Morgoth’s Review – The Morgcast 04 – The Internet of Bodies and Things – Apr 30, 2021 — Transcript


 

[Morgoth discusses a World Economic Forum article that proposes what it calls “The Internet of Bodies” where our bodies are monitored through various devices in the name of creating a better and healthier society, yet would really be part and parcel of living in a total surveillance State.

 

KATANA]

 

 

 

Morgoth’s Review

 

Morgcast 04

 

The Internet of Bodies and Things

 

Apr 30, 2021

 

 

 

Click here for the video:

 

https://odysee.com/@MorgothReviews:5/morgcast4:0

 

Published on April 30, 2021

 

Odysee Description

Morgoth’s Review

The MorgCast#4: The Internet Of Bodies And Things

April 30th, 2021

1,218 views

Morgoth’s Review

@MorgothReviews

Following

Thanks to the kind people who support my work

https://www.subscribestar.com/morgoth-s-review

The WEF article

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/internet-of-bodies-covid19-recovery-governance-health-data/

globalism

great reset

vaccine passports

LBRY URL

lbry://@MorgothReviews#5/morgcast4#0

https://www.subscribestar.com/morgoth…​

https://www.patreon.com/Morgoth​

https://ko-fi.com/K3K3RSEG​

 

Thanks to Theberton for the intros and outros

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_0K…

 

 

TRANSCRIPT

(56 mins)

 

[00:00]

 

 

[Intro music and imagery by Theberton.]

 

[00:25]

 

 

Well hello everybody. Welcome back to another Morgcast, which I haven’t done for a few weeks because a few things have got in the way.

 

I’ve been working on another script for a longer video. And I wanted to just take the opportunity, … The reason why I set up this podcast was mainly just so I could get into things without doing a load of editing, and it will be a little more off the cuff. Not that well organized. And where I could kind of just let me thoughts flow about things without worrying too much about censorship, like on YouTube, and things like that.

 

And one of the things that’s been on my mind and is on my mind more, and more, is this, the Great Reset, and how it ties in with the Covid and the vaccine passports, and all these kinds of things. And I find it’s just this cloud that kind of keeps coming and it keeps getting worse, and worse! By now I’ve actually done quite a bit of content on this. But I’m surprised that how few other people in my circuit, in this scene, they just don’t seem that interested in it, or at least as not as paranoid about it as I am. But I thought nevertheless I’m gonna carry on, [chuckling] anyway!

 

And one of the things you’ll hear from the people who do talk about this you’ll see links to the World Economic Forum being passed around, articles and clips, and things.

 

And so I thought it would be interesting to actually take a look at one of these articles. Like what is it that they’re saying? What’s actually in the text? And I’d heard of the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” before. I’d heard of “The Internet of Things” before. But I hadn’t heard of the “Internet of Bodies” before.

 

 

Now, just the title “The Internet of Bodies” sounds absolutely horrific to me! And they’ve got this article here which I thought would be interesting to take a look on and kind of go off on tangents and things as we go through it. And it says:

 

“The Internet of Bodies is here. This is how it could change our lives.”

 

And it’s written by a Chinese named Xiao Liu. A Fellow at The Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution World Economic Forum. So the thing is they’re not trying to hide it either. I think it’s fair to come out and like do away with a conspiracy kind of stuff. Even though, … Like that’s the weird thing, when you talk about this it does have the aura of a conspiracy about it. Yeah, it’s just up there on the website, you know.

 

And then you can have a look at what’s going on in the real world, and the vaccine passports and things. I’m sure I’ll get onto that. And you can have a look at what they’re saying on their own website. They’re not trying to hide it!

 

And another thing is, which I’m also going to touch on here, is that you can even argue that this is a good thing. Like these people don’t think they’re evil. They’re not, you know, I mean, Tony Blair is like the worst of the worst! And he’s all involved with this. Then you’ve got that Klaus Schwab, and you’ve got these other people.

 

When they tuck themselves into their beds at night, in their mansions, or their sort of high-rise flats and apartments, like they’ve gotten in Manhattan, or wherever, it is. They don’t actually think they’re evil. They think they are doing the world a service. And when you look into this, when you read what they’re saying, you can kind of understand the reasoning behind it.

 

And so the Internet of Bodies article here. It just says, I mean, this is how it kicks off. And this is again like Xiao Liu a Fellow at The Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution World Economic Forum. So the Fourth Industrial Revolution is basically where everything is going to be hooked up to the internet. And everything is going to be automated. And so that it kicks off and they say:

 

“We’re entering the era of the ‘Internet of Bodies’: Collecting our physical data via a range of devices that can be implanted, swallowed or worn.”

 

So yes, straight away it’s about imposing this on you. So a device that you’re gonna swallow, or they’re gonna implant it – again this is right there on their article – or worn. And the idea of this is that it’s gonna track everything about you. And the way they’re going to frame this is mainly in terms of “health”..

 

So then it says:

 

“The result is a huge amount of health-related data that could improve human wellbeing around the world, and prove crucial in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.”

 

So Covid’s right at the heart of all of this. And I’m not the first person to point out that it is quite convenient:

 

“But a number of risks and challenges must be addressed to realize the potential of this technology, from privacy issues to practical hurdles.”

 

So they want to bring in the Internet of Bodies. And it’s going to explain what that is. But they are aware that there’s people pushing back. More people locally. I mean, thankfully that there is now a bit of a backlash against this stuff. But so then the article begins in earnest. And it says:

 

“In the special wards of Shanghai’s Public Health Clinical Center, nurses use smart thermometers to check the temperatures of COVID-19 patients. Each person’s temperature is recorded with a sensor, reducing the risk of infection through contact, and the data is sent to an observation dashboard. An abnormal result triggers an alert to medical staff, who can then intervene promptly. The gathered data also allows medics to analyse trends over time.”

 

[06:27]

 

So if you think of the smart thermometer. So you’ve got a thermometer that’s hooked up to the internet. And then it’s also an automated service which is looking at the health of a patient. So instead of having a nurse wandering around taking notes all the time, it’ll all be hooked up.

