|
Kleine Einführung
ins aktuelle
Weltgeschehen
Wisse was IST,
dann weisst du,
was zu TUN ist
(jhr)
Kleine Einführung ins aktuelle Weltgeschehen
NACHDENK-SUITEN
Impulse 2016
Impulse 2015
Die 'WARUM'-Frage
Was uns so selten beantwortet wird
MAHNWACHE(N)
für den Frieden und die Freiheit - global
Fortsetzung Paradigmawechsel
Sei dabei - OCCUPY
Einleitung
Paradigmawechsel
Impulse 2014
DELPHINE & WALE
brauchen unsere Hilfe
DIE NEUEN KINDER
...
sind da ...
Impulse 2013
ANGST und ihre TRANSFORMATION
ESM-Vertrag -
Europa auf dem Weg in eine
Diktatur?
Impulse
2012
Ein Neubeginn
GRUND-EINKOMMEN
Bedingungsloses Grundeink. für ALLE
IMPFEN
Wem hilft's denn tatsächlich?
GRIPPE 09
-
sogenannte Schweine-Grippe
MMS
Miracle
Mineral
Supplement.
Ein "neues Antibiotikum?"
°
BORAX
CODEX ALIMENTARIUM
- (Anti-)Lebens-mittelcodex
CHEMTRAILS, HAARP, MINDCONTROL
die täglichen Manipulationen
OIL-KATASTROPHE
USA
im Golf von Mexiko
BIOMETRISCHER PASS
(CH)
Chip-Kontrolle unisono
ATOM-KATASTROPHE JAPAN
& GLOBAL die 'neuen'
Altlasten
UFO-DISCLOSURE
was uns kosmisch
vorenthalten wird
Fazit im schon fast 'legendären 2012'
eigene
Astrologieartikel
erschienen in der Zeitschrift Astrolog
1981-2003
aktuelle...
Sonne
Erdbeben
Vulkane
Übersicht 1
Übersicht 2
Warnungen-News
Aktuelle Ereignisse
| |
° Tonbandabschriften von Dr. Richard Day aus dem Jahre 1969
Overlords of Chaos
Unfortunately for the people of the world everything is going according to
the New World Order Plan. But what is this New World Order Plan? In a
nutshell the Plan is this. The Dark Agenda of the secret planners of the New
World Order is to reduce the world's population to a "sustainable" level "in
perpetual balance with nature" by a ruthless Population Control Agenda via
Population and Reproduction Control. A Mass Culling of the People via
Planned Parenthood, toxic adulteration of water and food supplies, release
of weaponised man-made viruses, man-made pandemics, mass vaccination
campaigns and a planned Third World War. Then, the Dark Agenda will impose
upon the drastically reduced world population a global feudal-fascist state
with a World Government, World Religion, World Army, World Central Bank,
World Currency and a micro-chipped population. In short, to kill 90% of the
world's population and to control all aspects of the human condition and
thus rule everyone, everywhere from the cradle to the grave.
Novus Ordo Seclorum: the New World Order
Tape Three
Note: This is a transcript of an interview by Randy Engel, Director of the
US Coalition for Life, with Dr Larry Dunegan on Oct. 10, 1991 in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. On tapes I and II, (made in 1988) Dr Lawrence Dunegan,
recounted his memories of the lecture he attended in 1969 where a New World
Order insider, Dr Richard Day, revealed plans for a "World System" which is
usually called the New World Order i.e. the long planned and awaited
feudal-fascist World Government. In this final tape Dr Dunegan fleshes out
the character of Dr Day and the nature of his "New System."
Randy Engel (R.E.): Why don't we open up with a little bit about the man who
you are talking about on these tapes. Just a little profile and a little bit
about his education and particularly his relationship with the population
control establishment. I think that probably was his entree into much of
this information.
Dr Lawrence Dunegan (D.L.D.): Yeah. Dr Day was the Chairman of the
Department of Pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh from about 1959
thru '64, about that period of time, and then he left the University of
Pittsburgh and went to fill the position of Medical Director of Planned
Parenthood Federation of America.
R.E: And that was what… about 1965 to '68, about that period?
D.L.D: About '64 or '65 'til about '68 or '69, and then he left there ... I
don't know specifically why, I did not know him intimately. We were, you
know, more than acquainted ... I was a student and he would see me at
lectures and, so he knew my name as a student, probably corrected some of my
test scores and that sort of thing. Of course, I knew him as lecturer -would
stand in front of the auditorium and listen as he talked about diseases ...
and take notes.
R.E: What's interesting is that this man is not as well known, I think to
our listeners as names like Mary Calderone and Allen Gootmacher(sp). They
were medical directors at one time or another for Planned Parenthood, but Dr
Day was not well known. And as a matter of fact when I went back into the
SIECUS archives there was very little information that had his actual name
on it. So he was not one of the better known of the medical directors, but
I'd say he probably had the scoop of what was going on as well -if not
better- than any of the others before or after he came. Can you describe the
scene of this particular lecture, the approximate date, and what was the
occasion- and then a little bit about the audience?
D.L.D: This was the … the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society holds about four
meetings each year where we have some speaker come in and talk about a
medical topic related to pediatrics and this was our spring meeting. It's
always late February or early part of March. This was in March, 1969 and it
was held at a restaurant called the Lamont which is well known in
Pittsburgh. Beautiful place. In attendance, I would say somewhere in the
neighborhood of 80 people. Mostly physicians, if not exclusively physicians.
Predominantly pediatricians, particularly pediatric surgeons and pediatric
radiologists -other people who were involved in medical care of children,
even though they might not be pediatricians as such.
R.E: And the speech was given after the meal, I presume?
D.L.D: A very nice meal and everyone was settled down, quite comfortable and
quite filled and really an ideal state to absorb what was coming.
R.E: But when you listen to the tape, he says some of the most ... well not
only outrageous things, but things you would think a pediatrician would kind
of almost jump out of his seat at ... for example when he mentions the
cancer cures. There were probably doctors in the audience who were perhaps
treating a child or knowing of a child who was in need of a particular
cancer cure. And to hear that some of these prescriptions for or treatments
for cancer were sitting over at the Rockefeller Institute, and yet, as far
as I got from the tape everyone just kind of sat there ... didn't say very
much. I mean he was talking about falsifying scientific data and everyone
just kind of yawns and ... How long did this speech go on?
