OBAMACARE AND THE MATRIX

Mar27

THE MECHANICS OF THE MATRIX

MARCH 25, 2012. We are witnessing an intensified effort, on the part of elite groups, to manage THE MATRIX.

This involves shaping:

political realities;

social realities;

economic realities;

medical realities;

information realities;

psychological realities;

spiritual realities.

When all is said and done, the attack is on the power and energy of the individual.

One part of my work consists in showing how the evolving medical cartel is really waging chemical warfare on the population, with toxic drugs. At the highest level, behind the curtain, the objective is to grossly weaken, physically and mentally, the body and the brain.

For example–

THE DEVASTATING TRUTH BEHIND OBAMACARE.

National Health Insurance Before Supreme Court for Ruling.

Last week, guest-hosting The Alex Jones Radio Show, I discussed the case of a young Michigan boy, whose parents have been taken to court three times to force them to submit their child to intensely toxic chemo treatments—despite these facts:

The boy’s latest scans reveal no sign of cancer; the drugs that would be forced on him can cause cancer; the drugs have not been approved to treat children. [Go to 4m50s in the video.]

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ8Zd6DSQY8&w=400&h=233]

More about this case here.

And I warned: this is what waits for you and your children, up the line, if the Supreme Court allows Obamacare (National Health Insurance) to stand as law. [More on this in the above video segment and in what follows below.]

The “share and care” humanitarian mask will be peeled away. The US Dept. of Health and Human Services will create, as mandated, a complete list of approved treatments for every disease-label under the sun. And everyone in the insurance plan (everyone in America) will be forced to take what the doctor tells them to take.

For a bonus, unapproved treatments will eventually be banned. People and practitioners who try to use alternative treatments will find themselves in trouble.

This is the hidden agenda of Obamacare. This is what it will morph into in the future—unless it is struck down as unconstitutional.

I’m not dreaming or fantasizing. I’ve been following and reporting on the medical cartel for 30 years, and I know the mindset of these people, these medical bureaucrats, these pharmaceutical string-pullers behind the scenes. Obamacare is right up their alley. It’s about control, so it’s an answer to their prayers.

What do we know about their mainstream medicine, the hospital-based drug-addled modern version?

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of theAmerican Medical Association published a landmark paper by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.

Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZL9vNmUKyU&w=415&h=241]

In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.

So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise.

This is the dirty secret.

Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple.

The Obama Plan involves appointing an “expert panel” to decide what treatments Americans should be given for what diseases, under the new regime.

Only a certified idiot would assume that, over time, alternative non-mainstream therapies would survive such an ongoing vetting. Hope may spring eternal, but common sense makes it easy to grasp the realities on the ground.

In the long run, alternative therapies will be edged out. Those that remain will be permitted for a narrow range of conditions, or as adjuncts to standard drug treatments and surgery.

Chiropractors and acupuncturists, who are temporarily basking in the notion that Obama “really cares,” are in for a very rude awakening. Their careers and practices will be significantly reduced. Not today, not tomorrow, but it will happen.

Doctors, under the Plan, will be telling patients they may not take nutritional supplements while in treatment. This will assume the status of an irreversible edict. In many cases, “while in treatment” means years.

What happens to a person, conscripted into the mandated Plan, who is told by his doctor that he should/must receive a vaccine? Suppose this person says no? What are the consequences? Will he then be labeled a defector? What penalties will he suffer?

Does a diagnosis of cancer imply a patient must submit to chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery? Can these treatments be forced upon him?

Perhaps, in the early days of the Plan, nothing untoward will happen. But then, as time passes, and the system assumes tighter and tighter controls, the hand of government will close around the recalcitrant patient’s neck.

“Take this vaccine. Take this chemo drug. If you don’t, you’re out of the system, and that makes you a criminal, because everyone has to be in the system.”

Doctors, who are an integral part of the Plan, will surely be punished if they give unapproved (alternative) treatments to patients.

And in order to make the Plan operate on a day-to-day basis, the records and bookkeeping data of every health-care practitioner in America will be tracked on government computer networks.

Every person in America will have a traceable and trackable medical ID package. Government-issued. There is no way around it. The monitoring apparatus can’t work without it.

Orwellian consequences lie up the road in the field of psychiatric practice. In case you hadn’t noticed, the invention of “disorders” by committee is the preferred method for “discovering” more and more mental illnesses.

Yet, the science is completely fraudulent. For evidence, consult the many works of psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who has done more than any other person to expose the guts of his own profession (see www.breggin.com) Breggin establishes that mental disorders are not authoritatively diagnosed by a chemical or biological test. Conclusive tests do not exist. And worse, in this undefined and arbitrary territory, the drugs that follow diagnoses are killers: for example, 300,000 cases of motor brain damage, as a result of the administration of major tranquilizers.

Under the Obama Plan, you can bet your bottom dollar that psychiatric care will eventually become mandatory. A patient suddenly diagnosed with clinical depression or bipolar disease will be told he must take the drugs—and suffer their adverse effects.

Very young children will be given more and more debilitating and dangerous brain drugs.

Under the Obama Plan, it will be very convenient to declare new pandemics every few seasons, because these phony non-epidemics provide an opportunity to herd the sheep into clinics and remind them who is running the show. Go here, take this vaccine; go there, take that drug; the epidemic is endangering the herd, and you must help your brothers and sisters.

These are the figures on the last several “epidemics.” They are not yearly; they are grand totals, to date; global totals, except in the case of West Nile (US only):

SARS: 774 deaths.

WEST NILE: 1159 deaths.

BIRD FLU: 262 deaths.

SMALLPOX: (terrorist threat): 0 deaths.

SWINE FLU: 25,000 deaths.

To give perspective, globally, 250 thousand to 500 thousand people die of ordinary flu-like illness every year. Yet this higher death rate accrues no interest as an epidemic. It is only the “teaching (brainwashing) moments” of the phony epidemics that are promoted by health agencies (e.g., CDC and WHO) and their pharmaceutical allies, who rake in billions by manufacturing new vaccines.

Yes, under the Obama Plan, there will be more declared health emergencies, and they will serve to cement the citizen to his new role as eternal patient in the medical march along bleak streets of the future.

Can you perceive the loss of individual freedom implicit in this universal system of health control?

_________________________________

Sources and comments: I’m fully aware that people reading the facts in this essay will be shocked, and they will have doubts. Here are the sources for those facts. Things are not what they seem.

Barbara Starfield, “Is US health really the best in the world?” JAMA, July 26, 2000. Contains statistics on medically-caused deaths in the US.

On January 8, 2001, the LA Times ran a piece by Linda Marsa on the effects of medical drugs in the US. Predictably, the story sank like a stone. It provoked no Congressional hearings, no arrests.

The article described, in a few key paragraphs, a world of trouble. Adverse medical events, from med drugs:

“A 1998 University of Toronto study found that roughly 100,000 Americans die of adverse [medical-drug] reactions each year, and 2.1 million more are hospitalized.”

Marsa offered, in her Times article, a quote from an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, Dr. David Bates, an author of a 2000 study on drug effects. The study found that “18 percent of patients complained of drug-related complications,” Marsa wrote.

Here is the quote from Dr. Bates: “People often have [drug-caused] symptoms for months, but they’re either reluctant to let their doctor know or they weren’t sure if they just felt lousy…But these numbers translate to 36 million adverse drug events per year.”

To add up the death totals from recent phony epidemics:

SARS—See WHO “Summary of probable SARS cases with onset of illness from 1 November 2002 to 31 July 2003” (based on data as of Dec.31, 2003).

BIRD FLU—See WHO “Confirmed Human Cases of Avian Influenza A (H5N1)” (24 September 2009)

WEST NILE—See CDC, West Nile Virus, Statistics, Surveillance, and Control. Years are reported separately, 1999-2009. I included only US cases because I couldn’t find a good source for global cases.

To confirm that every year, between 250,000 and 500,000 people die from ordinary flu, see WHO Fact Sheet No.211, Influenza (Seasonal).

Read Dr. Peter Breggin’s classic, “Toxic Psychiatry: Why Therapy, Empathy and Love Must Replace the Drugs, Electroshock, and Biochemical Theories of the ‘New Psychiatry'” (St. Martin’s Press, 1991). Follow Breggin’s argument, through several chapters; labeled mental disorders are not based on factual biological evidence; and see p.89-91 for evidence that at least 300,000 people are suffering from brain damage (tardive dyskinesia) as a result of being administered major tranquilizers.

Founded in 1992, the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), a minor bureau of the National Institutes of Health (a federal agency), has managed to derail, stall, and divert the progress of real alternative medicine. It has forwarded no breakthroughs. It has bogged itself down in conferences, reports, and committee deliberations. It has fooled a number of so-called alternative-health advocates into believing that the federal government supports non-mainstream health strategies.

_________________________________

Imagine what would happen when healthcare in this country becomes centralized to a much greater degree under the Obama Plan. If this one tiny agency, NCCAM, can now befuddle the alternative field with a collection of inept and self-seeking bureaucrats, gargantuan power held at the top of the federal government will make that diversion look like a raindrop in a hurricane.

The history of the decline of infectious disease is a history of improved sanitation, alleviation of overcrowding, the rise of the middle class, and above all, the betterment of nutrition. This decline in disease occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread vaccination. (See Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis) Under massively centralized medical care, in an environment where chemically saturated agri-business grows our food in depleted topsoil, there is a greater and greater need for nutritional supplements. But this vital avenue will be narrowed and blocked in the ways I have indicated above.

_________________________________

Last but not least, medical-research fraud continues unabated, an out-of-control rampant crime.

See, for example, “20 Percent Of Cancer Studies Report Conflict of Interest,” ScienceDaily (May 13, 2009): “Nearly one-third of cancer research published in high-impact journals disclosed a conflict of interest, according to a new study from researchers at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center…”

Also, from the Boston Globe (Boston.com, August 15, 2005), “Flaws are found in validating medical studies; many see need to overhaul standards for peer review”:

“…after a study that sent reverberations through the medical profession by finding that almost one-third of top research articles have been either contradicted or seriously questioned, some specialists are calling for radical changes in the system…almost one-third of the top papers that appeared in top journals over a 13-year period from 1990 to 2003, had been either contradicted or found to have potentially exaggerated results. All the articles had [prior to publication] undergone vigorous peer review, leading to questions about whether problems should have been caught by reviewers…”

_________________________________

What does this epidemic of cheating and lying in medical research add up to? New dangerous drugs will continue to be approved for public use, by the government. The dangers of the drugs will be hidden in fabricated studies published in prestigious journals.

As the Supreme Court deliberates on whether the individual mandate in Obama’s healthplan implies a penalty or tax if people opt out, and as the Court mumbles its way through questions about the Commerce Clause of the Constitution—which was never written to permit Congress to command people to buy health insurance—the real secret is concealed.

