Sept. 21, 2010 (#668)
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:
Poem Copyright Alan Watt Sept. 21, 2010:
Energy Efficient Cook Stoves:
Somethin' for Nothin',
And the Fuel ain't Free:
"Under Guise of Redistribution of Wealth,
Austere (Poor) Countries Help Third-World with Health,
Peoples Believe They'll Get Something for Nothing,
From Kindness of West Whose People are Loving,
In Reality Their Independence will Be Stripped Away
For a Generation, Then One Fine Day
They Find That Should They Need to Go Back,
Basic Skills for Survival They All Do Lack,
The More "Civilized", More Defenseless They Are,
Skills So Basic are Lost and Afar,
Now All They Need Owned by Those Relentless,
Dominating the World Under "Interdependence" "
© Alan Watt Sept. 21, 2010
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Sept. 21, 2010 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Hi folks. I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix on September 21, 2010. I always get the big annoying part over rather than hit you all the way through the show, for donations or buying the books and so on. I get it off the plate first right to you. I advise you to go into cuttingthroughthematrix.com web site. There are hundreds of audios for download for free; help yourself to them. I try and give you the shortcuts to the big picture of understanding the world. If you were to take your whole lifetime trying to find out what’s going on, you would need quite a few thousand lifetimes in fact because one is not enough. All we can do is pick up the clues that are left out there by the big boys themselves when they have been rather untidy in days gone by. So go into the web site and help yourself to the audios. You’ll see the books I’ve got for sale and the disks and so on. That’s what keeps me ticking over. It’s up to you to purchase them. They are different from the usual history books that give you names and dates and battles and generals and that kind of stuff. I go into the ancient system up to the present and show you the conology, as I call it. CONology… of the techniques that are used upon all societies from the earliest civilizations. Civilization, really, is a very interesting term, from city. Once you are crammed into a city you must live in an artificial system and those who own the city and rule the money – there is always a money system for a city because you can’t grow anything or raise cattle and so on in a city, therefore you become sort of shark-like and you are too busy scrounging for cash to pay your taxes and buy your meager substance to worry about what’s happening. And it hasn’t really changed up until this day. So purchase the books. [Order and donation options listed above.] I don’t really push Western Union because they are quite hefty for a fee to transfer a wire; it’s so easy to do and they charge so much. Money Gram is a bit cheaper. You can send cash as well from other countries; they are still cashing it over here, so far. So that’s that over with. But you’ve got to help me out as I say, and donations themselves are really appreciated. Believe you me, it’s more the donations here and there that add up, and help me to pay the bills, for the satellite uploads and all the rest of the stuff that I have to pay for here, just for this one hour show. And this is not a business. It’s not a business. If it was, if I needed the cash for a business I’d be off doing something where I’d make money and I do have certain opportunities to do that. The alternative is to bring on guests who are really are there to sell something, and you listen to an hour of advertising and that really isn’t quite right either in my book. Why listen to an hour’s advertising, get scared, and then get offered the solution? That’s the standard technique of advertising. The ads you hear on this show are paid by advertisers to RBN to broadcast the show. It pays for their air time, their staff, equipment and their bills and it’s got nothing to do with me. So this gives me a freer hand to say the different things I want to say, or if I’m asked a question I can answer it more truthfully and I’m not compromised. I'll be back with more after this break.
Hi folks. I'm back and we're Cutting Through The Matrix. It’s amazing you know, how old the idea of money is. Before it was even coined around 800 BC or so they weighed it and they had different techniques. Some of it was just the gold dust. Some of it was very basic as ore even in ancient times. Sometimes it was made as a bracelet that wound around your arm, around and around and around it and you’d cut off little pieces of it and weigh them as you paid your way along the trade routes and paid off the gangs that would stalk you along the way. Wherever there is money there is always corruption; it goes hand-in-hand with it. Along with money you need commerce. The two, again, go hand-in-hand. If you look at primitive societies as they are called – and I think it’s an unwarranted term – they are generally completely truly self-sustainable. These so-called primitive societies don’t really go in for commerce much. They make their own tools. They make everything that they need. They are completely independent of the system. That is why the big boys hate them so much and call them primitive. They are not under this slavery system that we are all under here.
We are born into it as I say. Many, many generations have been born into the same corrupt system and it simply gets more and more corrupt. But it isn’t really just corruption sort of willy-nilly and guys helping themselves to the big pot. It’s also a directed corruption because it’s the New World Order as they call it, a total control of every single individual across the entire planet done under the guise of helping people. Whenever these guys come and say they want to help the third world, the third world should really arm themselves to the teeth because they are going to take away every bit of ability you have to be independent and live and survive during the good times or bad times, especially the bad times. You’ll be completely dependent on them for everything that you need for food and even the water because water will be owned by the UN eventually. It will be the sort of arbiter for the private corporations which will own the entire world’s water supply. And I’m not kidding about that; it’s all been talked about at the top.