 

Now this sounds benign! And they’re really gonna hammer this, because they realize this is the carrot! This is like the sweetener. This is the cherry on the cake. The incentive to make it look benign. And yeah they’ve got their arguments for it.:

 

“The smart thermometers are designed by VivaLNK, a Silicon-Valley based startup, and are a powerful example of the many digital products and services that are revolutionizing healthcare. After the Internet of Things, which transformed the way we live, …”

 

I mean, that’s an interesting way to put it, because I’m obviously – if you’re watching this – you’ll know that I’m don’t like technology. And I complain about it’s effects on the world quite a bit. And I’m basically doing it again here. But I mean, the way they’ve put this like:

 

“After the Internet of Things, which transformed the way we live, travel and work by connecting everyday objects to the Internet.”

 

That hasn’t happened where I am! I mean, my telephone is like five years old. I’m not even sure if I could handle all this stuff. I don’t have tags. And what they mean, I mean, an example of the internet of things is where, … Let’s say your fridge. You order your food via the internet. And then like the idea is that you’ll have a “smart fridge”. So the smart fridge will then be keeping track of the things in the fridge. And then they’ll have like a tag on. So the fridge will be able to warn you if say that the butter is going out of date, or something like that. Then the fridge can say:

 

“Well you’ve got this, and this.”

 

Or the fridge will prioritize it and say:

 

“Well, this is the oldest stuff. So this is what you need to be using.”

 

What the internet of things, the Internet of Bodies is going to do, is then take up one step further and then see how this is going to affect your health. So they’ve just said before you’ll be hooked up. They’re gonna mention smart watches in a bit. But you’re gonna be hooked up to the internet.

 

 

So you all of your things in the house will be, the fridge let’s say, in this example, that’s going to be hooked up to the internet. The fridge will then be detecting the things that are in it. And how long they’ve been there. It’s possible that the fridge will also just automatically sort of contact the supermarket for you and then put in your own weekly shop, for example.

 

But then at a different level what’s also going to be logged is your body itself and what your body’s actually taking in! So, and if you’ve got an implant or a smart watch, whatever it happens to be, then you go from ordering your shopping. I mean, it used to be the case where you just go to the supermarket and buy it. I mean, I still do. And then it’s like that will be done on the internet. The fridge will be hooked up on the internet. The food inside will be hooked up on the internet. And then your body is going to be hooked up to the internet.

 

And all of these things are going to – which they’re going to come to a minute – it’s going to be this like huge sprawl of data which can be analyzed. But we are not there yet. I think they’re getting a bit carried away in terms of the internet of things. So anyway, they go on and say:

 

“Some of these solutions, such as fitness trackers, are an extension of the Internet of Things. But because the Internet of Bodies centres on the human body and health, it also raises its own specific set of opportunities and challenges, from privacy issues to legal and ethical questions.”

 

So again, like written right into the heart of this, is human health. So if you go out jogging, for example, if you go out for a morning jog what they call fitness trackers will be logging that. That will be more data and information about your body! And then you’ll come back and you’ll maybe have a shower. Having the shower will also be an internet process. And it will be sort of set in there on what temperature you like to have the shower.

 

[11:16]

 

And when you put the two things together with your implant, or your smart watch, if you’re jogging back home it may be that the shower will begin to turn itself on, or something like that. That’s where they’re gonna go. I mean, it seems to me that it’s a hell of a lot of things, as they would have it, that need to be replaced.

 

Like I mean, I’ve got nothing that can deal with any of this! My stuff’s all ancient! And I’m fine with it. But I suppose something like a fridge is closer there, than a shower. It seems to me it’ll be quite a bit of work to automate the shower. But the idea is everything will be automated and done via the internet. And I think it’s a good thing. So before everybody gets like paranoid like, they don’t see this as being “bad”. And it says:

 

“It also raises its own specific set of opportunities and challenges, from privacy issues to legal and ethical questions.”

 

Then they’ve got this sort of graph here:

 

“Most consumers are open to the use of digital in healthcare.”

 

And then they’ve got this big list of, … Just a few of them, I mean, “search for doctor ratings and reviews”, which is all digital. “Pay my health insurance bills” is digital. “Monitor my daily health metrics” is already digital. Mine isn’t! “Search hospital, or health system ratings and reviews. Order prescriptions. Search for a doctor.

 

 

All of these things. There’s a lot of them there. So they’re saying that all of these things are already digital. I mean that seems to be a bit of a stretch. Because, at the end of the day that’s just googling like what doctors are in your area. So is that really the same thing as having a database of your information on which could be tracked? I don’t think so.

 

The next section says:

 

“Connecting our bodies. As futuristic as the Internet of Bodies may seem, …”

 

I mean, I just can’t believe that term:

 

“Many people are already connected to it through wearable devices. The smartwatch segment alone has grown into a $13 billion market by 2018, and is projected to increase another 32% to $18 billion by 2021. Smart toothbrushes and even hairbrushes can also let people track patterns in their personal care and behaviour.”

 

So I mean, I don’t have any hair brushes, because I don’t have any hair! But the smart tooth brushes, you can see again like the information which will be going through the toothbrush will be how many times a day that you’re brushing your teeth, and how much toothpaste that you’re using. So this is the internet of things.

 

A toothbrush will be a thing. And then like, how are you doing it, right? Or do you need to replace the toothbrush? Or even like what is the current state of your dental care? So this will be reported, then it connects with the Internet of Bodies, and then it’ll go into the data bank on you.:

 

“For health professionals, the Internet of Bodies opens the gate to a new era of effective monitoring and treatment.”

 

So yeah, [chuckling] so the internet will be monitoring your health for you and then suggesting treatment. So you may have a cracked tooth, or something like that. Eventually it’ll pick it up and report it into the database [chuckling], maybe:

 

“In 2017, the U.S. Federal Drug Administration approved the first use of digital pills in the United States. Digital pills contain tiny, ingestible sensors, as well as medicine. Once swallowed, the sensor is activated in the patient’s stomach and transmits data to their smartphone or other devices.”

