Category Archives: Covid

New evidence for infanticide in the creation of the fetal cell line used for COVID vaccine testing

by Jon Rappoport

October 20, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

“To obtain embryo cells, embryos from spontaneous abortions cannot be used, nor can those obtained by means of abortions performed via the vagina: in both cases, the embryo will be contaminated by micro-organisms.”

“The correct way consists in having recourse to Caesarian section or to the removal of the uterus. Only in this way can bacteriological sterility be guaranteed.”

“In either case, then, to obtain embryo cells for culture a programmed abortion must be adopted, choosing the age of the embryo and dissecting it while still alive, in order to remove tissues to be placed in culture media.”

“Given these premises, we face the dilemma of whether the deliberate systematic destruction of a human creature to obtain cell material can be justified, when it is recognized that this is of great interest to fundamental research and for the diagnosis of some human diseases. Are research and diagnosis of such great value that they justify the destruction of human beings?”

“The Geneva Declaration affirms that the doctor has the duty to take the greatest care to safeguard the life of a human being from its conception and will not, even under threat, use his knowledge to infringe humanitarian laws.” (1986-04-26; Herranz, Gonzalo; Il Sabato, no.15…Professor Herranz was, at the time, president of the Committee of Medical Ethics of Spanish Doctors and vice-president of the Permanent Committee of Medical Ethics of the European Community.)”

What exactly happened in 1972 or 1973, in the Netherlands, where an infant girl was aborted, and her kidneys used to make a cell line that would be used, going forward, in the testing of vaccines?

That cell line is called HEK 293 (HEK stands for human embryonic kidney), and it has been used to test COVID vaccines.

I have already presented evidence for concluding the abortion involved removing the living infant from her mother’s womb, and taking her kidneys, which of course killed her.

This evidence rests on the realization that, in order to extract viable and useful kidney tissue, the baby had to have a functioning blood supply, which meant she was alive.

But the evidence ALSO comes from knowing many other abortions have been carried out, in order to harvest tissue for medical research, by murdering living babies.

I have found a very informative article (2/9/2021) at the Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform UK, by Christian Hacking, titled, “What the HEK?!” by Christian Hacking. Quoting from the article:

“HEK 293 is a human cell line created using a kidney from a dissected unborn baby in the Netherlands between 1972 and 1973. It is the second most common cell line and is used extensively in ‘pharmaceutical and biomedical research’. It is also used in vaccine creation and cancer research.”

“It was used, along with other human cell lines, to develop a genetically engineered spike protein (that the mRNA vaccine codes for) in the original development stage of the vaccine. The ‘new technology’ Pfizer vaccine and the Moderna Vaccine were tested on HEK 293 before they began human trials. This testing is ongoing for all new batches. Finally the ‘old technology’ Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine grew a weakened viral strain in HEK 293 cell culture…”

“The kidney in question was dissected from a healthy Dutch baby girl of unknown origin by the team at Leiden University in the Netherlands in 1972. Despite the inclusion of the term ‘embryonic’ in the title, the baby in question was probably 12-13 weeks old when she was killed so as to secure functioning kidney cells. The man in charge of the research was named Alex Jan Van der Eb; he is still alive and still based in Holland.”

“When questioned on the matter by the FDA in 2001, Dr Van der Eb confirmed it was an intentional abortion of a ‘fetus’ but gave hazy details of the exact experiments.”

“’So the kidney material, the fetal kidney material was as follows: the kidney of the fetus was, with an unknown family history, obtained in 1972 probably. The precise date is not known anymore. The fetus, as far as I can remember, was completely normal. Nothing was wrong. The reasons for the abortion were unknown to me. I probably knew it at that time, but it got lost, all this information’.”

Author Hacking continues: “…extracting and growing living cells is incredibly difficult. In order to give oneself the best chance of success you need to ensure the child is healthy, fresh, intact and sterile. As one embryologist and Emeritus Professor of Anatomy confirms:”

“’In order to sustain 95% of the cells, the live tissue would need to be preserved within 5 minutes of the abortion. Within an hour the cells would continue to deteriorate, rendering the specimens useless’.”

[That statement was made by “Dr C Ward Kischer, embryologist and Emeritus Professor of Anatomy; specialist in Human Embryology, University of Arizona College of Medicine…”]

[My comment: This suggests the abortion, in the Netherlands, in 1972, was planned and technicians were standing by. I would say that, to ensure the viability of the tissue, the infant had a functioning blood supply and was alive when her kidneys were removed, killing her.]

Hacking: “In order for the organs to be at ‘optimal viability’, the child needs to be dissected and organs extracted within 5 minutes of delivery. Anaesthetic also cannot be used so as to not change the cellular activity of the organs the researcher wants to obtain.”

“Acclaimed Doctor, Ian Donald, the pioneer of the ultrasound scanner, also claims to have witnessed the WI-38 [another cell-line] dissections [1962], conducted at the Karolinska Institute; he described them such:

“’Experiments were being performed on near-term alive aborted babies who were not even afforded the mercy of anesthetic as they writhed and cried in agony, and when their usefulness had expired, they were executed and discarded as garbage’.”

“In his dense book ‘The Foetus As Transplant Donor the Scientific, Social, and Ethical Perspectives’, immunologist Dr Peter McCullagh relays detailed descriptions of the methods used on dozens of ‘fetal tissue donors’ from the 1970’s onward, including the deaths of babies between 7 and 26 weeks gestation by decapitations, exposure, dissection and drug testing. Gynaecologist and ex-abortionist Dr Bernard Nathanson, relaying his own understanding of abortion, and citing McCullagh’s book claims the Swedish experiments took place thus:

“’…in Sweden they have been puncturing the sac of a pregnant woman at let us say 14 to 16 weeks, and then they put a clamp on the head of the baby, pull the head down into the neck of the womb, drill a hole into the baby’s head, and then put a suction machine into the brain and suck out the brain cells….. Healthy human fetuses from 7 to 21 weeks from legal abortions were used. This is in Sweden. The conception age was estimated from crown rump length and so on. Fetal liver and kidney were rapidly removed and weighed. Now at 21 weeks, what they were doing, or 18 weeks, or 16 weeks, was what is called prostaglandin abortions. They would inject a substance into the womb. The woman would then go into mini-labor and pass this baby. 50% of the time, the baby would be born alive, but that didn’t stop them. They would just simply open up the abdomen of the baby with no anesthesia, and take out the liver and kidneys, etc.’”

“A research paper from the University of Toronto from June 1952 commenting on the method of their experiments suggests that these techniques were universal with researchers working in close proximity to the abortions.”

“’No macerated [softened after death] specimens were used and in many of the embryos the heart was still beating at the time of receipt in the virus laboratory.”

“According to Gonzalo Herranz, former head of the Committee of Medical Ethics of Spanish doctors, the best way to prevent ‘contamination by microorganisms’ is to deliver the child by caesarean section or the removal of the uterus.”

