GEORGE CRAPANOPOULOS WOULD GO PSYCHOTIC IF THE TRUE EXTENT OF VOTE FRAUD WERE KNOWN

 

GEORGE CRAPANOPOULOS WOULD GO PSYCHOTIC IF THE EXTENT OF VOTE FRAUD BECAME KNOWN

by Jon Rappoport

November 6, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

It’s not just George. All the network poll experts, like Chuck Todd, John King, and Michael Barone would flip out and start punching their sacred touch-screens randomly. Helplessly. Furiously. Looking for proof that this election, like every other election, is honest and above-board and righteous…reflecting the innate popular wisdom of the people, blah-blah.

 

All major-media number-crunchers have to believe their work is real. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have any work. They’re there to convince the public that elections are 99.9999 percent honorable and only paranoids would question them.

 

So let’s go to the scorecard. We’ll start with the little stuff and work up to the grand finale:

 

New Black Panthers are back in Philadelphia at voting centers…

 

Thousands of absentee ballots for the military haven’t come in.

 

Vote screens are registering Romney votes for Obama.

 

In New Jersey and New York, untold numbers of voters can’t get to polling stations.

 

Some votes are coming in as emails.

 

SCTYL, a foreign company, is tabulating and reporting a small percentage of absentee votes.

 

In Ohio, a key state, eight counties, 16% of the vote, can be easily hacked through the machines.

 

In Ohio’s Franklin County, the Voter Integrity Project, a vote-monitoring group, has had its status revoked. Charges and counter-charges of dishonesty are flying.

 

In Nevada, non-citizens are being pressured to vote by unions.

 

There are 3020 112-year-olds registered to vote in North Carolina.

 

Both Republicans ad Democrats were claiming vote-fraud before the polls opened in Pennsylvania.

 

Also in Pennsylvania, a fake mailer was sent out stating people needed ID to vote.

 

In Penn., again, Republican registration forms were shredded and thrown away.

 

This is just the beginning of the reports coming in.

 

But here is a deeper dagger. Michael Snyder (“Are operatives from both parties systemically committing election fraud?”) cites a Pew Center study which concludes that, nationwide:

 

One out of every eight voter registrations is inaccurate, out of date, or a duplicate;

 

And 2.8 million Americans are registered in two or more states;

 

And 1.8 million registered voters are dead.

 

While you watch George and Chuck and John and Michael perform their wizardry tonight on their touch-screens, as they report and project and parse and stroke their chins and pontificate and estimate and intone, keep that in mind.

 

Among other numerous delusions, they see dead people.

 

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

THE VOTING BLOC THAT COULD SWING THE ELECTION IS IGNORED…AGAIN

 

THE VOTING BLOC THAT COULD SWING THE ELECTION IS IGNORED…AGAIN

by Jon Rappoport

November 6, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

When I ran for a Congressional seat in 1994, I tapped into a small vein of the sleeping giant.

 

It takes a a great deal of effort to wake it up, but it can be done.

 

The Democrats don’t want to do it. Neither do the Republicans. They sense the danger.

 

The sleeping giant is a rough and rebellious crowd. They can make all sorts of trouble for mainstream politicians.

 

They don’t particularly like the stink of government. They don’t react to typical political slogans or cons.

 

Some of them have been dragged into the mainstream, but most of them stand far outside and prefer not to vote.

 

I’m talking about the health-freedom people. There are millions of them in America. In 1993-4, they sent letters to the federal government, more letters than had ever arrived in Congressional offices and the White House on any issue.

 

They wanted the terminally corrupt FDA to keep their filthy hands off vitamins and other supplements in stores. They wanted the freedom to choose how they would manage their own health. They wanted the freedom to consult any health practitioner.

 

No Democratic or Republican presidential nominee has ever directly addressed these health-freedom people.

 

They’re scared to. They want to pretend this potential voting bloc doesn’t exist. It’s too much like real freedom. It’s too Constitutional. It cuts too close to the bone of what this country, under the fat and the blubber, is supposed to be all about.

 

But if effectively wakened, it could swing a presidential election.

 

And it could also set the medical cartel’s balls on fire. Freedom and the medical system aren’t two items that go hand-in-hand. The cartel would like to see all vaccines made mandatory. They’d like to see the vast majority of alternative health practitioners put out of business. They’d like to see high-dose vitamins made into drugs requiring a prescription.

 

Any serious candidate who pursued the health-freedom vote would face nasty opposition from the medical powers-that-be. So there is a trade-off.

 

But consider this. By the most conservative estimates, 225,000 people in the US are killed by medical drugs every year. 2.1 million are hospitalized for the same reason. And there are 36 million severe adverse reactions to pharmaceuticals, annually.

 

For each one of those deaths or maimings, there would be at least four people in the immediate circle who suffer emotional turmoil and stress because of what’s happened to their friend or family member.

 

Add up all those numbers, keeping in mind that the stats quoted above are exploding newly, every year, and you see the number of health-freedom people is potentially enormous.

 

How many Americans are opposed to what is happening to our food supply? I’m talking about genetic modification and the drenching deployment of pesticides and herbicides. These people are in the same basic boat. They want health, too. They want to be free from the government-Monsanto-Dow-DuPont nexus.

 

What about chemtrails? What about the toxic elements that have been found in this massive program of aerial spraying? How many Americans have already awakened to this source of illness?

 

What about enforced vaccine schedules, and the government-led program to close down exemptions? What about all the parents who are fully aware that their autistic children were devastated by vaccines—no matter what the government claims?

 

Do the math. Now we are talking about a political sleeping giant that certainly could elect a president of the United States. There is no doubt about it.

 

But here is where we come to a crossroads. Is a new national political party the best option? The Health Freedom Party?

 

Or is the better choice to move in the direction of nullification of federal laws that violate the powers assigned to the central government by the Constitution?

 

They’re certainly both long shots.

 

Perhaps doing both is the right path.

 

This needs some thought, appropriate for the day on which the nation will election one of two puppets for its next criminal-in-charge.

