Feb 8th, 2012 (#1018)
Alan Watt "Cutting Through the Matrix" LIVE on RBN:

Poem Copyright Alan Watt Feb 8th, 2012:

The Government Transparency Pact
Has Developed a Cataract:

"It's Great how Prompts and Nudges Lean,
Especially with "History" from Silver Screen,
And Education from Authorized Perpetrators,
Passed by Regime-Run Regulators,
Leaving Your Brain with "Proper" Opinions,
A Cloned Know-it-All Blending with Minions,
On Medieval England, Ah, Forsooth!
It's Impossible to Find a Note of Truth
With Spins the Media Take Years For,
Demonizing a People on Whom We'll War,
Real Big Plans Never Published or Read,
Are De-Classified 60 yrs After You're Dead"

© Alan Watt Feb 8th, 2012


Poem & Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt – Feb 8th, 2012  (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)

alternate sites:
cuttingthroughthematrix.net  ,   .us  ,   .ca

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

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

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

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

 mail via the postal services worldwide.)

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

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


Hi folks, I’m Alan Watt and this is Cutting Through the Matrix on the 8th of February, 2012.  For newcomers, I get this over quickly at the beginning of every broadcast, look into the cuttingthroughthematrix.com website and help yourself to the free downloads of audios which are there.  It’s over a thousand there now.  And you can take your pick and go through them at your leisure, and hopefully you’ll understand the system you live in.  The system that’s very deceptive, because the public are always lied to, and really, there’s nothing new in this.  It’s always been like that, even with the beginnings of Parliaments in Britain and elsewhere.  That’s their job really, is to distract you into certain areas, while they go ahead with other areas.  It’s like Francis Bacon, when he’d give advice to the king, he said, the public never notice the pennies when you put a penny tax on everything.  He says, it’s better, rather than ask for a pound more per year or per week from every citizen, just put pennies on this, and pennies on that, and pennies on that, and they’ll never notice.  And it’s so true, you know.  It’s deception, really. 


It’s also tells you how they’ve always understood human nature, very, very well indeed.  And nothing is different from today. Today it’s just more organized.  The media all belong to the same organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, and so they make sure they standardize your news for you.  Even most media get its information from the AP and from Reuters.  And Reuters is a Rothschild creation, and they own it still, I think, today.  So, they make sure that all media ends up with the two main lines, which are owned by the same people, to make sure the world gets the same standardized version of news, and that becomes your thoughts for the day, and then they give you another bunch tomorrow. 


So, you’ll never get truth, really, by going along with the establishment.  The establishment is so high above us.  They’re all part of what they call international management or governance.  Have you noticed that, in articles to do with big corporations?  They’re always talking about the corporate governance.  That’s what they’re talking about.  They all work together.  And they are, like Bertrand Russell said, technically they’re a separate species now, because they’re in on what’s really happening in the world, and they decide to give us a different version at the bottom to get us all on board with wars and things like that.  It’s not difficult.  And it’s inevitable, really.  And I think that’s just the way power goes. 


And so, help yourself to the audios and so on.  Remember too, you can get transcripts as well from those sites, and transcripts in other languages of the talks I’ve given at alanwattsentientsentinel.eu.  And you can buy the books and discs, hopefully, at cuttingthroughthematrix.com and help me just tick over here.  And from the US to Canada, a personal check is good to order.  You can also use an international postal money order from the post office, or you can use PayPal.  Some people just send cash.  Across the world, Western Union, Money Gram, and PayPal once again. 


And what I do here really is just categorize and chronicle the events as we go through them to try and show you the other sides of the story.  We’re lied to mainly by omission.  We get partial truths.  And you can make anybody the guilty party, anybody the innocent party, simply by omitting partly, a good half of the truth or so.  And that’s how it’s always really been, because everyone’s got a spin on things, since they all belong to the same organizations.  And if you really want to know what’s going on, go into the Council on Foreign Relations’ own website.  They’ve got thousands of experts across the planet, because they have their headquarters across the whole planet now.  And they tell you what’s going to happen, because their boys all work and advise every government in the world.  They advise them what to do.  Big, big, massive, massive think tanks, working on every part of society, including the coming food crisis.  They’ve been doing that one for sixteen years. 


So, really, what we get in the mainstream is almost a cast down watered version, a fifth-grade explanation of why things are happening, and they say that’s good enough for us.  Back with more, after this break.


Hi folks, I’m back, and we’re Cutting Through the Matrix.  Talking about really the way we get our thoughts given to us.  And we do have massive organizations, agencies, think tanks, giving us our thoughts all the time.  What to be concerned about one day, the next day, or for a week, or maybe a few months if it’s a coming war or whatever.  And even with war especially, they really get you going to get you onboard with it.  You must always get the public support for anything that you want to go and plunder.  And so, it works the same way through thousands of years from the ancient times to the present.  The same, if you introduce the same method over again, that’s been worked before with humans, it will always work again.  That’s what even Plato said.  So, there’s nothing really new under the sun, as they say, it’s just that they’ve got better and more full-time employees and think tanks working on how to manipulate our minds. 