It all runs on money. Money is the key. Money… we don’t work for our food and we don’t work for things we really need so much. We work for money to buy the food, to pay the rent, to pay all the taxes and so on and so on and so on. That’s the real system we live under. There is more corporate welfare out there than there is general welfare. Folk forget we just bailed out the banks not long ago there for trillions of dollars and trillions of pounds, still ongoing. These are cash gifts from you to them, again, brokered by your government that works for the big bankers. And there is no doubt about that. They all work together, the top CEOs. If you look at most of the top politicians, they have all been CEOs of big corporations. They go in and out of these seats as they call them, and into politics for a few years and then back in again and get handsomely paid for all the laws they introduced to help their big businesses when they were in politics. Standard story.
Here is a politician in Britain who has come forward with the right kind of thing. I don’t know how far it will get, probably get shot down as they say, when a bill is introduced. However, it says…
Douglas Carswell (Alan: who is a member of parliament in Britain.) MP Introduces Bill to Stop Fractional Reserve Banking
Sep 15, 2010 / webcache.googleusercontent.com / Parliament & Legislation By Ben Dyson
(A: It’s a well written article. I guess the guy really wrote his speech up to present it in the House of Commons and then it goes to the House of Lords. The Commons is for the commoners, and once you have really screwed the public you get put up to the House of Lords. Anyway…)
“Mr Douglas Carswell (Clacton) (Con): I beg to move, (A: He put in what they call a ‘move.’ A movement isn’t going to the toilet there, sometimes it is, but it’s actually to put forward a bill, so they call it a move.)
“That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prohibit banks and building societies lending on the basis of demand deposits without the permission of the account holder; and for connected purposes.
[Demand deposits are bank account deposits that can be withdrawn on demand - you don't need to give any notice before demanding your money back, for example.]
“Who owns the money in your bank account? That small question has profound implications. According to a survey by Ipsos MORI, more than 70% of people in the UK believe that when they deposit money with the bank, it is theirs—but it is not. Money deposited in a bank account is, as established under case law going back more than 200 years, (A: That’s when the Rothschilds took over.) legally the property of the bank, rather than the account holder. Were any hon. Members (A: Honorable Member, that’s what they call politicians there. I don’t know where the ‘honorable’ part comes in.) to deposit £100 at their bank this afternoon or, rather improbably, if the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority was to manage to do so on any Member’s behalf, the bank would then be free to lend on approximately £97 of it. (A: ...out. As soon as you put 100 in, they lend 97 out, even though that should still be kept for the guy that deposited it, right.) Even under the new capital ratio requirements, the bank could lend on more than 90% of what one deposited. Indeed, bank A could then lend on £97 of the initial £100 deposit to another bank—bank B—which could then lend on 97% of the value. The lending would go round and round until, as we saw at the height of the credit boom, for every £1 deposited banks would have piled up more than £40-worth of accumulated credit of one form or another.
“Banks enjoy a form of legal privilege extended to no other area of business that I am aware of—it is a form of legal privilege. I am sure that some hon. Members, in full compliance with IPSA rules, may have rented a flat (A: That’s an apartment.), and they do not need me, or indeed IPSA, to explain that having done so they are, in general, not allowed to sub-let it to someone else. (A: That’s the rules; that’s the law.) Anyone who tried to do that would find that their landlord would most likely eject them. So why are banks allowed to sub-let people’s money many times over without their consent? (A: And they give you nothing back right.)
“My Bill would give account holders legal ownership of their deposits, unless they indicated otherwise when opening the account. In other words, there would henceforth be two categories of bank account: deposit-taking accounts for investment purposes, and deposit-taking accounts for storage purposes.
[This is the system recommended by proposals such as Irving Fisher's 100% Money solution and the modern full reserve banking proposal available (A: They give you a link to go and read all of that.) at www.BankofEnglandAct.co.uk]
“Banks would remain at liberty to lend on money deposited in the investment accounts, (A: That’s when you go into a bank and they ask you if you want to open an investment account; that gives them permission to go out and invest that cash, of yours. You get a little dribble back, not much, but they invest it and they get a lot back.) but not on money deposited in the storage accounts. (A: That’s like a savings account.) As such, the idea is not a million miles away from the idea of 100% gilt-backed storage accounts proposed by other hon. Members and the Governor of the Bank of England.
“My Bill is not just a consumer-protection measure; it also aims to remove a curious legal exemption for banks that has profound implications on the whole economy. (A: This is the same, by the way, in every country, the same system.) Precisely because they are able to treat one’s deposit as an investment in a giant credit pyramid, banks are able to conjure up credit. In most industries, when demand rises businesses produce more in response. The legal privilege extended to banks prevents that basic market mechanism from working, with disastrous consequences.
