Matrix Programming 101: Destroy Logic

							Matrix Programming 101: Destroy Logic
 by Jon Rappoport
January 22, 2013




Once upon a time, in medieval universities, new students enrolled in the trivium. It was the
foundation curriculum. It was required. Its parts were: grammar, logic and rhetoric.
Grammar: the interior construction of language; the parts of speech; the proper agreement of parts of
speech.
Logic: the valid and invalid connections in the course of an argument; the method of proper reasoning;
the deductive links in a chain, at the end of which is a conclusion.
Rhetoric: oral presentation; the use of language to make a case; the capacity to persuade, even in the
face of counter-argument.
Today, the subject matter of the trivium is not only downplayed. It has been shattered.
This article focuses on the death of logic.
When the intensive handling of ideas is seen as a laughable goal for education, indoctrination is
plugged in as the only alternative.
The mind of the student shifts from being an active force to being a container.
The destruction of logic is a conscious strategy, a game plan. Its goal is to pervert rational thought at its
core and insert ideology masked as insight.
The game plan was cooked up a long time ago at the Carnegie Foundation, where the undermining of
American history was the No. 1 pastime.
Instead of merely erasing knowledge of American history, it was decided that the basic way ideas are
studied should be torpedoed.
The actual meaning of an idea was firmly placed on the back burner. Front and center would be:
Relentlessly assess and attack the people who forwarded those ideas.
                                                And sure enough, this strategy has gained great
                                                prominence.
                                                The revered Founders of the Republic? Shysters, con
                                                men, slaveholders, monopolists who saw rebellion from
                                                England as the way to win greater power for themselves
                                                at the expense of everyone else living on American soil.
                                                Therefore, the argument continues — and this is crucial
                                                — the Founders’ ideas, as expressed in the Declaration
                                                and the Constitution, were rotten to the core. The ideas
                                                can be dismissed out of hand as coming from “a bad
                                                source.”
                                                If you want to see that sleight-of-hand trick in action,
                                                just visit a few American studies classes in universities
                                                and catch the wave.
                                                Ideas no longer need to be judged on their sense, merit
and alignment with basic principles. Nor are they judged by their position in a well-formed argument.
All that is out. Now, you have to “look to the source” and make all your decisions based on “who these
people really were who expressed the ideas.”
And since that’s the case, learning to think or reason is unnecessary.
New education, then, once you strip away the old essentials, is really nothing more than learning who
the bad guys were and the good guys were. This can be taught by ideologically motivated professors in
a few hours.
In logic, this used to be called the fallacious ad hominem argument. Now, it isn’t called anything. It’s
praised as the insightful way to do intellectual business.
In the case of the Founders’ ideas, we have, among others: the free market, individual freedom, private
property and severely limited central government.
No need to examine these concepts. No need to assess, for instance, the success of the free market —
despite its corruption by criminals and monopolists — in providing a better standard of living for
millions of people. Forget it. All you have to know is that the free market was proposed by phony
American aristocrats who wanted more power for themselves. On that basis alone, you can reject the
free market.
How about private property? Same thing. The same phony Founders put that idea forward; therefore, it
must be wrong.
Thomas Jefferson? He owned slaves. Therefore, as the night follows day, everything he said or thought
or did was wrong.
See how easy education has become?
Individual freedom? Another absurdity proposed by the crooked Founders. Reject it. Don’t bother
thinking about what that freedom has allowed you to express. Who cares?
So, one by one, these core ideas fall to the ax; and criticizing America becomes destroying America.
Another Orwell Prophecy Nearing
Fulfillment
by Sam Rolley
January 22, 2013

There were no telescreens, of course, but there
was always the danger of concealed microphones
by which your voice might be picked up and
recognized; besides, it was not easy to make a
journey by yourself without attracting attention.
For distances of less than 100 kilometres it was
not necessary to get your passport endorsed, but
sometimes there were patrols hanging about the
railway stations, who examined the papers of any
Party member they found there and asked
awkward questions. — George Orwell, 1984
Orwell’s grim depiction of a dystopian futuristic
society in which the every movement of every
person is meticulously scrutinized by the power of
the state sometimes appears to have been used by
American officials as an instruction manual over the
past decade. More often than not, an idea similar to
whatever the Department of Homeland Security has
most recently proposed can be found within the
pages of Orwell’s prescient novel.
Late last week, the Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service issued a request for
information for microphones that are being considered for placement around Washington, D.C., to
detect gunshots.
From the request:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) / United States Secret Service (USSS) is seeking
information on commercially available gunshot detection technologies for fixed site surveillance
applications. Typical coverage areas are expected to be from 10s to 100s of acres per site, located
within urban areas. Due to the secure nature of these sites, a high gunshot detection rate (>95%)
is strongly desired while daily, operational monitoring of the system by external parties is
undesirable.
But, as Infowars pointed out in a recent report, similar sensors installed in cities throughout the
Nation have been used not only to locate gunshots but also to record conversations.
The New York Times pointed out in May that gunshot sensors were actually used to listen to a loud
street argument that resulted in a fatal shooting in New Bedford, Mass. While even the staunchest
privacy advocates have had little problem with law enforcement using systems like these to pinpoint
the location of urban gun violence, law enforcement did generally did not inform the public of the
ability of the sensors to record conversations.
                                                Last year, the American Civil Liberties Union’s Jay
                                                Stanley began asking questions about the gunshot
                                                locators: “If the courts start allowing recordings of
                                                conversations picked up by these devices to be admitted
                                                as evidence, then it will provide an additional incentive
                                                to the police to install microphones in our public
                                                spaces, over and above what is justified by the level of
                                                effectiveness the technology proves to have in
                                                pinpointing gun shots.”
                                                It is often noted that the United States is usually not far
                                                behind the United Kingdom in terms of police state
                                                surveillance measures, raising the prospect that the
                                                audio recording infrastructure being implemented now
                                                could give way to more blatantly Orwellian
                                                developments in the near future. According to a report
                                                from Homeland Security News Wire in June 2010, some
                                                English cities already have installed devices that pick
                                                up suspicious sounds and conversations.
                                                From the report:
                                             Microphones that can detect aggression by the
tone of someone’s voice were installed in Coventry, England, where they will cover an area
blighted by drunken violence. The Coventry decision has raised the prospect of
microphones coming to other cities in the United Kingdom.

The system, called Sigard, is able to direct CCTV cameras toward suspicious sounds, which can
also be gunshots or the smashing of glass. Operators can then direct police straight to a
confrontation, in the hope they can stop violence before it erupts.

The system was designed by mimicking the hearing processes of the human ear. It can filter out
background noise. The microphones detect suspect sounds, including trigger words spoken at
normal volumes as well as angry or panicked exchanges before they become violent.

For now, the 4th Amendment generally protects American citizens from being secretly recorded by law
enforcement in conversations in which the officials are not involved. But the Constitution has been
little more than a speed bump for legislators, law enforcement and busybodies promising ultimate
security to Americans in return for privacy in America since 9/11.
In the quote at the beginning of this article, Orwell was writing about microphones hidden in rural
areas. For now, Americans most likely only have to worry about them in urban city centers. But, as
with other state surveillance measures, it’s likely only a matter of time until they are universally
present.
1984 George Orwell Movie Trailer (1984)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4rBDUJTnNU


    http://www.infowars.com/