And we know too, that Sunstein, the big guy next to Obama there, really is supposedly an expert.  I don’t really think he is, but he imagines himself to be an expert on really neuroscience.  Although he’s really a lawyer, but he dishes out a lot of stuff to do with nudging.  And he works with the guys on the internet, the FBI, CIA, and all the rest of them, NSA, to go into the thousands of studies, which they’re doing already on forums.  They’ve always been doing it.  And they write about it, what people’s habits are, but even, he’s even mentioned how to disrupt them and put false ones out there.  There’s lots of false ones out there. And that’s why you can never believe anything you really see on the net and forums, etc, because you don’t know who owns it really.  Is it a CIA operative or whatever, or a newcomer comes in to your group, and before you know it, you’re all fighting each other, which is a way of disabling you.  He talks about all that stuff in his own writings.


Anyway, the Nudge idea is working every day on your computer.  You’ll see “people who read this story also read that.”  Well, so what?  That’s my answer to that.  So what.  I’m not going to read it because they supposedly read it.  But you’re getting nudged, you see.  Whether it was true or not, you’re getting nudged to go along a certain way of thinking on a certain topic, to make sure you get the proper opinion at the end.  And you’ll think it’s your own.  It happens every day, and people don’t even know it’s happening to them.  This is an article about:


Nudge theory trials


(Alan: And every country is using them.  It says:)


'are working' say officials


(A: That’s something like experts, you know, only with badges.  So, it says here:)


Trials suggest millions of pounds could be saved by using "nudge theory" about how people behave to encourage them to pay taxes and fines, officials say.


Trials organised by a special government unit suggest so-called "nudge theory" could play a "key role" in reducing fraud, error and debt.


(A: They should try it on the government.  Anyway, it says:)


Using simpler language in letters, highlighting key messages and stressing "social norms" have boosted compliance.


(A: Because people are herd animals.  Most of them will just follow the rest, you see.  “So many people have used this product,” you know, and so you go and use it too.)


In one case, a local authority saved £240,000 on false council tax claims.


(A: I think that’s a bit of a nudge misdemeanor there.  I think they’re kind of amplifying that out of proportion.)


Nudge theory is seen as a way of producing positive economic and social outcomes without resorting to bans or increased regulation.


(A: In other words, nudge theory is forcing people through subconscious means to comply with what you want to do with them.  I mean that’s really it, isn’t it?)


The Cabinet Office established a "behaviour insights team" after the 2010 general election and the unit has published details of some of the work it has been doing in the past eighteen months.


(A: And the link is here too.  I’ll put these links up at the end of the broadcast tonight.  And it says:)


'Minor changes'


It says eight trials carried out in partnership with government departments and agencies have shown that "relatively minor changes to processes, forms and language can have a significant positive impact on behaviour".


(A: They’re talking about forms and demands and things like that.  Well, you really need to be a bureaucrat to understand them.  They can’t say anything simply, because they’re all mixed up.  It’s amazing going into the whole bureaucratese language they speak.  And Sidney Webb of the Fabian Society, one of the founders, was a guy who came up with the bureaucratese language that no one understands, you know.  So simplifying it would certainly help trying to figure out what they’re actually saying or wanting.  It’s always wanting, actually.)




Emphasising in letters to people that those who do not pay their taxes are in a minority in their local area


(A: That’s to make them feel bad.)


Telling professionals that unpaid taxes in the past would be treated as an "oversight" but from now on would now be seen as an "active choice"


Warning tax cheats that third-party information could be used to expose them


(A: Interesting too that I had an article, I think I put it up, where one of Her Majesty’s tax collectors, who actually, they actually work with big corporations, but they’re paid by the taxpayer, and they work for HM, the Queen, you see.  And he was working with Goldman Sachs, I think it was, and he wouldn’t even tell the guys he worked for, and who paid him, HM, the Queen, all about their business.  He says, I can’t tell you that.  It’s confidential.  So, he’s really taking kickbacks, obviously, from Goldman Sachs, even though he worked for the British government.  They should nudge him a bit too, eh?  And by the way, he saved them millions and millions of dollars.)


Warning tax cheats that third-party information could be used to expose them


Contacting people in person by text to urge them to pay outstanding fines

Using images of untaxed cars on insurance demands

Asking people to state that they are still eligible for council tax discounts

In one six-week exercise, 140,000 people were sent a variety of letters by Revenue and Customs.