“A 1982 review of a history of tissue donation affirms this, and much of the above evidence:”

“’Fetal tissue for transplantation must be “harvested” within a few minutes of delivery. Ideally this is by hysterectomy, with the fetus delivered in utero. Drugs which reduce fetal physiological activity need to be avoided. The fetus is therefore in as alive and aware a state as possible when being opened’.”

From Hacking’s article, it’s quite clear how the standard procedure of infant-murder is carried out.

It’s entirely reasonable to assume fetal cell line HEK 293—used for COVID vaccine testing—was originally produced, in 1972, by the murder of an infant. Refusal to take a COVID vaccine on the basis of conscience and religion is more than justified.

Given the weight of the circumstantial case, I would say that for all people of faith, refusal is essential.

Lunatic medical murderers and their allies will say anything to avoid blame and the application of true justice to themselves. They will invent “science” at the drop of a hat and couch it in humanitarian terms. They will claim the ends justify the means. They will commit gross forgery to pretend those ends are vital.

But we don’t have to stand by and passively believe them.

Billions of people of faith can stand against them.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

The vaccine: A religious exemption for the whole world

by Jon Rappoport

October 19, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Yesterday, I quoted extensively from AnnaMaria Cardinalli’s stunning Crisis article that concluded there was the murder of an infant, in order to obtain the cell line used in COVID vaccine testing.

I put out a call to medical professionals to weigh in on her analysis.

Here is the basic ramification: THERE IS A RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION FOR THE WHOLE WORLD.

For all people of faith. Every faith.

“According to my religious belief, the murder of an undeniably live infant for any reason is unconscionable and evil, and I refuse the vaccine.”

Here is a Force against which no government, no establishment, no secret society, no wealth can stand.

I fully understand all sorts of professionals will spout language that purports to show “the infant was not alive, the lab followed all the legal guidelines, this is an old argument that has been debunked…”

But this is not just an old argument. This is the equivalent of an opening statement in a murder trial. Nothing less.

If religious leaders will read AnnaMaria Cardinalli’s article, they will see how important her charge is.

The question isn’t “will people of faith wake up and do what they should”; the question is “how can any person of faith NOT do what they should”.

If they will make a stand; if all people of faith will; the entire dire situation we are facing changes in the blink of an eye.

Solomon to God: “You have made Your servant king instead of my father David, but I am a little child; I do not know how to go out or come in…Therefore give to Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people, that I may discern between good and evil.”

Gautama Buddha: “To cease from evil, to do good, and to purify the mind yourself, this is the teaching of all the Buddhas.”

John 10:10: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.”

Would any church, any religion in the world say that God wants the killing of live infants for the purpose of medical research?

In the midst of this COVID tyranny, haven’t we all been looking for an issue that will galvanize huge numbers of people?

And not as some kind of stunt. But rather as an inevitable outcome of deep faith.

Faith and justice come from the same everlasting tree.

I hear the voices that say we can never rouse a billion people from their slumber. But they are wrong. Nothing is impossible. The so-called evidence of history is never more than What Was. And even down through history, “what could never happen” was the status quo until a breakthrough shattered it.

For people who missed it, here is my article from yesterday:

Was COVID vaccine fetal tissue obtained by the murder of an infant?

With the release of COVID vaccines, and then the mandates, we’ve seen a new resurgence of people attempting to gain religious exemptions.

Many of these attempts focus on fetal tissue obtained through abortion.

On January 19, 2021, AnnaMaria Cardinalli published an explosive article in Crisis Magazine, headlined, “Catholic Conscience and the COVID-19 Vaccine.”

Cardinalli details the collection of fetal tissue for the cell line named HEK 293. This cell line was used for “testing” the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.

Cardinalli writes: “We know that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines do not use any cells derived from abortion in the production process. That is, we know that we are not being directly injected with fetal cells or their engineered descendants (though this fact differs with other manufacturers). We hear that the abortion-derived cell lines were only used in testing, which should somehow comfort us, though it still means that the vaccines from which we seek to benefit depend on the involvement of abortion. We are told that the cell line used in testing came from one abortion, which took place decades ago. These things are all true, but they do not serve to inform us fully.”

“What we may not know follows. The most prominent cell line, called HEK 293, comes from an abortion performed in the 1970’s. It’s labeled 293 because that’s how many experimental attempts the researchers needed to get a working cell line. Therefore, though the abortion-to-experiment ratio is not precisely one-to-one, hundreds of abortions went into the project, even if they didn’t result in the working line.”

“HEK stands for human embryonic kidney. To harvest a viable embryonic kidney for this purpose, sufficiently healthy children old enough to have adequately-developed kidneys must be removed from the womb, alive, typically by cesarean section, and have their kidneys cut out. This must take place without anesthesia for the child, which [anesthesia] would lessen the viability of the organs. Instead of being held, rocked, and comforted in the time intervening between their birth and their death, they have organs cut out of them alive.”

“There is no way that a spontaneous abortion could result in the cell line (as the kidneys cannot remain viable past the brief window in which they must be harvested) or that some brilliant researcher found a way for great good to come out of a rare tragedy by making use of a child’s body donated to science after it was aborted. The deliberate killing of an unwanted child (a little girl, in the case of HEK 293) took place in the tortuous manner it did precisely to obtain her organs for research. The harvest of her organs was the direct cause of her death, prior to which, she was a living child, outside the womb.”

“I fear that Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict may not have had this information when they received the vaccines. If we re-examine the Vatican statement that ‘it is morally acceptable to receive COVID-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and productions process,’ we see that it does not apply here. It does not imagine this scenario. To approve of the currently-available vaccines, it would have to read ‘it is morally acceptable to receive COVID-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from living persons, killed by the harvest of their organs for use in medical research and productions processes,’ but the Church’s moral teachings could never truly bend so far.”

“Similar to the human rights abuses exposed by international tribunal in today’s China, where unwanted individuals such as religious and political dissidents are executed by the harvest of their organs for profit, the little girl whose cells gave rise to the COVID-19 vaccines was brutally sacrificed for the purpose, as were all the children whose cell lines failed before her.”

If Cardinalli is correct in her analysis, not only is the granting of religious exemptions a foregone conclusion; the whole field of fetal tissue research, going back many years and involving many pharmaceutical products should be put on trial.

The people who have been carrying out the murders, the people who have been using the harvested tissue, the companies—all of them—on trial.

I hope many medical professionals will take Cardinalli’s article as a springboard, and weigh in on what she is very clearly stating.

And not just doctors. All people who are shocked by her conclusions.

So far, I see two counter-claims to Cardinalli’s assertions.

One: In the fetal cell line HEK 293, the number does not stand for the number of live-birth abortions performed, in order to obtain a functioning cell line. The number 293 refers to the number of “passages” of the one cell line obtained from one abortion. This difference doesn’t concern me. It’s not central to the fact of murdering babies. And of course, many such live abortions are performed all over the world with the goal of obtaining cells lines for research.

Two: Cardinalli’s claim that the kidneys of the aborted baby must be harvested very quickly is false. The kidneys can survive for a longer period.