“As I shall explain, if the market mechanism worked as it should, once demand for credit started to increase in an economy, banks would raise the price of credit—interest rates—in order to encourage more savings. More folk would save as a result, as rates rose. That would allow banks to extend credit in proportion to savings. Were banks like any other business, they would find that when demand for what they supply lets rip, they would be constrained in their ability to supply credit by the pricing mechanism. (A: In other words, they wouldn’t keep doing it and creating money out of nothing, and then end up in a bubble that pops.) That is, alas, not the case with our system of fractional reserve banking. (A: Fractional reserve just means they only have to give you a tiny percentage of what you deposit. They lend the rest out.) Able to treat people’s money as their own, banks can carry on lending against it, without necessarily raising the price of credit. The pricing mechanism does not rein in the growth in credit as it should. Unrestrained by the pricing mechanism, we therefore get credit bubbles. To satisfy runaway demand for credit, banks produce great candy-floss piles of the stuff. The sugar rush feels great for a while, but that sugar-rush credit creates an expansion in capacity in the economy that is not backed by real savings. It is not justified in terms of someone else’s deferred consumption, so the credit boom creates unsustainable over-consumption.
“Policy makers, not least in this Chamber, regardless of who has been in office, have had to face the unenviable choice between letting the edifice of crony capitalism come crashing down, with calamitous consequences for the rest of us, or printing more real money to shore up this Ponzi scheme—and the people who built it—and in doing so devalue our currency to keep the pyramid afloat. (A: Which is what every country has done since the crash.)
“Since the credit crunch hit us, an endless succession of economists, most of whom did not see it coming, have popped up on our TV screens to explain its causes with great authority. Most have tended to see the lack of credit as the problem, rather than as a symptom. Perhaps we should instead begin to listen to those economists who saw the credit glut that preceded the crash as the problem. The Cobden Centre, the Ludwig von Mises Institute and Huerta de Soto all grasped that the overproduction of bogus candy-floss credit before the crunch gave rise to it. It is time to take seriously their ideas on honest money and sound banking.
(A: Then he goes on to the big communist one, the Keynesian-monetarist economists. Keynes was all about that. Keynes worked for the big boys. In true socialism, true socialism is Nazi-ish, you see. They don’t believe in the people having rights. They believe that the elite should run the world; that’s why they’re in with the bankers. And Keynes basically had not a good word for the ordinary working people.)
“The Keynesian-monetarist economists might recoil in horror at the idea, because their orthodoxy holds that without these legal privileges for banks, there would be insufficient credit. They say that the oil that keeps the engine of capitalism working would dry up and the machine would grind to a halt, but that is not so. Under my Bill, credit would still exist but it would be credit backed by savings. (A: …by real savings.) In other words, it would be credit that could fuel an expansion in economic capacity that was commensurate with savings or deferred consumption. It would be, to use the cliché of our day, sustainable.
So he goes on and on and on and explains and explains and explains it. However it’s quite simple. Whenever you put your cash in the bank they immediately loan most of it out and keep a few pennies in reserve. That’s what they had been doing with the last crunch too. They were lending to other banks, that money you just put in, and then they’d lend that out too, the 90-odd percent of it, and they had nothing to back anything with when the bubble came down. So we end up paying it all, but that’s what we’re here for. We’re slaves you see, under this economic system. So this has had its second reading in Parliament. I don’t know what will happen, probably nothing, but at least it shows you that some of them know. It’s been getting a voice. It’s been legalized. It’s been noticed you might say, that some people know what’s going on. Which is rather unique for parliament isn’t it?
Another con that’s going on too, is the big move, by the big boys and their pyramid – they have a capstone of their pyramid that guides the world, through IBM and all the big think tanks and so on, and the foundations. We’ve heard of all their con games. Remember they came up with the idea of using the climate, catastrophes and the climate, at the Club of Rome, in order to control the world and get us to cut consumption and get into these sustainable areas, which really means prison camps, that we wouldn’t be able to move out of. You see, in any totalitarian system that has existed in the past, you can’t have free access of movement. You must be contained in an area… and that is coming. That is coming. Step by step, under Homeland Security, and the same Homeland Security is in every country under different names. They are pushing the same things because they have all signed the same treaties with the United Nations, Agenda 21, The Millennium Project, and many other names for the same thing. So they have scared us with all this nonsense, and it’s always bogus claims that they make. I’ve read the bogus claims too from the guys who make them, saying that they have to put out scary scenarios or no one will listen to them. So they lie. It says here…
UN climate change claims on rainforests were wrong, study suggests
The United Nations' climate change panel is facing fresh criticism after new research contradicted the organisation's claims about the devastating effect climate change could have on the Amazon rainforest. (A: I love all these ‘coulds’ and stuff. You could say Mars will crash into Earth. Yeah, it ‘could’ happen you know...)