One was a standard communication stressing the need to pay outstanding taxes while others contained statements such as "nine out of 10 people in Britain pay their tax on time"


(A: Oh don’t you feel rotten, eh?  Ashamed, eh?)


or stressed other people living in the same area had already complied.


Letters emphasising such "social norms" produced a 15% higher response rate than the standard letter. Revenue and Customs believe this could help it to collect £160m extra tax revenues a year if borne out across the country.


(A: They’re probably working out their new pay raises in Parliament and the bureaucracies right now with all that extra cash to come.)


A new approach to collecting council tax could bring "significant savings" to town halls, the Cabinet Office report suggests.


In a trial conducted in November, Manchester City Council saved £240,000 by using a different tone in letters to people claiming a single person discount on their council tax bills.


(A: In other words, they weren’t being heavy-handed.  “Dear, dear, dear, Citizen.”  You know.  “We’re so happy that you’re going to comply.”)


While it previously just required people to fill out a form saying their circumstances had not changed, it is now asking them to state directly that they are still eligible.


This method - which also downplayed references to the size of the discount and warned that knowingly providing false information was an act of fraud - resulted in a 6% fall in people claiming the rebate.


(A: A lot of folk actually are terrified of putting anything down in case it’s thought of as being fraud, you know.  Because they don’t understand half of it.)


The change of approach was based on the theory that people are less likely to lie if they are forced to "actively provide" false information rather than simply not updating their details.


'Different incentives'


In another trial, doctors and dentists with outstanding tax liabilities were told that their failure to pay in the past was regarded as an oversight but if they did not respond in future it would be seen as a conscious decision.


(A: And of course the government is even better than dentists at pulling teeth, you know.  It says:)



Using handwritten fonts to personalise letters

Asking people to complete an "honesty code" in letters

Sending a "thank you" letter to people who have complied

Highlighting key information in bold or "strong" colours

Using lotteries or prize draws to encourage people to pay tax returns early


(A: I’ve got to say something, with these lottos and you-could-win, etc.  I can understand an awful lot of why the elite eventually have contempt for the masses.  And I’m sure those amongst you who are really awake understand that too.  It’s so Pavlovianly simple, and yet it works every time, eh.  You might get something for nothing.)


Linking tax evasion to the impact on council services

Naming and shaming late payers on a website

The letter - which also warned that third-party information could be used to prove they were defrauding the exchequer - resulted in a 14% higher response rate and prompted £1 million in voluntary disclosures.


Officials said other initiatives, such as sending personalised text messages urging people to pay fines and including images of untaxed vehicles in demands for payment of duties - had proved initially successful.


So, with all this extra cash, I guess you can throw it in that big black hole called Europe, where they don’t tell us where the money goes, and then just get more taxes.  Just create new types of taxes.  That’s enough of that. 


Now, the New York Times, as everyone has heard, I’m sure, has published a hit piece against the Constitution of the US.  And it says:


New York Times Publishes Hit Piece Against US Constitution As FBI Demonizes Everyday Americans As Possible Terrorists


In a move that has shocked many Americans, the New York Times has published a hit piece against the US Constitution and its “outdated” ways.


(A: Now, years ago, I think the CFR had a big push on for this very thing to happen, because they were the first ones to really, really work hard and hard.  In fact, they even said they’d have to, rather than hit it head on, that’s the Constitution, they would go around it and build treaties and things around the Constitution.  They’d just ignore it all together.  But they also said too that it was outdated years ago.  And that’s the guys who run your country.  Every top politician is a member of the CFR, and has been for a hundred years by the way.  And it’s just the way it is.  And it says:)


The hit piece comes on the heels of a sitting justice of the Supreme Court recommending multiple other constitutions and human rights charters to Egypt over the very constitution she is tasked to protect.


Joe Joseph, speaking during an emotionally charged Intel Hub News Brief Podcast, outlined this disgusting attack on the very foundation of this country and the ridiculous examples and excuses used to demonize the Constitution.


In the hit piece, the author actually claims that the US Constitution guarantees “relatively few rights.”


(A: Well, it does now.  Never mind the Constitution, but the fact is, the way of life, the way it’s run today, definitely gives you very little rights.  And even then, you got to have a lot of cash for a lawyer in the States.  An awful, awful lot of cash, if you want to take on anything for rights.  And it says:)


There are lots of possible reasons. The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights.


The commitment of some members of the Supreme Court to interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning in the 18th century may send the signal that it is of little current....


Significance.  Etc, etc.  Back with more, after this break.


Hi, folks, we’re back, and we’re Cutting Through the Matrix.  It says here:


In the hit piece, the author actually claims that the US Constitution guarantees “relatively few rights.”


(A: And then it says, this is the article itself:)


There are lots of possible reasons.


