Category Archives: 2016 Massacres

3 boggling facts in Hillary email cover-up/Dallas shooting

3 boggling facts in Hillary email cover-up/Dallas shooting

by Jon Rappoport

July 8, 2016

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

—Arch-Globalist Hillary Clinton’s no-prosecution, the recent exit of Britain from the EU which torpedoed the unchecked advance of Globalism, the current Presidential campaign which features a candidate (formerly two candidates) attacking Globalism as no major candidate ever has before—all this suddenly fades from public consciousness in the specter of the Dallas shootings—the racial conflict that has been decades in the making—made in America, by Globalists, for the express purpose of Divide and Conquer—

I know full well how incompetent, stupid, amateurish, and ill-prepared government employees can be. But the dog and pony Hillary show of the last few days is truly staggering.

If the effort was to exonerate Hillary Clinton, it was done so badly the American people are more certain than ever that she is guilty as sin.

Here are the top three actions of the past few days that conspired to free her, while actually revealing how culpable she is, to anyone with a few working brain cells:

One: Just by chance, US Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, the highest law-enforcement official in the land, runs into Bill Clinton at the Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport. They talk in secret, as the FBI is wrapping up its email-scandal probe and is preparing to present its findings. This Lynch-Clinton meeting assures one and all that the fix is in. “Hillary’s guilty, but we’re going to find her innocent.”

Two: In an unprecedented move, FBI Director Comey holds a global press conference. He runs down a massive list of Hillary’s actions, leaving no doubt she is guilty of gross negligence in her handling of classified materials. But then he does an abrupt turn and recommends no prosecution, because the Bureau found no evidence she intended to do harm.

Comey knows, and ensuing press reports emphasize, that intent is not the legal issue. The Federal Penal Code (Title 18, section 793f) makes that clear. Gross negligence is sufficient for prosecution, conviction, and a sentence of up to ten years in prison.

Furthermore, why is FBI Director making his recommendation in public, before the world? His job is simply to turn over the evidence to his boss, Attorney General Lynch, who will decide whether prosecution is the next step. But since, a day earlier, Lynch inexplicably said she would blindly follow the FBI’s recommendation—thereby abdicating her duty as Attorney General—Comey is suddenly doing her job and occupying her position. He is, for the moment, the US Attorney General.

As any fool can see.

Comey is also an appellate judge, because he is interpreting Title 18 of the Federal Penal Code—and interpreting it falsely.

As any fool can see.

Three: Comey then appears before the Congress for a grilling. Are we to assume he expected to get off easily? Of course not. He knew he would be raked over the coals, and in the process he would reveal more clearly how Hillary had violated the law. Comey would continue to assert there was no need for prosecution, while showing the world that prosecution was exactly the proper path. And that’s what happened, during Comey’s conversation with Rep. Trey Gowdy.

Four main facts emerged out of Comey’s mouth:

* When Hillary said she didn’t use her personal server to send or receive emails marked “classified,” she lied.

* When Hillary said she didn’t send classified material, she lied.

* When Hillary said she used only one device that was connected to her personal server, she lied. She used four.

* When Hillary said she returned all work-related emails from her personal storage to the State Department, she lied. She didn’t return thousands of emails.

Comey admits all this under questioning. He further concedes that lies of this nature would normally be used to mount a prosecution.

Not only that, these lies would be used to form a circumstantial case for intent, the very issue on which Comey found Hillary “innocent.”

Could Comey, Loretta Lynch, and Obama have figured out a worse way to exonerate Hillary? It’s hard to imagine.

More likely, Obama and Lynch decided to put the egg on Comey’s face. He would have to take one for the team.

Comey, in turn, decided that if he was going to be the fall-guy, he would, in the process, lay out the details showing how guilty Hillary was. After all, his own people, his own FBI investigators, had assembled an air-tight case against Hillary. Comey knew they would boil with rage when he exonerated her. So he threw a bone to his team. In effect, he said to them: “I have to recommend no prosecution, but I’ll expose some of what you discovered.”

