Inner Matrix

Job #1793

Job Posting Details

Job # 1793 Inner Matrix

Posted Date
Jul 12, 2006 @ 20:34
Respond By
Oct 31, 2006
Word Count
0
Language
English (British)
Gender
Male
Age Range
-
Category
-

Job Description

I have 10 manuals each consisting of approximately 10,000 words, I'm looking for a simple but professional voice recording of each manual onto CD or in MP3 format

I have included all the text below from manual 5 for your own assessment, the other 9 manuals will be similar in length and content:-


Inner Matrix Level Five Material

Last month I presented you with some hard-hitting information concerning religion. It is only because you are a member of Inner Matrix that I dare to release such material to you. As I mentioned in the last release, if the material on religion were made available to the general public, there would be a huge outcry from the religious sheep who would bay for my publishing company to be closed down. I would probably be targeted by all sorts of religious fanatics also - people who believe that God has given them a special mission to destroy me! Quite sad really, except that people like this are murdering their way through thousands of people a week around the globe. God obviously has a lot of people he wants out of the way...

It is quite possible that you did not find the last release at all surprising or offensive. In fact you might have found it totally obvious! If this is the case, then I hope you obtained value from the release because it should have clarified your thoughts and feelings concerning religion. Also, it was an excellent example of how the con-artists use the weapons to extract values from you under false pretences.

This month, I want to cover a further class of con-artists - the media.

Why have I singled-out the media for attention? It is because we live in an 'information society'. We are surrounded and bombarded with media output, daily, nightly, continuously. Our only relief from this outpouring is when we go to sleep - and it's getting worse.

By 'media' I mean radio, television, newspapers, magazines, films, billboard advertising, books and junk mail; to mention only a few. We truly do live in an environment in which information is power, which means that information is also money. A great many companies are now dedicated purely to accumulating, processing and selling information, and this situation is increasing almost exponentially. The more channels there are available for the distribution of information (cable TV, satellite TV, video, new FM radio channels, etc. etc.) then the more companies proliferate to exploit the desire of the sheep for all this information. The companies gather it, and sell it to the sheep. It's that simple. I am not talking about advertising here.

The operators of the media scam attempt to con values from you under false pretences. The values they seek are primarily money, and secondarily influence (= power) over the masses. They are con-artists because they are often not 'up front' about their motives. Instead, the media masquerade as altruistic champions of the people, fighting the corner for their readers/viewers and facing every danger selflessly to bring the latest important news story from far-flung corners of the globe.

The pay-off for the media is money, power and influence. The pay-off for the sheep is the rather sad and pathetic belief that they actually know what is going on around the world - when they don't; and a feeling that, because they understand the 'latest issues', they have personal power - which they don't.

The media operate by selectively presenting you with edited snippets of world news. These snippets are the pieces which they believe you will be most interested in. And most of the time, they are selected purely for their degree of sensationalism.

Using these 'news' items, the media attempt to manipulate your emotions in order to get you to feel what they think you should feel. They also offer opinions which they attempt to get you to subscribe to. Even up-market newspapers present an extremely narrow cross-section of current world news. A few stories are selected from thousands of possible stories by the editor. His or her job is to present you with a version of reality which he or she thinks you will find most acceptable. By ‘acceptable’ I mean that you will be willing to pay good money to purchase this particular version of reality. The sheep then scramble to purchase the particular fantasy which most concurs with their own fantasy.

The first thing you must realise is that newspapers exist to make lots and lots of money for their owners. That’s it. This is the only reason they exist. Dismiss from your mind any notion that newspapers exist as any kind of public-spirited information service which altruistically keeps the citizens informed of the latest world events!

How do newspapers make their money? They make their money through selling advertising space in the newspaper. They also make money on the ‘cover price’ of the paper or magazine. Television makes money through selling advertising space. This is their prime concern - how to sell as much top-priced advertising as possible.

From this, it follows that the bigger the circulation of your newspaper/magazine, or the more people who watch your TV program (and hence the adverts during the commercial breaks), the more you can charge for advertising. Indeed, this is exactly the case. The amount you pay for advertising is directly related to the number of potential punters you are going to reach. This means that the publications are forever striving to increase their circulation.

How do you increase your circulation? Certainly not by printing hard facts about various global events! They sell more copies by using one of the eight weapons to manipulate you into parting with your cash. Headlines like:

Naked Vicar in Royal Sex Romp Shock

sells far more papers than:

UK Car Production Efficiency up by 11.76%

although the latter news item is likely to have far more effect on the reader’s life than the former.

What are the main weapons used by the media?

Fear (Weapon #2)

This weapon is much loved by the media. The trick here is to make the masses afraid of something, and then sit back and wait for them to scramble over themselves to pay money for details of the impending doom! Consider these typical headlines:

One in Ten Britons Will Die of Aids - Top Doctor Warns

Fears Grow as Butter Found to Cause Cancer

Mad Cow Disease Could Infect Children’s Brains
Women at Risk From Video Nasties, Claims Psychiatrist

Iraq Now Has Nuclear Weapons - Shock Revelation

And so on. They all have the common element of fear.

Fear is a very big trigger in normal people. They are full of fear. They fear being mugged, raped or murdered. They fear being poor. They fear a whole spectrum of diseases and health problems. They fear travel. They fear other countries and other races. The list is endless. People are particularly afraid for their children. Headlines like:

British Children Show Lowest Literacy Rate in Europe

will have concerned parents flocking to part with their cash.

Another huge fear the sheep have is that their cosy lifestyle will change. This fear is seized upon gleefully by the newspapers and is usually woven into the political affiliations of the newspaper. Great tracts of editorial are devoted to 'slamming' the opposition party by raising the spectres of fear. For example:

Income Tax Set to Rise to 50% Under Labour

Tories Plan to Close 200 Hospitals

All these headlines are intended to make you afraid. Afraid that your world will change from the comfortable one you know and love, into some horribly different world. Of course, these headlines not only sell papers; they also help to reinforce your voting habits!

Most newspapers have a heavy political bias in one particular direction (mainly to the right). The proprietors of these publications not only make large sums of money from selling advertising, but they also gain power, because millions of people are being influenced by their publication. Remember that power is all about having influence over other people. This is what newspapers seek.

Fear and powerlessness form a vicious circle. As an Inner Matrix member, you are expected to break out of this cycle. Normal people are afraid which in turn makes them powerless and weak.