The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights.


The commitment of some members of the Supreme Court to interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning in the 18th century may send the signal that it is of little current use to say a new African nation.


And the Constitution’s waning influence may be part of a general decline in American power and prestige.


(A: And I think it should really say, well, the fact is, no one in Washington’s time would have stopped anybody from going anywhere they wanted in the country.  You didn’t go through x-ray machines and get pulled over and strip-searched, and all the rest of it, with the black-clad goons out there either.  And the same thing when they were fighting Communism.  Same thing happened.  You can come back from the military service and cross the country without a darn problem.  Not now.  They’ve turned into the very thing they claimed they were fighting, you see, because they’re run by a small clique.)


These absurd statements and type of thinking actually make sense coming from the New York Times, especially when you consider their devout worship of globalization and any war the military industrial complex wishes to wage.


(A: Remember too that Carroll Quigley, who was the Council on Foreign Relations historian, said that the New York Times was one of their first papers that they put out there.  They never let go of it.  In fact, the Times across the world, India Times, is all part of this global society that the founders wanted to bring in.  Not a happy, harmonious society, but really a eugenically run society, run by experts, the ones with the pointed heads.  Now, it says:)


Consider this quote taken from a 1991 Bilderberg Meeting in Baden, Germany from none other than kingpin globalist David Rockefeller:


(A: Now, David Rockefeller has been in the CFR forever.  He was the president, the whole bit.  He’s a Trilateral member too, a Trilateralist, and also, he got the World Council of Churches together, to blend Christianity into a form of Judaism basically, to bring it into the Old Testament rather than the New Testament, which they were very successful at.  And then, of course, they start putting out the training for all pastors, etc, so they all get standardized into the same kind of thing.  But this is what he said to the Bilderberger Meeting in Baden, Germany, 1991.  He says:)


“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings


(A: Because they’re all members.)


and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.”


(A: Forty years.  That was in the 90s, right.)


“It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite


(A: That’s themselves.)


and world bankers


(A: Which he’s one too.)


is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”


(A: That’s what he said.  And no one seems to think much about it.  I mean, he’s the guy, literally working, but seen as a traitor, to undermine the system, and the country itself.  Pretty well openly.  And at the head of so many organizations, and funding them through their foundation to do so, along with the other foundations.  And of course, they are simply the sister organization of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in Britain, that was founded initially with the merger of the Milner Group and the Cecil Rhodes Society to become the Royal Institute of International Affairs, with a global agenda, always at the front, to take over all the world’s resources, to run the world in exactly the manner he talks about here, run by bankers and intellectuals.  No more democracy and all that kind of stuff.  In fact, he even helped set up, I think, the Club of Rome, one of their think tanks that advises governments, who said in the 70s, in their own book, that democracy would not work.  And there was too many conflicting parties to get anything done.  And so, they just bypassed it, through using nongovernmental organizations, and technocrats, guys who go behind the scenes and get things done.  They’re not responsible to the public.  It says:)


Meanwhile, the FBI is now demonizing Americans who seek to restore the gold standard as possible terrorists, the Department of Homeland Security is openly promoting and attempting to control globalization, and the entire corporate media is pushing misinformation in their bid to convince the American people to support an illegal war with Iran.


(A: But it doesn’t matter what standard they put you on.  Whatever you as a people say is money is money.  And that’s as simple as that.  But the fact is, it was the same guys running gold and silver as running paper today.  It says:)


If we actually followed the Constitution none of the above acts of tyranny would be allowed to happen and this fact is the underlining reason why attacks against the US Constitution have been increasingly occurring throughout the corporate controlled media.


So, you can read the rest of that for yourselves, and I’ll actually put the article up that started this fracas.  It got lots of publicity, because they always make sure they launch it with lots of publicity, because all the media is onboard with it.  And it says:


"The Declining Influence of the United States Constitution," by David S. Law


(A: What a better name than that, eh, for political science and school of law? And:)


Mila Versteeg, University of Virginia School of Law


And the whole article is here, and its abstract, it says.


So, yeah, nothing changes really.  They’ve been pushing this for an awful long time, for the global governance they want to put across the whole planet.  Which is really here, actually.  It’s pretty well here.


Now, quite a few years ago, I read on the air an article where a farmer in England had been sent some massive bill, because he was taking subsidies from the government not to plant crops.  And they claimed he was planting crops.  And I’ll give you an update on this today, because it’s happening across the world now.  Back with more, after this. 


