Nov. 17, 2010 (#709)

Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:


Poem Copyright Alan Watt Nov. 17, 2010:

Climate Journalists' Solidarity  for the Party:

"The IPCC, Egg on Face, Carries on Undaunted,
Training "Reporters" to Tell News the Way IPCC Wants It,
"Climate Deniers" Simply will Not have a Mention,
These Leftist Fools will Censor Them in Quiet Detention,
Prophets of the Ages have Waxed on Prolific,
Warning of Coming Tyrannies, in This Case Scientific,
With NGOs, Foundations, Technocrats, Corporations,
For Austerity, Depopulation, the Loser's Consolations,
To Bring in a Bright Green Planet, Oh, So Utopian,
Vasectomies for Peasant Males -- Women Tied Fallopian,
Only The Party's "Better Sort" will Be Allowed to Breed,
For a Pristine World Inherited by Superior Seed,
You See, It's Next Stage in Evolution, This They all Agree,
The Future's for Ordered Folk, No Room for Likes of Me,
No Independent Thinking, Knocking Group Consensus,
Why a Man of Facts and Learning could Leave Them Defenseless,
They Just Love Their Army, Clothing Casual or Dressy,
I Fear the Road to Utopia will Become Unbearably Messy"
© Alan Watt Nov. 17, 2010


Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Nov. 17, 2010 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
alternate sites:  ,   .us  ,   .ca

mirror site:
European site includes all audios & downloadable TRANSCRIPTS in European languages for print up:

Information for purchasing Alan’s books, CDs, DVDs and DONATIONS:

Canada and AmericaPayPal, Cash, personal checks &
 for the US, INTERNATIONAL postal money orders / for Canada, INTERNAL postal money orders
 (America:  Postal Money orders - Stress the INTERNATIONAL pink one, not the green internal one.)

Outside the AmericasPayPal, Cash, Western Union and Money Gram
(Money Gram is cheaper; even cheaper is a Money Gram check – in Canadian dollars:

 mail via the postal services worldwide.)

Send a separate email along with the donation (list your order, name and address)

Click the link below for your location (ordering info):
USA        Canada        Europe/Scandinavian        All Other Countries


Hi folks.  I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix on November 17, 2010.  Newcomers look into web site.  There are lots of audios for download and lots of information on the audios where I try to give you shortcuts really.  Shortcuts, because if you go through all of this stuff yourself and try to start from scratch it’s like reinventing the wheel.  Why bother when there is so much material already out there for you to follow?  You can either accept it or deny it – it’s up to yourselves – or go off in a different direction with it, as some people do.  However, the big boys made it quite plain the kind of world they wanted to bring in an awful long time ago.  We are dealing with one of the biggest organizations, in fact the only organization I’d say, on the whole planet that really directs our lives and the cultures and shapes societies into great societies, regions across the world to what they call ‘the great society.’  That’s what the new world order really is.  It’s the great society; ‘the big idea’ is another term they use for it too – lots of names for the same thing.  As I say, I give you shortcuts to it, so go into the web sites.  They all have transcripts in English of a lot of the talks I’ve given, for print up.  You can find transcripts in other languages for print up if you go into; that’s also shown on the .com site as well.  Bookmark all the other sites you’ll see on the .com site because sometimes I get problems of sticking with the main .com site.  If you find sticking downloads try these alternate sites that I have listed there. These are the official sites, so hopefully you will have no problem in the future should the big ones go down again.  That’s why there are so many up there already. 


Remember too, to buy the books, CDs and DVDs that I have for sale.  You are the people who keep me going.  These books are different from the usual HIStories, and that’s what history is; it’s HIS story, whoever’s the authorized HIS at the time gets his STORY told and that becomes the mandate. That’s how we are taught history; it’s AUTHORIZED history. That’s why you get AUTHORS. They are called authors for a reason; they are authorized to tell their story and you get his story, and everybody gets a little gold star if you parrot it well and believe in it too.  And of course it really shapes the mind of you and everyone else and how you all think about the past, especially when it’s all fake.  It’s an awful shock to find out when it is fake and what isn’t fake.  It happens all the time.  You can buy these books of mine which help to wake you up because there are techniques written into it to make you think in different ways that you didn’t even know you had.  Because there is much more to learning and thinking than just reading off books and parroting it.  You have to be involved in it yourself. There are many different ways to understand language itself and I try and show you that too, through symbols and the different techniques which are IN the books.  So you can purchase them by [Order and donation options listed above.]  Here we go through the history that led up to this stage where we’re in.  The new world order isn’t just a thing that happens, and that’s the final thing done and over with and a flag is hoisted.  It’s an ongoing process to indeterminate goals, goals which are always changing to the future. They call it progress.  Back with more after this break.