The Inner Matrix initiate has reversed this circle. His power makes him unafraid - and his lack of fear makes him powerful. I hope you understand the crucial difference.

GUILT (Weapon #2)

Many newspapers will give high profile to stories which play upon your feelings of guilt.

Pictures of starving babies tearfully staring out at you from the front page, are sure-fire ways of getting you to reach for your wallet. Other great stories include:

1. The one about lorry loads of animals starving to death due to a transport strike.
2. The one about homeless people freezing to death in cardboard boxes.
3. The one about the slashing and burning of vast acres of rain forest.

All are designed to make you feel guilty. Guilty that you are not doing enough. Guilty that you are well, and others are ill. Guilty that you have so much when others have so little.

Now I want to make a very important point. Notice that normal people rarely do anything about the situation which makes them feel guilty. Their guilt never makes them go out and give all of their money to the starving, or help the homeless, or support Greenpeace. They just wallow in feeling wicked, sinful and guilty; in other words, they allow themselves to feel temporarily miserable.

This soon passes and they quickly forget the current disaster story - which is just as well, because tomorrow there will be a new one! After all, there's a new edition of the paper to sell!

The Inner Matrix initiate has completely eradicated guilt from his or her life. They simply never feel guilty about anything because guilt is a wholly useless emotion. It has no value whatsoever, and you must remove it from your life. If an Inner Matrix initiate saw a newspaper headline designed to provoke guilt he would react in one of two ways:

1. He might decide to do something about it. This is unlikely for reasons I have stated elsewhere, but if he did become involved, his huge personal Power would ensure that something was actually done.

2. He would look at the story and realise:

a) It had been selected for his consumption out of countless thousands of similar stories, all just as bad, but none of which he will see.

b) He would realise that this story was no more worthy than the thousands of other ‘ghost’ stories which the media have decided not to print.

c) He decides that he is not going to take any action, and so he completely ignores the story. He does not feel miserable or upset by the story.

The sheep, in contrast, act as follows:

1. They read the story and actually believe it!

2. They are largely unaware of the thousands of similar ‘ghost’ stories which go unprinted. They are also largely unaware that the newspaper is using the weapon of guilt to manipulate them into parting with their money.

3. They buy the paper. They discuss, pontificate and debate the story (“ain’t it awful...”) with their friends in the belief that they actually know something about the facts of the story - which they don’t.

4. They waste a certain amount of precious life moments feeling guilty or bad about the story.

5. They do absolutely nothing at all about the problem which is central to the story.

6. They forget all about it, and wait with bated breath the next edition of the paper.



Appeals

Guilt is also a great way of raking-in pots of money. Following any disaster, you will see 'appeals' launched in the newspapers and on television.

These appeals are disguised (false pretences) as altruistic efforts on behalf of the newspaper concerned, selflessly to offer the humble facilities of the paper to the fund-raising effort. In actual fact, the newspapers are only interested in making money by increasing their circulation and creating a good image for themselves. Please be clear about my direction here. There is nothing wrong with making money, either for a newspaper, or any other company. The problem is the con-trick of false pretences - pretending to be something they are not.

There is also a shocking lack of accountability concerning the money which is raised.

Think back over the hundreds of appeals you must have heard about in the last few years. Can you remember hearing one single definitive account of how the money was spent? And from all these millions and millions of pounds, was there any change? If so, what happened to it? Of course you can't remember! After a particular disaster is over, it is 'dead news'. It is time for another shock-horror, guilt inducing disaster to take the headlines. My favourite appeals are the ones which regularly appear showing a ‘starving donkey’ with the headline which goes something like: “Won’t You Do Something To Save Poor Little Peppi?”

People feel guilty about hundreds of things, and they all make great stories. Here are a few headlines which are designed to induce guilt:

Working Mums Damaging Mental Health of Play Group Tots

U.K. Industry ‘Dirty Man’ of Europe

Crime Caused by Lack of Home Discipline - Shock Report

Under 10’s Watch Three Video Nasties a Week

All of these headlines are intended to make as many people as possible feel guilty. People will then buy the newspaper. At first sight, this might seem a contradiction. Why would people pay money for something which makes them feel guilty?

Why? Because this simple action makes them feel less guilty. The process of handing over money (no matter how little) is a guilt-reducing process in itself. After all, if you care enough to buy the paper and read the story, you can't be that bad a person, can you?

This is exactly the same mentality as the £50 ‘conscience’ cheques I mentioned during my discourse on religion. Remember, they give this fiddling small change to justify the retention of the vast bulk of their wealth for themselves. It is purely a guilt-assuaging process.

Also, reading the paper, reading the story and shooting the breeze about it with others gives you a big, fat pay-off. The pay-off is that you can have the appearance (not the reality) of being a deeply caring, compassionate and wise person - and this reduces your guilt.

The reality is perceived by the Inner Matrix initiate. The way it really works is as follows:

1. Papers (and all media) exist to make money.

2. To make money, they must strive to increase their circulation.

3. Guilt stories are one way of doing this.

4. People read these stories, believe them, and instantly make the ‘facts’ of the story into their own ‘considered’ opinion.

5. For the duration of the hot story (rarely longer than three days), they will then discuss and debate with friends, family and anyone else who will listen. During these discussions, they will regurgitate the ‘news’ exactly as received by them from the media.

6. This gives them the pay-off of feeling powerful (because they think they know all about the latest issues, and have strong opinions about them). It also makes them feel caring (because they can start the conversation with “isn’t it awful about...”, or “Did you hear that terrible story about...”). It also reduces their guilt because they believe that by knowing about a problem, and discussing it, they are somehow reducing it.

The Inner Matrix initiate knows these people are truly powerless, because they are doing absolutely nothing about the disaster (or whatever). All their talk, debating and pontificating has absolutely zero effect on the disaster itself.

These people are also ignorant, because they know almost nothing about the true situation. They know only a handful of opinions, lies and sensationalist rubbish printed by the newspapers. These they call ‘facts’ and rapidly change them into their own ‘considered opinions’ These people are also uncaring hypocrites because they choose to debate instead of actually doing something to help.

In contrast, how does an Inner Matrix initiate respond to 'disaster' stories?