Hi folks, I’m Alan Watt.  We’re back Cutting Through the Matrix.  And talking about farmers.  Farmers really, it’s the same old story.  When you have a war, you change society completely.  Government steps in.  People are willing to go on rations if necessary and take up more hardship, and all for the common cause, you see.  Oh, the common cause.  The common good.  And government sets up more and more agencies.  And that’s when all the agricultural agencies came into being, in World War II, mainly.  And, again, they had the carrot and the stick, and all the rest of it, policies, all set for farmers after the war, where they’d give them tax subsidies or breaks, etc, until literally, your main visitor at the farm now is simply one government agency after another, you know.  So, again, people fall for all the things.  “Oh, if I join this, I’ll get breaks on this and that.”  What’s the cost of it?  Anyway, it says:


Farmers who claim more Economic Union


(A: That’s the Parliament thing.  You’d think they’d get a better name than the EU, eh?)


subsidies than they should, or who break Common Agricultural Policy rules, are now more likely to be caught out by a camera in the sky than an inspector


(A: I almost called him an insect, there.)


calling with a clipboard. How do they feel about being watched from above?


(A: Then they give you the usual imagine thing, walking in the country, and then down comes a plane, but it’s actually a drone.  It says:)


What is there to spy on here? No secret military installations, just farmland.


“They thought we had an additional building without permission - but it was actually a haystack”


(A: It says:)


But Europe's farms cost taxpayers billions of euros in subsidies each year,


(A: Now, it’s true.  Some of these farms in this EU, it caused a lot of problems at the beginning, because there were so many small, like plot farmers, in France especially and other countries, that were claiming massive grants.  But the bigger farms too, that have been intergenerational farms, and farmers, got really hit as well.  It says:)


and EU agricultural inspectors are turning to technology to improve their patchy record on preventing fraud and waste.


Satellites have already been in use for several years, and drones are currently undergoing trials.


(A: You wonder why the cost of government keeps going up, eh?)


Scanning a farm with a satellite costs about one third as much as sending an inspector on a field visit - £115 ($180; 150 euros) rather than £310 ($490; 400 euros), says the UK's Rural Payments Agency (RPA), which is responsible for disbursing the subsidies in the UK and checking for irregularities.


(A: This EU thing is the biggest waste you could ever imagine.  They used to dump, they call them butter mountains and sugar mountains, and so on, because now, all your foodstuffs were in a common market.  And they want to keep the prices up, so they just dump all the stuff at sea.  Destroy the stuff.  Incredible.  To keep prices up.  It says:)


"The RPA follows up only on those claims where there is some doubt about accuracy, and then only at the specific fields for which the doubt exists," the RPA says. "This saves time, lifts the burden on farmers and reduces cost to the taxpayer."


Satellites can rapidly cover a huge area in detail and quickly return to photograph it again if necessary.


In 2010, about 70% of the total required controls on farm payments in the EU were done by satellites, which photographed more than 210,000 sq km (81,000 sq miles) of land in all.


But they are not infallible. Austria does not use them, on the grounds that the shadows cast by very mountainous terrain sometimes make satellite images inaccurate.


And Scotland, unlike the rest of the UK....


They’ve got difficulty getting clear weather, it’s always raining there.  So, the answer to this all is to bring in these drones, you see.  And it’s going to cost you a lot more, but the taxpayer will pay for that too.  And they can be used for lots of other things, like policing, and yadda, yadda, yah.  So, now you can’t even work in peace and quiet anymore.  You’re getting spied on with these darn drones and so on. 


And of course, what you know too is, the big lobbyists that make these things are lobbying governments to take them.  You know, the biggest corruption is within government itself.  They’re all on the take.  That’s the way it is.  If they weren’t on the take, believe you me, you wouldn’t be surrounded, parliaments and congress wouldn’t be surrounded by streets and streets of lobbyists.  It wouldn’t work, obviously, if they weren’t on the take.  That’s how the real government is.  That’s how it really works.  Yeah.  It’s amazing how people don’t really understand that thing.  They don’t go in there and say, “oh, please, Mr. So-and-so, Secretary of Whatever, could you please take our products?  We’re trying to promote them and we need the cash.”  Do you really think that’s how it works? 


Now, another article here too.  It’s quite good, actually.  You’ve all heard about the Camden Camera which talks to the residents to get off the streets or face prosecution.  I’ll put that link up tonight, but there’s an even better one up.  It’s caught on:


CCTV police officer 'chased himself' after being mistaken for burglar


An undercover police officer "chased himself round the streets" for 20 minutes after a CCTV operator mistook him for suspect.


The junior officer, who has not been named, was monitoring an area hit by a series of burglaries in an unnamed market town in the country’s south.


As the probationary officer from Sussex Police searched for suspects, the camera operator radioed that he had seen someone “acting suspiciously” in the area.


But he failed to realise that it was actually the plain-clothed officer he was watching on the screen, according to details leaked to an industry magazine.


The operator directed the officer, who was on foot patrol, as he followed the "suspect" on camera last month, telling his colleague on the ground that he was "hot on his heels".