Hi folks.  We’re back and we’re Cutting Through The Matrix.  The big society, the big idea, the good life… there are many different terms used for the same thing.  In the early phases they often called it ‘the good life’ but what they really meant was a scientifically-run society, an ordered society where the unfit wouldn’t breed. Eugenics is a big, big part of it and depopulation was a big part of it, still is a big part of it today, a VERY big part of it in fact.  I’ve gone through the histories on this particular show – I won’t go through them again – to do with eugenics and the organizations and foundations which funded a lot of the big programs in eugenics in the US and Britain and elsewhere.  There were big, big players and yep, members of the aristocracy, the Huxley’s, all these guys were involved in eugenics. They were fascinated by the idea that science could eventually create the perfect society through tinkering with genes and so on.


They also wanted to bring in a society where certain people would be forbidden to have children.  They thought the idea of mandatory sterilization was a very good idea, for certain people.  That was picked up on, of course, even the Soviets picked up on that one and so did Adolf Hitler.  It’s quite amazing how old this particular agenda is.  You’ll find it even in the writings of Blavatsky, and Annie Besant that took over, that they’d bring in a new society, this wonderful new society, this socialistic ordered society where science would take over.  It’s always the same thing, science would take over.  We go into guys like Charles Galton Darwin who wrote The Next Million Years, who furthered that and said that scientists and technocrats would be the ones who would rule on behalf of the dominant minority.  Huxley touched on that too, ‘the dominant minority’ would always be above academia and the technocrats who would just kind of run the public in a Sovietized type fashion.  That’s the system we’re in today. 


They said democracy was too cumbersome.  It really stopped progress; there was too many bickering parties and self-interested parties and factions; therefore to get the big idea and the program across they’d have to basically train the public, gradually, into a new system.  So cleverly too, that they wouldn’t know they were no longer in a democracy.  And then you go into the Club of Rome, big think tank for the United Nations who also said the same thing. They said that democracy is too cumbersome, has to go… has to go.  Believe you me, it has gone.  As you are well aware, I hope, out there… that you are well aware that it has gone.  Then you get the big, BIG organizations that are also part of this, that you think of as merely the kind of right wing type ones, working with the left, like the Council on Foreign Relations.  Quigley himself, the historian for the CFR, said, we are often mistaken for communists.  And why?  Because their ideas and agenda were exactly the same direction as communism.  Then of course, going deeper into that, you find out, sure enough, the big boys, the big bankers, funded communism into existence.  The dialectic is always used between left and right, up and down, to come out at the same goal.  You end up on the same road at the end.  That’s the fascinating thing about this. 


We are given many false debates, many false arguments to chase our tails with and keep us busy.  We are given lots of counter-intelligence put out there too.  Why would they allow you to run away with the internet without giving you counter-intelligence to take you off in circles, into the stars, and creatures that should be made into shoes and belts and stuff like that, that are supposed to be kind of humanoid, if you get my drift?  This is all counter-intelligence, to mix fact with fiction and ridicule the fact.  That’s a simple tactic with it. 


It’s interesting too, that Professor Carroll Quigley said that the group, the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations, which is just the American branch of the Royal Institute for International Relations in London.  He said, we were often mistaken for communists.  He said, We have no aversion to working with them. That’s what he said in Tragedy and Hope and The Anglo-American Establishment.  And they do. They work with dictators, communists, and whatever.  Communists are very good because communists are the main ORGANIZED group in the world.  Communists are very dedicated to what they do.  The far-lefties are very, very dedicated.  And literally, and George Orwell showed you the mentality of them in his book, 1984, that communistic mindset of training and the ability to take a new idea, that totally contradicted yesterday’s idea, and spout it out as though you’d always believed it.  Well, that’s how the communists are.  And if we go into a deep freeze, you’ll find the same thing with the climatologists who basically are all part of the socialist left – that used to be called communists, and that’s why they use them all, because they want an ecological, scientific group to run the world, exactly as the soviet system wanted to.  They have the ability to get told we are going into a deep freeze and immediately parrot that as thought they had never mentioned global warming. 


