Oct. 5, 2010 (#678)
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:
Poem Copyright Alan Watt Oct. 5, 2010:
No Privacy Found when Cam-Zombies Around:
"Technology with Gizmos of Infinite Variety
Are Making Their Impact on Society,
What with Wars, Terror and Cataclysm,
We've Become the Inmates of Electronic Prison,
Neighbours with Head Cams, Minds in Space,
Video Everything and People in Any Old Place,
Automatically Uploaded to Satellite Relay,
Then it Ends in Seconds with NSA,
Self-Policing, They Call It, To Change Behaviour,
Marxists Put Pavlov Up as the Saviour,
Be Indignant, Demand Justice, Your Mind is Sound,
Tell Stupid "Eyeborgs" to Find Other Ground"
© Alan Watt Oct. 5, 2010
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Oct. 5, 2010 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Hi folks. I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix on October 5, 2010. I get this part over quickly, at the beginning of every show, and Iím sure that those that have listened to it so many times can skip it, or go and make some tea or coffee or something, BUT I always tell the newcomers to look into cuttingthroughthematrix.com web site. Thatís my own web site. Youíll find hundreds of hours of talks Iíve given over the years for download, for free. Youíll see on the front page there are a lot of other sites listed. [Official sites listed above.] You should bookmark them for future use because sometimes the main ones go down. If you find a slow download Ė tomorrow for instance, after I put this up tonight Ė you can always try these alternate sites. Everyone goes into the .com at the same time and sometimes that tends to overload it. Remember too, there are books for sale that I have written. There are CDs and DVDs and so on for sale. Thatís the only thing that keeps me going and ticking over here. I donít ask money from advertisers; I get offered it but I donít take it. Thatís how most hosts make their money and thatís the way things run in the business world. But what I do isnít a business. Iím only out here talking because I decided a few years back that there wasnít much time left before people should really know what had happened, and how they got to where they are, and whatís all scheduled ahead of them. Thatís why I came out. [Order and donation options listed above.] I do appreciate donations because itís generally the donations the keep me going to be honest with you. Itís always the same few people all the time who do it, so Iíd appreciate those who have been listening for years to chip in once in a while and put a few pennies this way.
The thing is too, this New World Order of ours is quite something. This New World Order is on a rampage. Most folk think itís just a name change or some kind of regime change. Itís more than any regime change; itís an old, old plan, put in long before you were born, to recreate the world the way that they think it should be createdÖ with all of its mistakes gone, its follies gone, and those who know better, those who Ė you know, an elite type crew, who believe they have studied different sciences Ė have the right to decide how the rest of you should live. Öa very ordered society, eventually going into a brave new world type of society, for those down the road who will help to serve their masters, who will still continue as the masters with their own dynasties, as always. Thatís really what itís all about. So thatís why I came out a few years back and decided it was time that I should say and speak about what I knew, and what I had studied for years and years and years, and never really had put too far except to small groups of people because I thought nobody would understand what I was talking about. Most folk are so brainwashed BY their education, by the media, television Ė they grow up, they are babysat with television Ė and those who run those companies know that too. Thatís why so much of the programming goes right into the young childís mind; all the greening stuff was getting pumped out YEARS ago in cartoons as the children were just learning to speak. I'll be back with more on whatís happening today after this break.
Hi folks. I'm back and we're Cutting Through The Matrix. You know, the United Nations was set up to be an independent body that had a special status in the world, a status that no one except the leaders voted on, to even give them that status, special powers and all the rest of it, like a sovereign entity. Iíve always been puzzled as to why a guy like Rockefeller could donate the land there, that really is American territory, to this sovereign body to build their sovereign, independentÖ temple basically, that big building there. They organize the treaties that they get everyone to sign on to and then those treaties are put into law. It doesnít go through Congress or Parliaments and so on; it just gets put into law across the board. They bypass the regular functions of what we think of as democracy by doing so. But this idea is to bring in the socialist, expert run, world society. Believe you me, under the guise of liberalism, they are the most intolerant of all. These are the guys who bring all your politically correct updates on what you should believe now about this, that, the other, whatever, and itís generally the opposite of what you believed years before. Thatís what political correctness really is; itís updates on the NEW, the new PC.
