Alan Watt
"Cutting Through The Matrix" Live On RBN (#292)

Poem Copyright Alan Watt April 6, 2009:

King Kong Chest-Beating at G20 Meeting:

"From the G20 Meeting Comes Predicted Utterance,
A Rallying Cry for Global Governance,
Over 300 Years in the Making,
For the Last 100, Politicians a-Faking,
Political Debates, Arguing and Quibber,
While in Bars, Backslaps, Congrats and Snicker,
Their 'Profession' Mud Under Thin Veneer,
Obeying Party Boss, Good for Career,
We're Now Ruled by Fake Statistics,
Sustainability, Climate Change, Bogus Logistics,
Bureaucracies Like Weeds 'cross the World,
Obeying the UN, Banner Unfurled,
Watch Your Words and Every Move,
Every Action They Must Approve"
© Alan Watt April 6, 2009

Monday 6th April 2009

Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - April 6, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)

Hi folks, I'm Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix on April the 6th 2009. 

There's always new people coming in to the show and I advise them to go into www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com  where they can download lots of talks I've given in the past; and I do try to give you, or at least share, some of the knowledge I've gained through life, where I try to paint the big picture of the system which guides us.  And we are guided by very intelligent people, all connected with each other, using Foundations, Non-Governmental Organisations, the educational system and there's no conspiracy really involved, because they've published many-many books, over the last 100-odd years especially, stating where they're taking the world and how to do it. They even have their own websites up now, openly boasting about where they're taking us, because we're so dumbed-down now and so used to being domesticated, like animals, that we allow ourselves to be guided along these paths; and, of course, they also use massive propaganda from regular media. You can't watch a comedy today without being downloaded with some kind of new dictate or other political correctness; it abounds everywhere. That's how you manage the minds of the people. 

Also look into www.alanwattsentientsentinel.eu for transcripts of these talks, which you can download / print up and they're written in the various languages of Europe.  

For those who want to keep me going, you can go into www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com website and purchase that for which I have for sale. There's not a lot there, that's why I rely upon you to also donate to me and that helps pay, at least, almost pay, for the costs of what I do here. Those who want to donate and I know there's a lot of discs get passed around so they don't even come into the site to see where to send it, send your donations to [listed above].

We are, as I say: we've always been on a roll, towards New World Orders. It's really just different phases of the next world order, one after another, because 100-odd years ago, when they came up with the more formulated scientific socialism, they decided they'd have to take the world on by segments and categories and peoples and ethnic groups and religious groups and so on. Therefore, they devised 5 year plans for certain segments, 10, 15, 50, 100, 200 year plans. When the League of Nations came into being, they published many of their big studies to do with these same plans and agendas for 50 and 100 year plans for different things. The Communist system which was just "Socialism in a hurry", according to Stalin, also used these terms, 50 year plans, 5 year plans. Every step of the political correctness and the globalisation is done in plans, 50, 5, 10, 15, 30, for different parts of the agenda.

If you look into previous books written by the NGOs and the big Foundations that are associated with the United Nations, their big-big front group, you'll find that even the take-over of the water supply was written about, back in the 1960s. They planned to take-over the world's water supply, saying no one could possibly own it themselves, therefore, if you had a well on your property, it was only right, since it belonged to everyone, that the government should be in charge of that water and, of course, eventually, your food too. 

I'll be back with more - after these messages. 

=== BREAK ===  

I'm Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix. It's interesting to watch this big world move towards the plan, in a big way now; and I said before the G20 Summit that what will come out of it would be more power to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. You see, they were set up in the first place a long time ago, for this very function of appearing to run the world's economy, total economy, because we're going into the global phase now. That's why there’s all this hoopla has started, that's why they crashed the economy at this time in fact. It's us that must believe in it, we must believe that they have no option but to take tighter control of everything on a global scale, now that we're all inter-dependent.

