By VC
Today’s pop music is filled with symbols and messages aimed to shape and mold today’s youth. Apart from the occult symbolism discussed in other articles, other parts of the elite’s agenda are communicated through music videos. Two of those parts are transhumanism and the introduction of a police state. We’ll look at the way those agendas are part of the acts of Rihanna, Beyonce, Daddy Yankee and the Black Eyed Peas.
As seen in previous articles on this site, the world’s biggest stars exploit common themes in their work, permeating popular culture with a set of symbols and values. The cohesiveness of the message that is communicated to the masses, regardless of the artists’ musical genre, attests to the influence of a “higher power” over the industry. Other articles on this site have explored the way Illuminati symbolism, based on secret society occultism, has been reflected in popular videos. Exposing and desensitizing the world to the elite’s sacred symbols is, however, only one aspect of their agenda. Other aspects of Illuminati control are reflected in today’s popular music as well, including: mass mind control, transhumanism (the “robotization” of the human body) and the gradual introduction of a virtual police state. Through the news, movies and the music industry, this agenda is being insidiously presented to the masses, using various techniques. If the news scares people into accepting measures diminishing their personal freedoms and ushering in a “new era”, the music business accomplishes the same job by making it seem sexy, cool and trendy. This angle is mainly aimed at the younger crowd, which is much more susceptible to “take in” the industry’s message.
Essential Information
If you’ve never heard of transhumanism or martial law, I suggest you visit the “Educate Yourself”section first, as I will only provide a very summary explanation of each concept here.
Transhumanism
- Image from humanityplus.org
“Transhumanism is an international intellectual and cultural movement supporting the use of science and technology to improve human mental and physical characteristics and capacities. The movement regards aspects of the human condition, such as disability, suffering, disease, aging, and involuntary death as unnecessary and undesirable. Transhumanists look to biotechnologies and other emerging technologies for these purposes. Dangers, as well as benefits, are also of concern to the transhumanist movement.
The term “transhumanism” is symbolized by H+ or h+ and is often used as a synonym for “human enhancement”. Although the first known use of the term dates from 1957, the contemporary meaning is a product of the 1980s when futurists in the United States began to organize what has since grown into the transhumanist movement. Transhumanist thinkers predict that human beings may eventually be able to transform themselves into beings with such greatly expanded abilities as to merit the label “posthuman”. Transhumanism is therefore sometimes referred to as “posthumanism” or a form of transformational activism influenced by posthumanist ideals.
The transhumanist vision of a transformed future humanity has attracted many supporters and detractors from a wide range of perspectives. Transhumanism has been described by one critic, Francis Fukuyama, as the world’s most dangerous idea,while one proponent, Ronald Bailey, counters that it is the “movement that epitomizes the most daring, courageous, imaginative, and idealistic aspirations of humanity”.
What is almost never mentioned is the fact that those technological “improvements” will be out of reach for the average man. The huge price tags of those scientific discoveries will render them only accessible to a select elite. While the common man is forced to seek nourishment in genetically modified, chemically altered and even poisonous foods, the elite is trying to achieve immortality through science. Even if the masses cannot have access to those discoveries, mass media makes transhumanism cool, desirable and, ultimately, acceptable.
- Cover of H+, a transhumanist magazine. The headline says it all.
Police State
George W. Bush’s Patriot Act has enabled the American government to expand surveillance of its citizens, whether it be phone calls, e-mails and physical movements. It also gave the government almost unlimited powers of arrest, detention, search and seizure. Donald E. Wilkes, Professor of Law at the University of Georgia School of Law describes this last concept:
“I want to examine here a single section of the USA Patriot Act–section 213, definitely one of the most sinister provisions of this monstrous statute.
In euphemistic language that conceals the provision’s momentous significance, section 213 states that with regard to federal search warrants “any notice required … to be given may be delayed if … [1]the court finds reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate notification of the execution of the warrant may have an adverse result …;[2] the warrant prohibits the seizure of any tangible property … except where the court finds reasonable necessity for the seizure; and [3] the warrant provides for the giving of such notice within a reasonable period of its execution, which period may thereafter be extended by the court for good cause shown.”
Section 213 may be couched in Orwellian terminology, but there is no doubt about what it does.
