How the Newtown massacre became a Mind-Control television event

by Jon Rappoport

December 18, 2012

Mind control. Mass hypnosis. Operant conditioning. Brain entrainment. That’s what we’re talking about here.

We’re so conditioned to how television covers life that we rarely step back and take notice.

In the case of massive disasters and crimes, network news rules the roost.

First, the premiere anchors, who are managing editors of their own broadcasts, give themselves the go signal. They will leave their comfortable chairs and travel to the scene of crime. “It’s that big.”

The anchors lend gravitas. Their mere presence lets the audience know this story trumps all other news of the moment. That’s the first hypnotic cue and suggestion.

Of course, the anchors were not in Newtown, Connecticut, as reporters. They weren’t there to dig up facts. Their physical presence at the Sandy Hook School and in the town was utterly irrelevant.

They could have been doing their newscasts from their studios in New York. Or from a broom closet.

But much better to be standing somewhere in Newtown. It imparts the sense of crisis to the viewing millions.

At the same time, the anchors are also there to give assurance. The subliminal message they transmit is: whatever has happened here is controllable.

The audience knows the anchors will provide the meaning and the official voice of the tragedy. The anchors are, in a way, priests, intoning their benediction to the suffering and their elegies to the dead.

This is what the audience expects, and this is what they get.

This expectation, in fact, is so deep that anything else would be considered an insult, a moral crime.

For example, suppose a network suddenly shifted gears and began interviewing police and residents and asking tough questions about contradictions in the official scenario. Suppose that became the primary focus. Suppose the tone became argumentative, in the interest of, God forbid, the truth.

In other words, in a jarring shift of perspective, the anchors began asking questions to seek answers. What a concept.

No, a priest doesn’t browbeat a parishioner. He takes confession and then offers a route to redemption.

But if, by some miracle, these anchors launched a quest for truth, the whole scene would devolve into uncertainty and even chaos.

“First, there was a man in the woods. You people chased him. You pinned him down and brought him back into town. Who is he? What’s his name? Where is he? Is he under questioning? What are you asking him? What gave you a clue that he might be a second shooter? Come on. Talk to us. People want to know. We aren’t going anywhere. We want some answers.”

This is called reporting, a foreign enterprise to these blown-dried kings and queens of media news.

“Sir, I know ABC definitively reported there was a second shooter. They said you gave them that information. Where did you get it?…No, I’m sorry, that’s not an answer, that’s a non-sequitur.”

Those of us reporting online declare there is something amiss when the second-shooter story is dropped like a hot potato…and we are called conspiracy theorists.

Get it? Trying to ask relevant questions becomes conspiracy only because the major media didn’t do their job in the first place.

“Sir, was it one gun found in trunk of the car or three? Show me the car. Yes. Let’s see it. I want to get the license plate. Excuse me? The car is what, some kind of state secret? I don’t think so. There are twenty dead children in that school over there, and we want to get to the bottom of this. Take me to the car.”

It’s called an investigation. Reporters do that.

“Sir, your newspaper ran a story about a man’s body being found in Adam’s brother’s apartment. Then that became Adam’s mother found dead in her own house here in Newtown. What exactly happened there? A mistake? Wouldn’t you say that was a pretty big mistake? How did it happen? What’s that? Typical confusion in the early reporting of a crime? I don’t think so. Thinking a woman was a man and thinking he or she was found in New Jersey instead of Connecticut, that’s not typical at all. Did police find a man’s body. Speak up.”

Your typical American television viewer would cringe at such demanding questions. You know why? Because he has been entrained and conditioned by news anchors to refrain from digging below the surface. In other words, that viewer is hypnotized.

“Dr. Smith and Officer Jones, we understand that this boy, who was autistic, extremely shy, who had some sort of personality disorder, went into that school and methodically carried out the slaughter of twenty-seven people. In order for him to do that, he had to reload clips at least twice after the first clip ran out. Does that make sense? We’re not just talking about a violent outburst here, we’re talking about a methodical massacre. How do you explain that?”

If these anchors kept on asking questions like this, do you know what would happen? The viewing audience would begin to stir, would begin to break through their hypnotic programming and wake up.

“You know, he’s right. That doesn’t make sense. Maybe there really was a second shooter.”

“Or that Lanza kid…maybe he didn’t kill anybody at all.”

“What? You mean he was…set up?”

“Maybe he was a patsy.”

Yes. Instead of this kind of talk being consigned to “conspiracy nuts,” it actually becomes part of the evening news experience. Because reporters suddenly ask tough questions.

But no. We have to go with grief and shock. We have to lead with it and stay with it.

But that is an artificial construct. Yes, of course people in Newtown feel great shock and pain and loss and grief and horror, but the news producers are consciously moving minutes and hours of it through the tube and filtering out everything else.

They do this every time one of these events occurs, and so the audience expects it and soaks it in and, in that state of entrainment and hypnosis, the audience doesn’t want anything else…because anything else would BREAK THE FLOW and the spell, and the grief would no longer have the same impact.

Newtown is presented as a television event. From the outset, the mood is funereal. It has that tinge and coloration. The audience absorbs it and wants no intrusion on it.

This is Matrix programming.

The anchor is not only the priest, but also the teacher. He/she shows the audience how to experience the event and what to feel and what to think and how to act.

One of the great skills of an anchor is the ability to present the news seamlessly. This is what those big paychecks are for: the blends and segueways and the underlying tone of sincerity that bleeds into every detail of what is being reported.

That is also hypnotic. It sets up a frequency that moves into the brains of the audience. In those brains, it’s an Acceptance-frequency. It’s the mark of a great news anchor, to be able to transmit that and achieve it.

Scott Pelley (CBS) has only some of that. Diane Sawyer (ABC) is decidedly inconsistent in her ability to deploy it. Brian Williams (NBC) is the contemporary master. That’s why he’s been called the Walter Cronkite of the 21^st century.

“Sir, we have a report that police pinned a second man on the ground just outside the school. What is his name? What did you do with him? Where is he now.”

No, no, no, no, no. That would crack the Acceptance-frequency like an egg and send the evening news to hell in a handbasket.

“Sir, I’m glad we finally located you. We understand you were getting ready to go to Bermuda. Now, you were Adam Lanza’s doctor. What drugs did you prescribe him? Not just recently, but going all the way back to the beginning. You see, we’ve compiled a list of possible drugs for Asperger’s and autism and depression, and of course we see that they do, in fact, induce violent behavior. Suicide, homicide. Speak up, Doctor.”

The egg not only cracks in that case, the news anchor is suspended the next day, and the network releases a statement that his “breakdown” on camera was brought on by stress.

Pharmaceutical companies put him on their “to-do” list.

Yet, the questions about the drugs are exactly what a real reporter would ask. Not a “conspiracy theorist.” A reporter, on the scene in Newtown.

Anyone who thinks that is absurd and out of bounds is hypnotized, programmed. That’s all there is to it.

Traditional media are dying in this country. Their money is drying up. They could revitalize themselves in a New York minute if they really started COVERING stories and waking up their audience, but that’s not on their agenda. They would rather die.

They are the hired hands of the elites that own this country. They are the whores sent out every day by their pimps, and they know what their job is and what it isn’t.

The direction of elite television news is squeezed down the path of consciously constructing artificial events, for mass consumption experienced in a state of emotional, mental, physical, and spiritual mind-control. Those reporters who venture outside that framework are labeled fringe figures on the margins.

“Lieutenant, excuse me. Hello. Brian Williams, NBC News. I was wondering: if there had been armed employees inside the school, what are the chances the killer could have been stopped before he shot all those children? You know, people who have been trained to shoot and have concealed carry permits. Strong people who could confront a murderer.”

Oh, people say, that is not a reasonable question. That’s a nutcase question. That question shouldn’t be asked. Why not? You want the real answer? Because it destroys the hypnotic frequency that is being delivered by the television networks. That’s the real answer.

The viewer: “Don’t bother me, I’m hypnotized. Don’t interrupt the frequency my brain is absorbing while I’m watching the news.”

And of course, under those conditions, the very last person who should interrupt the hypnotic flow is the anchor himself. He’s the one who’s inducing the hypnosis in the first place.

That tells you the the anchor is quite definitely NOT there to dig up new facts or perspectives himself.

Entrainment means: the brain is being bathed in rhythms and frequencies that literally train it to accept the information that is being transmitted at the same time.

In the same way, a song can succeed because the melody (carrier frequency) makes the trite lyrics seem important.

Entrainment also makes the recipient feel he is part of something larger. This is a key component. The recipient senses he is a member of a collective that is sharing a moment, an experience.

