March 28, 2011 (#798)
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:
Poem Copyright Alan Watt March 28, 2011:
The World Gov'ment is Final Judgement:
"Diktats from the World Soviet Float Down from
Pollution Carbon Taxes, Eat Money Needed to Get By,
Government Consists of Think Tanks, Corps., NGOs,
The Latter Unelected Decide the Way World Goes,
It's "The New Democracy," Redistributing Wealth,
Guaranteeing World Citizens the "Minimum" of Health,
And Every Corporation's Hand is Out for the Cash,
A Penny Doled Out to 3rd World, Rest Goes in the Stash,
Democracies Built on Promises, Factual -- Never See Them,
Counting on the Peasants' Vote, Who Hope it Will Free Them"
© Alan Watt March 28, 2011
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - March 28, 2011 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Hi folks. I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix on March the 28th 2011. I always get the boring stuff out the way at the beginning of the show, and that is to tell the newcomers that you should look into cuttingthroughthematrix.com web site and help yourself to the audios which are available for download for free; there’s hundred to choose from. I try and give you shortcuts to understanding this big system into which you’re born and to show you that you’re living through a script, a big business plan, really run through the United Nations by thousands of organizations working with governments and business, big international business to bring in their beautiful new world order utopia. There’s so much to it of course, but you have to work your way through all these audios and go through the books I suggest you read, from the big boys themselves, and that way you don’t get confused by the media which is not there to inform you. Well, it can inform you in a certain sense and it’s never really with enough truth, that’s for sure. It’s really out there to keep you busy with trivia and scary stories and so on until you just pack in, your mind closes down, and you’ve been led by their suggestions, and by the experts too. Remember too, you are the audience that bring me to you so you can buy the books and disks I’ve got for sale on cuttingthroughthematrix.com. [Order and donation options listed above.] Remember too, straight donations are certainly welcome because it costs an awful lot of cash to keep this thing going here.
Now, this new world order has been on the books for an awful long time. You’ll find even philosophers in the 18th century talking about bringing in this wonderful system where experts and intelligent people would guide the whole planet, in an international system in fact, and out of that was born, eventually, the Marxist idea of international communism – that was one form, and other ones were variations of the same thing basically. Of course we know too, that the Marxian philosophy was picked up by academia and given authorization by their own governments to promote it. That’s a fact in the Western world. Also the bankers were all behind it because it’s far easier for bankers to work directly with governments for debt than to go to individuals door to door, like they used to do in the old days by the way, and try to collect money owed. And that was a deal the Kings had at one time with the money lenders; they would borrow cash from the money lenders, and the money lenders had the personal right to go door to door through the citizenry and collect taxes. So it’s far better for banks to go right to the government, get them to borrow cash, and put you all down basically as the collateral for that payment, and your children and your great grandchildren, if any have any anymore these days. That’s basically it in a nutshell. However, they have a big, big plan to depopulate, to bring the world back into, basically a 1700s standard of ‘pristine beauty,’ as they call it, with forests and wild animals being reintroduced into the wilds, even the predator class, in America and elsewhere. That’s all part of this big business plan for a vastly reduced population. And they hope to bring the population down drastically now; Rockefeller called for it himself. Not just through abortions and birth control, but he stepped it up and he says, we must bring down the population through radical means, radical depopulation. And we’re living through lots of that and you just don’t know it yet. Back with more after this break.
Hi folks, we’re back Cutting Through The Matrix and I’ve spoken many times about Professor Carroll Quigley who wrote a book called Tragedy and Hope and he also wrote another book called The Anglo-American Establishment where he outlined this big world plan on behalf of the company that basically ran the world and was taking over bigger chunks of it. It was called the Royal Institute of International Affairs and in America it was called the Council on Foreign Relations. It’s still on the go today, big time. It really places its own members within government. Some already in government, and bureaucracy by the way at the federal level especially, are approached; you can’t just apply to join it, they will approach you, after really observing you for a long time to see if you can keep secrets, keep quiet and play a kind of double life to the public.
