"Cutting Through The Matrix" Live On RBN (#251)
Poem Copyright Alan Watt Feb. 6, 2009:
The Dream of Green will Make You Scream:
"Rich Men of the
Earth Cause Wars and with Greed
Plan Sustainable Future Using the 'Greenie' Creed,
Using Nonsense So Arrant to Bind Every Faction,
Controlled Society with Adequate Gov'ment Action,
When the People Believe They Are the Problem,
Health Authorities with Scalpels Then will Rob Them
Of Their Ability to Go Forth and Procreate,
The 'Abler' Ones to Different Fate,
There's Other Methods Still Detrimental,
Inoculation or Castration, Means by-Chemical,
Petition and Pleading Tossed Aside Without Care
By Those Living an Agenda of Total Warfare,
Shalom will Come When Our Minds are Stolen,
We'll Work Night and Day as Efficient Golem"
© Alan Watt Feb. 6, 2009
Friday February 6th 2009
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Feb. 6, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Hi folks, I’m Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix on February the 6th 2009.
Newcomers: I always suggest you go into www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com and, on the website, you'll find lots of previous talks I've given, where I show you lots of history, which, once you tie it together, proves that we don't stumble down through time, we're guided along certain paths and predicted paths, basically, planned paths, so that the world will end up in the place it's supposed to, according to the planners. It's done with the coordination of the media, of course, in all ages; and we have been run this way for an awful long time, by a very small group of people really, very-very wealthy people who employ lots of academics to do the thinking for them and to do the strategy for the them as well. It's planned with military precision into a system that's not quite communist, as Lenin said himself, not quite communist and not quite capitalist; it's a new type of socialism. It's an organised society, where everyone lives according to nature, but we'll have high priests of nature who will tell us who should be born and will not be born, according to your value to life, to the system.
Also look into www.alanwattsentientsentinel.eu for transcripts which you can download of the talks I've given and print them up and they’re written in the various languages of Europe. For those who want to buy my books, or donate, you can find out how, just go into www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com website and it's all there. You do keep me going, you bring me to you, the listeners bring me to you, because I don't ask for payment from anyone. I don't ask advertisers to back me, if I did I'd have to bring them on the show and then you'd hear a lot of advertising going on, in the guise of a format of the show.
And, because things are so serious now, so serious indeed at the speed of this Brave New World scenario that's coming up, we really don't have time to even think about personal gain whatsoever - none of us do, even if we could, we can't, because it's coming like a roller coaster - and, as I said earlier, Lenin talked about the communist system, the dictatorship, supposedly, of the proletariat and he said it would only last about 70 years and it would emerge and blend with the West. Not quite capitalist, not quite communist. This is the system that we're going into now. It's a world run by experts, that's what it's about, as Bertrand Russell said: a world run by experts, in fact, Russell said we shall train the public until they can't do anything without the advice of an expert. That's happened, that phase has happened, because we've had 50-60 years of propaganda, from experts, of all kinds, often nonsensical. The reason it was nonsensical is the content was irrelevant, it was to get you used to being told what to do, by experts; it's a conditioning process.
You know the United Nations was set up as a private corporation, it still is a private corporation; it's not a democratic institute, by any imaginable means possible. It was set up as a front organisation, by the people I've been talking about for the last few weeks, that at least openly came out as a group, back in the late 1800s, under the Cecil Rhodes group, merging with the Round Table Societies and Lord Milner's Group and became the Royal Institute of International Affairs, or, as it's better known in the west as the Council on Foreign Relations; and their history is astonishing. You find out that they have think-tanks dealing with every social aspect of the world, everything that you need for survival, they have under their thumbs basically, or they're on to it. I'll be back with more of this topic after this break.
