The genius of Bill Gates: Steal it first
As late as about 1994, people like say, Bill Gates, had no interest in the Internet. He wouldn’t even go to conferences about it, because he didn’t see a way to make a profit from it.
(Chomsky, interview with Corpwatch, May, 1998)
We look at REAGAN era and see BERNSTEIN as both top Department of Defense and Cultural Arts and we get a culture in US filled with war, death and destruction, nihilism ---think HOLLYWOOD FILMS, TV SERIES, VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES.
ROBERT GATES was REAGAN CIA and BUSH DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE at the time the GATES FAMILY suddenly had a technology genius in the family. ROBERT GATES privatized all our public military technology to his family------
THAT IS ILLEGAL. POLITICIANS CANNOT PROFIT FROM PUBLIC SERVICE.
As a thank you the GATES family in Microsoft Seattle funded WAGNER OPERA HOUSE---all in the family of far-right wing global banking OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS HITLER/STALIN FASCISM.
Lecture and Book Signing with Dr. Robert Gates
January 29, 2014Past Event
Lecture and book signing with former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Dr. Gates was here to discuss and sign copies of his new memoir, Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War (Publish Date: January 14, 2014), a strikingly candid, vividly written account of his experience serving Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In Duty, Dr. Gates takes us behind the scenes of his nearly five years as a secretary at war: the battles with Congress, the two presidents he served, the military itself, and the vast Pentagon bureaucracy; his efforts to help Bush turn the tide in Iraq; his role as a guiding, and often dissenting, voice for Obama; the ardent devotion to and love for American soldiers—his “heroes”—he developed on the job.
Robert Gates served as secretary of defense from 2006 to 2011. He also served as an officer in the United States Air Force and worked for the Central Intelligence Agency before being appointed director of the agency by President George H. W. Bush. He was a member of the National Security Council staff in four administrations and served eight presidents of both political parties, including as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence for President Reagan.
THE CULT OF PERSONALITY ------TRUTH, JUSTICE, THE AMERICAN WAY in 1978 as global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS were capturing our US economy to become continuous war machine for FOREIGN SOVEREIGNTY OF MALTA. This is just before REAGAN hit the seen with full-blown LEO STRAUSS far-right HITLER FASCISM.
The era of RONALD REAGAN is the point in US history where TRUTH became LIES found only in IRONY.
No bigger global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS 33rd degree freemasonry than REAGAN.
So, an America which was built on strong US Rule of Law, truth, justice being all-American started to have CULTURAL ARTS AND MEDIA leaders filling our US media and academics with FAKE NEWS, FAKE DATA, leading to an EXISTENTIAL CRISIS.
Remember, HITLER working for global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS TRIBE OF JUDAH seized Germany's economic and industrial base----then seized the industrial base of each nation it captured.
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED TO US----WITHOUT A WAR-----
'The All-American President: Ronald Wilson Reagan (1911-2004 ...
Hope is an infectious disease, and Reagan was a carrier. The country he courted and finally won over in 1980 was a dispirited place, humiliated abroad, uncertain at home, with a hunger for heroes ... '
'Knute Rockne All American (1940)
Approved | 1h 38min | Biography , Drama , Sport | 5 October 1940 (USA)
The story of legendary Notre Dame football player and coach Knute Rockne.
Directors: Lloyd Bacon, William K. Howard (uncredited)
Writers: Robert Buckner (original screen play), Mrs. Knute Rockne (based upon: private papers of, and the reports of Rockne's intimate associates and friends) (as Mrs. Rockne)
Superman on "Truth, justice, American way"
From Superman 1978: Lois humorously reacts to Superman saying he stands for "truth, justice, and the American way."
THE NOISE OF TIME makes much of Shostakovich and 99% of USSR citizens dealing with Stalin's CULT OF PERSONALITY. Hitler/Mao had that CULT OF PERSONALITY---all manufactured by media, cultural arts---just as REAGAN.
THIS IS TOPS IN IDENTIFYING FASCIST LEADERSHIP.
Stalin simply working for global banking 1% OLD WORLD RUSSIAN KINGS AND QUEENS was given the spotlight because those global 1% hate to place their face on brutality, criminality, sacking and looting their own 99% of citizens.
THIS IS WHY WE SHOUT OVER AND AGAIN----WE CAN ENJOY ENTERTAINMENT BY GLOBAL BANKING 1% FREEMASON STARS----BUT DO NOT SUPPORT THE FADS.