(A: He was chasing himself.  So, he spent 20 minutes chasing himself:)


before a sergeant came into the CCTV control room, recognised the “suspect” and laughed hysterically at the mistake.


Eh?  Well, just as well, he didn’t tase him to death, eh?  That would have been quite the inquiry then, or embarrassment.


Now, we’re given our thoughts on everything, years in advance, actually.  For a while back, I’ve talked about the very little that’s out there from an Arabian perspective on their own cultures and so on.  And also, Reel Bad Arabs is a good video to watch, because it shows you how Hollywood literally for well over forty years has been demonizing Arabs as always the same sneaky suspect, untrustworthy people, in all their movies.  So many, many movies have them in there like that.  And of course, that’s where you get your ideas from.  That’s where literally, you don’t get it from history books, because nobody reads them anymore.  And even in the history books, you have to go deeper to get specialists, real specialists’ insight, people who have worked amongst them, especially spies.  They’re the best source of intelligence of all, when they write memoirs and so on.  And this was from:


Alastair Crooke, the legendary former British intelligence (MI6) agent, was adviser to EU High Representative Javier Solana on Middle East issues from 1997-2003 as well as the Mitchell Commission looking into the causes of the Palestinian intifada. He has been involved in negotiating with Hamas and other Islamist movements, including the ending to the Church of the Nativity siege in Bethlehem in 2002. Currently, Crooke heads the Conflicts Forum in Beirut. His recent book is "Resistance: The Essence of the Islamist Revolution." In June, both Lebanon, in which Hezbollah is contending, and Iran head into critical elections.


(A: And this is what he says.  He spent his life being a spy and causing problems, and no doubt wars as well.)


Most Western analysts of political Islam make the same mistake. They instinctively assume that conflict with the West has mainly to do with specific foreign policies, particularly of the U.S. with respect to Israel, the Arab world and Iran, and, if those changed, all would be well.


(A: Very simplistic, in other words.  But he goes on to say.)


In fact, my intensive contact over the years with Iranian clerics, Hezbollah and Hamas suggest that the conflict with the West is much deeper. It is rooted in radically different worldviews about human nature and the good society.


(A: And that’s what they call it at the top, the good society.  They actually call this the Good Society now, as we plummet.  And the Good Life.)


Failing to grasp this reality, the West continually misreads what is going on in the Muslim world.


(A: I would say, actually, they don’t misread it at all, since we know it’s all to demonize it.)


At root, the West is about individualistic, instrumental rationality and materialism;


(A: I’d say it used to be.  We’re post-materialistic now, and post-consumer.  Right?  And we’re not individualistic, we’re all treated like peasants.)


the Islamic resistance movements are about a communal and spiritual approach to life.


(A: Well, we’re all atheistic here now, because that’s been promoted for a hundred years, with Rockefeller and the rest of them.)


It has been 30 years now since the Iranian Revolution, and 50 years since the first Islamist resistance movement, the Muslim Brotherhood, was formed in Egypt.


(A: And I think it was British intelligence that formed them in the first place.)


Yet many in the West remain bemused: Why is there an Islamist resistance at all? "Against what are Muslims in revolt?" Westerners ask.


(A: I wonder what Westerners ask that?  They never ask anything.  They just take it all from TV.  “Oh, oh, oh, oh, go and kill them.”)


Even now, more shockingly, there seems still no clarity about the Iranian Revolution: Was it nothing more than a populist kick against power, and the Shah's heavy-handedness that was hijacked by the Ayatollahs -- as many assert?


(A: We know of course that Iran has never had peace because Britain and the US and other countries have always been destabilizing it and putting in their own boys until they get kicked out.)


Such explanations seem blindingly inadequate to account for events that were -- and still are -- mobilizing and energizing hundreds of millions of Muslims. In my book "Resistance: The Essence of the Islamist Revolution," I argue that the Revolution is essentially a "Refusal" -- a grand refusal to accept an understanding of the self or of the worlds dominated by contemporary secular Western consciousness.


(A: That’s more to the truth, actually.  It says:)


Islamism, in short, is not irrational -- it is no whimsy of divine caprice; it is accessible to reasoned explanation. And it seeks to evolve an alternative to the ways of the West.

Western modernity essentially has stood on two pillars:


The first has been described by historians as the "Great Transformation." It began in Europe in the 18th century and was based on a moral philosophy that saw human welfare yoked to the efficient operation of markets.


(A: In other words the people were put into as wage slaves in the West.)


Humans, pursuing private desires and needs, would intersect with others, through the market mechanism, to maximize not just individual welfare but community well being, too.


(A: As they slash the National Healthcare System apart.  It wouldn’t happen by the way in Muslim countries.)


