March 8, 2015
"Cutting Through the Matrix" with Alan Watt
(Blurb, i.e. Educational Talk)
"Reality has Flipped,
More "Tales from the Script""
© Alan Watt March 8, 2015
Title & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - March 8, 2015 (Exempting Music and Literary Quotes)
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 March 8, 2015. I hope you're all hanging onto your sanity as we go through the massive changes at present, and all those you sense that coming down the pike, pretty shortly in fact, as the big planned changes are put into effect. Of course, changes on a grand scale take lots of years, many years to plan and organize and have agreements upon, and all the legal stuff put into all the different documentations for bills and so on and treaties that are signed all the time. Therefore, whatever happens this year, for instance, was planned long, long ago. It's very much like the start of the Kyoto protocols, etc. to do with climate change and global warming, blah blah blah, to get the carbon taxes all through down the pike, it took many years to get to that stage. Of course this year they'll pretty well sign the first major treaty to do with the big, big cash funding of it globally, and implement at home all the different taxes you'll have to pay for energy, carbon, etc. etc. etc. Just for surviving and living in fact, you're going to pay for it all. As I've mentioned so many times, your excess spending money, the stuff that you used to spend on all the junk that they put in the Walmarts and so on, will be spent on things that are necessities, and taxes. That's where it's all supposed to go. That also decreases your consumption, which is quite happy for those who want to have the planet to themselves, hundreds of years down the road when there's lots of resources and you're not around anymore, nor are your offspring for that matter.
The world is planned – they never change their plans – on a grand scale, a fantastic scale, all the time in fact. People think too that war is spontaneous and they happen. It isn't until you really look into all the facts and details, many of which are at least maybe 50 to 80 years later, you find out it took sometimes 50, 60 years to work up into the start of a particular war, to get everyone prepared for it, to get the groundwork laid and all the different necessities for conducting such a long, prolonged war, what it would cost, etc, and how much even inflation would be at that period down the road when you started it all and what the profit returns would be, etc. etc. Massive planning goes into all of this. Nothing in the world is spontaneous, really, nothing. The occasional accidents are, personal and otherwise, but that's about it. Everything else is planned, like a big business plan, and that's how the world is really run.
The organized planned society has to have plans all the time. I've mentioned so many times over the years, if you just go into the guys who set up the League of Nations, the private organization that set up the League of Nations, then United Nations, and then funded all the NGOs through their foundations, because these are big business leaders that were behind it all and private groups. They had all the agenda set out then and to bring in a eugenically controlled scientific society, a scientifically controlled society where gradually and gradually they'd appear to give you more rights and freedoms in certain areas, but take other real rights away from you in the process. That's where we are today. It's worked awfully well.
Those living through those generations of change never really understand that. They've never thought about it deeply because they've never been told that think about it deeply. They simply adapt and adapt to changes. So they take the Darwinian idea of adaptation and they go with it, they run with it basically. It works awfully well and everyone's adapting all the time to the changes, even to the things which are designed to do them in eventually down the road.
Now, the greatest proof that the world is always planned ahead, of events that are meant to be passed into law and so on, is the fact that it doesn't matter how much you know about the scams, of the same groups that push for this and pressurize governments in the past for their particular agenda, it doesn't matter what you know about them and what they've done before, the agenda still goes through. So all that matters really is the agenda, that's all you have to know. These agendas you will not stop because most of the public go along with the scientific advice on it all. Even if it goes against the facts that scientists shove out in your face, it doesn't go with it I should say, with what you have witnessed yourself, then you'll adapt to it and accept their opinions as your own.
And then, I've never been a fan of the big crowd, because the big crowd can argue initially on things, eventually they become the solidified crowd with the solidified thought and they've all accepted what they've been told, and if you don't join them, you see, they can see you, they can spot you, and they call you an oddball or a Luddite or something for holding on to other convictions that are now obsolete. And how can convictions be obsolete? How can something that can be right one day be wrong the next? Well, that happens all the time. Even with what you say and the terms that you use to say things, it's by my man himself, you see, those who planned society, including your vocabulary as well, and the legal system, etc. etc. So we're constantly being manipulated with our thoughts and the way we say things, that's neuroscience, psycholinguistics, etc, and we adapt into it. If you don't adapt into, the crowd itself who have adopted will turn on you. Whether it comes down to opinions or things presented as facts, or anything else, it doesn't matter. And they eventually go along with all the big agendas because they don't have enough confidence individually, amongst the crowd, in themselves. They feel confident when they are in a massive group all baaing together like sheep, you see. That's the truth of society. Always has been though.
The biggest problem that the elite groups have had in the past has been individualism. I've always said that because it's true. They actually published articles about that, on the high levels. Even United Nations said the problem really was the individual, not the mass. It's easier to control the masses because they want to all belong, and dress and look the same and say the same things. They have no individuality, you see. Therefore, it was easy to control the masses in what they call a democracy because they will follow the experts, the authorized experts that are put out for them to follow. Bertrand Russell who was a big promoter of all this whole system, and we're living in today, including the culture creation part of it and all the changes that went from his era. All through the 30s and 40s and 50s and 60s up to the present, it was all designed by elite groups by the way. I've gone through that and you'll find the articles I've read before on the air in the archive section at cuttingthroughthematrix.com. So you can go on a big journey of all this history and the only satisfaction you have is knowing it yourself.
Because as I say, the facts don't counts when missions have been accomplished, and other ones which are under way right now will be accomplished. Because there's no input from the public, they don't want that to start with. The public too, have really given over their responsibility for their own actions, individually, to the mass, which is then put forth through the government that they think they have elected. So things work awfully, awfully well for those who plan the future, you know, the men of vision as they call themselves, amongst other terms as well.
But, we're taught to deny our own senses and experiences. For instance, I've kept my own charts of the weather this winter, as I did last year too. I've got the different stations that put out the weather reports, even from the government, and every night consistently they've underreported my area and the temperatures it went down to at night, and during the day too for that matter, but at night, by iat least 15 to 25°. Every night. And yet their newscasters will tell them on their TV, everybody watches TV, I don't, and everybody looks it up on the Internet too, and they'll tell you from about three different stations, this is what it's going to be tonight. And you know something, the next morning they never revise what it actually was. They keep it at what they predicted it was going to be from the previous evening or afternoon and that's what goes down in the books as fact, you see. So in April they'll come out and tell us, this was the warmest winter we've had for centuries, even though we thought it was colder. They can play with your head so easily today, and folk believe what they're told. But, that will come. You wait and see. You wait and see, yeah.