=== BREAK ===
Hi folks, I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix, really going through the histories of a group who planned to make the British system the microcosm of a global system, by first of all setting off wars across the world, having conflicts and, out of the conflicts, they'd have treaties signed that they hoped, eventually, would bring about amalgamation of various groups of nations. They were for a world war, the First World War, and, actually, many of the members talked about the need for a second world war, once that had finished, because the public were not ready to give up their sovereignty. Professor Carroll Quigley himself - in Tragedy & Hope and the Anglo-American Establishment - admits to much of this. They fought or, really, they set up both sides of every conflict, in Hegelian manner, to bring out a grand plan, a grand plan that's manifesting today, it was right through the whole twentieth-century; in fact it was this particular group that really advocated the beginning of the Vietnam War. It was the same group that eventually started the howling to get us out of the Vietnam War, because it had served its purpose. It helped to amalgamate a country, Vietnam, made up of many different warring tribes into a unified country of supposed democracy, by invading them. If they hadn't been invaded, it could have taken another 50 to 100 years before they'd amalgamate by propaganda and other ways of interference.
That's how the game is played, just like an incredible chess board and the world is seen as a chessboard by these people. You have to go into their members, it's astonishing who these people really are at the top; and even the ones as I say emerged for the first time, publicly I should say, because they'd been here for a long time before their first public emergence. Milner, who was one of them, has an incredible career, how he just managed to get into all the right positions in governments, he was put in charge of the British war Cabinet. Here's a guy with a private organisation, that had already started the Boer War, privately in South Africa, who's put in charge of the British War Cabinet and his group were all for a world war, to bring about world government and the creation of the League of Nations, which became the United Nations. It's fascinating too, to see that this man set up far-ranging strategies, because everyone's heard of the Balfour Declaration put out in Britain, it's actually a letter on behalf, supposedly of the British Parliament, from Mr. Balfour (Arthur Balfour) that the British Government was all for setting up a Jewish State, in Palestine; and yet, going into the memoirs of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, and the different biographies on Mr. Milner, it was Milner who drafted up the Balfour Declaration and gave it to Balfour to read.
That's how they do it, that's a long-term strategy and, of course, I've mentioned before, how Sir Storrs, who was the, basically, overseer of Palestine for Britain, he had the powers of a king while he was the Overseer, during the 1920s up to the 1930s. He himself talked about setting up an Ulster, he would set up an Ulster, he said, in the Middle East. Ulster was set up in Ireland, as basically a foreign entity, within Ireland, on behalf of London.
Long-term planning, absolutely incredible; and it's also amazing too, that Milner who set up all of that, got married to a very-very famous woman from a long lineage but he had one child out of wedlock who, again, was given all the helping hands, to go through the usual military academies of Britain but he had deserted eventually, changed his name to Israel and went to live in Palestine. He married an actress in the new Palestine, or Israel.
These guys were all bankers by the way, Milner was an incredible banker, they had their own banks, this group. Rothschild was one of the main characters who ran the money system that had JP Morgan and many others and they had lots of foundations, they set foundation after foundation up that are still running today. They have many front organisations and front foundations, through which they funnel the money, because they have a planned society coming into view. Now, remember, this group that created the Royal Institute of International Affairs, based themselves in Chatham House in London. Chatham House became the head of the O.S.S., during World War II; why? Because they already had the massive spy system and secretive organisations set up, they simply gave the name O.S.S. to a new branch of it. The O.S.S., at the end of World War II, became the CIA in the United States, and MI6 in England. Chatham House still goes on today and it's still spawning off massive groups that are pressure groups that lobby governments, with unlimited financing, along the course that we're on today, sustainable development and so on, the greening projects.
One of their biggest groups is pushing for the total, not just the emergence, we already have Europe completely combined, under a parliamentary system, one parliamentary system, but they want to completely integrate all of the systems to sustainable development, through all of those countries, again, mainly through schooling and so on and picking future leaders, they train future leaders. I'm talking about the Common Purpose coalition, that's one of the front groups, who use the same techniques as Chatham House, because that's who runs them. They call themselves a charitable group, by the way. They pick children at school, their teachers who belong to that group, pick children at school and they pick the right ones, of course, and they train them to be future leaders, who will then rise above everyone else, you can guarantee it, because they will be well-funded into the right positions.
