July 31st, 2009 (#376)
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:

Poem Copyright Alan Watt July 31st, 2009:

Depop Machinations of Connected Foundations:

"Much of World's ills, Cause of Frustrations,
Come from NGO Demands, Funded by Big Foundations,
Sustainable Development Sounds Nice and Logical,
'Til You Realize the Masses are Deemed Toxicological,
World can Handle CO2 Exhaled by the Elite,
Who Stifle Expulsions in Manners Discreet,
Lesser Urchins Consume, to Their Betters' Dismay,
Following Their Training, Designed by Bernays,
Fact is, This System is Not Meant to Last,
Post-Industrial Minions have Their Time Passed,
A Brave New World now Using Deterrents,
Destroying Cohesion and Breeding in Lesser Peasants,
Large Fines for Having Children, Forced Abortion,
In Totalitarian States, Offering No Option"
© Alan Watt July 31st, 2009

Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - July 31st, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)

 

Hi folks, I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through the Matrix on July the 31st, 2009.  Newcomers look into the cuttingthroughthematrix.com website, and on the front page you will find all the other sites I have up there, which you should bookmark for future use, in case the big servers take me down once more.  And that way you'll be able to download the latest talks for free.  You can also, you'll see there, there's cuttingthrough.jenkness.com, that's a very dependable site.  There's also cuttingthroughthematrix.net, .us, .ca, there's alanwattcuttingthroughthematrix.ca, and alanwattsentientsentinel.eu, that's the European site, Sentient Sentinel, and on that site in fact, you can also get written transcripts of the talks, of the audios, written in the various languages of Europe for print up.  Remember too, that you keep me going, you the listeners.  I have never asked for money from the radio stations, and most hosts out there, in fact, I think all hosts are funded by the advertisers you hear on their shows.  And often they bring them on as guests and so on, and that's how they get paid.  I don't do it that way.  The money that goes from the advertising for this show goes straight to RBN radio station to pay for their airtime and their equipment and their bills and the engineers, and all the rest of the stuff.  Lots of money to keep a show going, a station going.  And it's up to you to keep me going by buying that which I have for sale at cuttingthroughthematrix.com website, or you can donate to me through paypal or personal check from the U.S. and Canada.  Outside the Americas you can use Western Union, which is kind of expensive, or Money Gram.  And some people who have more imagination, have found other ways to just send cash to you.  It seems to get through as well.  That's all up to you.  But as I say, I need it to keep going, because it costs money to do what I'm doing here, and to keep all these sites up, and all the rest of it.  This is not a job, as I say, it's not even a career, it's a vocation.  It's something you must do while you're allowed to do it.  And free speech is something that really is going to be roped in very quickly in the next year or two, there's no doubt about that.  So it's up to you to keep it going.  And because, basically as I say, I'm not paid by sponsors I can also say a lot more, where otherwise you're sort of hamstrung by money coming in from sponsors.  As I say, I'm a free agent, and I can say pretty well what I want to, almost, as I say.  And those who just get the discs of the shows burned and passed to them to play in their players at home, you can write to me [listed above].  I'll be glad to hear from you.  And now, that that's over, that's the worst part of the show, is just doing this repetition to keep me going basically, but it's an essential part.  People one day will not hear me, and they'll say, what happened?  I'll say, well no one sent me a penny, and that's how it happens.  Everything that's supposedly free today, like television, and you realize even advertising on the television pays for it all.  It pays all those big guys, you see, all those stars that you see, and all the rest of it.  So don't take everything for granted.  The whole world isn't like that.  And believe you me, when it is like that, you're not going to get the truth.  Doesn't happen.  You're hamstrung, you're tied into what you can say, or who you can offend, or not offend.  Back with more after these messages.