On that score, I refer you to a devastating video interview conducted by Robert Kennedy Jr. His guest was SOUND CHOICE PHARMACEUTICAL INSTITUTE “President and Founder, Dr. Theresa Deisher Ph.D., [with] over 30 years of pharmaceutical research and leadership experience. She discovered adult cardiac derived stem cells, has worked on their therapeutic uses as an alternative to human fetal DNA, and leads a team of scientists at AVM Biotechnology dedicated to changing what a diagnosis of cancer, autoimmunity, or chronic infectious disease means to patients and their loved ones. As a result of this work, Dr. Deisher is named as an inventor on over 47 patents.”

In the first 15 minutes of the interview, Deisher makes it quite clear that infants in the womb are taken out alive, with their blood supply functioning (essential) and then killed by cutting out their hearts or their brains. This is what is done in order to obtain tissue that will be turned into fetal cell lines.

Since this act of murder is standard practice, it would appear it was committed against the live baby whose kidney cells became cell line HEK 293, used in testing the COVID vaccines. (More evidence coming in future articles.)

At the top of the interview, Kennedy said he didn’t want to get into the moral aspect of fetal cell lines. But after listening to Deisher, he was shaken. He said so. He said they would have to cover the moral aspect.

The whole world has to.

FURTHER READING:

Aborted fetal cells and vaccines – a scandal much bigger than Pfizer’s whistleblower ever imagined

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Was COVID vaccine fetal tissue obtained by the murder of an infant?

by Jon Rappoport

October 18, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

With the release of COVID vaccines, and then the mandates, we’ve seen a new resurgence of people attempting to gain religious exemptions.

Many of these attempts focus on fetal tissue obtained through abortion.

On January 19, 2021, AnnaMaria Cardinalli published an explosive article in Crisis Magazine, headlined, “Catholic Conscience and the COVID-19 Vaccine.”

Cardinalli details the collection of fetal tissue for the cell line named HEK 293. This cell line was used for “testing” the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.

Cardinalli writes: “We know that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines do not use any cells derived from abortion in the production process. That is, we know that we are not being directly injected with fetal cells or their engineered descendants (though this fact differs with other manufacturers). We hear that the abortion-derived cell lines were only used in testing, which should somehow comfort us, though it still means that the vaccines from which we seek to benefit depend on the involvement of abortion. We are told that the cell line used in testing came from one abortion, which took place decades ago. These things are all true, but they do not serve to inform us fully.”

“What we may not know follows. The most prominent cell line, called HEK 293, comes from an abortion performed in the 1970’s. It’s labeled 293 because that’s how many experimental attempts the researchers needed to get a working cell line. Therefore, though the abortion-to-experiment ratio is not precisely one-to-one, hundreds of abortions went into the project, even if they didn’t result in the working line.”

“HEK stands for human embryonic kidney. To harvest a viable embryonic kidney for this purpose, sufficiently healthy children old enough to have adequately-developed kidneys must be removed from the womb, alive, typically by cesarean section, and have their kidneys cut out. This must take place without anesthesia for the child, which [anesthesia] would lessen the viability of the organs. Instead of being held, rocked, and comforted in the time intervening between their birth and their death, they have organs cut out of them alive.”

“There is no way that a spontaneous abortion could result in the cell line (as the kidneys cannot remain viable past the brief window in which they must be harvested) or that some brilliant researcher found a way for great good to come out of a rare tragedy by making use of a child’s body donated to science after it was aborted. The deliberate killing of an unwanted child (a little girl, in the case of HEK 293) took place in the tortuous manner it did precisely to obtain her organs for research. The harvest of her organs was the direct cause of her death, prior to which, she was a living child, outside the womb.”

“I fear that Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict may not have had this information when they received the vaccines. If we re-examine the Vatican statement that ‘it is morally acceptable to receive COVID-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and productions process,’ we see that it does not apply here. It does not imagine this scenario. To approve of the currently-available vaccines, it would have to read ‘it is morally acceptable to receive COVID-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from living persons, killed by the harvest of their organs for use in medical research and productions processes,’ but the Church’s moral teachings could never truly bend so far.”

“Similar to the human rights abuses exposed by international tribunal in today’s China, where unwanted individuals such as religious and political dissidents are executed by the harvest of their organs for profit, the little girl whose cells gave rise to the COVID-19 vaccines was brutally sacrificed for the purpose, as were all the children whose cell lines failed before her.”

If Cardinalli is correct in her analysis, not only is the granting of religious exemptions a foregone conclusion; the whole field of fetal tissue research, going back many years and involving many pharmaceutical products should be put on trial.

The people who have been carrying out the murders, the people who have been using the harvested tissue, the companies—all of them—on trial.

I hope many medical professionals will take Cardinalli’s article as a springboard, and weigh in on what she is very clearly stating.

And not just doctors. All people who are shocked by her conclusions.

So far, I see two counter-claims to Cardinalli’s assertions.

One: In the fetal cell line HEK 293, the number does not stand for the number of live-birth abortions performed, in order to obtain a functioning cell line. The number 293 refers to the number of “passages” of the one cell line obtained from one abortion. This difference doesn’t concern me. It’s not central to the fact of murdering babies. And of course, many such live abortions are performed all over the world with the goal of obtaining cells lines for research.

Two: Cardinalli’s claim that the kidneys of the aborted baby must be harvested very quickly is false. The kidneys can survive for a longer period.

On that score, I refer you to a devastating video interview conducted by Robert Kennedy Jr. His guest was SOUND CHOICE PHARMACEUTICAL INSTITUTE “President and Founder, Dr. Theresa Deisher Ph.D., [with] over 30 years of pharmaceutical research and leadership experience. She discovered adult cardiac derived stem cells, has worked on their therapeutic uses as an alternative to human fetal DNA, and leads a team of scientists at AVM Biotechnology dedicated to changing what a diagnosis of cancer, autoimmunity, or chronic infectious disease means to patients and their loved ones. As a result of this work, Dr. Deisher is named as an inventor on over 47 patents.”

In the first 15 minutes of the interview, Deisher makes it quite clear that infants in the womb are taken out alive, with their blood supply functioning (essential) and then killed by cutting out their hearts or their brains. This is what is done in order to obtain tissue that will be turned into fetal cell lines.

Since this act of murder is standard practice, it would appear it was committed against the live baby whose kidney cells became cell line HEK 293, used in testing the COVID vaccines. (More evidence coming in future articles.)

At the top of the interview, Kennedy said he didn’t want to get into the moral aspect of fetal cell lines. But after listening to Deisher, he was shaken. He said so. He said they would have to cover the moral aspect.

The whole world has to.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Mandate or Freedom: An open letter to corporate CEOs

by Jon Rappoport

October 15, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Let’s be frank. Who in his right mind would appeal to corporate CEOs on fundamental issues of ethics and freedom?

But this is 1776.

We’re at the crossroads.

Are you going to order your employees to take the COVID vaccine? Are you going to fire those who won’t? Are you going to take away their freedom, for a vaccine that has already caused 700,000 injuries?

And by the way, that number represents vast underreporting. The well-known Harvard Pilgrim study concludes vaccine injuries should be multiplied by 100 to arrive at a true number.