“I feel this way, and everybody else does too.”

This is what substitutes, in our society, for individual experience and self-sufficiency.

But this collective is not real community. It only appears and feels that way. It is mass hypnosis. You can find that in Gregorian chants and in sermons. You can find it in political speeches.

The brain is bathed in certain harmonies and responds by Accepting.

The Globalists’ language is replete with entrainment. “We are all in this together.” “We are healing the planet.” “All of us must strive to make a better world for our children.”

It sounds right, it seems right, but it is delivered to create a collective instead of a real community. Take a few minutes and read Monsanto’s literature. Read it out loud. Listen to yourself. Try to impart convincing rhythms to the phrases. All of a sudden, you’re in the flow. You’re practicing entrainment.

This is what network television news does. And we aren’t even talking about the hypnotic effects of the physical signals that deliver the picture to the audience.

In a previous article, I pointed out that, if we are to believe the network coverage of the Newtown massacre, there wasn’t one angry outraged man or woman in the town. Because we didn’t see them onscreen.

The networks made sure of that. This was a conscious choice on their part.

“My son died in that school and I want to know why. I want to know exactly how the killer got in there. Who let him in? How did he get in? I WANT TO KNOW.”

Sorry, that isn’t part of the coverage.

It would interrupt the entrainment.

“Sorry, sir, you’ll have to back away. We’re doing mass hypnosis and mind control here. You’re breaking the rhythm.”

Instead, that angry man will be funneled to a grief counselor, who will try to soothe his outrage.

“Sir, we all have to find a way to begin the healing.”

Events like Newtown are extraordinary teaching moments for television. Network newscasts display a constellation of emotions that are deemed “acceptable and appropriate” for the audience to experience. And the audience is thereby trained to mirror those emotions, to feel them, to express them, to soak in them.

It’s a closed system.

This is how, incidentally, gun control works so well. It’s part of the overall message. The audience, existing inside that closed system, in that state of mass hypnosis, can be pointed to exactly the wrong remedy for the tragedy.

All the network anchor has to do is frown and shake his head a little, when the subject of guns arises. That’s all it takes, and the brains of the audience suck it in:

“Yes, of course. Take away the guns. If no one had guns, no one could shoot guns. No one would die. No crimes would be committed. How obvious.”

The capstone that makes this puerile grand solution seem reasonable is: the police are always the good guys; we can trust them; they can have all the guns and then everything will be all right.

That message is also imparted by the big-time network new anchors. These kings and queens don’t ask police the tough questions. They refrain from doing that.

In fact, the anchors ARE surrogate police chiefs. They express what the police chiefs would, if they had the anchors’ skills.

The anchors do stand-ups in Newtown and give us the absolute best of what the police would if they could. And in the process, they transmit:

Entrainment. Mass hypnosis. Mind control. Operant conditioning.

It’s perfect, if you want to be an android.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Three armed women teachers shot Adam Lanza in a classroom

Dec17

Three Women Teachers with Guns Shot Adam Lanza in a Classroom

by Jon Rappoport

December 17, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

When everybody is diagnosed with a mental disorder, gun permits will be a thing of the past.

Take that seriously.

At a presidential debate, Obama was asked about achieving gun control. He said, “Enforce the laws we’ve already got. Make sure we are keeping the guns out of the hands of criminals…[and] those who are mentally ill.”

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2012/10/17/keeping-guns-out-of-the-hands-of-the-mentally-ill/

In case you’ve been sleeping in a cave for the past few years, the US government is doing everything it can to create more categories of crimes, and the psychiatrists are expanding the list of (fictional but enforceable) mental disorders, as they also relentlessly promote “more diagnosis and treatment.”

Some estimates state 20-25% of the US population is suffering from a mental disorder. These are absurd and cooked figures, for several reasons, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is that huge numbers of people can be arbitrarily labeled as such.

So legally owning or not owning a gun may soon hinge on a broader definition of “mentally ill,” changed to “having been diagnosed with a mental disorder,” because that is one back-door way to execute a massive gun ban.

Simply put: diagnose everybody and his brother with a mental disorder, and then assert that any such diagnosis bars a person from obtaining a gun permit.

Psychiatry, in addition to destroying lives through toxic drugs, becomes a political instrument for gun control.

In the July editions of both Psychology Today and The Psychiatric Times, the same editorial, written by Dr. Allen Frances, America’s most influential psychiatrist, spelled out a clear position:

“Guns do kill people and the number of people depends on the number of guns and the number of rounds they can fire in a given period of time.”

Of course, no mention is made of the psychiatric drugs that induce violence and murder.

Dr. Frances sums up his unequivocal position: “We really have only two choices…accept mass murder as part of the American way of life, or…get in line with rest of the civilized world and adopt sane gun control policies.”

I thought I would explore the issue of mental illness from a slightly different perspective, however: WHY ARE FANATICAL GUN GRABBERS PSYCHOTIC?

What is the nature of THEIR mental disorder?

In the wake of the Newtown massacre, the gun-control forces are on the march. Ban this, ban that, go after the Doomsday Preppers and bitter clingers.

The gun grabbers don’t respond to the obvious charge that, when honest people have weapons for self-defense, they can, in fact, defend themselves and stave off crime, harm, and death.

This point doesn’t make a dent.

Neither does arguing Second Amendment. Neither does painting a picture of a society in which the only people who have guns are the government and criminals. The gun grabbers seem to like that picture. At least theoretically.

Here are a few truths you can take to the bank:

If the media in this country (which are notoriously anti-gun) made a big deal out of every case in which an armed citizen successfully defended his home against a violent intruder, and made every such person a hero, we would have a different mood in America. Everybody would see the sense in gun ownership.

In the case of the Newtown killings, the media would be saying, “Now here is a tragic case in which no one in the school was carrying a weapon.” And everybody would see the sense and the truth of that.

So really, it’s a matter of what the media cover and how they cover it, and what they ignore. That’s all it is. It isn’t anything else. In other words, they’re running a psyop.

Point two: the government doesn’t want private citizens to own and carry guns because that would diminish the role of government.

The people in charge hate it when private citizens take over a self-appointed government function. It’s insulting. It’s people saying to the government, “We don’t need you.” It’s proof that government acts in many, many ways that are intrusive and preemptive.

“No need to worry, officer, I caught the thief as he was leaving the liquor store. I pulled my weapon and put him down on the ground and cuffed him. He’s in the back of my car.”

No, no, no. no. The government must be in charge of everything that pertains to showing or using a gun. No outsiders allowed.

“Yes, Mrs. Smith, I’m sorry we’re late, and I’m sorry your husband was beaten to a pulp by that intruder, but we have other crimes to process. We have to man speed-traps. It’s better that your husband didn’t have a gun, let me assure you. Why? It just is. Now, let me call an ambulance. I hope they get him to the hospital in time.”

Imagine what the response would be if you asked an IRS executive what he thought about a flat consumer tax on bought goods that would replace the whole IRS code.

We’re talking about government jobs here. Jobs and money and pensions.

Private citizens must not do what the government does.

In case you hadn’t noticed, this spills over into the health field. The FDA certifies, as safe and effective, every (poisonous) medical drug before it can be prescribed for public use.

The FDA therefore controls drug treatment.

If somebody comes along and cooks up, in his kitchen, an herbal brew that knocks out the flu like a ridiculous little sissy in two hours, that’s a threat. Suddenly, a private citizen is miles ahead of the FDA (and the drug companies). No, no, no.

If home schoolers educate their kids better than government-run schools do, that’s another sore point. That’s bad. It expose the government factories that manufacture illiterate children.

Third point: if enough citizens were well-armed, it would take a full-scale federal invasion to overcome them in case of, oh, secession from the federalized United States.

The feds, of course, would win in the long run, if they killed enough people, but the publicity would be devastating to the government. Think Waco multiplied by a thousand or a million.

And in the process, word would get out about these well-armed private citizens’ grievances against the central government. The grievances would make sense to a lot of people watching the carnage unfold. Can’t have that. No, no, no.

Fourth point: A lot of people in this country grow up thinking they have to take care of other people. That’s really all they know how to do. This goes far beyond any understandable humane impulse.

This is meddling. It’s moving in on other people’s private business. The meddlers turn out to be vicious little scum. Well, where else are they going to be able to exercise these cheap impulses, other than in government jobs?

The corollary to this is: “I’m the hero. I protect you. I…you what? You protected yourself? No, you’re not allowed to do that, because then I can’t be a hero. You’re supposed to be the helpless citizen on my watch. If I can leap tall buildings, you have to be grounded. Otherwise, my life is in vain.”

