Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
Gorsad Kyiv is a collective of photographers that collaborates with the world’s largest brands. Apparently, everybody’s ignoring the fact that their work revolves around the graphic abuse and sexualization of children. Even worse, some of these “models” appear to be actual victims of child trafficking. Here’s a look at Gorsad Kyiv.
Warning: This article contains disturbing pictures.
Gorsad Kyiv is a photography collective consisting of three artists: Viktor Vasiliev, Maria Romaniuk, and Ulik Romaniuk. Based in Kyiv, Ukraine, the group has collaborated with many galleries, magazines, musicians, and brands such as I-D Vice, Dazed & Confused, Skim milk, Hood by Air, Ariel Pink, and others.
In 2022, Gorsad Kyiv was named in PhotoVogue’s list of “100 Next Great Fashion Image Makers”.
PhotoVogue Festival unites the biggest names in the fashion industry, along with numerous publishers from CondeNast – the megacorporation that owns hundreds of publications around the world. Here, PhotoVogue features a picture by Gorsad which features a sad and frightened girl.
One only needs to take a look at a few pics taken by Gorsad to realize one thing: There is something terribly wrong with them. Everything about their work refers directly to pedophilia, child abuse, and sex trafficking. Many children in these pictures appear deeply unwell as if they are actual victims of human trafficking that are constantly drugged and abused.
Instead of being alarmed by these pictures, “industry experts” actually celebrate Gorsad and reward them with lucrative contracts. And, since the Ukraine war, the collective is touted as “freedom fighters” by the media as it urges people to support them with donations. Are you crazy?
One of the ridiculous headlines praising Gorsad.
Why does the industry love Gorsad so much and why aren’t they being investigated by the police? Well, when one realizes that their works are also replete with the occult elite’s satanic symbolism, one realizes one important fact: They’re part of the same sick culture.
Here are the collective’s favorite themes.
Aggressively Sexualizing Children
This is one of these articles where I don’t feel comfortable posting pictures because they’re so vile. However, this insanity needs to be exposed for what it is or it will keep going due to general indifference. I did not dig these pictures from some obscure website – the following pictures are proudly exposed in trendy exhibitions, major fashion magazines, and all over social media accounts.
When fashion magazines describe Gorsad’s works, they like to use the words “youth, innocence, and sexuality”. That’s another way of saying “pedophilia”. Because that’s exactly what this is about.
A screenshot of an interview with Gorsad. They have to give vague answers because they cannot outright say that they’re catering to sick pedos.
A mere look at the following pictures is enough to realize that this is not about the natural “coming of age” of children, it is about their abuse, exploitation, and sexualization by sick adults.
Here are some pictures from Gorsad’s website and Instagram account.
In one of its exhibits, Gorsad proudly displays this picture of a young girl who looks deeply unwell while sitting in a suggestive position. This girl might be a victim of sex trafficking.
To promote an exhibition, Gorsad uses a highly symbolic picture: A balloon attached to a chain, representing the innocence of youth ruined by control and exploitation.
This picture could not be more obvious. This young girl is chained and bruised. This is all a reference to child sex trafficking.
Two young girls are chained next to something that looks like a cheese grater (which might refer to torture).
Inside the backpack is a dildo. Pedos love to mix kiddie stuff with adult things. They’re catering to this sick crowd.
This child is wearing a choker (used in BDSM) and the entire setup is deeply disturbing.
The innocence of youth mixed with adult things such as smoking.
How can this be considered “art” or “fashion”? It looks like a child trafficking catalog.
The same girl from above is bleeding from the nose. Are you Fucking kidding me?
This child is wearing a hat on which is written “BALLS” while suggestively poking a fruit. Next to the picture frame is an EROTICA book. I’m not kidding. They’re making it very clear that this is all pedophilia.
Beastiality.
In one of its many “stand with Ukraine” social media posts, Gorsad includes this pic of a girl who looks unwell with chains around her genitals. This is all about sex trafficking.
A girl bleeding from her genitals. A direct reference to rape?
Aggressively Abusing Children
Gorsad loves depicting the abuse, torment, humiliation, and torture of children. I’m honestly not sure how these pictures are allowed to exist without an in-depth police investigation.
A recurring theme in Gorsad’s works: Children choking in plastic bags. Gratuitous celebration of abuse.
Shirtless children choke on plastic bags. They really should not be taking part in any of this but I’m not even sure their parents are anywhere around them.
A child wrapped in plastic. This looks like a victim of human trafficking being “disposed of”.
This picture is not only disgusting but it also conveys the deeply sadistic nature of those behind it. Forcing people to stand in their own filth causes intense trauma (it is a major torture technique) and this guy has to go through the humiliation of posing for a picture. I’m inclined that no “special effects” were involved in this picture.
They took this girl to a cemetery and forced her to deal with death. They’re into killing the innocence of children and exposing them to trauma.
This child is “silenced” by an unseen adult. The arm is covered in latex, which is usually used in BDSM outfits. This is 100% about child abuse.
There are numerous Gorsad pictures of young boys in mussels. Once again this is about humiliation, control, and reducing them to animals.
Occult Elite Symbolism
Compared to those above, the following pictures are relatively tame. However, they contain the exact symbolism that has been described on this site for years. Through these symbols, the photographers are telling you that they are part of the elite’s sick, satanic culture that revels in abuse and desecration of youth and innocence. This is why they are being celebrated by mass media instead of being condemned.
As stated in numerous articles, the one-eye sign represents occult elite control. That sign is all over Gorsad pictures.
More one-eye sign.
A young girl has a butterfly hiding one eye. As seen in previous articles, this is 100% Monarch Programming symbolism.
Another recurring Gorsad theme is outright satanism, combined with the ridiculing of Christianity. One truly needs to worship outright evil to focus one’s “art” around the suffering of children. Appropriately enough, the entire entertainment industry is drenched in satanic symbolism.
They scribbled 666 on the forehead of this sad boy and took a picture of him. How is this “art” or “fashion”?
In occultism, holding the horns of a goat is highly symbolic. This is all about forcing children to embrace Satanism.
A staple of Satanism is ridiculing Christianity. Here, they are ridiculing Jesus and his crown of thorns.
The models bite the apple from the Garden of Eden while the proverbial serpent (which represents Lucifer) is wrapped around them. The message: They fully embrace evil.
This picture features an inverted pentagram which is used in satanism and black magic. This is what they’re about. Also, this is what the occult elite is about. And this is why they’re getting money, contracts, accolades and exposure.
In Conclusion
I easily could have posted three times more pictures in this article and I could have included some of Gorsad’s disturbing videos featuring children. But this is more than enough. While I’m sorry about exposing readers to these distressing pictures (they certainly distressed me), this imagery needs to be exposed and properly analyzed so we all clearly witness the sick and sadistic culture that prevails in the entertainment world.
Gorsad is not an exception, it is not “underground” and it is not even “counter-culture”. It is mainstream. They were praised by CondeNast, the mega-conglomerate that controls an astounding number of magazines around the world. In fact, those who are NOT part of this sick culture are the ones who are shunned by the industry.
As seen above, numerous pictures Gorsad pictures involve children who appear unwell, as if they recently underwent abuse or trauma. Several pictures directly refer to pedophilia, child abuse, and sex trafficking. There are clear references to trauma, torture, violence, and death combined with celebrations of satanism and black magic.
In short, Gorsad graphically puts on display all of the obsessions of the occult elite, in the sickest way possible. If you think any of this is still a “conspiracy theory”, you might as well be blind because these pictures could not be clearer.
Please report these fuckers (Instagram) and expose these motherfuckers wherever you see them online.
NY Times:Kirstie Alley, Emmy-Winning ‘Cheers’ Actress, Dies at 71
When one has been “gas-lighted” — so many times and for so long – it’s only natural to start theorizing that every seemingly ordinary event may not actually be what it appears. This not only gives the abusing gas-lighter further ammunition with which to label his victim as “crazy” or “paranoid,” but it can literally lead to an altered state of mind as the victim really does start to question if his or her imagination is going too far.
* Note: Ga-slighting is a contemporary term which takes its name from a 1944 psychological thriller film, “Gaslight.” It is the manipulation of someone by psychological means which causes the target to question his own sanity, or to even go insane.
In ordinary times, the unfortunate news of the unexpected death of 71-year-old actress / Jenny Craig weight-loss spokeswoman, Kirstie Alley — “following a sudden and brief illness” (colon cancer) — would have come and gone like any other bit of celebrity news. But these are not ordinary times. In this day and age of 24/7 Fake News “gas-lighting,” the question must be asked: “Was this outspoken pro-Trump Hollywood star and crusader against child / baby traffic “Hugo Chavezed” — meaning, silenced by the Deep State via a surreptitiously administered rapid cancer-inducing agent?
Or maybe, your favorite reporter / author / historian / philosopher here really needs to take a break and escape to the mountains for a few days? That’s what sustained “gas-lighting” can do to even the clearest-thinking individual.