Let’s get real. There will be many lawsuits filed from many quarters, to stop a vaccine mandate; but the outcome of these legal actions is vastly uncertain. Therefore, you CEOs must…

Stand up and refuse. Stand up and say you will not impose a mandate on your employees, NO MATTER WHAT.

No mandates, no more lockdowns, no further destruction of the economy, no destruction of millions more lives.

Except in a few states, governors can’t be relied on. You CEOs are a prime line of defense, if you have the courage. If you don’t, if your hard-charging reputations are built on a foundation of sand, if your prime loyalty is to a federal government that offers you cash bailouts in return for treachery against the system of free enterprise—what is left of it—then you are lost in a darkness of your own making.

Do you remember these words? “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

This was the final thought expressed in the Declaration of Independence by the signers.

Do those words ring hollow for you now? Is that where we are?

Are you going to let a boot stamp on your face forever?

Are you going to grind your boot on the very freedom that allowed your company to grow and prosper?

Are the echoes of 1776 so faint in your minds, you can’t imagine how this dire 2021 has anything to do with you?

You need to step forward and make bold uncompromising statements and pledges: No mandates. No lockdowns. No destruction of the right to earn a living. No federal dictatorship. No backing down.

You and your fellow CEOs must leave your offices and travel across the country and tell the people you’re on their side, and you must mean it. This is not your usual public relations campaign. This is honesty and honor and duty. If you have it in you.

First, there was the story of a virus. Then a story of a test for the virus. Then the story of case numbers. Then, the masks and lockdowns and distancing and blasting of the economy. Then the vaccine. Then the announced vaccine mandate. Hasn’t it occurred to you that this serial story, with each succeeding phase, is really the pretext for tyranny and dictatorship and takeover?

You have to start forging new alliances that go far beyond your workaday world; alliances with nurses, pilots, sheriffs, soldiers and others who are refusing the vaccine. Alliances with unions who are pushing back against the mandate.

It’s not, strictly speaking, your “business,” but business in America is heading toward the edge of a cliff, in case you hadn’t noticed.

Here’s the story of one your own. Alfie Oakes. He has 3,200 employees. His store is based in Florida. He owns 3,000 acres of farmland and a food processing plant. Watch him speak in this video. He understands what’s at stake. He knows this is 1776. He’s a good man who’s doing the right thing. He’s a hero.

We are talking about values. We are not talking about political correctness or endlessly sucking on the teat of socialism.

I realize many of you CEOs have embraced a form of socialism already—a close collaboration with government—because you believe it is the best guarantee for your survival. But you’re wrong. You’re wrong in strategic terms, and wrong when it comes to values and principles.

You now have to revolutionize your thinking. You have to help overcome the forces you’ve been aligning yourself with.

You have to find, embrace, and work with the people, wherever they are, whoever they are, who stand for freedom. And the work you do must be conceived along new lines.

“I’m the CEO of XYZ. I stand here today talking to you, alongside sheriffs, policemen, union workers, nurses, soldiers, business owners, parents, state representatives; people who want freedom in America again. We’re pledged to stand against vaccine mandates, lockdowns, closures, and all the failed measures that have kept us in isolation. We’re taking back what is ours. You’re going to hear from these people standing up here. You’re going to understand how their stories of freedom denied are your stories…”

This is an issue of character.

For decades, you’ve thought of your relationship with the public as Public Relations, with all the manipulations that profession entails.

This is 1776. You can’t travel that way anymore.

“THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.”

Do you want to keep selling what you’ve always sold, until the people’s money to buy your goods runs out? Because surely you realize this is the Plan. One government restriction and interference after another, until the only alternative is a structured and managed economy, from the top down.

Are you willing to live with that?

Those of us who are awake and have eyes to see can fight this war without you. We’re not waiting to reclaim our freedom. I write this letter because you can, if you will, become our allies.

Or you can sink into a pool of obscurity and never be heard from again.

Not even footnoted in the books of history.

What are you going to do now, in this crisis?

You have a chance to be great. You have a chance to help save this country. Somewhere inside you, haven’t you always wanted a battle worthy of your deepest efforts?

You can form a line, beyond which the wolves in power cannot cross.

In this hour, the authentic spirit of America reaches out to you.

The spirit of freedom, which never dies, taps you on the shoulder.

Will you turn away, or will you come to the aid of your country?

Will you try to maintain your customary position, with blinders on, only to realize, soon, that your position is untenable; or will you forge a new connection with The People and pledge your fortunes, your honor, and your lives to a new Declaration of Independence from this latest version of the Crown, which seeks to colonize us in a landscape of despair?

Whether you choose to retreat or advance, you’re risking everything you’ve earned. In the one case, you willingly surrender it, because as sure as the sun comes up, the government is going to keep devising ways to take it from you. In the other case, you risk it all for the right reason:

The dream of what America should stand for.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

The virus that doesn’t exist: lies and consequences

by Jon Rappoport

October 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Throughout this false pandemic, I’ve been listing and explaining the falling dominos:

The false claim that a virus exists.

The development of a diagnostic test to detect the virus that doesn’t exist.

Based on the test, the publishing of sky-high case numbers, all of which are obviously meaningless.

Based on the false case numbers, and absurd computer projections of cases and deaths to come, the imprisoning of people in their homes, the closure and destruction of businesses, the torpedoing of economies, and then…

The introduction of a highly destructive vaccine as the solution.

These are the consequences that flowed from the fake “discovery” of a new virus.

Lately, there has been a resurgence of interest in one or two documents I cited months ago. These documents reveal the hoax at the bottom of the test for a virus that doesn’t exist. The documents, written by the builders of the test, admit an isolated specimen of the virus is NOT AVAILABLE. But they’re going to devise a test for it anyway.

This is on the order of a doctor telling a patient, “I’m going to test you for Disease XQ.”

The patient asks, “What is disease XQ?”

The doctor answers, “We have NO IDEA. But we want to find out whether you have it.”

Let’s go to the first Smoking Gun.

The CDC document is titled, “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel.” It was originally published in February 2020, in the very early days of the “pandemic,” and it’s latest revision was published in July 2021 (rev: 07, 7/21).

Buried deep in the document, in a section titled, “Performance Characteristics,” we have this: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV [SARS-CoV-2] are currently available, assays [diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA…” (document page 40, pdf page 41)

The key phrase there is: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV [virus] are currently available…”

Every object that exists can be quantified, which is to say, measured. The use of the term “quantified” in that phrase means: the CDC has no virus, because it is unavailable. THE CDC HAS NO VIRUS.

One of the two most powerful public health agencies in the world can’t obtain the virus from anywhere. Why? Obviously, because no one has it.

A further tip-off is the use of the word ‘isolates.” This means NO ISOLATED VIRUS IS AVAILABLE.

Another way to put it: NO ONE HAS AN ISOLATED SPECIMEN OF THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

NO ONE HAS ISOLATED THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

THEREFORE, NO ONE HAS PROVED THAT IT EXISTS.

