January 13th, 2011 #746
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" LIVE on RBN:
Poem Copyright Alan Watt Jan 13th, 2011:
Committing the Crime takes Lots of Time:
"Nothing's Ever as it Seems to Be,
Guided Through Life by Those Who See,
Who Ensure We See Through Frosted Glass,
Like Plato's Cave Shadows, In the Dark, Alas,
There're Few Who Try to Take the Measure
Of Reality, Too Busy Having Pleasure,
No Questions On Who Sets the Pace
And Directs Change for Whole Human Race,
Never Dawns They're Living Through a Plan
Which Seeks Eradication of Sums of Man,
But That's in the Future, Too Far Away
To Connect to Lifestyle of Those Today,
Where Men Encouraged to Chase Women, Tarty,
Disposable, Replaceable in Perpetual Party,
Each Gender has Fun, the Chase, Ego, Lies,
The Fallout - No Progeny, Fewer Live Birth Cries"
© Alan Watt Jan 13th, 2011
Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - Jan 13th, 2011 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)
cuttingthroughthematrix.net , .us , .ca
|European site includes all audios & downloadable
TRANSCRIPTS in European languages for print up:|
Information for purchasing Alan’s books, CDs, DVDs and DONATIONS:
Canada and America: PayPal, Cash, personal checks &
Outside the Americas: PayPal, Cash, Western Union and Money Gram
PayPal Orders: USE THE DONATE BUTTON ON THE WEBSITE – AND –
Hi folks, I'm Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through the Matrix on January the 13th, 2011. Newcomers, as always, look into cuttingthroughthematrix.com website, and help yourself to the hundreds of audios that are up there already for free download. And remember all those sites you see listed on the .com have transcripts too, have a lot of transcripts in English of the talks as well, if you want to print them up, and hand them around to your friends. And if you want transcripts in other languages, go into alanwattsentientsentinel.eu, you'll see that listed on the .com as well, and you can take your pick from the choice that's available there.
And remember too, you're the audience that brings me to you, because I don't bring on most of the guests that other ones do, who generally are selling something, and that's okay. The ads you hear on this show are paid directly to RBN by advertisers to pay for the airtime and the staff and equipment and bills that they incur. So, it's up to you to keep me going, and you can do so, by buying the books and discs that I have for sale, at cuttingthroughthematrix.com. And from the US to Canada, remember, you can use a personal check. You can also use an international postal money order. And you can use PayPal. Just use the donation button, and follow it up by an email to me, with your name, address, and order, and I'll get it out to you, as fast as I can. Some people send cash. And across the world, same idea. You've also got Western Union for direct wire transfer. You can use Money Gram, which also wires, but you can, it has the ability too to give you a check if you ask for it. Which they can post off, and it's a lot cheaper, and that takes about seven days to get here. And some people again, just send cash. And again, PayPal to buy the books and so on or to donate. Just use the donation button, and follow it up by an email, with your order. And remember too, there's thousands who listen, who never send a penny this way. So, you can certainly help me out and keep me on the air, and keep me doing what I'm doing by sending the occasional few pennies over to me, through PayPal or whatever means you wish to. Because, pretty well all the items, all the topics I bring up here are picked up very quickly by other hosts and so on. And there's other writers who even grab the stuff and publish books on it. So you're getting all that for free. And nothing really is for free. It takes its toll in one way or another, or even in health, believe you me. Because this is more than any job, and it's more than most folk could actually stand.
Now, we're going through the biggest transformations we've seen for hundreds of years, and Kissinger and others and Brzezinski talked about this, a long time ago, because you see, nothing happens in the world on any large scale without planning. It takes a lot of planning. It takes a lot of machinery to set it up. That's bureaucrats and various organizations to set a trend in motion. Lots of negotiations, when they go through the United Nations and so on, and they bring in the desired kind of world, which they plan. Because you see, there are rulers of this world, and they don't plan to lose control of the world as they bring us through these transitions. Even for the next fifty, a hundred years, they plan to have their offspring in control of it. And therefore, they often divulge a lot of information in their own books, because they've got tremendous egos, and they've got to tell you something. They want to be admired and worshiped by a peer group, and all the lessers down there. They let a lot out of the bag, as I say, and they tell you what's often coming up. And a lot of that too is predictive programming, getting people used to the idea of inevitability, and that's how those who are not in the know see things. “Oh, it's inevitable, I guess. What can you do? I guess it had to go this way.” And that's what you're supposed to think. We'll expose some of that tonight, and show you how it's guided. Back with more, after this break.