By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent / telegraph.co.uk / 13 Mar 2010
A new study, funded by NASA, (A: That’s your tax money of course.) has found that the most serious drought in the Amazon for more than a century had little impact on the rainforest's vegetation.
The findings appear to disprove claims by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that up to 40% of the Amazon rainforest could react drastically to even a small reduction in rainfall and could see the trees replaced by tropical grassland. (A: That was the big scary part.)
The IPCC has already faced intense criticism for using a report by environmental lobby group WWF (A: The World Wildlife Fund, that’s the Queen’s hubby and all these characters.) as the basis for its claim, which in turn had failed to cite the original source of the research. (A: They never do of course. They even get students to write stuff.)
Scientists have now spoken out against the 40% figure contained in the IPCC report and say that recent research is suggesting that the rainforest may be more resilient to climate change than had been previously thought.
It comes just two days after the UN announced an independent review into the panel's procedures following a series of scandals over its most recent (A: lies… oh sorry, reports…) report which was found to contain factual errors and claims which were not based on rigorous scientific research. (A: No kidding. What was it they said, we’ve got to put out scary scenarios or the public won’t believe us. [Alan laughing.])
The InterAcademy Council, which is the umbrella organisation for the national academies of science around the world, will examine how the IPCC's reports are compiled and communicated.
Dr Jose Marengo, a climate scientist with the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research and a member of the IPCC, said the latest study on the Amazon's response to drought highlighted the variations on the previous claims.
So there you go. It’s on and on. Remember what the final intent is, that you can own nothing on this world. It will all be in ‘stewardship.’ It will be under the stewardship of the big boys and the big corporations themselves. Remember too, the United Nations is a corporation; that’s how it’s registered by the way. So it’s all a con to get us into the sustainable development, austerity programs, as you toss your money across the world – that’s the redistribution of wealth – to make sure that they can eat and all the rest of it. An example of that, for instance, the United States has no idea how much money they are shelling out, the same with Britain and all the countries that got hit with the crash, the planned crash – and it was planned by the way. They are throwing out money under the new prosperity schemes for the rest of the planet. That’s of course right from the Communist Manifesto. It says here…
Clinton to unveil US funds for clean cookstove push
21 Sep 2010 / Source: Reuters / alternet.org / By Jeff Mason
(A: This is only one of many programs that you are paying for right now across the world. I read articles two or three weeks ago where the US is paying for tuition for teachers in schools in China, as they rake in trillions of bucks, because they are the only producers in the world now, and India and elsewhere across the globe. And healthcare too by the way, for China. Yeah. You are paying for that as they cut yours back here.)
NEW YORK, Sept 21 (Reuters) - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will announce on Tuesday a U.S. contribution of more than $50 million toward providing clean cooking stoves in developing countries to reduce deaths from smoke inhalation and fight climate change. (A: Oh, they always tack that on, eh. They are going to fight climate change.)
The U.S. funding, which will be spread over five years, is part of a Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves (A: They’ve got a thousand projects on the go, all with your tax money, for across the world but not for home.) being started to combat a problem officials equate with malaria and unclean water in terms of their health impact worldwide.
Some 1.9 million premature deaths, (A: They go through the usual rubbish and pulling numbers out of the air and all the rest of it. We’ll be gone.) …
Smoke from such cooking methods can lead to childhood pneumonia, lung cancer, bronchitis and cardiovascular disease while contributing to climate change through emissions of carbon dioxide and methane -- two major greenhouse gases -- and black carbon. (A: Ooohhh, black carbon, ooohhh. You ever watch the forestry commissions; you know, their departments of forestry doing a controlled burn? They did it in British Columbia a few years ago in conjunction with Washington State. The two were to meet somewhere and this fire got out of hand and burned I think for 3 years. Millions of acres I think were just burned to the ground. There was BLACK CARBON everywhere… and that smoke was up in the air and no one said anything about this pollution that they caused. You see, when government does it, it’s HOLY smoke, you understand. It’s HOLY smoke, but when you do it, oooohh, that’s nasty smoke, it’s bad, it’s EVIL smoke… and you are going to pay for that. You see?)
The new alliance to combat the issue groups U.S. government agencies with the United Nations Foundation, Germany, Peru, Norway, the World Health Organization and corporate backers including Morgan Stanley and Shell, among others. (A: Who no doubt will also be the guys who own the shares to the companies that are making all the stoves.)