Fifth point: Elites want to continue to own America. They want to have sway over the land and resources and people and money. Their minions and agents are the official people with weapons. That’s the way it works. It has to be a one-sided game. If millions and millions and millions of private citizens owned guns and knew how to use them, the tin gods wouldn’t be able to sleep well at night.

Sixth point: So-called liberals hate people who own guns. For them, guns are symbols of everything else they hate. Religion, land ownership, property rights, fences, and boundaries. Unless, of course, those fences define the liberals’ land.

Corollary: Many conservatives hate people who own guns, too, when they perceive those people are ready to decentralize power away from an overarching corporate-government control- nexus.

These are all elements of a true psychosis. It needs to be treated.

Short of mandatory sedatives, or a sudden attack on a lonely street at night by armed thugs, I recommend mandatory gun ownership for every non-felon adult in the US. This would solve the problem expeditiously.

I especially want to see all members of Congress packing heat in their chambers. If, once in a while, there is a shooting, well, we can catch it on C-Span. It won’t be lost to history.

I also want to see Chris Matthews in his MSNBC studio with a .45 strapped to his leg, the one that tingles.

There is one caveat to my proposal. In order to create a fully armed population, that population must be responsible, which is to say they must understand inviolable private property rights. They don’t have to own property, but they have to know that such a thing as private property exists. Why? Because property is one of the things an armed citizen has a right to defend.

Unfortunately, we’re losing the concept of private property like water leaking out of battered rowboat. It’s part of government’s plan, because government wants to own everything that isn’t already nailed down by its partner mega-corporations.

And government’s thinking goes this way: “Since we own everything, our cops defend it with guns; there is no reason for private armed citizens to defend it; it isn’t theirs.”

Meanwhile, I have to get going. I just got a message that three armed women teachers shot a guy named Adam Lanza in a classroom. I’m heading over to check it out.

Jon Rappoport

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by accepting Jon’s Amazon cookie by clicking on Jon’s Amazon referral link.

Two movies, two mass murders

Dec17

Newtown: Two Movies, Two Mass Murders, and Questioning All the Facts. Torrid Political Implications are at Stake.

By Jon Rappoport

December 16, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

The Dark Knight Rises and The Hunger Games.

We’ll get to them in a minute.

This article is in the interest of full disclosure. The easy way out is to accept the basic facts given to us by the police and media. So let’s take a breath, back up, and take a wider view.

Multiple media sources state Adam Lanza, the accused Newtown mass murderer, wore a mask while he killed 26 people in the Sandy Hook Elementary School. So who IDed him as the killer?

Obviously, the police, after the fact, when Lanza was dead.

In any crime with such torrid political implications (“take away the guns”), we have to question all the facts.

Presumably, the police found Lanza dead with a bullet wound from a gun lying next to him. They saw he was wearing a mask and body armor. They assumed he was the killer.

Later, the gun was traced back to its owner, Lanza’s mother. Bullet analysis of the victims revealed this was the murder weapon.

So it was a murder-suicide.

Unless there was a different person who did the shooting (cops found and arrested a man wearing camo in the woods near the school…what happened to him?). And who was the man police had “proned out” near the school?

An alternate scenario: Lanza was the patsy. The actual shooter(s) in the school killed him with the murder weapon.

Oh, well, that’s impossible.

Really? Why?

Because “everybody knows” Lanza did it?

Because the media report what the police tell them?

Because the police drew the “obvious” conclusion when they found a masked and body-armored Lanza dead with the murder weapon next to him?

It all comes down to this. Conventional reality vs. extraordinary reality. The overwhelming majority opt for the former every time.

Lee Oswald was the lone shooter (the majority don’t even believe this now). Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK (the evidence says he couldn’t, because he standing on the wrong side of RFK).

Lanza would be the perfect patsy. Loner, shy, vulnerable, behaved strangely, Asperger’s Syndrome; MOTHER WAS AN AVID GUN COLLECTOR, had taught her son to shoot; relative of the family tells CBS News the mother was worried about collapse of the economy, wanted weapons in case she had to defend her home and family (DOOMSDAY PREPPER)…and there you have just the right scenario for the gun grabbers, who have been going at it full-bore in the last two days.

“These kids would be still be alive if the mother wasn’t a doomsday prepper.”

On top of that, as I wrote in my previous article, we now have the boggling connection to The Hunger Games. In that sci-fi novel and film, 24 children are picked to take part in a competitive, national, blood-sacrifice, killing ritual…one child survives at the end and 23 die.

Twenty died in Newtown.

And the author of The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins, lives in Sandy Hook, next to Newtown.

And this means? This is just the kind of bizarre and insane op secret societies are reputed to enjoy. Ordinarily, I would ignore this sort of thing and just call it a coincidence, but it’s too improbable. I can’t prove the killings in Newtown were part of that kind of op. But I can’t disregard it, either. The “coincidence” is just too stunning.

And if The Hunger Game connection is real here, then all bets are off.

If you recall, there was another recent mass murder in which a film played a part. Batman. The Dark Knight Rises. The Aurora theater. The Joker. James Holmes, also masked.

There are serious questions about exactly where he was arrested. At the theater exit, as the media reported? Or as other witnesses say, in his car. Was Holmes a patsy, set up to take the fall for murders committed by pros?

Corbin Dates, a purported eyewitness in the theater, and at least one other unnamed witness, spoke on camera to the media about a second shooter in the theater.

Yes, we want answers. We want them quickly. We always do. But it’s better to open up all lines of questioning, rather than chase a cooked-up scenario down the rabbit hole and end nowhere.

Of course, in the Newtown murders, we have all sorts of contradictory reports that surfaced early on. These “errors” have been attributed to “typical confusion that always accompanies” the first stories from a scene of chaos. We always write off these mistakes. But why should we?

There was the confusion about weapons. The killer used a hand gun. No he didn’t. It was a rifle. There was a rifle found in the trunk of a car. No, three weapons were found. The killing weapon was Sig Sauer pistol. No, a rifle, It was a Bushmaster rifle. No, it was a Sig Sauer rifle.

Were all these early errors made in the heat of a chaotic scene, or were some “errors” put out there to confuse a true investigation and possibly delay media and police, while the real killers escaped?

Inferring from the medical examiner’s statements, Lanza, if he was the killer and if he was using a Sig Sauer rifle, would have employed at least three clips in the killing spree. He would have had the persistence to reload that many times and continue the shooting?

A violent outburst, to which Lanza might have been prone, if he indeed had a developmental disorder called “Asperger’s” is not the same thing as the methodical murder of 27 people, reloading three or more clips in his rifle.

And now let’s back up again, to the scene of the crime, as police were inside the school. From reports, the police entered the school after the carnage was over.

They found Lanza’s body. They saw the mask and body armor. They inferred he was the shooter. But what would have prevented the real pros, the killers, from killing Lanza and dressing him in a mask and body armor and leaving him there?

Oh, that couldn’t happened. People wouldn’t do that.

Really? Why not?

The two movies, The Hunger Games and The Dark Knight Rises, provided a backdrop of dystopian chaos and violence, and a society in which coherence has broken down. Criminal forces, winning. The vision of a peaceful and prosperous nation in which institutional justice stands a chance, shattered.

Whether you call “them” the Globalists, the secret societies, the Illuminati, the elites, the Bilderbergs, the CFR, the Trilateralists, you come up with the same game plan:

Destroy America, destroy the idea of individual freedom, destabilize the webs of community, engender fear, make it seem necessary for top-down control to be exerted, “to save us all” from rampant chaos.

These two movies, with tremendous advance publicity and anticipation, bolster the premise that American is too far gone to save.

Now, on top of that, we have two horrendous mass murders connected to these films, and the murders seem to prove the point: we are, in fact, too far gone…unless our wiser leaders step in and make great changes in the way we live.

What changes? Take all the guns. Restrict freedom. Spy on all of us 24/7, no matter where we are, no matter what we are doing.

Then and only then can we have peace. Then and only then can we live side by side in a Matrix of happiness.

“If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.”

Yes. Be good little boys and girls. Obey all the rules. Accept new rules, whenever they are dictated. Keep your eyes straight ahead. Think good thoughts. Be positive.

But even then, be warned, as in Newtown, the perfect little American community, we can experience the murder of innocence. That’s the lesson that is being imparted.

Even then, we learn, there will be a struggle to establish this happy Matrix we all desire. Therefore, all the more reason to surrender our rights and freedoms, so our leaders can work their overarching solutions without resistance and interruption.