You see, there's no democracy involved here, it's all a complete sham, we've never had democracy; and the CFR and the Royal Institute of International Affairs have their men spread out through every country on the planet, in positions of politics and the bureaucracies the federal civil servants.
As I say, they set up the United Nations to bring all this about, as a front organisation. It's a private organisation, the United Nations, they have their own schools, for the children of the bureaucrats who tend to intermarry there; and the children are taught not to believe in democracy, they're taught to rule, to rule over people. This article ties in with it though, because it's from the BBC, by Mark Easton 2nd February 2009. Get used to seeing these articles appear now, because they're on a roll, as I say to sustainable development and bringing down the population:
Selfish adults 'damage childhood'
The aggressive pursuit of personal success by adults is now the greatest threat to British children, a major independent report on childhood says.
It calls for a sea-change in social attitudes and policies to counter the damage done to children by society. Family break-up, unprincipled advertising, too much competition in education and income inequality are mentioned as big contributing factors.
A panel of
Here's the word here, you don't even need to know who they are,
A panel of independent experts
As soon as we hear that word, we think oh my god, the holy ones, you know.
carried out the study over three years. The report, called The Good Childhood Inquiry
and commissioned by the Children's Society,
Children's Society, you think that sounds wonderful too, don't you?
concludes that children's lives in Britain have become "more difficult than in the past", adding that "more young people are anxious and troubled".
Well no kidding, I wonder why? They've been getting fed mercury, through all their soft drinks and their packaged foods; they've had more inoculations than anyone else on the planet, or any previous generation; they've been bombarded with video games and so on; brought up in a nihilistic society; given nihilistic music; and, remember too, I've gone into the culture industry that's all run by these same group of people.
According to the panel,
Now here it is, here's the term here, as I said, you'll get more and more of this:
"excessive individualism" is to blame for many of the problems children face and needs to be replaced by a value system where people seek satisfaction more from helping others
That's serving again you see, that's from the Royal Institute of International Affairs / CFR.
rather than pursuing private advantage.
Quite interesting isn't it? See, all media is propaganda; and, remember too, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, its members own the media, it owns the BBC. By the way, there are about a hundred members of Common Purpose that work in the BBC.
There's that one article and it ties in with the next article here, it says here, I think this is from WorldNet Daily February 05, 2009:
United Nations' threat: No more
Expert: Pact would ban spankings, home schooling if children object
A United Nations human rights treaty that could prohibit children from being spanked or home schooled, ban youngsters from facing the death penalty and forbid parents from deciding their families' religion is on America's doorstep, a legal
Here's the word again, breathe a sigh of relief
You see, an expert.
Michael Farris of Purcellville, Virginia, is president of ParentalRights.org, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association and chancellor of Patrick Henry College. He told WND that under the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child,
Now, that was done years ago, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, everybody thought how wonderful that children should have rights and then you find out that parents have no rights at all, once it was signed, that's how they do it. Anyway, I'm going to continue with this and show you where it's all going, after the following break.
=== BREAK ===
Hi folks, I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix, discussing this wonderful Treaty that was drafted up to give children’s rights and it should really be called the No Rights for Parents mandate, I suppose, or manifesto, they like manifestos; and it's from WorldNet Daily. They're talking about there's even a Home School Legal Defense Association; the chancellor of Patrick Henry College told WorldNet Daily:
that under the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, or CRC, every decision a parent makes can be reviewed by the government to determine whether it is in the child's best interest.
Now, that's exactly what they wanted; and, by the way, that's what the Milner Group, that became the Royal Institute of International Affairs, wanted. Remember what Carroll Quigley said about this group, he said this group acts in the way that the Right Wing thinks that the communists do. It's an ultra-socialist-type world, to be run by a small elite who decided they're the fittest of all, in the eugenics league, they've the right to decide how the world is to be run. So, it says here:
"It's definitely on our doorstep," he said.