As I say, I keep my own temperature gauges here, my thermometers, non-electronic by the way. I have different ones outside and I measure them every night. For instance, on Friday night they said it was going to be about a minus of maybe 4°, maybe 6° maximum, Fahrenheit where I am. And all through the night and the next morning, into 8 o'clock in the morning, it was 24° below, Fahrenheit. How can you make such miscalculations? And why don't you adjust it in the morning for the official records? Well you see, you've all to be taught that the planet is warming up because of climate change. Because big, big things are planned this year. They've been years in the planning but now they must get it all signed into action, so that you pay, pay, pay, pay and change your entire way of living, folks. From everything you purchase to the energy taxes that will be on every little bar of chocolate, and what it cost to make that thing and so on, right down to your heating, cooking, everything is going to be taxed. Everything that is transported is going to be taxed into the ground basically, and I'll touch on that tonight.
But as I say, most folk will never really go along with their own experiences. Even when they're freezing to death they'll say, well they told us it was quite mild last night, it must have just been me, I had to put on about three different sweaters, you know, it must have been me. And that's how we do it, you see. That's how we do it. It's so simple, isn't it? Now, when you accept their word, on anything today, how many things are they lying to you about? Think about that. All for a particular agenda, and there's many agendas on the go at the same time for the planned society, the scientifically controlled society, by experts and social workers and psychologists and psychiatrists and neuroscientists and behaviorists, from birth to death, all coming together, all these hundreds and maybe even thousands of things worldwide coming together right now. And you're kept alive with trivia. And you're kept alive with lots of entertainment, and what the stars are doing, and who is having an affair with who and all that rubbish. Because you're being kept off of the track, the track that might take you somewhere. You're off on the way sides and that's where they want you to be, a nonparticipant, and even conscious awareness on a daily basis of how things really are where it's going and why it's all planned that way and who's behind it all.
So really, the facts don't count when you're talking to the masses as such. I mentioned the book years ago, I think it was called Straight and Crooked Thinking which went through the logic used by people themselves. It was a very old book, it was written about maybe the late 1800s, early 1900s. The author went into how if you had a tramp in Hyde Park in England, London, on a soapbox in the park spouting off his particular philosophy, most folk would ridicule him and laugh at him and all the rest of them. But if you've got the same guy and dressed him up and gave him a shave and all the rest of it, and then put out lots of propaganda to make him into a new Einstein, before you ever saw him, that's how they launched Einstein, the same way, I don't know if he was a tramp or not… But anyway, the fact is you can dress him up, dress him in good close, make him a genius before anyone has ever seen him, and then put him on some big live show, people will listen to every word he says, when he is spouting the same philosophy as he would be as a tramp in the park on a soapbox.
There's nothing they don't know about the general population, how our minds work. So when they bring out professionals, supposedly, who all have political agendas, and they know where their income is coming from too and where their careers are going if they play ball, especially today, then there's always a different agenda behind whatever they're telling you. Always, folks, that's just the way it is. But as I say, the masses will never really want to know because they have a choice then. If they know and understand things and they don't like it, it makes them uncomfortable and they will shy away from anything which is uncomfortable to them. They seek what they are told today is positive... seek the positive and don't look at the negative. In other words, it's the same old story as they have used for years but now it's under positive and negative. It's optimism. Be optimistic about things… you know, and leave things of great decisions and weighty matters to your betters, the ones who live above you, and don't use toilets like you do, etc. etc, they're way beyond that, they're so wonderful and intelligent, etc., from better bloodlines and all that stuff. That's how you are trained to see these people, and that's what you believe as well.
But they are just people with agendas. They know where their bread is buttered, all these different scientists. Scientists come out, remember, hoping, when they come out from the University and got other degrees and so on, they hope to get grants to study something, like the mating habits of the fiery ant or something. I mean, who cares what it is. They're hoping to get grants and have a long, long career living off, generally its taxpayer-funded grants and some private corporations if there's some military use to it. So when you have a climate thing on the go that's to change all of society, then all the approved scientists that they have, who are authorized to be on board, in other words, they are all the positive ones who go along with the agenda.
What's amazing too, is that from the earliest dawn of history, from the ancient times, they've talked about the effect of the sun and the heat and warmth and how it gives us life and all the rest of it and crops grow. The sun hasn't even been factored into climate change, at all. It's absent from all their climate change models on their wonderful little computers. Because there's a different agenda here. The agenda is to blame all of YOU and to get you to all believe that you are the fault of it all and what's happening. Nothing to do with weather manipulation or anything else, it's all your fault.
It's a sad thing to say about professional people, but it's all around you. There's not a doctor around, I'm sure, who hasn't seen the youngsters get their triple MMR's and so on, and X amount of them come back within a week, the child has suddenly regressed and getting more infantile rather than starting to grow up a little. But they can always placate themselves and keep themselves happy, exonerate themselves I should say, by saying, well you know, the medical book, the medical history, the experts at the top, above them, would tell us if there's new information, so therefore it couldn't have been that that caused it. Humans are wonderful at saving their own ego, and especially their paycheck and status, and that goes for any profession, including, including the whole climate scam, folks. Because so much is riding on the scientific control of the world, and the scientists all depend on their big benefactors, the money bags at the top, who really are their employer and their boss. It's a sad thing, people will compromise anything, and they very often do, bend incredible truths to suit their own personal egos and paychecks.
I have always noticed throughout my life that once big agendas are at stake then, if they can accomplish their mission, like 9/11 or whatever, even though the Project for a New American Century group published all the countries they wanted to take down back in the 90s, they published it in the 90s, and it went all forward the same way it was supposed to go after that, after 9/11. It doesn't matter, you see, as long as the mission gets accomplished, once it starts, you see, that's it. You won't stop it or change it by knowing all the facts. And all the facts you can find afterwards, won't change anything, it's already happened, it doesn't matter, the goal has been achieved, the mission is accomplished. And lies are always used to achieve great goals, by those who rule over the masses. It's always the same story down through history.