D.L.D: Two hours. He spoke for over two hours which was longer than most of
our speakers go and one of the interesting things ... he hasn't finished, it
was getting late and he said:
" ... there's much much more, but we could be here all night but it's time
to stop."
And I think that's significant, that there was much more that we never heard.
In the beginning of the presentation, I don't know whether I mentioned this
at the introduction of the first tape or not, but somewhere in the beginning
of this he said:
"You will forget most or much of what I'm going to tell you tonight."
And at the time I thought, well, sure, that's true. We tend to forget. You
know, somebody talks for hours you forget a lot of what they say. But, there
is such a thing as the power of suggestion and I can't say for sure but I do
wonder if this may not have been a suggestion when we were all full of a
nice dinner and relaxed and listening - we took that suggestion and forgot,
because I know a number of my colleagues who were there when I would - some
years later – say:
"Do you remember when Dr Day said this, or he said that or said the other?"
They'd say: "Well, yeah, I kind of ... is that what he said? You know I kind
of remember that."
But most were not very impressed, which to me was surprising because ...
well use the example of cancer cures. But he said a number of things that …
R.E: Like doctors making too much money ...?
D.L.D: Yeah, changing the image of the doctor. You're just going to be a
high-paid technician rather than a professional who exercises independent
judgment on behalf of his independent patient. A number of things that I
thought should have been offensive and elicited a reaction from physicians
because they were physicians. I was surprised at how little reaction there
was to it. And then other things that I would have expected people to react
to just because they were human beings and I think most of the people at the
meeting subscribed more or less to the Judaeo-Christian ethic and codes of
behavior, and that was violated right and left. And particularly one of my
friends I thought would be as disturbed as I was about this just sort of
smiled ... wasn't disturbed at all. I thought, gee, this is surprising.
R.E: Was part of it also because of his prominence? I mean he was …
D.L.D: The authority ... Authority figure? Yeah, I think there might be
something there. This is the authority. We sort of owe some deference here.
R.E: And he couldn't possibly mean what he's saying or there couldn't
possibly be any ... I mean, he's such a good guy.
D.L.D: I've often heard that phrase, "He's such a good guy. I can't believe
he'd actually mean the things" ... I can only speculate about this. But I do
think at the time there was an element of disbelief about all of this.
Thinking, well this is somebody's fairy tale plan but it will never really
happen because it's too outlandish. Of course we know step by step it is
indeed happening right under our feet.
R.E: Before talking about the specific areas, I think there's a lot of
benefits from this tape. One of them is when we have a good idea of what the
opposition is about and the techniques he's using - then you can turn around
and begin your resistance to all the types of manipulations and so forth. So
I think that the seeing that there were four or five "theme songs" -he kept
repeating them over and over again.
For example this business which I think is so important that people fail to
distinguish between the ostensible reason and the real reason. In other
words, if you want someone to do something and you know that initially he'll
be balky at doing that because it's against his morals or against his
religious beliefs, you have to substitute another reason that will be
acceptable. And then, after he accepts it and it's a fait accompli then
there's just no turning back.
D.L.D: Right. It was in that connection that he said, "People don't ask the
right questions." Too trusting. And this was directed, as I recall, mostly
at Americans. I had the feelings he thought Europeans maybe were more
skeptical and more sophisticated. That Americans are too trusting and don't
ask the right questions.
R.E: With regard to this lack of ... almost a lack of discernment. I guess
that's basically what he was saying. They were easily tricked or too
trusting. The thing that flashed through my mind rather quickly, for example
in schools ... how quickly so-called AIDS education was introduced. It did
amaze me because if a group stated publicly that they wanted to introduce
the concept of sodomy or initiate sex earlier and earlier in children and
that was the reason given, most parents I presume wouldn't go for that. So
you have to come up with another reason and of course the reason for this
so-called AIDS education was to protect children from this disease. But
actually, as it turns out, it's really been a great boon for the homosexual
network, because through various things like Project Ten they now have
access to our children from the youngest years.
These programs are going on from K-12 and I imagine well into college and
beyond, so that they are reaching a tremendous segment. Speaking of children,
I gather that this speaker ... he kept on making the point about, well, old
people, they're going to go by the wayside, so I presume that the emphasis
for these controllers for this New World Order is really an emphasis on
youth.
D.L.D: Absolutely. Yes. Emphasis on youth. This was stated explicitly.
People beyond a certain age ... they're set in their ways and you're not
going to change them. They have values and they're going to stick to them.
But you get to the youth when they're young, they're pliable. You mold them
in the direction you want them to go. This is correct. They're targeting the
young. They figure, "you old fogies that don't see it our way, you're going
to be dying off or when the time comes we're going to get rid of you. But
it's the youngsters we have to mold in the impression we want."
Now something on homosexuality I want to expand on, I don't think this came
out on the original tape, but there was, first of all:
"We're going to promote homosexuality."
And secondly:
"We recognize that it's bizarre abnormal behavior. But, this is another
element in the law of the jungle, because people who are stupid enough to go
along with this are not fit to inhabit the planet and they'll go by the
wayside".
I'm not stating this precisely the way he said it, but it wasn't too far
from there where there was some mention of diseases being created. And when
I remember the one statement and remember the other statement, I believe
AIDS is a disease which has been created in the laboratory and I think that
one purpose it serves is to get rid of people who are so stupid as to go
along with our homosexual program. Let them wipe themselves out.
Now it's hard for me make clear how much of it is I'm remembering with great
confidence and how much is pure speculation. But as I synthesize this - this
is I think what happens ...
"If you're dumb enough to be convinced by our promotion of homosexuality you
don't deserve a place and you're going to fall by the wayside sooner or
later. We'll be rid of you. We'll select out ... the people who will survive
are those who are also smart enough not to be deluded by our propaganda".
Does that make sense?
R.E: Well, it certainly makes sense for them. And I think also this early
sex initiation has the over all purpose which I think we'll get to in depth
a little later. But of the sexualization of the population ... when he said
on the tape, basically, "Anything goes", I think that is what we're seeing.
It's not so much that, let's say, someone may not adopt the homosexual style
for himself, but as a result of the propaganda he certainly will be a lot
more tolerant of that type of behavior too. So it's a desensitization, even
for the individual who doesn't go over and accept it for himself.
