ALAN WATT
ON
"REVOLUTION RADIO"
WITH
MIKE SWENSON
TRUTHNET RADIO NETWORK
August 9, 2007
WWW.CUTTINGTHROUGHTHEMATRIX.COM
www.alanwattsentientsentinel.eu
Mike: Welcome back. Revolution Radio live right here on the TruthNet Radio Network. I'm your host Mike Swenson. We are broadcasting live from the Tampa Bay Florida area right here in the good old United States, home to police officers who eat pot brownies and overdose and call 9/11, and a country that taxes baseball. Yeah, that's right. That's the good old United States. All right, let me get to my guest. I want to get this started as soon as possible here. Alan Watt joins me. He's an author and long time researcher into the causative forces behind major changes in historical delopment. Born in Scotland, he watched the subtleties of politics and media as they guided the population of the U.K. covertly into a European Amalgamation. He has been warning the North American people for some years now that the same process of amalgamation is being carried out. With historical documentation, he shows how cultures are created and altered by those in control, always to lead the people like sheep into the next pasture. Mr. Watt has also been featured on numerous radio programs including Coast-to-Coast AM and Alex Jones' show. His website is cuttingthroughthematrix.com and Alan Watt joins us here tonight on Revolution Radio. I'm so psyched up to this. Alan, thanks for joining us tonight.
Alan: It’s a pleasure to be on.
Mike: Thank you so much. Alan, tell us how you got involved in all of this and you woke up to what's really going on?
Alan: I noticed when I was very young how bad the conditions in Britain were and I noticed that the adults when I was a small child were all arguing about the same basic things, which were basic things for rent mainly and food and so on. I went into libraries to check on the histories and found that Great Britain ruled a good part of the globe, had plundered most of the globe. I wondered where all the wealth went and how come most of the people were renting accommodation across the whole of the United Kingdom. Most people rented local council housing that had been built during World War II as a promise to the people that if they went to war they'd actually get low rental housing for the first time. I also realized that the economy was completely rigged, because no matter where you went in Britain, you'd find the same starting wages for different tradesmen and apprenticeships and so on. You also had really fixed wage type of income and prices. That took tremendous rigging from the top to make it this way, and that's when I realized how old this system was in fact, that you are not free at all. You were born and raised inside a fixed, rigged economic system and your duty (you'll find that from the old books on economics), your duty as a citizen was to serve the system and obey the system basically.
Then I went into the histories of the wars that Britain was involved in. I don't think that people realize that since the creation of the Bank of England, which was really a bank which ran on debts where the citizens are put down as collateral to pay the debts, meaning each generation and generations unborn that gave them limitless wars on which to draw from for the bank, and the guarantee that the future generations would pay off this debt, in order that a small minority living in and around London would reap the wealth of the globe; and nothing's changed. In fact, we have a global elite. A big massive club today that are going full steam ahead after writing their plans in the first world war and the second world war with creation of the United Nations to unite the whole planet and then start culling off the excess population of useless eaters, to gain a form of utopia, a utopia where they won't be worried so much about too many poor people who might one day revolt and overthrow them.
Mike: Right. It's becoming obvious lately we're all becoming slaves to this system, where we're slaves to debt and we're slaves to all different kinds of things – terror threats and all this other stuff. Now when we talk about certain issues and I know you've covered just a massive amount. You've done research in so many different aspects of what's going on, not only in America but across the globe. However, when we talk about certain issues such as New World Order, Trilateral Commission and we always refer to those who run it as "THEY," this has always bothered me a little bit because I can't really pinpoint who they are. So based on your research, who are they when we refer to them as “they”?
Alan: These are families that rose to prominence in the Middle Ages, basically with the emergence of investments and capitalism, not so much the merchandising. Although, they owned the merchandising routes and shipping and so on. They didn't do the actual work themselves. They employed others to do it for them, and you find even the Black Nobilities are called the dark-haired ones of Venice, for instance. Massive banking industry was developed there and tremendous wealth who lived there and they owned the shipping routes of the Old World and all the merchandising that went on back and forward from it.