This insurance plan will capture more and more of the population in the cross-hairs of chemical warfare. No amount of squirming or arguing is going to change that.

Jon Rappoport is the author of a new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

Jon has worked as an independent investigative reporter since 1982. The LA Weekly nominated him for a Pulitzer Prize, for a interview he did with the president of El Salvador University, where the military had taken over the campus and was disappearing students and burning books. He has written for In These Times, Village Voice, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, CBS Healthwatch, Stern. His work can be found at www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

MIND CONTROL IN THE MATRIX

Mar25

MATRIX MIND CONTROL

AN INTERVIEW WITH JACK TRUE

MARCH 25, 2012. In my new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, I interview Jack True, among other cutting-edge researchers.

Jack was the most innovative hypnotherapist I’ve ever come across. His understanding of what came to be called The Matrix was unparalleled.

During his years working with patients, he developed methods of unhypnotizing people, because, as he said, “I stopped doing conventional hypnosis when I realized the people who were coming to see me were already in a trance.”

That was the turning point in Jack’s career. He spent the rest of his life working on that problem.

Jack was instrumental in getting me my first book contract, in 1987. The book was AIDS INC. He viewed it as “an attack on the medical trance,” and it did turn out to be that. [My book, AIDS INC., is included in THE MATRIX REVEALED collection.]

The interview below (one of our earliest) took place in 1987, after several prior conversations about elites and the powers-that-be.

There is much more I could say about Jack, but I’ll just present the interview–

Jack began with several remarks about mind control:

“First of all, if you want to know anything about the mind, you have to get rid of the idea of categorizing and labeling mental states. Psychiatry is based on that model, which is really a business model. It creates patients.

“And as the whole study of the mind falls more and more into the hands of psychiatrists, what the patient has to say about his own experience becomes less and less important. The psychiatrist is mainly there to make a diagnosis and then to prescribe drugs.

“So the patient believes less and less in the idea of HIS OWN UNIQUE experience. What makes him different and unique becomes less and less important to him. This whole trend is itself a form of mind control. You need to understand that.

“We have this crazy situation, where the very means to make a diagnosis and supposedly help the mind is really a form of mind control.

“I take a different path. To me, what the patient says and what he comes up with are very, very important. It’s the essence of what I’m dealing with. It’s unique. If a patient, in a light trance, tells me he’s in a field smelling flowers, that’s where he is. The field and the flowers aren’t referring to something else. They’re not symbolic. The field is the field and the flowers are the flowers. I’m not interpreting anything. I’m not making inferences. Understand? I didn’t put the patient in that field. I didn’t suggest he go there. I didn’t give him hints or clues. If that’s where he is when, in that light trance, he lets go of his buzzing thoughts and his distractions, then that’s where he is. I don’t put labels on it. I don’t think to myself, well obviously he has this condition or that condition. I don’t think, well, he’s remembering something from his childhood or from last week. I go with what he gives me. Literally. People sometimes have a hard time understanding that.

“The second thing is, you need to realize that mind control through straight propaganda, from the media or the government or corporations or schools, needs a fertile environment. People who act like robots or puppets or androids are easy targets. They just suck in information of any kind and spit it out. They believe what they’re told. But how did they get that way? How did they become puppets to begin with? That’s the real question. Are you going to blame upbringing, education, genes? Are you prepared to say that puppets are ‘made?’ We really need to think about that. Because that’s the straight Victim model. In that model, people have no free will of their own. They’re ‘worked on’ and created like little machines. That’s a very popular view, because people like abdicating responsibility for their own lives and minds. They like to go on and on about what’s being done to them and how it’s all out of their control. That view of things has been overplayed. It’s gone too far.

“There’s another way to look at this. Another side to this. People who live like puppets have chosen that role for themselves. It’s a role. The Puppet. It’s like being cast in a play. ‘Okay, we have the role of a puppet. Anybody interested in playing it? You’ll have to suck in information like a vacuum cleaner and accept it. You’ll have to put your independence on the shelf.’ [Emphasis added.]

“There are external factors that contribute to making a puppet, but that’s far from the whole story. It’s a role. It’s a whole way of living and acting. And once a person takes on that role, his view of reality shifts. Things line up differently. For example, the Group becomes far more important. Because there are other puppets, and they link together. They form a society of their own. They recognize each other.

“They tend to mesh into a network. A web. And this network gravitates toward accepting the most common and official explanation of reality. The network sniffs that out and buys it. They’re all playing the role of Puppet.

“Here’s the most interesting part. The network can ‘wake up.’ They can, altogether, wake up to something new. But it’s a FAKE waking up. It’s staged. It’s an officially certified waking up. For instance, a new social campaign sweeps the land. It’s now officially certified to look at a social factor THIS way. And the network of puppets sniffs it out and gets on board. Yesterday, they looked at that same social factor THAT way, but today, all of a sudden, they’re looking at it THIS way.

“Now, when people [who aren’t puppets] see this sudden amazing shift, they say, ‘Well, that’s a brainwashing scheme. All those puppets over there are being brainwashed by the press and the government. Yesterday, they believed X, and today they believe Y.’ And that’s true. But I’m interested in what goes on a deeper level. How the puppets became puppets in the first place. And part of the answer, an important part of the answer is, they CHOSE to be puppets. They chose the role. Individually chose it. [Emphasis added.]

“And once they chose it, they decreased their own available IQ, they dimmed their own perception, they adapted to the role. People can do that. People are very flexible. They can play out all sorts of roles, and they can make the necessary adjustments.

“So it turns out that a puppet isn’t stupid at all. He’s very smart. He’s certainly smart enough to know how to diminish his own IQ. That’s a good trick. It is. And IF he became aware that he chose that role, Puppet, and NOW he decided he didn’t like the role anymore, he could experience a rise in IQ. I’ve actually seen that happen. I worked with a patient who was brought in by his mother. And in the course of working with this boy over a long period of time, I watched him gradually become aware that he had chosen to be a puppet. It was quite something. At the end of it, he thought it was quite funny. He said to me: ‘I taught myself to be stupid.’ Well, he wasn’t stupid anymore. He went on to demonstrate that in school and in his life. The change was extraordinary.”

Jack and I discussed this boy for a while and then we sat down to do the formal interview.

Q: (Rappoport) Okay, let’s get started.

A: (Jack) Are people ready for this? It’s pretty far-out stuff.

Q: I’m just interested in what you have to say.

A: Well, that’s you. When people consider a subject like mind control, they immediately think about what “the controllers” are doing to their victims. They assume that’s the whole subject.

Q: And?

A: For 99.9 percent of the people on this planet, mind control occurs in a variety of other ways. So the question is: what’s actually happening?

You see, we have this word “programming.” It’s used as if everybody knows what it means. As if somebody installs a fully formed program in your head. A set of operating instructions.

Q: And that’s not so?

A: It’s mostly a metaphor. “Well, he’s programmed to act that way.”

Q: Whereas the truth is?

A: The truth is different. For example, suppose you put a program in your OWN head? Suppose you’re the programmer AND the program-ee?

Q: Obviously, you don’t think much of the term “programming.”

A: It’s too easy. I’m interested in what people can discover about themselves when they aren’t burdened with simplistic preconceptions. Do you see? If you have a package of ideas and terms in your hip pocket when you explore the mind, you’re going to find what you already know. You’re going to plaster over whatever you encounter with old stale conceptions. I want to get away from that.

If you asked people what they think goes on in the subconscious, you’d get a fairly predictable spread of opinions. Whereas I take it somewhere else completely. For instance, suppose I said what happens in the subconscious is ART. Suppose I said it was an ongoing process of building structures.

Q: What? What goes on in the subconscious is art?

A: Right.

Q: That’s quite an unusual idea.

A: See, I don’t think it’s unusual at all. You know what I think is unusual? People who walk around doing everything in their power to “be average.” That’s extremely weird to me. You’ve got millions of people in America doing that. Where did that come from? Was everyone so influenced by puppet shows when they were kids, they decided to grow up to be puppets? (laughs)

People striving to be normal are strange. We accept it because it’s happening all around us. People are “behaving normally.” You want to talk about mind control? Talk about that! If people expended a tenth of the energy they use to be normal on something very creative, a lot of problems we have would automatically go away. Think about the amount of sheer energy it takes to maintain that normal front day after day.

You know, there are a whole lot of people who show up at therapists’ offices because they want to figure out how to be normal. Average. They’re pushing that as the grand solution. NORMAL is their idea of how to have a relationship with the world. Do you see? So what I’m saying is that NORMAL is a front, a mask. And behind it, people have a different relationship with the world. That’s what they hide. They hide it from other people and they hide it from themselves.

Q: The idea that a person is creating art in his subconscious. Can you give me an example?

A: I once had a patient who was quite brilliant and knew a great deal about deep politics and various elites and their machinations. But…he was in a trance.

Q: What do you mean?

A: He, outwardly, was very active. Lots of energy. Involved in his work, and in projects. But he felt trapped. We did a number of sessions. I put him in a light trance. I didn’t sink him down to the bottom of the well. Just a light trance, so that all sorts of random thoughts quieted down, so he could relax. And then there it was.

Q: There it was?

A: Yes. He was sitting in a swamp. He was mired in something. He was very passive in a central area of his mind, his consciousness.

Q: You talk about it as if you could see it.

A: I didn’t have to see it. He could. He did. Eventually, he told me all about it.

Q: You mean he regressed to a time in the past where he became passive, where something bad had happened to him?

A: No, it was much more graphic than that. He began talking as if he were IN A LANDSCAPE, and he described it to me. It was like something out of a gloomy novel. Barren place. Muddy streams. Gray.

Q: Do you think he had actually been in a place like that?

A: You’re going in the wrong direction.

Q: What?

A: You’re missing it.

Q: What am I missing?

A: You’re trying to use conventional ideas to explain what he was experiencing. It doesn’t operate that way. He was THERE. He was surrounded by this landscape. He described it. I didn’t prompt him. I didn’t guide him. I didn’t suggest anything to him. The important thing is that, in this light trance, he found himself there. You can say it was symbolic. You can say all sorts of things about it. But what you say doesn’t matter. I go with what I get from the patient. And what I got was a description of this passive place and state of mind. It was encompassing. He had never CONSCIOUSLY been there before. But, over a period of sessions, as he fleshed it all out for me, he explained his state of mind in that place, and he became aware of it. It was profound. Not for me. For him.

Q: And then what happened?

A: Many things. He experienced jolts of energy. In his body. They would come and go. He felt various emotions. Frustration, anger, and that passivity. He saw energy.

Q: He saw energy?

A: In several different ways. At one point, he reported seeing sub-atomic energy. Fields of particles moving.

Q: What did you do?

A: What do you think I did? I went along with it.

Q: Did you think it was strange? Did you think he was imagining it? Hallucinating it?

A: You’re trying to goad me, right?

