The formula of war vs. a pandemic of freedom

The formula of war vs. a pandemic of freedom

Notes on the exit from titanic boredom and failure.

Follow the bouncing ball all the way to the end, which is a beginning

by Jon Rappoport

January 15, 2016

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

Making war makes money. Winning a war makes more money.

The desire to keep making war requires building up and maintaining a standing army.

When many nations are pursuing this general course, the “threat-need” for maintaining a standing army rises to a new level.

The “need, for the sake of defense and preparedness,” to strengthen armies is exactly what war makers exploit.

Dismantling this whole operation, by scaling back foreign military bases, withdrawing troops, and setting boundaries and no-go zones is anathema to war makers.

If JFK, as a few scholars suggest, was planning to get out of Vietnam, and if he was also in the process of planning space missions with Russia, these would have been ample reasons for his assassination.

Everyone has his favorite reason for JFK’s murder—he wanted to take money-creation out of the hands of the Federal Reserve; he was about to blow the whistle on UFO secrets; he was on the verge of destroying the CIA; he signed the 1963 nuclear test ban treaty with Russia; he and his brother were trying to destroy the Mafia; JFK was about to lay taxes on multi-billion-dollar Liberian shipping operations; anti-Castro Cubans hated him because he failed to back the Bay of Pigs invasion; he was determined to push forward an ocean-turbine technology for the generation of electricity. Everyone who has a reason for JFK’s murder is quite sure it is the primary or only reason.

If withdrawal from Vietnam was one reason, it speaks to the “sensitivity” of the war machine and its allied industries.

If international peace broke out, what would happen to the US economy? To be more precise, what would happen to those corporations who depend on the largest government military contracts? To be even more precise, what would happen to these corporations, who depend on government taxes and money invented out of thin air by elite government-backed banks?

Those corporations would imagine new enterprises or crash.


The nation would have to find another way to have an economy. Would this signal, beyond the chaos, the end of the world? No.

Along a similar front, if gangs were wiped out, along with drug cartels, and if the main terrorist groups were isolated, attacked, and defunded (cut off from drug money, diverted government tax money and elite invented money), other sectors of the economy would take a hit, but again, the world would not end.

Along a similar front, if corporations who manufacture and sell poison (e.g., drug companies, pesticide companies) were punished to the full extent of the law, and even disbanded, the economy would take another hit, but again, the world would not end.

Along a similar front, if cheating, lying, and thieving banks and allied Wall St. firms were punished to the full extent of the law, and even disbanded, the world would not end.

What would the new emerging economy look like? That would depend on the imagination, and challenging work, done by individuals (not governments) who see new possibilities. That would depend on people who attempt to wake up a population muddled in passive acceptance of whatever consumer products are shoved down their throats.

Yes, I know all this speculation sounds like dreaming impossible dreams. But while I’m at it, here is another one: what would happen if everything I’ve written so far in this article became the subject of reasoned debate in colleges? I’m talking about serious lengthy debate about a new economy.

Several things would happen. First, it would come to light that the overwhelming number of students are intellectually incapable of carrying on such a dialogue. That in itself would rank as an inconvenient truth.

Students don’t learn how to think in a rational fashion. They know next to nothing about logic. Most of them aren’t even aware of what a line of reasoning looks like. They can’t follow such a line.

Second, it would become obvious that the overwhelming number of students are incapable of conceiving a new economy that is not spearheaded and controlled by government.

Students are brainwashed into thinking that all significant change must come from above. It must be planned. It must be designed to produce some vague outcome called “equality.”

This preference for central government control and planning is sustained even though, with a little thought, it’s clear that government has been the driving (and permissive) criminal force that protects the very economy that is causing all the trouble.

Third, it would become obvious that the faculties of colleges are also intellectually incapable of carrying on this debate. They, too, have been trained to ignore logic. They’ve also been trained to push a values-laden agenda that celebrates centrally planned collectivist economies.

Fourth, the idea that free and independent and creative individuals could spearhead a new economy seems outrageous, preposterous, and even illegal to the mass of students and professors. For them, all non-group-associated individuals, viewed in any light, are, a priori, greedy criminals.

So actually, this article isn’t about creating a new economy. It’s about the barriers to a rational, extensive, lengthy dialogue and debate about the creation of a new economy. A dialogue, by the way, that goes beyond what might be contained in cell phone texting or tweeting. How shocking.

