EVEN WHEN PEOPLE WAKE UP THEY DON’T WAKE UP

 

EVEN WHEN PEOPLE WAKE UP, THEY DON’T WAKE UP

by Jon Rappoport

October 20, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

An old professor of mine once told me that the purpose of learning was to “escape.”

 

He said that insight was the experience which would lead you beyond a system that was trapping your mind.

 

He gave a very interesting informal lecture to a group of us about the dawning age of science. He put us at the threshold of the great change, when people began to realize that science was real, that it worked.

 

So,” he said, “imagine you’re living then. You absorb some of this new scientific method, and the more you think about it, the more you see that superstition is a skin you can shed. It’s quite a discovery.

 

You track this new thing called science, you roll it around in your mind, you grasp what the experimental method is, and you suddenly break through. You reach a new level. You don’t need all those superstitious habits anymore. You can look with clearer eyes.

 

At that point, you’re awake. I hope you understand this is the purpose of learning, to make that breakthrough. That’s why learning is a serious thing. It’s not just a game.”

 

Fifteen years later, spurred by several articles on American politics, and some comments from an American original, Karl Hess, I came to one of those threshold moments: If people on the political right moved far enough to the right, they’d see the insanity of big government and its embrace with big corporations. If people on the left moved far enough to the left, they’d see that big government and its corporate partners were solidly and unalterably against individual freedom.

 

And then, those people who had gone far enough in their chosen left or right directions “would meet around the back of the barn.” I believe this was a phrase Karl Hess used.

 

At that moment, the whole left-right division crumbled in my mind.

 

I was “out of the system.”

 

To one degree or another, in one way or another, many Americans catch a glimpse or a full-on view of this false political dichotomy. When they do, they wake up.

 

Then comes an election season. Two actors take the stage and run for president.

 

The veil that was lifted drops again. The people who woke up go back to sleep. The freedom of escaping the system now looks dangerous. “This time,” in this election, the issues are just too important. Sitting on the sidelines is not an option. And so on and so forth.

 

If there were a few hundred thousand citizens packed together at the back of the barn, their ranks quickly thin out. People flee so they can vote for one of the two actors.

 

They re-enroll in the system.

 

I thought I wanted freedom. But now I realize how foolish that was.”

 

Here is my image: there are three men on a modest boat at sea. A lefty, a righty, and a neutral. Things seem to be going well. It’s a nice cruise. The boat keeps slowing down, but not to worry. It’s still moving, and the weather’s fine.

 

Then one morning, just after breakfast, the neutral is walking on the deck and he sees…something different. In a second, he realizes what he’s seeing has been this way since the outset of the trip, only now, for the first time, he’s noticing it.

 

The lefty is chopping holes in the boat with an ax. So is the righty.

 

The neutral begins yelling. He tries to take the axes out of the hands of these lunatics, but he isn’t strong enough.

 

Finally, the lefty and the righty stop chopping and come over to him. They begin talking in reasonable voices. They tell him that the boat is in danger, yes, but not for the reasons he, the neutral, believes.

 

No, the lefty is the problem. No, the righty is the problem. They tell him there is a very serious debate here, and he, the neutral, has to choose sides, because the survival of all three of them is at stake. That’s the true situation.

 

In other words, “for the good of all,” the neutral has to reject what he was just seeing with his own eyes. There was no chopping. There were no axes. Water isn’t pouring into the boat.

 

Hmm, the neutral thinks. There are two of them and there is one of me. They are the majority. Nothing can change that. Two against one.

 

But the two of them are opposed to each other. I have to cast the deciding vote. I have a grave and important responsibility.”

 

The neutral was awake, but he didn’t wake up.

 

So he goes back to sleep, and in his haze he listens the arguments of the lefty and the righty. At first, they sound like gibberish. He struggles to make sense of them.

 

Eventually, he figures out why their assertions seem so garbled. He’s seeing into their true character, and he can separate what they’re saying from their actual intentions. He can see the deception. He can watch the words float by like absurd little balloons.

 

So, accepting his new responsibility, the neutral shuts down that part of his own perception that can assess character. He turns it off. Instead, he just concentrates on the words.

 

That’s better. Now the words have some degree of meaning. He can “score” them. He can put THESE words into THIS category and THOSE words into THAT category. Better.

 

Yes. Much better.

 

Of course, the neutral doesn’t notice that his eyes are closed and he’s snoring. He doesn’t register that. As water continues to pour into the boat, he’s hearing the words and he finds them interesting, even intriguing.

 

He believes he’s getting a grip on what politics are all about.

 

The whole point of emerging from the hypnotic tunnel of deception is to stay emerged. That’s called progress. To go back and hide in same tunnel is counter-productive, to say the least. It’s self-induced narcosis.

 

For millenia, what we now call the controlled media have brought populations under their spell and put them into a trance that defines reality. For the first time in the history of planet, we are seeing new truth-telling media come to the fore in an explosive way.

 

WE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE OVERALL EFFECT OF WAKING UP WILL BE, BECAUSE IT’S NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE ON THIS SCALE.

 

One thing is certain. The old ways of creating positive action, based on the truth, are changing.

 

It’s up to people everywhere to imagine new ways and implement them. Imagination is another item which has been put in the deep-freeze for a long time. It is thawing.

 

Don’t assume that knowing the truth is paralyzing. It’s only paralyzing if you can’t invent ways to use it. Don’t wait around for a message to float out of the clouds. Don’t say, “But now that I’m awake, what do I do?” That’s a close cousin to surrender, and it’s a precursor to going back to sleep.

 

Don’t whine, don’t complain. INVENT. IMAGINE. CREATE.

 

Conceive of innovative ways by which you can effectively take this emerging consciousness/truth/wakefulness and make it work.

 

This isn’t the old model, where you sit around and hope someone will come up with a really great idea. This isn’t I’M A VICTIM, TELL ME HOW TO SAVE THE WORLD. This isn’t any of that crap.

 

This is going light years beyond watching two phony clowns on television telling you why they should be president.

 

Jon Rappoport

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

Once when we were free

Once when we were free

by Jon Rappoport

October 15, 2012

NoMoreFakeNews.com

We’re so much more sensible now. We don’t live our lives as much as we arrange them and organize them. B follows A. D follows C. We take our medicine and our shots because the doctor says so.

We’re careful, because accidents happen.

We don’t say what’s on our minds a lot of the time, because other people might pass that on, and who knows? We might get into trouble.

But once upon a time, when we were young, we were free. We didn’t take any shots and when we got sick we recovered. We were stronger than kids are now. We didn’t ask for much protection and we weren’t given much, and we survived.

There was no talk about the needs of the group. When we went to school, we weren’t told about ways we could help others. That was something we learned at home. We weren’t taught about The Planet. Instead, we learned to mind our own business, and it wasn’t considered a crime.

When we played games, adults weren’t hovering or coaching every move we made. We found places to play on our own, and we figured it all out. There were winners and losers. There were no plastic trophies. We played one game, then another. We lost, we won. We competed. Losing wasn’t a tragedy.

There were no childhood “conditions” like ADHD or Bipolar, and we certainly didn’t take any brain drugs. The idea of a kid going to a psychiatrist would have been absurd.

People were who they were. They had lives. They had personalities. They had eccentricities, and we lived with that.

There was far less whispering and gossip. There were fewer cliques. Kids didn’t display their possessions like signs of their identity. A kid who did was ignored, even shunned.

Kids never acted like little adults. They didn’t dress like adults. They didn’t want to be fake adults.

Our parents didn’t consult us about what we wanted. We weren’t part of the decision-making process. They didn’t need us for that.

We weren’t “extra-special.” We weren’t delicate.

No one asked us about our feelings. If they had, we would have been confused. Feelings? What’s that? We were alive. We knew it. We didn’t need anything else.

We could spot liars a mile away. We could spot phonies from across town. We knew who the really crazy adults were, and we stayed away from them.

We didn’t need gadgets and machines to be happy. We only needed a place to play. If you wanted a spot to be alone, you found one, and you read a book.

There was no compulsion to “share.”

School wasn’t some kind of social laboratory or baby-sitting service. We were there to learn, and if we worked hard, we did. Teachers knew how to teach. The textbooks were adequate. Whether the books were new or old didn’t matter.

Kids weren’t taught how to be little victims.

Sex was a private issue. You were taught about that at home or not at all. You certainly didn’t learn about it in school. That would have been ridiculous.

Some of us remember being young, and now, we still have that North Star. We still don’t take our shots and medicines. We still don’t take every word a doctor says as coming from God. We still know losing isn’t a crime or an occasion for tragic theater.

We still know how to be alone. We still think gossip and cliques are for morons. We still feel free. We still want to live, and we do.

We still resent intrusion on our freedom, and we speak up and draw the line. We still like winning and competing. We still like achieving on our own.

We can spot self-styled messiahs at a hundred yards.

As kids, we lived in our imaginations, and we haven’t forgotten how. It’s part of who and what we are.

We aren’t bored every twelve seconds. We can find things to do.

We don’t need reassurances every day. We don’t need people hovering over us. We don’t need to whine and complain to get attention. We don’t need endless amounts of “support.”

We don’t need politicians who lie to us constantly, who pretend we’re stupid. We don’t need ideology shoved own our throats. Our ideology is freedom. We know what it is and what it feels like, and we know no one gives it to us. It’s ours to begin with. We can throw it away, but then that’s on us.

If two candidates are running for office, and we don’t like either one, we don’t vote. We don’t need to think about that very hard. It’s obvious. Two idiots, two criminals? Forget it. Walk away.

We don’t fawn, we don’t get in other people’s way. We don’t think “children are the future.” Every generation is a new generation. It always has been. We don’t need to inject some special doctrine to pump up children. We remember what being a child is. That’s enough.

When we were kids, there was no exaggerated sense of loyalty. We were independent. Now, we see what can be accomplished in the name of obligation, group-cohesion, and loyalty: crimes; imperial wars; destruction of natural rights.

It didn’t take a village to raise a kid when we were young, and it doesn’t take one now. That’s all propaganda. It panders to people who are afraid to be what they are, who are afraid to stand up for themselves.

We don’t feel it’s our duty to cure every ill in the world. But it goes a lot further than that. We can see what that kind of indoctrination creates. It creates the perception of endless numbers of helpless victims. And once that’s firmly entrenched, then magically, the endless parade of victims appears, ready-made. When some needs have been met, others are born. The lowest form of hustlers sell those needs from here to the sky and beyond. They make no distinction between people who really can use help and those who are just on the make.

We didn’t grow up that way. We don’t fall for the con now.

When we were kids, the number of friends we had didn’t matter. We didn’t keep score. Nobody kept track of the count. That would have been recognized in a second as a form of insanity.

As kids, we didn’t admire people simply because other people admired them. That was an unknown standard.

We were alive. That was enough. We were free. That was enough.

It still is.

When we were young, we had incredible dreams. We imagined the dreams and imagined accomplishing them. Some of us still do. Some of us still work in that direction. We haven’t given up the ghost just because the world is mad.

The world needs to learn what we know. We don’t need to learn what the world has been brainwashed into believing.

Jon Rappoport

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

MIND FREEDOM, MIND BEAUTY

 

MIND FREEDOM, MIND BEAUTY

By Jon Rappoport

September 27, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Official science doesn’t really care about your experience or perception. It cares about its own paradigm.