In the film “Gaslight,” the gas lights dimmed because the husband was upstairs in the attic, looking for the jewels from the woman he had murdered. After the wife noticed the dimming and asked questions, he suggested to her that she is unable to remember that she herself dimmed the lights.
Kirstie Alley starred in the 2013 Lifetime Channel movie, “Baby Sellers” — which exposed the dark world of infant trafficking we later saw depicted in the Pizzagate social media posts.
“Baby Sellers” came out four years before the shocking “Pizzagate” images (2 & 3) were discovered.
By the time she had become politically outspoken, Alley’s already-established star status afforded her a degree of both financial and life protection.In 2015, she tweeted that she would not be supporting Killary Clinton, and then endorsed Donald Trump. In 2020, she stated she intended to vote for him again because “he’s NOT a politician.” That alone would suffice to land her on Hollywood’s hate list — but it wouldn’t get one killed — if that’s what really happened (gaslight alert! gaslight alert!).
No, the truly unforgivable infraction for someone in Hollyweird to commit is to expose child rape and murder. Ask poor Isaac Kappy what happened to him after he outed Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg as pedo perverts. Oh, that’s right — you can’t ask Kappy. The lower-level Hollywood actor “jumped off of a bridge” and died in 2018 — just one month after Hanks had posted an image of an abandoned glove on the same highway (Route 66 (Satan)) with the text, “Historic Route 66. Roadkill? I hope not.”
A third possibility — the first two being natural causes or foul play — is that Kirstie Alley was placed under the protective custody of the Witness Security Program (White Hats). Frankly, I think the whole Trump family is in a safe unknown location. The very strange death-by-falling of Trump’s first wife, Ivana, and her subsequent low budget burial at a golf coursenever made any sense. (gaslight alert! gaslight alert!).These Satanic child-torturing motherfuckers, don’t play around. So don’t blame ME if we seem to get a bit too imaginative with certain death theories. Blame the gas-lighters.
Hanks’s April post about roadkill on Route 66 mocked the murder of his accuser, Isaac Kappy, one month in advance.
Rest in Peace, lovely lady (you are dead, right?) — Either way, we’ll continue the war against Satan’s legions.
It was during the early days of my awakening more than two decades ago — at a time when my own boys were just 13 and 9 — that this sickeningly unforgettable story left me shaken. Even then, one could sense by intuition alone that there was some undefinable, CONSPIRATORIAL force protecting child rapists and torturers in high places. Today — as a result of the Q Anon movement and the ongoing revelations about the Jeffrey Epstein / Ghislane Maxwell pedo-sex operation — this ghastly tale of horror can be much better understood as part of a high-level phenomenon instead of just low-level rings of everyday average perverts.
In a story titled, Paedophile Outrage Exposes Italian Media, The UK Guardian (among many other outlets) reported on October 4, 2020: “A prime time news broadcast of child pornography has stunned Italy, triggered political uproar in the state-owned RAI television network. Graphic images of children being tortured and apparently murdered were followed within minutes by an apology which in turn led to resignations and allegations of rampant corruption.
Interrupting programs to make an emotional late night broadcast, Gad Lerner (cough cough) accepted responsibility for the fiasco and quit as news director of RAI’s first channel.” (emphasis & coughing added)
Italy was on fire for several days over this event. In an editorial titled “The Silence of the Lambs,” Turin’s La Stampa said it was “frightening” that at least 1,700 Italians were being investigated for ordering such material.
“They are links in a chain of monsters. They say good morning to you, talk about the health of their children, about politics, and all the while, an evil film is running through their brain.”
The Corriere della Sera newspaper wrote in its front-page editorial.
“From our comfortable seat in life … we never could have imagined that thousands of well-off adults, integrated and even cultured, find pleasure in seeing children tortured and killed.”
The event happened after Russian and Italian police cracked an international pervert network selling expensive child “snuff” (murder porn) videos to clients in Italy, the U.S. and Germany. Why Lerner allowed a clip of snuff porn to air nationally (and then re-air one hour later!) remains a mystery. Perhaps Lerner himself — an outspoken pro-homosexual — was into this type of stuff? After 1000’s of complaints from horrified and enraged viewers jammed the switchboards of RAI, Lerner had to go. He delivered his ‘apology” on air and resigned.
Gad Lerner’s “co-religionists” in Russia dominated the child porn / snuff business in Yeltsin’s broken-down, Deep State-owned Russia. After stepping down from his position at the head of left-wing RAI, (Italy’s main channel) the Jew Lerner (who looks like a pervert himself) soon resurfaced as a big player in Italian media and left-wing politics.
Never before and never since has a scene of a boy being raped and killed been aired on television. Italians were shocked.
In another article from the UK Observer, published one week prior to the Italian TV scandal, we found some clues that the fall guys behind this monstrous business likely had higher-ups protecting them — or at least arranging to have their punishments mitigated.
It turns out that the main suspect — Dmitri Vladimirovich Kuznetsov — was arrested in Moscow for distributing thousands of sadistic child porn / snuff videos and images. He had been traced following the seizure of his filth from British perverts. In Italy alone, police seized 3,000 of Kuznetsov’s videos on their way to clients. The Italian investigators confirmed that the material included footage of children being murdered during the rape. They said that some of the clients had specifically requested murder videos.
Following are some excerpts from The Observer article, along with our observations:
UK Observer: A second Russian child porn ring, which allegedly had a British distributor, was broken up earlier this year… Since then there have been dozens of other finds. “We have seen some very, very nasty stuff involving sadistic abuse of very young children, but actual deaths on film takes it a whole step further. That is very worrying,” said one senior customs officer. Analysis: This shows the sickness is widespread. Yet, we can recall no national wall-to-wall media uproar in the US or the UK over the fact that so many monsters were paying to watch the sodomizing and murdering of Russian children on film.
UK Observer: Though two men arrested with Kuznetsov have also been imprisoned by Moscow authorities, only one of the three remains behind bars. Dmitri Ivanov was sentenced to 11 years for actually participating in the abuse that was being filmed. The others were released under an amnesty aimed at clearing Russia’s overcrowded prisons. Analysis: This lucrative business was booming in pre-Putin’s broken-down Russia of the Jewish Oligarchs. The fact that snuff producers were released in order to relieve “prison overcrowding” is evidence of higher-ups intervening. The very LAST people that any sane society would grant “amnesty” and such light sentences to would be child torturers / murderers.
UK Observer: When officers from the Moscow Criminal Investigation Department raided Kuznetsov’s flat they found two boys in a makeshift studio. They seized a huge quantity of films and other pornographic material as well as lists of clients in Italy, Germany, America and Britain. Analysis: Who were these people that ordered snuff porn? We never did find out. Why didn’t “60 Minutes” or any of the “investigative journalists” from Sulzberger’s seditious stable of “Pulitzer Prize winners” ever do an in-depth investigation into this widespread underground crisis? Certainly, such a story would have had tremendous audience appeal.
UK Observer: The Italian police say they now have evidence against about 500 people. Among the suspects were businessmen and public employees. Hundreds of people are also under investigation in Germany. Analysis: Italy, UK, Germany, USA — how many thousands of monsters are involved in this?
1. The international horror show is not a fictional “conspiracy theory,” and many elites are either directly involved, or willing to cover up for colleagues. / 2. Satanic witch Marina Abramovic. // 3. DC power-broker Tony Podesta (heavier man) collects snuff “art.” Both he and his brother, Clinton-hack John Podesta (thin man), are fans of Marina Abramovic, sadistic pedos, and child kidnapping suspects.
The 2007 Chicago Sun Times obituary for “Mama” Mary K. Podesta revealed that she “adopted” 25 children after moving to Washington DC.
Fake News NEVER investigates the international phenomenon of child kidnapping, trafficking rape and murder — but they’ll often run “fact-check” stories about us “conspiracy theorists” and our “baseless” claims. You see, a “conspiracy theorist” is to be hated and feared more than a child snuff practitioner! See headlines below.
Continued:
UK Observer: They cost between £300 and £4,000, depending on what type of film was ordered. Analysis: Obviously, the snuff vids had to be the most expensive ones. Converting pounds into dollars and adjusting for the inflation of the past 21 years — that means that these individuals were paying today’s equivalent of $12,000 to watch a screaming boy get sodomized and murdered on film — one time. We therefore infer that some of the people possessing that type of throwaway money had to have been in high stations in life. And if one is willing and able to pay out that much money to view snuff on film, would he not pay even more (if he could afford it) to actually perform the acts on a live child himself?
UK Observer: Covert film of young children naked or undressing was known as a ‘SNIPE’ video. The most appalling category was code-named “Necros Pedo” in which children were raped and tortured until they died. Analysis: Can you imagine the sheer terror a young boy or girl is sensing during “Necros Pedo?” Imagine if it were your child! Where’s the Greta Thunberg-like crusade against this global horror? How many normies are even aware of the extent of this?