Here is just one idea that might spring up in the kind of dialogue I’m talking about. Urban farms. They already exist, of course. In each case, they began as an idea in the mind of one individual. They didn’t spring to life, originally, when six people, walking down the street, suddenly turned to each other and said, “Urban farms.”

These are very large operations that grow food crops for residents of cities, especially those who can’t afford good food. The people themselves learn to grow the crops.

What would happen, what would be the consequence of, say, 10,000 urban farms across America? What would this do for the health and morale of people in cities? How would profit be made? And, peripherally, why is it that local, state, and federal government haven’t backed such an idea—for an infinitesimal fraction of the money they spend on alleviating poverty; money that, by the way, seems to make things worse.

Again, peripherally, what would happen if thousands of college students, who matriculate on privileged campuses and yap endlessly about their lack of privilege, instead turned their victimhood-energies to starting urban farms and working in them? Would the world end? Would the sky fall? The same questions could be asked about the students’ professors, many of whom are merely paid propagandists of the State.

There are all sorts of interesting questions that could arise in a real debate/dialogue. Here’s another one: what would a world without Monsanto or Merck actually look like? Or: what would America look like with an army dedicated only to defense of the nation?

Such a dialogue could lead to action. Many separate actions. What a thought. Would the world end? Would the sky fall?

You want more? Pay particular and close attention to this one. What would happen, if one state in the union decided that anyone could offer health advice and non-harmful, non-toxic treatment to another person, for any ailment or illness, without control from above, without the need for government licensing? Suppose this arrangement, between consenting adults, was done by contract, not license? Suppose both parties asserted that no liability or blame would be attached to the outcome of such advice or treatment? In other words, God forbid, the citizens would actually take responsibility for themselves. Do you think many citizens and practitioners might flock to such a state? Do you think an economic bonanza might explode in that state? Do you think the outbreak of freedom might raise the morale in that area? Do you think improved health might result? Do you think other states might follow suit, merely by removing, at no cost, their grotesque rules and licensing/enforcement bureaus? Would you be afraid of such an arrangement, understanding the fact that current orthodox medicine, as licensed and practiced throughout the land, results in widespread pharmaceutical devastation? Shown a projection of the foreseeable economic bonanza from the new arrangement I just outlined, do you think there is at least one state in the US that might throw irrational caution to the winds and enact this program of health freedom?

In the kind of extended dialogue I’m talking about here, individuals come up with lots of interesting ideas—ideas that could very well lead to action. And in the process, the nightmare zombie cloud of government control and meddling takes major hits. All its operations aimed at interfering with freedom are exposed. The crud washes off. The unconscionable dreck drains away.

People start actually thinking again. They start imagining again. They feel their chains slipping away. They come out of the collective dream. They experience cascades of new energy. They think about entrepreneurship in a new way. They think about morality and ethics in a new way. They re-find themselves.

Does the sky fall? Does the world end?

No. It begins.

Perhaps (miracle of miracles) the quantity of self-invented victims begins to diminish. Perhaps untold numbers of people floating along in a New Age daze (because they see no way out of the dilemmas and conflicts of our time) rise up from their plastic lotus pads, sensing a genuine impulse of hope and desire for the first time in many years. Their own hope. Their own desire. Perhaps millions of people trapped in dead-end robotic work feel a creak in the psychological and spiritual machinery that surrounds them, as it begins to malfunction and split apart. Perhaps moon-blown, full-bore, doctrinal collectivist freaks feel a few pin pricks in the purple bloated corpse of their one-size-fits-all planetary vision.

Who knows what might happen if a true ongoing dialogue about a new economy persisted long enough?

If a person is dead inside and doesn’t want to be dead inside, he has to ask himself (paraphrasing Clint Eastwood) this question: Did he fire six shots into his psyche or only five? If only five, can he fire that last bullet into the passive trance that keeps him in thrall to Control Central?

Waking up may be hard to do, but it’s also contagious. If a college dared to offer a four-year course which consisted entirely of the dialogue/debate I’m proposing, carried out along respectful lines, omitting and barring the screaming opponents of free speech, who knows what might happen?

As William Blake wrote, “If the fool would persist in his folly he would become wise.” As the dialogue proceeds, all sorts of foolish ideas would come to light and unravel, and turn into other ideas, and those ideas would transmute into useful ideas, out of which would be born a few brilliant ideas…and on it would go.