 

Hi folks, this is Alan Watt, Cutting Through the Matrix. I've talked so many times about how the big system truly works.  The parallel government that Professor Carroll Quigley called it, and Maggie Thatcher called it, and others who have been high up in politics or bureaucracy.  When they leave their jobs they end up in this parallel bureaucracy where they all know each other, worldwide, because they've all mixed with and worked with each other in the past.  And this is what Quigley was talking about.  They form a parallel government that gets the true work done.  We find that Brzezinski also touches on it when he talks about the technocrats.  These people, these politicians, prime ministers, presidents, or ex-prime ministers, they become technocrats.  They're given true power for the dominant minority as Huxley called the ones who really run the planet.  Those who own the resources.  The big corporations.  Everything you need, all the energy supplies and so on.  And it's interesting too how they use all the non-governmental organizations, funded through the series of big foundations, that are often owned, the big ones, the big, big funders, are owned by the guys who own like the Federal Reserve and the bank of England and things like that.  Or the Rothschild bank in Switzerland.  These are the same people, and they also own the pharma companies too.  It's amazing how it all ties in together, isn't it?

 

When you've talked to many federal bureaucrats, in different countries, it's amazing what you find out when it comes near retirement time for them.  Did you know that federal government agents get pre-retirement therapy, like lectures for about six months to a year, before they retire, because you see, they've never mixed with ordinary people.  They've never ever really had to worry about the big things in life.  Some of them don't even drive cars, they're chauffeur driven.  And they have to relearn things.  It's like putting a baby out into the street, you know.  So they get this sort of therapy as to how and tuition as to how they can pass their time in retirement.  And here's what happens.  They tell them to go into charitable organizations, and to also move out from their main place where they all gather round, like in Canada it's Ottawa, and Washington D.C. of course, and then certain areas of London, in England, just outside London.  They're told to move out for retirement, and maybe start up an NGO, a non-governmental organization, which of course the governments will tell them they approve of.  In other words, it's almost a continuation of their career.  They never really retire.  And there's funding, extra, on top of their pensions, you'll receive for doing this kind of work.  And they infiltrate through little towns and villages across the world, these people.  Very nice people, and they will eventually put little notices round, or in the town hall for a little meeting.  Interested people in the environment and so on.  They're part of the technocratic, I wouldn't call them quite the elite, they're lower on the scale, but they're very necessary to get the things going.  For instance in Sudbury, this town, a mining town not far from me, only last year, it suddenly came out in the paper that there was an environmental group materialized in Sudbury, and that's who made it up, all these kind of high paycheck types, ex-exec types, from government and so on.  And now they're pretty well advising town councils on what they can and can't do, this non-governmental organization. And that happens all over the place.  You see this is all from a central head, that's what we have to understand.  The parallel government that Quigley was talking about obviously has a head to co-ordinate them all, to make sure they're all on track in the same direction at the same time.  And it's the same with other people in the big upper establishment, they have no problem getting their spiels into the newspaper, their particular beef, you might say, or enthusiasm, whatever they're into or been told to be into.  They never retire.  This is like an added bonus on top of their big fat paychecks, you see. 

 

And to give you an example of this, we all know about how they're blaming the world now, the people in the world for carbon dioxide, and how it's all tying into the environment, global warming, and I've gone through ad nauseam the statements made out by the Club of Rome where the founders, Alexander King was one of them, admitted in one of his own books, that he wrote with the co-founder called The First Global Revolution, that back in the 70s, they were given the task to bring the whole world together, and they released that it could only be done through a war type scenario, that's when people pull together, sacrifice, do what they're told by government, even have rationing and so on.  And experts come to the fore to guide the public on what to do.  And King said they were given that task.  They looked all kinds of ways to get a war type scenario going, and they thought, well if man was an enemy of the planet, that they could convince people of this, then man would be the enemy all together.  We'd have to work against man himself, and they said that would fit the bill.  Global Warming would fit the bill.  So they dreamed the whole thing up.  And as I've said before, once they start, they will never deviate from their plans, never, ever deviate from their plans.  So you can always take it to the bank, whatever they say in their own books and journals.  Now here's one character here, and this is presented in the Guardian News, the guardian.co.uk, and the Observer as well.  It's from the 22nd of July 2007, going back to 2007.  It's to give you an idea how you're bombarded with articles and you don't really notice it, it's almost subliminal the way it all comes in, until you agree with everything that happens on TV to do with Global Warming and too many people, and all this stuff.  You see there's too many of the wrong sort of people, that's what they mean, for a post-industrial era.  This article here says:

 

Science chief: cut birthrate to save Earth

 

New museum head says lower population would cut CO2 at a fraction of renewable energy cost

 

(Alan: So, that's their answer to it.  Simple economics.  Get rid of a bunch of the population.  Right?  Even though there's no relationship between global warming and CO2 rising.  You see CO2 follows any warming pattern, actually follows sunspots or lack of them.  It will either reduce or increase them.  It's nothing to do with us.  And since people weren't here millions of years ago causing any global warming, the same scientists will tell you, oh, there's been many periods of global warming between ice ages.  Well, that happened without any of our help, didn't it?  But the facts don't matter here, because there's another agenda at work.  Says here:)

 

The new head of the Science Museum has an uncompromising view… (A: You see they gave him this kind of semi-retirement at a Science museum.)

