Lester Holt: android, wisdom figure, computer brain

Lester Holt: android, wisdom figure, computer brain

by Jon Rappoport

September 28, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)

Others have pointed out how many times debate moderator Lester Holt slanted criticism toward Trump, rather than Hillary. Others have suggested Hillary and Holt were a tag-team, with Hillary throwing hand signals to Holt indicating she was ready to hit Trump with a zinger.

On a different level…

Watching the debate-host, Holt, working his way through Trump vs. Hillary, sitting in his chair, bathed in a spotlight glow against a sea of total darkness, eerie metallic glimmers reflecting from his glasses, I was reminded of Dr. Eldon Tyrell, the barely human chairman of the corporation that designed androids in the film Blade Runner.

—Holt, the man who had the script and the questions and the facts at his immediate disposal. The brain. The wisdom figure. The synthetic guide with a touch of humanity built in.

Quite an archetype.

As I pointed out recently, the ridiculous notion of a debate with a moderator is modern. When Lincoln and Douglas famously debated slavery for hours at a time, over the course of several weeks, there was no intermediary voice. One man spoke for an hour, and then the other man spoke for an hour.

The moderator is a prop, a pretense of introducing objectivity into the proceeding.

The moderator is the “voice of rationality,” as it were. From that perch, he can, of course, slant the event—and Holt certainly did.

His dry speech patterns, in fact, resembled those of Barack Obama, when the President is reciting script.

Watching Holt operate, I was also reminded of the technocratic wet dream of a human brain hooked up to a computer, from which emanates undeniable wisdom.

Holt adopted the persona of a machine, and he pulled it off.

Which means? This is where the world is heading, if the technocrats have anything to say about it. You “need the best data—and one day soon you’ll get the data from a computer your brain is connected to. All will be well.”

Holt is also NBC’s national news anchor, which means he tells the stories of our time, every night, to millions of tranced viewers who are seeking a voice not their own.

Anchor and debate moderator—a powerful combination.

Hypnotically commanding.

Replay the debate moment when, out of nowhere, Holt’s words suddenly crackled like dry autumn leaves: “[Stop and frisk] was ruled unconstitutional.”

The narrator thus spake.

A brain not their own…a voice not their own…a narrator of reality…a fount of instant wisdom…the answer from on high…there are many, many people who want those things, and they want them embodied in a machine-like structure that assures them of dispassionate “honesty.”

Holt provided.

It’s no surprise that giant television networks have made these debates their own property. After all, the companies consider the events media-moments. Hosting them and appointing the moderators is no different from designing and presenting the nightly news broadcasts.

Of course, when you stop and think about this arrangement for debates, it’s absurd. Why would Lester Holt be more qualified to guide the proceeding than a car mechanic from Peoria?

Why have a guide at all?

Why allow media companies or government entities or even non-profit organizations a place in the debates? The two ruling political parties are the correct sponsors. We’re watching their candidates.

Holt was a well-groomed device. A hint of the near-future. A figure of “just-enough-authority” sitting in the darkness, dispensing voice-of-god to the masses, backed up by a production crew with split-screen, miced-up, podium-on-stage technology to provide a fatuous imitation of a real debate.

Instead, let there be a stage in a glen. Two or three television cameras. Let there be a topic. Foreign policy. Hillary ascends the stage and speaks for an hour. Then she leaves. Trump appears. He talks for 90 minutes. Then Hillary comes back for 30 minutes. The candidates never speak to each other. There is no moment-to-moment exchange of daggers or jokes or gotchas. This isn’t entertainment. It isn’t grins or hair or dress or tie or teeth.

If there is a moderator, he stands down off-stage and to the side, grumpy and frowning, holding an umbrella in case it rains. He reads a book while the candidates speak, he eats a hot dog. He combs and re-combs his hair. He waits. He thinks about his 20-dollar-an-hour salary. He must remain absolutely silent.

He’s an actual prop put there to remind people of a time when things were different, when the so-called news was delivered by media stars, who competed to see which ones were the most clever at inventing reality that seemed factual, but wasn’t.

In a world with a shred of sanity, that’s what Lester Holt would be doing.

Exit From the Matrix

What is modern television news (including debate moderation)?

From their perch, anchors can deign to allow a trickle of sympathy here, a slice of compassion there.

But they let the audience know that objectivity is their central mission. “We have to get the story right.” “You can rely on us for that.”

This is the great PR arch of national network news. “These facts are what’s really happening and we’re giving them to you.” The networks spend untold millions to convey that false assurance.

The anchor is the narrative voice of his time, for all people everywhere. The voice that replaces what is going on in the heads of his audience—all those doubts and confusions and objections in the heads of the great unwashed. The anchor will replace those and substitute his own plot line.

