Debunked: Ke$ha forced to sing "we’re gonna die young”"

Clock

Senior Member.
Once in awhile, I admit, I go on Vigilant Citizen, to see what paranoid assumption they are talking about at the moment. And guess what? it's the music industry! The folks at VC say that having these random signs and other things prove that the NWO exist. (This whole theory has been debunked by a very good debunker, right here : http://thrivedebunked.wordpress.com/?s=Global+)

This week they decide to attack Ke$ha. Lovely. I decide to dive right in, and, of course, debunk it. It seems to be about a tweet that she made on twitter. This is the article that VC wrote:

Ke$ha Claims She Was Forced to Sing “Die Young”

In the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, radio stations across the country are dropping Ke$ha’s single Die Young from their playlist. The song’s constant repetition of the words “we’re gonna die young” is now apparently deemed inappropriate for airplay. As I’ve stated in The Illuminati Symbolism of Ke$ha’s “Die Young” and How it Ridicules the Indoctrinated Masses, the entire imagery of the video and of the live performances that accompanied the song were about glorifying death and ritual sacrifices. All of this was interlaced with Illuminati symbolism, hinting that the whole thing was yet another way of the elite to push a culture of death on the masses.

Now when they talk about the music video for that song, don't worry, I plan on making another thread about that, too.

Let's continue:

tweet.jpg


This tweet was later deleted because it probably pissed off her bosses.
But who exactly forced her to sing those lyrics? Why was she credited as a writer of the song? As I stated in the Die Young article:
“In reality, Ke$ha didn’t do anything for any LOLs. She did not direct the video. She is just performing what she is told to perform, like most pop stars. The fact of the matter is: Illuminati symbols are becoming more prevalent because that was the plan all along – to gradually make them part of popular culture. The occult elite is revealing itself and the masses are dancing to their tunes.”

Pop stars have no control over their careers, they are puppets used to push Agendas. Die Young was all about celebrating the sick culture of death that is prevalent in mass media today. Ke$ha’s temporary tweet gave us a small glimpse of the coercive and forceful nature of the music industry and how it imposes content on stars.

It apparently took a mass shooting to make some people realize that there is something sick and unhealthy in popular culture. I am not for censorship of any kind, but for people to wake up and reject the crap that is pushed on them. Let’s hope other tragedies won’t be needed to make more people see the obvious.


These guys sure are a ball of joy. :rolleyes:

OK, first thing's first: I love the fact how Vigilant Citizen loves making assumptions, and jumping to conclusions (Everything someone rich does has to do with the Illuminati or being controlled OMG OMG) in order to fit their own view, that is right and you are considered stupid and brain-washed if you disagree.

What Ke$ha meant by this tweet:
She responded to many of the conspiracy theorists and fans about her tweet, and this is what she said on her website:
MESSAGE FROM KE$HA

December 20, 2012
After such a tragic event I was feeling a lot of emotion and sadness when I said I was forced to sing some of the lyrics to Die Young. Forced is not the right word. I did have some concerns about the phrase "die young" in the chorus when we were writing the lyrics especially because so many of my fans are young and that's one reason why I wrote so many versions of this song. But the point of the song is the importance of living every day to the fullest and staying young at heart, and these are things I truly believe.
http://www.keshasparty.com/us/news/message-keha

Now, what she means by forced, does not mean manipulated by someone to sing the song. She was forced, to sing the lyrics as is, because let's face it, that's the song. If someone would make a song about peace and war, having it become a smash single, and then a war breaks out somewhere, well, the artist playing live is going to have to sing the song as is, because that's what people pay to see, sometimes.

Later, VC goes on this tangent about agendas and manipulations. This is entirely debatable and I'm going to prove it, using another popular artist these days, Bruno Mars. He recently released his second studio album, Unorthodox Jukebox.

"This is me going into the studio and recording and writing whatever I want. This album represents my freedom. I've had big record label presidents look me in the face and say, 'Your music sucks, you don't know who you are, your music is all over the place, and we don't know how to market this stuff. Pick a lane and come back to us.' That was disgusting to me, because I'm not trying to be a circus act. I listen to a lot of music, and I want to have the freedom and luxury to walk into a studio and say, 'Today I want to do a hip-hop, R&B, soul or rock record'

After the success of his first album, Doo-Wops and Hooligans, the record label wanted his 2nd album to sound more like it, and he did not do that. Instead, the album follows a variety of styles, from Disco to an Elton John ballad, and finally to a Police-ish rock song.