That’s the mindset of that type of personality.  I’ve met quite a few of them and it’s always astonishing to listen to them prattle off the party line.  What I realized too in communism, years ago, is that there can be no dissent.  It was all from the top down, what you had to say, what you had to believe, and when they told someone the latest line, it was like a robot talking to you.  You’d look in their eyes to see if they really believed what they were saying, and they would be hostile, very hostile against even a challenge of basically countering them or questioning them on it.  That’s the type they’ve got running the IPCC at the United Nations for so-called climate change now, as they’ve toned it down to climate change.  Last night I was sent a link, an audio link, from, Australia, by Will in Australia. 


2010 George Munster Award Forum


It’s an interesting audio; I’m going to put the link up tonight after the show on my web sites.  Listen to this.  This is for journalists, a journalistic panel debating the new way they will report news about climate change to the general public.  It’s fascinating… fascinating to listen to them.  You’ll remember me talking maybe about two months ago when the IPCC at the United Nations said that they were going to work differently and train journalists to put it across, the whole climate change agenda, across in a different way to the general public. Well you see, they are already doing it.  They are already doing it and they are all on board.  When I listened to this bunch of so-called independent free-thinking journalists talking, I thought it was listening to a communist party meeting.  I’m not kidding about it.  Because every tactic they’d use, smear campaigns on their enemies and so on, nasty name-calling of their enemies, was used. 


They actually had a loathing for Christopher Monckton, who was given exposure on Australian television and radio.  Christopher Monckton knows his stuff.  He just put out facts, figures and so on. He didn’t give his opinions. These guys tried to say he just gave his opinions.  And from now on, they said, they are not going to report people’s opinions and ‘climate deniers’’ opinions.  They called him all kinds of nasty words, these wonderful independent reporters. So you have to listen to this because you are going to find you see the same meetings with your own journalists in each country are going on at the same time. They must have consensus, you understand, consensus building.  They actually put out people from the UN and the big think tanks; you know the charitable foundations that run the world.  They put them out to go around just building consensus so they all talk with one voice.  An old idea.  They use it in politics too, when they come out and use catchphrases like ‘weapons of mass destruction,’ so no matter who they are talking to you hear ‘weapons of mass destruction.’  Well, it’s the same idea with the journalists on climate change.  You’ll hear the same party line toed, regardless of how ludicrous it might sound with the deep-freezing weather we are going into.  I’ll put that audio link up.


I looked into this group of journalists and it says here, about the Australian Center for Independent Journalism, this is what they are reporting too, at The Muster Forum, Climate Change Munster Forum.  This is what they said in this audio…


2010 George Munster Award Forum


Has the scientific consensus about the increasing scale and urgency of climate change has made journalisms commitment to traditional concepts of fairness and balance obsolete? (Alan:  I hope you heard that.)


Has the scientific consensus about the increasing scale and urgency of climate change has made journalisms commitment to traditional concepts of fairness and balance obsolete?  (A:  So you are not going to get a fair and balanced journalistic opinion on anything.  You are going to have the SCIENTIFIC, the authorized scientific version.  That’s actually mentioned in the audio, that that’s all they are going to report from now on.)


The Australian Centre for Independent Journalism (ACIJ) (A: What a joke, eh?) aims to stimulate the production of high quality journalism (A: No kidding.), especially investigative journalism; to conduct and support research into journalism and the media; to contribute to scholarly debate and research about journalism; and to promote community discussion about the relationship of journalism to political, social and cultural democracy. (A: So we’re getting it from the far, far lefties who are – I’m not kidding – these people are radical.  They really believe in what they are up to.  They believe that any lie is okay, as long as they can get their ecological society brought in; you know, very little factories, very little this, that and the other.  They truly believe that mankind is the worst plague on the planet, these characters, especially the lesser types, the ones who don’t have the jobs like journalists do.)  The Centre is a non-profit organisation (A: No kidding…) based at the Broadway campus of the University of Technology, Sydney.


Activities of the Centre include the publication of investigative journalism; provision of resources and reference services; continuing education for practising journalists and research in journalism, and contributions to debates on areas of concern to journalists.  (A:  That’s one little bit about this particular group, that’s on the audio.   I’ll go into another one… actually I’ll hit it when I come back from this break.  It’s quite something to read.)


Hi folks.  We’re back and Cutting Through The Matrix, talking about this particular audio they had over radio in Australia.  How these journalists are coming to consensus and that they should only report the scientific side of things, from the IPCC at the United Nations.  And never bother with any opposing points of view, which are just simply unscientific you see.  So they have all agreed on that.  But who made up this panel of independent journalists, eh?  Well it was headed off by this one here…


Ann Henderson-Sellers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Professor Ann Henderson-Sellers (A:  No relation to Peter, I don’t think.  He had a sense of humor.) Australian Research Professorial Fellow in the Department of Environment and Geography of Macquarie University.  (A:  In other words, she makes her living off of this stuff.) 