1. He rarely reads them because they are such gross distortions of the truth.

2. Most of the time, if they do not affect his life directly, he chooses to do nothing about them. He realises that he doesn't actually care about people in far-flung corners of the earth. He also realises the selective nature of these stories. For every disaster which makes the front page, there are several thousand which do not get a mention.

3. He has absolutely no opinion whatsoever on these stories. Hence he will never become involved in a discussion about the latest 'disaster'. The reason he has no opinion is because he knows that he has little direct knowledge of the facts, and the story does not affect his life.

4. Whilst normal people are feeling sad, guilty and filled with doom, the initiate is getting on with his life, and feeling good, happy and fulfilled.

5. This is the most important point. Normal people do nothing about the ‘disaster’ and then waste their time feeling sad and guilty, or pontificating, debating, arguing and waffling about the subject to the other sheep. The initiate likewise does nothing about the ‘disaster’ and then spends his time in happy, guilt-free, life-enhancing pursuits. If you understand this, you will have understood a key part of the Inner Matrix philosophy.


Lies (Weapon #4)

Someone once coined a great phrase to describe the way the media operate:

“Make it brief, make it juicy, and make it up!”

I believe that the world is divided roughly into two types of people. Those who believe that the majority of the items of news they read in their paper are more or less true, and those who know that newspapers unhesitatingly invent any facts which they find themselves short of.

No prizes for guessing which view I subscribe to!

The initiate knows that the media circus exists to make money and not to give you good, accurate information. If they can get the story roughly right, and it’s no extra bother to them, then they will print something which approximates to reality. But if they are short of facts, or the story needs a little more spice, then they will invent the missing parts.

This is particularly true of the tabloids.

It therefore follows, does it not, that it would be illogical, even foolish to act on the basis of a newspaper story - for example, to give money away to an appeal.

It is also foolish to waste a second of your precious life in debating or discussing newspaper stories. You might just as well spend an evening hotly debating whether Jack, or the Giant was a real 'badie' in the story of Jack and the Beanstalk. After all, Jack did invade the Giant’s home and steal his gold, his harp and his hen! I think we ought to have a ‘phone-in’ on this subject so that we can all get hot under the collar - on air!

The Inner Matrix initiate knows that most media stories are, to a large extent, fiction. They are not all fiction, of course, but if you work on the premise that they are, then you will not go far wrong. You do not have enough information to allow you to determine which stories are completely made up, and which have a grain or two of truth in them, so you should not waste your time worrying about any of these stories.

Ghost Stories

The more reputable papers try to resist the temptation blatantly to invent the facts, but they still suffer from the ‘lie’ of editing. That is, a certain story presented in the quality press might be approximately correct in its rough outline, but why was that particular story selected, and a hundred other stories ignored?

The reason is that the editor believes that you will be more interested in the story he has selected for you, than all those others. He has made up your mind for you on this, and you won’t be consulted. You also won’t even get a glimpse of these other ‘ghost’ stories. They might as well never have happened.

By the way, something very interesting comes out of this:

If I were to get together a hundred independent, interesting, self-fulfilled individuals (e.g. Inner Matrix Initiates!) in a room and tell them that they would all like a particular novel I had selected for them, and a particular CD of classical music, and a particular restaurant I had selected for them to eat in, I would be shouted off the stage! These are free-thinking, strong-minded people, and they all have their own views on (say) novels, music and food. They would be downright insulted if I tried to 'select' these things for them on the basis of my arrogant assumption that I 'knew' what they would all like! So is the editor of the Sun wrong to do this?

No!

The amazing thing is that he can do this (select the news, I mean). Why? Because you can lump together all the sheep who read (say) the Sun under one rough heading. You can decide what they will all 'go for'. You can select the news for them, and know that they will, in the main, lap it up! This is because the readers of these papers are the exact opposite of the initiates I described above. They are all sheep. They are all in the same pen. They are all scrabbling to get out of one pen, and into another pen across the field. And they all thrive on an homogenous diet of sheep food!

I hope it will not come as too much of a shock for you to realise that members of Inner Matrix never, but never, buy newspapers! (unless you're a crossword fanatic, or you need to buy a house or some other valid reason).

But back to ghost stories:

For every one reported brutal crime (murder, rape etc.), there are countless thousands of similar, or worse, 'ghost' crimes around the world which never reach our attention. Perhaps now you realise why the initiate pays no attention to the one story which the media have singled out for his consumption. It is no more or less important than the countless thousands of others about which we never hear a single word.

The lower the social class the paper is intended to appeal to, the greater the proportion of total fiction in the editorial. It is assumed that the less intelligent the reader is, the more fantasies they are prepared to swallow. There must be truth in this when you compare the circulation of the tabloids with the ‘quality’ press.

VIP in Shock Sex Confession

Never forget that in addition to lying outright, the selective presentation of true facts is often equivalent to lying. For example, consider the following (true) situation:

A Very Important Person (VIP) and his wife are stopped by a reporter on their way to a charity ball. After a few general questions, the reporter asks jokingly: "Finally sir, there are some very pretty ladies here tonight, do you fancy your chances?" The VIP looks at his wife and replies: "I came here tonight with a very lovely lady, and I intend to leave with a lovely lady."

Next morning's headlines read:

Married VIP Eyes Beauty at Ball and Says: “I Intend to Leave With a Lovely Lady.”

Factually 100% accurate, but not quite what the man intended...

Consider these headlines. The 'truth' is given in brackets afterwards:

Tories Complete 500 More Hospital Projects Than Last Year.

(Because they have changed the definition of 'project'. A 'project' used to be a complete hospital. Now it is subdivided into many smaller projects. The car park is one project, the canteen another, etc.)

MP Denies Taking Part in Gay Club Sex Romp

(Quite simply because he didn't take part in a gay club sex romp and hasn't the faintest idea what the newspapers are going on about!).

Shame of Labour MP With Lowest Commons Attendance Record

(He actually died ten months previously and the paper hadn't bothered to check. This was a true story reported in a national newspaper!).

Britain’s Crime Rate Double That of EEC Counties

(Because, for example, we define 'crime' more stringently than other EEC countries. Handbag snatching might be counted as a crime here, but not in Germany for instance).

One in Three People Will Die of Heart Attack - Shock Report

(This ignores the fact that people have to die of something, and a cause of death must be entered onto the death certificate. Even if the person dies in their sleep at the ripe old age of 99, the cause of death might still be entered as 'heart failure'.)

