A Daily Web Page Summary of the Dirty Lies, Glaring Omissions,

Half Truths & Globalist Bias of The NY Times Front Page Headlines


        OCTOBER, 2017   1 FED RESERVE NOTE


“We read and rebut their vile crap so you won’t have to!”



Harvey Weinstein, left, and Bill O’Reilly 

New York Times: A Long-Delayed Reckoning of the Cost of Silence on Abuse


Without betraying confidences, suffice it to say that Sugar and I, er, “The Editorial Board” of The Anti-New York Times is just one degree of separation from a movie industry insider who, years ago, schooled your reporter here as to the realities of the Hollyweird “casting couch” (for both women and boys!) and the culture of intimidation, rape and retribution closely associated with it.

But it doesn’t take a friendly connection (a childhood friend), to confirm that the “casting / raping couch” is real and that Harvey Weinstein (cough cough) was a tyrannical sex-crazed pig. This criminal phenomenon has long been an “open secret” even among the lower-level dwellers of insular Hollyweird. Indeed, the big-shots and medium-shots of Jewish Hollyweird have been getting away with sexual abuse for nearly a whole century. And that is why this particular article, by Jim Rutenberg (cough cough), is particularly dishonest, but in a very, very clever way. But there is a reason for Rutenberg’s slick propaganda piece. 


You see, the Swinestein scandal is problematic for Sulzberger’s Slimes and the rest of the Piranha Press. The Judenpresse doesn’t want it to be known that the only reason that their tribal brothers in Hollyweird have been able to get away with the “casting / rape couch” is because the “mainstream media” (cough cough) has “looked the other way” when it could have / should have blown the Satanic scandal wide open many years ago.,width=300,height=300,appearanceId=1,backgroundColor=E8E8E8,version=1473664654/casting-couch-agent-men-s-premium-t-shirt.jpg

The “casting couch” — which can easily turn into a raping couch — has been a running joke in Hollyweird for decades. But Slimes scribbler Jim Rutenberg(Image 1), would have us believe that the conduct of Weinstein (and many others) has only just now come to light.


Rutenberg’s piece is actually an attempt to divert from Sulzberger’s complicity of silence. Let’s see what we mean:


Rottenberg: Bill O’Reilly and Harvey Weinstein may have come from different ends of the political spectrum, but it turns out they have a lot in common.

Analysis: Three rhetorical tricks in one here:

1) Diversion: The “conservative” Bill O’Reilly’s disgraceful conduct is a diversion from Weinstein’s scandals.

2) Different Circumstances: Weinstein’s crimes were previously well-known, but ignored. O’Reilly’s harassment truly was not known until the women came forth.

3) No Moral Equivalence: O’Reilly’s inappropriate comments, though ungentlemanly, vulgar and unprofessional, were not crimes. Weinstein, on the other hand, has been accused by several women of actual rape.

Rottenberg: They rose to positions of power around the same time and used their big, bullying voices to secure for themselves leading roles in American culture.

Analysis: Again, a false equivalence. In the vast scheme of things, millionaire O’Reilly, for all his fame, was just a low-level cog in the machine. Weinstein, on the other hand, was a mega-mogul who instilled fear into many millionaires and movie stars below him, as well as the numerous Demoncrat politicians that he raised big money for.

Rottenberg: Mr. O’Reilly, late of Fox News, and Mr. Weinstein, late of the Weinstein Company, share something else. They kept their alleged misconduct under wrapswith the help of the nondisclosure agreements included as part of the numerous out-of-court settlements that allowed them to admit to no wrongdoing.

Analysis: “Under wraps?” That’s a damn lie! Whereas O’Reilly’s misconduct was indeed hidden because of out-of-court settlements, Swinestein’s brazen “casting / rape couch” was an open secret — which, back in 2015, actually became a front page story in the competing New York Post! (see below) The Slimes could have picked up on the explosive story and “given it legs” in 2015, but chose to ignore, er, “keep it under wraps” instead.


Everyone in Hollyweird (and the MSM) knew about this sex-mad swine! Why didn’t the Slimes dispatch a team of reporters back in 2015, when, in addition to already numerous rumors and running jokes about his behavior, an Italian actress made a huge stink about Harvey’s aggressive groping?


Rottenberg: The sums they paid their accusers bought them silence.

Analysis: Again, he uses the word “they” to conflate two entirely different cases. O’Reilly’s harassment of women truly was hidden by multi-million dollar payouts. The raping couch of Weinstein (and Hollyweird in general) was not!

Rottenberg: A full, public airing did not come to be until those meddling reporters came along.

Analysis: No. The “full, public airing” came to be only because Bibi Satanyahoo‘s boys are having an intra-tribal mob war with big Globalist Marxists. The Slimes had to be forced into covering Swinestein.


At this point, the article transitions to O’Reilly only, not Swinestein. And so, the simple-minded readers of Sulzberger’s Slimes  are therefore left with the mistaken impression that “non-disclosure agreements” — not Jewish media complicity — were the reason why Swinestein’s criminality was “kept under wraps” all this time. By pretending that the Swinestein scandal came as a recent surprise, Rottenberg is lying through his yellow teeth. Let’s hope that more dirt comes out of Hollyweird, and see how Rottenberg spins that.




Charlie Chaplin,60,640,360_AL_UX477_CR0,0,477,268_AL_.jpg

Communist “secret Jew” producer / actor Charlie Chaplin was probably the first to use the “casting couch” method to audition young actresses — as young as 15! (here) During the era of the silent film, Chaplin would use caption cards to prompt unsuspecting actresses into sexually suggestive situations. After having been made to stripped naked, Chaplin would start groping them. They were then instructed, by the cards, to stand naked against the wall as he threw pies at them and then ate the mess off of their bodies. Finally, he satisfied himself with the ones who didn’t run out in terror.


Alfred Hitchcock / Tippi Hedren

Director / Producer Alfred Hitchcock ruined Tippi Hedren‘s (The Birds, Marnie) career after she refused his groping advances (here)

“He (Hitchcock) suddenly grabbed me and put his hands on me. It was sexual, it was perverse, and it was ugly, and I couldn’t have been more shocked and repulsed. The harder I fought him, the more aggressive he became. Then he started adding threats, as if he could do anything to me that was worse than what he was trying to do at that moment.

When Hedren fought him off, Hitchcock promised, ‘I’ll ruin your career’ … He asked me to touch him, and I’d resisted the temptation to slap him and just turned and walked away,” 

Hedren finally made the allegations made public in 2012.

Corey Haim & Corey Feldman

Child actors and troubled adults Corey Haim and Corey Feldman were both abused, as children, by Hollyweird pedo-homosexuals that Feldman (on right in Image 1, on left, grown up in Image 2) has, so far, refused to publicly name. Haim died of a drug overdose in 2010. His friend Feldman (as well as other Hollywood actors) revealed back in 2013 that Haim had been penetrated, was mentally damaged because of it, and “everybody knew it.” (here)


  Boobus Americanus 1: I read in the New York Times today that Harvey Weinstein and Bill O’Reilly used settlements with non-disclosure agreements to keep their accusers silent all these years.

Boobus Americanus 2: Oh — so that’s how Weinstein was able to keep his abuse under wraps.



You may also like...