When you look back again, a hundred-odd years, or into the 1800s, 1880s, when the Fabian Society came into being, funded by different bankers and the Astor family and you look into the members from the beginning, right through to the present time, you'll find lots and lots of prime ministers belonged to it, another branch of it really is the Socialist International, and you'll find many presidents in fact have also been, or are, members of it as well. You have these umbrella groups and splinter groups but they're all really working together. You see: if you're going to bring the world together, and they realised this back in the 1800s and even before that, when they were having the world wide revolutions, led by Freemasonry. It's wide-open now, it's in all their own publications, as they take the credit for it, but it was well known that they knew that different people / different cultures wouldn't get on so easily. People tend to hold on to their cultures and their values, so they'd have to supply leaders, good shepherds for every culture (maybe for the next 100 - 150 years in fact) and those shepherds would have to lead their flocks altogether towards the meeting place, where they can mix all the sheep in the same one pen; but that would take time. The Fabian Society took its name after Fabian, an emperor, who favoured delaying tactics, delaying tactics, and incrementalism: slow, slow, a little bit at a time, don't push for the maximum all at once. This is the technique they use in Scientific Socialism, as they train us with every intake in kindergarten every year is a little bit ahead of the one the previous year, that's how it's done. Beria talked about that, at the Comintern meeting in about 1934. In his day, he said it would take 70 years to retrain a whole population (at that time they called it a “complete generation”) but he said they'd already got down to a perfect art whereas every five years, they could upgrade the population, with the intakes of children being taught a little bit more than the one before.

What were they teaching them? More politically-correct ideas, altering their viewpoints, feeding them idealism, an ideology you feed the children, exactly what Obama's planning to do; and Obama himself is a front man who's proven his worth to the World Fabian Society. He's right on board with it and you also have his top advisor Mr. Haass, who of course was the head of the CFR, the parallel government. That's exactly what the Fabian Society, the Milner Groups, they're all connected together; they’re all splinters of the same organisation. That's exactly what they planned to do an awful long time ago, eventually bringing in the parallel governments, which they would set up and run, exactly what Carroll Quigley talked about and he was the historian for the CFR. That's been done and now they're bringing them together more openly, now that we accept it and most of the public, to be honest with you, don't really care much about anything that's going on, outside their fun and games from television. They really don't, or outside their own pay cheque, they really-really don't care who is managing them. That's exactly the technique that Russell said would be implemented until they got to them that step; once they're all there, they can really rush ahead with the agenda and stop being so 'Fabian' in their movements, that's what we're witnessing today.

This is an article from oldthinkernews.com, it's going along with this topic, March 31st 2009, by Daniel Taylor 

CFR Unveils Global Governance Agenda 

The Council on Foreign Relations, often described as the “real state department”, 

And it has been, because pretty-well everybody in it is a member of it, has been since long before Quigley's day in the '60s. It says:

has launched an initiative to promote and implement a system of effective world governance.  

World governance” - you see. 

The program, titled “The International Institutions and Global Governance Program,” 

That's the IIGG; and that's exactly what I was talking about, you see, international Institutions, that's their private Foundations and NGOs and the Global Governance Program. 

utilizes the resources of the “…David Rockefeller Studies Program  

We know all about him, look into him and what he founded and funded and all the rest of it. It says: 

to assess existing regional and global governance mechanisms…” The initial funding for the program came with a $6 million grant from the Robina Foundation, which claims that the grant is “…one of the largest operating grants ever received in Council history.” 

The IIGG program, launched on May 1st, 2008, 

They love May Day, don't they?! 

is the latest manifestation of an agenda that has existed since and before the founding of the Council on Foreign Relations. Former CFR member, Rear Admiral Chester Ward, stated regarding the group,  

“The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in common - they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the United States. 

I'd say it's for the whole planet actually. 

A second clique of international members in the CFR comprises the Wall Street international bankers and their key agents.  