UK Observer: Many customers repeatedly ordered videos from him. The Naples newspaper Il Mattino published a transcript of an alleged email exchange between a prospective client and the Russian vendors. ‘Promise me you’re not ripping me off,’ says the Italian. ‘Relax, I can assure you this one really dies,’ the Russian responds. ‘The last time I paid and I didn’t get what I wanted.’ ‘What do you want?’ ‘To see them die.’ Analysis: Hug your children / grandchildren and remember that this is why we fight these devils.
When you take an old story like this — with elements of it clearly indicating the involvement of some “elites” — and then factor in the big names of certain individuals since definitively exposed as child-raping monsters; then the “debunked” assertion that Satanic child rapists sit at the head table of the “Big Club” which runs this world isn’t so “crazy” and not so debunkable after all.
These people, no, these monsters are sick, evil, numerous and, by necessity, CONSPIRATORIAL. They must all be publicly exposed and killed. Please share this.
1. “Sir” Edward Heath (1916-2005) was UK Prime Minister from 1970 to 1974 and Leader of the Conservative Party from 1965-1975. (story here) // 2. Dennis Hastert, US Speaker of the House from 1999-2007 (story here) // 3. Lord Mountbatten (1900-1979) — The last British Viceroy of India — was a member of the British Royal family and second cousin of Queen Elizabeth II. (story here)
Some more intriguing factoids: * In our opinion — admittedly based upon circumstantial evidence — World War II instigator Winston Churchill was a boy rapist as well. * The two atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 were named “Fat Man” & “Little Boy.” * Hollywood pedo-rapist rings covered up (here) * CIA covered up rape of children by some of its employees (here) * Pentagon covered up rapes of Afghan boys (here) * State Department under Hillary Clinton covered up child rape (here)
Drag Queen Story Hour—in which performers in drag read books to kids in libraries, schools, and bookstores—has become a cultural flashpoint. The political Right has denounced these performances as sexual transgressions against children, while the political Left has defended them as an expression of LGBTQ pride. The intellectual debate has even spilled into real-world conflict: right-wing militants affiliated with the Proud Boys and the Three Percenters have staged protests against drag events for children, while their counterparts in the left-wing Antifa movement have responded with offers to serve as a protection force for the drag queens.
Families with children find themselves caught in the middle. Drag Queen Story Hour pitches itself as a family-friendly event to promote reading, tolerance, and inclusion. “In spaces like this,” the organization’s website reads, “kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where everyone can be their authentic selves.” But many parents, even if reluctant to say it publicly, have an instinctual distrust of adult men in women’s clothing dancing and exploring sexual themes with their children.
These concerns are justified. But to mount an effective opposition, one must first understand the sexual politics behind the glitter, sequins, and heels. This requires a working knowledge of an extensive history, from the origin of the first “queen of drag” in the late nineteenth century to the development of academic queer theory, which provides the intellectual foundation for the modern drag-for-kids movement.
The drag queen might appear as a comic figure, but he carries an utterly serious message: the deconstruction of sex, the reconstruction of child sexuality, and the subversion of middle-class family life. The ideology that drives this movement was born in the sex dungeons of San Francisco and incubated in the academy. It is now being transmitted, with official state support, in a number of public libraries and schools across the United States. By excavating the foundations of this ideology and sifting through the literature of its activists, parents and citizens can finally understand the new sexual politics and formulate a strategy for resisting it.
Start with queer theory, the academic discipline born in 1984 with the publication of Gayle S. Rubin’s essay “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality.” Beginning in the late 1970’s, Rubin, a lesbian writer and activist, had immersed herself in the subcultures of leather, bondage, orgies, fisting, and sado-masochism in San Francisco, migrating through an ephemeral network of BDSM (bondage, domination, sadomasochism) clubs, literary societies, and New Age spiritualist gatherings. In “Thinking Sex,” Rubin sought to reconcile her experiences in the sexual underworld with the broader forces of American society. Following the work of the French theorist Michel Foucault, Rubin sought to expose the power dynamics that shaped and repressed human sexual experience.
“Modern Western societies appraise sex acts according to a hierarchical system of sexual value,” Rubin wrote. “Marital, reproductive heterosexuals are alone at the top erotic pyramid. Clamouring below are unmarried monogamous heterosexuals in couples, followed by most other heterosexuals. . . . Stable, long-term lesbian and gay male couples are verging on respectability, but bar dykes and promiscuous gay men are hovering just above the groups at the very bottom of the pyramid. The most despised sexual castes currently include transsexuals, transvestites, fetishists, sadomasochists, sex workers such as prostitutes and porn models, and the lowliest of all, those whose eroticism transgresses generational boundaries.”
Rubin’s project—and, by extension, that of queer theory—was to interrogate, deconstruct, and subvert this sexual hierarchy and usher in a world beyond limits, much like the one she had experienced in San Francisco. The key mechanism for achieving this turn was the thesis of social construction. “The new scholarship on sexual behaviour has given sex a history and created a constructivist alternative to” the view that sex is a natural and pre-political phenomenon, Rubin wrote. “Underlying this body of work is an assumption that sexuality is constituted in society and history, not biologically ordained. This does not mean the biological capacities are not prerequisites for human sexuality. It does mean that human sexuality is not comprehensible in purely biological terms.” In other words, traditional conceptions of sex, regarding it as a natural behavior that reflects an unchanging order, are pure mythology, designed to rationalize and justify systems of oppression. For Rubin and later queer theorists, sex and gender were infinitely malleable. There was nothing permanent about human sexuality, which was, after all, “political.” Through a revolution of values, they believed, the sexual hierarchy could be torn down and rebuilt in their image.
There was some reason to believe that Rubin might be right. The sexual revolution had been conquering territory for two decades: the birth-control pill, the liberalization of laws surrounding marriage and abortion, the intellectual movements of feminism and sex liberation, the culture that had emerged around Playboy magazine. By 1984, as Rubin acknowledged, stable homosexual couples had achieved a certain amount of respectability in society. But Rubin, the queer theorists, and the fetishists of the BDSM subculture wanted more. They believed that they were on the cusp of fundamentally transforming sexual norms. “There [are] historical periods in which sexuality is more sharply contested and more overtly politicized,” Rubin wrote. “In such periods, the domain of erotic life is, in effect, renegotiated.” And, following the practice of any good negotiator, they laid out their theory of the case and their maximum demands. As Rubin explained: “A radical theory of sex must identify, describe, explain, and denounce erotic injustice and sexual oppression. Such a theory needs refined conceptual tools which can grasp the subject and hold it in view. It must build rich descriptions of sexuality as it exists in society and history. It requires a convincing critical language that can convey the barbarity of sexual persecution.” Once the ground is softened and the conventions are demystified, the sexual revolutionaries could do the work of rehabilitating the figures at the bottom of the hierarchy—“transsexuals, transvestites, fetishists, sadomasochists, sex workers.”
Where does this process end? At its logical conclusion: the abolition of restrictions on the behavior at the bottom end of the moral spectrum—pedophilia. Though she uses euphemisms such as “boy-lovers” and “men who love underaged youth,” Rubin makes her case clearly and emphatically. In long passages throughout “Thinking Sex,” Rubin denounces fears of child sex abuse as “erotic hysteria,” rails against anti–child pornography laws, and argues for legalizing and normalizing the behavior of “those whose eroticism transgresses generational boundaries.” These men are not deviants, but victims, in Rubin’s telling. “Like communists and homosexuals in the 1950’s, boy-lovers are so stigmatized that it is difficult to find defenders for their civil liberties, let alone for their erotic orientation,” she explains. “Consequently, the police have feasted on them. Local police, the FBI, and watchdog postal inspectors have joined to build a huge apparatus whose sole aim is to wipe out the community of men who love underaged youth. In twenty years or so, when some of the smoke has cleared, it will be much easier to show that these men have been the victims of a savage and undeserved witch hunt.” Rubin wrote fondly of those primitive hunter-gatherer tribes in New Guinea in which “boy-love” was practiced freely.
Such positions are hardly idiosyncratic within the discipline of queer theory. The father figure of the ideology, Foucault, whom Rubin relies upon for her philosophical grounding, was a notorious sadomasochist who once joined scores of other prominent intellectuals to sign a petition to legalize adult–child sexual relationships in France. Like Rubin, Foucault haunted the underground sex scene in the Western capitals and reveled in transgressive sexuality. “It could be that the child, with his own sexuality, may have desired that adult, he may even have consented, he may even have made the first moves,” Foucault once told an interviewer on the question of sex between adults and minors. “And to assume that a child is incapable of explaining what happened and was incapable of giving his consent are two abuses that are intolerable, quite unacceptable.”
French philosopher Michel Foucault, the father figure of queer theory, an academic discipline that seeks to subvert sexual hierarchies
Rubin’s American compatriots made the same argument even more explicitly. Longtime Rubin collaborator Pat Califia, who would later become a transgender man, claimed that American society had turned pedophiles into “the new communists, the new niggers, the new witches.” For Califia, age-of-consent laws, religious sexual mores, and families who police the sexuality of their children represented a thousand-pound bulwark against sexual freedom. “You can’t liberate children and adolescents without disrupting the entire hierarchy of adult power and coercion and challenging the hegemony of antisex fundamentalist religious values,” she lamented. All of it—the family, the law, the religion, the culture—was a vector of oppression, and all of it had to go.
