The gold standard of medical tests is fake

by Jon Rappoport

April 4, 2018

Because of their sophistication and complexity, scientific tests are accepted without question. But what happens when they don’t work and are nothing but professional gibberish?

One such test is the PCR (polymerase chain reaction), when it is used to measure the amount of a particular virus present in the human body and, therefore, the presence of disease.

The PCR is used all over the world as a gold standard of disease diagnosis.

PCR starts with what is presumed to be a tiny, tiny, tiny piece of a virus from a patient. This piece is far too small to be seen directly. The test amplifies the supposed viral fragment many times. Think of a whisper of a sound in a far-off forest turning into a full orchestra three feet away from you. It’s that level of amplification.

The result? According to the pros, they can then observe the virus and identify it. And they can also tell how much of it is in the patient’s body.

“Well, Mr. Jones, you have virus X24. So you have disease X24.”

Brilliant.

Except for a few issues.

First, in order to say a person has a disease, you would have seen lot and lots and lots of virus in his body. Millions. A few little critters aren’t going to make any impact on the person’s health.

So why is the PCR test necessary in the first place?

If all you can find is a tiny, tiny fragment of what might be a virus, you already know you’re barking up the wrong tree.

Without the PCR, you should be able to establish that millions of a particular virus have invaded the patient’s body.

If you can’t, why bother using the PCR?

And second, the claim that the PCR can be used to say there ARE millions of a particular virus in the body is unverified. It could be verified or rejected, if more direct tests were done, but I don’t see that happening.

For example, you do a PCR on a patient, and you conclude he has a huge load of virus X in his body. Well, then, use a different test and confirm this is true. It should be easy. With filters and a centrifuge, for example, show that you can extract a concentrated pellet consisting of millions of virus X particles.

The PCR test itself is a remarkable procedure. But its use in disease diagnosis is way off the mark. Fake.

What are the implications? All over the world, every day, patients are tested with the PCR. The results say nothing about disease, yet that’s exactly how and why the test is deployed.

False disease diagnoses are made, and toxic drugs are prescribed.

“Well, we did a PCR test on Mr. Jones, and we found he has virus X, so he has disease X.”

“You didn’t find out anything. If Mr. Jones has disease X, he would have millions and millions of virus X in his body. You could find that out by using other direct tests. But when you do those other tests, you can’t find large quantities of virus X.”

“That’s ridiculous. I’m too busy to talk to you. I have to get to the lab.”

In 1996, journalist John Lauritsen wrote, “Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Science for inventing the PCR…has stated: ‘Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron’.”

Translation: the PCR test can’t be used to say how much virus is in a person’s body.

Using PCR to measure the number of viruses in the human body (quantitative) is contradictory to the way the test works. The test isn’t designed to spout those numbers. Therefore, using it to diagnose active disease in a person is absurd.

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Virus fakery: my conversation with a White House policy analyst

Feb26

Virus fakery: my conversation with a White House policy analyst

by Jon Rappoport

February 26, 2018

There are a number of cases in which a virus is said to be the cause of a disease—but the evidence doesn’t stand up.

I first realized this in 1987. I was writing my book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century.

Robert Gallo, who claimed he had found the cause of AIDS, hadn’t done proper work. From everything I read, he claimed to have discovered HIV in a low percentage of AIDS patients he had studied.

He should have been able to isolate HIV in virtually every patient.

Then there was the fact that the most popular tests for HIV, the Elisa and Western Blot, were fatally flawed. They could register positive for a whole host of reasons that had nothing to do with HIV.

And no one had found sufficient quantities of HIV in humans to justify claiming it caused any kind of illness.

My own research into the so-called high-risk groups revealed that the “AIDS” immune suppression in those groups could be explained by factors other than a virus.

(Note: All my research at that time assumed HIV existed. Since then, several researchers, including the Perth Group, have made compelling arguments that the existence of HIV was never demonstrated.)

As I was winding up the final draft of AIDS INC., I spoke, off the record, with a well-known and well-respected mainstream virologist at a large US university. I expressed my conclusions about HIV.

He spoke, first, about the difficulties in making an absolute decision about a virus as the cause of a disease.

I brought the conversation back to HIV.

He paused. Then he repeated that he couldn’t go on the record. I asked him why.

He said HIV was a subject fraught with problems. Politics were involved.

He said he and his colleagues were taking a pass on getting into a dispute about the virus. They were aware that the science was shaky. They just didn’t want to go near it. They might enter into other arguments about other kinds of research, but as far as they were concerned, HIV was off-limits.

His obvious implication was: careers were on the line.

Attacking HIV as the cause of AIDS could result in blacklisting.

He stopped short of saying HIV wasn’t the cause of AIDS, but it was clear he had seen enough to know there were major holes in HIV science.

This was a man who had no interest in unconventional points of view. He was an orthodox researcher from A to Z. He wasn’t a rebel of any kind. And yet he readily admitted to me that the whole AIDS research establishment was proceeding on a lack of proof.