When you think of all the terms you hear, at least weekly, often daily, on the news, until you are accustomed with terms that you don't really understand. But when they bring agendas out they bring forth that part of the plan with that term in it, it seems quite natural because you've heard it said so many times. So repetition, much-speaking makes it really happen, makes it more real and more factual and true, to you, even though you have never looked into it at all. Back in the 60s and the 70s it was going to be the Ice Age, the coming Ice Age. Of course everyone gets in on the act, the professors got in on the act then too, oh there's too many folk, and my God, and blah blah blah, and most of them will perish because there's too many folk to start with, and so on. When the Ice Age didn't materialize, and it actually warmed up for a few years, then they went back to the drawing board, gave it to the Club of Rome to think up a good idea, and they said that man would be the problem, it would be global warming and so on, that would be the problem. In both cases Hollywood gets in on the act too, to terrify you with the end of the world scenarios, you're going to fry to death or you're going to freeze to death, etc. Make Room, Make Room, which was the book which they made into the movie version entitled Soylent Green. It really was make room… the whole point of it was that there's too many people, too many of YOU, who are not so important, you see.
This is what of course the climate treaty, to be signed this year, this big one, one of the grand finales you might say, on the whole path to all the other ones that will add to it down the road. But this is the big one to get all the money together and to really start changing how we live individually and collectively as well, and what we'll get taught in the schools and what you're going to get brainwashed with as well. This article here talks about the Paris climate talks....
Paris Climate Talks:
Canada's Contribution To UN Conference Dependent On Provinces
huffingtonpost.ca / Bruce Cheadle / 03/03/2015
(Alan: In Canada they have states which are called provinces. It's beautiful too, where even the United Nations years ago talked about working on your local areas, etc., for all these changes they wanted to come into effect down the road, and they started all the different NGOs which are funded by the big foundations, plus your taxpayers money, all private organizations by the way that help plan and push the future that you're going to live through and all the changes they want to bring in. So here you are, Canada's contribution to the United Nations conference depend on the provinces. This article here goes on to talk about...)
OTTAWA - Canada's contribution to a major United Nations climate change conference later this year will be heavily dependent on actions by provincial and territorial governments.
Provincial governments confirm Environment Canada has been collecting greenhouse-gas reduction measures (A: …so greenhouse-gas reduction measures, right.... What they call greenhouse gases today are natural things that save you from getting fried by radiation. Anyway…) from across the country as the federal government works toward an end-of-March deadline to ante up for the summit in Paris. (A: …later this year.)
"Canada is actively preparing its intended nationally determined contribution," a spokesman for Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq said in a recent email.
"As this is a national contribution, the provinces and territories hold many levers for taking action on emissions, so the minister is seeking feedback from her counterparts on how initiatives in their jurisdictions will factor into Canada's overall commitment."
(A: What's the point in voting for national government, or even your local government, when they're all signed on already into a private corporation called the United Nations, and all its different departments, which are set up by the biggest corporations on the planet? You see, what's the point in it? You've got no input into it at all. All the NGOs come forward, they authorize what they call environmental groups, you know, people who care about the environment, like the rest of you don't care about the environment? Everything is a joke, but it doesn't matter, the jokes are all part of the big agenda.)
Aglukkaq would not agree to an interview on the subject over the last month and her office provided no additional details. (A: So that's how much you get in a democracy, no information at all.) Nor is it yet certain the federal government will meet the March 31 deadline set by the Paris conference organizers.
But with the Conservatives under pressure for refusing to regulate the oil and gas sector — the country's fastest-growing source of greenhouse gas emissions — federal-provincial co-operation may be Ottawa's only way to save face on the world stage. (A: So they're trying to say, well it's just the provinces and the feds, you see, it's nothing to do with you, all the effects of this, it's got nothing to do with you, when they start passing all these laws and taxes and so on.)
Countries participating in COP21, as December's UN climate conference is known, have been asked to relay their "intended nationally determined contributions" this month. (A: Did you hear anything about that? Has there been any surveys put out to the general population? You don't matter, the proles don't count, you see, in reality.) These will serve as a starting point for negotiations that are supposed to conclude with a successor to the 2009 Copenhagen Accord.
Under the Copenhagen agreement, the Harper government committed Canada to cut greenhouse gas emissions 17 per cent below 2005 levels by the year 2020 — a national target even Environment Canada has concluded won't be met. (A: Well, they could do that if they ask half of us to just commit suicide and don't breathe anymore.)
However, some of Canada's biggest provinces are meeting or exceeding their own goals for GHG (A: …global greenhouse gases.) reductions and are increasingly taking matters into their own hands.
Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard was in France this week where French President Francois Hollande publicly stated he would "ensure that Quebec is not only present, but also that it has the opportunity to make its voice heard," at the climate conference.
There's been "a real shift in where the energy is," ever since B.C., Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec were among a group of subnational governments who met on the sidelines of a climate conference in Lima, Peru, last December, said Glen Murray, Ontario's minister of environment and climate change.
The premiers will meet next month in Quebec City at the invitation of Couillard to discuss climate change and a national energy strategy.
A wider group of sub-nationals, including California and several New England states, will meet in July in Toronto, where they hope participants from across the Americas can agree on an 80-per-cent GHG reduction target from 1990 levels by the year 2050.
"At the national level what we are hoping — and I think minister Aglukkaq has opened up the door to this now — is that those provincial priorities and plans become reflected in Canada's contribution," for Paris, Murray said in an interview.
David Heurtel, Quebec's minister for sustainable development, environment and climate change, said international climate deals can't be "coming from the top down."
"What we are hoping, and what we've demanded, is that the provincial processes already in place ... that these not only be taken into consideration by the federal government but also that we work collectively," in setting Canada's contribution for the next global climate treaty, Heurtel said in an interview Tuesday. (A: It just goes on…)
"My belief very strongly is that it will be subnational governments and corporations and the NGO community (A: …that’s all these private groups, all funded by the big foundations…) that will deliver this."