"This is something that touches on climate, on health, on women's empowerment, (A: Oh, let’s use Hillary; she gets off with that all the time. The only time she picked anything off a cook stove was to throw at Bill. Anyway it says here…) on deforestation and on poverty," (A: Ohh God, that’s enough of that guff anyway. I call this stuff guff because it really gets to you, all this PC prattle that comes out of think tanks. You know, these little phrases that are put out there by the marketers for them to spew out to us.)
As all that is happening and we are paying for the third world to have these wonderful cook stoves, of course you are going to get your electricity cut back at home, and your gas supplies, you are going to pay through the roof and all the rest of it. There are people in Canada terrified of this year coming because the oil prices go up every year, the ones who use oil for heating. But they won’t get any help from the third world or the UN, but they certainly will pay out to make sure they have cook stoves across the world. I’ll read what they are doing now, as they sell off your countries. I'll be back with more after this break.
Hi folks. We're back, and we're Cutting Through The Matrix, talking about the farce of the world as the big agenda steamrolls ahead and they keep repeating the same terms to embed them in your brain, until you’ll think that carbon footprints and all that is really real. You’ve no idea how much money they paid marketers to come up with the ideas of these particular little terms, to try to make something into a physical picture that gets embedded in your brain. And it’s all bogus, utterly bogus, but it’s to bring you into a new form of slavery, called austerity, where you will have no more spending money to purchase things that you want, or extras. You will spend it all on fees and carbon taxes, like good little slaves should.
This article is about how far they are going now with the assets of countries and cities. Remember, your tax money, your property tax monies for instance, were all put in there with the usual intention of saying, well we’ll give you certain services and all that kind of stuff. Folk will say, okay, okay; they are kind of unsure but they go for it. Of course the whole idea is to create big infrastructure, big roads, power stations, that kind of stuff, your water supply systems. All of those things are paid for by the taxpayers’ money and they keep it kind of nationalized to an extent; it’s still owned technically by the taxpayers. They of course, the idea is, once they have perfected the system they sell it off privately for a few pennies to their bosses, to their boys, you know, the big boys. That’s the standard thing they have done all over the world. Well, now they’ve got the new world order in. Now that they’ve got countries amalgamated totally under a super government, so far away from them it should be in Timbuktu because it will make no difference how far away it is. Once you are out of sight of reach, that is getting to a politician… if you want a politician to complain about what’s happening you have to go over to Europe cap-in-hand and hope, hope… I mean really hope you’ll get to see one, because you probably won’t. So people in Britain…
Birmingham could put city assets up for sale
Coalition spending cuts may lead city council to make venues, including the NEC and NIA, available to sovereign wealth funds
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 21 September 2010
Birmingham council leaders, who are hoping to plug a budget hole (A: A budget hole? It’s a bottomless pit.) by selling some of the billions of pounds of property assets owned by Britain's second city, are in talks with Middle East sovereign funds.
The National Exhibition Centre (NEC) – Britain's biggest exhibition venue – prime real estate and a stake in Birmingham airport could all be up for grabs, councillors said, as they look to fund large capital projects at a time when the national government is demanding deep spending cuts. (A: You see how it all works together, it’s beautiful.)
Mike Whitby, leader of Birmingham city council, which represents over a million people and describes itself as Europe's biggest local authority, said he had been approached by sovereign wealth funds and was talking with the Abu Dhabi government as he tried to forge closer ties with the Middle East. (A: I love this ‘forging closer ties’ [Alan laughing.] with the Middle East, until you are joined at the hip. That’s what they said about Europe, as they were joining Europe country by country over years. No, they weren’t joining it; they were just forming closer ties. …we’re forging closer ties. That was the term they used.)
"We would allow them to be in partnership with our assets, (A: Well that sounds nice, partnership with their assets.) including the National Indoor Arena [NIA], the Symphony Hall, the ICC [International Convention Centre] and the NEC," Whitby said.
The NEC Group, which is wholly owned by the council and includes venues such as the NIA and ICC as well as the main exhibition centre, has fixed assets worth about £750m, according to pre-credit crisis valuations included in the council's most recent annual report.
The NEC made an operating profit of almost £30m last year, on revenues of £110m.
So this is what they are doing now. They have already sold parts of England off to other companies as well. This will continue. The idea remember, is to demolish any MEMORY of having a country, until you’re sort of wandering around wondering what you are and nothing to relate to, and no past or anything else. That’s all part of it too. And it’s working very well. Then you go to Ireland. Ireland is doing the same thing.
Irish Government To Auction National Assets:
Criminal Stupidity Or National Sabotage?
By Gabriel Donohoe, 19th September 2010 / sovereignindependent.com
The Irish Government is so hard up for cash that it is considering auctioning off national assets like state lands, buildings, state agencies, and other valuables that belong to the Irish people. (A: It’s kind of like the money. You put it in the bank and you think it belongs to you.) The Government says that the money is needed to support economic growth and employment.