Hi folks, we're back, and we're Cutting Through the Matrix. Talking about the big changes we're going through right now, and really, even the changes I've seen in my own life, and they were radical changes, believe you me, from being a toddler growing up and being observant too, and wondering and asking questions as to why things were drastically changing. And I lived through the sexual revolution as they called it and a whole bunch of revolutions, and I knew darn well that they were not coming from people with a few placards on the street. They were coming from big, powerful, wealthy sources and eventually I found out they were foundations, private foundations. And Professor Carroll Quigley, who was the official historian for the Council on Foreign Relations, admitted that too. He called them the parallel government. The whole idea of democracy is an illusion. And it always was an illusion. There's always been an elite. They all agree on that. Every major writer out there agrees there's always been a dominant minority, and there always will be according to Huxley, Aldous Huxley, and they don't plan to give up their power to the rabble down below, as they like to call them. But it's nice to have the people down below behave, thinking they actually have a say in things. And we're supplied with all the circuses too, and the clowns we call politicians, that come out and speak on our behalf, supposedly, and go off in strange directions, which they never, ever mention at election times to do with globalism and interdependency, and giving your money off to other countries all the time, as you go down the tubes. Things like that. And I've watched this my whole life, but I've always tried to find out why, all the reasons behind it.
Again, as I say, too, I've watched families fall apart. When I was young, people actually had children, and kind of liked it. They didn't think of living any other way at that time. That was the norm. And really, I saw from the top, from the BBC, for instance, it was totally staffed by people from Eton. They only employed people from Eton to work in the BBC at that time. And I thought, well this is the aristocracy; why are they pushing all the pop music they called it, and the go-go dancing, and the sexual liberation, the drug scene? They were pushing that mightily, and all that stuff. And it's because you see, it had been planned a long time before I was born.
We find traces of that in Karl Marx and all the Socialist writers ever since. The destruction of the family unit had to come, and they would use what they would called sexual liberation. Remember all the wars that they used in Socialism, or Communism, it's the same thing. Communism is just Socialism in a hurry. And were used, and they called them revolutions. That's why you've got sexual revolutions or liberation, as well. National liberation was part of the process, supposedly, of the Marxian theory. And lots of other liberations, but it's all to do with creating as they destroy an old society, creating a new society and a new way of living for everyone. And of course, they get right into the schools and indoctrinate the children there. And it still goes on today, it's even more hyper today. Because the children, they have even more advanced techniques, to get through into the minds of the children, and they'll all grow up being nice little Greenies. And very few will ever think of mating. Most won't want children at all. And that's the way it's supposed to go, according to the great plan, you see.
Part of this big foundation, this parallel government that's comprised of incredibly wealthy, tax-free foundations, that all came out again in the Reece Commission in the 1950s, and there was a book put out too, by one of the people involved, called Foundations: Their Power and Influence. It's well worth the read. It was all verified by Quigley again, for the Council on Foreign Relations, who talked about the parallel government and the technocrats they would use as well. Technocrats, by the way, are the Kissinger / Brzezinski types, and the people who advise presidents. People who are appointed to the top, but they're never elected to anything. And they could be there one day, they could be at the United Nations the next year, and World Bank the following year, and then back into something else. They're rotated around. They get the big movements done to change the world, working in unison, all from the same central source, obviously, since they're all on board with the same agenda, and they don't get any criticism from the public, because the public are vastly unaware of them or what they're doing. And because they belong to private organizations they are exempt from laws and prosecution, and various things. They're not under governmental control, you might say. And that's the beauty of them, they can really get things done. And I've read articles here from the big books themselves, the big players, who've stated this, that they can get the job done.