Then you go into this article here. This is the United Nations news center.
2015 pivotal for finalizing universal climate change agreement,
Ban tells Member States
23 February 2015 – This year is pivotal for global action on climate change, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said today in New York, emphasising that all the major advances of 2014 have set the stage for success in 2015.
(A: I hate reading these things, they're just basically handouts for the press, that's what they are. It doesn't go into all the different agreements they have already pre-negotiated with all your presidents and prime ministers, to do with you and your taxes. And here's how they phrase it…)
“Our challenge now is clear: to finalize a meaningful, universal agreement on climate change,” (A: …Gods of the Air indeed, hey.) Mr. Ban told Member States at a briefing on relevant progress as momentum builds towards a meeting to be held in Paris this December, when leaders are expected to reach a landmark treaty.
“Addressing climate change is essential for realizing sustainable development. If we fail to adequately address climate change, we will be unable to build a world that supports a life of dignity for all,” (A: …all who?) the Secretary-General warned.
Joining Mr. Ban at the briefing was President of the UN General Assembly, Sam Kutesa, as well as the Permanent Representatives of Peru and France, who organized the gathering.
Today's briefing follows the 20th Conference of the Parties (COP) (A: COP they call it, Conference of the Parties…) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (A: …that’s the 20th conference over the years.) (UNFCC), held in Lima, last December where Member States reached the “Lima Call for Climate Action”, paving the way for a new, ambitious and universally-binding climate agreement to be adopted in Paris (COP21) this December.
(A: And when you go into it they talk about, they briefly touch on the cost, you see, the rest of it is just rubbish and we've heard it all before, and you get a lot more here again as they push all their stuff through, and down your throats. But they go on about the finance part of it, who's going to finance it. YOU are going to finance it all. It was always planned, this, 20 odd years ago, even before that, you are going to finance it all. Because the whole point is to change your whole way of living, and they needed an excuse to do it so this is the one that they picked. And that's what the Club of Rome went into, that was their job, to pick reasons for bringing this whole system in, of control, what would they believe, you know, what can we use? This is what they hit on. Anyway it says here…)
To that end, Mr. Ban urged all pledging countries to deliver their contributions as soon as possible. “Climate finance is critical, not only for catalyzing action, but for building the political trust needed to reach a universal agreement in Paris,” he said, emphasizing that developed countries need to set out a clear trajectory for achieving the goal of mobilizing $100 billion per year by 2020. And resilience must be strengthened, especially in the small island states and least developed countries.
…no time to waste and so on, all the usual stuff they tell you, you know, time is of the urgency. This is the stuff that's going to… They're trying to keep it out of your heads altogether, the cost factor of all this stuff. In fact, most of you don't even know what it's about because you've never followed any of it, you see, and what's really behind it all. But I've done all that, again if you go into the archive section of cuttingthroughthematrix.com, I've given lots of talks over the years on the facts that have been published on all of this, these particular topics and so on, where they wanted to take this, why, etc.
But this is the rubbish they give the public. And if you notice, there's no public input into this at all. There's no, none of you give an opinion on it, none of you get any say into all of this, you're just out of the picture altogether. So what's the point in voting local politicians into anything? when they are all on board already under different agreements and treaties to go along with all this stuff. And it's like this with a lot of the big agendas, the big global agenda, it's all worked the same way, you see.
Now what the West, West of Britain that is, has to learn, rather quickly, is that just like Britain that now has thousands of folk, and I've read the stories over the years, thousands dying off in their own homes, not homeless but in their own homes, because they don't have enough heating credits for the winter and they freeze to death. That's going to come across the world now as they cut out coal fires and everything else and so on. Eventually it will come down to so many credits under this guise of socialism for all and managing us all, so many credits to heat yourselves. Whatever method you use it's going to be restricted to a certain amount, except for depending on your status within the community. Are you essential to the community or are you not essential? That already happens in hospitals, how they label you for resuscitation, etc. So anyway, that's how it's all going to come down the pike with all of this, the different taxes, energy, carbon and so on, that you're going to have to pay, very shortly actually, and it will affect your whole way of living, and in every area. As I say, everything that transported the cost will fly up and you pay at the bottom. You pay for everything, the cost for all manufacture, all the way to delivery. You pay for it all of course.
And another technique they've used for a long, long time is creating National Forests, National Parks, etc. When you look at the UN treaties on these parks, they called them biospheres at one time, that was one of the things that they tried to popularize from the United Nations. But it's just the same old thing of putting vast areas of really great resources, rich resources, aside and if possible, if there's folk on it they want to get them off the land by different means and methods, and label it really as a preserve paradise basically, except when you go into the different treaties they sign at the United Nations for these, they have special designations for particular big massive international corporations to come in and drill and take out the resources, if need be, you see. It's just that you can't walk through it and so on. But this article is just one of many over the years and it says…
Colorado canyon latest Obama “monument” land grab
cfact.org / February 24, 2015 / Bonner Cohen
Continuing its pattern of bypassing Congress and acting unilaterally through administrative fiat, the Obama White House in February designated three new areas as “National Monuments.”
While two of the designations — one in Illinois, the other in Hawaii — involve relatively small parcels of land, the designation of 21,000 acres of Brown’s Canyon in Colorado represents a significant federal lockup of land.
The move was welcomed by (A: ..again, that religious group called…) environmentalists and (A: …that other religious group called…) Democrats. Sen. Michael Bennett (D-CO) told the Washington Times (Feb. 19) that the canyon has “a rugged and unique beauty that attracts outdoor enthusiasts from around the world.” Bennett added that “Coloradans have been very clear they wanted this protection (A: So they wanted it, the people, they wanted it, you see. Sure.), along with assurances that existing uses will be protected.”
But Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) doesn’t trust the Administration’s “assurances,” and he scolded the President for making the designation without the consent of Congress. (A: I have to laugh listening to a lot of shows when Americans talk about their rights and so on, and the checks and balances and all of that. And you watch the way it's been run, like dictatorships, for such a long time. And now they keep talking about getting America back. I always think, back to what? to when? You know. Anyway this Congressman Ken Buck says...) “He is not king. No more acting like King Barrack,” Buck told the Times. “This is not how we do things in the U.S. Actions like this lead the American people to view Mr. Obama’s presidency as an imperial presidency.” (A: Well, it doesn't really matter if nothing is done about it.)
Contrary to Buck’s assertion, this is exactly how thing are done in the U.S. Beginning with the designation of Utah’s Grand Staircase Escalante as a national monument in 1996, the Clinton and Obama Administrations have used the Antiquities Act of 1906 to create national monuments without the formal approval of state officials or members of the congressional delegation from state where designations were made. And in its eight years in office, the Bush Administration made no effort to overturn monument designation on federal land in Utah.
The Colorado Cattlemen’s Association (CAA) doesn’t put much stock in the Administration’s assurances, either. Together with the Public Lands Council (PLC), the cattleman CAA, according to fowlertribune.com (Feb. 22), wants the following points clarified in the monument designation:
(A: Then they go through it all, what they want done, the people who are going to be affected by all this.)
•Motorized access must continue to be allowed for permit administration, range improvement, and water maintenance. (A: Well, that's very important if you got livestock.)
•Explicit language must be written into the designation that allows cattle and sheep producers to trail their livestock to and from their federal grazing allotments through portions of the designated area.
And that goes on and on. But the thing is, this is that happening for... forever. You're constantly living… I keep telling you, you’re living through a script, a massive agenda, that was set in stone before you were born. And that's how things really are run, like a big long-term business goal. That's how it's done.
This article here is about... the culture falling apart, although it doesn't say that because it gives out this rah-rah type of article here.
New sex-ed curriculum gets mixed reviews from parents
thestar.com / March 12, 2015
(A: Now, the way that the culture industry has always worked, for this particular, again, the same agenda, it's had many facets, it's all-encompassing, is to push the envelope in any particular area, a bit at a time, a bit at a time, many times in each generation, and accumulatively you can’t complain about anything down the road because you've all adapted into the new normals, new normalities, new norms I call them.)
Some parents say the new curriculum introduces material at too young an age — including “sexual pictures”/sexting in Grade 4 and in Grade 7, information about sexually transmitted diseases and oral and anal sex.
(A: It gives you the usual stuff about who's complaining and so on.)
Ontario’s new sex ed curriculum was unveiled Monday to mixed reviews from parents, with some lauding changes to the almost two-decade-old material as long overdue, (A: Yeah, but two decades ago they were pushing the envelope then to get the present stuff in. You understand? And it wasn't coming from the parents.) and others vowing a showdown over what they consider age-inappropriate content.
Education Minister Liz Sandals expected some parental opposition but reiterated that the materials will be implemented this fall as planned.
“I anticipate there will be members of various religions who may object to one thing or another . . . but the curriculum is the curriculum that will be taught in Ontario schools,” said Sandals.
(A: It's amazing. Again too, this is the technique that they use in the Delphi technique and various other techniques. So only people who are into religions may object. I mean, you won't get other folk who classify themselves as normal in some way or another objecting either? Is that the whole idea? You see how they narrow it all down. And they've already given negative connotations to religions, you see, so you don't want to get lumped in with them do you?)
On Monday, the Liberals unveiled the first update to the province’s health curriculum since 1998. So antiquated was the existing syllabus that it did not even reflect the legalization of same-sex marriage in Canada more than a decade ago. The update also covers cyber safety, including sexting, as well as consent, and puts the curriculum in line with what’s being taught in other provinces. (A: So if it's being taught in other provinces it's okay here. Is that the idea? They use the same technique and excuse when they do it nationally and say, well this country is doing it, you know. Well, that makes it all right. Whatever it is… whatever the topic... These are all techniques, you see. It's like movies, I've mentioned how formulas are used in movies, to write the movies, it's always the same stories rehashed and you must go through the formula. It's the same thing with the big agendas, they have formulas, you see, and they use them over and over again.)
Toronto mom Stephanie Baptist, a counsellor with Toronto Public Health, said it’s important to talk to kids about things like sexting in Grade 4 because even though they likely don’t have a cellphone, they do have access to devices “early, and often” — and often without supervision.
Parents, she added, will always play a role no matter what schools teach. (A: Really?!? Now, Bertrand Russell who helped design the whole system of this type of indoctrination where the state would give the new moralities to the children, he experimented in his experimental schools in the 20s and 30s, with permission of the crown, ha, he got a charter to try that because otherwise it would be illegal, the things that he wanted to push in his little schools. He said at the time, with the proper socialist type of indoctrination, a scientific indoctrination, when the children go back to their parents in the evening or afternoon, whatever input that comes from their parents will be totally ignored and the state will give them their new morality. So again, everything is the same formula, same big agendas.)
“Curriculum comes from the province — but the values always come from the family,” (A: What a joke.) she said.
However, as many as 2,000 parents plan to protest outside Queen’s Park on Tuesday, upset at what they feel is too much information at too young an age, as well as a lack of meaningful parental consultation.
(A: Then they give you more about who is complaining and so on and so on, different individual stories. But what they did say here is, some of the people who complained said...)
In a telephone interview, Sandals said the curriculum underwent significant consultation with many groups over the years, (A: What groups? What groups are they talking about?) and Premier Kathleen Wynne told reporters Monday the government is “very committed to this.”
Sandals said she has not labelled parents who object as zealots — that characterization has come from the media. (A: See, they all work together.)
“We understand that parents are concerned and they want to know what their kids are learning,” she said, adding materials were created by experts (A: ...again, experts, it's okay then.) and based on evidence.
The curriculum that will be in use in schools by this September is largely the same as what was proposed five years ago, then scrapped by then-premier Dalton McGuinty due to an outcry by a vocal minority of social conservatives. (A: …a minority… and these conservatives, they’re bad, like religious folk, you see. Everything you read has got the psycholinguistics in it. And other folk are complaining about it too, another guy…)
Farina Siddiqui, co-ordinator of the Greater Toronto group Coalition of Concerned Parents, will take part in Tuesday’s protest and said it includes parents “of faith, of no faith — from every walk of life.”