When the cash for the sale of these assets is spent, what then?
The State will still have no money and its assets will then be in private hands. The inherent wealth of the citizens of Ireland will have passed to the super-rich, a small class of people who already own most of the wealth of the island. The thrift, travail, and sacrifice of previous generations (A: That paid to have all this infrastructure put up…) will be casually tossed aside.
Well that’s the history that I’ve seen even in Scotland too. That’s what they have been doing for years. That’s the big con game of using your money and pretending it’s still yours, to make your facilities to serve you. It’s all a big con game. It great because the big boys don’t have to put any money in, for research and development or all that kind of stuff, as the stuff is getting set up, like pipelines and gas supplies and so on. Wonderful isn’t it?
And when was this all planned, all of this ability for foreigners to come in and buy up your assets? It was in the 1990s. They had the setting in France for it. It was highly hush-hush. The CBC Canada did a little documentary on it. No outsiders were allowed to get inside and that’s when they set up the system where any foreign country can come in and basically buy up anything they wanted from any other country. If you tried to stop them, by any bylaw or whatever, they could fine the government, which is you lot, and you pay millions of dollars in fines. That has already happened too, by the way. It’s amazing. We are nothing but slaves. Nothing, nothing but slaves. Quite something. And folk don’t know it. Still think they are free. Still go and vote. [Alan laughing.]
The Dutch too, this is quite interesting. There is an article about Holland.
Dutch Cabinet (A: That’s their parliamentary system.)
cuts spending in 2011; more to come
Dutch Cabinet cuts back on government workers and health care in 2011;
more austerity coming
finance.yahoo.com / Toby Sterling, Associated Press Writer, September 21, 2010
(A: This is like something out of a Hollywood movie. You’ve got to understand, this is the 21st century. It says, the Netherlands’ QUEEN…)
AMSTERDAM (AP) -- The Netherlands' queen and the outgoing prime minister presented an austere annual budget on Tuesday that cuts spending on health care, immigrants, and government workers -- a foretaste of more far-reaching cuts likely to come under the conservative Cabinet now being formed.
At the start of an afternoon full of ceremonies. (A: They love ceremonies, the big ones, don’t they?) rituals (A: Lots of rituals… Masonic rituals that go way, way back, and long before you heard of Pike and these characters.) and conspicuous hats, (A: You know, because they are very wealthy and they have to show off their hats and stuff.) Queen Beatrix rode through the streets of The Hague in her gold-trimmed horse-drawn carriage, waving to thousands of fans who lined the route leading to the 13th-century Hall of Knights. (A: That’s where they held it, in the Hall of Knights. Very important place, Holland, especial Orange, the area Orange… very, very important place. That was a hub really of the takeover into the new system; the demolition as well of Catholicism as they brought in a new system and things really took off from there.)
In her speech to both houses of Parliament, she outlined the government's plans for the year ahead -- despite the lack of a new Cabinet 104 days after national elections.
"A far-reaching package of cuts is necessary now to improve the position of our country in the long term," she said, reading a text written by outgoing Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende.
So even what she was reading was written for her by the previous Prime Minister, who was outgoing. So they are going to start slashing back there, for austerity you understand, but they still also have to pay for nice cookers across the world and stuff like that in third world countries to make them what? To make them slaves to a system that we are already in slavery to. See, over in those countries they know how to cook in 100 ways you’d never imagine. They don’t need cook stoves, a lot of them. They don’t need to have canned gas, propane gas, or anything like that pumped into them. Once they are under the same system, that’s it. One generation passes and they don’t know how to survive anymore. Seriously. Seriously. And this is known at the top too. We are here to help you... We are here to help you, they say. Quite something. And folk never catch on.
They are really, really pushing now into… well, they are not pushing. Put it this way, they are disclosing more to the public about DNA testing. However, whatever they disclose to you is ancient. And it’s been ancient probably for about 50 years by the time they tell us about anything. Here is an article…
We can build whatever animal you want to eat, say scientists
AP / September 21, 2010 / news.com.au
TINKER with the genetics of salmon and maybe you create a revolutionary new food source that could help the environment and feed the hungry. (A: They tie the environment into everything. Don’t they? …and feed the hungry. You understand, it’s the constant… This is intentional. They are taught to put these wee things in here when they write, in ALL these articles.)
Or maybe you're creating what some say is an untested "frankenfish" that could cause unknown allergic reactions and the eventual decimation of the wild salmon population. (A: Never mind the decimation of those with allergies to it, that would die with it. Never mind the bioengineering that goes on IN the human body once you’ve eaten the stuff.)
The US Food and Drug Administration hears both arguments this week when it begins a two-day meeting on whether to approve the marketing of the genetically engineered fish, which would be the first such animal approved for human consumption. (A: They are already doing it in other countries.)