The Club of Rome, that's another big, powerful think tank, working for these foundations, and as advisor to the United Nations, one of the main advisors, talked about this too, that Democracy was too cumbersome, too many conflicting parties. They couldn't get the job done. What they meant by that, by the way, is that they couldn't get their agenda rushed through. So they simply bypass governments altogether. That's agreed upon now, because governments haven't run themselves for an awful, awful long time. They bring in sources to run them. One of the links I'll put up tonight is from one of the sources. I've talked about the Rand Corporation many times, and how it's heavily, it's called a charitable, non-profit organization. It rakes in billions every year for doing these studies for governments and running all the facts back to governments, or statistics I should say, and governments then act upon statistics run through computers, and surveys. In fact, the whole Obama, it's not even Obama's medical scheme, they were on the go before Obama, getting it all ready, for the US, is based on a Rand Report, the study. And Rand mentioned in the report they used Britain as the example that they would copy. Well, Britain is a basketcase now in Socialized medicine, and they're cutting them again, their staff, all over the place. And there are more articles in the paper today. Rand isn't the only corporation doing this, there's a bunch of them. I'm sure they all work together, mind you, because you couldn't have one going off in some other direction and advising another government to go off in some tangent which was not under control. They all work together.
One of them is also called the Copernicus Group, after Copernicus, and it's very interesting, because if you've seen the movie Wag the Dog, excellent movie to watch, because it shows you in a comical way things that really do happen, and how everything is perception to the public, and how they put displays on using Hollywood and everything to con the public into wars for instance, the necessity for wars and various other things. It's used for everything, actually, today. In that movie you'll see some of the techniques they use, and some of the lingo they use as well. Well, you'll find the same thing in the big groups like Rand Corporation, and the Copernicus Group, because it's all the same language they're using. And it's a far bigger organization than just what the movie showed in Wag the Dog with two or three people dreaming up the ideas. It's far bigger than that. And look at the change. They keep mentioning change. Their whole goal is change, change, change, because we're going through an incredible transition, as I say, where people used to think they had a stay in things, although it was a con, they're actually overriding that now, and telling you, well, no, you don't have a say in things anymore, and this is how it's going to be. And we've all been getting trained this way, for quite a few years now. Actually, really, definitely since 9/11 happened in 2001. It's all authority, authoritarianism. And that's what the Club of Rome said too. They had to bring in authoritarian types of government, planned long ago, mind you. Long ago.
H.G. Wells talked about it, in his various writings, for instance, A Modern Utopia. And he talked about this, not just a guardian class, but they'd also have, again, these Kissinger types or Attali types – I've mentioned him, many, many times; I've read from his books as well, on this show – who he called the samurai. Very aesthetic types, and trained in a special way, special privileges and so on, but they would have ultimate authority. We see the same thing coming out of the professor that I mentioned last week or so, who's got a book out, saying they'd have to bring in a warrior class to run the world basically, to save the planet, and all that kind of stuff. A lot of hype too, just to sell his book of course, and so he has to give a radical kind of outburst to get you to go and buy the thing, which I wouldn't bother.
Non-governmental organizations also were supposed to come in, and they have come in, in a big, big way, ever since the United Nations treaty was signed, because along with the treaty came incredible amounts of money. And they've got all these different departments; for every department you have in a federal government, the United Nations has an equivalent department, so they've been giving us the laws, for building permits, building plans, all plumbing, electricity, everything comes from the United Nations. They're already running you, and they have been for a long time. And they were never elected by the people, any people of the world, into getting an official position over us. They're a private corporation. It was prime ministers and presidents, all Socialists who gave credence to the United Nations and it was the big multi-trillionaires of that day, who set it up in the first place, to serve them, and bring in the right kind of society.
Tonight I'm putting up a link too, to Haiti. In Haiti, we know darn well that billions of dollars were given by taxpayers and so on, after the earthquake a year ago, and the BBC has put out an audio. I'll put that link up. You can listen to it. And you'll find out these NGOs are really corporations now, just living high on the hog. No money gets to Haiti. And the smaller NGOs that are there have got their hands out too for a few billion for themselves here and there, and they do nothing with it, except fill their own pockets and set themselves up as another corporation. It's incredible what's been happening, but it's only incredible if you really believe the projected image that they put on television of these wonderful helpers who rush off to give people aid wherever they happen to be. Charity is the most corrupt organization out there, apart from banking. Charities. About two cents get to the actual person out of every dollar, if they're lucky. Back with more after this.
