A Lil' Positivity / Conspiracies & The Illuminati / Just A Little Something / Mind Control and MK Ultra / Something Cool

A Thanks To: “I Spy Butterfly”! You’ve Been Added To The Blogroll, Too! ;)


I like to pop over to this site and not only do I like the design but I’m digging the style they have over there.  You see– you’d really have to be “up on your game” to comprehend their website.  It’s called “I Spy Butterfly” because those pesky little monarch butterflies keep pointing out who the victims of mind control are.  Their blog just highlighted Natalie Wood.  When you know what to look for… the symbols pop off the screen.  The sites’ slogan;

If you are awake…you will understand.

A special note to “I Spy”… I wanted to leave a comment and say thanks so much for the add but it appears that people can only leave comments through “gmail” now.  I love the new design but can you possibly bring back the option URLs (like wordpress, etc.)?  I was so looking forward to commenting on the Natalie Wood pics you selected.  It’s crazy to think “they messed with” the little girl from “The Miracle on 34th Street”, isn’t it?  Thanks again for the add, “I Spy Butterfly“… YOU ROCK!!  🙂

16 thoughts on “A Thanks To: “I Spy Butterfly”! You’ve Been Added To The Blogroll, Too! ;)

    • Hi Darren!

      Well… I’d like to think those are pretty harsh statements from a site that appears to only show images of public figures. There are little words on “I Spy Butterfly” because I think the point of their blog is to simply show images. In the months I’ve visited, their site is all about images. I’ve visited “SickSad” before and nearest I can tell– looks like “I Spy” is borrowing images, nothing more. After all, the reason I’m aware of them adding Why O Why to their blogroll– there was an influx on an article that was related to them. They certainly credited Why O Why on the recent “pedophiles communicate” entry so I’m not sure of any “foul play”. I think they are doing a good thing in a simple way. I mean– for those who understand that mind control is alive and ‘well’ the images this site shares confirms it.

      “… which happens to be listed on their blog roll (as if that makes it okay)”… I’ve listed a few on this blogroll that later were removed because their fraudulent ways. Vigilant Citizen is one we [Butterfly] shared in common and you’ll notice “VC” is no longer on this blogroll. Again– I see the site as not relying on words but rather, images. More facts before the bashing commences is what I hope for. What say you “I Spy”? 😉

      A Darren P.S.: I like the recent Kokesh video you’ve got posted. He’s doing good things!

      Jazz

  1. WOW!!! I am honored. Truly. Thank you. (and no, I am NOT doing a Taylor Swift (fake) surprised that I won something kind of speech here on the AMA’s) Geez, that was bad acting last night. Ha hah. I fixed that commenting thing like you asked. My apologies. I respect your blog, your vision and others as well. Again, I appreciate you…appreciating me.

    • Well hi there!

      hahaha…. Taylor Swift (tee-hee)

      I think it’s so cool to get added “on the cool”! I was flattered to a state of blushing! And I absolutely appreciate you and that cool blog you’ve got. What a clever concept! I didn’t realize that poor Reese Witherspoon was also a victim until I came across your blog! Part of me thinks that some of these popular celebs don’t go through that trauma but then I remembered the ruthlessness involved. Keep up the good work, lady… I like it!!!

      Oh– and thanks for fixing the URL option thingy. I’m leaving a comment on Tom Cruises’ oldest son… because GOOD FOR HIM. 😉

      Jazz

  2. you’re right Jazz, its one thing to borrow images, everybody does that. I am referring to sicksadworld having recently called I Spy Butterfly out for using their original graphics and images without asking. How did I Spy respond? They proceeded to “borrow” the same images of Natalie Wood from sicksad’s post on Natalie. they probably only added you to their blog roll so you wouldn’t say anything to them when they started to copy and paste your articles–which they did. they don’t explain any of their images or how they are used in mind control…because they don’t understand, as they are just mimicking other sites…yet they have no problem duplicating posts from these other sites, which have gone into detail on the same subject. not the makings of a good blog when the blogs you “borrow” from are telling their visitors you’re taking the images that they have edited to fit into their layout without asking. I Spy Butterfly takes what these other blogs (including your site) have put together, after hours of research, and turns their hard work into a dumbed-down picture parade, that they don’t even explain the significance of to their readers. then, when you ask them what it means or why they keep copying and pasting from other blogs, they delete your comment. I don’t know what your beef is with VC’s blog but he does explain the images. how did you get that from I Spy? they don’t even tell you what the images mean.