Section 213 is the first statute ever enacted in the history of American criminal procedure to specifically authorize an entirely new form of search warrant-what legal scholars call the sneak and peek warrant (also dubbed the covert entry warrant or the surreptitious entry warrant). A sneak and peek search warrant authorizes police to effect physical entry into private premises without the owner’s or the occupant’s permission or knowledge to conduct a search; generally, such entry requires a breaking and entering.”
- Donald E. Wilkes, Flagpole Magazine Sept 2002.
Subsequent acts have further diminished civil liberties of citizens by enabling the government to declare any American a “terrorist” with little to no proof. The government can also declare martial law with little or no valid reason.
“The John W. Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2006, “named for the longtime Armed Services Committee chairman from Virginia,” was signed October 17, 2006, by President George W. Bush. The Act “has a provocative provision called ‘Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies’,” the thrust of which “seems to be about giving the federal government a far stronger hand in coordinating responses to [Hurricane] Katrina-like disasters,” Jeff Stein, CQ National Security Editor wrote December 1, 2006.
“But on closer inspection, its language also alters the two-centuries-old Insurrection Act, which Congress passed in 1807 to limit the president’s power to deploy troops within the United States … ‘to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy’,” Stein wrote.
“But the amended law takes the cuffs off” and “critics say it’s a formula for executive branch mischief,” Stein wrote, as “the new language adds ‘natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident’ to the list of conditions permitting the President to take over local authority — particularly ‘if domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order.’”
“One of the few to complain, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., warned that the measure virtually invites the White House to declare federal martial law. … It ‘subverts solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military’s involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law,’ he said in remarks submitted to the Congressional Record on Sept. 29.”
- Source
We’ll see how those concepts are cleverly inserted into pop music in order to create specific climate in the collective consciousness.
Rihanna’s Hard and AMA Performance
Previous articles on this site looked at the occult or mind-control related symbolism found in Umbrella,Disturbia and Russian Roulette. Fully embodying Illuminati agenda, Rihanna’s Hard incorporates the military/police state element.
In hip-hop slang, the term “hard” usually refers to someone who is street-savvy, gritty, rebellious and who is decisively “not down with police”. Hard transposes this term to a military context. Her militaristic video features a gang of uniformed men dancing under the orders of “General Rihanna”. We’ve come a long way from Public Enemy’s Fight the Power…it is now Submit to the Power. All of this military/dictatorial imagery is mixed with Rihanna’s sexy moves and outfits, appealing to the masses’ basest instinct: sex. This generates in the viewer an unconscious positive response to this otherwise terrible backdrop. I mean, who likes to be in a war zone? Not people who have experienced it, that’s for damn sure.
- Ummm, I don’t really relate to all of this.
How come guns were always censored from music videos (especially rap) until very recently? Is it only acceptable when they are used to promote war and a police state?
- In this symbolic image, Rihanna’s Mickey Mouse hat represents Mind Control. She is sitting on the phallic symbol that is the tank’s cannon. In other words, she is a pawn of the Illuminati agenda.
Her performance in the 2009 American Music Awards also contains a great deal of noteworthy elements. The intro video is a disturbing display of dehumanization and Mind Control lead by a “shadow government”. Rihanna is a cyborg being programmed by the insertion of a microchip inside of her (RFID anyone?). Notice the shadowy appearance of those performing the surgery.
During her performance she is surrounded by dancers wearing riot gear helmets and totting shotguns around.
At the end of the song Hard, Rihanna chants “Where the bloggers at? Where the bloggers at?”
I’m right here.
Beyonce’s Grammy Performance
Beyonce walks on stage with a bunch of men dressed in riot gear… the type of unit a police state would use to repress opposition during popular turmoil. What are they doing in Beyonce’s performance? Contributing to permeate popular culture with police-state imagery.
Is the American public being mentally prepared for martial law? But that’s impossible, Beyonce is such a good girl … oh wait.
Daddy Yankee’s Performance at Premio Lo Nuestro 2010
Reggaeton superstar Daddy Yankee has likely been chosen to promote the Agenda to the Latino community. His performance at the Premio Lo Nuestro awards in Miami is simply a perfect Illuminati fit. At the beginning the performance, a picture of Daddy Yankee standing under a Masonic compass is displayed.