Hi folks, we're back, and we're Cutting Through the Matrix. I'm also putting up a link to the Big Society from the government department itself, a link from the government, about Communitarianism. And it's just amazing how it's suddenly all there, isn't it, eh? You understand, it took years and years of planning, with big organizations, to bring even the machinery again, never mind all the paper work and the forums and forms that would have to be used to bring it out into an actual working system. And here they are doing it in Britain, suddenly with a change in government. It just came out of the blue, supposedly from Cameron, which is absolute hogwash, you know. Absolute hogwash. You don't want to go anywhere near hogwash, believe you me, but that's how they present things to the public. We're living through a script, I keep telling you. And that's what we are, living through a script.
Remember too, in that Reece Commission I mentioned earlier, the inquiry into the big foundations, why they were backing all the left wing organizations, even Communist ones, and of course it came out that their job was to bring the Soviet system and the West together, so it would blend seamlessly. It's a more perfect Marxism. That's what it's supposed to go down too. And in perfect Marxism, there's nothing wrong with having multi-trillionaires running your show. In the Soviet Union, you could run banks. There were private banks. And again, the only quandary they had was to get round their charter that said they couldn't make money off labor. Well, you can imagine the field day lawyers can have with that terminology and get round it anyway. And that's why you have these wealthy people, some of them even aristocrats, working towards this global agenda. They know where it's supposed to go. They know that they want their own offspring in power, in the next generation, and then the next generation down there. And they're making sure they bring it in.
So this Department for Communities and Local Government says:
We are helping to create a free, fair and responsible Big Society by putting power in the hands of citizens, neighborhoods and councils...
And lo and behold, they've got it all set up for you already. You really had a choice in this, didn't you? Even that in itself should make you think. It's all set up to go. And appointed NGO leaders, exactly as the Soviet system was, because Soviet meant rule by councils, right down to the local level. Coincidence, isn't it? And that's how, of course, you're supposed to think. It's all coincidence. Governments are just broke by themselves. They're so broke, but they can still dole out billions of your money off to wars, and billions of your money off to other countries outside your own, to build roads and hospitals; even in China we're building hospitals. But they're so broke. Just terribly broke. So I'll put that link up there too.
Another thing too, before I get on to the main story, if I even have time for it tonight, is to do with the United Nations again, because I mentioned before how they're into everything to do with living. Everything. Every sector of the economy. Everything. Even your governmental departments. And they've tested out already an RFID test of letters and mail in some countries, because they want to go global with this system, and they're working with the Universal Postal Union. Universal Postal Union. What is that? It's "a United Nations agency that serves as the primary forum for cooperation between postal organizations around the world." Universal Postal Union, eh? Sounds very official, like a real union. It's a United Nations agency. Private agency it will be too, working for them.
Under the terms of the agreement, GS1 and UPU will cooperate to develop their standardization activities (Alan: Everything in the world is getting standardized) and define a joint program of norms for the postal sector. One main objective of this agreement is to help postal services make efficient use of RFID-enabled Electronic Product Code (EPC) technology.
This is for regular, real, hard mail and for email business as well. So they're running all that was well. I'll put that link up, and how they're actually setting it up in the US as well, right now, after testing it out over in the Middle East and in other countries, so they claim. They're into every, they've got a finger in every pie. Every pie. Another article I'm putting up too, is a link to Kenneth Roy's Scottish Review in Scotland, because Scotland was chosen for this, basically from birth to grave monitoring of your personality, school work, everything all through your life. They're training them at school now, and doing this test on the Scottish Children. And he starts off this blog here, he says:
In our time it is broadly true that political writing is bad writing. (A: This is from Orwell, by the way, he's quoting.) Where it is not true, it will generally be found that the writer is some kind of rebel, expressing his private opinions and not a 'party line'. Orthodoxy, of whatever colour, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style. The political dialects to be found in pamphlets, leading articles, manifestos, White Papers, and the speeches of Under-Secretaries do, of course, vary from party to party, but they are all alike in that one almost never finds in them a fresh, vivid, home-made turn of speech.
(A: And they don't have to. They give you slogans now. That's what Lenin said. We shall win by slogans. You know. And that's what you get, little slogans all the time. And that was from:)
George Orwell, Politics and the English Language, 1946
(A: And this author goes on to say:)
For confirmation that Orwell's low opinion of political language still holds true 64 years later, you need look no further back than the windy rhetoric of the party political conferences in England, including the fatuous patriotism of yesterday's speech by the prime minister.