Exposing this fact would go far beyond the usual definition of a scandal. The result would be a volcanic eruption, if, say, a dozen respected virologists told the truth.

After we finished our conversation, I understood something about consensus reality. It contains elements about which people can argue in public—but then there are other elements which are completely out of bounds, which can never be refuted in a mainstream setting.

Why? Because if certain lies are exposed, they initiate a contagion of doubt and insight that spreads to the whole complex inter-structure of what people take to be reality.

Great curtains are torn away. Pillars are cracked, and fall. Images which are taken to be absolute and unchanging distort, dissolve, and blow away in the wind.

A week after AIDS INC. was shipped to bookstores, in 1988, my friend and colleague, hypnotherapist Jack True, told me a copy of the book was on its way to Russia in a diplomatic pouch.

I asked him how he knew. He shrugged and said he had a few connections.

Of course, I’ve never heard anything back about the Russian response to the book, but I find it interesting that, in America, my publisher and I never made any headway in connecting with government officials.

There was one exception. In 1987, I had a conversation with James Warner, a White House policy analyst. The interview was published in the LA Weekly.

Warner had serious doubts about the HIV theory of AIDS, and would arrange a White House conference on the issue. Pro and anti HIV scientists would be permitted to speak at length.

At the last minute, the conference was cancelled.

Here are a few brief excerpts from my conversation with Warner. As a White House analyst, his comments are explosive:

Warner: The government really hasn’t fulfilled its role in providing good information [on AIDS]. We just may not know enough. With AIDS, we’re dealing with a syndrome, not a disease. We may see a patient who has a genetic defect that’s causing his immune deficiency [instead of HIV being the causative agent]. I’m not satisfied we know all we think we do, by any means.

Rappoport: Robert Gallo, Max Essex, people like that, were the field commanders in the NIH [National Institutes of Health] war on cancer in the 70’s. They lost that war. So why are they in charge of AIDS research now? It seems odd that we don’t have other people running the show.

Warner: If ever I’ve been tempted to believe in socialism, science has disabused me of that. These guys [at NIH] assume that it’s their show. They just assume it.

Rappoport: Peter Duesberg, a distinguished molecular biologist at Berkeley, has said that HIV does not cause AIDS. Have you asked people at NIH what they think, specifically, of his arguments?

Warner: Yes. I’ve been told that Peter Duesberg’s refutation of HIV has been discounted by the scientific community. I was given no explanation as to why. I was very offended. No evidence was presented to me. Just that Duesberg had been ‘discounted.’ That’s absurd. It’s not a scientific response to dismiss Duesberg as a crank.

Rappoport: The definition of AIDS in Africa is now becoming synonymous with starvation. They’re saying the three major symptoms are chronic diarrhea, fever, and wasting-away. Weight-loss. It certainly makes a perfect smokescreen for the
aspect of hunger which is political [and intentionally maintained] – just call it AIDS.

Warner: I had not considered that. There is a program to make Africa self-sufficient by the year 2000. This could certainly hinder that activity. You know, I was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. I experienced weight-loss of eighty pounds. And when I came home, I was suffering from a form of dysentery that you could call opportunistic. A number of us were. We didn’t have AIDS.

—end of interview excerpt—

In this current political atmosphere, a White House analyst wouldn’t dare go on the record with comments like these.

Rigid consensus must be maintained, at any cost.

Truth is beside the point.

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

Jon Rappoport

What’s behind the norovirus outbreak at the Olympics?

Feb6

What’s behind the norovirus outbreak at the Olympics?

by Jon Rappoport

February 6, 2018

First, here’s the official story:

USA Today: “The organizing committee for the Pyeongchang Olympics has called in 900 military personnel after more than 1,200 security workers were pulled off duty because of concerns about the spread of the Norovirus, Christophe Dubi, IOC executive director of the Olympic Games said Tuesday.”

“Later Tuesday evening, the organizing committee said 32 cases of Norovirus had been confirmed and those people were quarantined after being treated. Those 32 cases involve 21 private security staff members from the Horeb Youth Center and 11 people from other locations, including three foreigners.”

“In a statement, POCOG said that starting Sunday workers reported headaches, stomach pain and diarrhea. The Gangwon Province Health and Environment Research Center found 41 workers with symptoms that might be related to the virus. The others have been pulled from duty to prevent possible spreading of the illness.”

“The workers are largely responsible for checking credentials and screening baggage entering the venues. The military personnel were brought in from about 40 minutes away.”

“…The organizing committee said ground water used in food and beverages at the Horeb Youth Centre — a housing facility — was suspected.”

Here’s the problem. Officials admit the illness appears to be coming from contaminated water, and you can’t reduce that situation to a single virus. Forget the sophisticated analysis. Bad water contains bad things. A number of them. If you didn’t clean up the water in the first place, you’re going to have trouble.

The norovirus, as an explanation, is a convenient cover story. It seems to explain the outbreak of illness—but it doesn’t.

