The Walt Disney Illuminati pedophile agenda

page: 7
43
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurManInGlasgow
It is quite suspicious that these 'Disney kids' start off all smiley and cutesy and are trying hard to be the kid next door, and when they grow up their public persona is All-hyped-up sexuality.
You didn't rebel against your parents or authority figures when you were a teenager? The harder they got pushed into one mold, the further the other direction they had to swing to get out of it...




posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I would agree that there may be a sinister side to Disney, but alas I fear this thread is waaaay of in the wrong direction. Disney is what it is today beacuse it markets itself to kids. Kids nag parents and parents shell out cold hard cash. Look around you today at most adverts on all mediums and you will see the advertisers have cottoned onto this.

If you cant convince an adult, convince their kids, no one has as much influence on adults as their children even if it is just to shut them up.

I have no proof, indeed I am only speculating here (Judging by some of the wild claims on this thread, speculation is fine.)

But if I were absolutley dedicated to proving that there is somethin unethical with Disney I would start by investigating their merchandising scope, the intentional dumbing down of your kids by the flagrant distortions of their stories from there true and original forms, and the monopolistic way they "acquire" many companies who manage to squeeze into there market.

And to the posters who are terrified by any sort of sexual innuendo particularly with reference to the little mermaid maybe you should try reading a copy of Hans Christian Andersons original The little mermaid , yes the story is A LOT darker, much scarier and is to cut all the acedemia out, entirely about sex. I think has a much stronger message than Disneys version could ever have too.

I would bet that if someone tried to Make a movie today along the original plot and dialogue they would be blocked at every turn by people like YOU under the pretext that it warps your childrens views about something as seemly inocuas as disneys version.

Educating yourself means reading more than just the sensational rhetoric of armchair revolutionaries.

Here is a quick breakdown of the original plot: (paraphrased from rottens library) The mermaid falls in love with a prince. She gets a spell to grant her legs from the witch, but the price is incredible pain in her legs when walking on land. The witch who gave her the spell also cuts out her tongue saying "Cleanliness is good.",

The mermaid is a densely layered collection of sexual metaphors and complexes. She's naked and continually wet, with long hair and bare breasts, but she lacks the vagina that (perhaps) dominates the dreams of the sex-starved sailors who encounter her. In The Little Mermaid, she trades her tongue for a vagina, but is forced to endure terrible stabbing pains when she walks, bleeding from her feet, which adds a menstrual motif to an already overcrowded set of symbols. In the end she has the option of of murdering her rival for the pirince but instead commits suicide.

Now which version would you rather your child learned the story of. Personally I would encourage both.

And please dont knock the analysis just because it came from Rotten. If you look for an anylisis of H.C.A's version online it you will come up with the same observations. I just like the way the guy from Rotten writes.
Rottens take on mermaids.

P.S. Nearly all of Disneys biggest hits were bastardised versions of stories and legends from all over the planet, that were made child friendly by dumbing down the central themes morals and messages from the existing forms. Personaly I find the subversive way of appropriating another cultures fables and stripping it of it's true value to the culture from which it was taken to be far more sinister than allusions to sex in some of there movies. I mean do you think your kids wont ever grow up or worse do think they are stupid.

Peace

[edit on 3-4-2010 by da_ruse]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
So i somehow stumbled upon a Disney movie released in 2001 called Atlantis: the Lost Empire. I am currently watching it now and here is a little info on it:
It is the first sci-fi based Disney animation.
There is no singing in the movie
The main character is working in DC at what looks to be the Smithsonian Institute in 1913 and is deemed crazy by the big wigs.
He is inspired by his "crazy" father to hunt for atlantis.

Now i do not know how this fits in with the who Disney pedophilia agenda, but i found it interesting that Disney would do a movie like this. They mention Plato in the beginning, have had ancient Egyptian and ancient American references and is really a cool movie for Atlantis fans.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   
This is the second thread that you have blatantly taken material from other sites without one link.


Originally posted by ucalien

Then lets do a brief review of the prior chapters:



Walt Disney was part of an Illuminati family. His initial interest was not in kids in the way you might think, but he was in fact a sexual pervert and pedophile, which was displayed in everything he did. He was also a big time occultist, a 33° Freemason, member of the "Order of DeMolay" and during decades his sinister agenda remained hidden behind all those cartoons, magazines, movies etc. An agenda to control children’s minds.