The second prerequisite for understanding Drag Queen Story Hour is to understand the historical development of the art of drag. It begins with a freed slave named William Dorsey Swann, who dressed in elaborate silk and satin women’s costumes, called himself the “queen of drag,” and organized sexually charged soirées in his home in Washington, D.C. Over the course of his life, Swann was convicted of petty larceny—he had stolen books from a library and dinnerware from a private residence—and then, in 1896, was charged with “keeping a disorderly house,” a euphemism for running a brothel, and sentenced to 300 days in jail. From the viewpoint of modern sexual politics, the story has all the elements of the perfect left-wing archetype: Swann was a man who liberated himself from chattel slavery and then from a repressive sexual culture, despite the best efforts of the oppressors, the puritans, and the police.
Drag became explicitly political seven decades later, during the Stonewall riots of 1969, in which patrons of a gay bar in New York City rioted against police and began a wave of gay and lesbian political activism. As writer Daniel Harris explained in the counterculture journal Salmagundi, traditional drag performances from William Dorsey Swann until the mid-1960’s were sensual experiences, “an innocuous camp pastime,” but with the onset of the sexual revolution, they became forms of resistance and revolution. “After the 1960’s,” Harris wrote, “ideology [tightened] its grip on the aesthetic of drag when gay men began to use their costumes to reevaluate the whole concept of normality and thus carry out a crucial part of the cross-dresser’s agenda: revenge.” Drag performers increasingly saw their vocation as political and started street organizations such as Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries in order to join the wave of activism rising through their communities in New York, San Francisco, and other hubs.
Suddenly, drag was not a private performance but a statement of public rebellion. The queens began using costume and performance to mock the fashion, manners, and mores of Middle America. In time, the need to shock required the performers to push the limits. “Men now wear such sexually explicit outfits as ball gowns with prosthetic breasts sewn on to the outside of the dresses, black nighties with gigantic strap-on dildos, and transparent vinyl mini-skirts that reveal lacy panties with strategic rips and telltale stains suggestive of deflowerment,” Harris noted. “The less drag is meant to allure, the bawdier it becomes, with men openly massaging their breasts, squeezing the bulges of their g-strings, sticking out their asses and tongues like porn stars in heat, and lying spread-eagle on their backs on parade routes with their helium heels flung into the air and their virginal prom dresses thrown over their heads.”
“The goal of drag, following Butler and Rubin, is to obliterate conceptions of gender through performativity.”
The next critical turn occurred in 1990, with the publication of Gender Trouble, by the queer theorist Judith Butler. Gender Trouble was a bombshell: it elevated the discourse around queer sexuality from the blunt rhetoric of Gayle Rubin to a realm of highly abstract, and sometimes impenetrable, intellectualism. Butler’s essential contribution was twofold: first, she saturated queer theory with postmodernism; second, she provided a theory of social change, based on the concept of “performativity,” which offered a more sophisticated conceptual ground than simple carnal transgression. Gender Trouble’s basic argument is that Western society has created a regime of “compulsory heterosexuality and phallogocentrism,” which has sought to enforce a singular, unitary notion of “sex” that crushes and obscures the true complexity and variation of biological sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, and human desire. Butler argues that even the word “woman,” though it relates to a biological reality, is a social construction and cannot be defined with any stable meaning or categorization. There is nothing essential about “man,” “woman,” or “sex”: they are all created and re-created through historically contingent human culture; or, as Butler puts it, they are all defined through their performance, which can change, shift, and adapt across time and space.
Butler’s theory of social change is that once the premise is established that gender is malleable and used as an instrument of power, currently in favor of “heterosexual normativity,” then the work of social reconstruction can begin. And the drag queen embodies Butler’s theory of gender deconstruction. “The performance of drag plays upon the distinction between the anatomy of the performer and the gender that is being performed. But we are actually in the presence of three contingent dimensions of significant corporeality: anatomical sex, gender identity, and gender performance,” Butler writes. “When such categories come into question, the reality of gender is also put into crisis: it becomes unclear how to distinguish the real from the unreal. And this is the occasion in which we come to understand that what we take to be ‘real,’ what we invoke as the naturalized knowledge of gender is, in fact, a changeable and revisable reality. Call it subversive or call it something else. Although this insight does not in itself constitute a political revolution, no political revolution is possible without a radical shift in one’s notion of the possible and the real.”
By the 2000’s, the performance of drag had absorbed all these elements—the social-justice origin story of William Dorsey Swann, the carnal shock-and-awe of Gayle Rubin, the ethereal postmodernism of Judith Butler—and brought them together onto the stage. The queer theorist Sarah Hankins, who performed extensive field research in drag bars in the Northeast, captured the spirit of this subculture and its ideology in a study for the academic journal Signs. Drawing on the work of Rubin and Butler, Hankins describes three genres of drag—straight-ahead, burlesque, and genderfuck—that range from stripteases and lap dances to simulations of necrophilia, bestiality, and race fetishism. Hankins describes the world of drag as a “sociosexual economy,” in which the members of “queerdom” can titillate, gratify, and reward one another with cash tips and money exchanges. “As an audience member, I have always experienced the tip exchange as payment for sexual gratification,” Hankins writes. “And I am aware that by holding up dollar bills, I can satisfy my arousal, at least partially: I can bring performers’ bodies close to mine and induce them to touch me or to let me touch them.” Or, as one of her research subjects, the drag queen Katya Zamolodchikova, puts it: “I’m literally out there peddling my pussy for dollar bills.”
The goal of drag, following the themes of Butler and Rubin, is to obliterate stable conceptions of gender through performativity and to rehabilitate the bottom of the sexual hierarchy through the elevation of the marginal. “The act of paying a dominant/domineering woman, a male supplicant, a hapless wage slave, or a boy allows the audience member to temporarily embody one or more of a number of ‘bad/unnatural’ social positions, for instance the pedophile, the closeted gay chickenhawk, the predatory female cougar, the sugar daddy or momma, even the sexualized youth/child themselves,” Hankins writes. And the discipline of “genderfuck” takes it a step even beyond adult–child sex. As Hankins describes, this style of performance “foregrounds tropes of primitivism and degeneracy as tools of protest and liberation” and seeks to subvert taboos against “pedophilia, necrophilia, erotic object fetishism, and human–animal sex.” These performances constitute the end of the line: the culmination of more than a century’s work, from the silk-and-satin drag balls to the hyper-cerebral politics of deconstruction to the annihilation of traditional notions of sex.
The final turn in the story of drag is, in some ways, the most surprising. As the dark side of drag pushed transgression to the limits, another faction began moving from the margins to the mainstream. Some drag queens—most notably, the drag performer RuPaul—toned down the routines, pushed the ideology deep into the background, and presented drag as good old-fashioned, glamorous American fun. Television producers packaged this new form of drag as reality programming, softening the image of the drag queen and assimilating the genre into mass media and consumer culture.
This provided an opportunity. As the queer theorists’ vanguard intellectual project was running aground on incest and bestiality fantasies, the most enterprising among them took a different tack: using the commercialization of drag and the goodwill associated with the gay and lesbian rights movement as a means of transforming drag performances into “family-friendly” events that could transmit a simplified version of queer theory to children. The key figure in this transition was a “genderqueer” college professor and drag queen named Harris Kornstein—stage name Lil Miss Hot Mess—who hosted some of the original readings in public libraries and wrote the children’s book The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish, Swish, Swish. Kornstein sits on the board of Drag Queen Story Hour, the nonprofit organization that was founded by Michelle Tea in 2015 to promote “family-friendly” drag performances and has since expanded to 40 local chapters that have organized hundreds of performances across the United States.
College professor Harris Kornstein, aka Lil Miss Hot Mess, a key figure in transforming drag performances into “family-friendly” events
Kornstein also published the manifesto for the movement, “Drag Pedagogy: The Playful Practice of Queer Imagination in Early Childhood,” with coauthor Harper Keenan, a female-to-male transgender queer theorist at the University of British Columbia. With citations to Foucault and Butler, the essay begins by applying queer theory’s basic premise of social constructivism and heteronormativity to the education system. “The professional vision of educators is often shaped to reproduce the state’s normative vision of its ideal citizenry. In effect, schooling functions as a way to straighten the child into a kind of captive alignment with the current parameters of that vision,” Kornstein and Keenan write. “To state it plainly, within the historical context of the USA and Western Europe, the institutional management of gender has been used as a way of maintaining racist and capitalist modes of (re)production.”
To disrupt this dynamic, the authors propose a new teaching method, “drag pedagogy,” as a way of stimulating the “queer imagination,” teaching kids “how to live queerly,” and “bringing queer ways of knowing and being into the education of young children.” As Kornstein and Keenan explain, this is an intellectual and political project that requires drag queens and activists to work toward undermining traditional notions of sexuality, replacing the biological family with the ideological family, and arousing transgressive sexual desires in young children. “Building in part from queer theory and trans studies, queer and trans pedagogies seek to actively destabilize the normative function of schooling through transformative education,” they write. “This is a fundamentally different orientation than movements towards the inclusion or assimilation of LGBT people into the existing structures of school and society.”