From chaos, order.

Jon Rappoport

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by accepting Jon’s Amazon cookie by clicking on Jon’s Amazon referral link.

Newtown murders: astonishing Hunger Games “coincidence,” and killer’s mother now a Doomsday Prepper??

Dec16

Newtown murders: astonishing Hunger Games “coincidence,” and killer’s mother now a Doomsday Prepper??

by Jon Rappoport

December 16, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

CBS News gives us this sizzling report:

(Source): the CBS Evening News, broadcast (on network TV) Sat. 12-15-2012.

Segment begins at 7 minute point in online version of the TV broadcast:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50137189n

Program anchor Jim Axelrod (live in Newtown, CT): “You’re also learning more about the guns used in the shooting, that belonged to Lanza’s mother?”

Senior Correspondent John Miller sets us up for the punch line: “It’s about the process. She had to go to an awful lot of trouble to get these guns. CT has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. That meant going down to the state police, filling out the forms, getting finger printed, and then waiting to hear back that she was approved for a handgun permit. Then it meant going down to the store and getting an FBI background check, waiting for another period and picking those weapons up. So it’s not one of those things where you just show up with your driver’s license and make a purchase. She made an affirmative effort to get these weapons and as we learned from the landscaper, enjoyed shooting.”

Ready? Here is John Miller’s punch line: “We spoke to another relative who also said she was worried about the defense of her home if there was a collapse of the economy [on screen – close up casual photo of Mrs. Lanza]. She wanted to have weapons on hand to defend them which of course only underscores the irony that those were the guns used by her own child to kill her and so many others.”

Boom.

And there we are. The circle is complete. Now the gun grabbers can really take off and run with this. “The doomsday preppers are responsible for the murders of 20 children! That’s where this whole thing is coming from! Get their guns!”

You don’t have to be a genius to figure out where this is going!

But then there is THIS. The SGT Report cites a “coincidence” that will leave you thinking about a planned scenario at Newtown, just the kind of operation secret societies are reputedly famous for.

http://sgtreport.com/2012/12/a-startling-fact-gigantic-coincidence-about-fridays-mass-shooting/

In The Hunger Games, many times called a model of predictive programming, the ritual sacrifice of 23 children is carried out. Twelve districts, two children from each district; they fight in pairs and kill each other until one winner is left. 23 children are killed.

In Newton, Adam Lanza killed 20 children.

The author of The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins, is listed by Wikipedia as one of the famous people who lives in Newtown.

You take it from there. Call it whatever you want to. I try to avoid winging big stretches, but this is too stunning to omit. WTF.

…Meanwhile, the police in Newtown are lying. Here is how that plays out.

We are entering another familiar phase of the standard mass-murder scenario.

It goes like this: “A portrait is beginning to emerge of the killer…”

With Adam Lanza, it starts with “loner, shy, awkward, different, very smart.” It now proceeds to “goth, computer nerd, carried briefcase not backpack, played video games.”

The latter terms are meant to connect the audience, the public, to the 1999 Columbine School mass murders, the touchstone of school shootings, the gold standard. The so-called “trenchcoat mafia”; Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the “goth shooters.”

Next, we may hear Adam Lanza was bullied.

These are all synthetic descriptions about Lanza, manufactured to cue the audience to make certain assumptions about a person they don’t know at all.

The “emerging portrait” is a necessary step in the media presentation. It assures the public that they can make at least partial sense out of the killer.

It’s also a false trail, if in fact the killer was on psychiatric meds, because then all bets are off. The drugs (Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Ritalin, Adderall, etc.) do things to the brain that result in actions entirely beyond any description of Lanza, even when that description comes from family and friends.

Now, the police are getting into the act.

Connecticut State Police Lieutenant, Paul Vance, dangled a carrot in front of the press today: “Our investigators at the crime scene…did produce some very good evidence in this investigation, that our investigators will be able to use in, hopefully, painting the complete picture as to how—and more importantly why—this occurred.”

A note from Adam Lanza, found at the scene? A recording of a confession? Vance didn’t say. Perhaps his punch line will come tomorrow.

Here’s why this is a lie.

Killing your own mother, and then breaking into a school and killing 26 people, most of whom are very young children, doesn’t, by any stretch of the imagination, resolve by assigning a motive.

There is no motive that can explain such a crime.

Lanza was bullied, so he killed 26 people, including little children?

He had a very bad experience when he was in school?

His mother was brutal toward him?

But the media and law-enforcement presentation requires some sort of motive. It’s part of the planned sequence of events that occurs in the aftermath of mass murders. It needs to be there. The public is supposed to digest this motive and either accept it or grudgingly acknowledge it might have played a role in the killings. It’s better than a vacuum.

The public is not supposed to be left with a vacuum.

Of course, the television anchors button the whole thing up with their somber, high-minded, and world-weary bottom-line reminders that “we may never understand what really happened here on the morning of December 14^th.” That’s folded in to provide the “helpless factor” that’s now engraved on every mass murder.

“We’re all victims and we have to accept what cannot be explained.”

We’re talking about multiple vectors of explaining a killer. Planned vectors.

“Well, he was this way and he was that way, and so-and-so person said he was this way, and at the end of the day all this helps but there is still an underlying mystery about the human mind that researchers are only beginning to probe, and here is Dr. Such and Such, who has been researching the deep corridors and channels of the brain for thirty years at Harvard, to try to help us make some sense of out of all of this…Doctor?”

Smokescreen.

Meanwhile, if Adam Lanza was on psychiatric drugs, the answer is obvious. HE HAD NO MOTIVE FOR KILLING ALL THOSE PEOPLE.

There was no motive.

That’s what the drugs do.

Yes, a person might be angry, might be resentful, might feel put-upon, might fantasize about revenge, might wish that people were dead…but he would never act on those feelings and thoughts.

That’s the whole point.

And then he takes the drugs, or dangerously withdraws from them from them, and THEN he kills people.

He does what he would otherwise never do.

In fact, some people who feel absolutely no desire for revenge, after taking the drugs kill others or themselves or both.

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo has written about the case of Julie Marie Meade. In a column for the ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News, “Children and Prozac: First Do No Harm,” Tarantolo describes how Julie Meade, in November of 1996, called 911, “begging the cops to come and shoot her. And if they didn’t do it quickly, she would do it to herself. There was also the threat that she would shoot them as well.”

The police came within a few minutes, “five of them to be exact, pumping at least 10 bullets into her head and torso.”

Tarantolo remarks that a friend of Julie said Julie “had plans to make the honor roll and go to college. He [the friend] had also observed her taking all those pills.” What pills? Tarantolo called the Baltimore medical examiner, and spoke with Dr. Martin Bullock, who was on a fellowship at that office. Bullock said, “She had been taking Prozac for four years.”

Tarantolo asked Bullock, “Did you know that Prozac has been implicated in impulsive de novo violence and suicidalness?” Bullock said he was not aware of this.

Tarantolo is careful to point out, “Violent and suicidal behavior have been observed both early (a few weeks) and late (many months) in treatment with Prozac.”

Keep in mind that a person doesn’t have to be severely “down” to be given one of these antidepressants. He or she could just be going through a temporary disappointment, but upon recommendation, a visit to a psychiatrist is made…and then life takes a radically different and extremely dangerous pharmaceutical course.

As far as motive for murder in the Adam Lanza case, everything is backwards. First, the police should be investigating whether he had been under the care of a physician. If so, what drugs were prescribed?

If the psychiatric meds are positively established, then all the rest of the mumbling and hinting and explaining and writing script is completely irrelevant. Lanza went crazy from the drugs and he killed. He took the drugs and he killed.

This is not an excuse. It’s a fact.

It doesn’t change the tragedy, but knowing it can prevent more mass murders, if the people trying to cover up what these drugs do can be pushed out of the way and shelved, along with all the other medical liars in this country.

Meanwhile, we’re getting the full dose of media mind control out of Newtown, Connecticut. The planned sequence is playing out.

Here’s the capper: Newtown USA is the perfect town. Everybody is happy there. It’s the best place to live. People are friendly. There is virtually no serious crime. It’s so safe. It’s Christmas season. Decorations have already been hung in the streets. It’s the wonderful holiday in the wonderful community. Everybody likes everybody.

What’s the takeaway?

If this horrible, horrible thing happened in Newtown, no one is safe in America, anywhere.

Who wants to promote that message?

The same people who promote the imminent threat of terrorism, in order to wipe out freedom, to install wall to wall surveillance of everything we do and say and write, 24/7, to remove guns from citizens, to increase dependence on government for life and survival.