Professor Ann Henderson-Sellers (A:  A double-barreled name…) (born 1952) was the Director of the World Climate Research Programme in 2006 and 2007 (A:  Well, she’s very fair, isn’t she? and she would represent a good side of the story.)  and was the Director of the Environment Division at ANSTO from 1998 to 2005. She was the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research & Development) of The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology from 1996-1998. Prior to this she was the founding director of the Climatic Impacts Centre at Macquarie University where she continues to hold a Professorship in Physical Geography. Professor Henderson-Sellers previously led the WMO Project for Intercomparison of Land-surface Parameterization Schemes, which operates as an international Internet-based "collaboratry". She recently led the Model Evaluation Consortium for Climate Assessment (MECCA) (A:  Oh, they love their names, eh?) Analysis Team. She also acts as a consultant to the United Nations University on various aspects of the impact of climate. (A:  A very impartial person here, to be involved in this little debate there, as she laid down the parameters of where they were to go in their talk.)


So that’s one of them.  Then we’ve got Sarah Clarke, ABC’s National Environment and Science Correspondent.  You understand, every radio station, every television company, every newspaper has their own correspondent now on the environment.  In other words, these are the hack ones who couldn’t get a job writing anything else, and it’s so safe to write on this stuff, with the handouts they get handed all the time, on greening, greening, greening and so on, that they’ve got a lot to lose if this whole thing goes down the tube.  So they are very impartial as you know, very, very impartial.  So she’s the National Environment and Science Correspondent for ABC.  It says…

ABC journalist, Sarah Clarke, December 2009. (ABC News)


Sarah Clarke is the ABC's national environment and science correspondent, reporting for both ABC Radio and Television.


She has travelled extensively around Australia reporting on the environment and the impacts of the drought and climate change across a number of programs including ABC's 7pm news, Lateline, 7.30 Report, Foreign Correspondent and across radio news and the ABC's flagship radio current affairs programs AM, The World Today and PM.


Her brief is extensive and covers climate change, space exploration (A:  That’s certainly where she is.), water issues, drought, and future technologies.


Recent assignments include covering the United Nations Climate conference in Copenhagen, (A:  She’s well in there isn’t she?) a trip to the arctic circle to visit an Inuit village in North West Alaska living in a vulnerable and changing environment (A:  Oh, there’s a woman with guts.); an assignment in the Antarctic alongside a team of scientists and ongoing coverage reporting on the state of the Murray Darling Basin.  (A:  So she gets to travel an awful lot…)


She's also travelled to South Korea, the Pacific Islands, the Caribbean, South Africa and to Chile reporting for the ABC.


That’s another one that attended this, that’s on the audio too.  Then there is…


Ben Cubby, Environment Editor, Sydney Morning Herald (A:  Well, again, he’s a very impartial guy who’ll give you impartial news on the environment obviously, since he’s also making his living off it. 


Associate Professor Philip Chubb, Journalism, Monash University (A:  And the link’s up there for that too.)  Philip’s career as a journalist combines leadership positions in print, television and online media with publishing, business and communications technology.  (A:  Then it goes through his history as well.  He’s obviously well up there and got lots friends in high places, in the right kind of clubs you might say.  He also was making his living on this as well.) 


It’s quite fascinating to realize that everyone who slanged anybody at all, and you should hear the words in this audio. You’ll hear the words that they call anyone who they call ‘climate deniers’, you should hear the names… all they can do is resort to calling them names.  That’s standard left wing policy, because you cannot attack the reasoning of certain people who have come up with their science.  Not only that, they never mentioned all the hundreds of scientists who left the IPCC because they wouldn’t go along with lies.  That wasn’t mentioned at all.  It wasn’t mentioned at all.  Quite something.


You understand it’s happening in every country.  They all get on board.  So anything that you are read – and I hope you always understand this, and NEVER forget this, never, ever forget this – whatever you read in any mainstream journal or newspaper or magazine has got CONSENSUS with the reporting to do with climate change and other social topics as well.  Because there is a big world agenda here and these people are getting highly paid to make sure that YOU get the kind of news they want you to believe, and it certainly is anything but impartial and fair and balanced. In this particular group, they have admitted they can’t do fair and balanced reporting.  It was just too imperative to save the planet, etc, and so they will only give you the official announcements from the IPCC.  There is fairness for you.  How’s that for an agenda?  Huh?  And you think you are living in a free, open, democratic society.  Back with more after this.