Quigley also mentioned too, that every President and Prime Minister in the Western world – including Australia too I should say and New Zealand of course, part of the British Commonwealth countries – Every Prime Minister and President they’d had since the late 1800s had been a member of this group, even before they gave it its present title; they had different names in previous centuries. Now he knew this because he was the official historian for the group and he also taught at Georgetown University. He taught the people going into the diplomatic corps for the United States. He taught congressional members too at high-level meetings, about other cultures and their histories and so on. So he was well placed up there. He made no bones about it, he thought it was a great idea to take the world over and run it with academia and scientists and specialists at the top, instead of democracy. Democracy was too cumbersome; it had to go. People don’t like having their systems changed; they get used to a system. You can even get used to a really bad system, anything which is familiar to you is something that becomes normal to you and you resist change.
So they decided that democracy had too many folk arguing when they wanted to get their big changes through, like taking the land off people and stuff like that. So they’d simply introduce a new type of system, very much like the Marxist system. That’s why often the Council on Foreign Relations and the Rockefellers, that are all part of this big world system, were funding through their foundations all left-wing societies. That came out at the Reece Commission directed by the US congress to find out why these foundations were dishing out millions of dollars every year to left-wing agencies within their own countries. They were told, by the heads of the Ford, Carnegie, and Rockefeller Foundation, their job was to blend the soviet style system with the West so that eventually they’d be as one. In other words, you would still have an appearance of having the old system, but through the schooling systems and the bureaucracies and so on it would become more authoritarian as time went on; you would really be the same kind of sovietized system. And private organizations were to come in, unelected organizations, on a massive scale to be the new soviet; ‘soviet’ means ‘rule by councils.’ This is what you have today. You have all these massive councils advising governments and you don’t elect them at all. So democracy was bypassed a long time ago in actual fact. All it means now is you have to vote to whoever they present in front of you, just like they did in the soviet system: politburo member 1, 2, 3, or 4, it didn’t matter because it was all the politburo. That’s what you have today; it’s Council on Foreign Relations 1, 2, 3, or 4. It’s the same in Britain and elsewhere too. So that’s really how we have been for a long time and they have their big business plans.
Now, the Council on Foreign Relations have their own web site out there. They also publish the Foreign Affairs magazine which will give you the future, they tell you the future. They have thousands of staff and think tanks and they’re all over the world now; they’ve got them in India and elsewhere. They basically advise governments on the way to go. Many of these circles, like the CFR, Council on Foreign Relations, mix; many of their members are also in other circles and big think tanks which also advise governments from other directions. So they’re into everything, including the coming food shortages. They’ve been working on that for the last 15-16 years, just one small department there of a about a thousand people. And they have other thousands of peoples in other department working on every other facet of the world that they’re bringing into being.
That’s why nothing changes when you vote one guy out. In democracy you don’t really vote new people in; you’re so sick of the old ones you vote them out. They just simply replace you with the same thing, under a different guise. They never toss out the old agreements. They never tear up old treaties. They simply go ahead with more and more treaties with the United Nations until the UN technically is running the whole show, at least on the face of it. Because in actuality, the United Nations was started up by the Council on Foreign Relations and is obedient to the CFR, which in turn is obedient to a much higher organization than themselves.
Now, on the CFR’s web site here – I’m going to put this up tonight at cuttingthroughthematrix.com – they have this little piece on their invasion of Libya, because under their charter at the United Nations they’re not supposed to invade countries. So here’s their doublespeak. It says...
The Dilemma of Humanitarian Intervention
CFR.ORG / Jayshree Bajoria, Senior Staff Writer / March 24, 2011
(Alan: If you scroll down they come to...)
Responsibility vs. Sovereignty (A: ...right. A big sticking point with the US because the people want to believe they’re still sovereign, even though they’ve been fighting wars across the world for the last 50-odd years—but not for themselves.)