    • Hi Darren…

      I see your points. It’s a curious matter indeed. “how did you get that from I Spy? they don’t even tell you what the images mean.”… having studied the subject of mind control thoroughly for a bit now, I’ve learned to recognize what’s in the images without the verbiage and that’s what drew me to the site. There’s a Versace commercial with “Johnatelli” that’s all the buzz right now that’s brimming with all sorts of symbolism of mind control– there’s no narrative needed for that sick promo, you know?

      The Natalie Wood pics is unfortunate if true. I assumed, because of the re-opening of her death that all webs/blogs were buzzing with Natalie pics (rarely does Why O’ Why cover celeb stuff).

      As for my “beef” with VC… here ya’ go: https://yoy50.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/the-vigilant-citizen-the-website-is-an-agent/

      Sifting someone’s hard efforts isn’t cool in my book, let’s hope for a chime in for clarity soon. I believe the etiquette calls for linking back, crediting a site, etc. I think that’s a real easy thing to do. This truth seeking shit is riddled with drama I see.

  3. its hilarious cause I sent her a comment about how Madonna was the first to have pink hair and she didn’t allow the comment but then she started adding all of the Madonna pictures that are from the same shoot as the one featured on the site she is stealing from.

  4. Thank you for your kind words YOY.

    Facts are good. Let’s deal with the facts. The author of SSW or anyone claiming to be the author of SSW has never contacted me either in comment format, phone or by email. Nor am I aware of any postings regarding my blog, my actions or me personally on that website or any others…besides you.

    I have not received any “cease and desist” letters from any attorney representing anyone or blog/website. Were I ever to receive such a letter, I’d simply take the offending image down. . The case is then moot. I’ve never gotten a complaint from a photographer.

    My blog and many other blogs use images/video that are all available publicly on the internet through Image Search/video search engines, social media, you tube, tumblr images, and public Facebook images/video… that yes, do also appear on 100’s of blogs and facebook pages and posts.

    I am not aware of any of the photos or videos posted to my blog as being created by someone exclusively. If SSW as your commenter claims is in need of calling people out for using images that are similar or are in the public domain search such as Google Image search, then perhaps they need to put a request in the form of a robots.txt file in the root folder of their website for all imagery and video exclusively created, copyrighted and owned by SSW.
    It will prohibit their blog, postings, images etc from being searchable in the public domain, but the supposed issue with infringement or image stealing will disappear.

    Also, I find it difficult to believe that out of all the photos, images, videos and concepts on the blog your commenter seems to be defending….that none of them were found using the above mentioned resources as well …or learning from others blogs/sites/videos on the subject.

    I do not believe that it is “ownership” if a public image has been cropped to a specific size for specific blog/s and then posted on a blog which is then indexed in the public image.video search engines on the world wide web.

    I have never claimed pn my blog any photo ,concept or video as my own.
    It is possible that some of the photos grabbed during my public image search processes came from blogs/websites similar in concept as mine.
    Because of my efforts, many of the photos and videos posted to my blog have been added because I do understand and see what others have not, or provided in a different way.

    I add sites to my blogroll that I am truly inspired by to learn more and believe to be credible and altruistic.

    Since I am the author of my blog, I see no need to respond to the reasons your commenter does not like it. He simply need not visit it any longer. That is his right. Problem solved.

    My reasons for starting my I Spy Blog are personal and really no ones business…for it is about my journey. Whether I choose to use words or not is also really no ones business. Actually, I have several successful and highly visited ones on various subjects (with words even) that interest me over the last 8 years and have never had issue or been accused of stealing or copying from anyone.

    I have received 100’s of comments to moderate on all of my blogs. Many positive, many constructive, some by spammers, some by lunatics who spout hatred and negativity. As do numerous other bloggers and website owners. Just part of the territory.

    Yes, I do remember two very nasty comments and personal attacks very recently (by two different people) about me and my I Spy blog and also the use of the word troll. There were no genuine questions posed in either of them asking me what anything means. Also, there was no mention of who the person was, or who this person was supposedly defending and why. There were no claims of ownership or copyright infringement.
    I would have posted them and attempt to constructively and politely respond…however, when I clicked on the blogger profile of each person who (anonymously) posted them, I saw that each of the profiles had only been viewed by one person and that they each were set up the same day apparently just to leave the nasty comments instead of voicing a genuine concern and request.

    Which to me, is very cowardly and dare I say, troll like.

