matrixcutter
19-10-2007, 09:21 PM
Oct. 17, 2007
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" on RBN (ads removed):
"Fascism Weds Socialism Begets Fascocialism - For A "Brave New World" (http://cuttingthrough.jenkness.com/CTTM/Alan_Watt_CTTM_LIVEonRBN_26_Fascism_Weds_Socialism _Begets_Fascocialism--For_A_Brave_New_World_Oct172007.mp3)"
(Books: "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler" by Anthony C. Sutton. "The Trap" by Sir James Goldsmith.)
Sir James Goldsmith was a man who helped champion the British corporate interest for years. He was all for the union for many years, worked hard towards it and he pulled out towards the end when he saw the direction which it was going. And he formed a society to try to pull Britain back out of the union. And he was just getting popular, came across to the US and spoke to the US Senate, warning them in one of the most eloquent speeches I've ever heard - a fantastic orator, warning them of all the dangers that lay ahead and what they'd go through if they had the NAFTA agree and the GATT agreement go through. And all the senators agreed with him, but they all voted to go along with it any way, which tells you who was putting money in their pockets; the big corporate interests.
James Goldsmith suddenly came down with a fast acting cancer, of I think it was the pancreas, very popular one for assassinating people, and he died within about 4-5 weeks of diagnosis.
In his book, it's called "The Trap", Sir James Goldsmith has a question and answer with a man called Yves Messarovitch, who was the economics editor of Le Figaro. And on page 68 of this book, I'll read a little bit here, this is what James Goldsmith says:
"Mastricht,"
Alan: That's where they signed the agreement for, basically bringing the whole of Europe together under this fascist system.
"Mastricht seeks to create a supra-national, centralized bureaucratic state."
Alan: Now remember the US and Canada, and Latin American countries have to follow suit - we're already under way.
"It will destroy the pillars on which Europe was built as nations would convert Europe into one multi-cultural space, in which national identities would be fused and sovereignty abandoned. It would coerce ancient European nations to merge into the ultimate artifical state. George Orwell remarked it is characteristic of intellectuals to pass over an incomprehension of the dominant political passion of the age. Today that passion is national identity and this is the moment when European ruling elites are seeking to destroy the identity of every European nation."
Alan: Here's the question that follows.
"How is it that the peoples of 12 European nations have agreed to this?"
Alan: And here's Sir James Goldsmith's answer. Now this is a man who was involved in the setting up, now listen what he says.
"The European Union was built in secret, not through carelessness or casualness, but in a deliberately planned and skillfully executed manner."
Alan: That's right from the horse's mouth.
"Claude Cheysson, former French Minister of Foreign Affairs and a member of the European Commission from 1985-1989 described the mechanism in an interview in Le Figaro on May 7th, 1994. He explained proudly that the European Union could only have been constructed in the absence of democracy. And he went on to suggest that the present problems were the result of having mistakenly allowed a public debate on the merits of the treaty of Maastricht."
Alan: So it leaked out into the public and they had a debate on it and that was a mistake according to them - it should have been kept secret.
"And the British newspaper The Guardian lodged a case before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, complaining of the secrecy in which European decisions are taken. Lawyers for the European Council of Ministers responded by stating to the judges that there is no principal of community law which gives citizens the right to EU documents."
Alan: So the averge citizen is not allowed to have access to any of the European Union's documents. This is total fascism.
"He went on to make the astounding claim that the low heads of government had repeatedly called for more openness in the EU affairs. Their declarations were of an eminently political nature, not binding on the community institutions, so they asked the judges to ignore the repoeated declarations at EU summit meetings in the past two years in favour of greater openness. Statements by the 12 heads of government were no more than policy orientations and had no binding effect."
Alan: So you had no say. Once you've taken over into this big conglomerate - and that's all it is; it's a corporate conglomerate, a fascist system - you have no say whatsoever, into anything. You can't even get hold of the records, or anything that they're doing in secret.
He goes on to say:
"This belief that the nomenclatura knows best and that the public is no more than a hinderance explains why there now exists a profound and dangerous divorce between European societies and their governing elites."
Alan: This is from a guy who is one of the elites; he doesn't mind saying it. And he calls them the governing elites. He says:
"What was done in secret?"
Alan: That was the question. Here's the answer.
"Quietly and progressively, power was transferred to the 17 unelected technocrats,"--
Alan: A technocrat is someone who's been involved in politics and often they're unelected. They're appointed. We all have these characters at the high positions.
"technocrats who were the members of the European Commission. Originally power had been entrusted to the council of ministers, which consists of the elected national heads of state or the representatives. As they were more interested in national policies than in creation of Europe, bit by bit the technocrats of the commission were allowed to take over executive power."
