China coronavirus hype straight out of the CDC flu playbook

by Jon Rappoport

February 24, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

In today’s episode of Numbskulls and Deceivers in Medical Science, I ask the question: Are Chinese researchers copying an old CDC scam, or have they independently come up with their own lies which happen to mirror CDC hype?

In my series on the China epidemic (archive here), I’ve pointed out that pneumonia—the key indicator of the “coronavirus”—can be caused by many other factors:

Other microbes, fungi, toxic pollution, etc.

And Chinese authorities no longer require direct testing for the coronavirus. Instead, CT scans of the chest are employed. If these scans show signs of pneumonia, the “coronavirus epidemic” label is absurdly applied to the patient.

I’ve also pointed out that, historically, pneumonia has been a major disease in China. Long before “the emergence of the new human coronavirus,” people in China have been dying of pneumonia at the rate of about 300,000 a year. Now those people, passing away from the disease in 2020, can be falsely called “deadly epidemic cases.” How convenient.

Well, it turns out the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has been running its own pneumonia scam for a long time.

Some years ago, when I was writing about the flu, I received emails from Peter Doshi and Martin Maloney. They fed me data from the CDC’s own charts detailing flu deaths in the US. And they pointed out the lies.

Doshi went on to write an analysis for the journal BMJ Online (December 2005). Here is a key quote from his report:

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”

You might want to chew on that sentence for a while.

You see, the CDC has created one overall category that combines both flu and pneumonia deaths. THEY CALL THIS CATEGORY “FLU.” Why do they do this? Why do they deceptively assert the pneumonia deaths are complications stemming from the flu? Because they want to sell doctors and the public on the “dangers of the flu.”

Pneumonia has a number of non-flu causes.

But even worse, in all the 2001 flu and pneumonia deaths, only 18 revealed the presence of an influenza virus.

Therefore, the CDC couldn’t truthfully say that more than 18 people died of influenza in 2001. Not 36,000 deaths, the old CDC PR statistic. 18 deaths.

Doshi continued his assessment of published CDC flu-death statistics: “Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data show an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).” These figures refer to flu separated out from pneumonia.

This low death toll would drop MUCH lower, if you added the need to confirm the presence of a flu virus in those cases.

Clearly, the CDC combines flu and pneumonia in one category, and calls it “flu,” in order to lie about the number of flu deaths in the US, and thus push the flu vaccine.

So we have two fake hustles, years apart, in the US and China, both based on the deceptive use of pneumonia.

Liars tend to tell the same kinds of lies, over and over. Medical liars often import diseases which have nothing to do with their claims, in order to build up case numbers and pump up threats and fears.

And then sell toxic drugs and vaccines, as solutions.

I’d be quite happy to offer this article and its blunt facts to the New York Times, or the Washington Post, or CBS, NBC, or ABC, providing they assure me they’ll print it and then force their hungriest hounds to track down and indict the high-level deceivers, by name, who are pushing these criminal falsehoods. Ordinarily, I would charge $10000000000000 for the article, but in this case I’ll settle for a six-hour, face to face, live streaming interview with the head of the CDC, in prime time.


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


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.

Wuhan and the polluted air as a cause of epidemic illness

by Jon Rappoport

February 23, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

At the very beginning of my coverage of the “China epidemic,” I cited evidence that the air quality in Wuhan is chronically dangerous.

Among other sources, I referred to a Yale review which stated that the mixture of toxic elements in the air is unprecedented in human history. The synergistic effects of these individual toxins is unknown.

I also mentioned the large street protests against air quality in Wuhan that took place last summer. These protests were also carried out in other Chinese cities. The government was obviously alarmed at the nascent rebellion.

Those protests are now gone. Because the cities are locked down. It’s all about “the virus” as the cause of illness.

Horrific air quality brings on lung infections of all kinds, including pneumonia. Pneumonia is THE illness attributed to the coronavirus. How convenient.

The Chinese government has recently ruled that testing patients for the coronavirus isn’t necessary for a diagnosis of “epidemic illness.” A CT scan of the lungs is sufficient. If the patient thus shows signs of pneumonia, he is labeled “a coronavirus case.”

Air quality? Brushed aside.

Assessing studies of annual pneumonia deaths in China—covering years long before the supposed emergence of the new human coronavirus—I settled on the estimate of 300,000 deaths a year.

Assuming this death rate is more or less constant, hundreds of thousands of people could now be called deceased “coronavirus cases” without a flicker of interest in the actual cause of their illness. Those CT scans, picking up signs of pneumonia, and absurdly leading to the label “coronavirus,” are a perfect tool for deception.

Recently, I found an article from capitalcambodia.com, dated February 7, 2020: “‘Polluted air’ could be an important cause of Wuhan pneumonia”. It makes some interesting comments about Wuhan air quality. The article also speculates that “the virus” is carried on particulate pollutants, a claim I find completely unsupported—but the remarks about pollution are worth repeating:

“…three factors. First, the increase of static wind in the horizontal direction, which is not conducive to the diffusion and dilution of atmospheric pollutants. Second, the emergence of a temperature inversion layer in the vertical direction, which makes it difficult for pollutants to move upwards and are blocked at low altitudes and near the ground. Third, the increase of suspended particulates in the air. These three conditions are all available during the high incidence period of Wuhan pneumonia.”

“According to data released by the Wuhan Bureau of Ecology and Environment, the moment when a large number of pneumonia cases emerged in Wuhan was during the period from Jan 19, 2020, to Jan 23, 2020, and the Wuhan air during this period was at the stage of serious pollution. The indices are all higher than 100. This means that the outbreak period of Wuhan pneumonia coincides with the severe period of air pollution and this is one of the reasons. The second supporting reason is that the high incidence areas of Wuhan pneumonia coincide with the severe air pollution areas. We observed by randomly taking one day as a sample and found out that the area with the highest level of air pollution in Wuhan was Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market. This shows that even in ‘normal weather’, the air pollution in the seafood market area was the relatively worst area in Wuhan…Therefore, it is not accidental that Wuhan Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market has become a high-incidence area of Wuhan pneumonia…”

You’ll recall that, at first, reports circulated about the coronavirus emerging in that Market and “jumping species from animals to humans.” These reports didn’t mention highly dangerous air pollutants “jumping” into the lungs of humans.


The Matrix Revealed

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


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.

Human psychodrama on the world stage: Power Outside the Matrix

Emerging from the dead-end

As the drama called Human Life on Planet Earth advances in the 21st century, we are seeing an escalation of lower-brain emotional responses to events. And this is according to plan.

I want to emphasize the underlying propaganda message. It’s very important to understand that message:

“As more and more people are unable and unwilling to employ logic and rationality, those qualities diminish in importance, and you should abandon them because…they don’t serve you. They aren’t useful.”

