HenryMakow.com – Oct 11, 2022
“Goddard was born in 1910 and bred by a twenty year old Charlie Chaplin after he was signed to the comedic Fred Karno theater company which brought him to America from England.
“Goddard’s conception likely took place during an orgy — a fertility ritual and quarterly event that young Hollywood hopefuls are always encouraged to participate in. While it is impossible for us to know who her mother was, she was most likely a beautiful starlet.
“Knowing full well that Paulette Goddard was his daughter, Charlie Chaplin chose to breed with her and the child they produced was Paul Newman who was born on January 26, 1925.
(Disclaimer – I reserve judgment. )
By Matrix Hacker – (henrymakow.com)
Chaplin and Goddard in Modern Times, 1936. Click to enlarge
According to the official narrative, Charlie Chaplin and Paulette Goddard met for the first time in 1932 when both were invited to a cruise aboard a yacht owned by Joe Schenck, then president and chairman of United Artists.
Already, we have been misled because the truth is that Goddard and Chaplin were brought together for a brief rendezvous eight years earlier, in 1924.
Goddard was born in 1910 and bred by a twenty year old Charlie Chaplin after he was signed to the comedic Fred Karno theater company which brought him to America from England.
This happened at a time in his life when his talent had already been endorsed but he had not yet gained entry to the big leagues of the entertainment industry.
After Lizzie died recently, I again reflected on how the royal family and Hollywood seem to serve similar functions.
Whether Newman is Chaplin’s son is something I have no idea of, but the idea that Henry Makow suggests of young people being groomed for “stardom” also fits in with the royal family analogue. That is to say, only certain people can qualify for the function they serve beyond the superficial one of “entertaining” people. Suffice to say, these people are puppets.
One may wonder whether the Egyptian pharaohs that the extended Makow article touches upon might also have been puppets of the priestly class to some degree…
The inbreeding suggested by the ancient royal world is less advertised in the Windsor and Hollywood bloodlines. As such, the social engineering engaged in by TPTB has to be admired for its long term planning.
The influence of cultivated celebrities on the minds of the masses cannot be underestimated. I recently finished researching and writing a book on an Ancient Aliens style “documentary” series that has seen me joining several Facebook groups as part of my research. The way in which people are hypnotised by the BS of “famous people” has amazed even cynical old me. No wonder many of us here have become hardened to “people getting what they deserve…” .
I’m not surprized that you put a disclaimer on this one, Rixon. What a load of puerile old bunkum. Is Matrix Hacker an anagram for Henry Makow? (I was never very good at anagrams.) Notice how much the two names sound alike, however. The obvious conclusion to draw, is that Henry Makow is Matrix Hacker’s real father.
I’ve personally always preferred Harold Lloyd to Chaplin or Keaton. As someone who gets jittery at heights, Harold Lloyd’s 1923, “Safety Last” is still one of the most unnerving movies that I’ve ever watched. Terror-Comedy.
My second favourite silent movie ever, is Cecil Hepworth’s 1905 masterpiece, “Rescued By Rover.” It’s on youtube and it’s only six minutes long or so. Rover was played by a Rough Collie called Blair, who was the first ever, doggy-hero, film-star. It won’t surprize you learn that “Rescued By Rover” was a British film.
If these people were still alive, can you imagine how this filth would make them feel? How would you feel if someone wrote that about you?
Well said, andyay.
These type of childish articles only deprecate the site, and lower the integrity and dignity of those who post them.
Even the royals don’t inbreed in the way these people imply. It amounts to the same thing, but the royals intermarry for the same reason all the rich only marry other rich people. It’s not some idiotic “breeding program”. It’s just greed for money and position. No doubt you’d also marry your daughter to a millionaire before a homeless person. The above is all simply click bait, but there are a whole bunch of people that claim to believe it. They probably also think all the jabbed are zombie bluetooth devices.
You’d be better off watching ‘Triumph of the Will’ (1934) to see what a sane white society looks like than these Charlie Chaplin movies..A few other films you need to watch to advance your spiritual/mental development are:
The Empty Mirror (1996) “The roots of National Socialism are hidden in secret places.”…. (The Book of the Law)
Slaughter of the Vampires (1962) Great allegorical anti-Jewish film.
Paul Newman is not CC child
Excellent post by Andyay, as always from him. I also like Nico’s, er I mean Damien’s, film suggestions – I have seen Triumph of the Will, sane white society is right, and I’ll have to check out the other two. Thanks for the suggestions!
As for the article, I never cared much for Chaplin’s shtick. But I have enjoyed a lot of the work of Paul Newman. I rarely watch movies, and practically no tell-lie-vision, anymore, at least the newer stuff as it has become utterly insufferable. They just can’t tell a decent story anymore without trying to shove a bunch of seriously warped social justice bullshit, or queers gone wild, or other deranged mongrelizations down the throats of the viewer. If I want a sermon from a warped degenerate imbecile, I’ll go to a sinagogue or Baptist church.
On the same day, I read an early Ripley’s Believe it or Not piece claiming a string of thirteen sibling marriages in a certain Pharaonic Dynasty, and Tut as the fourth of a different one: the Bock Saga says something similar about itself, Ralph Ellis makes Jesus an incest product and practitioner, Ripley says Cleopatra was, and beautiful and intelligent, the priests gave Zoroaster very incestuous origins, but the fascination is mainly, I think, from narcissism, with people pretty much marrying themselves, but marriage to mother, sister or daughter will also give three different types of result (woman as boss, man as boss, equivalence)
Like most readers I very much value andyay’s contributions, but there are still English lessons going on in my head: if you put “…as someone who gets jittery at heights..” the next thing you have to write is the subject of the verb, in this case “I”, with the verb as “gets”, and “Safety Last” cannot be that subject. No apologies for interfering, I can’t even help it