If you go back as far as the Knights Templars, even with the Crusades, they had to go there to Venice to ask these guys to supply them with all the ships they needed to take them across into the Middle East. These characters owned merchandising, shipping lanes and money and investment system, basically.
Mike: Yes and it's absolutely mind-numbing just how far it goes. I mean just how far back into the world's history all of these families, these bankers, these controllers of society go back. I mean it just goes back generation through generation. I was listening to an interview you did with Alex Jones, I guess it was a couple of months ago, and I was listening to an MP3 download off your website and he was referring to the inbreeding that had been going on for centuries. We all know that anybody that inbreeds in a family, it's going to lead to all kinds of physical and mental problems; and that has been going on especially in these royal families for quite some time.
Alan: Yes, the inbreeding has gone on, and the problem is, once in a while (the problem for the people that is) one is born who looks very normal and is often a tremendous tyrant. A pure utter power-mad psychopath and he's raised in tremendous wealth and status like a spoiled child and he becomes a tyrant. Going back as far as the days of Plato, Plato talks about the difference of the aristocracy compared to the ordinary people whom he called the ITS. The ordinary folk were called ITS by Plato. He says the reason we are so wise and wonderful is that we are superior because of our specialized breeding. They chose their wives for their lineages of having wealthy and successful people in their lineage. He also talked about the ability to breed qualities out of humans and other qualities in; and therefore, for kings and queens and the tycoons of business, you want someone who's pretty sharp but you want someone who is also very ruthless, and so you breed out those with higher emotions and you breed in the ability to be very cunning and decisive.
Mike: Exactly, and I heard you refer to them as - they were referred to as IT. Because they were underlings they weren't even considered people. They were considered things and I think that where all of this started with the downgrading, the marginalization of people that aren't part of the royal family that are part of the royal bloodlines. They're not even considered people; and it still goes on today. You know what I mean?
Alan: Yes, they're chattel and they've no problems you see up until – the average person today doesn't realize that it's only really since the 1700’s, and even then, in Europe you were still considered to be a serf really by the ruling classes. A serf was just another British way of saying you were a slave, in a nicer form that's all. You were bought and sold with the land coming up through a feudal system, so they gave a sham called democracy while they got all the peasants out of the countryside and moved them into the cities, these slum cities that they created for industry, and gave you this strange term that's very flexible called democracy that keeps changing direction.
Yes, it's an old, old trick and we know for instance that in the late 1800’s the first major associations came to the front on behalf of the feudal system, the royalty. Chartered systems like the Cecil Rhodes Foundation and the Lord Milner group of the Roundtable. These joined and merged and became The Royal Institute for International Affairs, with a sister branch in America called The Council on Foreign Relations. The whole idea of this group (and it is one group) was that the elite of both countries, the U.S. and Britain, would merge and rule the world into a British type empire. They said that democracy was just too slow with all of its arguing and debating and so many contrary points that you couldn't get anything done, so they needed a parallel government that would actually work and dictate to those in government, to the ones who are elected; and that's what we have today
In 2005 when they signed openly for the first time the first part of the Amalgamation of the Americas, Canada, the U.S. and Mexico in Waco, Texas, The Council on Foreign Relations came out openly on national television in Canada as The Council on Foreign Relations for the first time and they said that they had drafted up the whole charter for amalgamation and presented to the prime minister and presidents for signing. They boasted about it. No one elects these guys, remember. These are non-governmental organizations.
Mike: Oh exactly. I've totally lost faith in our election system because of all the rigging that goes on. I mean I'll still vote but I don't know if it will even count anymore. What a lot of the mainstream American population doesn't understand, you know they hear this stuff and they’re like “what does this have to do with America?” They don't understand that a lot of these concepts, a lot of this way of life has bled into this country. We came from England and we started up the slavery system here by importing slaves from Africa, and it's the same type of stuff that's been going on, and you know, in countries throughout the world; and people totally underestimate that.
Alan: Yes they do. Even the Founding Fathers said they'd basically adopted the British system for law et cetera. I think there's a lot more to it, to be honest with you, especially when you see how many presidents of the U.S. were actually related to royalty. That's rather surprising.
