Aug. 3, 2011 (#889)
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:
Poem Copyright Alan Watt Aug. 3, 2011:
As Snow Turns to Slush, Our Brains Become Mush:
"It Seems The Future Creators have No
As the Great Herd's Ensured to Adaptation,
The Electronic Prison is Almost Complete,
Even Chips in Food Broadcast What You Eat,
Facial Recognition and Voice Recognition,
Mind-Reading Gadgets Know What You're Thinking,
The Military Industrialists Fund Creativity,
To Bring in a World with No Freedom or Privacy,
Except for the "Somebodies", Old Families, Wealthy,
Who Eat Real Food, They Wish to Be Healthy,
Nobodies are Mind-Bombed, It's Easy to Trick Us,
Cheaply Entertained in the Electronic Circus,
Our Opinions Downloaded, Distracted with Ease,
See Gaga Swing on the Flying Trapeze"
© Alan Watt Aug. 3, 2011
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Aug. 3, 2011 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
Hi folks. I am Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through The Matrix on August the 3rd 2011. For newcomers, you should look into the web site cuttingthroughthematrix.com and you’ll find hundreds of audios there for free download where you can hopefully get the shortcuts to this big system you’re under, this system that gives you your reality, and constantly alters it too as we go along. And you’ll find the big players behind it, the big corporate enterprises, the foundations that are a part of the parallel government, the real government and not the one that you think you elect, although they run that as well, and the history behind it, where they’re taking you, what they think of humanity. Hopefully, as I say, it will give you shortcuts to understanding how it really does work, instead of the media barrage that you get every day, of look here, look there, look here, look there until you’re utterly confused and you just give up. That’s the intention of the media. It’s not there to tell you what’s really going on or the big agenda because they’re owned by the ones who are the parallel government. So help yourself.
Remember too, all those sites you’ll see listed there on the .com site have transcripts as well of a lot of the talks I’ve given for print up in English. And if you want transcripts in other languages go into alanwattsentientsentinel.eu and you’ll find a variety to pick from there. Remember too, that you are the audience who bring me to you. If you want to keep me trotting along here, or crawling along, it depends what day it is, then you can certainly buy the books and disks I have for sale at cuttingthroughthematrix.com. [Order and donation options listed above.] And remember, straight donations too are certainly welcome.
I generally tend to give, as I say, as I roll along here I give little bits and pieces of the big system that runs the world, its history, where they wanted it to go a long time ago. Because we’re going through parts of the big plan that really world meetings decided upon well over 100 years ago some of them, and what kind of society they’d have today. They predicted it because you see, they made it happen. That’s how you control the future. The same as the big corporations do. International corporations literally look at investments 50 years to 80 years ahead. It’s the same with this big group that is called the new world order. In fact they gave us the term themselves and they love to use it more and more openly all the time. So once you’ve got a basic understanding of what’s happening you’ll understand why things are happening the way that they are happening. Nothing happens by chance in society. Everything comes from the top down, the culture industry, the whole lot. Anything from the grass roots truly that wasn’t belonging to the ones who control, it would have to be demolished or taken over. Generally it’s taken over very quickly; they’re infiltrated. Because even Plato said that, all culture has to be authorized from the top otherwise they’d lose control. That’s cultural changes and all varieties of the society that you live in. And we’re certainly going through them today.
It’s so amazing too, how you get used to things. We adapt, and the big boys at the top say this. We adapt, we’re the most adaptable species on the planet, mankind. And we can adapt very quickly into any kind of system they give us. We see that in history even the history of the 20th century and then into the 21st century, where we’ve seen fascism, communism, lots of different kinds of -isms. They love -isms of course. And we’re now into the new terrorism era. And everyone’s adapted quite calmly about it. And folk go into their waiting queues and get, you know, x-rayed and all the rest of it, quite calmly. We adapt to everything, unfortunately, because we’re told it’s normal. Back with more after this break.
Hi folks, we’re back and we’re Cutting Through The Matrix, talking about how we adapt so quickly, and we’re counted on to adapt, by those who rule our lives basically. And all governments do it too; they have all their specialists working with them, and psychologists and neuroscientists and etc, all working towards our adaptability to what they have in store. And if they find that there’s a big leap they want to make in taking rights away and the public’s not quite ready for it but they want it quickly done, or more quickly done, then they simply make it happen. That’s why you have what they call false-flag events happening across the world. It’s no coincidence, for instance, that Norway was the one that was picked for that particular one. You have to go into different things that have happened or have been signed in Norway to find out why. Anyway, that’s up to you to go and do your own homework.