 

…an uncompromising view about how global warming should be dealt with: get rid of a few billion people. Chris Rapley, who takes up his post on September 1, is not afraid of offending. 'I am not advocating genocide,' said Rapley. 'What I am saying is that if we invest in ways to reduce the birthrate - by improving contraception, education and healthcare - we will stop the world's population reaching its current estimated limit of between eight and 10 billion.

 

(A: When did they come up with this estimated limit?  It's a nice way of putting it too.  Not prediction, but an estimated limit.  Limit is a different thing from a prediction.  Meaning they've already got a limit on it now, you see.)

 

'That in turn will mean less carbon dioxide is being pumped into the atmosphere because there will be fewer people to drive cars and use electricity. The crucial point is that to achieve this goal you would only have to spend a fraction of the money that will be needed to bring about technological fixes, new nuclear power plants or renewable energy plants. However, everyone has decided, quietly, to ignore the issue.'

 

(A: Then he goes on, and on, and on, about how since he left NASA, you know that big military-industrial complex, the guys who made missiles.  This is what this guy was working in, most of his life.  Because you see these big missiles that were going to come across the sky from Russia or vice versa, from the States, had to go out of the atmosphere, and that was NASA's main field.  It's a military organization.  They don't just put spiders up into space to see how they can mate.  That's just for children to believe in, you see.  It's to do with repairing military satellites and stuff like that.  That's what they're up there for with the shuttles and so on.  And it says here, he was given this position:)

 

since 2005 when Lindsay Sharp abruptly left the £150,000

 

(A: That's not a bad little pop on top of your pension is it?)

 

£150,000 post following rows about financial waste, cronyism and the 'Disneyfication' of exhibitions.

 

What does it say about this guy, too?  He belongs to as well the Optimum Population Trust.  That's the bunch that Prince Charles had out recently, pushing for the same thing.  As I say, remember too that the elite have always been worried about the numbers of ordinary people, and Charles Galton Darwin put that very clearly, you know the wrong sort of people breeding, in his book, The Next Million Years, in the 1950s, and he was a part of the scientific elite himself.  He was a physicist, the grandson of Charles.  So here you have the Optimum Population Trust, that's made up of very white, very rich, upper elite people, that Mr., this character here, Rapley belongs to.  Now I'm going to put this link up on my site at the end of the show, plus a couple of other links as well.  And it isn't until you go into what else Mr. Rapley was in, and again, he was at King Edwards School, Bath,  Jesus College, Oxford, you know up there with the silver spoon, Manchester University, he got an MSc in radio astronomy, and then he was at University College London, he got a PhD in X-ray Astronomy in '76.  He was also into dealing with all kinds of detection devices, devices which gather info, right down to the chips we're talking about these days, this character.  After all, controlling people and observing them and monitoring them was very important to these control freaks.  Back with more after this break.

 

This is Alan Watt, and we're Cutting Through the Matrix.  Just discussing how these characters, just like civil servants, top civil servants, and people like that, never retire.  They're given other jobs to do within society.  They're given their causes to champion, because it's a policy.  A policy above the elected politicians and their policies, generally, although they're both combining together as we see these days.  In fact, they basically lobby governments to get their way.  They have full-time lobbyists just like any other big corporation, all of these foundations and NGOs, but getting back to Mr Rapley.  It said here, that apart from all the other things he was given, you know different directorships and so on, it says:

 

During his time in the Antarctic, he helped Al Gore

 

(A: So he's a pal of Al Gore, you see.  You know, the Green Man himself.)

 

with the "Live Earth" concert by arranging for the Rothera Research Station's in-house band, Nunatak, to perform in Antarctica as part of the event.