The question now is, will one or more of Comey’s FBI investigators leak further devastating facts, revealing Hillary’s guilt, to the press?

power outside the matrix

By chance, this whole travesty of justice was suddenly overshadowed by the events in Dallas, where snipers shot 12 police officers and killed five.

Arch-Globalist Hillary Clinton’s no-prosecution, the recent exit of Britain from the EU which torpedoed the unchecked advance of Globalism, the current Presidential campaign which features a candidate (formerly two candidates) attacking Globalism as no major candidate ever has before—all this suddenly fades from public consciousness in the specter of the Dallas shootings—the racial conflict that has been decades in the making—made in America, by Globalists, for the express purpose of Divide and Conquer.

Jon Rappoport

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

Orlando shooting: actor/witness: what?

Orlando shooting: actor/witness: what??

by Jon Rappoport

June 16, 2016

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

Want to get this one out fast…

See a post on anomalies in the Orlando shooting, at the site, Fellowship of the Minds, by “Dr. Eowyn.”

See: Orlando gay-club shooting: The pieces that don’t fit

The Eowyn post mentions mainstream press articles reporting the shooting—those mainstream articles appeared six hours before the Orlando shooting actually occurred. That’s rather curious, yes?

But the Eowyn revelation that cooked my brain was about a Pulse-club “witness to the shooting,” Louis Burbano, who is an actor. An actual actor with credits. He was interviewed by ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos. Eowyn shows an IMDb screenshot of Burbano’s most recent role in a short 2015 video: Burbano played a “club patron.” The title of the video? “Spirit of Orlando: Shooting Up.”

Now we’re through the looking-glass. Way through the looking-glass.

Jon Rappoport

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

Orlando shooter: deeper hidden ties to the FBI?

Orlando shooter: deeper hidden ties to the FBI?

by Jon Rappoport

June 13, 2016

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

“…Michael German, a former F.B.I. agent who researches national security law at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, told the Times, ‘They’re [the FBI] manufacturing terrorism cases.’” (The New Yorker, June 10, 2016, “Do FBI Stings help fight against ISIS?” by Evan Osnos)

The website Cryptogon has pieced together some interesting facts, and a quite odd “coincidence.” I’m bolstering their work.

First of all, the Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, changed his name in 2006. As NBC News notes: “Records also show that he had filed a petition for a name change in 2006 from Omar Mir Seddique to Omar Mir Seddique Mateen.”

Why is that important? Why is his original last name, Seddique, also spelled Siddiqui, significant? Because of a previous terrorism case in Florida, in which the FBI informant’s name was Siddiqui. And because that previous case may have been one of those FBI prop-jobs, where the informant was used to falsely accuse a suspect of a terrorist act. The New Yorker (cited above) has details:

“This is not the first time that the F.B.I. has attracted criticism from national-security experts and civil-liberties groups for generating terrorism cases through sting operations and confidential informants. In ‘The Imam’s Curse,’ published in September, I reported on a Florida family that was accused of providing ‘material support’ to terrorists. In that case, a father, Hafiz Khan, and two of his sons were arrested. The charges against the sons were eventually dropped, but Hafiz Khan was convicted and sentenced to twenty-five years in prison. At Khan’s trial, his lawyer, Khurrum Wahid, questioned the reliability of the key [FBI] informant in the case, David Mahmood Siddiqui. Wahid accused Siddiqui, who’d had periods of unemployment, of lying to authorities because his work as a confidential informant was lucrative. For his role in the case, Siddiqui had received a hundred and twenty-six thousand dollars, plus expenses. But in a subsequent interview with the Associated Press, Siddiqui stood by his testimony and motives: ‘I did it for the love of my country, not for money.’”

The website Cryptogon, which pieced this whole story together, comments: “What are the odds that an FBI informant in a [previous] Florida terrorist case shares the same last name as the perpetrator of the worst mass shooting in U.S. history—also in Florida—[Omar Mateen] a lone wolf cop poser with multiple acknowledged contacts with the FBI, who was formerly listed on the terrorist watch list and associated with a suicide bomber… while holding a valid security guard license?”

Indeed.