This is back to WorldNet Daily.
"The left wants to make the Obama-Clinton era permanent. Treaties are a way to make it as permanent as stuff gets. It is very difficult to extract yourself from a treaty once you begin it.
And that's a fact, you should never sign any treaties, at all; you can't compromise in life, you can't even start to compromise.
If they can put all of their left-wing socialist policies into treaty form,
It's not left-wing, it's the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the CFR, who seem to be very communistic in the way they deal, according to Quigley, right?
we're stuck with it even if they lose the next election."
It's nothing to do with it, it doesn't matter who you get in, because, as Quigley said too: we always put our members in at the top of all parties; that's in Tragedy & Hope and the Anglo-American Establishment, where he talks about the parallel government.
The 1990s-era document was ratified quickly by 193 nations worldwide, but not the United States or Somalia. In Somalia, there was then no recognized government to do the formal recognition, and in the United States there's been opposition to its power. Countries that ratify the treaty are bound to it by international law. Although signed by Madeleine Albright,
What a fascinating lineage she's got.
U.S. ambassador to the U.N., on Feb. 16, 1995, the U.S. Senate never ratified the treaty, largely because of conservatives' efforts to point out it would create that list of rights which primarily would be enforced against parents.
Because that's the truth of it, it would be enforced against parents' wills and wishes; and it's interesting now that Hilary Clinton's stated openly, a few years ago, that if she ever gets in, she would end home-schoolers, there would be no home-schoolers. See how things are all set up, way ahead in advance and they always put the right people in at the top, as Quigley said, they all belong to the same group; it's fascinating. Madeleine Albright though, she's the same woman who said on television, without a blink, that when she was told that all the people were starving in Iraq, during / after the first Gulf War, because of the embargo that the United Nations had put on them, that loving caring group, they were starving them to death, that's used as a tactic of warfare you see, and she was told that half a million, at that time had died, women, children, men, because they couldn't get food or medicine, she was asked if she thought that was acceptable and she's says it's quite acceptable, without a blink. That's the sort of monster we're dealing with here, there's lots of these monsters at the top, believe you me; and they're baring their teeth now.
Here's an article that fits right in again, it's a joke this article too, it's a real joke; but, again, that's how the media feeds it to us, they treat us like stupid fools, all the time, that's their job, when they're not giving us trivia. This is from The Telegraph, it's on children's health. It says:
Too much television and time spent on the internet can make children mentally ill, an in-depth report has concluded.
This was on the 2nd February 2009
Excessive exposure makes a child materialistic, which in turn affects their relationship with their parents and their health. That is one of the conclusions of a new wide-ranging survey into British childhood, produced for the Children's Society.
I just mentioned them, see.
It says that children are part of a new form of consumerism, with under 16 year-olds spending £3 billion of their own money each year on clothes, snacks, music, video games and magazines. The report claims that some advertisers "explicitly exploit the mechanism of peer pressure, while painting parents as buffoons" and that in its most extreme form, advertising persuades children that "you are what you own".
Well, no kidding. They've just noticed this. I've gone through Bernays and his whole techniques, remember Bernays helped set up and do the propaganda for the League of Nations that was the precursor for the United Nations; he had a hand in the latter too. He thought that the public of the world were fools, because he could manipulate their minds and make them do anything he wanted them to do; and it's the same bunch that are running the world today, as I say. They created the culture of America; I went through the whole history of that. He says:
In addition the "constant exposure" to celebrities through, TV soaps, dramas and chat shows is having a detrimental effect.
Hey, look at their parents, they've been watching them all their lives too, look at them, look where their head space is. The TV is the greatest weapon ever created.