One young man, on one or two medicines, goes on a rampage and kills, and the planners advance their heinous cause: Operation Newtown.

As long as we stay asleep.

Jon Rappoport

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by accepting Jon’s Amazon cookie by clicking on Jon’s Amazon referral link.

Lanza, Bloomberg, Obama, guns, psychiatric meds, and mass hypnosis in Newtown, Connecticut

Dec15

Lanza, Bloomberg, Obama, guns, psychiatric meds, and mass hypnosis: the TV script

by Jon Rappoport

December 15, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Mayor Bloomberg is leading the charge to take away guns in the wake of the Newtown child murders. The pressure is on.

Apart from grandstanding, which Bloomberg knows how to do, this is all about deflection from the main event: the killer himself.

Last night, I watched network coverage, wherein, of course, the anchors were in Newtown, standing on the street, “trying to make sense of the whole thing.”

If they’re so interested, along with the public, in figuring out why Adam Lanza killed all those children, you would think, with their enormous resources, they would find out who Lanza’s doctor-psychiatrist was in five minutes and ask him about his patient.

Of course, that’s sacred ground. Patient-doctor confidentiality.

Except the patient is dead.

So much for the networks wanting to know who Adam Lanza really was. It’s all a sham. They just want to keep asking the question over and over, pretending to be in the dark about the whole thing.

They want to “deepen the mystery” and emphasize how futile it is to get into the mind of a killer. They’ve got that rap down. They use it every time one of these mass murders happens.

They know about the psychiatric-drug connection to murders and suicides. But they won’t say the magic words. They’ll just keep biting their tongues.

And “out of respect for the victims,” the drug companies aren’t running ads anywhere near this media coverage. Translation: the companies don’t want to encourage the public to make the connection between meds and murder.

Prozac, murder. Zoloft, murder. Paxil, murder. Ritalin, murder.

Bloomberg is playing the shill for new gun control. He’s the point man of the moment, insisting “the president do something meaningful” right now. It’s an orchestrated little play.

“Let’s ask Michael Moore what he thinks.”

“Oh good, Rupert Murdoch is weighing in against guns.” Yes, he’s providing the “balanced” in “fair and balanced,” so people stop associating FOX News with “right-wing gun advocates” for a few hours.

And the Boston mayor is chiming in, too.

Meanwhile, the public is under the spell of mass hypnosis. Can’t stop watching the tube. Never stops to think, “Hey, why don’t they put Lanza’s doctor on the screen and have him talk about his patient?”

There are other elements of this mass trance. People bolster their belief that what happens in life is out of their hands. “See, it’s just like I thought. We have no power. I have no power. All we can do is grieve and try to heal. Light a candle.”

Notice another odd thing. No one in the tightly bound Newtown community is saying, “We’ve got to get to the bottom of this. We’ve got to find out what this killer was.” If they are saying it, you’re not seeing it on camera.

The people of Newtown can find out in an hour who Lanza’s doctor was. They can march right up to his office or house and knock on the door and tell him to come out and talk.

Why don’t they do it?

They’re still in shock, yes. But they’re also in a hypnotic state, when it comes to doctors. Don’t question the high priest in the white coat. He lives in a different sphere from the rest of us.

Ignorance=grief=healing=being a good citizen.

Here’s a phrase you’re hearing all over the tube from politicians and officials. “We have to come together.” What the hell does that mean? I even heard the police chief say it, in reference to “resolving what happened.” Garble. Pure garble.

No, “coming together” means giving up. It means abject helplessness. It means, above all, no outrage.

Have you see one person on television express outrage?

That’s verboten. They won’t allow that. Perhaps they’ll put a few citizens of Newtown on, if they want to say it’s time to take the guns away. A little bit of outrage on that score is all right.

Who knows? Maybe Newtown will become the center of a national movement to ban guns. Maybe a few PR agencies will tap in and go for it.

We’re looking at operant conditioning here. It’s acceptable to feel grief, confusion, pain. It’s acceptable to feel helpless. But outrage? No. That’s not in the playbook.

And the public, glued to their TV sets, absorbs the message. “This is the way I’m supposed to feel in the wake of one of these tragedies. This is what I can feel.”

And it’s all “in deference to the victims and their families.” That’s the capper. Anger is covertly being framed as an insult to the children who died.

This is the show we’re watching. It’s scripted and sculptured.

Part of mass mind control is defining for people what they can feel in a given situation. Left to their own devices, people feel all sorts of things. But because television is the sticky substance that binds the collective together, it becomes the counselor and teacher. It tells people how to experience an event.

It’s powerful. It parades people across the screen who suddenly have special status because they’re on the screen, because they’re being watched by millions. And those key characters, who get their thirty seconds and two minutes are proxies, who instruct the public about emotion, about range of allowable emotion.

This IS mind control.

It’s like an eight-year-old at a funeral. He doesn’t have a clue about what he’s supposed to do, what expression he’s supposed to have on his face, whether he’s supposed to say anything, where he’s supposed to stand, what he’s supposed to feel. So he looks around at the adults. He picks up their cues.

This is the public, watching television. Picking up cues from the citizens of Newtown USA. And those citizens are screened by the producers of the network news shows, before they’re brought on camera.

We’ve got a father who’s pissed off, who wants to go to the home of Lanza’s doctor and ask him questions? Forget it. Sorry, sir. Maybe we’ll get to you later.

The network anchors themselves exude an air of sober respect and somber “humanity.” That’s what they get paid for. Not everybody can do that and keep track of what’s being said in their ears by the producers. The somber tone is the money.

The anchors are the priests at the funeral, before the funeral happens. They set the stage. They convey to the public the meaning and atmosphere and essence of the whole event.

And having done that, there is simply no room for anything that would intrude on this sepulchral mood.

All this occurs while Barack Obama sits in the White House, conferring with his advisers, debating the political upside and downside of issuing an overriding executive order that would limit citizen access to guns.

“Sir, I think the sentiment, at this moment, would be a flood in your favor. This is the time. We’ve got all these dead children. Congress has refused to act in the past, so you do now. You take the whole matter into your own hands, as the nation’s leader in a time of crisis. Sir, you say, ‘Enough. We’ve had enough. All these children, cut off from the rest of their lives and from their loved ones. I refuse to stand by and do nothing.’ I tell you, sir, it would work. We can drum up enormous support from our people, our supporters, and from the press. They’ll say you’re showing great courage. We can pull it off. We can do this. It’ll set the whole stage for your second term. We’ll drown out the opposition…we’ll organize candlelight marches in the inner cities. Thousands, hundreds of thousands of people will come out of their homes and walk down the streets. Mothers holding photos of their dead children. The networks will be there in full force. We’ll put this on television 24/7, and overwhelm our enemies…”

Jon Rappoport

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by accepting Jon’s Amazon cookie by clicking on Jon’s Amazon referral link.

Here come the grief counselors, over the hill, pouring into Newtown, Connecticut

Dec15

Here come the grief counselors, over the hill, pouring into Newtown, Connecticut

By Jon Rappoport

December 15, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

You may as well say that, from this point on, the rest of the events in Newtown, Connecticut, will be brought to you by Merck, Glaxo, and Pfizer.

Media outlets are already reporting that “a raft of services” will be available for the children of Sandy Hook Elementary school, and the Newtown community, where Adam Lanza killed 26 people yesterday.

This is phase two. It always happens at these mass murder events. The grief counselors. The social service workers. The psychologists.

They pour in. And they end up referring people to psychiatrists, who will in turn prescribe some of the very drugs that trigger murder and suicide.

The drugs that cause people to kill.

This is one way the psychiatric drug industry spreads its heinous influence.

The sequence is always the same, because it’s set up that way. After the mass murders and the shock and the horror, the grief industry arrives, and then come the referrals to psychiatric drug pushers, along with the memorials and the “healing.”

The entire mass-shooting aftermath is laid on as a cover, to deflect REAL investigation into what happened.

So here is the first real question.

WHO WAS ADAM LANZA’S DOCTOR?

I kept asking this question about James Holmes, the accused Aurora theater shooter. Finally, it emerged that, indeed, he’d been seeing Lynne Fenton, a psychiatrist at the U of Colorado.

Now, in Newtown, Connecticut, it’s Adam Lanza, whom his brother describes as having had a personality disorder.

If the school shooter was seeing a psychiatrist, we want to know who the doctor is, now. We want a list of all medications Lanza was taking, now.

