Author Archives: Jon Rappoport

Chemical warfare against the nation right under our noses

Chemical warfare against the nation right under our noses

by Jon Rappoport

April 2, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Thirty years ago, Nancy Reagan launched her version of the war on drugs: “just say no.”

She campaigned on that slogan all over America.

She was lampooned as an idiot.

Now, some researchers estimate that 60% of the Mexican economy would crash if the drug business disappeared there. We have US street gangs operating as retailers for Mexican cartels. We have Mexican cartel soldiers living in suburban homes outside American cities, guarding rooms piled to the ceiling with cash.

US banks are laundering drug money. In Mexico, battling cartels have murdered 50,000 people over the past several years.

We have scores of serious reports from former DEA agents about the collusion of US federal agencies in the drug trade.

Right now, in Chicago, US attorneys are winning delay after delay in the trafficking trial of Jesus Niebla, a Sinaloa cartel lieutenant who was busted in 2009. The issue? Niebla’s lawyers claim the US government granted Sinaloa immunity from prosecution, in return for intell on rival cartels. The government doesn’t want possible evidence of this claim to see the light of day.

The war on drugs was lost a long time ago.

How many lives do you think have been destroyed, how many marriages ruined, how much violence committed, on the basis of booze since 1933, when Prohibition was lifted?

Legalize drugs, don’t legalize them, people find them and buy them and ingest them. They develop physical illnesses. They deteriorate.

The number of lives destroyed by drugs, and the peripheral ripples, continue to increase.

We’re left with: just say yes or just say no. And it isn’t some Sinaloa chief who says it. It’s the user, the person who swallows it or snorts it or shoots it. It always was.

For those people who love citing poverty, abuse, lack of education as the social causes of drug use, the answer is a program to lift up the poor. But despite billions of dollars in aid, over decades, such a program, in the hands of the government, hasn’t shown results. The actual intent to foster dependence on government is the covert purpose of this op.

It may be insensitive and cruel to suggest that the poor have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and revolutionize their own communities, but it is another hard fact of life. The government isn’t going to do it. All previous attempts have ended in disaster. The condition of the poor in this country is worse than it was 30 years ago.

So even at that level of society, “just say no” applies. People who are better off may find this intolerable. They may say we can’t consign the poor to making their own hard decisions. They may say it’s inhuman. They may say Bill Gates can save Detroit with computers in every classroom. They may say anything. But what they’re saying isn’t making any difference.

I fully realize that making no difference doesn’t deter these caring individuals from their idealism. They wear it as a badge of honor, and they don’t give a damn what the results show.

The federal government is fully aware, for example, that drug gangs in inner cities are causing enormous destruction. But are these gangs the targets of any successful program of deterrence or elimination?

On a larger scale, is Mexico going to destroy its drug business? The answer in both cases is no.

People speak of high-level corruption. Of course it exists. Governments and banks profit from drugs. In many ways. You could say banks are leaders in the drug business. You could say they ultimately run it.

But what does that do for the addict, for the chronic user?

The person at the end of the supply line, the user, says yes or no. If you think there is no wisdom in that, you’re surrendering far more than lives destroyed by drugs. You’re advocating the destruction of lives in which the freedom to choose is eliminated by a social construct that, in one way or another, denies such freedom exists.

It’s a hell of a lot harder to affirm freedom in Iraq than it is in Scarsdale or Beverly Hills. But that doesn’t mean we should have invaded Iraq and mangled millions of lives. If we really wanted freedom to exist there, we would have left those people to their own devices. Why? Because you can’t deliver freedom like a steak on a plate to someone else.

They have to take it. And sometimes that means risking life and limb.

My best friend, when I was 20, killed himself on drugs. He could have chosen a different road. He didn’t. It was expected, by his wife and friends, that he would kill himself. Naturally, they wanted him to get healthy and strong instead, but he went another way. They were there to help him, but he didn’t take the help. So they knew he would do himself in.

He was smart enough to know he had a choice. He chose. On some level, everyone is that smart. To keep saying, over and over and over and over, that people can’t choose to stop taking drugs, is a fatal position.

Yes, families help, and yes, friends can help, and yes, there are groups that can help. But the user is the one who decides.

You have to ask yourself this: what culture is better and stronger and safer? The one that regards freedom and choice as primary values, or the one that claims these qualities don’t really exist at all?

So now we come to pharmaceutical drugs, which in the US kill, at minimum, 106,000 people a year. (See Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”)

The CDC has just reported that a staggering 6.4 million American children under the age of 17 have been diagnosed with ADHD. This figure includes one out of five boys of high school age. Every one of these children has, of course, been prescribed Ritalin or Adderall.

This corporate-government juggernaut wants more control than it has now. By legislation, by edict, by regulation, people will no longer be able to refuse medication—that’s its goal. Under Obamacare, the ability to achieve this objective improves.

Patients can be intimidated. They can be told they must obey their doctors if they want to stay in the program. They can be exiled if they’re labeled “resistant” or “non-compliant.”

But as with street drugs, the onus would fall on the user, and he would make the choice. Say yes or no to a drug. Regardless of consequences, the choice is there.

Freedom and choice. This society is moving away from these values like an express train. The ticket to ride is “victim status.” You buy that, you’re on the train.

You keep telling people who live hard lives they have no choice, they’re suffering from social injustice and diseases of addiction, and so forth, and you draw in believers. Whether you’re right or wrong in your assessments of other people’s problems, if you deny choice and freedom, you’re helping to kill hope at the deepest level.

You may like what you’re hearing yourself say, you may believe you’re on the side of the angels, you may feel better, you may be able to argue your position cogently, but you’re in the killing fields with a scythe.

The pundits on television with their careful hair and their bland smiles and their earnest expressions are waving scythes, when they cite all the social and economic reasons people can’t rise up on their own. These social critics are trying to create a culture in which only the powerful criminals survive. They may as well be peddling crack on a street corner.

“We just want to help the less fortunate,” delivered with a goonish thrust, is the same lie it always was. It’s superiority in sheep’s clothing.

The drug dealer sees through that in a second. Put him on television and let him speak uncensored, and very soon you’ll notice a real and inconvenient truth swim to the surface: people make choices.

The dealer knows that. His job is to make those choices as hard as possible. He works that angle all day and all night. If he bothers to listen to the pundits, he celebrates their lies. They’re helping him do business. They’re peddling the psychological equivalent of physical addiction.

Addiction to the idea that there really is no freedom:

“Nobody can say no and nobody can say yes. It’s all up to the machinery turning in the brain. It’s all social and economic. It’s all predetermined.” That’s the big infomercial and the big sales campaign and the big lie.

It’s taken root. The roots are so deep even middle-class kids are trying to figure out how they can qualify as victims with a disability. ADHD is right up there on their list.

The street drug dealer and the doctor are basically operating on the same premise. Use every available strategy to cut off the possibility of choice by the user.

The Matrix Revealed

But the eternal fact about freedom is anybody can choose it at any time. No permission required.

If the government really wanted to start solving the problems (including drugs) of inner cities in America, you would see a completely different approach. It would be based on encouraging at least some degree of freedom and strength—which runs counter to government’s aims. Instead of the interminable agency and task force bullshit which is par for the course in poverty programs, you would see, for a millionth of the $$ now being doled out, people participating in building their own homes, growing their own food in vast urban farms, making their own clothes.

But instead, you see funding, funding, funding, drugs, drugs, and drugs, more and more poverty.

You hear generality after generality after generality, about “the moral imperative to help the downtrodden,” dissolve into nothing. No progress, no betterment, only destruction.

It’s a straight con.

Freedom, power, and choice are the only way out.

Take a bombed-out destitute city like Detroit. To the precise degree the residents of Detroit have bought the idea that help and liberation are on the way and they have no power of choice over their own future, they’re paralyzed and doomed. That’s the plain fact. You can try to weasel your way around it and make excuses and say you’re for “a humane answer” and “there is a moral obligation,” but that rides on the wind like dust.

If tomorrow, the people of Detroit said ENOUGH and came out of their homes on to the dangerous streets, whose drug-thugs are keeping them hostage and guaranteeing their long slide into sickness and death; if the people of Detroit took over large swathes of land and started growing food, because food is survival, and if those who had guns stood guard over that land around the clock and protected it as their last refuge against decimation, they could begin to reverse the tide. That is a choice called freedom. It’s a choice called power.

I once interviewed a crack dealer who told me, “I live on that government bullshit.” He was saying the promises and the humanitarian clap-trap and the sentimental musings and oozings were the staple that kept the poor in check, in the middle of nowhere, in a squeeze play. Ripe for drugs.

He was saying the government wants people to be addicted to drugs.

And this is true, all the way from crack to Prozac.

So if the government of the United States hadn’t made a deal to keep Sinaloa, the largest drug cartel in Mexico, out of prison, that would truly be a shock. The Sinaloa is a key element of US government domestic policy.