They do have a special status and the Supreme Court of the United States UPHELD that status that they are UNTOUCHABLE within the United States. This article is about a sexual harassment case thatís been going on for years. Itís one of many thatís happened over the years, amongst other things too, and no one can touch them. It saysÖ
United Nations above the law, Supreme Court rules
UN investigators found Rudd Lubbers guilty of harassment.
Steven Edwards, Postmedia News ∑ Tuesday, Oct. 5, 2010 / nationalpost.com
UNITED NATIONS - The United States Supreme Court has upheld the tenet the United Nations is above the law, refusing to question the world body's legal immunity in a sexual harassment case involving one of its former top officials.
The U.S. justices left intact a lower U.S. court's finding, which stated that the UN and UN bosses are "absolutely immune" in attempts to sue over sexual harassment allegations. (Alan: That goes for everything else as well. They have diplomatic immunity, like a sovereign nation.)
The decision comes despite the fact that the UN's investigators found Ruud Lubbers, former chief of the UN's refugee agency, had "engaged in unwanted touching" of staffer Cynthia Brzak after a December 2003 meeting in Geneva. They also found he had intimidated staff in a bid to derail the probe.
Mr. Lubbers, who served as Dutch prime minister from 1982 to 1994, has long denied all allegations of sexual harassment. (A: Well, of course he will. Of course. Heís been doing this his whole darn life, this character. But in the land of America Ė that means heís a landlubber I guess. In the land of America heís free to do what he wants.)
He resigned as UN High Commissioner for Refugees in 2005 as the scandal continued to make headlines. (A: This same guy, if you scroll down this article Ė Iíll put these link up at the end of the show on my sites Ė it says here, this wasnít the first person or the last person he had done this to while he was a UN chief of refugees and so on.† It says he did the same with Angelina Jolie.)
One of the UN investigators has also revealed that the probe into Mr. Lubbers' conduct uncovered allegations he groped actress Angelina Jolie soon after appointing her as the refugee agency's Goodwill Ambassador. (A: All these actresses and actors have got to get something appointed to them, in Hollywood, to be acceptable, even though about 1 cent on the dollar of charity goes to any real cause.) Ms. Jolie continues to serve as UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador, and did not file a complaint.
Staff who witnessed the incident told investigators that minutes before coming down in the elevator to be introduced to staff in the building's Geneva headquarters, Mr. Lubbers grabbed Ms. Jolie from behind, Frank Montil, one of the OIOS investigators, told the Sydney Morning Herald after his retirement.
The thing is, they do have diplomatic immunity, sovereign status. They can do this all over the world, wherever they go, this kind of thing. There have been many cases too, where they have been drunk and smashed cars and stuff, and they canít be touched because they have this diplomatic, sovereign immunity wherever they go. Thatís quite the protection. See thatís the world you are coming into folks. You have the ones who can get away with this kind of stuff at the top, you know the real entities, and then you all have the non-entities beneath them; thatís all of the rest of you out there. Thatís the world they are bringing in, all these specialists, and control freaks. Because they are control freaks, believe you me.
If you dig into the United Nations youíll find every part of whatever they do is a big incredible scam. You look into the charitable agencies that they have over there and the refugees areas, where they are supposed to dish out so much food and so on, they CONTAIN refugees in vast areas and they still put up on their sites how many die, per month, in the areas they are supposed to be feeding. I think itís a culling operation to be honest with you. Thatís how this world operates. Itís often doublethink or doublespeak or double meaning. The opposite is generally what they are really up to. No kidding. Iíve been looking into that and itís just an eye opener. Quite something.
The other night too, I was looking into an old Monte Python type movie, from the 80s I think it was. It was called Time Bandits and itís by Terry Gilliam. Itís quite funny. Youíve got to really watch it from the beginning and get through the initial stuff, until it gets to the point; a lot of statements are made in Gilliamís movies. Heís the guy who did Brazil, about the futuristic society that we are now in, where the world is run under the guise of terrorism everywhere, bombs go off all over the place, the people are used to it, but no one ever catches or sees a terrorist. Itís a way of keeping control over the public. In this particular movie, Time Bandits, itís a comedy about the Supreme Being versus the Devil. The Devil is down in his little pit there with his demons having a good ole time. He says, what does the Supreme Being know about microchips and computers and so on? He says, thatís how Iím taking over. He says, thatís how Iím taking overÖ that was in the early 80s. Amazing eh?