We know these drugs’ effects. We know a number of psychiatric drugs cause brain storms that push people into committing suicide and homicide.

Newtown is a small community. Somebody there can step up and say who the doctor is. Do it now. The police can’t be depended on to do it. You people in Newtown want to save yourselves from another horror down the line, get the name of the doctor and make it public.

What are we waiting for? Do you think the major media are going to tear away the curtain and tell us anything important? We don’t need official confirmation that the drugs, like Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, and Ritalin are causing people to go crazy and kill. It’s in the literature. I’ve cited the references time and time again. We have to have a public uproar. This killing has to stop.

Expose the drugs, once and for all. Expose the doctors who prescribe them knowing full well what effects they have. Expose the pharmaceutical companies that sell them knowing what they do. Expose the FDA for permitting the drugs to be given in the first place.

Do we need a hundred more of these insane shootings before we wake up? Do we need to stand by and let the government blame it on guns?

Who was Adam Lanza’s doctor?

Who was his doctor?

The op is to keep the people in Newtown in shock, grief, and “we’re all in this together” long enough to avert a true investigation.

Jon Rappoport

If you shop through Amazon, then consider supporting Jon’s work by accepting Jon’s Amazon cookie by clicking on Jon’s Amazon referral link.

The Connecticut school shootings: Operation Chaos

Dec15

by Jon Rappoport

December 14, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

Jacob Roberts, the Oregon mall shooter, and the shooter(s) (Adam Lanza) at the Connecticut elementary school, share a common trait: they committed irrational and inexplicable murders.

This may seem like an obvious fact, but it holds the key to understanding what is going on. You don’t look for an ordinary motive. Therefore, what are we dealing with?

It’s easy to say, “They were crazy,” or “Who cares why they did it,” but that gets you nowhere.

We have to shake off our own conditioning to these repetitive murders. We have to shake off the idea that “they just keep happening” and instead look below the surface.

First and foremost, we have to consider the possibility that SSRI antidepressants like Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft were in play. The drugs have been well studied. They do, in fact, push people far over the edge, scramble neurotransmitter systems, and result in patients committing suicides and murders.

My extensive school-shooting report, written a decade ago, lays out the facts about these drugs, and also about the amphetamine-type drugs prescribed for ADHD, like Ritalin:

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2012/02/11/the-school-shooting-white-paper/

The meds cause inexplicable violent behavior: suicide, homicide. The drugs were, in fact, linked with the 1999 Columbine school shooting. Eric Harris, one of the killers, was on Luvox, an SSRI antidepressant, which was taken off the market by its manufacturer several years later.

It’s long past the time when police should continue to fear defensive psychiatrists. In these latest tragedies, an investigation must be launched immediately to see whether the shooters were on these drugs, or whether they had just come off them. The withdrawal effects alone can be horrific.

You can be sure drug companies have people striving to find out, in Oregon and Connecticut, before anyone else does, whether the shooters were on the devastating drugs. It’s called damage control, which means, if necessary, covering up or downplaying the facts.

The same kind of damage control is no doubt being tried in the Aurora theater shootings, where it finally leaked out that James Holmes was under the care of a psychiatrist and was, most likely, on one or more of the drugs that induce out-of-control violence—inexplicable baffling violence.

Jacob Roberts, the Oregon mall shooter, was said to be happy-go-lucky, and then shortly before the killings, “went numb.” Investigate whether he was under the care of a doctor, and whether he was given psychiatric drugs.

Whether either or both of the shooters in Oregon and Connecticut were operating out of an even darker mind-controlled program, as was apparently the case, for example, with the dupe in the RFK assassination, Sirhan Sirhan, we are still looking at Operation Chaos:

Generations of children and adults have now fallen under the influence of psychiatrists, who have given them these brain-scrambling chemicals, and the overall outcome is certain. People will continue to launch inexplicable motiveless murders, on a random basis.

The destabilizing effects on the society, the debilitating effects on the population are enormous. People are confused, they become more passive, they move a little further each time into dependence on the authorities.

The government screws in tighter controls on freedom. New programs are mounted to take away guns from citizens.

All this is the aim of the massive covert operation that is behind the “mental-health establishment.” Distort the brains and neurological systems of millions of people, and let the chips fall where they may.

Mass murders are the consequences.

Whether or not Jacob Roberts and the Connecticut school shooter(s) were on these psychiatric drugs, Operation Chaos will proceed. The very fact that we may never find out whether the latest mass murderers were drugged in this way speaks volumes: powerful people don’t want the truth to be known.

This is a common feature of all mass murders: the police and the prosecutors refuse to investigate the psychiatric medicines, unless they are absolutely forced to. They are under tacit orders to ignore that obvious and glaring route of inquiry.

The most important reason why? The hugely powerful drug companies, who are only a step away from incrimination, when a shooter is driven to kill by the storm created in his brain by the drugs.

Billions of dollars are at stake.

The pharmaceutical companies have it all figured out. No matter how much is written and discovered about the violence-inducing effects of psychiatric chemicals, they can ride things out and keep selling those poisons. The FDA will maintain a hands-off attitude. The money will keep rolling in unless:

One of these killers is shown to have killed because he was on Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Ritalin, or Adderall.

Terrible things happened in Oregon and Connecticut. Terrible things will keep happening unless a relentless pursuit of the truth is undertaken. Anything less is obscene dereliction of duty.

To law-enforcement officials: blood is already on your hands. Find the truth and tell it.

Sources:

http://www.breggin.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=295

http://www.naturalnews.com/034960_Prozac_teens_murder.html

http://www.infowars.com/prozac-zoloft-paxil-did-one-of-these-drugs-drive-the-empire-state-shooter/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-peter-breggin/panel-to-examine-murder-a_b_838147.html

http://ssristories.com/

(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.

James Holmes: three ways to get set up for murder

Dec1

by Jon Rappoport

November 30, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

A prison inmate claims Holmes confessed he was a mind-controlled assassin. Paul Watson, writing at Infowars, covers the story:

http://www.infowars.com/inmate-james-holmes-told-me-he-was-programmed-to-kill-by-evil-therapist/

There are three roads that can lead to the hugely inconvenient truth about Holmes.

One: he was set up and subjected to mind control, after which he committed the murders at the Aurora theater. He was programmed to kill.

Two: he was a patsy. He didn’t kill anybody. He was drugged and dumped in his car at the theater, set up to be arrested there, not at the door of the theater. The drug would have induced short-term amnesia. Holmes was clueless.

Three: he was a victim of standard psychiatric drugging, at the hands of any of three psychiatrists at the U of Colorado, where he had been a student. For example, ordinary “therapeutic” dosing with antidepressants like Prozac, Zoloft, or Paxil could very well have induced a homicidal rage. In that case, the U of Colorado would be bracing for a billion-dollar lawsuit.

This is one reason for the very tight information-control on the case.

It should be understood that standard psychiatric drugging and the drugging that would have taken place, in mind-control programming, are two very different protocols.

You don’t feed somebody Prozac and feel certain he will kill as directed. The SSRI antidepressants are unpredictable. Under intentional mind-control programming to kill, the drugs would have assisted accompanying hypnosis. The drugs would have induced temporary passivity and increased suggestibility.

The exception? If Holmes had been subjected to long-term mind control, all sorts of disorienting drugs could have been used to soften him up; for example, LSD at high doses, or similar designer hallucinogenics.

Nothing public has been released about the results of Holmes’ tox-screen blood tests while in jail.

It would, of course, be quite revealing to learn what drugs Holmes was given by his psychiatrist(s). If any of them, e.g, Dr. Lynne Fenton, was actually involved in programming him, they would have avoided standard meds, because such unpredictable chemicals could have disrupted Holmes’ orders to kill.

In 1995, a presidential committee set up to hear testimony on illegal radiation experiments suddenly bloomed into testimony about mind control. Two patients of New Orleans therapist, Valerie Wolf, Claudia Mullin and Cris De Nicola, took the stand and recounted how radiation had been used on them, as part of a much wider-ranging program.

They spoke about their long-term nightmare, starting as children, during which hallucinogenic drugs, spinning tables, blinking lights, hypnosis, and programming were employed to make them into agents under the CIA’s secret MKULTRA aegis. In those cases, the drugs were used to scramble their brains.

In Holmes’ case, more sophisticated means could have been deployed. For instance, electronic transmissions that would have disrupted normal functioning of his brain, and even induced thought-replacement, if he had been already placed under sufficient duress.

One of the crude forerunners of these techniques was invented by the world-famous Canadian psychiatrist, Ewen Cameron, who carried out experiments on unwitting patients during the 1950s. Partially funded by a CIA front, Cameron’s torture method was called psychic driving.