So is Big Pharma. They are the two pillars of the real structure of government.

This is why, for instance, you can read studies about levels of depression among residents of inner cities. Calling depression in those areas a brain chemical imbalance is like saying a pilot in a plane that’s just dropped a flaming engine into the sea is suffering from Panic Disorder.

The latest “humanitarian” program in these blighted neighborhoods is giving kids Ritalin without even bothering to diagnose ADHD, in order to “level the playing field.” Despite studies that show ADHD drugs do no good and are highly toxic, psychiatrists are feeding these kids cheap speed to “help them in school.”

Street drugs aren’t enough. Pharmaceutical psychotropics have to be introduced.

The best definition of depression is: a person won’t fight his way out of feeling depressed. That also is considered a cruel assessment. Maybe it is, but it’s accurate. It’s accurate in Beverly Hills and the south side of Chicago and the slums of Bombay. It’s accurate in the American midwest where farms have been hit by long droughts and in parts of Ethiopia.

People change their circumstances by choosing to take action and then taking it. Nothing can alter that formula.

Yes, help can arrive, and help can help, but whether it does or doesn’t, people have to pull themselves up. They can do it, or they can refuse to do it. If they refuse, they pay the price.

Relying on government for a solution is dangerous. Waiting for idealists to change government’s mind about helping is very dangerous.

Just ask people in parts of Africa where, like gifts from heaven, doctors arrive with drugs and vaccines. The vaccines push already compromised immune systems over the edge into failure, and the drugs, many of them past expiration date, spoiled from lack of refrigeration, and toxic to begin with, kill and maim.

It’s chemical warfare. It’s chemical warfare on the streets with drugs sold by cartels, and it’s warfare from Big Pharma. The promise is always Relief, but the tightening spiral takes people down into destruction.

Governments are basically selling less freedom and more drugs as an answer, and they’re packaging it as We Care.

For people who really want to lift the poor, here is a piece of advice. Ask yourself, what would really help people become freer, stronger, and more self-reliant? Find answers that actually fit that bill, and then put those answers into action. Don’t wait. Forget the government. Organize on your own, and launch.

Freer, stronger, more self-reliant. Able to choose. Able to say yes or no. Those are qualities that represent a platform from which a life can be lived.

Anytime you see a program based on “we’re going to give you what you need, and then we’re going to do that again and again and again and again,” know you’re looking at an op designed to torpedo the core of what a human being is.

Turn your telescope around. You’ve been looking through the wrong end.

Try reading a history of drug companies like Hoffman La Roche, Sandoz, and Boehringer. Starting in the early years of the 20th century, they shipped large quantities of heroin and cocaine to the Far East. When necessary, they used falsified records, shell companies, and foreign staging areas to circumvent confiscation and arrest.

Little has changed since the British Opium Wars against China. These days, the PR is much better. So are government connections and support. The main players have better teeth and smile often. It’s still More Drugs, More Human Destruction, More Profits, Less Freedom.

Here’s another factor to contemplate. For corporations listed on The New York Stock Exchange and the NASDAQ: if the extent to which these companies relied on laundered street-drug cash were known, trading markets across the world would crash in 24 hours.

That tells you two things. Governments aren’t going to fight a real war on drugs, no matter what. And the end user of those drugs, the person who snorts and shoots and swallows them, is funding those corporations and holding up the global trading markets, on his back, as he goes down the tunnel to oblivion, to be replaced by a fresh customer.

So if you think that, somehow, help is on the way to users, rich or poor, and the choice to take or not take drugs is in the hands of people other than the users, think again. And again.

Bill Hicks, one of the truly great comedians of our time, used to say:

“Here’s what we can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money we spend on weapons and defense each year and instead spend it feeding and clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace.”

Yes, we could. And we could repeat what Bill said many times, and still the “we,” which turns out to be the government/corporate nexus, would have no intention of producing Christmas on Earth.

That’s why the burden falls on the end user. The end user of drugs, the end user of intelligence, of hope, of desire, of courage, of whatever he uses and decides to use.

The true cruelty is omitting that factor from the equation, omitting it in what we teach ourselves and those we profess to care about.

Exit From the Matrix

Sometimes freedom and choice are easy. Sometimes they’re very hard. But no matter who you are, no matter what your circumstances, no matter where you live, you always choose. You can default that natural right and fact, in which case that was your decision.

Whether we’re talking about street drugs or pharmaceuticals, whether we’re talking about people who live in Beverly Hills or South Central LA, whether we’re talking about Fair or Unfair, the building block is freedom. The individual chooses.

The most basic psyop of our time is the denial of the existence of freedom. And in many ways, life seems to cooperate with that psyop. It seems to say, as it always has, since the beginning of time: you have no freedom, you have no choice, you must give in.

That is the grand illusion.

People say, “That’s not right. Many people simply don’t have the means to make choices. They’re at the bottom of the ladder. They can only climb it with outside help, lots of it.”

I point out, again, that this notion, no matter how well-intentioned, can’t ever replace the individual’s courage to take his freedom in his own hands.

I began this article to expose the obvious but overlooked fact that the population is a target of chemical warfare from drugs. And yes, I know there are still other chemicals involved. Fluorides, chemtrail heavy metals, pesticides. But I wanted to go for the most basic thing. I ended up at freedom, because our society is leaving it behind.

And the stark truth is, when for any reason under the sun, a person denies or gives up his own freedom to choose, he is doomed. He is waiting for the war to end, and it won’t. The quality of help he might or might not receive is always in doubt.

There are thousands and thousands of talk-show hosts and pundits and reporters and academics who, armed with “superior understanding,” are ready to take up the cudgel and beat down any attempt to say people must use their freedom to escape their problems and dire circumstances.

These professional liars earn their bread by making it seem obvious that people can’t be free, they can only function through massive outside help.

Yes, and that help, of course, would come from the precise people and agencies and companies that are waging the all-out chemical war against the populace.

Makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

A totalitarian closed circle always does, until you have to live inside it.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

How “kill the pigs” became “only the police should have guns”

How “kill the pigs” became “only the police should have guns”

by Jon Rappoport

March 30, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

In the fabled 1960s, the cops were called pigs, and anybody on the political Left who wanted a ticket to the show knew that and mouthed it often.

At rallies, protests, and riots, people said: are the pigs here yet? I heard they were three blocks away. Wonder how many pigs they’re sending today? There! There they are! The pigs!

Now, on the Left, that tradition has morphed into: repeal the 2nd Amendment; turn in your guns; citizens with guns are satanic; the police will protect us; a private citizen with a gun is a killer and needs psychiatric lockdown; suspend that five-year old with the gun screen-saver.

What happened?

In 1968, if you asked a leftie college student whether a black man living in the inner city had a right to own a gun to protect himself against the cops, the answer, ten out of ten times, would have been yes.

Now, that leftie kid will be talking about the insanity of anybody owning a gun. Except for the cops.

Well, three things have happened since the 1960s. The end of the military draft, and the end of anybody caring who smokes pot or who has sex with who. Those changes melted away the whole “movement.”

A professor friend taught at UCLA during the turbulent 60s and early 70s. He told me as soon as the Vietnam war was over, the campus transformed in a flash. Students were suddenly all about finding a niche in the job market after graduation. Boom. Switch on, switch off.

The titanic idealism was put away in a drawer and filed under “crazy shit I did.”

The one remaining piece from the 60s that has endured is hatred of big corporations. But gradually, a parallel mindset has developed. First, grudging acceptance of big government; then toleration; then admiration.

Now, the Left is all about big government and the “positive changes” it can make.

And when I say the Left, I also mean the center, and a great deal of the right, because they’ve come along for the ride, too. They are the Left now.

In 1968, a big-time liberal presidential candidate, Hubert Humphrey, was the target of riots, by the Left, at the Democratic National Convention. Those riots tore apart half the city. Two years earlier, a march, by the Left, on the Century Plaza Hotel in LA, where Democratic President Lyndon Johnson was staying, sealed his fate. It was the last stone. Johnson, who had presided over the war on poverty and the creation of “The Great Society,” the biggest federal program since FDR’s New Deal, was mangled into oblivion.

Johnson announced he wouldn’t run for office again in 1968.

If Pelosi, Reid, Frank, and Obama had been around then, they would have been hammered in the same way by the Left. If they were for the war in Vietnam.

That was the big key, the war. Or to be precise, the military draft.

“Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?!”

Meaning: “I won’t risk my neck going to Nam!”

The elite Left has become the personification of the soccer mom now. Worries about everything. Danger everywhere. Needs more helmets. Schedules more play dates. Wants more state surveillance. “If you’re against intrusion on your privacy, maybe you have something to hide.” “Keep the poor bottled up in inner cities, give them anything they want, just don’t let them into my neighborhood.”