 

That paradigm, in order to work, excludes your subjective knowledge.

 

Two basic questions are eliminated from scientific exploration: what is freedom and what is mind?

 

A strange embrace among the fields of psychology, psychiatry, and academic philosophy has blocked an understanding of the mind.

 

Prior to 1970, the discipline of psychology considered several interesting models of mind. Then, psychiatry, struggling to survive in the face of declining public interest, hatched a staggering deal with the pharmaceutical empire.

 

Drug companies would bankroll the profession of psychiatry as never before. Conferences, research grants, journals, professorships, advertising, PR—money would pour in.

 

On their part, psychiatric researchers would be obliged to publish studies that “proved” all mental disorders stemmed from chemical imbalances in the brain; these imbalances could be remedied by new drugs. Naturally, Pharma would develop and sell such drugs.

 

From that moment on, adventurous theories about mind went begging. As far as “science” was concerned, mind was nothing more than the brain. A severely limited materialist view of human life moved solidly to center stage.

 

It was soon bolstered by a new generation of computer devotees, who assumed that mind was merely an apparatus that functioned on the basis of hardware/software applications—and any notions of individual freedom were possibly delusions “built into the equipment” or bugs that needed to be found and scrubbed away.

 

It was assumed that only “professionals” had the necessary tools to investigate the mind, and anything a layperson might discover or say about the subject was as important as a street sweeper speculating on nuclear physics.

 

As a student of philosophy at Amherst College in the late 1950s, I was exposed to a series of sophistries that attempted to skirt the whole question of individual freedom, substituting instead two major premises:

 

Human beings could only know what they could see with their eyes and measure; it was permissible to continue talking about freedom as if it existed, but this permission was simply an acknowledgment that language consisted of all sorts of quirky habits, and it might be useful to catalog those quirks, like sub-species of butterflies, as long as one didn’t take their meaning seriously.

 

I wasn’t pleased by either of these admonitions. I’d entered the field of philosophy because I felt freedom was a vital thing, and I sensed it was being attacked on many fronts.

 

As I wended my way through college, I became aware of the odd fact that, while the philosophy department was doing all it could to avoid squarely facing the issue of individual freedom, the political science department was assigning students original-source material on the founding of the American Republic.

 

This material (the Declaration, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers), of course, was deeply engaged in establishing freedom as an incontrovertible principle.

 

When I inquired about the obvious contradiction at the College, I was told it was “one of those inter-departmental differences” that was unavoidable. After all, what should political scientists do? Teach nothing about freedom?

 

As a young and inexperienced student, 50-plus years ago, I thought perhaps a professor in the psychology department might be able to clear up the confusion.

 

A practicing therapist on campus fielded my questions and said, “Freedom really isn’t our issue. We want to understand how the mind operates.” He went on to say that the goal of therapy was “happiness and adjustment.”

 

That pretty much ended my adventure of learning in college. Fortunately, life isn’t college.

 

Three years after I left Amherst, I was living in Los Angeles, and I had a small studio where I was painting. One night (and I can see this very clearly), I was sitting at my table. There was a piece of blank paper in front of me. To my left, there was a box of oil crayons. I was looking at the sheet of paper, wondering what I might draw on it, when suddenly, and for no discernible reason, I knew that I had the freedom to draw anything.

 

Sounds silly. But this was not an intellectual observation. Of course I or anyone else can draw anything. That isn’t news. No, this was something much deeper and more expansive. It was as if some interior space, in my mind, a space I’d never realized existed before, made its presence known. And the essence and core of that space was freedom. Was liberation. Was an unbounded and direct knowing about freedom. That space imparted to me one of the most immediate feelings of freedom I’ve ever had. It was luxurious and adventurous and intensely exhilarating. And it came out of nowhere.

 

The feeling lasted for about a minute, and then it slowly faded away. Ever since that moment, I’ve remembered that, whenever politicians or their allies are obviously trying to discount or dump freedom, when they are trying to sell some substitute, when they are raising some phony banner under which we’re all supposed to march toward our collective destiny…I’ve remembered that freedom is REAL and it has to be defended. To do otherwise would betray a fantastic quality of the space we call Mind.

 

I’ve also known that freedom isn’t just an effect of a cause, like one billiard ball moving into a pocket after being hit by another ball; it isn’t one electron being kicked by another electron. If freedom can be said to be anywhere, it’s behind all the cause-and-effect activity of matter and energy. Freedom isn’t just another event in a long chain of events; it’s free.

 

Obviously, I don’t know what your experience of freedom has been. But I’d be willing to bet that, as a child, you had moments and even hours where, perhaps, playing in a field or on the street, you realized you were free and alive and something apart from any restricted, pinched, limited existence.

 

The feelings you felt were enormous and ecstatic. You understood, at a level no one could challenge, what life was about.

 

And yet, this is nowhere reflected in the approved studies of psychiatry, psychology, or academic philosophy. It’s discounted as “anecdotal” and spurious and even delusional.

 

Having a tremendous and stunning experience of freedom might qualify you for psychiatric help. It appears we’re heading in that direction.

 

These days, many mainstream brain researchers will insist that freedom is nothing more than a “thought generated by brain activity,” no more important than any other thought.

 

If you’re looking to explain how technocrats can possibly envision a world in which humans are only cogs in a machine, you’ve found the answer. These scientists refuse to admit that freedom is real. As bizarre as this sounds, it’s true. To them we’re all already cogs in a machine. They just want to change the arrangement, the configuration of parts.

 

You see, and this is where philosophy pokes its head into the fray, to say that freedom is real is to acknowledge that it lies beyond all formulations and theories of cause and effect. And such a confession would torpedo the authoritarian and privileged status of modern science.

 

No, you say, this couldn’t be true, everybody knows that freedom exists. Everybody knows that you can choose A or B. You can make decisions about your future. I’m sorry to say, not everybody knows this—and the disturbing thing is, the people who are doing the most advanced research on the brain, the kind of research that could shape and fence in our future world, quite definitely do not know freedom exists.

 

Freedom and “mind independent of the brain” are, to them, maddening little questions they want to get rid of. They want to sweep them under the carpet. They want to chart and map every possible action of the brain and then, inevitably, make those changes in it they deem proper “for the good of All.”

 

So, first on the list of things I would recommend is, take inventory of your own experience. Remember moments when, beyond your normal level of daily consciousness, you experienced freedom directly and powerfully. No filters. No intellectual assumptions. Just undeniable encounters.

 

Why? Because you need to know what you are defending when you defend freedom against attack. Yes, freedom is the right to choose your life. Yes, it’s the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Yes, it’s all those assertions in the Bill of Rights. Yes, the Constitution delineates what the central government can and can’t do. Yes, we know that. But then there is YOU. There is your existence. There is your experience of freedom. Those times, those moments when you felt it so strongly you were thrilled to your core to be alive.

 

That is natural freedom. That is mind freedom. That is why the founding documents of the Republic have any meaning. They flow from something that is already there, in each one of us. A potential that is already there.

 

And if you forget that, you defend freedom for an incomplete reason.

 

I knew a man in his late forties whose life was a complete mess. This was a man you wouldn’t want to be around. He somehow managed to turn every conversation and situation in his life into an unsolvable problem. He annoyed everyone he came into contact with. He was one of those “difficult people,” and his life was falling apart at the seams. He couldn’t hold a job for more than a few months. His bosses would fire him for any reason they could. Anything to get him out the door. He was a classic self-created victim.

 

In an act of desperation, he went on a vegetarian diet, without really believing it would do any good. It didn’t. He persisted for a month or two, and then he scraped together enough money to go to a spa where he could stay for two weeks and do yoga and fast on fruits and vegetables.

 

In his second week at the spa, he was walking from yoga class to his room, and suddenly, as he told me, he “felt his body was well-oiled and elastic.” He felt as if he were 10 years old again, on summer vacation from school, with unbounded possibilities stretching out in front of him.

 

In a matter of moments, his entire framework of unending complaints vanished without a trace. It left no residue in its wake. He could clearly contemplate what he most wanted to do with his life, and he could see his way to achieving it. His sense of grappling with a bottomless inscrutable problem was gone.

 

This feeling lasted a few days. But even after it dissolved, he was positioned in a new way. He dropped his “whole act,” as he put it. He went on to launch a career, and he made it a success.

 

A bookish woman in her 30s, who had never worked at a job she enjoyed, decided to sell cars. She got a job at a dealership in Southern California, and after a month she was coming up empty on sales. She saw no chance of breaking through.

 

Her manager pulled her into his office and suggested she try something a little easier. He helped get her a job in a large store selling home appliances.

 

Her first day at the store, she swore to herself she would do more to connect with prospective customers. She would treat them “as if they were real people,” she said. Forgetting about landing immediate sales, she made a herculean effort to “climb out of her cave” and chat with people in the store.

 

After two days, she felt a surge of energy, as if she’d come alive in a new way. For the first time in memory, she was relating to strangers.

 

The feeling lasted for a month, during which she incidentally racked up many sales. She described her state of mind as “completely open and free,” as if she’d cracked through a barrier.

 

She quit her job, enrolled at a college, and eventually got her degree in architecture.

 

I tell these stories because, in each case, the experience of freedom was intense and life-changing, and because the people came to it in radically different ways.

 

Freedom exists.

 

It can be drawn out of hiding. It can be felt beyond any structure or pattern, and it most certainly doesn’t depend on permission granted by a government or Official Science.

 

One can’t explain these experiences by citing specific brain activity. Freedom isn’t a brain phenomenon. It isn’t a delusion. One might say the reverse: everything except freedom is a delusion or the result of oppression.

 

People tend to believe the mind is either a trap or a “device” for thinking. It can certainly be those things, but it is also a gateway into freedom.

 

Mind is a kind of space dotted with familiar outposts we visit. Each outpost is a collection of feelings, ideas, preferences, and aversions. We move from one outpost to another, looking for a way out, a way to go beyond our present state.

 

Then, something unforeseen happens. On our way to a particular outpost for the thousandth time, we make a detour, and we arrive at a spot that contains of none of those feelings, ideas, preferences, or aversions. Instead, we are in a gorgeously empty place. And being there, we experience a joy that expands. We experience ourselves in a natural state.

 

We know we are free.

 

Everyone is entitled and equipped to explore what this means because, after all, we aren’t simply talking about a generalized notion; we’re talking about intimate knowledge of what we are.

 

This is not the province of science. It’s the wide open territory of self. It’s more real than real.

 

We can become discouraged. We can become cynical. We can lower our expectations and options. But we can’t ultimately avoid what we are. Coming to grips with that is our destiny, as much as motion is the destiny of the body.

 

The elites who, increasingly, run this planet long ago abandoned any search for their own freedom as individuals. They falsely believe they’re already there. That’s what they keep telling themselves, and that’s why they feel compelled to control everything they can. Control is a substitute for freedom. It’s a false card in the deck. It’s the iron mask that hides the truth. It’s a drug that can induce amnesia about the existence of freedom. It’s the ultimate expression of self-denial.

 

Before psychiatry, brain research, and pharmaceutical empire-building crowded out truly independent research on the mind, there were two great 20th-century psychologists. They both understood freedom and sought it with stunning intensity. Wilhelm Reich, a breakaway student of Freud, was arrested and put in jail, where he died. JL Moreno, the founder of Psychodrama, was largely ignored by the Freudians coming into power.

 

In his autobiography, Moreno recounts a 1912 encounter: “I attended one of Freud’s lectures…As the students filed out, he singled me out from the crowd and asked me what I was doing. I responded, ‘Well, Dr. Freud, I start where you leave off…You analyze [patients’] dreams. I give them the courage to dream again…’”

 

The dream is about freedom. Experiencing it. Creating a life from it.

 

Taking instructional cues from media about what emotions we are supposed to invest and project into images (mass mind control), we discover that the list of emotions is rather short. It’s stunted. Not only are we supposed to respond with these feelings, we’re all taught we have to “share” them. If we don’t, we’re looked at as strange, as outsiders.

 

But when we experience freedom directly, we immediately realize such feelings are misplaced. They’re props in a bad play. What we feel when we are standing in the middle of our own freedom is beyond labels. It’s another level of mind. Perhaps it’s beyond mind entirely.

 

In the old stories of Zen masters, we find teachers who put irrational pressures on students until the “catalog of familiar emotional outposts” in their minds blew apart. At that moment, the students experienced “satori,” which roughly means “seeing into one’s true nature.”

 

What is that nature? Is it a particular thing, a prior established thing…or is it really freedom?

 

If it’s freedom, then the world suddenly appears as unending possibility.

 

Isn’t that what we really want? Isn’t that part and parcel of what we remember, when we reflect on past moments when we felt truly alive?

 

There is nothing esoteric about this. It is stripping off a layer of fabricated synthetic substance, and finding underneath the ecstatic energy that was always there, waiting for us to return from our long strange trip.

 

Our nature is to be free.

 

Jon Rappoport

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

www.nomorefakenews.com

The basis of mass mind control

The basis of mass mind control

by Jon Rappoport

September 18, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

It’s so simple. And everybody knows it.

Mass mind control focuses on two elements: image and feeling.

By linking the two primary elements, it is possible to short-circuit thought and “cut to the chase,” when it comes to enlisting the allegiance of huge populations.

Two seemingly unrelated events spurred my interest in mass mind control.

On the evening of April 12, 1945, I listened to a radio report on the death of Franklin D Roosevelt. I was seven years old.

I became upset. I didn’t know why. I was angry at my own reaction.

Forty years later, I pulled into a gas station near my apartment in West Los Angeles. I got out of my car and took the cap off my gas tank. I looked to my right and saw Tony Curtis sitting in his car. I was shocked.

A few days later, I began making notes under the heading of “image-emotion cues.” At the time, I had just started working as a reporter, writing articles for LA Weekly. I knew next to nothing about mind control, MKULTRA, Soviet psychiatric gulags, Chinese re-education programs, or US psychological warfare operations.

But because I had been painting for 25 years, I knew something about the power of images.

I remembered my first exhibition of paintings in LA, at my friend Hadidjah Lamas’ house. We had hung my work in her large living room and dining room. Hadidjah had enlisted the services of a friend who had videotaped me painting in my studio, and at the exhibition she set up a television set out on her patio and continuously played the videocassette.

People came through her front door, almost automatically walked through the house to the patio, as if guided by an unseen hand, and watched the video; then they came back inside and looked at the paintings.

They would stop at a painting and say: “That picture was in the video!” “ You see that one? It was in his studio!”

My first note on “image-emotion cues” was, “Investing an image with importance. Projecting emotion into an image.”

Projecting emotion into a newspaper image of the president, FDR. Projecting emotion into the screen image of Tony Curtis. Projecting emotion into a video of a painter working in his studio.

When people encounter an image, when they invest it with importance, they project feeling into the image—and this all happens in a private sphere, a private space.

If this didn’t happen, there would be no way to control populations through images. It wouldn’t work. It all starts with a person setting up his own personal feedback loop that travels from him to an image and back again.

Coming out of World War 2, US psychological warfare operatives knew they could turn their skills to political purposes. They had just succeeded in making Americans believe that all Japanese and German people were horribly evil. They had been able to manipulate imagery successfully in that area. Why couldn’t they shape America’s view of a whole planet that lay beyond personal experience?

They could and they did. But the power to do that emanated from the fact that every person invests images with feeling. That’s where it really starts.

I had seen the 1957 film, Sweet Smell of Success, a number of times. I admired it. Burt Lancaster and Tony Curtis gave tremendous performances. When, decades later, I saw Curtis sitting in his car at that gas station, I was “working from” the emotion I had invested in his onscreen image. It produced a sense of shock and paralysis for a few seconds.

Other people might have rushed up to Curtis and asked for his autograph. With me, it was shock, cognitive dissonance. Ditto for the death of FDR. I was working off newspaper pictures I’d seen of him, and the feeling I’d invested in those presidential images. Other people, when FDR died, went out into the street and hugged their neighbors and wept openly. For me, it was upset and shock and anger.

There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with investing emotion in images. It can be exhilarating. It can be uplifting. As a painter, I know this in spades. Putting emotion into images can, in fact, vault you into a different perception of reality.

But on the downside, it can also take you into lockstep with what media operatives want you to experience, second-hand.

We focus to such a degree on how we are being manipulated that we don’t stop to consider how we are participating in the operation. And our own role is clear and stark: we invest images with feeling.

So how does one individual’s projection of feeling into an image become a uniform projection of the same feeling into one image, by millions of people? How does what one person invests privately become mass mind control?

Through external instruction or cues.

Why does this work? Why do millions of people fall into line?

Because they don’t realize they started the whole ball rolling themselves. All they know is: images are connected to feelings.

If they knew they were the real power in the whole operation, if they knew they were investing feelings into images all day long, if they could actually slow down enough to see how they do this….then they would be far less prone to taking instruction about what feelings they “ought to” invest in second-hand images.

Hypnotherapist Jack True unceremoniously put it to me this way: “If a dog could analyze how he got from eating meat to drooling at the sound of a bell that came at feeding time, he could stop drooling.”

I would add: If Chris Matthews could analyze how his own voluntary investment of feeling in the image of Barack Obama sends a tingle up his leg, he could stop tingling.

We’re now seeing images of people rioting all over the Middle East. We’re seeing burning flags and crowds outside embassies. We’re supposed to invest our own anger into those images. Outrage.

We see an image of miles of flat farmland and wheat waving in the breeze. We’re supposed to invest that image with feelings of happiness and pride.

Nowhere are we told we can back up a step and realize that we are the ones who begin the whole process, by projecting feelings into images. Any images.

Imagine a thought-experiment. You’re watching your computer screen. It holds an image of a tall blue vase. With purpose, you project the feeling of joy into the vase. Then you project the feeling of disgust. Then, fear. Then, worry. Then, pleasure…on purpose.

The objective is to gain some measure of consciousness about an unconscious process.

When I was 19, I was sent to a trained expert in New York to take a Rorschach (ink-blot) Test. I was displaying signs of what would now be called Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

The expert said he wanted me to tell him everything I saw in each ink-blot. I took him at his word.

An hour later, I was still working on the first blot. I was describing everything from bats and owls and chickens to space ships and buckets of hidden treasure in caves.

Well, I was cheating a little. I wasn’t really describing what I saw. I was imagining. I was taking off from what was on the page and improvising. This was outside the bounds of the Test.

The expert was seething. He was sweating, because he had many other blots to show me, and it was late in the afternoon, and he was looking at spending the entire evening with me. Finally, he held up his hand and put an end to the Test.

I wasn’t playing his game. Among other sins, I wasn’t investing feelings in the images. Therefore, my choices of “what to see” in the blots expanded greatly.

When I go to a museum, I like to watch people stand in front of abstract paintings. Many of them are stumped. They’re trying to figure out what feelings they “are supposed to” project into the painting. They’re looking for “instruction,” and there isn’t any. They’re asking for mind control, and they’re not getting it.

Fanaticism of any kind begins with individuals projecting feelings into images. This is harnessed by leaders, who then choose the images and direct which feelings are permitted. The tempting prospect for the follower is: participation in a drama that goes beyond what he would ordinarily experience in life. This is bolstered by the idea that what he is doing is moral.

In this election season, people on the left are urged to project messianic feelings into images of Barack Obama. People on the right are cued to invest feelings of pride, hope, and “tradition” into images of Mitt Romney. On both sides, it is principally images that are presented. The real candidates aren’t actually experienced.

Since Vietnam, shooting wars have been more difficult to sustain among soldiers. “In the old days,” feelings of hatred could be projected into images of enemies that included civilians, so overtly killing everybody on foreign soil was easier to accept. Now, soldiers are taught “enemy combatant” and “civilian” are two different images that require the injection of two different feelings.

Here at home, police and military are taught, more and more, to invest feelings of suspicion into images of American civilians. This is a acceleration of mass mind control for law enforcement.

The astonishing number of civilians who participate in government and corporate surveillance of the public, through technological means, learn to invest “dead empty feelings” into images of citizens, as if these targets are nothing more than ciphers, units.

The recent bizarre instances of police detaining and questioning parents who allow their children to play unsupervised reveal another accelerating trend. These confrontations start with neighbors snitching on the parents. The neighbors have learned to invest feelings of panic, suspicion, and anger in images of “free children.”

In all these cases, there is no real experience. It’s all second-hand. It’s all feeling-projected-into-image.

In the medical arena, countless advertisements and news stories are geared to convince people to invest feelings of trust in images of doctors. The suggestion, “Ask your doctor if X is right for you,” is framed as the solution to a little problem. The problem is set this way: Drug X is wonderful; drug X has serious adverse effects; what to do? Solution: ask your doctor; trust him; he knows.

As the class of victims in society has grown by leaps and bounds, including any group that can organize and promote itself as needing help or justice—going miles beyond the people who really do need assistance—citizens have been trained to invest feelings of sympathy and concern for all images of victims everywhere, real or imagined. This, too, is mass mind control.

Pick an image; invest feelings in it. Facts don’t matter. Evidence doesn’t matter.

We shouldn’t leave out a peculiar twist on the feeling-image op. The very people who are portrayed, image-wise, as objects for us to invest feelings into, take their cues from this game as well: doctors act like the doctors on television; gangsters acts like gangsters on television; FBI agents and cops act like law-enforcement officers on television. They’re roped in, just like everyone else.

You’ve heard people say, So-and-so has become a caricature of himself. Well, that’s what it means. The person has projected massive feelings of approval into an image of himself—often an image shown on television.

As a society, we can go on this way until we become a horrific cartoon of ourselves (some people believe we’re already there), or we can step back and discover how we invest emotion into images, and then use that process to pour feeling into visions of our own choosing and invent better futures.

Since the dawn of time, leaders have portrayed themselves as gods. They’ve assembled teams to promote that image, so their followers could project powerful emotion into the image and thereby cement the leaders’ control and power.

The game isn’t new. Understanding the roots of it within each individual could, however, break the trance of mass mind control.

During the first West Nile “outbreak” of 1999, I spoke with a student who had just dropped out of medical school. He told me he’d been looking at electron-microscope photos of the West Nile Virus, and he suddenly realized he was “supposed to” invest feelings of fear in those images.

Somehow, he broke free from the image-feeling link. He was rather stunned at the experience. His entire conditioning as a medical student evaporated.

Parents all over the world are having the same experience vis-a-vis vaccines. They realize they’re supposed to invest fear in images of germs and disease, and they’re also supposed to invest feelings of hope and confidence in images of needles and vaccines. They see the game. They’re supposed to ignore evidence that vaccines are dangerous and ineffective. They’re supposed to remain victims of mass mind control.

But they’ve awakened.

We’ve all been taught that what we feel is always and everywhere out of our control. These feelings are simply part of us, and we have to act on them. The alternative would be to sit on them and repress them and turn into androids, robots.

This is simply not true. There are an infinite number of feelings, and as strange as it may sound, we can literally invent them.

This, it is said, is inhuman. It’s a bad idea. It’s wrong. It would lead us to “deserting the human community.”

Nonsense. That’s part of the propaganda of mind control. If the controllers can convince us that we’re working from a limited map of emotions and we have to stay within that territory, they can manipulate that limited set of feelings and trap us.

The power of art is that it shows us there are so many more emotions than we had previously imagined. We can be much freer than we supposed.

The synthetic world of mind control and the handful of feelings that are linked to images is what keeps us in thrall.

The natural world—the world of what we can be—is so much wider and more thrilling and revealing.

Jon Rappoport

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

www.nomorefakenews.com

REALITY IS MANUFACTURED FOR THE MASSES

REALITY IS MANUFACTURED FOR THE MASSES

by Jon Rappoport

September 9, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

In major media, there is always a potential Threat Level. Reporters feel it. Editors who assign reporters stories feel it. Even CEOs can feel it.

It happens when a story is about to break through containment and show the public that a cherished belief or institution is as phony as a three dollar bill.

Bells start ringing. Red flags go up.

Time to pull back. Time to lie. Time to pretend there is nothing to see.

If not, jobs will be on the line. Heads will roll.

The JFK assassination was that kind kind of story. 9/11 is that kind of story. The true statistic on medically caused death in America is that kind of story. Such stories are not permitted to be exposed in the mainstream. And by exposed, I mean “pounded on, ripped from stem to stern, day after day, revealing true conspiracies and heinous crimes.”

Instead, false fronts are erected. Cover stories are built and sold to the masses. A secret faith is kept.

There are so many false fronts in so many areas of life that, woven together, they form an overall picture of reality.

When people buy this picture, the price they pay is very steep. They sacrifice their capacity to invent their own futures. They lose touch with their own imaginations.

They live within a defined space that grows smaller as they grow older. They compromise their core freedom again and again. They train themselves to “fit in.” In fact, they become experts at fitting in, right down to what they will allow themselves to think.

They lose the desire to express their freedom. Their physical health suffers and deteriorates. Their energy drains away.

This is what happens to most people.

I’ve known several mainstream reporters who felt they were on the verge of a breakthrough in their work. They were investigating major stories that, when published, would punch a hole in the picture of mass reality.

These reporters felt like explorers who had found a buried treasure at the end of a long and arduous journey.

Then the bells went off and the red flags went up. Editors shut them down. The editors, said, “We can’t touch this one.”

So the reporters stopped in their tracks. They buried their files. They put themselves in harness.

This is a metaphor for what happens to many, many people in their lives. They suddenly sniff the air of real freedom and discovery. They climb out of the morass called consensus reality, and know why they are alive. And then they think, “What will happen if I break the pledge to remain a normal and average person? How will my friends and family and co-workers react?”

They pause.

Then they retreat. They adjust. They go back to their former role of fitting in. Their friends and family breathe a sigh of relief.

For a moment or two, a physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual crossroad had been reached. A person saw beyond the picture of ordinary reality. He saw huge open space. He knew he could act on the basis of an inner leverage that defied the laws of the material world. He knew there was a greater power within him.

But no…he wouldn’t take such a path. He would buy the reality created for him.

And then one day:

THE REALITY SALESMAN CALLS.

Step up, folks. This is a deal you can’t afford to miss. You know that thing you cling to like a drowning man in a turbulent sea?

It’s called reality, and I represent the company that manufactures it. I’m proud to say I’ve held this job for over a hundred thousand years. So as far as product knowledge is concerned, you just aren’t going to find anybody like me.

I’m here to tell you that reality is never anything more than rocks and bricks and concrete and steel. Reality is never anything more than a house and all the things in it, and the mementos you hold on to, to remind you of the past.

And in conjunction with that, I’m really selling…guess what? A little thing called perception.

I’m selling How You See Things, and what you think about what you see.

Because, no matter what time period you live in, it all comes down to that: how you see what’s in front of you.

And believe it or not, perception comes in different forms. My company makes the perception that endures. It’s the package you’re living with right now. It’s the down-to-earth here-it-is straight-ahead common-sense type. We call it: IT IS WHAT IT IS. That’s trademarked, by the way. ISWII. It is what it is.

ISWII was invented by a very smart guy whose name has been long forgotten. He was a flaming genius, and he realized something great. People would go for ISWII because it would lock them in.

Who wants to wake up on a Tuesday morning and suddenly see life in a completely different way? Who wants that kind of shock to the system?

ISWII is the most popular perception package in the universe, bar none. It has Reliability. Consistency.

All those centuries and epochs ago, when I was a rookie training for this job, the guys let me try on a whole bunch of different perception packages, so I could see what kind of competition I was up against.

I saw things I wouldn’t want to describe to you. Horrible things. And when I was given ISWII, our product, I felt like I was home.

ISWII gives you a stability you can count on for your whole life. And, believe me, that’s no small feat. We’ve built slow decay (SD) into the package, so things gradually deteriorate—because, think about it, do you really want that tree in your back yard to stay at one stage of growth forever? Do you?

ISWII is time-tested. It’s as solid as solid can be. It doesn’t break down.

But it does need vaccine boosters from time to time, and that’s why I’m here today talking to you.

Every twenty thousand years, we institute a planet-wide upgrade, just to make sure nothing goes wrong. And you’re all due.

Now, you could refuse, in which case you’ll have to take full responsibility for the ugly consequences, or you could do the right thing and just re-up. I have to tell you, our re-up rate is 99.859 percent. I’m proud of that figure.

By the way, the holdouts, the deniers, and the self-styled rebels? The governments of your planet keep close track of them. I feel obligated to let you know that. Without boosters, when your ISWII breaks down, you’re going to fail to fit in. Most definitely you’re going to experience some things other people just won’t understand. And your governments will hunt you down and lock you up, or worse.

That’s not my doing, because I believe in the free market, but it’s part of my service to clue you into the whole picture.

But here’s the good part. You can get your vaccine booster now, during our pre-op special, by simply signing for it and taking the pledge, and continuing to pay a mere sixty percent of of your annual income for the rest of your lives. Which when you think about it, is nothing for what you’re getting. Again, reliability, and consistency.

In the small print, the pledge lays out a few details concerning IMAGINATION. This is for your own protection—because if you take imagination too far (and who knows how far that is, until it’s too late), you’ll set up what we call an interference field, which means ISWII will tend to malfunction. You don’t want that.

So here’s the contract and the pledge. Sign on the dotted line, and pay the fee, and we’re done.

Thank you very much.

I love you guys. Really, I do. I admire your tenacity and your willingness to stay with our package. Our company continues to prosper because of you. Visit the ISWII website and Facebook page and find out about upcoming picnics and vacation tours. We’re hosting booster events at thousands of locations.

If you don’t come to us, we’ll come to you.

We’ve got you on our list.

THE PLEDGE: “I promise to see reality as the perception package presents it for me. I promise not to mess with the package. I promise to bury my own imagination and creative power and refrain from inventing realities of my own. When I take this perception-vaccine that installs and boosts the package, I understand that I must obey all the rules of reality that form the substance of my life. I will not stray. I will interact as a good and obedient citizen. I will follow the straight and narrow. I will see exactly as I’m suppose to see. I will report all suspicious activity to Central Planning. If I believe someone is operating outside the boundaries of the package, spewing strange ideas, rebelling, defecting from the consensus, I will report him or her promptly. If I myself stray, I will turn myself in and receive treatment. If not, I understand I will be hunted down like a dog and forcibly treated. All hail to the ISWII perception package!”

The reality salesman knows what he’s doing. He makes a very good living. Secretly, he knows our perception of our own lives and futures is grossly limited by his product, his package, just as our eyes can only see part of the light spectrum. He is aware of this.

He’s selling limitation and we’re buying limitation.

He works for a set of controllers. The controllers have long since realized that the package they’re selling cements their hegemony and their power over us. Because we can only act on what we see.

The one crack in their armor is our inner conviction that we can create new realities that go beyond what we ordinarily perceive.

And so they do everything in their power to indoctrinate us in a planetary cult of self-regulation, wherein we try to pull down “defectors” and rebels into our common swamp of acceptance and acquiescence.

In other words, the controllers need us to police ourselves.

And this is called Life.

It’s essentially a cartoon. Yes, it can be a vicious and nasty and inhibiting animation, but it’s a cartoon nonetheless, when is all is said and done.

Whether we sit still for it or break out is entirely up to us. It’s our choice.

Jon Rappoport

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

www.nomorefakenews.com

I AM one of those people you were lying about in Roanoke, Mr. Obama

I AM One of Those People You Lied About in Roanoke, Mr. Obama

By Jon Rappoport

July 19, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

On July 13, 2012, President Obama made a speech in Roanoke, Virginia, that will live in infamy. He said, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” Media outlets criticized those who “put such a narrow interpretation on the president’s words.”

Here is my proud confession.

I am one of those people Obama talked about in his speech in Roanoke. I AM one of those people.

Obama claimed I didn’t create my own business. I am one of those people Obama claimed wasn’t really there at all as a prime mover in his own enterprise. I am one of those people Obama claims is eternally beholden to the system, the public sector, the government, which is his business.

His business, as with the parade of our fake presidents, is stealing everything he can. That’s what knows how to do and that’s what he wants to do. He never invented a business. He never created an ongoing enterprise in the private sector.

I am one of those people he thinks “wasn’t there” and “didn’t do it.” He is making a religion out of that intentionally perverse and foul perception. I never imagined I would see the day when a US president came right out and said, “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

Those were his catastrophic words. That is his tool for dragging in more support from the expanding impoverished underclass his own administration is creating.

I’m one of those people he was talking about in Roanoke, and I won’t forget it.

He is saying, as sub-text: “We, the government, will give you what you need. We just need to rein in those horrible people who are making their own money and keeping too much of it. Help us rob them, and then we will give you what we steal.”

Since I’ve gone this far, let me take one more step. I’m not rich from the sale of my products. I’m not even close to being rich. But I would gladly be very rich if I could sell enough of those products, and I would not feel a shred of guilt if that happened.

Okay? Have I made myself clear? If I could make a billion dollars selling my products, which products I believe to be of the highest quality, I would gladly take the billion dollars. And I would say I EARNED THEM.

Does that sound like a sin to you? Have we reached the point where THE EXCHANGE OF MONEY FOR FAIR VALUE, FOR GOOD VALUE, FOR EXCELLENT VALUE is no longer acceptable? Have we reached that stage in our moral decline?

Yes, I use the word MORAL. Because that’s what we’re talking about. The parade of fake presidents we have seen in this country are IMMORAL. They steal. They take what is not theirs to take. They spin lies and fantasies about altruism and humanity and “we are all in this together” to promote their evil designs of theft.

But you see, it all comes down to the individual human being. We tend to forget that. And when we forget it, we lose track of what this country is supposed to be all about: the so-called public sector exists to enable the individual. For God’s sakes, do we really now believe it’s the other way around? Have we sunk that far? Are we that stupid?

I am one of those people Obama talked about in his speech in Roanoke—a day I say should live in infamy forever. (And in case you don’t know anything about my work, I am no supporter of Mitt Romney.)

I’m one of those people who invest their own sweat, energy, emotion, intellect, creative power, and commitment to inventing an enterprise I can be proud of, come hell or high water. I do it every day. I write articles by the ton. I cover stories people in the mainstream won’t cover. I expose crimes. I expose what goes on behind the scenes of these crimes. I present a philosophy of the free individual and I present the vision of what the free individual can really do and accomplish. That’s my self-chosen work and my job and, yes, my business. MY BUSINESS.

I’m proud of every penny I earn. I don’t automatically owe those pennies to some cause a president promotes through his lying teeth. I don’t bow to the altar of the public sector. I never will.

Is this getting through to you? Does what I’m writing here sound like the expression of an extinct species? I’ll tell you a secret. Are you ready? I believe there are millions of people like me. They invented and they run their own businesses. They offer a service and a product and they are proud to offer them. They make as much money as they can by those sales. They aren’t gouging customers, and they certainly aren’t stealing from them, as the government does.

They know what it’s like to get up in the morning and re-create their enterprises and make them work every day. They know how much energy it takes. They know it isn’t the easiest thing in the world, but they value the FREEDOM it brings. They know how it feels to follow their own desires. These people are real. They exist.

THEY OWN THEIR BUSINESSES. THEY OWN THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY.

They experience frustrating days when their business isn’t going well. On those days, they feel trapped in the very universe they created. They wonder how it might be to give up and go to work for someone else. They even wonder how it might be to get a desk job in government and feel the protection of government. But they don’t give in.

They’re too damn stubborn to give in. They show up every day and they do what they can to push their enterprise forward.

And these are the people about whom Obama says: “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

Sure, Mr. President. We weren’t there at all. We’re fictions. We don’t exist. Other people are always standing in for us. It’s not our sweat, it’s not our power, it’s not our imagination, it’s not our vision, it’s not our commitment that invented and sustained our businesses. It’s all done by remote control from Washington. I’m glad you finally clarified this mystery for us. You’re a genius.

A few moments later in his Roanoke speech, Obama tried to qualify his disastrous words a bit, as if he was throwing a dog a bone. He praised entrepreneurial “initiative.” Thanks, Barack, but we don’t need that. We don’t need it. And we don’t need those delusional followers of yours who want to slam every person who owns his own business.

And make sure you understand this. Just because some businessmen are corrupt, we don’t accept the repulsive slimy equation that tries, by extension, to make all independent businesspeople corrupt. That’s an argument that’s nothing but propaganda in the phony class war you’re promoting.

We see what you’re doing. Okay? We’re not falling for the stage magic. You’re doing everything you can to erase the idea of the FREE INDIVIDUAL. We’ve seen your game.

You’re trying to eradicate the entire reason this Republic was created in the first place. It was created, despite the corrupt intentions of aristocrats of that time, FOR THE INDIVIDUAL. Somehow, the words of the Constitution were written on paper and somehow they were signed, and they were ratified. You want to talk about magic? THAT was magic. It was a miracle. But it happened. And it wasn’t perfect. We all understand that. We’re not idiots.

You’re trying to erase the whole concept of the FREE AND POWERFUL INDIVIDUAL—when in fact it was the centerpiece of the Constitution. These are the words that have endured. Slavery didn’t endure. Tom Paine wanted slavery outlawed from the beginning, but his colleagues had no stomach for that battle. There were other sins of omission and commission involved in the Constitution.

But the words that limited the power of the central government and elevated the free individual survived.

I am one of those individuals and I feel no shred of shame. Why the hell should I? I am proud of it. I LIVE on that basis of freedom every day, and I know there are many other Americans who do, too. I’ll never meet them, but I salute them.

It’s time we stopped screwing around here. It’s time we defined the terms of this war we’re in. It has everything to do with the government trying to impose a completely different set of values on us. The government wants to make THE GROUP the primary unit of existence in this country. Get it? Everything must be about THE GROUP. THE COLLECTIVE. THE HIVE.

It’s a clever and appealing way to destroy the country. But we don’t want to destroy the country and what it means. We’re crazy enough to believe that, however many crimes the government has committed, at home and abroad, and however many crimes its corporate partners have committed, under the cover of lies, there is still something alive here on this soil. Alive and good. And it all starts with THE INDIVIDUAL.

How dare you try to demean and finagle and lie and pervert that, Mr. President. How dare you stand up on a platform and tell us we weren’t there, we had nothing to do with taking our destiny in our own hands. How dare you claim somebody else did it for us. How dare you lie.

It would be easy to say you lied because you simply never had experience launching your own business enterprise and you don’t know what it really means. You don’t know what the sweat means and the struggle means and the vision means and the power to keep doing it every day means, and you don’t know what the satisfaction of making money means and victory means. It would be easy to say that and it would be true. All too true.

But that’s not what is at the bottom of this campaign of yours. You do have some idea about what a FREE INDIVIDUAL is. You do. And you don’t like it. You just don’t like it. You want a world of Central Planning. That’s where you’re heading. You feel a welter of emotions, all negative, when you contemplate that glorious fact: THE FREE INDIVIDUAL. You’re against it.

And you and I both know that if you’re against that, it’s obvious what you’re for. It’s no secret, is it, Mr. President?

I am one of those people you were talking about in Roanoke. I’m one of those people who “didn’t do it,” who wasn’t there. Well, I’m here. I was never anywhere else. I built the substance of my own vision. It’s a lot of things, but one of them is a business. It’s mine. I own it and I stand on it.

I hope and believe there are a lot of other people out there who share my stand and who will speak up about it in their own terms.

We’re not gone. We’re not erased. We feel pride in our businesses, big and small. We should. WE BUILT THEM.

We are FREE INDIVIDUALS, and we never stop.

No matter what you say, what you do, what people like you do, Mr. Obama, freedom never dies. The individual remains.

Money is not inherently evil. Profit is not inherently evil.

What is evil is trying to melt the individual into the collective. That has always been evil. If you want to forward that goal, that is your business.

It’s not mine.

It may seem outlandish to say this, but it is my absolute bottom line: Each truly free individual is more powerful than all the force of collectivism taken together, and some day, in some way, there will transpire on this continent a vindication of that, and we will fully see, for the first time, by contrast, what foul, despicable, and slimy crimes the leaders of collectivism have committed, to keep their monstrous control intact.

That’s my bet, and I have shoved in all my chips on it every day for the last thirty years.

I am one of the people you were talking about in Roanoke, Mr. President.

I caught the drift of your message. I caught the stench and the decay. I know the agenda. People like me have been fighting against it all our lives. We’ve heard that tune played a thousand different ways—you must surrender and give in to The Group. We’ve logged a lot of time rejecting that message. We’re veterans in this war.

I’m one of the people you were talking about in Roanoke, Mr. President. I’m talking back. I’m talking to you and your allies.

Since the early days of ancient Egypt and India, and earlier still, the high priests have tried to sell your message. They were the original masters of collectivism and the phony “we’re all in this together.” You’re just the latest in a long line of suits that are blowing the same PR. You’re nothing new.

The pyramids and temples you want us to build “all together” are a bit more subtle, but they amount to the same kind of slavery. You want us to be joyful in sacrifice to your version of “the greater good.”

I know how evil that plan is.

I was one of the people you were talking about in Roanoke. I got the message.

You tried to defame the very essence of what free individuals are and do. The thing is, you can’t defame it. That essence is forever. You would never understand it. You missed that boat. You were schooled in a different world. What you speak about as your privation was really the absence of something called your own essence as an individual.

You chose, all the way along the line, to avoid your own essence. You had to live with that disastrous decision. And now you think you can outlaw the essence of freedom and power from every individual.

You lose.

That’s the end-game.

You will lose.

I ought to know. I was one of the people you were talking about in Roanoke. I heard you. I saw through your front. I was not alone.

In the truest sense, you stand clueless in the Oval Office.

Our freedom will not vanish.

This is about so much more than you imagine.

What the free and powerful individual IS is something you have to LIVE AND CREATE, in order to understand.

You’re living on the spur line, Barack. And no matter how good things look to you now, your empire of dreams will eventually collapse in heap of garbage.

I know. Others know. We were the people you were talking about in Roanoke. We’re here.

We live lives you will never comprehend.

To us, you are just the latest con man working his pitch, mugging for the mob, shaking down the rubes, promising what you don’t have but are trying to steal. It’s a hell of business, pal.

We are the people you were talking about in Roanoke. Hello.

Jon Rappoport

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

Why I produced “The Matrix Revealed”

Why I produced “The Matrix Revealed”

by Jon Rappoport

June 20, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

My new collection, The Matrix Revealed, was assembled on the same basis as the suggestion that “None Of The Above” should be placed on all ballots at election polls.

The more you understand about how the Matrix is put together, the nuts and bolts of it, the closer you approach the decision that you want none of it.

And then you begin to think about and imagine and enact true alternatives.

It’s as if you enter a huge factory where machines run night and day, and you examine the highly complex operation at close range. The more details that emerge to your eye and mind, the fuller your penetration of the inescapable conclusion that all this activity is generated to fabricate an illusion:

An illusion that this is the only possible Reality.

That’s the objective of Matrix.

My objective is to explode that myth through 1) detailed knowledge of how Matrix is built and 2) the ascension of individual creative power to invent new realities.

With that in mind, here is an interview with my late colleague and friend, Jack True. Jack was a most brilliant and innovative hypnotherapist who eventually stopped using hypnosis in his practice. (I interview him 43 times in THE MATRIX REVEALED; 320 pages.) Jack developed extraordinary methods for waking people up beyond a point that is normally considered possible. I’ve published this interview before. Since then, I’ve found additional notes from the conversation and added them.


Before the interview, I want to say a relevant few words about the animated videos I’ve been making with my colleague, Theo Wesson. You can see them at www.youtube.com/jonrappoport. There’s a new one, just out, on the Obama/Romney debates. We make these animations because the viewer has a chance to have a unique experience for a few minutes, where ordinary reality is blown apart.

Aside from all the usual reasons for making a cartoon, you can expose the lies of ordinary reality. People, whether they admit it or not, want a unique moment. A moment where the rules are suspended. The machine of ordinary reality-manufacture stops.


This is what Jack True is talking about in this interview. As a hypnotherapist, he was particularly adept at putting people in a light trance. Their minds would be open to new experience, but they wouldn’t be suggestible. That was the trick. To relax the mind and eliminate, for the moment, the clutter and the internal dialogue and the push-pull of competing automatic thoughts. Finding that sweet spot, Jack was then able to have his patients achieve some remarkable things, things they wouldn’t be able to do in their ordinary state of consciousness.

This is important to understand. When Jack talks about a patient being able “to conceive of something,” it might, on the surface, not sound so important. But Jack wasn’t working on the surface. The patient, conceiving of something in a light trance, was operating in a whole different theater of experience. The impact was magnified many times.


The Matrix Revealed


Okay, here we go.

Q: You’ve talked about “the habitual mind.” What do you mean?

A: It’s a mind that can’t get enough of predictability. It’s addicted to seeing the same thing over and over.

Q: Even if it doesn’t see it?

A: (laughs) That’s right. It will invent it.

Q: Why?

A: Because it’s avoiding something. It’s avoiding the possibility of a unique experience.

Q: Again, why?

A: Because a unique experience would open the door to the possibility that all the systems the mind has built up are insufficient or lacking.

Q: Why is it important to allow your patients to see “beyond ordinary reality?”

A: The answer to that is, of course, obvious. But I’ll try to give you a slightly different slant on it. You could say that everything a person believes or is conditioned to believe is held in place, held in one place, like a corral. The sheep in the corral are all his beliefs, and they stand there. There is a fence around the corral, and the gate is locked by the way he views reality. As long as he views reality in the same way, the gate is going to be locked. And his beliefs are going remain there. They’re not going to change. But if, for some reason, he begins to see reality in a new way, the lock on the gate is going to spring open, and the beliefs are going to scatter and disperse.

Q: So, in hypnotherapy, you try to get patients to–

A: Not through suggestions, but by other strategies.

Q: For example?

A: With certain patients who I feel are up to to it, I bring in the idea of a unique object. A singular object.

Q: What’s that?

A: A unique object, for my purposes, is a one-of-a-kind thing that never existed before and will never exist again. It could be anything.

Q: There are lots of unique objects.

A: Depends on how you look at that meaning. I’m talking about a thing that isn’t composed of whatever everything else is composed of. So a unique object isn’t made out of atoms. It’s different.

Q: Like a very strange chair?

A: Why not? It could be anything. But it’s utterly unlike anything else.

Q: Not sure I follow you.

A: I put a patient in a light trance. That means he’s aware, and it also means he can focus. His mind is, for the moment, uncluttered. He’s not thinking fifteen thoughts. He’s in a sort of zero state. Calm. He can think and he can respond, but he’s not distracted. His consciousness is relaxed and open. He’s not overly receptive to suggestions. He’s not in a Pavlovian condition. He’s in the moment.

Q: Okay. Then what?

A: Then I describe, in general terms, what a unique object is. And I ask him to conceive of one.

Q: Does he?

A: It varies. Some people work at it but they don’t come up with anything. Other people give me lots of objects, but nothing much happens. In some cases, though, a very interesting thing occurs. The patient begins to see or imagine or think about a truly unique thing. An object of great significance to him. It’s not me who is telling him the object has great meaning. He comes upon that by himself. It’s all subjective. You see? I give him the general idea of what a unique object is, and then he takes it from there. And what he describes to me isn’t a startling revelation, in terms of the object itself. It’s how he sees it and how he feels about it. It’s like trying to catch lightning in a bottle. When it happens, the patient experiences a change in perception. Right away.

Q: Because he feels he’s really seeing something unique.

A: That’s right. He feels that. You know, people go through their lives and they see all sorts of things, and nothing much registers with any great impact. It’s often just cultural responses, like, “Well, I’m standing here on top of a mountain, and I’m supposed to be enthralled, so I’ll act like I am.” Or “I’m walking through a forest and I’m supposed to feel the majesty of the tall trees, so I will.” My idea is to have a patient actually experience something in a spontaneous way.

Q: Give me an example.

A: One patient was quiet for a long time. Then he began talking slowly about…it seemed to be a musical instrument. He got this look in his eye, as if he was feeling something he had never felt before. As if he was making a real discovery. As if this object wasn’t part of the known world.

Q: And then what?

A: The next day, he told me his blood pressure, which had been high, was down to normal levels. His low-level chronic headache was gone. He didn’t need his glasses.

Q: Was this change permanent?

A: The blood pressure never went all the way back to the high level. For about a week, he didn’t need his glasses. The chronic headache eventually became a once-a-month headache. But he also began to see his life differently. His marriage really underwent a revolution. He reconciled with his wife, and they became much happier. His overall mood changed.

Q: All from…

A: From that experience.

Q: And you would say his beliefs changed.

A: Absolutely. Until that point, he had a very restricted view of his possibilities. That all shifted.

Q: Because he glimpsed a unique object.

A: It sounds strange, doesn’t it. But yes. It was a moment in a session. The “gap” between what he believed and what he could see just…fell apart. Here’s how I would characterize it. Perception is often an apparatus where you have whole strings of things that are deemed to be similar. The person sees A and subconsciously thinks, “Well, A is like B and B is like C and C is like D…” He’s not really seeing A. He’s linking A to other things he’s seen or heard about. It’s not true vivid perception. It’s perception plus memory and thought. It’s a hybrid. And it’s dull. It’s really uninteresting. Which has emotional implications. The person’s level of feeling becomes dull, too. So what happened in this case with the patient was, that whole pattern was broken. For a few minutes, the perception, the seeing was direct. He saw a unique object. Or to put it differently, he saw uniquely.

Q: And what caused his beliefs to change?

A: Well, if perception is dull, feeling is dull. If feeling is dull, then a person begins to adopt beliefs that will go along with that level of dull feeling. Limited beliefs. Limited ideas about the possibility of his life and even existence itself. So when that whole pattern broke apart, the sun came through. He perceived uniquely. He did it himself. Not through my suggestions. Not through drugs. He did it. And so, automatically, his dull beliefs began to slip away, because there was nothing to hold them in the corral.

Q: He perceived uniquely, so he felt uniquely, and then his beliefs, which were based on, as you say, dull feelings, were unsupported.

A: Right. Life tends to form into an un-unique pattern. That’s what characterizes it. The un-uniqueness is the glue that holds the pattern together. When you melt that glue, you get a chance at liberation.

Q: This reminds me of preconceived knowing. A person has a set of assumptions, and then anything he comes across—information, ideas, concepts—he fits them into the assumptions he already has and…grinds out a conclusion about whether these ideas are of value or not.

A: Yes, it’s the same thing, but what I do with patients relates to direct perception. Direct spontaneous experience.

[At this point, we took a long break. When we came back, we continued the conversation. Jack reiterated some of things he’d been saying, adding a few twists.]

Q: You were talking about political structures.

A: Yes. They are built in relation to public blindness.

Q: What does that mean?

A: To the degree that people think they are blind to what is going on in the world, the political structures that act on their behalf become larger.

Q: Governments are people’s eyes?

A: Absolutely. So the more complex the world becomes, the more people think they are blind, and they allow governments to expand. The formula works from both ends. Government is an apparatus of perception.

Q: Of course, what governments “see” is colored by their agendas.

A: Sure. I didn’t say the government is a reliable set of eyes. I just said it substitutes for people’s blindness. It’s second-hand perception. But I bring it up because it’s very much like what happens within an individual.

Q: How so?

A: A person tends to believe he can’t see what’s really going on, in front of his own eyes. This comes about because of disappointments the person suffers. He sees something and he wants it, and he tries, but he doesn’t get it. So he begins to believe there is something wrong with the way he sees.

Q: That’s a strange idea.

A: Yes, but it’s true. People start out with a simple formula—if I can see it and I want it, I can get it. When that formula doesn’t work enough times, the person begins to believe he isn’t seeing correctly. So he enters into a complex process with his mind, where he appoints a structure, an internal structure to see for him.

Q: A proxy.

A: Yes. And this structure is based on comparisons. A is like B, and B is like C, and C is like D. A person begins to see in categories. He doesn’t perceive directly. Instead of seeing A directly and uniquely, he sees the things A is compared to. He sees a concept. And he gets into cultural norms, seeing what the culture tells him he is supposed to see.

Q: You’re talking about a habit.

A: A deeply ingrained habit.

Q: Aside from your technique of “the unique object,” how would it be broken?

A: You’re the one who told me how.

Q: Through imagination.

A: Yes. Because imagination throws a monkey wrench into the apparatus of second-hand perception. It doesn’t go along with A is like B and B is like C. It comes from a different place. I once did an experiment with ink blots. You know, the ink blot test psychologists use. I took a small group of people and told them I wanted them to look at a few cards with ink blots on them and write down what they could imagine when they saw them. It was all imagination. The people knew that. So first, they wrote down a number, before they looked at any of the cards. The number represented their estimate of their “feeling of well-being” at that moment. It was a scale from 1 to 20, with 20 being highest. Then, after I showed them the cards, and they spent about an hour writing down what they imagined…they wrote down another number—their state of well-being at THAT moment. And in all cases, the second number was higher than the first. The well-being index. (laughs) Imagination raises the level of emotion. It raises energy. But it also creates perception. That’s the most important thing. So, essentially, imagination shreds the apparatus of second-hand perception by creating new perception.

Q: The culture isn’t set up to accommodate that.

A: The culture is all about showing people what they’re supposed to see, through sets of definitions and categorizations. That’s what a culture IS. An apparatus of perception. Imagination works at cross purposes to that.

Q: Because imagination doesn’t care what the culture says or thinks.

A: When you imagine something, you see it or feel it right away. You see what you imagine. Your perceive THAT. So it’s a different way of seeing.

Q: And it only applies to the individual.

A: Of course. As soon as it becomes a group enterprise, you’re building a culture. You’re building another second-hand perception apparatus.

Q: With this patient you were talking about, you asked him to conceive of a unique object. What do you think that meant to him

A: Well, it was a puzzle to start with. He didn’t know exactly what to do. The gears of his ordinary mind stopped working in the usual way. See, I wasn’t asking him to remember his Social Security number. I wasn’t asking him to tell me what he thought about the weather or his trip to the Greek islands or some article in the Times. He knew how to come up with answers to those things. I was asking him to come up with something completely new and different.

Q: Very Zen.

A: You could say that, yes.

Q: So how did he do it?

A: I’m sure he scoured his memory. But there was no map. He had to come to grips with the idea that there was some other way to proceed, some way he wasn’t used to. He had to think in a different way.

Q: Suppose he couldn’t?

A: But he could. That’s the thing. You see? It’s possible. There is a way to get past all the usual categories of perception. It’s as if you’re walking down a street and everywhere you look there are gates. You can walk through the gates, but if you do, you’re going to come into territory you’re already familiar with. You’ve been through all those gates before, thousands of times. So you don’t do that. You look for something else. You don’t know what it is, but you look.

Q: Are you saying this is a natural process? Are you saying that the gates and the categories are unnatural?

A: The gates and the territories and the rest of it are the result of conditioning. A lot of the conditioning comes into us from the outside, but we also condition ourselves. When you look for a unique object, you’re going past the programming in a very direct way.

Q: Somehow, energy plays a role here.

A: When you come upon a unique object, energy is released. It’s not the usual pedestrian plodding energy.

Q: You’re talking about inspiration.

A: Yes, in a way. But the energy is also a kind of signal. It’s communicating to you. It’s telling you that you just “climbed the mountain.” You climbed the mountain and you floated off the top. That energy, that signal also is transmitted to the body. Your body is alerted to a new dimension of experience. The body responds.

Q: How?

A: It generates a new energy field. A more alive field. Endorphin release also occurs. But the energy field goes beyond that. Your ordinary categories of thought and perception, the normal associations you make…all this is plugged into processes of the body, and the body takes its cues from that grid. But when you supersede all this, as with the perception of a unique object, the old grid isn’t in the seat of control anymore. It isn’t the absolute dictator.

Q: With patients where you’ve been successful with this, I assume there’s no predicting what unique object they’ll come up with.

A: That’s the whole point. If the unique object were the same for everyone, it wouldn’t be unique. People get nervous about this idea. They want to know right away what the object would be. They want a plan. A pattern.

Q: They want a system.

A: “Yes, class, here is the unique object. Now everybody focus on it.” This is exactly what mysticism and religion give you. They tell you up front what the unique object is, because they know that’s what the majority of people want.

Q: And focus isn’t the issue, is it?

A: No, this has nothing to do with focus or concentration. And it certainly has nothing to do with repetition. It’s all about finding or inventing a unique object. Look, what I’m talking about here isn’t for the masses. The masses want symbols they can hang on to. They want symbols that seem to promise them rescue.

Q: You’re saying that all conditioning and programming have to do with sameness.

A: That’s what’s programmed into people. Do A and then A and then A and then A over and over again. People program themselves this way. So their perception of reality becomes stagnant. On one level, it really doesn’t matter how people program themselves. It’s the fact of the programming that’s important, because all conditioning has this feature. It repeats. It spits out the same answer every time. It has the same solutions, to the point where you don’t think any other solution is possible. The strategy of the unique object works in exactly the opposite direction. And in my clinical experience, when it works, it’s extraordinary what happens. One search, one finding of one unique object, and you get a shift. The programming begins to split open.

Q: Before we sat down to talk, you said something about second-hand existence.

A: People look at something or read something and right away they’re experts. They’re experts on what other people will think about it. So you show them something and they judge it by what they think other people will think about it. So they’re not looking at it for themselves. Their perception is geared to a category called “what other people will think.” Except those other people will do the same thing. They’ll look at it and decide its value on the basis of what still OTHER people will think about it. So you get this complete absurdity.

Q: Whereas when a patient of yours conceives of a unique object?

A: As you can see, it’s hard to describe that experience.

Q: Well, you can’t relate it to any system.

A: That’s the point. You have somebody who’s lived for fifty years without ever having considered the idea that there is a unique object. The whole premise seems ridiculous or trivial. But then one day in my office, he does it. He’s in a light trance, and he comes up with a unique object. When he does, there is no system. There is no conditioned apparatus for perceiving. He breaks through that. He’s in a space that is free in a way he’s never experienced freedom before. He’s “off the grid.” He feels like a combination of a treasure hunter who’s just arrived in the cave and opened the box full of gold and jewels, after tracking the place for a long time—and an artist who just made something on a canvas that was completely spontaneous and new and alive. That’s a transcendent moment. It’s his own experience. He did it.

Most of the time we operate inside the grid. Everything happens there, or we think so. Some things we like and some we don’t. We assemble all sorts of concepts and preferences and ideas to justify why we should be doing what we’re doing. But there is a whole universe of experience that lies outside this grid.

[A few comments. Later in his career, Jack True developed many other methods for achieving the kind of breakthrough he explains in this interview. In our many conversations, I also began to develop exercises and techniques for such breakthroughs. The starting point for gaining a grasp on this work is The Matrix Revealed, followed by my audio seminars, MIND CONTROL, MIND FREEDOM, and THE TRANSFORMATIONS incorporated into Exit From The Matrix.]

Jon Rappoport

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

A CARTOON: NSA AND GOOGLE EMBRACE

 

A CARTOON: NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY AND GOOGLE

by Jon Rappoport

June 16, 2012

 

This article is about a cartoon I produced with Theo Wesson. I’m now in the animation business. Videos. I write the scripts and Theo does the visuals.

 

We’ve produced four cartoons so far, and in the last three days they’ve suddenly taken off on my YouTube channel. The total views for the four went from about 700 to 12,000.

 

You’ve all read the news stories about Google and NSA teaming up to…oh, that’s right, they don’t have to say what they’re doing together. They’re allowed to keep it a secret. Maybe they’re selling toasters or opening car washes. But my guess is it has something to do with information. Just a thought.

 

Immensely powerful US-based multinational corporations, which owe no allegiance to any nation, are in the business of global conquest. It stands to reason that, on some level, the NSA, which is also in the business of global conquest, shares part of what it learns about American citizens every day with those corporations.

 

Therefore, what looks on the surface like an enormous and illegal invasion of our privacy on behalf of some concocted agenda about US national security is, at the margins, about globalism—a program to bring planet Earth under the control of an elite management system.

 

The cartoon is about what NSA and Google could cook up together.

 

You can view it at www.youtube.com/jonrappoport or embedded here:

 

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMIcTiOG4UU&w=415&h=241]

 


It’s my considered observation that we live in a social, political, economic, and cultural cartoon. And I also conclude that many people sense this but don’t articulate it. Now, a cartoon can contain suffering. Just because it’s animated doesn’t mean the people living in it don’t experience pain.

 

And I think many of us love cartoons because they indeed reflect our awareness that life is, in certain major respects, a cartoon.

 

Also, animations suggest there are other possible realities that operate according to different principles. We want some of those realities. We want to experience them. Unfortunately, a whole lot of people believe such experience only occurs after death. I say it can happen right here, right now.

 

Frost’s line, “And the work is play for mortal stakes,” comes to mind. Part of the operation of The Matrix is to make us serious in the same way The Matrix is serious. We risk becoming too tight to win, too closed off to our own energies, too stultified to imagine how we can emerge victorious over Matrix systems and structures.

 

The Matrix is a cartoon. We can dismantle it in pieces, and we can also proliferate our own cartoons that rocket us past the illusions we’re being sold in the bazaar of daily experience.

 

Really? Our imaginations are that powerful?

 

You have no idea. Or maybe you do.

 

I hope you enjoy our cartoon and pass it along.

 

Jon Rappoport

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

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

HYPNOSIS FOR THE MASSES, AND MAGIC

 

HYPNOSIS FOR THE MASSES, AND MAGIC

(an excerpt, edited from The Magician Awakes)

By Jon Rappoport

June 5, 2012

 

This is not an easy subject to describe, because it is shot through with so many contradictions and subtle shades of deception. But if we’re to understand anything about magic in the true sense, we need to explore it from several angles.

 

Let’s start here: For many reasons, the window of history on The Individual is closing. One can view this with melancholy, or it can be the opportunity to stake out a new, stronger, uncompromising position on Self.

 

For centuries, humankind has been bombarded and caressed with the idea that everything good and important has a SOURCE somewhere ELSE.

 

This has attained truly hypnotic proportions.

 

I’m thinking of a group that currently preaches and teaches, perversely, that The Individual’s imagination and creative power emanate, like some steady-state hum, like some radio broadcast from The Universe. This balderdash sells very well, because people simply don’t have the confidence to declare what is already and inherently theirs. No, they need what is theirs to come from a mysterious and wonderful Otherness. They need that. They have to curl up in it like a cat in a blanket. Otherwise, they wouldn’t experience the hypnotic comfort they so desperately long for.

 

People refuse to believe they are strong enough or powerful enough or worthy enough to move through life without a Greater Principle feeding them metaphysical and spiritual chocolates every day in every way. This mindset is Hypnosis 101 personified.

 

I really don’t care what people believe. However, when I see so many people using their beliefs to submit to an Otherness so intensely and completely, I call it what it is: hypnosis.

 

A person, for example, can believe and surrender so fully to some Active and Dynamic Principle that he becomes passive! That’s right. It becomes a drug. And, of course, a complete contradiction.

 

Every deep belief has a symbolic component. In that sense, the substance and content of the belief matter less than the energy a person derives from it. So I’m not arguing here so much about content of belief, but only about the way a person uses it. And if we look around us, we see androids-of-belief, people who use their convictions to stay passive.

 

Earth changes.

 

It’s all going to happen TO us, not FROM us.

 

December 2012.

 

We’ll automatically enter a new age.

 

DNA changes.

 

Just wait a few minutes and your DNA will change and then everything will be better and different.

 

And so forth and so on.

 

Passivity.

 

Hypnosis.

 

MAGIC IS AN ACTIVE PRINCIPLE, NOT A PASSIVE ONE.

 

Of course, whatever is deemed passive AND good is far more popular than what is deemed active, because active means you actually have to DO something.

 

PEOPLE WILL ADOPT BELIEFS AND USE THEM ON THE BASIS OF HOW MUCH self-generated action VERSUS passivity THEY WANT.

 

Think about that one because it’s a key.

 

Jack True, the brilliant hypnotherapist I interview 43 times in my new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, eventually stopped using hypnosis altogether, because he realized the people coming to his office were already, “in a core part of their consciousness, hypnotized.”

 

Jack had many things to say about beliefs, based on his clinical experience. Here is a quote:

 

When I put people in a light trance, I would have them ‘travel’ to a place where they kept their beliefs, as if it were a landscape. When they arrived, I’d have them describe what they saw. The majority of my patients saw their own beliefs in one of two ways.

 

They saw dead energy, energy that had been used over and over until it had become like sludge. Or they saw their beliefs as engines of a kind, except the engines weren’t putting out energy, they were taking it in. Sucking it in. On closer examination, this ‘taking in’ proved to be un-dynamic. It was, in a real sense, sleep-inducing.”

 

Historically, we can see the evolution of a similar phenomenon. As the buttoned up era of the 1950s gave way to the turbulent 1960s, people all over the world began to believe that better times were coming. In fact, the future was here, and it was much happier. It was a New Age. Fueled by drugs and the fear of dying in a war in Vietnam, young people became active, quite active.

 

But once the war was over, there was a remarkable and sudden shift. Those very beliefs, as we entered the middle 1970s, developed a passive hue. They accumulated sludge. They took in energy, but not for dynamic use. Rather, the energy was “laid back.” Soporific. The New Age was still coming, but it was going to descend on us like an all-embracing rainbow delivered by a Disneyesque cosmos.

 

Magic isn’t sociological. It doesn’t depend on trendiness, on this era or that era. It isn’t an offshoot of a commonly held consensus. Therefore, real magic isn’t very popular. It has everything to do with stepping outside that consensus on many, many levels.

 

It has everything to do with the free individual, with dynamic self.

 

The dynamic and free individual, whether he is aware of it or not, begins to invent space and time. And energy.

 

And that is, for the individual, why magic surpasses history. Psychologically, history is over. The past is over. The serial cause-and-effect chain that is viewed as time begins to disintegrate. However, instead of leaving a passive vacuum in its place, what comes into play is creative and far-reaching inventing by the individual.

 

This is alchemical. The individual can tap into and use and transform energies, spaces, times, ideas, concepts, the past, the future as fuel for his creative fire.

 


I’ve told this story before, but I’ll tell it again here and place it in a slightly different context. Think of it as a living metaphor for what I’m discussing:

 

In the early 1980s, in the Lincoln Heights section of Los Angeles, an entrepreneur bought up a few acres of land and structures that had been a large facility of the Pabst corporation. Pabst had made beer there. There were small sheds and a few larger buildings.

 

One day, Pabst had shut the whole place down and walked away.

 

This entrepreneur came in and recast all the spaces as artists’ studios/living lofts. About 70 of them. All sizes and shapes. Old Pabst offices became studios. Tiny offices, large offices. Factory spaces with loading docks became studios. The corrugated sheds became studios. The place was now widely called The Brewery.

 

Artists moved in and quickly transformed those spaces in their highly individual ways.

 

And in an empty area between buildings, there was a chaotic mountain of disassembled metal parts from Pabst machines. Garbage.

 

Well, once the artists settled into their studios, they began to visit this mountain and look it over. They sifted through it. They took away pieces and used them in their work. They transformed them.

 

A year or so later, the mountain was almost gone. It was now part of hundreds of sculptures, assemblages.

 

The garbage bins on the property began to accumulate debris and leftovers, deposited by the artists—the useless aftermath of their production.

 

And they began to visit the bins and see what was there, and they found, in one another’s refuse, materials they could use again and transform in their new work again.

 

And so forth and so on.

 

I had a few friends who were living and working in one of the corrugated sheds. These spacious sheds had upper-floor lofts for sleeping. The ground floors were for work.

 

The day arrived when many of the artists opened their doors for a massive group show, for the public.

 

I put several of my paintings on display in my friends’ shed. So I was there, when about 1500 people showed up from all over the city and took The Brewery tour of 70 studios.

 

I took the tour, too.

 

On the basis of variety alone, it was absolutely staggering. Every living and working space was unique, to say nothing of the art. I called it an interplanetary excursion, because that’s what it felt like. By comparison, your normal gated apartment complex would be in the android-robot realm.

 

I remember two comments friends made to me that day.

 

One said, “I feel like I’ve been visiting science labs. It’s as if a company hired a bunch of maverick researchers and just set them loose in their own labs, to experiment, to push the frontiers in all directions…”

 

And the other comment: “If this kind of thing took hold and spread out over the whole city, if people just started creating art in spaces like this, everything would change. The way people think, what they do, what they say to one another, the way they relate, the way they see…”

 

Their beliefs, their energy, their imagination would change.

 

The artists at the Pabst nexus in Lincoln Heights weren’t waiting for a new reality to descend on them like a cloud. They weren’t passive. They weren’t relying on some Otherness. They weren’t stalling at the gate of a new life.

 

There is a line you cross with invention, with imagination, with creative power. And once you cross the line with enough intensity, you find yourself in a different world.

 

I know that world.

 

It’s actual magic. The real thing. Undiluted.

 

The vast organizing and controlling of society and its parts is, from that perspective, simply a postponement of a true Day One. It’s hypnotic absurdity.

 

EVERY human activity and endeavor can undergo this radical transformation. The potential exists. And once you see it and experience it and make it happen, you can look around and grasp what the term hypnosis really means.

 

We live in a number of spaces, and many of them are half-created possible-could-be futures. They came from people who started to innovate and then stopped. These spaces move. They float. They contain what might have been, but when seen head-on they are actually more real, even in their fragmentary form, than the consensus reality that passes for Reality.

 

Magic is invented. Paranormal phenomena are invented, created. Realities are imagined. The universe is one work of art out of a possible infinite number of works of art.

 

Loyalty to WHAT IS or even to a SUPER WHAT IS is misplaced. It’s a self-generated and self-induced trance.

 

Magic is its opposite.

 

How far can magic go? What is the limit on the ability of imagination to create new realities?

 

There is no limit. As Western history emerged from the Middle Ages, an unfolding of thought and action gradually took hold, and that unfolding, which was generated by individuals, was all about personal freedom from oppressive structures. Freedom from oppressive leaders who built those structures.

 

Then there was a counter-revolution. Its real leaders were and are secretive men who play with injecting chaos into the order they have championed. They build oppression and they then they tear it down. This whiplash effect is aimed at engendering the perceived need for a super-order, far more confining than what has gone before.

 

But, under the surface, what is this perverted game really all about? It’s about FEAR of what the free individual can CREATE. It’s about this inherent force in the free individual to imagine, invent, build, create, innovate ideas and realities that not only upset the established order, but reveal it for the stage-set it is.

 

Passively accepted reality ALWAYS amounts to a stage-set. Space is restricted, time is restricted, energy is restricted. These are all hallmarks of The Group, not the free individual.

 

When you live through and by imagination long enough and intensely enough, when you work to create new realities that reflect your most profound desires, on and on and on, you attain “escape velocity.” You move into a different state of mind. A state of mind that burns up hypnotic debris.

 

There are many pundits and ‘spiritual teachers’ who can’t abide this. And there are elites who are terrified of this, because they have tried to kill it in themselves, and they don’t want to be reminded that it still exists. When people say elites have gone over to “the dark side,” this is what it really means.

 

But magic is open and is infinitely wide and high and deep. It has no boundaries composed of programming. This is the space and the promise of the great journey. It has always existed and it will always will.

 

For those who want it, who want it ENOUGH.

 

Jon Rappoport

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

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

PART 2, THE FOUNDATION OF MAGIC

 

PART 2, THE FOUNDATION OF MAGIC AND POWER

NOTES FROM THE MAGICIAN AWAKES
(unpublished)

by Jon Rappoport

June 2, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

How many times do we wish we had followed a glimpse, a dream?

 

How many times have we wished we could stop looking at reality through a set of categories that played out long ago and became useless?

 

How many times have we wished we could see reality anew, as if for the first time?

 

These wishes can’t be fulfilled by joining groups that appear to have our dreams engraved in their bylaws.

 

Magic begins with the independent individual.

 

Here is a quote from the brilliant hypnotherapist Jack True, whom I interview 43 times (320 pages) in THE MATRIX REVEALED:

 

“Why are dreams, when we sleep, episodic and nonlinear? Because we’re searching for something else, a different way of approaching reality. In these dreams, we KNOW the space-time complex is an illusion. We know we’re escaping from prison.

 

“All the major myths of humanity, since the beginning, have been ORGANIZED out of dreams. They’ve been tailored and reworked to have a cause-and-effect relationship among their parts. So we’re right back where we started, at zero. We’re trying to break through the linear quality, but we’re reconstructing these dreams to take the spontaneity out of them.

 

“Look at the ancient Greek apparatus of gods. As usual, there was a top persona. There was a hierarchy. This is nonsense. This is all a rearrangement of dreams. Each god is given various magic powers. It’s childish. It’s like doling out Christmas presents under the tree. This is your present, and this is your sister’s present. It’s a fool’s errand.

 

“Magic is fluid. Yes, it can be performed, but really it involves the whole being of a person. It comes out of the wellsprings of desire. Deep desire.

 

“We dream the way we do because it’s natural, and because something about the day is exhausting. The structure and organization of the day saps our energy, because when we live in a linear fashion, we don’t have that much available energy to begin with. We’re only tapping into a relatively small amount. So it drains away inside the structure. We have so much more energy deep-down, but it’s ‘nonlinear energy,’ it thrives on seeing and creating and living and knowing in a completely different way.

 

“Sure, there are a lot better ways to organize this world, but that doesn’t solve the most basic problem for anyone. Magic, as much as it’s been defamed, is the solution, and magic operates in simultaneously multiple and nonlinear ways.”

 

Here is Jack again:

“People sometimes think I’m advocating chaos. I’m not. But they think so because they can’t imagine the world [reality] could be fundamentally any different than it is now without descending into total confusion. Putting nonlinear thought into the world is doable, though. That’s the next stage of evolution. Imagination isn’t just coming up with a better screwdriver. It isn’t just solving what we can only see as a problem begging for an answer. Seeing problems everywhere isn’t a function of reality itself. It’s the way we approach and filter reality and organize it. That’s why we think civilization is the end result of solving a whole string of problems sitting on the back of prior problems. We think man discovered fire as the solution to the problem of being cold. On one level of perception, that’s true. But on another level, discovering fire had everything to do with imagining fire. Dreaming fire.”

 

Movies began as nonlinear excursions on the screen. Many of the early movies were very much like dreams, or like interruptions in the smooth flow of time. Movies were an escape hatch from linear organization. In that sense, they were a reflection of a different kind of consciousness.

 

When we talk about ruling elites, we’re really talking about men who are obsessed with organizing things. We think they want to organize society down to the last detail because that makes it possible for them to control us, but that’s only part of the story. These men are frightened of dreams and dreaming. They are frightened by their own deeper minds. They can’t face that. That’s why they have to organize everything they touch.

 

Over the years, I’ve had many questions from readers that boil down to one question: “If I were using my imagination to the fullest, what would I see that I don’t see now?”

 

That’s a very interesting question, because it puts the cart a few thousand miles ahead of the horse. I don’t know what you would see, because it’s your imagination. Not mine. That’s the whole point.

 

I’m not trying to organize anyone’s reality. I have no interest in that.

 

But I do know that if you were using the power of your imagination, your whole approach to consensus reality would change. That much I do know.

 

Consider two types of people. The first type firmly believes that all progress and all good things come from strengthening the consensus among larger and larger numbers of humans.

 

The second type believes this leads, inevitably, to a form of slavery. Even if the consensus started out with mass devotion to a high ideal, somewhere along the line the ideal would sink below the waves and something unpalatable would emerge in its place. Why? Because tighter and tighter consensus about reality, no matter what that reality is, always brings about a shrinking of individual power.

 

Consensus, beyond a point of common sense, is grossly inhibiting, is in fact self-induced mind control.

 

Imagination, which moves away from consensus, is an active force. It is woven with creating. You imagine and create. You aren’t passive. You’re the furthest thing from passive.

 

Mass education is, for the most part, an effort to convince students that they should use their imaginations to create greater consensus. If schooling doesn’t accomplish that job fully, then certainly on-the-job training finishes it.

 

The idea of “finding answers” that apply to everyone is a very limited operation from the start. Of course we share certain similarities, but the differences, in the long run, are far more important.

 

This idea is unsettling to most people. They don’t understand it and they don’t want to understand it. At best, they pay lip service to it.

 

Society is organized around the concept of organization. That’s what society is doing.

 

The liberated individual doesn’t live that way.

 

[For those people who find these ideas interesting, important, attractive, I would suggest ordering and working with the following, in this sequence: THE MATRIX REVEALED; THE SECRET BEHIND SECRET SOCIETIES; MIND CONTROL, MIND FREEDOM; THE TRANSFORMATIONS; THE MYSTERY AND MAGIC OF DIALOGUE. They are available at my site store at www.nomorefakenews.com]

 

The so-called “eternal questions” humanity has been grappling with since the dawn of time are offshoots of questions about imagination and magic. However, when the questions drop below the threshold of imagination, when the questions are asking for mechanical answers, then imagination is automatically excluded. This, obviously, becomes unworkable. Imagination is not mechanical; it isn’t a system.

 

It is free.

 

So we have here a wider meaning of freedom. A meaning that goes beyond systems.

 

Again, people want to know, “What would I see and know, if I could get beyond systems?” The whole point is, there is no pat answer to that question. Imagination, though, is the way to find out what the individual would see and find.

 

Imagination is the place in consciousness where we put those things, ideas, events that we consider impossible or incomprehensible. But when we live through and by imagination, the whole ball of consensus reality begins to come apart. Then we experience deeper energies and deeper power.

 

Jon Rappoport

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

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com