Hi folks.  I’m back and we’re Cutting Through The Matrix.  This system we are going into, we’re actually really into it, well into it.  The youngsters are already into it through their conditioning and indoctrination in school, starting at Kindergarten, into the greening society, sustainability. They are all part of the Millennial Project, Agenda 21, all the names for the same thing really… where we are going to live under an ecological scientific grouping, or dictatorship, in little community areas, within regions because there will be no more nations at the end of it.  That’s always been the big plan.  ALL the groups at the top, all the opposing groups that you think are opposing, the far left, the far right, the corporations, and so on, are all part of it.  They are all IN on it together, using the dialectic to bring us into it.  They all agreed long ago that this is the way they are going to take the world.  You can go into HG Wells’s book, A Modern Utopia, and you get glimpses of it even there, as far back as when he wrote that one, with the help of his masters of course, who financed him.  He was also a mouthpiece for the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Fabian Society. The Fabian Society was just a group created by the Royal Institute of International Affairs to manage the left wing radicals to make them really push towards a utopia, thinking it was going to be a wonderland for the worker, all run by the elite of course; look at who the founders were.  Regardless, they are all working together towards the same road to bring you all back on to the same road at the end of all the fighting.  That’s how the Hegelian Dialectic technique works.  To be honest with you too, they have already set everything up around you.  You are already inside a cage.  You’ve got all these different organizations working right into your local level, and on your local councils. They are handing out different agendas to even your roads and works departments and all that kind of stuff.  Wherever you happen to live, it’s all to do with sustainability and austerity is now tied in with it as well, budget-cutting and so on.


In Britain, they are a little bit ahead of the US.  They have already announced the big society and communitarianism.  It’s being put into action. They have trained the leaders years ago under Common Purpose; there is this particular group called Common Purpose who will be the local commissars pretending to speak on behalf of the public and the people.  They will eventually have to go, as a part of a region, to The World Bank to borrow money.  That’s what will happen to all of your little communes.   You will have reps that get sent over to talk to the big boys and decide how much cash you are going to get and what you are going to give back in return for it, because nothing is going to be free.  Nothing is going to be free. 


You understand that countries themselves, as they have been for a long time, are really, each country, each nation, is a business.  Collectively we are all one big massive business for the bankers and the taxations and all the rest of it.  It doesn’t matter how many businesses comprise it, we are one big business.  That’s how they view us.  That’s why they are bringing in carbon taxation, eco taxation of all kinds as well, through The World Bank and through the Rothschild bank before it gets to The World Bank of course, through carbon credits and so on.  This is to take over from the country, the nation as a business, which they loved, to the next system which will be easier for them.  They’ve got the whole world with regions in it and they can tax each individual directly to this world system.  It’s far better for the big banking boys, who will always be in charge, being the dominant minority. 


What they are doing in communitarianism is also saying, oh look, the government can’t handle these big, big budgets anymore, there’s just too many people, there’s too much debt – as they pay off more money to the bankers; they are still bailing them out you know, and the bankers are still giving out their billion dollar bonuses to their pals.  Regardless of that, as we all know, what they are going to do is (so-called) decentralize government as they do away with the nation-state. That’s the whole idea, decentralization, and put you down into your little regions with your so many communes inside each region.  YOU will have to deal with the problems yourself.  Here is an article on that, from The Guardian which is as far left as you can imagine.  They are all for the IPCC and they have their own environmental push as well, for this ecological society. That means everything has to come under economics and sustainability on the planet, and population reduction. That’s what they mean by ecological society.  It says here…


Ministers (A:  That’s politicians.) plan to give personal care budgets

to 1m elderly people  (A:  Right… so when you get sick and you are elderly, this is what they are going to do for you.)

Measures in social care shake-up to be spelt out in white paper as part of  'big society project' / Randeep Ramesh / Tuesday 16 November 2010


An elderly woman sits in her room at a nursing home lost in thought. 


The government plans to quadruple the number of elderly people with personal care budgets from the current 250,000 (A:  Which they are trying out.)


Social care can no longer be left to the state but was "everyone's responsibility," (A:  You see… it’s EVERYONE’S responsibility.  I wonder if it’s the bankers’ responsibility too, with the massive profits they rake in?  I guess they are exempt.) ministers said today when the government announced a white paper next year on how people should fund help in old age.