As if this were not a revelation to shock the world, the CDC goes on to say they are presenting a diagnostic PCR test, in that very paper I’m citing, to detect the virus-that-hasn’t-been-isolated…and the test is looking for RNA which is PRESUMED to come from the virus that hasn’t been proved to exist.

And using this test, the CDC and every other public health agency in the world would go on to count COVID cases and deaths…and governments instituted lockdowns and economic devastation using those case and death numbers as justification.

The pandemic is a fraud, down to the root of the poisonous tree.

And now, let’s move on to a second key document. This one formed the basis for the first PCR test aimed at detecting the COVID virus all over the world.

READ WHAT THIS STUDY SAYS. These quotes should be engraved in stone above the entrance to a museum dedicated to the history of medical fraud.

“We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology [a test for a virus] for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available.”

TRANSLATION: We want to develop a test to detect the new COVID virus without having the virus.

“Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV [SARS-CoV-2] its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with [the older 2003] SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.”

TRANSLATION: We HAVE developed a diagnostic test to detect the new COVID virus. We ASSUME this new virus exists and is closely related to an older coronavirus. We ASSUME we know HOW it is related. We ASSUME, because we don’t have the new COVID virus. Therefore, all our assumptions are made out of nothing. Actually, we have no proof there is a new coronavirus.

“The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from [the older 2003] SARS-CoV.”

TRANSLATION: Our new test to detect the new virus? We don’t have the new virus. We’ve never observed it. We can’t study it directly. There is no proof it exists. But we will create and use a test to detect it.

The study is titled, “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR.” [Euro Surveill. 2020 Jan;25(3):2000045. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045.]

Those quotes from the study are astounding. A diagnostic test for the virus, but there is no virus. No standard against which to compare the reliability of the test.

The authors blithely assume they can somehow infer that the virus exists in the first place, without having an isolated specimen.

Then they assume they can understand the structure of the virus that isn’t there.

The virus isn’t there. It has NOT been isolated. It has NOT been separated out from other material. Therefore, it has not been observed and its existence has not been proved.

And yet, the test which these authors have developed is launched, all over the world, to detect that virus; to promote the unproven notion that there is a pandemic; to form the basis for counting COVID case numbers; and ultimately to justify all the lockdowns which have crashed the global economy and destroyed millions upon millions of lives.

A great deal of confusion has been created, because scientists talk about the “new virus” as if they understand its structure and genetic sequence. No. They’ve built a hypothetical structure, AS DATA. Nothing more. And then they gibber about what it means.

As far as what is actually going on in labs where researchers are making vast assumptions and proclamations; don’t talk to me about science. Talk to me about liability and prison.

At the site, fluoridefreepeel.ca, you will find roughly a hundred FOIA requests to public health agencies. These requests are asking for records showing that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated. The repetitive and routine reply is: “We have no records.” Taken together, they paint a picture of egregious fraud.

Mainstream scientists will make two claims: one, we have isolated the virus; and two, it is not necessary to isolate the virus, because we’ve discovered its genetic sequence. Both claims are false.

From reading the arcane language surrounding claims of having sequenced the virus—there is a multi-layered scam composed of leaps of unwarranted assumptions. The researchers say they are using tools that allow them to closely approximate the structure of SARS-CoV-2, even though they don’t have that virus in hand. This is absurd.

It’s like saying: There is a new planet in the solar system. We don’t know where it is or what it looks like. We don’t know what processes are at work on this new planet. But we do know the moon is a very close approximation of the planet. Therefore, we can know everything we need to know about the new planet from our knowledge of the moon.

And a rabbit is spaceship. And there are condos for sale on Jupiter. And new element #267587, in the Periodic Table, which no one has ever seen, is almost an exact copy of Philadelphia Cream Cheese.

And now we come to a third document, which bulges with devastating admissions. It was issued by the CDC.

The release is titled, “07/21/2021: Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.” It begins explosively:

“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.”

Many people believe this means the CDC is giving up on the PCR test as a means of “detecting the virus.” The CDC isn’t saying that at all.

They’re saying the PCR technology will continue to be used, but they’re replacing what the test is looking FOR with a better “reference sample.” A better marker. A better target. A better piece of RNA supposedly derived from SARS-CoV-2.

CDC/FDA are confessing there has been a PROBLEM with the PCR test which has been used to detect the virus, starting in February of 2020—right up to July 21, 2021.

In other words, the millions and millions of “COVID cases” based on the PCR test in use are all suspect. Actually, that statement is too generous. Every test result of every PCR test should be thrown out.

To confirm this, the CDC document links to an FDA release titled, “SARS-CoV-2 Reference Panel Comparative Data.” Here is a killer quote:

“During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical specimens [of the virus] were not readily available to developers of IVDs [in vitro diagnostics, the PCR test] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs [tests] based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation. While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: We, at the CDC, did not have a specimen of the SARS-CoV-2 virus when we concocted the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. Yes, and that’s the test we’ve been using all along. So we CONTRIVED samples of ‘the virus’. We fabricated. We lied. We made up [invented] synthetic gene sequences and we SAID these sequences HAD TO BE close to the sequence of SARS-CoV-2, without having the faintest idea of what we were doing, because, again, we didn’t have an actual specimen of the virus. We had no proof THERE WAS something called SARS-CoV-2.

This amazing FDA document goes to say the Agency has granted emergency approval to 59 different PCR tests since the beginning of the (fake) pandemic. 59. And, “…it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: Each of the 59 different PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 told different lies and concocted different fabrications about the genetic makeup of the virus—the virus we didn’t have. Obviously, then, these tests would give useless and meaningless results. It was all a fantasy.

BUT, don’t worry, be happy, because NOW, the CDC and the FDA say, they really do have actual isolated virus samples of SARS-CoV-2 from patients; they have better targets for the PCR test, and labs should start gearing up for the new and improved tests.

In other words, they were lying THEN, but they’re not lying NOW. They were “contriving,” but now they’re telling the truth.

If you believe that, I have Fountain of Youth water for sale, extracted from the lead-contaminated system of Flint, Michigan.

We KNOW they are lying now, because they continue to torture the meaning of the word “isolate.” Here, once again, I report virology’s version of “we possess isolated specimens of the virus”:

They have a soup they make in their labs.

This soup contains human and monkey cells, toxic chemicals and drugs, and all sorts of other random genetic material. Because the cells start to die, the researchers ASSUME a bit of mucus from a patient they dropped in the soup is doing the killing, and THE VIRUS must be the killer agent in the mucus.

This assumption is entirely unwarranted. The drugs and chemicals could be doing the cell-killing, and the researchers are also starving the cells of vital nutrients, and that starvation could kill the cells.

There is no proof that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup, or that it is doing the cell-killing, or that it exists.

Yet the researchers call cell-death “isolation of the virus.”

To say this is a non-sequitur is a vast understatement. In their universe, “We assume, without proof, we have the virus buried in a soup in a dish in the lab” equals, “We’ve separated the virus from all surrounding material.”

Virology equals “how to spread bullshit for a living and scare the world and lock it down and shoot it up with a devastating destructive vaccine.” Other than that, it’s perfect.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

If the virus actually existed

by Jon Rappoport

October 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

…and it doesn’t…

There would be no way to stop it.