You can see where this would lead. More and more people would surrender to their own stimulus-response mechanisms, and the overall level of chaos would increase and expand.

There is no situation in which you should abandon your own ability to employ reason and rationality, no matter what other people are doing. Their surrender should not become an excuse for you deserting your own power on any level.

The two most formidable individual powers are logic and imagination.

Logic is essentially grounding and stabilizing. It allows you to analyze any situation or cluster of information and see through to its validity or invalidity, beyond deception.

Imagination takes you soaring. It allows you to see your greatest vision for your life—and therefore act toward its fulfillment.

Others around you may be succumbing to their own misperceptions and lack of energizing spirit—but that doesn’t mean you have to.

And as an aside, if you decide you want to help those you care about and lift them up, try doing it without logic and imagination and see how far you get.

All this is preface and prelude. It occupied me for more than a decade of research and investigation, as I saw the human psychodrama entering a new phase. Its hallmark was random emotional reaction.

Nothing wrong with emotions, but entering a space where they take you from pillar to post, sucking up and draining energy, while producing no visible progress along the line of fulfilling goals…that’s not a good thing at all. It eventually ends up paralyzing the individual, who retreats from his most profound ambitions.

This was the setting in which I developed my third collection, Power Outside The Matrix. Here is a description of its contents:

This mega-collection is all about achieving power outside The Matrix and stabilizing that power.

It features a long section called: Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation.

This section is filled with specific examples of my past investigations. Based on 25 years of experience, it shows you how to take apart and put together data that lead to valid conclusions.

It is far more than a logic course.

It’s an advanced approach to analysis.

Establishing power outside The Matrix requires that a person be able to deal with today’s flood of information, misinformation, and disinformation. I’ve left no stone unturned in bringing you a workable approach to analysis.

There is a further extensive section titled, A Writer’s Tutorial. People have been asking me to provide this Tutorial, and here it is in spades. But it’s not just for writers. It’s for any creative person who wants to grasp his own power, understand it, and use it to reach out into the world.

My Tutorial exposes you to lessons that go far beyond what is normally taught in writer’s seminars. In fact, several core concepts in the Tutorial contradict ordinary writer’s seminars, and thus give you access to inner resources that would otherwise be ignored.

Another section of this mega-collection, titled Power Outside The Matrix and The Invention of New Reality, features creative exercises you do on a daily basis that will help you move toward the goal of power outside The Matrix. The exercises are all about increasing your energy and stability—and about the invention of new spaces.

Access to your internal energy, in huge amounts, is necessary for a life outside The Matrix—rather than relying on the illusory energy that The Matrix seems to provide.

This is a key fact. I’ve developed the exercises for exactly that purpose: your energy, your dynamism, independent and self-sufficient.

And finally, I have included a number of audio seminars that offer a wider perspective about The Matrix and what it means to live and work outside it.


power outside the matrix


Here are the particulars. These are audio presentations. 55 total hours.

* Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation (11.5-hours)

* Writer’s Tutorial (8.5-hours)

* Power Outside The Matrix and The Invention of New Reality (6.5-hours)

Then you will receive the following audio presentations I have previously done:

* The Third Philosophy of Imagination (1-hour)

* The Infinite Imagination (3-hours)

* The Mass Projection of Events (1.5-hours)

* The Decentralization of Power (1.5-hours)

* Creating the Future (6-hours)

* Pictures of Reality (6-hours)

* The Real History of America (2-hours)

* Corporations: The New Gods (7.5-hours)

I have included an additional bonus section:

* The complete text (331 pages) of AIDS INC., the book that exposed a conspiracy of scientific fraud deep within the medical research establishment. The book has become a sought-after item, since its publication in 1988. It contains material about viruses, medical testing, and the invention of disease that is, now and in the future, vital to our understanding of phony epidemics arising in our midst (and how to analyze them). I assure you, the revelations in the book will surprise you; they cut much deeper and are more subtle than “virus made in a lab” scenarios.

* A 2-hour radio interview I did on AIDS in Dec 1987 with host Roy Tuckman on KPFK in Los Angeles, California.

* My book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies

(All the audio presentations are mp3 files and the books are pdf files. You download them upon purchase. You’ll receive an email with a link to the entire collection.)

At the core of consciousness, there are two impulses in the individual. The first is: give in, surrender. The second is: express power.

The teaching of every civilization and society is: don’t use your power.

When you follow the second path, when you express your power without limits, remarkable things happen.

The veil of illusion melts away.

You meet yourself on new ground.

You know what your freedom is for.

Without imposing on the freedom of others, you live the life you always wanted.

That’s what Power Outside The Matrix is all about.

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 OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The Matrix Revealed: Revelations of a Hypnotherapist

by Jon Rappoport

If there was any person worth talking to in depth about the Matrix and how to understand it, it was the most innovative hypnotherapist who ever lived, Jack True. He took all his experience with his clients and made enormous breakthroughs in un-hypnotizing people at very deep levels.

In The Matrix Revealed, there are 43 interviews with Jack True. 320 pages.

Jack was determined to find ways to show people how their own approach to reality was merging with the Matrix. He never tired of explaining his insights based on clinical experience.

Jack once told me a person had to be stimulated to pry open his own passive inclinations, in order to discover hidden energies and power. He was all about providing that stimulation, in the form of innovative and sometimes shocking ideas about reality and perception.

These 43 interviews are priceless explorations of frontiers of consciousness.

One night at dinner, Jack said, “If you take any fixation a person has, you are looking at a funeral ceremony for his own creative power. Suppose he’s fixated on money. Dig far enough into that, and you’ll find a brilliant artist who has innovative ideas about making money. It seems impossible, but it’s there. I’ve seen it many times. But you have to open up the whole area, not just a little bit. What you end up with is the blueprint for the formation of a problem. Where does a problem come from? It comes from deciding that your own creative approach to something is too radical. Then you try ‘the normal way’, and that doesn’t work for you. So it’s a problem now. You try to solve the problem and wrestle it to the ground. You can’t. You become fixated on the problem. That’s what happens to people. And to put the cherry on the cake, these people tell you they’re not creative. You can meditate for a thousand years and you won’t solve that. So we come to the question: why do people give up on their own creative power? That’s been the core of my practice for a long time. Unraveling that has been my life’s work.”

It was very good work. It was brilliant work. It was unparalleled work.

And that’s just a fraction of the overall text, which runs to 1,100 pages. Then there are 10-plus hours of audio from me about the Planetary Chessboard, the Matrix, and what amounts to psychological operations aimed at populations and individuals.

You get the full text of AIDS INC., my first book, which Jack shepherded into a publishing deal for me. It takes apart the medical-research complex at a level most people never investigate: the most hidden lies; how they are built; how they are told; how they are sold; how they are fused into an anti-logical whole. Step by step.