But there is a new class of political bad writing, unforeseen by Orwell, which is to be found in the reports of what are loosely known as the caring professions.
Now, we're going to go into all your governmental departments that rule your children, after this break. Back in a moment.
Hi folks, we're back, and we're still Cutting Through the Matrix. Reading an article from the Scottish Review, by Kenneth Roy, to do with the testing of children with all kinds of mass surveillance and monitoring from their birth right through schooling. And that's the country they're really testing it out in an advanced way, although they're doing the same kind of thing in some of the US states as well, maybe not quite so far advanced, so constant, but it's coming, it's to be coming worldwide eventually, of course. This is what he says:
But there is a new class of political bad writing, unforeseen by Orwell, which is to be found in the reports of what are loosely known as the caring professions. The document on which the mass observation of children in Scotland has been based is the worst imaginable example of bad writing, yet it is the bible of our new electronic surveillance society. There may be some connection – it may be that most sinister ideas can only be communicated in debased language.
(A: Isn't that true today, eh? It says, the child. This is what they say, you see.)
The child is someone who is 'on a journey', who needs to be helped to 'understand the past, and the here and now of the journey'.
(A: That's a quote from their official documents for those that look after your children, since you don't.)
At the end of a week in which we have attempted to explain what is going on in the lives of Scottish children, unknown to most of their parents, it is worth taking a closer look at this document, 'Getting it right for every child: Electronic Information Sharing Model and Process' (August, 2008), published by the 'Transformational Technologies Division, Standards Branch, Scottish Government' (A: Can you believe this? 'Transformational Technologies Division, Standards Branch, Scottish Government.' They're standardizing everything and redefining everything. They're redefining a child. They've already redefined adults. And it says:) which has been signed off by a named civil servant, presumably a fairly senior one. It is worth taking this closer look because the document offers a disturbing insight into the closed world of official thinking about children.
(A: And where did all this come from? Well, it's like the Rand Corporation again. It's the Copernicus Group, etc. This is their stuff you see, and other companies too.)
It is a world of practice models, resilience matrices, triads and triangles, a world of increasing interoperability and inter-agency involvements, of pathfinder developments and universal systems, a world in which the child becomes 'the service user' and the person reporting on the child becomes 'the practitioner'. The child is someone who is 'on a journey', who needs to be helped to 'understand the past, and the here and now of the journey'.
In this pretentious, sub-mystical, almost impenetrable world, there is very little precision. Do the authors of such prose know what they are trying to say, but are prevented from doing so by sentences as choked as the gutters of a country cottage in autumn? Or is the vagueness, the absence of what Orwell called 'outcrops of simplicity', simply a convenient way of concealing what is happening? (A: Well, it's actually the latter. Although the fellow says:) It is probably a bit of both. (A: It's really the latter. It's a technique used by all these groups now who work for government)
There is an almost evangelical certainty about the introduction:
This document is not just about Systems change but brings the 'Getting it right for every child' triad of change mechanisms, Systems, Practice and Culture (in the context of information sharing and the eCare framework) (A: eCare, yeah) in one place. The three change mechanisms are interdependent on each other and therefore this document is just as much about practice and culture as it is about systems. Systems cannot live in a business vacuum and the models and processes described here reflect these shifts in a 'Getting it right for every child' world.
That paragraph, for all its banality and ugliness, just about hangs together: with a bit of effort we can discern its meaning. But as the process of mass observation starts to be explained, the language more or less disintegrates. Orwell argued that the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. What foolish thoughts are these, shaping the lives of our children?
Under the heading 'Plan', we read that 'the circular process within the model ensures that help is specifically targeted on a child's ever changing circumstances and becomes a dynamic interaction'.
(A: Are you talking to a machine, or what are these things, eh?)
Helpfully, the document provides an illustration of 'dynamic interaction'. It is the one concrete example, so we should treasure it:
A child is about to place their [sic] hand in an open fireplace.
Concern – Safety.
Assessment Question – Will the child be at risk?
Plan – Remove hand from fire.
Action – Remove hand now.
As the late Eric Morecambe used to say: there's no answer to that.
Within weeks of the coalition government coming to power, Contact Point was scrapped on two grounds – its intrusion into private lives and its escalating cost.