Mike: It’s disturbing at the same time. Now, moving on to 9/11, which is a huge heated issue nowadays, especially in the alternative media circuit. I cover it a lot on this program. I haven't much lately, but I'm starting to get more into this New World Order stuff and what the grand plan is, but 9/11 is no less an important event. It's obvious that either the government allowed it to happen or they made it to happen. I believe in the latter. What is your take on 9/11 and who in your opinion pulled it off?
Alan: It doesn't really matter who they got to pull it off. What it does matter is that it was an imperative. It had to happen because they wrote about it in the 1990’s as being a necessity. Something on the scale of a Pearl Harbor attack in order to go into Afghanistan and Iraq and get the public support behind them. Zbigniew Brzezinski also wrote about it in "The Grand Chessboard" that he wrote, the book; but you also find it in "The New American Century" policy, the first one they drafted up in '92 and published it, and then they revamped under Wolfowitz in '98 and republished it again. They said they had to go into first of all Afghanistan, then Iraq, then Iran and Syria – so this had to happen. It was very obvious it had to happen.
What's also interesting is that Margaret Thatcher, when she was doing her world tour, came to Canada to Massey Hall in the 1990’s, about '92 or so, and the title of her speech she was giving was "The New World Order." In there she said that because the Cold War was now over, their main problem now would be fundamental religionists of the world and they'd have to move in to especially the Middle East and take care of that problem; because that's all they foresaw at the time, was nothing but terror they claimed. They had this plan on the go long before 9/11 actually happened, and they had troops around Afghanistan before 9/11 happened, too. That's all you really need to know.
Mike: Based on the research I have done, I've come to the conclusion that we're in Afghanistan for pretty much the sole purpose of two things. One, to guard the opiate fields there; and number two, to build that natural gas line in the Caspian Sea. But you're right. I mean my opinion and you share this as well. It's about a total systematic takeover of the Middle East. Iraq obviously had nothing to do with 9/11 yet the government continues to say that it does, because they keep actually flip-flopping in a speech that Bush gave last year. He said that Iraq didn't have anything to do with it. Now Cheney starts that they did and that Bush follows right along, and I'll get more into Bush here in just a little bit. It's almost like Cheney is controlling what Bush is saying. Controlling his thoughts, so to speak, if you want to put it that way, and they don't have any direct ties. There is no evidence that Iraq was tied to 9/11, but they keep painting it as that issue in order to justify us being there. Bush, from the very beginning when the Iraq war started, he's painted several scenarios and flip-flopped as to why we're there. First it started out as Saddam was a tyrannical dictator who was murdering, which he was. I'm not saying he wasn't, but you know he had to be taken out and once he was taken out, people were like okay, why are we still there. It turned into “we're there to liberate the country so that they can vote and be free and be democratic,” and it keeps on shifting. He keeps on shifting his agenda as to being there and then all of a sudden it turns into “Iraq is connected to 9/11 and that's why we're there.” Why does he keep doing this?
Alan: It's an old strategy. The more confusion they can actually put out into the general public, the more confused the public become. When the public become confused, they switch off and allow things to happen. This is the standard old Tavistock technique, because Britain used it before in previous wars too. It was actually on national television here in Canada, the whole inquiring into attacking Iraq, and I have it on tape where Bush said, "I never said that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9/11.” He said, “he was a bad man and the world's a better place without him." That's what he said.
Mike: Exactly, and once the public are constantly pounded with all kinds of flip-flopping and confusion, like you stated, then they feel like they're backed into a corner and they just say “you know what? Screw it. I'm just going to believe it. Why not just believe it,” because it saves them a lot of trouble, rather than digging into the actual evidence to prove otherwise.
Alan: This is the whole idea – this is the thing with war – when you study it, you see the vast history of England and Napoleon turns out to be right when he says “perfidious England.” You find that it doesn't matter what they say is the cause of the start of the war, once they've got your troops abroad it doesn't matter which party they put in, they'll always turn round and say they have to keep them there or there'll be chaos. It really is irrelevant to them as long as get in, in the first place. That's all that matters.