My interviews with Ellis Medavoy, retired propaganda expert, and Richard Bell, financial rebel, provide you with striking and startling insights into other key aspects of the Matrix.

The Matrix Revealed represents about half of my work over a ten year period. You could say it’s why I left the field of conventional investigative journalism. There were questions that needed to be answered. Big questions. And I refused to shy away from them.


the matrix revealed


Here are the contents of  The Matrix Revealed:

* 250 megabytes of information.

* Over 1100 pages of text.

* Ten and a half hours of audio.

The heart and soul of this product are the text interviews I conducted with Matrix-insiders, who have first-hand knowledge of how the major illusions of our world are put together:

* JACK TRUE, the most creative hypnotherapist on the face of the planet. Jack’s anti-Matrix understanding of the mind and how to liberate it is unparalleled. His insights are unique, staggering. 43 interviews, 320 pages.

* ELLIS MEDAVOY, master of PR, propaganda, and deception, who worked for key controllers in the medical and political arenas. 28 interviews, 290 pages.

* RICHARD BELL, financial analyst and trader, whose profound grasp of market manipulation and economic-rigging is formidable, to say the least. 16 interviews, 132 pages.

The 2 bonuses alone are rather extraordinary:

* My complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and audio to guide you. I was previously selling the course for $375. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

* The complete text (331 pages) of AIDS INC., the book that exposed a conspiracy of scientific fraud deep within the medical research establishment. The book has become a sought-after item, since its publication in 1988. It contains material about viruses, medical testing, and the invention of disease that is, now and in the future, vital to our understanding of phony epidemics arising in our midst. I assure you, the revelations in the book will surprise you; they cut much deeper and are more subtle than “virus made in a lab” scenarios.

Also included:

* Several more interviews with brilliant analysts of the Matrix. 53 pages.

* The ten and a half hours of mp3 audio are my solo presentation, based on these interviews and my own research. Title: The Multi-Dimensional Planetary Chessboard—The Matrix vs. the Un-Conditioning of the Individual.

(All the material is digital. Upon ordering it, you’ll receive an email with a link to it.)

Understanding Matrix is also understanding your capacity and power, and that is the way to approach this subject. Because liberation is the goal. And liberation has no limit.

I invite you to a new exploration and a great adventure.

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.

Nano-technology: one world, one brain

From lexico.com: nanotechnology: “The branch of technology that deals with dimensions and tolerances of less than 100 nanometers, especially the manipulation of individual atoms and molecules.”

by Jon Rappoport

February 21, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

The recent arrest of Harvard pioneer in the field of nanotechnology, Charles Lieber—on charges of lying to federal authorities about his business connections to China—has exposed wide-ranging relationships among American and Chinese researchers.

These relationships include, above all, the open sharing of sensitive technologies that, once upon a time, would have been considered closely guarded state secrets. (See my recent piece, “Behind the explosive Charles Lieber scandal.”)

Here are quotes from the journal Nano Today, from a 2019 paper titled: “Nanowire probes could drive high-resolution brain-machine interfaces”. Its authors are Chinese and American:

“…advances can enable investigations of dynamics in the brain [through tiny sensor-implants] and drive the development of new brain-machine interfaces with unprecedented resolution and precision.”

“…output electrical signals of brain activity or input electrical stimuli to modulate brain activity in concert with external machines, including computer processors and prosthetics, for human enhancement…”

Aside from research into prosthetics and, perhaps, the reversal of certain paralyses, this avenue of investigation also suggests “modulation” of the brain, hooked to machines, for the purpose of control. Control of thoughts, sensations, emotions.

And along with the Internet of Things, why couldn’t that control eventually be extended, in order to “harmonize” many, many brains with one another?

Who would be interested in such a thing? Think Chinese government, DARPA (the technology arm of the Pentagon), and numerous other international actors. Think Rockefeller medical researchers. Think technocracy and Brave New World.

Over the past few decades, the flow of all sorts of ultra-sensitive scientific information, between the US and China, hasn’t consisted of rare leaks. It’s a flood, out in the open, in labs and universities. All part of the new share-and-care Globalist agenda.

Nanotechnology, to choose one branch of such research-exchange, has applications in weaponry, transportation, surveillance, medicine, etc. And of course, mind control.

“Look, I’m certainly willing to share my latest research on nano-brain implants. But I need your, ahem, assurance that your government won’t use this for dark purposes.”

“I understand completely. My government would no more do that than your government would.”

“All right. Then we’re good.”

“Yes. Good.”

How did US-China relations get to this point? At one time, it appeared the two governments were involved in a cold war. Oh, that’s right, President Nixon opened up China to trade, in 1972, after 25 years of no diplomatic relations. Nixon was the agent of David Rockefeller, who, years earlier, had rescued him from a broken career as a politician. David Rockefeller, arch Globalist.

Here’s what Rockefeller blithely wrote in 1973, a year after Nixon had worked his China miracle:

“Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.” (“From a China Traveler,” New York Times, August 10, 1973.)

Millions of people dead, freedom crushed, a whole population under the boot of the Communist regime, but somehow that’s not what David Rockefeller saw, or pretended to see. He, like other of his elite Globalist colleagues, admired the Chinese government for the capacity to control its own people, to such a high degree.

Flash forward 47 years. Scientists from both countries are blowing each other kisses, as they collaborate on developing a technology that has the potential to gain intimate influence inside the human brain itself.

—Of course, remember, when political push comes to shove, and it always does, China is the friend of China. In the case of American corporate and government big shots, hometown loyalty tends to be conditional, depending on which sources and countries are putting money on the table.


The Matrix Revealed

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


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.

Behind the explosive Charles Lieber scandal

Once upon a time, they called it espionage. Then they called it “illegal technology transfer.” Then they casually and admiringly called it Globalism.

by Jon Rappoport

February 20, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

(For Part-2 in this series, click here.)

Imagine this.

A cutting-edge technology, which has applications for weaponry, transportation, medicine, artificial intelligence, surveillance, mind control…is being openly shared between the US and China.

As just one example, tiny sensors would, up the road, be placed inside the human body. These sensors automatically monitor and report thousands of changes, in real time, in the body—as a way of diagnosing diseases.

The sensors will transmit all this information, through the emerging Internet of Things—using the 5G pipeline—to medical centers—where AI corporate and government analysts will confirm the disease diagnoses and prescribe treatments.

Eventually, a few billion people (patients) would, through these sensors in their bodies, be hooked up to the 5G Internet of Things.

However, as I’ve reported many times in these pages, the standard definitions of diseases and disorders are often incorrect, or even invented. But because the future system I’ve just sketched is automated, the patient is enclosed in a fake and dangerous bubble. Among other problems, the disease treatments, the drugs, are toxic.