D.L.D: With the power of propaganda you dare not be against homosexuals,
otherwise you get labeled homophobe. You dare not be against any of our
programs for women, otherwise you're a male chauvinist pig. It's like
anti-Semitism. If this label gets enough currency in the culture that people
get shockingly stuck with it. It's easier to keep quiet.
R.E: Another theme was this business about "change." And I want to get to
change in relation to religion and family, but during the period of hearing
this tape, I remember going to a mass and they happened to have at that
point dancing girls from the alter. So when I was sitting and getting a
chance to listen to the tape I thought, as a Catholic that has been ... if
you talk about effective change, that has been probably the most difficult
and the hardest thing has been to watch our traditional Mass, those things
which Catholics have practiced and believed for so long and ... at about
that time this speech was given which was about late 1969, everything had
begun to turn over on its head, so much so that I think many people feel now
when they go into a church where there is the Novus Ordo (sp), I think
you're almost in a state of constant anxiety because you're not quite sure
... What am I going to encounter now?
You look at the little song book; of course that's changed radically and you
see, instead of brethren, you see people; or you might see something odd
happening up at the alter which is now the "table". The notion of God as
eternal and the teachings of Jesus Christ as eternal, and therefore the
teachings of the church as eternal depends on the authority of God, and God
brings about change in God's way. What this boils down to me is these people
say, "No, we take the place of God; we establish what will change and what
will not change, so if we say that homosexuality or anything is moral today
... wasn't yesterday, but it is today. We have said so, and therefore it's
moral. We can change tomorrow. We can make it immoral again tomorrow". And
this is the usurpation of the role of God to define what the peon, the
ordinary person's supposed to believe.
D.L.D: So, the idea is, that if everybody is used to change most people
aren't going to ask, "Well who has decided what should be changed and how it
should be changed"? Most people just go along with it, like hemlines, and
shoe styles and that sort of thing. So it is a usurpation of the Rule of God,
and if you read the Humanist Manifesto, and somewhere early in the
introductory part of it, they say, "human intellect is the highest good."
Well, to any human being, what you call the highest good, that's your god.
So to these people human intellect being the highest good is god. And where
does human intellect reside? Well, in the brain of one or more human beings.
So these people, in effect ... I don't know think they'd be so candid as to
say so, but whether they know it or not what they're saying is, "I am god.
we are gods, because we decide what is moral what is moral tomorrow, what is
going to be moral next year. We determine change."
R.E: That's right. And of course, in a nutshell, you've just explained the
human potential, the New Age, all the new esoteric movements that we've seen.
But with regard to change, he seemed to acknowledge that there were a couple
of entities which traditionally blocked this change and therefore made
people resistant to constant manipulation. And of course one of those is the
family, and that would include grandmothers, grandfathers, our ethnic
background and so forth and I guess I was impressed by everything he seemed
to mention whether it was economics, music ... had the overall effect of
diminishing the family and enhancing the power of the state. That was a
constant theme, and therefore when we're evaluating things I think one of
the things we should generally say to ourselves is, "What effect does that
have on family life, and the family and I think if every congressman or
senator asked that question we probably wouldn't have much action up on
Capitol Hill, because almost everything coming down the pike has an effect
of disavowing, hurting the family life and enhancing and expanding the power
of government.
D.L.D: It has an ostensible purpose, and then it has a real purpose.
R.E: Yes, and as a so-called helping professional your ability to say that
is very interesting. The other factor is this whole factor of religion, and
he was talking basically about a religion without dogma, a religion that
would have a little bit from all the other traditional religions so no one
would really feel uncomfortable, and he said, rather condescendingly, some
people need this and if they need it we'll manufacture something that they
need. But of course it can't be anything that would declare anything that
were moral absolutes or the natural law. Which means that the main target of
this group of controllers of course, was and is the Roman Catholic Church
and he mentioned the Roman Catholic Church specifically.
D.L.D: Religion's important because it is eternal and we ... people who
would follow the church will not buy our rules about change. But if we make
our own religion, if we define what is religion then we can change it as it
suits us. Yes, the Roman Catholic Church ... I was kind of flattered sitting
here as a catholic, hearing it pointed out that the church is the one
obstacle that, he said:
"We have to change that. And once the Roman Catholic Church falls, the rest
of Christianity will fall easily".
R.E: I notice that, as the conversation went on, he said:
"Now you may think Churches will stand in the way, but I want to tell you
that they will help us," and he didn't say they will help us, all except the
Roman Catholic Church ... he said, "They will help us," and unfortunately
...
D.L.D: He was right.
RE: He didn't say this explicitly, but again it was one of those themes that
came through ... he apparently thought the use of words was real important
because he mentioned this with regard to a number of things, like the Bible.
The very same as the psychiatrist, Miralu mentioned that "if you want to
control the people, you control the language first." Words are weapons. He
apparently knew that very well and I think the controllers as a whole know
this very well. Of course, it's part of their campaign.
But that little statement about words, that "words will be changed." When I
heard that I thought ... "Instead of saying 'alter' you say 'table'. Instead
of saying 'sacrifice' you say 'meal' with regard to the Mass," and people
say, "That's not important". Of course, you know that's VERY important,
otherwise, why would they bother to change it? Otherwise, why go through all
this rigmarole if it isn't important? It's obviously important for them
because they know with the changing of words you change ideas.
D.L.D: They're exerting a lot of effort and time to change it and they're
not exerting effort on things that are NOT important, so yes, you're
absolutely right. The priest no longer has the role ... in some cases he no
longer has the role the priest formerly had. Because words carry meaning.
There's the dictionary definition, but I think we all know that certain
words carry meaning that is a little bit hard to put into words ... but they
carry meaning.
So yes, controlling the language ... you think in your language. You think
to yourself in English or Spanish or whatever language you're familiar with,
but when you think, you talk to yourself and you talk to yourself in words,
just the way you talk to other people. And if you can control the language
with which one person speaks to himself or one person speaks to another
you've gone a long way towards controlling what that person is able- what he
is capable of thinking, and that has both an inclusionary and an
exclusionary component to it. You set the tone ....