After horrendous electric shocks, drugs were given to place patients in days of prolonged sleep. Cameron then subjected them to audio tapes he made, in which he repeated phrases thousands of times, in order to produce new personalities for them.

A 2012 lawsuit filed by veterans’ groups, against the CIA and the DOD, refers to Cameron’s methods. The suit also states that two researchers, Dr. Louis West and Dr. Jose Delgado, working together under the early MKULTRA subproject 95, utilized two protocols: brain implants (“stimoceivers”) and RHIC-EDOM to program the minds of victims.

RHIC-EDOM stands for Radio Hypnotic Intracerebral Control-Electronic Dissolution of Memory. Translation: bury memory, and insert commands.

The stimoceiver was an implant developed by Delgado, who was a famous Yale researcher. He set out to prove he could control physical actions.

Delgado’s most dramatic experiment involved stepping into a ring with a bull, who had been outfitted with the stimoceiver implant. The bull charged Delgado, who pressed a button on a handheld device…and the bull stopped dead in his tracks.

In ensuing years, RHIC-EDOM and Delgado’s stimoceiver were researched using a variety of newer methods. The main objective was production of artificial emotion, thought, and action.

On the other hand, if James Holmes wasn’t an MKULTRA-type assassin, but instead a simple psychiatric patient, there is ample evidence in the medical literature to indicate murder is an outcome of various drugs.

In other words, Holmes’ personal problems weren’t enough to push him into the theater where he killed people at random. That was an ordinary effect of the drugs, which scrambled his neurotransmitter systems and literally drove him crazy.

See the work of Dr. Peter Breggin, who has been aptly called “the conscience of psychiatry.” In his first landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, and in later books and articles, Breggin makes a clear case for psychiatric meds as the cause of suicides and homicides. (www.breggin.com)

In interviews with me, Breggin stated that, in the 1999 Columbine school-shooting case, one of the shooters, Eric Harris, was on Luvox, an SSRI antidepressant. “This type of drug,” Breggin said, “can cause the patient to kill, but also to make grandiose plans for destruction.”

Holmes as a simple patsy is the third road of investigation. There are clues to suggest this path. The “other gas mask” found at the back of the theater, after the murders, is still unexplained. It could have been cast aside by a shooter, not Holmes, during an escape.

At least two witnesses have testified there were two shooters in the theater. This, of course, suggests, a planned operation. The idea of Holmes collaborating with another killer is odd, to say the least, given the background we’ve been fed about his unstable mental condition and his loner status.

Initial reports claimed Homes surrendered himself to police, at a theater exit, after the shootings. This is contradicted by witness assertions that he was arrested in his car.

To sort out what really happened at the Aurora theater, one must follow all three tracks of inquiry.

Possible overlaps exist. Holmes could have been drugged merely to set him up as the patsy, in which case, he committed no crime at all. He could have been drugged and programmed prior to him visiting a psychiatrist at the U of Colorado. In that scenario, the basic op was enforced by psychiatric “boosters” involving, perhaps, hypnosis. Or Holmes was indeed programmed to kill and become the patsy, allowing other shooters to escape—but Holmes didn’t, finally, carry out the murders.

This last scenario resembles what happened in the 1968 assassination of Robert Kennedy. Sirhan Sirhan, the patsy, did in fact have a gun at the Ambassador Hotel. But he was standing in front of RFK in the kitchen, and the shots that killed RFK came from behind. Sirhan had kept notebooks in which, prior to the assassination, he revealed an obsessed and apparently dissociated state of mind.

See this account of the RFK murder, which casts overwhelming doubt on the official story:

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Robert_Kennedy_Assassination

Holmes, like Sirhan, kept a notebook, which he mailed to his psychiatrist at the U of Colorado. What was in it?

If we ever find out, we may see even closer parallels to the RFK assassination, in which all signs pointed to Sirhan, including his programming…but those clues were laid down to divert the investigation from the real shooter, who stood behind Kennedy in the kitchen of the Ambassador Hotel.

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

Perhaps the most tantalizing clues of all come from a kind of social/media analysis. Here is a section from an earlier article of mine, “Were the Batman Murders a Covert Op?” (note: click here for the full article):

It is noteworthy that a young neuroscience student, Holmes, who was at one point studying “the biological basis of mental disorders,” winds up as an accused mass murderer who is “obviously deranged” and “suffering from a chemical imbalance in the brain.”

At this point, we go down the rabbit hole, and the pieces of the puzzle are strange.

A video has emerged of Holmes, at age 18, six years ago, lecturing to fellow attendees at a science summer camp at Miramar College in San Diego.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lotOPjLlbDU

Holmes explains he has been studying temporal illusions and subjective experience. A temporal illusion, he states, is the idea that you can change the past.

At the Cannonfire blog (http://cannonfire.blogspot.com) there are comic-book panels posted from what Joseph Cannon calls “the most famous passage in the most famous of all Joker stories, Alan Moore’s ‘The Killing Joke.’”

The Joker is asked: “I mean, what is it with you? What made you the way you are? Girlfriend killed by the mob? Maybe brother carved up by some mugger…?”

The Joker replies: “Something like that happened to me, you know…I’m not exactly sure what it was. Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another…if I’m going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice! Ha ha ha!”

James Holmes, at 18 years of age, said he was studying temporal illusion, “the idea that you can change the past,” a feat the fictional Joker had obviously accomplished.

In the last ten years, the film that explored this subject—and Holmes’ other interest, the subjectivity of experience—most deeply, through its treatment of dreams and the insertion of synthetic experience in the mind, was Inception, directed by Christopher Nolan, who of course also directed the recent Batman trilogy, including The Dark Knight Rises.

In yet another version of changing the past, in 2000 Nolan directed Memento, which unraveled its story backwards, as a victim of anterograde amnesia, who can’t store memories, tries to revenge his wife’s murder by leaving clues for himself that will lead him to the identity of her killer.

Are we simply talking about a neuroscience student’s (Holmes’) interest in comics and films, or did he participate in experiments that attempted to alter his subjective view of the world and his own past?

For example, there is wealth of information about the criminal experiments conducted by Canadian psychiatrist, Dr. Ewan Cameron, who operated with funding from the CIA during the 1950s. Cameron ran MKULTRA Subproject 68, during which he used massive electroshocks, sensory isolation, drug-induced periods of sleep (7-10 days), and audiotapes of “re-patterning” commands to attempt to wipe out patients’ pasts, their memories, their former subjective mindsets, their very personalities—in favor of recreating these patients as “new and improved people.”

As a teen, Holmes interned at the Salk Institute in San Diego. Salk carries out studies using functional MRI, a technique of brain mapping that involves correlating read-outs with various mental activities. It’s only speculation at this point, but somewhere along the line, did Holmes participate in such experiments, and were the results used to map regions of his brain for later inputs, so someone could achieve behavioral/thought control over him?

To even suggest Holmes may be a mind-control subject brings immediate criticism, to which I would offer this counter: why accept the scenario of the crime put forward by the Aurora police? Why do they deserve the benefit of the doubt? Why limit and narrow the investigation to their story?

Was law enforcement correct about the JFK and JFK and MLK assassinations? Was law enforcement correct about the Columbine massacre, in which 101 witnesses state they saw other shooters? Was law enforcement correct about the lone duo of plotters in the Oklahoma bombing? Was law enforcement correct about 9/11?

In all cases—no.

I’ll tell you this. If the authorities really wanted to know what makes James Holmes tick (a prospect I strongly doubt), their best chance would be to send someone into his cell who could talk to him about Christopher Nolan, Inception, Memento, functional MRI, and the TV series, Lost, which contained time-travel themes and was a show he and his friend, Ritchie Duong, used to watch together every week when they attended UC Riverside. Talk to Holmes about what he wants to talk about. Who knows what would eventually unravel?

It would be far more than the police wish to uncover.

Jon Rappoport

JAMES HOLMES’ PSYCHIATRIST LAWYERS UP

Aug10

JAMES HOLMES’ PSYCHIATRIST LAWYERS UP

by Jon Rappoport

August 10, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

The University of Colorado has endured several scandals in the last 15 years. The use of sex to lure football recruits. Accusations of rape against players. Raising student tuition rates and then funneling the money into salary raises for top University officials. But all that is nothing compared to what the University could be facing now.

The University is circling the wagons, bracing for a legal attack. They have brought in a lawyer to represent their director of student medical services, psychiatrist Lynne Fenton, who may have been treating James Holmes before the Aurora theater shootings.