What is the technology that is on the way to producing these body sensors?

Nanoscience. Nano-engineering.

One of the leading nanoscience researchers in the world was recently arrested on a charge of concealing his connections to China.

Major US science star busted by the feds.

Charles Lieber, now suspended by Harvard, is the University’s chairman of the chemistry department.

I have read two articles from a foreign news outlet headlined with the claim that Lieber stole and smuggled the “new coronavirus” from the US to China. In both cases, the text of the articles mentioned nothing about such a theft. Click bait? I’m not writing this article about “coronavirus.” I’ve been writing many articles rejecting the premise of an “epidemic” caused by the “virus” (archive here).

I decided to look into this situation, because Lieber does apparently have big-time connections to China. Sharing research on his specialty, nanoscience, with China would be one more case of “technology sharing.”

Bloomberg News, February 12, 2020, “The U.S. Government’s China Crackdown Comes to Harvard”:

“Lieber’s arrest on Jan. 28 came in connection with his dealings in China. He hasn’t been charged with any type of economic espionage, intellectual-property theft, or export violations. Instead, he’s accused of lying to U.S. Department of Defense investigators about his work with the People’s Republic…”

“…by targeting Lieber, the chairman of Harvard’s chemistry department and a veritable ivory tower blue blood, prosecutors struck at the crimson heart of the academic elite, raising fears that globalism, when it comes to doing science with China, is being criminalized.”

“According to a government affidavit, signed by a Federal Bureau of Investigation agent named Robert Plumb, Lieber signed at least three agreements with Wuhan Technology University, or WUT, in central China. These included a contract with the state-sponsored Thousand Talents Plan—an effort by Beijing to attract mostly expatriate [Chinese] researchers and their know-how back home—worth a total of about $653,000 a year in pay [to Lieber] and living expenses for three years, plus $1.74 million [to Lieber] to support a new ‘Harvard-WUT Nano Key Lab’ in Wuhan. The government offered no evidence that Lieber actually received those sums… Lieber also deceived Harvard about his China contracts, the [federal] affidavit said.”

“Whatever extracurricular arrangements Lieber may have had in China, his Harvard lab was a paragon of U.S.-China collaboration. He relied on a pipeline of China’s brightest Ph.D. students and postdocs, often more than a dozen at a time, to produce prize-winning research on the revolutionary potential of so-called nanowires in biomedical implants. Dozens of Lieber’s 100 or so former lab members from China have chosen to stay in the U.S. Many now lead their own nanoscience labs at top universities, including Duke, Georgia Tech, MIT, Stanford, University of California at Berkeley, and UCLA.”

I’d say that’s pretty big technology-transfer WOW right there.

“In the 1990s and 2000s, as Lieber’s achievements and stature were taking off, U.S. research institutions and grant makers pumped money and moral support into expanding the burgeoning collaborations between scientists in the U.S. and other countries, particularly China. The new paradigm was globalization, China was an emerging economic power, and Lieber’s lab became an exemplar of pan-Pacific collaboration. “

Another WOW. Not a leak of information. A flood.

“A more controversial Lieber protégé is Liqiang Mai, the international dean and chair of materials science at WUT, the little-known school in Wuhan that prosecutors allege recruited Lieber to be a ‘strategic scientist’ in 2011, for $50,000 a month. Mai, who hasn’t been named in any U.S. filings against Lieber, earned a doctorate at WUT in 2004 and worked as a postdoc in Lieber’s lab from 2008 to 2011, according to Mai’s WUT online bio…”

How big a star is Lieber? Wikpedia: “Charles M. Lieber (born 1959) is an American chemist and pioneer in the field of nanoscience and nanotechnology. In 2011, Lieber was recognized by Thomson Reuters as the leading chemist in the world for the decade 2000-2010 based on the impact of his scientific publications. Lieber has published over 400 papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals and has edited and contributed to many books on nanoscience. He is the principal inventor on over fifty issued US patents and applications, and founded the nanotechnology company Nanosys in 2001 and Vista Therapeutics in 2007. He is known for his contributions to the synthesis, assembly and characterization of nanoscale materials and nanodevices, the application of nanoelectronic devices in biology, and as a mentor to numerous leaders in nanoscience. In 2012, Lieber was awarded Israel’s Wolf Prize in Chemistry.”

Chemistry and Engineering News, January 28, 2020, “Harvard chemist Charles Lieber charged with fraud”:

“In addition, Lieber allegedly signed a contract that obligated Harvard to become part of a cooperative research program that allowed WUT [Chinese] scientists to visit the university up to two months each year. The [federal] complaint says he did not inform university officials of the agreement, which was for ‘advanced research and development of nano wire-based lithium-ion batteries with high performance for electric vehicles’.”

Another “technology transfer” of great value.

“…the NIH [US National Institutes of Health, a federal agency] asked Harvard about whether the university or Lieber failed to disclose his financial relationship with China. Lieber has been a principal investigator on at least three NIH grants totaling $10 million since 2008. After interviewing Lieber, Harvard [incorrectly, supposedly based on Lieber’s statements] responded to the NIH that he [Lieber] had ‘no formal association with WUT [Wuhan Institute of Technology]’ and ‘is not and has never been a participant in’ the [Chinese] Thousand Talents program.”

NIH has strict regulations about its researchers disclosing their conflict-of-interest connections. The feds obviously believe Lieber has failed to report his China connections to NIH. This may become a factor in his prosecution.

Lieber was operating a robust center at Harvard: Lieber Research Group. Its focus is nanoscience and nanotechnology. So it’s natural to ask, what kind of research findings would be shared with China?

On the Group’s website, there is this, right off the bat: “We are pioneering the interface between nanoelectronics and the life sciences…sensors for real-time disease detection…”

Hence, the picture of the future I sketched at the beginning of this article.

I may report further on nanoscience. Of course, the ominous technological innovations apply to both China and the US, and the rest of the world…

The Chinese government has the clout, will, force, and intent to impose, without hesitation, every sort of possible control on its 1.4 billion citizens. It is in the process of building many new “smart cities.” These centers will be models of wall-to-wall surveillance. AI, Internet of Things, 5G, the works. If nanoscience can achieve much more intimate access to people, through implanted sensors, why wouldn’t the central government jump at the chance to deploy it? The rationale and the cover story are obvious: WE MUST HAVE EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF NEW VIRUS EPIDEMICS. WE WILL DETECT THEM DIRECTLY FROM THE BODIES OF OUR PEOPLE IN REAL TIME.

All hail, Globalism and technocracy.


The Matrix Revealed

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


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.

The power of viruses and the Power of You

“I saw a horror movie and somehow it was the greatest experience of my life.”

by Jon Rappoport

February 18, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

In this article, I depart, for a moment, from the strategy of citing evidence in my coverage of the “China epidemic.” (For my series of articles on the “China epidemic,” click here.)