For the drag pedagogists, the traditional life path—growing up, getting married, working 40 hours a week, and raising a family—is an oppressive bourgeois norm that must be deconstructed and subverted. As the drag queens take the stage in their sexually suggestive costumes, Kornstein and Keenan argue, their task is to disrupt the “binary between womanhood and manhood,” seed the room with “gender-transgressive themes,” and break the “reproductive futurity” of the “nuclear family” and the “sexually monogamous marriage”—all of which are considered mechanisms of heterosexual, capitalist oppression. The books selected in many Drag Queen Story Hour performances—Cinderelliot, If You’re a Drag Queen and You Know It, The Gender Wheel, Bye Bye, Binary, and They, She, He, Easy as ABC—promote this basic narrative. Though Drag Queen Story Hour events are often billed as “family-friendly,” Kornstein and Keenan explain that this is a form of code: “It may be that DQSH is ‘family friendly,’ in the sense that it is accessible and inviting to families with children, but it is less a sanitizing force than it is a preparatory introduction to alternate modes of kinship. Here, DQSH is ‘family friendly’ in the sense of ‘family’ as an old-school queer code to identify and connect with other queers on the street.” That is, the goal is not to reinforce the biological family but to facilitate the child’s transition into the ideological family.
After the norms of gender, sexuality, marriage, and family are called into question, the drag queen can begin replacing this system of values with “queer ways of knowing and being.” Kornstein and Keenan make no bones about it: the purpose of what they call drag pedagogy, or the “pedagogy of desire,” is about reformulating children’s relationship with sex, sexuality, and eroticism. They describe drag as a “site of queer pleasure” that promises to “turn rejection into desire” and “[transform] the labour of performance into the pleasure of participation,” and DQSH as offering a “queer relationality” between adult and child. They litter their paper with sexualized language and double entendres, blurring the lines between adult sexuality and childhood innocence. In fact, as the queer pedagogist Hannah Dyer has written, queer pedagogy and, by extension, drag pedagogy seek to expose the very concept of “childhood innocence” as an oppressive heteropatriarchal illusion. “Applying queer methods of analysis to studies of childhood can help to queer the rhetoric of innocence that constrains all children and help to refuse attempts to calculate the child’s future before it has the opportunity to explore desire,” Dyer writes.
The purpose, then, is to subvert the system of heteronormativity, which includes childhood innocence, and re-engineer childhood sexuality from the ground up. And drag performances provide a visual, symbolic, and erotic method for achieving this. Kornstein and Keenan’s language of the discipline—“pleasure,” “desire,” “bodies,” “girls,” “boys,” “glitter,” “sequins,” “wigs,” and “heels”—gives it away.
Of course, the organizers of Drag Queen Story Hour understand that they must manage their public image to continue enjoying access to public libraries and public schools. They have learned how to speak in code to NGO’s and to appease the anxieties of parents, while subtly promoting the ideology of queer theory to children. While many of Drag Queen Story Hour’s defenders claim that these programs are designed to foster LGBTQ “acceptance” and “inclusion,” Kornstein and Keenan explicitly dismiss those objectives as mere “marketing language” that provides cover for their real agenda. “Though DQSH publicly positions its impact in ‘help[ing] children develop empathy, learn about gender diversity and difference, and tap into their own creativity,’ we argue that its contributions can run deeper than morals and role models,” they write. “As an organization, DQSH may be incentivized to recite lines about alignment with curricular standards and social-emotional learning in order to be legible within public education and philanthropic institutions. Drag itself ultimately does not take these utilitarian aims too seriously (but it is quite good at looking the part when necessary).” In other words, as a movement, Drag Queen Story Hour has learned the dance of operating a cash-flow-positive activist organization, winning government contracts, and securing access to audiences, while providing a plausible rhetorical defense against parents who might question the wisdom of adult men creating “site[s] of queer pleasure” with their children.
This gambit has been remarkably successful. Drag Queen Story Hour began with voluntary programs at public libraries, which are required by law to provide equal access to organizations regardless of political affiliation or ideology. But within a few years, those state-neutral events have turned into state-subsidized drag performances for children. The New York City Council and New York Public Library have provided taxpayer funding directly to the Drag Queen Story Hour nonprofit, sparking a trend of state-subsidized drag readings, dances, and performances across the country. Next, the New York City Public Schools, with more than $200,000 in funding from the municipal government, began hosting dozens of drag performances in elementary, middle, and high schools in all five boroughs. Other political figures seem to want to go even further. The attorney general of Michigan has called for a “drag queen for every school.” California state senator Scott Wiener has suggested in a tweet that he might propose legislation to offer “Drag Queen 101 as part of the K–12 curriculum” and mandate that students attend Drag Queen Story Time as a way to “satisfy the requirement.” Both might have said this tongue in cheek—but in any case, these things have a way of going from joke to reality at the speed of light.
“New York City began hosting dozens of drag performances in public schools in all five boroughs.”
Though the spread of sexually charged drag performances has an aura of inevitability, one should keep in mind that transgressive ideologies always contain the seeds of their own destruction.
As the movement behind drag shows for children has gained notoriety and expanded its reach, some drag performers have let the mask slip: in Minneapolis, a drag queen in heels and a pink miniskirt spread his legs open in front of children; in Portland, a large male transvestite allowed toddlers to climb on top of him, grab at his fake breasts, and press themselves against his body; and in England, a drag queen taught a group of preschoolers how to perform a sexually suggestive dance.
Advocates of Drag Queen Story Hour might reply that these are outlier cases and that many of the child-oriented events feature drag queens reading books and talking about gender, not engaging in sexualized performances. But the spirit of drag is predicated on the transgressive sexual element and the ideology of queer theory, which cannot be erased by switching the context and softening the language. The philosophical and political project of queer theory has always been to dethrone traditional heterosexual culture and elevate what Rubin called the “sexual caste” at the bottom of the hierarchy: the transsexual, the transvestite, the fetishist, the sadomasochist, the prostitute, the porn star, and the pedophile. Drag Queen Story Hour can attempt to sanitize the routines and run criminal background checks on its performers, but the subculture of queer theory will always attract men who want to follow the ideology to its conclusions.
When parents, voters, and political leaders understand the true nature of Drag Queen Story Hour and the ideology that drives it, they will work quickly to restore the limits that have been temporarily—and recklessly—abandoned. They will draw a bright line between adult sexuality and childhood innocence, and send the perversions of “genderfuck,” “primitivism,” and “degeneracy” back to the margins, where they belong.
An older photo of Biden (the real one) with his troubled sex-obsessed daughter.
AUGUST 25, 2022
NY Times: Florida Pair Pleads Guilty in Theft of Biden’s Daughter’s Diary
Aimee Harris and Robert Kurlander admitted to participating in a conspiracy in which Ashley Biden’s diary ended up in the hands of the conservative group Project Veritas near the end of the 2020 campaign.
The “theft” and emerging introduction of Ashley Biden‘s salacious diary — which includes allegations of incest — into the public and legal spheres smells like yet another one of those White Hat “washing of the fruit from the poison tree” operations. And oh what a pleasant aroma it is!
From the article:
“Two Florida residents pleaded guilty in federal court in Manhattan on Thursday to stealing a diary and other belongings of President Biden’s daughter, Ashley Biden, and selling them to the conservative group Project Veritas in the final weeks of the 2020 campaign.”
The “inadvertently” misplaced diary — like Hunter Biden’s child pornish laptop (“inadvertently” left at a repair shop) — and Alex Jones‘ cell phone contents (“inadvertently” sent to opposing counsel) — and the “raided” documents from Mar-a-Lago etc. etc. etc. is now fair game in a legal, evidentiary sense — which was the plan all along. Well played, White Hats, well played. By the way, Project Veritas has a defamation lawsuit going against the New York Times and O’Keefe is demanding a TON of money and a jury trial.
*Note: * Project Veritas never actually published the diaries after having come into possession of them. It was a much lesser known blogger which later published parts of them.
Ashley is the daughter of Pedo Monster Joe and his 2nd wife, Jill. 2 & 3. A dirty, depraved and demented predator who cannot control himself around women (including other men’s wives), little girls and little boys. .
The Times article represents a classic example of the practice known as “lying by omission.” What makes the diaries so potentially explosive is Ashley’s private speculation that she had been molested, and took showers with her father. But nowhere in this lengthy article are Ashley’s claims even mentioned. There is no longer any excuse for concealing this because, first of all, the diaries are now accepted as authentic, even by the Times —- and secondly, many millions of people are already aware of the claims because they have been circulating on the Internet for more than one year now. The following excerpt is the closest that the article comes to revealing that the diaries contain very bad information:
“The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan began the investigation in late October 2020, after it was alerted by Ms. Biden’s lawyers that Project Veritas had demanded an interview with her father about the contents of the diary, which included embarrassing disclosures about them.”