Joseph Stalin’s Cult Of Personality
Joseph Stalin’s rise to prominence began soon after the 1917 Russian Revolution. Although it was under the leadership of Lenin that the Soviet Union experienced its first wave of cultural, social, and political changes brought on by the revolution’s aftermath, Stalin was continuously working behind the scenes (and sometimes in front of them) casting his influence where he could. He was at the forefront of changes happening in Russia and worked alongside Lenin and Trotsky as one of the seven members of the first Politburo, established in 1917 with the purpose of managing the Bolshevik Revolution.
By 1918, Stalin harnessed a great deal of persuasion over the Russian military. He used it carry out assassinations of counter-revolutionaries in order to protect Lenin and the Bolshevik cause. In 1924, following Lenin’s death, he successfully consolidated power. Ideas about Stalin and Lenin’s relationship became a useful tool of persuasion. Stalin was successfully able to cast himself as an extension of Lenin and his legacy.
In doing so, every idea, gesture, and statement Stalin made were implied to have at least in part come from Lenin, whose leadership Stalin characterized as “flawless.” The blending of identities endowed Stalin with capabilities similar to those granted to Roman Emperor Augustus.
In 12 BC, the Roman emperor Augustus was made Pontifex Maximus, a merging of the highest religious and highest political rank bestowed Augustus with immeasurable influence and power. Similarly, with the ghost of Lenin’s legacy, Stalin armed himself with a crown of absolute power and an inability to be wrong. It was the first of many phases of metamorphosis that the persona of Stalin would undergo before becoming Russia’s most loved and abominable cult figure.
During Stalin’s reign, the press played a vital role in projecting his image. They began referring to him as the Father of Nations, while labeling him a “genius”, “beloved”, “wise”, and “inspirational”.
IN TODAY'S US WITH GLOBAL POLLING CORPORATIONS GIVING FAKE POLLING DATA---HE WOULD POLL AS LOVED BY ALL AMERICANS JUST LIKE CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA.
The press particularly liked to feature Stalin as a father figure, playing with children. It was a favored propaganda theme because it easily conjured a connection with the mass public that Stalin was a fearless and strong, but sensitive leader. Soviet propagandists purposely utilized elements associated with outside powers of influence to dissuade, manipulate, and weaken their base of loyalty.
Superimposing the word “Father” onto Stalin was meant to undermine Russia’s priests, also called “Father” and to suggest the church and Stalin were one in the same. Stalin’s cult of personality operated under the guise of convergence: every event, every celebration, every tradition and every holiday was infused with something recognizable from the past along with Stalin’s image. The desired result was always to hold Stalin up and repress everything else.
For a short while, the press engaged in another tactic. Honing in on his universal qualities, they tried to demonstrate a connection between him and the common Russian citizen. After the Second World War, this lessened. Stalin took a giant step back from center stage and information and messages from Stalin became minimal in their format: a telegram, a paper receipt, a candid photograph were offered to the public.
Although Stalin was portrayed as one of the “everyday people,” he and the organizers of his administration were engaged in the “Great Purge”. From 1934-1939 the colossal campaign raged inside the country. Its primary purpose was to repress groups that were considered a threat to Stalin’s leadership. This included any figure or groups that might be critical of the way Stalin led Russia. Many academics, along with opposition political parties, were classified (with a Bolshevik-sounding label) “enemies of the working class.” Millions were executed, exiled, or imprisoned.
An additional cult of personality tactic was generated by artists. Musicians, poets, writers, and painters were encouraged to show their admiration for Stalin. Statues of him began popping up all over Russia. One statue sat him side-by-side with Tsar Alexander III, although Stalin was not a towering figure, standing around 5’5″ tall. Throughout the 1930s, private homes installed “Stalin rooms,” spaces dedicated to the leader where his image hung. The cult of personality encouraged villages, town, and cities rename themselves as an homage to Stalin.
Not surprisingly, distortion of reality reached a sociopathic state, and the decision was made to rewrite historic events. Namely, the 1917 Revolution was rewritten in order to embellish the role Stalin played. In the new version, Stalin took Lenin’s place as second in command. Making decisions to alter the past required more than rewriting history. To conceal the truth, the Stalin cult-making machine faced the daunting task of ridding its expansive empire of the evidence that told the truth.
In reality, this task generated a society shrouded in tense fear. Widespread censorship, investigations, imprisonment, spying, and general mistrust were primary results of the campaign. Stalin’s desire to sweep the empire from its roots made every person a suspect of sabotage. Anyone with a memory of what happened the day before was forced to feign another truth. Every now and again, a film or book would slip through the censorship council. Russian artists learned to adopt covert ways of expressing the reality of the nation were living in without pointing at it directly. The schizophrenic state of Stalin cast a cold, dark shadow over Soviet society until his death in 1953.