The United Nations, formed in the aftermath of World War II (A: Now listen to this...) to promote peace and stability (A: We’ve had more wars under them than the previous centuries combined.), recognizes the importance of sovereignty, especially for newly independent nations or those seeking independence from colonizers. The UN Charter says: (A: I read a part of this last week, because Kaddafi himself brought it up at the United Nations a few years ago.) "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." (A: ...‘any state,’ they mean country; they don’t like calling you nations, you see. And that should be that, right? But then the CFR go on with how they approach this, being lawyers and everything.) The principle does not rule out the application of enforcement measures in case of a threat to peace, a breach of peace, or acts of aggression on the part of the state. (A: So it doesn’t rule it out. So in other words, because they haven’t said, this little piece they’ve added on to it, by themselves, it doesn’t say that, then technically you can go in there, you see. Remember that means too, the UN can go into ANY of your sovereign states now. That’s a precedent... whether you like it or not.) The Genocide Convention of 1948 also overrode the nonintervention principle to lay down the commitment of the world community (A: What is the world community? Is that like the general public? What is the general public? Do you know that’s actually a legal term, the ‘general public’, or like ‘the masses’, you know. So anyway, you have this world community...) to prevent and punish. (A: Have you ever voted for the world community? Has anybody ever asked you to vote? Or asked your opinion on it or anything else? No?) Yet inaction in response to the Rwanda genocide in 1994 and failure to halt the 1995 Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia highlight the complexities of international responses to crimes against humanity.
(A: So in other words, they can say it’s a crime when it suits them and it’s not a crime when it doesn’t suit them, and basically that’s it. So you understand, these guys are lawless. You understand? If you don’t go by the letter of their own laws and agreements then they’re lawless. You can change it when it suits you, and tack words on to it, even though it’s not technically tacked on, it’s still the same charter, if you go your own way it’s still lawless. And we know it’s lawless, and it’s plunder. But then again you see, they have their big long-term business plans for the whole world, of interdependence, you understand, and that means that everyone must have this fake democracy, with well paid people, of course, who will love it – the ones who were well paid loved the soviet system too – and they will make sure you all follow the dictates that come out of their mouths and they’ll have this wonderful world. You understand, that’s why the bankers and the big boys like the sovietized type system. They love China because the dictate comes down from the top and everyone simply obeys; there’s no comeback or voting on it. It’s just ‘that’s the order’ and that’s it; that’s what you do. You jump to it.)
In 2000, the Canadian government and several other actors (A: ...‘actors,’ they’re called ‘actors on the world stage’ now...) announced the establishment of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) to address the challenge of the international community's responsibility (A: Now, again, this international community idea is something that a small group of people dreamed up, didn’t ask the general populations of ANY country to vote on it, and they simply made another club, much like the G20, you see. So that’s what they mean by the ‘international community.’) to act in the face of the gravest of human rights violations while respecting the sovereignty of states. It sought to bridge these two concepts with the 2001 Responsibility to Protect (R2P) report (PDF). (A: And the .pdf is available from the site that I’ll put up at cuttingthroughthematrix.com at the end of this tonight.) A year later, the co-chairs of the commission, Gareth Evans of the International Crisis Group and Algerian diplomat Mohamed Sahnoun, wrote in Foreign Affairs: "If the international community is to respond to this challenge, the whole debate must be turned on its head. The issue must be reframed not as an argument about the 'right to intervene' but about the 'responsibility to protect.'"
So you get, again, their double wording, their Orwellian-speak, the ‘right to intervene’ and they can’t intervene, so they have a ‘responsibility to protect.’ They just give it to themselves when it suits them. So this is how they double-speak their way through. You’ve got to understand, when you’re in a lawless system, and it’s got to be lawless because these guys keep changing it as they go through their big business plan for the world. They have to break their own rules to get it through. You try doing that at the bottom and you’ll be in the slammer before you know it. But these guys are pretty well lawless because they have big 50 year plans, 100 year plans, 150 year plans, on different projects to fulfill and they can’t do it with this idea of being responsible to the public at the same time. Margaret Thatcher said the same thing when she left politics. She said, I now belong to the parallel government, the same term that Quigley used and others have used. The parallel government consists of ex-Prime Ministers, ex-Presidents, and top diplomats, who all know each other and they are not responsible to the public now that they’re private, this private organization, because the CFR and the Royal Institute of International Affairs are private institutions. Back with more after this break.
Hi folks, we’re back and we’re Cutting Through The Matrix. I’ll also put up tonight a link to Libya’s Great Man-Made River Project where they show you this huge massive river that was constructed through Libya under Gaddafi, without borrowing a penny from the International Monetary Fund or The World Bank or any foreign lender by the way. It’s a massive thing, beautiful too, and they’ve got nice pictures to see and all the rest of it. However, it’s brought water to all the present agricultural areas, and yet they’ve played it down in the West. It says...