It would have spread so far and so deep…

The only answer would be: LIVE THROUGH IT.

Period.

Have a look at the open borders of the US. Have a look at the packed football stands every weekend across the US. Have a look at Israel, where lockdowns and high vaccination rates have failed to stop the progression of cases. Of course, those cases are nothing more than false positive tests. Nevertheless, you get the idea.

The very concept of a virus and its spread implies: UNSTOPPABLE.

The war against the virus was always a losing idea. And it was never that war anyway. It was always a war against the people and against freedom.

The planners calculated that freedom had withered to such an advanced degree that it would be possible to take away what was left of it.

The war against the virus is very much like the war against freedom of speech, aka censorship. Governments are never going to be able to stop the flow of independent ideas. The seal is never air-tight.

Of course, as I’ve been proving for the past year, the virus doesn’t exist. It’s a fantasy. It’s the ghost in the dark closet at night, when the child is lying in bed thinking that random noises are a threat to his safety.

A well-known scientist with impressive mainstream credentials recently confided to me that he believes the virus (which he accepts as real) will eventually infect everyone. EVERYONE. Therefore…

There is nothing to be done. LIVE WITH IT. LIVE THROUGH IT.

Even the false premise that the virus exists implies the continuation of freedom.

The notion that a war against a virus can be won is on the level of the notion that a war against the natural flow of air on the planet can be won.

Nations that have fought a relatively mild battle against the virus—Sweden, Denmark, and Norway—have officially stated they’re ending that battle. Why? Because only small numbers of people are becoming ill. Those numbers mirror the recent years before the pandemic was declared.

In those countries, the nightmare of the ghost in the closet is over, for now.

The leading pornographer of fear in the US, Anthony Fauci, is still turning out his little movies. Every week, he “adjusts the data,” in order to bolster his claims. And every week, his sales force of media personnel put him on television to spread the message:

OBEDIENCE IS VICTORY.

Fauci is the envy of sadists everywhere.

For the past year and a half, he has been the de facto president of the United States.

His style reflects the decades-long machinations of the CIA: invent endless enemies, and then attack them. All for the purpose of establishing CONTROL.

On some nights, while I’m asleep, a part of my mind that operates on entirely conventional premises calculates the odds in the war against the virus. It spins, all on its own, fragmented scenarios: the infection rate, the degree and extent of lockdowns, the barriers against the virus created by masks, the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated, and so on. That ridiculous piece of my mind is a cameo Pentagon.

As I wake up, I realize the fantastical nature of these wartime calculations. I see them clearly for what they signify. A rooting interest, no more meaningful than sitting on the sidelines watching a contest of tiddlywinks, with a bet of a few pennies riding on the outcome.

It’s instructive to have these dreams. They convey an insane fool’s errand.

If the virus existed, there would be no way to stop it. Since it doesn’t exist, there is no “it” to stop.

However, the war against freedom is an entirely different matter. It has always existed, and it always will.

There are certain men who have lost their own vivid life-breathing creative freedom, and they have chosen, as their only substitute, the path of destroying freedom wherever they find it.

They are the virus.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

There is still no “hundred-employee” vaccine mandate

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

First, the broad strokes. Just over a month ago, Biden directed the Department of Labor and OSHA to develop the details of a COVID vaccine mandate for all US companies with 100 or more employees.

It appears (but it is not certain) that this mandate will allow several escape hatches: medical and religious exemptions, and weekly testing as a substitute for vaccination.

If there are exemptions, we don’t know under what terms they’ll be permitted.

The Department of Labor has not yet issued the regulations framing and detailing this mandate.

Indeed, as the law firm Eckert Seamans states on its website: “The President did not give a deadline or timeframe for the New COVID ETS [Emergency Temporary Standard], but it is likely to take weeks or months to be issued. Though it is a simple directive on its face, there are complex issues that OSHA will have to work out in preparing the ETS. Moreover, even though it is an emergency standard, OSHA still must build a basis for meeting the statutory criteria for emergency standards, and that takes time.”

“Recall that in January the President directed OSHA to issue a COVID ETS…and he imposed a March 15 deadline for action on that. However, OSHA did not issue the First COVID ETS until June, and even then, it applied only to healthcare settings…”

“However, if the New COVID ETS toes the line the President has drawn, it will be considerably broader and certainly more heavy handed, so it is more likely to draw court challenges from employers and others who already are declaring their opposition to such a broad mandate—and that could mean further delay.”

So we don’t yet have a set of rules for this 100-employee mandate, a month after Biden made his speech, and perhaps we won’t have those rules for some time.

Therefore, the question is: Right now, does the mandate exist?

The Eckert Seamans law firm has an answer: “The President’s statement [on September 9] itself imposes no immediate legal obligations or penalties as far as private employers under the OSH Act. It is simply an announcement that he has directed OSHA to promulgate the New COVID ETS, and provides a few details of what he expects it to contain.”

There is no mandate now. There is only an announcement that there will be a mandate.

There will be a mandate when the Department of Labor issues its regulations.

If an employer went to court now, to challenge the mandate, the judge (assuming competency and honesty) would say, “Your challenge has no merit, because there is no mandate yet.”

And if there is no mandate yet, no employer with 100 or more employees is under obligation to order his employees to take the vaccine.

Note: I’m not talking about the Biden order that all federal employees and contractors must be vaccinated. That is a different situation.

Right now, all employers with 100 or more employees who are ordering their employees to take the vaccine are doing so voluntarily.

If they are ordering their employees to take the vaccine “because we have to, because the federal government is ordering it,” they are making a factually incorrect statement.

This possibly opens the door to an employee filing an action against his employer: “I was told to take the vaccine under false pretenses…”

I’m not saying such a charge would stand up in court, but it’s worth thinking about.

On September 10, Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki took questions from reporters. She couched the 100-employee mandate this way:

“So, Congress passed a law in 1970 — the Occupational Safety and Health Act. And the reason the Department of Labor and OSHA is able to take the strong step to protect Americans from COVID [with the new mandate] is that Congress passed that law. Yesterday’s announcement by the Department of Labor is proceeding under that law. And the law basically requires the Department of Labor take action when it finds grave risk to workers. And certainly a pandemic that killed more than 600,000 people qualifies as ‘grave risk to workers’.”

“And so, if the Secretary determines workers are in grave danger, he has an obligation to issue an emergency temporary standard [ETS]. That’s exactly what he did.”

I believe this is incorrect. Psaki is implying the 100-employee mandate already exists. Her words can certainly be taken that way. But the mandate doesn’t yet exist, because the Department of Labor hasn’t issued the regulations which CONSTITUTE the mandate.

Again: ALL EMPLOYERS WITH 100 OR MORE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ORDERING THEIR EMPLOYEES TO TAKE THE VACCINE, OR ARE FIRING THOSE WHO REFUSE, ARE DOING SO VOLUNTARILY.

