of itself. The bus had the word, “Oasis” painted on its side - the Harrison interview emphasized Harrison’s dislike of the music group, Oasis. Again, in and of itself, Oasis written on the side of a bus is not something I would have you regard as being so very out of the ordinary. I felt very unsettled by these two large vehicles and made a mental note of what had just happened and how it connected with the Harrison interview. Immediately following this, I was surrounded on all sides by cars with license plates that collectively brought to mind a letter Paul McCartney sent to me in 1978. The letter was on the subject of hiring me, and came under my dormitory door a week after Billy Joel had sat next to me on an airplane. As it was Labor Day Weekend and the reference 1978 letter had been on the subject of hiring me, the idea of being surrounded by cars whose license plates brought the letter to mind sort of seemed to fit, if you’ve ever experienced anything in relation to any of the world’s less conventional billionaires. For the most part I don’t remember what the license plates said specifically; what my new mental note focused on was the fact that the bus and the truck relating to the Harrison interview had been replaced by comparatively benign cars regarding McCartney.
That evening Princess Diana was killed in Paris when her car was surrounded by the cars of reporters chasing her, including a reporter from the newspaper, La Figaro.
Marie Antoinette of Austria married King Louis XVI of France because historically such marriages can create an important bridge between nations of people who might otherwise live in conflict, even war against each other. At the time of her death, Princess Diana appeared poised to enter into a most serious phase of her relationship with an internationally famous Egyptian, Dodi Al-Fayed. In fact, a few days before on the Larry King Show, Dodi Al-Fayed’s ex-fiance appeared as the guest, claiming that Princess Diana had stolen him from her.
If one can imagine people in this world with a fanatically serious wish to prevent a bridge between Arabic people and the Western world, one might see the question of responsibility for the death of Princess Diana as being worthy of scrutiny beyond that which takes place in the tabloids. And those with something serious to add to this discussion should not deserve to be cast into the role of tabloid mongerers.
Part 2 – The Death of the Mother of the Duchess of York
Approximately one year later, on September 19, 1998, Susan Barrantes, the mother of the Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, was killed in what was regarded as (investigated as) a car accident. I experienced a similar series of events on that day as I had a year before.
While driving to San Diego from Los Angeles I saw a few license plates that brought to mind something of personal significance from when I attended CalArts, the word “Ziggy”. Hours and hours later, on the way back from San Diego, I saw a few more license plates that also suggested this word (such as “ZIG SKI”). I also saw license plates that brought Mickey Mouse to mind (CalArts has often been referred to as Mickey Mouse U, owing to the involvement of the Disneys with the school).
Part 3 - The Ziggy Connection
During the 1970s while attending CalArts, a friend of mine, Al Goulder, had a kind of bird that originates from Australia, a cockateel, who was named Ziggy. I took care of Ziggy for him over Christmas break one year. Al Goulder’s roommate was Steve Holland, who went on to make a number of movies. He wrote and directed “Better Off Dead”, made in 1985, which co-starred Curtis Armstrong. In that same year Curtis Armstrong began co-starring with Bruce Willis in the TV show, “Moonlighting”. In 1986 Steve Holland wrote and directed, “One Crazy Summer”, which co-starred Demi Moore, who married Bruce Willis in 1987. Bruce Willis played a character in the TV show “Moonlighting” named David Addison from 1985 to 1989.
September 19th was also the anniversary of Mickey Mouse’s debut, in a cartoon entitled, “Steamboat Willie”. Some are aware (particularly in Great Britain) that Sarah Ferguson created a cartoon character named Budgie The Little Helicopter, named after a bird that originates from Australia, called a budgie.
Part 4 - Why Bruce Willis Is Relevant
On August 31, 2005, the anniversary of Princess Diana’s death, the media carried the story of how Taliban terrorists had taken a soldier hostage (he was killed a few days later), a soldier with the recognizable name of David Addison (the same name as the Bruce Willis character on “Moonlighting”). The following year, on Labor Day Weekend 2006, I saw a car with a license plate that read “ADDISON”, or something similar.
For a long time I have made reference to the fact that the first person from whom I ever learned of CalArts was Sean Daniel, that Sean Daniel (a Spielberg friend) makes inside references to my work in the movies he produces. Sean Daniel produced a movie released on November 14, 1997 starring Bruce Willis entitled, “The Jackal”, which has the Bruce Willis character saying, "You can't protect your women." It related to the assassination of the American First Lady.
Summation
I believe that if the true story behind the John F. Kennedy assassination is that Oswald was sent by the Russian government, the publicizing of such a fact could have resulted in the U.S. being backed into a corner where nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union would not have been particularly easy to avoid.
I believe that if the true story regarding the death of the mother of the Duchess of York is that it was caused by the same people who killed Princess Diana, massive publicizing of this fact would likely serve the purposes of the perpetrators. Furthermore, if the likes of Harrison or McCartney were to appear implicated in one or both of these deaths, again, one would likely have been led to such a conclusion by perpetrators who preconceived such a frameup.
What I believe is the value of what is reported here, therefore, is that there could be clues that could lead to the actual perpetrators, in spite of where they might want the clues to lead, and perhaps, eventually, this could prevent some future terrible event. I caution against playing into the hands of the perpetrators. Was the Barrantes death ever investigated with an eye towards the possibility of a clue that might unravel a huge mystery? No, it was thought an accident. Was the Addison death ever investigated as containing the potential to ultimately lead to the solving of the true cause of the death of Princess Diana? No, it was assumed to be a random Taliban killing. Deaths are investigated in accordance with certain preconceptions regarding what occurred. In the absence of certain theories about a murder, the investigation follows a more limited course. Correlatingly, the information here could lead to new information. I have been reluctant to present my information because it could alert the perpetrators to more perfectly bury the trail of real information. And attaching value to what I present first requires accepting the premise that my doorstep is a place where things of this significance might land.
I have often tried to demonstrate that I possess the personal credibility required to be believed as the type of person whose doorstep these clues would wind up on. Apparently my credibility is seen as too opposite to the interests of the likes of Spielberg and McCartney for anyone to come forward and admit that my doorstep would indeed become a likely repository of such information. I have other information. It is useless if my premise is not appreciated. Why would these clues be left for me? When did I ever prove my importance in relation to McCartney, Spielberg and others? The coverup of my importance has for some time now become a significant part of the coverup of things that the world needs investigated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