Instead, I want to make a few brief notes on the subject of power.

For many or most people, there is a kind of programming in the mind which urges the acceptance of viruses as powerful. This programming results in visceral emotional reactions toward microbes.

The collection of sensations would be something like: riding on a train heading toward a possible break in the tracks. Each person on board has been warned. No one is sure whether the tracks, a few miles in the distance, have actually been ripped apart. The train’s engineer in the cab isn’t stopping.

There is fear, of course. But there is also something else. An almost wild feeling. Where does it comes from? It comes from the realization that power is SOMEWHERE. Where? In the potential break in the tracks.

People don’t often experience a sensation of power. For that reason, they don’t want to minimize the importance of the tracks up ahead. They don’t want to throw away that feeling. At some level, they believe that, if they do throw it away, there will be no power anywhere. And THAT would provoke panic.

The idea that they might be coddling an ILLUSION—and the whole warning they received was a monstrous fabrication to begin with—well, this prospect is entirely out of the question. That couldn’t be, under any circumstances. That would be too, too much.

If you were so foolish as to approach such a person and suggest he could, first and foremost, look to his OWN power, he would stare at you as if you were speaking a language from another planet. To say that your advice, under the circumstances—the speeding train, the tracks, the warning—was inappropriate…this would be a vast understatement.

If a person, for whatever reason, believes he has no significant power, he searches for it elsewhere. If he can find a train, a warning, and danger, he’ll climb onboard. It’s far, far better than nothing.

In our society and present culture, of course, the thought that the individual has a great deal of inherent power, and a right to it, is on the wane. That ship, to go to another metaphor, is taking on lots and lots of water.

Typical sociopaths in high places, and their bootlickers, apply basic psychology they don’t teach in fifty-thousand-dollars-a-year colleges: People must be able to imagine power is SOMEWHERE. They don’t believe they have it themselves. So why not invoke images of power in a venue which results in a strange allegiance:

“I’ll see and feel power in a fearful threat to me. I’ll sign on and remain loyal, no matter what. I’ll cling to my threat, and I’ll feel rising fear and strange rising joy together.”

That’s the speeding train, the warning, the tracks.

That’s the virus.


Exit From the Matrix

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


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.

How are viruses discovered and identified in the first place?

The earthshaking Etienne De Harven interview by Celia Farber

by Jon Rappoport

February 18, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

The question I’ve been asking since 1987—

If the experts are going to claim a particular virus causes a particular disease—how do they know that virus exists in the first place?

For example, the supposedly new coronavirus in China. For example, Ebola. For example, HIV. For example, the coronavirus supposedly causing SARS (2003). How do researchers know these viruses exist?

“Well, of course they know. They must.”

That is not a satisfactory answer—even though most people would offer it.

The question can become very interesting, when you stop and consider researchers working away in biowar labs fiddling with viruses. How do they know they’re tweaking viruses that actually exist?

On a more mundane frontier, when scientists tell us they’re rushing to develop a vaccine against a virus that is harming the population, how do they know that virus exists to begin with?

I came to this question when I was researching HIV in 1987. I began to think about it seriously in 1990. During all these years, I’ve reached out to independent researchers, and I’ve tried to stitch together their answers. I can’t say it’s been a smooth trip.

But I have found some answers; and I have certainly found some fake mainstream assertions, which glitter like baubles on plastic branches of 99-cent store Xmas trees.

Here are a few clues. You need to take a tissue sample from a live human being. You need to filter that sample correctly so you arrive at a much smaller sample you believe might contain a virus. You need to put a drop of that sample under an electron microscope and observe what looks like a virus.

How much virus? How many identical particles of virus? Opinions differ on this. It could be one definite virus, one particle. It could be many, many identical particles.

Sidebar: If you’re trying to prove this virus is actually causing DISEASE in a person, you have to go further. You have to show the very same virus is active and replicating at a very high rate in the person’s body, and his immune system isn’t defeating it. Beyond noticing the patient is sick, how do you test for all THAT? I’m still looking for a definitive technical answer—if there is one.

All right, let’s’ get back to the electron microscope. Let’s say you’ve observed many identical particles of what looks like a virus in the electron microscope photograph, called an EM. You can then say, “Found it.” But you need to be sure. You need to figure out that this virus isn’t just something that ordinarily lives in the human body like a couch potato and does nothing—a passive endogenous virus. No. You want to show this virus comes from the outside as an invader—an exogenous virus. And how do you perfectly make that differentiation every time? Another question that might have no precise formula as an answer.

Big question: CAN WE BE SURE ALL VIRUSES THAT ARE SAID TO EXIST AND SAID TO CAUSE EPIDEMICS ARE ACTUALLY FOUND AND OBSERVED AND IDENTIFIED ON ELECTRON MICROSCOPE PHOTOGRAPHS? CAN WE AT LEAST SAY THAT?

No.

In which case, the researchers have been, at least some of the time, up the creek without a paddle. They’ve jumped the gun. They’ve bolted out of the starting gate too soon. They’ve laid their money down on a horse that may not even be in the race. They’ve written a check no one can cash. They’re talking about lockdowns and quarantines without having proved their favorite virus of the moment exists. Sure, people on the back end will make big money from these unwarranted presumptions, but money is not science. It might control science, but it ISN’T science.

All right. I’ve now set the stage for an excerpt from an interview, a profound interview with a late mainstream master who, in the face of fake science, suddenly was characterized as a rebel, Etienne De Harven. The interview was conducted several years ago by the brilliant reporter, Celia Farber. You can find the whole interview here. I strongly suggest you read it sixteen times. Yes, it gets technical. You’ll also notice names of elite scientists you haven’t run across. Learn the meaning of the words you’ve never seen before. Dig in. This isn’t television-type brush-off conversation. This isn’t a YouTube throwaway.

I have another reason for exposing readers to this interview—it’s what a conversation about serious scientific issues looks like…this is what trying to bridge the gap between researchers, honest reporters, and the public looks like. There should be hundreds and thousands of such print-interviews taking place, laid before readers. They can handle it. Dumbing down people is partly an illusion: they can wake up. They WILL wake up if they’re sufficiently interested.

Etienne De Harven’s background: president of the Electron Microscopy Society of America; researcher, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; Cornell professor of cell biology; professor of pathology, University of Toronto; recognized pioneer in the field of electron microscopy.

The interview focuses on HIV; whether it was ever found and isolated. The implications and questions spread out to any and all viruses.

DE HARVEN: Unacceptably frustrated by the total lack of success in all attempts to demonstrate virus particles in human cancer by EM, the “impresarios” of the cancer/virus “dream” (Gallo, Fauci, and others) totally engaged in the molecular approach.