Libya's Great Man-Made River Project
The 1st of September marks the anniversary of the opening of the major stage of Libya's Great Man-Made River Project. This incredibly huge and successful water scheme is virtually unknown in the West, yet it rivals and even surpasses all our greatest development projects. The leader of the so-called advanced countries, the United States of America cannot bring itself to acknowledge Libya's Great Man-Made River. The West refuses to recognize that a small country, with a population no more than four million, can construct anything so large without borrowing a single cent from the international banks.
I’ll put that up for you to look at yourself. And it’s true, it’s a massive underground aquifer and so on they have there, and they’ve got water to the surface and really made parts of their desert certainly bloom, but we’re not supposed to think about that. We’re supposed to think about a nasty man who obviously was mistreating his people. And we know for a fact, as I say, that the West has sent infiltrators in there, professionals of course, the agitators, as they’ve done elsewhere. We even have people in the West talking about the revolutions up on YouTube, giving talks about the coming revolutions. We’ve had the New American Century with their list of countries they wanted to take down; I put them up last week again and you’ll find the links at cuttingthroughthematrix.com. You’ll also find that guys who made the speeches on how it was to be done and so on and the order in which they were to take out these particular countries.
So we’re living through, again, the big business plan because you see, this world system has to have a united Africa and African States, a united Arab states, all of them, which will all be fronts of course with their own people put in there. And just like they’ve got with the European Union which is not a democratic institution by any means at all, and they’re going full-steam ahead still with amalgamation of the Americas. If you haven’t noticed, since 2001 there have been articles in the paper talking about Fortress America and how this will help to integrate the Americas even quicker, through security and the fear of terrorism and so on, again, all from the Council on Foreign Relations. And they’re already sharing all their data, these countries with each other – the US, Canada, Mexico – and they use the same computer systems on ALL their citizenry. They’re basically swapping all data; instant access if you’re from Canada and you work with CSIS and instant access if you work with the FBI in the US. So it’s all a done deal basically. They’ve got to keep the pretense up that we’re still independent nations while we pay for the last few countries to be bombed and forced into submission into this thing called democracy, something that’s very elusive and we can’t quite get it ourselves. But it will do, the term will do until they bring out the new world system of just total obeyance, you see, and that’s what’s to come in the future.
Now, Cass Sunstein is quite the character. He’s up in office with Obama. He specializes really in neuroscience and mass psychology, how to get the masses to accept things. They studied animals of course years ago; that’s why so many went into zoology. HG Wells sent his own son into studying zoology. He actually left him in the soviet system; took him over for a holiday, a visit, and he left him with the people he admired the most, the ones who were using dogs and so on, and children, to see if they could salivate on command, stuff like that. And his son eventually came over and taught at New York University. Anyway, Sunstein is very similar to that. Anything they can do to an animal and teach an animal, you see, they can then use on humans; that’s what they truly believe. And unfortunately it tends to work. They’re very, very thorough sciences, at an incredible level right now of understanding. We’ve been through Bernays and his techniques too; he also knew this stuff in the early 1900s and they also knew it, obviously, in certain societies in the 1800s, because someone taught Bernays. He gave America its consumerist society. He got women to smoke for instance. He knew how to use the media and the moving pictures, as they called it, to entice people to emulate what they saw on the screen.
Now, Sunstein is very similar to that only, again, more modern. He knows even more stuff on how to get people to behave, change their habits and so on. Because we’re now in behavior modification, the whole world and the whole Western world is under behavior modification. If you haven’t realized it, the children of today are behaving vastly different from the children of even 1960, as they in turn were different from those in 1930 or 1940. It’s a step by step process of what was called ‘contamination’ by the soviet system, as they would contaminate cultures through the generations until anything goes. And literally anything today does go. It really does go. You’ve handed your children over to them in the school system, which is more interested in their sex life at 10 or 9 than they are about anything else. It’s social engineering, and most folk, because they’re contaminated, the adults, the parents don’t really care too much.
Now here’s Sunstein here, and to show you the way that they’re using climate change, he admits that in this particular article here, that this would help redistribute the wealth across the world. It says...