R.E: Take the word gay, for example. I have some old tapes by Franz Lehar
and he talks about the gay Hussars, you know ... the happy soldiers ... and
now you couldn't quite use that same word, could you? But you know, the word
homosexual, sodomite has been replaced with the term "gay", represents an
ideology not only a word and when you use it, it's tacit to saying, "Yes, I
accept what your interpretation of this is".
D.L.D: They probably had a committee working for months to pick which word
they were going to use for this. The word "gay" carries a connotation, first
of all, which is inaccurate. Most homosexuals are not at all gay. They tend
to be pretty unhappy people. Despite all the publicity that tells them they
can and should feel comfortable with what they're doing, most of them deep
down inside don't ... (both begin talking at the same time here).
R.E: I suppose they're going to come up with a sadophobia for those who have
a hang-up about sadomasochism and a pedophobia for those who have
difficulties with pedophilia, so we can just look forward to this I think. I
guess we can look forward to it to the extent we permit ourselves ... that
we permit the opposition to have access to the brain.
D.L.D: And to dictate the truth we use. Sex education is not education. It's
conditioning, and we should never use the term "sex education." It's a
misnomer. If they control the vocabulary, then they can control the way we
can think and the way we can express ideas among ourselves and to anybody.
But "sex conditioning," "sex initiation" is much more accurate and we should
insist on that. We should never use terms "homophobia" and "gay." Homosexual
is homosexual. It's not at all gay.
R.E: That's right. In fact we're probably going to have to do some homework
on ... probably of all the popular movements in the US Probably the pro-life
movement is the most sensitive to words. Talking about media events and
access to the brain, I remember the first speech Bush gave in which he
talked about the New World Order ... I remember jumping halfway off my seat.
That term. Here he is, the president, saying New World Order as if it was
something everyone knew about. And someone looking across the room said, "I
heard that. What did he say?" And I said, "He said, 'New World Order'!" And
they said, "What does that mean? Why is that extraordinary?"
So, I think one of the weapons we have against the controllers is that if we
can cut off his access to our mind then we have a shot at escaping the
manipulation, if not totally - at least escape a portion of the
manipulations. Remember, one of the books on Chinese POWs pointed out that
some of their survivors in order NOT to be brainwashed broke their eardrums.
And in that way - not being able to hear - the enemy could not have access
to their brain and therefore they were able to survive where others did not.
And in our popular culture we have a number of things ... TV and radio
probably primarily, that are the constant means by which the opposition has
access to our brain and to our children's brains. So I think the logical
conclusion, and one of the common-sense conclusions is that if you don't
want the enemy to have access you have to cut off the lines of access ...
which would be in homes to simply either eliminate altogether, or control by
other forms ....
D.L.D: Take the networks at there word. They say, "if you don't like our
programming, turn it off." And we should. We should say, "Yeah. You're
right." And we should turn it off. And let the advertisers spend their money
on an audience that isn't there. As a pediatrician I'm always interested in
how kids do things and how kids are like adults, and whether you're talking
about International politics where one nation goes to war with another or
kids on the playground, there are certain things that are common. It's just
that kids on the playgrounds do it on a smaller scale. But you mention
cutting off access to your brain ... somebody says, I don't want to hear it.
And I remember hearing kids on a playground ... somebody says ..."ya-na-na
na naa-na." and they're teasing the kid ... What's he do? He puts his hands
over his ears. Says I'm not going to listen. And the kid who's trying to
torment him will try to pull his hands away and be sure that he listens. And
it's the same ....
R.E: Words. Words entering. And the child knows. Words have meaning. They're
hurting him.
D.L.D: Goebels knew it. Lenin knew it. CBS knows it. It's interesting; the
principle stands - across the board. It just gets more complicated as you
get older. More sophisticated. But watch kids on a playground and you'll
learn a whole lot about adults.
R.E: Yes. We're all nodding our heads at that one. This Dr Day was very much
into the whole population control establishment, and he was of course in
favor of abortion. But as he started talking about the aged and euthanasia I
recall one of the population- control books saying that birth control
without death control was meaningless.
And one of the advantages in terms … if one was favorable toward the killing
of the aged … one of the favorable things is in fact abortion for the simple
reason that -universally speaking- abortion has the result of bringing about
a rather inordinate chopping off of population at the front end. That is, at
the birth end. And the inevitable effect is that you will have a population
that is top heavy with a rapidly aging population which is the current state
in the United States. So, inevitably, if you are going to go about killing
the young, especially at the pace we seem to have adapted ourselves to in
this country, then invariably you're going to have to do something about all
those aging populations. Because, the few children who are born, after all,
they cannot be expected to carry this tremendous burden of all these people.
So you're cutting one end and therefore, inevitably, as you pointed out on
the tape, he was saying:
"Well, these few young people who are permitted to be born will feel this
inevitable burden on them and so they'll be more desensitized."
They'll be more warmed up to the idea of grandma and grandpa having this
little party and then shuffle them off to wherever they shuffle off to. And
whether it's taking the "demise" pill or going to a death camp, or ....
D.L.D: There was a movie out sometime back called "Soylent Green." Remember
that movie? I didn't see the whole movie, but Edward G. Robinson liked to
sit in the theatre and listen to Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony as he was to
take his demise pill.
R.E: That's right. He also made the point that the food the people were
eating were each other. But as he said, as long as it's done with dignity
and humanely ... like putting away your horse.
D.L.D: That's a little bit like pornography. Years back kids would come
across pornography. It was always poor photography and cheap paper. Then
Playboy came out with the glossy pages and really good photography, so then
pornography is no longer cheap. It's respectable. We went to a movie at the
Pittsburgh Playhouse. I took my son along. It was the Manchurian Candidate.
During the previews of the things that are going to come there was a title I
don't remember but it was (inaudible) in technicolor with classical music in
the background.
And it was a pornographic movie. And I said, well, if you have a guitar then
it's pornography; but if you have classical movie then it converts it into
art. It was pornography. It's an example of what you were saying. As long as
it's done with dignity, that's what counts. If you kill someone with dignity,
it's ok. If you have pornography with classical music it's art. That was the
point I was trying to make.
R.E: Again, talking about the family. Currently I know there are an awful
lot of people who are out of jobs and he [Dr Day] had quite a lot of things
to say about, for example, heavy industry. I guess the shock was that this
man ... I wasn't surprised that he knew a lot about population control,
abortion, and at the other end: euthanasia.