And in case you think Siddiqui is a common last name, here is a statement from Mooseroots:

“Siddiqui is an uncommon surname in the United States. When the United States Census was taken in 2000, there were about 4,994 individuals with the last name “Siddiqui,” ranking it number 6,281 for all surnames. Historically, the name has been most prevalent in the Southwest, though the name is actually most common in Hawaii. Siddiqui is least common in the southeastern states.”

If for some reason the name Siddiqui throws you off, suppose the last name was, let me make something up, Graposco? A few years ago, an FBI informant in Florida, Graposco, appeared to have falsely accused a man of terrorist acts—and in 2016, another Graposco, who changed that last name to something else, killed 50 people in a Florida nightclub shooting—after having been investigated twice by the FBI? Might that coincidence grab your attention?

Again—the 2016 Orlando shooter had extensive contact with the FBI in 2013 and 2014. The FBI investigated him twice and dropped the investigations. The FBI used an informant in a previous Florida case, and that informant had the same last name as the Orlando shooter. It’s quite possible the previous informant was told to give a false statement which incriminated a man for terrorist acts.

You can say this is a coincidence. Maybe it is. But it seems more than odd. Are the two Siddiqui men connected?

Was the Orlando shooter involved in some kind of FBI plan to mount a terror op that was supposed to be stopped before it went ahead, but wasn’t? Was the Orlando shooter “helped” over the edge from having “radical ideas” to committing mass murder?

I could cite a number of precedents. Here is one I reported on in 2014:

There seems to be a rule: if a terror attack takes place and the FBI investigates it, things are never what they seem.

Federal attorney Andrew C McCarthy prosecuted the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing case. A review of his book, Willful Blindness, states:

“For the first time, McCarthy intimately reveals the real story behind the FBI’s inability to stop the first World Trade Center bombing even though the bureau had an undercover informant in the operation—the jihadists’ supposed bombmaker.

“In the first sentence of his hard-hitting account, the author sums up the lawyerly—but staggeringly incomprehensive—reason why the FBI pulled its informant out of the terrorist group even as plans were coming to a head on a major attack:

“’Think of the liability!’

“The first rule for government attorneys in counterintelligence in the 1990s was, McCarthy tells us, ‘Avoid accountable failure.’ Thus, when the situation demanded action, the feds copped a CYA posture, the first refuge of the bureaucrat.”

That’s a titanic accusation, coming from a former federal prosecutor.

Yes, the FBI had an informant inside the group that was planning the 1993 WTC bombing that eventually, on February 26, killed 6 people and injured 1042.

His name is Emad Salem, a former Egyptian Army officer. Present whereabouts unknown. Yanking Salem out of the group planning the Bombing was a devastating criminal act on the part of the FBI.

But there is more to the story.

On October 28, 1993, Ralph Blumenthal wrote a piece about Emad Salem for the New York Times: “Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast.” It began:

“Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer [Emad Salem] said after the blast.”

Continuing: “The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer, Emad A. Salem, should be used, the informer [Emad] said.”

The FBI called the “plan” off, but left the planners to their own devices. No “harmless powder.” Instead, real explosives.

The Times article goes on: “The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of hours of tape recordings Mr. Salem secretly made of his talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as in a far better position than previously known to foil the Feb. 26 bombing of New York City’s tallest towers.”

This is a shockingly strong opening for an article in the NY Times. It focuses on the testimony of the informant; it seems to take his side.

Several years after reporter Blumenthal wrote the above piece, I spoke with him and expressed my amazement at the revelations about the FBI—and wondered whether the Times had continued to investigate the scandal.

Blumenthal wasn’t pleased, to say the least. He said I misunderstood the article.

I mentioned the fact that Emad Salem wasn’t called as a prosecution witness in the 1993 WTC Bombing trial.

Of course, why would the Dept. of Justice bring Salem to the stand? Would they want him to blame the FBI for abetting the Bombing?

Again, Blumenthal told me I “didn’t understand.” He became angry and that was the end of the conversation.

I remember thinking: letting the bomb plot go forward…what else do you need for a criminal prosecution of the FBI?