We out global PEACE NGOs like today's CODE PINK as having a mission of making THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA the rogue actor in continuous wars as too DEMOCRACY NOW. DEMOCRACY NOW was the mantra of REAGAN/BUSH/CLINTON and the far-right wing authoritarian militaristic war machine they were creating. At the same time REAGAN era started attacking internally our American democratic political and governance structure.
Global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS hid behind last century's BRUTAL FASCIST DICTATORS -----Stalin and Hitler ---not wanting to be shown doing the dirty work. So, too these few decades of continuous wars capturing our US sovereign military structure working for FOREIGN SOVEREIGNTY OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH.
We have discussed in detail how US media was filled with CIA ----working for CIA during these decades.
This is exactly what STALIN/HILTER cultural arts----musicology leaders did as well. No doubt there is PESSIMISM in Eastern Europe never having been able to escape this continuous round of brutal dictator/KINGS AND QUEENS.
THE WORLD WOULD HAVE NEVER BELIEVED ALL THAT 5% FREEMASON CIVIL UNREST CIVIL WAR WAS DONE BY
'LEFT' MARXIST REBELS IF DEMOCRACY NOW WAS NOT REPORTING IT AS SUCH.
Genre News program, current affairs
Running time 60 minutes daily (M–F)
Country of origin United States
Syndicates Pacifica Radio (radio)
Hosted by Amy Goodman
(frequent co-host) Nermeen Shaikh
Produced by Mike Burke
Executive producer(s) Amy Goodman
Recording studio New York City
Original release February 19, 1996; 22 years ago – present
When did US become a ROGUE SUPERPOWER? That would be EISENHOWER era. So, Russia was the ROGUE SUPERPOWER---now our America and it's all because of TRUMP.
America Is Not in Retreat. It’s a Rogue Superpower.
As Trump upends international relations, will other nations restore stability?
By Jeet Heer
January 3, 2018
In the wake of President Donald Trump’s apocalyptic rhetoric last year about a potential nuclear war, North and South Korea are making surprising gestures of goodwill, trying to open up lines of direct communication to sidestep the belligerence of the American leader. In his New Year’s message, North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un expressed hope for a “peaceful resolution with our southern borders” and suggested that his country was open to South Korea’s offer to participate in the Olympics. In response, by South Korean President Moon Jae-in ordered his government agencies “to quickly come up with follow-up measures for the speedy restoration of South–North Korean dialogue and realize the North Korean delegation’s participation in the Pyeongchang Olympics.”
The New York Times wrote on Monday that Kim, “perhaps sensing the simmering tension between President Trump and President Moon Jae-in of South Korea,” employed this “canny new strategy ... in the hope of driving a wedge into its seven-decade alliance with the United States.” The response from Nikki Haley, Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations, suggested Kim’s strategy was working:
Trump, meanwhile, first took credit for these diplomatic developments on the Korean peninsula and reiterated his mocking nickname for Kim.
Then, on Tuesday night, he returned to his apocalyptic rhetoric:
The unfolding Korean drama fits a popular narrative lately that the United States is in global retreat. Trump’s instinctive isolationism, even if tempered by the internationalism of some of his staff, allegedly is causing American allies to chart a more independent path. In a recent article for The New Yorker, Evan Osnos articulated the idea thus:
Under the banner of “America First,” President Trump is reducing U.S. commitments abroad. On his third day in office, he withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a twelve-nation trade deal designed by the United States as a counterweight to a rising China. To allies in Asia, the withdrawal damaged America’s credibility.
Arguing that America under Trump is “retreating from the front,” Osnos suggested that the Chinese government was stepping up its global commitments to capitalize on the uncertainty created by Trump and to accelerate China’s rise as a global power. Surveying Trump’s first year in office, Mark Landler wrote at The New York Times, “Above all, Mr. Trump has transformed the world’s view of the United States from a reliable anchor of the liberal, rules-based international order into something more inward-looking and unpredictable.”
YOU MEAN CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA AS A RULES-BASED RELIABLE ANCHOR FOR INTERNATIONAL ORDER? OH, REALLY??
The U.S. is not in retreat under Trump. Rather, it is following a much more dangerous course: eschewing diplomacy, forswearing ideals of democracy and human rights, disdaining its own allies, and cozying up to autocrats—all while trying to retain its hegemonic power through military might alone. Trump’s America is a rogue superpower.