You’ll find that even to do with the computer, and I’ve gone through before about the people who work in creating the programs that you use on the computer. Never mind the fact that they talked about giving us a technique, a system of communication that would change all of society but it would also benefit primarily those in control of society – and that was Brzezinski that said that back in the 70s. So they have people who teach you to ‘prompt.’ You get prompted all the time by your computer. It’s teaching you where it wants you to go, and you follow along, just being prompted and prompted and prompted. Also too, we know it’s to do with total recognition for the present and the future. They want to know everything about you so that you’re completely predictable. Or down the road if you fall afoul of one of the many, many laws that are getting rammed through right now, without even knowing it, they can go back and find, oh yeah on this particular day you were looking at this particular site and that’s where you got the idea of this particular thing. Or whatever it happens to be. And they’re already doing that kind of stuff of course.
Here’s an article here to show you how they plan it all ahead. And when the time is right for them they simply implement it. Google and Yahoo, all these big companies were put out in advance. They’re all part of the intelligence gathering system. That’s why they could break every law that was out there and get away with it. No one took them to trial. It’s part of the world intelligence network. And it’s like the CIA; people don’t realize the CIA have many real businesses established, REAL businesses and big name ones too, that really do sell things that you buy, but that’s a front for other things all together. It’s a front. All the electronic companies are the same.
Google acquires facial biometric company
homelandsecuritynewswire.com / 2 August 2011
Following Facebook's decision to implement biometric facial recognition software, Google has acquired a company to boost its facial recognition capabilities; the search giant recently purchased Pittsburgh Pattern Recognition (PittPatt), which develops technology that can search images and videos for a specific face
Following Facebook’s decision to implement biometric facial recognition software, Google has acquired a company to boost its facial recognition capabilities.
The search giant recently purchased Pittsburgh Pattern Recognition (PittPatt), which develops technology that can search images and videos for a specific face. PittPatt originated in the 1990s as part of Carnegie Mellon University’s Robotics Institute and eventually branched out in 2004.
Google already uses many of the PittPatt’s technology in its products including Image Search, YouTube, Picasa, and Goggles.
The move is contradictory to Google’s previous actions and statements as the company developed and then later abandoned facial biometric technology due to privacy concerns. (Alan: Well, they just let you bide your time a little bit and then they come back with it again. Because they never abandon anything that they’ve put any work into. They always know where they want to go.)
In June speaking at the All Things Digital D9 conference in California, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, said, “We built [facial biometric] technology and we withheld it.”
He added, “As far as I know, it’s the only technology Google has built and, after looking at it, we decided to stop.” (A: Yeah, sure.)
“I’m very concerned personally about the union of mobile tracking and face recognition,” Schmidt went on to say. In particular, Google was concerned that facial recognition capabilities could be used both for good and “in a very bad way.” As an example, Schmidt pointed to how an “evil dictator” could use facial recognition to identify people in a crowd and use that technology “against” its citizens. (A: Well, you see, I know for a fact since the 60s every crowd there’s been out there, especially protests, they’ve always been taking your photographs of every single person. Even if you were a bystander or somebody walking on the street, they took yours as well to find out who you were. It’s much easier for dictators nowadays. And that’s what we have, really, today, is just a conglomerate of dictators, really. And that’s of course what Carroll Quigley was talking about, a new feudal system. New overlords, that’s what we have.)
The company’s latest acquisition suggests that despite the company’s concerns, it still deems facial biometrics a worthy investment. (A: Well you’re darned tootin’ because they’ll get a lot of cash, as they already have, they’re always getting cash grants by the way; they never tell you about the cash grants they get from government and homeland security and all these different organizations across the planet.)
Then you go into this here...
Face recognition software may reveal one’s social security number
homelandsecuritynewswire.com / 3 August 2011
Researchers demonstrate ability to predict social security numbers from people's faces; "When we share tagged photos of ourselves online, it becomes possible for others to link our face to our names in situations where we would normally expect anonymity," one of the researchers said.
It is possible to identify strangers and gain their personal information — perhaps even their social security numbers — by using face recognition software and social media profiles, according to a new study by Carnegie Mellon University’s Alessandro Acquisti and his research team. The results of the study will be presented 4 August at Black Hat, a security conference in Las Vegas.
“A person’s face is the veritable link between her offline and online identities,” said Acquisti, associate professor of information technology and public policy at the Heinz College and a Carnegie Mellon CyLab researcher. “When we share tagged photos of ourselves online, it becomes possible for others to link our face to our names in situations where we would normally expect anonymity.” (A: I don’t know how people write this stuff anymore, you understand; they keep repeating the same things over and over, with maybe one word or two words changed in a paragraph. Anyway it says...)