 

So this is already in play in 2017. So you then swallow a sensor, and it activates in the stomach. The data which it’s picking up about your body then goes onto your phone, your smartphone, or other devices. Maybe a laptop, or something. And so, I mean, I still wouldn’t be interested in that. But at least in this case it seems that it’s kind of like just you and your computer. But they want to hook that up to the internet as a whole.:

 

“In 2018, Kaiser Permanente, a healthcare provider in California, started a virtual rehab program for patients recovering from heart attacks. The patients shared their data with their care providers through a smartwatch, allowing for better monitoring and a closer, more continuous relationship between patient and doctor. Thanks to this innovation, the completion rate of the rehab program rose from less than 50% to 87%, accompanied by a fall in the readmission rate and programme cost.”

 

.

 

[16:26]

 

So, if you’ve got health problems this will seem like a good thing! So this is the positive side of it. This is the way they’re trying to sell. This, you know, it’s all very well, if you’re fit and healthy and you say:

 

“Well I don’t need any of this garbage!”

 

But, you know, especially for old people, people with illnesses, this will be good for them. And I think if people are going to be critical about this, or scared of it, you have to think, you have to sort of confront it on its own terms. You can’t of just pretend it’s a bunch of evil demons. Like if you’ve got a sick relative and they’re housebound, this is good stuff for them. So let’s not pretend that that isn’t the case:

 

“The deluge of data collected through such technologies is advancing our understanding of how human behaviour, lifestyle and environmental conditions affect our health. It has also expanded the notion of healthcare beyond the hospital or surgery and into everyday life. This could prove crucial in fighting the Coronavirus pandemic. Keeping track of symptoms could help us stop the spread of infection, and quickly detect new cases. Researchers are investigating whether data gathered from smartwatches and similar devices can be used as viral infection alerts by tracking the user’s heart rate and breathing. At the same time, this complex and evolving technology raises new regulatory challenges.”

 

So this is really what they’re getting at, is that the internet of things is, as they would say, is a “done deal”! They need to have your body hooked up to it. And then that will then alert the various authorities to the state of your health.

 

Now the thing is like they’re basically changing everything about how we live, to keep people safe, as if people are like really weak. Because I mentioned just before about well if you are in a bad way, this stuff may be useful to us. But they want to bring it in for everybody, all across the board, whether you’re fit, or not! This is just going to be, this is just the Great Reset! So everybody will be hooked up to the internet and being monitored all of the time! And they’re selling it as:

 

“Well, it’s going to be good for your health!”

 

So in my view it makes people into babies. But if you look at the way they’ve came out with Covid, they’ve used the same logic as well. And it’s like:

 

“Well, we have to shut things down, because we have to keep people sort of safe. We have to prevent people from catching this! We have to stop people from dying!”

 

And you see that you are kind of like a child. And you do have this kind of big system, this Big Brother system taking care of you like you’re a little baby. And they want to have this is a permanent feature of everybody’s lives, where everybody is being monitored, everybody’s got an implant, a smart watch to begin with. And you’re taking care of your pulse. It’s seeing how active you’re being. It’s looking at the state of your heart rate.

 

You’ll take your little implant and swallow it and it’ll sit in your stomach. So then it’s maybe going to know if you’ve got some kind of cancer. And what you’re going to pay for that is, … Well this is what they’re going to come on to, because there’s problems with the implementation. And it says:

 

“What counts as health information? In most countries, strict regulations exist around personal health information such as medical records and blood or tissue samples. However, these conventional regulations often fail to cover the new kind of health data generated through the Internet of Bodies, and the entities gathering and processing this data.”

 

[20:50]

 

So the problem they’ve got is that basically it’s not allowed [chuckling]! It’s not allowed to do this [laughing]! Because the health legislation. Again like, it’s just this obsession with the health, bodily health! I just find it just speaks to such a weak population that they’re so obsessive about not falling ill. But they get you in a bind because then they’re gonna say:

 

“Well, you don’t care about people?”

 

Or:

 

“Would you do this if you were dying?”

 

But the problem that they’ve got is a lot of the legislation was written decades and decades ago, before this technology existed. And that is now sort of standing in the way of them bringing this in. So he says:

 

“In the United States, the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA), which is the major law for health data regulation, applies only to medical providers, health insurers, and their business associations.”

 

So the standard sort of practice in the Western world was that somebody’s data on health would be kind of kept very private. I mean, in the case of the health insurers that’s already a little bit of a leak, I suppose. But I don’t know how you get around that. But this little legislation is standing in the way basically. That’s what he’s getting at here.

 

And they need to find a way around it, or they need to find somehow to undermine it, so then your health information, … Which is to say, by the way, like this is just the thin end of the wedge. It’s going to be everything about how you live. But I’ll come on with that:

 

“This definition is turning out to be inadequate for the era of the Internet of Bodies.”

 

So what he’s saying is that the legislation is out of date. You know, it doesn’t occur to him for a second to say that the Internet of Bodies is like a bad idea, or unethical, or intrusive, or overreaching, or anything like that. No! It’s the previous legislation that’s a problem is what he’s saying:

 

“Tech companies are now also offering health-related products and services, and gathering data.”

 

Which, you know, they do. So this is like being tracked. And then targeted advertising and that kind of thing. Let’s just say, like I had an accident last year, I ended up getting burned. And then you look for creams on the internet, or your maybe I’m talking about it in an email with somebody. Then that gets picked up. And then you’ll find that the next thing you’re on the internet you’re being bombarded with like creams, different creams for burns, or some fancy bandages, and this kind of thing. So what he’s saying is that this kind of thing already exists. Your data is already being picked up. So like what difference does it make?:

 

“Tech companies are now also offering health-related products and services, and gathering data. Margaret Riley, a professor of health law at the University of Virginia, pointed out to me in an interview that this Act (HIPPA) does not cover the masses of data from consumer wearables, for example.”

 

So yeah, what they’re saying is that you can’t really complain about the internet of things, well the Internet of Bodies, primarily because the internet of things has already got your private data. Your private data has already been pissed all over the place, because of the internet of things [chuckling] which is coming in! So that it’s like there’s no point in complaining about it now! We’ve already traveled so far down this road, why not just go all the way? And put an implant in your stomach which tracks what you’re eating?:

 

“Another problem is that the current regulations only look at whether the data is sensitive in itself, not whether it can be used to generate sensitive information. For example, the result of a blood test in a hospital will generally be classified as sensitive data, because it reveals private information about your personal health. But today, all sorts of seemingly non-sensitive data can also be used to draw inferences about your health, through data analytics.”

 

So yeah, again like it goes back to if you’re ordering your shopping off the internet, then they kind of know what you’ve ordered, they know what your consumer habits are. The data is already being picked up probably through by your bank details. So they know what you’re buying.

 

[25:52]

 

But what’s going to happen, because they’ve already implied this at the beginning of the article. So let’s just take the example that you’re out for a jog, and you slightly overdo it. And your smartphone, you know, it’s too hot, you’ve gone too far, you’re getting overheated, or whatever. And then your smartwatch, maybe will start to buzz. And like say like:

 

“You’re going to have to sit down for five minutes and have a drink of water, because you’re reaching your Max here.”

 

The problem is like once we’ve hooked up everything else, once we’ve hooked up our food, and our fridge, and our the bank details. Like am I gonna get a warning if like I’m sitting on a Friday night, am I gonna get a warning? Is my implant gonna buzz when I reach for like the third bottle of Crafty Old Hen? Will it will it be that I’ve reached the Max? How does that work? What about if I have two bacon sandwiches, in two days in a row? Will the fridge buzz to say that I’m eating too much bacon?

 

 

Like, is it going to be like 2001 Space Odyssey? Where you’ve got HAL advising you, like [chuckling] a little robot? Advising you not to take the third bottle of Crafty Old Hen?:

 

“You’ve already reached your limit Dave!”

 

Is this what this is about? So they’re saying:

 

“But today, all sorts of seemingly non-sensitive data can also be used to draw inferences about your health, through data analytics. (((Glenn Cohen))), …”

 

[Laughing] I mean, a lot of people haven’t been interested in all this stuff, because they didn’t have, … My take on why so few people in the nationalist scene don’t seem to be very interested in all of this stuff was, because there wasn’t a clear, there doesn’t seem to be loads of (((Cohens))) at the top of it.:

 

“A professor at Harvard Law school, told me, …”

 

Mr Cohen there, …:

 

“Told me in an interview that even data that is not about health at all, such as grocery shopping lists, can be used for such inferences.”

 

So they’re going to say if your shopping list is full of donuts, and all this, then the data will be run through the system and checked off. And it will be yeah:

 

“You eat unhealthily!”

 

Now, are they then gonna sort of make a judgment on that? Well yeah, that’s the big thing, isn’t it? Is it gonna be benign, or is it that you’re going to be constantly bombarded with messages telling you like – just to keep with the example of donuts – will you get a message, or a little warning that you’re eating too many donuts?:

 

“As a result, conventional regulations may fail to cover data that is sensitive and private, simply because it did not look sensitive before it was processed.”

 

So again this is the thing where they’re saying:

 

“Well we’ve already come this far already.”

 

Then it’s:

 

“Data risks – Identifying and protecting sensitive data matters, because it can directly affect how we are treated by institutions and other people. With big data analytics, countless day-to-day actions and decisions can ultimately feed into our health profile, which may be created and maintained not just by traditional healthcare providers, but also by tech companies or other entities.”

 

[29:42]

 

I mean, what we’re going to have like Google take care of your health now? Or some internet app.

 

Is now going to be in charge of your health? And all of the data? I mean, yeah:

 

“May be created and maintained not just by traditional healthcare providers, but also by tech companies or other entities.”

 

I mean that’s kind of already here I suppose:

 

“Without appropriate laws and regulations, it could also be sold. At the same time, data from the Internet of Bodies can be used to make predictions and inferences that could affect a person’s or group’s access to resources such as healthcare, insurance and employment.”

 

So this is what I just mentioned. There’s the potential there that you will be judged on how you live. Like not how you perform in the job, but about you as a person. About what you eat. I mean, look we can come on to that. I know what people are thinking.

 

Let’s just for now stick with the issue on health. Because what they’re saying is the potential will be there to discriminate against you. So if you’re a boss, like you’ve got two employees. One of them is a heavy drinker. He doesn’t take care of himself. He doesn’t exercise very much. And the other fella’s like really super fit! All of the stuff he’s eaten, … And then the employer can look that up. There’ll be a way for the employer to think:

 

“Well, I like the guy who sits and has a high protein milkshake on a Friday night, more than the one who’s reaching for the third bottle of Crafty Old Hen.”

 

This is what they say. It’s a fear, but it seems to me all this amounts to is taking one more step. So they keep going these different steps:

 

“Well, we’ve got the internet of things, it seems sensible to have the Internet of Bodies! Oh we’ve got the Internet of Bodies, so now we can maximize efficiency around who’s healthy and who isn’t.”

 

So then goes on. It says:

 

“The affected people may not even be aware of this.”

 

So you wouldn’t even know why you’d been turned down. But, because you’re not going to be judged. You know, in the old days you’d go along for a job interview. And it was kind of like who had the best patter. Who had the best bullshit! Who could sort of kind of manipulate the boss, or whatever.

 

Now like with this, what they’d be saying like, this is what this is moving towards is that you as a person don’t actually exist. What exists is a set of algorithms and a spread of data, which will be just glanced down. You will just be data on a file. You’re just a mass of algorithms and numbers. And they’re going to be able to run down it and see which ones they like, which ones they don’t.

 

So this raises the question of, like is this ethical? And they’re going to move on and say:

 

“One solution would be to update the regulations. Sandra Wachter and Brent Mittelstadt, two scholars at the Oxford Internet Institute, suggest that data protection law should focus more on how and why data is processed, and not just on its raw state.”

 

So then it would the boss, and to keep on with this example, would have to ask why he had that data, or why he needed it. But the problem with that, … I mean, that’s weak!:

 

“They argue for a so-called ‘right to reasonable inferences’, meaning the right to have your data used only for reasonable, socially acceptable inferences.”

 

Now I’m calling bullshit on this right from the start! Because what is, or is not, socially acceptable in the West today changes like the wind! It changes like the weather! I mean, if you look at like a few years ago, nobody was talking about trannies. And yet now it’s just everywhere! It’s the media who decides what is, or not, socially acceptable. Because, if you raise an objection, you’ll just be platformed and ignored, or worse!

 

So I find this whole thing here socially repulsive! I find this not acceptable at all! I don’t find any of this creeping technology and the idea that you’re gonna reduce the person down to like an algorithm. I don’t find that acceptable at all!

 

But I haven’t got any choice in the matter, because what is, or is not acceptable is decided from the top! And then it drips down through the media. And then it sort of gets the normies on side. I mean, I’m pretty convinced. I mean, I’d love to see just how insane they could, … Like you see things coming out now about like beef with human DNA in it, or whatever.

 

Like just as a sort of mental exercise would it be possible, … Because, I mean, my sort of contempt for the normies has reached like maximum by this point, after witnessing the last few years. And it gets to the point where you realize they’ll just do what they’re told! They’ll just do what the media tells them.

 

You can even speak to normal people in the real world. And you can even know if they read The Daily Mail, or if they watch the BBC. So somebody, I mean, usually it will be a man who reads The Daily Mail. And I can tell by what he’s saying and his general attitude and things, that this is a Daily Mail reader. This is where he gets his information from.

 

I can also tell when it’s somebody’s more likely to be the BBC. So it’s not like an exact science, but I kind of get it. And so their opinions on the world are just being molded by the media. The media is itself then the sort of the propaganda wing of the those in power at the top.

 

[36:07]

 

So when they say:

 

“Well socially acceptable.”

 

Like that’s not acceptable! Because what is, or is not, socially acceptable, it’s just a matter of whatever the media wants! Would it be possible for the media to normalize cannibalism?

 

 

Because you see something coming in. I mean, I had this with “White Privilege Theory” years ago. And you think:

 

“Well, this can’t come in. This is obviously bullshit! This can’t grow legs! And here we are! Every institution, every education center, big documentaries on the television. Can you do that on cannibalism? Can the media normalize cannibalism?”

 

I mean, another one which is similar again is eating the maggots, eating bugs! Which is related to this. Are they going to normalize that? They’re already doing it. They’re already slowly smoothing the way, and sort of rewiring the brain of the masses, so that all of a sudden:

 

“Well, why not?”

 

And I know how they do it as well. They’ve got this sort of post-modernist kind of way of approaching it, which undermines the a priori assumption which went before it. Like:

 

“Well, why not?”

 

See there’s social standards that we’re used to. Like say eating maggot sausages, or something. Now the reason why we don’t do that, is like, is it rational? So then, when you go back:

 

“Well, we just we don’t do it, because we just don’t do it!”

 

It’s like that’s just the way things are. But you see that’s where the post modernism kicks in and says:

 

“So you can’t really explain it.”

 

So it’s like it doesn’t really make sense, and you begin to see this undercutting of these narratives. That’s why it’s so toxic.

 

So I mean, just in terms of like social acceptance, like forget it! They’ll just normalize it through the media:

 

“This would involve setting standards on whether and when inferring certain information from a person’s data, including the state of their present or future health, is socially acceptable or overly invasive.”

 

Like once again, that will be decided by manipulation, anyway.

 

The next section, which I think is the last one, is called “Practical Problems”:

 

“Apart from the concerns over privacy and sensitivity, there are also a number of practical problems in dealing with the sheer volume of data generated by the Internet of Bodies. The lack of standards around security and data processing makes it difficult to combine data from diverse sources, and use it to advance research. Different countries and institutions are trying to jointly overcome this problem. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and it’s Standards Association have been working with the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health, as well as universities and businesses among other stakeholders since 2016, to address the security and interoperability issue of connected health.”

 

So this comes down to trying to centralize all this. Because if America is operating under certain conditions, certain legislation, certain rules, certain internet providers, and all of this. And then say Europe, and China, and Russia, … And this is a problem, they need to kind of sync all of this up.:

 

“As the Internet of Bodies spreads into every aspect of our existence, [chuckling] we are facing a range of new challenges. But we also have an unprecedented chance to improve our health and well-being, and save countless lives.”

 

Again, I mean, let’s not get carried away about the vaccine at the moment. But, is it worth it then? It it worth it to be sort of in the matrix, like hooked up to the internet, everything you do, everything you eat, how often you go to the toilet? And you’re being monitored by your own devices, your body, your physical health, you’re just being monitored all of the time!

 

Now, will that result in a healthier society? Well, probably it will, to be honest. But is there something missing? Is this what humans are all about? So then it moves on again. And it says:

 

“During the COVID-19 crisis, using this opportunity and finding solutions to the challenges is a more urgent task than ever. This relies on government agencies and legislative bodies working with the private sector and civil society to create a robust governance framework, and to include inferences in the realm of data protection.”

 

[41:20]

 

So what they’re doing is bringing in the entire system. So the government is then going to work with say the financial sector. And the financial sector will work with the media, and then law. And all of these things are going to be interconnected and pushing in the same way. What the Neo-reactions call “The Cathedral”. Like this is it! This is how it works! Each node of this network will reinforce the other nodes to make the narrative inevitable.

 

So what people tend to do is push back against one kind of node in particular. If you take the example of Donald Trump getting elected it’s like one sort of part of that network took a fall there. In this case it was like the government, the political. It took a bit of a beating there, because they didn’t want him in. And then what steps in is that all of the other nodes sort of step in to pick up the load, and undermine him on all sides.

 

And this is what they’re gonna do as far as this is concerned. And you see them all in lockstep. It’s bad! Like it’s really bad! Because it’s like this huge network that you’re up against. And it’s difficult. You can have a temporary win over one part of it. But you can’t take it all on, all of the time. Which is why like, once you really wrap your head around this it does kind of lead you to think:

 

“What do we do? What do we do about this?”

 

Because, if you were to win an election and declare a dictatorship, you’d have to have one hell of a powerful state. And you’d also have to be dragging people off to jail. Because then you’re going to be in the situation where one of the nodes has to overwhelm all of the other ones, and this kind of thing.

 

 

So what he’s saying here is that all of these different institutions have to get on board and push in the same direction. Which also, they do say, like keep in mind the data protection and this kind of thing. I’m not convinced! Because I don’t trust any of these people! But more than that is that I just don’t like the thinking! I don’t like the logic and the reasoning behind any of this! So:

 

“The key is to collaborate across borders and sectors to fully realize the enormous benefits of this rapidly advancing technology.”

 

So it’s going to be global, as well. So you’re going to have a global internet of things and bodies, which will all be interconnected. And that’s been, you know, I know people are going to say:

 

“Well it’s been like that for 20 years.”

 

It was like that in some ways. But what they’re doing now is like where the implant in your skin, and what you’re eating in your fridge, and everything, it’s all going to be hooked up to this data set.

 

Now the problem that they’ve got, is how to bring this in. Because sooner, or later, it seems to me, that there has to be a direct implementation of an ID which would make all of this much easier. Otherwise it would be too scattered.

 

And yeah, so this could be the vaccine passport. Because even though the Covid itself is like drifting away now, they talk about the vaccine passports is only now really getting off the ground. So if you’ve got a vaccine passport then there’s the “Digital You”. And again they’ve used health. You’ll see in this article that it’s all about “health”. Because it puts you in a bind where it’s like:

 

“Well do you want to have all of these people die off? We could save so many people! And people who are in danger of having a heart attack, if they’re hooked up to the Internet of Bodies they’ll be alerted to that, because their body will transmit the data.”

 

[45:36]

 

Your body is just a data set which is being monitored. And then it will be reported back to your smartphone, or your device, as they call it, and it will all be alerted.

 

This is a Social Credit system. That’s what this is. Because all it’s lacking is a judgmental sort of consciousness. But I don’t even think they need to do that, because everything you do is gonna build up an online picture of you.

 

And that’s certainly gonna be like what you actually watch on the internet. What you read. Even I mean, eventually if you read a book, or something like that. Because, if you order an edgy book off Amazon – well you won’t get one on Amazon! If you use your bank to order some edgy book off Imperial Press, then that’s going to be logged, because you’ve used your bank card, you’ve used your bank details, and that too will be part of your data set. That will then be logged. They’ll see that you’ve done that.

 

So then they’re going to say:

 

“Well okay this, …”

 

Then the data will be run through the system. And let’s just say you ordered said some reprint of a Julius Evola book, or something. You know, Revolt Against the Modern World, which seems quite fitting [chuckling] in this particular case, then that book itself will be run against more algorithms. And it’ll start and set off alarm bells and it’ll be like.:

 

“This is something that the far-Right read. This is far-Right literature! Julius Evola was a fascist!”

 

And then these little bells will start to ring. And then that will be against you as well. And that seems minor. But I mean, I’m doing this video here and just yesterday you see that people are being blocked from airplanes. You’re travel banned.

 

In China, which is just like one, or two, steps further along the line on this, that would be automated. It would be automatic where you:

 

“Well you’ve just dropped below the line! You can’t, I’m sorry. But there’s a bit of a problem there.”

 

At least in the case of say Nick Fuentes, it’s directly related. He’s well known, he’s outspoken. You’ve got what happened on January 6 and everything. So there’s actually something going on about it. What happens when it’s just automated, because of what you do? What happens if it’s, because you’ve ordered Julius Evola’s book from Imperial Press? Imperial Press will itself be down there. That will itself ring off alarm bells.

 

So all of a sudden the picture that’s going to be built up of you, will in that case would be a negative one. So that’s kind of like, why I’ve become so pessimistic about all of this stuff. And I’m not sure of a way out of it.

 

I mean, if you’re aware of the Michel Foucault thing, and the Panopticon of the prison. I think it was Jeremy Bentham before him as well. Where you have a prison, because people will use that word Panopticon quite a lot with the internet. They’ve done it for a long time.

 

And the thing is, it has subtle effects on the human mind. Because people are going to be aware that everything, they are doing is going to amount to data which is being logged. And it’s going to become algorithms. And this will actually affect human behavior.

 

In my opinion this will have a profound effect on how humans just actually exist. I mean, they use that language themselves. It’ll affect everything about your existence! Because you can say in the case of your fridge and whatnot, you’re going to be aware that what you’re putting in there is tracked. That it isn’t just the personal. It isn’t just a private thing anymore. And and so this will then have an effect and you’re gonna begin to comply in certain ways. Your mind will, in your habits of how you live, will be trained and it will push you into a certain mode.

 

Now what, let’s say the elites, the people behind this, what they’ll reply to that:

 

“There isn’t a brain behind it. That it is benign, and it is just sort of dead data.”

 

[50:41]

 

But the problem is we know that they have an ethical code. We know that they support say “Social Justice”. We know that there’s like a political slant to this. And we know that they think some people behave in ways which is better than others.

 

Now it will not just be political, of course, it will be also to do with your health.

 

But what this means is that it’s going to create a society where even if they don’t bring in like an outright social score – which I think they will – but as they said when it came to the employers, you may never know about it. I mean, if the employer is going to cross you off his list, because he’s seen your data, or a sort of condensed representation of your data, then like they admitted themselves in this article you’d never know about it anyway. So it may well be that this is also going to be in your normal day-to-day life.

 

And there’s going to be a certain model that they’re going to push that people are going to adapt to, because they know they’re being watched. So maybe you won’t reach for the third beer, you won’t buy that Julius Evola book, you won’t rock the boat, you will conform! Even if it isn’t explicit, even if the punishment isn’t sort of directly dangling over you, you will conform to a certain mode, and that’s exactly how a Panopticon works. And that’s what this is.

 

So whether, or not, they will just go full bore, I mean, you’ve already got people having their bank accounts closed down, and you begin to see that in the old days something like a bank would be like non-political. You may well have like a special rules about somebody supporting terrorism, or some crazy thing. Your country’s at war and that the government will lay down the law to the bank that you can’t have people using this bank to fund arms runs for people who the state is fighting against. And all of this kind of thing.

 

But when we look at how this whole network is constructed everything becomes politicized in a certain way. They’ve all got incentives to help each other out. So all of a sudden something like a bank on the High Street which didn’t care about your politics, all of a sudden that becomes politicized. It becomes involved! It becomes one of those nodes on the network.

 

And where does this come from? I mean, in the case of the World Economic Forum it is like the elites.

 

So this is the reason why I want to do is, because it needs to be pushed back against. But and what they’re going to do is say:

 

“Well, you just want, …”

 

It automatically puts you into this reactionary mode. It automatically puts you where you’re kind of waving your hands and just trying to tell the modern world to stop! Which is a bad, bad, situation to be in!

 

So if you go back to my conversation with the Woodlander, it is kind of like:

 

“Well how can we kind of have a different vision from this?”

 

So when the backlash comes, and it is! In all fairness it is. You’ve got hundreds of thousands of people on the streets of London just last weekend. But like the media just won’t report it properly. Again, because it’s just another node in the network.

 

So, when the people are pushing back against this they need to have a positive narrative. We understand all of this, and we’re not saying throw all this technology out. But let’s at least, why can’t we just get it to work for us in certain ways? There’s a conversation to be had there.

 

But yeah, that’s what I think of the Internet of Bodies. And even the word. Even the word of it, is like where the human body just becomes an object. It just becomes this sort of “meat sack” of data which is like numbers on a computer screen.

 

And the thought processes, you know. I find that they’re just the complete lack of poetry, and spiritualism, and metaphysics, in the world. Like we’ve seen that dwindle away over decades, and decades, and even centuries. And it reaches now to this point where the human form, the human being is just an object! It’s just a mass of numbers and data. Which will be controlled by more numbers and more data in the technology, in the technique.

 

Because in the end that’s what this comes down to its Western man who created all of these wonders. And all of these technological marvels, falling into his own machine.

 

Like as we look into the future you begin to understand what Martin Heidegger said, which I’ve mentioned before, where he said:

 

“Only a god can save us now.”

 

And you begin to get it. You finally begin to get what the bargain was. The downside of the bargain!

 

So let the pushback begin.

 

Thanks for listening folks. I know it’s been a bit of a gloomy one, but I feel like I’ve got to have a few words on this.

 

So I’ll see you next time. Take care now.

 

 

[56:39]

 

 

[Outro music and imagery by Theberton.]

 

[57:05]

 

 

END

 

[Readers: If you see any errors (however minor), or ways to improve things, in the transcript, please let me know in the Comment section. Also please share the link to this transcript, so others can benefit. Thanks.]

 

============================================

 

 

xx UNFINISHED TRANSCRIPTS — Volunteers Needed

 

 

============================================

 

See Also

 

 

Millennium Woes with Morgoth on Brexit — TRANSCRIPT

Millennial Woes’ Millenniyule 2017 No. 66 – Morgoth — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review – YouTube Hangout 01 – Skeptics and Cucks — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review – YouTube Hangout 02 – Merry Holocaustmas — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review — Discussing the Government’s Anti-Extremism Agency ”Prevent” With Based British — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review — Hate-Reading The Guardian – Hirsch, Critical Theory & Nihilism, Jan 2019 — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review — The Psychotic Left, Feb 2019 — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review – Fishing For White Pills, Feb 2019 — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review – Hope Not Hate and the State of Play, Feb 2019 — TRANSCRIPT

 

 

Morgoth’s Review – A Conversation with Jacktion, Mar 2019 — TRANSCRIPT

Morgoth’s Review – YouTube Hangout 01 – Skeptics and Cucks — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice TV – Extinction Rebellion, Our Future of Bugs and Pods – Morgoth’s Review – Oct 10, 2019 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Against The Controlled Warmongers of The Right – Jan 3, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Turbocharged Atomization – May 15, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Free Falling – Jun 1, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – ”Cracka” Is Anti-White Filth – Jun 29, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Edward Bernays – The Group and The Herd – Jul 1, 2020 — Transcript

 

 

Morgoth’s Review – Why The Conservative Party Conserves Nothing – Jul 16, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – The Telegraph vs The Guardian – Or How To Lose A Culture War – Jul 31, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – On Liberal Blindness To The Jewish Question – Aug 4, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Notes On Machiavelli – Aug 14, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Neo-Liberalism & the Ballad of Terry Bell – Sep 15, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Morgoth & Endeavour’s Classic Movies 1 – Lawrence of Arabia – Oct 10, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Systems of Control – China’s Social Credit vs Western Political Correctness – Oct 16, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – The Deep Breath Before the Plunge – Nov 3, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – The Twitterfication of Everything – Nov 17, 2020 — Transcript

 

Morgoth’s Review – My Image of 2020 – An Analysis – Dec 7, 2020 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – London’s New Year’s Firewoke Display – Jan 1, 2021 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Winter is Here – Jan 9, 2021 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – Reading ”American Extremist” by Josh Neal – Feb 6, 2021 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – The Frozen North & Frozen Thinking – Feb 10, 2021 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – The Equation That Destroyed Our World – Feb 14, 2021 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – The Last of Us – Feb 24, 2021 — Transcript

Morgoth’s Review – How Piers Morgan Shapes the Discourse – Mar 3, 2021 — Transcript

 

============================================

 

PDF Notes

* Total words = 8,993

* Total images = 15

* Total A4 pages = xx

Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):

(Available later)

 

 

Version History

 

Version 4:

 

Version 3:

 

Version 2:

 

Version 1: May 1, 2021 — Published post.

This entry was posted in Brainwashing, Britain, Coronavirus, Deception, Globalism, Jew World Order, Morgcast, Morgoths Review, Nationalism, New World Order, Political Correctness, Thought Crime, Thought Police, Tony Blair, Transcript, Uncategorized, Vaccine Passport, World Economic Forum. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Morgoth’s Review – The Morgcast 04 – The Internet of Bodies and Things – Apr 30, 2021 — Transcript

  1. Puck says:

    Very good article Mr. Hilliard. That you dare speak the Truth speaks volumes about your integrity.

    Those that say you ‘can’t’ speak the truth are accepting slave status. Things are either true or not true. If that’s a sore spot, it’s because they’re wrong. If you’re English you can’t speak the truth because your masters are the jews and they are exempt from criticism on the point of imprisonment. They rule. You are the slaves.

    Hobbes defined the first and greatest power of the Sovereign as the power to define, and to effectively enforce his definitions. The adversarial spiritual forces behind both world wars were supporting the destruction of the European races, and indeed, Western Civilization itself. Divide and conquer, followed by divert and control. All they have to do to win is to stop us from asking the right questions.

    The events of World War II were the founding events in the creation myth of modern Europe and the perversion of Western Civilization. We can no more ignore the role of World War II in forming our contemporary societies than Americans can ignore the role of the Revolutionary War in the forming of the United States of America.

    Hitler led what might be the only example of a loyal White elite. Germans are the most lied about and abused people in history. One would be hard put to disprove this. They don’t talk about what happened. Jews are the reverse. They talk endlessly about stuff that never happened. Jews are basically a photo negative of valuable humanity.

    By ‘Nazi’ the jew means a White man because in the jew mind Hitler was a White man who dared to fight back. The entire White race is Hitler to them and must be destroyed. You’re in the game whether you accept it or not. whether you understand it or not.

    It’s a fact that jews alone wrote, “The Authoritarian Personality”, a pseudo-scientific tract that asserts that all Whites are Hitlers. The jew’s big-lie is that Hitler tried to exterminate them, but the big-truth, whether jews believe that lie or not, is that jews are trying to exterminate Whites for the sin of existing.

    Jews assert that all Whites are instinctively authoritarian – instinctive supporters of a ‘Hitler’ archetype. This is correct. This means that Whites not supporting a Hitler is proof of their successful seduction or misguidance of Whites, that has caused their minds to be hacked through the influence of the powers that be, their schools as well as social and media control. That could change at any time, given the right personality and political program. Trump’s success terrified them. Basic instincts don’t change, and continue to provide a latent threat to jew dictatorship, hence the need for White genocide.

    Hitler put his constituency first – before all else ! Imagine, someone looking out for your kind, instead of criticizing them unjustly and discriminating against them legally, or attacking you and shaming you at every opportunity. Hitler had no name, no money, no backers ! How did he win? He was right and he didn’t back down – that’s what got him the rest. Together their team very nearly achieved the goal of White liberation.

    Jews are forcing us to evolve. We have solved the political problem on paper. we know what jews are and what they intend and we know why. We know they are not a religious problem but a biological one. The struggle is physical rather than intellectual at this point. We’re under attack as a race, by a contending race and the coalition that they have arrayed against us. We should defend ourselves as a race. Whites are attacked as Whites, for being White, whether they defend themselves or not; whether they even acknowledge their race or not. Race is real ! Pretending it isn’t, as certain religious and other ideologues like to do, doesn’t make it go away.

    There is no jewish question, there never was. Claiming there is one serves the jew by turning a matter of biology and resource competition between rival species, into a trivial matter of morals, religion or politics. Jews are not people whom we must find a way to live with. They are a hostile species working toward our genocide, which pretty much answers any questions we might have on how to deal with them.

    Hitler’s men were immediately PHYSICALLY attacked by jews when they spoke to mass audiences in public. It’s not a “war of ideas”, it’s just a war, because nothing has changed. When we begin to deliver blows and not just suffer them – that’s where it all begins. That’s where the logic suddenly becomes persuasive.

    Read Hitler’s history of his movement in “Mein Kampf”. What you find when you try to bring any form of pro-White change anywhere, is that you are PHYSICALLY attacked by jews or jew-agents the minute you begin to make inroads. That is where a pro-White movement truly begins; with the ability to physically resist and overcome the opposition. It was the same for Oswald Mosley in England. It’s the same today with the activities of so-called anti-facists and anti-Whites, in the streets of cities that were founded by White people.

    Hitler et al. represented the ONLY serious and successful White response to the jew and any future successful response will duplicate the original in all essentials. The jews haven’t changed.They just find new technical methods to amplify or enhance the tricks that they’ve been polishing for over 2000 years.

    We’re under attack as a race, by a contending race. The only basis for Whites to defend themselves is racial. If you have a moral problem with that, then you hate reality, facts, and the-world-as-it-actually-exists. Moreover you are, as a purely objective matter, a proponent of White Genocide, no matter how you spin your views.

    Whites do not and never will agree on politics, economics and religion. White Nationalism is for those who value their race, even if that just means they won’t be attacked for it. What White Nationalists seek is the expressed preference, whether declared or revealed , of the vast majority of Whites. That is why jews have made it illegal to form racially exclusive White communities or to express a preference for White people in employment or the marketplace. White nationalism isn’t advocacy so much as an articulation of innate White preferences and behaviour. It is White Nationalists who have to be banned, and White-exclusive terrain that has to be outlawed – because these are the natural defaults that Whites always instinctively look for and head back to.

    Jews win through intimidation. They threaten your status, your money, your liberty or your body. The people who oppose them, at the start, are found among those who are more naturally virtuous and antagonistic to injustice, but if we build the right organization we can get healthy and fit White men to join us. If you’re young and White, literally everything in this society is twisted against you. Apologies gentleman, it’s time to fight. No crying, no whining – just fighting together.

    Today is our Good Friday, yet Hitler is the man jews fear the worst. Jesus ? Jews could care less and rarely mention him. Hitler they demonize.

    Did Hitler try to appeal to people? Not in the way that term is used and thought of by the ‘optics’ crowd today. Those who believe they can become mainstream and cease to be stigmatized by putting on a polo shirt, wearing khakis and going to the gym are as deluded as the Africans who believe that eating the hearts of their enemies will cause bullets to magically bounce off them in battle. Worse still are the effete sensibilities of the ‘opticians’ who disavow working class white men and their own berserkers, to spare the delicate sensibilities of insane sluts and homos. You will be called a Nazi even if your message is delivered with a tongue as talented as that of a hundred dollar whore.

    Think of Hitler as Shackleton, and our South Pole as Aryan Liberation, with an ad seeking racial warriors, promising nothing but but hardship in the highest most important struggle of all.

    “Faith is immediacy after reflection. I have understood the highest. It is not given to many in every generation, but almost at the same moment something new rushes upon me; the highest of all is not to understand the highest but to act on it. It is not the doctrine which aught to be revised. It is not the church which aught to be reformed. It is existence which should be revised. “
    – Soren Kierkegaard

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.