Mike: Exactly. I was talking about this last night. Last year in the elections, when the democrats were elected, people were saying this is great because we have a total shift in policy. The democrats are going to come in here and save the day. They're going to get the economy back on track. We’re going to pull the troops out of Iraq. We're going to see a total shift here because we have a bunch of democrats; and there's a 14 percent approval rating on the democrats right now. It's probably even lower. That's just the last number I heard. It's obvious now when you see Cindy Sheehan pulling out of the anti-war democratic movement, because she realizes now, as most of us should by now, that there's no difference between the democrats and the republicans. It’s just a false paradigm that's put there in order to systematically control how people feel about issues.
Alan: Professor Carroll Quigley couldn't have said it any plainer, remembering that he was the actual historian for The Council on Foreign Relations. He had access to their records and he updated their records and their histories, and he was all for them. He was part of them. He wrote in his book 'Tragedy & Hope" in the 1960’s that there had been – and had been for 50 to 60 years already, a parallel government that actually made all the decisions. He said every president, all the vice presidents and the top men had been professionally picked by this particular group that were not elected. They picked the guys, trained them; and he said that the only competition that was allowed amongst politicians was for the ones at the bottom. You know the millionaires on that side or the millionaires on the other side. It doesn’t matter. They were allowed to do little competitions between themselves for fame and glory and to get their hands into the public cookie jar, but the ones at the top were already picked, passed and approved by The Council on Foreign Relations.
Mike: I mean how scary is that, that we face that now? I want to vote for Ron Paul. I'm going to tackle that issue later, but it's like I know he doesn’t have much shot because of the status of Giuliani and Romney, and on the democrats, you've got Hillary and Obama who I think are just total globalists. I don't think Ron Paul has much of a chance. It seems more and more every day that he's gaining some ground. I mean the mainstream media is censoring him on a daily basis. This MSNBC article is just now hitting here that's saying that they're deleting Ron Paul votes on the poll of their website. I mean they’re doing everything they can to take him out. My point of this is I'm saying I want to vote for Ron Paul but I don't know if I have any confidence. I don't even know if my vote will count. I don’t know how many people’s votes will count anyway. Do you think that the election is already determined right now as we speak?
Alan: I'm sure it was determined 20 years ago who would be in today.
Mike: That goes back to there's no difference between democrats and republicans. I mean it's obvious, even if they put in a democrat after the next election, if it's Hillary or Obama, Obama has already publicly said that he wants to bomb Pakistan and Hillary last week took a donation of like 20 to $40,000, I heard both numbers from News Corps who's owned by Rupert Murdock who owns Fox News and all the mainstream pundits and so there's no difference. Fox totally backs Hillary Clinton. She claims that they don’t. She attacks the republicans. She attacks the neo-cons but there's no difference between her and them.
Alan: The whole thing of politics has been a sham for a long, long time. It's a Punch and Judy show. It's a wrestling match for public. They always tell you who to vote for, because one of them is going to tell you he's going to cut welfare and so on, and the other one isn’t, so they tell you who to vote for and the bulk do. Even then, you have all the vote fraud, so what does it matter?
Mike: Exactly, and these democrats who come in and they want government program after government program. They want to tax the living hell out of the citizens. They want the government take over healthcare. They want the government to take over just about everything. I mean it's a total shred of our Constitution. They're totally for these granting amnesties to illegals and things like that and turning the country into the North American Union combined with Canada and Mexico. Obviously there's no difference at all and that's the problem nowadays, Americans are getting so hung up in this false paradigm and I want to tackle this issue with you as well, is the mainstream media. The mainstream media, you hear the mainstream talk shows, the cable shows and all they do and I mean they're obviously conservative based. They're neo-con based in my opinion, and what they do is they sit here and they say everything that's going wrong – and, of course I'm paraphrasing, but everything that's gone wrong in this country is all the democrats. It's all the liberals fault and they just continue to push this false left-right democrat-republican paradigm in order to – I think it's just to distract people. Would you agree?