A Carnegie Mellon University release reports that Acquisti said his research team, which included CMU postdoctoral fellows Ralph Gross and Fred Stutzman, combined three technologies — an off-the-shelf face recognizer, cloud computing and publicly available information from social network sites — to identify individuals online and offline in the physical world. Since these technologies are also accessible by end-users, the results foreshadow a future when we all may be recognizable on the street — not just by friends or government agencies using sophisticated devices, but by anyone with a smartphone and Internet connection. (A: Well, we already knew from Facebook and others too, that’s why they put that out there. Everybody immediately put all their photographs up and of course the CIA said, thanks, thank you very much, so did the NSA and lots of others. And of course that’s the idea of it. They’re always collecting your data.)
In one experiment, Acquisti’s team identified individuals on a popular online dating site where members protect their privacy through pseudonyms. In a second experiment, they identified students walking on campus — based on their profile photos on Facebook. In a third experiment, the research team predicted personal interests and, in some cases, even the Social Security numbers of the students, beginning with only a photo of their faces.
The release notes that Carnegie Mellon researchers also built a smartphone application to demonstrate the ability of making the same sensitive inferences in real-time. In an example of “augmented reality,” the application uses offline and online data to overlay personal and private information over the target’s face on the device’s screen.
“The seamless merging of online and offline data that face recognition and social media make possible raises the issue of what privacy will mean in an augmented reality world,” Acquisti said.
Cloud computing will continue to improve performance times at cheaper prices, and online people-tagging and face recognition software will continue to provide more means of identification.
What a world, eh? I saw a movie not too long ago and it says, the only right that you don’t have, really, is the right to privacy and anonymity. In a world where there’s no anonymity you can’t have privacy wherever you happen to go. That’s the world they’re bringing in. Because you see, the guys who own you – and you are owned by the way if you don’t know it – want to make sure that their animals are behaving the way they’re supposed to be, and the right weight, size, and doing the right things and all the rest of it. Because you see, we’re all worth money as you go along paying taxes throughout your lifetime, and even beyond that. Because we’re just stock; I’ve said this so many times. You understand, we’re just stock, we’re the human herd. And that’s how we’re referred to, even in medicine today when they talk about ‘herd immunity’; that’s to immunize the herd. And they like to weigh us and poke us and prod us and x-ray us to make sure that the animals are going to be fit enough to continue and earn enough cash for them during their lifetime. And even before you’re dead they’re wanting parts of your body.
Here’s an article here, as things get worse and worse. They always start off with... I’ll mention it during this actual article. This is to do with body parts. I mean, we live in a cannibalistic system. I can remember when I was small, you used to have real butcher shops and in the butcher shops you’d see the carcass of the animal hanging up and you’d also have a picture on a wall of a cow. And it was all marked off in sections for the prime cuts, etc., and what they were called. Well, I used to think, my God it’s like us isn’t it? It’s kind of like us; we’re all kind of animals and eventually they’ll be selling parts of us the same way. Well, we already did that when we dehumanized ourselves by allowing them to ram through abortion, knowing that would lead to the next step, which was body parts from fetal tissue. Most of your inoculations are made and grown actually, the viruses, on fetal tissue today and then they inject that mush into you. It’s kind of cannibalistic, but most folk don’t mind these days. Anyway, it’s just one step, and the next step and the next step until you’re literally living in a form of barbarism.
Legalise sale of human kidneys, expert urges
heraldscotland.com / 3 Aug 2011
PEOPLE should be allowed to sell their kidneys for £28,000 in an NHS-regulated organ market, a Scots researcher has said. (A: I don’t know if she is Scotch actually. She’s probably living in Scotland or working there, because her name certainly isn’t.)
In an article published online today by the British Medical Journal, Dr Sue Rabbitt Roff (A: That’s not a very Scottish name, and I’m not being very bunny about that.), of Dundee University, called on the health service to offer financial rewards to individuals willing to give up a kidney as a means of speeding up the rate of transplants and reducing the cost of treatments and dialysis to the NHS.
But her comments divided the medical community amid concerns the payments would encourage people to risk their health for money. The British Medical Association said it would not support money being offered in exchange for kidneys. (A: Now, this is a trail balloon and it’s a predictive programming article. And I’ll explain this when I come back after this break.)
Hi folks, we’re back and this is Cutting Through The Matrix, reading an article about legalizing the sale of human kidneys. Selling them. And an expert urges. Well, who is this expert? Well, it’s Doctor Sue Rabbit Ruff. Sorry... Roff. I keep thinking of a dog chasing her, like Hamish across the field there; like rabbit, roff, or ruff. Anyway, it’s quite interesting. She’s actually, really, when you see what she is, she’s really a bioethicist, which is really the new name for eugenicist. In here they call it a different term again, because folk were catching onto the bioethics and the whole bit. She says here that she belongs to a department of medicine to do with sociology; in other words, it’s bioethics again. Because sociology was founded in eugenics; that’s where it all comes from. All your social workers are taught that stuff too, about the inferior types and the people at the bottom and how they’ll all have a mess in their life and lots of problems for society, etc. It’s all eugenics, you see. So anyway, this is predictive programming; it’s getting you used to the idea coming. And it will come. It will come, just like they do in the Philippines. A lot of Americans who are very wealthy can get kidneys in the Philippines. I think they get about $2,000 for them over there and most of them die because once you go back, and there’s always problems going back to their own climate, etc, and conditions, they can’t even afford the antibiotics to fight the infections and they often die. There have been documentaries on it. Anyway, here we go again with bioethics. It says...