The narrative of a withdrawn America ignores the crucial fact that Trump is making the United States much more aggressive abroad. Trump has raised the specter of nuclear war with North Korea, threatening to rain down “fire and fury.” As Newsweek reported, “U.S. air strikes aimed at countering extremist organizations in Africa and the Middle East more than doubled under President Donald Trump.” The Trump administration has also approved arms sales to the Ukraine, a move likely to provoke Russia. Trump is also escalating on the ground in Afghanistan, where he is sending thousands more troops. The intractability of the Afghan problem has led Trump to initiate a war of words with the government of Pakistan, a longstanding American ally:
He broadened his complaints on Tuesday night to encompass “many other countries,” though notably focused on another favorite Republican target:
Trump’s foreign policy is an incoherent stew in which the president’s “America First” ideology clashes with the hawkish doctrine of key national security figures like Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis and national security advisor H.R. McMaster. While Trump rants about the world taking advantage of America, many foreign policy decisions are being made by staffers who share the same neoconservative tendency of the George W. Bush administration, using the military rather than diplomacy as the major instrument of statecraft. What distinguishes Trumpism is that this militarist foreign policy is mostly shorn of Bushian rhetoric about promoting democracy around the world.
The militarist faction of the Trump administration is all the more powerful because Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has turned out to be extraordinarily weak, following Trump’s anti-government agenda by gutting the State Department but receiving no measurable sway over the president in return. Normally, the State Department would serve as a moderating force on the Pentagon’s instinctive search for military solutions. But with Tillerson sidelined—and reportedly in a “death struggle” with McMaster--the military wing of the government is now running foreign policy without check.
The ideological dispute between Trump and his staff is further complicated by a third factor: the friendliness of Trump and his family to regimes that promise personal enrichment. As Osnos observes, Trump has softened his harsh earlier rhetoric of China as a trade rival and civilizational threat, instead pursuing collegial relations with President Xi Jinping—possibly at the urging of his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. “During the transition, Kushner dined with Chinese business executives while the Kushner Companies was seeking their investment in a Manhattan property,” Osnos wrote. These talks, along with other overtures between Kushner’s family and the Chinese government, only ended after they received unfriendly public scrutiny. The murky role that Trump and Kushner family business interests play in guiding policy make Trump-era diplomacy seem even more unpredictable.
In Politico, Susan B. Glasser provided the best recent analysis of Trump’s foreign policy, emphasizing the incoherence of various factions:
Trump’s national security team and his allies are engaged in a silent conspiracy of sorts to guide and constrain him. America’s enemies in China and Russia have taken their measure of the man and are preparing to test him more decisively than they have yet ventured. Opportunists in the Middle East and elsewhere are taking what they can get. War talk with North Korea grows ever louder. And in Washington, the America Firsters have been purged from the White House staff—but not from the Oval Office itself.
Given the crudeness of Trump’s diplomacy, it’s not surprising that longstanding allies like South Korea and Germany are now distancing themselves from the United States. Nor is it unexpected that China thinks it can supplant America in some ways (though it’s unlikely that China will be a truly global power for many decades to come). These responses are logical, and in some cases welcome. But the question is not whether America is in retreat; it’s whether these nations can effectively check Trump’s belligerence and pursue global stability apart from the United States For there’s little dispute that Trump has turned America into a destabilizing force in the world. Are other countries up to the task of quarantining it?
One last point from THE NOISE OF TIME having the hero Shostakovich educating our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE how to think and behave in far-right wing authoritarian, militaristic, extreme wealth extreme poverty LIBERTARIAN MARXIST FASCIST societies-------
Shostakovich tells us it is critical to keep that MONA LISA SMILE on your face at all times----that look hiding real emotions---not knowing if one agrees or disagrees---not knowing if one approves or disapproves.
So, MONA LISA filled our US cultural arts and became a FAD during CLINTON/BUSH-----MONA LISA being that symbol of global banking 1% corporate FASCISM.
WELLESLEY COLLEGE in 1950s-60s was the beginning of our strong US IVY LEAGUE academies being taken by global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS -----THERE IS NO TRUTH.
Very important says the hero Shostakovich to keep that MONA LISA smile in place in far-right wing corporate FASCISM.