    Further, when I checked my stats to compare the timestamp…I saw googlebot as the domain names. So, I deleted them because I assumed they were not real…or done by cowardly trolls who just want to spread hate. (This is done a lot especially when it comes to the “butterfly” subject.)

    It is nice to see your commenter has outed himself as possibly one of the nasty commenters on my blog or both…

    I am not aware of any blogs/sites visited by me telling their visitors that I am taking their images…nor am I aware of any allegations as such by them or my own blog readers.
    Only now by your one commenter’s allegations, negative reviews, claims and activity here on your blog.

    Coincidences happen: For example

    10/19/2011~ My post on amy winehouse

    10/22/2011~ SSW post on Amy Winehouse
    http://www.sicksadworld.info/news/2011/October.php?10222011-AmyWinehouse

    don’t see SSW crediting any of the photos used in that post. hmmm?

    There is no disclaimer on the SSW site at all.
    http://www.sicksadworld.info/index.php?disclaimer

    I don’t have ads on my blog…SSW does.

    Your commenters criticism seems to be focused on promoting someone elses website on your blog at the cost of mine. There has been no wrongdoing on my part.

    Nearly all the photography in the world is copyrighted and belongs to the person who took the picture or shot the video….not to the person who gets them off the internet and resizes them to fit their blog.

    I have never claimed anything on my blog as my own.

    Thanks again, YOY50

    • Nicely done, lady! I absolutely agree with you on the fact that stock photos of public figures are fair use. I will tell you this (in an effort to lighten this a bit). I usually locate my photos by literally typing the word “stock” in front of it. Well, I did a post about “The Blonde Affect”. An Asian women who’d died her hair was selected. The story posted for more than a year and then one day I got an email. It was the blonde Asian girl in the stock photo! Turns out– some pervert snapped her pic as she crossed the street! She pleaded for me to remove the photo– which wasn’t necessary. That’s a line that’s crossed, not using Natalie Wood, Lindsey Lohan or any other public figure.

      I’m glad this blog inspires you too. And I do like the simple approach you’ve taken with your blog! If a person is new to the subject it will encourage them to ask questions. If they’re old timers like myself it’s a neat spot to check out to see who’s under the spell of mind control. You’ll notice that the blogroll hasn’t changed. 😉

      Jazz

      P.S. Cute pic!

  5. Fair Use.

    Wow! Apparently you have alters as well!! Let’s see there is a Darren, a few anonymous, The Blinding…or perhaps I should speak to Brody now. Seems you have outed yourself again as the angry commenter above.
    Well, whoever you are it would be wonderful if you included all the facts before you haphazardly and quite snidely comment as you do. It’s very sophomoric…but, I saw your profile pic..you look very young.
    This seems to be the only public forum for you to vent your unwarranted disdain. I feel sorry for YOY50.
    So, for the readers at home:
    The cowardly er… I mean “anonymous” comment one of these fellows posted went like this:

    Anonymous said:
    “no, Madonna was, surprised you didn’t see that when you were busy stealing from other sites.”
    ________________________________________________________________

    Now…that is not written in a polite, or constructive manner.And it was my right to delete it because it was rude and vindictive.
    I do however, thank you for informing me of the Madonna thing…and I did research that. I also found other famous people I had not considered. I really wouldn’t know what is on your blog with regards to Madonna or pink hair…I am sure if I had you wouldn’t have had to point it out to me in a nasty comment.
    I did not visit your blog for photos or any other blog or website. All the images I found were on the public domain search engines.

    By the way, I am just curious….SSW…where do you get all of your imagery? What is your source? Do you create every image and video yourself, I mean, do you actually take all those pictures or film all those videos? Or do you draw them? Hmmm

    Do you believe that you are the only person in the world allowed to and dedicated to bringing attention to the on-going trauma based mind control and occult symbolism and imagery exploited in popular culture over the past century?

    Do you still possess an open mind to all of the information that is out there? Or…
    Are you actually believing that YOUR interpretations of these topics are somehow owned by you?

    Are you open to all ideas and interpretations expressed by your readers or any other person?

    Or… are you intent on provoking an argument where ever you can find one because you need attention….and a way to keep putting your link in comment forms and on other websites to promote your blog by bashing others? If so, then that is Sick and Sad.

    Yes, I agree….your blog would greatly improve if more construction as done Further, there is no disclaimer on your so called disclaimer page. hmmm.

    Do you have a common sense understanding of the law? Not too sure you do because you have brazenly admitted on my blog to stealing logos from websites and altering them…and demanding credit for it to anyone you suspect of using it. This is why I posted your comment publicly regarding that so, all would know.