Cass Sunstein: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
conservativedailynews.com / Aug 8th, 2010 | By John Smith
Sunstein and Posner (A: That’s a guy he worked with.) further speculate about the possibility of achieving this redistribution by means other than direct payments: (A: They’re cunning sods, these, aren’t they? Really cunning... really.)
“It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy than otherwise, or to be accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid.” (A: See, before we were doing it through foreign aid, now it’s through climate policy. Back with more after this.)
Hi folks, we’re back Cutting Through The Matrix and Sunstein is talking about basically redistribution of wealth, which again is another plank of the Communist Manifesto. And Sunstein of course is basically the new type of Marxist. It’s never really changed; it’s world Marxism, kind of Trotskyite type too. And they don’t rule out private corporations in bed with them. They’re really corporate Marxists you might call them, but they all agree, you see, that specialists and experts should rule the world. He says here...
“If the United States agrees to participate in a climate change agreement on terms that are not in the nation’s interest, but that help the world as a whole, there would be no reason for complaint, certainly if such participation is more helpful to poor nations than conventional foreign-aid alternatives.”
“If we care about social welfare, we should approve of a situation in which a wealthy nation is willing to engage in a degree of self-sacrifice when the world benefits more than that nation loses.”
And that’s why you’ve got mass unemployment across, you know, the so-called civilized world. Because you see, these same boys through their international agreements at the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, another private organization by the way, signed you all down to lose all your factories and so on, and to actually encourage and pay for through your tax money the transplanting of all those jobs and factories over to China a long... well, now it’s quite a long time ago. It was done so slickly most folk hardly even noticed. The same goods appeared in the store, they just said made in China, and most, again, didn’t think anything of it, at least those who were still left working. You see, this is a world system you’re living in. Everything that happens is on schedule, every major event is on schedule, the whole idea of privatizing the world’s water has been going on for years now. They started before the public even heard of this, 30 years beforehand, and it’s all sewn up, and I’ve got so many articles on that even with Canada it’s quite amazing.
Sunstein himself really works on ways, through government, to get you to alter your way of PERCEIVING things, you see, so that you perceive them in the way that he wants you to perceive them. He’s a mind manipulator and that really is his job. Because you see, at the bottom we’re supposed to be just animals and we can’t think for ourselves, we’re not too bright, we’re not specially intelligent and therefore we need people like him to goad us and prompt us along the right paths of the great business plan of the world. I’ll put that link up tonight at cuttingthroughthematrix.com.
Alan: There’s a few callers and there’s Kyle from Philadelphia on the line. I’ll see if Kyle is there. Are you there Kyle?
Kyle: Yeah, hey Alan, how you doing tonight?
Alan: Not too bad.
Kyle: One thing that I noticed, about just the general population, that really staggers me, is how they lie to themselves and let themselves, they’re their own manipulation. Like somebody can be watching 3 hours of, you know, fiction on TV and then all of a sudden it becomes 11 o’clock and then they tell themselves, okay, even though I just spent 3 hours watching fiction, now because it’s 11 o’clock and the news is on, this is all for real, this is all the truth. And that sense of just never questioning and never looking deeper, or reading a book like Carroll Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope, it doesn’t occur to them.
Alan: You’re absolutely right because it takes the consent of the dominated, the ruled, to make any plan work you see. And most folk, again, as Sunstein talks about that himself, that you can actually create consent amongst the people because most folk go along with everybody else in the population. So if the majority are moving one way, they will join them even though they don’t even know what the topic’s about. They’ll just say, yeah, your opinion is now my opinion, because it’s too difficult to think it out for myself, or they’re too lazy to think it out for themselves. Group pressure is tremendously important in this technique of getting folk to comply with the changes that are already planned and now being implemented on the general population. You have to consent to everything yourself and that’s the key. It doesn’t matter how intelligent you are, or even how dumbed-down the society is, everything comes down eventually to a personal choice. Even when your antenna goes up and you say, there’s something wrong with this news, what they’re doing, there’s something wrong... – and this was also explained by Sunstein, and long before him by Bertrand Russell – people are created to be egosyntonic, encouraged to be egosyntonic; they’ll seek pleasure and avoid pain. And thinking about something that’s unpleasant is painful, therefore they go along with the pleasant story.