Alan: Now he says they were allowed to take over executive power. He's telling you that there's a higher authority here that selects these characters and puts them in placements in those positions.
"They have been granted a monopoly right to propose new initiatives for the development of the European Union and ambition is not modest. Jacques Dolores, outgoing president of the commission declared that in future 80% of all laws governing economic, social and fiscal affairs of each European nation would originate in Brussels and therefore from proposals initiated the commission. This was certain to be the case. This rush towards technocratic, hyper-centralisation has created a Europe which is hopelessly weak externally and unable to influence the course of world events. Internally, the power of the technocracy is employed to destroy sovereignty, freedom and self-reliance."
Alan: And he was asked "how do you define a technocrat?" He says:
"Usually a technocrat is an ex-politician or a civil servant. He is unelected, virtually impossible to dislodge during his term of employment and has been granted extensive executive and even legislative power without popular mandate and without being directly answerable to the people whose interests theoretically they suppose to represent."
Alan: So that is from Sir James Goldsmith, very good book called "The Trap", worth reading. You can get it pretty cheap I'm sure on Amazon or somewhere. And that's from one of the guys who made a speech at the US Senate, one of the best speeches ever, over an hour long, warning of all the pitfalls - what would happen to the people of the US and Canada, Latin America, if they amalgamated and copied the European Union. What he didn't mention of course was that the Council on Foreign Relations and the Royal Institute for International Affairs was set up a long time ago - 100 years ago pretty well - to do exactly this, to turn the world into a 3-part trading bloc. And they place their members, they put in the technocrats at the heads of all these big organisations, who work diligently for their whole lives long towards the amalgamation process. The big foundations back them up, in fact many of the foundations train them and put them out there. They're unelected, and we have never had really democracy, we simply live one long business plan because that's what the world is; a long long business plan.
Once again this goes all the way back, we trace it through history. We can find people like John Dee who was an advisor at the court of Queen Elizabeth I. He was also a spy for Queen Elizabeth I on his foreign tours of Europe, and his designation was 007 by the way. John Dee wrote about the "Brytish empire" he called it, and how it would be based on free trade. Those who would join get special grants and be given "most privileged nation" trading status - a term that was given to China just before Britain handed Hong Kong back to China. And on it goes; big business plan.
Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" on RBN (ads removed):
"Fascism Weds Socialism Begets Fascocialism - For A "Brave New World" (http://cuttingthrough.jenkness.com/CTTM/Alan_Watt_CTTM_LIVEonRBN_26_Fascism_Weds_Socialism _Begets_Fascocialism--For_A_Brave_New_World_Oct172007.mp3)"
(Books: "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler" by Anthony C. Sutton. "The Trap" by Sir James Goldsmith.)
Sir James Goldsmith was a man who helped champion the British corporate interest for years. He was all for the union for many years, worked hard towards it and he pulled out towards the end when he saw the direction which it was going. And he formed a society to try to pull Britain back out of the union. And he was just getting popular, came across to the US and spoke to the US Senate, warning them in one of the most eloquent speeches I've ever heard - a fantastic orator, warning them of all the dangers that lay ahead and what they'd go through if they had the NAFTA agree and the GATT agreement go through. And all the senators agreed with him, but they all voted to go along with it any way, which tells you who was putting money in their pockets; the big corporate interests.
James Goldsmith suddenly came down with a fast acting cancer, of I think it was the pancreas, very popular one for assassinating people, and he died within about 4-5 weeks of diagnosis.
In his book, it's called "The Trap", Sir James Goldsmith has a question and answer with a man called Yves Messarovitch, who was the economics editor of Le Figaro. And on page 68 of this book, I'll read a little bit here, this is what James Goldsmith says:
"Mastricht,"
Alan: That's where they signed the agreement for, basically bringing the whole of Europe together under this fascist system.
"Mastricht seeks to create a supra-national, centralized bureaucratic state."
Alan: Now remember the US and Canada, and Latin American countries have to follow suit - we're already under way.
"It will destroy the pillars on which Europe was built as nations would convert Europe into one multi-cultural space, in which national identities would be fused and sovereignty abandoned. It would coerce ancient European nations to merge into the ultimate artifical state. George Orwell remarked it is characteristic of intellectuals to pass over an incomprehension of the dominant political passion of the age. Today that passion is national identity and this is the moment when European ruling elites are seeking to destroy the identity of every European nation."
Alan: Here's the question that follows.
"How is it that the peoples of 12 European nations have agreed to this?"