We are all being monitored today to deathÖ by all this technology. They will tell you, thatís progress; you canít stop it. Oh, really? Why arenít enough people getting up in arms about it? Because they are not, really; they are accepting it. Itís because they have had YEARS of programming that this is inevitable. By movies and dramas and TV and all the rest of it, that this is just inevitable; eye scans and so on, and theyíve seen it in God knows how many movies. Even though they canít remember the movies, they remember the downloads, when theyíve seen them. So they think itís all quite inevitable and thatís why they adapt. Itís called predictive programming they put out years and years ahead. Years and years ahead.
Here is where it goes. Itís never endingÖ and it wonít end up, by the way, theyíve got a long ways to go. They know where they want to take it but itís got a long ways to go. They train you Pavlovian style, step by step, donít spook the herd too much by doing a radical change all at once, just a little bit at a time, and we adaptÖ because we are the most adaptable species on the planet. There is an article here that saysÖ
School installs £9,000 facial recognition cameras to stop students (A: This is the excuseÖ) turning up late... (A: Really. This is the rubbish they are telling you.) and teachers could be next target
By Andrew Levy / dailymail.co.uk / 5th October 2010
It could make the time-honoured tradition of taking the school register a thing of the past.
Cutting-edge cameras are being used to scan childrenís faces as they enter school.
The face-recognition technology makes sure they have turned up, records whether they were on time or late and keeps an accurate roll call.
It can also deliver messages to pupils as they sign in. Ten schools have started using the system, which is likely to be introduced elsewhere if considered a success. (A: Now, what are the school headmasters getting paid for this eh? I mean, they have to buy this stuff. They are all funded by the taxpayers. Where are they getting all of this cash? Whoís getting the deal? Whoís getting the kickbacks? There are always kickbacks in big contracts you know. Always. From your federal level to your state governments there are always kickbacks. You are the government; you give them the award to do this contract and they kick back so much of a percentage, generally 5%. Thatís how it happens. Thatís how it REALLY works in the real world.)
But privacy campaigners reacted angrily (A: They always have your authorized everything here; your pros and your antis, eh. Thereís never an uncle anywhere; thereís always pros and antis.) yesterday, warning that the technology was another Ďencroachment on civil libertiesí. (A: Well, big deal. You can say what you want. Youíve got to DO something about it. You donít just keep yapping about it; do something about it. Everybody else is getting cut back with inflation, and inflationís going through the roof. Your taxes are all going up. But no, the schools, the military, the police get all the toysÖ without a problem. Thatís what Lenin said. Youíve got to keep your teachers well paid because they indoctrinate the next intake of children. Youíve got to keep your police well paid and give them more privileges than the general public so they will stay on your side; they will do what they are told. And of course the same with the military. Why should they ever change the formula when it works?) Britons are already subjected to the greatest level of electronic surveillance in the world, with our movements said to be recorded in some way about 3,000 times a week.
Britain, as I say, is the flagship for the world to copy. They were the ones who plannedÖ it wasnít Britain really; itís London. Thatís where they planned the whole world empire that was to blossom into a global system; a commonwealth system and then into a world United Nations system of global governance and itís still going on today. So when I read these articles about Britain, remember, thatís coming to you eventually; absolutely coming to you, no two ways about it. But yeah, theyíve always got the cash for these particular projects, always. Here is an article, now, a very interesting article from the CEO of Google Technology.
Eric Schmidt: Google gets close to 'the creepy line'
By Shane Richmond October 5th, 2010 / telegraph.co.uk
Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, has described his companyís policy: ďGoogle policy is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it.Ē
Schmidt was talking to The Atlantic about the possibility of a Google implant Ė a chip under your skin that would track you and provide easy web access. That, Schmidt said, was probably over Ďthe creepy lineí. (A: I'll be back with more after this break.)
Hi folks. This is Cutting Through The Matrix, talking about Google and reading an article from the CEO who talks about the ďcreepy lineĒ as he calls it, a chip under the skin would be the creepy line. He doesnít want to quite cross that; maybe not yet. Then he says this though, listen to thisÖ
However, he followed that by saying: ďWith your permission you give us more information about you, about your friends, and we can improve the quality of our searches. (A: Thatís the excuse they use for all that, they say. Of course itís a lame excuse.) We donít need you to type at all. We know where you are. We know where youíve been. We can more or less know what youíre thinking about.Ē
Some might argue that that is over the line too but Google will only read your mind ďwith your permissionĒ, so thatís a relief.