A Scottish Review reader has emailed to ask whether 'this wretched project' is being 'rolled out' in England and Wales or whether it is entirely a Scottish initiative 'to make the population utterly dependent on the public services and then get public service employees to inform on the population'. The 'wretched project' in England and Wales was called Contact Point: its purposes and methods were broadly similar to GIRFEC in Scotland. Within weeks of the coalition government coming to power, Contact Point was scrapped on two grounds – its intrusion into private lives and its escalating cost.
(A: So they scrapped it in Wales and England, but they kept it in Scotland as the pioneer basically. And they'll bring it back in England too, eventually).
It remains to be seen whether the administration at Holyrood will follow this admirable precedent or whether the mass observation of children being piloted by five Scottish local authorities will be allowed to continue at a cost to the public purse, and the greater cause of civil liberties, which is yet to be counted.
And remember too, if you actually have parents for these children anymore, you'll find that these authorities want to know everything about you, on an ongoing basis as well. See, that's the planned society. That's the planned society. So, we'll see it spread from Scotland eventually, because they never give up, these characters. They know exactly where they want to go, and they will go, one way or another. They never, ever, ever give up. They don't sit and make plans for years and have committees working on them and just scrap it, it just doesn't happen. They've got an agenda to fulfill you see.
Now, this was also touched on by Aldous Huxley, and Sir Charles Galton, and Charles Galton Darwin, and others too, all the other eugenicists, who talked about depopulation, how they would change sexuality. And then even the brother again of Aldous Huxley, Julian Huxley, who worked at UNESCO, the first CEO of UNESCO in fact, who wanted a standardized education, where the children become what I just read in that last article. He said they'd have to dethrone the human being from his special privilege on the pedestal and train him to believe that he's just basically an animal, so that they could get their agenda through, and life would have to be stepped down a few rungs on the ladder, and it has been. We watch wars all the time. And we watch slaughtering on television all the time, and life really is becoming cheap and cheap and cheap. And this part of this article here, this was predicted by Aldous Huxley and Jacques Attali, and all the rest of them, all the big boys that are involved in the ongoing program. It's from the Telegraph. It says:
Abortion provider, BPAS, is demanding that women be allowed to take the second of two drugs for an early medical abortion in the comfort of their own homes rather than in clinics.
(A: I guess that's so they can watch the soaps at the same time).
The organization, previously known as the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, (A: It's a private organization. Charitable, you know) said the Abortion Act does not take into account modern advances that mean terminations before nine weeks can be induced with drugs without having to resort to surgery.
Currently women have to attend the abortion clinic to be provided with the first drug, which stops the pregnancy progressing, and then she has to return 24 for 48-hours later for the second, which causes the miscarriage. (A: Oh, it's a miscarriage now, eh. I love how terminology can change the perception of everything).
Doctors have said it is unnecessary for women to return to the clinic for the second drug and experience in other countries shows it is safe and acceptable to give them the medicine to take at home. (A: Other countries? Well, which ones, you know?)
Women having early medical abortions have warned they are worried about miscarrying on the journey home after being forced to attend the clinic for the second drug. They are legally able to leave the clinic once they have taken the second drug and can miscarry between one and six hours later.
BPAS has launched the legal action to have the interpretation of law changed so that instead of saying the all medication must be prescribed and administered in the clinic, it says it must be just 'prescribed and issued'.
It had hoped the change could be negotiated with the Department of Health but has resorted to legal action after little progress was made.
(A: And then they have the spokesman for the BPAS:) said opposition within the Department of Health had never been about the safety of giving women tablets to take home, or whether it was in their best interests.
(A: It's amazing how everyone always runs to government for help and cash and all the rest of it, for issues which they brought on by themselves. But they don't want responsibility anymore. At the same time they complain about too much government. You see, the people are already socialized. They're now under Socialist systems, and they expect government to come out and do it all for them. Even if whatever issue it happens to be was brought on by themselves. It doesn't matter.
I can remember in Canada when they kept harping on about should the government pay for all daycare for all Canadian women. And they brought it back every year, preparing the minds of the public to accept it. That's what it was all for. And eventually they got it. And, I can remember too, that the daycare workers went on strike for a week or two, and women were in the streets with placards, demanding the government do something and get them back. The women had actually come to accept that it was the government's responsibility to take care of their children. It didn't take long. That's how Socialism works. Quite something. Back to this article. It says:)
Some people believe women should "somehow be taught a lesson" and therefore an abortion should be difficult to obtain.