And the process itself would act as a catalyst for every person within listening range. His own imagination would rev up. He would discover his own future path.

Would that be a calamity? Would the sky fall? Would the world end?

Or would the dawn finally break?

exit from the matrix

It’s instructive to read what authors wrote about core values a hundred or two hundred years ago, because then you can appreciate what has happened to the culture of a nation. You can grasp the enormous influence of planned propaganda, which changes minds, builds new consensus, and exiles certain disruptive thinkers to the margins of society. You can see what has been painted over, with great intent, in order to promote tyranny that proclaims a greater good for all.

Here are several statements about the individual, written in 19th century America. The authors, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, and James Fenimore Cooper were prominent figures. Emerson, in his time, was the most famous.

“All greatness of character is dependent on individuality. The man who has no other existence than that which he partakes in common with all around him, will never have any other than an existence of mediocrity.” — James Fenimore Cooper

“The less government we have, the better, — the fewer laws, and the less confided power. The antidote to this abuse of [by] formal Government, is, the influence of private character, the growth of the Individual.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

“The former generations acted under the belief that a shining social prosperity was the beatitude of man, and sacrificed uniformly the citizen to the State. The modern mind believed that the nation existed for the individual, for the guardianship and education of every man. This idea, roughly written in revolutions and national movements, in the mind of the philosopher had far more precision; the individual is the world.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

“If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” — Henry David Thoreau

“They [conformists] think society wiser than their soul, and know not that one soul, and their soul, is wiser than the whole world…Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members….Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist…. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

Can you imagine, today, any of these statements gaining traction in the public mind, much less the mainstream media?

In the public mind? Yes, I can.

The world, as it is presented to us, is a shrunken mural in which the individual must carve down his energies, in order to fit in. If he reverses that process, he finds a new world that didn’t seem to be there before.

But now it is.

It most definitely is.

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.

28 comments on “The formula of war vs. a pandemic of freedom

  1. Sha'Tara says:

    Reblogged this on ~Burning Woman~ and commented:
    Yes indeed, what would happen if we all began to think, and reason, as free individuals, not as sheeple?

  2. Sha'Tara says:

    This is another smashing great post. Reblogged to my own page.

  3. Wow! Your thoughts and ideas are so awesome and powerful. I think a lot like you and will post your article on my home schooling blog as food for thought. I dream that just half of what you propose would come true. I would come back with my family to America and join the awakened crowd. Sign me up for those glorious days. But the banksters and the war machine need to trip over themselves first and I just can’t see that happening so I digress. But we do have great patriots like you to keep our Founders ideals alive no matter where expats like me live. I raise my boys with those thoughts and ideals always in mind. Thanks so much for making my day (AGAIN). I love your articles and would love to meet you one day. I never vote but I would certainly would vote for you. High five Jon!

  4. tomaz050959 says:

    Joy and happiness would abound throughout the world, Jon. A society built on control and scarcity would morph like a butterfly into a world based on freedom and abundance. I’m with you all the way, Jon. Let’s make it so.

  5. Reblogged this on John Barleycorn and commented:

  6. laurabruno says:

    Reblogged this on Laura Bruno's Blog and commented:
    Imho, Jon Rappoport’s best post ever:

  7. David says:

    I’m witnessing a movement towards individuality already. “Lead, Don’t Follow”, is a theme I’m seeing all over the media, and in people around me.

    But, for some reason, I tend to do the opposite of that. I tend to do the opposite of whatever people tell me to do.

    If someone is pressuring me to be a Leader, to be a Free Individual, it makes me want to be the opposite.

    Likewise, if someone were pressuring me to be a Dumbed-Down Robot Follower, it would make me want to be the opposite.

    Maybe some reverse psychology is in order?

    P.S. I LOVE the idea of having real debates in college, if that were true, I would be in college right now!

  8. From Québec says:

    The reason why JFK was killed is very simple. He was killed because he was a threat to the establishment. Just like Trump is. Most people now, are quite sure that Trump will also be killed, either before he becomes President or after.

    Wars are bad, I’ve never been for wars, except of course if you are attacked. If WW3 happens, you can rest assure that Putin will not have fired the first shot. The USA will have fired the first shot.