Schmidt has a history of attention-grabbing and quotable statements about Googleís increasing, err, creep into our lives. There was the time that he said: ďIf you have something that you donít want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnít be doing it in the first place.Ē Recently he has suggested that young people might in future change their names so as to escape their Google-able past. (A: When they put all their, you know, juvenile escapades up there.)
Last month he muttered cryptically about having ďother waysĒ to get access to Facebookís data should the social network decline to let Google index it. (A: Facebook came under attack, and there are some people leaving; there are a lot of idiots quite happy with it. The leader of that, of course, the guy, the CEO of that said he was selling all the information he was gathering on people who were using it, I think because they were putting it all up on the sites, right. And he said they were all stupid foxesÖ I think it was foxes, it sounded like a fox, something like that. Anyway, it says hereÖ)
Schmidtís comments often sound like those of a man speaking off the cuff, and perhaps saying a little more than he should. Maybe thatís what they are but Iím not sure. I spent some time with Schmidt earlier this year and since then Iíve heard him repeat in other interviews Ė almost word-for-word Ė answers that he gave me. I think Schmidt has thought very carefully about these issues and heís very clear on the message he wants to give.
Google makes some wonderful products. I use many of them, including Gmail, Google Reader and, of course, search. However, their attitude towards our private data is a cause for concern, not least because Google tends to make its services Ďopt-outí, rather than Ďopt-iní, which means that the permission Schmidt talks about will be given implicitly.
While Google is honest about wanting to ďget right up to the creepy lineĒ, it would also suit them if that line could be pushed ever further back. Schmidtís comments play a tiny role in helping that process along. I would bet that in a decade the line will have been pushed even further. In the meantime, though, there will be a lot more court challenges and protests as Google slowly gets its way.
Itís tempting to suggest that Eric Schmidt should keep quiet instead of stirring people up every few months but I think he knows exactly what heís doing.
Of course he does. Heís the CEO of the company; heís not a dumbo. He knows what heís doing. Thatís what you find with these characters too. They let things out on queue, at the right time. And of course they rehearse them as well.
Another thing about the CCTV, here is another part too. They are employing citizens now, because they can hook up citizens with their own computers to sit and watch the CCTV cameras at home, through monitors at home, in their houses. It saysÖ
The CCTV vigilantes:
Snoopers paid to sit at home watching store security cameras
By Jack Doyle / dailymail.co.uk / 5th October 2010
Private snoopers are being paid to monitor thousands of CCTV cameras from home.
Their job is to try to spot criminal behaviour on live feeds from cameras in stores and streets. (A: Whatís criminal behavior? Do you understand, itís going to go up and up and up? A smile at the wrong time could be aÖ you know, psychologists will get a hold of that and say oh, pull that guy in; weíll have to see whatís going on in his head.)
If, for example, they see a shoplifter they send a text message warning the owner of the firm.
The company behind the idea, Internet Eyes, says it will help fight crime.
Are you getting sick of hearing that? Öit will help fight crime. Even the Chief Police of London came on last year and says that not one of these cameras has ever helped fight crime. But who cares when big business is on the go, eh. And of course itís not the real agenda anyway. Itís to modify YOUR behavior, because when you know you are being watched ALL the time, you behave differently. Itís not an experiment. In an experiment the subject mustnít know heís being experimented upon; it changes his behavior. So you know you are getting experimented and watched, therefore you canít act normally, anywhere you go. You are SELF-POLICING. Thatís the terms that the United Nations call bringing in this brave new world, a society where the public are TRAINED to be self-policing, in case you didnít know that.
That film that came out, that I was mentioning, it was called ďNo PressureĒ by 10:10, the movie, put out by a really radical greenie group but paid by the big boys. All the big names are up there funding them, the big corporations funding them, and they paid big bucks for actors, real actors not little ham actors, and they got real cameras to use, the guys and the whole bit, to do the movie, and a full-time professional director whoís made professional moviesÖ to terrify the school children, primarily, into going along with weíve got to cut carbon all the rest of it. Cut back on humans basically, because behind it all they keep blaming people for all the worldís problems to do with what they call Climate Change. Now that theyíve dropped global warming theyíve got to just call it Climate Change. But they blew up their classmates. That was supposed to be the funny parts of the film they said. This is what the funny parts are, they blew up their classmatesÖ and they think thatís okay to TEACH that way, by impacting their minds that anybody who dissents, including their classmates, should be killed, just blown up, and thatís funny, you laugh at it. Can you believe that? And yet young children are getting suspended for drawing a little gun on a bit of paper, getting suspended for a year. I'll be back with more after this break. Liberals are lovely; donít you just love them?