The virus hunters at the CDC are trained to look for the single viral culprit. That’s what they always do. They’re medical, not environmental. They don’t want to find the true answer when it’s something in the environment, because medical solutions don’t work. You have to clean up the water.

Over the past 30 years of investigating medical ops, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen this pattern repeated. Ignore the environmental contamination; blame a single virus. It’s a sham.

Taken to an extreme, you would get something like this—gene researchers look forward to day when genetic modifications would protect humans from all sorts of environmental contamination.

Translation: Let corporations and governments pollute to their heart’s content; “altered” humans would be safe.

That may sound like science fiction. And it is. But researchers are working to make it fact.

They’ll fail.

Meanwhile, at the Olympics, there better be a fleet of huge trucks carrying clean water to the workers and the athletes, or the problems they’ve encountered so far are going to get worse, much worse.

Years ago, in an off-the-record conversation, a public health official readily admitted to me that contaminated water always contains a number of noxious substances that endanger human health. “If you’re saying it’s this virus or that virus, you’re lying,” he said. “You have to go back to the beginning and clean up the water.”

“Virus hunters don’t like that solution,” I said.

“Of course they don’t. It puts them out of business.”

The norovirus is just one more lame medical cover story.

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

Jon Rappoport

How to stage a fake bioterror attack

Jan31

by Jon Rappoport

January 31, 2018

“Imagine this. A big-time doctor from the US Biological Warfare Group waddles into a meeting room, where a collection of Army, CIA, NSA, and DHS representatives sit quietly in their chairs. He says: ‘So I understand you boys want to put on a little domestic bioterror show, to keep the natives from becoming too restless. Well, the first thing you need to know is, germs don’t obey orders. Forget all that sci-fi nonsense. Germs work and they don’t work. It’s a crapshoot. You could have a big fat dud on your hands. I can tell you how to make it work, though, if you give up on your fancy high-tech wet dreams…” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

There are future scenarios which, with enough exposure before they’re staged, can be stopped—or at least analyzed correctly when they occur.

A calculated bioterror event is one of those.

The primary fact is: no matter what kind of germ you’re talking about or where it came from, releasing it intentionally does not guarantee predictable results. Far from it.

For instance, people whose immune systems operate at different levels of strength are going to react differently.

The perpetrators may find that less than 2% of people exposed get sick or die.

But there is another strategy that should be understood:

The use of a germ as a cover story for a chemical.

In other words, there is no germ attack. It’s called a germ attack, but that’s a lie. The perps bring in researchers to the affected area, who go on to claim they have isolated a germ that is the cause of death and illness. It’s a sham. What really happened was:

The spread of a toxic chemical that can’t be detected, unless you’re looking for it.

The chemical has severe, deadly, and predictable effects for a week or two. Then it disperses and loses potency and the “epidemic” is done.

In some town, a fairly isolated community, the word goes out that people are suddenly falling ill and dying. The CDC and the Army are called in to cordon off the area and quarantine all citizens. A peremptory announcement is made, early on, that this is a biowar attack.

Major media are allowed outside the periphery. Network news anchors set up on-location and do their wall to wall broadcasts “from the scene.”

The entire nation, the entire world, is riveted on the event, 24/7.

People inside the cordon fall ill and die. Reports emerge from the town:

The networks state that “heroic doctors are taking samples of blood and the blood is being analyzed to find the germ that is causing the epidemic.” The DOD confirms over and over that this is, indeed, a biowar attack.

Human interest stories pile up. This family lost three members, that family lost everybody. Tragedy and horror produce the desired empathic response from “the world community.”

It’s a soap opera, except real people are dying.

The medical cartel promotes fear of the germ.

All controlling entities obtain their piece of the terrorist pie.

Finally, the doctors announce they have isolated the germ causing death in the small town, and researchers are rushing to develop a vaccine (which they produce in record time).

Everyone everywhere must be vaccinated, now. No choice. Do it or be quarantined or jailed.

In this declared martial law situation, the doctors are the heroes. The doctors and the Army. And the government, and even the media.

Then, after a few weeks, when the potency of the secret chemical has dispersed, it’s over.

When you think about it, this scenario is a rough approximation of what happens every day, all over the world, in doctor’s offices. The doctors are prescribing chemicals (drugs) whose effects are far more dangerous than germs that may (or may not) be causing patients to be ill.

In other words, a chem-war attack is being leveled at people all over the world all the time.

See Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, “Is US health really the best in the world?” 106,000 people in America are killed every year by FDA-approved medical drugs. That’s over a million people per decade.

In the wake of a staged “biowar” terror attack, new laws are enacted. The State clamps down harder on basic freedoms. The right to travel is curtailed. Criticizing the authorities is viewed as highly illegal. Freedom of assembly is limited.

“Citizens must cooperate. We’re all in this together.”

A new federal law mandating the CDC schedule of vaccines for every child and adult—no exceptions permitted—is rushed through the Congress and signed by the President.

It’s all based on a lie…in the same way that the disease theory of the medical cartel is based on a lie: the strength of an individual’s immune system is the basic determinant of health or illness, not germs considered in a vacuum.