What did Fenton know about Holmes’ state of mind and plans before the shootings? Did she properly report her concerns to the correct authorities (a key issue in the Penn State scandals)? A hearing has been set for August 16 to determine the exact nature of Fenton’s professional relationship with Holmes.

Lawsuits from the families of those shot in the Aurora theater are waiting in the wings.

The University will argue that a) although Holmes may have presented signs of mental illness, b) there was no way to know he was going to launch violent murders on July 20.

All this maneuvering is taking place in an artificial world of presumed knowledge about Holmes’ actual connection or non-connection to the murders.

At a court hearing on Thursday, Holmes’ lawyers stated their client is mentally ill. This confirms speculation they will enter an insanity plea in the case. It also makes clear that the defense team has zero interest in reconstructing a narrative about events leading up to, and including, the shootings at the theater. They want Holmes’ entire future to rest on a narrow judgment about his mental state.

Both the defense and the prosecution want the judge’s gag order to stand, thereby making it impossible to learn anything new about what evidence the police and the FBI have collected in their investigation. If no full trial is ever held, that evidence will be locked away, and aside from choice leaks to the press, it will never see the light of day.

The exception could be public deliberation on the question of whether to allow Holmes’ insanity plea. During that period, the prosecution could argue that Holmes was sane, and would offer proof to that effect. Even then, however, much evidence would be kept from view—especially details that contradict the official narrative.

For example: who left a second gas mask at the back of the theater after the shootings? Was someone other than Holmes killing people inside the theater, as at least two witnesses suggest? Was Holmes a patsy who was actually arrested in his car, in a stupor, when the police discovered him? Did he really confess to the crimes? Did the copious amounts of blood outside the theater come from a neck wound sustained by a customer in the theater (even though a purported photo of the scar, taken in the hospital, suggested a superficial cut)? Or did the blood come from a professional shooter? Or from a girl who was abducted from the scene?

Leading up to the shootings, was Holmes treated with psychiatric drugs known to induce violent behavior? If so, this would be another reason the University of Colorado has enlisted an attorney to represent Lynne Fenton. The University wants to avoid any airing of this issue.

It would not only be a disaster for the University, drug companies could be named in lawsuits, and at trial mountains of damaging evidence about the drugs could surface.

It would be safe to assume major drug companies presently know exactly what drugs Holmes was given, if indeed he was yet one more psychiatric casualty. These companies are standing by with their own consultants and cutouts, to advise the University and Lynne Fenton. They are also using their considerable resources to discover what both the prosecution and the defense know about these matters, and what kind of case they intend to put forward.

If Holmes was actually a victim of MKULTRA-type programming, interested players behind the scenes, at this moment, would include black ops case handlers who want to make sure there is no exposure on that front.

For all these reasons, there is a good chance the Jared Loughner strategy will be employed: an insanity plea, followed by a period of incarceration, during which psychiatrists will go to work on Holmes and prepare him to “become competent,” after which he will enter a guilty plea and find himself in lock-up, with no connections to the outside world, for decades.

At this moment, Lynne Fenton’s lawyer is readying the strongest possible defense on her behalf: she acted responsibly; she informed authorities of her concerns about Holmes; she treated Holmes within approved guidelines; she never saw Holmes’ infamous notebook until after the shootings.

However, Fenton may yet find herself thrown to the wolves, if a scapegoat is needed. The University may decide that attorneys for plaintiffs in an enormous lawsuit are going to discover fatal irregularities in her actions. The University could then reach out for a desperate strategy: she, Fenton, “acted alone,” contravening the regulations of the University threat assessment team, without the team’s knowledge or permission. It could get ugly.

Right now, she is one of the University’s own. Their interests and hers are are identical. But strange things happen as cases proceed, and partners can become adversaries, as all parties try to cover themselves from liability.

The University of Colorado is a state institution, so the governor and his advisers are in the mix as well. A billion-dollar hit to the state treasury, from lawsuits, is not a welcome prospect.

This case, in that respect, has similarities to the Penn State scandal, which has not yet begun to unfold in civil court. Families of the children Sandusky molested, and families of people killed in the Aurora theater, want their day before judge and jury.

For other interested parties, trying to escape blame and exposure and judgment, a Holmes “suicide” would be a satisfactory ending. Don’t discount the possibility.

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

WHAT LIES IN STORE FOR JAMES HOLMES?

Aug9

BATMAN MURDERS: WHAT LIES IN STORE FOR JAMES HOLMES?

by Jon Rappoport

August 8, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

There is much speculation that James Holmes’ lawyer will initially go for an insanity plea.

If Holmes is, in fact, the patsy here, who was not in the theater at all; or if he was a shooter driven to kill by violence-inducing psychiatric drugs; or if he was specifically programmed to kill; an extensive trial is obviously something people in the shadows want to avoid.

An insanity plea would work for them.

The end result? Holmes will be warehoused for the rest of his life.

One has to wonder what Robert Holmes, James’ father, is doing right now. Why hasn’t he hired a top-flight lawyer to negotiate for his son? Why is his son being left to the devices of a public defender? Perhaps the legal outcome is already decided by all parties.

A look at what just happened to Jared Loughner could give a clue to James Holmes’ fate. Loughner has now entered a guilty plea to the 2011 shootings in Arizona. At first, his lawyer put forward a plea of insanity. This was followed by a year in a locked psyche ward, where Loughner was forced to take psychotropic drugs to “alleviate his schizophrenia.” Finally, he was deemed competent to stand trial, at which point he confessed to the crime, earning life in prison.

Who knows what actually happened to Loughner during his stay in the psych ward? Who knows what kind of coercion and deal making took place? The drugs themselves are a form of torture.

Thorazine, the basis for all later so-called antipsychotic drugs, was discovered by a French researcher, who found that rats, when fed the chemical, could no longer climb ropes, and he decided it would be ideal for humans.

It’s possible that Loughner, when faced with the choice of life in prison, versus having his brain destroyed by drugs, chose the former.

At his court appearance, Loughner smiled and nodded when his special friendship with one of his psych-ward guards was mentioned. It would be standard procedure for a guard to form such a bond, in order to induce the desired plea outcome.

In Holmes case, the public outcry against an insanity plea would be mitigated by the promise that, if he can be made competent through “psychiatric care,” he will then have a chance to enter a second plea, and if that plea is not guilty, a trial will indeed take place. But in fact, Holmes could be kept in lockup and forcibly administered drugs until he is ready to say, “I’m guilty,” no matter how long that takes.

All this, of course, is couched in terms of humane and fair treatment. The whole idea is avoid images of a psychiatric gulag.

But the psychiatrists will eventually have the last word.

A Holmes “suicide” while in custody cannot be ruled out. Loughner apparently tried suicide several times.

The most bizarre official statement made two days ago about Loughner: there is no doubt he will have to remain on psychiatric drugs for the rest of his life, in order to remain competent. While serving life without the possibility of parole, he needs to remain competent? Isn’t this code for “we don’t want him talking about what may have gone on behind the scenes that led to the shootings”?

There are several political reasons for placing people under long-term institutionalized psychiatric care (drugging or worse): to be able to label them insane, so anything they say can be discounted; to medicate them into a brain-damaged state of compliance, so they won’t or can’t make any coherent statements at all; to add credibility to psychiatry by claiming the patient has eventually been “rehabilitated.”

The first two reasons protect people behind the scenes who have secret crimes on their hands. Example: for decades, Joe Kennedy, Sr. and his wife hid the fact that Joe had his daughter, Rosemary, lobotomized and then stashed in institutions away from public view.

Dr. Walter Freeman, the infamous pioneer of lobotomy, performed the surgery. Rosemary was awake throughout. She was asked to do simple arithmetical calculations while Freeman was cutting into her brain. When she could no longer come up with answers and fell silent, Freeman knew the operation was successful.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: 2012 Massacres

How the Newtown massacre became a Mind-Control television event

Three armed women teachers shot Adam Lanza in a classroom

Two movies, two mass murders

Newtown murders: astonishing Hunger Games “coincidence,” and killer’s mother now a Doomsday Prepper??

Lanza, Bloomberg, Obama, guns, psychiatric meds, and mass hypnosis in Newtown, Connecticut

Here come the grief counselors, over the hill, pouring into Newtown, Connecticut

The Connecticut school shootings: Operation Chaos

James Holmes: three ways to get set up for murder

JAMES HOLMES’ PSYCHIATRIST LAWYERS UP

WHAT LIES IN STORE FOR JAMES HOLMES?