The initiate knows that the media are prepared to use misinformation, selective reporting or downright lies in order to sell newspapers. The initiate does not buy newspapers, and does not waste any of his precious life discussing the stories they contain.

Duty/Honour/Fairness (Weapon #5)

The weapon of 'duty' is monotonously wheeled-out by the media every time there is a war. Thus it will be the duty of every brave young man to leap to the defence of his country, and the duty of every woman to support him by being a good, faithful and loving wife/mother/partner.

The other time the weapon of duty is used by the media is during times of economic crisis. Thus, for example, it is the duty of everyone to buy British during these hard times. The Nationalistic fervour whipped up by the concept of duty can be quite a powerful force. It certainly sells papers!

The initiate is completely unaffected by this jingoistic nonsense, and refuses to allow his behaviour to be modified by this weapon. As mentioned before, he does not take part in armed conflict (far too dangerous), and does not really have strong opinions ion the ‘rights’ and ‘wrongs’ of a particular war. This is because he has so little real information on the situation. All he has is what the government decide to release, and what the media say - hardly good enough to make a decision which might involve losing his life!

On the ‘buying British’ type of situation, the initiate buys what he wants wherever de decides to buy it. He is absolutely uninfluenced by media attempts to alter his life using the weapon of duty.

If drawn into an argument on the subject (which, of course, he wouldn’t be) he would argue as follows:
“You are asking me artificially to alter market forces. Even if such a thing is possible, which is unlikely, the long-term effects of protectionist policies are unknown. Although on the surface it might appear ‘good’ to distort economics by buying an inferior British product instead of (for example) a superior German one, the long term effects on the country could be detrimental. It could promote laziness and lack of motivation in the industry, resulting in products getting steadily worse instead of better. Buying a German car, for instance, could have the effect of making British manufacturer’s tighten up their act in an effort to compete.”

If this doesn’t earn you a punch in the mouth, then nothing will!

It is central to your Inner Matrix training, that all of these effects are unknown, and probably unknowable. The initiate does not waste his life debating, analysing, discussing or pontificating about these issues - you simply live your life with power, the way you decide to live it.

The weapon of fairness is also great for selling newspapers!

Fair Shares

Because people have so little personal power, they become really upset if other people appear to be getting more than their 'fair share'. They insist that everyone should be as powerless, hopeless and poor as they are! In this way they can justify their own lack of action to improve their own lives.

We live in a collectivist society in which money is looted from the productive using force, and handed out free to a long line of moochers, shuffling forward with outstretched beggar’s hands. That’s the plain truth. Most people are net recipients of the loot and so do not want to change the system. In fact they want more force to be directed against the transgressors - either those who are not paying their ‘fair share’ or those who are scrounging more than their ‘fair share’. Wealth, to these people, just somehow magically appears in society and the only thing we need to do is divide it up ‘fairly’.

The media play upon this powerlessness, and periodically reel-out the following stories:

1. The 'SSS', or Social Security Scrounger story. This story has many variations but typically involves Fred Shiftless, unemployed, living in a six-bedroom council house, who takes taxis everywhere, even down to the pub, where of course, he spends most of his time boozing away the truly massive handout of our money which he receives every week. Fred has never had a job in his entire life, yet claims every handout going.

The angle to this story is that this should not be allowed, it’s not fair on the hardworking stiffs who are contributing their money to support this scrounger. Something should be now to prevent this sort of thing happening.

2. The ‘MPI’ or Massive Pay Increase. This story concerns Sir Frederick Ponsomby Shiftless who has just awarded himself a thumping quarter of a million pound pay rise: and this at a time when he is asking his own staff to freeze their wages due to poor productivity. Sir Fred, who lives in a mansion and has just bought a second Rolls Royce for his daughter, claims he needs the cash to bring his salary into line with industry standards.

3. The ‘ULS’ or Ultra Light Sentence. This story concerns a Mr J Ripper who has been found guilty of hacking seventeen women to death in the past three years. Despite these horrendous crimes, a senile judge has just let Jack off scot-free with a meagre one year community service. Something should be done now to stop this travesty of justice.

All of these stories have only one aim - to sell newspapers, which, in turn, sells advertising space. They also keep the sheep endlessly debating and discussing the ‘fairness’ of this or that case. They get hot under the collar about the injustice of it all. They whine and moan and complain that something should be done about the situation.

The masses really hate it when someone appears to be avoiding the strict rules and regulations which govern them, so they bay for blood. This locks them into frittering away valuable present moment time in futile complaining - time when they could be enjoying themselves, having fun and leading rewarding and fulfilling lives.

The initiate completely ignores these stories. He knows that they represent the one or two exceptional cases. They have no bearing on his life, they are largely exaggerated, and in many cases he does not expect the world to be ‘fair’. It isn’t. Since he is a powerful person, he cares nothing for the fact that a tiny handful of people manage to grab a little more power than the usual crumbs allotted to the masses. Good luck to them!

Sacrifice/Altruism (Weapon #6)

This is not a weapon used much by the press for the simple reason that 'no news is good news'. Nevertheless, if the editor decides to use this weapon for a change then he will do so.

Actually this weapon also plays a part upon people's fear, but in a more subtle way. People fear that the 'world is going to the dogs', what with crime, unemployment, the environment and armed conflict around the globe. This makes them afraid for their security and lifestyle.

You can sell newspapers by occasionally telling the sheep that the world isn't such a bad old place after all, and that there are still a few good 'old-fashioned' values left. This gives people temporary comfort - and increases the impact of tomorrow's shock horror 'ain't it awful' story!

These are a few of the standard stories used by newspapers:

1. The BYP or Brave Young Person. In this story we hear how 13 year old Anne Do-Good selflessly risked her life to enter a blazing building in order to rescue her sick old Granny.
Anne is shortly to receive the Prince Charles brass medal for brave young persons from the man himself. When questioned by 32 reporters and 11 TV crews, Anne modestly said: "I
wasn't really very brave, in fact I didn't think about it. I love Granny and I knew I had to save her, so I just went in."

Point of story: Not all young people are vicious hoodlums. There are some decent ones around. (The initiate knew this already, of course, as he hadn't read the last year of media output claiming that all young people are vicious hoodlums!).