“The ministry is calling us a fringe group. We are parents; we are the most important stakeholders in our children’s lives.” (A: Again, they'll be called Luddites and all the rest of it, you see.)
Wynne, who has long championed a revised curriculum, told reporters everything in the update is “age appropriate” and “it’s done in a way (A: …children. I always use the word children instead of using this term kids. A kid is young goat, remember.) [children]can understand,” adding it’s important for [children] as young as Grade 1 to learn about “different lifestyles and different family configurations.”
(A: You see what I'm saying? See, indoctrination must always start very young. And they always make sure they update it according to their big plans for the future, what they want to change down the road, prepare those children who are going to have the big, big changes, you see, for what they are going to experience in life. We all had indoctrination's if you went to school. And what they're going to say here, and in their talks and so on, in their lectures is...)
Proper names for body parts and genitals will be taught in Grade 1 — something child-abuse investigators have long urged. (A: But they'll also use a lot of slang too, I'm sure. And they already do the slang stuff, in their lectures.)
The first mention of the concept of same-sex relationships will be introduced to Grade 3 students. (A: So when they are about the age of 8 they'll be taught about same-sex relationships.)
Grade 4 students will learn about online safety, text messaging and “sexual pictures,” as well as puberty.
Grade 6 students will be taught what masturbation is and will learn about healthy relationships and consent. (A: Well again, everything is a healthy relationship now, according to this curriculum, isn't it?)
Grade 7 students will be warned about the risks of “sexting” as well as informed about sexually transmitted diseases and oral and anal sex. (A: But along with that of course will be all the pleasures of it, at the same time, I'm sure of that, because that's really what all these big agendas are for. And if you go into the history of all this kind of stuff to do with sex, it's very, very old, with their big agendas.)
This is an interesting article here because you see, this is a guy who's been implicated in helping design this, even though the present group dealing with it say he didn't have a hand in designing this. This man is called Ben Levin and it says…
Ben Levin case casts shadow over new sex ed curriculum
torontosun.com / Christina Blizzard / February 18, 2015
Her crackdown on the mischief at the Toronto District School Board is bold and long overdue.
Her grasp of education is a result of her many years as a trustee with the Ontario Public School Boards Association.
That said, I don’t envy her the task ahead of bringing in the new sex ed curriculum.
The Liberals botched their previous attempt in 2010 to re-vamp the curriculum.
It was flawed, poorly thought out and wildly age-inappropriate. (A: I guess it’s all appropriate now though.)
It was seen as being a way of using the school curriculum to promote a social agenda. (A: My goodness, it was that blatant, that folk actually said this is a social agenda here.)
Now we find out that the deputy minister of education at that time, Ben Levin, is preparing to plead guilty to child porn charges. (A: This is the guy who helped set it up.)
According to my Toronto Sun colleague, Joe Warmington, Levin’s made a plea arrangement with the Crown and will formally acknowledge his guilt to three of seven charges when he goes to court March 3.
He’s seeking character references to support him with the hope of getting a lenient sentence.
The timing couldn’t be worse for Wynne, Sandals, et al.
Just as they’re rolling out the new sex ed curriculum, we’re reminded that the person at the helm of the ministry the last time around is facing serious sex charges relating to children.
In his column Wednesday, Warmington reports one of the charges is counselling a sexual assault.
Levin advises prospective character witnesses to say: “I am aware that during these chats he counselled an undercover police officer posing as the mother of a child to sexually assault a child for him,” in his letter to his would-be supporters.
This casts the whole sex ed curriculum in a new light.
While Sandals said she believes Levin had, “very little” to do with the development of the new program, it’s impossible to believe he didn’t have input. (A : He was the deputy minister.at the time.)
Thousands of ordinary parents — not “homophobic bigots,” as some would have you believe — raised concerns that the curriculum was age inappropriate. It introduced sexual concepts, such as anal and oral intercourse at too early an age. It was outrage over those kinds of missteps that forced former Premier Dalton McGuinty to scrap the curriculum.
Few parents argue sex ed should not be taught in schools.
They just want it to be done in a sensitive way and at an age when children have started to ask questions about it.
Late Wednesday, a spokesman for Sandals put out an e-mail to “clarify,” Sandals’, comments.
“Ben Levin had no involvement in the development of the content of the curriculum. Curriculum is developed by subject experts (A: [Alan chuckles.] …subject experts…) and is based on research in addition to consultations with a wide array of people, including teachers, parents, and students,” said Nilani Logeswaran.
Yep, but he was still the deputy minister. (A: [Alan laughing.] That’s in reply to what she said.)
So it doesn't really matter. I mean, the parents themselves have been contaminated with years of indoctrination through their movies and what they're watching, until it each envelope is pushed. They don't really object to it because they're watching such... stuff that was banned years ago, in their general homes across the country. Because that was the big agenda, you see. I've done many talks on this before. So it doesn't really matter, does it? It's going to go ahead regardless. Then this article here says…
Former deputy education minister
Benjamin Levin pleads guilty to child porn charges
thestar.com / March 12, 2015
Former Ontario deputy education minister Benjamin Levin has pleaded guilty to three child pornography-related charges in a Toronto court.
Levin, who was also a University of Toronto professor, entered a guilty plea for making written child pornography, counselling a person to commit a sexual assault, and possession of child pornography.
He was originally charged with seven child-pornography-related offences.
The investigation that led to Levin’s July 2013 arrest began in mid-2012 after officials in Toronto were contacted by authorities in New Zealand and later police in London, Ontario.
From late 2004 to early 2007, Levin held the post of deputy education minister, and was on Premier Kathleen Wynne’s transition team as she took office.
He also served as Manitoba’s deputy minister of advanced education and deputy minister of education, training and youth between 1999 and 2002.
Levin has been back in the spotlight in recent days as Ontario released an updated sex-education curriculum.
