The Real Kevin Spacey often Just Played His True Psycho Persona

The Real Kevin Spacey often Just Played His True Psycho Persona

Ever thought wow, that Kevin Spacey plays such a great BAD GUY!

Well, what if .. he’s just playing himself..?

 

Did you Know Kevin Spacey was banned from Epstein Island according to sources he liked little boys and preferably screamers violently beaten raped them. He wanted to hear them scream for their lives. He was supposedly so sadistic, that it made other island goers uncomfortable, to the point where he was banned from ever returning.

src. Wikileaks emails dump w/ A.Wiener Laptop Evidence leaked to Darkweb

 

Ghisele and Kevin, hamming it up as King & Queen of what exactly?

The Serial Killer Reveal in SE7EN

Frank Underwood’s
Ruthless Words to Live By

The Usual Suspects
The Ending Reveal

SO IF WE READ BETWEEN THE LINES…

Connect. The. Dots.

Do. The.
MATH

 

To date, Spacey, an Oscar-winning actor has been accused by more than a dozen men of sexual misconduct.

“Third Kevin Spacey Accuser Is Found Dead”

By Patty McMurray | Dec 27, 2019

Another alleged Kevin Spacey victim has died, bringing the total of dead Spacey accusers to three, in only one year. There’s only one family we know of that rivals Spacey’s curious record.

 

On Christmas day, Danish author Ari Behn committed suicide according to Fox News:

Ari Behn, a former member of Norway’s royal family who was one of Kevin Spacey’s sexual assault accusers, died by suicide on Wednesday, his manager said. He was 47.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Norway’s Princess Martha Louise and former husband Ari Behn Foto: NTB scanpix

The successful Danish author was married to Norway’s Princess Martha Louise between 2002 and 2017. They have three daughters, the youngest of whom is 11.

In December 2017, Behn came forward to accuse Spacey, 60, of groping him under a table at a Nobel Peace Prize concert in 2007. Spacey never responded to that allegation and could not immediately be reached for comment.

Behn, who would have been about 30 when the molestation occurred, is just the latest alleged victim to die.

In September an anonymous massage therapist who claimed to have been sexually assaulted by Spacey died.

Via Hollywood Reporter:

Trending: WATCH: Frontline COVID Doctor Calls Out Fake News, ‘Hydroxychloroquine Is The Cure’ [VIDEO]

The individual, suing as a “John Doe,” filed claims in September 2018 with the allegation of being forced to grab the actor’s genitals twice during a massage two years earlier at a private residence in Malibu. In May, a federal judge in California allowed the case to move forward despite Spacey’s objection that the plaintiff’s identity was being shielded.

Only one month after the parties came to a plan for proceeding in the suit that detailed prospective discovery and envisioned a seven- to 11-day trial, the plaintiff’s attorney informed Spacey that the client “recently passed.”

The individual, suing as a “John Doe,” filed claims in September 2018 with the allegation of being forced to grab the actor’s genitals twice during a massage two years earlier at a private residence in Malibu. In May, a federal judge in California allowed the case to move forward despite Spacey’s objection that the plaintiff’s identity was being shielded.

“His untimely death was, to his family, a devastating shock that they are struggling to process and is so recent that they have not yet held his funeral service,” the alleged victim’s attorney, Genie Harrison, told Hollywood Reporter. “Out of professional responsibility, we notified Spacey’s counsel of Mr. Doe’s passing. We explained our intent to allow his family more time to get past their immediate, paralyzing grief and begin settling his affairs before we filed a death notice with the court — which is our prerogative as his counsel. Spacey ignored our request for compassion and filed the notice yesterday without our consent.”

In July 2019, Vanity Fair reported about another accuser, a busboy working at a Nantucket bar who withdrew his sexual assault case against the powerful actor.

Spacey was charged with felony indecent assault and battery after allegedly groping a then-18-year-old busboy at a restaurant in July 2016, USA Today reports.