It says: "Children today know in intimate detail the lives of celebrities who are richer than they will ever be, and mostly better-looking. This exposure inevitably raises aspirations and reduces self-esteem."
No kidding, no kidding, my we're always learning here, eh? I'll be back with more, after this break.
=== BREAK ===
Hi folks, I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix and we're cutting through a lot of nonsense here as well, I was going to call it something else, but I won't, because I have to laugh at these studies that come out and give us such amazing conclusions, we'd never have thought about ourselves, astonishing isn't it?
Here's this big study going into children's mental health, primarily; and they've just noticed that the media and advertising have been exploiting children, they've just noticed that, even though Bernays was doing it back in the 1920s, right through the '50s and ‘60s and beyond in fact, until he died, a very old man; he and his kind. It wasn't just to sell products, believe you me, it was to alter the culture, they created the culture of consumerism, in fact, but they also targeted the children. Remember, one of the prime objectives for this new world order was to segregate the generations, until they could hardly even converse with any other generation, they'd be stuck in their own, that way they're easier to manipulate and you can re-indoctrinate them with a new doctrine, so that they won't get contaminated with their parents' doctrine, that was all part of the strategy that's been used up until now. In fact, they're going really at it now, with the children in school, because, from the age of kindergarten onwards they're getting incredible scientific indoctrination into greening and serving the world state and so on. Exactly as Bertrand Russell said they'd do.
Getting back to this article, from the Telegraph, it says here:
The report has found that only a quarter of children with mental health problems get any specialist help,
Listen to this:
and one in 10
One in ten.
five to 16-year-olds now have mental health issues,
One in 10, five to 16 years olds, well, we've seen what happened with autism and all the different categories of autism, believe you me, Attention Deficit and all the rest of it, these are all just categories of the same problem and they all get that from their early inoculations. Never mind all the mercury they're taking in through their soft drinks and so on, that only now they’ve released, after 50 years of studying it!
ranging from anxiety or depression to conduct disorders such as destructive behaviour.
No kidding, all they've watched on TV is guys with guns, generally the good guys, these days, it used to be the bad guys that wore the hoods, now it’s the good guys wear the hoods, smashing down doors and all that; and using video games where you just kill everything that's in your path, designed for the military, to make them become desensitised to killing. But they've just found this out. Anyway:
It claims that the upward trend of violence in the media in general, is making children violent and causing tension within the family.
I wonder why?
The report says: "We know from controlled studies that exposure to violence can breed violence.
No kidding, that's exactly what they were saying years ago, just with the video games alone.
"So it seems likely that the upward trend in media violence is helping to produce the upward trend in violent behaviour and also the growth of psychological conflict in family relationships."
Now here's what it really goes to you see, you got to understand this, how they do it:
The report also notes that commercial pressures have led to the "premature sexualisation" of young people.
I guess that's like the Spice Girls and all that aiming at 8 to 12 year olds; they've just noticed that as well.
It notes that young people are having sex earlier because of "many forces", including "more privacy when both parents work, more contraception, commercial pressures toward premature sexualisation, and fundamental changes in attitude".
Well, again, go back to Bertrand Russell's books, when he was talking about his private schools, where he was encouraging this kind of stuff, back in 1920s, as a test for the rest of the world. This bunch here, are just finding this out now, supposedly.
The report recommends
Now, here's the recommendation after all this mental illness and everything else, it:
recommends that sex and relationships, and understanding of the media should be a compulsory part of the personal, social and health curriculum.
So, more sex education; you know, children today, at school must go through the whole Kama Sutra, I'm not kidding, they could shock their parents, with what they're taught in school. So, the answer is more sex education; and I'll guarantee you what will come out of this will be a new way of learning how to have different kinds of relationships, because they don't want personal bonding, you see. That's what it's about really, that's the reality behind it. The impersonalisation of sexual contact: you don't have bonding, you don't have groups, you don't have family, and then government will eventually be the master over every single person, just like George Orwell said it would be. That's the one thing standing in its way, where people who bonded leads to families, the families stand up for each other, then you've got more families in a community they tend to all stand up for each other, at least they used to do, when they had families; and the government had a problem and you could not have a totalitarian regime where you could guide the whole world and tell them what to do when you've got families in the way. It doesn't work that way, so there's been a war on families for an awful long time.