You see: Socialism is not run by the people at the bottom, they use minority groups, they use the "disaffected" as they call them, those on the fringes, and always by - supposedly - championing their causes, they end up with more bureaucracies, that master everyone else beneath them, the whole planet. That's the key to it; they couldn't care less about the victims that they help promote into higher levels of society, they couldn't care less about them.  

Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government.”  

Socialism, you see, (remember it's run by the bankers), is going to announce itself as being a sort of watchdog over the world's economy and people will never associate the bankers running the system. It's kind of like having the fox in the hen house, that's exactly what it is. Remember what Rockefeller said himself, he said, it is much preferable to have elitists, intellectual elitists and bankers, he says, running the world, directing the world's course, rather than leaving it to the auto / self-determination of nations. This is the guy who helped and he was the chairman of the CFR for years and the Trilateral, another group that belongs to them.  

The International Institutions and Global Governance Program identifies several “global issues” that require a system of world governance. 

This is exactly what came out of that G20 meeting - I said they'd go for the IMF / The World Bank and it also wants sustainability / environmental issues. In other words: the weather, they want better weather, you see; ‘climate change’ and all that. 

Environmental issues, terrorism, the global economy and energy are all mentioned. The project then states that a system of “universal membership” could be pursued, or alternatively, a regional organization, such as the European Union model. 

Now, the European Union model was based on the first model, remember what the Cecil Rhodes and the Milner Group (that became the Royal Institute of International Affairs, which is the British CFR), they said they'd use Britain, the UK as the United Kingdom, that was the small model for the world, the small model for the world. Eventually you end up with one government running the whole thing, so they fashioned the European Union on that, with one government running the whole thing. Now they're going for the planet, you see. They want to set up a system based on the European Union model; the European Union is a dictatorship, or really an oligarchy. It's incredible, it's dictatorial methods and there's no questioning it; it’s beyond question, by any of its citizens. It says: 

“In each of these spheres, the program will consider whether the most promising framework for governance is a formal organization with universal membership (e.g., the United Nations); 

Of course, that's why they set it up. 

a regional or sub-regional organization; a narrower, informal coalition of like-minded countries; or some combination of all three.”  

The program calls for the “Re-conceptualizing” of national sovereignty, 

Well you know what that means, it means: put in the trash can, that's what it means, which was always their goal. 

citing the European Union’s “pooling” of sovereignty as a model. The CFR project recognizes that historically, the United States has been resistant to the ideals of global governance. The project states, “Among the most important factors determining the future of global governance will be the attitude of the United States…”  

“…few countries have been as sensitive as the United States to restrictions on their freedom of action or as zealous in guarding their sovereign prerogatives.” The program then states that the separation of powers as stated in the Constitution, along with the U.S. Congress, stand in the way of the United States assuming “new international obligations.” 

So, they're on a complete roll, as you can see, to their new system; and they've almost got it accomplished, because you have to train the public, every generation, and the public must always acquiesce to everything that's happening to them. We always agree by our silence, we do nothing and it just rolls on to the next step and that becomes law, because no one spoke up, no one said "no". And I understand why no one says no, because every political party is run by the same group, at the top, it doesn't matter who's down below, put your own men at the top, exactly what Quigley said. We've had that for about 80 years.  

Back with more - after this break. 

=== BREAK ===

I'm Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix, talking about this amazing web of a system that controls our lives and knows where it's going, because it's a capstone, it's managed at the top. It's always been managed and their only problem is how long to keep the public indoctrinated in a certain phase, before they move on to the next phase; and that's why with computerisation they've got their pulse on the public's minds, in all different areas. They know exactly when to make their next move, when we are ready to accept the next step, you see. It’s like the old Parthenon building, it had all those pillars holding up the roof, you just knock one pillar down and that's more stress on each one, it's easier to knock the rest down. That's the technique that they use to change society and culture; and really, there's not much left to save. In fact, you might say the roof is falling down on top of us, because we have been so desensitised and we have been so programmed to be out of the culture as it's falling apart and living in our little boxes, watching a glowing screen, that we're separated; and it's worked very-very well.