 

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

NOAM CHOMSKY AND TOM HAYDEN JOIN THE RANKS OF THE BRAIN DEAD

 

NOAM CHOMSKY AND TOM HAYDEN JOIN THE RANKS OF THE BRAIN DEAD

by Jon Rappoport

November 6, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

These two luminaries have formed a group called No More Stolen Elections. If Romney wins, they’ll challenge any instances of Republican election fraud they can find.

 

They still think there are two political parties in this country.

 

How quaint. And soda fountains still dispense cherry Cokes and milk shakes in metal cans. A twist of licorice is two cents.

 

There was a time, 40 years ago, when the political left in this country stood for No More War and an end to illegal surveillance of private citizens.

 

Millions of people took to the streets to protest the Vietnam war, and thousands exposed the FBI’s COINTELPRO program, whereby the DOJ was planting spies and agents in protest groups to push them over the edge into mayhem and violence, so they could be prosecuted.

 

Those objectives are still relevant. The US, under a Democratic president, is engaging in covert and overt military adventures all over the planet. The Obama adminstration is arming terrorists to pose as armies of liberation in the Middle East and Africa. We are still in Afghanistan.

 

The Surveillance State today makes the old COINTEPRO program look like a rag-tag picnic in the park.

 

But the left, including Chomsky and Hayden, is focused on other things. Re-electing Obama at any cost. Giving away more welfare freebies than the current trillion-dollar-a-year programs deliver, while inner cities rot into tombs. Forcibly enrolling all Americans in a national health insurance plan that will bankrupt the already bankrupted government, that will expose millions more people to medical drugs that are already killing at least 100,000 people a year and maiming 30 million.

 

In 1966, a march and rally held in West Los Angeles surrounded the Century Plaza Hotel, where President Lyndon Johnson was staying, and forced LBJ into a box he couldn’t escape from. He abandoned his run for reelection in 1968.

 

The left was mercilessly excoriating its own standard bearer, a Democratic president, for his expansion of the war in Vietnam. Today, the notion of the left moving against a Democratic president is unthinkable. Obama could fire missiles at the moon and take out half of it, and the left would find a reason to praise the move.

 

The left has become a know-nothing force that rivals the right.

 

In California, the referendum on GMO labeling of foods has seen a fading of active support from the left. Their stance against murderous big corporations (in this case, Monsanto) has withered. Perhaps this is because their hero, Obama, has become Monsanto’s chief lobbyist in Washington. The left rarely mentions this.

 

The left’s aborted Occupy protests failed to see through to the implications of what they themselves were pointing at. It was too much for their tired brains. They couldn’t and wouldn’t equally accuse Clinton, Bush, and Obama for their roles in Grand Theft America.

 

The political left in this country is now all about more freebies, and sometimes they’re not even able to articulate that.

 

They fail to recognize or admit that Obama is the equal of Bush when it comes to war-mongering.

 

If Romney wins, he’ll bring back the old neocon crowd to replace Obama’s new neocon crowd. The federal government will not shrink. Imperial empire will still be on the table. 24/7 surveillance of private citizens will still be the rule. Ditto, if Obama wins.

 

The left in this country is a barnacle hanging on to a bubble of delusion.

 

It can’t follow a train of thought, even its own. It can’t see that progressivism should mean defecting from and decentralizing central power in all its forms. It can’t see that vast expansion of the Welfare State means more mad power for the federal government. It can’t see past the end of its own nose.

 

The left is now a quasi-religion based on empty slogans. Even the labor unions in America, once a force for better working conditions, have devolved into a ground-game army to get voters to the polls. Long ago, the private-sector unions sold away their strength to NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, the WTO, and other death-dealing “free trade” regulations, with barely a whisper. They sold out their memberships to mega-corporations, and they’ve been paying the price.

 

The left is now a charade, a shadow play of ghosts.

 

They have no memory of the days when at least a few of their own wanted to crack the egg of centralized political and economic power in America. They don’t have the brains or balls for that now.

 

Tom Hayden? Noam Chomsky? You can put them on a level with George Clooney, Samuel Jackson, Madonna, and Alec Baldwin. At best, at the very best, they’re all brain-dead amnesia victims.

 

There is one political party in America, and no matter who wins the election today or how much fraud occurs on either side, the mission to forge a better nation will fall, by default, into the hands of people who reject both branches of that one party.

 

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

THE FORCES OF EVIL PREPARE TO STRIKE DOWN PROP 37

 

THE FORCES OF EVIL PREPARE TO STRIKE DOWN PROP 37

by Jon Rappoport

November 5, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

You can go into a market and pick out organic vegetables and fruit. This isn’t something you do through magic or secret divination with a special wand. There are labels that tell you the food is organic.

 

Experts” claim organic food is no better or safer than food drenched with pesticides. But still, you can choose organic.

 

You have a right to know. And then, knowing, you have a right to make your choice.

 

You can go into a market, pick out a food product, and read a list of its ingredients as long as your arm. But you’ll find no mention of whether someone shot insect genes into it.

 

For some reason, you have no right to know about that.

 

It’s no accident. The powers-that-be want it that way.

 

On Tuesday, the voters of California will cast the die on Prop 37. Yes on 37 means GMO food will henceforth be labeled.

 

The idea behind 37 is simple. If you’re eating food, you have a right to know what’s in it and what’s been done to it. Government scientists and corporate scientists can claim GMO food is “the same in all aspects” as non-GMO, but you still have a right to know.

 

Monsanto and it allies claim that you knowing is unfair, because you might be swayed, by your own prejudice, to leave that GMO food on the market shelf, when in fact there is no reason to leave it there.

 

They are telling you the companies who are selling you food are more important than your own judgment about what to put in your body.

 

You would be impeding commerce if you believe GMO food is bad for you, and in order to protect GMO companies and the economy, you must go into a market blind, to keep things “honest.”

 

That’s what they think of you: you’re an idiot. You can’t make reasonable judgments. Therefore, you need to be blind.

 

Let me draw an exact parallel. Let’s suppose you were part of a group that was rallying for a particular political cause, and the government had planted an FBI agent in your midst.