 

So he's in with all the same Greenie players, the Big Elitists that want the population reduced.  Now there's another link I'll put on my sight as well.  It's an excellent site, it's about foundations.  And they have a green tracking library on it.  You can find out who gives all the grants out to the NGOs, who runs them in other words, and what their polices are, and what their mandates are.  And it's an excellent site.  There's two of them actually from the same site, and it's got an index of foundations.  It says here, here's a quote by Barbara Dudley, from the Beach Foundation.  She says:

 

"It is true that the environmental movement is an upper class, white movement.  We have to face that fact.  It's true. 

 

(A: Now listen to the words.)

 

They're not wrong that we are rich and they are up against us.  We are the enemy as long as we behave in that fashion."

 

(A: So how do they alter that, we and them and all that stuff?  Well, they have to come in and try and find things in common with you, then gradually educate you, you see, until you've got the right ideas and the right opinions, through massive propaganda.  That's how it's done.  I'll read that again it's so wonderfully true.)

 

"It is true that the environmental movement is an upper class, white movement.

 

(A: Remember the dominant minority that Huxley talked about.)

 

We have to face that fact.  It's true.  They're not wrong that we are rich and they are up against us.  We are the enemy as long as we behave in that fashion."

 

And on this particular link, as I say, I'll put these links up, there's a box you can type in the particular environmental group or foundation you want to investigate, and they'll take you to it.  It's very good indeed.  And there's also one from the same group, and it's got at the top:

 

The Golden Rule: Who has the gold rules.

 

(A: They took that really from a Canadian entrepreneur, the same one by the way who owned ALCAN, and daddy in fact set up the whole booze industry during Prohibition, and ran the booze from Canada into the States.  Then when they stopped it and let booze flow in the States, and banned it in Canada, they reversed the flow because they had the network set up.  And they got ALCAN with its waste aluminum oxide to lobby governments and dental associations to put it in your toothpaste.  Big guys.  And their dad by the way is the guy who had that above his bed, The Golden Rule: Who has the gold rules.)

 

Private foundations have taken substantial control of the environmental movement in America. They bring with them what psychiatrist Roy Menninger called "the narcissism of the righteous," a.k.a. the "I'm a better angel than you" syndrome. Having money and the power to decide who gets it is intoxicating and toxic both to those who give and those who get. They live in a world that knows nothing of creating wealth, but only of spending it.

 

But don't call it plutocracy (the rule of wealth) because that will end your credibility among the plutocrats. And don't call those who rule by wealth an oligarchy (rule by the elite few) because that will end your credibility with the elite few.

 

So we're reduced to calling them rich guys who give the money and the marching orders. And we call them the ecoligarchy.

 

(A: The ecoligarchy, that sounds pretty good.)

 

You know, a story with a humorous ending? Or an unexpected juxtaposition of two disparate planes of thought that produces a sudden insight?

 

However, the products of the plutocracy and their ecoligarchy are not funny to the people whose lives they ruin. They destroy jobs, they destroy companies, they destroy industries, they destroy industrial sectors. Their power is enormous and dangerous.

 

Many liberal foundations have become prescriptive, that is, they design their own programs for leftward social change and then pressure a highly orchestrated network of environmental groups to perform their projects.

 

Some foundations no longer accept applications, but only fund pre-selected groups.

 

(A: And then it gives you cases and points on how they word it if you want grants from them, and it says:)

 

Numerous foundations have some version of this exclusionary policy.

 

"Prescriptive" also means pressuring applicants from the open application process into programs they would not have originated themselves.

 

(A: And here's an interesting one, because David Suzuki, the Big Greenie Man for Canada, the guy who said, and it's up there on google by the way, and I have the link to it, where he says that people are just maggots, you know.  He's a geneticist.  It's got:)

 

The Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) (A: Did you know there was one?)

 

The Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) is a group of more than 200 foundations with important environmental programs.

 

(A: And I'll be back with more on this after this break.)