Q: A little.

A: So he’s seeing these fields of particles. They’re moving at different speeds. Some are slow, some are fast, others seem to be wandering around as if they’re lost. This goes on for quite a while. Over the course of several sessions. He’s really intrigued by this. Then one day he kind of shivers and says his mind and these particles merged.

He’s shocked. He says his own mind and these particles “got together.” Not just now, but sometime in the past. He describes this merging between his mind and these physical particles. How they meet and link up. How they form a kind of structure.

Q: What kind of structure?

A: Different configurations. Interlocking shapes. Geometric shapes. Symmetrical. Others are more vague.

Q: He’s interested in this?

A: Excited. He starts talking a mile a minute. He’s relating what he sees as if he can’t get it out fast enough. It’s as if he’s looking at some huge building or even a city, and he’s seeing pieces of it, and progressively the pieces are bigger, and they’re coming into view. Finally, one day he tells me that he’s figured out “how it works.” His mind and these particles have become joined. It’s not some sort of spiritual connection. It’s not enlightenment. It’s a habit. That’s what he called it. A habit. As if, he said, he was some kind of engineer, and he was building a structure. But, he said, and this is a key, he had been doing all this UNCONSCIOUSLY. Subconsciously. It was an ongoing preoccupation. It wasn’t just a one-time thing. And it took energy to do this. It took lots of energy.

Q: He said that.

A: Yes. And then I realized there was something different about his physical appearance. It was hard to pinpoint. But it was as if he had clarified. His features were more…vivid. I noticed his eyes were clearer. His gestures were more definite. I had the sense a knot of confusion had been undone. He told me this subconscious “building” he had been doing…he felt this mandate, this imperative within himself to “be this engineer.” He was a bit troubled by that, but he was also excited.

Q: This is VERY far-out stuff.

A: Again, I want to make it very clear that I was following along with him. I wasn’t guiding him in the slightest. It is very far-out, but not to me. You see, I’m used to having people tell me what they find, what they discover. I don’t care what it is. I’m just working from what they tell me. I’m not doing anything else.

Q: So what was the outcome of working with this man?

A: Well, I can tell you that his physical conditions, and he had a few, resolved in a dramatic way. He had a balance problem, and that just went away completely. His fatigue went away. He started to sleep well for the first time in years.

Q: Would you say he had been in a chronic trance, until he discovered he was doing this subconscious “building of structures?”

A: I would.

Q: Explain that.

A: This structure he was subconsciously building, on and on and on, was his habit. It became trance-like, the ongoing building. And it was debilitating for him. It used up a whole lot of his energy.

Let me give you a metaphor for it. Every day, you carry water. Okay? You’re carrying buckets of water to the same place. You’re digging a trench, and you’re making a stream. Every single day. But you don’t consciously know you’re building the stream. You get up in the morning and you go to work and you buy things at the store, and you come home and sit with your family and talk. MEANWHILE you’re still building this stream. And it requires energy and it takes energy away from you. It’s exhausting you. And it’s so repetitious. It’s no longer fun. It’s deeply boring. It’s wearing you down. And it eventually puts you in a kind of walking trance. At some level, it puts you in a place of accepting your fate, that you’ll be building this stream forever. You’re accepting that reality. You’re passive in that way. You believe that IS reality.

Q: So do you wake up from that?

A: That, my boy, is what my life’s work is all about. I’ve developed many strategies.

Q: Do they involve trying to dismantle the “building project?”

A: I tried that and I found it was unworkable.

Q: What makes it unworkable?

A: Well, if you’re absolutely devoted, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to building castles in the sand, and I come along and convince you to tear them down and stop making them, do you think that’s going to have a lasting effect? We can kick down castles and smooth out the sand, but eventually you’re going to be back at the beach doing it again.

Q: So if that’s unworkable, what then?

A: First of all, I WOULD SAY THAT THE HUMAN RACE HAS A VERY SOLID ADDICTION. THE ADDICTION INVOLVES THE SUBCONSCIOUS INVENTION OF SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES. AND PATTERNS. So what I began developing were exercises I could use with people, exercises through which they would invent or create in new ways, in unaccustomed ways. In ways that would break that habit, that subconscious habit.

Q: Has it worked?

A: It’s working. They gain back energy. They sometimes lose physical problems. They feel different. They begin to approach life in new ways.

My comments on the interview: Looking back on it now, Jack was presenting a description of how the mind and reality “merge” in a kind of Matrix. In many later interviews, Jack goes further in explaining his strategies for transcending this situation. As you can see from his remarks here, he wasn’t making suggestions to his patients while they were in a light trance. That method didn’t interest him, once he decided they were already, in a sense, in a state of hypnosis when they came to him.

As a result of his training, Jack initially took the position that hypnosis and suggestion could change behavior for the better. Later on, he abandoned that idea. He found ways of getting patients to describe what they were seeing and experiencing on a subconscious level—and then using techniques that would liberate them from their “habits,” their unconscious and repetitious actions that drained away energy and put them in a passive state.

In the conversation above, Jack was intentionally NOT covering certain forms of attempted mind control based on induced trauma, chemicals, electronics, etc. He wanted, rather, to explore less known territory.

In another interview, Jack once said to me, “Some people think accepting reality is an advanced spiritual state. Well, accepting reality can allow you to be freer from stress, but all by itself, it eventually becomes a formula for passivity, repetition, profound boredom, and subconscious depletion of energy. You form a de facto religion of Reality-As-It-Is, and you worship at that altar. YOU GLUE YOURSELF ON TO REALITY and the result is a kind of weave or mesh, which is a trance, a hypnotic state. You don’t walk around looking like a zombie, but in a major place in your consciousness, you’re trying to abandon your immense creative power…”

Jon Rappoport

Jon is the author of a new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED. He has been working as an investigative reporter for 30 years.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

GRIEF IS NOW A DISEASE

Mar23

GRIEF IS NOW A DISEASE

by Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

MARCH 23, 2012. The current issue of Psychiatric Times reports that the new bible of mental disorders, the DSM-V, will make grief a mental disorder.

Specifically, a parent who deeply mourns the loss of a child for more than TWO WEEKS will rate a diagnosis of clinical depression (and of course, drugging with one of the toxic SSRI antidepressants.)

This absurdity is even too much for some doctors, and they’re rebelling. For example, see Dr. Joanne Cacciatore’s blog post here.

But the “experts” who are assembling the upcoming DSM-V don’t care. They’re shrugging off the criticism so far.

Well, of course they would. There is a lot of money to be made by prescribing more drugs, in this case, to grieving parents.

The Psychiatric Times’ editorial attacking this lunatic classification of grief-as-disease is written by none other than Dr. Allen Frances.

Dr. Allen Frances has summed up position on the lunatic classification of grief-as-disease in this post on the Huffington Post Blog published on Mar 23, 2012.

Readers will remember my recent article about the good doctor. He is the man who was in charge of assembling the previous DSM-IV. His team expanded the definitions of ADHD and Bipolar, so that many more people would be dosed with toxic and destructive drugs like Valproate, Lithium, and Ritalin.

In fact, Dr. Frances, in a December 2010 Wired interview by Gary Greenberg (entitled Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness), stated: “There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.” [Emphasis added]

I’m not kidding. He actually said it. Here is the opening opening paragraph of the article:

“Every so often Al Frances says something that seems to surprise even him. Just now, for instance, in the predawn darkness of his comfortable, rambling home in Carmel, California, he has broken off his exercise routine to declare that ‘there is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.’ Then an odd, reflective look crosses his face, as if he’s taking in the strangeness of this scene: Allen Frances, lead editor of the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (universally known as the DSM-IV), the guy who wrote the book on mental illness, confessing that ‘these concepts are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the boundaries.’ For the first time in two days, the conversation comes to an awkward halt.” [Emphasis added]

The complete article can be found at wired.com here.

Which would be like the chairman of Exxon asserting, “We need to explore for more oil. Of course, cars don’t really work. They don’t go anywhere. They’re fictions. Delusions.”

The committees who put together these DSMs would be better off posting a list of a few hundred human behaviors on a wall and, blindfolded, throwing darts at them.

What lies below this latest psychiatric nonsense about grief is an entire industrial complex. It’s dedicated to brainwashing the public into accepting the notion of discrete and real mental disorders.

People have problems, they become frustrated and confused, they suffer, but the act of carving up behavior and thought into diseases is a way of a) expanding business and b) extending the Matrix.

More and more, as a result of relentless PR, the public believes there are a whole host of mental disorders that not only intrude on their lives but require pharmaceutical treatment.

The public believes they are victimized by these diseases and can alleviate them only through drugs.

The public believes it is “humane” to accept the existence of these diseases, and we must all join together to “remove the stigma of diagnosis.”

The public believes they are at the mercy of arbitrary shifts of brain chemistry that bring on these diseases.

The public believes, therefore, that life itself is limited by the potential onset of “psychiatric illness.”

The public believes we’re all, to one degree or another, disabled.

The public believes what they’re told to believe. Therefore, the fictitious existence of discrete mental disorders becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The Matrix op called psychiatry provides a focal point, around which are woven many strands of propaganda. The overall objective? A future world that resembles, to a remarkable degree, a Universal Hospital, in which the population, granted “free” care, lives through dozens of diagnoses of diseases and disorders, with (toxic) treatments—from cradle to grave. The eternal patient.

Further propaganda strives to label such a life the hallmark of What Humans Are.

That is the high-level objective of the medical/psychiatric cartel.

What makes psychiatry different is that it seeks to gain control and domination over the entire area of human behavior, through classification by labels and bogus claims of diagnosis.

As I mentioned in the article on Dr. Frances, there are no definitive chemical or biological tests for any so-called mental disorder. This fact is stunning to people. They automatically assume psychiatry is a science. It isn’t. It’s a shell game.

I refer now to the PBS FRONTLINE presentation, Does ADHD Exist? A quite revealing (and side-splitting) exchange occurs between the interviewer and Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center. Barkley is also the author of books about ADHD.

INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY: That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]

Live long and prosper, Dr. Barkley. And you might want to re-check the definition of science. Just a thought.

Here is a final prediction for you:

Author/psychologist Paul Babiak recently stated that a psychopath is someone with “a psychopathic personality.”

Quite informative.

My prediction?

We’re going to see an accelerated push to label many career criminals—on the street and in corporate boardrooms—as ill with the disease of psychopathy. Now, I’m old-fashioned. I believe you prosecute people like that to the fullest extent of the law.

The point is, though, the definition of psychopathy is going to be extended to those people who, in the view of mental health professionals, show a lack of empathy, who aren’t happy to live in the Global Village, where Share and Care are actually, at a high level, fronts for advancing the cause of Globalism.

Schoolchildren who don’t want to play the usual games, who don’t want to join the group are going to be examined for signs of incipient psychopathy.