The agency has already said the salmon, which grows twice as fast as conventional salmon, is as safe to eat as the traditional variety.
Approval of the salmon would open the door for a variety of other genetically engineered animals, including an environmentally friendly pig (A: Well, you wouldn’t want to kill that would you?) that is being developed in Canada or cattle that are resistant to mad cow disease. (A: That’s because they are away from cities and stuff like that.)
"For future applications out there the sky's the limit," David Edwards of the Biotechnology Industry Association said.
"If you can imagine it, scientists can try to do it."
AquaBounty (A: This company that’s making this thing; it sounds fishy to me.) submitted its first application for FDA approval in 1995, but the agency decided not until two years ago to consider applications for genetically engineered animals - a move seen as a breakthrough by the biotechnology industry. (A: Now, Holland is way ahead in this stuff anyway. Holland is doing the same thing but they are breeding, they are growing tissue in tanks that they hope to sell to the public. They say it’s awful and kind of mushy at the moment; it doesn’t have the texture that real, say, beef would have.)
Genetic engineering is already widely used for crops, (A: It’s amazing too, Monsanto, the main Monsanto station in the US won’t eat their own stuff, from their own cafeteria. They brought it into the cafeteria and told them that they’d eat organic stuff, only. They won’t eat the stuff they make. What does that tell you?) but the US government until now has not considered allowing the consumption of modified animals.
Although the potential benefits - and profits - are huge, many individuals have qualms about manipulating the genetic code of other living creatures. (A: Never mind the fact that once these things get loose, and they do get loose by the way. We’ve found that in Canada. They get into the normal stream of things, of the normal fish, and we haven’t seen the full outcome of that yet. We don’t know what it’s going to be yet, with these monsters out there.)
Genetically engineered - or GE - animals are not clones, which the FDA has already said are safe to eat.
Clones are copies of an animal. With GE animals, their DNA has been altered to produce a desirable characteristic.
In the case of the salmon, AquaBounty has added a growth hormone from a Chinook salmon that allows the fish to produce their growth hormone all year long. (A: It’s kind of like what they did with the cattle with the lactating hormone.)
The engineers were able to keep the hormone active by using another gene from an eel-like fish called an ocean pout that acts like an on switch for the hormone, according to the company. (A: I wonder what else it does?)
Conventional salmon only produce the growth hormone some of the time. (A: Which would be normal.)
In documents released ahead of the hearing, the FDA said there were no biologically relevant differences between the engineered salmon and conventional salmon, and there is a reasonable certainty of no harm from its consumption. (A: Really? Do you understand how long it would take to observe humans down the road to see what it had done to them?)
Critics have two main concerns: The safety of the food to humans and the salmon's effect on the environment.
Because the altered fish has never been eaten before, they say, it could include dangerous allergens, especially because seafood is highly allergenic. (A: It’s also the fact they use an e-coli bacterium, a specially created type of e-coli that’s been altered itself. They attach the new DNA onto this and they literally infuse it into the fish, into the tissue of the fish, and the e-coli carries it deeper. And guess what happens? The e-coli stays there. Then you eat it. Well, if it’s meant to alter the fish, what’s it doing to you if this darn thing is live inside you? Hmm? But that doesn’t matter does it? We’re all dying of cancers now, eh, because of all the high lifestyle we live and all that kind of stuff. And all of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready that we’re absorbing with all the crap they feed us for grain, etc. So we don’t have to worry about that too much.)
They are really going ahead at it. Then you go into this article here, where DNA is all the rage now you see. Everything is about predictability, predicting how people are, predicting how you will behave. The Pentagon is at it; they have a clone of you basically in their little cyber world where they update it with your new latest data, feed it problems to see how YOU would behave in reality, and they observe it. Well, they are doing the same thing with DNA. If they could only program your DNA they could find out if they could STOP people like this getting born, like psychopaths you see. But it’s only for violent psychopaths. I wouldn’t mind so much if they came out with a test for the psychopaths who wear the big business suits and are not violent like that; they get other folk, they get armies to go off and do THEIR battles for them when they want to steal land and stuff like that, the REAL guys. So here you go…
Finnish researcher wants DNA test on convicted psychopaths
9-21-10 / uk.news.yahoo.com
A simple genetic test can help predict whether psychopaths convicted of violent crimes are prone to be repeat offenders, a Finnish researcher said Tuesday.
"It has long been known that there is a biological, a genetic element to psychotic tendencies," said Helsinki University researcher Matti Virkkunen, who co-authored a study published in Psychiatric Research. (A: They won’t be happy until literally they can try and predict all of us and say, yep, this one should get born, that one shouldn’t get born. This is what it’s coming down to.)