Hi folks. Iím back and weíre Cutting Through The Matrix, talking about this movie they made to terrorize children, to brainwash them through basically embedding or imprinting in their minds Ė very young minds Ė that people who dissent and donít go along with the big group, you know, the big liberal group, will be blown up. Because liberals, under the preaching of tolerance for all, of course they are the most intolerant of all; they wonít accept anybody elseís opinion outside their agenda. Thatís rather evident over the years, isnít it? They forbid you to talk about certain things in fact. Once theyíve got power, they really go to it, with all their forbidding stuff. It saysÖ
Climate Group Regrets Shock Film Tactic (So Does Sony)
(A: Sony was one of the big backers of it.)
By ANDREW C. REVKIN / nytimes.com / October 4, 2010
There are much more important things to focus on than an utterly misconceived mini movie blowing up kids to recruit carbon cutters, so itís welcome that Eugenie Harvey, the director of the 10:10 UK group (A: The non-governmental organization charity group, that live very well, high on the hog.) that commissioned the film, has moved toward closure by issuing a real apology (text below). The rather reluctant regrets note posted on Friday essentially encouraged YouTube visitors to copy and disseminate it by saying, ďWe wonít be making any attempt to censor or remove other versions currently in circulation on the internet.Ē (A: So they wonít remove anything; they are proud to have it up thereÖ because these guys are totally unrepentant. It doesnít matter who came down against them, they stand up because they consider themselves radical, radical you see, they are radical. Youíve got to be radical to get all these grants. Iím not kidding about that; government gives you grants if you are radical, for radical change.)
Of course the 10:10 folks canít do anything about the even more horrific ďremixesĒ of the video that are now being propagated by foes of climate action. (Sorry, youíll have to Google for them yourself.) (A: Because now everyone is running with it and making a lot of blow up terrorist cartoons.)
If youíd like to see what funny gory humor looks like, I encourage you to check out climate blogtoonist Marc Robertsí take on the ďNo PressureĒ video.
A Greenwire report on The Times Web site describes more reverberations related to the film.
If you missed it, I encourage you to read my initial post on the film, including my (two thumbs down) review and a variety of reactions by people involved in moviemaking and/or environmental communication.
Hereís todayís apology from Harvey, followed further below by a note from Sonyís European division: (A: Öwho helped fund it.)
STATEMENT BY EUGENIE HARVEY, DIRECTOR OF 10:10 UK
Last week, 10:10 made available a short film. Following the initial reaction to the film we removed it from our website and issued an apology on Friday 2 October.
Subsequently there has been negative comment about the film, particularly on blogs, and concern from others working hard to build support for action on climate change. We are very sorry if this has distracted from their efforts.
We are also sorry to our corporate sponsors, delivery partners and board members, who have been implicated in this situation despite having no involvement in the filmís production or release.
We will learn from this mistake. Today I have written to supporters and stakeholders explaining that we will review processes and procedures to make sure it cannot happen again. (A: Maybe they wonít have enough high explosives the next time, eh?) Responsibility for this process is being taken by the 10:10 board.
The media coverage of the film was not the kind of publicity we wanted for 10:10, nor for the wider movement to reduce carbon emissions. (A: They should tell them these explosives cause carbon, big black smoke, you know.)
If people have been in touch with us personally about the film, we will be replying to individual emails over the next few days. Meanwhile our thanks go out to all those who support 10:10 and who work to combat the threat of climate change. (A: So thatís their apologyÖ if you call that an apology. Itís kind of like an apology, but itís not an apology. These people are unrepentant, arrogant control freaks. As I say too, if they do this with school children, to train it to school children, as I say, school children who even draw a picture of a gun, if they draw it on a piece of paper get put out for a whole year, banned from school for a yearÖ for that. But these guys can use classrooms and pretend to blow up their classmates, cover them in gore and all the rest of it, to get their message across. Some strange message too, isnít it? Ö that I guess if you ignore carbon you blow up. Hmm? What kind of minds are we dealing with here?)