The Left has also become the promise of a vague fairyland new age. “We’re all in this together.” “We can raise up the lowest among us (by printing more money).”

And the police are part of that fantasy. They’re the centurions at the gate. “Arm them to the teeth.” “Render the rest of us powerless.” That’s the grand solution to all our social ills. Naked, hairless, unarmed, watched around the clock, we’ll be beautifully safe, under the machine of a national police force.

You think I’m attacking a straw man here? You think I’m devising a distorted picture of the collectivist Left and their allies? You think there’s some still-powerful rebellion, on the political Left, against the State, that can put a million people on the street to protest a specific fascist program of that big power? Where is it?

What was it, really, even in 1968? If the Vietnam war had been fought with no draft, with a volunteer army, a large part of the 1960s wouldn’t have happened at all.

As the 1970s droned on into the 80s, a rapprochement was achieved between the citizens and the police. More and more, the Left came to believe the whole idea of rebellion against the State was an old delusion. It was something people like Camus and Sartre had written about. It was really a European thing, an abstract philosophical pose.

Once the dust and the smelly underwear of the 1960s had been cleared away, the real State Op came into being. Encourage, in every way possible, crime and criminals; and then come in behind that with an answer to the horrific threat: cops.

Irresistible. On the streets, in the newspapers, on television, enact crime after crime after crime…and then promote the only answer: cops. More cops. More cops with bigger and better weapons.

Disarm everybody and leave the police and the FBI and the military and numerous other government agencies with the only guns.

Does this excuse the actual perpetrators of street crimes? No, of course not. In fact, it makes them more guilty, because they’re aiding and abetting a much larger plan. I’m not here to excuse a man who picks up a gun and shoots somebody. I’m spelling out context:

Seed the whole country with violence-inducing toxic psychiatric drugs and you will get plenty of crime. Which is exactly what has happened. All the way from Ritalin (cheep speed) to the SSRI antidepressants, to the brain-hammer anti-psychotics, the drug companies and their allied psychiatrists have been creating killings.

Allow American street gangs to work for Mexican and Colombian drug cartels, while providing those cartels with US government protection as they sell tons of heroin and cocaine and crack all over the country, and you will get plenty of crime.

Pour billions of dollars into “rehabilitating” inner cities and stand by while the money disappears and is stolen, dedicate funds to programs that have no chance of working, stop genuine grass roots movements to build vast urban farms and provide free food and a sense of community, and you will get plenty of crime.

These and other strategies are the actions of a war to expand crime, to necessitate massive intervention by the State. This is an Op.

Our current leader, after similar mouthpieces like Bush and Clinton, is the one man who couldn’t possibly be on board with the Op. Barack Obama. He couldn’t possibly be doing his part to destabilize the whole society. He couldn’t. Which is exactly why he is the president of the United States now. Because he seems to stand for something better. But he doesn’t. He is definitely part of the Op.

But if he really did stand for something better, he could do several things, by executive order, that would detonate a real revolution in this country. Three crazy wild out-of-left field things, just for starters.

Declare and wage an all-out war on drug cartels and their sub-contracted domestic gangs.

Kick off a huge—and I mean huge—genuine urban farming program in every city in America. Free, clean, non-GMO food for the poor, grown by the poor, shared by the poor. The ramifications of such a program, carried out swiftly, would be astonishing on every level.

And attack, with a vengeance, Big Pharma and their psychiatric drugs.

What???

Huh???

The baffled response to such a program illustrates just how deep the brainwashing in this country goes.

And some people would say, “If Obama stood up and did those things, he’d be killed tomorrow.”

That’s getting us closer to the truth. But it would be senseless to stand up alone. He would need allies. Lots of them. Where would he find them? (Assuming he would launch this three-pronged program…a ludicrous assumption.)

Would he meet with Pelosi, Frank, Reid, Hillary, Boehner, Paul Ryan, Rubio, Rachel Maddow, Rush Limbaugh….

Where in the familiar circles of power would any president find allies to turn things around?

Nowhere.

And that’s exactly why rebellion against the State isn’t just some old crusty abstract idea.

That’s why decentralization of power in America, at all levels, is THE counter-agenda. Intentional communities, nullification of unconstitutional federal laws, boycotts against corporations like Monsanto, alternative news sources, growing your own food, local parents threatening school boards to back off forcing psychiatric drugs down the throats of their children, home schooling, etc., etc.

Rendering every citizen weaponless, while at the same time giving the police every possible weapon and surveillance tool, is a solution in the same way that closing your eyes and jumping into a big barrel and pulling down the lid over your head is a solution.

300 million barrels with TV sets and smart phones is exactly what the State Corporatists are pushing.

The political Left promoted rebellion against the State as long as they saw themselves outside in the cold. But when they began to realize that they were, in fact, becoming the State, with all the power of the federal government, they dropped the idea of genuine rebellion like a hot potato. They praised big government, they assured everybody it was the solution, not the problem.

They shed bottom-up revolution because they were top-down.

There are lots of old Lefties who have been working to stop GMOs. When Obama signed the Monsanto Protection Act the other day, they paused and pondered. They began to realize they’ve been caught in a squeeze play. Their man, the president, isn’t who they thought he was. Not at all.

This disaffection is a familiar theme: outsiders feel solidarity in their revolution; then their leaders become insiders; then the ideals vanish, leaving the foot soldiers in the lurch.

The Matrix Revealed

Exit From the Matrix

Down through history, this scenario has played out countless times, in every conceivable organization that became big, bigger, and biggest. But history isn’t our strong suit. If a teacher really wanted to educate his college students, he’d put together a course on this very subject: The Carrot and the Stick.

The promise of something better, announced from a perch or pulpit of leadership; and what eventually happened to that promise.

What happens is a grand reversal. The very force that is being fought against eventually becomes the “guardian of the Good” and the supreme ruler.

The cadre who once railed against the rise of the police state is now dealing, not pot, but the surveillance of every phone call, email, text, computer keystroke, and purchase in this country. They’re dealing the TSA and the war in Afghanistan. They’re dealing covert ops in the Middle East and executing regime change, using thugs and terrorists. They’re bailing out mega-corporations and banks. They’re buying billions of rounds of ammo. They’re appointing people to hold the door open for Monsanto. They’re using psychiatry to drug the population. They’re spraying heavy metals in the sky. They’re presiding over and sustaining the economic disaster. They’re funding the transhuman future.

They’re doing all this while continuing to mouth the ideals they once swore to uphold.

In the words of the 1960s, they’re working for the Man.

The Man is the group of elite Globalists who have always followed the same plan: put the management of the planet under one roof.

To accomplish this Globalist aim, every honest cop and effective cop and idealistic cop and indifferent cop and corrupt cop will have to be turned into a faceless pig with a weapon pointed against his own people.

These “former rebels” who now rule the roost are saying, “Today, the pigs work for us. We tell them what to do. Just love the pigs and everything will be okay. You don’t need to own a gun. It’s all good. Just keep your eyes straight ahead and march into the future.”

Who would have thought rebels of bygone days would be staging their own version of neocon glory?

Anyone with a grain of sense.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

The launch of my new collection, Exit From the Matrix

The launch of my new collection, Exit From the Matrix

by Jon Rappoport

March 28, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

If you haven’t already read it, you can find the complete description of Exit From the Matrix in my store at nomorefakenews.com.

Readers who’ve been with me for a while know I’ve written a great deal about imagination. This new collection puts together more than 50 exercises and techniques for expanding the scope, range, and power of imagination.

Why? Because it is the quality that outdoes reality. Any kind of reality. Imagination is the infinite road.

It turns out that consciousness wants to create new consciousness, and it can. Imagination is how it does it. If there were some ultimate state of consciousness, imagination would always be able to play another card and take it further.

In any arena of life, and especially when it comes to mind, perception, power, empathy, and so on, there is always a status quo. It’s the place where a person says, “Well, that’s enough. I’ll settle for what I have. I’ll stop here.”

Sooner or later, this leads to boredom, frustration, problems, and conflict. It leads to a decline.

Here are some quotes about imagination I wrote a couple of years ago. They impart the flavor and the sense and great adventure I’m pointing to. What remains are ways of using imagination, and living through and by it and expanding its power and building your own worlds without limit.

Exit From the Matrix

That’s what Exit From the Matrix is all about:

Imagination, which knows no bounds, is the fountainhead for the most adventurous explorations. It can have great impact on the material world, of course, but one mustn’t therefore conclude it is composed of matter or energy. Imagination is non-material. To think otherwise can wind you up in using some version of physics to depict imagination—and then you are imposing limits on it. This is an error. Imagination doesn’t obey any laws of physics.

Sooner or later, you will come across people who try to assert that every power is “inherent in the universe.” They will describe such power. They will keep on doing this until they realize that nothing they have discovered begins to explain consciousness or imagination.

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, we’ve flattered reality enough. It doesn’t need any more.