    “Dismantling this whole operation, by scaling back foreign military bases, withdrawing troops, and setting boundaries and no-go zones is anathema to war makers.”. (Jon)

    I agree with you. Bring them all home and reorganize the Military and make it so strong, that no other countries will dare to fight you. That’s Trump philosophy. And I agree with him, because the USA right now, is the most hated country in the world. And there are a lot of countries that has Nuclear weapons: Russia, China, United Kingdom. France. Pakistan. Israel, North Korea, India, South Africa and soon, probably Iran.

    Now, about “Urban farms.”.

    It’s a good idea, but, (because, there is a but), with all the chemicals falling from the daily Chemtrails on the soil, and the poisoning of waters: drinking water, lakes, rivers, oceans and rain and the winds spreading GMO’s and round up all over the fields, I doubt the food would be any better than it is right now, unless you use greenhouses to grow them.

    By the way, Russia could become the world’s largest supplier of ecologically clean and high-quality organic food, said President Vladimir Putin on Thursday. He also called on the country to become completely self-sufficient in food production by 2020.

    Putin should have been nominated the MAN of the year. He doesn’t put fluoride in the water, he bans all GMO’s from his country, refuses the Islamic so-called refugees, pays the citizens to have children, gave asylum to Edward Snowden, doesn’t believe in the Global warming hoax, and kick the asses of ISIS in Syria and told the whole world that the USA has created ISIS and the mess in Syria..

    Putin wants Russia to become world’s biggest exporter of Non-GMO food

    Now, as for your dream: “I know all this speculation sounds like dreaming impossible dream” (Jon)

    I don’t think it is impossible, I think it’s unlikely probable. And this is why:
    Just like you have to work the soil to grow a garden, take out the bad weeds, etc., you first have to clean up the whore house that is governing you. The almost complete Police state, will fine you on anything you will try to do or throw you in jail.

    The USA is 210 Trillion in debts

    On the verge of economic downfall, open borders, Islamist refugees staging home terror attacks, endless wars, that the USA now always loses, the war on free speech and the war on the second Amendment… you are in deep waters.

    Local governments all across the country are increasingly making headlines for shutting down lemonade stands and issuing fines to young children for not obtaining expensive peddler’s licenses or vender’s permits, or for allegedly violating local ordinances.

    Growing Your Own Food at Home is now illegal!
    A disturbing new trend is emerging where people who try and live a sustainable life by growing their own food and harvesting their own energy from the sun and water from rain are now being raided by swat teams and in some cases thrown in jail.

    Not much can be accomplished if you do not fix this mess first. This is why, the next election is so crucial, You get it right this time around or it’s game over. Forget the Renaissance, it will be too late, much too late.

    And for all the inspiring quotes from the brilliant minds written in the 19th century: Well, it looks like it fell on deaf ears, so imagine now with the dumbing down of society?

    I still believe in the individual’s imagination and creativity, but, let’s face it, the odds are not their side in this controlled reality we live in. Time is short, it is 5 minutes to midnight.

    I’m not being pessimistic here. But I know that wee cannot put the cart before the horse.

    • Eileen Kuch says:

      From Quebec, I agree with you completely in all but Iran. Just recently, Iran has poured cement into the reactor which would have been used for nuclear weapons production and sent its enriched uranium to Russia.
      JFK was assassinated for a number of reasons, which Jon has listed .. however, he left out JFK’s row with the late Israeli PM David Ben-Gurion over inspections of Israel’s nuclear facilities in the mix. This dispute happened a mere six weeks before JFK was assassinated. The 35th President had already suspected that Israel had stolen nuclear weapons technology and produced these weapons within the Dimona facilities .. thus, his demand for inspections. None of his successors have ever been so bold and courageous as he was.

    • @FQ

      You appear to be “comparing” Trump with JFK. You cannot seriously anticipate any congruity? That would be surely like saying a mask is representative of face. Perhaps puppets don’t need string pullers. As an Ozzie “bumpkin” I see JFK as an individual, whereas Trump is super-glued to the group as much as his antics deflect the glare. The only question is which version of manifest World War III does America want? “democratic” Clinton’s or “face of America” Trump’s? Do you strike Syria or Iran 1st?

      The “powers” have been spruiking this presidential assassination certainly from 2004 and perhaps prior. There’ll be some red faces in the corridors of order if someone doesn’t get “hit” soon! People have money on it for sheesh sake.