 

Now, if exposed and questioned, this FBI plant would say, “I wasn’t there to disrupt or influence the group in any way. I was merely trying to protect good Americans. I was there to observe, nothing more.”

 

Would you nevertheless have the right to know he was there? Would you have the right to decide whether you wanted him there? Or are you too stupid to know that he should be there because America is in danger and we need people like him to spy on us without our knowing, to keep us safe?

 

It’s the same situation. They tell you the genes planted in your food are neutral in every sense. They affect nothing. They’re good genes and they do good work. But because you might not think so, because you’re too stupid to know the truth, you have to be blind about what’s in your food when you choose it and buy it and eat it.

 

That’s the argument.

 

YES ON 37=you have a right to know.

 

NO ON 37=you need to be protected against your own stupidity.

 

According to this logic, the NO ON 37 people have a right, even a moral duty, to lie to you, to say whatever they need to, in order to move you in the direction of giving up your right to know. They should lie, they have to lie, since their “truth” wasn’t doing the job.

 

And they have lied.

 

http://www.carighttoknow.org/documented_deceptions

 

In other words, they’re looking at you as if you were a leading suspect in a criminal case. The cops can put you in a room, they can falsely say they have a witness who saw you at the scene of the murder, who saw you dump the gun in a garbage can. They can falsely say they have you on video committing the murder. They can lie about all this non-existent evidence.

 

The Supreme Court has ruled this is legal in criminal cases. The cops can do this to get a confession from a suspect.

 

In the same way, the NO ON 37 people can tell you anything, can lie to you about anything, because it’s assumed their cause is just.

 

Your inherent right to know is a threat to the established order. It must be taken away.

 

The government is trying to make the same argument about vaccines. They want to close down all possible exemptions that would allow you to refuse a vaccine for yourself or your child. Why? Because, they say, only a moron would refuse a vaccine. Therefore, the CDC can make all sorts of false statements about dire disease threats and pandemics that aren’t pandemics, in order to scare you into taking a vaccine. It doesn’t matter what they say, as long as it results in you getting the vaccine.

 

And since you’re too stupid to realize the country is under constant threat from terrorists and, therefore, the government has to spy on you 24/7, they spy on you without a warrant. Secretly. Otherwise, you might object.

 

All these examples of preempting your right to know the truth are connected. They are the strategy of the corporate-government complex that runs America.

 

They claim to have a monopoly on truth. To impose the truth, they need to lie.

 

The massive push to defeat Prop 37 in California tomorrow is the latest illustration.

 

Cops need to lie, the FBI needs to lie, the CDC needs to lie, Homeland Security needs to lie, so NO ON 37 needs to lie.

 

Does it make you feel warm and safe?

 

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

DEPT. OF JUSTICE LYING TO DEFEAT PROP 37

 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LYING TO DEFEAT PROP 37

By Jon Rappoport

November 4, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

The vote is two days away. In California, Prop 37 is on the ballot. It states that all GMO food should be labeled as such, so the consumer can decide whether to buy it and eat it.

 

The NO ON 37 forces have been caught in a deception. They used the official seal of the FDA in a mailer, and above that seal they attributed a quote to the FDA which was never made by that agency.

 

The quote was: “The US Food and Drug Administration says a labeling policy like Prop 37 would be ‘inherently misleading.’”

 

The FDA told KPBS they “never made such statements with respect to Prop 37.”

 

Here’s the capper. After receiving a complaint about all this, the US Attorney in Sacramento, who works for the US Dept. of Justice, said he would refer the whole matter to the FDA.

 

What?

 

The question of whether NO ON 37 committed a crime is not up to the FDA. It’s up to the Dept. of Justice. Its their investigation.

 

The FDA isn’t going to arrest anyone at NO ON 37 for stealing its seal or making a false statement over that seal.

 

If you issued a pronouncement on Dept. of Commerce letterhead under the seal of that agency, would employees of Commerce arrest you? Of course not. The FBI (as an agency under the DOJ) would arrest you.

 

The US Attorney in Sacramento is essentially lying when he implies the FDA should handle the matter of its own seal being used without federal authority. There is no reason for the DOJ to refer this matter to the FDA. The DOJ should investigate NO ON 37. It’s their job.

 

Two days ago, the YES ON 37 people held what turned out to be an infamous press conference. As I’ve previously reported (see this and this), the whole thing degenerated into a hair-splitting argument, when reporters for major outlets like the LA Times and the NY Times demanded to know whether the DOJ had really launched an investigation into possible crimes committed by the NO ON 37 forces.

 

This distraction torpedoed the press conference.

 

These brain-addled reporters should have been asking why the DOJ didn’t launch a full-blown investigation and instead referred the matter to the FDA.

 

The headline on their subsequent stories should have read: DOJ REFUSES TO INVESTIGATE NO ON 37; REFERS INVESTIGATION TO WRONG AGENCY.

 

But truth isn’t the mission of these quacking ducks.

 

At the end of All the President’s Men, Ben Bradlee, the editor of the Washington Post, tells his two cub reporters, Woodward and Bernstein: “We’re under a lot of pressure, you know…Nothing’s riding on this except the, uh, first amendment to the Constitution, freedom of the press and maybe the future of the country…”

 

In this case, nothing is riding on the vote on Prop 37 except the future health of the country, the hidden destructive effects of GMO food, the capture of the food supply by Monsanto and its government allies, and the killing of small family farms.

 

So let’s stall and cover the wrong story, let’s ignore the underlying issues, let’s let the Dept. of Justice off the hook, let’s allow big pesticide and GMO companies, with their deep pockets, to swing Tuesday’s vote in their favor, let’s subvert the role of a free and vigorous press, let’s fiddle and faddle and take a hands-off attitude and do nothing.

 

And they call these people reporters.

 

They’re pernicious scum who bring a boomer indifference and smirking sense of entitlement to their work, which is no work at all. They’re not good enough to sharpen pencils or clean computer screens in the office of a real newspaper…if one existed.

