I haven't watched terrestrial TV for many years (to the extent that Scott and Charlene's recently announced "shock return" to Neighbours was largely a shock to me as I didn't entirely realise they'd left...), but I do watch carefully selected films from time to time, because films - along with the printed press - give us some of the most revealing insights into both the current agenda, and what the ruling classes intend to insert into the narrative next. 

Obviously, where it comes to tinsel town and its glitzy productions, it would be absurd to believe that ultra-wealthy misanthropic narcissists - and I wasn't meaning to intentionally invoke Amber and Johnny, but they do epitomise the rancid reality of Hollywood with acute precision  - would spend such a gargantuan amount of time and money producing films merely to "entertain" us, and they don't. Hollywood productions are not there to entertain, they are there to entrain - to entrain the mind to accept what the overlords are planning to unleash next, a phenomenon otherwise known as predictive programming and revelation of the method.

A film I watched a couple of days ago, as it had been specifically recommended on this brief, was 'Alita: Battle Angel'. A high-concept sci-fi affair, the film is set several centuries in the future (300 years after 'the fall'), where society has become deeply degraded and ultra-violent - and, also, totally trans-human. Humans ("meat boys", as they are called) live side by side with cyborgs - high-tech creations with human brains infused into robot bodies, which give them incredible super powers.

"Alita" is a discarded, broken cyborg, found by a benevolent cyber-doctor, who puts her back together, and discovers she is a relic of a forgotten era: a combat cyborg developed with extremely advanced military technology that no longer exists. Highly trained in martial arts and programmed to "engage in conflict without hesitation", Alita goes around the city getting into lots of fights with other cyborgs, mainly "hunter warriors" who exist only to kill. She easily triumphs over most of them. 

Alita is human in appearance and has a human brain, so ends up falling for a "meat boy" named Hugo. She tries to protect him from the murderous machinations of the other evil cyborgs, but inevitably - with only his paltry human powers to protect him - Hugo ends up getting killed, at which point, Alita rushes his severed head to cyber-doc to infuse into a robo-body. Romantic, right?

All the other evil cyborgs now want to kill Alita and Hugo, further violent conflicts ensue, and this leads ultimately to an epic escape scene where Hugo tries to ascend a sky-ladder to the "promised land" of a secret city that floats above the clouds, but (spoiler alert) gets his torso cut in half by a flying-drone-thing. Alita tries to save his severed head (again) to take back to cyber-doc, but his bionic arm snaps off and so he perishes, falling away under the clouds (a weird and warped 'modernising' of the famous Titanic scene where Jack disappears under the water). Alita is left devastated and vows to avenge his death by becoming even more of a merciless serial killer. The End.

Well, how to unpick all the truly terrifying trans tyranny implicit in this? And when I say trans, I obviously don't mean trans "gender" (although that is a separate sort of tyranny I will be addressing in due course), but transhuman. This whole film might as well be a serenade to cyborgs, a romanticism of robots - because it is made irrefutably clear: humans ("meat boys") are fragile and fallible, incompetent, and imperilled (cyber-doc's daughter is murdered because she is in a wheelchair and cannot escape the hunter warrior who comes for her. If he'd been able to infuse her into a cyborg in time, the doctor tells Alita, she would have survived). 

Transhuman robots, on the other hand, are strong, vital, multi-skilled and a formidable force to be reckoned with - and yet, as our doe-eyed heroine is meant to demonstrate, have lost none of their humanity along the way. There is a very telling scene where Alita asks Hugo, "does it bother you I'm not completely human?", and he replies, "you're the most human person I've ever met."

This film is nothing but propaganda to induct us into the transhumanist future we are just on the precipice of entering - if we haven't got there already. Technology has rapidly accelerated from its inception as something we passively observe (movie screens, TVs), to something we actively interact with (computers, video games) to something we carry around with us (laptops, phones) to something we wear (Apple watches) to, now, something we put inside our bodies (air pods) - so is it really such a leap to brain chips and bionic implants?