Word for word from this site, including the image.

Walt Disney was part of an illuminati family. His initial interest was not in kids in the way you might think, but he was in fact a sexual pervert and pedophile, which was displayed in everything he did. He was also a big time occultist. Walt Disney was a 33° Freemason and an illuminist.
theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com...

All the images in the OP are on this site and a lot of the text as well.
This entire thread has been ripped off from here.
Some sections of your OP are word for word.
theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com...




Disney productions over the years are filled with Masonic symbolism, mind control and indoctrination through subliminal messages. They are preparing the younger generations for the NWO as well as introduce them to sorcery (black magic). Many current celebrities that have started their careers in Disney shows, as Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera and Justin Timberlake, are indeed puppets and mind control victims and the scandals they are usually involved, give us a clue about what you learn inside Disney world and for what you are prepared.


Disney Freemason commemorative postcard







Justin Timberlake and Britney Spears started their careers as "Mouseketeers". After grown up, they became artists with strong sensual appeal, with works extremely sexist.





Christina Aguilera, also was a "Mousekeeter" and it seems that she was severely affected by Disney mind's programing.



Yes, is Aguilera in the picture you see above, yes the guy inside Donald's suit is doing exactly what you see and yes, the photo was taken inside a Disney theme park.

The whole lot is on here: theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com...





[edit on 3-4-2010 by Derised Emanresu]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Derised Emanresu
 


Yes, this work has been proven as "stolen" from another site.

Copy-paste-post-theft.

I only flagged this thread because I thought the OP did considerable work to craft it. I thought the info was false and misleading but the level of the work was worth a flag.

Come to learn, it was stolen from somewhere else.

So...my flag was also stolen.

I want it back.

Boo to plagiarism.

PS- 43 flags for this thread = stolen. 70+ flags on your other plagiarized thread = stolen.

The Mods should remove both threads and take back all rewards you have earned from them...

Read the rules behind stealing other people's hard work and start trying to do your own.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I assume the BAN hammer will be heavy with this one.

Sad, so sad.

Good topic though, whish he'd done right by us and the sources..

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I assume the BAN hammer will be heavy with this one.

Sad, so sad.

Good topic though, whish he'd done right by us and the sources..

~Keeper



Yknow...honestly...I do not think the "ban hammer" should be swung on anyone over this.

Lord knows the Staff has allowed me to make my mistakes with just warnings and what-not. They could easily ban me for everything I've ever messed up on here.

I think the OP could just "not be aware of what a crime like plagiarism actually is".

Banning offense? Dunno...I'm not a Mod and never will be.

But surly not cool.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I figure if he didn't know about it, he'd have apologized before "dissapearing" which makes him look dishonest.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I figure if he didn't know about it, he'd have apologized before "dissapearing" which makes him look dishonest.

~Keeper


You make a decent point there.

He could have been embarrassed of his mistake and decided to flee instead of face the wrath of the board.

But you do make a good point.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I could see the OP being ignorant of maybe some of the LHC information. But the Disney thread is word for word with all the exact same images from the site I link.

In the text search on only those two sites have the text matchups Considering the OP post dates the other site I don't believe the OP can appeal to ignorance in that case and it is just blatant plagiarism.

The OP stopped posting on a busy thread when I called him on the CERN LHC plagiarism. I don't think that works in the OP favor? What do you guys think?



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mask

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I figure if he didn't know about it, he'd have apologized before "dissapearing" which makes him look dishonest.

~Keeper


You make a decent point there.

He could have been embarrassed of his mistake and decided to flee instead of face the wrath of the board.

But you do make a good point.


That's another good point, I agree it's just ignorance of that rule and how seriously we take that offense here then fine, all will be forgiven.

The longer he waits to address the issue the worse it will be.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Derised Emanresu

What do you guys think?


I think-

"for a new member you have done a great service to ATS."

Heck, I'd even click the friend button on you if I didn't "wait a long time" before doing so with each friend I click.

Good job and thank you for defending the standards of ATS.

But, if the guy just didn't know that this offense is taken seriously around here and now is smack-dab in the middle of "looking bad for it". He may just have fled the scene.

If he wasn't aware of how wrong this is...then he was simply ignorant. I still deny him for it...but I can forgive him for it if he wasn't aware of the weight of the matter.