 

This is Alan Watt, we're Cutting Through the Matrix.  Discussing how the Big Foundations fund pretty well all the big topics, the major topics that you hear about today.  And they comprise a parallel government.  You have to get the book Foundations: Their Power and Influence.  It's about starting with the Reece Commission, going back into the 1950s, the early 50s, a Congressional investigation into why these big foundations like the Rockefeller foundation, Carnegie, Ford, etc, the ones that fund all the universities and so many other institutions that we take for granted, why they were funding what seemed to be all left wing communistic policies.  And it isn't until you tie it in with Professor Carroll Quigley, who was the historian for the Council on Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute for International Affairs, Canadian Institute for International Affairs, Australian Institute for International Affairs, New Zealand Institute for International Affairs, you see they have them for all the British Empire Countries.  It isn't until you go into his book Tragedy and Hope, and the Anglo-American Establishment, his other great book, that it starts to make sense to you how they really create policy, they're outside of politics and they're not responsible to the public.  And he talked about the creation of the big foundations and that's how they fund these big groups, like the Royal Institute for International Affairs, which is a private non-governmental organization, even though they often staff governments and civil service bureaucracies with their members.  Getting back to this particular site, it's Undue Influence, that has the stuff where you can check up the different foundations.  As I say, in Foundations: Their Power and Influence, during the Reece Commission they were astonished in the 50s to find out that their job according to Norman Dodd, who was one of the investigators, for Congress, and for the Senate, was told bluntly by the head of one of them, one of the big foundations, well, our job is to change the culture in the West, so much so that they'll blend seamlessly with the Soviet type system.  Now going back to the Club of Rome, Mr King, the ones that dreamt up the idea of Global Warming, that would fit the bill, to get us all under this agenda, in the 70s.  You see how these tie in together.  Everything ties in together.  Big foundations come up with ideas, big think tanks and their foundations too, set a policy, they all use it, all the other ones use it together, because they're all on this same road, using Socialism, which is actually Fabian Socialism, which is not for the working classes at all.  In fact, they encourage welfarism so they can have more governmental agencies right into your life.  There's children getting brought up now and they call the different social workers by their first names, and they think they are their friends.  I'm not kidding.  It's amazing.  It says here:

 

Big foundations, which have a distinctly liberal cast, use their tax-exempt dollars to fund everything from the environmental movement to studies supporting the welfare state to population control.

 

(A: It's all mixed together.)

 

When used to finance "public interest" group advocacy, foundation wealth can have an enormous influence on which public policy is adopted

 

Most significant policy initiatives undertaken today by the Federal government have some foundation support, (A: Often a lot of it.) and many are implemented as a result of foundation-funded advocacy

 

Those who run big foundations represent a small, elite, insulated group, most of whom live in the eastern United States, (A: That's what Professor Carroll Quigley said too, the Eastern Establishment.) hundreds or even thousands of miles from the areas affected by the environmental policies they support

 

Foundations have no voters, no customers, no investors (A: They have no complaints department either)

They have no wish to receive feedback from those affected by their decisions, nor are they accountable to anyone for funding policies which adversely affect the well-being of people or local economies

Tax exempt foundation funding of environmental advocacy groups unfairly tilts the playing field against the views and input of those most affected by the policies advocated

The average citizen’s voice and input in the government decision-making process is often drowned out by those advocacy groups largely funded by foundations, making our government seem even more remote and less responsive to the needs of the average person

(A: It's astonishing, but again Maggie Thatcher referred to it.  She said she now belonged to it, and that she'd left government.  We have Zbigniew Brzezinski in his own book, Between Two Ages, talk about it.  He says they were technocrats now.  They call these characters technocrats.  Not responsible to the public.  They're given more power then Presidents and Prime Ministers, because they can get the job done.  The Club of Rome also said they advocated collectivism, that's why they were measuring the Soviet System with the West.  It's much easier to run the masses down below them with vast bureaucracies and agencies over the top of them.  And they said under a democracy they couldn't get anything done, because the public input often stops what they want done.  Therefore they bypass public input all together, you see.  That's how it works.  And these foundations, even though there's hundreds of them, and it will tell you how many of them are in here in fact, you know, and how much money they have.  It says here for instance, Foundation Assets now exceed:)

Foundation assets now exceed $200 billion, half of it controlled by fewer than 200 foundations

 