2. The HPP, or Honest Poor Person. In this story we are told how penniless pensioner Molly Trusting finds a wallet with four thousand pounds inside, all in £50 notes. Instead of keeping
it, Molly dutifully trots down to the local police station and hands it in. Picture of toothless, smiling Molly handing over wallet to grateful owner. "Don't think I wasn't tempted," says 83 year old Molly "Because I was. But in the end, right’s right and fair’s fair and I knew I’ad to ‘and it in’. “If only more people were like Molly,” said Sergeant Ivor Truncheon, “Our job would be a lot easier.”

Point of story: There are still some good old honest ‘salt of the earth’ people around, with good old honest ‘salt of the earth’ morals. (The initiate knew this anyway, as he had not read the last year of the media output telling us that we live in an unsafe world where you can’t trust anyone!).

3. The IBCP or Incredibly Brave Crippled Person. Here we are told how David Invalid struggled against incredible odds to become the all European downhill skiing champion. David, who tragically lost several limbs in an horrific car crash which also killed his pretty blonde girlfriend just two days before they were due to be married, has struggled to piece together the shattered remnants of his life. We hear the story of his terrible pain, the five years in hospital coming to terms with his horrible injuries, and the gradual struggle to win against all the odds.

Doctor: “He was clinically dead when they brought him in, it’s nothing short of a miracle.” Etc., etc.
David; “I owe it all to the doctors. It was nothing short of a miracle.” Etc. etc.
Nurses: “David was just fantastic. He wouldn’t give up. “Etc., etc.
David: “I couldn’t have done it without the nurses. They were fantastic. They wouldn’t give up.” Etc.

Point of story: “You think you've got problems? That’s nothing. Listen to this...”

The intended result is to make you feel content with your lot, problems and all. After all, there are so many people worse off than you are.

4. The WWSTC or Workers Who Saved The Company. In this story we hear about the altruistic work force who ganged together to work without pay for one month to save their ailing company. Picture fifty smiling lads and girls in the factory canteen, giving the ‘thumbs up’ sign.

Doreen, who's been with the company for fifty years, is quoted as saying: "It's been fantastic. The atmosphere reminds me of the war when we were all pulling together."

Point of story: Money isn't everything. Isn't it great that there are still people like Doreen and her friends around? (The initiate knew this anyway, as he had not read the last year of press output which claims that the working world is populated with brace-wearing yuppies who are screwing everything they can get out the system!)

All of these stories, and more, are intended to make the reader feel safe, secure and snug in the knowledge that the old world out there isn’t such a bad place after all. There are still a few good people around. There is hope.

The initiate knew this all along, as his life is filled with joy and hope! He hasn’t read all the media output about how insecure and dangerous the world is, and he doesn’t need a newspaper to tell him (once every six months) that parts of the world are safe, secure and snug! Of course, the very next day after printing one of the above stories, the newspaper will lead with another shock horror story about how awful the world is, or how terrible are the people who inhabit it!

Image (Weapon #7)

The media really do have a great deal of power to influence people. After all, over ten million rational, thinking, British adults purchase a newspaper every single day of the week! Presumably they buy these papers to read them; and presumably they believe at least a percentage of what they read, otherwise why would they buy them?

All media are masters of image manipulation. You don't have to come out with a downright lie in order to swing the thoughts and emotions of your readers in a particular direction. The English language is extremely rich and varied, and through careful choice of words, a newspaper can influence your opinion and get you to believe certain things.

One of the best ways of manipulation is to come up with a snappy, easy to remember stereotyped image for someone. For example, if newspapers were only interested in giving you the news, then you might read:

President of Iraq Orders Troops Into Kuwait

Contrast this straight presentation of the facts with:

Mad Dog Saddam Orders Invasion of Kuwait

Immediately the paper is telling us how we should think and feel about this issue. We are told which side to take. By describing Saddam Hussain as a 'Mad Dog', we know he is the 'baddie'. An epithet like this will stick and stick. Hordes of hack journalists will repeat it ad nauseam, and forever afterwards the man will be known as 'Mad Dog Saddam'. Note also the use of the word 'invasion'. This tells us who is right (Kuwait), and who is wrong (Iraq).

Please note that I am making absolutely no statement whatsoever about how 'mad' or otherwise Saddam Hussain is. I have never met the man and so I have no opinions on the matter. Neither am I taking a stance on the 'invasion' of Kuwait (to quote just one example from thousands of possibilities). I've never been to Kuwait. I haven't studied Middle East history. I know almost nothing about Iraq. How can I possibly have an opinion on this subject? Because The Sun tells me I should?

This stance is typical of the initiate. He or she rarely has opinions on media stories.

Day Of The Jackal

Another example of image: Have you noticed that whenever a series of crimes is committed (for example, serial murders), then the press immediately invent a snappy name for the murderer.

For instance, he might be nicknamed The Jackal or the Bedford Ripper. The reason for this is that the papers can invent shock horror headlines like:

Jackal Claims Fourth Victim and

Ripper Still Prowling Bedford Streets

This sells far more newspapers than a straight presentation of the facts, such as this:

Fourth Person Murdered in Recent Series of Killings, or:

Murderer Still at Large in Bedford

The effect of these names is to glorify the criminal. It's not just some pathetic lunatic who likes to hack people's heads off, but it's.....The Jackal. Sounds pretty respectable eh? Maybe even thrilling and exciting? It also prejudges any trial if the person is caught. How can someone who has been called The Jackal for six months by the press, possibly receive a fair trial?

These excesses are mainly true of the tabloid press, but never forget that the vast majority of papers purchased in this country are of the tabloid variety. Only a small percentage of people read the 'quality' press.

The subject of the misuse of English is a large one, and I cannot go into it in great detail. There are many, many examples where image-provoking language is used to manipulate your thoughts and feelings.

If I were to tell you, for example, that ICI had recently made one hundred people redundant from their Coventry facility, what would you think? Probably not very much. You might think that the company needed to trim the work force in order to remain profitable, but you probably couldn't care less either way. But if I tell you that one hundred hardworking and loyal employees had been callously thrown on the scrap-heap, then I would be attempting to bias you through my misuse of the language. Suddenly you feel a little anti-ICI, and pro all those poor old workers, don't you? This image-creating technique also devalues language.

