Comrade Putin no stranger to Tinsel Town

Many who encounter the information reported at Newsspell for the first time may begin to think the author is in dire need of a one way ticket to the nearest mental health facility.

The information to follow shall certainly do nothing to dispel that notion.

Nevertheless, the author invites loyal readers and newcomers alike to conduct their own investigations, if only to corroborate, augment, or even counter one’s hypotheses.

After all, one should never accept at face value any information, whether delivered through the conduit of the mainstream media or discovered here. The real purpose of Newsspell is to encourage critical and individual thought, and to encourage skepticism at every turn, no matter how uncomfortably that may jostle delicate sensibilities. Discovering and reporting the truth as one understands it is never a safe endeavor.

The pursuit of and engagement with the unfettered process of free thought has become the terminal enemy of what has been termed “political correctness”, and seeking the truth in a world grown comfortable with lies reinforced by ham fisted, social behavioral modifications one often finds to be quite a solitary endeavor – but, so be it.

To say the very least, what one shall soon observe is truly stunning and controversial – and perhaps, even inconceivable.

Nevertheless – shall we proceed?

Did the Cold war between the Soviet Union and America ever really die?

Those who grew up during the so-called MTV era of the 1980’s, particularly here in America, became well familiar with what was popularly proffered as the “cold war” with the Soviet Union. Like the concept of terrorism today, the threat of nuclear attack became ubiquitous, and looming like some monstrous and fearful ghoul, it grew to perpetually haunt the psyche of an entire generation. Now – the threat has been resurrected, and if the bellicose and incessant bellowing of the corporate, mainstream media is any indication, Russia has once again been posed as that terrible monster, lurking for prey like Beowulf’s devouring and ominous beast.

Why now – this sudden resurrection of “cold war” fearmongering?

Is it because the ruling elite families are beginning to realize their terrorism ruse is wearing thin – is this merely due to the fact the ruling elites simply lack creative imagination – or is it due to the fact the former MTV generation is now the largest corporate news watching demographic, and those executives running the networks now operate under the premise a resurrection of the shopworn cold war fear is still effective at drawing ratings and advertising dollars when marketed towards the target demographic of those born after 1965?

Certainly, nothing the ruling elites decide occurs accidently, nor is this happening by mere coincidence – everything is planned well in advance.

But first – one shall attempt to set the history straight.

What was dubbed the cold war, represented yet another psychological operation, a grand, manufactured ruse consisting of what appeared to be a dialectical struggle between two diametrically opposed ideological systems, and if history has demonstrated anything, it is that appearances have always proved very deceptive.

As loyal readers know, one recently published an installment based on the working hypothesis renowned filmmaker Alfred Hitchcock was a fictional character portrayed by Hollywood mogul Barry Diller AKA Austro-German prince Eduard von Furstenberg. One must always remain cognizant of the true significance of the published findings found here at Newspell. For, the very celebrities the public has been conditioned to worship and adore, are genealogically related to European royalty, and by extension, the thirteen ruling elite families.

These are the royal families financing the prevailing social and political agendas sold to the masses through their puppet political proxies working under pseudonyms (many of whom are actors related to the ruling elite families).

Yes, folks, the politicians observed through one’s television and computer screens, contrary to public perception, have not been “freely” elected, but carefully selected.

Recently, one was able to cull some interesting footage from a Hitchcock interview conducted by 1970’s American talk show host, Dick Cavet. During that interview, the character of Hitchcock made some very interesting remarks, not only concerning his filmmaking methodologies, but his experience of visiting a secret military installation in New Mexico well before an atomic device was allegedly deployed by Allied military forces against Japan.

Beginning at 56:51 in the video displayed above, the character of Hitchcock tells of his foreknowledge of the atomic bomb’s manufacture, and of his correspondence with an alleged scientist intimately familiar with the Manhattan Project. One has detailed before, of the long standing and intimate relationship between Hollywood, the Pentagon, and CIA.

Could it not be so argued, that a royal Austro-German prince possessing foreknowledge his European royal family would greatly benefit from the post-war Marshall Plan funded by American taxpayers to reconstruct and modernize the decrepit infrastructures of his kingdom and country, may also have benefitted from this clandestine relationship with CIA, a taxpayer funded agency secretly designed to protect the financial interests of the prince’s family?

Does this also help explain why Hitchcock, a royal prince disguised as a mere movie director, would have been privy to such a secret project prior to its public unveiling?