The research, which was a joint Finnish-American project, showed that convicts who scored high on both a traditional behavioural disorder test and had a certain gene variance were far more likely to commit additional violent crimes than those who scored high on the test but did not have the same gene variance.
The study followed 167 convicts for seven years after they were released from prison. All of the subjects had been convicted of aggravated violent crimes, were alcoholic, and had scored high enough on the assessment test to rate them as psychopathic.
They were also genetically tested to show a particular variance of a gene called monoamine oxidase A (MAOA). (A: It’s quite interesting, monoamine oxidase, because most of the real big antidepressants INHIBITED the monoamine oxidase, which kind of makes you feel kind of happy I guess. Who knows… or vice versa. I'll be back with more after these messages …as we all get tampered with, with SCIENCE.)
Hi folks. I'm back and we're Cutting Through The Matrix. We’re meant to go through all of this craziness at this time now. That’s why this is all coming forward at this time. What they are doing now are things really that they have been working on for maybe the last 50 years, or even before that. They always knew where they were going. You’ve got to read Brave New World and books like that, written in the 1930s. You couldn’t dream that stuff up because these guys were already IN on think tanks, these authors. They knew where they were going with genetic modification and creating new types of people, and better people, and taking out genes, and making them all placid and so on, right down to eugenics, having a higher class of better alpha types, even alpha pluses and then you have your betas and your thetas and so on. And the ones at the bottom are kept pretty stupid to do the menial tasks. They are not too bright so they don’t mind, and that kind of stuff. That was all in Brave New World. Pretty well everything else I’ve read has been in old novels as well.
Now it’s in the mainstream as fact. Not because they’ve got good imaginations; it’s because these authors are picked to put this stuff out. Here is an article just to make you more confused, you see. I can remember a time if you were asked these questions, you would have left an office in an awful mess, including the person who asked you them. But if you go for a job now it says…
What do you think made you become a heterosexual? Just one of the bizarre questions council chiefs are asking staff on 'diversity' course
By Chris Hastings / 19th September 2010 / dailymail.co.uk
(A: Oh, DIVERSITY, you know.)
Town Hall bosses are asking staff to take part in a 'heterosexuality quiz' so they can gain a greater understanding of what it is like to be gay. (A: I can remember when they started that with putting blindfolds on you and making you stumble around a classroom to let you know what it was like to be blind. It’s actually a technique they are using here. There is actually a psychological technique that they use on you when they are doing all this stuff.)
The quiz, devised by managers at Buckinghamshire County Council, is part of an equality and diversity course called 'Respecting Sexuality'.
Questions, which are described as a 'twist' on those routinely asked of homosexuals, include 'What do you think caused your heterosexuality?', 'Is it possible your heterosexuality stems from a neurotic fear of others of the same sex?', (A: Ho-ho-ho, it’s amazing eh?) and 'If you've never slept with a person of the same sex, how do you know you wouldn't prefer it?' (A: By the way, this is the same stuff they are being taught in school for children and when the children don’t really participate in the discussions they are sent to the little counselors, all the little guidance counselors, that pretend that they are your parents, and that’s what they say to them. How do you know unless you have tried it? You could be inhibited. And here they are telling them, ‘if you’ve never slept with a person of the same sex, HOW would you know you wouldn’t prefer it.’)
The quiz, devised by managers at Buckinghamshire County Council, is part of an equality and diversity course called 'Respecting Sexuality'
The course, which encourages staff to 'have a better understanding' of the challenges faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender colleagues, includes a film which follows the experience of four fictitious employees. (A: So they even have to get fictitious ones.)
The film is said to 'build in intensity' and can provoke a variety of reactions. Trainers' notes state: 'Initial reactions to the stories vary widely, with heterosexual (straight) people often dismissing the stories as exaggerated or rare and homosexual (gay people) immediately recognising the issues and emotions explored here as honest and relevant.'
Why would you want to bring your problems, your personal problems into the workplace? And you realize this is about getting a job? Getting a job... What do you have to do, start dressing and pretending you’re something that you’re not? Hmm? Disgusting! But that’s what the world’s come down to, isn’t it? As we’re all tampered with and remade, remodeled, Brave New World here we are. Only because you let it… And that’s the bottom line isn’t it?
From Hamish and myself from Ontario, Canada, it’s good night and may your God or your Gods GO with you.
Topics of show covered in following links:
Bill Introduced in Britain to End Con of Fractional
UN Climate Claims on Rainforests Wrong
One of the Thousands of Ways to "Redistribute" American Taxpayers' Wealth
Birmingham Assets to be Sold Off
Ireland to Sell Off National Assets
Holland Cuts Back on Health Care etc..
ReBuilding Animals and Fish for Food
DNA Tests for Violent Psychopaths
What do You Think Made You Heterosexual ?--Diversity Course