Imagination can be used to invent a better shade of nail polish or a universe. In a society devoted to nail polish, imagination is not to blame.

You make me a painting of something that never was. I make you a painting of something that never was. The beginning of a true friendship.

To launch, all you need is the imagining of imagination.

You can create the same thing over and over, and eventually you’ll be about as alive as a table. Inject imagination into the mix, and everything suddenly changes. You can steer that boat anywhere you want to. You can steer it into nothing and build worlds.

The lowest common denominator of consensus implies an absence of imagination. Everyone agrees; everyone is bored; everyone is obedient. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there are massive floods of unique individual creation, and then that sought-after thing called abundance is as natural as the sun rising in the morning.

Sitting around in a cosmic bus station waiting for reality is what reality is. Everything else is imagination.

There are those who believe life is a museum. You walk through the rooms, find one painting, stroll into it and take up permanent residence. But the museum is endless. If you were a painter, you’d never decide to live inside one of your canvases forever. You’d keep on painting.

Traveling to places one has never seen is far different from creating something that never existed before.

The relentless and obsessive search for all those things on which we can agree is a confession of bankruptcy.

We re-learn to live through and by imagination, and then we enter and invent new space and time. But space and time aren’t superior forces. They come into being at the tap of imagination.

With imagination, one can solve a problem. More importantly, one can skip ahead of the problem and render it null and void.

You can enter imagination as an infinitely fluid medium, or you can give it sharp lines and edges. You can balance left and right, or you can tilt it eighty degrees to the right. You can do anything you want to. You can put a million pink quarks into a bowl or turn the bowl upside down in the sky. It’s Tuesday or it’s Thursday. It’s raining. The sun is out. It helps considerably to have a medium by which to express all this.

When you tap imagination on the head, everything changes in a split second. There is no compelling reason to complain after that.

There are a billion murals on a billion walls, and the person chooses one and falls down before it and devotes himself to it. He spends a thousand years trying to decipher it. So be it. Eventually, he’ll wind his way out of the labyrinth, because where else can he go? Then he’ll enter another labyrinth and undergo the same process. He’ll do this on and on and on, and finally he’ll get the notion that he can imagine his own labyrinth. So he does. He invents many labyrinths. The one day, it’ll occur to him that he can imagine whatever he wants to. It doesn’t have to be labyrinth.

Imagination isn’t a system. It might invent systems, but it is non-material. It’s a capacity. It feels no compulsion to imitate reality. It makes realities. Its scope is limited only by a person’s imagining of how far imagination can go.

The human race is obsessed by the question: what exists? It appears to be a far easier question than: what do you want to imagine? This comparison explains why civilizations decline.

Imagination is a path. Walking on that path long enough, you find answers to all the questions you’ve ever asked. You also find power that people dream of.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Top 10 excuses for Obama signing the Monsanto Protection Act

Top 10 excuses for Obama signing the Monsanto Protection Act

by Jon Rappoport

March 28, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Yes, he signed HR 993. It was a bill funding the federal government. There was a rider in it. A Monsanto and biotech rider.

The gist of the rider is: a dangerous ghoulish GMO food crop can’t be stopped by a court order. That crop can still be grown, harvested, and sold in the US.

Isn’t that wonderful? Isn’t it grand?

250,000 people signed an emergency letter to Obama, telling him to send HR 993 back to Congress so the rider could be removed. He didn’t.

Of course, there must be some mistake here, because we all know Obama is the radiant messiah. Right? He’s constantly assuring us “we’re all in this together.”

He would never allow such a rider to pass through his hands and become law, because GMO food IS, in fact, dangerous to human health and is part of an overall plan to put the planet’s food supply into the hands of Monsanto.

Therefore, Obama has excuses. He surely does.

I propose the following ten. You can take your pick and thereby sustain your belief in his mission of bringing peace and love to the world. He’s not just another arch conman who scuttled into the White House. Of course not.

He would never support Monsanto in its drive to patent life forms, own the food supply, drench the world in more pesticides, engineer RNA so it silences and activates genes in the body in random fashion, leading to incalculable consequences for the human race.

He would never come down on the wrong side of the issue that could supersede all others in shaping the future of the human race.

So pick your favorite excuse:

Obama didn’t know what he was signing. He was too busy with other matters. He was on vacation. He was checking his brackets on March Madness. He thought that letter of protest, signed by 250,000 people, was about some new TV show called Monsanto Rider, a Western.

He’ll tell us that, just like the NDAA, which allows him to unilaterally assassinate Americans, this Monsanto rider will never be enforced. It’s just for show. It’s, well, an IDEA, not really a law. It doesn’t set a precedent destroying the power of the judicial system. No. We’re getting our knickers in a twist over nothing. Relax.

He and Michelle are secretly planning, along with Chief Chef Bloomberg, an organic food revolution in America that will sweep aside all resistance.

Obama has inside information we aren’t privy to. It exonerates Monsanto. Astonishingly, Monsanto turns out to be an agent of hope and change.

Obama is Obama. Because his character is basically other-worldly (in a good sense), he would never do harm. Therefore, a priori, the Monsanto rider is all right. We need not worry. Be happy.

All great prophets must undergo tests and survive crises. This is one of those tests. Sooner or later, Obama will reverse course and expose Monsanto for the diabolical son of Satan it is. Just wait. Be patient.

Obama knows full well how hideous Monsanto is on the world scene, how it is gobbling up seed companies and destroying farmers and putting Frankensteinian genetic distortions into our very bodies. He’s just giving Monsanto enough rope to hang itself. He’s allowing Monsanto to operate freely so it can reveal, to humanity, its Grinning Skull—and thence be overthrown by popular revolution. Again, wait. Be patient. “We’re all in this together.”

Obama was drugged by Monsanto operatives. When he wakes up, he won’t remember he signed the bill, nor will he ever know he signed it. This drug can selectively inhibit his mind on that single item. If he ever reads that he signed it, he’ll think he’s reading about Harry Reid buying three casinos in Vegas and having plastic surgery to look like James Bond.

Obama never signed the bill. A lookalike double was brought in to do the deed. Obama is now living under heavy guard, along with Piers Morgan, in a Texas compound run by a bevy of full-auto maximum-clip country women.

Joe Biden, who only pretends to be off his rocker and minus a few dozen light bulbs, is actually running the country. He is Obama’s Cheney. Joe gave the order to sign the bill.

There are your ten. Pick your fave.

The Matrix Revealed

Exit From the Matrix

Just in case you still think Obama is only peripherally involved with Monsanto, here is the evidence that you’re sadly mistaken. I compiled it some months ago and published it:

During his 2008 campaign for president, Barack Obama transmitted signals that he understood the GMO issue. Several key anti-GMO activists were impressed. They thought Obama, once in the White House, would listen to their concerns and act on them.

These activists weren’t just reading tea leaves. On the campaign trail, Obama said: “Let folks know when their food is genetically modified, because Americans have a right to know what they’re buying.”

Making the distinction between GMO and non-GMO was certainly an indication that Obama, unlike the FDA and USDA, saw there was an important line to draw in the sand.

Beyond that, Obama was promising a new era of transparency in government. He was adamant in promising that, if elected, his administration wouldn’t do business in “the old way.” He would be “responsive to people’s needs.”

Then came the reality.

After the election, and during Obama’s term as president, people who had been working to label GMO food and warn the public of its huge dangers were shocked to the core. They saw Obama had been pulling a bait and switch.

The new president filled key posts with Monsanto people, in federal agencies that wield tremendous force in food issues, the USDA and the FDA:

At the USDA, as the director of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Roger Beachy, former director of the Monsanto Danforth Center.

As deputy commissioner of the FDA, the new food-safety-issues czar, the prince of darkness, Michael Taylor, former vice-president for public policy for Monsanto. Taylor had been instrumental in getting approval for Monsanto’s genetically engineered bovine growth hormone.

As commissioner of the USDA, Iowa governor, Tom Vilsack. Vilsack had set up a national group, the Governors’ Biotechnology Partnership, and had been given a Governor of the Year Award by the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose members include Monsanto.

As the new Agriculture Trade Representative, who would push GMOs for export, Islam Siddiqui, a former Monsanto lobbyist.

As the new counsel for the USDA, Ramona Romero, who had been corporate counsel for another biotech giant, DuPont.

As the new head of the USAID, Rajiv Shah, who had previously worked in key positions for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a major funder of GMO agriculture research.

We should also remember that Obama’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, once worked for the Rose law firm. That firm was counsel to Monsanto.

Obama nominated Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court. Kagan, as federal solicitor general, had previously argued for Monsanto in the Monsanto v. Geertson seed case before the Supreme Court.

The deck was stacked. Obama hadn’t simply made honest mistakes. Obama hadn’t just failed to exercise proper oversight in selecting appointees. He wasn’t just experiencing a failure of short-term memory. He was staking out territory on behalf of Monsanto and other GMO corporate giants.