Consequently, they invented molecular markers to compensate for the missing viral particles…This would have been acceptable if the specificity of these new molecular markers would have been clearly established. Unfortunately, this was not the case. The most misleading molecular marker was probably the first one, i.e. the enzyme [called] reverse transcriptase (RT). Following Temin and Baltimore 1970 papers in “Science”, the RT enzymatic activity has been, most abusively, used as a specific retroviral marker. Both Temin and Baltimore demonstrated RT activity in samples of supposedly “purified” retrovirus.

Embarrassingly, they both omitted to verify the “purity” of their samples by EM. Some of their samples were simply purchased from a commercial company… True, the label on the vials read “pure retrovirus”… However, it was known that these commercial “pure retrovirus” were heavily contaminated by cellular debris!

And since it is also known that all cells contain RT (see Varmus), cellular debris are most likely carrying similar RT enzymes.

Temin and Baltimore did not, therefore, prove that RT is a specific molecular marker for retroviruses. It would have been so simple to check, by EM, the degree of “purity” of the samples they used. This would have, most probably, shown important cell debris contamination, and would have obliged Temin and Baltimore to be much more cautious in the interpretation of their results. In 1975, the members of the Nobel Committee, most regrettably, failed to scrutinize this “purity” problem…

In 1983, at Pasteur Institute in Paris, reliance on the RT marker was a key element in the claimed “isolation” of a new retrovirus [HIV]. Still, Montagnier himself recognized “We did not purify”… He dangerously omitted to consider the misleading interference of cell debris, just as Temin and Baltimore did in 1970.

But a paper on the discovery of a new retrovirus looks much better if it contains at least… one EM picture! So, members of Montagnier’s team spent hours at the TEM [transmission electron microscope], looking at their mixed cell cultures, and they found the virus!

See Fig. 2 in their “historic” 1983 “Science” paper! It is, by the way, a good quality EM picture. It shows unquestionable retroviral particles, budding at the surface of a cell. But the legend of this Fig. 2 states that this cell is a cord blood lymphocyte. Indeed, cord blood lymphocytes were admixed to these complex cell cultures (why?)

Montagnier and his co-workers should have known that human embryonic tissues, and the placenta in particular, are very rich in endogenous retroviruses (HERVs), and that cord blood lymphocytes should therefore be expected to carry the same endogenous retroviruses (under the TEM, endogenous and exogenous viruses, looking identical, cannot be distinguished.)

The budding of these particles has perhaps been stimulated by some of the growth factors also present in these cell cultures. An essential control would have been to repeat the experiment using lymphocytes from the peripheral blood instead of from cord blood. This control is unfortunately missing.

In short, I would frankly state that the Pasteur 1983 paper (whose 30th anniversary has just been celebrated in a “grand messe” of official HIV retro-virology!) contributed very little in AIDS research because its conclusion (i.e. “the isolation of a new retrovirus”) is based on 1) the use of a non specific RT molecular marker, and 2) is falsely supported by EM pictures of, most probably, endogenous human retroviruses.

More details and appropriate references on this analysis can be found in my 2010 paper published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons [— “Human Endogenous Retroviruses and AIDS Research: Confusion, Consensus, or Science?”] (jpands.org/vol15no3/deharven.pdf).

CELIA FARBER: When antibody and VL [viral load] tests became widespread as diagnostic tools for “HIV infection” over the ensuing decades, what happened with EM inside of HIV science and literature? It is my understanding that nobody has ever found HIV in human blood, on EM. Is this an accurate way to say it?

DE HARVEN: In my views, Western Blot [antibody] tests lost all credibility after the publication of Eleni Papadopulos’s et al. (1993) paper, and antibody tests (“Elisa”) [lost credibility] after Christine Johnson’s report (1996). The notion of a “Viral load” (VL), however, brought a new parameter in AIDS diagnosis (Ho,1996). It called attention to the actual number of HIV particles supposedly present in the blood plasma of AIDS patients, PCR technologies [tests] being presumed to offer a way to quantify that number.

If such a viremia (i.e. presence of virus particles in the blood) is indeed present in AIDS patients, it reminisces the retroviral viremia well known in leukemic mice. In such case, retroviral particles should be readily demonstrable, by TEM, of appropriately prepared patient plasma samples. Unfortunately, it has never been possible to demonstrate by TEM one single retroviral particle in the blood plasma of any AIDS patient, even if one selects patients presenting with a so-called “high viral load.”

I was apparently the first researcher to make that statement, during the opening session of President T. Mbeki’s major AIDS conference, in Pretoria, SA, in May 2000. My statement to that effect has never been refuted.

CELIA FARBER: How come?

DE HARVEN: That question must be answered because “something” is measured by PCR technologies in the blood of many AIDS patients. Actually, what is being measured is definitely not the number of retroviral particles (phantom-like, i.e. EM invisible!). In fact, what is being PCR identified, amplified, and supposedly quantified is the number of genomic nucleotide sequences that are extremely similar to sequences known to be part of the retroviral genome. Most regrettably, these sequences were misinterpreted as an indication as a certain number of … HIV particles! This did a lot to consolidate the quasi-religious dogma of HIV as the cause of AIDS, a dogma that has been sharply criticized, a few years ago, by David Rasnick who wrote, authoritatively, about “The AIDS Blunder”…

This interpretation would have been acceptable only if retroviral particles would have been readily demonstrated, by EM, in the blood plasma of these patients; but, since this is not the case, another explanation for the presence of these nucleotide sequences has to be founded.

I presented at the RA conference in Oakland, CA, in 2009, and further developed in my 2010 JAPS paper such a much needed explanation for the presence of these retroviral-like nucleotide sequences. My explanation is based on the well known, variable amounts of circulating DNA in the blood of severely ill patients, and on the fact that we all carry [irrelevant] retroviral-like sequences in our DNA, as endogenous, defective retroviruses, i.e. HERVs (HERVs, for “Human endogenous retroviruses”) (See “Virus in all of us”, R. Lower at al., 1996 PNAS paper).

No surprise, therefore, that these nucleotide sequences are recognized by PCR [tests] in the blood of many AIDS patients, who are indeed severely ill. As already demonstrated in 2008 in Robin Weiss laboratory, HERVs can interfere as confounding factors in the search for novel retrovirus in chronic human diseases…

CELIA FARBER: …Paint a picture for us. The story of the [HIV] virus, the “new deadly virus,” what happens first: What steps did they [—] Montagnier, on one hand, Gallo on the other [—] take to “find” the new entity? Then once they ‘found’ it, what shape was it in? It was not an entity, a thing, with a body, right? It was not coherent. Can we say that? So it lived where? It was seen only through the technologies developed to find it, Elisa, WB [both are antibody tests]? Later PCR/VL [tests]? But what happened back THEN when they tried to see it on EM? Why didn’t everybody look for it on EM? Too expensive?