Either way, great eye, awesome researching skills and THANKS for being a watch-dog.

Good move on your behalf.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Derised Emanresu
 


If you read this thread, you will see that he got it from his own post..lol

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


Cheers bro.
Look forward to seeing you around ATS.
Although, your signature scares me.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

While Walt Disney was indeed a member of Demolay he never went on to become a Mason, let alone a 33rd degree member of the Scottish Rite. Please let me know what lodge you found him to have been initiated, passed and rasied in as this is readily available for all well known Masons. Also, the Scottish Rite publishes a list of new 33rds every year. Which year did Disney get his?





[edit on 1-4-2010 by AugustusMasonicus]


The original Demolay Charter Can be found on the wall of the Scottish Rite Temple at The Paseo And Linwood in KansasCity MO .It is in the Blue lodge room on the third floor ,to the right of the masters chair .It is a Masonic charter mixed with Disney style cartoons .I know because i am a member and anyone can take a tour of the building and see it .Though i believe you are correct I have never been told Walt was a mason and i have never scene proof .

Just thought i would add DeMolays HQ is right off of I-29 and Tiffany Springs also in KAnsasCity Near KCI Airport .

[edit on 3-4-2010 by essanance]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Infact here ya go if ya look down at the Lodge Room Pic you can see the Charter in the very back right hand corner .Ill try and play with it ,perhaps go take a close up picture sometime this week for all of you .

www.srkc.org...



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by da_ruse

And to the posters who are terrified by any sort of sexual innuendo particularly with reference to the little mermaid maybe you should try reading a copy of Hans Christian Andersons original The little mermaid , yes the story is A LOT darker, much scarier and is to cut all the acedemia out, entirely about sex. I think has a much stronger message than Disneys version could ever have too.

I would bet that if someone tried to Make a movie today along the original plot and dialogue they would be blocked at every turn by people like YOU under the pretext that it warps your childrens views about something as seemly inocuas as disneys version.

Educating yourself means reading more than just the sensational rhetoric of armchair revolutionaries.

Now which version would you rather your child learned the story of. Personally I would encourage both.

And please dont knock the analysis just because it came from Rotten. If you look for an anylisis of H.C.A's version online it you will come up with the same observations. I just like the way the guy from Rotten writes.
Rottens take on mermaids.

P.S. Nearly all of Disneys biggest hits were bastardised versions of stories and legends from all over the planet, that were made child friendly by dumbing down the central themes morals and messages from the existing forms. Personaly I find the subversive way of appropriating another cultures fables and stripping it of it's true value to the culture from which it was taken to be far more sinister than allusions to sex in some of there movies. I mean do you think your kids wont ever grow up or worse do think they are stupid.

Peace

[edit on 3-4-2010 by da_ruse]


you are right, children are not stupid, and personnaly i would "encourage" the original.
as i agree with your idea that dumbing down society is one of the crimes of the millennium.
however..., if they did make the film of the original it wouldnt be for children.
also, why would you want your child to see either of them in this case?

the flaw in your logic is plain to see, as i could say the same of the godfather book by mario puzo, if they lightened it up a bit for hollywood, you still would not show it to someone of an unsuitable age. especially if they kept certain aspects and threw them in subliminally.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ChizMasterGrey
 


You are right. I should have been more clear about that. It is no subject matter for an infant, at best they wouldn't undersstand it, at worst it would overly scare them. But kids get older and are still kids. The reason I wouldn't mind my child reading then watching it is because I feel that by the time they are old enough to read a fat novel they are old enough to learn the morals of the story.

But don't forget kids are still kids at an age where they begin understanding these things. And in the past fables were taught as allegory through oral or written tradition to youngsters of a community to help their young minds deal with the harsh subject matter.

Of course I dont want my 7 year old kid to watch a bloody film about sexuality when they are that young. But I don't want those early impressions to make them unable to see a message in a story either.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Raud
 


There is clearly a lack of criminal record checks at Disney, I some of the theories is paranoia but after seeing this video you can't argue, especially the first bit where the guy gets aroused, that's just disgusting and could in no way be anything but what is seen.



posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Thread closed pending staff review. Apologies for any inconvenience to those wishing to discuss the OP.





new topics
top topics
 
43
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join