They’re caving in. They’re issuing orders to their employees before the regulations are issued, and before the many legal challenges against those regulations pile up—challenges which, if they chose to, they could help spearhead.

power outside the matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

“Viruses can’t be isolated, but isolation is unnecessary”; another ridiculous claim from those who insist on saying SARS-CoV-2 exists

by Jon Rappoport

October 12, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

There are two types of virologists.

First, those who claim they’re isolating viruses. I’ve written many articles debunking their absurd stance. They define isolation as “swimming in a soup of many substances and never separated from the soup.” In other words, these virologists define isolated as un-isolated. You could call this Orwellian Scientific Newspeak. Sheer nonsense.

Then there are “the more sophisticated” virologists who say, “Viruses can only live in liquid inside a cell. Therefore, they can never be separated from the cell or the liquid. To demand isolation is to ask for the impossible. We can discover the genetic sequences of these viruses without isolating them. Forget isolation. Discovering the genetic sequences proves the viruses exist.”

Let’s examine this second brand of virology.

Let’s go back to the moment when scientists decided viruses existed for the first time. After all, THEY made the original claim. The burden of proof was on THEM. And they made that decision long before there was a procedure called genetic sequencing.

If isolation is impossible, if these viruses swim forever in liquid inside cells, un-isolated, then HOW DID SCIENTISTS FIRST DISCOVER VIRUSES EXIST?

On what basis did they make the claim?

Through direct observation? Certainly not, if the viruses can never be separated from the liquid in which they swim.

“We first discovered the existence of viruses that can’t be isolated by…”

By what? Singing songs? Talking to an ancestor of Antony Fauci? Finding out how much money was in the bank accounts of the Rockefeller family?

“No, look. Here’s the way it works. NOW we say isolation of viruses is impossible, because people are accusing us of not isolating them. But THEN, way back in time when scientists discovered the existence of viruses for the first time, they knew viruses HAD TO EXIST.”

“How did they know that?”

“Because all other explanations for why people were getting sick with certain diseases didn’t work, fell short.”

“I see. So there was only ONE other possibility. Viruses.”

“That’s right.”

“Do you realize what a ridiculous position that is?”

“No comment.”

And that’s really the end of the story. There was no “original discovery” of viruses. There was only an assumption backed up by nothing.

And NOW, when virologists claim they don’t need to isolate viruses because they can lay out their genetic sequences, another ridiculous situation arises. HOW DO YOU ANALYZE THE STRUCTURE OF SOMETHING YOU CAN’T ISOLATE?

How do you describe the structure of a thing when you don’t have the thing?

You DON’T describe the structure. You PRETEND you do.

You refer to other structures which themselves are only pretenses, and you pick out pieces of those pretended structures and you cobble them together, and you say, “Here it is. Here is the genetic sequence.”

This would be like a shop owner holding out his empty hand to the mafia thugs who showed up to collect their protection money for the week. The owner says, “Here’s your four hundred dollars. Can’t you see it?”

After a thug pulls out his gun, the store owner opens his wall safe and takes out strange bills and hands them over. The bills are pieces of money from the game called Monopoly. They’re pieces from American, French, German, Italian, Spanish Monopoly money, taped together.

And THAT’S called genetic sequencing of viruses. Funny money.

I’ll cover two more points. As Dr. Tom Cowan has stated, according to the conventional hypothesis of virus infection, viruses must be breaking out of cells and traveling to other cells. Otherwise, how can infection spread throughout the body? But this description assumes that viruses CAN live and thrive outside the liquid in cells.

Therefore, the claim that viruses can’t be isolated because they always live in liquid inside cells is false.

Which would bring us back to the first type of virologist, the one who says he IS isolating viruses—but can’t prove it, because his definition of isolation is, “swimming inside soup and never separated from the soup.”

And finally, what about electron microscope photos which purport to show isolated viruses? This is a subject fraught with conflict and misunderstanding. It is far from settled science. Many so-called viruses in these photos are cells that are “budding,” as if something has not yet, but is about to break out of the cell. Virologists will arbitrarily call these somethings viruses, without visual proof.

Then there are exosomes, “microvesicles released by cells in both physiological and pathological situations.” They are mistaken for viruses. There is other genetic material which can be misidentified as viruses.

People who wish to explore this thorny problem should read the works of Harold Hillman, a foremost critic of electron microscopy methods, who was exiled from the scientific community for his findings. Hillman once wrote: “Electron microscopists have ignored the dictates of solid geometry and most of the apparent structures they have detected are artefacts of their preparation procedures…” In other words, the techniques of electron microscopy create artificial entities which are then mistaken for natural entities.

Brian Martin, emeritus professor of social sciences at the University of Wollongong, Australia, writes, “In one case, Hillman gave a talk to a large audience at what he calls ‘a well known Welsh university’. The many undergraduates in the audience seemed sympathetic to his case. A lecturer stood up and claimed to have pictures from an electron microscope which showed that Hillman was wrong. After the talk, Hillman asked the lecturer to see the pictures. ‘I have not got any’, he said, laughing. ‘Why did you say you had in front of that large audience?’ ‘Because I did not want the students to be misled by you’.”

And that concludes today’s episode of Two Schools of Virology, Both Wrong, brought to you by NIH Paper Towels, the brand that mops up every spill but somehow never traps a virus.

Harold Hillman folder: click here.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Natural immunity vs. Vaccine-induced immunity: the issue that terrifies the pro-vaxx mafia

by Jon Rappoport

October 11, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

As my readers know, I’ve been proving, for the past year, that the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist. Therefore, the whole issue of immunity is a non-starter. Immune to what? To a phantom. A myth. A superstition. A fairy tale. A collective hallucination.

NEVERTHELESS, I make frequent forays into the fantasy bubble-world, where millions and millions of people believe the virus is real, the case numbers are real, and the vaccine is relevant. I do this to point out the ridiculous contradictions and internal inconsistencies and lies within that bubble.

I’m making another such foray now. For the purposes of argument only, I’ll assume the virus is real and viral immunity is real and discussion about the vaccine is relevant.

A key question within the bubble: is naturally acquired immunity, achieved through infection by the virus, equivalent to, or better than, immunity acquired as a result of vaccination?

The answer to that question is vital for the pro-vaxx mafia. They MUST claim natural immunity is inferior. Otherwise, their goose is cooked.

Otherwise, their whole brutal campaign to force shots into arms is doomed.

Enter Senator Rand Paul. The other day, in a hearing, he took Biden’s Health and Human Services Secretary, Xavier Becerra, to the woodshed, to the cleaners, to school.

Infowars reporter Steve Watson wrote a piece covering Rand Paul’s merciless critique:

“Referring to a recent Israeli study that found vaccinated people are up to seven times more likely to get COVID-19 than those who have natural immunity, Paul told Becerra that Americans should be allowed to take a ‘Look at a study with 2.5 million people and say you know what? Looks like my [natural] immunity is as good as the vaccine’ or not.”

“’Maybe in a free country, I ought to be able to make that decision,’ Paul urged.”

“’Instead, you’ve chosen to travel the country calling people like Johnathan Isaac, and others, myself included, flat-earthers,’ the Senator continued, adding ‘We find that very insulting. It goes against the science’.”