Closely associated with this was another idea, taken up by English Puritans, that had its roots deep in Anglo-Saxon history: It saw the "invisible hand" of Providence also at work in politics to bring about another "ideal" outcome.


This view held that the jostling and hurly-burly of political contention between the Anglo-Saxon tribes in the earliest society had given rise to a spontaneous harmony and political order.


(A: All the way down to the slaves which actually they called serfs.)


From this political "market," English Puritans believed that the Anglo-Saxon institutions representing the epitome of personal freedom and justice had spontaneously emerged.


(A: Just like that.  They never mention banking or anything like that behind it, money-lending.)


Such key ideas about politics and economics were transported to the Americas with the Pilgrim fathers to become the archetype for the U.S. system of government. The concept of the nation-state, democracy and human rights all flowed from this Protestant current.


Of course the "Great Transformation" did not come about either naturally or spontaneously. The creation of a market system required massive state intervention to subordinate other important social, communal and political objectives to this overriding end.


(A: Absolutely.  To the central banking boys.)


This brought stresses that took 19th-century Europe to the brink of revolution and, by the 1920s, left Islam in crisis, holding on by its fingernails.


In the century leading up to Islam's crisis in the 1920s, the "Great Transformation" had been exported to the Muslim world. There was a rush by the West to create ethnically unitary nation-states in the former Western provinces of the Ottoman Empire.


(A: This is very important, this part, for those who are still awake.  Because, you see, this is a continuation from George Bush Jr. onwards, but he called it Revolutionary Democracy across, whether they like it or not, they’re going to get it.  It says here:)


A powerful nation-state was seen as the only structure with enough instrumental strength to force through the social changes required to impose market liberalization on Muslim societies.


As in Europe earlier, the impact of "transformation" was truly traumatic. Approximately five million European Muslims were driven from their homes between 1821 and 1922 -- as the West created nation-states in former Ottoman provinces.


(A: Now, this is interesting.)


The Young Turk determination to emulate Europe's secular liberal-market modernization in Turkey came at terrible cost:


(A: Now, the Young Turks were started up by the Milner Group.  They had the Young Italians, Young Turks, and Young everything else.  That was your Color Revolutions of then.  Do you realize that what we’re doing today is the same darn process, run by the same people, to do the same, across the same area, to finish it off?  You’ve got to read your history on this.)


One million Armenians died, 250,000 Assyrians perished, and one million Greek Orthodox Anatolians were expelled. Kurdish identity was suppressed, and finally Islam was demonized and suppressed by Kemal Ataturk. Islamic institutions were closed; and the 1,400-year-old Caliphate was abolished.


Paradoxically, it was the Kemalists and Turkey's transformation, which Westerners so admire,


(A: All that slaughter.  We’re taught to admire that.)


that inadvertently, by severing the links to the Caliphate superstructure that had provided stability to the Islamic world for centuries, created the conditions in which Islamism at the popular level could transmute and evolve into a revolutionary movement from the bottom up, including from the margins of the Shiite minority.


(A: The Young Turks, the Milner Group, which is now the Royal Institute of International Affairs, CFR, set up and financed the Color Revolution of its day, caused millions and millions of deaths, across the Middle East.  It says:)


There is a clear line leading from the secularization of Turkey to the Iranian revolution more than a half century later.


Then he goes on about Part II, as well, which I’ll put up tonight at the end of this broadcast.  Because, if you don’t understand this, and again, look at Reel Bad Arabs.  I’ll put that link up again, to show you how we’re all propagandized into hating, hating, hating.  Even when they tell us, oh, hate is bad.  It’s okay to hate the enemies that they give you, you see.  And remember, you really do get your world view from fiction more so than little articles.  That’s where your world view comes form.  But this is from the horse’s mouth.  Alastair Crooke.  Just look up the terms for yourself.  See what they mean, and you’ll see that I’m right.


And now, the US, this other article:


The U.S. and allies are seeking ways to increase pressure on Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad after diplomatic efforts at the United Nations Security Council to support a political transition were blocked by Russian and Chinese vetoes.


“We’re going to have to take measures outside the UN to strengthen and deepen and broaden the international community pressure on Assad,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said yesterday.


(A: So, who is the international community?  I love it when they say America.  Or Britain.  “Britain has decided.”  The people don’t even know themselves what’s going on.  This game has been played for too long, you understand.  We have no say in anything.)


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will work with allies


(A: That’s All Lies, remember.)


to create an international support group for Assad’s opposition and to tighten sanctions against Syria, Nuland said. Other steps include pushing Syria’s trade partners to drop business with the regime and halt weapons shipments in particular, she said. Further action at the UN is also on the table, according to UN diplomats who weren’t authorized to comment publicly.