Paul Burstow, the Liberal Democrat care services minister, announced several measures, the most radical being the plan to put a million people in charge of their own personal care budgets, against the current 250,000.  (A:  Now, this is the same technique they used in business quite a few years back, where they were handing out sort of status reports.  You’d go in for your status report every month or so and your boss would say to you, how do you think you’ve measured up this week and so on and they’d tick you off for assessments and so on. And then, when they wanted to cut down or downsize as they called it – all the firings… downsizing, it sounds better doesn’t it?  …psycholinguistics.  Then they would actually hand the form over to the person and you would have to justify why they should keep you at that work.  The idea being, as you were ticking off your performance, and say oh gee I’m not doing too well am I? and then YOU’D feel responsible and then at the end he’d just sort of look at you with that, you know, and put the hands out, and say, yeah, yeah, you’re not too great are you?  And so you would leave, they wanted you just to leave, and pack up feeling terrible with your tail between your legs as a failure.  Well that’s what they are doing to YOU now.  You’re sick, you’re old, this is what it’s costing, here’s the lump sum, you’ll deal with it… you deal with it. And then you are going to have the elderly saying, well, I need this and I need that, well maybe I shouldn’t; maybe that’s taking money from other people who need it too.  And making them feel guilty, you see.)


Other measures include £400m to support holiday breaks and hobbies for carers, and an expanded role for the voluntary sector.  (A:  You see, the voluntary sector is to get heavily involved in this as well.)


Personal budgets can range from a few hundred pounds to £50,000 a year. They allow the elderly and infirm to buy services such as home help from charities (A:  Now, why are you buying anything from charities?  Because these charities ain’t charities, folks, never were.) or private companies – but they have been controversial.


While the idea was introduced in 1996, it has proved a hard sell to the public, with the Audit Commission last month warning that people were fraudulently claiming the cash.  (A:  Well, that’s the red herring.)


Burstow described the ideas as part of the coalition's big society project, with individuals taking on responsibility for their own lives. "Personal budgets give people choice, control and independence," he said. "They look to people, not the state, to shape services, and improve outcomes, making a reality of the Big Society."  (A:  Well, maybe at the end if you’ve got enough pennies you can hire one of the recent immigrants, and he’ll do a voodoo dance for you and clear up whatever’s making you sick.  They might be quite cheap. I’m not kidding you.  This is what they are going to do. They are going to make you feel guilty at what you are costing the state.  They are already using the same technique in the US, by the way.  In the US, if you had your big insurance plan like when you work for a company, the insurance companies are now posting back what it costs them for you to go to the doctor and have this test, and that test, and so on, to make you feel guilty about going to the doctors, so you won’t use your insurance.  It’s the same technique being used.)


However, there were concerns that the money earmarked for social care would be swallowed up by the 25% cut to council budgets announced by the chancellor in last month's spending review. (A:  Do you understand, I’m talking about a totally socialized country already.  It’s totally socialized, completely socialized country.)  Care packages account for up to 55% of local authority spending, if central funding for schools is accounted for, and there are concerns that the extra £1bn made available by the government in last month's spending review is not ringfenced.  (A:  …whatever that means.)


So they are going to make you feel guilty and lots of older folk will feel guilty and they won’t claim this and they won’t claim that. They’ll all say, well, I’ll do without that pain medication and I’ll do without that…maybe somebody will need it more than me.  That’s what they are hoping for.  They use psychology in all of this.  That’s what it’s about.  Then of course they will start, once that’s under way and under swing, they will start reducing the amount they will give out to each people every year.  The same way as they are going to start reducing your rationing, once they introduce rationing, coming from the United Nations, which is scheduled by the way, eventually to dish out the food to the regions.  They will start off with something that won’t have you all grumbling and then 2 or 3 years later when you are used to it, and you think it’s always been there because that’s how fast most folk adapt, they’ll say, we can’t give you as much this year, it’s been a bad crop across the world, and you will get less, and then it’s up to you as how to get rid of the excess population. That’s what they’ve actually said, by the way. 