That's why no one stands up for anyone else today, exactly what they wanted. Wells talked about this, in his books, in the 1920s. He said government won't achieve its full power until there's no one to stand up for anyone; the government can then talk directly to the individual and you will shake in your boots basically when they do; just like Orwell's “1984” when the screen talks to you.  

This is an article from the Telegraph, which shows you how Socialism works, it sounds more and more like the Soviet Union; and it should, because you see that's how the Soviet Union was run, it was a Socialist system; and remember Communism was just Socialism in a hurry, it's all the same ideology. This is from the Telegraph.

This brave new world we live in needs leaders based in reality  

4th of April 2009 

'Today's decisions, of course, won't immediately solve the crisis," said Gordon Brown, 

Fabian Socialist. 

presiding over last week's G20 summit in London. "But we've begun the process by which it will be solved."  

Triumphalism on the part of our Prime Minister isn't new. Last December, he told the Commons  

That's like the Congress. 

he'd "saved the world". 

That's what he told them: he'd saved the world. 

As Chancellor, 

This is before he was Prime Minister. 

Brown took spin way beyond simple language and into the data itself, presenting official numbers in a way that often snapped the line between mere distortion and untruth.  

They don't like to say "lies" you see, these journalists, so he calls it "untruth".

And that was the Soviet system, they always had their great five year plans for the crops and so on; or for some irrigation, or whatever happened to be, and all through the building and construction, people lived on propaganda. The propaganda was so intense; you'd believe it, even though your eyes saw nothing happening. It was more important you see and people will take perception rather than fact of what they see themselves; and that's what we see with Socialism: great pomp and circumstance but - really - what have they done, you know? The saviour of the world: Mr. Brown. However, what impressed me with Mr. Brown was his technique of speaking: he talked like a world manager, a bureaucrat, not like a Prime Minister. He reminded me of the few occasions where you will hear someone from a United Nations department speak directly, instead of going through their public relations board; and they speak down to the public, they say what the public will do shortly and how they will react shortly etc etc. There's no negotiating with these types, they're arrogant and they're masters, they're taught to be masters, not elected leaders. And it says here: 

But despite everything I know about Brown, his G20 statement – and much of the media's summit coverage – made me queasy. "Smile, ogle at the First Ladies' dresses and pretend everything's fine," we're being told. "Fear not – we have a communiqué. The world is saved! Hurrah!"   

This G20 hyperbole, complete with a one-day "relief rally" on global markets, is pure escapism. It's the real-life equivalent of "soma" – the mind-bending drug used for mass thought control in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. 

"The warm, the richly-coloured, the infinitely-friendly world of soma-holiday," thought Henry and Lenina as they danced around Westminster Abbey. "How kind, how good looking, how amusing everyone was!" 

Our leaders need to snap out of this trance and face reality. During the final quarter of last year, UK GDP fell 1.6pc. We're now looking at a 4pc decline in 2009, in my view, and a further contraction next year. In fact, unless the Western world grabs its banks by the scruff of the neck – forcing them to come clean about their losses, so thawing our frozen credit markets – we could see an 8pc peak-to-trough GDP fall, far worse than the early 1980s. 

House prices dropped only 2.7pc during the first three months of 2009 … 

Etc etc, so they're telling you the economy's still going down the tubes; and here's these guys at the top having their Balls, these big pageants that they're having. Mind you, these Balls are just there for show anyway, because all the work was done by bureaucrats, long before these guys meet to sign agreements. They don't draft them up; we're watching a pantomime, a pantomime where these guys give you a perception that they really are making decisions for the world - they were made long ago, long ago and we're on a timetable.  

Back with more - after this break. 