The withdrawal, filed in Nantucket Superior Court, did not reveal if any kind of settlement had been reached between Spacey and his accuser. The lawsuit was also dropped “with prejudice”—meaning it can’t be refiled—though Spacey will still have to contend with criminal charges of indecent assault and battery. Spacey pleaded not guilty to the charges in January.

In May, a woman who accused Spacey of sexual harassment of one of her patients died after being hit by a car.

From Pop Culture – A woman who allegedly accused actor Kevin Spacey of sexual harassment was found dead after being struck by a car in Quincy, Massachusetts on Feb. 25, while crossing a parkway.

The Patriot Ledger reports that Linda Culkin, 59, was crossing Burgin Parkway when she was hit by a car, with police Sgt. Karyn Barkas stating that Culkin was crossing while the traffic light was green. The driver tried to avoid her and, as a result, hit another vehicle head-on. No charges were filed against the driver.Culkin was a nursing assistant who was reportedly obsessed with Spacey and had threatened to kill the actor, according to prosecutors. She sent bomb threats to two of Spacey’s workplaces and also sent threats to his coworkers and associates. Radar claims that her threats to Spacey and his team began after one of Culkin’s patients told her about allegedly being attacked by Spacey.

{ MORE TO COME – CHECK BACK — INFORMATION IS LEAKING RATHER QUICKLY }

7/28/2020

https://youtu.be/AE5t8EBnOmg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJVXg1AHQTY
Did you know that American Beauty is Filled With Subliminal Messages about Child Abuse, and Sacrifice? Roses are a Symbol Commonly Used to represent Occult Rituals involving Sacrificial Blood

Chris Cornell was About To Expose Elite Pedophile Ring Before He Died

Late rock star was going to reveal high-level Pedogate info

By: Jay Greenberg
Neonettle.com

As the world still mourns the loss of legendary Audioslave and Soundgarden frontman Chris Cornell, more information begins to emerge that adds further speculation about his suspicious, premature death.

Rockstar Cornell worked closely with various foundations to help and protect children from pedophilia and child trafficking.

Speaking to TMD, a source close to Cornell has come forward claiming that he had uncovered evidence of a “cocaine and child trafficking ring in Mena, Arkansas, that was tied to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

According to the source, Mr. Cornell had uncovered the identities of high-level Elites that were part of the same “Satanic Illuminati Occult Operation” as the Clintons and planned on exposing their “goings-on” right before he died.

Cornell’s death was officially ruled as a suicide, but his family and close friends say he was in no way suicidal, which has raised more than a few doubts about his untimely passing.

Source

Be Advised! Aspartame Changed its Name to AminoSweet

Be Advised! Aspartame Changed its Name to AminoSweet

Aspartame has been renamed –  AminoSweet – and is now being marketed as a natural sweetener

Aspartame, the artificial sweetener linked to cancer, heart palpitations, seizures, weight gain and other severe medical issues, is now going by the name AminoSweet. The toxic sweetener, Aspartame, has been around over 25 years after it was accidentally discovered by chemist, James Schlatter while working for the drug company G.D. Searle & Company. It was created as an anti-ulcer pharmaceutical drug, but the chemist discovered it had a sweet taste, so the drug company switched its application to the FDA from a drug to a food. It was none other than Donald Rumsfeld, who was the CEO of Searle who pushed for Aspartame to be sold on the market in 1985. If that name sounds familiar, your right, he is the same Donald Rumsfeld, former U.S. Secretary of Defense who served under George W. Bush.  He is a perfect example of someone taking advantage of the “revolving door” between our government and corporations.

AminoSweet is Aspartame, it changed its name to fool the public, and I am guessing it did so because consumers figured out that their product made them sick. Aspartame is made up of three chemicals: aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol. The book Prescription for Nutritional Healing, by James and Phyllis Balch lists aspartame under the category of “chemical poison.”

Aminosweet2

WARNING! Read labels before buying foods with the name Phenylalanine. I will go one step further — if you need to bring along a chemistry book to the store in order to understand the ingredients on the labels — DO NOT BUY IT!