This evening, a representative of Sony Corporation (Europe) sent a note to an angry viewer of the video that was then forwarded to me by Marc Morano of Climatedepot.com. I just confirmed its authenticity with the author, and here it is: (A: So they also thank the concerned and so on and so on, and they sayÖ)
Thank you for your email concerning the video released by the 10:10 climate change campaign group. Sony has supported the 10:10 climate change campaign because we share its objective to reduce carbon emissions. (A: Well as I say, explosions give off a lot of carbon, and toxic stuff as well.) However, we strongly condemn the ďNo PressureĒ video which was conceived, produced and released by 10:10 entirely without the knowledge or involvement of Sony. (A: Well, who used the cameras? Who provided them, too?) The company considers the video to be ill-conceived and in extremely bad taste.
We also believe the video risks undermining the work of the many thousands of members of the public, schools and universities, local authorities and many businesses, of which Sony is one, who support the long-term aims of the 10:10 movement and who are actively working towards the reduction of carbon emissions. (A: Maybe you should try it all, Mr Sony and all that, with telling some TRUTH and FACTS about the matter instead of a political indoctrination agenda. Thatís maybe a place for you to start. Hmm? Anyway.)
There you go. Itís a big global agenda, as you know, from the top, so it doesnít make any difference what you say. And under this greenie plan, itís all ripped from the taxpayers whoíve been already plundered, raped and pillaged by their governments, bailing out the banks that also raped and pillaged and plundered themÖ
Households face £769-a-year rise in power bills to 'rewire the nation' for green energy
By Sean Poulter, Consumer Affairs Editor / dailymail.co.uk / 5th October 2010
(A: Whatís green energy? Are they going to make the lines overhead made of asparagus or something? Green energyÖ can you believe their rubbish? Just keep repeating the same stuff over and over and over. Itís like carbon footprint; what footprint is that? There is no such thing as a Ďfootprintí of carbon. The big marketers and psychologists work up this kind of stuff and terminology for you to use, to make it a real thing in your mind. But greenÖ green energyÖ)
A £200billion plan to switch to green energy could cost households an average of £769 a year, it was claimed today.
Industry regulator, Ofgem, said a massive construction plan is needed to build new wind farms, (A: New, more wind farmsÖ haaaÖ) power stations, including nuclear, and a modern national grid.
The first stage, a £32billion plan to build new pipelines and pylon networks, has been given the go-ahead.
(A: You know, Ofgem is a company that works like an NGO type company on behalf of government and business. Itís one of these strange, in-between parts of government we have now, that nobody elects: public/private.) Ofgem said this element will cost households a relatively modest sum of an average of £6 a year.
However, industry analysts said the full £200billion cost would put up the average annual bill of £1,194 by £769 a year - or 68 per cent - to £2,000.
It goes on and on and on. And this is to come to Canada and all over the place as well, as they put up the occasional windmill. There are even documentaries up there where you will see some of these windmills in action, during a storm, and youíll see the blades and rotors come flying off them. I mean, those things are lethal, you know, but they are pretty well useless as well. And they know that. Theyíre well aware of that, theyíre useless. Theyíre going through a big charade right now as they want to bring down the populations and all the rest of it. Thatís really what itís about.
Another site, too, I wanted to look into, from Real Science.
Sea Level Falling In 2010
Posted on October 1, 2010 by stevengoddard / wordpress.com
We are constantly being told that 2010 is the hottest year ever, and that the polar ice caps are melting down at a record rate. Dr. Hansen tells us to expect 3-6+ metres of sea level rise this century. That would be a minimum of 30 mm/year.
Given Dr. Hansenís record heat, the oceans must be heating and expanding, and the polar ice sheets must be melting and pouring into the sea. Sea level must be rising like crazy!
Then they give you the counter to it, the actual stuff of people who have actually gone around the world testing it, professionals again, testing the actual records of the sea, is it falling or rising or what. And itís actually falling. Itís actually been falling everywhereÖ except in the computer models of course. Itís been falling in actuality and Iíve read some articles in the past about that too. Utter, utter rubbish. Iíll put this link up on my web site too and you can go through it for yourself.
There are callers on the line. Thereís Luke from Vermont there. Are you there Luke?
Luke: I just wanted to tell you Iíve been listening to you a lot and, kind of a more relaxed version of what Alex Jones has to say, I feel like. Certainly more easier to listen to. But Iíve heard someÖ Iím just scrolling through your poems and some of your recordings and you made a reference to sort of the leaders in the Patriot Movement and how they are kind of just another arm and a provided hero. I was wondering if you feel that way about Alex Jonesí listeners and Alex Jones himself?