Alan: It's not just to distract them. It's to get them back into an emotional way of thinking. These are emotive things. It's nothing to do with reality and it's to make a form of emotional reality for them that there really is a debate going on and there really are differences. You'll find even the Founding Fathers like Thomas Jefferson said it. He said, when you see a particular agenda going ahead unaltered and straightforward ahead, even when the House changes between different parties and the same agenda moves forward, he says, you know you're under tyranny. It's been like that since World War II when they signed the NATO charter, which became the United Nations charter, because you have been under another government since then.
Mike: Exactly. Mussolini once said that once the corporations start working in cahoots with the government, then you have total fascism; and we've had that for years. It's just people are now starting to wake up to it. However, when we get back from the break, we've got to go to break here in just a minute, I want to get into Freemasons with you as well as Nazis and CIA and just this grand puppet scheme that's going on with our current administration and whether or not you think that an impeachment would accomplish much and other topics. But the mainstream media is definitely blinding the mainstream public, the majority of the public in this country from what's really going on; and we're going to get more into that as well. Folks, stay tuned. Joining me tonight is Alan Watt from cuttingthroughthematrix.com. Don't go anywhere. This is Revolution Radio right here on the TruthNet Radio Network, the second hour of the program. Thank you all for joining me here tonight. My website is realinsidenews.com. My email address, if you'd like to contact me with questions, comments, criticisms, guest ideas, advertisement ideas, whatever, just email me at contact@realinsidenews.com or you can click the contact link on my website. Joining me tonight is Alan Watt from cuttingthroughthematrix.com, just one of the most amazing researchers I've ever come across. He knows pretty much the game as it's going and he joins us here tonight to talk about a wide range of issues.
Alan, before the break we were talking about mainstream influence and it just seems like the mainstream media is systematically brainwashing people I mean to put it lightly. I know of a lot of people who will look at me and say man you’re not. I mean brainwashing through a TV, but it's the truth. People will literally watch Fox News, CNN and MSNBC and all these commentary base shows and think that they're really getting the news. They are confident that they are getting their news. Why is there so much confidence, so to speak, in mainstream media by the general public?
Alan: It's because they’ve been weaned on it and raised on it, in a psychological type of mind control technique which has been used on them. If you look at the anchor people, the major ones, they stay there their whole lives. You grow up with them. It's like daddy looking at you at 6:00 p.m. every night and staring right at your face and telling you all you need to know; and would he lie to you? Now, if you notice, all these big media personnel for news end up going over to England and being knighted. Why is it so important that the moguls go over to be knighted by the Queen of England?
It's very, very important to them. You find, of course, that it's England where this whole system of world domination, a global society based on integration and free trade with certain countries being given favored trading status. Most-favored-nation trading status, an idea that was born in the 1500’s with John Dee and Queen Elizabeth I in her court. This is just a combination of a long-term strategy, which Britain is very famous for. They used to start making cathedrals and it takes seven generations of stonemasons to complete them. That's how they run the affairs of the world as well. You have countless bureaucrats working on agendas and they'll never see the culmination of it in their lifetime, but they're quite happy to do their part towards it. All you're seeing is the end of one big part of a business plan taking place.
When General Allenby and the others went into the Middle East in World War I, and Kitchener, they talked about this long-term strategy for the Middle East and how they would divide up the old Ottoman Empire that was run by Turkey, and then how Britain would eventually run Palestine for a short while and then hand it over to a new state of Israel; and they did that through the Balfour Declaration. The Balfour Declaration included much more than just a state for Israel or a home for Israel. It also included a whole long-term plan laid down for the Middle East and those countries like Iraq and Iran and the countries you hear about today were drawn up with lines in the sand by British generals after World War I. Winston Churchill in his own memoirs said “we will eventually have to go to war with Iraq because of the vast amounts of oil in its northern parts.”
Mike: Yes and it's a big chunk of the – like I said earlier, the systematic control of the Middle East – in the grand scheme of things it's just a small part of the control mechanism that not only the military, and this is just based on my research, that not only the military and the government here wants to implement but the bankers as well. Moving on a little bit into the topic of freemasons, they’re an interesting group of individuals, to say the least. Many portray them as a threat to our society. Aside from the bizarre rituals, what in your opinion makes them such a threat to our society?