Phenylalanine is an essential amino acid (that is, an amino acid which our bodies cannot make and which we must obtain from our diet). It is also one of the amino acids which is used to make aspartame. Phenylalanine is found in all protein-containing foods including milk, cheese, eggs, meat and fish.

Products which contain aspartame have a label which says ‘Contains a source of phenylalanine’. This label is there to help people with a rare inherited genetic disorder called phenylketonuria (PKU). These people cannot metabolise phenylalanine from any source and need to follow a strict diet to control their intake of this amino acid. The disorder affects approximately 1 in 10,000 babies, and is identified by screening shortly after birth. [Source]

Ten percent of this sweetener contains methanol. When it is absorbed by our intestines, it breaks down into formic acid and formaldehyde. Formaldehyde is a deadly neurotoxin that causes cancer, retinal damage, interferes with DNA replication and causes birth defects.

I went to the AminoSweet website to see what kind of “spin” they are putting on their repackaged product to entice shoppers to buy their so-called “natural” sweetener and here is their selling point:

AminoSweet aspartame is the low calorie sweetener that tastes just like sugar. It is made from two building blocks of protein just like those found naturally in many everyday foods. Aspartame is digested by the body in exactly the same way as these other protein foods and so does not bring anything new to our diet.

Makers of this artificial sweetener claim it is made from protein found “naturally” in many everyday foods. So what is the meaning of ‘natural’ when it comes to the labeling of food? The FDA’s website writes:

“From a food science perspective, it is difficult to define a food product that is ‘natural’ because the food has probably been processed and is no longer the product of the earth. That said, FDA has not developed a definition for use of the term natural or its derivatives.” [Source]

The word ‘natural’ is being thrown around to describe all sorts of genetically modified foods and AminoSweet is genetically modified. There is nothing natural about it. Why do you think these drug companies buy patents? They create them in a lab and they own it. And they know exactly what they are doing and choose to fool consumers into thinking their foods are safe when science proves differently.

In June 2013 Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream and Campbell’s Soup became defendants in class action lawsuits that allege they misrepresented the nature of the ingredients on their product labels. The Campbell’s Soup Company is currently being sued by Florida residents for misrepresenting the genetically modified (GMO) corn in its soup as “natural.” Ben & Jerry’s decided to stop using genetically modified ingredients as a result of their suit.

Ben & Jerry’s used to be known for their healthy ‘natural’ ice creams, but I guess when they sold out to British-Dutch conglomerate Unilever, they sold their souls along with it. It looks like they haven’t updated their website since the sale either, even though Unilever has owned them since 2001. They portray themselves as another American success story — but according to the lawsuit, they are just another corporation choosing to deceive the public — much like another American success story — Monsanto who purchased Searle & Company in  1985– who make Aspartame now called AminoSweet.

 

http://csglobe.com/aspartame-changed-name-aminosweet/

Supreme Court Makes It Even More Impossible for Torture Victims to Win Lawsuits

Supreme Court Makes It Even More Impossible for Torture Victims to Win Lawsuits

The US Supreme Court unanimously decided that foreign political organizations and multinational corporations cannot be sued for the torture or extrajudicial killing of persons abroad under an anti-torture law passed in 1992. The law only gives people the right to sue “an individual,” “who acted under the authority of a foreign nation,” according to the Los Angeles Times.

The decision came in a lawsuit filed by the family of a US citizen, Azzam Rahim, who was tortured and killed in the Palestinian Territory by Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) intelligence officers. It was Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who President Barack Obama appointed to the Supreme Court, that spoke for the decision. She explained the text of the Torture Victims Protection Act of 1991 “convinces us that Congress did not extend liability to organizations, sovereign or not. There are no doubt valid arguments for such an extension. But Congress has seen fit to proceed in more modest steps in the Act, and it is not the province of this branch to do otherwise.”