Chairman Slammed In Furious Storm

For example, you can't be slightly annoyed at something without being reported as 'furious', as in "The Prime Minister is reported to be furious at recent leaks from the cabinet." What this literally means is that he became red in the face, started yelling loudly, running around waving his fists and smashing up the room! This is hardly likely! In fact the Prime Minister was probably mildly annoyed at the leaks. This completely inaccurate reporting of the facts also devalues the language. In this case, the word ‘furious’ is used for all of the emotions from a bit miffed, through annoyed, and on up to really furious.

A committee cannot have a small disagreement without it being reported as a ‘row’ or a ‘storm’. If a committee really do have a row about something, then this is interesting news. But if you report every minor disagreement as a ‘row’ or ‘storm’, then who knows what really went on in that committee meeting?

I really hope that you are starting to understand why the initiate never reads newspapers, or pays much attention to the media at all.

By the way, have you ever had the experience of going away from the country, say on holiday, for a couple of weeks or more? You come home and suddenly realise that you haven’t heard any news for two weeks. All of those stories have been born, risen to prominent attention, and then died again. Phone-ins have discussed the stories - but you missed the lot! Are you a poorer person for having missed all that stuff? Do you feel that there is a huge gap in your knowledge? Did you worry about any of these stories that you missed?

Of course not! Why? Because you were out there having fun and enjoying yourself. You were far too busy having a great time to worry about all that crap going on back home!

Well, this example gives you an insight into how the initiate lives his whole life, and not just the two weeks 'holiday' taken by other people.

Approval (Weapon #8)

The media also rely on weak people's need for approval.

For example, although many people enjoy reading the 'quality' press, there are hundreds of thousands of these papers sold daily to people who want to be seen to read the quality press. Consider all of those suited businessmen travelling on the trains each morning reading the Times or (God help us) the European! How many of these people long to read The Sun, or The Sport on the way to work? And yet they all drag out their Guardians and Financial Times (both worthy papers, of course), and dutifully read them along with everyone else. Why? Because they fear the disapproval of total strangers!

To prove this, you can apply my 'empty carriage' test.

In this test, any one of these suited businessmen finds himself alone in a railway compartment (purely fanciful!). On the seat is a copy of The Times, and The Sun. Which of these papers will he pick up and read, if he can be sure that no-one is watching? Of course, the answer is that nine out of ten would go for The Sun first, and then read The Times later. So why don't these same people take out The Sun when travelling together? You know the answer!

Phone-Ins

Phone-in programs are classic examples of weak and powerless people struggling for a modicum of approval from other people (again, total strangers). It is the ultimate in anti-initiate behaviour to call a 'phone-in ' program! Ditto for 'points of view' type of programs. Here's why:

1. Phone-in programs almost always deal with the latest 'hot' media issue of the day. As I have already explained, these issues are largely artificial, transitory and of no consequence. Yet the sheep get hot under the collar. They become desperate to join in the debate, to make their point, to have other people hear their views on the subject. And, of course, each caller knows that their viewpoint is the only valid viewpoint and that the other callers must be crazy to take an opposite view.

2. The people who take part in these programs rarely have an informed opinion on the subject. Instead, they are simply regurgitating back to the media, snippets of sheep fodder handed out to them earlier by the self-same media! People telephone these programs because they hold a rag-bag collection of opinions on every subject under the sun. No matter what the issue, they can drag out an opinion to suit - and they can’t wait until the rest of the Nation has heard it!

3. The participants are desperately seeking a little bit of personal power for themselves. They revels in the feeling that the whole nation has heard their prejudices and biased version of reality. They can bask in the warm glow of achievement for months after the show.

The truth is, of course, that there are two types of people who listen to these shows:

a) Those who listen to have a laugh at the arrogant, self-opinionated and often downright silly people who ‘phone-in.

b) Those who listen merely to baa “Quite right” after hearing one caller, and “Rubbish!” after hearing another caller with the opposite view.

4) Phone-ins encourage the sheep to stampede for pen A or pen B (see an earlier release on the ‘illusory debate’ trick). Once herded into their pens, they are encouraged to ‘baa’ angrily at the sheep in the opposite pen! The media circus keeps this whole charade going for exactly the run-time of the program, and then cuts it dead! After a day or two, the entire issue will be dropped by the media, in favour of another, equally trivial, but ‘hot’ issue.

People take part in these programs because they are powerless in their personal lives, and they seek the approval of others. They also seek to influence others by giving their opinions. Attempting to gain influence is, of course, an attempt to grab a tiny piece of personal power for yourself.

The 'points of view' programs are even worse! Those who participate are so lacking in personal power, that the best they can think of to do with their precious time here on Earth, is to compose long and silly letters which start: "Why, oh why must the BBC........." I need say little more on the subject than this:

More people would complain if the BBC were to move The Archers half an hour forward, than if the National Front were to seize power in Britain! And I'm not joking!

Television, Video, Films

I have concentrated mainly on newspapers in this release, but many of the comments apply to all of the media. It is an amazing fact that only seventy years ago, there was no media of the airwaves. In other words, no television, no radio. There was also little cinema to speak of. The only 'media' were the newspapers.

Go back another hundred years and newspapers hardly existed. There would be the odd crudely printed sheet of paper carrying some particular piece of news. There were also books. Most people were illiterate, and books were completely out of the financial league of the common people - apart from the bible! Media is a very, very modern phenomenon. People prior to (say) 1700 would rarely have heard anything about anything! They would know what was going on in the next village. They would hear once a week a few facts about the next town, and they would hear every few months, a few facts about other countries - but that would be it!

Nowadays, we are bombarded day and night by a constant stream of media output, most of it aimed at trying to alter your life from what you want it to be, to what they want it to be. The most obvious of these techniques is advertising. Most advertisers are selling image first, and product second. In other words they are trying to get you to aspire towards being something different.

I don’t want to go into much detail in this release, but I want to summarise how the Inner Matrix initiate handles and uses the various channels of media which attempt to pervade his or her life:

1. He will listen to the news on TV or radio roughly once every other day. He does this just to keep abreast of what is going on. He never buys newspapers.

2. He watches TV for about two hours per week. This would be an educational program of interest, or an occasional entertainment program. The reason for this low viewing figure is that he or she has far more important life-enhancing things to do than watching television! Watching TV is the ultimate vegetable occupation! O.K., it’s nice to just slump in an armchair sometimes, but the initiate is far more likely to do this with a book, rather than gawping at a screen.
I want to make it very clear that I am not attempting to dictate ad hoc, your viewing habits!