Here is an excerpt from one of those tapes Emad Salem made when he was secretly bugging his own FBI handlers. On this phone call, he talks to his Bureau friend John. Others have claimed this is an agent named John Anticev. The conversation is taking place at some point after the 1993 WTC Bombing. The main topic is Salem’s fees for services rendered as an informant. He apparently wants more money. He also wants to make sure the Bureau will pay him what they’ve agreed to. During the conversation, Salem suddenly talks about the bomb. His English is broken, but his meaning is clear enough. When he finishes, his Bureau handler John just moves on without directly responding.

Salem: “…we was start already building the bomb which is went off in the World Trade Center. It was built by supervising supervision from the Bureau and the DA and we was all informed about it and we know that the bomb start to be built. By who? By your confidential informant. What a wonderful great case!”

According to Salem, there was a bomb, it was built under FBI and “DA” supervision, Salem himself built it, and it exploded.

Questions remain. Did Salem literally mean he built the bomb? Or was he claiming he successfully convinced others to build it? As a provocative agent for the FBI, did Salem foment the whole idea of the WTC attack and entrap those who were eventually convicted of the Bombing? Without his presence, would they have planned and carried out the assault? Was the truck bomb set off under the North Tower the only weapon? Were there other bombs? If so, who planted them?

But the role of the FBI seems to be clear enough. They aided and abetted, and at the very least, permitted the 1993 attack on the Trade Towers.

power outside the matrix

What about Omar Mateen in 2016, in Orlando?

As the LA Times, reports, the FBI investigated him on two occasions (LA Times, June 13, “Orlando terror attack live updates…”):

“While working as a courthouse guard in 2013, Mateen made ‘inflammatory and contradictory’ statements to co-workers about having relatives in Al Qaeda, the radical Sunni terrorist group, [FBI Director] Comey said. Mateen also claimed to be a member of Hezbollah, Lebanon’s Shiite militia, and his remarks drew an 11-month FBI investigation, Comey said. Both groups oppose Islamic State.

“Comey said the FBI also briefly investigated Mateen in 2014 for allegedly watching videos by Al Qaeda propagandist Anwar Awlaki and attending the same mosque as an American who would later become a suicide bomber for Al Nusra Front in Syria — another Al Qaeda affiliate opposed to Islamic State.

“Both investigations were closed without charges.”

Did the FBI just investigate the Orlando shooter? Or did they in some way enlist him in an operation?

Is it merely a terrible mistake that enabled the shooter to work nine years for G4S, the world’s “biggest guarding company” and one of the biggest contractors to the DHS, as Bloomberg News states? Is it merely a terrible mistake that G4S was aware the FBI was investigating the shooter in 2013 and did nothing about it?

Or did some federal group intervene and tell all parties to leave the shooter alone and in place—because he was part of an operation?

Jon Rappoport

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

ISIS attacked Brussels? The US created ISIS? Therefore?

ISIS attacked Brussels? The US created ISIS? Therefore?

by Jon Rappoport

March 23, 2016

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

I want to acknowledge two researchers and reporters, whose work cuts deeply into the ISIS mirage: Tony Cartalucci and Brandon Turbeville. In a half-sane world, Cartalucci would be the international editor of the New York Times, if the Times were a real news outlet.

If we accept the premise that ISIS attacked Brussels, then the next question is: what is ISIS?

Who is behind it? Who supplies it? Who funds it? Who sustains it?

Brandon Turbeville, writing at Activist Post (“Congress Votes To Fight ISIS By Funding ISIS To Fight Assad”, 9/19/2014), states:

“Obama’s plan [is] to ‘detect and degrade’ ISIS…the reality is that the plan is nothing more than a plan to…destroy the Syrian government to benefit of ISIS and other fundamentalist groups that the United States has created, funded, trained, and directed since the very beginning of the Syrian crisis.”

Cartalucci, in an article titled, “In Syria, There No Moderates” (9/2013), writes:

“…there were never, nor are there any ‘moderates’ operating in Syria. The West has intentionally armed and funded Al Qaeda and other sectarian extremists since as early as 2007 in preparation for an engineered sectarian bloodbath serving US-Saudi-Israeli interests. This latest bid to portray the terrorists operating along and within Syria’s borders as ‘divided’ along extremists/moderate lines is a ploy to justify the continued flow of Western cash and arms into Syria to perpetuate the conflict, as well as create conditions along Syria’s borders with which Western partners, Israel, Jordan, and Turkey, can justify direct military intervention [in Syria].”