And now let us look at what key Obama appointees have wrought for their true bosses. Let’s see what GMO crops have walked through the open door of the Obama presidency.

Monsanto GMO alfalfa.

Monsanto GMO sugar beets.

Monsanto GMO Bt soybean.

Coming soon: Monsanto’s GMO sweet corn.

Syngenta GMO corn for ethanol.

Syngenta GMO stacked corn.

Pioneer GMO soybean.

Syngenta GMO Bt cotton.

Bayer GMO cotton.

ATryn, an anti-clotting agent from the milk of transgenic goats.

A GMO papaya strain.

And soon, genetically engineered salmon and apples.

This is an extraordinary parade. It, in fact, makes Barack Obama the most GMO-dedicated politician in America.

You don’t attain that position through errors or oversights. Obama was, all along, a stealth operative on behalf of Monsanto, biotech, GMOs, and corporate control of the future of agriculture.

From this perspective, Michelle Obama’s campaign for gardens and clean, organic, nutritious food is nothing more than a diversion, a cover story floated to obscure what her husband has actually been doing.

Nor is it coincidental that two of the Obama’s biggest supporters, Bill Gates and George Soros, purchased 900,000 and 500,000 shares of Monsanto, respectively, in 2010.

Obama was lying all along. He was, and he still is, Monsanto’s man in Washington.

To those people who fight for GMO labeling, and against the decimation of the food supply and the destruction of human health, but still believe Obama is a beacon in bleak times:

Wake up.

Sources:

http://redgreenandblue.org/2012/02/02/monsanto-employees-in-the-halls-of-government-part-2/

http://redgreenandblue.org/2011/02/09/monsanto-employees-in-the-halls-of-government/

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2011/10/fda-labeling-gmo-genetically-modified-foods

http://fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2011/feb/15/update-obama-goes-rogue-gmos-tell-him-say-no-monsa/

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/food/genetically-engineered-foods/

http://news.yahoo.com/not-altruistic-truth-behind-obamas-global-food-security-174700462.html

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Monsanto proves that corporations don’t run the government

Monsanto proves that corporations don’t run the government

by Jon Rappoport

March 27, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Collectivists have a favorite target. Big bad corporations. This is a complete scam. Why did Goldman Sachs turn out to be the biggest funder of Obama’s 2008 election bid? Why weren’t the corporate banksters who demanded and received those enormous bailouts, under both Bush and Obama, prosecuted for crimes?

Collectivists actually love big corporations. Collectivists just want to distract us from their real goals. And in order to enact those goals, they need banks, they need the military-industrial complex, they need Big Pharma and Big Oil.

They especially need somebody to control the world’s food supply, because that’s one of the ultimate squeeze plays on the global population. So who do they bow down to, in that arena? Monsanto, Dow, DuPont.

Washington politicians aren’t victims who can’t fight off big bad corporations. They aren’t at the mercy of those corporations. That’s a load of nonsense. That’s Politics 101 for brainwashed college students.

O poor little politicians! No power. No way to win against the big boys. No chance.

If you buy that, you’re ready to buy condos on Mars.

Politicians play the victim tune because it diverts attention away from them. It shifts the blame and responsibility.

Asking Congress to pass laws canceling corporate donations to their election campaigns, and instituting instead “public funding,” is a joke. That’s not going to happen, and even if it did, politicians would find back doors.

Bottom line: the politicians want to be in bed with corporations. To say that our elected representatives can’t resist corporate money is like saying people aren’t responsible for their own corrupt practices. It may be fashionable to assume that everyone is a pawn and a victim, but it doesn’t hold water.

So we come to the so-called Monsanto Protection Act, the rider to a funding bill that just sailed through the Senate, and is awaiting Obama’s signature. This sneak measure will nullify court decisions to ban GMO crops while those crops are under review for being “potentially dangerous.”

Here, again, we hear excuses made for the politicians. They didn’t know the rider was in the bill, they didn’t read it, they didn’t understand the consequences, they were played by Monsanto and other biotech giants.

If you sit in the Senate and vote yes on a bill, and you didn’t read the bill, whose fault is that? If you allow one of these thousand-page monstrosities to pass into law, and you don’t know the full meaning of it, and you don’t make a huge stink about it in public, what good are you?

If you allow Monsanto to take over your vote, is whining and complaining after the fact of any use?

Of course Monsanto is a crime boss. Of course it’s in the process of degrading life on planet Earth. Yes, we know that. But to say it can’t be stopped because the politicians are “under its sway” is an egregious lie.

“Oh, the big corporations own America.” I’ve heard that just as you have, for decades. And it’s a true statement because the people in government who could resist the takeover don’t. They surrender. They sit there. They take money. They lie. They participate in their own corruption.

The victim mindset always blames somebody else. That’s the way it works. So the people who love big government and support a collectivist state are going to exonerate government and accuse corporations of stealing the country.

Corporations have stolen the country, side by side with the politicians who have sold their own principles and their own souls.

The theft is a team operation. It always has been.

Robert Anton Wilson once wrote: The political left hates big corporations; the political right hates big government; and they’re both correct.

But as long as the hatred is split down the middle and channeled into two separate beds of foul festering crime, the divide-and-conquer operation succeeds.

GMOs have spread across the world. Who forwarded that agenda? Presidents, legislators, and the biotech giants. Together.

Who stacked his administration with ex-Monsanto people? The current sitting president.

Again, it’s fashionable to say the juggernaut of corporations is too powerful for government to resist. That’s absurd. The government has multiple agencies that could cause lethal trouble for mega-corporations. But it doesn’t happen.

When Eisenhower left the presidency, he famously warned against the growing power of the military-industrial complex. The military is part of the government. Eisenhower wasn’t just accusing corporations.

Since its inception, the CIA, a government agency, has run interference for corporations in foreign lands, subverting and even overthrowing governments that were unfriendly to these corporations’ agendas.

Is Monsanto clever and relentless? Of course. But they don’t win alone. They have political partners in America at every level.

This latest fiasco, the Monsanto Protection Act, isn’t written in stone. It could be repealed, even after passage, by a new piece of legislation. The Congress could do it. The fact that they won’t speaks volumes about their character.

Once you realize the global Monsanto takeover is an operation deploying both corporate and government forces, the idea that the federal government is “here to help us,” a notion that has gained much currency during Obama’s reign, goes into the garbage can.

Many people can’t handle that. One way or another, through one ideological lens or another, they have to see Washington DC as a shining city on the hill. It’s a prime feature of their religion.

Washington is also a source of financial aid. Whether we’re talking about a small welfare check or massive contracts let out to companies, the federal government is in the business of buying friends.

This largesse contains its own buried rider: don’t resist what the government’s corporate allies are doing. If the federal government says or implies that Monsanto is good, it’s good.

“Well,” Clinton supporters and Bush supporters and Obama supporters say, “the government does make mistakes. They do let big corporations slide and skate and gain certain advantages. You see, politics is a gray area. It’s confusing. There are all sorts of conflicts and partnerships and deals, because that’s the way of the world. You can’t fight that. A compromise is made here in order to do something good over there…”

No, Virginia, it’s a lot worse than that. Government and corporations march and dance together to their own music, shredding the law and the Constitution as they go.

These partners have made sure that GMOs spread everywhere. These partners make sure Big Pharma is protected against prosecution for heinous crimes. It’s business as usual, and it takes two to tango.

The Monsanto Protection Act isn’t just a slimy move by a huge corporation. It’s a collaborative effort.

All those corporate lobbyists who infect Washington with their machinations and their money? Are they really imposing their will on politicians because those pols are at their mercy? In a victim’s dream, yes. But in reality, any legislator who tells himself he can’t get reelected unless he takes corporate money is really saying he won’t stand up on his two hind legs and blow the whistle on the whole stinking system.

The Matrix Revealed

Exit From the Matrix

If one, five, 10, 20 Congressmen started exposing the real government-corporate game, loudly and passionately and eloquently, we’d see a crisis that would make the fiscal cliff and sequestration look like a child’s birthday party.

Names would be named. Crimes would be detailed. Endemic corruption would float to the surface and sit there steaming, for all to see.

People who view themselves as chronic victims view the world in those terms. They see government as the victim of corporations. They forward and promote this big lie. They make endless excuses and spin endless fairy tales.

Let’s opt instead for a more stark approach: Congressional scum just passed a rider protecting Monsanto from getting the justice it deserves. It’s never too late to reverse that decision.

That’s more realistic.

How many times have legislators been “duped” by sneaky bills passing through their hands? At what point are they supposed to wake up and do something about it?

When you’ve had the farm stolen from you a few thousand times, and you’ve done nothing about it, there’s only one conclusion possible: you like it that way.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Brand new GMO food can rewire your body: more evil coming

Brand new GMO food can rewire your body: more evil coming

by Jon Rappoport

March 26, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

It’s already bad. Very bad. For the past 25 years, the biotech Dr. Frankensteins have been inserting DNA into food crops.