This is the real world that we are living in.  It is nothing BUT deception out there.  Nothing BUT deception.  We are already IN the scientific society, run by the scientific society and the technocrats.  You’ve been in it for a long, long time.  And you have never had a free independent press in your lives, never seen it.  Never seen it.  One of the guys who helped set up this part of the scheme I read from last night.  That was Lord Bertrand Russell, a guy who admitted in his biography that he went over to China back in the 20s to start getting communism taught in the universities, because eventually they were going to make it a communist country, so they sent a British Lord over to do it.  Interesting, eh?  He talks about the coming society and how it would be and how they would bring it in.  He says here,


“I fear that the place for splendid individuals will be much more restricted in the future than in the past.”   Apart from this purely personal opinion, it is easy to imagine ways in which the world might acquire a scientific government such as I am supposing.  (A:  Now, what do you have in the US and in Britain’s government? They have appointed science Czars, with whole teams behind them.  You don’t vote these guys in.  You see, it’s all ready here.  It’s been here for quite some time.)


It is clear that in the next great war Europe will go to pieces.  Probably the population will be halved and the surviving half will be in a condition of anarchic despair.  These circumstances will rest with the United States to make the world safe for plutocracy.  (A:  … the world safe for PLUTOCRACY, folks, is the term they use here.  What’s the US doing now?  It’s flattening the last few cultures who will not go into the system, to standardize the world.)  An essential step in this process will be the acquisition of a considerable measure of control over Europe.  (A:  They’ve already integrated it completely.)  Dawes Plans and the Young Plans more drastic than those imposed in Germany in recent years will be imposed upon Europe as a whole. Scientific experts will be employed to make Europeans work and to introduce the most up-to-date organization and technique.  (A:  You better understand the word ‘technique’.  It doesn’t mean what most folk think it is.)  American marines will occupy the site of what had been London, if need be, and skyscrapers will be erected over the ruins of St Paul’s.  In this way a world government will come about, in which the power will belong to great plutocrats but will be largely delegated by them to experts of various types.  It may be assumed that the plutocrats having become soft will gradually become lazy.  (A:  That’s the same as the Marxist doctrine.  And you thought that came from the left wing didn’t you?)  Like the Merovingian Kings, they will allow their powers to be usurped by the less lordly experts, and gradually these experts will come to form the real government of the world.  I imagine them forming a closed corporation, regulated partly by opinion so long as their government is challenged, but chosen later on by means of examinations, intelligence tests, and tests of will power.


The society of experts which I am imagining will embrace all eminent men of science except a few wrong-headed and anarchical cranks.  (A:  A crank to him was anyone, just like those journalists, who opposes the official point of view.)  It will possess the sole up-to-date armaments, and will be the repository of all new secrets in the art of war.  (A:  Now, he’s talking about ALL war; that’s war on the mind, all kinds of wars.)  There will, therefore, be no more war, since resistance by the unscientific will be doomed to obvious failure.  The society of experts will control propaganda and education.  (A:  They already do.)  It will teach loyalty to the world government, and make nationalism high treason.  (A:  Right… for the hard of thinking, it says, “and make nationalism high treason.”  You’re there already folks.  That’s why the UN was set up. They said that their greatest enemy was the individual and nationalism.)  The government, being an oligarchy, will instill submissiveness into the great bulk of the population (A:  That’s what you’ve been getting trained with since 9/11 happened, 2001.  Give up all your rights and freedom for safety; give up all your rights and utter penetration into everyone’s lives.  No privacy. You’ve been trained already and most have accepted it. Now it’s normal… it’s normal.  We adapt very quickly, as Darwin says.)  The government, being an oligarchy, will instill submissiveness into the great bulk of the population, confining initiative and the habit of command to its own members.  (A:  The only ones who will have initiative and command will be its own members.)  It is possible that it may invent ingenious ways of concealing its own power, leaving the forms of democracy intact (A:  That’s what you’ve had, this appearance of democracy or even republicanism; appearance, but really they are all working behind it all doing the real work.), and allowing the plutocrats to imagine that they are cleverly controlling these forms.  Gradually, however, as the plutocrats become stupid through laziness, they will lose their wealth; it will pass more and more into public ownership and be controlled by the government of experts.  (A:  The government of experts… we’re at that stage now.)  Thus, whatever the outward forms may be, all real power will come to be concentrated in the hands of those who understand the art of scientific manipulation.  (A:  That’s where you are.  That’s where you are already.  That’s pages 235-237 of The Scientific Outlook.)


That’s how far we’ve come.  Most folk still think they are living in some kind of democracy.  Meanwhile you’ve got the technocrats running all over the place.  You have all these appointed scientists with all their boards telling Presidents and Prime Ministers what to do.  Setting up communitarianism everywhere; it’s here under many names to bring in this new war to save the world, to save the planet, to save humankind against all kinds of terror, including eco terror and all the rest of it.  See, we are HERE already in all of this.  We are here already… with all of it.  And most folk don’t know. They still think we are back in the 1920s with all the rights and so on and so on. Back with more after this break.