Alan: And here's Sir James Goldsmith's answer. Now this is a man who was involved in the setting up, now listen what he says.
"The European Union was built in secret, not through carelessness or casualness, but in a deliberately planned and skillfully executed manner."
Alan: That's right from the horse's mouth.
"Claude Cheysson, former French Minister of Foreign Affairs and a member of the European Commission from 1985-1989 described the mechanism in an interview in Le Figaro on May 7th, 1994. He explained proudly that the European Union could only have been constructed in the absence of democracy. And he went on to suggest that the present problems were the result of having mistakenly allowed a public debate on the merits of the treaty of Maastricht."
Alan: So it leaked out into the public and they had a debate on it and that was a mistake according to them - it should have been kept secret.
"And the British newspaper The Guardian lodged a case before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, complaining of the secrecy in which European decisions are taken. Lawyers for the European Council of Ministers responded by stating to the judges that there is no principal of community law which gives citizens the right to EU documents."
Alan: So the averge citizen is not allowed to have access to any of the European Union's documents. This is total fascism.
"He went on to make the astounding claim that the low heads of government had repeatedly called for more openness in the EU affairs. Their declarations were of an eminently political nature, not binding on the community institutions, so they asked the judges to ignore the repoeated declarations at EU summit meetings in the past two years in favour of greater openness. Statements by the 12 heads of government were no more than policy orientations and had no binding effect."
Alan: So you had no say. Once you've taken over into this big conglomerate - and that's all it is; it's a corporate conglomerate, a fascist system - you have no say whatsoever, into anything. You can't even get hold of the records, or anything that they're doing in secret.
He goes on to say:
"This belief that the nomenclatura knows best and that the public is no more than a hinderance explains why there now exists a profound and dangerous divorce between European societies and their governing elites."
Alan: This is from a guy who is one of the elites; he doesn't mind saying it. And he calls them the governing elites. He says:
"What was done in secret?"
Alan: That was the question. Here's the answer.
"Quietly and progressively, power was transferred to the 17 unelected technocrats,"--
Alan: A technocrat is someone who's been involved in politics and often they're unelected. They're appointed. We all have these characters at the high positions.
"technocrats who were the members of the European Commission. Originally power had been entrusted to the council of ministers, which consists of the elected national heads of state or the representatives. As they were more interested in national policies than in creation of Europe, bit by bit the technocrats of the commission were allowed to take over executive power."
Alan: Now he says they were allowed to take over executive power. He's telling you that there's a higher authority here that selects these characters and puts them in placements in those positions.
"They have been granted a monopoly right to propose new initiatives for the development of the European Union and ambition is not modest. Jacques Dolores, outgoing president of the commission declared that in future 80% of all laws governing economic, social and fiscal affairs of each European nation would originate in Brussels and therefore from proposals initiated the commission. This was certain to be the case. This rush towards technocratic, hyper-centralisation has created a Europe which is hopelessly weak externally and unable to influence the course of world events. Internally, the power of the technocracy is employed to destroy sovereignty, freedom and self-reliance."
Alan: And he was asked "how do you define a technocrat?" He says:
"Usually a technocrat is an ex-politician or a civil servant. He is unelected, virtually impossible to dislodge during his term of employment and has been granted extensive executive and even legislative power without popular mandate and without being directly answerable to the people whose interests theoretically they suppose to represent."
Alan: So that is from Sir James Goldsmith, very good book called "The Trap", worth reading. You can get it pretty cheap I'm sure on Amazon or somewhere. And that's from one of the guys who made a speech at the US Senate, one of the best speeches ever, over an hour long, warning of all the pitfalls - what would happen to the people of the US and Canada, Latin America, if they amalgamated and copied the European Union. What he didn't mention of course was that the Council on Foreign Relations and the Royal Institute for International Affairs was set up a long time ago - 100 years ago pretty well - to do exactly this, to turn the world into a 3-part trading bloc. And they place their members, they put in the technocrats at the heads of all these big organisations, who work diligently for their whole lives long towards the amalgamation process. The big foundations back them up, in fact many of the foundations train them and put them out there. They're unelected, and we have never had really democracy, we simply live one long business plan because that's what the world is; a long long business plan.
Once again this goes all the way back, we trace it through history. We can find people like John Dee who was an advisor at the court of Queen Elizabeth I. He was also a spy for Queen Elizabeth I on his foreign tours of Europe, and his designation was 007 by the way. John Dee wrote about the "Brytish empire" he called it, and how it would be based on free trade. Those who would join get special grants and be given "most privileged nation" trading status - a term that was given to China just before Britain handed Hong Kong back to China. And on it goes; big business plan.