Kyle: Well, their arrogance is their downfall, because they say like, oh I’m too smart, you know, they could never get that past me. Or, I know better, I know the truth, when you only know what they tell you and what they want you to know. And it’s just such... I mean, it’s really depressing. When I first, you know, found out what was really going on, and you know, the plan, I wanted to tell everybody, but the blowback from it and the sense of like, you’re crazy, we know better... it’s so disheartening on a certain level.
Alan: Well as I say, it takes consent. It’s far easier to look at the same familiar faces a good part of your life, like Dan Rather and all these characters, looking straight at the camera and telling you that’s just how it is, here’s the truth, you know, and the public swallowing it because he’s an authority type figure. Again, Sunstein would explain this, that we are obedient to authority type figures, whether we know it or not. And they’re in your home every night at 6pm or 11pm supposedly telling you the truth, even though lawsuits went up to the Supreme Court in the United States with companies that were supposed to do investigative journalism. They found out eventually, they were into Monsanto and they were warned off by Fox Television and Fox fired them eventually, and they sued Fox. It went all the way to the Supreme Court and the judge ruled, he says, understand that there’s nothing in law that says the news must tell you the truth. There’s nothing in there, you understand. The people don’t know that. They really believe that somehow this is an appendage to their thinking cap, this television, that is there to do their reasoning for them, and by the way Brzezinski said that.
Kyle: Well, I was watching one show, I think a couple months ago, and they were talking about the side effects of a drug that was brought forth by GlaxoSmithKline and then one of the commercials was for a drug made by GlaxoSmithKline. And I said to myself, there is no way that this news company is going to report the truth of this, you know...
Alan: Of course not.
Kyle: ...how massive this drug is bad for you, when they’re getting paid by that drug company.
Alan: In fact, you understand too, most of the programs you see on television news are decided, the formats are decided maybe 6 months in advance, and these are their fillers. Then they go and get in touch with the corporations and say, this is good for advertising, we’re doing an article on so-and-so, we’d like to have your ads on. This is business. That’s how they work. That’s business. News is business.
Kyle: Well, and nobody wants to accept the fact that they don’t know the truth. Nobody wants to accept the fact that they might not have the big picture, they might, you know, they don’t, they want to just, you know, plug their ears and stomp their feet and close their eyes and say, my world is what I say it is, when it’s, you know. They’re arrogant...
Alan: ...The best experts in the world have debated this on television for me. [Alan laughing.]
Kyle: Yeah, exactly. Exactly. He knows better than I do and I agree with him, therefore he’s right.
Alan: That’s right.
Kyle: Well, I just wanted to tell you, keep up the good work, Alan. I really love your show. I hope it goes real well for you.
Alan: Well thanks for calling. And we’ll go to Carlton in New York now. Is Carlton there?
Carlton: Hello Mr Watt. How you doin’?
Alan: Not too bad.
Carlton: Just looking at the last caller, I agree with what he was saying, as far as like me talking to people. They just want to stay in their own safe little world. But I do tend to find, like at my job mainly, that a lot of people are receptive to things that I say, the things that I’ve learned and from you and that I’ve read about. But my question was, okay, with all of this going on right now, and I don’t know if it’s because I’m recognizing more because I’m into this type of information more, but it’s a lot of revealing going on. A lot of Christians will tell you you’re living in Revelation times. I guess the question is slightly twofold, because in some ways I believe that they do leave opportunities for us to make a change. You know what I’m saying? Like withholding information, like they had to know when they let the internet go that a lot of this information was going get out and what the drawback would do to it. But my question is, was that part of the plan and did they, well of course I’m pretty sure they did, foresee the drawback. But what ways do you think we can use, to like at least take advantage of the slight opportunities that they have given us? I’ve heard you in previous talks speak about how, like in the mystery religion they tend to write the beginning at the end and the end at the beginning. And you put that in context with Revelations, how it is kind of sort of playing out right now as we speak.