(A: Do you want to get run by a global system that won’t comment publicly?  Do you?  What’s the point in democracy?  What does democracy mean now?  So:)


“There will be a ‘Plan B,’” Aaron David Miller of the Wilson Center, a Washington policy group,


(A: Another think tank, you see, private.)


said in a telephone interview.


We should get all these characters and see what organizations, private organizations, other ones that they belong to.  Shouldn’t we?  But of course, they won’t do that.  You have to do all that yourself.  So, anyway, they’re still wanting to go and bomb the rest of them, just like the Young Turks, etc, etc.  Back with more, after this break.


Hi folks, I’m Alan Watt.  We’re Cutting Through the Matrix.  And this hour flies in, so I’m going to the callers now.  There’s Daniel from the UK hanging on, and Clint as well.  So, we’ll take Daniel first.  Hello, Daniel?


Daniel: Yeah.  Hello, Alan.  I just wanted to, if it’s all right, read something quickly for people.  It’s from Global Trends, Strategic Trends Document, I downloaded from your website, which I think is important that people should look at.  So, if it’s all right, I’d just like to read out a section entitled Global Economic Collapse.  It’s from 2007, just as the financial problems were starting.  It says:


Globalization will result in critical interdependences that will link members of a globalized society that includes a small super-rich elite and a substantial underclass of slum and subsistence dwellers, who will make up 20% of the world population by 2020. A severe pricing shock, possibly caused by an energy spike or a series of harvest failures, could trigger a domino effect involving the collapse of key international markets across a range of sectors. The impacts of this collapse could be transmitted throughout the globalized economy, possibly resulting in a breakdown of the international political system, as states attempt to respond to domestic crises and the local effects of wider economic collapse.  Sophisticated societies that depend on complex, transnational networks for the supply of basic human needs, such as food that cannot be provided indigenously, are likely to face severe infrastructure failure, collapse of public services and societal conflict.


I mean, that’s pretty scary, because, I mean, this is coming from the MOD. 


Alan: That’s right.  I’ve got the whole thing in my archives section, the whole 90 pages there.


Daniel: Yeah, yeah.  The whole lot’s there from your website.


Alan: The Ministry of Defence, yeah.


Daniel: This was compiled by, amongst others, the RAND Corporation and Chatham House, these think tanks.  But, I mean, that one paragraph really sums up what is coming down the line, exactly.


Alan: Oh, yeah.  And not only that, it’s designed, all the chaos is designed to bring in the New Order, that’s the beauty of it too, of forcing interdependence on everyone across the whole globe.  Absolutely.


Daniel: But I mean, it’s literally a glance into what is going to happen.  That’s what’s so scary about it, because, as it happens, this was 2007, and everything it says here, so far, is building up as they said. 


Alan: Yes.  And they go on with projections up to the year 2040.  They even talk about flash mobs in the streets over food and things like that. 


Daniel: Well, I mean, in the 2010 document, it says:


The state will remain the preeminent actor in international relations and many individual states will be dominated by elite groups that emerge in distinct social, economic, educational, tribal, and ethnic groups.  However the emergence of a global entity, a powerful network of individuals and institutions that sits above the level of individual states and influences the global agenda is also possible. 


Now, they don’t tell you how they reach that conclusion, but really, they’re just bringing it out in the open. 


Alan: They’re bringing it out in the open, absolutely, that we’re run, you see, we’ve been run by a feudal system for a long time, run by corporations and think tanks and international corporations.  So, they’re simply bringing it out into the open.  Quigley again, goes through that, back in the 60s, in his book, Tragedy and Hope, and his other one, The Anglo-American Establishment, that this is the way it would come.  Your CEOs of corporations would be your new feudal overlords.  And that’s the way it’s brought down today.  Government works with nothing but corporations now.  And even, they hire out most of their jobs to them for think tanks and different work and so on.  Roads, everything.  So, you’re quite right.  I’ve got the archives, the archives section at cuttingthroughthematrix.com.  The Ministry of Defence Report for Britain.  It’s also the same one as for NATO, and the American one as well, for 2007/2010.  Both of them.  So, go in there and have a look yourselves.  And sorry, Clint from Ontario, I couldn’t get to you.  Maybe try back tomorrow. 


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:

Nudge Theory Trials used to Bring in More Taxes

--More on Above

NY Times Publishes Hit Piece against US Constitution

Decline of Constitution--Original Papers

Drone Spies for Checking Farms

Policeman Chases Himself on CCTV

Big Brother in Camden Britain

Camden Robocop--UK

Hollywood, Propaganda and Portrayal of "Real Bad Arabs"

Alastair Crooke (MI6) Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Gives an Alternate View on Muslim History


Alan's Materials Available for Purchase and Ordering Information:


"Cutting Through"
  Volumes 1, 2, 3


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


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


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


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