But what did surprise me was that he was an individual who was talking about
religion, law, education, sports, entertainment, food ... how could one
individual have that much input? Now one could say, "well, it didn't pan
out." But we know listening to these recollections twenty years later ...
except perhaps for some minor things, everything that he has said has come
to pass and almost beyond imagination. How could one individual talk with
such authoritative, non-questioning ... that this was the way this was going
to happen and this was going to happen in "fashion" and this was going to
happen on TV and there were going to be video recorders before I ever heard
of the word.
D.L.D: I think what happens ... certainly one individual hears this, but the
plans are by no means made by one or a small number of individuals. Just as
industrial corporations which have a board of directors, with people from
all sorts of activities who sit on the board of this corporation, and they
say, "Now if we do this to our product, or if we expand in this area what
will that do to banking? What will that do to clothing? What will that do
... what impact, ripple effect will that have on other things?" And I'm sure
that whoever makes these plans they have representatives from every area you
can think of. So they'll have educators, they'll have clothing manufacturers
- designers; architects ... across the board. I'm sure they get together and
have meetings and plan and everybody puts in his input, just the way a
military operation goes. What will the Navy do? Will they bombard the shore?
What will the Air Force do? Will they come in with air cover? What will the
infantry do? It's the same thing. These people, when they plan, they don't
miss a trick.
They have experts in every field and they say, "Well, if we do this, that
and the other ... John, what will that do to your operation?" And John will
be in position to feed back, "Well this is what I think will happen." So it
certainly covers a broad range of people. And for one individual to be able
to say all of this in the two hours that he spoke to us, really tells us
that he was privy to a lot of information.
R.E: That's right. He must have been sitting in on one of those boardrooms
at least at some point. And I think not at the highest level from his
position, but enough, because anyone in the population control would be
associated with names of foundations ... powerful foundations, powerful
organizations ...
D.L.D: And I'm sure there was a lot in the plans that he never heard. He
wasn't a four-star general in this outfit. He wouldn't be in on the whole
story.
R.E: Well, too bad he couldn't have talked for six hours instead of two, and
we might have had a lot more information. There was another aspect that I
found fascinating in listening to this. This whole aspect of privacy ... he
mentioned that as the private homes went by we would have individuals,
non-family members perhaps sharing our apartments.
As I understand that is becoming more popular out in California. Could
California and New York being the coast states, did he say ... That's right
... port cities that bring in things so that they can eventually work their
way to middle America. But this is about privacy. When he was talking, for
example, about the area of sex, he made some interesting remarks. One of
them that hit me like a ton of bricks was this business about; "We must be
open about sex." As if there can't be any fear of the person that does not
hesitate to open up to the public. Now, if you look at these so-called sex
initiation programs in the schools where the children are forced either
through writing or through verbal expression to talk about all aspects of
the sexual sphere …
[here, side one ends abruptly]
D.L.D: .... of our right to investigate even your sex life. Your money will
be easy. We'll have it all on computer. We'll know more about it than you
do. But we have to form a generation where the most intimate activity which
two people can have is public, or can be public. Therefore, it's harder to
have any private thoughts and you can't buck the system if everything you
think and do is public knowledge. But the planners won't be that open about
their own lives. They'll reserve their privacy. It's for the rest of us.
R.E: Yes. Just like their listening to concerts and operas, but for the mass
media they're pumping in hard rock. That was another fascinating thing. For
example, the ... and I know this has come to pass because I deal with a lot
of young people ... the young people have their own radio stations for their
music and adults have their own and never the twain shall meet. And when
they do there's usually a clash. And I think the same is probably true with
a lot of the classical movies. I can remember when I was growing up and my
dad had the radio on, I think it was a kind of general music. I didn't say,
"Dad, I don't like that music; turn to another station." Whereas now there
is a fabricated generational gap which puts the family at the disadvantage.
D.L.D: And it creates conflict within the family, which is one of the
spin-off benefits to them. If you're constantly fussing at your kids, you
don't like the music they're playing, and they're constantly fussing at you
because they don't like what you're playing ... that does bad things to the
bonds of affection that you would like to be nurtured in the family.
R.E: It would appear, that any resistance movement against the population
controllers would probably be based on families strengthening themselves in
a number of ways. One of them being to make sure that children know about
grandma and grandpa and where did they come from and developing a whole ...
getting out the family albums and making sure that children know they have
roots, first of all. And secondly, that their family is stable. One father,
one mother, with children, with grandfathers. Those of us who have them
should hold on to them.
Toward the end of the tape there was a reference - at the time everything
would be coming together - how this New World Order would be introduced to a
population which, at this point I think they would assume would be
acceptable to it .... how was this put? We're just going to wake up one
morning and changes would just be there? What did he say about that?
D.L.D: It was presented in what must be an over-simplified fashion, so with
some qualifications, here's the recollections I have ... That in the winter,
and there was importance to the winter - on a weekend, like on a Friday an
announcement would be made that this was or about to be in place ... That
the New World Order was now the System for the World and we all owe this New
World Order our allegiance.
And the reason for winter is that - and this was stated - people are less
prone to travel in the winter, particularly if they live in an area where
there's ice and snow. In summer it's easier to get up and go. And the reason
for the weekend is, people who have questions about this, Saturday and
Sunday everything's closed and they would not have an opportunity to raise
questions, file a protest and say no.
And just that period over the weekend would allow a desensitizing period so
that when Monday came and people had an opportunity maybe to express some
reservations about it, or even oppose it ... there would have been 48 hours
to absorb the idea and get used to it.
R.E: What about those who decided they didn't want to go along?
D.L.D: Somewhere in there it was that … because this is a "New Authority"
and it represents a change, then, from where your allegiance was presumed to
be, people would be called on to publicly acknowledge their allegiance to
the new authority. This would mean to sign an agreement or in some public
way acknowledge that you accepted this ... authority. You accepted its
legitimacy and there were two impressions I carried away. If you didn't ...
and I'm not sure whether the two impressions are necessarily mutually
exclusive because this wasn't explored in great detail ... one of them was
that you would simply have nowhere to go.
If you don't sign up then you can't get any electric impulses in your
banking account and you won't have any electric impulses with which to pay
your electric, or your mortgage or your food, and when your electric
impulses are gone, then you have no means of livelihood.