There are people who are determined to inflate the dangers of germs. They trumpet every “new” germ as the end of humankind on the planet. They especially sound the alarm when researchers claim a germ may have mutated or jumped from animals to humans.

“This is it! We’re done for!”

However, if you check into actual confirmed cases of death from recent so-called epidemics, such as West Nile, SARS, bird flu, Swine Flu, and Ebola, the numbers of deaths are incredibly low.

If political criminals, behind the scenes, wanted to stage a confined “biowar” event, they would choose a chemical, not a germ, and they would leverage such an event to curtail freedom.

Understand: researchers behind sealed doors in labs can claim, with unassailable ease, that they’ve found a germ that causes an outbreak. Almost no one challenges such an assertion.

This was the case, for example, with the vaunted SARS epidemic (a dud), in 2003, when 10 World Health Organization (WHO) labs, walled off from view, in communication with each other via closed circuit, announced they’d isolated a coronavirus as the culprit.

Later, in Canada, a WHO microbiologist, Frank Plummer, wandered off the reservation and told reporters he was puzzled by the fact that fewer and fewer SARS patients “had the coronavirus.” This was tantamount to confessing that the whole research effort had been a failure and a sham—but after a day or so of coverage, the press fell silent.

SARS was a nonsensical farce. Diagnosed patients had ordinary seasonal flu or a collection of familiar symptoms that could result from many different causes.

But the propaganda effort was a stunning success. Populations were frightened. The need for vaccines, in the public mind, was exacerbated.

Several years ago, I spoke with a biologist about the fake bioterror scenario I’ve sketched out above. His comment was: “Do you think any mainstream scientist would dare go into that cordoned-off town and actually check the area for a highly toxic chemical? He’d be blackballed, exiled, and discredited in a minute. The authorities would call him crazy. And that’s if he were lucky.”

Such is “science,” these days. A researcher can discover anything he wants to, if it’s approved. Otherwise, the door is closed.

After 30 years of covering and reporting on deep science fraud, I can tell you that most scientists know, without instructions from above, the dimensions of their “permitted territory.” They can sniff out career danger from a mile away.

GMOs? Roundup? Other toxic pesticides? Climate change? Vaccines? Medical drugs? Diagnostic medical tests? Actual environmental pollution? Mercury? Chemicals in food? Radiation? Nuclear power plants? Fracking? Fluorides? On these and a whole host of other issues, government is centrally involved as a ruling force. And there are armies of compliant scientists ready and willing to carry out preferred government (and corporate) dictates. These scientists already know the answers before the questions are even asked.

Meanwhile, propaganda rivers flow, extolling the glories of science.

It’s a dream situation, for the terminally corrupt.

A huge number of scientists, who don’t actually participate in research fraud, stand back and watch it happen and say nothing. They see the handwriting on the wall in very large letters.

In 1988, while writing my first book, AIDS INC., I interviewed a highly respected virologist at a US university. I mentioned that several molecular biologists were challenging the HIV-causation hypothesis of AIDS. He told me that he and a number of his colleagues were aware that “a serious problem” existed concerning evidence for the hypothesis, but they were all going to “let this one go.” It was too political, he said.

Yes, well, an enormous amount of science turns out to be political.

Keeping one’s head down and letting things go by may not be part of a PhD curriculum, but soon after school is out, researchers enter a different kind of training.

A main theme then pops up: do you want a career, or do you want to live in the middle of nowhere, in exile?

As it so happens, building a broad scientific consensus resting on sand is a straightforward job. It takes time and money, but the work requires no brilliance.

You just flash signs at scientists. The signs say: money; job security; status; advancement; promotion; grants; prestige; reputation; pension; exposure; censure; discrediting; exile; isolation; death.

They get the idea right away.

They would get the idea when a fake bio-attack (that was actually a chemical) occurred. Stay quiet, agree with the authorities.

“Sure, I knew it was a chemical, but I have house payments to make, and my kids are applying to expensive universities…”

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

Jon Rappoport

Virus fakery: my conversation with a White House insider

Apr18

Virus fakery: my conversation with a White House insider

And another conversation with a virologist

by Jon Rappoport

April 18, 2016

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

There are a number of cases in which a virus is said to be the cause of a disease—but the evidence doesn’t stand up.

I first realized this in 1987. I was writing my book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century.

Robert Gallo, who claimed he had found the cause of AIDS, hadn’t done proper work. From everything I read, he had discovered HIV in 35 to 60 percent of AIDS patients he had studied.

He should have been able to isolate HIV in virtually every patient.

Then there was the fact that the most popular tests for HIV, the Elisa and Western Blot, were fatally flawed. They could register positive for a whole host of reasons that had nothing to do with HIV.

And no one had found sufficient quantities of HIV in humans to justify claiming it caused any kind of illness.

My own research into the so-called high-risk groups revealed that the immune suppression in those groups could be explained by factors other than a virus.

(Note: All my research at that time assumed HIV existed. Since then, several researchers, including the Perth Group, have made compelling arguments that the existence of HIV was never demonstrated.)