Now, going into this month, or the next month too, where they have this big campaign on, to get the public to accept the fact we've got to start being sterilised, and neutered and stop having children, we're not dying fast enough, even though they've done their best, covertly, for the last fifty years, through the food, the phthalates, the sterilisers, the Bisphenol A they put in the food, the melamine they put in the food and all the injections they gave us as well.
Then go into Arthur Koestler, who worked for MI6 by the way (and that's out now as well), to write all these novels, to get us all thinking in a certain way. He himself said that he worked with a think-tank with the United Nations, to find ways of lobotomising that part of the brain that gave you your self-preservation abilities; preservation, you wouldn't need it, he said, because the State would be making all the decisions for you.
We've been under total warfare attack and people didn't know it; but they can't tell the children, we're the children. After all, if they asked us all to go forward and get neutered, would they have many volunteers? So, they had this big problem: how do you bring the world down to a manageable world population? Well, you have to do it without the consent of the people, obviously; it's warfare, warfare. This group, again, that have caused most wars, real wars, in the twentieth-century, also led the cultural wars; and now they're on a roll for the next part of depopulation, to fit their targets. After all, you've made a long-term business plan, you’ve got to make sure your objectives are reached on time; they will not deviate from their terms of their plan.
Everybody that I have mentioned, over the last few months, worked and worked, when they were alive, and many alive today and still do it for the Royal Institute of International Affairs, combined with MI6, combined with the CIA, combined with the culture industry, combined with academia. People don't realise that the CIA and CSIS in Canada and MI6, have lots of professors that work for them as well, through all the big academic universities on the planet, academia. You can also have people too, throughout society, that work on a contract basis with them, they don't work full-time. It's not like the movies; and they make sure that culture is guided along the right paths, they run the media, they run the magazines, they run the scientific journals etc.
They want the world brought down to a manageable society, a manageable level, and they are the ones who are also promoting what they call Transhumanism. What is Transhumanism? Basically, their goal is to create a society, really, two societies:-
(1) Will be the elite who will be, basically, barring any accidents, technically immortal; but they will retain all of their mental faculties. They must be wild animals, as Charles Galton Darwin said, because they are steering planet earth, along a pre-determined path.
(2) The other ones will be, basically, Golem. A Golem is a man-made slave; that's what they'll be: more perfected, they won't need sleep, they won't need entertainment, they won't need to consume much, they won't need rewards. They will be very-very efficient; they'll be the Borg, in other words.
Back to population control, this again is from Lord Bertrand Russell, one of the guys who helped set up communism, in China, he taught at university, he was sent over there to teach communism in the universities, before they had the revolution. He also was a member of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, who are busy all over the planet; they're also busy in other countries, Japan as well, with the IPR (Institute for Pacific Relations) to build a trading bloc, that would come out after wars, mind you, and they would have that bloc there, they'd have a European Bloc and a North American bloc. He was a big-big player in all of this but he also went ahead with all the other problems that they had, for the future world, which is just round the corner right now. In the Scientific Outlook, Russell says this, on page 221:
I come now to a matter which touches the individual more intimately: I mean the question of propagation. It has hitherto been considered that any man and woman not within the prohibited degrees have a right to marry, and having married have a right, if not a duty, to have as many children as nature may decree. This is a right which the scientific society of the future
He was talking about his own one.
is not likely to tolerate. In any given state of industrial and agricultural technique
You've got to understand the word "technique" what they're talking about here.
there is an optimum density of population which ensures a greater degree of material wellbeing than would result from either an increase or a diminution of numbers. As a general rule, except in new countries, the density of population has been beyond this optimum, though perhaps France, in recent decades, has been an exception. Except where there is property to be inherited, the member of a small family suffers almost as much from overpopulation as the member of a large family. Those who cause overpopulation are therefore doing an injury not only to their own children, but to the community.