The point is that television and videos and films and adverts are all trying to interfere with your own perceptions of what you are, and where you are going. Adverts do this by making you aspire towards a lifestyle, which in turn, makes you want to drink a certain brand of coffee, or whatever. Many films deal purely in stereotypes. This makes men want to be Rambo or Clint Eastwood. It makes women believe that ‘romantic happy ever after love’ exists, and is even normal! It makes all of us believe that extreme violence is normal, and that victims get up and walk away.

I don’t want to get too ‘heavy’ over this subject. It is enough to say that the media output (films etc.) deal in illusions. Although it is nice to be told a story sometimes, there is a great danger that if you are swamped by this stuff night and day, you will be unable to distinguish illusion from reality. I think most people are like this already. You are not ‘most people’. You are attempting to gain firm and powerful control of your life. This means that you will inevitably start acting and thinking differently from those around you. If they watch five hours of soap operas a week, then they earn contempt and pity! Imagine; fifteen whole hours a week! Just think what you could do with that time! My god, if someone gave me another fifteen hours a week I could rule the world! (Metaphorically speaking of course...).

I have a thought now and then, which goes something like this. If you were to throw out your television and radio, and never see a newspaper or magazine again, would your life be any different? It would mean that you would hardly ever hear any news or current affairs. The really vital stuff you would hear other people discussing, but the usual daily output of sheep fodder would pass you by. I've just got a feeling that this would work, and that your life would be richer, not poorer. But this is rather extreme, and so I keep my TV and radio, but I use them with extreme selectivity. You need discipline to do this.

You see, one of the reasons that people allow themselves to fill their lives with all this stuff is because they really, truly haven't got anything more important to do. I realised this a long time ago. If I were to free these people from the need to work (say by paying the equivalent of their salary) they would be completely at a loss. I don't mean temporarily, I mean permanently. They really don't have anything much that they want to do with their lives. It's true, I'm afraid. They wouldn't watch TV for fifteen hours a week if they had things they wanted to do!

This single fact alone is what distinguishes Inner Matrix initiates from ordinary people. Initiates have things - dozens of things - which they want to do with their lives. If you gave them ten lifetimes, they would cram them full. They are almost like people who have been given six months to live. If you were given six months to live, would you spend most of it watching The Generation Game and EastEnders??!! Of course not!

There is little point in grasping personal freedom if you panic at the thought of being free! There is a penalty to becoming free. Suddenly, the game's up. You have to face yourself and decide what you want to do with what little remains of your life. It's scary, but fun. Inner Matrix initiates have a whole long list of things they want to do, from learning the piano to climbing Mount Everest! Normal people, in contrast, have little or nothing they want to do. Given the opportunity, they would stare at you blankly and come up with....nothing.

I am being deadly serious here when I tell you that this reason alone is why most people allow themselves to be controlled by the illusions and weapons. They collude in the control. They want to be controlled because they are terrified of examining their lives and finding that the cupboard is bare.

At this stage of your training, I want you to start taking a good, long, hard, honest look at yourself. Are there things you really want to do? Are you aware that once you become free, you will actually be able to do these things? Have you used your lack of freedom as an excuse for not starting the things you claim you want to do? Is the cupboard bare, or do you have untapped depths of creativity within you? These are tough questions, but I want you to answer them for yourself. You see, it’s not enough to be a member of Inner Matrix. In fact there is a danger there. Spending £19 a month should not ease your conscience! You can’t buy freedom and power, you have to truly want it, and work at it yourself. I can show you the way, but you have to really want to walk down the path I am pointing out to you. I will be returning to these points again and again.

Films

Finally, I want to draw your attention to films and videos. I want to show you (using the example of the film ‘Titanic’) how this form of entertainment can be dangerous in that it can attempt to sneak incorrect ideas into your brain. I’m not saying you shouldn't see such films. I’m just asking you to become more aware of the hidden agenda the filmmakers have, and how they seek to influence your beliefs.

Have you seen the film ‘Titanic’ yet?

If not, I urge you to see it as it must surely be one of the best films made in the last decade. At three and a half hours long, I found it somewhat short and was sorry to see the final credits rolling.
If you haven’t already seen the film, don’t worry, I am not going to spoil the ending. Not that ending. We all know the ship sank (or did it?... word amongst conspiracy theorists is that aliens beamed all the passengers off the ship and then sank it with neutron photonic acublasters. They also implanted false memories in the survivors, thereby erasing the harrowing vision of the giant saucers hovering over the ship just seconds before the disaster. That’s why no bodies were ever found...).

No. I mean the other ending when the old woman is on the back of the ship and she.... you know... does it... remember?

Anyway, I want to make a serious point about the flaw in an otherwise brilliant film.

The flaw is a philosophical one. I want to explain how your world view and opinions are subtly shaped by films like Titanic, and countless other messages you receive throughout your life which sabotage your efforts at success.

Let me tell you straight out that you cannot succeed with your subconscious mind working against you - striving to sabotage your efforts from behind the scenes. This is why you must be careful what you expose yourself to, what you read, what you view and who you mix with.

But first let me explain something about film directors.

They are artists. Most artists (of all persuasions) have strong left wing neo-communist leanings. Okay, there are exceptions - but this is the rule.

Here’s why...

To an artist, art is everything. The most important star in the universe, the ultimate purpose of man’s life on earth.

They are, of course, entirely mistaken in this belief because art is, in fact a luxury to be enjoyed only when the necessities of life have been provided. To elevate art to any position of central importance is akin to making lemon cheesecake the focus of your diet, over and above any other foodstuff. Don’t get me wrong, lemon cheesecake is my favourite desert, but I know my main dietary needs come first, and lemon cheesecake fits into any small corner I might have left. It is a pleasure to be indulged after I have taken care of the necessities.

Artists disagree with this ‘practical’ view.

Furthermore, they all secretly believe that art (their art in particular) should be forced on the public whether or not the public want it. Worse, they believe that art is too pure, too noble, too spiritual to be coarsened and demeaned by anything so unworthy as...money. Art should be paid for out of the public purse (ahah!...here comes the left-wing communist bit). Artists, particularly struggling, talentless newbies, should be supported at the taxpayer’s expense. They should be given subsidies and grants. In short they should be the major recipients of money looted from the productive.

It is this single belief which leads me to assert that most artists are left-wing. If you doubt it, then I challenge you to ask any artist the following question:

“Should the arts be subsidised with ‘government’ money?”