As I was winding up the final draft of AIDS INC., I spoke, off the record, with a well-known and well-respected mainstream virologist at a large US university. I expressed my conclusions about HIV.

He spoke, first, about the difficulties in making an absolute decision about a virus as the cause of a disease.

I brought the conversation back to HIV.

He paused. Then he repeated that he couldn’t go on the record. I asked him why.

He said HIV was a subject fraught with problems. Politics were involved.

His obvious implication was: careers were on the line.

Attacking HIV as the cause of AIDS could result in blacklisting.

He stopped short of saying HIV wasn’t the cause of AIDS, but it was clear he had seen enough to know there were major holes in HIV science.

Exposing this fact would go far beyond the usual definition of a scandal. The result would be a volcanic eruption, if, say, a dozen respected virologists told the truth.

Why? Because if certain lies are exposed, they initiate a contagion of doubt and insight that spreads to the whole complex inter-structure of what people take to be reality.

Great curtains are torn away. Pillars are cracked, and fall. Images which are taken to be absolute and unchanging distort, dissolve, and blow away in the wind.

A week after AIDS INC. was shipped to bookstores, in 1988, my friend and colleague, hypnotherapist Jack True, told me a copy of the book was on its way to Russia in a diplomatic pouch.

I asked him how he knew. He shrugged and said he had a few connections.

There was one exception. In 1987, I had a conversation with James Warner, a White House policy analyst. The interview was published in the LA Weekly.

Warner had serious doubts about the HIV theory of AIDS, and would arrange a White House conference on the issue. Pro and anti HIV scientists would be permitted to speak at length.

At the last minute, the conference was cancelled.

Here are a few brief excerpts from my conversation with Warner. As a White House analyst, his comments are explosive:

Rappoport: Robert Gallo, Max Essex, people like that, were the field commanders on the NIH [National Institutes of Health] war on cancer in the 70’s. They lost that war. So why are they in charge of AIDS research now? It seems odd that we don’t have other people running the show.

Warner: If ever I’ve been tempted to believe in socialism, science has disabused me of that. These guys [at NIH] assume that it’s their show. They just assume it.

Rappoport: Peter Duesberg, a distinguished molecular biologist at Berkeley, has said that HIV does not cause AIDS. Have you asked people at NIH what they think, specifically, of his arguments?

Rappoport: The definition of AIDS in Africa is now becoming synonymous with starvation. They’re saying the three major symptoms are chronic diarrhea, fever, and wasting-away. Weight-loss. It certainly makes a perfect smokescreen for the aspect of hunger which is political [and intentionally maintained] – just call it AIDS.

—end of interview excerpt—

In this current political atmosphere, a White House analyst wouldn’t dare go on the record with comments like these.

Rigid consensus must be maintained.

Jon Rappoport

Canada and the great flu hoax

Oct21

Canada and the great flu hoax

by Jon Rappoport

October 21, 2015

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

Under the radar: a November 25, 2012, CBC News article by Kelly Crowe, “Flu deaths reality check.”

Crowe highlights the often-parroted, official Canadian estimate of between 2000 and 8000 yearly deaths from flu.

Then she gets down to business.

At the time of the CBC News article (11/25/2012), the FluWatch/Public Health Agency of Canada figures for 2012 flu deaths in Canada? How many deaths?

One.

One death.

I just checked FluWatch for flu deaths so far in 2015. None. Zero.

Crowe, in her stunning article, goes on to detail how various computer models can be used (massaged) to “count” wildly different numbers of flu deaths.

Of course, Canadian health officials keep on telling people how important the flu shot is.

Next, we come to the matter of how many flu cases occur every year. The answer? Unknown. Doctors slap on a flu diagnosis at the drop of a hat, without running lab tests.

Crowe mentions other germs that are linked to flu symptoms: the RSV (respiratory syncytial virus), the coronavirus, the adenovirus, Streptococcus pneumonia, etc. But guess what? Public health officials and doctors rarely mention this fact—instead, they keep saying, “Take the flu vaccine.”

Even if you believe the flu vaccine is safe and effective, the shot would do nothing to prevent illness from all these other germs.

Bottom line: the whole flu business in Canada is a hoax.

In past articles, I’ve demonstrated how the same hoax is being played out in the US. You can bet the farm that this is the case all over the world, wherever “modern medicine” is practiced.

Here are a few quotes from Crowe’s article:

“How reliable are the computer model estimates [of the flu]? ‘I don’t think they’re reliable at all,’ Dr. Tom Jefferson told me. He is a Rome-based researcher with the Cochrane Collaboration, and he spends his days reviewing all the research on acute respiratory infections and vaccines. He said hard data on flu deaths ‘are difficult to get hold of for obvious reasons. So enter modelling, which is nothing more than guesswork, highly sensitive to the assumptions you feed into the model. “Give me a model and I will make it say whatever you want” a colleague of mine always repeats.'”