The agenda will be to weed out people who are free and independent. Label them. Treat them. Drug them. Isolate them from the rest of us.

“Your son is what some people would call an outsider. But actually, he’s case of psychopathy in progress. We have to act now. I’m not saying he’s a Lee Oswald or a Jack the Ripper or a Bernie Madoff, but you never know. If we catch this early, we have a chance. He doesn’t feel sympathy for others. He doesn’t recognize his inclusion in the human community. When he looks at people, he doesn’t smile. He just looks. We have promising treatments. Let’s move quickly…”

Of course, Doctor. Perhaps you could melt a few of his brain connections and banish his unsympathetic aura.

Jon Rappoport

An investigative reporter for the past 30 years, Jon is the author of a new wide-ranging collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

ELITE MATRIX PROPAGANDA

Mar23

ELITE MATRIX POWER

MARCH 22, 2012. Propaganda is a strange animal, because it often capitalizes on the genuine motives of people who, unknowingly, are being used to promote an agenda they can’t fathom or see.

For example, the idea of helping others who are in desperate straits—what could be wrong with that? And if they live thousands of miles away, and we are suddenly connected to them via the internet, via Facebook, via cell phones, doesn’t this constitute a new global community that can achieve great aims?

I’m not here to impugn people who want to help. But I am here to point out that ever since the notion of the Global Village took hold, we have seen a number of campaigns for Togetherness and Oneness that were designed or used to advance Globalism itself.

Globalism—a system under which national borders and sovereign nations will be eradicated, under which banks, multinational corporations, and elite organizations like the Trilateral Commission will set up a management-structure to run the planet, control and allocate its resources, and reap gargantuan profits—while diminishing the destroying the quality of life for more and more of the population.

Co-opting people and groups who may have noble motives is a strategy as old as the hills.

I could spend the next five years trying to lay out all the propaganda efforts that are in progress to “centralize the management of planet Earth.”

Consider just one: utilizing celebrities who, in various ways, try to forward the concept that the human race is “one big family.” Whatever you may think of this “family” idea, the point is, far above the level of celebrities, the message becomes something quite different: nations are evil; borders are evil; everyone has to share equally in everything; individual achievement is nothing; the group is All; the only way to secure justice is to put power into the hands of experts who can rationally distribute the goods and services of the world from a central planning authority; “we” are all together, but “we” are subjects of technocratic planners who will ensure that love and tolerance and diversity are translated into dispensing the essentials of survival as THEY see fit.

And of course, “the planners” are somehow, in some spiritual sense, supposed to be a reflection of our own noble aims.

If you like that fantasy, I have condos on Jupiter for sale at slashed prices.

Here is a backgrounder on one of the elite groups that is consolidating power to position the world in its orbit.

ELITE MATRIX CONTROLLER

THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION

ITS ORIGINAL STATED GOAL: TO CREATE “A NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER”

Many people think the Trilateral Commission, created in 1973 by David Rockefeller to shape a new world, is now dead, a relic of an older time.

Think again.

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington, brings us up to date at the August Forecast Review. There are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America. Obama appointed ELEVEN of them to posts in his administration.

They include:

Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;

James Jones, National Security Advisor;

Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;

Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

In Europe, the financially embattled nations of Greece and Italy have brought in Lucas Papademos and Mario Monti as prime ministers. Both men are Trilateral members, and Monti is the former European chairman of the Trilateral Commission.

In the US, since 1973, Wood counts eight out of 10 US Trade Representative appointments, and six out of eight World Bank presidencies, as American Trilateral members.

The Trilateral Commission, as is clear from members’ writings, aims to erase sovereign nations and establish a corporate-banking-government complex that runs the planet.

Four years before birthing the Commission with his godfather, David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote: “[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Several other noteworthy Trilateral members: George HW Bush; Bill Clinton; Dick Cheney.

Through the years since the Trilateral Commission was founded, major corporate interests have been invited in, via their handpicked representatives. A few: IBM; Archer Daniels Midland; JP Morgan Chase; Goldman Sachs; GE; Citigroup; B of A; Halliburton.

Wood contends that the Trilateral goal to remake the world’s economic order has been shoved forward in several key ways: dramatically increase US government debt; create a growing negative imbalance of US imports to exports; sell off large American corporations to foreign interests; outsource US jobs; but at the same time, greatly increase multinational corporate profits.

Obviously, in this scenario, torpedoing the US is a first-rank objective, since the American people are the strongest holdout against a globalist takeover.

Here, now, is a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment, from out of the past, to illustrate Trilateral power.

It’s through the Looking-Glass—a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper. The interview took place in 1978. It concerned the issue of who, exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating US economic and political policy.

The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”

NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations, and they would resent such [Trilateral] coordination [of governments’ policies].

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others?After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

SOURCE: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.

Although Kaiser and Cooper claimed everything being manipulated by the Trilateral Commission committee was already out in the open, it wasn’t.

Their interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. Yet on the Richter Scale of scandals, it ranked far higher than, say, Watergate.

US economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission had been been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.

Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We’ve lost. And I’ll quit.” Lost—because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.

Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security advisor, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

With this article as background…consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.

From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force.

Terms like “sharing” and “global family” and “together” and “diversity” are re-translated and used to elicit widespread support for what is actually the ongoing takeover.

If this leaves you feeling depressed, don’t be. The seeds of the real revolution are contained in the basic premise of Globalism, which is centralization. Clearly, the response is massive decentralization of power. Their vector runs one way; ours runs the opposite way.

I have covered these issues in many articles in my archive at www.nomorefakenews.com Eventually, decentralization gets back to your own power, your own imagination, your own commitment.

The amount of obfuscation laid like a blanket over individual power is enormous. It needs to be removed.

When free individuals form groups that do not encroach on or diminish their power, remarkable things can be done.

Recent history reveals we have come a long way down. But up is still there. It’s always there.

It never goes away.

Just as freedom never really goes away.

If you can even glimpse the tonnage of propaganda and coercion elites have deployed to saddle the individual, you can understand how resilient and resistant and enduring the individual must be—otherwise, why does it take so much effort to battle against him?

Jon Rappoport

An investigative reporter for 30 years, novelist, lecturer on imagination and individual creative power, Jon is the author of a new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

DECONSTRUCTING THE NAKED FILMMAKER

Mar22

DECONSTRUCTING THE NAKED FILMMAKER

MARCH 21, 2012. The UK Telegraph (linked at infowars.com) gives us an update on Jason Russell’s condition.

Russell, the man who made the viral KONY 2012 video, was arrested on a San Diego street where he was running naked.

Russell is now in lock-down in a psych ward, and his wife suggests he may be there for a while receiving treatment.

If Russell was not under the influence of a psychiatric drug when he took off his clothes and wandered out into the city, it’s likely he is now. (See my interview with Dr. Peter Breggin yesterday on the Alex Jones radio show at the Alex Jones You Tube channel.)

It’s quite instructive to read what the UK Telegraph has to say about Russell’s condition. I’ll quote several paragraphs and put my comments in brackets and caps, so you can separate fact from utter fiction:

“Russell…was given a preliminary diagnosis of brief reactive psychosis, in which a person displays sudden psychotic behavior. [NO SUCH THING AS BRIEF REACTIVE PSYCHOSIS. NO PHYSICAL TEST FOR IT. IT’S A MADE-UP CONDITION. IT’S ABOUT AS TECHNICAL AND LEGITIMATE AS “HE FLIPPED OUT.”]

“‘Doctors say this is a common experience given the great mental, emotional and physical shock his body has gone through in these last two weeks…’ Danica Russell (Jason’s wife) said in a statement. [PHYSICAL SHOCK? WHAT PHYSICAL SHOCK?]

“Researchers do not know how many people suffer from the condition [CONDITION? FICTITIOUS CONDITION. PEOPLE HAVE PROBLEMS, THEY ACT IN UNUSUAL WAYS, THEY SUFFER, BUT THERE IS NO ‘CONDITION’], mainly because the symptoms are fleeting [THERE ARE NO ‘SYMPTOMS’, BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONDITION], but those with personality disorders [NO SUCH THING. LABELED ‘PERSONALITY DISORDERS’ HAVE NO PHYSICAL TESTS FOR A DIAGNOSIS. MORE MADE-UP TERMINOLOGY] are at greater risk for having an episode [THERE IS NO EPISODE BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONDITION. THERE ARE EXPERIENCES AND ACTIONS, THERE IS PAIN AND SUFFERING, THERE IS CONFUSION, BUT THERE IS NO CONDITION]. Brief reactive psychosis [THE FICTION WHICH DOESN’T EXIST] is triggered by trauma or major stress [THERE IS NO TRIGGER FOR THE CONDITION BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONDITION] such as an accident or the death of a loved one. Other triggers [NO TRIGGERS] can include sleep deprivation or dehydration.” [SLEEP DEPRIVATION OR DEHYDRATION CAN INDEED LEAD TO CONFUSION, ACTIONS THAT ARE OUT OF CHARACTER, AND SUFFERING, BUT NOT TO A ‘CONDITION’.]

Now that Russell is in lock-down in a psych ward, I hope they are giving him plenty of liquids and electrolytes, and I hope he is resting. Whatever drugs, however, they may be dosing him with will destabilize him further, in the short or long-term. If he’s receiving, SRRI antidepressants like Paxil, Prozac, or Zoloft, watch out for an amphetamine-like effect involving more wild actions on his part. If he’s getting so-called anti-psychotic drugs, he could develop tremors that indicate motor-brain damage. (See Dr. Peter Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry, and visit www.breggin.com.)

The whole strategy of psychiatric treatment is based on a) diagnosis of fictitious “conditions” that leads directly to b) toxic drugging.

That’s the plan, that’s the layout, that’s the sequence.

If indeed Russell was physically exhausted and dehydrated, and was also under stress, he could behave in ways that would satisfy the fictitious criteria for a fictitious diagnosis of a fictitious non-condition called “brief reactive psychosis,” as well as any number of other fictitious psychiatric “disorders.”

Any and all of which lead to the ingestion of dangerously toxic medical drugs.

Notice the role of the cops in this situation. They arrested Russell on a street in San Diego, and because they didn’t believe he was a threat, they turned him over to the doctors/psychiatrists. And he landed in lock-down. From the police point of view, this was the humane thing to do, but it wasn’t. Not really.

The young man needs to be in a peaceful place, away from the roaring crowds, resting, getting electrolytes, liquids, good food, and in the company of a few people who care about him.

Everything else is institutional insanity.

And, for further background and context on the Jason Russell story, read my recent blog post entitled BIGGEST LIAR IN AMERICA, which exposes Dr. Allen Francis — one of the key figures behind the FICTITIOUS CONDITIONS. It summarizes that part of THE MATRIX called “mental health”.

Thank you, Dr. Frances.