The widespread dangers of this technique have been exposed. People all over the world, including many scientists and farmers, are up in arms about it.

Countries have banned GMO crops or insisted on labeling.

Now, though, the game is changing, and it’ll make things even more unpredictable. The threat is ominous and drastic, to say the least.

GM Watch reports the latest GMO innovation: designed food plants that make new double-stranded (ds) RNA. What does the RNA do? It can silence a gene. It can activate a gene that was silent.

If you imagine the gene structure as a board covered with light bulbs, in the course of living some genes light up (activation) and some genes go dark (silent) at different times. This new designed RNA can change that process. No one knows how.

No one knows because no safety studies have been done. If you have genes lighting up and going dark in unpredictable ways, the functions of a plant or a body can change randomly.

Genes that were doing their jobs could stop doing their jobs. Other genes that were dormant could spring into action and perform tasks that weren’t meant to be performed.

Think of this latest biotech “innovation” as a drunk playing pinball. Lights on the board go on and off, and TILT is always a distinct possibility.

As GM Watch reports, an Australian company, CSIRO, has designed wheat and barley seeds that put genes to sleep, “to change the type of starch made by the plant.”

Also on the way: next-generation biopesticide food crops that repel insect predators. In this case, the designer RNA can be injected or even sprayed. When a gene is silenced in the insect, it dies.

GM Watch states there is published evidence that the designer RNA can move from the plants into the bodies of people who eat the plants, outlasting cooking and digestion, and winding up in the bloodstream.

The RNA has changed gene-expression (activation/silencing) in mice.

Several food-safety inspectors in several countries have been interviewed. They simply rubber-stamp the new RNA technology, assuming it’s safe. No problem.

Pinball, roulette, use any metaphor you want to; this is playing with the fate of the human race. Walk around with designer-RNA in your body, and who knows what effects will follow.

The Matrix Revealed

Exit From the Matrix

There are still people, at this late date, who believe that all science is good science. They blithely accept the latest thing, and refuse to acknowledge that scientists can be crazy, stupid, or malevolent. They also fail to make the connection between junk science and the greed for profit at any human cost.

Biotech giants like Monsanto view their genetic operation from an entirely different level. Every new DNA or RNA tweak to a plant—no matter how insane—allows them to file a patent, to own that new artificially designed piece of Nature. This is their approach, and it’s obvious they intend to control the planet’s food supply.

It’s a mafia program writ large across the whole world: “buy from us or else; pay us our cut.”

Meanwhile, the damage they inflict is of no concern to them, as the spinning of the genetic roulette wheel opens up the human race to vast mutations.

The new Monsanto Protection Act, as it’s called, is a cynical piece of legislation that underlines this lack of concern; it torpedoes the ability of the court system to stop new gene-designed crops from popping up everywhere.

Source: GM Watch, 3/22/13, “New paper on dsRNA risks—briefing for non-specialists.”

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14717:new-paper-on-dsrna-risks-briefing-for-non-specialists

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Major announcement from Jon Rappoport and NMFN

Major announcement from Jon Rappoport and nomorefakenews

March 24, 2013

This one has been a long time coming. Many of you who ordered my collection, The Matrix Revealed, knew I was preparing another volume. Well it’s here. It’s titled: Exit From the Matrix.

It’s about those inner capabilities and powers we have, and how we can use them and live by them and, thereby, exit from the Matrix.

The years haven’t dimmed my passion for this grand enterprise; they’ve only increased my motivation.

The Matrix Revealed laid out the nuts and bolts of The Great Game, and how it is played.

Now, in Exit From the Matrix, I turn that card over and display what’s on the other side: the core of life-force, imagination, and creative power that knows no limits.

I’ve greatly expanded a repertoire of exercises and techniques you can practice every day to regain what is yours.

It represents some 15 years of investigation and research into what the individual is truly capable of.

I’ll be writing more about this, but for now read my introduction to the new collection, Exit From the Matrix.

Introduction to EXIT FROM THE MATRIX

by Jon Rappoport

This mega-collection, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, is the realization of a goal I’ve been pursuing for the last 15 years.

It’s intensely practical. It contains more than 50 new exercises and techniques aimed at expanding the power, range, and scope of the imagination—along with very simple instructions on how to use these exercises.

Imagination is the buried key that unlocks the door that exits from the Matrix.

This collection also contains a presentation of the vital philosophy that underpins the limitless power of the individual. This is more than theory. It’s a guide to exiting from the Matrix.

From what is in EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, from the huge amount of material, I think you’ll see I’ve made no short cuts. In fact, I’ve done everything possible to go the extra mile.

You can order this new collection at my site, www.nomorefakenews.com

So let’s get to the details. Here is the list of my brand new audio presentations included in this collection:

* INTRODUCTION: HOW TO USE THE MATERIALS IN EXIT FROM THE MATRIX

* EXIT FROM THE MATRIX

* 50 IMAGINATION EXERCISES

* FURTHER IMAGINATION EXERCISES

* ANESTHESIA, BOREDOM, EXCITEMENT, ECSTASY

* ANCIENT TIBET AND THE UNIVERSE AS A PRODUCT OF MIND

* YOU THE INVENTOR, MINDSET, AND FREEDOM FROM “THE EXISTENCE PROGRAM”

* PARANORMAL EXPERIMENTS AND EXERCISES

* CHILDREN AND IMAGINATION

* THE CREATIVE LIFE AND THE MATRIX/IMAGINATION

* PICTURES OF REALITY AND ESCAPE VELOCITY FROM THE MATRIX

* THIS WOULD BE A VERY DIFFERENT FUTURE

* MODERN ZEN

* GREAT PASSIONS AND GREAT ANDROIDS

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

* Mind Control, Mind Freedom

* The Transformations

* Desire, Manifestation and Fulfillment

* Altered States, Consciousness, and Magic

* Beyond Structures

* The Mystery and Magic of Dialogue

* The Voyage of Merlin

* Modern Alchemy and Imagination

* Imagination and Spiritual Enlightenment

* Dissolving Stress

* The Paranormal Project

* Zen Painting for Everyone Now

* Past Lives, Archetypes, and Hidden Sources of Human Energy

* Expression of Self

* Imagination Exercises for a Lifetime

* Old Planet, New Planet, New Mind

* The Era of Magic Returns

* Your Power Revealed

* Universes Without End

* Relationships

* Building a Business for Success

I have included an additional bonus section:

* My book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies

* My book, The Ownership of All Life

* A long excerpt from my briefly published book, Full Power

* My 24 articles in the series, “Coaching the Coaches”

And these audio seminars:

* The Role of Medical Drugs in Human Illness

* Longevity One: The Mind-Body Connection

* Longevity Two: The Nutritional Factors

All the audio presentations are mp3 files and the books are pdf files. You can download them.

What has been called The Matrix is a series of layers. These layers compose what we call Reality. Reality is not merely the consensus people accept in their daily lives. It is also a personal and individual conception of limits. It is a perception that these limits are somehow built into existence. But this is not true.

Exit From the Matrix

What I’ve done here is remove the lid on those perceived limits. This isn’t an intellectual undertaking. It’s a way to open up space and step on to a new road.

That road travels to more and more creative power, joy, and fulfillment.

During that great adventure, the individual experiences what has been labeled “paranormal” and “synchronistic” and “magical.” These words really don’t do us justice. They only hint at what we are and what we can do.

I put this collection together because it expresses, explains, and shows, in detail, how the individual can rediscover and reclaim his/her true power.

That process, that engagement, that life, is beyond solving problems. Our problems, at the core, exist only because we have “misplaced an infinity.”

Everything I’ve done and written in the past 20 years has been aimed, one way or another, at bringing back that infinity, seeing through the layers of disguise, and moving ahead on the sunlit road we all desire.

This is collection is for you, for me, for all of us.

We have, each one of us, an infinite life, lived in a world that is convinced it is bounded.

It’s time we dissolved that false contradiction.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

The hoax at the bottom of Autism and Alzheimer’s

The hoax at the bottom of Autism and Alzheimer’s

by Jon Rappoport

March 22, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

For the medical cartel, Autism and Alzheimer’s are big, big business. Profits are soaring.

These two conditions are promoted as specific diseases. That’s where all the trouble starts.

If you read the Alzheimer’s and Autism definitions, which are the criteria for diagnosis contained in the psychiatric Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), you find there are no physical tests of any kind.

No blood tests, no saliva tests, no urine tests, no genetic tests, no brain scans.

Instead, what you see are lists and menus of behaviors.

What does this mean?

First of all, it means researchers haven’t found the cause of these conditions. If they had, they would state it.

So how do you say you’ve located a specific disease if you don’t know the cause? Answer: you can’t.