- Daddy Yankee under a Masonic compass
Daddy Yankee’s is surrounded by dancers looking like robotic cyber-police/soldiers. The name of his new single is Descontrol, which means “lose control”. Interesting.
By the way, here is the logo of Premios Lo Nuestro awards.
- How many sixes do you see?
The Black Eyed Peas’ Imma Be Rocking that Body
This long video is all about the merger of humans and robots, which is, as seen above, the ultimate goal of transhumanism. It starts with Fergie saying “we are not robots!” … only to see her become a half-robot shooting a gun that causes an irresistible need to breakdance.
Will.I.Am starts his verse by saying “Imma be the upgraded new negro”, which pretty much sums up the transhumanist philosophy.
- The upgraded new Will.I.Am and friends?
At the end of the video, Fergie wakes up from her “dream”. It sure was cool when she was a robot, wasn’t it?
In Conclusion
Articles on this site have mainly focused on the occult symbols found in music videos. There are, however, other aspects of the Illuminati agenda that are present in popular culture. Transhumanism and the establishment of a virtual police state are two objectives that are slowly but surely being implemented with little to no public debate. Movies, video games and the music industry are doing the job of leading the masses’ collective consciousness towards a new era by saturating the airwaves with those concepts. The “robot agenda”, as some observers call it, has been an intricate part of the music industry for years now and examples of it are way too many to enumerate. The theme of the “upgraded human” due to his robotization has been exploited by most of today’s international stars. There is a difference between a trend and an agenda.
The “police state” element found in video and performances is relatively new but equally, if not more, disturbing. Music has always been a healing, liberating and emancipating medium. Looking at the music industry’s products of the last years, is there a possibility of it being hijacked by an ever-intrusive elite? Think about who owns the record companies.
Michael wrote: As Russell points out, it is our right to make mekocry of religion. If you are religious, it is my right to disrespect you all day long if I feel like it. In America, a free country, I can do any damn thing I want as long as I don’t break the law (and sometimes even then). You can feel free to disrespect me back. But I see Christianity unraveling, and it’s our obligation to pull on the threads. Other than extreme fringe types, I don’t think there are many who would dispute your First Amendment right to slam Christianity. I’m not sure that disrespecting people is quite as effective as you imagine, however. No doubt there’s a good deal of emotional satisfaction involved in smacking those poor deluded believing fools up side the head (rhetorically, of course), but I speaking as one of the aforementioned find that approach highly offputting, and not the least bit persuasive.I also don’t like it when obnoxious, in-your-face fundamentalists try to set me straight on how things are and for the same reason.They’re obnoxious.A while back I mentioned on my Facebook profile page that I consider myself a free-thinker. I didn’t realize that the term free-thinker somewhere along the line came to mean agenda-driven atheist who posts four or five items per day to Facebook about how stupid religious people are. But I learned, as I continued accepting friendship requests, that this is apparently what the term now means. For me, being all worked up and pissed off all the time have very little to do with thinking freely, but what do I know?What those wussy accomodationists have going for them is a willingness to engage in real dialog. I consider myself something of an accomodationist on the other side, as offensive as that idea might be to some of my Christian friends. But I think the arguments for atheism have a lot going for them, and I am of the opinion that a committed atheist who has thought the matter through and come to his or her conclusions honestly is in a superior intellectual, moral, and spiritual position to a believer who has just kind of followed along with what everyone else around him or her has always done.Likewise, I think an individual who has really worked on his or her faith is much better off than an intellectually lazy atheist who doesn’t actually care one way or another, but who loves ripping on all those stuffy religious hypocrites. I don’t think there were too many of of the latter in the past, but my guess is that the growing popularity and acceptance of atheism, coupled with this strident rhetorical approach that gives people a real Us vs. Them bandwagon to jump on, will produce a lot more of them.The amount of noise those people make might help move the numbers in your direction, but then you serious atheists will have to deal with the old embarrassing friend problem, which will actually be kind of nice seeing as serious believers have been dealing with it for a long time.Anyhow speaking as just one believer if ever I do become an atheist, that worldview is much more likely to grow out of an understanding reached through dialog and respect than it is through one of my Facebook friends telling me that I’m an idiot. And I may yet become an atheist; I think I have good reasons to view the world as I do, but I could be wrong. And for some reason, I tend listen more closely to others (on either side of this particular issue) who say the same.