Alan: What they did essentially was use the same technique they employed to bring in television. Television came in as a very innocuous thing in the beginning. They gave you what they called ‘wholesome entertainment’ to begin with and then they started to slip in over the years a little bit more degradation, a little bit more and so on, until they changed society. Even the sexual revolution really, the TV could take credit for that too. It created what was called the Teenage Revolution. Before the 60s there was no such word as ‘teenager;’ that was literally an invention of the 60s. That was to separate the generations, ala Karl Marx again, into older folk and us, us who are on the cutting edge. That was very successful too, with children’s programs, teenage programs, the beach party movies, that kind of stuff. So it worked very well. But it must also start off with something you’re familiar with, which it did. The internet was something similar, only this time, because they already had society degraded, they actually played on the fact that there was so much porn restricted from the population, but they knew it was out there so they made sure everyone knew there was porn. That’s the only thing I heard for years, oh there’s porn on the internet. And all the major media screamed about it to make sure that everybody would look in to see it, especially the children. They also talked about the coming information wars back in the early 70s. They said that a time will come, and Brzezinski touched on this in his book, a technology being given to the public, he said, which would change communication across the world. You can go even earlier and find the writings of Marshall McLuhan, another professor who talked about this kind of Ethernet society where people would contact, they’d get so used to contacting people they’d never even see, through the air, the air waves, that it would so drastically change society. So the Pentagon and all the big boys were way ahead in all of this and therefore they had to get the people hooked on it first of all, which was easy enough to do, and eventually it would become, basically, their master; it just soaks up their time, they’re on the net all the time. And you couldn’t bring in a world society of spying on everyone without the computer, and without everyone having a computer. Because they wanted to really do a personality profile on everyone and make sure they could understand you perfectly, even better than you knew yourself. And they have done that too. So it’s been very, very good.
Now that they’ve got to a stage where there are people speaking out and so on and making some kind of impact, they’re starting to take those rights away step by step. They’ve already started in other countries; I’ve got an article here about even the programs you use for spyware, those same corporations are being used by your governments in Middle Eastern countries to censor their population. So don’t forget that same stuff will be used on you as well. It’s already used. There’s certain sites I can’t even get into now in Canada; it just comes up blank and it can’t find the page and so on. So we’re already going through the censorship aspect. There’s politicians in all countries now, on queue, all together at the same time, coming out with new internet laws, on the right to speak. Sunstein is a big advocate of it too; he says that they must put out everyone with a site talking about the new world order, must give provision for alternative people or a good part of their site or their show, to folk who have differing opinions. In other words, professional agitators paid for by the guys like Sunstein and the groups that he belongs to. So they will change it; that will definitely go down the road. And they talked about this before they even gave us, by the way, the internet. So they knew how long they’d let us have it, long enough to get everyone stuck on it, hooked on it and addicted to it even, and then when they started to draw it in you would be left with mainstream news again but you’d still keep watching it because now you’d be accustomed to it and you couldn’t do without it. So that’s really the technique they’re using.
Carlton: Basically like a glorified TV.
Alan: Yes. Much better really because now they watch everything that you’re watching, as you’re watching it, and add that to your personality profile, which they admit they have. For everybody in America and Canada too, the Pentagon has a virtual you in a supercomputer and they add your daily data onto that personality, give it actual fictitious things that it would go through in a day, problems to solve and so on, and the way that that virtual you will behave, they say, is the way that you will actually behave, according to how they understand you. So they’ve already done this. I read the articles; again, it’s in cuttingthroughthematrix.com in the old shows section.
Carlton: One quick question because... I mean, you’ve been studying this I guess forever because you’re probably old enough to be at least my father. I don’t know because I probably know like maybe 2% of what you know and I just look at things and it just makes me angry. I mean, I guess because I’m still sort of like a baby to this. But like, how do you... how have you stopped yourself from going crazy? [Caller laughing.]