Take four people who are 70 years old and are experiencing severe memory loss. You’re a researcher. You don’t know why these people have this problem. You can guess, you can talk about maybe-this or maybe-that, but you don’t know.

Therefore, you can’t say the cause of the memory loss in each case is the same. It might well be different for each person.

Should you make up a label like Alzheimer’s and slap it on all four people? Of course not. A single label means a single cause. Otherwise, why use the label?

But you don’t know the cause. No matter how many behavioral characteristics of memory loss you name, you don’t know the cause.

Therefore, you have no business applying a single label to those four people. That’s not science. It might be marketing for drugs, it might be a lot of things, it might be about obtaining grant monies, but it isn’t science.

Take four young children who have suddenly withdrawn from the world. Same principle applies. If you slap them with the Autism label, you’re lying. You don’t know the cause of that withdrawal in any of the children.

Now, if you were the parent of one of these children, and you noticed that soon after the child was stuck with multiple vaccines, he developed a fever and then he withdrew from the world, you would, indeed, know something vital.

But if you’re an unbiased researcher a thousand miles away from these four children, all you know, at the outset, is that they all withdrew.

In two cases, the cause might have been vaccination. In another case, it might have been severe and chronic malnutrition or a reaction to heavy metals in food. In another case, the child might have developed a brain lesion. There are a number of possibilities.

Why then slap all four children with the label Autism?

Just because they exhibit the same general characteristic? That’s patently ridiculous.

Let’s take this a step farther. Suppose you had a group of 500 children, all of whom withdrew and folded up after receiving a load of vaccine. You know these vaccines contain toxins. You know the toxins were injected. You know the toxins can cause neurological damage.

Well, what are you waiting for? These are cases of VACCINE DAMAGE. It’s not Autism caused by vaccine damage. It’s not Autism or Cd3syt or Vcti45 or any other arbitrary label. It’s not a disease or a disorder. It’s poisoning. Do you say a person who develops a severe and chronic problem after eating fish loaded with poison has a disease? Is it the fish-eating disease?

Of course, we know that exonerating vaccines keeps a giant industry from destruction. And we know that putting a disease label on people opens the door to enormous profits. Drug-company profits. “Well, we’re researching several promising medicines for Autism…”

You don’t hear, “We’re investigating remedies for vaccine poisoning and exposure to industrial pollutants.”

Alzheimer’s researchers are very fond of talking about “biomarkers” and “imaging.” They keep testing blood and the spinal fluid. But they don’t know enough to include the results of those tests in the official definition of Alzheimer’s.

And think about this: suppose one biomarker finally emerges as a common denominator in a study examining 5000 people who have been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s? Who is to say the cause of that biomarker is the same in all 5000 people? This is not a trivial point. It’s crucial.

If, for example, chemicals can cause genetic changes, and then cancer researchers hail “new genetic findings in investigating the cause of cancer,” at what level are they plugging into the true situation? If they keep ignoring the chemicals, how far are they going to get?

Researchers and the press keep promoting a fairy tale: “If we diagnose people who show the same behavioral factors with a single disease label, and if we keep examining these people for common biomarkers, we’ll find the cause of the disease.”

Well, look at the DSM. It contains 297 official disorders, all labeled. Many of these so-called disorders have been investigated for decades. And yet, not one disorder lists a specific across-the-board diagnostic test that can define it.

Taking all this to a conclusion, we have this: there is no reason to suppose that Alzheimer’s or Autism exists.

Damage exists. And there are cogent reasons to infer that, in different individuals, the causes are different.

Therefore, what we need are very capable and independent-minded health practitioners who can investigate one patient at a time and find out what really caused his/her problem.

That is why, when somebody tells me he’s found the cause of Alzheimer’s or Autism, and the cure, I know he’s on the wrong track. He failed to notice that these conditions don’t exist. Damage exists.

In the alternative field, I’ve read journal articles that begin: “New discovery may revolutionize the treatment of Alzheimer’s…”

The author of the article was bamboozled. He accepted the idea that Alzheimer’s was a single disease. His opening sentence should have read: “New discovery may revolutionize the treatment of that thing that doesn’t exist…”

Then he and everybody else would see the error.

Damage exists. Memory loss exists. Withdrawing from the world exists. Suffering exists. Pain exists. Finding what caused it in a single patient, one at a time, is a step toward healing.

And healing is what it’s supposed to be all about.

The correct metaphor here is the detective. Suppose he says, “Well, we have a murder, and we know that murder is caused by bullets. So we’ll find the bullets and that will constitute the solution to the case.”

The detective investigates each case on its own facts and merits. He brings a wealth of experience to his work. He knows patterns in murders. He knows what sometimes turns out to be the answer. He applies what he knows. He uses clues. He uses logic. He tries one avenue, and if it doesn’t pan out, he embarks on another avenue. He keeps looking. He provisionally uses generalities, but he also avoids them. This is called intelligence. It’s called discernment. It’s called caring about finding the truth.

If genuine healing were the objective, practitioners would approach so-called Alzheimer’s and Autism patients very differently.

The fact that most medical doctors don’t is, at the very least, criminal negligence.

Back in the 1990’s, I interviewed the mother of a boy who had been diagnosed with Autism. He wasn’t a case of vaccine damage, because he’d never been vaccinated.

His health practitioner, during an extensive conversation with the mother, did discover a forgotten head injury at the age of three. The boy was now 16.

The practitioner tried a course of hyperbaric oxygen treatments, based on the hypothesis that some brain cells were in an “idling state,” and had never awakened after the injury. The treatments helped somewhat. The boy became a bit more communicative.

The practitioner then shifted the boy’s diet several times, and in the process found out he was having a severe and chronic reaction to milk and other dairy products. So they were eliminated from the diet. After a month, the boy came a bit more out of his shell. His awkward physical movements lessened.

Supplementation with minerals produced further results. The boy’s speech cleared up gradually. He mumbled less. His spoke more forcefully.

At this point, for the first time, the boy was willing to undertake a light exercise program. After a month or so, it produced dividends. His muscle tone improved, and he enjoyed short runs. He’d return from these runs with fierce enthusiasm. He was happy that his coordination was increasing.

Several new supplement protocols were tried. One of them included a meal-replacement drink that he liked. He came further out of his shell. His mother began home schooling him. His writing was no longer a dense scribble. He could focus on his work.

The boy went through another series of hyperbaric oxygen treatments. This time the results were more visible. His face, which tended to be mask-like, relaxed. He became more animated.

The supplement regime was enhanced with a ginseng adaptogen and a different type of magnesium. The boy received several adjustments from a chiropractor, who had been trained in the original techniques of the art.

The Matrix Revealed

A month later, the boy’s communication with his parents and his neighbors reached a new level. He had recovered a significant part of his life.

I asked the practitioner whether he would apply that entire course of treatment across the board for all children diagnosed with Autism.

“Absolutely not,” he said. “I don’t do ‘across-the-board’ anything.”

When I told a doctor what happened to this boy, he said, “It wasn’t Autism to begin with. He was misdiagnosed. It was a head injury.”

“No,” I said. “Nothing is Autism.”

He stared at me and then he smiled. “I know where you’re going with this,” he said.

“So?”

“Yeah,” he said. “They don’t have a cause for Autism.”

“So they have no right to say it’s a disease with a single cause.”

He scratched his head and walked away.

There is yet another reason the medical cartel wants to maintain this fiction about Autism and Alzheimer’s. It’s about controlling the research, of course. Keeping a lid on the fact that chemicals and inserted genes in the food supply; water contaminated with chemicals, including fluorides; heavy-metal particles sprayed in the skies; radiation; vaccines; medical drugs; industrial pollution and dumping; and other factors have been producing the symptoms of what is being called Autism and Alzheimer’s.

Covering all that up is a major priority. One dirty hand washes another.

Sources: “Dementia of the Alzheimer’s Type Symptoms and Diagnosis,” psychtreatment.com; “DSM-IV Criteria Pervasive Developmental Disorders,” firstsigns.org.

Jon Rappoport

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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

The fatal flaw in the human-machine interface

The fatal flaw in the human-machine interface

by Jon Rappoport

March 21, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

There is a great deal of research going on in the area of artificial intelligence (AI) merging with the brain.

Exuberant cheerleaders like Roy Kurzweil are quite confident that we are approaching a moment when a computer will exhibit all the power of the human brain.

The definition of “power” in this context is fuzzy. But Kurzweil and others are sure we’re about to uncover the “algorithm” that underlies all brain activity.

They couldn’t be more wrong. Neuroscience has barely scratched the surface of understanding how the brain operates. Cracking the code is not on the horizon.

This fact reflects a much deeper problem. PR is not science. Predictions about what is imminent are not the same thing as verified research results.

PR is not information.

In exactly the same way, were a human-computer interface with awesome capability endowed with access to a hundred galaxies of stored data, it would run up against the problem of vast chronic misinformation in those cosmic warehouses.