      • From Québec says:

        Ozzie, When I was younger, I was trying to become an artist painter. And I wanted to acquire the best painting skills I could get.. So, for almost two years, I’ve only painted portraits, I must have done a few hundred of them. Oh, I really did acquire incredible painting skills by doing this, but surprisingly, I got much more out of it. I acquired the skill to grasp the soul of the people just by looking at them.

        It’s now my biggest skill. The minute I see someone, I know immediately who that person is. I can describe anybody even by just looking at a picture of that person. It never failed me. My friends test me all the time on that skill, they come along with their pictures, and they are shocked at how accurate I am.

        I knew the minute I saw Obama, that he was a con artist and that he was bad, real bad. Same thing for your outher Presidents, I knew their souls. This skill never fails me. I was always right about your past Presidents, the minute I saw them.

        I can tell you, that Trump is for real, he’s genuine.. He really likes his country, he likes people, he has a good heart, he’s generous, has a lot of imagination and creativity. He his an individualist and has passion and can get things done. He’s a born leader. He can get along with almost anyone and knows the art of good deals. If sometimes he is wrong, he will admit it and change his mind. He has already done it twice. That is a great asset for a President. He is solid, very strong and fearless. But, do not screw with Trump, He will come back at you and win.

        – Cruz, is as slick as Obama, he can fool just about anyone. Not a man to be trusted,

        – Hillary has a very black soul, she is superficial, no morality, but you already knew that.

        – Rand Paul is genuine, but not strong enough. He is not presidential, he will not be able to fight the establishment He is not a natural born fighter, neither is he a leader, people tend to ignore him. He’s too nice and soft.

        – Rubio is arrogant and cruel, he wants power like a tyrant. He’s a warmonger and would be a disaster for the USA

        – Ben Carson surprisingly, is weak, he tries to hide it, but he is very fragile. He’s a real nice guy, but not fit to be a President. The establishment would easily walk all over him.

        -Bernie Sander is full of himself, he is very stubborn, he can not learn from anyone and will never agree that he is wrong.

        – Jeff Bush is a very insecure person. He tries to be tough and rude to hide it. He would be the perfect puppet for the establishment.

        • Simple questions, simple answers; but it will take you researching it and being completely honest and non-partial…if you believe DT is honest and truth and a comparative on JFK…
          How does Donald Trump makes his money?
          How much money does he actually have, and what is his relationship tp Big Banks.
          What is Donald Trumps Military experience?
          Does Donald in his business practices argree or diagree about the TPP?
          Is Donald Trump connected to any consortiums , Foundations, think tanks, social engineering groups?
          Does DT in his business practices use lobbyists, and has he ever been a recepient of government welfare, and/or government bailouts.?
          How many Americans have jobs in DT businesses, and are they paid fairly for those jobs?
          How many lawsuites have been filed against DT, and for what reasons?

        • @FQ

          Though he is too much of a “cartoon” for me (to buy), I respect how Trump has been true to form. I agree with you. He is a straight shooter and that pisses a lot of people off. Nevertheless, he has shown he can also be extremely cunning (slippery) and the presidency is not a “cheap game show” (as much as the public buffoonery suggests it).

          Thus honesty, transparency and sharp shootin’ for the people won’t wash in this game. However “real” he is it will not work. I get your “assassination” call. Stupid, Trump ain’t….

          Thanks for the comment tho’…I get your picture better now 🙂

  9. Jon, I feel Vietnam was the “capper” for JFK because it ties in with so much.

    In fact Vietnam prompted the first Western awakening. There was sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll in a giant ashram called the “hippie movement” which coincided with the consumerism obliteration of the gold standard and lack of faith in “war” (heavily promoted by John Lennon. His assassination was the “turning point”).

    As for ET, well that’s when a genetic shift (of humans) moving from dark (emotional) to light (logical). It’s all in my book but, hell, “normal” people wouldn’t understand information like that.

    That’s partially why Emerson, Blake, Pope, Milton’s gargantuan writings are (comparatively) rarely read, lest understood. People seem to like “fudge”.

    Perhaps FQ is right; perhaps people can be “made” to think if it’s put in a “cartoon scene”. Is that why the ancients constantly reinforced proverbs? Because they knew the masses were mindless and would “believe” anything that was packaged in a way that could either be accepted or not but never debated.

    “Bad luck if a black cat crosses your path”. How can that proved or disproved?