Alan: Well, I think the one I was referring to was actually not a radio host; although there was a radio host belonging to that group that was on the air at the time. They are one of the biggest organizations that pump out fantastic, professional, professionally done reports on whatís happening to them. So they circulate the information TO a lot of the Patriot Radio stations who run with it, without questioning the source really, or what their main objectives happen to be. It isnít until you get into their site that youíll see that they are doing the Trotskyite version of the world they want to bring in, by using good data but with spins on everything. Iíve always said too, that no one should follow anybody in this world. You canít follow people and you shouldnít follow peopleÖ because people will change. People will change as they go along. You will get bribes coming your way and all the rest of it, which you have to turn down. There is no doubt about it, you get approached. Followers are always disillusioned eventually with their leaders and generally turn on them. Thatís the history of the world. They always give you the allegory of Jesus being followed by the mob. And the mob followed him because he fed them and he cured them. He showed them miracles and entertained them. But when it comes to crucifying him, they all turned up to boo him, you see. So people should not be followers. To be honest with you, not that I think this will happen, but the only way you could fight this is for people to take back their individuality, and their privacy, and their rights, one by one by one, because as soon as you form a group you are going to be completely taken over.
Luke: Right. So as far as any mass movement goes, you think thereís nothing any mass movement can do? It has to come down to the individual?
Alan: It always has to come down to the individual. A mass either has to be made up of individuals, who stay individuals, but agree on certain topics when it comes to action, but they must retain their individuality. The problem with most mass groups is you have your group dynamics set in, and well understood at the top. Leaders will vie with each other to become leaders and overthrow, overpower, and there is a lot of political infighting. That always happens, especially when money starts to come their way. Not only that, the big boys have been at this for a long time, at putting in infiltrators. One of the best books on how itís done was written during the Cold War and itís called, You Can Trust the Communists. It shows you how many of the fronts were organized, actually communists fronts. Other ones were used by Christian churches, well meaning people and all the rest of it, to do the bidding of an organization they didnít really understand. It sounded good to them, what they were being told. And other organizations, the agencies sent in people who worked harder than anybody else at the top. They were the last ones to go home. Theyíd take on extra work and eventually when it came time to appoint a new chairperson, they got the job. Thatís how you infiltrate. I read recently that Martin Luther King, during his whole time in the spotlight, he was accompanied with a professional photographer. He thought it was his friend, and he was actually an FBI informant. This is standard in every group.
Luke: Wow. Thatís pretty interesting. I had another question. Do you think at this point weíve, maybe the people up top that you refer to, understand that weíve reached a peak oil and maybe what theyíve done to get us involved in these wars in Iraq, like, if 9/11 was an inside job, things like that. Do you think possibly they organized it that way because they know weíve reached peak oil and they are perhaps working for our own benefit in anyway?
Alan: Itís not just peak oil. They will certainly grab all the goodies that are there. But if you went to Ontario alone in Canada youíd find about 200 oil wells that were capped in the 1920s for future use that are still capped today. They are all over Canada. They are still capped, full of oil; they have never been pumped. Theyíve got plenty of oil all over the world. Oil eventually will become more and more unnecessary as they go purely synthetic and into other things as well. That can be done. In the mean time, yeah, they will use their oil. What you are seeing isnít just a war of conquest. You are seeing a political war. The neo-conservatives, when they were in power, made it quite plain, and some of those who were at the top, now that they are not in power, have come out with their own videos on what they did and they called it revolutionary democracy. They would invade countries under the guise of they were freeing the people to give them democracy, revolutionary democracy. Thatís the term they use. Of course, of course they will plunder everything thatís there in the meantime, absolutely. What they are doing is standardizing the world under one system. Obama is just carrying on, because there is no difference between any parties; hasnít been for a long, long time.
Luke: Right. You know Iíve tried to get my DadÖ heís conservative. Heís a business owner up here in Vermont. He had some complaints about the federal government in his business. He does a quail farm operation so when it comes to having his birds inspected heís got a lot of regulations to deal with. But I try and get him to, you know, which is hard for me because I know Iím not anyone to educate anybody, except Iíve been listening to Alex Jones and watching your videos, and other peoplesí. Iíve been trying to get him to think about these ideas, these New World Order ideas, one world government ideas, and he said, you know, one world government is not happening, itís never going to happen. Private central banks, thatís the way it should be. I donít want clear government. I donít want to know everything that they are up to. Kind ofÖ he trusts the good old boys, you know.† He made a reference to the guys in the back smoky room with cigars making deals; thatís how itís always supposed to go.† I donít really know what to say to that.