There are tons of of artists I could think of that were like this, but Bruno Mars is a great example because he is modern.

There are other people in bands that 'control' a band in a certain way, and these guys are called managers. These guys book, advertize and take care relations between the band and the record label, and many other things.

Vigilant Citizen is a paranoid website that is full of fear mongering, and lack of proper research. They did not bother to prove that she was being controlled by others and that she told to sing this song, which makes no sense considering she wrote the thing.

In the next thread, I will debunk Ke$ha's video "Die Young" and artists commonly recognized for being part of the NWO.

Until next time,

Clock
 
OK, first thing's first: I love the fact how Vigilant Citizen loves making assumptions, and jumping to conclusions (Everything someone rich does has to do with the Illuminati or being controlled OMG OMG) in order to fit their own view, that is right and you are considered stupid and brain-washed if you disagree.

In the next thread, I will debunk Ke$ha's video "Die Young" and artists commonly recognized for being part of the NWO.

Until next time,

Clock

Ah, back to putting 'Debunked' at the beginning of threads again... Nice :rolleyes:

Are you saying the Illuminati do not exist?

or maybe

The Illuminati, (lol came up on spell check Illuminati must have a capital I, so guess they must exist:)), are not a bunch of 'rich people', (poor illuminati :()?

or maybe

They don't control anything?

If you are simply remarking they do not control 'everything' as yet, I can go with that.
 
Ah, back to putting 'Debunked' at the beginning of threads again... Nice :rolleyes:

Are you saying the Illuminati do not exist?

or maybe

The Illuminati, (lol came up on spell check Illuminati must have a capital I, so guess they must exist:)), are not a bunch of 'rich people', (poor illuminati :()?

or maybe

They don't control anything?

If you are simply remarking they do not control 'everything' as yet, I can go with that.

No, I do not believe in them in the modern sense. They existed in 1776, and are often called the Bavarian Illuminati. They followed Freemason beliefs and were encouraging enlightenment. They disbanded in 1885 after the king of Bavaria made a law that banned secret societies. That is why the 'I' has to be capital.
 
I've changed the thread title to more accurately reflect the content.

Putting "Debunked" in front of the thread title should be done when you actually debunk (or think you have debunked) the actual subject that follows that word. The aim is the describe exactly what the tread is about, which allows other people looking for a debunking of that topic to find it with Google.
 
Good work Clock,and I'll be following your work on this carefully and helping out where I can,being an old muso and having some idea about the business.
 
Putting "Debunked" in front of the thread title should be done when you actually debunk (or think you have debunked) the actual subject that follows that word.

lol Mick What is that supposed to mean?
 
lol Mick What is that supposed to mean?

It means that the thread title should identify the subject or claim precisely, then then the thread itself should identify and explain the bunk associated with that subject or claim.

Putting "Debunked: Vigilant Citizen Being Silly Again" is far too general a subject to be useful as to identifying what the thread is about. You also can't really debunk them being silly. So instead the thread title is "Debunked" and then the actual claim that they make. Then you go on to explain what's bunk about the claim.
 
No, I do not believe in them in the modern sense. They existed in 1776, and are often called the Bavarian Illuminati. They followed Freemason beliefs and were encouraging enlightenment. They disbanded in 1885 after the king of Bavaria made a law that banned secret societies. That is why the 'I' has to be capital.

Can you explain how you can effectively 'ban' a 'secret society'?

I understand the Freemasons were banned as well as all other 'secret societies, at the same time, do you acknowledge they exist?

http://www.crystalinks.com/illuminati.html

In 1784, the Bavarian government banned all secret societies, including the Illuminati and the Freemasons. The structure of the Illuminati soon collapsed, but while it was in existence many influential intellectuals and progressive politicians counted themselves as members
Content from External Source
A Scottish Mason and professor of natural history named John Robison started to publish Proofs of a Conspiracy Against all the Religions and Governments of Europe in 1798. Robison claimed to present evidence of an Illuminati conspiracy striving to replace all religions with humanism and all nations with a single world government.

More recently, Antony C. Sutton suggested that the secret society Skull and Bones was founded as the American branch of the Illuminati; others think Scroll and Key had Illuminati origins, as well. Writer Robert Gillette claimed that these Illuminati ultimately intend to establish a world government through assassination, bribery, blackmail, the control of banks and other financial powers, the infiltration of governments, mind control, and by causing wars and revolution to move their own people into higher positions in the political hierarchy.