=== BREAK === 

I'm Alan Watt; we're Cutting Through The Matrix. Earlier, I was talking about how children are used by progressive indoctrination, year to year, new intakes, new indoctrination, for the things which they will see happen through their life and social change, all planned before they were born. You upgrade them so they get about 20 and those changes will all seem quite natural to them because they've had intense indoctrination, before they were able to really reason things out for themselves. They have no wisdom, it takes an awful long time, it takes a lifetime to get wisdom; therefore, the children are always used in a Socialist system. That's why they use camps and so on for them, where they can give heavy indoctrination, that's standard throughout all of this. 

This article here is from the Times Educational Supplement, the T.E.S., April the 1st 2009: 

Fight for their rights 

This is how children are used in little campaigns, by adults, of course, who all belong to the right agencies, societies and Foundations and NGOs. 

If you involve children in campaigns, are you fostering their sense of social conscience or subjecting them to propaganda? When teachers from Hounslow Heath Infant and Nursery School 

A Nursery school. 

in Middlesex took 30 banner-wielding six and seven-year-old pupils to Westminster to protest against plans to expand Heathrow airport, the children were resolute. 

Six and Seven year olds, resolute. 

The allocated speakers, who had to be lifted up to a microphone, told the audience that they didn’t like the amount of noise the planes created and that they couldn’t hear their friends speaking when they flew over.  

Maybe it's because they've got the earphones on and they're text messaging and i-poding each other and all that kind of stuff, hmm? 

"I was impressed by the children. They seemed to understand what they were saying,” says Kathryn Harper-Quinn, the head teacher. “Normally I would not advocate using young children in campaigns, but we’re talking about their future. 

You see, these characters, who are all politically correct, are using the national education system and the international educational system, to program the children, for PC stuff, political correct stuff. But where does this all really tie in? Well, you scroll down this here and it goes into where it's all coming from, because this is only one segment of what it's all about. It says it's to do with citizenship programmes, taught at school, citizenship, well guess who defines what good citizenship is? Well, the United Nations does, of course; and who funds it? Foundations fund it and money from the tax payer as well, of course. It has different names for the citizenship programmes, because it covers a whole bunch of areas in social change - it says: 

“Many schools do a good job of embedding

Embedding!

citizenship in the curriculum but could do better at encouraging pupils on the participation side. Others do the opposite,” he says. 

This is the guy talking about it: 

Tony Breslin, chief executive of the Citizenship Foundation. 

It's also to get children involved in politics at a very early age, exactly what Communitarianism is all about; and of course, as I say, you have no wisdom when you're young and you're given the dialectic: this or that; this or that, pick your argument, on this side or that side. They don't know they've been set up and they'll become very vehement and aggressive and angry during their debates, I'm sure, at that age, since they haven't a clue what life's all about, except for their indoctrination. This is the stuff they're putting into children’s heads; but it's a whole wide variety of topics, to create what they call "world peace"; when no one's fighting with anyone else, we'll have world peace. The same thing Arthur Koestler talked about, in the Ghost in the Machine, world peace, to him, was lobotomisation of the brain, literally, done by chemicals.

You're watching, you see Britain's ahead of the US, in using children and giving them idealistic indoctrination, idealism, ideology; but now it's going to really step up, because Obama's there to sign all the stuff to bring the US into this global system of indoctrination. That's why they put him in now; Bush set up the machinery of force, that can be used across by all agencies now - including Children’s' Aid, you can get SWAT teams now for Children’s' Aid - so the whole machinery was set up and Obama's put in afterwards to bring the US into the global system, including the indoctrination of youth. A big thing in Socialism, they never change their methods, you can always recognise it, and unfortunately it works, because children who have massive indoctrination and once you have one generation of them, it would take another 70 to 80 years, after those people had died off, before you'd be back to a healthy society. This is also understood, at the top.  

It's an on-going battle, and most folk don't even know the battle's on; if they do know it's on, they're stuck in one little area of it, they're stuck in blaming one bunch or another bunch, not realising, as I say, the good shepherds are at the top of every group and the good shepherds are a brotherhood, to lead all the sheep into the central pen, for this wonderful, peaceful, world they're creating. They've got them at the top of all religions, all ethnic groups, all belonging to the same society at the top. That's all you need; and the sheep follow and they'll talk a good walk and speak the good talk and be the epitome of what you think stands for you, guarantee you.  

Now we'll go to the callers and there's Tony from New Orleans there; are you there Tony? 

Tony: Hey, Professor Alan! 

Alan: How you doin'? 

Tony: Ah, you know I've been better, they're pumping out chemicals right now; but, I wanted to ask you, there's all them shootings around where you're talking about chemical brainwashing, it's no coincidence that it all pops up all at one time. And I wanted to ask you: your assessment of Orwell was spot on just recently on that guy’s other show. He was a man born into it, who was raised for it, but he ‘glitched’ and he went against it; that's obvious, from reading his writings. And this Aldous Huxley: if you read Brave New World, he's all about it, you know, no matter how much he's supposedly writing about a counter character, he's writing about a man who's, you know, it's all in glorious terms, there's no ‘oh this is bad’, it's like ‘man this is a great idea’. Now in Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World, they have this place for people who can see, people who understand and they send them off to this place and separate them and it's a nice place where they can live a normal life but that didn't exist in Orwell's world. There was no special magical land where the Alphas, who weren't supposed to be Alphas, could go off to.  And I'm just wondering does this place really exist? Is there really a place where people who can see, who don't want any part of it, where they'll just let them go and live and won't mess with them and let them do their own thing? Is that real or is that just propaganda? 

Alan: No. It is propaganda, I mean, in Orwell's day there was still areas that the communications were not so far ahead as they are today. You didn't have every country across the world belonging to a United Nations at that time, run by a United Nations that push big militaries for internal rioting and so on. There were places you could go and probably live out the rest of your life; and of course his generation, he knew they'd be gone by now anyway.  This Socialist banker agenda, economist really, plans to let no one escape, no one escape whatsoever. In fact, you'll now see the push going towards the banning of home schooling for instance; everyone must get the same indoctrination and that was stated by the Prime Minister, or President, of Italy, just last year. He said they were banning home schooling because everyone must have the same indoctrination. Hilary Clinton said the same thing. 

Tony: Did he use that word "indoctrination"?  

Alan: Yes. 

Tony: Wow! They don't even try to hide it anymore really. 

Alan: They don't have to, they don't have, no; so it's out in the open. Eventually they plan to conquer the entire globe and anyone that has memory of another way of living or different opinions will be their number one enemy.  

Tony: Well, that's the whole purpose of the Alzheimer's and all that, it's to annihilate anybody who has any memory that could contradict what they're putting out. 

Alan: Yes. You've got to understand that Socialism, as I say, when you look into, for instance, that video, The Soviet Story, they always go by the same techniques; and they always eradicate a good amount of the populations of the countries, as they take them over. And I've said before, there's many ways to eradicate people: you're getting sterilised in the West - and their own statistics are telling us that every year. 

Tony: And nobody makes a big deal about it, the sperm count has dropped by about 70% since 1930 and nobody is going to say oh my god, what's going on here?  

Alan: Yes, well that doesn't happen, obviously, in nature, unless something's happened to the people; and something has obviously happened to the people. Then you tie it in with Julian Huxley's talks and Russell and they talked about using the needle, the inoculations, in their own books and they also talked about compulsory sterilisation and they also said that the elite would have antidotes to these things they would put into the public arena, so that the elite themselves could produce the right offspring. They were quite open about the whole agenda and we're living through that stage right now, it's mission accomplished almost for them. 

Tony: Now, read "1984", he glosses over, very briefly, the stage leading up to the world they're living in and talked about he comes home one day and his Mom, who can remember that stage, is just gone. Now, I mean: I think that he wrote about that stage in depth, I think that they wouldn't let him publish that, what do you think about that? 

Alan: Well, in his own memoirs, he talked about that fact - now he had contracts with three major international publishers, when he was putting out the pro-Socialist stuff that he'd been indoctrinated in himself, at Cambridge University. These were on-going, limitless; and when he came out and turned against them, after fighting in the Spanish Civil War, he came home and went round the Socialist clubs and they walked out on him, most of them, they didn't want to hear this bad news about Socialism. Then, his publishers, he couldn't get his book published by any one of them, even though they were all under contract to publish his books; and that's when he realised that all publishing companies are is an international group that will decide what you will think and what will be kept from you. That's the real function of publishers, it's not to help you get your books out; it's to decide what the public will hear and what they will not hear. Therefore he gave it to an independent small firm and managed to get it published through them. 

Tony: OK. I always got the sense you know, in Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World it's kind of glamorising the whole lifestyle. But there was no glamour in "1984" and I always kind of felt these places where people who could see and didn't want to be a part of it, went off there and, like, this can't be real. And recently, I got back from a trek round the country, following some rumours, looking for these places. Because people talk about them and people say they're been there; I went looking for them and what I saw was areas where people who see congregate and that's just to get them to congregate there, so they're easier to get rid of. What I saw, I went up to Northern California and it was totally, there's all kinds of people who would be like right on with what you're saying and they don't realise there's four-lane highways running through a County with a 150,000 people. There's no need for four-lane highways, they don't understand that a four-lane highway is there for when the time comes they're moving in on you.    

Alan: That's right; that is right. They're putting through near where I am giant highways, at a time when we're supposed to be under massive economic depression. It's been on the go now for about 4 years, winter and summer, 7 days per week; it's a mandate and you don't need it for the kind of traffic we have up here! 

Tony: That's exactly what I saw and I decided that's a really bad place to go to, if you're trying to get away from this stuff! 

Alan: Yes. Well, they talked about this a long time ago, about rapid deployment forces, for internal strife. They published articles from the CFR and other agencies 20-odd years ago on this; and they talked about the necessity for creating super highways for the military to get to response places in time. They always plan ahead, way ahead. 

Tony: Everything you're saying, I've seen so much truth in all - some of the stuff, you talk about all the spraying and where I went, I went to Humble County in California and I saw on your website they got this stuff in the grass that kind of looks like a spider web, that's a result from the spraying. 

Alan: That's right. 

Tony: Well, what I found in walking the old loggers roads, in California, is wherever the trees didn't block it, it built up in the grass. It looks like maybe some kind of mite is living there and if you stand there and stop for a minute, it's only where there's a break in the trees this stuff would congregate, drifting in off the coastal winds. And you grab it and it dissolves in your hand. 

Alan: That's right and if it gets too much sunlight, it likes the shade too, too much sunlight, it will turn into a white powder and now, as the snow is retreating, I've had about 15 inches of snow since the weekend, but before that, the snow was retreating and you've got 4 or 5 months of snow concentrated spraying there going down and down and where it's retreating from the grass, you see this white spider web stuff. That’s been like that now for a few years, every spring. 

Tony: It looks like there should be mites living in it, if you stop and stand in it for 30 minutes, you should be covered in mites; but if you stop and stand in it you're not covered in mites; something's wrong there. 

Alan: It's a chemical powder. 

Tony: When I saw the thing about the spraying, I'm like: 'This guy's crazy, there's no way they're doing that' but then, I mean, I actually saw the stuff; and I think the Marijuana counteracts the effects of it, I think the THC is so powerful that whatever it is they're pumping out, it overpowers that and I think that's why they're so against THC. 

Alan: They're also against just ordinary cigarettes and I think, partly, it's because, if you're smoking, you tend to cough up a lot of phlegm and you'd also block it - you see, this stuff is almost based on nanotechnology, it's meant to go into the alveoli sacs of the lungs, right into the bloodstream; and if there's anything interfering, it's going to get trapped and it won't get through and I think that's part of the massive campaign against smoking. They don't care how many folk die off with cancer, they don't care about that; here they are talking about sustainability and population reduction, why would they care about folk dying of cancer? 