And if you cut down those foundations, the 200 that runs it all, it will come back to only about 10, and even then you can cut them back further to about 5 main ones.  Completely intertwined by the way at the top, like the Rockefeller group, with the CIA, MI6, Mossad, and all the rest of it.  I've read before from even America's Cultural Cold War, how America, the CIA ran the culture industry through the whole Cold War.  By the way, they haven't given up.  And in the book it said, and this is all from declassified stuff, they can tell you 50-odd years later, or 40 years later.  They tell you so much of how they were altering the culture, again to go along with agendas that the public hadn't even heard of yet.  Done slowly, slowly, slowly, almost subliminally.  The Rockefellers, it tells you in the book, were approached often when the CIA didn't want to go through a black budget or some other thing, they'd go to Rockefeller.  Why?  Because Rockefeller had a big, big part in the CIA, and he would fund them privately too.  And he had a whole bunch of targets he wanted taken out of Latin America, because he was already taking over a good part of the food industry and the resources down there.  And he literally had a list of people he wanted removed.  This great benefactor to mankind.  The guy who funds all the major universities across the planet, along with a list of things he'd like to get pushed, and things he'd rather have not mentioned at all.  You wouldn't believe what hides behind charitable organizations.  You have no idea.  No idea at all. 

 

And we also know that Britain for instance, and they've had so many politicians coming out from Tony Blair onwards up to the present, pushing for GM food to be unlimited with what it wants to do, what it wants to sell to the public.  That stuff is soaked in Monsanto pesticide, incredible amounts, and they wonder why we've all got cancers and stomach problems.  Well they know, they know of course.  Again, depopulation they say is a good thing, isn't it.  Now they're getting stuff coming out from a government agency that supposedly tested organic food, compared to what they called ordinary food.  What is ordinary food now I wonder?  Because there is no ordinary food.  It's either organic or it's GMO, you see, but it's all in the wording.  And what they're trying to say in the government report, a pro-government report, by the government, is that there's no difference in health benefits.  So here's The Mail Online:

 

By Joanna Blythman

31st of July

Despite its obvious benefits for our health and for the environment, organic food continues to be denigrated by the political and corporate establishment in Britain.

(A: It's been out the last few days, this government report.)

The food industry, in alliance with pharmaceutical and big biotechnology companies, has waged a long, often cynical campaign to convince the public that mass-produced, chemically-assisted and intensively-farmed products are just as good as organic foods, despite mounting evidence to the contrary.

The latest assault in this propaganda exercise comes from the Food Standards Agency, the government's so-called independent watchdog, (A: It's as good as the FDA.  You know how good that is.) which has just published a report claiming that there is no nutritional benefit to be gained from eating organic produce.

Those forces bent on promoting GM crops and industrialized production, would have been delighted by the widespread media coverage of the Agency's report, portraying enthusiasm for organic foods as little more than a fad among neurotic consumers that would pass once the public is given the correct information.

But what is truly misguided is not the increasing popularity of organic goods, but the Food Standards Agency's determination to halt this trend and instead promote genetic modification.

The new report from the FSA highlights this. For all the publicity it has attracted, the document does not contain any new material.

In fact, it is just an analysis of existing research carried out by other bodies. Moreover, the organization that conducted this second-hand study, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, is not renowned as a leading centre in this field.

Indeed, there is far more significant work currently being done on organic foods by several other bodies, some of it funded by the European Union, though the FSA has chosen to ignore it.

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the FSA has decided to give such loud backing to this report because it can bend the findings to suit its political, pro-GM, anti-organic agenda.

 

And that's what it is.  You see, when the Milner group started up, and they sent out guys like Cecil Rhodes, and they combined the groups together, they became the Royal Institute for International Affairs that was set up always to be a counter to democracy.  To bypass democracy on behalf of the already existing elites, the dominant minority.  They sent them out to take over the world's resources.  And under a warfare strategy, and these guys were trained in warfare strategy, you go for the basic essentials first of all.  Food and water.  After that comes all energy sources, you get people totally dependent on you, because you will be the big boss, and you will decide if they can eat or heat themselves for instance, or drink some water.  That's incredible power.  And they're going to do it eventually through their big front group that they created – read Carroll Quigley as I say – called the United Nations.  And I'll put this article up here, the whole article for you to see at the end of the show on my website.  All these links will be up on that particular website. 