Mona Lisa Smile
ft. Nicole Scherzinger
MONA LISA SMILE video Based on a concept by will.i.am Directed by Michael Jurkovac Edited by Igor Kovalik Painting brought to life by Pasha Shapiro…
Mona Lisa Smile
Mona Lisa Smile Movie Poster
Mona Lisa Smile (2003)
Julia Roberts as Katherine Watson
| Roger Ebert
December 19, 2003 | 3
I find it hard to believe that Wellesley College was as reactionary in the autumn of 1953 as "Mona Lisa Smile" says it is -- but then I wasn't there. Neither were the screenwriters, who reportedly based their screenplay on Hillary Clinton's experience at Wellesley in the early 1960s. The film shows a school which teaches, above all, that a woman's duty is to stand by her man, and if Clinton learned that, she also learned a good deal more. No doubt she had a teacher as inspiring as Katherine Watson (Julia Roberts), who trades in the bohemian freedom of Berkeley for a crack at Wellesley's future corporate wives.
This is the kind of school which actually offers classes in deportment, grooming and table setting, and the teacher of those classes, Nancy Abbey (Marcia Gay Harden) takes them so seriously that we begin to understand the system that produced Cathy Whitaker, Julianne Moore's showpiece wife in last year's "Far From Heaven." Watson finds her students scornful of her California background (every students makes it a point to be able to identify every slide of every painting in her first lecture), but she counterattacks with a blast of modern art, and there is a scene where she takes them to watch the uncrating of a new work by Jackson Pollock.
Of course the board of trustees is suspicious of Katherine Watson, modern art and everything else that is potentially "subversive," and resistance among the undergraduates is led by Betty (Kirsten Dunst), whose mother is a trustee, whose plans include marrying an upward-bound but morally shifty Harvard man, and whose editorials in the school paper suggest Watson is leading her girls in the direction of communism and, worse, promiscuity. (A school nurse who gives advice on contraception has to leave her job.)
We are pretty sure what the story parabola of "Mona Lisa Smile" will be (the inspiring teacher will overcome adversity to enlighten and guide), but the movie is more observant and thoughtful than we expect. It doesn't just grind out the formula, but seems more like the record of an actual school year than about the needs of the plot. In the delicate dance of audience identification, we get to be both the teacher and her students -- to imagine ourselves as a free spirit in a closed system, and as a student whose life is forever changed by her.
But, you're wondering, how can I identify with a 30ish teacher and her 20ish female students? Don't you find yourself identifying with just about anybody on the screen, if the movie is really working? Katherine Watson is smart and brave and stands by her beliefs, and so of course she reminds us of ourselves.
Julia Roberts is above all an actress with a winning way; we like her, feel protective toward her, want her to prevail. In "Mona Lisa Smile," she is the conduit for the plot, which flows through her character. The major supporting roles are played by luminaries of the first post-Julia generation, including not only Dunst, but Julia Stiles as Joan Brandwyn, a girl smart enough to be accepted by Yale Law but perhaps not smart enough to choose it over marriage; Maggie Gyllenhaal as Giselle Levy, who is sexually advanced and has even, it is said, slept with the studly young Italian professor, and Ginnifer Goodwin as Constance Baker, who is too concerned about her looks.
"A few years from now," the Wellesley students are solemnly informed, "your sole responsibility will be taking care of your husband and children." This is not a priority Watson can agree with. She tells the competent but conservative school president (Marian Seldes), "I thought I was headed to a place that would turn out tomorrow's leaders -- not their wives." Unlike the typical heroes of movies about inspiring teachers, however, she doesn't think the answer lies in exuberance, freedom and letting it all hang out, but in actually studying and doing the work, and she despairs when competent students throw away their futures (as she sees it) for marriage to men who have already started to cheat before their wedding days.
Watson herself has a fairly lively love life, with a boyfriend in California (John Slattery) and now a warmth for the abovementioned studly Italian teacher (Dominic West), although it is probably not true, as a student rumor has it, that she had to come east because of a torrid affair with William Holden. The movie is not really about her romances at all, but about her function as a teacher and her determination to install feminism on the campus before that noun was widely in use. The movie, directed by Mike Newell, may be a little too aware of its sexual politics and might have been more absorbing if Katherine and her students were fighting their way together out of the chains of gender slavery. But the characters involve us, we sympathize with their dreams and despair of their matrimonial tunnel vision, and at the end we are relieved that we listened to Miss Watson and became the wonderful people who we are today.
Bringing in one more global banking 1% freemason STAR to promote societal FADS------as UMBERTO ECO so too DAN BROWN creating historical FICTION basing this time on Roman Catholic church. We speak of DARK AGES TRADE GUILDS led by MASTERS----just as we speak of STALIN/HITLER using far-right corporate fascism to create TRADE GUILDS led by MASTERS. As we state, STALIN/HITLER throwing all geniuses, writers, composers in GULAG none the less forced them to produce FOR FREE the talent for which they would have been paid. So too DARK AGES 1000AD global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS. The word FASCISM is a modern description of what 1000BC----1000AD looked like replacing OLD WORLD KINGS----with fascist MADMEN.