JON RAPPOPORT

Jon is the author of the new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, and, with Robert Scott Bell, a 10-hour audio seminar, VACCINES: ARMED AND DANGEROUS.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

THE RAPPOPORT LOGIC COURSE

Mar20

FAQ ON RAPPOPORT LOGIC COURSE

(I’ve been getting many requests to describe my logic course—hence this FAQ, which answers a lot of questions.)

Note: The course is now part of a much larger collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED. The course was selling, alone, for three times as much as the entire Matrix product. Click THE MATRIX REVEALED banner on my home page at www.nomorefakenews.com

Since I began writing articles about my new LOGIC AND ANALYSIS course, I have had a flood of inquiries, and people have been ordering the course for independent adult self-study—and to teach it to their home-schooled children.

So now I’m doing this FAQ. I’ll make it as complete as I can.

Q: How long is the course?

A: Eighteen classroom sessions. That includes a final exam.

Q: So it isn’t just a workshop or a seminar.

A: No, it’s a real course.

Q: At what pace would you recommend teaching it in a home-school setting?

A: Three sessions a week, if possible. An hour per session.

Q: Is the course available online?

A: No. I ship all materials.

Q: What are the course materials?

A: A extensive teacher’s manual, student study sheets, and a CD.

Q: What’s in the teacher’s manual?

A: The manual contains a layout for all the lessons, in chronological order, and explanations for all the passages that are analyzed in the course.

Q: Passages?

A: Yes. There are short and long passages of text. I wrote these with logical errors embedded in them. Students and teachers work over the passages and discover the specific logical errors. The main passages are written to resemble news stories, press releases, political-speak, science journalism, and internet reporting.

Q: Why?

A: Because they resemble what you encounter in the real world. The whole point of the course is gaining the ability to deal with information in any form, in life. That means being able to take information apart and pinpoint the specific logical mistakes, and analyze those mistakes, in detail.

Q: If an adult is studying the course on his own, how does he proceed?

A: Actually, whether the adult is studying the course on his/her own or preparing to teach it to children, the approach is the same. Go through the entire teacher’s manual, step by step. Master everything.

Q: What if questions arise during this process?

A: Contact me directly. qjrconsulting@gmail.com I’m available to answer any and all questions.

Q: Is there an extra fee for this service?

A: No.

Q: What is on the CD?

A: My analysis of the six long passages of text that make up the core of the course. I wanted to do this part on CD, so the teachers can listen to me attacking the text and pulling it apart. It gives a sense of what it’s really like to dig out each logical error and identify it.

Q: When a home-schooling adult teaches the course, is it a process of the teacher and students mutually discovering logical fallacies?

A: No. The teacher already has mastered the course and knows where all the errors are. However, in class, the children first battle through a passage on their own, with the teacher noting their findings. Then the teacher explains each actual logical error in detail. Then, as homework, on their own, the students go back to that passage again and find all the logical errors, and describe them in writing.

Q: These logical fallacies—are they written in stone or did you dream them up?

A: The traditional fallacies have been discovered and described, in various ways, over the last 2400 years. They are very real and very exacting.

Q: What is your background?

A: As a college student (Amherst College), I studied logic as part of my major in philosophy. I had extensive training in logic there. I taught in several private schools in New York and Los Angeles, and tutored remedial English at Santa Monica College. I’ve had a 25-year career as an investigative reporter—LA Weekly, CBS Healthwatch, Spin Magazine, Stern (Germany), etc. During this period, I applied logic to my investigations on a regular basis. Particularly in the area of medical fraud, I had to use logic to get behind the PR pronouncements of various “authorities” and find the inconsistencies and deceptions that were occurring in published research.

Q: On what basis do you sell your course to home-schooling parents?

A: They may use it with any size class for as long as they want to teach it, as many times as they want to teach it, but the course must be taught in their own home-school. The course is copyrighted and cannot be sold or given away to other teachers.

Q: I have a plan to teach it to people in my community. Is that all right?

A: Absolutely. You can deliver the course as many times as you want to—as long as you are the teacher.

Q: Is your course given for academic credit in home schools?

A: No. It is for enrichment. I don’t use sanitized and silly politically correct passages in the course—most if not all school systems would refuse to allow real-world-type passages. They want largely unrealistic material. That would defeat the whole purpose of the course.

Q: Why is logic so important?

A: Because it is the foundation on which all other fields of study are built. It is a priceless Western tradition, and it is being lost. We need to reverse that trend. A student can’t be truly literate unless he can analyze what he is reading. This fact is ignored in most schools.

Q: Do you oppose rote learning?

A: Actually, no. I oppose learning that is exclusively and only rote. Students also think. Everybody thinks. There is a choice. You can learn how to think clearly, or you can remain passive and accept whatever is thrown your way. People have a confusion about this. They sometimes believe independent thinking is the same thing as rebellion. Clear thinking is clear thinking. It enables you to face information, reporting, and argument head-on, and make judgments on the merits. The logical merits.

Q: But what about, say, faith? How does logic relate to faith?

A: Learning how to think lucidly strengthens any faith or first principles you live by, because logic is about something else. Logic shows you the difference between profound faith and analysis. You don’t need to confuse the two.

Q: How many long passages are there in the course?

A: Six. They are taken up and analyzed during twelve classroom sessions. They are analyzed deeply.

Q: How do I pay for the course?

A: You contact me at qjrconsulting@gmail.com and I give you instructions for using my PayPal account. Or you can mail me a check. I’ll supply the address.

Q: How soon after I pay do you ship me the course?

A: It goes out to you within three business days.

Q: How much is the course?

A: $375.

Q: Explain your pricing of the course.

A: I’m glad to. I developed it over a period of ten years and many hundreds of hours. As long as you are the teacher, you can use it forever. I know of at least one online publisher that charges, per course, about $350 for each student in the class—and allows the course to be taught only once. If the teacher wants to teach it again, he has to pay again. There is also my backup service: If at any time during the period when the teacher is mastering the materials, or during the actual teaching of the course to others—at any time questions arise, I’m here to answer them fully. That service is included in the course fee as well.

Q: Could you personally teach the course in a corporate setting?

A: Yes. I’m available on that basis. The content of the course would change somewhat.

Q: Is each classroom lesson of the course based on the prior lessons, or can it be taught in any sequence?

A: You follow my sequence. The course is built in a traditional fashion. The easier and simpler material comes first. Then, the more complex lessons and passages.

Q: Can I read an outline of the course?

A: Yes. I’ve included it at the end of this FAQ.

Q: Are eighteen classroom sessions enough to become a logical thinker?

A: Yes. You certainly don’t exhaust the whole field of logic, but you move into a new sphere. You can no longer be deceived or taken in by illogical presentations. You can take those presentations of information, in whatever form, apart and dissect the logical errors.

Q: Illogic is rampant in our society?

A: It’s the “way things are done” now. You have to realize that the higher you go on the educational ladder, the more subtle bias and coercion creep in. Teachers and institutions have their slant on things. They cleverly sell that slant and disguise it. If students don’t know what’s going on, they become captive to some form of bias. They become “products” of the system.

Q: Your course is an antidote to that?

A: It is. In our society, there are many political points of view masquerading as pure knowledge. The question is, do you want your children to fall under the sway of these strategies, or do you want their heads to rise above them.

Q: As an adult, will I be able to master the course myself?

A: Of course. The reading level required for the course is “bright high school.”

Q: I have children I want to home school, but they’re young.

A: I have several parents who have young children. These children are readers, but they’re not yet at the level of the course. So the parents are taking them through the course by reading parts of it to them, and then discussing the logical issues in those passages. Later, when these children are old enough and are reading at a high school level, the parents will teach the course to them again—fully. It’s a very good strategy, and it gives the kids a fine head start.

Q: There are several different types of illogical arguments?

A: About ten basic ones.

Q: Certain patterns of illogical argument emerge and you can recognize these patterns?

A: Exactly. I once had a student who worked for a big company. He was on the receiving end of many reports from a particular manager. After studying logic, the student was able to see that this manager was making the same basic illogical argument over and over, in different situations. He was costing the company a great deal of money.

Q: On the whole, would you say that people who offer illogical information are unable to see what they’re doing, or are they intentionally trying to deceive others?

A: Mainly, these people who chronically commit logical errors are uneducated—they don’t know logic. They’re struggling along in the best way they can. But a surprising number of people are just trying to sell their own personal bias. They’re slanting things intentionally to fit that bias. It happens in politics all the time, but I can say from experience that it happens just as often in science, and in other fields. Economics, history, psychology, for example.

Q: And students who can see this clearly and specifically would be ahead of the game.

A: Such students would have a towering advantage.

Here is the course outline:

LOGIC COURSE OUTLINE

By Jon Rappoport

Author of LOGIC AND ANALYSIS

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

APRIL 12, 2010. I have received MANY inquiries about my new course. People have asked me for an outline or syllabus of the course. So here it is.

I’m happy to answer any and all questions that come up while people are reading the outline, including queries about cost, shipping details, etc.

When students complete this course and know the materials, their world has changed. They can approach other material in school and out of school with vastly increased awareness—and they are, in fact, eager to dig into new information and analyze it with these new tools. The students become the inheritors of a profound Western tradition of thought, a tradition that brought tremendous progress to civilization.

Two significant points: Unlike some other educational publishers, I offer the course for use as many times as the teacher wants to teach it to his/her student classes, on into the future—the price of the course remains the same. And I do not increase the price of the course on the basis of how many students are in a given class.

I’M AVAILABLE TO HELP TEACHERS MASTER THIS MATERIAL, SO THEY CAN TEACH IT WITH CONFIDENCE TO THEIR STUDENTS.

Keep in mind that this outline only begins to describe the depth of the material. The student, in many classroom sessions, analyzes passages of text that contain multiple logical errors. The student learns how to dissect these passages and find all the flaws. This is an experience that can literally change lives—because the student wakes up to what logic is all about in a real-life situation—as opposed to passively accepting whatever information comes his way.

OUTLINE

The course has 18 classroom sessions. The last two sessions are the final exam and the teacher’s step-by-step review of the exam.

The teacher’s manual explains how every lesson is laid out.

EVERY CLASSROOM LESSON IS FILLED WITH EXAMPLES THAT ARE STUDIED BY THE STUDENT, UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF THE TEACHER.

LESSON 1—The student learns how generalizations and vague terms can infect the reasoning process and make it useless and misleading. What is a generalization? What is a vague generalization? What is a vague term? Examples are studied. Vague terms and generalizations are the most common errors found in the reasoning process.

LESSON 2—The student learns to analyze several traditional logical fallacies that occur in a line of reasoning. These fallacies are shown in many examples. They are concise and clear. These are the flaws first described by Aristotle in ancient Greece.

LESSON 3—The student now begins to examine actual passages of text that contain multiple logical errors. The passages are short. With the teacher’s guidance., the student comes to see how these passages are misleading. This lesson is the groundwork for everything that is to come in the course.