Dr Roff, a senior research fellow at Dundee’s department of medical sociology (A: You see. That’s bioethics.), believes it is a “small step” to move towards paid-for kidney donation. She said: “It’s a very small step from where we are now to where I’m suggesting we go.
“We already allow strangers to donate kidneys out of the goodness of their hearts. They get their costs covered, they don’t know who the recipient is, there’s no publicity, no public acknowledgement of what they do.
“We’ve moved away from the notion it has to be a family member (A: And you see, here’s the key. She’s showing this step by step. I can remember when they started this stuff and they always said, oh it had to be a family member to get the closest genetic match, you see. That’s how they introduced this idea. Oh yeah, and members love their own family so it will help. And we were kind of sympathetic, you see.) or a close associate who can give you a kidney. We’ve already moved into the zone of allowing the general public to make good-hearted donations.
“What I’m suggesting is, why don’t we add money to this equation in order to increase the amount of provision which is there, because we’re behind the eight ball in terms of the number of kidneys that are needed in the community.”
There are currently 725 people in Scotland waiting for a new kidney but the number coming up for transplant has plateaued at around 200 in recent years.
Dr Roff said she had calculated her suggested fee of £28,000 based on average incomes (A: No kidding you. I mean, this is just business. You understand, it’s nothing but business and big bucks for the ones doing it.), compensation and the cost-benefit analysis to the health service of a successful transplant.
She said: “The parameters have already been set by our compensation authorities in relation to criminal injuries, and also in relation to military service compensation. If a person lost a kidney in a criminal injury event, they would be eligible for compensation of £22,500 for a lost kidney. (A: See how they start equating it with other things? That’s when they muddy the waters for the average person and they can’t keep track of where it’s going and they say, oh I’ll just give up; it’s coming anyway.)
“I came to this figure of £28,000 because that’s the average national income in Britain at the moment, so it seems a fair price across all the social strata. It’s also a great deal cheaper than it costs the NHS to treat someone on dialysis for a year, apart from all the social advantages of helping someone regain quality of life or even avert dying from renal failure. Everything I’m saying is just an extension of what exists. We’ve already got systems in place for men to donate sperm and women to donate eggs – that’s paid-for donation. (A: You understand how they start connecting all the things and you often wonder if it should have happened in the first place? And then they equate it with, oh they’re doing that over in this country so why don’t we do that here? That’s how they start to use this rationale, which is not rational at all.)
“The special thing about kidneys is that we have two of them. (A: I can see she’s been to medical school.) Most of us can get by on one. (A: She’s definitely, you know, had basic biology.) The other thing is that live kidney donation is better than any deceased kidney donation. (A: She’s also, you know, a snob.) It’s medically stronger and it’s going to do more for the recipient than anything that comes from a dead person.
She said donors could be paid from a pool of money set aside by the NHS, preventing a black market trade in organs. (A: There’s only one black market trade and that’s carbon taxes.) A similar system could be applied to liver and blood donation, she added. (A: Well, she’s going to go places. She’ll have to move from Britain and go elsewhere, where the big cash is. Because she’s got the ideas. I can see she’s up and coming. And that’s Miss Sue Rabbit Roff.)
But that’s what I’m saying. You understand, it’s a predictive programming article here. She’s not telling you how much the surgeons get when you go into hospital for taking something out of you; and often that a lot of these things go to private buyers as well, who can afford the kidneys and how much they pay for it. When you go into hospital now you don’t know if that guy’s going to save your life or if he’s... it’s just like that chart on the wall in the butcher’s place I mentioned with the cow there with all the choice cuts marked out. You don’t know if he’s looking you up and down to see how much money he can get off you, because you’re worth more dead than alive. Well you’ll be dead once he’s finished with you. Think about these things. Think about them. Because I’m telling you, that is the world that you live in. And these characters are all out for big, big cash; that’s why they go into this kind of profession these days. And that’s where you are with that.