“Another model assumes that every extra death that happens in the winter is a flu death. At the risk of oversimplifying, this is the basic formula of that model: winter deaths (minus) summer deaths = death by flu virus.

“That includes winter deaths from slippery sidewalks, snowy roads, freezing temperatures, plus all the winter heart failure, lung failure and deaths from cancer. In the language of the computer model, all excess mortality in winter is considered ‘death by flu.’”

Getting the picture?

The major challenge facing Canadian doctors, public health officials, and vaccine manufacturers is: how do they make astonishing lies sound like science?

They’re up to the challenge. They’ve had a lot of practice. The question is, are you ready, willing, and able to reject them?

A hoax keeps selling as long as people keep buying.

Jon Rappoport

Vaccination: how the West invades the world

Oct1

by Jon Rappoport

October 1, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“The first great wave of missionaries brings a fairy tale of a religion to ‘the less fortunate primitive people’. The second great wave of missionaries are the priests in white coats. They too bring a fairy tale: medical treatments for problems they can’t possibly solve. The self-generated delusions of these doctors about their ‘success’ are equal to, or even surpass the religious delusions.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

In the past, I’ve laid to rest the illusion that vaccines are safe and effective. I’ve also exploded the ridiculous myth of herd immunity.

This article is about something else. It’s about the invasion staged by Western medicine against areas of the globe where older forms of healing have long prevailed.

Vaccination is the prow, the leading edge of the invasion. Convincing nations that vaccines are absolutely essential opens the way for all the other practices of Western medicine. Especially mass drugging.

In recent years (think Swine Flu, SARS, and other fake epidemics), the World Health Organization has played a major role in insisting—with threats of sanctions and quarantines and travel advisories—that nations vaccinate their citizens to the hilt, in order to protect the world against “the deadly spread of viruses.”

The WHO wields significant power in this regard. It is a pharmaceutical enforcer.

Here is the second aspect of the vaccination-invasion: the local leaders of “backward” nations stand to gain from the vaccine ruse.

Instead of having to admit they are causing widespread death and devastation by maintaining poverty, hunger, starvation, unsanitary overcrowded living conditions, and contaminated water supplies—all of this on purpose, in order to keep their populations weak and under control—the political leaders in those countries can say:

“Our people are suffering from specific diseases, over which we have no control. We are afflicted with viruses. We must take steps. We must upgrade our medical care programs. The first step is instituting widespread vaccination against viruses.”

This con lets them off the hook. This con is a cover story that obscures what these leaders are actually doing to their own people. This con obscures the fact that, when living conditions are execrable and miserable, disease arises independent of what particular germs are circulating. The imposed conditions of life destroy immune systems, after which any germ that comes down the pipeline causes debilitation and death—whereas, in the presence of strong immune systems, the germs would have little or no adverse effects. They would be routinely repelled. (I suggest you read this paragraph again, twice. For further info, go here, here, and here.)

Vaccination, as a “bonus” for repressive leaders, actually makes things worse for populations. It pushes already weakened immune systems over the edge into complete collapse.

Consider also how mega-corporations benefit.

After making deals with local dictators to set up shop, hire workers for pennies an hour, steal land and resources, and keep populations weak, confused, debilitated, and therefore less able to rebel against the outright theft of their countries, these corporations also have a built-in cover story:

“It’s shame what’s happening to the people here, all this disease. Therefore, we wholly support bringing in medical aid, to stem the tide…”

As if doctors and drugs and vaccines could cure the destruction wrought by abject poverty and starvation.

The degree of brainwashing propaganda about the miracle of medicine is extraordinary.

People watch/read news stories about doctors and medical supplies going to impoverished countries, and casually assume there is some connection between that and bringing health to millions of people.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

“Yes, I see you’ve been hungry for 20 years. Here is a drug. And roll up your tattered sleeve for 10 vaccines.”

Any doctor worth his salt understands these things. He knows. He knows he is being used as a prop in a fantasy stage production of The Cure: A Great Deception.

The man in the white coat comes to dinner, but there is no dinner.

“Hello. I represent a few mega-corporations who, in conjunction with your leaders over the past hundred years, have stolen your country from you, taken the best farm land, the richest minerals, and put you to work at starvation wages. Therefore, you’re sick. So now I’m going to help you with a shot in the arm that will do nothing to raise your level of health. But we’ll pretend it will. Okay?”

Many years ago, in my college bulletin, a young doctor wrote a piece about his experiences in Africa. He grasped part of the truth. He mentioned that severe dehydration/diarrhea was a leading cause of death there, but the medical people refused to give out simple packs that would at least, for the moment, rehydrate the sufferers. Instead, they insisted on administering antibiotics—which of course made the problem worse by killing off beneficial gut bacteria.

Thirty years later, while I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., I got a call from a doctor who had set up a small AIDS clinic in Uganda. He simply gave his patients clean rooms and nutritious food, and helped them start a little farm, where they grew beans and sold them. That’s all.

He said to me, “All their AIDS symptoms went away. What do I do now?”

The first thing he could do was realize that HIV was a stupendous cover story to explain “why so many people in Africa were sick.”