Tony: I was watching, have you ever seen ‘Supersize Me’, the thing about the food? 

Alan: Yes. 

Tony: Well, they were talking to a lobbyist in Washington for the food companies and he's saying it's your personal responsibility to eat food without the crap in it, well, I go into a grocery store and there is no food without the crap in it! 

Alan: You're dead on, I've noticed that too, but thanks for calling. 

I'll be back with more - after this break. 

=== BREAK === 

Hi folks, this is Alan Watt and we're Cutting Through The Matrix and Rachael from North Carolina is on the line, are you there Rachael? 

Rachael: Hi. Thanks for taking my call again, I watched the Soviet Story, that you talked about, and so now I have a vivid picture of what Socialism is; and I remember watching the Norman Dodd video about how they were trying to roll us into the, basically, there's three organisations: the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie were trying to roll us into the Socialism, and you were talking earlier about the CFR and I was watching something on how their funding originally was from the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie. Is that true? 

Alan: They did get it; they fund each other into existence, because they're all run by the same bankers really. They also got massive grants from some families like the Astor family; and the Astor family really put the cash out there for them and then they moved off to Britain and put the rest of the money into the British Fabian Socialist society. You see, the Fabian Society is only part of the Royal Institute of International Affairs. You always find that there's a main group running all of these different organisations; and the Royal Institute of International Affairs was set up to bring in global government, the brotherhood of man, but run by, again, the experts and the bankers; so they've all these other groups down below them, specialising in different areas.

The Fabian side of it was to set up leaders for working class and minorities that would eventually vote them into power, more and more of them; but the objective, really, was to create more bureaucracies that would then lord over all of the populace, that was the intention of it. Massive government, the socialist-style government and they also call it Collectivism, which is exactly what the Club of Rome said they favoured most, a Collectivist society, on behalf of those at the top; but we'll be run in a Communistic fashion at the bottom. 

Rachael: How are these guys getting continual funding, I'm assuming they're working 8 hours a day, 5 days a week at the CFR, writing these documents. How do they get their funding? 

Alan: They are funded, again, by the other Foundations. You'll find that there's thousands of Foundations out there; but you just have to go to the main rich families. The Rothschild family has many Foundations for fronts and so does the Rockefeller family, for the States, it's primarily the Rockefeller family. They have many, again, front Foundations, they funnel money from one Foundation to another but it comes from the Rockefeller Foundation initially. 

Rachael: How does the CFR kind of weasel their way to get their documents used by the government, or does the government come to them and say we're going to use you as consultants? 

Alan: No, I'll tell you what it is, a lot of their members are always present in every government, so they don't have to go asking for them. They've worked alongside government, like a parallel government, since they were created and many of the top people, as you know, are present members. They're supposed to pretend they've left it while they're in office, at least they did in the old days; I don't think they bother anymore; they stay members of the CFR. 

Rachael: So they kind of get brought into the CFR and then they go back and forth into government? 

Alan: That's right and you also have many of them in high-level federal bureaucratic positions that are permanent members of the CFR. 

Rachael: OK, thank you. 

Alan: And they have all sides, all parties, it doesn't make any difference, it's just the dialectic they play. 

Well, that's it for tonight, so from Hamish and myself, from Ontario, Canada, where there's a bit of a storm going on, it's goodnight and may your god, or your gods go with you.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Transcribed by Bill Scott.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Links to articles and topics covered in the show:-

"CFR Unveils Global Governance Agenda" by Daniel Taylor (oldthinkernews.com) - March 31, 2009.

"This brave new world we live in needs leaders based in reality" by Liam Halligan (telegraph.co.uk) - April 4, 2009.

"Fight for their rights" by Vicki Shiel, TES Magazine (tes.co.uk) - March 27, 2009.