Also, it’s interesting how Japan disappeared from the radar map on the day that we started bombing Libya. Well, I didn’t bomb Libya, I had nothing to do with it so I won’t say ‘we’ anymore. They encourage you to use terms like that too, and then you kind of lump yourself in with the guilt. That’s the day they stopped talking about Japan as though nothing had ever happened. And then these little bits sneak out, once in a blue moon, very, very rarely at all, to keep us all happy. They don’t want us to sell radioactive kidneys or anything like that. Back with more after this break and I’ll read this article.
Hi folks, we’re back and this is Cutting Through The Matrix, reading about how Japan suddenly appeared back in the radar. It says...
Tepco Reports Second Deadly Radiation Reading at Fukushima
Nuclear Plant Q
bloomberg.com / Tsuyoshi Inajima and Kari Lundgren - Aug 3, 2011
Tokyo Electric Power Co. reported its second deadly radiation reading in as many days at its wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant north of Tokyo.
The utility known as Tepco said yesterday it detected 5 sieverts of radiation per hour in the No. 1 reactor building. On Aug. 1 in another area it recorded radiation of 10 sieverts per hour, enough to kill a person “within a few weeks” after a single exposure, according to the World Nuclear Association.
Radiation has impeded attempts to replace cooling systems to bring three melted reactors and four damaged spent fuel ponds under control after a tsunami on March 11 crippled the plant.
“It’s probably the first of many more to come,” said Michael Friedlander, who spent 13 years operating nuclear power plants in the U.S., including the Crystal River Station in Florida. “Although I am not surprised, it concerns me greatly; the issue is the worker safety.” (A: Actually, it’s the world’s safety because this stuff is floating around pretty well in a circle across the planet. It’s still coming across Canada and the US. Even all the sites that were up there from different governments telling us, oh it was below any concernable level, they pulled them all off. Well, if it truly was so below and so miniscule why didn’t they leave all their sites up? Hmm? Well, you should think for yourself there. Anyway it says...)
The 10 sieverts of radiation detected on Aug. 1 outside reactor buildings was the highest the Geiger counters used were capable of reading, indicating the level could have been higher (A: It probably was.), Junichi Matsumoto, a general manager at the utility, said at a press conference.
“Ten sieverts is the upper limit for many dosimeters and almost equal to the amount that killed workers at the JCO nuclear accident in 1999,” said Tomoko Murakami, a nuclear researcher at the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan.
Anyway, this stuff’s still coming out and supposedly, unless they get some new kind of technology or means of burying this stuff, because it’s so low into the ground now. There’s water under the ground there too, it’s so level with the sea. I don’t know how they’re going to put concrete around that. They don’t know either. And they say it might take 10 years before this stuff burns itself out. Maybe we’ll all need kidneys by then, eh? We’ll all be radioactive and bit and pieces will be dropping off us and dying off, as they already are actually.
This article here is to do with Canada because this has been a big thing in Canada for many years. People don’t realize that the police are the only ones authorized to use deadly force in any situation. That’s the law here. And it’s the same at the United Nations under the treaty they made back in the 60s to do with Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World. They said that ultimately only a United Nations army would have the right to use ultimate force, deadly force, and no one else. It doesn’t matter what happens to you or if a mass rapist comes in and rapes everybody and kills you. You can’t do a darn thing about it, if you hurt him, that is. And there’s been a lot of ridiculous things that have happened over the years in Canada and still going on. A man who confronted an intruder was charged, it says.
New case raises issue of self-defence rights
montrealgazette.com / Adrian Humphreys / August 3, 2011
David Chen is one of a number of Canadians who’ve been charged by police in the past year after protecting their property.
TORONTO — A Toronto man escorting his girlfriend to her home Sunday night discovered signs of entry to her house and, fearing for the woman's mother sleeping inside (A: So the mum was inside, right.), searched for intruders. A man was found hiding, Toronto police said. An ensuing struggle left the intruder bleeding from stab wounds.
As frightening as the incident was, it is the charging of the boyfriend with aggravated assault, punishable by 14 years in prison, that makes the case stand out in a clutter of urban crime. (A: I love how they call it urban, everything’s urbanized.)
It is the latest flashpoint in the debate over self-defence and protection of property after a number of high-profile cases across Canada brought a clamour for clarity and change.
Defence lawyers said on Tuesday it's the sort of case that a defendant — the 28-year-old man charged with the stabbing — would want to be decided by a jury, where citizens can imagine themselves in a similar circumstance and ponder what they might do.
"You can defend your property, you can defend persons in your charge and you can defend yourself. In this case he can make an argument to all three, but he has to use proportional force," (A: Proportional force is a ridiculous terminology for this whole thing. Proportionate force...) said Gordon Dykstra, a criminal defence attorney in Abbotsford, B.C.
"I think if he gets in front of a jury and he's halfway presentable, if he doesn't have a criminal record and makes a good case for what happened, a jury will acquit him."
But Toronto police suggest this might not be a perfect example for champions of self-defence rights.