It goes on and on, but this is nothing unusual, because that's generally the one who leads the charges, who are actually selected by their bosses, high above them, to lead these particular charges, to promote certain things in society. It's quite amusing to me because there's nothing new in it at all. I've watched this my whole life long, as they push the envelope and push the envelope. And I've read all the so-called experts at the time who said how they would have to do it and how they would have to push it in certain ways and so on and what the real objectives were. I mean, Russell himself said, if they can promote prepubertal sex, hypersensitize folk to have sexual activity and make it really addictive, almost like an addictive thing, then the people would not get married down the road and they would not have children. That was part of the big eugenics program at the time.
Now, whenever you see a name in the paper of the social advocate for something, a guy who has really been promoted at the top and universities and political departments too for your government, you have to really delve into their record. Because they are not just local, you see, or even national. They're international, and what they do nationally for their different agendas is done internationally at the same time. Now, this particular guy I was talking about is actually promoted by Harvard Education Publishing Group. One of the books this particular guy, who is now charged with this pedophilia and so on, child porn, etc., he's Harvard. It says…
How to Change 5000 Schools
A Practical and Positive Approach for Leading Change at Every Level
hepg.org [Harvard Education Publishing Group]
(A: A very interesting title actually. Because you see, these are all 'in' words for the pervs that push everything. And the whole of society is changing, including all the green movements and the climate change movements. Change. Remember Obama's election run?... Change is good. And the schmucks didn’t even know what he meant by it, you know. These are all the in terms that are used for pushing, oh, big agendas, the global agendas through. So this book that Ben Levin wrote, this professor/political minister and advisor and educational advisor, isn't just used in Canada, this stuff that he's put out there, here is the Harvard publishing group promoting all his stuff.)
How to Change 5000 Schools
A Practical and Positive Approach for Leading Change at Every Level
In How to Change 5000 Schools, Ben Levin, former deputy minister of education for the province of Ontario, draws on his experience overseeing major systemwide education reforms in Canada and England (A: So he's involved with the English stuff.) to set forth a refreshingly positive, pragmatic, and optimistic approach to leading educational change at all levels.
(A: Then they go on to praise it.)
This book provides a powerfully optimistic view of what can happen when policy makers, system leaders (A: You should look into these terms, folks. Things that you think you know are, really, you've got the wrong impression of.) system leaders, and educators operate around common point of view about student learning and school improvement.
And so on and so on. So it's all testimonials from different professors across the States, Harvard and different places and so on, and Canada, the different university professors praising this guy’s work, you see, this guy who is accused of various, a kind of perversion at the moment. Mind you, pedophilia and child sex won't be bad connotations in the future because they'll do away with it altogether when it becomes normalized. It will be a normal thing, and they're actually pushing for that normalization… Well, if the child consented it's okay… I don't know how you can consent when you two or three years old, but there you go.
That's the real world we live in, it's pretty disgusting. But you know, you can do anything with the general population if you understand the psychology and behavioristic techniques to use on them, psycho-neurology, psycho-linguistics, all of that kind of stuff, Pavlovian training. It's so easy to do. And as I say, you just incrementally do it to each generation, and within each generation you keep pushing the envelope, in a whole bunch of different areas, whether you want them all to live in little 10' x 10' homes in the future, get them used to the idea by promoting it as a great way to save us all, or, freezing to death to save the world. You can promote it, push, push, push, you see, that's how it's done. Big agendas, all from the same sources by the way, all of them. Any particular agenda that has gone off on a different track wouldn't even get past the gates if it wasn't authorized from the top.
And as we go down the tubes and they've got all the bail-ins approved and signed into law and in effect, they can use them. Because they knew all this when they signed the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT) by the World Trade Organization and so on, all private organizations belonging to the same group that set up the United Nations. But when they passed all that and had this free trade agreement, where really the first world countries had to pay all the taxes for exports and everything, but the countries that are up-and-coming as they call them – they still call China a developing country, even though it's got the biggest manufacturing, is THE manufacturer for the world, they have to pay hardly any taxes because they got all these benefits and so on. That's why they can also keep their emissions pretty high and poison us because they are given so many exceptions, but you in the first would countries are not allowed that anymore. They knew that we would get to this stage today where we're going to be broke in the West as all your jobs go over to China. They knew that before they signed all these agreements. It was decided and talked about and debated long before you heard of GATT, NAFTA, free trade, a World Trade Organization, or anything else. They knew what they were going to bring the Western world into because service economies can only float for a little while, when you're actually producing nothing, you're just buying things in and reselling them down to the bottom.
So the countries now are, because governments never have enough money, they've never balanced any budget, and there's no intention to ever balance any budget, never was, never ever was. But here is from the Chronicle Herald. It says Ottawa’s, (A: Ottawa is Canada's capital, or government.)
Ottowa's GM shares could help balance budget
thechronicleherald.ca / ANDY BLATCHFORD THE CANADIAN PRESS / February 22, 2015
OTTAWA (CP) — The Harper government’s push to deliver a balanced budget (A: You hear that your whole lifelong but they never balance anything.) despite the burden of low oil prices has attracted fresh attention to a potential stockpile of federal cash: a multi-billion-dollar taxpayer stake in the auto business. (A: Most folk don't even know that your money was put into the auto business to bail them out. Just like the banks. Even in Canada, especially in Canada, they kept it quiet that they bailed out a whole bunch of banks in Canada.)
The government’s remaining 73.4 million shares in General Motors are now worth more than $3.4 billion in total, thanks to the combined effect of a solid stock price and a weakened Canadian dollar. (A: See how they work everything in to get the right prices and everything else, including devaluing your dollar, for the right things they want to do, for the big boys who own the country.)
In fact, once the Canadian exchange rate is factored in on the U.S.-priced stock, its per-share value is higher than it has been in more than five years. (A: Isn't that just a wonderful coincidence?)
The government needs to make $4 billion in proceeds from its remaining shares to break even on its initial investment (A: I love how they call it, when they bail them all out, hey, it was a government investment.), which would leave it only $600 million short if it sold the stock at current values. (A: So they're selling it off and they'll still have $600 million to pay, to break even, which of course comes from you again.)
Earlier this month, Ottawa became the only North American government still holding stock acquired as part of the 2009 effort to bail out the then-sputtering automaker.
Ontario’s recent sale of its last GM holdings may add to the federal government’s temptation to offload some, or all, of its own stock.