It's so interesting too, you see we're already international, and we've been trained since 2001 we have no rights, we have no privacy, and of course it always come back to, well what have you got to hide.  Well that's not the point of it.  You see, we are individual human beings with the right to privacy.  You have the right to what's in your own head.  That's nobody's business but yours.  It's your property.  But they want to know everything about you.  And to show you how there are no nations, and that all of the agencies, all of the intelligence agencies are completely interlinked worldwide – if you truly were a separate nation, would you allow foreign countries to look into your own citizens' bank accounts?  This article is from the 28th of July, 2009, from the BBC News.

EU to renew US bank scrutiny deal

The EU plans to renew an agreement allowing US officials to scrutinize European citizens' banking activities under US anti-terrorism laws.

EU member states have agreed to let the European Commission negotiate new conditions under which the US will get access to private banking data.

US officials currently monitor transactions handled by Swift, a huge inter-bank network based in Belgium.

German politicians have voiced concern about the scope of US bank scrutiny.

The US wants to have access to a new European database that Swift is setting up in Switzerland.

The US Treasury already has access to Swift's American database.

Tracking the funding of terror groups (A: Terror groups.  I wonder if they mean CIA and MI6?) globally has been a priority for Washington since the 11 September 2001 attacks on the US.

 

Mind you, it works both ways.  That means that Europe has also got access to everybody's bank account in America.  That's what it also means.  You see it's not just what they don't say, it's what they leave out.  You're supposed to figure in the rest yourself.  You see everything is a deal at the top.  And they all must play the same game.  They don't really trust each other, unless they're all on the same track with the same rules.  That's how it works.

And here is from the London Evening Standard.  Tamiflu, right.

'Half of children suffer swine flu drug side-effects'

31st of July

More than half of children taking Tamiflu suffer side-effects such as nausea, insomnia and nightmares, researchers said.

Two studies from experts at the Health Protection Agency (HPA) showed a "high proportion" of British schoolchildren reporting problems after taking the anti-viral drug.

(A: I wonder if this is a toned-down version you see.  What's a few nightmares, sort of thing.  When you look at what happened in Japan, and the effects it had on the children there.  Severe physical effects, maybe permanent some of them.)

Data was gathered from children at three schools in London and one in the South West who were given Tamiflu earlier this year after classmates became infected.

(A: I wonder how they knew?)

The researchers behind one study said that, although children may have attributed symptoms that were due to other illnesses

(A: See, you get one person.  I've watched this all my life, well something is sweeping through an area, and somebody faints in a school because they're petrified of it, the other ones suddenly get these strange symptoms.  This is ongoing.  And generally it ends up in the paper, they don't know what it was.  It's called hysteria, that's what it is.  It says:)

"this is unlikely to account for all the symptoms experienced".

Their research, published in Eurosurveillance, (A: I love the name of it, Eurosurveillance) looked at side-effects reported by 11 and 12-year-old pupils in one school year in a secondary school in South West England.

The school was closed for 10 days in response to a pupil being confirmed with swine flu on return from a holiday in Cancun, Mexico.

A total of 248 pupils took part in the study and were given Tamiflu prophylactically. (A: Preventively)

Compliance with prophylaxis was high, with 77% of children taking the full course, the researchers said.

But they added: "Fifty-one per cent experienced symptoms such as feeling sick, headaches, and stomach ache.

The researchers said "likely side-effects were common" and the "burden of side-effects needs to be considered" when deciding on giving Tamiflu to children prophylactically.

 

And so on, and so on, but there's a lot more severe side effects to these symptoms, if you look into the Japanese studies, and what was happening to the children in Japan.  And I used to think, you know, just watching occasional TV growing up, I used to study television.  I'd always scrutinize it and study it.  I never got lost in a story, because I knew there was always a reason for the story, or for a reason with how certain things were put across to the public in a certain way.  And when you're being entertained, you don't realize that you're being downloaded with propaganda generally.  And the greatest tool they've ever had for propaganda is television.  That's why they made it a mandate that everybody in Britain had to get a TV, I think back in the 1950s.  And they brought millions of used ones over from the United States, with a company called DER, and allowed people to pay it up every week.  That was the first time they allowed pay up with no collateral behind it.  You had to have a TV.  Back with more after this message.

Hi folks, this is Alan Watt, we're Cutting Through the Matrix.  Just mentioning how TV was an imperative for the British government to get into the British public, a TV in every home, a long time ago.  An imperative, to create the culture that they wanted, or actually to degrade and bring it down by knowing full well that as Plato said, monkey see, monkey do.  People copy what they see on drama, on stage, and it's the same with television.  You're given your culture.  Well here's India going at it.  And this is from The Times Online.