 

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

DYING NY TIMES NOW TWEETING THE “NEWS” ON PROP 37

 

DYING NY TIMES NOW TWEETING THE ‘NEWS’ ON PROP 37

by Jon Rappoport

November 3, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

The latest reporter to dismiss the crimes of the NO ON 37 forces is Stephanie Strom of the NY Times. She’s tweeting. That’s right. The Times has hit rock bottom. Why don’t they just close their doors and fumigate the building?

 

Strom’s tweets are posted at her Muck Rack page:

 

http://muckrack.com/ssstrom

 

In yesterday’s YES ON 37 press conference, the right of California citizens to know whether their food is genetically engineered was undermined by reporters who kept whining and complaining about whether the DOJ was really investigating the NO ON 37 forces for fraud.

 

Was it an investigation or only a modest concern? Was it an inquiry? Was it just a returned phone call? Can six million angels dance on the head of a pin or only 5,999,999?

 

At the press conference, the YES ON 37 people raised legitimate concerns about fraud and felonies in the NO ON 37 ads. Among the concerns: NO ON 37 was illegally using the FDA seal to impart a false legitimacy to false statements.

 

But the reporters at the press conference didn’t care about that complaint. It wasn’t interesting to them. They only cared about whether the DOJ had opened an official investigation of NO ON 37.

 

So here is NY Times reporter Stephanie Strom tweeting the word of God yesterday.

 

Tweet One: “Yes on Prop 37 folks say they’ve heard the DOJ is pursuing a ‘criminal investigation’ of complaints.”

 

Tweet Two: “Oops—Yes on 37 say DOJ in [sic] investigating use of FDA seal by No on 37. It’s been a long week.”

 

Tweet Three: “So it’s not an ‘investigation’ at all. Beware of hyperbole.”

 

Well, that takes care of that. No official investigation, so who cares? No story there at all.

 

Doesn’t matter that NO ON 37 people are lying in their ads, are using the FDA seal illegally, which is a felony. Doesn’t matter that NO ON 37 people lied to voters in the California Voter’s Guide by making intentionally false statements, another felony. Doesn’t matter that NO ON 37 people attributed statements to organizations which those organizations say they never made. Who cares?

 

That’s not a story. The only story is whether the DOJ has opened a criminal investigation into NO ON 37.

 

That’s on the order of: “Look, the Justice Department denies Nixon was covering up anything, so there’s no story.”

 

Eric Holder, the Attorney General, says the DOJ didn’t do anything wrong in Operation Fast&Furious, so forget about the story.”

 

Janet Reno, the Attorney General, says every possible caution was taken at the Waco compound, so that’s that. End of story.”

 

Here’s what happened. Joe Sandler, lawyer for YES ON 37, got a phone call from an FBI agent, Jason Jones, a few days ago. Jones was following up on a complaint that had been lodged with the DOJ. The complaint laid out, chapter and verse, the lies the NO ON 37 forces had engaged in.

 

Sandler took this as a sign that the DOJ was investigating. But technically speaking, he was a bit off the mark. Who cares? Sandler basically had it right.

 

However, for eminent reporters, like Stephanie Strom, this was the end of it. No story. Move along, nothing to see. “Beware of hyperbole,” she writes.

 

I’m afraid not. “Beware of the NY Times. Beware of reporters for the Times who can’t see past their Twitter accounts.”

 

You can read my piece on the whole YES ON 37 press-conference fiasco here. It’s a bit more substantive than a tweet.

 

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/11/03/breaking-elite-media-try-to-destroy-yes-on-37-press-conference/

 

But I can tweet, too. How about this? “DOJ should open full-blown criminal probe into NO ON 37 but refuses to.”

 

Or “DOJ fails again. NO ON 37 criminals free as birds.”

 

Or “NO ON 37 forces steal FDA seal to lie in their ads. It’s a felony.”

 

I didn’t attend journalism school and I don’t write for the NY Times. Therefore, I know my tweets signal a much bigger story than “YES ON 37 said DOJ started an investigation but that was sort of wrong.”

 

Here is a link re the complaint against NO ON 37 filed with the DOJ:

 

http://www.carighttoknow.org/documented_deceptions

 

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

BREAKING! ELITE MEDIA TRY TO DESTROY “YES ON 37” PRESS CONFERENCE

BREAKING: MAJOR MEDIA TRY TO DESTROY “YES ON 37” PRESS CONFERENCE

by Jon Rappoport

November 3, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

No, this wasn’t a group of street thugs breaking into a liquor store. This was a string of reporters trying to destroy the truth about a subject that threatens the health and future of the planet’s population: GMO food.

They did it in serial fashion over the phone, on a press-conference call organized by supporters of YES ON 37. The California ballot measure that would force sellers to label their GMO food “genetically engineered,” to allow consumers the right to know and choose.

I was on the call, and I was stunned by the parade of morons from the press who were obscuring the main issue and complaining and whining about the definition of word “investigation.”

It was miles and miles through the looking-glass.

To begin with, Joe Sandler and Andy Kimbrell, lawyers supporting Proposition 37, laid out a convincing case for fraud on the part of the NO ON 37 group, who are funded by pesticide and biotech interests.

The charges: NO ON 37 had used, in their ads, the official seal of the FDA, a felony. They attributed statements to the FDA, Stanford University, the World Health Organization, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics which those organizations had never made; statements that would convince voters to turn down Prop 37.

Sandler, Kimbrell, and others from the YES ON 37 camp further stated that these organizations had gone on the record denying they had ever made those statements.

Finally, the YES ON 37 representatives clearly asserted that the NO ON 37 forces had made false assertions in the California Voter Guide, which is sent to voters to help them understand arguments for and against ballot propositions. This would be another felony.

You can read the specific NO ON 37 deceptions here:

http://www.carighttoknow.org/documented_deceptions

Then came the time for questions. Suddenly, the mood changed. It changed because the press-conference organizers had publicized the event by claiming the FBI had opened an investigation into the NO ON 37 forces.

Reporters wanted to know whether there was really an FBI investigation. Joe Sandler and Andy Kimbrell explained there was. Sandler remarked that he had received a call from an FBI agent, Jason Jones, after a complaint had been sent to the Dept. of Justice.