R.E: Could you get these things from other people, or would that be ... in
other words, let's say if you had a sympathetic family ...
D.L.D: No you could not because the housing authority would keep close tabs
on who is inhabiting any domicile. So the housing authority would be sure
that everybody living there was authorized to live there.
R.E: Could I get some food?
D.L.D: Your expenditures, through electronic surveillance would be pretty
tightly watched so if you were spending too much money at the super market,
somebody would pick this up and say, "How come? What are you doing with all
that food? You don't look that fat. You don't have that many people. We know
you're not entertaining. What are you doing with all that food?" And these
things then would alert the ...
R.E: I have seven people in my basement who object to the New World Order
and I'm feeding them and then they said, well, one has to go.
D.L.D: They don't belong there and you can't feed them and since you're
sympathetic to them, maybe your allegiance isn't very trustworthy either.
R.E: Yes. We see this ... I think the Chinese experience tells us a great
deal about certain things. For example, when they wanted to enforce the "One
child family" ... they cut off all education for the second child. Your food
rations were cut so you couldn't get the right amount of food, and if they
found ways around that, they instituted compulsory abortions and compulsory
plugging in of the IUD's.
Somewhere in the tape this business about "People can carry two conflicting
ideas around - or even espouse two conflicting ideas as long as they don't
get two close together". And what immediately came to mind is … here we have
an organization like Planned Parenthood ... "freedom to choose," yet they
support population control programs which is of course not the freedom to
choose. And then when they're called into account and someone says, "Now
wait a minute here. You're, 'freedom to choose - freedom to choose' here,
but you're supporting the Chinese program which is compulsory."
I remember a statement from the late Allen Gootmacher, one of the medical
directors of Planned Parenthood and he said:
"Well, if people limit their families and do what we say, fine. But if we
need compulsory population control, we're going to have it."
What would happen with people who wouldn't go along, and particularly that
point about, "There wouldn't be any martyrs?" That was significant, because
I recall having watched some movies about the Third Reich that many times
they would come late in the evening and people would be taken from their
home, but neighbors would never ask, "Where did they go?" They knew where
they went!
D.L.D: Solzhenitsyn mentions that in the Gulag Archipelago.
R.E: I think this is very similar to what we would see. People would just
disappear and you would not ask because it might endanger yourself or your
family. But you would know where they went. If you ask questions, you draw
attention to yourself and then you might follow them to where they went. So
you mind your own business and step over the starving man on the street who
didn't go along.
D.L.D: He didn't go into detail about precisely how this would come about
but it's not too hard to imagine. Yes. In the past, the Nazi's came, the
Communists came in the middle of the night, people just disappeared and one
simple way to do this is that if you're cut off from all economic support
and you have no place to live and nothing to eat ... we already see a lot of
homeless now.
I just had a man in the office this morning talking about he and his child
seeing people living in boxes in downtown Pittsburgh today. When the New
World Order is here and you're living in a box, we can't have people
littering the place, so you come around in the wagon and you pick them up.
If your frame of mind as you're growing up and formed is that, "Human value
resides in being productive; you have to have a prestigious position or at
least perform something useful - make a contribution," and the truck comes
by to pick up some guy living in a box and he's not making any contribution,
who's going to get excited about it? You know… he's sub-human; he's a fetus;
he's a zygote; he's a derelict, and fetuses and zygotes and derelicts are
all the same animal. So what do you do with them? You dispose of them. Who
gets excited about it?
R.E: I recall that when the Chinese Communists came into power one of the
first things that they taught in schools was not any thoughts about specific
political ideology, but about evolution and that man was just an animal and
if man was just an animal then we won't mind being herded and having masters
who keep tabs on the animals and we're one big ant colony and we've got
someone to direct traffic and ...
Speaking of traffic. We talked about the aged and again -people hearing this
tape, it's phenomenal how many times these things on this tape will hit you.
I just came back from New Jersey which has a lot of retirement-type villages
and I've been there over a period of years and there's a structure around a
retirement home which has been uncompleted for at least two or three years.
Now they've recently completed it. It's kind of a roadway, but I think it
would be easier to get out of a complex at a play-land it is so complicated.
And yet the whole area has elderly people driving.
And we are a fairly middle-aged couple and for the life of me we couldn't
figure out how we were going to get out, what we were going to do and so I
asked some of the residents: "Doesn't it bother you that they haven't fixed
this road for years and now you can't just go across the street which would
have been the logical thing?" You have to go down and they have a jug-handle
and you have to go over and under, so it takes you so long, and the woman
replied to me, "Well you know, we just don't go out. We just don't go out."
So here we have this little retirement village where they've made it very
difficult for a population, maybe several hundred homes in this plat with
only one exit and the exit involves such a great deal of bother, they say
they just cut down on the number of times they have to go out shopping.
D.L.D: Right away it makes me wonder ... if it's difficult to get out, it's
also difficult to get in probably for visitors.
R.E: These retirement homes sort of remind me of an elephant burial ground.
The one thing you notice is that there are no children. There's not the
laughter of children in these homes.
D.L.D: My experience has been, these people in the retirement homes, when
they see a child they just blossom. They're really delighted to see a child.
Sure they're happy to have their sons and daughters come and other adults,
but when they see a child -and it doesn't have to be their own- it has a
very beneficial effect on their mood. And if these older people aren't
seeing children, the other side of that coin is, the children aren't seeing
older people either. So if you don't get used to seeing older people, they
don't exist.
R.E: And that's why, with the family, making sure your children see their
grandparents very often, no matter how much that entails, the trouble with
the logistics, etc ... it's certainly worth while because, again if you
never see someone and you don't learn to love them and you never have any
contact with them, when someone says: "Well it's time for your grandpa to
check out," it's like, "Who's that?"
Who's going to defend and fight for someone they never even saw before? Oh,
I remember one of the phrases. So many of these things ... you only have to
hear them once and they stick in your mind. It's so jarring.
We've already discussed "sex without reproduction", then you also said the
technology would be there for "reproduction without sex" and this is a whole
other area because it's contradictory. If a land is so overpopulated, then
you would want to diminish sexual activity, get rid of pornography, get rid
of everything that was sexually stimulating. But, no. It's a contrary. You
want to Increase sexual activity but only insofar as it doesn't lead to
reproduction. That was the message, right?