Alan: Well, heís basically telling you he doesnít want to know. Heís happy in his mind space, in his head space, and he doesnít really want to know anything that would upset that or burst that bubble.
Alan: So I wouldnít pursue it with relatives, if you want to stay friends with them. Thanks for calling. I'll be back with more after this break.
Hi folks. Iím Alan Watt and weíre Cutting Through The Matrix and there is Clint from Ontario on the line too. Are you there Clint?
Clint: Yes, Alan. Thanks again for taking my call. Iím glad actually you brought up some points tonight about technology and where we are going with it and whatnot. I just wanted to throw a couple of theories at you with what I think in regards to the high definition televisions that are out there and whatnot, especially the new 3D that they are bringing back with the films and that. I honestly think that somehow they are going to have a mass hypnotization, so to speak, of society and perhaps brainwash us in a way. Because our brains do run on electrical waves; we know that. And I really think that that could be a possibility, maybe through HAARP or whatnot. I just wanted to get your take on that. Also another thing you touched on was the doublespeak with our leaders, so to speak. I honestly think that thatís a modern day form of Gematria, modern day hieroglyphics so to speak. And when they talkÖ
Alan: It is.
Clint: I really think so tooÖ and just to hear you say that it affirms my thought on that. When I see these symbols that they put out and the way that they talk to people, I think they are really just talking to themselves in a way, and the plan is going forward.
Alan: Oh, itís going forward, absolutely. There is nothing stopping it. Well, DARPA had some information out on their capabilities of crippling and even killing a person who watches a video screen. What they can do is actually send signals into that picture in such a way, random thoughts and so on, random pictures that interact with your brain and the way that your eyes perceive, that then pushes those thoughts, those flickers and so on and images, to other parts of the brain designed just like a virus to go in. They can actually slow down your heart or stop it. They actually call it a virus, for a computer, which they can select on certain individuals. If they can do that now on you and get your body to react in certain ways, they can do anything they want to your mind to be honest with you. You donít see most of whatís actually on that screen. When symbols come up and flickers come up and so on, or something that is flashing away on one side, you have no idea. They actually said they can actually do it also with adding certain colors for certain effects, to affect the brain. Well the television is the same. Thatís why they got you into high definition as well. And high definition also is to make you unhappy eventually with the way you actually see in real life, because you canít seeÖ When you concentrate on something and focus on something at a distance, you donít see everything in the foreground, you see everything clear in the background, and vice versa. In high definition everything is clear from the very tip of the picture that they are showing you, and then as you go IN to the picture, further away, it still is clear. So they are making you unhappy with real vision. Eventually they are coming out now, even with a movie Ė Iíll put the link up. Itís called Eyeborgs. Itís a movie coming out to show you they are all getting their little cameras on their foreheads and so on. Eventually we know itís going to go into exactly what you saw in Star Trek on the Borg; they will actually implant this little eye. People will want it. The youngsters will want to have this particular eye implanted in them. With that will come a program, and someone else will be running that program, remotely, and your brain is no longer yours.
Clint: Definitely. And lastly, quickly, Iíll just say, like the other caller said, I have known about you for a while but for the past several weeks Iíve really just listened to you and all the other researchers whoíve Iíve followed since 2002 when I woke up, I believe that many of them are just perhaps gatekeepers or jesters so to speak. I really think that, Alan, you are the real deal and I really appreciate what you are doing, for keeping me on my toes, for what I really have to watch, and what I can do for the future and my family.
Alan: Well thanks for saying that. I appreciate that.
From Hamish and myself from Ontario, Canada, itís good night and may your God or your Gods GO with you.
Topics of show covered in following links:
United Nations Above the Law--Supreme Court
Schools and Facial Recognition
CEO of Google and "The Creepy Line"
Private Snoopers Paid to Snoop using CCTV Monitors at Home
An Almost Apology from 10:10 "Blow up Dissenters" Movie-Maker
Household Costs to Rise for Green Energy Nonsense
Sea Levels Falling, not Rising