“Paul then asked Becerra if he was a qualified medical doctor, knowing that he isn’t.”

“’So you’re not a medical doctor. Do you have a science degree?’ Paul further questioned, knowing that Becerra doesn’t.”

“’You alone are on high and you’ve made these decisions, a lawyer with no scientific background, no medical degree…this is an arrogance coupled with an authoritarianism that is unseemly and un-American,’ Paul blasted.

“’You sir, are the one ignoring the science. The vast preponderance of scientific studies, dozens and dozens, show robust, long-lasting [natural] immunity after infection,’ the Senator further charged, demanding that Becerra should apologise for being dishonest.”

If natural immunity is superior to vaccine-acquired immunity, then millions and millions of people who have been labeled “COVID cases” and recovered…don’t need the vaccine.

Oops.

Wait. There’s more. A few months ago, the FDA issued a strange edict that confused many medical professionals. The agency suddenly announced that COVID antibody tests would no longer be considered useful or accurate.

The hidden reason for that decision is becoming clear. Widespread antibody testing would reveal that an EXTRAORDINARY number of people developed viral infections and recovered. A far greater number than anyone expected or assumed. They have antibodies against the virus and they’re healthy.

And THAT revelation would sink the pro-vaxx ship to the bottom of the sea. Because, obviously, all those antibody-positive people developed natural immunity to the virus and have no need for a vaccine.

Then, on top of all this, the PCR test, when run at a sensitivity of 35 cycles or above, also indicates millions and millions of people are infected by the virus and recover nicely. THOSE people as well would need no vaccine.

Getting the picture?

The total tonnage of scientific bullshit required to argue that everyone should be vaccinated is titanic.

Hence, we have Fauci, sold-out talking news heads, vaccine mandates, lying doctors, lying public health officials, etc.

It would not surprise me at all if it turned out that 80-90 percent of the population—subjected to testing and re-testing—at one time or another qualified as COVID cases—and recovered nicely or were never sick in the first place…AND THEREFORE HAVE NO NEED FOR A VACCINE.

—And that concludes today’s episode of Lunatics on the Loose inside the Mad Mad World Where People Believe the Virus is Real and the Vaccine is Relevant and Necessary. As I say, I make forays into that world to demonstrate the contradictions and lies the liars are spouting, even on their own terms.

The liars are no more reliable than drunks in a bar at 2AM.

However, they’re a lot more dangerous.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Your basketball god refuses the vaccine; memo to Brooklyn Nets fans

by Jon Rappoport

October 8, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Desperate times call for loud measures.

Memo to Brooklyn Nets fans: If Kyrie Irving continues to stand his ground and refuses the vaccine…while you’re sitting in the stands this season shout in unison for 10 or 15 minutes at a time without pause, WE WANT KYRIE, WE WANT KYRIE. Try to drown out the television announcers. And since the NY vaccine mandate has emanated from both the governor and the mayor of the city, shout F*UCK DE BLASIO, F*CK HOCHUL. Let the people watching the game at home hear it. Give it your all. Come on. Organize. Hold parties at your house for season ticket holders. Practice shouting in your living rooms. On your balconies and rooftops. In the streets. You’re Brooklyn. Nobody tells you what’s what.

It would be hard to find an NBA player who can perform more magic on the court than Kyrie Irving, one of the three big stars for the Brooklyn Nets.

Kyrie hasn’t said he won’t take the vaccine. He just hasn’t taken it yet. And he wants that decision to remain private.

But it can’t be private, because his team resides in a holy site, New York, a sacred center of the Church of the Mandatory Injection.

No player can play a sport in an indoor NY venue unless he’s vaccinated. So says God.

Therefore, we have an untenable situation. Kyrie would have to sit out all 41 home games and then play most of the 41 road games.

The other day, one of the babbling sports talk-show luminaries compared getting the shot to wearing a seat belt. Therefore, Kyrie should stop screwing around and line up and take the needle.

Forget the fact that reported COVID vaccine injuries in the US have risen above 700,000. Forget the Harvard Pilgrim study that concluded vaccine injuries are grossly underreported, and you should multiply them by 100 to reach a true figure.

We’re talking about BASKETBALL. Let’s get our priorities straight. Winding up in the hospital after vaccination is okay. Dying is okay. But not playing on the court is a mortal sin.

The sports media world, of course, sucks up every edict, decree, and mainstream proposition about vaccines as Revelation handed down on stone tablets from the mountain. Safe and effective. Rare side effects. Minor swelling at the injection site.

Sudden heart conditions after the shots? Blood clots? Miscarriages? Collapse? Death? No problem. Death is Nature’s way of telling us the vaxx is working.

Hey, the Pope says, if you can sip the wine and munch on the wafer, you can take the jab. And he’s wired up to the Deity.

Other ignoramuses say, “What’s wrong with Kyrie? Doesn’t he realize his team has a chance of winning the championship this year? We don’t want athletes among us who contradict everything that makes America great. Kyrie is a ROLE MODEL. We can’t have kids saying KEEP THAT NEEDLE AWAY FROM ME.”

And so we come to this:

Kyrie? Open the door. Let me in.

It’s the middle of the night. Who’s there?

Tony. Tony Fauci.

Oh. Hold on…

Thanks for letting me in, Kyrie. I just want to put a few facts in front of you.

You mean no need to wear a mask? Wear a mask? Wear two? Don’t wear one? Wear one? That sort of thing?

I had to keep adjusting my recommendations.

Why?

Because we’re training people like dogs to obey.

So you can set up a dictatorship.

Well, sure.

What about the cycles?

What? How do you know about the cycles?

I read, Tony. You admitted that when labs set the PCR test cycles at 35 or above, the results are meaningless. But labs in the US have been running the test at 40 cycles. So false-positives are pouring out by the millions. Millions of people have been labeled COVID cases for no reason.

This is the kind of thing that gets you into trouble, Kyrie. You’re overthinking.

Meaning I get to the truth.

The truth per se is always shifting. We have to settle on a kind of average message that reaches average Americans.

In other words, Tony, you’ve got more tricks than I have on the court.

Come on, Kyrie. You’re elite. Join us. We’re elite, too.

Good night, Tony. I have to sleep, so I have energy tomorrow for practice, which I’m not attending because NY politicians, following your advice, shut down venues to the unvaccinated outlaws.

I want to get back to this ROLE MODEL business.

“Kyrie is setting a very bad example for the children. They’ll want to refuse the shot…”

The CDC is trying to head in the opposite direction (7/12/21): “Children and adolescents have the capacity to understand and reason about low-risk and high-benefit health care interventions. State laws should therefore authorize minors to consent to COVID-19 vaccination without parental permission.”

All right. If these demented criminals want to go there, then children, “who have the capacity to understand and reason,” can also REFUSE THE VACCINE, even if their parents demand they take it.

It’s only fair.

And with these cognitive skills, the kids won’t be unduly influenced by anything Kyrie does or says or declines to do.

Case closed.

power outside the matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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