DE HARVEN: No, EM is not cheap but not that expensive! And its cost has certainly nothing to do with the fact that it has barely been used for the past 30 years in AIDS research! It has not been used because “They” knew it was not going to show anything of retroviral significance in samples coming directly from AIDS patients. And since AIDS had become big business, the stocks of involved giant pharmaceutical companies could not be jeopardized! It had to be saved at all cost, even at the cost of trusting non specific molecular markers… Fear is good business, and viruses generate fear most efficiently… So, the HIV flag has to be maximally agitated. In worldwide medias, with thousands of computer-generated, colorful caricatures of an idealistic retrovirus… By contrast, the medias have been dominated by the most rigorous censorship when it comes to inform the public about views of rethinking dissidents. This total censorship put a safety lock on any information that could jeopardize the colossal, entirely HIV derived profits of the major pharmaceutical companies.

But I am glad we have Internet!

Daring to say that HIV does not exist amounts to some sort of a capitalistic crime…

Yes, the HIV dogma is probably the darkest page in the history of modern medicine.

CELIA FARBER: Etienne, if you could sum up: Does HIV exist? If so, where and how and as what?

If you could examine 1,000 HIV positive people’s blood under EM, what would you expect to find? If you don’t find HIV on EM in human blood, can any argument be made that the virus is “hiding” and so forth, or that the drugs suppressed the virus to undetectable levels? This is what the defenders of the orthodoxy seem to be saying about the results seen in the Nushawn Williams case.

DE HARVEN: This is the main question! Questioning the very existence of HIV is not something that should be debated only between specialized retro-virologists. It is an essential question that concerns all of us.

CELIA FARBER: Why?

DE HARVEN: Simply because 100% of AIDS research funding is based on the dogmatically postulated existence of HIV. If HIV does not exist, it would follow that AIDS research is the most appalling case of total misappropriation of public research funds! And it would also follow that the monumental amounts of money, so far exclusively devoted to HIV research, would be much better used in other directions. Could you imagine what world we would live in, today, if the total amount of money wasted over the past 30 years on HIV research had been, instead, used for feeding starving Africans, for clean water supply equipment, for public hygiene infrastructures, and for public health education? This would happen only if HIV research is totally stopped! And for this, the scientific and public health organizations have to face the fact that, indeed, HIV does not exist!

…we all have to, courageously, face the fact that the very existence of an exogenous HIV has never been scientifically verified.

—end of interview excerpt—

Again, you can read the whole interview here.

De Harven unmasks HIV research. How many other unproven viruses have likewise been prematurely massaged into existence and prominence? How many times have researchers pulled “special markers” like rabbits out of hats—spuriously claiming these markers establish the existence of otherwise never-observed viruses?

And therefore, when these researchers state they have published the genetic sequences of these viruses—what are they really sequencing? Harmless and passive endogenous viruses that wouldn’t hurt a fly and prefer to lie around in the body for the whole course of a lifetime watching television?

And when someone steps forward, and claims a new and never-before-seen virus is actually a manmade weapon, and he knows this from studying its genetic sequence—is he right, or is he looking at the sequence of an irrelevant microbe that has been rudely coaxed from its long languishing snooze in the warmth of the human body?


Exit From the Matrix

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


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.

CDC begins testing Americans for the Coronavirus—but how?

by Jon Rappoport

February 17, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

As my readers know, I’ve been presenting evidence AGAINST the idea that the China “epidemic” is caused by a new coronavirus. (archive here)

Of course, the World Health Organization and the US Centers for Disease Control are relentlessly pushing the idea that: this is a spreading epidemic, and it is caused by COV-19, a new human coronavirus.

Now, the US Centers for Disease Control is rolling out a program to test Americans (e.g., travelers who have been to China). As time passes, the program will likely pull larger numbers of Americans into that net.

The CDC program immediately raises two problems: why bother testing for a virus if it isn’t really causing human disease; and what kind of test is being done?

In this article, I’m focusing on the type of test, and whether it’s accurate, even if you assume the coronavirus is causing disease.

Reading through CDC literature (see also here), I believe the two most prevalent US testing methods are: antibody, and PCR.

Antibody tests are notorious for cross-reactions. This means factors in no way relevant to a given virus can make the test read positive. In that case, the patient would be falsely told he “has the coronavirus.” But it gets worse. Traditionally, antibody tests reading positive were taken as a good sign for the patient: his immune system had contacted a germ and defeated it. Then, starting in 1984, the science was turned upside down: a positive test was, astoundingly, taken to mean the patient was ill or would soon become ill.

The PCR test (which requires excellent technicians who will not make any number of possible mistakes) takes a tissue sample from a patient which might contain a tiny virus particle(s) much too small to be observed—and blows it up many times, so it can be seen. However, the test says nothing reliable about HOW MUCH virus is in the patient’s body. Why is that important? Because millions and millions of replicating virus in the body are necessary to even begin talking about actual illness. A positive PCR test, nevertheless, will be taken to mean the patient “has the epidemic disease.” —An even deeper issue: where is the PRIOR PROOF that the PCR is testing for a virus that actually causes disease?

The prospect of these two tests being done on Americans is not comforting, to say the least. People will be roped into believing they are “epidemic cases,” and therefore need to be isolated, and treated with highly toxic antiviral drugs.

In the event they become ill, from the drugs, they’ll be told “the coronavirus is doing the damage.” In some cases, this will result in even further dosing with the same drugs, at higher levels—a disaster.

A very small percentage of doctors are aware of the profound shortcomings of these two diagnostic tests. Most of them will shrug off their doubts and perform the tests anyway, because refusal would endanger their careers and medical licenses.

This is the sordid drama now unfolding in the American landscape.

It’s not just America. The same tests are being done all over the world.


Exit From the Matrix

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


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.

Coronavirus: run, here come the experimental drugs

by Jon Rappoport

February 16, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

As I’ve shown in recent articles (archive here), the virus hunters have fallen far short of proving a coronavirus is causing this “outbreak.” But here come the antiviral drugs.

They’re ordinarily used for other diseases (malaria, HIV) or, in one case, no disease yet (unapproved, unlicensed). But it’s time for “heroic measures.” A better term would be “reckless experimentation.”

Public health officials are expressing a mixture of hope and…vampire-ish worry that the epidemic may not last long enough to properly test the efficacy of the drugs.

LA Times, 2/13/2020, “Doctors fight coronavirus outbreak with drugs that target HIV, malaria and Ebola”:

—Characterizing the remarks of a Harvard professor of medicine, the Times author writes: “The lack of certainty surrounding treatment for coronaviruses is partly due to the boom-and-bust nature of outbreaks — they can spread like wildfire and then disappear… Although that is good for the public’s health, it also means scientists sometimes don’t have the time or the means to thoroughly test a treatment in humans.” Tsk, tsk, what a shame.