He was something close to a real healer, and he had done his job well. But because of his indoctrination, he didn’t know it.

When experts rattle on about how vaccination has wiped out many diseases in the Third World, what they really mean is: vaccines have suppressed the visible symptoms that lead to the diagnosis of these diseases. But new symptoms will arise, and they will be called other disease-names. It’s a shell game.

I challenge anyone to show me large, correctly done studies that track people in the Third World who have received the usual batches of vaccines. Show me that the overall health level of these people has improved over time.

In other words, show me that people who are chronically affected by hunger, starvation, contaminated water, and unsanitary overcrowded living conditions are somehow enjoying improved health because they were given shots in the arm.

“Well, when you put it that way…”

I do put it that way. Because that’s the way it is.

All the laudatory verbiage about the unparalleled success of vaccines in the Third World is just more illusion, more cover story, more diversion.

The invasion is ongoing.

Jon Rappoport

Boggling flu hoax: not for prime-time news

Sep29

Boggling flu hoax: not for prime-time news

by Jon Rappoport

September 29, 2015

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

“Repeat a lie often enough and people believe it. We all know that. But there are millions of people out there who think a public-health agency like the CDC, a scientific body, would never engage in such tactics. Those millions of people would be wrong. There is a rule: the most holy, sacred, revered, uncontestable organization hides the biggest secrets. It’s a good rule to keep in mind. Major media don’t apply it. But you can.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

There are many propaganda operations surrounding the flu. Here I just want to boil down a few boggling facts.

Dr. Peter Doshi, writing in the online BMJ (British Medical Journal), reveals one monstrosity.

As Doshi states, every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory samples are taken from flu patients in the US and tested in labs. Here is the kicker: only a small percentage of these samples show the presence of a flu virus.

This means: most of the people in America who are diagnosed by doctors with the flu have no flu virus in their bodies.

So they don’t have the flu.

Therefore, even if you assume the flu vaccine is useful and safe, it couldn’t possibly prevent all those “flu cases” that aren’t flu cases.

The vaccine couldn’t possibly work.

The vaccine isn’t designed to prevent fake flu, unless pigs can fly.

Here’s the exact quote from Peter Doshi’s BMJ review, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):

“…even the ideal influenza vaccine, matched perfectly to circulating strains of wild influenza and capable of stopping all influenza viruses, can only deal with a small part of the ‘flu’ problem because most ‘flu’ appears to have nothing to do with influenza. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.

“…It’s no wonder so many people feel that ‘flu shots’ don’t work: for most flus, they can’t.”

Because most diagnosed cases of the flu aren’t the flu.

So even if you’re a true believer in mainstream vaccine theory, you’re on the short end of the stick here. They’re conning your socks off.

In December of 2005, the British Medical Journal (online) published another shocking Peter Doshi report, which created tremors through the halls of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), where “the experts” used to tell the press that 36,000 people in the US die every year from the flu.

Here is a quote from Doshi’s report, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412):

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”

Boom.

You see, the CDC has created one overall category that combines both flu and pneumonia deaths. Why do they do this? Because they disingenuously assume that the pneumonia deaths are complications stemming from the flu.

This is an absurd assumption. Pneumonia has a number of causes.

But even worse, in all the flu and pneumonia deaths, only 18 revealed the presence of an influenza virus.

Therefore, the CDC could not say, with assurance, that more than 18 people died of influenza in 2001. Not 36,000 deaths. 18 deaths.

Doshi continued his assessment of published CDC flu-death statistics: “Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data show an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).” These figures refer to flu separated out from pneumonia.

This death toll is obviously far lower than the parroted 36,000 figure.

However, when you add the sensible condition that lab tests have to actually find the flu virus in patients, the numbers of flu deaths plummet even further.

In other words, it’s all promotion and hype.

“Well, uh, we say that 36,000 people die from the flu every year in the US. But actually, it’s closer to 20. However, we can’t admit that, because if we did, we’d be exposing our gigantic psyop. The whole campaign to scare people into getting a flu shot would have about the same effect as warning people to carry iron umbrellas, in case toasters fall out of upper-story windows…and, by the way, we’d be put in prison for fraud.”

False realities bloom from the intentional planting of false seeds. Bit by bit, garden by garden, pasture by pasture, the reality spreads, until it is considered unimpeachable. This is how the game works.

Jon Rappoport

If a mainstream reporter told the truth

Sep24

If a mainstream reporter told the truth

the pillars of reality would crumble

by Jon Rappoport

September 24, 2015

“Imagine this. The public is told a new disease is sweeping the world, threatening the global population with suffering and death. Millions and millions of words are spewed, detailing and reinforcing the threat. Every day, official reports are issued, blaring the new numbers of cases. Researchers are rushing to develop an effective vaccine. And then, suddenly, someone discovers there is no epidemic. It doesn’t exist. What would happen?” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Telling the truth, of course, must lead to publishing the truth.

And then follow-up investigations would be done to flesh out the story further; to prompt people with inside knowledge to emerge from their closets and confess their complicity.