It is widely known DIVINCI was that TRADE GUILD MASTER and we know he did not actually paint much of the art to which he is attributed. His all-around GENIUS sounds very much like DARK AGES CULT OF PERSONALITY. We think IF a person DIVINCI existed ---he was a MASTER of GUILDS in which real talented and genius 99% of WE THE PEOPLE worked.
MONA LISA AND HER SMILE has become iconic because this is the time period OLD -SCHOOL FREEMASONRY was indeed getting its start and there was TRUTH woven in the details----with the LOUDEST MESSAGE being TRUTH WRAPPED IN IRONY. Today's freemasonry has been corrupted----global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS filled what was a real talent and genius secret society with 5% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS players----like STALIN/SHOSTAKOVICH----like HITLER/STRAUSS-----like REAGAN/BERNSTEIN.
MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1% bringing back DARK AGES capture of GEEKS AND GENIUS from 99% WE THE PEOPLE handing it to NO talent royal family.
Is there any truth to The Da Vinci code?
Question: "Is there any truth to The Da Vinci code?"
Answer: Is there truth to Dan Brown’s bestseller The Da Vinci Code? It is important to remember that The Da Vinci Code is entirely fictional. As much as author Dan Brown would like us to believe, The Da Vinci Code has no solid basis historically, biblically, or theologically. The Da Vinci Code is essentially an attempt to "humanize" Jesus Christ by inventing a story of how His true identity was distorted and hidden for nearly two thousand years. In the book, Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had children. Mary Magdalene and Jesus’ descendants were the “holy grail” that carries the blood of Christ. The Da Vinci Code states that these facts about Jesus Christ were covered up by the early church in order to protect the idea of Jesus’ divinity. All the Christian books which told of Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene were destroyed, and any evidence of such a relationship was covered up.
Again, The Da Vinci Code is fiction. It has no basis in reality. It is a well-written, entertaining book, but that’s all there is to it. Dan Brown is of the persuasion that these ideas about Jesus are true. Since there is no historical, biblical, or theological basis for his beliefs, Dan Brown presented them in a fictional account. But the truth is that Jesus was not married to Mary Magdalene or anyone else. Jesus did not have any children. Yes, the early church attempted to destroy many “gospels” about Jesus, but they did so because they were almost universally recognized as heretical, not to cover anything up. Even these “gospels” only give hints of a relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. The church did not cover up the truth about Jesus being married to Mary Magdalene. Rather, the church protected the truth about Jesus being God in the flesh (John 1:1, 14).
The Da Vinci Code is in reality an attack on the Person of Jesus Christ. People do not want to believe that Jesus is God or that He is the Savior, so they make up falsehoods about Him in order to create a false Jesus that they can believe in. That is what The Da Vinci Code is all about—presenting a false view of who Jesus Christ truly was and then explaining why this “truth” has been "hidden" for nearly 2000 years.
Dorothy destroyed all that beautiful wickedness! DOROTHY was of course EMPIRE ALICE pretending to be TRUTH/JUSTICE/THE AMERICAN WAY but there is TRUTH in all that OZ IRONY------
When our 99% WE THE PEOPLE are forced to LOSE THEIR SOULS to wicked far-right wing global corporate FASCISM as was what WICKED WITCH OF EAST AND WEST represented----those global banking 5% freemason/Greek civil unrest/civil war players guarding that witches' castle--being those winged monkeys were HAPPY to be free from that SOCIOPATH.
It really is EASY PEASY for our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens to STAND UP and be US CITIZENS-----because those global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS trying to OCCUPY our US sovereign nation/state/city will MELT AWAY.
I'm Melting! - The Wizard of Oz
(7/8) Movie CLIP (1939) HD
Published on May 26, 2011
The Wizard of Oz movie clips: CLIP DESCRIPTION: When the Wicked Witch (Margaret Hamilton) sets The Scarecrow (Ray Bolger) on fire, Dorothy (Judy Garland) accidentally kills the witch with water.
We think calling THE NOISE OF TIME a MASTERPIECE is exactly what makes TIME full of NOISE.