We're very nearly there, but there will need to be one big final propagandist push to normalise transhumanism and have the masses openly clamouring for it, and we are currently being prepped for this via two major celebrities with very prominent media profiles:

1. Elon Musk - presented as an anti-establishment champion, Musk is making all the right noises to be anointed as a true hero of the people - he currently has vast swathes of ordinarily sceptical people convinced he has purchased Twitter for purely noble purposes and is genuinely and benevolently dedicated to principles of free speech and democracy. So, when he announces we just have to have neural implants "to protect free speech", that it's the only way to "defend our democracy", he'll get a lot of cheerleading support - it's exactly the same kind of pied piperism we saw with Trump. Note that, in 2016, Musk said humans "risk being treated like house pets by artificial intelligence" (a bit like Alita's relationship with Hugo) unless technology is developed that can "connect brains to computers" (which ends up being exactly what Hugo has to do in order to survive and be an equal to his robo-love).

2. Madeleine McCann - as regular readers will know, I've been banging on about this for years (sorry), but I remain firmly convinced that that entire performance was an intricately stage-managed pantomime, set up from the beginning, to set the stage for a VERY big agenda item - the microchip. I think they're going to find Madeleine soon, and they're going to find her alive. This child has intentionally been made an international household name (tens of thousands of other children have gone missing in the 15 years since she vanished, but can we name any of them?), with her story having never really left the headlines. There were three consecutive stories about her in the UK's second-biggest newspaper yesterday alone. This does not happen if a news story is not part of something much bigger.

Everyone who thinks "the parents obviously did it" is, I believe, being set up. If the parents really did it, then, with all their friends in high places, why wasn't the whole thing kept out of the papers entirely and swiftly covered up (like e.g. the hideous Hampstead case), rather than being international headline news within about ten minutes of it happening and never having left the headlines since? 

You're being lured into a trap, tricked into pointing fingers at innocent people, so that when Madeleine is found alive and the parents exonerated, this can be used against "conspiracy theorists" to "prove" that they victimise innocent people with their crazy fantasies, and thus used as an excuse to further restrict and criminalise free speech.

At this point, Madeleine is more or less as famous as the Queen, so her being found alive is going to be one of the biggest news stories of all time, and, like most massive news stories where the world's media goes completely lockstep and immaculately coordinates on a story (as they will), this is a big red flag that some or all of it has been staged. It has been staged to fulfil an agenda. What is that agenda? Microchipping the population.

Remember that it's not illegal for the media to engage in 'street theatre' - to present fabricated events as if they are real in order to propagandise the public.  Acclaimed author and journalist, Naomi Wolf (who has been deeply steeped in the media and politics her entire career and so should know), has stated that: "we have entered an era in which it is not crazy to assess news events to see if they're real or not real… In fact, it's kind of crazy not to." (See this excellent 9-minute lecture she gave on the subject.)

So, in due course (and very soon if I am right), we will see the McCanns doing the media circuit, gushing over their long-lost daughter and how they never gave up hope, and, oh, if only there had been some way of knowing where she was, some kind of tracking system, all this terrible grief and heartache could have been avoided.... (meanwhile, and not incidentally, it has just become illegal not to microchip your cat). 

Cue: "Maddie's Microchip". Keep your child safe with this incredible new technology! Hey, why not get it installed at the doctor's at the same time you get them vaccinated? 

There is just no way the McCann story would have stayed prominently in the press for fifteen years (fifteen years!) unless it was all pre-scripted from the start and part of a long-game agenda item. 

Equally, there is simply no way Elon Musk would be getting the level of press attention he is currently receiving if he wasn't a major player in inciting the next stage of the agenda.

 And there is no way big budget, sci-fi epics would be uncritically endorsing transhumanism and advocating it as a far superior state to being human, unless this was all part of the future plan.

As ever, this agenda will all be pushed as being "for your safety". Children are safe from predators if they're chipped. Humans are safe from AI if they're "upgraded". People are safe from assault and disease if they're transhuman.

Well, there was a phrase I used to hear a lot during the Covid episode, regarding all the government's pernicious propaganda about "safety", which is going to be just as pertinent and perhaps even more so during the chip chapter.

The point is not to stay safe. The point is to stay human.