 

Ghulam Nabi Azad says late-night TV will help slow India’s birth rate

 

India's taken a big leap forward recently, because they've also said recently they're going to give everyone a National ID card, quite a big project in India, but so is making sure they all get televisions.  They want electricity across the whole country, not to help them run machines or anything, no, to get televisions going, because they want to alter the culture.  That's why.  And believe you me, what they'll do is exactly what they did across Europe.  You get nothing but sex, sex, sex eventually.  The youngsters emulate it, because it's all they're thinking of, naturally, it's in everything.  And then there's a fallout to the sex: we need abortion clinics all over the place.  Then life becomes degraded, and cheap, until, well, you're just another animal aren't you.  It's all a technique, it's been tried before.  A few years ago they tried that in India too, and people were throwing their television sets out their windows, in a big mass demonstration.  I wonder if they'll keep doing that.  Always beware of Greeks bearing gifts they say.  And when the West gives you gifts, you should run off in a different direction.

Maggie from Texas, are you there Maggie?

 

Maggie: Yes I am, Alan.  I was going to ask you something about something else, but I'm wondering now does England still have a requirement that everybody get a TV.

 

Alan: I think they've pretty well got it.  They've probably got more than one TV now.  At one time you could not, if you lived in Council housing, that was 90-odd percent of the public, you couldn't get a television, because you couldn't get a loan at a bank without collateral, and they made that, that was the first exception they made across the country, that they called them tick men could go around and collect money every week from the average household, and they delivered to the house the television, they set it up.  DER was the company, which was RED backwards of course, and they brought them all in from the United States.  And then the propaganda really started hitting the public, until you end up with the mess that you have today.

 

Maggie: Oh, I see.  Is there time for one more question?

 

Alan: Yes

 

Maggie: Yeah, okay. Something you touched on earlier, briefly, I didn't quite catch.  Did I understand you correctly to say that the main lobbyist for fluoride in water after the war was a Canadian who had established the liquor empire?

 

Alan: It was the Bronfmans. The Bronfmans owned ALCAN.  It was the largest aluminum factories across the country, including the States too.

 

Maggie: Well, I thought, I thought it was the Carnegies and ALCOA.

 

Alan: Well, I'm sure they all helped each other, because they all knew each other very, very well.

 

Maggie: I see.  Okay.  I'd like to mention quickly also that I found a fascinating document.  I just found it online.  And it's called Hearing, it's a 1954 document put out by the U.S. government printing office, and it's Hearings on the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives: A Bill to Protect the Public Health from the Dangers of Fluorination of the Water.  That's what they called it at the time, Fluorination.

 

Alan: That's right.

 

Maggie: And it's up there, and it can be read on the internet and it can be downloaded too.

 

Alan: Okay, I'll have a look into it myself.

 

Maggie: Want me to send you the link?

 

Alan: Thanks for calling. Actually, the link, send it to me, and I'll mention it next week.

 

Maggie: Okay, I sure will.

 

Alan: Thanks, Maggie.  You take care.  Well, from Hamish and myself – Hamish is my dog – in Ontario, Canada, it's good night, and may your god or your gods go with you.

 

 

Topics of show covered in following links:

"Science chief: cut birthrate to save Earth" by Robin McKie (guardian.co.uk) - July 22, 2007.

"Chris Rapley" (wikipedia.org).

"Jesus College Oxford - News Archive 2007" [Scroll down to 'New Director of Science Museum, Professor Chris Rapley'] (jesus.ox.ac.uk).

"Green Tracking Library - Index of Foundations" (undueinfluence.com).

"Green Tracking Library - About Foundations" (undueinfluence.com).

"A cancerous conspiracy to poison your faith in organic food" by Joanna Blythman (dailymail.co.uk) - July 31, 2009.

"EU to renew US bank scrutiny deal" (newsvote.bbc.co.uk) - July 28, 2009.

"Half of children suffer swine flu drug side-effects" (thisislondon.co.uk) - July 31, 2009.

"Ghulam Nabi Azad says late-night TV will help slow India's birth rate" (timesonline.co.uk) - July 13, 2009.