Spin it all you want, Sulzberger. But sooner or later, America will know that Joe Biden / “Joe Biden” is / was a child rapist. That’s what this whole operation is about, I believe.
Actual quote: “You know how horny I am standing next to a 13 year old girl.”
Another side-effect of this story is that it leads to more suspicion about the tragic crash in which Neila Biden(Biden’s first wife) and daughter Naomi (age 1) were killed. On the afternoon of December 18, 1972 — one month after he had been first elected to the U.S. Senate — Neilia was driving with her three toddlers along a rural road in Delaware. At an intersection, she inexplicably pulled out in front of an oncoming tractor-trailer truck. Police speculated that Neilia drove into the path of the truck because her head was turned and she did not see it. All four occupants were taken to Wilmington General Hospital, where Neilia and Naomi were pronounced dead on arrival. Her two sons, Beau (3) and Hunter (2), were critically injured but survived the wreck with multiple serious injuries. Two weeks later, Papa Joe, just recently turned 30 years old, was sworn into the US Senate at the hospital where Beau and Hunter were still being treated.
Nearly 40 years later, Biden made the false claim that the truck driver (since deceased) had “drank his lunch” just before the fatal collision. The driver’s family vehemently denied that claim and the police did not substantiate it either. Lyin’ Biden soon apologized to the deceased trucker’s family. In a 2015 commencement speech at Yale University, the then-Vice President made a rather odd comment. He spoke of his first wife and then said:
“The incredible bond I have with my children is the gift I’m not sure I would have had, had I not been through what I went through [after the fatal accident]. But by focusing on my sons, I found my redemption.”
“Redemption?” Hmmmm. What did you have to “redeem” yourself of after the tragedy, Joe? Did you do something that drove your wife to madness?
The phenomenon of “Suicide by Truck” is well known within the trucking community, and something that truckers dread. Could Neila Biden have been driven to killing herself and her three children as the only means of escaping a powerful & protected sex-mad pedo monster who was impregnating her at the rate of once-a-year and who may already have been diddling the genitals of all three of the toddlers? Is anything outside of the realm of possibility when dealing with these demons in human form?
A spate of recent stomach-churning books, TV shows and films suggests we’ve never looked so delicious — to one another.
I can’t quite say that I was expecting this type of “soft-on-cannibalism” piece to soon appear in the “paper of record” — but given the “normalization” of gender insanity and child grooming; as well as the trial balloons regarding Satanism and child rape (we refuse to utter the benign-sounding term: “pedophilia” (love of children) — we are not at all surprised by this article. Repulsed, yes. Surprised, no.
The excerpts — from a story which does not seem to mind the spate of cannibalism books, shows and movies being churned out lately — speaks for itself:
“An image came to Chelsea G. Summers: a boyfriend, accidentally on purpose hit by a car, some quick work with a corkscrew and his liver served Tuscan style, on toast.
That figment of her twisted imagination is what prompted Ms. Summers to write her novel, “A Certain Hunger,” about a restaurant critic with a taste for (male) human flesh. Turns out, cannibalism has a time and a place. In the pages of some recent stomach-churning books, and on television and film screens, Ms. Summers and others suggest that that time is now.
There is “Yellowjackets,” a Showtime series about a high school women’s soccer team stranded in the woods for a few months too many… The film “Fresh,” released on Hulu in March, involves an underground human meat trade for the rich.
“Lapvona,” a novel published in June, portrays cannibalism in a medieval village overcome by plague and drought. Agustina Bazterrica’s book “Tender Is the Flesh,” released in English in 2020 imagines a future society that farms humans like cattle. From 2017, “Raw,” tells the story of a vegetarian veterinary student whose taste for meat escalates after consuming raw offal.
Still to come is “Bones and All,” about a young love that becomes a lust for human consumption, is expected to be released later this year.”
The cannibalistic columnist and occasional Slimes contributor, Alex Beggs, is actually a food writer — formerly for Bon Appetit magazine — and there is not a hint of disgust or reasonable judgement about these sick and twisted stories from Ms. Beggs. Maybe she eats the stuff herself?
1. The article “beggs” the question — does Ms. Beggs eat people? // 2. In “Fresh,” a woman becomes charmed by a man she meets at a grocery store, whom she later discovers is involved in an underground human flesh trade. // 3. Another disgusting image from the Slimes (yet they won’t show what aborted babies look like).Times image & caption: A course on cannibalism in contemporary fiction would include “Lapvona,” “A Certain Hunger” and “Tender Is the Flesh.”
The Times’ first foray into cannibalistic “normalization” came in the form of a December 2020 story about consumable human meat, on display at a London museum exhibit.
From that piece:
“Orkan Telhan, an artist and associate professor of fine arts ,spent the last year imagining how climate change might impact the future of food consumption. He collaborated with scientists to create a provocative development of what they call “Ouroboros Steak,” meat cultivated from human cells and expired blood, that challenged the sustainability practices of the nascent cellular agriculture industry, which develops lab-grown products from existing cell cultures.“
Cannibalism to solve the climate “crisis?” A Swedish “behavioral scientist” named Magnus Söderlund was actually given a respectful hearing when he proposed that in 2019; as was “evolutionary biologist,” militant atheist and apologist for what he calls “mild pedophilia” Richard Dawkins in 2018. The abuse of children and the consumption of human flesh and blood are indeed part of the ritual practice of Satanism. This stuff is real, boys & girls — and it’s a lot more vast and historically entrenched in high places than what most analysts of this phenomenon might previously have imagined.
1. “Ouroboros Steak,” meat cultivated from human cells and expired blood on display in London. // 2. “Art” imitates life? // 3. Professor Magnus Söderlund
One of the “tricks of the trade” for deconstructing the devious dung presented by the “paper of record” is to look for instances in which the writers will attempt to dispel a shocking absolute truth by actually stating said truth openly and precisely. This is done to make the truth seem ridiculous because, upon hearing such astonishing assertions – without any context or advance “baby step” preparation — the normie mind shuts down and automatically accepts that the “conspiracy theorists” are quite insane. For example, here’s a 2020 excerpt from the Slimes, about Q Anon’s core beliefs:
“The QAnon movement is a false belief that Trump is saving the world from a Satanic cult made up of Democratic pedophiles and cannibals.“ (as the readers shake their heads and laugh at us)
ANYT Translation to Truth: There is a Satanic cult made up of Leftist child rapists and cannibals ruling the world.
See how the “in broad daylight” coverup trick works?
1. Time Mag: 1979 // 2. Time has run many stories sympathetic to Satanism.At some of her “art” events, Satanist-to-the-Stars Marina Abramovic invites her “elite” guests to eat mock human bodies. They probably eat the real stuff in super secret settings.
The political left as a movement has proven to be made up of some of the worst people imaginable – The kind of people that thirst for destruction and take joy in the oppression of others.
They might think they are reveling in a form of anarchy, but they are actually the opposite: They are chaos creators, but only as a means to gain total control.
However, while leftists make my skin crawl with their pungent scent of evil, there is one group of people that is even more annoying, and that’s the fence sitters and fake moderates.
Though these people will never admit it, there are times when social conflict arises and one side is completely right while the other side is completely wrong.
Fake moderates pretend as if there are merits to the side that is wrong even when there are none because they want to appear as though they are “wise.” The truth is they don’t have the guts to take a stand one way or the other, and so they act as if neither side is correct, or that both sides are partially right.
Meaning, the side of destruction is given license to continue their pillaging because, hey, we don’t want to seem like we are discriminating or biased, right?
This is how societies and cultures are slowly but inevitably erased and the principles they hold dear are eroded to nothing. It’s mostly done through apathy and a sedate tolerance of corruption. Compromise is the hallmark of “democracy,” and it is also the root of tyranny.
If people did not compromise on their principles and freedoms, tyranny could not exist. This why the Founding Fathers of the US opposed pure democracy and formed our nation as a Constitutional Republic with checks and balances.
Democracy alone often demands acceptance of poisonous and oppressive behaviors we might otherwise stop, all in the name of appeasing the “majority.”
Discrimination, at times, can be a good thing. It is a biological imperative that contributes to tribalism and has allowed humanity to survive as a species for millennia.
Without the ability to discriminate, all behaviors no matter how radioactive would proliferate, and this is what we are facing today in western societies.
When tribes were faced with narcissist members, psychopathic members, or outright schizophrenic and delusion members, those people were often cast out or ignored and for good reason. When the insane and the sociopathic are allowed to integrate into a culture they are also allowed to inject a certain level of moral insanity into that culture.
Insanity is generally an inborn condition, but insane habits can also be learned, and if people think there are benefits and gains associated with acting insane, some of them will do so and the problem will grow.
The political left argues that all discriminating tendencies are a form of bigotry. Yet, they are some of the most bigoted people on the planet when it comes to opposing ideals and beliefs. We can see this attitude within their own policies and the people they seek to censor.
They readily embrace full bore erasure of all ideas that contradict their beliefs and they do this because they know, given enough time, that this kind of censorship works.