She added that elected MPs do not have the expertise to make clinical decisions,
And so on, and so on, and so on. And so they want to take it home, with their partner if they have one or their family or whatever, and I guess they'll turn it into some kind of party. I don't know. It's just beyond me. But that's the world that we're now living in. And as I say, that was all talked about by authors in the past, because you're living through a script as I say, and people adapt into the script, through a hundred different indoctrinations, even through fiction and all the rest of it. It's quite fantastic.
You'll find as I say, I've read this book quite a few times on the air for the last year or so, since it came out. And Jacques Attali, who's a big player at the United Nations. He's been in charge of the European Development Bank. He's been the special advisor to prime ministers. And he's a really big player, multi-billionaire of course, as usual. And he says, on A Brief History of the Future. He says on pg. 208.
From the very beginning the human species has sought to distance itself from its own method of reproduction. (A: I wonder where he gets that from. From the very beginning, eh?) To differentiate itself from the animal kingdom, it strove first to deny the reproductive function of sexuality. Then it gave it to another meaning. In the ritual order, most cosmologies insist that not being born of a sexual relation is peculiar to the gods. The monotheistic religions in particular consider sexuality a constraint imposed on men by the forces of evil. (A: No, that was the Socialist funding of the feminist movement, because it didn't exist before they funded it. And they put out the leaders.) The mercantile order (A: He's talking about the system that's coming in now, where corporations really will rule the world and rule over governments. But they're also owned by the same guys who own the foundations.) The mercantile order on the contrary chooses to admit it, while reorganizing in it a function different from reproduction, which is pleasure. Reproduction thus remains in the mercantile order as in previous orders, an animal constraint that psychiatry, starting at the close of the 19th century, aims to make tolerable. In the 20th century the mercantile order sought to evacuate the reproductive role of sexuality by making motherhood artificial by using increasingly sophisticated methods, pills, premature labor, in vitro fertilization, surrogate mothers. In super empire (A: Because that's the next phase we're going into, super empire.) the mercantile order will even go so far as to dissociate reproduction and sexuality. Sexuality will be the kingdom of pleasure. Reproduction that of machines.
(A: In other words science will eventually do it in vitro, etc, for the few that want children, or the few that are permitted to have them. You need special qualifications to have children. He goes on to say:)
Hyper-surveillance, (A: What we were talking about with the children in school in Scotland), self-surveillance, (A: That's indoctrination of you to police yourself. The United Nations calls it policing yourself), then self-repair will provide what is needed for it. After repairing diseased organs they will want to reproduce them and then create replacement bodies. First they will produce lined stages of stem cells without destroying the embryo, which will make genetic therapy ethically acceptable, and then reproductive cloning. Finally, they will manufacture the human being like a made to measure artifact, in an artificial uterus, which will allow the brain to further develop with characteristics chosen in advance. The human being will thus have become a commercial object.
(A: Really we already are a commercial object. We're economic objects. So you'll be a commercial object, which you can buy and sell. And don't forget that he's writing this about a year or so ago, when you find that Aldous Huxley wrote Brave New World in 1933 with all this in it too. They never change their agenda, you see. And the think tanks carry on. Remember, foundations can set out with projects and goals. And regardless of politicians coming and going and governments coming and going, they can hire, retire guys, and hire, retire for generations until they get what they want. And that was also admitted by Professor Carroll Quigley. That's how they do it. They never change their agenda, and they get what they want. Generally on time, as well. And he says:)
Thanks to astounding progress we can expect from the nano-scientists, everyone will even hope to transfer his awareness of himself to another body, to acquire his own double, copies of beloved people, dream men and women, hybrids built with peculiar traits pre-selected to reach precise objectives. Some will even seek to overtake the human species, with a life form endowed with a different and superior intelligence.