D.L.D: Yes, and this is my own extension. He didn't say this, but that leads
to slavery because if you become enslaved to your gratification, whether
it's sex, food or whatever, then you're more easily controlled, which is one
of the reasons the celibate priesthood is so important. And so many priests
don't even understand that. But if you're addicted to sex ... if sex is
divorced from reproduction, something you do for gratification only - I
won't try to parallel that with food because you can't go without food -
then you can be more easily controlled by the availability or the removal of
the availability of sex. So that can become an enslaving feature. Now,
reproduction without sex ... what you would get then would have all the
desirable attributes of a human being without any claim to human rights. The
way we do it now, we say, you're human because you have a father and mother
... you have a family and so you're a human being with human rights. But if
your father was a petrie dish and you mother was a test tube, how can you
lay claim to human rights? You owe your existence to the laboratory which
conveys to you no human rights.
And there is no God, so you can't go for any God-given human rights, so
you're an ideal slave. You have all the attributes of a human being but you
don't have any claim on rights.
R.E: In Brave New World they had the caste system, the alphas, the omegas,
etc. The way they brought about the different caste systems was that in the
decanting, or birthing rooms, the individual who was to do menial or slave
labor ... work in the mines ... received just a little bit of oxygen to the
brain so they learned to love their slavery and they were very happy. They
didn't know any better. They didn't have the wherewithal to do things, but
the higher in the caste you got, the more oxygen you got to your brain. So
we actually had a group of sub-human beings who loved their slavery. In the
past slaves probably didn't love their slavery very much, but in this case,
we have this technology which will make people love their slavery, and each
caste loved being what they were in "Brave New World." And any of our
listeners who hasn't read that recently ...
D.L.D: You may remember the slogan that was above the Nazi concentration
camps ... something about, "Work is Peace and Work is Happiness." I don't
remember if it was Bucchenvald or Auschwitz. My recollection of words isn't
precise, but the idea is what counts. And here's Huxley, writing Brave New
World, saying basically the same thing before Hitler was even in power, so
Huxley knew something.
R.E: He came from a family that probably contributed at least in part to
this New World Order. A number of the English authors ... H.G. Wells ...
from that period and from those associations who highlighted the concepts of
what was coming down the path. I can remember reading Brave New World in
high school, and thought, "Boy, is this fantasy land." Thirty years later
and I said, "This is scary." There seems to be kind of a similarity between
his writings and the talk given by Dr Day, because you get kind of a mixed
message in Brave New World, that these things are not really good. It would
be better if man still had a sense of humor, a sense of privacy, if the
family still existed ... but, it's inevitable. They're going to go. Too bad.
I feel a little sorry about that. A little sentiment, but the New Order has
to come in and we have to make room for it.
And I got that same impression from the things that were said about this Day
tape. He wasn't real happy about some of the things, but they're going to
occur anyway, so make it easier on yourself. The more you accept it the
easier it's going to be when it comes around, and I'm kind of doing you a
favor -you physicians out there this evening- I'm going to make it easier
for you by telling you in advance what's coming and you can make your own
adjustments.
D.L.D: Somewhere in Scripture … I think it was after the flood, God said, "I
will write my law on man's hearts," and I feel the same parallel that you do
between Dr Day's reaction to what he was exposed to and mine ... seeming not
totally accepting of this. Huxley seeming not totally accepting of what he
wrote about but both saying, "Well, there's a certain inevitability to all
of this, so let's try to talk about the best parts of it. It's going to be
good for people. Technology will be better, quality of life will be better
... so you live a few years shorter."
But they both do seem to send out messages not buying the whole package ...
R.E: And maybe wishing some people would ask more questions. Looking back
over history there are many individuals who had an idea of what a New World
Order should be, certainly Hitler and Stalin did, but what was lacking
during these periods is that they lacked the technology to carry many a many
of the things out ... surveillance, constant monitoring ... but in this
so-called New World Order it's going to be very difficult to escape because
technology will provide those means which had been lacking those
totalitarian individuals from years ago.
D.L.D: I can't remember on the original tapes, did I mention the phrase
where he said: "This time we're going to do it right!" ?
R.E: No. You didn't.
D.L.D: There were so many details to remember. But when he mentioned
bringing in the New World Order, he said:
"This time we're going to do it right."
And right away, I'm wondering, "what do you mean, 'this time'?" There was no
explicit explanation of that, but I think it's fairly easy to infer that
previous efforts had to do with the Third Reich ... Your point about the
technology is critical with computers and all means of exchange being
controlled by electronic impulse.
Nobody has any wealth. You own nothing of value except access to electronic
impulses which are beyond your control. A cashless society. So when your
reward for working is [nothing more than] impulses on the computer and the
only claim you have is these impulses and the people who run the system can
give or take them as they choose. Up until this time there was no way the
statement in the Book of Revelation that said, "No man can buy or sell
unless he has the mark of the beast" ... there's no way that could have been
enforced.
People could say I'll trade you a bushel of tomatoes for a bushel of wheat.
If you'll drive my kids to school I'll give you six ears of corn. Bartering.
And even not going necessarily that primitive, there was always gold and
silver and other forms of money that were even better than bartering. But
with this cashless society, I believe this is the first time in the history
of the human race where the entire population of the world can be controlled
economically so that somebody can say, "I pushed the right buttons and I
know how much credit you have electronically; I know where you spend your
money electronically; and you cannot buy, you cannot sell unless you get on
my computer."
Right now you have a half a dozen credit cards in your pocket, but pretty
soon it will be narrowed to one credit card and then when we ... you know
the ostensible reason is that when people loose their credit cards and we
have to get rid of that and put the implant in ... where it has to be
accessible to the scanner ... in your right hand or in your forehead.
R.E: Speaking of scanner. When we had the TV War .... the Gulf War? It was
the first war where you just sit there and 24 hours a day just like being on
the battlefield there. There were several points made about the advances in
technology and how they could spot just one little individual down in ...
they used the constant reference to pinpoint ... "pinpoint." I imagine with
the different technologies they can also pinpoint a couple of renegades in
the New World Order. The technology which was applicable to a so- called 'enemy'
can also be applicable to this controlling the order.