Turbeville writes:

“Indeed, even the New York Times has been forced to admit that there are, as Cartalucci expertly argues in his article, no moderates in the ranks of the Syrian death squads. As Ben Hubbard [NY Times] wrote in April, 2013 (“Islamist Rebels Create Dilemma on Syria Policy”), ‘In Syria’s largest city, Aleppo, rebels aligned with Al Qaeda control the power plant, run the bakeries and head a court that applies Islamic law. Elsewhere, they have seized government oil fields, put employees back to work and now profit from the crude they produce…Across Syria, rebel-held areas are dotted with Islamic courts staffed by lawyers and clerics, and by fighting brigades led by extremists. Even the Supreme Military Council, the umbrella rebel organization whose formation the West had hoped would sideline radical groups, is stocked with commanders who want to infuse Islamic law into a future Syrian government…Nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of.‘” (emphasis added)

In other words, the “moderate Syrian rebels” are a fiction no one could fail to notice. The US funding has always gone to ISIS.

power outside the matrix

I could cite much more from Cartalucci and Turbeville, who effectively argue that ISIS is a created tool of the US government and its allies. I strongly recommend you read and study their work.

As far as the Brussels attacks are concerned, if we assume that ISIS was responsible, the whole scenario is turned upside down after analyzing the basis of ISIS.

The Obama administration (jointly with the Bush administration) should be announcing: “Well, we keep ISIS alive. Unfortunately, things happen. One of those things is Brussels.”

And then you could go on to query the sincerity of the word “unfortunately.”

Articles by Tony Cartalucci:

Brussels Attack: The True Implications of ISIS Links (3/22/2016)

ISIS: US-Saudi Plague Reaches Indonesia? (1/16/2016)

America’s Fake War on ISIS Grinds On (3/22/2016)

Turkey: The Islamic State’s Second Home (1/18/2016)

Jon Rappoport

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

Brussels attacks: the black glove: false clue and diversion?

Brussels attacks: the black glove: false clue and diversion?

by Jon Rappoport

March 22, 2016

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

The now-famous photo of three men pushing carts in the Brussels airport is offered as evidence: these are the attackers.

Two men are wearing single black gloves on their left hands.

Why?

The press offers two possible explanations, both of which, according to FOX News, are being considered by law-enforcement investigators:

One: the gloves concealed detonators. If the left hands of the bombers were released from their grip on the cart handles, the bombs would go off. Two: the gloves reduce static electricity, which could cause the bombs to go off prematurely.

An Australian terrorism researcher states that he knows of no symbolic meaning the gloves could have.

Okay. There is an obvious question about the gloves. Why is each accused bomber wearing only one? Two gloves wouldn’t change the detonator or the static-electricity explanations.

In fact, wearing only one glove would be a very strange move, since it might draw attention. As in: why are those two men wearing only one black glove on their left hands?

power outside the matrix

I understand that criminals and terrorists aren’t necessarily geniuses, but the one-glove approach seems ridiculous.

—Unless these three men weren’t the bombers, but someone wanted the public to think so—in which case providing an odd detail, like the single gloves, would bolster that impression.

“Look, they’re each wearing a glove. Must be a concealed detonator inside.”

“And that third man with them. He isn’t wearing a glove. He must be their handler. He didn’t set off a bomb.”

Jon Rappoport

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

Brussels attacks: the next step: bye bye Europe

Brussels attacks: the next step: bye bye Europe

by Jon Rappoport

March 22, 2016

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

Hours after Donald Trump suggested the US should downsize its role in NATO (also here), bombs went off in Brussels.

In the wake of the attacks, the Globalist party line is shaping up: Downsize? Absolutely not. NATO must respond. Led by the US, it must, wait for it, invade Syria, an ISIS stronghold. With ground troops.

Don’t even bother trying to figure out the logic behind that idea. It goes something like this: get rid of President Assad (who is in a war against ISIS) because somehow the Brussels attack is all his fault.