The complaint detailed the false assertions in ads and in the Voter Guide. The FBI agent gave the impression that the FDA would be consulted, to see if they knew their official seal had been used by the NO ON 37 organizers.

But, whined a reporter, is that really really an investigation? One by one, reporters from the LA Times, the NY Times, and other papers wanted to get into a Talmudic hair-splitting conversation about the use of the word “investigation.” LA and NY Times reporters stated they had contacted the Dept. of Justice and learned no investigation had been launched.

Sandler said: look, a complaint was filed; an FBI agent followed up on it; the agent said the matter would be looked into.

The reporters were not assuaged. They kept chewing on the word “investigation.”

What shall we call it? An investigation, an inquiry, a preliminary fact-gathering expedition, an active concern, a mission to Mars, a ham sandwich, a kick in the ass? Who cares?

The YES ON 37 people had just exposed grievous and explosive lies and crimes by the forces who don’t want consumers to know whether the food they’re eating is engineered or GM-free.

That’s not a good enough story for the LA Times or the NY Times? That’s not a page-one ripper?

No, it’s not. It’s not because the reporters would actually have to THINK, and God forbid, COMPARE, in order to carry the ball themselves. They’d have to compare the statements made by NO ON 37 people against the truth, and they’d have to write more than: “FBI opens investigation.”

This is how these dancing monkeys operate. With the least possible amount of work.

They had a hook for their story in mind before they went on the press-conference call. It was, again: “FBI opens investigation.” If that hook wouldn’t technically hold up, they had no story. They had no more ideas. They had no more interest. They had no more active brain cells. They had no more balls. They had no more concern about GMO food or human health or the real issues involved.

And this is just on Level One. On Level Two, we would look into the preconceived media bias in favor of GMO food and no labeling.

But here, I’m just giving you the details of the press conference and the idiots who make up the press, the press that is dying, day by day, as the pages of their papers shrink and their ad revenues dry up and their jobs go away and their fate opens up an abyss before their eyes.

The reporter for the NY Times went so far as to suggest that the YES ON 37 PEOPLE really had no right to call the NO ON 37 people deceptive because there was a deception about, yes, THE FBI INVESTIGATION. It wasn’t actually an official investigation.

This is on the order of: “I drove all the way here to get your pastrami sandwich on a roll and I find out your menu actually says it comes on rye bread.”

To which the proper reply should be: “Your brain is made out of hamburger, so what difference does it make what I say to you? You’re a public nuisance. Get lost.”

This is exactly why the public loses faith in major media. This is why major media has no leg to stand on.

Here is another obvious fact the addled reporters didn’t think about: the NO ON 37 people, with their deep pockets, don’t care that they’re lying. The election is next Tuesday, and if they face some fines after that, it’s chump change to them. They want to sink Prop 37. That’s what they’re focused on.

The press, the fabled Fourth Estate, which is there to protect the public interest, put on quite a display at this press conference. They whined, they wheedled, they accused, they split hairs, they complained, they obfuscated, they distracted, they diverted, they came across like entitled high-school sophomores who’d just been given their first assignment for the school paper.

Meanwhile, Prop 37 is on the line. The right to know whether you’re eating food that has been injected with insect genes is on the line. A whole lot is on the line. But the press doesn’t care. They’re too busy failing in their mission and mandate.

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

IS CHOOSING TO BE VICTIM A TABOO SUBJECT?

 

IS CHOOSING TO BE A VICTIM A TABOO SUBJECT?

By Jon Rappoport

November 1, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Some people apparently think there are no fake victims, only real ones.

 

They believe that if all the oppression in the world were magically lifted tomorrow, people would suddenly become independent.

 

I don’t believe that. I raise these issues because I think it’s time for some honest input.

 

When I went to junior high school (it wasn’t “middle school” then, and “junior” wasn’t considered a dangerous pejorative that could ruin young minds), the concept of a victim, as we use it now, didn’t exist.

 

Can you imagine it? There was no special ed. There were no federal funds paid out for each “specially abled” child. No one used the word “victim.” There was no such thing as ADHD. There was no such thing as a clinically depressed child. There were no shrinks hovering around ready to make diagnoses and dispense drugs.

 

This junior high had a cross-section of kids from different economic and ethnic backgrounds. There were rich kids, middle-class kids, and poor kids. There were white kids and black kids. There were Italian kids and Jewish kids and WASP kids.

 

Did cruel things occasionally happen? Were there a few bullies? Yes. Was it paradise every day? No. Were there injustices? Yes. But all in all, it was a good school. Kids learned. Kids had fun. Most of the teachers were fair and just.

 

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, more learning took place in that school than in a comparable school today. It wasn’t even close, by any reasonable standard of measurement, like literacy.

 

And in terms of the kids feeling safe and free (as free as anyone can be in a school), again it was no contest. Things were better then than they are now.

 

The word victim was never used. Kids didn’t wear victimhood like a badge. It didn’t take a village. We didn’t have the incomparable advantage of knowing we were all on Spaceship Earth, and yet we did well.

 

We somehow managed to struggle through without being taught about sex in the classroom. No one told us about the need to respect every point of view. In fact, there was no social training at all. We never sat around in class and had group discussions with the teacher.

 

We all knew the principal was an idiot. We knew who the bad teachers were and who the good teachers were. The good teachers just taught their subjects.

 

By today’s standards, we were living in the Stone Age. Yet, we got through it. We weren’t ever treated as victims, and we didn’t know what victims were. Kids understood they either succeeded or failed. If they failed, they didn’t make it to the next grade. It was stark and simple. No one objected.

 

Yes, in some respects, school was a real pain in the neck, but we bit the bullet and kept on going.

 

If someone from the future had showed up and told us about ADHD and what it was, and what the drugs were, we would have called him crazy. We would have laughed him into oblivion.

 

Flash forward 60 years…

 

Oh, but now there are so many more distractions. TV, computers, the Internet, cell phones. And drugs, porn, divorced parents, guns, junk food, advertising. Kids today need more help. They need more caring adults.”

 

No, actually, kids need schools where the rules are simple and stark. You learn or you don’t learn. You behave or you don’t behave. You aren’t a victim.