Hi folks.  We’re back, Cutting Through The Matrix and there are 3 callers just popped up.  I’ll take the long distance one, Paul from Australia.  Are you there Paul?


Paul:  Hi Alan, how’s it going, mate?


Alan:  Not too bad. 


Paul:  That’s good. That’s good.  I was listening to what you were saying before, about all the debts and stuff like that.  I was thinking to myself, with China, with the amount of debt that China has bought up, with America not being able to really pay it because, as you know, you don’t borrow money to get out of debt.  Isn’t that right?  You know, you can’t borrow your way out of a debt situation. 


Alan:  Absolutely.


Paul:  Also, how are they going to come and collect it because don’t you reckon that wars… because like Alex Jones said on his show, a time ago, about how the American government gets money for every single soldier that’s killed; they get a cut of money from that.


Alan:  That’s right. 


Paul:  And I was thinking about China, if they are not going to get their money they’ll come and collect with blood money.  Do you reckon that’s a possibility?


Alan:  It’s a possibility, if they were authorized outside of China.  China doesn’t run itself.  China was a creation of the big bankers of the West and the Royal Institute of International Affairs.  They’ve been working with them, the Institute for Pacific Relations for 50 years to bring China up to this stage that it is now.  These guys are based in London. They run the CFR.  They run the European Parliament.  They run everything now.  No, China is not its own master. Don’t believe that for a second. 


Paul:  That’s fascinating. I never knew that.  I thought they were in power on their own accord.


Alan:  Oh, no.  When a country rises up, it’s the same with Brazil and India right now.  They rise up when the United Nations, through all of their various organizations, tell the big foundations to get on board and then they lobby all the big corporations to invest in those countries. That’s how the money comes in.  No country can pull itself up by its own bootstraps just like that. 


Paul:  That’s right.


Alan:  And China back in the 30s was a third world country and yet there is Bertrand Russell over there teaching communism because he says we’ve got to get a communist revolution over there to standardize the country.  Then you find that the Royal Institute of International Affairs was talking about building China up to be THE manufacturer of the world in about the year 1970 or so.  They wrote that back in the 1930s.  These guys do world long-term planning.  No country will pull itself up without the injection of cash and all the agreements through The World Trade Organization that gives them all the freebies; that’s why China doesn’t have to pay any pollution taxes.  They have no penalties to pay on the chemical waste and the polluted rivers like they do in the Western countries.  All the factories that moved to China were paid by you, the taxpayers in Australia, Canada and America, to move, through The World Trade Organization.  We paid them for moving, their setting up, retooling, and we pay for their loses for the next 10 years until they start making a profit.  And if they say they are not making enough profit being based in China, because of the move, they can extend that period for 10 more years, of paying no taxes. 


Paul:  Wow.  Isn’t it true that only federal government people are supposed to be paying federal taxes, if you’re a federal employee, and that the usual citizen doesn’t have to pay federal tax?


Alan:  Well, we shouldn’t be paying taxes at all.  But the fact is, he who’s got the big gun is the boss.  You know.  That’s the bottom line.  These guys don’t go by rules they draft up. They go by force. Government is force, remember.  The legalities are just something to keep us rather pacified thinking we have a chance and rule of law.  If they are out to get you, they get you.  There’s no doubt on that.  Thanks for calling in.


From Hamish and myself in Ontario, Canada, it’s good night and may your God or your Gods GO with you. 



Topics of show covered in following links:


Reporters Build Consensus to Promote IPCC Climate Data as Infallible--Ridicule Opposing Parties --Audio

Health Care Budgeting--How Much is Your Life Worth?




Alan's Materials Available for Purchase and Ordering Information:


"Cutting Through"
  Volumes 1, 2, 3


"Waiting for the Miracle....."
Also available in Spanish or Portuguese translation: "Esperando el Milagro....." (Español) & "Esperando um Milagre....." (Português)


Ancient Religions and History MP3 CDs:
Part 1 (1998) and Part 2 (1998-2000)


Blurbs and 'Cutting Through the Matrix' Shows on MP3 CDs (Up to 50 Hours per Disc)


"Reality Check Part 1"   &   "Reality Check Part 2 - Wisdom, Esoterica and ...TIME"