D.R.D: Exactly. It's infra-red stuff that's ... I'm sort of amateurish about
this, but any heat source like a deer, a human being, a renegade ... can be
picked up by an infra-red scanner and you get sort of an outline of whether
it's a deer or sheep or whatever.
My first hearing about them was in the Vietnam War where our troops used
them to detect the enemy. That's twenty-some years ago, so they're probably
even more sophisticated now than they were then; but with this kind of
surveillance it would be pretty hard for anybody to escape and say, "Well,
I'm just going to go out into the mountains and be a hermit and escape the
New World Order. I can shoot deer and eat berries and survive and I've got a
wife who's pretty sturdy and she'll be able to survive and we'll do what the
Indians did before Columbus got here and we'll all survive." The New World
Order will say, "No you won't because we're gonna find you".
R.E: Even in Brave New World they had a group of people who still lived as a
family and the women breast-fed and they were called savages. But we won't
have any savages. We're cultured, we'll be thin and our teeth will be
straight.
D.L.D: Something also that was mentioned; forests could — and if necessary
would — be leveled or burned. Now this comes out of this movement ...
goddess mother earth, and how we have to protect the environment ... but if
we want to get someone who's trying to get away we'll burn down the whole
forest. We'll find them. That was stated. Deforestation could be and would
be brought about to make sure that nobody gets outside the control of the
system.
R.E: We're drawing to a close here. How did you feel after ... well, it's
been about 22 years now since that original lecture and there probably isn't
a day that goes by - at least since I've heard the tape - that I don't think
about the things that this Dr Day said.
D.L.D: You get constant reminders. Not a day goes by something doesn't say,
"That reminds me of …" such and such, whether it's surveillance or security
...
R.E: ... or clothing. I opened up a toy catalogue the other day and noticed
there didn't happen to be any baby dolls in this toy catalogue ... of course
going back to the idea that we don't want little girls to by thinking about
babies. They only had one little doll and it was kind of an adult doll. And
nothing that would raise anyone's maternal instincts. Well, Doc, what's the
prognosis?
D.L.D: Left to man alone I think the technology is already here and with
technological progress, I think it is inevitable -- if man is left to his
own devices -- that some men will be able to assert total control over other
men ... other people. Man left to his own devices ... the tendency is -- in
groups like this, then -- is for internal dissention to arise where the
leaders would be at each other's throats too ... each saying, "No, I'm more
powerful than you. I deserve more than you."
R.E: Who will control the controllers?
D.L.D: Yeah. They would stab themselves. I think so. They would create their
own seeds of destruction while they're creating the system. But the other
thing I wonder if indeed this may be time for our Lord to come back and say,
"Enough's enough. Because you're going to destroy my planet earth. I am in
charge of the planet. I'm in charge of mankind. Mankind will be destroyed if
I say. I will not allow my creatures to assume and exert this degree of
control where you're going to destroy the whole thing."
R.E: What I was just thinking as you were just saying that is that in the
past, dictators could kill people, they could torture them, but essentially
they could not change what it meant to be a human being. They could not
change human nature. Now we are going to have with this new Genome Project,
a multi-billion dollar project where they're going to be getting a tab on
everyone's genes. No one shall escape. Everyone shall have their genetic
codes and with this opens the door to manipulation to change the very
meaning of what it means to be human. And if one has an entity then that no
longer has free will, you just have to wonder if that point out Lord says, "Enough."
D.L.D: Just as Lucifer set himself up as God in the beginning, some people
now would set themselves up as God and say, "I control the computers, I
control the genomes, I control everything, I am God ..." and at that point
He would have to say, "No, you are not! I have to demonstrate to you ...
you're not. I'm still God. You're just a creature"
RE: And as you said on the original tape, we believe in what our Lord has
said, in that He will not leave us orphans. He will be with us 'til the end
of time.
D.L.D: This right away now begs the questions, when they come around and say,
"It's your turn to sign the allegiance form" ... what are you going to do?
When Henry the eighth came around and said, either sign here and join ...
and while he was saying it they were throwing the noose over the limb of the
oak tree, and slipping the noose around your neck and saying, "you want to
sign this or do we slap the horse out from under you?" and a lot of people
said I won't sign it and they were martyred.
Despite his having said there will be no martyrs, certainly there will be
martyrs. The implication of his statements were that they would not be
recognized as martyrs, but there will be martyrs and they will be recognized
as martyrs. Maybe not the same way as in the past but I think this is
something people should sort of prepare themselves for.
When I'm nose to nose with this choice, "ether sign this allegiance or we're
going to put you in a boxcar and you're going out to Arizona, to the desert
..." I think we have to be prepared to make a decision.
R.E: I think it would be an understatement to say that this tape has great
meaning and it's like a forewarning and it gives us ideas of things we
should do and things we shouldn't do and I think everybody listening to the
tapes will come up with things he can do on a small scale. I think that's
the beauty of this thing. As he was talking ... it wasn't real earth
shattering things he was talking about. He was talking about little things.
Television. Things that we do every day. Things that are under our control.
The books we read.
And I think some of these changes if they are going to occur will occur with
the individual person within that family, with him getting the word out and
then doing the little things. I think they matter over the long haul, the
most.
D.L.D: Just as with the prisoners who survived the brainwashing, I think
people who are Spiritually oriented, who are thinking about God, thinking
about their relationship with God, are the ones who will then be better
prepared or equipped to survive this world and the next. Whereas, those who
are just focused on meeting their needs right now, strictly the material
needs of the day, they're more easily controlled.
Under the threat of losing your comforts or losing your food or loosing your
head or whatever, certainly some people are going to yield, and those who I
think will survive and I really mean both in this life and the next -
they're going to have to be the ones who are prepared because it's my belief
when the time comes to make the decision … "Are you going to sign on or not?"
... it's too late to begin preparation and start saying, "Well, let me think
about this."
You won't have time to think about it. You're either going to say yes or no.
I hope a lot of us make the right decision.
R.E: I do so too, and I think the tape will change as
many lives and have hopefully as good an effect as it had on mine and on
yours and so let me thank you very much. For further information please
contact the US Coalition for Life; Box 315, Export, Penn 15632. Your
comments and criticism and any other information which you might have
regarding this tape will be most welcome.
(end of Tape Three)
-EOF-
www.overlordsofchaos.com/html/new_order_of_barbarians.html
zurück: Der grosse
Plan
|
°über-wachung 