  10. gokmen says:

    I don’t know why you forgot, Jon, some people still think this was the only reason for him got killed in public: JFK was also against Israel’s nuclear programme in the Middle East. Israel was the first to break middle eastern nuclear peace with their Dimona nuclear enrichment-research center disguised as “power plant”..thanks to Mordechai Vanunu, an individual, who jailed by the Israeli govenment we know it.

  11. Sotir Ilievski says:

    Well Jon, look how far the dinosaurs in the room have pushed you, to the fringes of society, all the way to South America. It is hard to survive as a small animal when you have these beasts roaming around. Supposedly it took a very big chunk to knock them off their perch. I don’t know if a big chunk is headed their way today, but we little people must fight to reclaim the space from which these brutes have banished us. They keep creating the world in their image, so we can’t reform it through politics, or any other of their ticks, we must start recreating society in our image anew. Now is a good time to start. Thanks for the insights.

  12. Mobus Wambly says:

    “Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don’t want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” – Hermann Goering

  13. Kool-Aid for True Believers Only says:

    Ewww you non-conformist! Groupthink hivemind is the only way forward.
    The glorious rebuilt Babel People’s Collective will be the precious equalocracy where the same results for all will be mandatory.
    How dare you spew this nutopian thoughtcrime crap. I’m getting on google and looking for the proper agency to report you to…after I update my fakebook page and gaze at my navel while reporting what I had for dinner last night on twitter.

  14. By TheMillennianReport

    John F. Kennedy Set The Bar Very High

    There are only TWO directions that The Donald can take toward a successful GOP nomination. Before those directions are delineated, it’s very important to first understand the following conditions and qualifications that every president after John F. Kennedy was forced to meet and comply with–without exception.

    First, that every serious candidate, from both of the main political parties, are compelled to sign a contract not to prosecute the war criminal U.S. presidents who have served before them. This stipulation is both non-negotiable and binding throughout their term, should they be elected. Every U.S. President is actually recruited for their ability to sell American warmongering the world over. This type of salesmanship is, BY FAR, the single most important trait that a presidential nominee can possess.

    • From Québec says:

      @ Doreen:

      OUCH and WOW!
      This powerful information must be known to all citizens,

      Bring this article back again on the next Jon’s article on Donald Trump, so everyone sees it.

      But, you know what? I think Donald Trump will beat them, because he has the people on his side. He has also the most powerful whisleblowers behind him. If there is a person who can do this, it’s Trump. He already blew the whistle on many of them. I think he will go all the way and the Military will back him up. Putin will also back him and the most powerful great American minds will help him.

      Let’s hope that I’m right.

  15. The U.S. Electorate Has Been Tricked Into Voting For Criminally Insane Psychopaths

    By voting for any particular representative, a voter confers their ‘consent’ upon the elected official to act in their name, with their tax dollars, and with their support. By backing them, the voter becomes responsible — to varying degrees — for the improper and/or offensive actions of the elected leaders as they discharge their official duties.

    • Wow finally some fresh air, thank-you!
      They are all incapable of being what they purport. It seems though, that the hard sell is getting more and more irritable each new election.
      Their desperation to become POTUS lowers them to even more profound sub-levels of chicanery.
      The latest election debates and finagling for position numbero uno, seems reminescent of the end days of ancient Rome.
      I dare say, I don’t think we are far away from a political poisoning or an assassination as a means to illiminate an opponent from the race.

    • @DA

      +1 BM’ed both links for reference

    • Sha'Tara says:

      Rarely do I find anyone in these airy-fairy democracies who seems to agree with my choice, lo those many years ago, to forego voting. If we took our “democratic” responsibilities seriously, I wonder if these CIP’s (criminally insane psychopaths) would still get elected? Here’s a thought: without resorting to mandatory (forced) voting, how about a required minimum 80% turnout to validate any election. Anything under 80% turnout invalidates the election and all the names on the ballot are also invalidated. No running twice in the same election. How about adding, to the ballot: “None of the above” and then “As an alternative, I vote for myself” these votes being legal and the counts made public even if the election is invalidated. If “elections” are as important as touted, then it’s about time they be taken seriously by all. The way to do that is to change the approach to representation and balloting. Too complicated? What’s all that fancy computerized technology for, then?

      • Sha'Tara says:

        Forgot to add: anyone in the “vote for myself” category becomes automatically eligible to run in the next trial race. Off the cuff, but fun thinking about. I would go for the “None of the above” myself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *