Pandemics are staged on Television

Network: the last great film about The News

by Jon Rappoport

September 22, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

The official COVID narrative—more absurd with each passing day—is being transmitted on television. That is a cardinal fact.

The absurdity called TELEVISION NEWS was depicted in a giant of a film, NETWORK (1976)…

When a new epidemic is launched and promoted, despite the absence of good science and good evidence, it is jacked up on television screens. Images begin to flow:

An emergency medical vehicle on a street. EMT personnel, in hazmat suits, load a man strapped down to a stretcher, into the van. On another street, a man collapses on the sidewalk. We see a quarantined man sitting inside a huge plastic bubble on a third street. Cut to an airport lobby. Soldiers are patrolling the space among the crowds. Cut to a lab. Close-up of vials of liquid. Camera pulls back. Techs in light green scrubs are placing the vials into slots of a table-top machine. Auditorium—a man on a platform, wearing a doctor’s white coat, is pointing a wand at a large screen, on which a chart is displayed, for the audience. Back to the street. People are wearing face masks.

These images wash over the television viewer. Meanwhile, the anchor is imparting his prepared meaning: “The government today issued a ban on all travel into and out of the city…hundreds of plane flights have been cancelled. Scientists are rushing to develop a vaccine…”

The television audience has an IMPRESSION of knowing something. They’re in the flow, the flow of the news…they’re in the images…

—Network, the 1976 film written by Paddy Chayefsky, reveals what media kings would do if they unchained their basic instincts and galloped all the way into the madness of slash-and-burn Roman Circus.

The audience is jaded beyond recall. It needs new shocks to the system every day. The adrenaline must flow. The line between reporting the news and inventing it? Erase it. Celebrate the erasure. Watch ratings soar.

Why pretend anymore? Why spend countless hours preparing and broadcasting synthetic artificial news, as if it were real? Does the audience care about such niceties? The audience just wants action.

The film proceeds from these premises.

Arthur Jensen, head of the corporation that owns the Network, speaks to unhinged Network newsman, Howard Beale, who has revealed, on-air, a piece of the real planetary power structure in a few moments of sanity: “You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won’t have it!! Is that clear?!… You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today! And YOU have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU WILL ATONE!”

Head of programming for the Network, Diana Christensen, shifts the whole news department over to the entertainment division.

Thus emerge new shows with soaring ratings: Howard Beale, [Religious] Prophet of the Air Waves; The Mao Tse-Tung Hour, in which a guerrilla group films itself carrying out armed bank robberies; and Sybil the Soothsayer, a Tarot reader.

Diana becomes the network’s new executive star.

There is no longer even a pretense of a need for news anchors to appear authoritative, objective, or rational.

Diana Christensen is unstoppable. She sees, with burning clarity, that audiences are bored to the point of exhaustion; they now require, as at the end of the Roman Empire, extreme entertainment. They want more violence, more insanity, out in the open. On television.

In promoting her kind of news division, she tells network executives:

“Look, we’ve got a bunch of
hobgoblin radicals called the
Ecumenical Liberation Army who
go around taking home movies
of themselves robbing banks.
Maybe they’ll take movies of
themselves kidnapping heiresses,
hijacking 747’s, bombing bridges,
assassinating ambassadors.
We’d open each week’s segment
with that authentic footage,
hire a couple of writers to
write some story behind that
footage, and we’ve got
ourselves a series…

“Did you see the overnights on the
Network News? It has an 8 in New
York and a 9 in L.A. and a 27 share
in both cities. Last night, Howard
Beale went on the air [as a newscaster] and yelled
‘BULLSHIT’ for two minutes, and I
can tell you right now that tonight’s
show will get a 30 share at least.
I think we’ve lucked into something…

“I see Howard Beale as a latter-day
prophet, a magnificent messianic
figure, inveighing against the
hypocrisies of our times, a strip
Savonarola, Monday through Friday.
I tell you, Frank, that could just
go through the roof…Do you want to figure out
the revenues of a strip show that
sells for a hundred thousand bucks
a minute? One show like that could
pull this whole network right out
of the hole! Now, Frank, it’s being
handed to us on a plate; let’s not
blow it!”

Television in the “real world” isn’t all the way there yet, but it’s close.

In Network, Diana Christensen personifies the news. She is the electric, thrill-seeking, non-stop force that is terrified of silence.

She lives and feeds on adrenaline. So does the viewing public. Nothing else ultimately matters. Ratings are the top line and the bottom line. The individual and his thoughts are completely irrelevant.

Howard Beale, over the cliff, a news man screaming on-air about the insanity of the news, is perfectly acceptable, because the audience is simply responding to Beale’s inchoate outrage and their own. Nothing deeper is explored. What could have resulted in a true popular rebellion is short-circuited. Beale becomes a crazy loon, a novelty item. Yet one more distraction.

When, in a brief interlude of clarity, he begins telling his audience about the takeover of society by mega-corporations and mega-money, his show droops. Ratings collapse. Diana is no longer interested in him; she wants to sack him.

However, Arthur Jensen, the head of the corporation that owns the television network, wants to keep Beale on the air, as a messenger of the “galactic truth” about the beneficial integration of all human activity under the rubric of global money and global power. He converts Beale to his cause.

Diana sees only one way out of this ratings disaster: kill Beale; on-air; during his show. And so it is done.

Network also shows us the audience becoming actor, player, participant. The audience is jumping out of its skin to be recognized, courted, and adored as a mighty rolling force embodying no particular meaning.

Audience wants to be a star. Audience wants to BE news; audience wants its actions to be shown on television. That establishes its legitimacy. Nothing else is necessary.

Diana knows it, and she is more than willing to accommodate this frantic desire, if only her bosses will let her go all the way.

The best film ever made about television’s war on the population, Network stages only a few minutes of on-air television.

The rest of the film is dialogue and monologue about television. Thus you could say that, in this case, word defeats image. Which was scriptwriter Paddy Chayefsky’s intent.

Even when showing what happens on the TV screen, Network bursts forth with lines like these, from newsman Howard Beale, at the end of his rope, on-camera, speaking to his in-studio audience and millions of people in their homes:

“So, you listen to me. Listen to me! Television is not the truth. Television’s a god-damned amusement park. Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers, and football players. We’re in the boredom-killing business… We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true! But you people sit there day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds. We’re all you know. You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here. You’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube. This is mass madness. You maniacs. In God’s name, you people are the real thing. We are the illusion.”

It is Beale’s language and the passion with which he delivers it that constitutes his dangerous weapon. Therefore, the Network transforms him into a cheap religious figure, whose audience slathers him with absurd adoration.

Television’s enemy is the word. Its currency is image.

Beale occasionally breaks through the image and defiles it. He cracks the egg. He stops the picture-flow. He brings back the sound and rhythm of spoken poetry. That is his true transgression against the medium that employs him.

The modern matrix has everything to do with how knowledge is acquired.

Television, in the main, does not attempt to impart knowledge. It strives to give the viewer the impression that he knows something. There is a difference.

The impression of knowing is a feeling, a conviction, a belief the viewer holds, after he has watched moving images on a screen and listened to a narrator. THIS is what the viewer prefers. He wants no part of knowledge.

A basic premise of modern age is: “everything is (connected to) everything.” This fits quite well with the experience of watching video flow.

Example: we see angry crowds on the street of a foreign city. Then young people on their cell phones sitting in an outdoor café. Then the marble lobby of a government building where men in suits are walking, standing in groups talking to each other. Then at night, rockets exploding in the sky. Then armored vehicles moving through a gate into the city. Then clouds of smoke on another street and people running, chased by police.

A flow of consecutive images. The sequence, obviously, has been assembled by a news editor, but the viewing audience isn’t aware of that. They’re watching the “interconnected” images and listening to a news anchor tell a story that colors (infects) every image: “This is revolution for democracy, created by the technology of cell phones…”

Viewers thus believe something. Television has imparted a sensation to them.

Therefore: a short circuit occurs in the mind.

When you export this pattern out to a whole society, you are talking about a dominant method through which “knowledge” is groped and held close.

“Did you see that fantastic video about the Iraq War? It showed that Saddam actually had bioweapons.”

“Really? How did they show that?”

“Well, I don’t remember. But watch it. You’ll see.”

And that’s another feature of the modern acquisition of “knowledge”: amnesia about details.

The viewer can’t recall key features of what he saw. Or if he can, he can’t describe them, because he was inside them, busy building up his impression of knowing something.

Narrative-visual-television story strips out and discards conceptual analysis. To the extent it exists, it’s wrapped around and inside the image and the narration.

Paddy Chayefsky made his pen a sword, because he was writing a movie about television, against television. He was pitting Word against Image.

When a technology (television) turns into a method of perception, reality is turned inside out. People watch TV through TV eyes.

Mind control is no longer something merely imposed from the outside. It is a matrix of a self-feeding, self-demanding loop.

Willing Devotees of the Image WANT images, food stamps of the programmed society.

The triumph of Network is that it makes its words win over pictures, IN a picture, IN a film.

A pandemic, the false pandemic I’ve been rejecting in many articles, is delivered through video flow and narration. Stacked and cut images.

There is no challenge to the flow in any basic way, through the intrusion of actual knowledge, because that would shut down the parade of images and nullify the reasons for broadcasting them in the first place.

The old theater adage, “the show must go on,” when adapted for television, becomes, “the flow must go on.” Once its course is set, there can be no turning back.

The television audience, imprisoned in homes, rides the river…

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

Wuhan: back to the beginning, where the whole fraud started; buried revelations

Sep21

by Jon Rappoport

September 21, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

I recently went back to my original articles on COVID. They contain very significant information about the situation in Wuhan, in early 2020, when the false pandemic was first declared.

Readers need to grasp a central point I’ve been making for the past year and a half: what is being called COVID is not one disease. For the most part, it is a relabeling of older traditional lung conditions—flu, COPD, pneumonia, etc. I have explained this point in many articles.

I repeat it now, because the relabeling began in Wuhan. And the cause of illness there was not and is not a virus. No one discovered a new virus. I’ve detailed that fact as well in many articles.

So…what WAS happening in Wuhan, in 2019 and early 2020?

A very common and widespread illness, called pneumonia, was suddenly repackaged as the cardinal symptom of a “new disease,” COVID.

Here are excerpts from my very early COVID articles—

JANUARY 25, 2020: Wuhan, a city of 11 million, is called “the Chicago of China.” It is both an economic juggernaut and a transportation hub—railroads, roads, highways connecting travelers to other Chinese cities.

Several sources list the annual GDP of Wuhan at a staggering $220 billion dollars.

230 foreign Fortune 500 companies have offices in Wuhan and do business there. All in all, 80 foreign countries are funding companies in the city.

The Chinese New Year is now underway. It lasts from January 25 to February 10. During this period, Chinese people travel. They journey far and wide. In fact, this is the largest annual human migration on the planet. We’re talking about hundreds of millions of people on the move.

It provides a perfect pretext for saying a new virus is spreading uncontrollably, and requires unprecedented lockdowns of 50 million people in China.

Then there is this, from Bloomberg News, January 23, 2019: “When Premier Li Keqiang declared a ‘war against pollution’ in 2014, a few hundred residents of the city of Wuhan in central China took it as a cue.”

“They printed Li’s words on a six-meter (20 foot) banner and protested outside a foul-smelling incinerator plant they feared was causing illness in the community. Buoyed by the conviction they were answering the leadership’s call, the residents were instead harassed by local police officers who tore down the sign and trampled on it.”

“’We were worried and angry when we realized what was causing the stench and making our kids sick’,” said Zhang Xijiao, 44, who was detained for a week for making the banner. ‘But we are like ants, the local government can crush us as they please’.”

“Ren Rui, 40, quit her apartment in 2017 after her son developed a lung condition that required repeat surgery. She said smoke from the plant would blow her way under certain conditions. She tried to rent it out, ‘but no one wants to move here. Sometimes my mood depended on the direction of the wind,’ said Ren. Despite the financial pressure since, ‘I never regretted moving away’.”

Faulty incinerator. Illness. Pollution. Lung problems.

Let’s move on to another description of Chinese protests—in Wuhan.

CNN, July 11, 2019: “…Recent weeks [in Wuhan] have seen major protests there — in themselves a rarity in China — over plans for a new garbage incineration plant.”

“Holding banners with slogans such as ‘we don’t want to be poisoned, we just need a breath of fresh air,’ thousands [!] of people took to the city’s streets over two weeks in June and July calling for the suspension of plans to build the plant.”

“’We are fearful that the plant is too close to residence area,’ one protester in the city of 10 million people told state media. Others expressed concern that emissions could worsen air pollution and harm residents’ health.”

“Local officials were apparently surprised by the scale and size of the protests, which came after several similar waste plants were reportedly found to be giving off dangerous emissions. Photos and videos shared on social media showed large crowds marching in the streets near where the plant was to be built, and police arresting numerous protesters.”

“The government has since suspended building of the plant, which locals said had halted protests, but a heavy police presence remains in the city where the situation is tense.”

“Public pressure has been the driving force of pollution policy in China, and it shows no sign of letting up.”

“In 2016, protesters took to the streets of Chengdu wearing face masks to demand action to tackle smog, while other demonstrations have targeted power and chemical plants in Sichuan, Jiangsu and Heilongjiang provinces in recent years.”

“The Chinese government is highly sensitive to the threat of protests like those in Wuhan, with the shadow of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre looming large. Calls for collective action are among the most censored subjects online, and people organizing protests or working for civil society groups can face harassment and imprisonment.”

In other words, protests against pollution in one Chinese city can inspire protests in other cities. A very dangerous situation for the Chinese government. Furthermore, it is generally acknowledged that official and corporate reports on pollution levels are being faked, to make “dangerous” into “improving.”

Grist.org, June 12, 2012: “At about 2 a.m. local time Monday morning, a dense smog began to cover the province. By early afternoon, it reached its peak density in the land-locked city of Wuhan itself…The demonstrable danger is to lungs and bloodstreams.”

Yale Environment 360, April 17, 2018: “The foul air of dozens of fast-expanding cities across China contains cocktails of toxic contaminants unprecedented in the range of pollutants they contain at high concentrations. Now, new research into these swirling maelstroms of gases and tiny particulates suggests that they may be incubating chemical reactions that compound the health effects in ways not seen before – effects that doctors say are cutting five years off the expected lifespan of half a billion people in northern China…China has the world’s most dangerous outdoor air pollution.”

“Three other cities listed as regularly suffering dangerous levels of four or five of the pollutants are Jining, also in Shandong, Wuhan in Hubei province, and Jiayuguan and Jinchang in Gansu. None of the seven appear in the lists of the ten most polluted Chinese cities published by the WHO or Chinese environment ministry.”

“All the five major pollutants in smogs – SO2, NOx, ozone, PM10 and PM2.5 — are known to be linked individually to increased risk of strokes, heart disease, lung cancer and asthma, and to rising hospital admissions and death rates during smogs. What is disturbing is that there is growing evidence of synergistic effects between these different pollutants that make the whole worse than the sum of the parts.”

Lung disease, pneumonia—and no need to invoke a virus to explain it.

Getting the picture?

We have a major clue here. The use of a “coronavirus” cover story to obscure huge pollution dangers and put down protests against that pollution, through mass lockdowns and quarantines.

“It’s all about the virus and nothing else.” How many times have I seen that cover story deployed?

Too many times to count them. Wherever in the world you see extraordinary chemical pollution, grinding poverty, war, starvation, lethal dehydration, absence of basic sanitation, overcrowding in cities, horrendously contaminated water supplies, corporate takeover of farm land from the people—you will find the virus cover story publicized to the sky as the explanation for suffering, illness, and death.

On FEBRUARY 20, 2020, I wrote: At the very beginning of my coverage of the “China epidemic,” I cited evidence that the air quality in Wuhan is chronically dangerous.

Among other sources, I referred to a Yale review which stated that the mixture of toxic elements in the air is unprecedented in human history. The synergistic effects of these individual toxins is unknown.

I also mentioned the large street protests against air quality in Wuhan that took place last summer [2019]. These protests were also carried out in other Chinese cities. The government was obviously alarmed at the nascent rebellion.

Those protests are now gone. Because the cities are locked down. It’s all about “the virus” as the cause of illness.

Horrific air quality brings on lung infections of all kinds, including pneumonia. Pneumonia is THE illness attributed to the coronavirus. How convenient.

Air quality? Brushed aside.

Assessing studies of annual pneumonia deaths in China—covering years long before the supposed emergence of the new human coronavirus—I settled on the estimate of 300,000 deaths a year, countrywide.

Assuming this death rate is more or less constant, hundreds of thousands of people could now be called deceased “coronavirus cases” without a flicker of interest in the actual cause of their illness.

Recently, I found an article from cambodiacapital.com, dated February 7, 2020. It makes some astonishing comments about Wuhan air quality in the time-window when the “pandemic” was declared:

“…three factors. First, the increase of static wind in the horizontal direction, which is not conducive to the diffusion and dilution of atmospheric pollutants. Second, the emergence of a temperature inversion layer in the vertical direction, which makes it difficult for pollutants to move upwards and are blocked at low altitudes and near the ground. Third, the increase of suspended particulates in the air. These three conditions are all available during the high incidence period of Wuhan pneumonia.”

“According to data released by the Wuhan Bureau of Ecology and Environment, the moment when a large number of pneumonia cases emerged in Wuhan was during the period from Jan 19, 2020, to Jan 23, 2020, and the Wuhan air during this period was at the stage of serious pollution. The indices are all higher than 100. This means that the outbreak period of Wuhan pneumonia coincides with the severe period of air pollution and this is one of the reasons. The second supporting reason is that the high incidence areas of Wuhan pneumonia coincide with the severe air pollution areas. We observed by randomly taking one day as a sample and found out that the area with the highest level of air pollution in Wuhan was Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market. This shows that even in ‘normal weather’, the air pollution in the seafood market area was the relatively worst area in Wuhan…Therefore, it is not accidental that Wuhan Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market has become a high-incidence area of Wuhan pneumonia…”

On FEBRUARY 25, 2020, I wrote: Here is more information on China’s air pollution and its destructive effects—The Lancet, November 19, 2005; CHINA: THE AIR POLLUTION CAPITAL OF THE WORLD, by Jonathan Watt:

“Over 400 000 premature deaths a year in China are blamed on air pollution levels…”

“According to the European Space Agency, Beijing and its neighbouring north-east Chinese provinces have the world’s worst levels of nitrogen dioxide, which can cause fatal damage to the lungs.” [The so-called “coronavirus disease” is pneumonia.]

“At a recent seminar, Zhang Lijun, deputy director of the environmental protection agency, said that pollution levels could more than quadruple within 15 years unless the country slows the rise in energy consumption and car use.” [15 years later, it’s a “coronavirus epidemic.” How convenient.]

“A recently published study, conducted by the Chinese Academy on Environmental Planning, found that a third of China’s urban residents were exposed to harmful levels of pollution. More than 100 million people live in cities where the air reaches levels considered ‘very dangerous’.”

“The academy blamed air pollution for 411,000 [yearly] premature deaths—mostly from lung and heart-related diseases.”

“’It’s a conservative figure. The real figure could be higher’, Wang Jin’nan, a chief engineer of the academy, told the AFP news agency. ‘These figures all exist, but the local governments do not want us to reveal them.’ Asked for an interview with The Lancet, academy officials declined, saying the matter was ‘too sensitive’.”

“The political implications of worsening pollution are becoming more apparent. Although it does not publish figures on the link between pollution and health, the [Chinese] government admits that respiratory diseases are the leading cause of death in China…” [Pneumonia is called THE “coronavirus” disease.]

“Such health concerns, particularly regarding cancer and birth defects thought to be caused by chemical factories, have been a major factor in a recent wave of protests. Among the latest was the demonstration last month by hundreds of people living in a Beijing suburb against plans to build a factory in their neighbourhood. But similar outbreaks [protests] are occurring nationwide on an almost weekly basis.” [All the protests are gone now in 2020; key cities are locked down.]

“This situation is not unique to Beijing. Frequent dirty grey skies are taken for granted in Shanghai, Wuhan, Chongqing, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, and Hong Kong…Water has suffered the same fate as air. Increasingly likely to be exploited for dams and dumpsites, it is estimated that three-quarters of the rivers running through Chinese cities are so polluted that they cannot be used for drinking or fishing.”

“In 2008, it is quite possible that this authoritarian government will restrict traffic and close factories to ensure blue skies for the month of the Olympics. But it will only be a temporary fix. Unless more drastic measures are taken soon, the health costs of pollution will be paid in China for generations to come.”

—I can think of a more drastic measure. Claim a new virus is killing people, lock down cities and quarantine 50 million people, and shove all the news about deadly pollution causing pneumonia far, far into the background.

It all started in Wuhan—the fake discovery of a new virus, the pretense of a new reason for disease actually caused by deadly pollution.

Without that central lie, the whole pandemic narrative would have collapsed before it was launched.

In other articles, I’ve accounted for “COVID” illness and death in other places around the world—no virus required. This article shows the first deception, the beginning of the monstrous fake.

Think about how thousands of obedient lying scientists and public health officials in many countries completely ignored what was staring them in the face in Wuhan; the deadly pollution.

I’ve analyzed claims that the early COVID patients in China (and other places) were displaying unusual symptoms and signs that didn’t indicate ordinary pneumonia. “COVID pneumonia” was supposedly different and unique.

I took up two familiar assertions: the COVID patients were coming to hospitals with extreme shortness of breath, and their X-rays revealed a strange “ground-glass” pattern.

Here is what I wrote on February 4, 2021:

Extreme shortness of breath. Hypoxia. That’s one of the “strange symptoms.”

But WebMD lists a number of obvious causes for hypoxia: asthma attack; trauma (injury); COPD; emphysema; bronchitis; pain medicines, “and other drugs that hold back breathing”; heart problems; anemia, “a low number of red blood cells, which carry oxygen.”

Among the drugs that can cause the oxygen deprivation known as hypoxia? From drugabuse.com: “…opiate [opioid] drugs also slow your breathing…and in case of an overdose, your breathing is slowed to a virtually non-existent and lethal level.”

Is anyone looking into THAT, in China?

I did. I discovered (and wrote about it) that Wuhan happens to be Opioid Central for worldwide drug trafficking. Particularly, when it comes to the lethal drug, fentanyl, and its designer offshoots.

Chinese criminals launching an opioid war against many countries from Wuhan is ANOTHER fact covered up by the fatuous claim that a pandemic caused by a virus started in Wuhan.

Now let’s consider the so-called “ground glass” phenomenon. From MEDPAGE Today: “The term [ground glass] refers to the hazy, white-flecked pattern seen on lung CT scans, indicative of increased density.”

“Chest radiologists adopted it [the term] in the 1980s, with a first appearance in the Fleischner Society Glossary of Terms for Thoracic Radiology in 1984.”

“’We see [ground-glass opacities] so often in chest imaging,’ Guo [‘Henry Guo, MD, PhD, of Stanford University in Palo Alto, California’] told MedPage Today. “They come in different shapes, sizes, quantities, and locations, and they can indicate many different underlying pathologies — including other viral infections, chronic lung disease, fibrosis, other inflammatory conditions, and cancers.”

So there’s nothing new or highly strange about the ground glass phenomenon.

But wait. There’s more. “Adam Bernheim, MD, of the Mount Sinai system in New York City, authored one of the early papers on chest CT findings in COVID-19. He and his colleagues studied images captured from 121 patients at four centers in China mostly in late January [2020].”

“’There are a lot of diseases that can cause ground-glass opacities, but in COVID-19, there’s a distinct distribution, a preference for certain parts of the lung,’ chiefly in the lower lobes and periphery, and it appears multifocally and bilaterally, Bernheim said.”

“COVID-related ground-glass opacities also have a very round shape that’s ‘really unusual compared with other ground-glass opacities,’ he said.”

Aha. So maybe COVID patients ARE exhibiting a different outlier pattern of ground glass.

Alas, there are several problems with that assertion:

First of all, how do we define a “COVID patient?” Through a PCR test for a virus that has never been proved to exist. So there is no distinct group correctly labeled “COVID.”

The second problem with the doctor’s statement in the MEDPAGE article? All the patients came from China, and they were diagnosed very early, at the beginning of the “outbreak.” How were they diagnosed?

—“Guess what? We have 40 patients with unusual CT lung scans. We’re going to call them a unique cluster of ‘pandemic victims of a new virus.’ Why? Because they have unusual CT lung scans.” This is called fallacious circular reasoning. It’s a chapter in a subject called logic, which used to be taught in schools, before “I’m triggered” and “I want to cancel everything” became major courses on the way to a PhD in Grunge.

The other problem has to do with deadly pollution, and what lung X-ray patterns it can cause. In China, for example, above large cities like Wuhan, there is a unique mixture of early industrial and modern industrial pollutants—never before seen in human history.

The synergistic effects of these individually toxic compounds have never been studied. Therefore, it’s quite possible that the outlier ground glass patterns in X-rays are the result of this new and different air pollution mixture.

What I’m reporting, about “strange symptoms,” needs to be understood before making bald claims that a new virus, or some other esoteric cause, is responsible for “ground glass in COVID patients” or “low oxygen levels.”

Back in early 2020, a story about a virus was launched like rocket, out of Wuhan. It served the interest of elites who wanted to control populations and usher them into a Brave New World. It also allowed the Chinese regime to stop all citizen protests against deadly air pollution (through lockdowns), and to cover up the fact that Wuhan was the global center for opioid trafficking.

The whole pandemic story was a lie. Anyone with eyes to see knew lethal air pollution was causing the pneumonias suddenly re-labeled “COVID.”

The whole pandemic story is still a lie.

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

Jon Rappoport

The failure to prove the virus exists

Sep20

by Jon Rappoport

September 20, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Over a year ago, I proposed (insisted on) a procedure to prove SARS-COV-2 exists.

This procedure is essential—and needless to say, it hasn’t been done, and will never be done.

Why? Because the outcome could completely and utterly destroy the COVID narrative.

Here is the procedure: You line up 500 people who have been diagnosed with COVID-19, and you take tissue samples from them.

You properly process these samples, through centrifuging, etc., in order to extract and arrive at what you believe is the virus.

You put that material under an electron microscope and photograph it.

You then place the 500 photos from the 500 “pandemic patients” side by side.

You ask yourself three burning questions.

One: In each and every photo, are there many identical viruses?

Two: Are these viruses in every one of the 500 photos?

Three: Is the virus one you’ve never seen before?

If the answer to question one and two is yes, you appear to have found a common virus for the 500 patients. If the answer to three is yes, it’s a virus never seen before.

If the answer to either question one or two is no, you’ve failed to find the common virus you’re looking for. You’ve failed to prove a viral cause for what you’re calling COVID-19.

If you see many identical virus particles in some, but not all, of the photos, you may or may not have found a virus. To decide that issue, you need three conditions: the researchers are honest and independent; a new team of such researchers will repeat the whole procedure, from the beginning, to see whether their findings match those of the original team; and you need truly qualified experts to determine whether the particles in the electron microscope photos are actually viruses or something else.

Note: This is why one or two photos from a study mean NOTHING.

All right. Moving on, there are other factors involved in the process of discovering a virus. These factors are ISOLATION and GENETIC SEQUENCING.

They’re both covered in a Statement on Virus Isolation, authored and published by Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, and Sally Fallon Morell. I reprint it here in full:

Statement On Virus Isolation (SOVI) [1]

“Isolation: The action of isolating; the fact or condition of being isolated or standing alone; separation from other things or persons; solitariness.” — Oxford English Dictionary

The controversy over whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus has ever been isolated or purified continues. However, using the above definition, common sense, the laws of logic and the dictates of science, any unbiased person must come to the conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. As a result, no confirmation of the virus’ existence can be found. The logical, common sense, and scientific consequences of this fact are:

* the structure and composition of something not shown to exist can’t be known, including the presence, structure, and function of any hypothetical spike or other proteins;

* the genetic sequence of something that has never been found can’t be known;

* “variants” of something that hasn’t been shown to exist can’t be known;

* it’s impossible to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19.

In as concise terms as possible, here’s the proper way to isolate, characterize and demonstrate a new virus. First, one takes samples (blood, sputum, secretions) from many people (e.g. 500) with symptoms which are unique and specific enough to characterize an illness. Without mixing these samples with ANY tissue or products that also contain genetic material, the virologist macerates, filters and ultracentrifuges i.e. purifies the specimen. This common virology technique, done for decades to isolate bacteriophages [2a] and so-called giant viruses in every virology lab, then allows the virologist to demonstrate with electron microscopy thousands of identically sized and shaped particles. These particles are the isolated and purified virus.

These identical particles are then checked for uniformity by physical and/or microscopic techniques. Once the purity is determined, the particles may be further characterized. This would include examining the structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the particles. Next, their genetic makeup is characterized by extracting the genetic material directly from the purified particles and using genetic-sequencing techniques, such as Sanger sequencing, that have also been around for decades. Then one does an analysis to confirm that these uniform particles are exogenous (outside) in origin as a virus is conceptualized to be, and not the normal breakdown products of dead and dying tissues. [2b] (As of May 2020, we know that virologists have no way to determine whether the particles they’re seeing are viruses or just normal break-down products of dead and dying tissues.) [2c]

If we have come this far then we have fully isolated, characterized, and genetically sequenced an exogenous virus particle. However, we still have to show it is causally related to a disease. This is carried out by exposing a group of healthy subjects (animals are usually used) to this isolated, purified virus in the manner in which the disease is thought to be transmitted. If the animals get sick with the same disease, as confirmed by clinical and autopsy findings, one has now shown that the virus actually causes a disease. This demonstrates infectivity and transmission of an infectious agent.

None of these steps has even been attempted with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor have all these steps been successfully performed for any so-called pathogenic virus. Our research indicates that a single study showing these steps does not exist in the medical literature.

Instead, since 1954, virologists have taken unpurified samples from a relatively few people, often less than ten, with a similar disease. They then minimally process this sample and inoculate this unpurified sample onto tissue culture containing usually four to six other types of material — all of which contain identical genetic material as to what is called a “virus.” The tissue culture is starved and poisoned and naturally disintegrates into many types of particles, some of which contain genetic material. Against all common sense, logic, use of the English language and scientific integrity, this process is called “virus isolation.” This brew containing fragments of genetic material from many sources is then subjected to genetic analysis, which then creates in a computer-simulation process the alleged sequence of the alleged virus, a so called in silico genome. At no time is an actual virus confirmed by electron microscopy. At no time is a genome extracted and sequenced from an actual virus. This is scientific fraud.

The observation that the unpurified specimen — inoculated onto tissue culture along with toxic antibiotics, bovine fetal tissue, amniotic fluid and other tissues — destroys the kidney tissue onto which it is inoculated is given as evidence of the virus’ existence and pathogenicity. This is scientific fraud.

From now on, when anyone gives you a paper that suggests the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated, please check the methods sections. If the researchers used Vero cells or any other culture method, you know that their process was not isolation. You will hear the following excuses for why actual isolation isn’t done:

1. There were not enough virus particles found in samples from patients to analyze.

2. Viruses are intracellular parasites; they can’t be found outside the cell in this manner.

If No. 1 is correct, and we can’t find the virus in the sputum of sick people, then on what evidence do we think the virus is dangerous or even lethal? If No. 2 is correct, then how is the virus spread from person to person? We are told it emerges from the cell to infect others. Then why isn’t it possible to find it?

Finally, questioning these virology techniques and conclusions is not some distraction or divisive issue. Shining the light on this truth is essential to stop this terrible fraud that humanity is confronting. For, as we now know, if the virus has never been isolated, sequenced or shown to cause illness, if the virus is imaginary, then why are we wearing masks, social distancing and putting the whole world into prison?

Finally, if pathogenic viruses don’t exist, then what is going into those injectable devices erroneously called “vaccines,” and what is their purpose? This scientific question is the most urgent and relevant one of our time.

We are correct. The SARS-CoV2 virus does not exist.

—end of Kaufman, Cowan, Morell Statement—

Finally, here is a repost of my article about a claim of virus isolation. Dr. Kaufman does a step-by-step analysis of a quote from a typical study that purports to describe how SARS-CoV-2 was isolated:

—Dr. Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the virus exists—

The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”

But what if the virus doesn’t exist?

People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.

“Isolation” should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”

I took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to Dr. Andrew Kaufman [3], and he provided his analysis in detail.

I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 — June 2020)” [4].

First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.

The researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number of compounds. The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not occurring.

They set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the soup are dying. THAT’S THEIR KEY “EVIDENCE.” This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.

There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.

Finally, the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus” they never isolated. “We didn’t find it, we don’t know anything about it, but we sequenced it.”

Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:

STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”

KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”

STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”

KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”

STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”

KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”

STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”

KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”

KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO) [5]. Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”

STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols…”

STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”

KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”

STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”

KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”

—end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis—

My comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not occurring.

Dr. Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr. Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that “the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.

And finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of “the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 300 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [6]) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?

The answer is no.

SOURCES:

[1] https://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com/sovi/

[2a] Isolation, characterization and analysis of bacteriophages from the haloalkaline lake Elmenteita, KenyaJuliah Khayeli Akhwale et al, PLOS One, Published: April 25, 2019. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215734 — accessed 2/15/21

[2b] “Extracellular Vesicles Derived From Apoptotic Cells: An Essential Link Between Death and Regeneration,” Maojiao Li1 et al, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, 2020 October 2. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2020.573511/full — accessed 2/15/21

[2c] “The Role of Extraellular Vesicles as Allies of HIV, HCV and SARS Viruses,” Flavia Giannessi, et al, Viruses, 2020 May

[3] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/

[4] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

[5] https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home.html

[6] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/covid/

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

Jon Rappoport

How the CIA hid their MKULTRA mind-control program

Sep17

And yes, this has a COVID vaccine punchline

by Jon Rappoport

September 17, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Back in the early 1990s, I spoke with John Marks, author of Search for the Manchurian Candidate. This was the book (1979) that helped expose the existence and range of the infamous CIA MKULTRA program.

Marks related the following facts to me. He had originally filed many Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests for documents connected to the CIA’s mind-control program. He got nothing back.

Finally, as if to play a joke on him, someone at the CIA sent Marks 10 boxes of financial and accounting records. The attitude was, “Here, see what you can do with this.”

I’ve seen some of those records. They’re very boring reading.

But Marks went through them, and lo and behold, he found he could piece together MKULTRA projects, based on the funding data.

Eventually, he assembled enough information to begin naming names. He conducted interviews. The shape of MKULTRA swam into view. And so he wrote his book, Search for the Manchurian Candidate.

He told me that three important books had been written about MKULTRA, and they all stemmed from those 10 boxes of CIA financial records. There was his own book; Operation Mind Control by Walter Bowart; and The Mind Manipulators by Alan Scheflin and Edward Opton.

After publishing his book, Marks continued to press the CIA for more MKULTRA information. He explained to me what then happened. A CIA official told him the following: in 1962, after ten years of mind-control experiments, the whole program had been shifted over to another internal CIA department, the Office of Research and Development (ORD).

The ORD had a hundred boxes of information on their MKULTRA work, and there was no way under the sun, Marks was told, he was ever going to get his hands on any of that. It was over. It didn’t matter how many FOIA requests Marks filed. He was done. The door was shut. Goodbye.

The CIA went darker than it ever had before. No leaks of any kind would be permitted.

In case there is any doubt about it, the idea of relying on the CIA to admit what it has done in the mind-control area, what it is doing, and what it will do should be put to bed by John Mark’s statements. The CIA always has been, and will continue to be, a rogue agency.

To give you an idea of how far the CIA, the US military, and its allied academics will go in MKULTRA “research,” here is what I wrote in 1995 about several human experiments. My information was based on the three key books I mentioned above, as well as Martin Lee’s classic, Acid Dreams:

“Dr. Robert Heath of Tulane University, as early as 1955, working for the Army, gave patients LSD while he had electrodes implanted deep inside their brains.”

“In the mid-1950’s, Paul Hoch, M.D., a man who would become Commissioner of Mental Hygiene for the State of New York, then a laborer in the field for the CIA, gave a ‘pseudoneurotic schizophrenic’ patient mescaline. The patient had a heaven-and-hell journey on the compound. But Hoch followed this up with a transorbital leucotomy [aka lobotomy]… Hoch also gave a patient LSD, and a local anesthetic, and then proceeded to remove pieces of his cerebral cortex, asking at various moments whether the patient’s perceptions were changing.”

People need to understand how the history of mind control and psychiatry are interwoven, and how the madmen and murderers within these “professions” are content to use torture “in the name of science.”

From a naturalnews.com article by the heroic whistleblower, psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin (“Never again! The real history of psychiatry”), we get insight into one aspect of that history.

Breggin: “[Before World War 2, in America], organized psychiatry had been sterilizing tens of thousands of Americans. For a time in California, you couldn’t be discharged from a state hospital unless you were sterilized. In Virginia the retarded were targeted. American advocates of sterilization went to Berlin to help the Nazis plan their sterilization program. These Americans reassured the Germans that they would meet no opposition from America in sterilizing their mentally and physically ‘unfit’ citizens.”

“While the murder of mental patients was going full swing in Germany, knowledgeable American psychiatrists and neurologists didn’t want to be left out. In 1942, the American Psychiatric Association held a debate about whether to sterilize or to murder low IQ ‘retarded’ children when they reached the age of five. Those were the only two alternatives in the debate: sterilization or death.”

“After the debate, the official journal of the American Psychiatric Association published an editorial in which it chose sides in favor of murder (“Euthanasia” in the American Journal of Psychiatry, 1942, volume 99, pp. 141-143). It said psychiatrists would have to muster their psychological skills to keep parents from feeling guilty about agreeing to have their children killed.”

The psychiatrists who later went to work for the CIA, in the MKULTRA program, were devoid of conscience. Any experiment was a good experiment. Human beings were “useful subjects.”

Here is an MKULTRA sub-project you may not have heard of. I wrote about it several years ago—

Some would say the 1940s and 50s were the most vibrant and innovative period in the history of American jazz.

During those years, it was common knowledge that musicians who were busted for drug use were shipped, or volunteered to go, to Lexington, Kentucky. Lex was the first Narcotics Farm and US Health Dept. drug treatment hospital in the US.

According to diverse sources, here’s a partial list of the reported “hundreds” of jazz musicians who went to Lex: Red Rodney, Sonny Rollins, Chet Baker, Sonny Stitt, Howard McGhee, Elvin Jones, Zoot Sims, Lee Morgan, Tadd Dameron, Stan Levey, Jackie McLean.

It’s also reported that Ray Charles was there, and William Burroughs, Peter Lorre, and Sammy Davis, Jr.

It was supposed to be a rehab center. A place for drying out.

But it was something else too. Lex was used by the CIA as one of its MKULTRA centers for experimentation on inmates.

The doctor in charge of this mind control program was Harris Isbell. Astonishingly, Isbell was, at the same time, a member of the FDA’s Advisory Committee on the Abuse of Depressant and Stimulant Drugs.

Isbell gave LSD and other psychedelics to inmates at Lex.

At Sandoz labs in Switzerland, Dr. Albert Hofmann, the discoverer of LSD, also synthesized psilocybin from magic mushrooms. The CIA got some of this new synthetic from Hofmann and gave it to Isbell so he could try it out on inmates at Lex.

Isbell worked at Lex from the 1940s through 1963. It is reported that in one experiment, Isbell gave LSD to 7 inmates for 77 consecutive days. At 4 times the normal dosage. That is a chemical hammer of incredible proportions.

To induce inmates to join these MKULTRA drug experiments, they were offered the drug of their choice, which in many cases was heroin. So at a facility dedicated to drying out and rehabbing addicts, the addicts were subjected to MKULTRA experiments and THEN a re-establishment of their former habit.

Apparently, as many as 800 different drugs were sent to Isbell by the CIA or CIA allies to use on patients at Lex. Two of the allies? The US Navy and the US National Institute of Mental Health—proof that MKULTRA extended beyond the CIA.

In another MKULTRA experiment at Lex, nine men were strapped down on tables. They were injected with psilocybin. Bright lights were beamed at their eyes—a typical mind control component.

During Isbell’s tenure, no one knows how many separate experiments he ran on the inmates.

As I say, Lex was the main stop for drying out for NY jazz musicians. How many of them were taken into these MKULTRA programs?

As Martin Lee explains in his book, Acid Dreams, “It became an open secret…that if the [heroin] supply got tight [on the street], you could always commit yourself to Lexington, where heroin and morphine were doled out as payment if you volunteered for Isbell’s whacky drug experiments. (Small wonder Lexington had a return rate of 90%.)”

A June 15, 1999, Counterpunch article by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, “CIA’s Sidney Gottlieb: Pusher, Assassin & Pimp— US Official Poisoner Dies,” contains these quotes on Dr. Isbell:

“Gottlieb also funded the experiments of Dr. Harris Isbell. Isbell ran the Center for Addiction Research in Lexington, Kentucky. Passing through Isbell’s center was a captive group of human guinea pigs in the form of a steady stream of black heroin addicts. More than 800 different chemical compounds were shipped from Gottlieb to Lexington for testing on Isbell’s patients.”

“Perhaps the most infamous experiment came when Isbell gave LSD to seven black men for seventy-seven straight days. Isbell’s research notes indicates that he gave the men ‘quadruple’ the ‘normal’ dosages. The doctor marveled at the men’s apparent tolerance to these remarkable amounts of LSD. Isbell wrote in his notes that ‘this type of behavior is to be expected in patients of this type’.”

“In other Gottlieb-funded experiment at the Center, Isbell had nine black males strapped to tables, injected them with psylocybin, inserted rectal thermometers, had lights shown in their eyes to measure pupil dilation and had their joints whacked to test neural reactions.”

If you think these experiments were so extreme they bear no resemblance to modern psychiatry, think again. Thorazine, the first so-called anti-psychotic drug, was researched on the basis of its ability to make humans profoundly quiescent and passive. Electroshock and lobotomy are straight-out torture techniques that also destroy parts of the brain. SSRI antidepressants increase violent behavior, including homicide. Among its many documented effects, Ritalin can induce hallucinations and paranoia.

Well, all these effects are part and parcel of the original (and ongoing) MKULTRA.

But now the whole population, via psychiatry, is included in the experiment.

Which is one reason why THE RIGHT TO REFUSE MEDICATION must be protected and expanded.

Including, of course, the right to refuse VACCINES.

For example, the COVID vaccines.

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

Jon Rappoport

The real “lab-leak” story: nanotech crimes and betrayals in the New World Order

Sep17

“Scientists from the US and China are blowing each other kisses, as they collaborate on developing a technology that has the potential to gain intimate control over the human brain itself.”

by Jon Rappoport

September 17, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

From lexico.com: nanotechnology: “The branch of technology that deals with dimensions and tolerances of less than 100 nanometers, especially the manipulation of individual atoms and molecules.”

PART ONE: NANOTECH FOR MIND CONTROL

Here are astonishing quotes from the journal Nano Today, in a 2019 paper titled: “Nanowire probes could drive high-resolution brain-machine interfaces.” Its authors are Chinese and American.

“…advances can enable investigations of dynamics in the brain [through nano-sensor-implants] and drive the development of new brain-machine interfaces with unprecedented resolution and precision.”

“…output electrical signals of brain activity or input electrical stimuli to modulate brain activity in concert with external machines, including computer processors and prosthetics, for human enhancement…”

This avenue of research involves “modulation” of the brain remotely connected to machines, for the purpose of control.

Modulation could include control of basic impulses, sensations, emotions.

Nano-sensors, implanted in the body and brain, would issue real time data-reports on body/brain functioning to ops centers.

And from those ops centers, data—including instructions—would be sent back to the nano-sensors, which would impose those instructions on the brain and body.

If this seems impossible, consider nanotech research aimed at improving the use of prosthetics. In that field, imposing instructions on the body/brain appears to be the whole point.

SUPPOSE, THROUGH VACCINES, NANOTECH IS INSERTED INTO BODIES AND BRAINS OF THE GLOBAL POPULATION? As a grand “experiment.”

PART TWO: WHO IS SHARING AND TRANSFERRING THIS NANOTECH RESEARCH?

Once upon a time, they called it espionage. Then they called it “illegal technology transfer.” Then they casually and admiringly called it Globalism.

In January of 2020, one of the leading nanoscience researchers in the world, Charles Lieber, was arrested and charged with concealing his research connections to China.

Bloomberg News, February 12, 2020: “…by targeting Lieber, the chairman of Harvard’s chemistry department and a veritable ivory tower blue blood, prosecutors struck at the crimson heart of the academic elite, raising fears that globalism, when it comes to doing science with China, is being criminalized.”

You mean some researchers believe sharing ultra-sensitive research with China should be standard operating procedure? Not just some researchers; many.

Bloomberg: “According to a government affidavit, signed by a Federal Bureau of Investigation agent named Robert Plumb, Lieber signed at least three agreements with Wuhan Technology University, or WUT, in central China. These included a contract with the state-sponsored Thousand Talents Plan—an effort by Beijing to attract mostly expatriate [Chinese] researchers and their know-how back home—worth a total of about $653,000 a year in pay [to Lieber] and living expenses for three years, plus $1.74 million [to Lieber] to support a new ‘Harvard-WUT Nano Key Lab’ in Wuhan. The government offered no evidence that Lieber actually received those sums… Lieber also deceived Harvard about his China contracts, the [federal] affidavit said.”

It gets worse. Far worse. Here’s the real money quote from the Bloomberg article: “Whatever extracurricular arrangements Lieber may have had in China, his Harvard lab was a paragon of U.S.-China collaboration. He relied on a pipeline of China’s brightest Ph.D. students and postdocs, often more than a dozen at a time, to produce prize-winning research on the revolutionary potential of so-called nanowires in biomedical implants. Dozens of Lieber’s 100 or so former lab members from China have chosen to stay in the U.S. Many now lead their own nanoscience labs at top universities, including Duke, Georgia Tech, MIT, Stanford, University of California at Berkeley, and UCLA.”

I’d say that’s a pretty big technology-transfer WOW right there. How many of those hundred Chinese nanotech researchers, who now occupy leading academic/research positions in the US, are actually scientific spies for Beijing?

A final note from Bloomberg: “In the 1990s and 2000s, as Lieber’s achievements and stature were taking off, U.S. research institutions and grant makers pumped money and moral support into expanding the burgeoning collaborations between scientists in the U.S. and other countries, particularly China. The new paradigm was globalization, China was an emerging economic power, and Lieber’s lab became an exemplar of pan-Pacific collaboration. “

Not a leak of technology transfer. A flood. Right out in the open.

How big a star is Charles Lieber? Thomson Reuters named him the number one chemist in the world (covering 2000-2010).

Lieber was operating a robust center at Harvard: Lieber Research Group. Its focus is nanoscience and nanotechnology. So it’s natural to ask, what kind of research findings would be shared with China?

On the Lieber Research Group’s website, there is this: “We are pioneering the interface between nanoelectronics and the life sciences…sensors for real-time disease detection…” These sensors would be placed inside the body.

The Chinese government has the clout, will, force, and intent to impose, without hesitation, every sort of possible control on its 1.4 billion citizens. It is in the process of building many new “smart cities.” These centers will be models of wall-to-wall surveillance. AI, Internet of Things, 5G, the works.

If nanoscience can achieve much more intimate access to people, through implanted sensors, the Chinese government will jump at the chance to deploy it. The cover story is obvious: WE MUST HAVE EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF NEW VIRUS EPIDEMICS. WE WILL DETECT THEM DIRECTLY FROM THE BODIES OF OUR PEOPLE IN REAL TIME.

The US and other countries are also eager to deploy nanotech in this way.

“Look, I’m certainly willing to share my latest research on nano-brain implants. But I need your, ahem, assurance that your government won’t use this for dark purposes.”

“I understand completely. My government would no more do that than your government would.”

“All right. Then we’re good.”

“Yes. Good.”

How did US-China relations get to this point? At one time, it appeared the two governments were involved in a cold war. Then President Nixon opened up China to trade, in 1972, after 25 years of no diplomatic relations. Nixon was the agent of David Rockefeller, who, several years earlier, had rescued him from a broken career as a politician. David Rockefeller, arch Globalist.

Here’s what Rockefeller blithely wrote in 1973, a year after Nixon had worked his China miracle:

“Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.” (“From a China Traveler”, nytimes.com, August 10, 1973)

Millions of people dead, freedom crushed, a whole population under the boot of the Communist regime, but somehow that’s not what David Rockefeller saw, or pretended to see. He, like other of his elite Globalist colleagues, admired the Chinese government for the capacity to control its own people, to such a high degree.

Flash forward 47 years. Scientists from the US and China are blowing each other kisses, as they collaborate on developing a technology that has the potential to gain intimate control over the human brain itself.

—Of course, remember, when political push comes to shove, and it always does, China is the friend of China. In the case of American corporate and government big shots, nationalism is dead.

This is what used to be euphemistically called “a trade imbalance.”

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

Jon Rappoport

The vaccinated sheep are being taken for a ride; how long before they jump off the train? Never?

Sep16

by Jon Rappoport

September 16, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Here’s how it goes, Mr. Jones.

First, they told you the vaccine was your way out of the dark, out of the lockdowns. And if enough of you took the shot, the pandemic would be over.

So you lined up and took the jab. And you took the second dose.

THEN they said wait. You could still transmit the virus. In fact, you could still catch COVID.

On top of that, your viral load could be as high as the unvaccinated.

Boom.

So you’d still need to wear a mask. You’d still need to distance.

And voila, boosters would be necessary.

How many boosters? Unknown. Maybe one a year, or one every eight months.

If you take the boosters, would you still need to wear a mask and distance? Apparently, yes.

They keep claiming the vaccine will protect you against severe illness and hospitalization, but…the clinical trials of the three major vaccines were structured to show the shots would only prevent MILD ILLNESS. Chills and fever, or a cough. They still haven’t told you THAT.

Let’s see, what else? Do you watch football? This past weekend, as college and NFL games swung into action, HUGE CROWDS of unmasked spectators filled the stands all over the country.

Do you really think officials vetted those people, to make sure they had vaccine passports before they entered the stadiums? Are you kidding?

So how do you like THAT? You’re acting like a good little sheep, you took your shots, but millions of people were attending football games, shouting and screaming, sitting cheek to jowl, with no masks on.

Droves of immigrants are streaming across the southern border of the US, and most of them aren’t are getting vaccinated. They’re being relocated to cities and towns from San Diego to Bangor.

And don’t forget, the number of reports of injuries and deaths from the vaccine is staggering. The experts admit they have no idea about the vaccine’s long-term effects.

Officials in some parts of the country are laying on new lockdowns. There’s no way to predict when such imprisonments might pop up in your area.

You thought that by taking the vaccine, you’d earn special privilege. You’d wear your badge with pride. But no.

You thought being vaccinated meant you wouldn’t catch the disease. But no.

You scoffed at the idea that the whole pandemic was a hoax, and you were sure there was no evidence that contradicted what the experts were telling you.

You chose not to look into the fact that no one has actually proved the virus exists, or that the test is meaningful, or that the case and death numbers are real. You assumed taking the vaccine would solve all your problems for you.

You were wrong.

You’ve chosen to ignore the destruction of freedom by vaccine mandate, by lockdown, by devastating financial ruin for millions of people. You’ve kept your mouth shut. You’ve settled for protection by obeying the rules and taking the shot in the arm.

A curtain of lies has been raised all over the world. The fraud is awesome. The fear is mindless.

You sided with the wrong people. They are promoting an absurd religion of ceremony and ritual. “First you do this, to protect yourself. Then you do that. Then, the third step is this. Then you’ll be blessed. But actually there are more steps, and if you take them, you may or may not be protected…”

These priests keep telling you they’re changing their minds about what is necessary because new data are emerging—and you believe them. You believe they and you are following science. It still hasn’t dawned on you that all this is about CONTROL.

You’re on the Tyranny Train, and with each mile the enveloping power of our so-called leaders tightens around you. You don’t want to know what the Great Reset or the New Normal means. You think somehow everything will stay the same, even though the evidence in front of your eyes is presenting you with real-life denials of what you think at every turn.

How did you get to be the way you are, Mr. Jones?

There are MANY answers to that question. Here is one:

Creating ADHD is the goal of education.

There is a form of mind control that is really mind-chaos. It shatters the processes of thought into, at best, vaguely related fragments. There is no direction, no development, no progress along a line of reasoning. This is how you disable a person. You disrupt his ability to move from A to B to C. At that point, he becomes passive. He’s willing to be programmed, because it’s easier. He wants to be programmed.

“I learned twenty-four new things today at school,” the child said. “One right after the other. I felt so happy. My teacher told me I was learning accelerated. I wrote on my iPad. I saw pictures. I did group harmony. I added. I divided. I heard about architecture. The teacher said we were filled with wonder at the universe. We solved a problem. We were all together. I ate cheese. A factory makes cheese.”

The new education is ADHD.

It’s a method of teaching that surrenders ground on each key concept, deserting it before it’s firmly fixed in the mind of the student.

It hops around from idea to idea, because parents, teachers, administrators, students, departments of education, and educational publishers have given up on the traditional practice of repetition.

Repetition was old-world. For decades, even centuries, the time-honored method of instruction was: introduce an idea or concept or method, and then provide numerous examples the student had to practice, solve, and demonstrate with proficiency.

There was no getting around it. If the student balked, he failed.

There were no excuses or fairy tales floated to explain away the inability of the student to carry out the work.

Now, these days, if you want to induce ADHD, teach a course in which each new concept is given short shrift. Then pass every student on to the next grade, because it’s “humane.”

Think of it this way. Suppose you want to climb the sheer face of a high rock. You know nothing about climbing. You engage an instructor. He teaches you a little bit about ropes and spikes and handholds. He briefly highlights each aspect and then skips to the next.

So later…while you’re falling five hundred feet to the ravine below, you can invent stories about why the experiment didn’t work out.

Since the advent of organized education on the planet, there has been one way of teaching young children…until recently. Explain a new idea, produce scores of examples of that idea, and get the students to work on those examples and come up with the right answers.

Subtraction, division, decimals, spelling—it all works the same basic way.

For the last hundred years or so, however, we’ve seen the gradual intrusion of Teacher ADHD.

School text ADHD.

Not enough examples. Not enough exercises.

Education has nothing to do with a full frontal attack to “improve the self-esteem” of the student. It has nothing to do with telling children they’re valuable. It certainly has nothing to do with trying to embed social values and team spirit in children.

And no matter how many fantasies educators spin, schools can’t replace parents.

If what I’m writing here seems cruel and uncaring…look at the other side of the picture. Look at what happens when a student emerges from school with a half-baked, dumbed-down education.

He can sort of read. He can sort of write. He sort of understands arithmetic. He tries to skate through the rest of his life. He fakes it. He adopts a front to conceal the large territory of what he doesn’t know.

He certainly can’t think straight. Give him three ideas in succession and he’s lost. He goes on overload.

He operates on association. You say A and he goes to G right away. You go back to A and he responds with R. He’s up the creek without a paddle.

That’s what’s cruel.

Forty years ago, I was on the verge of landing a lucrative job with a remedial education company. The owner gave me a lesson plan and told me to write a sample “computer” program.

I did. He looked at it and said, “There are too many examples and exercises here. You have to move things along faster.”

I told him the students would never comprehend the program that way. They had to work on at least 20 exercises for each new concept.

He was shocked. “That’s not how it’s done now,” he said.

“Oh,” I said, “you mean now the student and teacher both fake it?”

And that was the end of that.

Several years ago, I explained teacher-induced ADHD to a sociologist at a US university. His response: “Children are different now. They don’t have patience. There are too many distractions. We have to operate from a new psychology.”

I asked him what that psychology was.

“Children are consumers. They pick and choose.”

I know how the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations torpedoed education in America. They cut off teachers and students from the history of the nation and the meaning of individual freedom.

What I’m talking about here is a different perversion. The unhinging of the young mind from any semblance of accomplishment and continuity. This goes far beyond the agenda of outfitting children to be worker-drones in a controlled society.

This is the induction of confusion and despair about what used to be called thinking. This is the imprinting of “gaps” that make it very hard for a person to operate, even as a drone.

In addition, if you seed children with all sorts of debilitating psychiatric drugs, you have a profound and dangerous mess that only dedicated parents can undo, one child at a time.

People may wish it weren’t so, but that doesn’t change the facts of the matter.

The upside is, when you explain a concept to a child, and you then take him through many exercises designed to help him understand that concept, he’ll achieve a victory.

Then you’ll see the lights go on in his mind.

And when education also includes getting children to use their imaginations broadly and widely and often—and you need a certain kind of teacher to accomplish THAT—you have independent, strong, adventurous, creative people, who aren’t controlled.

They don’t board other people’s trains and ride them to nowhere.

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

Jon Rappoport

The Pandemic Planners: Conversations in the Dark

Sep15

by Jon Rappoport

September 15, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

A SIGN LIGHTS UP: JULY 10, 2017.

Do we have a launch date set for the pandemic?

Looks like December of 2019, or January 2020.

I’m still confused about the virus.

There is no virus.

Why not?

We’re selling A STORY ABOUT A VIRUS—that’s a winner. That’s all we need.

How do we sell it? Won’t people catch on right away?

Are you kidding? Our people will develop a diagnostic test for the virus that isn’t there. How they build that test determines the outcome. It’ll register positive much of the time, along with some negatives. And here’s the important point: the technical details involved in constructing the PCR test are very dense. Even many professionals don’t understand them. It’s like speaking Icelandic to a South American tribe in the rain forest. Don’t worry, we’ll get away with it.

And the lockdowns? The quarantines?

They’ll come, trust me. The Chinese will start the ball rolling. They have the force to pull it off. They’ll lock down a few cities right away. Wuhan, for example. Maybe 60 million people. Overnight. It’ll be a startling development. The UN and the WHO will climb on board quickly and praise China for its handling of the crisis. China will become THE MODEL for the rest of the world. Other countries will follow suit.

Who is going to step forward in the West? Italy?

Yes. They’re next in line for big lockdowns. The Chinese regime has enormous clout with the Italian government. So Italy will become the first beachhead in the attack on the West.

America is the key. If they join the club, we’re in. How do we convince Trump to play along?

He’ll cave. We’ll feed him a computer projection of deaths in America. Something huge, like two million. Trump isn’t good with details. He’ll buy in.

But the lockdowns will decimate the US economy. Trump’s whole presidency rests on economic success.

He’ll give in to Fauci and Gates.

Why?

Because he doesn’t have the stomach for this battle. He won’t go up against the medical experts. He’s bold in some respects, but on this issue, he’s a wobbler. That’s our calculation.

The news media are ready?

With wall to wall messaging, 24/7. PANDEMIC. Cases. Deaths. There are no dissenters among them. We’ve got that all sewed up. Medical experts pontificating on-air. Fear.

Where will the deaths come from?

We’ll relabel and repackage all sorts of traditional lung infections and count them as “pandemic deaths.” We’ll label anything we want to “pandemic.” We’ll be counting the elderly, who die for all sorts of reasons. We’ll use treatments that kill the elderly.

I’m nervous about this. Will it really sell? I mean, how can they construct a PCR test if they don’t have a virus, if there is no virus?

It’s easy, trust me. We’ve done it before. Anyway, your part of the operation comes after the lockdowns. You’ve made a few hundred million doing business with China. You’ll be able to make a few BILLION soon, buying up distressed properties after the lockdowns gain traction.

I’m going to bankroll social justice movements. Protests, riots, burning, looting, assault, in major cities across America. It’s a terrific issue, and it’ll be a major distraction from the lockdowns.

I know all about that. I’m copied in on every aspect of the operation. Just make sure all those riots are focused on racism and police brutality. We don’t want any leakage about inner city gangs and drug cartels and banks.

No problem. The gangs distribute drugs for the cartels, the cartels wash their money through banks. It’s a tight fit. Nobody is going to prosecute the gangs as continuing criminal enterprises. That’s off the table completely. The protests will have no mention of gangs as a problem. We’ve got the foot soldier protestors all sewed up. Hell, some of them ARE gang members. Are you sure the 2020 presidential election is in the bag?

Biden is our man. We need someone with SEVERE cognitive deficits in the Oval Office. Only a completely dim bulb, mentally speaking, would sign some of the orders we’re going to put in front of him. Harris is being prepped to step in if Biden has to resign for health reasons. She knows enough of the score. She won’t try to go off on her own. Give her a whiff of the presidency and she’ll do somersaults for us.

Here’s the thing. Forget about Trump. The real danger is all the people who support him. The millions of deplorables out there. They still think the American Republic and freedom are on the table.

I agree. They’re a problem. But there are solutions. We’re going to put a label on all their heads. ‘They’re very bad people. They all want to destroy the government.’ That’s how we’re going to paint them. Our modelers believe there are enough Americans who are beholden to the federal government…they’ll view Trumpers as a serious threat. Very serious. We’ll have that issue covered.

Is the QAnon op going to keep going?

We’ll keep it going forever. After Trump leaves the White House, we’ll have people saying he’s still president and he’s arresting every high-level evil person in the world.

BLACKOUT

The lights come back up.

Wow, THAT was a hell of a dream—who are you?

Agent Jones. Federal Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

What are you doing in my bedroom?

I’ve been recording your dream.

What?

We have it all. Two pandemic planners. Why were you dreaming about them?

I have no idea. Who—

It reflects a certain state of mind. A dangerous mindset. Why weren’t you dreaming about a television show or a garden in the forest? Have you been reading conspiracy literature?

I read newspapers. WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?

Something in you must have triggered this dream. A psychological predisposition. A latent dissatisfaction.

I’m not dissatisfied.

That was not the dream of a normal man. Thoughts and dreams lead to conclusions, and conclusions lead to action.

I once had a dream about jumping off a building. I haven’t jumped.

Not yet.

Why are you here?

Checking up on a potential defector.

A defector from what?

What the rest of us know.

I’m like everybody else.

Everybody else doesn’t dream about a plan to make billions of dollars buying up distressed properties.

Is that a joke? I wouldn’t know where to start, even if I had that ambition. Which I don’t.

You start from where you are. A man with his thoughts. We need to explore your life thoroughly. You may have connections you’re unaware of. A distant relative. A casual acquaintance. Something may have slipped through the cracks.

I have to be at the office in a few hours. And I want to speak with a lawyer.

About your dream?

About you. This situation. Am I being charged with a crime?

No.

Then I’m free to—

You’re not free. Your status is “suspended, depending on outcome.”

What status?

Who told you Kamala Harris would cooperate in a plot to subvert the government?

No one.

Where did you get the idea that Biden is disabled?

Nowhere. It was a just a statement a man in my dream made. I wasn’t speaking at all. I was watching and listening.

I wouldn’t advise trying to deny responsibility. I didn’t have the dream. Your neighbor didn’t. You did.

Do you dream?

No.

Never?

The kind of dream you had was aberrant. What makes you think there’s going to be a pandemic and it’s some sort of plan?

Why do you care about my dream?

Because some fantasies are dangerous.

And some are meaningless.

The key is the content. You were constructing a conspiracy scenario. Do you have an opinion about viruses?

No.

I’m going to leave now. By tomorrow, you’ll wonder whether this conversation actually took place. If you reject my existence, think of this event as a warning from your subconscious.

What are you going to do?

You’re on a list.

Meaning what?

A more thorough background investigation. Increased surveillance.

Even while I’m asleep?

Listen carefully, sir. You’re always asleep. In the dream, you woke up for a minute or two.

BLACKOUT

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

Jon Rappoport

Metal particles in many vaccines; but don’t worry, line up and take your shots like happy little robots

Sep15

by Jon Rappoport

September 15, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

First, current news—Japan and the Moderna COVID vaccine. Fiercepharma reports:

“…another one million doses of the vaccine were suspended over concerns of possible contamination found in two additional vaccine lots…The material was determined to be metallic particles, Japan news outlet NHK reported last week. Last week, Japan suspended the use of 1.63 million doses.”

So that’s two separate suspensions of lots of the Moderna vaccine in Japan.

But this is just the beginning of the problem. Here is a piece I wrote more than a year ago, about a widely ignored study. The implications are staggering:

—Dangerous nanoparticles contaminating many vaccines; groundbreaking study—

“The Lung,” Second Edition, 2014: “Nanoparticles [are] comparable in size to subcellular structures…enabling their ready incorporation into biological systems.”

A 2017 study of 44 types of 15 traditional vaccines, manufactured by leading global companies, has uncovered a very troubling and previously unreported fact:

The vaccines are heavily contaminated with a variety of nanoparticles.

Many of the particles are metals.

We’re talking about traditional vaccines, such as HPV, flu, Swine Flu, Hepatitis B, MMR, DPT, tetanus, etc.

To begin to understand some of the destructive effects of contaminating nanoparticles in vaccines, here is the groundbreaking 2017 study:

International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination
Volume 4 Issue 1
January 23 2017
New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines:
Micro- and Nanocontamination
Antonietta M Gatti and Stefano Montanari

https://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/new-quality-control-investigations-on-vaccines-micro–and-nanocontamination.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20200604111734/https://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/new-quality-control-investigations-on-vaccines-micro–and-nanocontamination.html

“The analyses carried out show that in all samples checked vaccines contain non biocompatible and bio-persistent foreign bodies which are not declared by the Producers, against which the body reacts in any case. This new investigation represents a new quality control that can be adopted to assess the safety of a vaccine. Our hypothesis is that this contamination is unintentional, since it is probably due to polluted components or procedures of industrial processes (e.g. filtrations) used to produce vaccines…”

“The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. The inorganic particles identified are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means that they are biopersistent and can induce effects that can become evident either immediately close to injection time or after a certain time from administration. It is important to remember that particles (crystals and not molecules) are bodies foreign to the organism and they behave as such. More in particular, their toxicity is in some respects different from that of the chemical elements composing them, adding to that toxicity…they induce an inflammatory reaction.”

“After being injected, those microparticles, nanoparticles and aggregates can stay around the injection site forming swellings and granulomas…But they can also be carried by the blood circulation, escaping any attempt to guess what will be their final destination…As happens with all foreign bodies, particularly that small, they induce an inflammatory reaction that is chronic because most of those particles cannot be degraded. Furthermore, the protein-corona effect…due to a nano-bio-interaction…can produce organic/inorganic composite particles capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable way…It is impossible not to add that particles the size often observed in vaccines can enter cell nuclei and interact with the DNA…”

“In some cases, e.g. as occurs with Iron and some Iron alloys, they can corrode and the corrosion products exert a toxicity affecting the tissues…”

“Given the contaminations we observed in all samples of human-use vaccines, adverse effects after the injection of those vaccines are possible and credible and have the character of randomness, since they depend on where the contaminants are carried by the blood circulation. It is only obvious that similar quantities of these foreign bodies can have a more serious impact on very small organisms like those of children. Their presence in the muscles…could heavily impair the muscle functionality…”

“We come across particles with chemical compositions, similar to those found in the vaccines we analyzed, when we study cases of environmental contamination caused by different pollution sources. In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd as they have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring, for example, when waste is burnt. In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable medicament, let alone in vaccines, more in particular those meant for infants.”

This 2017 study opens up a whole new field: the investigation of nanoparticles in vaccines where none were expected.

Such particles are not medicine in any sense of the word.

Many legal and scientific “experts” assert the State has a right to mandate vaccines and force them on the population. But these contaminating nanoparticles are not vaccines or medicines. Only a lunatic would defend the right of the State to inject them.

Here is another section from the 2017 study. Trade names of vaccines, and compositions of the nanoparticle contaminants are indicated. Take a deep breath and buckle up:

“…further presence of micro-, sub-micro- and nanosized, inorganic, foreign bodies (ranging from 100nm to about ten microns) was identified in all cases [all 44 vaccines], whose presence was not declared in the leaflets delivered in the package of the product…”

“…single particles, cluster of micro- and nanoparticles (less than 100nm) and aggregates…debris of Aluminum, Silicon, Magnesium and Titanium; of Iron, Chromium, Silicon and Calcium particles…arranged in a cluster, and Aluminum-Copper debris…in an aggregate.”

“…the particles are surrounded and embedded in a biological substrate. In all the samples analyzed, we identified particles containing: Lead (Typhym, Cervarix, Agrippal S1, Meningitec, Gardasil) or stainless steel (Mencevax, Infarix Hexa, Cervarix. Anatetall, Focetria, Agrippal S1, Menveo, Prevenar 13, Meningitec, Vaxigrip, Stamaril Pasteur, Repevax and MMRvaxPro).”

“…particles of Tungsten identified in drops of Prevenar and Infarix (Aluminum, Tungsten, Calcium chloride).”

“…singular debris found in Repevax (Silicon, Gold, Silver) and Gardasil (Zirconium).”

“Some metallic particles made of Tungsten or stainless steel were also identified. Other particles containing Zirconium, Hafnium, Strontium and Aluminum (Vivotif, Meningetec); Tungsten, Nickel, Iron (Priorix, Meningetec); Antimony (Menjugate kit); Chromium (Meningetec); Gold or Gold, Zinc (Infarix Hexa, Repevax), or Platinum, Silver, Bismuth, Iron, Chromium (MMRvaxPro) or Lead,Bismuth (Gardasil) or Cerium (Agrippal S1) were also found. The only Tungsten appears in 8/44 vaccines, while Chromium (alone or in alloy with Iron and Nickel) in 25/44. The investigations revealed that some particles are embedded in a biological substrate, probably proteins, endo-toxins and residues of bacteria. As soon as a particle comes in contact with proteic fluids, a nano-bio-interaction…occurs and a ‘protein corona’ is formed…The nano-bio-interaction generates a bigger-sized compound that is not biodegradable and can induce adverse effects, since it is not recognized as self by the body.”

“…examples of these nano-bio-interactions. Aggregates can be seen (stable composite entities) containing particles of Lead in Meningitec… of stainless steel (Iron, Chromium and Nickel…) and of Copper, Zinc and Lead in Cervarix…Similar aggregates, though in different situations (patients suffering from leukemia or cryoglobulinemia), have already been described in literature.”

I’m sure you’ve read official assurances that vaccine-manufacturing problems are “rare.” You can file those pronouncements along with other medical lies.

“I’d like the heavy metal sandwich on rye, please. And instead of serving it on a plate, can you inject it?”

Several vital questions demanding answers spring from the findings of this 2017 study:

Are some of these nanoparticles intentionally placed in vaccines?

Does the standard manufacturing process for traditional vaccines INEVITABLY lead to dangerous and destructive nano-contamination?

New nano-technology is already being employed in vaccines—supposedly “improving effectiveness.” Does this manufacturing process carry with it the unavoidable effect of unleashing a hurricane of nanoparticle contaminants?

How many cases of childhood brain damage and autism can be laid at the door of nanoparticle contamination?

And finally, where are these contaminated vaccines manufactured? The above study did not attempt to discover this. It was outside the scope of the research. It’s common knowledge that, for example, in the case of the US, vaccines or their components, are, in many instances, not produced domestically. Where does this put control of safety? In, say, China, where there have been numerous pharmaceutical scandals connected to contamination of products?

The vaccine establishment does not show the slightest interest in answering any of these questions. They are busy pretending the questions don’t exist.

Trusting the establishment would be suicidal.

The Galactic Tribunal grills Bill Gates

Sep14

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

We don’t know how Bill Gates was transported to a Galactic proceeding, and we only have fragments of the interrogation. But because no court on Earth would deliver justice, those distant powers intervened.

A judge read an unusual opening statement, which apparently is presented before every trial:

“In our high civilization, we’ve fulfilled the ancient prophecy, THE LOST SHALL BE FOUND. There is no barrier between those of us who live here in the flesh and those most close to us who’ve departed this life. We experience joy with them in dimensions far greater than this. Why then do we bother to conduct these trials? Because we also fight for justice. We will not turn our backs on that ideal.”

FRAGMENT 1: …Mr. Gates, it’s time for the truth. How long did you plan the pandemic before launching it?

Why am I forced to tell the truth?

Because this is a place for conscience.

Will you torture me if I decline?

We’ll keep asking until you answer honestly, no matter how long it takes.

Who can I pay? I’m rich.

Denied. We don’t want money.

How about land? I can deliver you a large colony on Earth. A whole country. Maybe even Europe.

No.

I could create a medical system for you that would dazzle your minds. On Earth, the Nobel Committee should give me the Prize for my efforts, but they don’t have the balls. Did Melinda put you up to kidnapping me? I demand my rights…

FRAGMENT 2: …The pandemic narrative was simply the occasion for establishing a worldwide dictatorship?

We needed a pretext. There were many meetings over the course of 25 years. We decided early on that a medical story was our best option. It appears to be politically neutral.

On Earth, the modern religion is science.

Exactly. So if we could get out in front of that trend and create a medical scenario of threat and impending destruction, we could apply just enough coercion to control the population.

But you weren’t conducting real science.

We were inventing the appearance of it. We had so-called experts in our camp. They would take the lead. The masses have no way of distinguishing science from fantasy…

FRAGMENT 3: In the planning stage prior to the declaration of a pandemic, what were the vital elements?

I’m most proud of our messaging organization. We had the news media. We had government leaders. We had recognized medical experts. But you see, in that type of operation, you can’t afford defections. The seal has to be tight. Ours was. Over the years, through money, through influence, in some cases through threats, we had built a network of unity and compliance.

You’re proud, you say?

Why, yes. It took work. Much work. You don’t lock up all the key sources of information on a planet overnight.

So it was the message you were aiming for, rather than the truth.

Of course. There was no pandemic. We had to make it seem there was. Convincingly.

You were heading a sales force.

Exactly. The whole idea was to make the buying compulsory…

FRAGMENT 4: …You had planned the lockdowns?

Years in advance. Then, at the right moment, China pulled the trigger, setting the example. When my World Health Organization praised China, other nations followed suit and imprisoned their populations.

So the Chinese regime’s lockdowns were definitely part of the advance planning.

Yes. That was crucial. The government there wasn’t fully on board with the globalist future we set our sights on. China is, first and foremost, for China. But we had enough cooperation from them to make it work.

And social media? You had them on your side from the beginning?

That was easy. Their leaders are willing and compliant. They’re afraid to go against our medical consensus. And they’re globalists. In the long run, they want world government, too.

As do the controlled media?

Yes. Putting the right people in place in the news industry has been a decades-long proposition.

You wanted a planet that was a prison.

Yes.

And the pretext again?

The scenario? There is a deadly virus sweeping across Earth, and in order to stop it, we have to lock down countries…and then inject everyone with a vaccine.

But there was no virus?

Among us, there were arguments on both sides of that question. But if it existed, it certainly wasn’t any more dangerous than the flu. We had to make it seem very, very dangerous.

Through pronouncements to that effect.

Yes…

FRAGMENT 5: …You want depopulation?

We have to have it. You can’t run a planet when 8 billion people are living on it. It’s impossible. The vaccine is the weapon. But not just the COVID vaccine. Vaccines before it and those coming in the future.

And all those deaths will be laid at the door of pandemics?

Yes. “The virus did it.”

And you’re willing to murder all those people.

Hard choices dictate the outcomes of events. A better life for some, rather than a terrible life for all. That’s my choice.

Are you listening to yourself, Mr. Gates?

I always listen to myself.

FRAGMENT 6: …I want to return to the messaging effect you created. It’s difficult for us to understand how you managed it…why so many leaders in their fields went along with your false science.

It was a combination of things. Many people are true believers. Scientists talk, and they believe. Other people wanted money. We paid them money. Certain resistant politicians were threatened. We set an example with several assassinations. As you build a consensus, you reach a threshold where the tide is in your favor. Then people ride it with you, out of fear of excommunication if they don’t. Media leaders were given to understand that the pandemic was the gateway into a global governance system. And the system was inevitable.

What about Anthony Fauci?

He’s a little man, a striver, who wants to be accepted in elite circles. I recruited him a long time ago…

FRAGMENT 7: …You yourself have given much money to media companies.

I praised their work, gave them money, and they showed loyalty to me. You see, life runs on stimulus-response. I make use of that principle on a worldwide basis. My colleagues and I provide calculated stimuli, and the population, in all areas of life, responds as we predict.

You view humans as machines.

Well, they are.

But you and your colleagues aren’t.

We’re of a higher order. We can stand outside stimulus-response and operate the levers.

As you sit here, Mr. Gates, you don’t believe you’re confessing to crimes. You’re proud of what you’ve done.

Of course.

Listen to me carefully now. We know enough of what you are, in order to pass sentence on you. But we know a great more than that. Like every individual, you have a greater dimension. We could show it to you. We could compel you to experience it. If we did, you would come apart at the seams. You would understand your own evil actions in a way that is undeniable.

…I don’t like the sound of that. What are you talking about?

I think you have an inkling of what I mean. The experience we could compel you to have is one you yourself, on your own, will come face to face with, some day. Not in your present life. Afterwards, at some point. There is no telling when, but it will happen.

You mean some supposed higher power will force it on me?

No, Mr. Gates. It’s much worse than that. You’ll force it on yourself.

Why would I do that?

Because although you’ve embraced crime and destruction, somewhere inside yourself you also understand The Good. And in that understanding, you can potentially live in joy and peace. As anyone can.

You’re not making sense.

You’re beginning to see I am making sense.

I don’t like this.

Why would you like it, given what you’ve made of your life and lives of others?

You’re trying to pass off some kind of religious nonsense on me.

Far from it. We don’t have churches in this place, Mr. Gates. We don’t need faith in things unseen. We’ve already seen.

I want to go home.

You will.

You’re not going to kill me?

So you can blame us for what you’re doing to yourself?

You’re insane.

We’ve opened up just a bit of light here for you.

Why?

Because although we’re a just people and don’t need justice for ourselves, we will exercise it on behalf of others, who’ve been harmed.

This is ridiculous.

Even the worst murderers have it in themselves to become good. They can cross that bridge.

No they can’t.

We can hear voices, Mr. Gates. Many voices are telling us to put you to death.

Then why don’t you? Go ahead.

We’re doing something much worse. We’re imposing this sentence…YOUR FATE IS IN YOUR OWN HANDS. That sentence is real. It carries weight. As you’ll discover.

It’s meaningless.

Take Mr. Gates away. He’s about to become ill. Take him home…

You don’t have the courage to kill me. You’re cowards.

I’ve heard that refrain from hundreds of murderers in this court…they all want a quick death. We don’t give it to them…

Kill me.

Take him home.

You did something to my mind.

We heard your confession of crimes. Mass imprisonment and murder.

Then destroy me. I throw myself on the mercy of this court.

Goodbye, Mr. Gates.

This is just a dream.

If it is, it’s your dream. You have to ask why you’re presenting it to yourself…

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

Jon Rappoport

In case you thought the PCR test detects an actual virus…wrong

Sep14

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

In a CDC document titled, “Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) 2020 Interim Case Definition, Approved April 5, 2020,” [1] under the section, “Laboratory Criteria,” we have this:

“Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ribonucleic acid (SARS-CoV-2 RNA) in a clinical or autopsy specimen using a molecular amplification test.”

The test referred to is the PCR. And as you can plainly see, it is detecting, not the virus itself, but a piece of RNA.

A piece of RNA ASSUMED to come from the virus, SARS-CoV-2.

I say ASSUMED because, where is the actual virus? Where is the virus isolated from all surrounding material?

If you don’t have an isolated specimen of the virus, you can’t say, with any degree of certainty at all, that you have a piece of it (the RNA).

As I’ve described many times [2], “isolated” is a term that is tortured by researchers, so that it means just the opposite of what it is supposed to mean.

Numerous studies that claim the virus has been isolated actually turn out to mean: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. The soup contains various types of animal and humans cells, toxic chemicals and drugs, and other genetic material. The virus is completely surrounded, but it is there. We know this, because some of the cells are dying, and this dying must be the result of infection with the virus…”

This argument not only turns the definition of “isolation” on its head, it reveals, upon a moment’s consideration, that the dying of the cells could come from the action of the toxic chemicals and drugs; and on top of that, the cells are being starved of nutrients, so they could be dying as a result of that deprivation.

Therefore, to say “the virus must be in the soup in the dish in the lab” because is killing cells…well, this is completely unproven, and therefore…

There is no reason under the sun to claim that the virus is there in the soup at all.

Hence, the claim that the PCR test is detecting a piece of RNA from the virus is unwarranted. Because, again…where is the virus? Where is the truly isolated virus?

Nowhere.

And on that basis alone, the PCR test is irrelevant, useless, and deceptive.

It is set up to look for and detect a piece of RNA material that has never been proved to come from this un-isolated phantom ASSUMPTION, called “SARS-CoV-2.”

A few more moments of clear thought, and you realize the whole string of “science” that leads to the lockdowns and the economic devastation is not science at all.

It is what is called, in the intelligence community, a cover story. A story launched to justify crimes.

In this case, capital crimes against humanity.

SOURCES:

[1] https://ndc.services.cdc.gov/case-definitions/coronavirus-disease-2019-2020-08-05/

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/04/21/isolation-of-sars-cov-2-refuted-in-step-by-step-analysis-of-claim/

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Covid

Pandemics are staged on Television

Wuhan: back to the beginning, where the whole fraud started; buried revelations

The failure to prove the virus exists

How the CIA hid their MKULTRA mind-control program

The real “lab-leak” story: nanotech crimes and betrayals in the New World Order

The vaccinated sheep are being taken for a ride; how long before they jump off the train? Never?

The Pandemic Planners: Conversations in the Dark

Metal particles in many vaccines; but don’t worry, line up and take your shots like happy little robots

The Galactic Tribunal grills Bill Gates

In case you thought the PCR test detects an actual virus…wrong