They are trying to reverse the old tribal model – These days, anyone who is SANE must be converted or cast out of society.
The examples are numerous. Anyone who points out the lack of science behind transsexual ideology and gender fluid theory is immediately a “bigot” and must be cast out. Anyone who questions extreme environmentalism and carbon controls is a “climate denier” and must be cast out.
Anyone who questions government paid “medical experts” and their draconian mandates is “anti-science” and must be cast out. Anyone who claims that Critical Race Theory is highly inaccurate and misleading is a “racist” and needs to be cast out.
Anyone that thinks teachers should not be allowed to sexualize children in schools and exploit those kids for their own psychological gratification is a “homophobe” that must be cast out. It goes on and on.
I have even seen leftists in the media defend heinous acts such as pedophilia because to be deeply opposed to any character trait of any human being is to commit the greatest sin in the leftist religion – Who are you to question the internal “truth” of an individual and set boundaries for their behavior? You have become intolerant, and therefore you are a heretic.
Make no mistake, this philosophy of “equity” might seem like random madness but it serves a very specific agenda. If all behaviors must be tolerated, then any evil can become acceptable. The only evil action you can then commit is intolerance of evil. See how that works?
Psychopaths and those that lack empathy can now rule over our culture because they cannot be confronted without great social risk.
In a world where everyone is a good person at heart the idea of “equity” might work (probably not), but in a world where inherent evil exists and such people have no qualms about hurting who they want to get what they want, a culture built on equity is doomed to self destruct.
All they have to do is claim that they are a part of an oppressed class, a victim group, and therefore you are not allowed to question their actions.
If men want to claim they are women and overrun women’s sports, women’s locker rooms, women’s bathrooms, women’s prisons and women’s health, we have to let them, because if we don’t then we are denying their “existence” as they see it in their own heads.
If a pedophile wants to commit pedophilia we have to let them, because if we don’t we are guilty of discriminating against a psychological minority. If a mother wants to murder her unborn baby out of convenience, we have to let her, because who are we to tell her she has to face the consequences of her sexual actions?
Leftists believe in no moral boundaries, only political boundaries. The only behaviors that can be restricted are the behaviors that conflict with their ideology.
The past few months have been rather surprising in terms of the Supreme Court’s decisions and I can only hope that this represents a step away from our nation’s extreme flirtations with the leftist fold.
The end result of the “do what thou wilt” philosophy is clear as day – It can only lead to complete societal collapse and indoctrination of future generations. And maybe, just maybe, some members of the Supreme Court have realized this.
Decisions in favor of the right to self defense under the constitution have finally shut down the political left’s obsession with disarming their opponents.
They see the 2nd Amendment as the last stronghold of a conservative culture that stands in the way of their plans to absorb America, turning it into something unrecognizable in the process.
As with all authoritarian regimes, leftists seek to take the right of defense away from anyone that does not believe as they believe. Their dreams are crushed, for now.
The decision to end Roe v. Wade and federal protections for abortion is perhaps the most surprising of all. Leftists view cultural tolerance of child murder as their greatest victory.
It’s not about women’s bodies or women’s rights; if abortion was about “human rights” then they would have to honestly take into account the rights of the child in the womb.
But, they won’t do that, because rights are irrelevant to them. What abortion is really about is changing the limits of what Americans are willing to morally endure. What long held virtues are we willing to sacrifice, and how many children are we willing to sacrifice in the name of “tolerance and equity?”
It’s a game, you see. A game played by psychopaths. And the goal of the game is to see if they can make all the people around them act just like them.
Can you be turned to the dark side? That is the purpose of this game, and they revel in the idea that deep down everyone else is just as evil as they are.
The refusal to compromise on such issues might seem like a push to the “far right” of the political spectrum, and this is the great lie that everyone has been led to believe.
Leftists have moved the goal posts so far in their direction that any moderate shift away from their end game is treated as an “alt-right attack” that will lead to fascism (even though fascists are all socialists just like leftists). What’s really happening, in my view, is a slow return to center.
Millions of Americans do not trust the left and they certainly don’t want to live in a world where there are no boundaries and all discrimination is considered a hate crime.
At their genetic core, most people understand that certain behaviors are wrong on every level and cannot be allowed. And if acceptance is actually a mantra for leftists, then they should also have to accept the existence of principles that do not align with their own.
The backlash against these people is very real. They see it as a conservative insurrection, but really, it’s only the beginning of a pendulum swing back to center by people who have a conscience.
This swing has to be uncompromising, because if there is any semblance of weakness the leftists will use it to pull us all back into the insane asylum.
There can be no moderation at this time, no fence sitting, no slack. The time for pretending there are merits to the leftist cult is over. The time to draw a line in the sand has begun.
Disney to Lose Special Tax Status in Florida Amid ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Clash * DeSantis’s Attack on Disney Is an Assault on Democracy
* What We Know About the DeSantis-Disney Rift
The once untouchable Walt Disney Co. Empire has had a very rough month of April. Bad publicity, a dying streaming service, sinking stock price, and White Hat Governor’s Ron DeSantis unexpected revocation of a 55-year-old arrangement which gave Disney special tax status and allowed it to self-govern its 25,000-acre Disney World complex. The loss of that designation is the latest battle in an ongoing war between DeSantis and the largest private employer in Florida.
The cosmetic cause of DeSantis / Disney fight is described in the article:
“In March, the governor signed a bill that prohibits classroom instruction and discussion about sexual orientation and gender identity.
The “Parental Rights in Education” law, referred to by critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill … has been heralded by conservatives and scorned by L.G.B.T.Q. activists and many school teachers. Although initially silent, Disney joined the debate when its chief executive, Bob Chapek, criticized the bill.
Mr. DeSantis was not happy with Disney’s response. “If Disney wants to pick a fight, they chose the wrong guy,” he wrote.”
In reality, DeSantis was just using Chapek’s forced and timid comments as a pretext to attack Disney because that Evil Empire is loaded with child rapists and promotes filth to children in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. More power to Governor DeSantis … and death to Disney!
Satan’s sodomite brigades pressured Disney into denouncing the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law. Stuck between a cock and a hard place, Disney’s CEO finally caved into the rainbow retards. Governor DeSantis then used the opportunity to pounce upon the company.
The real power above Chapek is Disney Chairbitch Susan Arnold(cough cough), and the six largest shareholders — Blackrock, Vanguard, State Streetformer Chairman Bob Iger, Allen Bravermanand Christine McCarthy. With a list of “usual suspects” like that (and many more in the top ranks of the company), regular readers of The Anti-New York Times certainly don’t need to be told why the Walt Disney Co. (of Florida and California) now pumps out degeneracy and is infested with child rapists. It’s simply what (((they))) do.
But enough about the usual suspects and their usual dirty deeds. Let’s learn a bit about Walt Disney — the good man who, with his brother, Roy — built the company and is surely turning over in his grave as his family name is now inextricably linked with this evil institution which got Judaized after the Disney brothers were gone.
Walter E. Disney was born in Chicago in 1901. He studied art as a boy and went on to work as a commercial illustrator before moving to California to set up the Disney Brothers Studio with his elder brother, Roy. Disney developed the character “Mickey Mouse” in 1928. As his studio grew, he introduced unique feature-length cartoons such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Dumbo, Cinderella and Bambi. During the 1950s & 60s, live action films followed, including the successful Mary Poppins. Disney also expanded into the amusement park industry, and opened Disneyland in Anaheim, California. After he died of lung cancer in 1966, Roy then took over and would also oversee the establishment of another resort in Florida. He died in 1971. The Brothers Disney ran a clean film and resort operation which many millions of children enjoyed. They were patriotic, anti-Communist, (Walt was rumored to be “anti-Semitic”) and decent men of business — true American originals. So, what the heck happened to their company?
Following the death of Walt Disney in 1966, the company narrowly survived several takeover attempts by the usual suspects. Years after Roy’s death, in 1984 to be exact, his son and major shareholder, Roy E. Disney, brought in Michael Eisner as CEO and Chairman of the Board to strengthen the company. Eisner then brought in Jeffrey Katzenbergas Walt Disney Studios chairman. Eisner soon became the king and the self-promoting public face of the company, and was very recognized by the children who visited the parks and often asked him for autographs. In a financial sense, Eisner and Katzenberg, and later on, Iger, did succeed in strengthening and expanding Walt Disney Company into a monstrous conglomerate which acquired ABC, The History Channel (50%), ESPN, Touchstone Pictures, Marvel, Lifetime (50%), A&E (50%) and more. But with respects to the cultural and moral elements of the multi-media operation — well, you know.
In recent weeks the Sunshine State has garnered global attention yet again. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis made headlines after unveiling HB 1557. Titled Parental Rights in Education, the legislation seeks to ban discussing explicit adult subjects with kindergarten and elementary school students.