I’m talking about a certain kind of truth, whereby a sacred cow is destroyed; the kind of cow everyone immediately believes is self-evident, universal, and vital, representing the best motives and impulses of people in power.

That kind of sacred cow.

A cow holding up the world, so to speak.

Destroyed.

There are many important lies that don’t quite rate that status. If they were exposed to the light of day, people would say, “Yes, it’s shocking, but we always had doubts.”

And life would go on.

A monumental sacred cow has the quality of being believed in the same way people believe the sun will come up in the morning.

Therefore, when it falls, the shock is volcanic.

However, I need to add this disclaimer. Most minds and eyeballs simply don’t notice the sacred cow falling and shattering like porcelain. It happens, but it doesn’t draw attention because people will do anything they can to maintain their grip on illusion.

It would take something on the order of Kansas disappearing off the map overnight to arouse the population—and even then, large numbers of people would claim it didn’t happen, because it couldn’t happen.

So now I’ll describe an example.

In the summer of 2009, the world was agog as a sweeping pandemic called Swine Flu invaded their lives. The virus said to be responsible for this catastrophe was H1N1.

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC), whose job was to report numbers of cases, claimed there were roughly ten thousand Swine Flu victims in America.

Understand: getting the numbers right was the CDC’s prime task. In the absence of doing that, they had no reason to exist as an agency tracking an epidemic.

In the fall of 2009, a CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, discovered something quite strange. She hit the motherlode of a scandal:

Back in July, the CDC had stopped counting Swine Flu cases.

The agency didn’t make this public. It didn’t put out the story to reporters. But Attkisson found out the truth.

She went further. She uncovered the reason the CDC stopped counting.

Here is what Attkisson wrote, on October 21, 2009, in an article posted on the CBS News website, titled, “Swine Flu Cases Overestimated?”:

“If you’ve been diagnosed ‘probable’ or ‘presumed’ 2009 H1N1 or ‘swine flu’ in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn’t have H1N1 [Swine] flu. In fact, you probably didn’t have flu at all.”

“That’s according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.”

“In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 [Swine] flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there’s an epidemic?”

“…we [CBS News] asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 [Swine Flu cases] prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.”

And the staggering capper on this tale? Roughly three weeks after Attkisson’s Swine Flu revelations appeared in print, the CDC, obviously in great distress over the exposure, decided to double down. The best lie to tell would be a huge lie.

Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon)

I interviewed Sharyl Attkisson. She told me the following:

“…we discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was ‘the most original story’ he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others [at CBS] pushed to stop it and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It [Attkisson’s investigation] was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.”

In other words, the whole Swine Flu episode was a dud. A hoax.

It was exposed on the CBS News website. Beyond that, it never became a big story at CBS or any other major mainstream outlet in the world. It was squashed.

To receive the full force of this hoax, you need to understand that so-called epidemics are very big business. Vaccine business. Pharma business. Government business.

When those governments announce an epidemic, the public believes. The belief is on the order of religious faith. It is also scientific faith. Once announced, there is no going back. These “epidemics” are, like major banks, too big to fail.

But Swine Flu did fail. Right out in the open. On the CBS News website. It was exposed as a grand hoax.

Realizing what they had just let happen, CBS dropped the curtain. There would be no follow-up. The story wouldn’t make it on to the national evening television broadcast.

And most of the people who read the story on the CBS website would blink and move on. Their minds wouldn’t register the implications. Kansas had just disappeared, but for them it was still there.

That’s how consensus reality operates. It’s there even when it isn’t. It’s there even after it’s been axed, sawed, dissolved.

It’s the proverbial bad penny that keeps coming back. It keeps showing up.

The public is married to the whole idea of viruses. Viruses are embraced as basic seeds of medical reality. From those seeds bloom all sorts of unshakable facts about illness. Virus does this, virus causes that, prevent virus from taking hold with a shot—news about viruses is as commonplace and familiar as pots and pans are in kitchens. “Everybody knows about viruses.”

Of course, everybody doesn’t know about viruses, but they think they do.

And here is a case, Swine Flu, where what everybody knew as a fundamental fact of reality was wrong.

The virus wasn’t there.

As a researcher once wrote me, “Pepsi, Coke, McDonald’s, ice cream, viruses. They’re the pillars, the foundation stones. But you’d be surprised how often we’re guessing about viruses. We say they’re there, causing a disease. We give a name to the disease, and the public salutes. We’re taking a stab in the dark. If we admitted it, our whole operation would crash…”

You can doubt what the President is saying. You can doubt the Congress, the FBI, the CIA, and the IRS. You can doubt all the mega-corporations. You can doubt Mickey Mouse and the Pope. But when you doubt viruses, you’re committing heresy, because medical science is a super-religion. Its basic tenets are “self-evident.” They must be. They have to be.

Especially when they aren’t.

Jon Rappoport

Virus fakery: my conversation with a virologist

Sep14

Virus fakery: my conversation with a virologist

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2015