LESSON 4—The student tackles a whole host of text passages that contain logical flaws. These passages illustrate such fallacies as: polemic; attacking the person rather than the argument; vague terms; inappropriate analogy; “sales pitch”; omission of vital information; circular reasoning.

LESSONS 5-16—The student now embarks on the analysis of six much longer and more complex text passages. Each long passage is studied for two classroom sessions. These passages resemble news stories, political promotion, internet journalism, science press releases—in other words, just the sort of material we all come across every day. The teacher has the students take apart each passage and offer up the errors they find; then, the teacher explains ALL the errors.

In my CD that accompanies the teacher’s manual, I go through each of these long passages and describe the errors contained in them. The teacher can play my descriptions to the class.

Lessons 5-16 are the core of the course. The student gains confidence in being able to dissect, SPECIFICALLY AND IN DETAIL, realistic written material that contains multiple logical errors. Step by step, passage by passage, the student learns how to find the flaws and see through the misdirection.

LESSONS 17 AND 18—The student takes the final exam. In it, the student examines a new long text passage and writes down all the SPECIFIC errors he/she can find. Then, after grading the exams, the teacher gives, in the last class, a detailed analysis of the exam passage.

This outline can’t possibly present the experience of actually doing the course. So after reading this, feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

The teacher’s manual is very complete. It contains every passage contained in the course—and a detailed explanation of how the major passages are flawed. Essentially, the teacher studies the manual and then teaches the course. I am available to answer questions teachers have as they study the material themselves.

The course is geared for bright high-school students. I am, on request, available to design logic courses for children of different ages.

Jon Rappoport has been working as an investigative reporter for 25 years. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize early in his career, he has published articles in LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, CBS Healthwatch, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. He has taught in several private schools in New York and Los Angeles, and has tutored extensively in remedial English at Santa Monica College. At Amherst College, where he graduated with a BA in philosophy, he studied formal logic under Joseph Epstein, a revered professor of philosophy.

Jon is the author of the new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, and, with Robert Scott Bell, a 10-hour audio seminar, VACCINES: ARMED AND DANGEROUS.

MATRIX BRAIN DRUG EXPERIMENT

Mar19

MATRIX DRUG EXPERIMENT ON BRAINS

MARCH 19, 2012. From Nazi war camps to the CIA’s mind-control program—many people are aware that the brain has become a major target of medical madmen.

But not as many people realize that the entire arsenal of psychiatric drugs constitutes an ongoing experiment on the human brain.

And this program is a significant piece of THE MATRIX, because when perception and feeling are altered, when natural neuro-chemicals in the body are scrambled, when the very “disorders” that prompt the drugs are fictions devised by committees, you have a destructive illusion and invasion that changes the world.

Just to take one example, the Columbine school shooting that shocked the nation was perpetrated by two boys who were reported to be on Luvox, an SSRI antidepressant. Even psychiatrists have noted that these drugs can and do cause people to go on rampages.

But as the pharmaceutical connection with Columbine hit the press, it was squelched and sidelined in favor of: “it’s time to to heal.”

For extensive information on these antidepressants and other psy-drugs, go to www.breggin.com and dig into the work of Dr. Peter Breggin, the one man in the world most responsible for exposing the grotesque toxicity of the whole array of brain-changing pharmaceuticals.

Many times since the Columbine massacre, Americans have been bowled over by news of senseless violent murders, and in every case people weigh with the usual array of explanations. No one is satisfied.

However, just try to discover whether the killer was on a psychiatric drug, and if so, what the drug was. It’s almost always a hidden issue, carefully protected.

The effect of these crazed murders on the public is that of a successful psy-op. Confusion, fear, erosion of faith, demoralization, passivity. “Everything’s going to hell. What can anyone do?”

This is called ALTERING PERCEPTION.

And THAT is a major Matrix element: people see reality as something they must passively accept, something that’s beyond their capacity to control or direct.

Now, we have two incidents on which everyone and his brother are speculating. One, the US Army Sgt., Richard Bales, who is accused of killing 16 Afghan civilians, and two, the bizarre actions of Jason Russell, who is currently in lockdown in a San Diego psych ward, after running around naked in the street. Russell directed Kony 2012, the video-gone-viral about a Ugandan warlord.

No one knows what motivated their actions. (In Bales’ case, an Afghan inquiry states at least 20 US soldiers were involved in the killings.) But suppose Bales and Russell were on psychiatric drugs that drove them over a cliff?

Here is some background on just one such drug: Ritalin. You aren’t going to read this material in the mainstream press. Some estimates place young users of the drug as high as 5 million in the US alone.

The conventional wisdom about Ritalin is: it’s safe and effective; it helps curb hyperactivity; if there are side effects, they’re mild.

Really?

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

. Paranoid delusions
· Paranoid psychosis
· Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
· Activation of psychotic symptoms
· Toxic psychosis
· Visual hallucinations
· Auditory hallucinations
· Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
· Effects pathological thought processes
· Extreme withdrawal
· Terrified affect
· Started screaming
· Aggressiveness
· Insomnia
· Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
· Psychic dependence
· High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
· Decreased REM sleep
· When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
· Convulsions
· Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Many parents around the country have discovered that Ritalin has become a condition for their children continuing in school. There are even reports, by parents, of threats from social agencies: “If you don’t allow us to prescribe Ritalin for your ADD child, we may decide that you are an unfit parent. We may decide to take your child away.”

This mind-boggling state of affairs is fueled by teachers, principals, and school counselors, none of whom have medical training. Yet even if they did…

The very definition of the “illness” for which Ritalin would be prescribed is in doubt, especially at the highest levels of the medical profession. This doubt, however, has not filtered down to most public schools.

In commenting on Dr. Lawrence Diller’s book, Running on Ritalin: A Physician Reflects on Children, Society, and Performance in a Pill,… Dr. William Carey, Director of Behavioral Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, has written, “Dr. Diller has correctly described… the disturbing trend of blaming children’s social, behavioral, and academic performance problems entirely on an unproven brain deficit…”

On November 16-18, 1998, the National Institute of Mental Health held the prestigious “NIH Consensus Development Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD].” The conference was explicitly aimed at ending all debate about the diagnoses of ADD, ADHD, and about the prescription of Ritalin. It was hoped that at the highest levels of medical research and bureaucracy, a clear position would be taken: this is what ADHD is, this is where it comes from, and these are the drugs it should be treated with. That didn’t happen, amazingly. Instead, the official panel responsible for drawing conclusions from the conference threw cold water on the whole attempt to reach a comfortable consensus.

Panel member Mark Vonnegut, a Massachusetts pediatrician, said, “The diagnosis [of ADHD] is a mess.”

The panel essentially said it was not sure ADHD was even a “valid” diagnosis. In other words, ADD and ADHD might be nothing more than attempts to categorize certain children’s behaviors – with no organic cause, no clear-cut biological basis, no provable reason for even using the ADD or ADHD labels.

The panel found “no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction [which malfunction had been the whole psychiatric assumption].”

The panel found that Ritalin has not been shown to have long-term benefits. In fact, the panel stated that Ritalin has resulted in “little improvement on academic achievement or social skills.”

Panel chairman, David Kupfer, professor of psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh, said, “There is no current validated diagnostic test [for ADHD].”

Yet at every level of public education in America, there remains what can only be called a voracious desire to give children Ritalin (or other similar drugs) for ADD or ADHD.

The 1994 Textbook of Psychiatry, published by the American Psychiatric Press, contains this review (Popper and Steingard): “Stimulants [such as Ritalin] do not produce lasting improvements in aggressivity, conduct disorder, criminality, education achievement, job functioning, marital relationships, or long-term adjustment.”

Parents should also wake up to the fact that, in the aftermath of the Littleton, Colorado, school-shooting tragedy, pundits and doctors began urging much more extensive “mental health” services for children. Whether you have noticed it or not, this no longer means, for the most part, therapy with a caring professional. It means drugs. Drugs like Ritalin.

In December 1996, the US Drug Enforcement Agency held a conference on ADHD and Ritalin. Surprisingly, it issued a sensible statement about drugs being a bad substitute for the presence of caring parents: “[T]he use of stimulants [such as Ritalin] for the short-term improvement of behavior and underachievement may be thwarting efforts to address the children’s real issues, both on an individual and societal level. The lack of long-term positive results with the use of stimulants and the specter of previous and potential stimulant abuse epidemics, give cause to worry about the future. The dramatic increase in the use of methylphenidate [Ritalin] in the 1990s should be viewed as a marker or warning to society about the problems children are having and how we view and address them.”

In his book, Talking Back to Ritalin, Dr. Peter Breggin expands on the drug’s effects: “Stimulants such as Ritalin and amphetamine… have grossly harmful impacts on the brain — reducing overall blood flow, disturbing glucose metabolism, and possibly causing permanent shrinkage or atrophy of the brain.”

In the American press, although many articles have appeared covering “the debate” about Ritalin and ADHD, no newspaper or TV network has taken it upon itself to hammer on all the lies, day after day, month after month. That kind of campaign could turn around the whole nation on this vital subject—but of course, pharmaceutical advertising is a more powerful force.

And one should not forget that Ritalin came out of a Swiss drug giant called Ciba Geigy (now Novartis) fifty years ago. That company once had very close business ties with the infamous Nazi cartel, IG Farben. Farben stood for inhuman experiments on human beings. Read the adverse effects of Ritalin again, and consider that millions of little kids take those pills every day.

JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Jon is the author of the new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, and, with Robert Scott Bell, a 10-hour audio seminar, VACCINES: ARMED AND DANGEROUS.

Four-foot Human with Cat’s Eyes

Mar15

by Jon Rappoport

March 15, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

I saw one in a dream once, but this is a little different. My dream was probably brought on by tequila plus an active imagination, but here we have the vision of a professor of philosophy and bioethics at New York University, S. Matthew Liao. He’d like to see it happen in the waking world.

Catch The Atlantic article by Ross Andersen, published March 12, 2012, and, Paul Watson’s excellent coverage at PrisonPlanet.com.

Prof. Liao announced his new paper (with co-authors Anders Sandberg and Rebecca Roache, both of Oxford), entitled Human Engineering and Climate Change, on his blog on March 9th, 2012. You can access the paper via his blog post.

The Atlantic interviewed Prof. Liao, who is so concerned about global warming (not a flicker of doubt about the science behind it, it’s settled, move along) that he wants to engineer humans so they’ll have a diminished impact on the environment.

Don’t worry, the professor wants to save you and me and everyone, and it’s all good.

Here are his recommendations:

A drug that will make humans hate meat because the sight of it brings on nausea. (Reduce the cow population, cut down on warming.)

Implant pre-screened embryos in wombs that will develop into significantly smaller-than-average adults. (Diminished carbon footprint.)

Drug-induced enhancement of empathy and altruism. (Enlightened people will “serve the Earth.”)