If the answer is yes, then you are talking to a die-hard collectivist. To subsidise with government money means: to give unearned money away which has been extorted through force.

Many artists dismiss the notion that they should earn money solely through the sale of their works as being ‘impractical’. Apparently, they argue, the public don’t buy enough of their works to support their lofty endeavours. The solution? Either the public should be forced to buy their works or the public should pay for their works (through grant and subsidy) even if they never see them.

Squeeze the outer skin of most artists and this is the (pinkish) juice which will run out.

Okay, so back to Titanic.

Now the backers and the sponsors of this film are hard-nosed businessmen and women with their eye firmly on the 'Bath-time Fun Accessory Titanic With Real Screaming Figurines’ merchandising angle. This is a strictly commercial enterprise (as it should be, of course) with the emphasis on the bottom line. However... the trouble is they have to employ those damned artist chappies to create and direct it for them, and they are a bunch of socially aware, community-minded, idealists who are often impassioned in their commitment to the cause...

These are the people who write the scripts, create the screenplays and produce and direct the films you see.

The result is... philosophically flawed story lines and screenplays - all (surprise, surprise) with a strong neo-communist or left-wing bias.

As an exercise, when you next watch a film, TV drama or (in particular) soap opera, see how many of them have one of the following messages:

1. Life is a hopeless struggle. No matter what you do, you just can’t get ahead.

2. Being poor is good. Although it might be ‘nice’ to have a little more money, we’re happy because we’re poor. “We’ve gor each uvah and this nice little ‘ahse. “ Etc. Poor people are decent through to the core.

3. Being rich is awful. It causes misery, despair and upset. Rich people are cold, uncaring and greedy. Rich people are corrupt through to the core.

Or features one of these story lines:

1. The life of a depraved/wasted/diseased person or an alcoholic, drug addict, rape victim, AIDS sufferer, battered wife, criminal, murderer, victim, psychopath or mentally ill person.

2. Death, disease, murder, mayhem, destruction, crime, rape, drugs, war, failure.

I would estimate that fully 90% of all dramas you see on the big screen or TV will be concerned with one of those themes, and this has an effect on your subconscious.

The film ‘Titanic’ is no exception. It majored on the following entirely incorrect (but typically collectivist) philosophical ideas, and hammered them mercilessly into the audience:

Being rich is bad. It is a worthless thing. All rich people are evil. They are either crooks or snooty aristocrats who inherited their money.

This film was teeming with wealthy people and, under the producer’s instruction, we are assured that not a single one of them was worth saving. They are bad through and through - totally corrupt and downright evil or even psychopathic in the case of Rose’s fiancé. His overriding preoccupations are extortion, rape, violence towards women and cheating in the most caddish fashion. He is the stereotype of the ‘evil millionaire’ without a single redeeming feature. He is the melodrama sawmill owner, twirling his moustache in glee as the helpless girl inches closer to the spinning blade...

Scene of rich man trying to buy a place on a lifeboat with a wedge of money. Cash flung back in his face by noble, poor and decent sailor: “Your money’s no good here, mister!”

Another message is: Rich people are devoid of compassion or decency. They are bent solely on saving their own skins.

Scenes of struggling poor people locked behind doors by the cigar-chewing evil rich as the waters slowly rise... “Let the scum drown! First Class passengers only if you please, this way for the lifeboats ladies. Back you filth! We’ll get to you when all the first class passengers have been seated...if there are any places left... nyahahaha!!”

The film promotes the lie that rich people always come to a sticky end or die miserable, unhappy, alone and unfulfilled.

Immortal line: “He hung himself after the 1929 stock-market crash.”

Also that: Being rich is no fun. In fact it is a crashing bore. The rich are incapable of enjoying themselves. They sit around with broomsticks up their bottoms, sipping Champers with their fingers cocked at just the right angle, talking trivia and trying to outdo each other. Children are stilted and restricted by having to learn ritualistic table manners.

Scene of lead female looking horror-stricken towards upper class little girl at dinner learning how to sit properly. Thinking “Oh no! This is just too, too awful. How can we torture our children like this? What monsters have we become with our money and fine ways? There must be something better. Oh how I long to be poor and free. If only I could find a quaint poor person to sweep me off my feet and teach me the true meaning of life. Those poor folk are so wise and so happy...”

Meanwhile, back in third class we are regaled with the message that:

Being poor is good. To be poor is to be happy. Poor people are noble, brave and wise. They think not of themselves but of others. Sacrifice and self-immolation are good, lofty standards to hold.

Scenes of noble poor folk sacrificing their place on the lifeboat to other, more deserving people whilst the evil rich men are trying to sneak onto boats reserved for women and children, even grabbing spare children in an attempt to cheat their way to safety at the expense of others.

The film continues to assure us that: The poor are good through and through. Decent to a man. There is not an evil person amongst them. The poor suitor (Jack) would sacrifice his life so that his love (Rose) might live. The rich suitor would abandon his love so that he might live.

Also, we are assured that: Being poor is tremendous fun. Really terrific. An absolute riot. A jolly jape right to the end. Poor people really know how to enjoy themselves whilst the rich just pretend.

Scenes of quaint ‘character’ Irish folk dancing wildly on the tables below decks and knocking back the Guinness, whilst russet-haired Irish beauties lift their skirts in time with the joyful beat of the Gaelic drum. Beaming ragged children are whirled into the frantic dance, careless of the fact that they haven’t eaten for two days. Compare with any scene of ‘poor people enjoying themselves’ from Oliver or Mary Poppins, for that matter - they’re all the same. Meanwhile, in first class, in what can only be described as a funereal atmosphere, women are dabbing their sated mouths with delicate silk handkerchiefs, unable to cram down another morsel of caviar, whilst the men politely suggest that they leave the ladies and step outside for a cigar and fine brandy. See! Those rich bastards don’t even know the meaning of the word ‘fun’, do they?

The director/screenplay writer even changed history by implying (strongly) that it was rich people’s greed which caused the disaster. Apparently it wasn’t caused by the captain’s ineptitude or the inattention of the lookouts (they were humble, common sailors, so they can’t possibly be to blame if you’re a collectivi

Ready to get started?

Join the #1 marketplace for voice-over talent

Need Some Help?
Contact us for help with your voice over project.