That's exactly the technique that is used in China that is to be the model state for the world, according to the UN and all these boys.
It may therefore be assumed that society will discourage them if necessary, as soon as religious prejudices no longer stand in the way of such action.
See, they had to destroy religion and Charles Galton Darwin said the same thing, he said religion's ok as long as there's no God in it. Interesting eh? Then he goes on to talk about the different nations and how they would do it in the different countries. He even talks about the techniques of bringing down liberty in countries, meaning bringing in totalitarianism, to enforce all of this and then you jump into his counterpart and they all knew each other, since they all belong to the same groups, as I've mentioned so many times before: The Next Million Years by Charles Galton Darwin and he says in page 185, he says here:
In connection with the recent wonderful advances in medical science, this is the place to mention a matter that will very soon indeed be of immediate importance. Since in the normal condition of the world there will be a margin of every population on the verge of starvation, it seems likely that there will have to be a revision of the doctrine of the sanctity of the individual human life.
You see, these guys all wrote about the same things, at the same time and that's what they call putting on a united front to the public; and the public gets dozed with all these books coming out from all these important people at the same time, just like today. And that's how you get your opinions formed for you, you're being conditioned, conditioned into that which is to come, that which is to come; and how else would they do it, what else would they use to make it all happen? If you keep on, in Charles Galton Darwin's book, from the 1950s. This is after World War II, this is after they had genocide and all the rest of it, in World War II and the massive slaughters. Here he is, pushing eugenics, of course, throughout the whole book. He's talking about creeds, now creeds are belief systems; now, here they are, they have to remove God and all the rest of it from religion and that's really why they're hammering the Middle East right now. This is a war on Islam, believe it or not, this is a war on Islam; they must remove God from everything, so they can replace it with their own doctrine. There can be no Gods before them, that's their motto, you see; and let's say this little saying from Bertrand Russell, he says: There's no nonsense to arrant (that means ridiculous) that it cannot be made the creed, the belief of the vast majority, by adequate government action; and here's his pal here, Charles Galton Darwin, writing this, he said, he's talking about creeds:
Though the majority of a population, say something like nine-tenths, accept their creed implicitly and regard it as part of the law of nature, there is always a small minority who do not. Most people — call them the sheep — follow the ideas of their leaders unquestioningly, but this minority — the goats
A goat, you see is a real wild sheep, he's not been domesticated.
— goes by contraries, and dis-believes anything just because those around them believe it.
Then, going down the book, he says, because he's talking about sustainable development:
In future history the constancy of human nature makes it certain that man will continue to be dominated by enthusiasm for creeds of one kind or another; he will persecute and be persecuted again and again for the sake of ideas, some of which to later ages will seem of no importance, and even unintelligible. But there is one much more valuable aspect of creeds that must be noticed. They serve to give a continuity to policy
To policy, remember.
far greater than can usually be attained by intellectual conviction.
In other words: he's talking about the using a creed, creating a creed, a belief system that would last for generations, because, simply, persuasion by itself, could only last one generation. And I'm talking here about what you hear today, of the greening movement, because that's what they planned to bring in. It would be taught in schools, it would have all the aspects and attributes of a religion; and it should last for generations: sustainability. It ties in the eradication and sterilisation etc of whole populations, which he mentions in his book, the one I'm reading from, The Next Million Years, quite the boast eh? I'll repeat that:
But there is one much more valuable aspect of creeds that must be noticed. They serve to give a continuity to policy
Whose policy? - Their policy.
far greater than can usually be attained by intellectual conviction. There are many cases in history of enlightened statesmen who have devoted their lives to carrying through some measure for the general good. They may have succeeded, only to find that the next generation neglects all they have done, so that it becomes undone again in favour of some other quite different way of benefiting humanity.