This is not something that can be deleted with a program or a committee tasked with making corrective changes.

For example, and this is just one area, medical science is so rife with fraud, at so many levels, as I’ve demonstrated over and over again for the past 10 years, that it would take humans decades to expose a significant part of it. And AI wouldn’t even know where or how to begin looking, because…who would set the parameters of such an investigation?

There is an inherent self-limiting function in AI. It uses, accesses, collates, and calculates with, false information. Not just here and there or now and then, but on a continuous basis.

Think about all the entrenched institutions and monopolies in our society. Each one of them proliferates false information like a Niagara.

No machine can correct that. Indeed, AI machines are victims to it. They in turn emanate more falsities based on the information they are utilizing. I’m sure someone can make a little model of the exponential expansion of this disaster.

Each and every false datum generates a wider and wider stream of lies, and the streams, becoming rivers, overlap and produce exceptionally large numbers of contaminated eddies, polls, and rapids.

When personal computers entered the marketplace, people began a clamor about the Age of Information.

There were cultural reasons for this enthusiasm. They could all summed up by the fact that we are living in a technological society, and technology walks hand in glove with information.

But as the messianic postulations and predictions reached new heights, and the drive began to marry machine and human brain, the gaping holes and rips in the utopian fabric of dreams loomed up for any intelligent person to observe.

When a corporation or government expands to a certain size, it dedicates itself to survival, not of its principles, not of its original mission, but of Itself as an entity. Therefore, it spins lies.

As Dr. Peter Breggin and I discussed on his radio show yesterday, when it comes to the newly announced federal brain-mapping project (B.A.M.), the scientists will very rapidly begin drowning in their own ignorance about the very organ they are investigating.

But that won’t do. This billion-dollar project is supposed to produce results, and the project must survive. Therefore, the researchers will cook up models to demonstrate their progress. These models will make assertions which are patently false.

Pharmaceutical companies will develop new drugs based on the false assertions about the brain, knowing full well they are operating in swamp of deception, and caring not one whit about it.

It is the same with the vaunted AI-human brain interface. It will gobble up and deploy untold numbers of lies already told by other institutions to defend and protect their own survival.

The complexity, on various levels, of false information will make the heralded AI-brain collaboration resemble an intelligence agency:

It lies about other lies, and then it lies about that.

The mathematics are packed with functions that automatically spiral out realities even Lewis Carroll’s Mad Hatter would find frivolous and repellent.

The field of information theory is about handling quantity of data and making that data readable. It’s not about the quality of the data.

AI can work successfully in engineering projects, but when the human interface is added, we are no longer merely talking about engineering. The whole purpose of the interface is supposed to be about somehow making humans better.

How can that happen when the hugely expanded access to data runs into billions or trillions of bits of false information?

The Matrix Revealed

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

I’ve been making notes for my second, more advanced logic course. The purpose of the course is to provide better ways of handling the flood of information we deal with every day. The first challenge is going beyond the rules and principles of classical logic, in order to analyze the quality of the data we are digesting and using.

There is no pat system for doing that. Certainly, accepting data based on the notion that “recognized authorities” are reliable would be a disaster. But that is exactly where the human-AI interface is heading, like a team of horses being driven toward the edge of a cliff.

The human-AI engineers are already fatally compromised. In journalistic terms, they are the mainstream reporters obeying the parameters laid down by their editors and corporate owners. They write their stories inside a bubble of illusory context. They go back, again and again, to the same sources, and those sources are permanently biased against popping the bubble and journeying out to where the truth exists.

Actually, an AI machine could write most of the articles that appear on the front page of the NY Times every day. It would save time and cut expenses. But the result would be the same: absurdly limited context, false information, deception, fatuous presumption of authority.

If, instead, you want to look for a program that would discount such a presumption and would reject institutional secrecy, a program that would undertake a relentless investigation of the quality of data, there is a potential candidate.

It’s called a human being. And it’s not a program.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

James Holmes, and how the CIA hid their MKULTRA mind-control program

by Jon Rappoport

March 20, 2013

(To join our email list, click here.)

Back in the early 1990s, I interviewed John Marks, author of Search for the Manchurian Candidate. This was the book that exposed the existence of the infamous CIA MKULTRA program.

I bring up this interview now, because James Holmes may well be on the receiving end of MKULTRA, as his lawyers try to navigate an insanity plea in the Aurora massacre case.

Holmes will be given “truth drugs” to “refresh his memory” about his state of mind at the time of the killings. If that sounds absurd, it is. I wrote a piece the other day detailing how such drugs are often given to produce extreme terror in patients. In other words, the drugs don’t elicit the truth. They’re used as threats to force the patient/suspect to confess to whatever his torturers want him to confess to.

John Marks related the following facts to me. He had filed many Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests to the CIA for documents relating to their mind-control program. He got nothing back.

Finally, as if to play a joke on him, someone at the CIA sent Marks 10 boxes of financial and accounting records. The attitude was, “Here, see what you can do with this.”

I’ve seen some of those records. They’re very boring reading.

But Marks went through them, and lo and behold, he found he could piece together MKULTRA projects, based on the funding data.

Eventually, he assembled enough information to begin naming names. He conducted interviews. The shape of MKULTRA swam into view. And so he wrote his book, Search for the Manchurian Candidate.

He told me that three important books had been written about MKULTRA, and they all stemmed from those 10 boxes of CIA financial records. There was his own book; Operation Mind Control by Walter Bowart; and The Mind Manipulators by Alan Scheflin and Edward Opton.

Marks continued to press the CIA for more MKULTRA information. He explained to me what then happened. A CIA official told him the following: in 1962, after ten years of mind-control experiments, the whole program had been shifted over to another internal CIA department, the Office of Research and Development (ORD).

The ORD had a hundred boxes of information on their MKULTRA work, and there was no way under the sun, Marks was told, that he was ever going to get his hands on any of that. It was over. It didn’t matter how many FOIA requests Marks filed. He was done. The door was shut. Goodbye.

The CIA went darker than it ever had before. No leaks of any kind would be permitted.

In case there is any doubt about it, the idea of relying on the CIA to admit what it has done in the mind-control area, what it is doing, and what it will do should be put to bed by John Mark’s statements. The CIA always has been, and will continue to be, a rogue agency beyond the reach of the law.

Since it is the agency with the most experience using “truth drugs,” when James Holmes is put on ice at a Colorado mental hospital, to go through what the judge has permitted—a “narcoanalytic review” to test Holmes’ state of mind—it’s probable that CIA people will be on hand to advise.

The Colorado in-house psychiatrists know nothing about the use of truth drugs. They especially don’t know how to employ those drugs to produce just enough terror in the patient to get him to admit to Anything.

To give you an idea of how far the CIA, the US military, and its allied academics will go in MKULTRA “research,” here is what I wrote in 1995 about several human experiments. My information was based on the three key books I mentioned above, as well as Martin Lee’s classic, Acid Dreams:

“Dr. Robert Heath of Tulane University, as early as 1955, working for the Army, gave patients LSD while he had electrodes implanted deep inside their brains.”

“In the mid-1950’s, Paul Hoch, M.D., a man who would become Commissioner of Mental Hygiene for the State of New York, then a laborer in the field for the CIA, gave a ‘pseudoneurotic schizophrenic’ patient mescaline. The patient had a not-unfamiliar heaven-and-hell journey on the compound. But Hoch followed this up with a transorbital leucotomy [aka lobotomy]… Hoch also gave a patient LSD, and a local anesthetic, and then proceeded to remove pieces of cerebral cortex, asking at various moments whether the patient’s perceptions were changing.”

People need to understand how the history of mind control and psychiatry are interwoven, and how the madmen and murderers within these “professions” are content to use torture “in the name of science.”

From a current naturalnews article by Dr. Peter Breggin (“Never again! The real history of psychiatry”) we get insight into one aspect of that history:

“[Before World War 2, in America], organized psychiatry had been sterilizing tens of thousands of Americans. For a time in California, you couldn’t be discharged from a state hospital unless you were sterilized. In Virginia the retarded were targeted. American advocates of sterilization went to Berlin to help the Nazis plan their sterilization program. These Americans reassured the Germans that they would meet no opposition from America in sterilizing their mentally and physically ‘unfit’ citizens.

“While the murder of mental patients was going full swing in Germany, knowledgeable American psychiatrists and neurologists didn’t want to be left out. In 1942, the American Psychiatric Association held a debate about whether to sterilize or to murder low IQ ‘retarded’ children when they reached the age of five. Those were the only two alternatives in the debate: sterilization or death.

“After the debate, the official journal of the American Psychiatric Association published an editorial in which it chose sides in favor of murder (‘Euthanasia’ in the American Journal of Psychiatry, 1942, volume 99, pp. 141-143). It said psychiatrists would have to muster their psychological skills to keep parents from feeling guilty about agreeing to have their children killed.”

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.