The network anchor is The Wizard Of Is. He keeps explaining what is. “Here’s something that is, and then over here we have something else that is, and now, just in, a new thing that is.” He lays down miles of “is-concrete” to pave over deeper, uncomfortable, unimaginable truth.

The anchor must become comfortable with having very little personality of his own. On air, the anchor is neutral, a castratus, a eunuch.

This is a time-honored ancient tradition. The eunuch, by his diminished condition, has the trust of the ruler. He guards the emperor’s inner sanctum. He acts as a buffer between his master and the people. He applies the royal seal to official documents.

Essentially, the anchor is saying, “See, I’m ascetic in the service of truth. Why would I hamstring myself this way unless my mission is sincere objectivity?”

All expressed shades of emotion occur and are managed within that persona of the dependable court eunuch. The anchor who can move the closest to the line of being human without actually arriving there is the champion.

The vibrating string between eunuch and human is the frequency that makes an anchor great. Think Cronkite, Chet Huntley, Edward R Murrow.

The public expects to hear that vibrating string. It’s been conditioned by many hard nights at the tube, watching the news.

There are other reasons for “voice-neutrality” of the anchor. Neutrality conveys a sense of science. “We did the experiment in the lab and this is how it turned out.”

Neutrality gives assurance that everything is under control.

Neutrality implies: we, the news division, don’t have to make money (a lie); we’re on a higher plane; we’re performing a public service; we’re like a responsible charity.

The other night, Lester Holt was the machine-like agent of the Cosmic Charity of All Souls dedicated to higher wisdom from an unimpeachable source. That was his role and he played it.

“I take no sides. I have no opinions. I am objectivity personified. I am…The Fact Checker.”

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

20 comments on “Lester Holt: android, wisdom figure, computer brain

  1. scully13 says:

    soooooo true !!!

  2. IMNAHA says:

    ANOTHER REASON TO TURN OFF THE HYPNOBOX.(as if I needed another reason).
    I have suspected for a long time that Lester IS LITERALLY an android, bot or clone of some type. He is the perfect combination of black and white, has a high forehead (connoting high intelligence) and a soothing even toned delivery.Even his name is soothing and innocuous.
    IOW if you were to design the PERFECT talking head from scratch, Lester would be it. Wouldn’t it be fun to drill down into Lester’s true origins. Surely Snopes or Wikipedia would give us the straight skinny on this, NOT!
    “The world is not stranger than you imagine , it is stranger than you CAN imagine.”

    • protectrespect says:

      Reading your comment I can’t help but think of the clip where Al Roker goes into a trance/programming mode, live on air directly after the words “Holy Ghost” were spoken.
      He resembled a robot that just glitches.
      However I think “Holy Ghost” must be a word his handler uses to program him.
      If you haven’t seen the clip, you should check it out on YouTube.
      Also, I believe the cloning of celebrities is a very real possibility.

  3. ProtectRespect says:

    Great insight and perspective!
    I appreciate how you often go beneath the surface of a subject matter and bring the deeper truths, effecting our subconscious, to light!

  4. Patriot says:

    WATCH HILLARY AND LESTER CHEAT HERE: Hillary signals lap dog Holt when she wants to speak uninterrupted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XSuG5aCFGs

    • Eileen Kuch says:

      You’re absolutely right in that Hillary Rotten Clinton and Lester RINO Holt cheated. The Hildebeast signalled lap dog Holt when she wanted to speak uninterrupted.
      Holt should be banned from hosting any further debates and the Hildebeast be sent right to prison.

  5. Bunny says:

    Can we be frank here? Hillary is a terrorist.

    She finds assassinating foreign heads of state “funny”.

    the deal is this, as sorry as I am to say it,..most of our presidents have been war criminals.

    Look up the Former School of the Americas where the US trained death squads to send to south America.Read about what the troops did in Dresden, Mai Lai…etc
    The US is in fact the largest purveyor of terrorism in the world.

    Hillary has a good head start in the murder for cash department…that is what the US is the biggest producer of.

  6. CPP says:

    Great piece. Nice continuation of your previous pieces on the elite news anchor.

    The android-esque Holt is ultimately an employee of the corporation named General Electric. Seems apt. Flip his name around a bit and you get Holster Less…nice little gun control subliminal perhaps.

    Here in Canada the prototype elite news anchor has for a long time been Peter Mansbridge of the CBC. I listened to an old Red Ice Radio interview of Alan Watt of Cutting Through the Matrix wherein he pointed out that the name Mansbridge signifies him as “a bridge to man” — fits well with your analysis here. And of course Peter means rock — a bridge to man made of rock.

  7. Theodore says:

    No mention of Lester Holt in the piece, but…

    “I Score the First Debate” — by Scott Adams


    “Clinton looked (to my eyes) as if she was drugged, tired, sick, or generally unhealthy, even though she was mentally alert and spoke well. But her eyes were telling a different story. She had the look of someone whose doctors had engineered 90 minutes of alertness for her just for the event. If she continues with a light campaign schedule, you should assume my observation is valid, and she wasn’t at 100%.”

  8. paulydeathwish says:

    Another priceless social critique! Superb writing, sir! I am reminded of a détournement of Juvenal which came to me earlier today regarding Hillary’s much-touted realtime brown shirts: who will fact-check the fact checkers?


  9. Once again, this is a comment from someone that missed the “debate”, Jon.

    Had I have been one of the chooks “in the zone”, I feel sure I would have savoured every word you have presented with relish.

    Instead, I would stretch the point further. Debate is one of those words that has been grotesquely twisted out of proportion over time; like “abuse”, “addiction” and “rape”.

    For me, all constructive, progressive arguments by way of discourse between multiple parties are true debates and not a “couple of puffed chickens” strutting before grand audiences “pomp-ing” (or “Pimping”) their views, whether that be the Lincoln/Douglas “model” or my unwitnessed farce Clinton/Trump.

    It is impossible to have debates on subjects like heroin use, murder, paedophilia (can I throw in Satanic ritual?) because at least one party (to the debate) would have to argue the rational “pro” position COMPELLINGLY and handle [presumed] numerous interjections “against” all the way. With so many more “tick items” off limits for governments these days, how can anyone take the buffoons they label “politicians” seriously?


  10. Potemkin Village says:

    A bust of esteemed party member comrade Lester Holt will join Candy Crowley in the journalism Hall of Shame.
    America’s trust in mainstream corporate media recently hit an all-time low.
    Only 32% say they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in media.

    Source:Gallup 09/14/16


  11. txsunshine49 says:

    This was the first debate I have watched in many years. Knowing the level of corruption that Washington is and has been for many years been guilty of, still I was moved to watch this. It is a great show for the people of not only for US citizens but for the world. Many know the elections are rigged, even more are still denying the truth of such a sad fact. What is this election saying to this world? In my opinion, humbly, I say it is that the leaders of our country have it’s people under a massive spell. We, the leaders of government in this country can do whatever we please and our people will waste their energy arguing with one another about which President Elect is the lessor of 2 evils. They play this across the world to let everyone know just how evil and dangerous our administrative leaders are and they had better take heed and sit back and do as they are told. At what point do we, like so many in other places around the globe, face the reality that we have been duped and stand up to the tyranny? I fear it is too late but then I remind myself that tomorrow is not even promised. Today we are still alive, strong and capable of putting our life on the line for our beliefs in what is right. It is right to remove people from jobs who steal, lie and cheat those they work for. These people are employed by us and it is only we, the people, that can throw them out in the streets, into jail and down into the poverty they seem to think we should live in.

  12. Greg C. says:

    Jon, you are my morning cup of coffee. I usually wake up to that sense of concrete is-ness. Then after reading the news about who said what, where the latest terrorist attack happened, etc. I read your latest gem. I wake up to something better, and long-forgotten possibilities take shape. Who gets to define my world? I do. Thank you.

  13. elxroflife says:

    What about the uninvited Green Party and Libertarian guests? Jill Stein was across the street from Hofstra University, denied access by police who declared it “private property”. Police officers formed a human chain to block Stein and her following. They were threatened with arrest. Stein was said to be “physically removed by police” from that site, but I do wonder if that was a publicity stunt.

    And what about the references to “the” presidential candidates throughout their campaigns by first name or last name, pending on their sex. Trump vs. Hillary, Hillary vs. Trump? If there is any mention of Trump’s first name, it’s “The Donald”, or “The Don”.

    Is this to make it clear we have a female candidate headed to the White House? In case we forget she is a woman? Does she even remember? She appears cold, robotic, having forgotten her human beingness, never mind her sex. Poor thing. So much money behind her, and yet, poor thing! I don’t envy her. No wonder she has been facing so many health problems.

    Or, wait. Is the name Clinton largely omitted from the campaign, so we can forget for a moment we are about to face another bloody Clinton era in the White House?

    My 10 year old and I watched a fraction of the debates via the Jill Stein “Fake Debate” protest YouTube, in which she attempted to get a “real debate” going. He liked what Jill was saying and was looking in disgust as he heard Clinton and Trump attack air each other’s dirty laundry. “They argue like little kids. Mom, could we please move to Canada now? ☺

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s