It's quite amazing, because in the book, as I say, he goes on into many more things to do with sexuality, and how love will be totally an alien concept eventually and basically just multi-partners and polygamy etc, will be a form, he said, just the same kind of form of masturbation. It would be nothing special at all. And it's almost that way today. And you'll find with these characters, when they write, remember, even if they're talking about the near future, it's already here. And they know that too. This is their little joke that they have, we're not quite there yet. Really, a lot of the stuff in his books is already here. And he talks about the new class, it's already here too, that has no country. They'll move their factories and move themselves to any country where they can benefit to the maximum, and then move again, in a year's time if need be, without a thought. And he calls them hyper-nomads. He says on page 195, and again, this is A Brief History of the Future, by Attali. Attali, by the way, was named about six months ago, in with a group of other Frenchmen, for being involved in arms smuggling, like arms running, basically, because they have wars to fight yet and get started. A lot of things to accomplish before they're finished, these guys. He'll get off with it though, nothing will happen. He's too high on the hog. Back with more after this break.
Hi folks, I'm back, and we're Cutting Through the Matrix. And I'm just finishing off with Jacques Attali here. He talks about the Nouveau Rich, too, who are making a killing right now, as they climb on to the markets. The make money off too of markets going down, actually bet on them and make a fortune, etc, and the ones who are involved in high technology. He says they're the new minor aristocracies.
They will thus invent the best and worst of a volatile carefree egotistical and insecure planetary society. Arbiters of elegance, masters of wealth and the media. (A: It's already happened, eh, a long time ago). They will acknowledge no allegiance whether national or political or cultural. They will increasingly dress like nomads, their garb recalling their adventures, their prosthesis, and their networks. They will be patrons of multi-form artists who will mingle forms of virtual art, at which emotions are aroused, measured, captured, and modified by the self-monitors. They will live in private cities behind walls, guarded by mercenaries. (A: Well, they already do). They will cause the price of artworks and real estate to soar. (A: That's already happened). The couple will no longer be their principle base for life and sexuality. They will prefer to choose in full transparency polygamous or polyandrous loves. Men and women, all collectors, more interested in the hunt than the prey, accumulating and exhibiting their trophies, constantly on the move in search of distraction. Many of them will be the offspring of mobile families, without a geographic or cultural base. They will be loyal only to themselves, and will interest themselves more in their conquests, their wine cellars, their self monitors, their art collections, and the planning of their erotic lives than in the future of their progeny, to whom they will no longer bequeath either money or power.
He's talking about, as I say, the Nouveau Rich. But the older rich, you see, the ones who are really the big boys, will still go on with their old agenda, because they run it all, and these kind of ones that make it today, they come and go, just like they've always done in every age before, like the end of Rome or the end of Greece, where they couldn't even breed with somebody of the opposite sex to have children in the nobility class too. As I say, there is a group in the world who's way above all of that. So everything is really planned and long before you're born. Long before your parents were even born, with a time table, like a big business plan, which you'll see organizations, corporations use them. Corporations have their investments, up to maybe fifty years, sixty years, or even further ahead, where they want to be. And they work on it all the time. And that's how the world is worked with the big foundations. They have their agendas. Some of these foundations started in the mid-1800s. And it's only now that they're coming to top power with everything that they planned already being instituted and some still to come. That's how long it can take to change society and remake it into the kind of society you want.
As I say, they've reinvented the child, they've reinvented the male, they've reinvented the female, and the family is almost an obsolete word now. I can remember when they called it the nuclear family. I said, is that N-E-W Clear family, or do they really mean nuclear, because there were many little meanings to the terms they give us. And we certainly are. If you have a family at all, you are the New Clear family, because they know everything. They can see right through you. They know everything that you're doing. They like their little jokes on you.
Well, from Hamish and myself, in Ontario, Canada, where it's way below zero right now, degrees. From Hamish and myself, it's Good Night and may your God or your Gods go with you.
show covered in following links:
One of the Groups Advising Governments for "Change"
Haiti--Disaster, NGOs and Billions of Dollars--BBC
The Big Society Website
UN Tests and Pushes Universal Postal RFID
More on UN and Postal RFID
Scotland and Re-engineering Children for The Planned Society
Right to Home Abortions
Alan's Materials Available for Purchase and Ordering Information:
Religions and History MP3 CDs:
Blurbs and 'Cutting Through the Matrix' Shows on MP3 CDs (Up to 50 Hours per Disc)
"Reality Check Part 1" & "Reality Check Part 2 - Wisdom, Esoterica and ...TIME"