 

Over the last 60 years, a culture of victimhood has become a major industry. This culture, as it turns out, doesn’t really solve very much at all. It engenders more problems. It invents endless excuses. It piles up bullshit to the level of every kid’s eyes. It gives a kid an out.

 

The people who promote victimhood make their living by promoting victimhood. That’s the clue. They’re hustlers.

 

There are a few fuzzy boundaries when you differentiate between a real victim and a phony one. It isn’t perfect. Nothing is. There is no system that can protect everybody. But, all in all, you’re far better off unloading the victim culture than you are expanding it.

 

And expanding it is what happens when the pros and hustlers take over. They’re liars right down to their shoes.

 

Parents are complicit. They’re looking for an out, too. They want to have outside people make sure their kids are all right.

 

It all comes down to this: if you perceive that society has become a bad place for your family, for you, do you insist that everything has to be changed before you can thrive, or do you take the bull by the horns? Do you choose victimhood, or do you choose independence?

 

In recent months, we’ve learned that the federal government and its allies consider people who are against central authority a potential threat.

 

Translation: if you don’t go along with the culture of victimhood, you’re a monkey wrench in the machinery of progress. You’re standing up for yourself. You’re not absolutely relying on outside sources to solve your problems.

 

Once upon a time, self-reliance was a given. In order for it to be a given, there had to be a concomitant principle: if you don’t rely on yourself, you’re going to be in trouble. The two ideas go together.

 

People accepted this.

 

You pass your courses or you fail and repeat the grade.

 

That wasn’t considered an onerous burden. It was a fact of life.

 

Then, there was a change. “I” was replaced by “we.” That was the “new idea.” It sounded good. It sounded interesting. It sounded hopeful.

 

But it was a con. The “we” was fake. It wasn’t about cooperation in a family or in a real community. It was high-flying and political. It was vague.

 

It was an out. It was a way to choose victimhood. In fact, it became, over time, a way for voluntary victims to bond with one another. “We’re all in this together, we’re in bad shape, and we need help.”

 

And help arrived. It arrived, along many fronts, in the form of the removal of the need to be a strong individual.

 

That was the key in the lock that opened the door, so the old culture of self-reliance could flow into the sea and disappear.

 

But there are real victims!” people say. Of course there are. Since there are oppressors, there are victims. But I’m not talking about that. I’m not talking about that at all. I’m talking about choice, about choosing to enter the dim realm of the put-upon.

 

And if you don’t think many, many people have made that choice, you’re not watching. In fact, there is a good chance you’re just glazing over inside the vast culture of victimhood and letting it wash over you.

 

There’s a chance you’re letting your own power drip away, and you don’t really care.

 

When I was in ninth grade, my teacher told us what deus ex machina meant. God from the machine. It was a dramatic device through which, in a play, the characters were rescued from their terrible troubles, at the last minute, from Above. It was a cheap trick.

 

Well, there are millions of people who, after choosing victimhood, have come to believe in deus ex machina. One way or another, the cavalry will come over the hill. They count on this. The cosmic lottery ticket will turn up.

 

Just wait long enough, and the payoff will appear.

 

This has NOTHING to do with cooperation in small groups or families. It has everything to do with a gathering malaise. It has everything to do with the expanding culture of victimhood.

 

My father grew up in the Bronx. When he was 11, his father died. My father had to quit school. He was then the head of the family, which included his mother and sister and his younger brother.

 

Helped to learn how to look out for himself by a private charity, he found a job sweeping floors in a textile factory. He eventually moved up the ladder and became the chief salesman and designer and a partner in the firm.

 

For a number of years, he was a staunch socialist. But eventually, he said, he realized that forcing everyone to be equal didn’t work. Some people would always game the system. Some people would always find a way to make the system stronger and the individual weaker. Some people would use the system to give a leg up to their cronies.

 

Worse than any of this, a whole culture would emerge, a culture designed to provide people with a way to fall back on their weakest instincts, a culture that would eventually become violent and vicious, because it would encourage massive self-esteem based on nothing.

 

Combine that culture with rampant obsessive consumerism and you have a volatile mix that destroys minds.

 

And there is a ready excuse for every shortfall, an excuse for every shortcoming and every crime—with parasitic intellectuals inventing newer and newer reasons to exonerate all behaviors everywhere, under the flag of tolerance and understanding and even freedom.

 

Do we need liberation from oppressive criminals and their systems? Of course. Do we need liberation from our own individual self-diminishing surrender to passivity?

 

More than ever.

 

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

POLISHING YOUR VICTIM STORY

 

POLISHING YOUR VICTIM STORY

by Jon Rappoport

October 30, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

No, I’m not talking about Hurricane Sandy. I’m talking about something much more widespread.

 

If you haven’t realized it already, kids these days are growing up with the full knowledge that victims get ahead. Therefore, they have to find and hone and polish a story that will serve them well in life.

 

It could be anything from ADHD to Bipolar to “my parents got divorced, what do you expect?”

 

It’s not just about telling a story, either. They have to live out at least part of it, to gain cred.

 

So the kid steals. Or he throws tantrums. Or he gets bad grades in school, on purpose. Or, in certain circles, he pulls a trigger and somebody dies.

 

In the mental health department, he has 297 official mental disorders to choose from. It’s a banquet.

 

You can say the kid is too young to really know what he’s doing, and the parents and teachers and doctors are to blame, and that’s partly true. But unfortunately, the kid is, in fact, doing it. He is constructing a victim myth for himself. Later in life, he’ll find more sophisticated cover stories, and at some point the chickens will come home to roost. He’ll deteriorate as an adult, it won’t be pretty to watch.

 

Every once in a while, when a reader decides I haven’t been sufficiently sympathetic to victims, he’ll write and remind me of all the people in the world who are screwing over other people. Screwers like the government, the corporations, the big non-profit foundations, the banks, the generals, the intelligence agencies, the 20 families who own the planet, the secret societies, the doctors, the insurance companies, the right wingers or left wingers…

 

I have no problem with that. As a reporter, I’ve been covering these criminals for the past 30 years.