To arrive at a more definitive conclusion, and utilizing the investigator’s tool of strong intuition, perhaps one should contemplate the true significance of what the character of Hitchcock reveals regarding his communication with the alleged scientist near the end of the video displayed above – about his idea to utilize an atomic bomb blast as a cinematic plot device.

The scientist’s paraphrased response, went something on the order of this:

“In reality, I don’t think such a bomb could ever work.”

Could it be, the character of Hitchcock is slyly revealing more than the audience, and perhaps the host himself, catches on to? If one looks closely, one shall also notice the manner in which the character of Hitchcock shapes his thumbs into the shape of a pyramid – the very symbol of the international Brotherhood of Freemasonry.

Could it be, with Hitchcock’s idea of placing the depiction of an atomic explosion into a cinematic production as a plot device to inflict maximum emotional trauma upon an unsuspecting, and naïve American moviegoing audience, this represented a deliberate revelation that the effect of the Manhattan Project upon the public was intended to be psychological in nature and not actual?

Furthermore, was Hitchcock attempting to reveal that he had direct involvement with the filming of the simulated atomic blasts allegedly unleashed upon Japan, and that their production may have been intended as propaganda pieces, meant merely for psychological effect upon the public, and much like the Homeland Security Preparedness Drills and crisis simulations sold to the public as actual historical events today, were also designed as military styled, psychological operations that would, in future, provide the creative impetus for a strategically manufactured “cold war?”

In past installments, both the subject of CIA’s secret filmmaking studio located in California’s Laurel Canyon and the role of Moor Hall studios in the suburbs of London were examined as producers of propaganda news stories. Hitchcock was heavily involved in the filmmaking activities of the latter facility, and decades worth of valuable, circumstantial evidence suggests there happened to have been significant coordination between the filmmaking production activities at Laurel Canyon’s Lookout Mountain and those occurring at Moor Hall studios.

Reportedly, these studios were responsible for producing both war and peacetime propaganda, and did so for a number of decades during the twentieth century. After the establishment of CIA in 1947, it has been estimated that the facility known as Lookout Mountain, located in California’s Laurel Canyon, the very same location served as the birthing crucible for what came to be historically known as the American counter-culture and Feminist movements of the 1960’s, produced thousands of hours of government funded propaganda, and released a good portion of those to the general pubic in the guise of either commercial cinema or television programming. On the other side of the Atlantic, London’s Moor Hall studio’s inhabited much the same function, with the character of Hitchcock reportedly having played a major role in the production of its post and pre-war propaganda material.

Could it be, Lookout Mountain and Moor Hall studios were responsible for producing the propaganda film campaign that began the cold war?

One conclusion becomes abundantly clear: the ruling elite’s have long known, that keeping the masses mired in the psychology of fear, and preoccupied with apprehension over the threat of death and destruction bolsters the profitability of the prevailing, global commercial system. Scientific studies have demonstrated, mindsets that have been hard-wired by the sinister psychology of fear and apprehension provide better consumers of commercial inventory, which serves to maintain and reinforce the robust profitability of the global merchant trades, of which the royal families are major stockholders. It seems, then, to have been no coincidence, the MTV generation that came of age during the decade of the 1980’s, a decade that celebrated the dubious virtues of materialism and material acquisition, was also the decade dominated by the constant threat of nuclear annihilation.

Rockefeller family funded so-called Communist revolution

There is significant empirical evidence, from esteemed scholars such as Yale University’s Doctor Anthony Sutton, suggesting the sole purpose behind the fomentation of the so-called Russian socialist revolution of the early twentieth century, the very revolution that provided America with a global nemesis, was not to establish a “proletarian uprising”, or as Lenin would have put it, a “workers paradise”, but rather to convert the untapped markets of Russia and the Eurasian world at large into a captive, commercial market, one that could be perpetually exploited by multi-national merchant bankers such as the Rockefellers and Rothschilds, who were, in truth, nothing more than fronts for the commercial interests of the thirteen, ruling elite Jesuit families.

Though history may indicate otherwise, the so-called Russian revolution posed the interests of the proletariat against those of the multi-national bankers, who, as usual, cleverly hid their monopolist intentions in the guise of a manufactured, regressive ideology which superficially appeared to have been born out of a progressively minded philosophy. One should never misconstrue – the philosophical essence of scholarly derived ideologies are anathema to the multi-national bankers working on the behalf of the ruling elite families, they are only utilized as tools with which to thoroughly exploit what are believed to be potentially profitable and exploitable commercial markets.

In fact, the concept of revolution and what appears to be the implementation of progressive social and political transformation has always existed as a valuable ally of the ruling elite families and their minions – the global merchant bankers. If one is so inclined, here is a link providing a more thorough explanation of this revolutionary dynamic that served to shape the historical dialectic of the twentieth century’s “cold war”:

This is why, the actor based reality is not merely exclusive to America, for it has been an ongoing and globally implemented strategy to shield the truth from the masses that they have been ruled by thirteen, self-appointed elite families, the very same families who established, and through negotiation that resulted in the codification of Uniform Commercial Code, consolidated the vast financial interests of a global monopoly during the eighteenth century.

Thus, considering the implications of the content available at the link supplied above, augmented by the premise one has articulated, one can safely arrive at the conclusion that by the early portion of the twentieth century, what with the private Federal Reserve well-entrenched in America by 1913, and the Bolshevik revolution well underway prior to the first world conflict, the ruling elite families had firmly, if not completely, solidified their control over both America and what came to be known as the Soviet Union, and all to play them off one another in service to a synthesizing Hegelian dialectic.

By that time, and going forward, the ruling elites realized they only needed to present the masses with appearances of representative governance, whatever the accompanying ideology. This state of affairs, in turn, facilitated the actor based reality broadcasted today over computer and television screens.

The kitchen debate clown show

As the virulent strain of cold war propaganda began to spread across America during the post-war period of the 1950’s, Vice President Richard Nixon AKA Warren Beatty was dispatched to the Soviet Union by his boss, President Eisenhower AKA Barry Diller/Prince Eduard von Furstenberg, for what appeared to have been a high level geopolitical summit with Soviet Premiere Khrushchev. There was only one problem with this scenario.

Actually, there were two.

Despite appearances to the contrary, what came to be historically known as the “kitchen debates”, amounted to nothing more than a Hollywood scripted clown show, starring a very young Warren Beatty in the guise of an American VP, and not only had it been most likely the entire affair occurred on a Hollywood soundstage rather than in the Soviet Union, but get ready for this folks – none other than Hollywood mogul/European prince Mister Barry Diller starred in the role of the irascible Soviet Premiere.

While observing this farce, one truly wonders how anyone could have given credence to what is demonstrated as anything other than high comedy, much less accepted it as a representation of a high-level political summit between a pair of global statesman. No, what one observed is yet another example of masonic derived pantomime, a complete mockery scripted by the Hollywood handmaidens of the ruling elite families, who, most likely, still harbor the same lowly regard for the masses at large as do their masters.

Well folks, this latest “summit” between President Trump AKA Michael Rockefeller and the current Russian Premiere identically represents the farcical display performed decades ago by Khrushchev and Nixon. Yes, the current host actor portraying Russian Premiere Vladimir Putin is no stranger to Hollywood. In fact, some of those who are loyal readers may have seen him starring in Smoky and the Bandit, co-starring the late American comedian, Jackie Gleason. or perhaps remember him starring as the maverick woodsman in the award winning 1970’s film, Deliverance.

Smoky and the Bandit:

Putin’s host actor discusses his performance in “Deliverance”:

Throughout most of his acting career in Tinsel Town, Mister Reynolds has worn a colored hair piece to conceal his balding pate. After digitally removing the mustache and gray beard, and the concealing glasses from Mister Reynolds profile, comparative ear biometric analysis from photographs with those of Russian Premiere, Vladimir Putin, conclusively reveals that indeed, Hollywood icon, Burt Reynolds, is currently portraying Putin’s host actor.

Burt Reynolds:

Vladimir Putin:


And you still don’t believe all the world is a stage?



3 thoughts on “Comrade Putin no stranger to Tinsel Town

  1. I’m so confused. It does make more sense to me that trump is micheal Rockefeller but now you’re saying m Rockefeller is Tom hanks. From the photos I agree.

    1. Don’t be so hard on yourself. Post-Modern Reality Simulation is a tough concept for most to grasp. As for “George Soros”, he’s been identified as King Constantine II of Greece and Denmark (AKA Aristotle Onassis/Evelyn De Rothschild/Newt Gingrich/Bernie Sanders/Dan Rather), the father of Hollywood actor “George Clooney” (AKA Prince Pavlos of Greece and Denmark (AKA John F. Kennedy Junior/Jay Leno/John Kerry/Sean Hannity, etc. etc.).

Leave a Reply