Critics insist this proposal is an attack on the LGBTQ community. The most vehement opposition came from outspoken Disney representatives who dubbed the bill ‘Don’t Say Gay’. They insist teachers should instruct children on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Conservative-leaning publications produced countless articles stating Disney’s founder would be horrified by his successors’ current stance. In reality, the iconic entrepreneur is not ‘rolling in his grave’ — he’s salivating.
“If the world only had the eyes to see the fibers which lay under the surface of Walt Disney’s image, they’d tar and feather him, and drag him through the streets. If only they knew what Disney’s primary goal is.”
Walter Elias Disney was born on December 5, 1901, in Chicago, Illinois. According to documents from the Central Intelligence Agency archives, he belonged to a very influential Illuminati bloodline. Walt’s father was an outspoken affiliate of the socialist party and a New World Order advocate. Behind closed doors, the strict patriarch physically abused his son.
Longtime companions of the esteemed animator claim that he coped by secretly cross-dressing in his mother’s clothing and makeup. Upon hitting puberty he realized women did not arouse him. Instead, he grew increasingly attracted to little boys. The young man kept these feelings hidden from his religious parents. Nevertheless, he was determined to find a way to live his deepest and darkest fantasies while maintaining an impeccable reputation. Disney would ultimately create a covert child sex trafficking operation insidiously concealed as the ‘happiest place on Earth’.
Child Abusing Pedophile
Early on in the imagineer’s career, colleagues began noticing his blatant affection and inappropriate behavior towards minors. Fellow cartoonists disclosed the executive owned a secluded Los Angeles apartment where he met with underage boys [that were being prostituted].
One victim named Ralph Ferguson testified that Walt paid him $100 for despicable sexual acts on multiple occasions. Another juvenile preyed upon by the predatory producer was Bobby Driscoll. In 1946 the nine-year-old landed a lucrative contract with Disney. He starred in dozens of films and TV shows but is best remembered for his lead role in Peter Pan. Other cast members on set witnessed Walt’s advances firsthand and the disturbing affair was common knowledge amongst industry insiders. Enduring such horrific assaults lead the traumatized actor to self-medicate with various drugs as a teen. After threatening to publicly come forward at the age of 31, Driscoll died under suspicious circumstances.
Federal Government Agent
During the late 1930s, Disney was recruited by high-ranking FBI officials. Dossiers obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests indicate he worked as a Special Correspondent informant for the United States government. Intriguingly, the seemingly wholesome director produced motion pictures for public schools, military personnel, and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) administrators.
Another federal branch interested in the studio kingpin’s unique talents was the CIA. They sought the mogul for his specialty in mind control and programming techniques. Disney flicks are infamous for rampant subliminal messaging. Since the organization’s inception, innumerable scenes flash split-second images that subconsciously affect viewers. Many of these stills portray perverse erotic content or play suggestive audio recordings intentionally obscured by background noise.
“On more than one occasion I observed Walt Disney at Nazi meetings, along with a lot of other prominent Nazi-afflicted Hollywood personalities. Disney was going to meetings all the time.”
A Mickey Mouse comic strip from June of 1940 featured swastika-laden drawings. As the budding brand grew, non-caucasian characters were frequently sketched in exaggerated and often grotesque depictions. The unsuspecting CEO was a radical eugenist who believed in racial superiority. During the mustached magnate’s lifelong reign, he only hired one full-time African American employee. His position: Walt’s personal shoeshiner.
For nearly a century Disney has meticulously orchestrated the perceptual hijacking of rapidly developing brains. Their target audience is deliberately selected for a nefarious purpose. Formative years, from birth to the age of eight, are critical in establishing our cognitive foundation. It is no coincidence why the corporation’s former stars frequently suffer from substance abuse and experience mental breakdowns.
Unsettlingly, these instances show no signs of slowing down. Today the conglomerate is worth over $100 billion and owns dozens of broadcasting networks. For this reason, mainstream media outlets parroting identical sentiments rarely equates to the truth. Walt was a depraved individual— not the patron saint ‘journalists’ dotingly idolize.
As parents around the country increasingly become fed up with left-wing hacks running school boards, more are beginning to take action against board members who refuse to listen to reason and respond to concerns.
In particular, parents are outraged at the adoption of an explicitly anti-white critical race theory curriculum, ridiculous and pointless COVID masking, tyrannical mandates and the inclusion of sexually inappropriate books and materials in school libraries that includes illegal acts of pedophilia.
In fact, parents and activists have just served members of the Scottsdale (Arizona) Unified School District with surety bonds totaling $1 million (that is, 10 parents have filed bonds of $100,000 each, totaling $1 million for each board member) as they move to get rid of several policies.
Leigh Dundas and Miki Klann speak to the Scottsdale Unified School District in Arizona. During the meeting, Miki declares her intention to file a claim against the Governor’s surety bond on behalf of the SUSD board members. Each member of the board will be charged with practicing medicine without a license, child abuse, segregation and inappropriate sexual material in the school libraries.
Miki served each board member with 10 letters of intent by 10 different parents. Each claim carries a liability of up to 100K – this means each board member carries a total liability of $1 million in the event that the claims are filed. Now the board members have 5 days to rectify the situation or the parents of SUSD will file the claim.
In order to resolve the problem, the board members must:
– Remove all mask mandates and recommendations
– Remove all “experimental treatment” clinics and recommendations
– Discontinue the Critical Race Theory and GLSNEN.org agendas
– Remove all inappropriate sexual material from the libraries
– Former board president Jann-Michael Greenberg must resign
In addition to inappropriate content, behaviors, and mandates, the SUSD board has had its problems in the past.
For instance, in November the board met in emergency session and voted 4-1 to remove Greenberg from his post following reports that he distributed “dossiers” on parents who were showing up at board meetings and voicing opposition to its left-wing policies.
The board voted to elect Patty Beckman as interim president. The ‘dossiers’ included photographs and personal financial information on some parents, US News reported.
“We do not have all the facts at this time. To make a decision without those facts that’s in the best interest of the district is simply not possible,” Greenburg said. “I strongly support the investigations that have been announced both publicly and privately.”
“When I first saw the contents of the Google Drive and I saw my 8- and 10-year-old’s photos, that was terrifying. And like, what’s he doing?” mother Amanda Wray told AZFamily.com.
“But he has pictures of my vacation home, property records. I’m not a political opponent, I’m an involved parent and that is threatening to me and it makes me wonder why and what he was planning to do with those photos,” she continued, adding she was “disgusted” by what she saw.
“I think we identified 47 people that were background checked, divorce decrees, Social Security numbers, property records, mortgages,” added Wray, who noted that the Google Drive included a number of cruel memes.
In the case of one woman, Wray said that whoever created the dossier “took her photos and superimposed it over a lynching and I can tell you, she’s distraught by this and it’s disgusting.”
She went on to say she thinks some parents are being targeted because they sought to have Greenberg recalled over the district’s manifestly stupid COVID-19 policies, according to AZ Family.
“We’re not anti-mask, we’re not anti-[jabs]. They’ve painted us that way because it fits their inflammatory narrative. We’re all for parent choice and really, transparency,” she said.
World Economic Forum Endorses ‘Insane Pro-CRT Propaganda’
The World Economic Forum (WEF) has come under fire for a video which initially appears as a neutral explainer on Critical Race Theory (CRT), only to quickly shift into a full-throated endorsement of the ideology.
CRT charges an entire demographic with a collective crime, uses the charge as grounds for framing individuals within that demographic of perpetrators of that crime, and then seeks to strip condemned individuals of rights, dignity, and equal protection based on that charge (h/t).
The WEF video defines CRT as a theory “first developed by US legal scholars in the 1980s” which “argues that the laws, rules and, regulations that govern society today have been shaped by the historical subordination of people of colour and that this is a driving force behind racial inequality today,” according to Breitbart.
As an example of the supposed racism embedded in every fiber of America’s institutions, the WEF points to the high number of incarcerated black males throughout the country.
“Take the US criminal justice system, for example,” it says. “While everyone is seen as equal under the law, Black Americans are imprisoned at 5 times the rate of white people.”
“CRT says this disparity is a legacy of America’s racist past,” but that opponents say it “paints all white people as bigots.”
The video then positions CRT awareness as an honorable pursuit. Watch what opponent Chris Rufo described as an “Insane pro-CRT propaganda video.”
This is what you need to know about critical race theory.
“Why would the World Economic Forum come out in support of Critical Race Theory?” asked author and mathematician Dr. James Lindsay, who warned last month that CRT activists aim to dismantle the U.S. and establish “a total dictatorship” of the so-called “anti-racists.”
“Because they’re the ones who want to divide our society with this Marxist Theory or any other tool they can use to break the world and seize power,” he said.
Why would the World Economic Forum come out in support of Critical Race Theory? Because they're the ones who want to divide our society with this Marxist Theory or any other tool they can use to break the world and seize power. https://t.co/wpsl3JAsh9
— James Lindsay, so emotional and sensitive (@ConceptualJames) February 9, 2022
Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) national security adviser tweeted “I can’t believe you’re advocating for ‘equality’ at the expense of equity” in 2022. “You’re either on board or you’re not. Be better.”
The World We Live In 