Engineering humans with cat’s eyes! (See in the dark, cut down on (those new mercury-laden) light bulbs.)

I’d be interested in knowing what drugs Professor Liao is on. I fear, however, he’s completely sober.

According to Liao, at least one pharmaceutical rep is quite interested in his suggestions. I’m sure he’s right.

In the last few years, academics have been writing and speaking much more boldly about plans to experiment on the human race. The other day I described a recent paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics that advocates the right to kill babies (for any reason), since they aren’t fully formed persons yet. It’s called “after birth abortion.” I’m quite serious. Then we have the wonderful proposal, backed by Japanese research, to dump lithium in water supplies as a mood-stabilizer.

At any rate, the real story here is the lack of outrage in the press, academia, and the public. Apparently, people are now conditioned to so much vicarious horror and bizarreness they just shrug.

And the massive increase in various kinds of plastic surgery has opened the floodgates to “whatever you can get away with.”

If the means were available to replace the usual brand of eyes with cat’s eyes, do you get the feeling thousands of people would step up and sign on the dotted line?

“I used to be afraid to drive at night, but now I don’t even turn my headlights on.”

Professor Liao, when prompted by the interviewer to compare an anticipated new “empathy drug” with the effects of Prozac, blithely admires the analogy. Somehow, he doesn’t seem to know about the horrendous adverse effects of Prozac (such as suicide and homicide). (See Toxic Psychiatry and Talking Back to Prozac, by Dr. Peter Breggin.)

Look for a great deal more of this academic clap-trap to emerge from our great centers of learning. The hustlers are on the move. They may be trying to get their faces in magazines and earn promotions, but they’re really serving the explicit elite agenda of population control.

They’re softening up the masses for greater and greater biological, chemical, and genetic mandates—characterized as genuine breakthroughs and logical extensions of what is already being practiced.

In their smooth fashion, they’re implying that those who are against such programs are merely phobic about science and technology; throwbacks and Luddites who just can’t stand progress, who don’t want to rescue the human species.

Movies spin endless scenarios about humans merged with machines. What’s a little thing like cat’s eyes?

Especially, if like birth control, government insurance plans would cover it.

Professor Liao has prepared another paper for publication, in the journal Bioethics. It’s titled, “Parental Love Pills: Some Ethical Considerations.”

He imagines a pill could be devised that would enable a parent to love his/her child more. Liao concludes that this pill would allow the parent to give “authentic” love (as as opposed to a mere drug-induced or “narcissistic” substitute.)

Having dubiously cleared that hurdle, Liao goes on to write the following: “It may even be morally incumbent on us to do so [take the pill] if no other means of inducing parental love are effective.”

Staggering. “Morally incumbent.” In the long run, that’s one layer away from “enforceable.”

But Liao, in the present-day drug culture, would find many, many adherents. They already take drugs because they want to go to sleep, wake up, feel happy, avoid the necessity of thinking, dampen their anger and outrage, become more aggressive. Why not, therefore, take a drug so they love their children? Even if, contrary to Liao’s assurances, that emotion is a function of a chemical.

“Daddy, do you really love me or is it just that pill you keep taking? Why do you have to take the pill? I don’t like it.”

And once more, Liao displays his ignorance of the reality of pharmaceutical damage. Every year, in the US, FDA-approved medicines kill 106,000 people, like clockwork. (Source: Dr. Barbara Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”) This love drug of his would have no adverse effects?

“Mr. Smith, it’s good that you ‘love’ your son now, but I have to tell you the tests show your liver is coming to resemble an old shoe.”

At BigThink.com, Max Miller writes: “In 2009, Dutch researchers at the University of Amsterdam tested the effects of beta-blockers…on minimizing fear responses. They artificially created fearful memories in subjects by showing them unnerving pictures of spiders coupled with small electric shocks. A day later, half of the subjects were given beta-blockers and again shown the pictures of the spiders. The fear response they had exhibited a day before was gone…”

Putting aside concerns such as adverse effects of the drugs, the potential usefulness of bad memories, the unintended deletion of other memories, and the use of these drugs as sheer mind control, the core question is: is chemical deletion a good thing? Does it help and strengthen the individual, or does it weaken him?

And if we dig deeper still and consider all the experiments mentioned in this article, what view of the individual does it represent? I’ll tell you. It represents the individual as a mechanical object to be manipulated.

And if this view is accepted, then anything is possible, any experiment can be carried out. There are no moral or even legal repercussions. We’re back in Nazi Germany, albeit with “a softer touch.” (See Scott Nobel’s film Human Resources: Social Engineering in the 20th Century)

Softer, in part, because people are stepping forward to volunteer. People, for example, want their memories deleted. And their handlers are acting in a kindly fashion.

And the human race is being CHANGED, step by step.

This is the hidden fact. This is what all this experimentation is obscuring and covering over with its invasive “science.”

And above the scorched plain of experimentation and mind control is the INDIVIDUAL, WHO IS, AT THE CORE, FREE, POWERFUL, POSESSED OF UMLIMITED IMAGINATION AND THE ABILITY TO CREATE FUTURES.

FORGETTING THIS is the real amnesia besetting the human race. It is the trance that is the Matrix.

Waking up is the task. Using his power to the fullest is the work of the individual.

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

THE EDUCATION CONSPIRACY

Mar13

EDUCATION AND THE DISMANTLING OF THE MIND:

WHEN THE SOLUTION IS WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM

by Jon Rappoport

MARCH 13, 2012. The state senate of Utah has just passed a bill that will allow public schools to opt out of providing sex education to children.

A counter-argument is being made that, although there was once a time when our country abounded in responsible two-parent families, that’s not the case anymore. Therefore, education about sex is lacking. Therefore, schools have to step into the breach and supply what is missing.

Otherwise, children won’t know about STDs, pregnancy, contraception, etc.

Over the last 40 years or so, school systems, under the aegis of government, have expanded their role. Using “duty” as the prow, these institutions have generated enormous programs to teach children what to think about everything from aluminum cans to bestiality.

Because it’s “right” and “important” and there is a “duty.”

Translation: outside groups with agendas worm their way into schools.

If I were obsessed with four-legged critters on the moon, and I had enough money and political clout and media/think-tank/foundation support, I could introduce Lunar Critterology as a vital subject into every public school in America.

If I were Bill Gates, I could push the need for computers in schools, despite the fact there is no credible evidence that computers improve literacy.

I went to school in the 1940s and 50s. At that time, the focus was simple. You learned to read, to write, and to do math. The textbooks were often old and worn. There were no visual aids. The lesson plans in every class were step-by-step. Learn a new thing, drill it to death, take a little quiz, learn the next new item, drill it, take a quiz.

It worked. It may have lacked glitz, but it worked because the vast majority of people can’t learn to read, write, or do math any other way.

You can’t gloss over these subjects with a broad brush and a lot of personality or caring. It’s all about digging in the dirt, one scoop at a time.

Some people would call it robotic education. I don’t think it is. It’s just doing what’s necessary—unless reading, writing, and math are deemed unimportant. In which case, you have a whole new idea about what education is.

If you spend time in the classroom on enterprises that are supposed to save the world or revolutionize society or build tolerance or cater to kids who don’t want to learn, then you take away hours from the core idea and practice of what learning is.

When I went to school, there could have been a better curriculum for history and science, but all in all, the teachers did a good job.

Now, we’re in a different world.

It’s assumed that most children are operating at a deficit, and they need to be brought up to speed on morals, on compassion, on sex, on greenness, on hope, on race and religion, on global concerns. At age five, eight, 12, 14.

And a great deal of this “new education” is about cashing in, for book publishers, for educrats, for federal overseers, for busybodies of all stripes who belong to agenda-driven groups that want their say and their moment in the sun.

I say this is all hogwash, and I believe anyone who consults national test scores and current levels of literacy would be compelled to agree.

Education is on the way out.

A few astute writers assert that, perhaps 80 years ago, the whole thrust of early education in America was altered intentionally, to produce worker-ants for a highly controlled society of the future. With all due respect, I think it’s worse than that. Because now we’re turning out kids who are essentially confused, badly schooled, drifting on the wind, lost in a mind-territory of fantasized entitlement. They aren’t androids ready to work on some non-existent assembly line. They’re just lost. They’re riddled with self-esteem that doesn’t work. They’re consumers looking for magic credit so they can buy their way into happiness. They’re loaded with sugar and other chemicals that scramble their synapses. They’re not only unsympathetic toward work, they have no passion of their own.

Logic? Imagination? Never heard of it.

When I went to school, there was virtually no classroom disruption of any kind. And my schools were attended by an economic, social, racial, and religious cross-section of students. We weren’t striving for diversity. We had it. The relatively few kids who were out of control and resisted any kind of discipline were herded into classes together, and teachers dealt with them.

The public schools of today lack the courage to say, “Look, if you’re here to learn, we want you. Otherwise, you’re out. Goodbye.”

If you need metal detectors at the school entrances, you went over the edge a long time ago. No one deserves to be subjected to that kind of environment.

The bullying problem? It’s an industry now. People with degrees write papers and books about it, and task forces gear up to study it and make recommendations. It’s a structure of carbuncles on the body-politic of education.

Once upon a time, no bully was allowed to attend school. If he pressed his attitude and his actions, he was expelled. Period. It wasn’t a question of why he bullied. He was gone. Learning couldn’t take place as long as he was on the scene.

And “gangs in schools?” I’m sorry, but there are no gangs in schools. There are schools in gangs—that’s what you have when groups of kids with violent tendencies inhabit classrooms and corridors. If you can’t expel them en masse, give up. Shut down the place.

If you want to make schools into six-hour-a-day baby-sitting machines, call it that. Try to obtain public funding for it. Hire guards and nurses and cops to staff it. Put it behind barbed-wire fences and install those metal detectors.

Or if schools are really lunch cafeterias, run them that way. Free public lunches. Have kids show up at noon, eat, and leave.

If you think kids of various religions should be allowed to commandeer a room to hold prayer groups, call it Government-Funded God. Rent a hall somewhere and schedule everybody from Christians and Jews to Muslims and Buddhists and Hindus and Zoroastrians.

“Well, we have these kids who are great football players, and they score very badly on all the tests, but we need them on the team.”

No you don’t. Start your own community team. Make up a name. Raise money for uniforms and coaches. Form a league. If these kids want to stay in school—which is a completely different matter—they’ll have to learn how to attain grades for real.

And this long-standing rule about passing kids on to the next grade, no matter how poorly they perform? Graduating them from high school even if they can’t read at fourth-grade level? Because they need to feel good about themselves? Because that’ll somehow help them wend their way through life later on?

Invent a new type of school for them and put it somewhere else. Bring in tutors. If that fails after an honest attempt, teach trades. Some of these kids will end up making more money in a trade than Harvard business-school grads.