Alan: [Alan laughing.] Well, I always say this. When you’ve known it for a long time and you’ve read it and so on and you understand their techniques, then you know not to get angry because that’s what they want. Remember every level is weaponized; there’s even weaponization of culture going right at those who think they’re awake, to bring them down, to break them as well, knowing how you react, etc. So you have to realize, this didn’t just start in your lifetime; that’s the beginning of it. It started before you were born, and the plan is very, very old. They worked on your parents the same as they work on you and each generation is upgraded into this new system, more efficiently and further forward than the last one. It’s a wonderful technique; mind you, when you have all the cash in the world and think tanks working on this, thousands of them, you can’t really fail. What you have to do is to learn to... Remember, anger can be turned into a positive thing if you know how to put your thoughts down, in writing or whatever. And actually, rather than get angry when you’re describing it to people, you have to keep your cool and almost tease them into understanding by throwing things out at them so that they can... They’re still familiar with what you’re saying, you’re not coming on as aggressive, and they’ll ask you the questions. Give them the teasers, get them to ask you the questions, and you don’t overload them, and leave it with them, and they’ll come back to you for more information. So it’s a matter of self-control and learning how to control yourself. Because, I keep stressing this, you see, never mind the groups and all the rest of it; they’re easily infiltrated. You can only be certain that you can control yourself. That’s the only building material you have, is your own building material, yourself. And so you start on yourself and you have to learn how to promote your ideas across to that ordinary person without scaring them off or having conflict with them. Thanks for calling.
Carlton: Thank you.
Alan: Back with more after this break.
Hi folks, I’m back Cutting Through The Matrix and we’ll go to Brian from New York, if Brian’s there.
Brain: Hi. I’m not actually from New York; I’m from Maryland. I was just wondering what the connection is between the pro-military cartoons in the middle of the 20th century and growth and rise of the first-person shooter games in the latter part of the 20th century, and you know the explosion in the 21st century as well, with like the military strategy games, and just kind of how that relates to the RAND Corporation. Thank you very much for what you do; I’ll go ahead and leave, get off here.
Alan: Yeah, the RAND Corporation, this private nonprofit organization by the way – that advises the US government and other governments across the world, and rakes in millions of dollars for being so wonderfully, you know, beneficent – did studies on behalf of the US government years ago. They got us through the Cold War literally by feeding each one of us through a supercomputer, again to find out what we thought and how we would react to certain things and so on. They also wanted to raise a generation back in the 60s for the present time; that’s long-term business planning. Do you want an aggressive youth, who basically have no power, growing up, and so you bring them into the military and then you allow them to be aggressive, and you give them the most debased culture you’ve ever given anyone before them – that was the idea of it. And giving them the video games of course to grow up with, where they would become used to killing, instinctively, very Pavlovian style, and that was all part of that training really. That’s what video games were given out for because they were developed by the military. There’s some excellent sites out there now with the history of this, how to get folk to kill without thought, just reaction. So that was all part of it. And they did do it through cartoons. There’s even one out now, apparently it’s straight from the military, developed for the military for killing, in action. It’s very realistic, and they just announced they’re giving it out to the youngsters in America. Because obviously they’ve got another 20 years of using you, at least in the military fashion, before they’re finished with the States all together. Meanwhile they’re also changing the States so drastically, that in 20 years time you wouldn’t recognize them anyway.
This is all part, as I say, of this hyperaggressive society where especially the male has no real power. He’s been portrayed, through comedy and movies, as almost a second class, almost irrelevant citizen. Even in the feminist sites they say that a man today is just a sperm donor; that’s all they are, and that’s how they’re treated certainly in comedies and in movies and so on. So the only way they can be manly, as they say, and be promoted as manly, and get respect in society, is with a uniform. And they’re given the big guns that they’ve grown up with, where they’ve blasted all their frustrations away as youngsters, the only way that they know how, that’s acceptable to do in society, and then they’re put over to other countries to blow people away and they have no problems about that at all. So that’s really how it was done. They found out in the American Civil War, I think it was only 1 in 15 or so that actually discharged their rifles on the battlefield. In World War II something similar happened, and under Patton’s command they actually had surveys done, so special troops were going in and observing the troops to see if they were actually aiming high, missing their target on purpose, and finding ways to make them actually shoot and kill people. It’s not normal, you see, to go from civilian society where you’re not allowed to kill folk; it’s against human nature to kill someone you don’t know, for no particular personal reason. So they’ve got to train you to do it. That’s really why big business and the Military-Industrial Complex trained a whole generation for this particular era, to use them. And that’s what they’re doing.
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:
CFR on "Humanitarian Intervention" re. Libya
2001 "Responsibility to Protect" report
Man Made River Project--Libya
Sunstein on Using Climate Change to "Redistribute" Wealth
US Spyware Companies Block Middle Eastern Sites