The moral of this novel is this: global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS from pre-Christian NERO/CATO/SENECA controlled our cultural arts and history. They do this not because they are MORE INTELLIGENT ----able to create GOOD FOR CIVIL SOCIETY----they do it to HOLD ON TO POWER AND WEALTH. Each generation has its REAL GENIUSES-----the next generation gives family members of those geniuses fighting to keep wealth and position always ready to grab the leg of the most available global banking 1% OLD WORLD KING AND QUEEN to be PLAYERS.
BARNES AND NOBLE as a business got its start the same way today's Bill Gates got his start-----he was related to someone who in medieval ages was a REAL genius.
'William Barnes | Poetry Foundation
Multitalented poet and autodidact William Barnes was born in Rushay, Dorset, in southern England. He worked as a clerk and a schoolmaster before earning a bachelor of divinity from Cambridge and becoming an ordained minister in the Church of England'.
We will never SILENCE these OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS-----but 350 million US citizens do have the power to create there OWN MEDIA, JOURNALISM, ACADEMIC WRITING---we KNOW because that is what all last century of REAL left social progressive K-UNIVERSITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS were about.
One man's FASCISM is simply another man's DARK AGES-------same political and economic policies.
The Noise of Time review – Julian Barnes’s masterpiece
Shostakovich’s battle with his conscience is explored in a magnificent fictionalised retelling of the composer’s life under Stalin
Sun 17 Jan 2016 02.00 EST Last modified on Wed 21 Mar 2018 20.06 EDT
Julian Barnes’s last novel, the Man Booker-winning The Sense of an Ending (2011), engaged in subtle and sustained dialogue with the book whose title it pilfered, Frank Kermode’s brilliant 1967 work of narrative theory, also called The Sense of an Ending. Barnes’s latest, The Noise of Time, borrows its title from Osip Mandelstam’s memoirs, and again the earlier work casts interesting light upon Barnes’s project. Mandlestam was one of Stalin’s most outspoken critics, his fate sealed with the words of his 1933 Stalin Epigram. He was exiled in the Great Terror and died in a Vladivostok transit camp in 1938. The subject of The Noise in Time is not the brave, doomed Mandelstam, though, but a rarer genius, one whose art continued to flourish despite the oppressive attentions of the Soviet authorities: Dmitri Shostakovich.
The Noise of Time initially appears to be the latest addition to a hybrid literary form with which we are increasingly familiar – the fictional biography. Recent examples range from Colm Tóibin’s The Master (which presented a repressed and unhappy Henry James) to Nuala O’Connor’s excellent Miss Emily (which gave us a wilful and tormented Emily Dickinson). As with all great novels, though – and make no mistake, this is a great novel, Barnes’s masterpiece – the particular and intimate details of the life under consideration beget questions of universal significance: the operation of power upon art, the limits of courage and endurance, the sometimes intolerable demands of personal integrity and conscience.
This novel, like its predecessor, gives us the breadth of a whole life within the pages of a slim book, written in an intimately close third person. The reader visits the composer during three critical moments in his life, the decades between skipped over with extraordinary panache, a bravura performance of Italo Calvino’s maxim that “time takes no time in a story”. We first meet Shostakovich as “a man standing by a lift, at his feet a small case containing cigarettes, underwear and tooth powder; standing there and waiting to be taken away”. A damning Pravda editorial, probably penned by Stalin, has denounced the composer’s Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District as “non-political and confusing” because it “tickled the perverted taste of the bourgeois with its fidgety, neurotic music”. Shostakovich waits for his first “Conversation with Power” – interrogation by the NKVD – and, presumably, exile or worse.
The reader visits the composer during three critical moments in his life, the decades between skipped over with panache
Our next encounter with Shostakovich is after the war, on a propaganda tour of the US. His visit is prompted by his second “Conversation with Power”, this time a telephone call from Stalin himself that recalls a similar call in Vasily Grossman’s Life and Fate (a novel that echoes within The Noise of Time). Restored to the party’s good books by the success of his patriotic “Leningrad” Symphony, Shostakovich is delivering a series of speeches denouncing his own work and, particularly, that of Stravinsky, whom he likes and admires. He reads his speech in a “muttered monotone”, hoping the words will be taken for what they are – dictations from the state. In the audience, though, is Nicolas Nabokov (Vladimir’s cousin and in the pay of the CIA), who forces Shostakovich to reiterate his endorsement of the views of Zhdanov, the man “who had persecuted him since 1936, who had banned him and derided him and threatened him, who had compared his music to that of a road drill and a mobile gas chamber”. It is a moment of abject, torturous humiliation for the composer.