This outcome is not just a blow for the family of Rahim but also those concerned with human rights. If one considers the intent of the law, it seems like Rahim’s family should not have been scoffed at as they were for bringing the lawsuit. (Chief Justice John Roberts laughed at the lawyer for the family, Jeffrey Fisher, during arguments in Court.)

President George H.W. Bush, who signed the law, intended this to be legislation that would push Congress to ratify the Convention Against Torture:

I regret that the legislation proposed by the Administration to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment has not yet been enacted. This proposed implementing legislation would provide a tougher and more effective response to the problem, putting in place for torturers the same international “extradite or prosecute” regime we have for terrorists. The Senate gave its advice and consent to the Torture Convention on October 27, 1990, but the United States cannot proceed to become a party until the necessary implementing legislation is in place. I again call upon the Congress to take prompt action to approve the Torture Convention implementing legislation.

The law was already considered a law that would not apply to the US Armed Forces or law enforcement operations that were carried out under US law.

UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Juan Mendez submitted a brief to the court in support of Rahim that outlined the fact that the Torture Convention is supposed to help “prevent torture” by “persons who act, de jure or de facto, in the name of, in conjunction with, or at the behest of the State Party.” In other words, being a government official doesn’t make one immune to prosecution. Any person who is complicit or participates in torture is to be criminalized. There are to be civil remedies in place to compensate and give justice to victims of torture. What this ruling does then is undercut the United States’ responsibility to uphold the Torture Convention.

Aside from the reality that the US government finds it has no obligation to do what signatories to the Torture Convention are expected to do, the ruling is troublesome on another level because the comments from Supreme Court justices suggest if the family of Rahim knew the names of people that had tortured and killed him then they might not have had a weak case.

Now, against scholarly understanding of international law, the Court has effectively rendered precedents where non-state actors, like corporations, have been held liable for torture moot. As the Yale Law School Center for Global Legal Challenges demonstrates in a brief, they are contradicting the US State Department policy:

The U.S. State Department has routinely acknowledged that non-state groups and organizations have engaged in torture. See, e.g., U.S. Dep’t of State,  Democratic Republic of the Congo: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (Feb. 23, 2000) (citing credible reports that “Mai Mai groups fighting on the side of the Government committed * * * torture * * * of civilians”); U.S. Dep’t of State, Sri Lanka: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (Mar. 4, 2002) (“[T]wo former Tamil terrorist organizations aligned with the former PA Government * * * have been implicated in cases involving extrajudicial killing [and] torture.”).

It was already difficult for torture victims to win lawsuits. In December 2011, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by a former Guantanamo detainee claiming US military officials had tortured him repeatedly. A federal appeals court dismissed torture cases against Abu Ghraib contractors in September 2011. The Ninth Circuit dismissed a suit against Jeppesen Dataplan that alleged they had “knowingly aided in the rendition and subsequent torture of terror suspects by the CIA,” after the Obama Justice Department invoked a state secrets privilege. A federal appeals court did allow a lawsuit against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for authorizing torture to move forward, but a district court dismissed another lawsuit against him for authorizing the torture of detainees by US military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, months before that, a lawsuit brought by convicted terrorist Jose Padilla against US Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Rumsfeld for their role in his torture and isolation on a Navy military brig was thrown out and the Obama Justice Department determined that Bush administration lawyers that had crafted legal justification for torture had engaged in no “professional misconduct.”

If torture is illegal, it is only prohibited from being expressly included in policies of agencies or departments. It most certainly is something agents, military personnel and government officials can engage in and avoid prosecution. Given that reality, the narrow interpretation is not necessarily surprising. Using this case to create a precedent that grants cover to corporations that engage in torture is in line with the culture of impunity that has been fostered by US government. Unfortunately, if torture victims want justice, the United States is one of the last countries they should turn to for reparations at this point in history.

By: Kevin Gosztola Wednesday April 18, 2012 6:40 pm

Source: http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/04/18/supreme-court-makes-it-even-more-impossible-for-torture-victims-to-wi-suits/