    Now, here in this forum you demand to be credited for a post on my blog you commented negatively on.
    Just because images found through public searches may be similar to ones you have used on your blog does not mean you have creative control or ownership of said images and that every public image or video out there on the internet regarding this subject or any other subject came from you.

    It simply means you used a public photo or video and/or altered it.

    I have never claimed any image, video or concept on my blog to be something I created or pondered exclusively or original. It is only my interpretation of the vast amount of information out on the internet, movies, television, music industry, fashion industry, books, advertising, education, sports…etc.

    This leads me to believe that your blog has no copyrighted or original imagery, ideas or concepts what so ever as you claim you deserve credit for. Otherwise you would provide proof instead of cowardly commenting and excessively linking back to your blog from this wonderful site, and anonymously posting on mine.

    You are not GodLike…so please get a grip on reality…
    Brody?, Anonymous?, Darren?, or the Blinding?…one of you at least.

    Fair Use.
    Regards,

    I Spy Butterfly

  6. your “efforts?” PLEASE… you have made very little “effort” to do anything but steal ideas from blogs that you like, then you delete them from your blog when they call you out or someone else accuses them of being disinformation agents (VC). this proves you can’t even think for yourself. I let sicksad know what she was doing and they asked her to remove the images and she didn’t. then, she accused them of stealing some logo that they obviously gave credit to the original source for. this woman is a delusional thief. what’s worse is that even after she was asked to remove the orignal content, she refused to do so. do you really think someone is going to hire a lawyer because some thief can’t keep her grubby mits to themselves. you had to steal from established blogs to gain any followers. that is what you do though, promote your pathetic attempt at being original by commenting on other blogs. the sites she steals from allow anyone to use the images they found while researching the subject but this woman just right clicks on Save As and keeps whatever is saved to her computer. this is the image she claims sicksad stole: http://www.sicksadworld.info/news/2011/October.php?10222011-AmyWinehouse

    this is where she put it on her site: http://ispybutterfly.blogspot.com/2011/10/amy-winehouse-foundation-logo-symbols.html

    this image is nowhere to be found on the official Amy Winehouse website, meaning sicksad owns it.

  7. ooh…now she replaced it. Blogger must’ve got toher. there is nothing “cute” about plagirism, yoy50. what happened to not liking it when sites “sift” and steal?

    • Hi Darren!

      Well… the best I can tell, there are all sorts of accusations flying about. I don’t censor, never will– each party can “present their case” in this instant for readers to decide “who’s right or wrong”. My position remains the same which is– pilfering/plagiarism or any of the likes is not okay, but “I Spy’s” reply was sufficient for defending ones self.

      I won’t weigh in on side or the other, other than to say that I think “fair use” as it’s applied correctly, is allowed. Now… I like your site and acknowledged the claims of your pictorial works regarding VC. What was allowed here was a chance for a person to defend what was claimed as wrong. just as in your case (“The Real One”). I felt she did that so now, it is time to move on. Additionally– she absolutely credited this blog for the efforts to introduce a tough subject and the site where it originated from. I get down like that. We should agree to disagree as I find nothing to indicate that “she’s done foul play” with Why O’ Why. Curiously– I can’t figure out why my site would be credited and no one elses’…

      Hell– this (the story that encouraged “I Spy” to add Why O Why to the their blogroll) had nothing to do with anything other than crediting the source she found, which ends up linking my research to the original (important) source (Hi TUECAA!). By the way I’ve approached blogging– this is proper etiquette.

      Because of this and MY “Vigilant Citizens” heads-up for truth seekers– comment rules will now be put in place.

      I’ll be honest (for the future readers of this particular thread in particular)– this matter as well as the VC post feels as though my site is now being infiltrated by shills. The comments that are “assuming someone else’ user id” is disturbing. I have far more important things to bring to the awareness of the readers here than try to defend, defuse and re-direct. Those are the very ingredients of shills and I’ll simply not have it. Rules for commenting, moving forward, are being posted immediately…

      Love, peace and soul (TRAIN)!– to ALL!

      Jazz 😉

  8. No. Blogger didn’t get to me. That’s cute. I simply replaced what you (on my comments page) admittedly stole, traced over and altered yourself from the original which happens to be found at the website locations below. So, again your claims above are not true.
    http://www.amywinehousefoundation.co.uk/blog
    http://www.amywinehousefoundation.co.uk/

    Happy Thanksgiving!
    Darren, Anonymous, Anonymous, Brody, The Blinding and the rest of your alters.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s