The U.S. government sold the last of its stake in December 2013.
So, these are what are called assets, where the taxpayers money is used on any big project they call that the assets, and its national assets, etc. Sometimes they'll say essential assets, like roads and things like that, which they have been selling off for years, especially in the States and now Britain. You know, the taxpayer pays for all the construction and then they hand it all over for a penny, ha, to their pals to buy off and make it private, then the public keep paying the upkeep of it, maintenance and so on, and the boys who now own it get all the profits. That's what they call public/private partnerships.
Then this article here from the Toronto Star says:
Selling off assets a bad bargain for city: Hume
thestar.com / March 12, 2015 / Christopher Hume
From Mayor John Tory on down, Torontonians nod approvingly whenever the suggestion is made to sell public assets to pay for public debt.
At first glance this makes sense, especially to those who want government finances run like those of the mythical hard-working Canadian family — one envelope for cash in, a second for cash out — that never spends more than it makes.
Despite the fact that this is delusional — personal debt in Canada has never been so high — it is the starting point for any number of political pronouncements and the reason so many seem based on fantasy.
But now the public sector isn’t just open for business, it’s up for sale. Faced with growing deficits and shrinking taxes — taxes are bad, bad, bad — governments are seeing what they have might fetch a buck. Ontario is mulling unloading that perennial cash cow, the LCBO (A: That's the liquor Canadian board organization. It's a Crown corporation they call it, a public asset.), to raise revenues that would help in the short run, that cost ever more.
The CBC is considering selling the Broadcast Centre, (A: That's the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.) its massive facility just north of the CN Tower, to make up for the massive cuts instituted by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
The Toronto and District School Board is drawing up a list of buildings it can sell to cover its fiscal shortfall.
Toronto sidewalks have been rented to advertisers through a trumped up street-furniture program that delivers little more than constant commercials.
Subway stations as well as the sides of TTC rolling stock — buses, streetcars and subway — are now available to the highest bidder. A couple of years ago, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation turned Union Station into a temporary likeness of a gambling casino.
Toronto even has an agency called Build Toronto, whose task is to find buyers for various city-owned properties. It lost money last year, of course, even though the local real-estate market is among the hottest in the world.
Ironically, perhaps, we could well come to thank Build Toronto one day for its incompetence; instead of selling land, the city should be buying it.
And this goes on into different things that have happened and what's happening as they sell off of these different things, which really belong supposedly to the general public for all the taxes you've been paying all along, you see.
And again, this article is really amazing too. When the housing bubble happened in the States, as they call it, the housing bubble, and they're selling all these subprime mortgages at vastly inflated prices, the factual prices of the homes, it's never really stopped Canada, you see, from doing the same thing. In Toronto it says...
The real cost of a $1 million home:
Toronto buyers resort to sub-prime loans as prices soar
business.financialpost.com / Garry Marr / March 4, 2015
They've been warning them for the last three years that it’s way too overpriced, all their real estate. But there's too many dogs in the fight with this one, making high profits off it all to ever change it. But little shacks basically in Toronto can be worth $1 million now. They've been through this bubble before and it has busted before, but the same characters, the same dogs in the fight keep coming back with the same cons and get it going. It's quite something.
And I’d just like to, to end at all, I'll mention this article…
The terrifying “smart” city of the future
salon.com / Feb 28, 2015 / Allegra Kirkland, AlterNet
(A: This is from the magazine Salon, which is generally very left wing, it doesn't matter, the story is pretty good. It's a warning about what the smart city really means. It gives you an idea of how they are promoting at all.)
Imagine a world without waste, where the train always comes on time, where snow is plowed before it even stops falling and watchful surveillance cameras have sent rates of petty crime plunging.
And so on and so on, that's how it's being sold. But then it goes into how it's really taking away all your rights, and how really you have to have ID which is recognized in the main computers to allow you into buildings, and maybe stores down the road to even by what you need to live and so on. Nevermind all the multitude of cameras, absolutely everywhere, for constant surveillance. Constants, constant surveillance. Remember too, a smart city also means in-the-house surveillance as well.
See, tyrants at the top can never relax until they know what you've been doing every second of every day. That's what they really want, constant, constant surveillance. It's all pretty well here. It's going to be a lot worse, actually. But folk will adapt into it and it will be hell on earth. That's the big plan, you see, when all of you are monitored all the time, and the elite of course, the elite themselves are exempt from all of that. They have their places across the world in the country, they fly from one small airport to the other on private jets. They don't travel in the same systems that you travel in, or even the same roads in fact, some of them.
But this is... The future is planned. You're living through script. And people don't participate in designing their own future, their own future, their personal future, therefore others will do it for you. And they have done. That's why they like the mass man, that's why they promote this thing called democracy, and that's why they want you all to believe that you belong to the big group. You know, you dress the same, you have the same ideas, you have adopted the same views on everything, even the updates on them, and you’re politically correct, you see, you are the ideal citizen. It shows you how science can create it. It's done a fantastic job on most folk, who will actually blush if certain topics come into the conversation, just the names of things. Because they have been Pavlovian indoctrinated into responses that Pavlov would admire, they work awfully well. You can go back to your default position as other ones in the neuroscience field have talked about. You’re set with default positions so it stops you from going any further on a particular topic, or even thinking about it, or even inquiring about it. Beautiful isn't it, for those that rule that is.
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:
Paris Climate Talks: Canada's Contribution To UN Conference Dependent On Provinces
2015 pivotal for finalizing universal climate change agreement, Ban tells Member States
Colorado canyon latest Obama “monument” land grab
New sex-ed curriculum gets mixed reviews from parents
Ben Levin case casts shadow over new sex ed curriculum
Former deputy education minister Benjamin Levin pleads guilty to child porn charges
How to Change 5000 Schools A Practical and Positive Approach for Leading Change at Every Level
Ottawa’s GM shares could help balance budget
Selling off assets a bad bargain for city: Hume
The real cost of a $1 million home: Toronto buyers resort to sub-prime loans as prices soar
The terrifying “smart” city of the future
Alan's Materials Available for Purchase and Ordering Information:
Ancient 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"