The third section of the novel gives us an elderly Shostakovich, sitting in the back of a chauffeur-driven car, made bitter by the inexhaustible demands of the party, even now that Stalin’s terror has given way to the reign of “Nikita the Corncob”. Shostakovich describes himself as a hunchback, “morally, spiritually”, a man shattered in body and spirit: “He could not live with himself. It was just a phrase, but an exact one. Under the pressure of Power, the self cracks and splits.” We witness his “final, most ruinous Conversation with Power”, when the oleaginous functionary Pospelov forces him to join the party and take up a position entirely within the fold, as chairman of the Russian Federation Union of Composers. Shostakovich succinctly diagnoses his own greatest fault: “He had lived too long.”
Around halfway through the novel there is a passage that operates as a kind of appeal to the reader, and also a statement about what kind of book this is: “There were those who understood a little better, who supported you, and yet at the same time were disappointed in you. Who did not grasp the one simple fact about the Soviet Union: that it was impossible to tell the truth here and live. Who imagined they knew how Power operated and wanted you to fight it as they believed they would do in your position. In other words, they wanted your blood.” Here we sense the ghost of Osip Mandelstam, providing a heroic vision of what might have been for Shostakovich – an early death, lauded by some, forgotten by most. Instead, we get the old man, churning out bombastic, grandiloquent public music and composing his masterpieces – his late string quartets – in private, all the while knowing that “music is not like Chinese eggs: it does not improve by being kept underground for years and years”.
Throughout The Noise of Time, I kept thinking of JM Coetzee (not a writer I’d have associated Barnes with before). Most obviously Coetzee’s underrated fictional biography of Dostoevsky, The Master of Petersburg, but more often and more interestingly, Disgrace. In that novel, the hero, David Lurie, is offered an easy way out of a tawdry fix at the beginning of the book; instead, driven by a stubborn sense of personal integrity, he subjects himself to untold privations until the novel’s extraordinary, quasi-religious ending.
Shostakovich, like Lurie, understands that his torments have ancient roots: “He knew his Bible well. So he was familiar with the notion of sin; also with its public mechanism. The offence, the priest’s judgment on the matter, the act of contrition, the forgiveness. Though there were occasions when the sin was too great and not even a priest could forgive it.” Every morning, in lieu of a prayer, he recites to himself a poem by Evtushenko – “But time has a way of demonstrating / The most stubborn are the most intelligent… I shall therefore pursue my career / By trying not to pursue one.”
The composer’s decline into ill health, the withering of his spirit, his hope that “death would liberate his music… from his life” – Barnes presents Shostakovich’s final downward spiral with a kind of ruthless inevitability (and inevitability is, as Susan Snyder says, the signal note of tragedy). Alexei Tolstoy wrote in Pravda of Shostakovich’s Fifth Symphony: “Here the personality submerges itself in the great epoch that surrounds it, and begins to resonate with the epoch.” Barnes has achieved a similar feat with a period of history, and a place, that despite their remoteness, are rendered in exquisite, intimate detail. He has given us a novel that is powerfully affecting, a condensed masterpiece that traces the lifelong battle of one man’s conscience, one man’s art, with the insupportable exigencies of totalitarianism.
What we did this week in discussing cultural arts, media, and journalism PUBLIC POLICY was take ONE BOOK and looked at the meaning from all kinds of different angles. This weeks' literary analysis is what BABY BOOMERS in US public universities were taught -----how to INTERPRET a novel, music, stage, opera--THE CLASSICS. We learn in college the 5Ws of doing this. It takes exposure to ART, SCIENCE, LITERATURE, HISTORY, ECONOMICS, POLITICS ----and it takes all of the above in understanding cultures around the world. A person doesn't learn that from a 4 year degree at university------
THAT IS WHAT LIFE-LONG LEARNING BRINGS. PLEASE DO NOT STOP EDUCATING WHEN WE RECEIVE A 'DEGREE' ----IT IS NOT AS VALUABLE AS WHAT WE WILL LEARN ONCE WE HAVE GRADUATED.
That one small novel THE NOISE OF TIME by a global banking 1% freemason LITERARY STAR-----provided an entire week's worth of public policy discussion.
We do not see that ANALYSIS technique from GOSHEN.EDU.
A global banking 1% FAKE religious freemasonry school will not teach how to HOLD POWER ACCOUNTABLE----or any REAL leadership in international education---sustainability---and especially SOCIAL JUSTICE
'Goshen College -
Goshen is a nationally-ranked Christian liberal arts college in Indiana known for leadership in international education, sustainability and social justice'.