"The man was charged because it is alleged the stabbing was excessive," (A: Well, what is excessive when your blood’s up and your girlfriend’s mum is inside? Has this guy killed her mum? You don’t know.) said Const. Tony Vella. "It is alleged that he stabbed the man a number of times. He's fortunate to be alive."
Key to the case is that the multiple stab wounds were inflicted both inside the home and outside, Vella said, suggesting the occupants might have been able to close the door once he was outside and call police. (A: People don’t think when they’re in crisis like that. And I tell you, it’s like being in war if that happens to you. You’d never bring up a soldier for doing this kind of stuff in a war situation.)
The scene of the incident was Parson Court, a pleasant street in west Toronto filled with large homes. The 32-year-old man who was stabbed was charged with break and enter. (A: So he gets charged with break and enter, with intent to rob or to steal I guess. And the other guy who stopped it all is up for what? You know.)
Neither accused could be reached for comment.
Recent self-defence cases have not gone well for prosecutors.
Last month, Lawrence Manzer, of Burton, N.B., had a mistrial declared in charges stemming from a confrontation with intruders on his neighbour's property. Sloppy paperwork was cited as the reason.
The same month Kim Walker, a Yorkton, Sask., welder, was sentenced to eight years after a jury declined to find him guilty of murder for killing his daughter's boyfriend whom he deemed to be destroying his drug-addicted 16-year-old daughter. He was found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter.
In May, Joseph Singleton, 46, a farmer in Taber, Alta., had his charges — for assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm, after he wounded a man who had just burgled his house with the blunt end of a hatchet — referred to an alternative measures program. (A: So he was given basically an alternative measures program.)
In March, prosecutors dropped gun charges against Ian Thomson, 53, of Port Colborne, Ont., who shot at three masked men caught firebombing his home while one yelled: "Are you ready to die?" (A: What would you do? Ah, please give yourselves up. That’s the kind thing to do. Huh?) The Crown said there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. (A: ...in that case.)
I mean the thing is you understand, as government takes over more and more and more of what YOU had the right to do before, you’ll get these things happening all the time. It’s happening all across society in different areas of society. Because now, you see, you’re in a socialistic type system where the government has authority over you, everybody you know, your family, relatives, and all the rest of it in different cases. And nothing’s clear anymore. The only thing that hasn’t changed is human nature in times of stress and crisis and you will react the way that any person would generally react. And tough luck on you if you’re caught. That’s as simple as that. I can remember when the guy who was in charge, he was kind of appointed over the Toronto Metro Police Association; he also had a jewelry store, although he was a politician. He ran outside with a gun firing after guys that had busted into his store. Anybody else would have been charged and the whole bit, and they tried to charge him and then they dropped it immediately because of his special standing. Because some are more equal in such utopias as socialism, you see. And that’s how it really is in the real world.
Things are getting worse and worse. And...
Police to carry out on-the-spot fingerprinting in the street even for minor traffic offences
dailymail.co.uk / Anna Edwards / Aug 1, 2011
Police are now armed with a device that can scan fingerprints so they can correctly identify suspects who lie about their details. (A: So they’ve got an excuse there right away to justify why they’re using it.)
In what sounds like something out of George Orwell's dystopia 1984, suspects can now be finger printed in the street thanks to the new hand-held police gadget. (A: This is Britain, by the way. In the States they’ve just introduced the one that can do this and do your iris scan at the same time. Isn’t that wonderful?)
The mobile identification service scans a print, then checks it by trawling through a national database for the details. (A: No doubt with the aid of Google and all the rest of them too, who are all part of the NSA.)
But police insist they do not retain the print afterwards.
I read an article yesterday where everything they’ve said that they had for a few years or a year or so, has been a lie. They’ve kept all data and they’ll keep it forever. So that’s just the way it is in this wonderful world of – I can’t say “ours” anymore. And then tonight too, I want to put up a site. It’s...
The CIA's Secret Sites in Somalia
Jeremy Scahill / thenation.com / July 12, 2011
Nestled in a back corner of Mogadishu’s Aden Adde International Airport is a sprawling walled compound run by the Central Intelligence Agency. Set on the coast of the Indian Ocean, the facility looks like a small gated community, with more than a dozen buildings behind large protective walls and secured by guard towers at each of its four corners. Adjacent to the compound are eight large metal hangars, and the CIA has its own aircraft at the airport. The site, which airport officials and Somali intelligence sources say was completed four months ago, is guarded by Somali soldiers, but the Americans control access. (A: And it goes on and on about that. It’s quite a good article and you should look into that. They got them all over the planet, these things. ALL OVER THE PLANET.)