Here’s another telling quote from the Times article: “The ramp-up in [drug] research and investments into outbreaks can wreak havoc on private drug companies, especially if the virus disappears at some point, as SARS did, said Dr. Jesse Goodman, a professor of medicine at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. The federal government helps offset these costs through initiatives…” What do you know about that? The SARS virus “disappeared.” And pity the poor drug companies. Their research was interrupted.

Among the drugs suddenly being used on people diagnosed with the coronavirus: Kaletra (anti-HIV); chloroquine (anti-malaria); remdesivir (unapproved, anti-Ebola).

rxlist.com provides a list of adverse effects of Kaletra:

* diarrhea
* headache
* weakness
* nausea
* vomiting
* stomach upset
* drowsiness
* dizziness
* a bad taste in the mouth
* trouble sleeping
* skin rash
* changes in the shape or location of body fat (especially in your arms, legs, face, neck, breasts, and waist)

“Tell your doctor if you have serious side effects of Kaletra including”:

* unexplained weight loss
* persistent muscle aches or weakness
* joint pain
* numbness or tingling of the hands/feet/arms/legs
* severe tiredness
* vision changes
* severe or persistent headaches
* signs of infection (such as fever, chills, trouble breathing, cough, non-healing skin sores)
* signs of an overactive thyroid (such as irritability, nervousness, heat intolerance, fast/pounding/irregular heartbeat, bulging eyes, unusual growth in the neck/thyroid known as a goiter)
* signs of a nerve problem known as Guillain-Barre Syndrome (such as difficulty breathing/swallowing/moving your eyes, drooping face, paralysis, slurred speech)
* increased thirst
* increased urination
* confusion
* persistent nausea or vomiting
* stomach or abdominal pain
* yellowing eyes or skin
* dark urine

Chloroquine adverse effects (from Drugs.com)—“Check with your doctor immediately if any of the following side effects occur while taking chloroquine”:

* anxiety
* attempts at killing oneself
* back, leg, or stomach pains
* black, tarry stools
* bleeding gums
* blistering, peeling, or loosening of the skin
* blood in the urine or stools
* blurred or decreased vision
* change in near or distance vision
* chest discomfort or pain
* chills
* cold sweats
* confusion
* continuing ringing or buzzing or other unexplained noise in the ears
* cough
* dark urine
* diarrhea
* difficulty in focusing the eyes
* difficulty with speaking
* difficulty with swallowing
* disturbed color perception
* dizziness
* dizziness, faintness, or lightheadedness when getting up suddenly from a lying or sitting position
* double vision
* drooling
* fast, slow, irregular, or pounding heartbeat
* feeling that others are watching you or controlling your behavior
* feeling that others can hear your thoughts
* feeling, seeing, or hearing things that are not there
* fever
* general tiredness and weakness
* halos around lights
* headache
* hearing loss
* inability to move the eyes
* increased blinking or spasms of the eyelid
* joint or muscle pain
* large, hive-like swelling on the face, eyelids, lips, tongue, throat, hands, legs, feet, or sex organs
* light-colored stools
* loss of balance control
* lower back or side pain
* muscle trembling, jerking, or stiffness
* muscular pain, tenderness, wasting, or weakness
* night blindness
* nausea
* overbright appearance of lights
* painful or difficult urination
* pale skin
* pinpoint red spots on the skin
* puffiness or swelling of the eyelids or around the eyes, face, lips, or tongue
* red skin lesions, often with a purple center
* red, irritated eyes
* restlessness
* shuffling walk
* skin rash, hives, or itching
* sore throat
* sores, ulcers, or white spots on the lips or in the mouth
* sticking out of the tongue
* stiffness of the limbs
* sweating
* swollen or painful glands
* tightness in the chest
* trouble breathing
* tunnel vision
* twitching, twisting, or uncontrolled repetitive movements of the tongue, lips, face, arms, or legs
* uncontrolled movements, especially of the face, neck, and back
* unusual bleeding or bruising
* unusual tiredness or weakness
* upper right abdominal or stomach pain
* vomiting
* yellow eyes and skin

Adverse effects of remdesivir—the drug has not been approved for public use. I find at least one human clinical trial has been done on people “infected by the Ebola virus,” and another clinical trial is underway now. So far, I see no published list of adverse effects—probably because the drug is still in the test phase. Using this drug on “coronavirus patients” would certainly be experimental.

This is what I’m sitting here picturing: A person in Wuhan, who is having respiratory problems, owing to the unprecedented mixture of toxic pollutants in the air of the city, enters a clinic. He is given a chest CT Scan. He’s told he has a lung infection—pneumonia. Because a CT Scan is now absurdly sufficient for a diagnosis of “epidemic coronavirus,” he is given that label. NO test for the purported coronavirus is done. The person is shunted into a treatment room, and a doctor tells him his condition is quite serious, and he will be treated with a drug: chloroquine.

Go back and read the list of adverse effects again.

Suppose this patient tells his doctor he has a relative who lives out in the country, where the air is much better, and he wants to stay with her.

The doctor will, of course, tell the patient this is not possible. The city is locked down. If the patient left Wuhan, he could “spread the virus to others.”

He will be given the drug. What about informed consent? Will the doctor read the patient the complete list of adverse effects? Are you kidding? Wouldn’t that be “counter-productive?”

Mustn’t interrupt the “research” of pharmaceutical companies.

We can only hope and pray the “epidemic” is SAID TO LAST long enough so these benevolent corporations can complete their testing. What else is a pool of human guinea pigs for?

And worry not, the pill kings have their bases covered. When “test subjects” become sicker or die, the kings can simply say, “The coronavirus was responsible.”

It all works out for the best, doesn’t it?

We haven’t even gotten to the coronavirus vaccine yet. The professionals are working hard on cooking one up. When they do, there will be no danger of an interruption in their work, if “the virus disappears.” The vaccine will be injected into healthy people. If and when some of these people keel over, all sorts of reasons can be trotted out: underlying genetic condition; the coronavirus hidden in their cells suddenly activated; undisclosed immune-system deficiency; an unrelated disease; allergic cross-reaction; and, of course, “a rare and unavoidable adverse effect among all the life-saving injections given, at no charge, to the global population…”

I’m looking through mainstream articles. I’m trying to find one that publishes the complete lists of adverse effects of the experimental drugs now being deployed on “coronavirus” patients. Odd. I can’t find one. I wonder what that means. Maybe I should ask a doctor. He would possibly be able to set me straight. Perhaps I should query a public communications pro at a pharmaceutical company. Certainly, he could contact major press outlets and urge them to print the adverse-effect lists, in the interest of full disclosure.

Right?

Right?


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


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.