Content from External Source
 
Can you explain how you can effectively 'ban' a 'secret society'?

I understand the Freemasons were banned as well as all other 'secret societies, at the same time, do you acknowledge they exist?

http://www.crystalinks.com/illuminati.html

In 1784, the Bavarian government banned all secret societies, including the Illuminati and the Freemasons. The structure of the Illuminati soon collapsed, but while it was in existence many influential intellectuals and progressive politicians counted themselves as members
Content from External Source
A Scottish Mason and professor of natural history named John Robison started to publish Proofs of a Conspiracy Against all the Religions and Governments of Europe in 1798. Robison claimed to present evidence of an Illuminati conspiracy striving to replace all religions with humanism and all nations with a single world government.

More recently, Antony C. Sutton suggested that the secret society Skull and Bones was founded as the American branch of the Illuminati; others think Scroll and Key had Illuminati origins, as well. Writer Robert Gillette claimed that these Illuminati ultimately intend to establish a world government through assassination, bribery, blackmail, the control of banks and other financial powers, the infiltration of governments, mind control, and by causing wars and revolution to move their own people into higher positions in the political hierarchy.

Content from External Source

The Bravarian Illuminati were banned. Secret Societies were banned only for the German state of Bravaria, not the United States or anywhere else.

The skull & bones society was created in 1832 and was a sort of union located at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.

after a dispute among Yale's debating societies, Linonia, Brothers in Unity, and the Calliopean Society, over that season's Phi Beta Kappa awards; its original name was "the Order of Skull and Bones.
The first extended description of Skull and Bones, published in 1871 by Lyman Bagg in his book Four Years at Yale, noted that "the mystery now attending its existence forms the one great enigma which college gossip never tires of discussing."[7] Brooks Mather Kelley attributed the secrecy of Yale senior societies to the fact that underclassmen members of freshman, sophomore, and junior class societies lived on campus, while seniors frequently left.

Skull and Bones owns an island in the St. Lawrence River in upstate New York named Deer Island:
The 40 acre retreat is intended to give Bonesmen an opportunity to "get together and rekindle old friendships." A century ago the island sported tennis courts and its softball fields were surrounded by rhubarb plants and gooseberry bushes. Catboats waited on the lake. Stewards catered elegant meals. Although each new Skull and Bones member still visits Deer Island, the place leaves something to be desired. "Now it is just a bunch of burned-out stone buildings," a patriarch sighs. "It's basically ruins." Another Bonesman says that to call the island "rustic" would be to glorify it. "It's a dump, but it's beautiful."
Alexandra Robbins, TheAtlantic.com

The societies remained central to campus life through the 1950s, but since then some say they have lost much of their importance.

Skull and Bones has developed a reputation with some as having a membership that is heavily tilted towards the "Power Elite".[18] Regarding the qualifications for membership, Lanny Davis, writing in the 1968 Yale yearbook, wrote:
If the society had a good year, this is what the "ideal" group will consist of: a football captain; a Chairman of the Yale Daily News; a conspicuous radical; a Whiffenpoof; a swimming captain; a notorious drunk with a 94 average; a film-maker; a political columnist; a religious group leader; a Chairman of the Lit; a foreigner; a ladies' man with two motorcycles; an ex-service man; a negro, if there are enough to go around; a guy nobody else in the group had heard of, ever ... "[19]

More recently, Antony C. Sutton suggested that the secret society Skull and Bones was founded as the American branch of the Illuminati; others think Scroll and Key had Illuminati origins, as well. Writer Robert Gillette claimed that these Illuminati ultimately intend to establish a world government through assassination, bribery, blackmail, the control of banks and other financial powers, the infiltration of governments, mind control, and by causing wars and revolution to move their own people into higher positions in the political hierarchy.

That's a theory. There is no evidence that the Skull & Bones are an extension of the Illuminati or following any Illuminati ideas at all. Robert Gillette is a good example of "extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.", and now I am only seeing a extraordinary claim, and no evidence at all.
 
And how could they ban a secret society? Well, Secret Societies aren't that secret. People know their existence, but they do not know what happens inside of them, hence making them 'secret'. For example, if Obama would announce tomorrow that secret societies are banned in America, then the Skull & Bones would be abolished. That's all.
 
Banning something just means making it illegal. It does not mean it no longer exists. Heroin is banned, it's still here.
 
Back
Top