And then too, to do with the coming Cloud; it’s already here of course, the Cloud. They’re altering the laws about copying discs and all the rest of it to make it more compatible with all their laws that they’ve already got worked out on the books. This guy in Britain is the guy who’s introducing it. I says, Cable, Mr Cable his name is. I don’t know where they get the names in Britain now; they’re all changed since I was there.
With one stroke, Cable stops millions breaking the law
politics.co.uk / Ian Dunt / Aug 2, 2011
Vince Cable is expected to legislate away intellectual property laws that inadvertently cause millions of Brits to break the law tomorrow.
The business secretary's plans for copyright reform will almost certainly wipe away old rules around transferring data that make it illegal to copy CDs or DVDs into a different format.
Millions of Brits currently transfer music and video files to their iPod or other devices without knowing they are breaking the law.
Mr Cable said: "We are determined to explore how exceptions to copyright can benefit the UK economy and support growth. (A: Oh, sure, they always have an ulterior purpose.) Private copying is carried out by millions of people, and many are astonished that it is illegal in this country. (A: But when you read down it’s all to do with, again, Google, Amazon, Apple, who are all keen for this new system to come in for the Cloud network, etc.)
Online companies like Google, Amazon and Apple are keen on a new regulatory framework before cloud computing becomes prevalent.
It’s to do with the Cloud, because that’s what you’re all being guided to. When they first gave you the computer they gave you the idea of competition, even with your search engines. It’s all a con. Because when you think you’ve got competition it must be real, like all different competing companies. No. The idea was they wanted YOU to get a computer and step by step they’d narrow the gates, with you inside of it, along the way till you get one system eventually. And once you’re into the one system, that’s you, that’s it, there’s no such thing as competition whatsoever. It’s where they wanted you to be in the first place; you’re guided there, by your own naivety. That’s what it’s about.
Alan: Now, we’ll go to the callers. There’s Sam in Toronto. Is Sam there? Hello?
Sam: Hi Mr Alan. Perfect, what a great show today. But I wanted to touch on a different topic quickly. Something that disgusts me is what happened in the meltdown, the great meltdown, the economic meltdown and something that people don’t realize, that it’s basically the fact that, how bankers, they basically took all these mortgages. They put them together and they sold them, right, as I guess derivatives of the actual performance of these mortgages. They didn’t sell the actual mortgages to offshore sovereign funds or whatever, or pension funds of different countries. So they actually just sold some derivative, worthless derivative that was based on the performance of the gradual increase of these mortgages and the real estate property, but they didn’t actually sell the actual property. So basically as I understand it, after everything crashed and these derivatives became worthless, it’s not like the offshore, or bank, or the sovereign fund somewhere, didn’t actually end up owning the houses, the properties. Once the crash happened and once the owner couldn’t afford to pay their payments and the house became foreclosed upon, the banks actually were still owners of the actual property as I understand it. I wanted to know if that is correct.
Alan: It’s even worse than that. What they did was buy them... The big banks at the very, very top, the ones who we all bailed out, the big banks were the ones who ended up holding them apparently. What they did, they encouraged smaller banks to pass on the mortgages to the next ones, inflate it, inflate the prices, and sell it off as a good asset to the next bunch. And it went through maybe 30 different hands, or banks, before it would get to the ones at the top. So fast in fact, often the ones at the top would take possession of the deeds, etc, sometimes they didn’t even have possession of the deeds, they’re still fighting over which banks actually own them today because there were so many that they were passed through. Each one simply inflated the price and says this is a great deal to hold onto, they’re going to be mortgaging this house for another 40 years. So they inflate the price, as a good asset, and pass it on to the next guy who would then do the same thing. And so it went right up to the top guys until thousands and thousands of homes were lost in this, literally lost in the shuffle. And even the people who had the deeds, the homeowners, they couldn’t even find out who eventually owned their homes anymore. It didn’t matter who was initially on the deed, it had been passed on so many times above them through the banks working this scam themselves.
Sam: So it’s basically just the banks owning real possession, real goods, in terms of the house, for just some useless cash and not even cash in this case, some derivative that basically they profited on both ways, and they ended up being the winners through all this, all these assets.
Alan: Not only the winners. I mean, they got bailed out; they’re still getting bailed out by the way. They’ve had so many bailouts that they’ve given themselves multibillion dollar bonuses. And then at the same time they turn around and they start finding that they still own a lot of these houses. So they also own a lot of the houses still, even though they’ve been bailed out and compensated for the loss of them. I mean, it’s just incredible how they’ve scammed everybody. But again, is it really? Because they run the US government, you know. The big banks run the government.
Sam: Right. It looks like a free-for-all between all these elite factions before I guess the big day of the big reckoning. I guess everybody’s just having a little free-for-all, taking what they can. Whether it’s the Military-Industrial Complex, how they’ve basically pillaged the Middle East for all the resources, whether it’s the banks, it’s just like they’re scrambling at these last minutes to collect whatever they can in anticipation of some new world order.