You understand their double-speak, they're talking from their own points of view in the managed society. He says:
The intellectual adoption of a policy thus often hardly survives for more than a single generation, and this is too short a period for such a policy to overcome the tremendous effects of pure chance. But if the policy can arouse enough enthusiasm to be incorporated in a creed, then there is at least a prospect that it will continue for something like ten generations, and that is long enough to give a fair probability [of success].
Back at the end of this break.
=== BREAK ===
Hi folks, I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix, showing you that the events you've lived through in your life were all planned that way. You thought the abortion industry just came out on its own, because women were demanding it; no, they were funded by big foundations that trace back to one major foundation in the US and one in Britain and all the other ones were fronts. Well-funded, because this is a policy, a policy not just of sustained development, as they call it, they like development as they sustain it. This is to reduce the population into a manageable size that was planned an awful-awful long time ago. I'm reading The Next Million Years, again, by a big player in this, who knew it was already on the go, in subversive ways / very stealth-mode ways, back in his own time. That's actually when the sperm count started dropping, around the 1950s, when he was writing this book. He says here, on page 149:
It is clear from all this that the world policy
Now, remember, he's making it quite plain, because this belongs to the Royal Institute of International Affairs, a world policy
would need to be supported by international sanctions, and the only ultimate sanction must be war.
Do you realise how many people have been killed off with wars and it creates famines and all the rest of it too?
Present methods of warfare would not be nearly murderous enough to reduce populations seriously,
That came out from the King's inquisition enquiry, or commission, into depopulation right after World War II, which this guy would be at, he attended it. So war is not murderous enough to bring us down you see, to what they want us to
and even so they would take a nearly equal toll of victims from the unoffending nations. So after the war the question would arise of how to reduce the excess population of the offending nation. It is not possible to be humane in this, but the most humane method would seem to be infanticide together with the sterilization of a fraction of the adult population. Such sterilization could now be done without the brutal methods practised in the past, but it would certainly be vehemently resisted.
Of course it would, so they've done it stealthily you see; these guys are no dummies. These big world meetings that these guys attend don't make wish lists and hope we'll all come to their point of view, they go ahead and do it, by stealth. He says:
I have dwelt on these details, perhaps at unnecessary length, not because I believe they will ever happen, but in order to show that this kind of enforcement, which is the only obvious one,
The only obvious one!
would lead to a condition of strife, jealousy and disorder, which is precisely the condition that it was designed to avoid.
Then he goes into how to introduce it world-wide, step-by-step, who to, who its main enemies would be, he talks about the churches etc and how they'd have to overcome them and on and on it goes.
It's quite astonishing to realise that these monsters have been running our lives and our parents' lives and grandparents' lives; and, as Quigley said, in his own book Tragedy & Hope and he was all for this group, he was a member of it, he said they'd been behind every major war in the twentieth-century. And I could say they've also been behind the one in the twenty-first century as well, because it's all according to the mandates they set up an awful long time ago. They've never deviated from the plans they laid down and published back a hundred years ago. Never a deviation, even their time limits, they're right on time, right on schedule with everything. That's the bad news, but if you don't know your enemy, you can't fight it unless you know who it is.
From Hamish and myself in Ontario, Canada, it's goodnight; and may your God, or your gods, go with you.
Transcribed by Bill Scott.
Book Excerpts from:
Bertrand Russell: “The Scientific Outlook”.
Charles Galton Darwin: “The Next Million Years”.
"Selfish adults 'damage childhood' " by Mark Easton (bbc.co.uk) - Feb. 2, 2009.
"United Nations' threat: No more parental rights" by Chelsea Schilling (worldnetdaily.com) - Feb. 5, 2009.
"Too much television can make children 'mentally ill' " (telegraph.co.uk) - Feb. 2, 2009.