All of the above, by the way, makes a good case for home schooling. Unless the parents themselves were shot out the top end of their schools, long ago, ill-prepared to handle reading, writing, and arithmetic.

No, the problem isn’t cookie-cutter education. It’s no education.

Now, of course, hovering over this revolution in education is the wider government becoming mommy and daddy to everyone. “Because they care.” Because they need to do this “caring” in order to obtain budget money for their departments. Because otherwise they would be useless.

And hovering over THAT is the program to convert everyone on the planet to a status much like an eternal patient with an eternal doctor.

This program is advancing based on the notion that “patient status” equals “more controllable.”

“Yes, we have to control you for your own good, because we care.”

No, they want control because they want control.

In my day, the subject that was conspicuously missing from the classroom was Logic. Once upon a time, it had been taught to children when their reading skills had progressed far enough. It was usually presented as a series of fallacies that infected the process of reasoning.

A few years ago, I decided to write a logic course to fill this gap. My strategy was to provide basic background lessons and then launch into a series of text passages seeded with fallacies and flaws. Students with the help of their teachers would find them and understand how they operated to derail lucid thinking.

I offered this 18-lesson course to home schoolers, and adults who wanted to use it for self-study.

[Now it’s part of my new collection, The Matrix Revealed. See the Matrix banner on my home page at www.nomorefakenews.com]

Twenty-four hundred years ago, in Athens, logic was, for the first time, explained in detail by Aristotle. It marked the beginning of a new era for humankind. Logic allowed a person to peruse a formal argument, differentiate between premises and deductions, and judge the validity of the reasoning process.

When students are taught this subject well, they turn into detectives. They realize that articles and books are more than mere lakes of information. They can trace the progress of a line of thought, and see that authors are offering evidence that leads to a conclusion.

It’s an awakening. I’ve seen it resolve what was foolishly diagnosed as ADHD. The student becomes grounded. He accrues real confidence. He can decide whether an argument is valid or invalid. He can spot flaws and describe them.

Armed with the tool of logic, he becomes independent.

This may explain why logic was dropped out of the secondary school curriculum.

God forbid the educational system should be turning out thousands of students who can really think for themselves, and think powerfully and consistently.

Note: I’m not covering the subject of college education in this piece, but I have an interesting anecdote for you. William E. Kennick taught philosophy at Amherst from 1956 to 1993. Amherst has consistently been rated as one of the top colleges in America. During his tenure, Kennick grew disturbed by the quality of papers his students were turning in. So he wrote and distributed a four-and-a-half page, single-spaced document titled, Some Rules for Writing Presentable English. The cream of the cream of American college students needed that on-the-fly tutorial to come up to basic speed. What other students at other colleges were/are producing in the way of written English is too horrible to contemplate.

So now we come to the central thesis. The modern vision of education, aside from the hard sciences, is all about unhinging or un-gluing the mind from its moorings, from its focus, from its ability to track complex thought.

Instead, we have education as: socialization; community; relativity.

This last factor is key. No particular piece of information is any more “valid” than any other piece, no more important, no more deserving of respect. Information is a soup into which one dips a spoon—coming up with whatever is there.

Over the range of society, you get young people wandering around with barely a clue. They’re dissatisfied, they’re upset, they’re resentful, they’re mystified, they’re rebellious.

To a degree, that describes every generation. But when the legs are missing, when the ability to concentrate and focus is absent, when the reasoning capacity is vastly underdeveloped, you get a stupendous crash.

It’s worse than cookie-cutter graduates heading for an assembly line. It’s the kind of trouble that spreads out in ripples, requiring assistance from the State. And that is the revelation.

That’s the society that’s being created.

For the elites who want to run things, globally, it’s not enough to gather up the most dependent people in a net and bring them over to the collectivist side with promises. No, what’s needed is a machine that PRODUCES huge numbers of newly minted dependents all the time.

Welcome to the educational wing of globalism.

Scour every textbook you can find at any level in the school system of your country. See if you can find the conjunction of the word “powerful” with the word “individual” where the implication isn’t pejorative. Where the thrust is positive. I know where my money is in that bet.

When political and economic collectivism is the goal of a society, certain things have to be done with the school system. Individualism has to be discouraged and sidelined. Status based on pure merit, achievement, and performance has to be minimized. And the core courses must lose their discipline.

Instead, group socialization, random expression of students’ opinions (based on nothing in particular), and bogus self-esteem must take center stage.

As a former teacher, I can tell you it’s rather easy to make this momentous shift. The starting point, from which the whole campaign unfolds, involves grouping together students in classes who are operating at significantly different levels of skill and ability.

For example, try teaching geometry to 20 kids who scored across a wide spectrum in their previous final exams in elementary algebra. Just try. Follow your day-to-day lesson plans and see what happens. It’s like crossing a bridge with drivers who never learned the difference between the brake and gas pedal. Chaos.

Jammed up in that baffling disorder, teachers will tend to gravitate to social concerns. They’ll encourage, wheedle, praise, empathize. They’ll try to draw out “the feelings” of students. What was once a very straightforward proposition will vaporize.

The pernicious effects of elementary-school teachers having failed to impart the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic will explode in a tsunami by the first year of high school.

And what happened in the first place, in grades 1-5? The model of repetition, in which each new concept in a subject is drilled over and over, and tested, before moving on to the next concept, was abandoned.

When I was a child, in the 1940s, the model of repetition was intact. It was brick and mortar.

But somewhere along the line, the “person-centered psychology” of education was invented. Every child automatically became “special.” On the surface, this sounded good. It sounded like enlightenment.

But it was really a piece of psy-war. It glossed over the fact that, if each child is innately special, he/she doesn’t have to be informed of it over and over. He only has to be taught well and learn well. More than enough encouragement begins to confuse a child and make him impatient. He wants to get on with things. He wants to prove he can excel. He wants new knowledge.

The history of mainstream psychology can be boiled down to two movements. First, there were the experiments of Pavlov. Conditioned reflex. The human as machine. Then there was the therapeutic age. Endless muddled rumination on problems and difficulties, and the need for “re-enforcement.” Everyone is special. The child as beloved pet.

The arc went from robot to dependent. They were both gross failures.

When pet/dependent became the order of the day, psychiatrists proliferated their invention of mental disorders. ADD. ADHD. Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Clinical depression. Bipolar. And powerful toxic drugs came down the line, to scramble brains.

This is the real war on drugs, except the war is being fought against children by “mental-health professionals.”

Suddenly, childhood diseases which had been accepted for generations, which came and went and gave children stronger immune systems in the process, were claimed to be a horrific threat, and 20 or 30 vaccines had to be taken to prevent these illnesses. (I have covered the ineffectiveness and dangers of vaccines elsewhere, most notably in my 10-hour audio seminar, VACCINES, ARMED AND DANGEROUS.)

Thus the shaping of a new and false and debilitating image of the child torpedoed children and their education.

Creating The Disabled is the cornerstone of Collectivism.

I need you. You need me. Everybody needs everybody. Whatever germs of truth lie in this ideal are crushed, because the “need” formula is artificially built. It’s a piece of debased architecture, whose real purpose is the inculcation of a reason to abandon self and individual power.

Once, the Carnegie and Rockefeller line of force viewed education as the assembly line for turning out objects that would produce other objects in mindless fashion. But that has changed. Now schools are built to become need-factories, breeding surreal socialized graduates who contemplate how political power has wronged them.

The new sign of intelligence is this: how many ways can you imagine you’ve been cheated?

And here is the kicker. Surprisingly little of this contemplation reveals the actual methods of manipulation.

But then, why would it? If children are engineered long enough, they’ll look everywhere for answers except at their hidden masters, the ones whose objective was to make them into children forever.

Jon Rappoport

Jon is the author of the new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, and, with Robert Scott Bell, a 10-hour audio seminar, VACCINES: ARMED AND DANGEROUS.

Jon Rappoport has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize early in his career, Jon has published articles on medical fraud, and politics in LA Weekly, CBS Healthwatch, Spin, Stern, and other magazines and newspapers in the US and Europe.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Raw Milk Seller Tortured In Jail

Mar11

ALERT! Get this story out far and wide! Don’t wait!n

by Jon Rappoport

March 11, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

James Stewart, 65 years old, a seller of raw milk in Los Angeles. the head of Rawsome Foods, was put through the system at LA County jail, while awaiting a hearing on the charge…of selling raw milk!

The system was something he wasn’t prepared for! Cuffed very tightly for hours with his hands behind his back, shackled with chains, unable to move more than a few inches, placed in a cell, unable to sleep because of screaming from other cells—and finally that whole area of the jail WAS FLOODED WITH RAW SEWAGE CONTAINING FECES an inch or two deep on the floor…

Ordered to clean up his floor with a squeegee and a mop that had already been used to clean up the sewage…

Go to Natural News to read about it and hear the interview.

Hear the whole interview here.

James Stewart survives torture in LA County jail – hypothermia, food deprivation, raw human sewage

If You Tube takes down the link, get other working links at NaturalNews.com.

Here are paraphrases and quotes from James Stewart’s interview with Mike Adams at Natural News:

I’m gonna die in here…shit floating on floor…somebody has flooded the whole area with raw sewage…day and half in that cell…I was freezing and shivering…wanted to call my attorney…no one paid attention….seems like you’re in a Gulag…like Midnight Express…this is supposed to be America…they put a red band on my arm…they said, are you a sovereign….I said what?…I didn’t know what they were talking about…they put me in a section of the jail for people who were supposed to be a danger to others…I’m 65 years old….no criminal record….

Some of what Mr. Stewart is reporting appears to be par for the course at the LA County jail. But in his case, he was subjected to all of it because HE WAS SELLING RAW MILK.

Yes, it was torture. Maybe not the worst thing you’ve ever heard of or seen in movies, but what would you think if you were painfully cuffed with your hands behind your back, shackled so you couldn’t move, deprived of sleep, water, and food, and then flooded with raw sewage containing feces, cut off from family and friends and your lawyer, lost in the system for a few days.

FORCE THIS STORY TO GET OUT THERE.

Somebody might say, “Well, how do we know all this is true? How do we know Mr. Stewart underwent all this? We only have his word for it.”

Okay. Let’s find out. Let’s see. Let’s put his own words in his interview on the record and expose EVERYTHING TO THE LIGHT OF DAY. NOW.

(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 29^th 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 NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Author Archives: Jon Rappoport

OBAMACARE AND THE MATRIX

MIND CONTROL IN THE MATRIX

GRIEF IS NOW A DISEASE

ELITE MATRIX PROPAGANDA

DECONSTRUCTING THE NAKED FILMMAKER

THE RAPPOPORT LOGIC COURSE

MATRIX BRAIN DRUG EXPERIMENT

Four-foot Human with Cat’s Eyes

THE EDUCATION CONSPIRACY

Raw Milk Seller Tortured In Jail