Alan: It’s plunder. It’s plunderizing the world. And you know these banks too, what they do, they work with the real estate guys and they tell them, oh this property is going to be worth double this in 2 months’ time or 1 years’ time. These are the scams that they pull off. They can do it with any commodity, you understand; they see homes as commodities. They don’t care about the people living in them. And they can do this with anything at all that’s vital for your survival. And the government allows them to do it. And then they get REWARDED for it! It’s just astonishing.
Sam: I just can’t believe the people aren’t on the streets rioting after...
Alan: Well, yeah. I mean, thousands lost. Tent cities in the US and elsewhere; Canada’s still to see theirs coming yet. It will happen here too. The same scams are going on here as well. Thanks for calling. Back with more after this break.
Hi folks, we’re back. This is Cutting Through The Matrix and we’ll go to Larry from Louisiana. Are you there Larry?
Larry: Hi Alan. You was talking about that facial recognition technology. Did you know that Apple just rolled out their new voice recognition technology? I say ‘new’ in quotes. And it’s for the Apple Care program which is where you pay a few extra bucks when you buy a machine and you can always call in. Well I used to have to call in and tell them my name, who I was and read the serial number of the machine and all that to identify myself. Now I just call in, the computer says, how may I help you, and I just say MacBook pro, and the lady just comes on and says, yes Larry, what can we do today. Now isn’t that just wonderful? The next program I really would like them to write for me, is you know that web speak thing where the computer can read your emails to you in that robotic voice? I want that thing reading in my voice with my dialect. Oh yeah! I want that program, but first I’m going to have to get over the concept and the true idea that they can have me saying anything, anywhere, at any time and prove that it’s me because it’s my voiceprint.
Alan: That’s exactly right. What they’re using of course is a technology they’ve had in the NSA for many, many, many moons because they’ve been monitoring all of our voices across the world for about 20-30 years actually. And they’ve had voiceprints for that long. Now they’re putting it into the low-level market and hoping that they’ve got anybody on it now who’ve they’ve missed. But yeah, you’re quite right. What we’re getting now today, actually, we’re getting antique technology. We think it’s cutting edge, but it’s in a sense antique. And of course at the very top of NSA they’ve had that stuff for 20-30 years at least. 30 years I’d say.
Larry: That’s exactly right, Alan. Okay, appreciate your program. Thank you.
Alan: Thanks for calling.
And it’s true. They’ve had this technology so that if you phone from another country they immediately know your voice, it’s immediately recognized, and up comes your name and where you really live, etc. No doubt too, where you are now and how you got there, without your knowing it. And more about you than you’d ever know about yourself, in fact. And maybe tomorrow I’ll talk about the mind reading technologies your tax money’s going into as they go into that whole area. It’s vast actually. And all the big universities are getting grants to find ways to monitor what you might be thinking. It’s just incredible. Eventually it’ll be, you’ll have to wear some kind of helmet or something, or maybe a suit of armor with a ground wire on it into the earth so as that you can get some peace and quiet without something tapping into you. And if they can tap into you, remember, they can also motivate you as well. Anything that can literally pulse over your brain for a game and predict what you’re going to do, can also pulse the certain parts of the brain, once it’s adapted to you, and make you go through certain motions as well. It works both ways, remember. But this is the technology that they’re using and it doesn’t bode well for the future.
You cannot have a free society, you understand, and this technology at the same time. It doesn’t compute. And in fact, they’ve just discussed this technology that’s here today and what’s to come; they discussed all of this at least 50-60 years ago, that this is what would happen. We’d get to a stage where you could not ever have peace or freedom, except mind you, for an elite. And they already set all the laws down for the elite. That’s why you can’t find much data on them even on that silly thing called Wiki, which is the big propaganda forum where they all argue with each other and try to get their points of view across. That’s where most people unfortunately even get most of their information today. They believe Wiki not knowing that it’s just a forum for propaganda from all varieties of people, all sides, everything. So you can’t count on that too.
But it doesn’t look good, unless you’ve got a spare spaceship you can get off to some distant planet, far away from even NASA’s reach, and live the rest of your life out there. Unfortunately we’re stuck here with all of its rules and regulations and the planned agenda.
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:
Google Acquires Facial Biometric Company
Facial Recognition Software and Social Security Number
Laid-Off by Globalism in Britain? --Don't Worry, Sell a Kidney
Tepco Reports Second Deadly Radiation Reading at Fukushima
Man who Confronted Intruder Charged--Toronto
Police--On the Spot Fingerprinting
The CIA's Secret Sites in Somalia
Britain--Law on Copying and Copyright for Cloud Computing