 

But I also know that self-made victims (as opposed to the people who are really being trampled on a daily basis) will blame major criminals to keep themselves weak and powerless. It’s a con. It’s a game.

 

Yes, this is an unpleasant subject. It’s also a basic element of human psychology, untouched by “mental-health professionals.” These pros feed off of, and in fact create, victims by the truckload. It’s good for business.

 

Several times, in print, I’ve called the 21st century the Century of the Brain. Ultimately, researchers want to say everyone is a victim of his own brain, and chemicals need to be applied to cure the inherent problem.

 

But on the other side, we now have many, many able-bodied people who are looking for an out. They’re looking for an acceptable way to predict and explain their failure and obtain freebies and sympathy.

 

Since the beginning of this election season, I’ve been saying that both candidates are shills for big government. We can go back many, many decades and then come back up the line and see that the federal government has been spreading like a fungus. It’s more than alarming.

 

However, it’s interesting that this election has been framed, as a story, about personal initiative and responsibility versus dependence and victimhood. This shows that people still think about these things. The amnesia and narcosis aren’t total. Not yet.

 

But at this rate, unless some fundamental change occurs, there will come a day when even the legend of personal liberty and responsibility will die out. At that point, a presidential election will look like an overt fire sale. It will be one set of freebies for victims versus another set.

 

Do you want the Democratic flat screen and car or the Republican Hawaiian vacation and the buttock implants?

 

The presidential debates will consist of competing late-night infomercials.

 

Parents who can afford it will be hiring victim consultants to tutor their little darlings, so they can choose stories that, later in life, will land them the most freebies.

 

Amidst the protests and uproar, the government will decide that every child, no matter how little money his parents make, deserves a civil servant to advocate for him and promote and shape his future as a disabled creature.

 

This is precisely what’s happening now in the mental-health arena. Last week, I reported on psychiatrists who are dispensing ADHD drugs to children in low-income neighborhoods, to effect “social justice.”

 

Since these MD morons assume the drugs actually do improve school performance over the long run, they want to close the gap between poorer and richer kids.

 

You see, it’s already SOP in middle-class homes to seek out shrinks who will make ADHD diagnoses for their privileged kids and give them the “performance-enhancing” drugs before crucial exams.

 

This must not stand, say the shrinks. No, the poorer kids deserve their (toxic) Ritalin and Adderall, too. You can’t pretend to be a victim in Shaker Heights or Scarsdale unless you can be exactly the same kind of victim in Watts or Southside Chicago.

 

By that logic, if little Jimmy who lives on Park Avenue can wear a $500 helmet whenever he leaves the house, in case a couch falls out of an apartment window and hits him on the head, then a child who is growing up in a ruined neighborhood in Detroit should also have the same quality of helmet. For free.

 

If little Jimmy can receive 55 doses of vaccines by the time he’s six, so he can be poisoned by the load of chemicals and contaminants in the shots, then his little opposite in Harlem should be allowed to get the same 55 doses for free.

 

If a white newborn baby, who is injected with the Hepatitis B vaccine before he leaves the hospital, can be “protected” against a disease transmitted only through sex or IV street-drugs, then a black baby should have the same protection.

 

Indisputable logic in an insane society.

 

So polish your kids’ victim tale. Many goodies await.

 

In the future, if victimhood and dependence on government are universal, there’ll be no need to have people around who make a good living on their own. Since dependence is a more basic goal, why bother? Just put a cap on maximum allowed salary and profit.

 

What we now call the safety net will become the only net.

 

I recall two kids I grew up with. This was back in the stone age, when things were quite different. These two boys shared several features. They were very smart. They wore thick glasses. Physically, they were very uncoordinated. During every game, they were placed off to the side, where they’d do the least possible damage.

 

They were, at times, razzed mercilessly. From the blank paralyzed expressions on their faces, they didn’t take it well. It was quite painful to them. I think there were moments when they became absolutely desperate, but they didn’t voice it. They just stood there and took it. No one came to their rescue. It was bad.

 

If then were now, these two boys would be diagnosed, at the very least, with clinical depression. Because they seemed, at moments, abstracted and detached, they might be labeled ADHD as well.

 

And with psychologists on hand to “draw out their feelings,” they would be encouraged to think of themselves as victims.

 

They would get SSRI antidepressants and perhaps Ritalin. The SSRIs might push them over the edge into suicide. If not, they might be given powerful anti-psychotics (neuroleptics), like Haldol or Risperdal. These drugs cause motor brain damage.

 

But because they lived and grew up in a more “primitive age,” they made it through. And they became quite successful in later life.

 

They escaped the victim trap. As children they were treated cruelly, but they escaped.

 


Here is a modern child who didn’t. This story is related by Dr. Peter Breggin, the author of the classic, Toxic Psychiatry.

 

Roberta was a college student, getting good grades, mostly A’s, when she first became depressed and sought psychiatric help at the recommendation of her university health service. She was eighteen at the time, bright and well motivated, and a very good candidate for psychotherapy. She was going through a sophomore-year identity crisis about dating men, succeeding in school, and planning a future. She could have thrived with a sensitive therapist who had an awareness of women’s issues.

 

Instead of moral support and insight, her doctor gave her Haldol. Over the next four years, six different physicians watched her deteriorate neurologically without warning her or her family about tardive dyskinesia [motor brain damage] and without making the [tardive dyskinesia] diagnosis, even when she was overtly twitching in her arms and legs. Instead they switched her from one neuroleptic to another, including Navane, Stelazine, and Thorazine. Eventually a rehabilitation therapist became concerned enough to send her to a general physician, who made the diagnosis [of medical drug damage]. By then she was permanently physically disabled, with a loss of 30 percent of her IQ.

 

“…my medical evaluation described her condition: Roberta is a grossly disfigured and severely disabled human being who can no longer control her body. She suffers from extreme writhing movements and spasms involving the face, head, neck, shoulders, limbs, extremities, torso, and back-nearly the entire body. She had difficulty standing, sitting, or lying down, and the difficulties worsen as she attempts to carry out voluntary actions. At one point she could not prevent her head from banging against nearby furniture. She could hold a cup to her lip only with great difficulty. Even her respiratory movements are seriously afflicted so that her speech comes out in grunts and gasps amid spasms of her respiratory muscles…Roberta may improve somewhat after several months off the neuroleptic drugs, but she will never again have anything remotely resembling a normal life.”