Led by the US, NATO should attack ISIS in Syria—ISIS, the group funded and backed and armed by the US government (see here and here). Perfect.

Gibberish.

I can just hear a US general trying to decipher his marching orders: “Let’s see, we have to go into Syria and get rid of President Assad, and he’s the one fighting against ISIS. Hmm. And we also have to decimate ISIS. In other words, we should more or less level the whole country, wipe out everybody, and turn the place into a wasteland worse than the wasteland it already is. Right? And while we’re doing that, we have to ignore the fact that our government shipped weapons to ISIS from Libya (see here). How about this instead? Locate the key people who are urging this insane military campaign and put them in prison where they can’t do more harm. Or let’s launch an operation against the moon. That would be good, too.”

French President Hollande is also right up there on the insanity index. His latest statement, after the Brussels attacks, assures one and all that this is a war against Europe, not merely Belgium. But he is the one who has been asserting that Europe has no right to question the flood of immigrants streaming across the continent. Border controls? No, no. What possible relationship could any of these immigrants have to terror attacks? They were trained outside Europe on how to mount bombing operations against civilian populations, after which they came into Europe with that intention? Sure, but so what?

Housed within Brussels, of course, is the headquarters of the European Union, which is Globalism Inc. for Europe. Its covert aim is to drown all nations of the continent in immigrants, so that within a few decades there will be no more recognizable countries—at which point a simple declaration that all of Europe is one indivisible entity will carry the day. This intention must never be spoken of. It must be hidden. Instead, the population of Europe must enlist in a universal, what shall we call it, Tolerance Corps, grinning from ear to ear wherever they go, urging acceptance of the new status quo, now and then grieving as new terror attacks blow people up. Who could doubt the efficacy and wisdom of this plan?

Do not offend the people who are blowing you up. Do not realize who is covertly backing the people who are blowing you up. Instead, rely on these backers to stop the people who are blowing you up.

Keep smiling. Don’t worry, be happy. All is well. Your tolerance and compassion and good cheer will earn you a gold star on the heavenly blackboard. Keep opening your door to all who enter. Extend them a helping hand, just as your government does. Your visitors will make your land a better place. Let us all sing a hymn of joy.

The realities of the situation don’t matter. The only thing that matters is your basic desire for kindness. You must give lip service to that. You must sing the hymn, because it marks you as a good person. Stop thinking. Mark yourself as a good person.

The US/Globalist wars of decimation in the Middle East and Northern Africa? The blowback from the wars? Not important. Not relevant. Well, they are relevant in one respect. You personally are guilty for those wars. Therefore, you must now surrender to whatever happens. You must give up everything as a sign of your humility and guilt. You have no right to defend yourselves. Nor do you have the right to insist that your governments defend you. Of course not.

Everything is all right. Everybody is all right. We are everybody.

One great cheese glob of the coming utopia.

power outside the matrix

Somewhere in the bowels of the EU headquarters, a high-ranking official is standing in front of a mirror, applying tan base to his parched pale face, combing his sparse hair, rehearsing his upcoming statement to the press:

“Let’s see. Reality versus appearance. The reality is, this is perfect for us. An attack within a mile of our building. We couldn’t have anything to do with it. We’re victims. We’ve been making sure the governments of Europe keep their borders open, to let in terrorists, and so on. Now, when I appear before reporters…the appearance. I need to affect an expression of outrage mixed with sadness. Dignified. Do dignified. ‘The terrible events of today, the assault on Europe, on the stability of society. We will not rest until we bring the criminals to justice. At the same time, we must not fall into the trap of believing that all people coming to our lands are’…no, scratch that last part. Too early for that. The bodies are still lying on the ground. Stay with the outrage and the sadness. And assurances that we will work harder to gain control over the situation. We all stand united. Together. Our thoughts are with the grieving families…”

He walks out into a large hall, exits the building, and stands before a throng of reporters. He nods, steps to a podium. He looks out into the distance, as if summoning up a greater understanding.

But he already understands. He understands very well.

Only a complete fool wouldn’t.

Jon Rappoport

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