This is the kinder, gentler society. This is care and share. This is prevention and intervention. This is It Takes a Village. This is “we’re all in this together.” This is the land of the victim.

For this, we are told we have to give up old-fashioned notions of self-reliance and independence as brutal remnants of a bygone era.

It is not only the pharmaceutical juggernaut that seeks to make profit from the manufacture of victims. The street-drug business also needs people to enshrine victimhood as their defining identity, which is exactly what happens when a person becomes addicted to meth or heroin or cocaine crack.

The Mexican-US border remains wide open because the tonnage of street drugs must flow. It has nothing to do with “concern for victim immigrants.” That is just the cover story. The drugs must move so the banks that launder drug money can stay afloat. (See Former Arizona State Senator Karen Johnson’s article, “Drug Cartel, Terrorists, and Banks,”)

There are two sides to this basic coin. One, people make themselves into victims. Two, government-corporate-syndicate-propaganda forces encourage victimhood. It’s big, big business.

Finally, I’d be remiss in failing to point out the rising trend in “victims claiming they’re not victims.” Many of these people assert this revelation happily, as if they’ve just discovered buried treasure in their back yards. It’s astonishing. I’m talking, for example, about women who opt for “prophylactic” mastectomies.

There is no diagnosis of cancer at all. The women choose to have one or both breasts removed to “minimize their later cancer risk.”

A study done in New York State inferred that, among all mastectomies performed, the percentage of prophylactic mastectomies rose over a decade by about 250%.

Well, I could have thought of myself as a victim, but I realized I was doing a really good thing. I was, in my own small way, a hero. I want all women to know about their options…”

Look for this joyous self-mutilation trend to accelerate in the coming years. It will be accepted as blandly as these preventive breast surgeries are now.

Last year, nine hundred perfectly healthy Americans had their legs removed in operating rooms. They opted for the amputations to make a statement. If some people somewhere can’t walk, neither can I…”

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

THE WAR AGAINST IMAGINATION

The War Against Imagination

by Jon Rappoport

October 25, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

I could begin by saying that the compulsion to vote for one of the two major presidential candidates is a failure of imagination, a failure to see clearly other long-range possibilities for the transformation of American politics…and that would be true.

But it’s only a tiny corner of the overall war against imagination.

And that war is being waged by propaganda experts, yes, in a massive way, but the true war is being waged by individuals in their own minds. This is the basic fact, and to overlook it is to surrender our future.

Why? Because the repression of imagination downgrades the essence of what the individual human being is.

That repression brings us ever closer to the day when orders from our leaders will be obeyed without hesitation, because we can only envision the choices they construct for us.

Take A or B. Of course, it turns out that our freedom and power are mortgaged by either choice. And since the prospect of imagining C through Z and beyond is dimly perceived, we acquiesce. We say A or we say B.

And we pay the price.

Imagination is the capacity to invent realities that don’t currently exist, that have never existed.

Along with imagination comes the courage to implement those invented realities, to make them FACT in the world.

We can blame all sorts of people and institutions for our failure of imagination, but that doesn’t change our situation one iota. It only postpones the day when we take the reins of our own destiny.

I’ll take this one giant step further. We don’t really know what we’re capable of until we live through and by imagination. Then and only then do we come into our own. Then and only then do the blinders fall away from our eyes. Only then do we begin to experience our true power and how far it extends.

I’m now talking about the individual. I’m referring to what has been called talent, high IQ, paranormal ability, magic. These and other terms have been used to describe the effect of living through imagination.

It may be hard to see this, because we have been looking at life through the wrong end of the telescope. We see ourselves struggling to reach up to a level we seem to know very little about. But this is backwards.

The truth is, there was a time when each of us knew what it meant to live through and by imagination. We were there. And when we were there, we understood perfectly. We understood because living through imagination was the most natural thing in the world. It was like breathing.

It still is, but we have managed to cut ourselves off from that knowledge, from that intimate knowing. And so we profess ignorance. Which is like a bird walking across a beach and wondering whether he’ll ever be able to fulfill his dream of flying.

Along with my work as an investigative reporter, imagination has been my main area of focus over the past 25 years.

To use the metaphor of alchemy, in which terms like Quintessence and Philosopher’s Stone and the Fifth Element were discussed, imagination is Quintessence. Imagination is ultimately the thing that surmounts a state of endless internal conflict in which nothing is ever finally decided.

Imagination can and does employ all the energies that are normally devoted to competing sides in a state of conflict. Imagination takes those energies as raw fuel for its fire and transforms them into the substance of vision and the creation of new realities in the world.

Although people tend to think of imagination as a toy for children, it is actually, when used and experienced intensely, a means for vaulting up to a whole new level of living…at which point a person gains access (magically, it seems) to information and capability that was never present before.

But in fact, this new level of living is entirely natural. It was always there. It was simply hidden and and buried and isolated under a welter of cover stories generated by the person himself.

Just as conspirators float cover stories to hide their operations, the individual conspires against his own power by floating cover stories to explain his diminished capability.

Trying to unravel and expose and catalog each personal cover story, and “get to the bottom of the whole thing,” is a fruitless task. It only digs one in deeper. This was the mission of psychology, and it has failed in the most profound ways.

The starting point is imagination itself. It raises all boats. It relieves us of the need to do exploratory surgery on all the roadblocks that might be holding us back.

As I’ve written before, the centuries-long struggle to liberate humanity from central authority, and establish individual freedom as the overriding principle of existence, was step one. Step two was deciding what freedom was for.

The answers we provided, while useful, were incomplete.

Freedom is for imagination. Freedom is the only platform from which limitless imagination can be launched.

Imagination creates new futures. Larger and more thrilling futures.

Most of all, imagination is the road along which the individual regains his natural power and joy, and attains what was always his.

Imagination cures amnesia about immortality.

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. 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