Quick alert on genetically engineered mosquitoes

by Jon Rappoport

January 18, 2016

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

You’re going to be hearing a lot more about this “solution” to disease-carrying mosquitoes in Florida, Brazil, and other places. For now, I want to cover a few basics. (Full archive here.)

A town in Brazil is already reporting elevated levels of human disease since the GE (genetically engineered) mosquitoes have been introduced.

The scientific hypothesis is: the GE bugs (males) will impregnate natural females…but no actual next generation occurs. However, this plummeting birth rate in mosquitoes is the only “proof” that the grand experiment is safe. No long-term health studies have been done—this is a mirror of what happened when GMO crops were introduced: no science, just bland assurances.

In Brazil, a major target for the experiment, the rational is: dengue fever (carried by mosquitoes) is the target; wiping it out is the goal. But the original ID of the dengue fever virus in a human was accomplished by what’s called the PCR test. There are several serious problems with this test. One is: there is no reliable way to calculate how much virus is in a human patient. In order to claim a virus is complicit in disease, there must be an ID that shows a huge amount of virus—otherwise, there would be no danger. So the entire basis (dengue fever) for the GE mosquito campaign is based on faulty diagnosis and faulty science.

Needless to say, without extensive lab testing, there is no way to tell what these GE mosquitoes are actually harboring, in addition to what researchers claim. That’s a major red flag.

And finally, wherever these GE mosquitoes have been introduced, or are about to be introduced, the human populations have not been consulted for their permission. It’s all being done by government and corporate edict. It’s human experimentation on a grand scale.

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.

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

(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.

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 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?

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.

Jon Rappoport

Inventing viruses: a staggering hoax

Aug6

“Ebola has returned.” Has it?

by Jon Rappoport

August 6, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“I have many reasons for exposing hoaxes about viruses. One vital reason: when people realize the truth, they begin to grasp, at a visceral level, what’s possible in the area of fake-reality invention. They see their own prior assumptions go whirling down the drain. They see how many pancakes of propaganda can be stacked up on one plate. The virus hoax cuts very, very deep, all the way down into what people automatically accept as Obvious. It isn’t obvious at all. It’s a complete fabrication. It’s an artifact made out of nothing.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Yahoo News, July 3, 2015, “Ebola Returns to Liberia: Where Did It Come From, and Could It Spread?”:

“The return of Ebola in Liberia — with three new cases reported this week in the previously Ebola-free country — is worrisome, and raises questions about whether Liberia was really free of the disease to begin with, experts say.”

Reader, we’re moving into deep waters now. This isn’t just about Ebola. This is about the whole structure of false medical reality.

And that reality begins with the arrogant assurance that what’s killing very large numbers of people can be traced to a virus.

The “experts” present a unified front. They assert that their tests for these viruses are correct, pure, and extremely useful.

Yes, the tests are useful to the pharmaceutical companies who make the drugs that purport to kill the viruses and the vaccines that purport to give immunity to the viruses.

But as I’ve shown in prior articles, these tests (antibody, PCR) are far from accurate. Worse, they’re irrelevant.

And they mask the fact that actual isolation of the virus from the human body is not being done.

Several readers have asked me what “isolation of a virus” means. The most obvious answer is: you know you’re looking at virus, rather than something else.

For example, you remove diseased tissue from a human being, and from it you separate out probable virus from non-viral material, and you then take electron microscope pictures of the probable, and you look at those picture, and you see lots and lots of the same virus. Not what could be or might be virus, but definitely virus.

This is direct. This is virus from a human. This is not indirect testing that is faulty, irrelevant, and can go wrong in many ways. Isolation is what you need to begin to say a virus could be causing a disease.

Let me take you down a road that is rarely traveled and show you a few precedents where “everybody knows it’s a virus” turned out to be dead wrong.

Peter Doshi, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease,” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):

“…Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory [flu] specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.”

Translation: 84% of what is considered to be flu isn’t flu. Every year.

The flu virus isn’t there.

Here’s another Doshi reference—December, 2005, the BMJ Online, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412):

That’s 18.

At various times, the CDC has stated that, every year, 36,000 Americans die from the flu…or, after revising that estimate, the CDC states it could be anywhere from 3000 to 49,000.

But only 18 patients’ blood samples showed any sign of the presence of the flu virus.

Consider Pellagra. In the first half of the 20th century, in the US, there were three million cases. 100,000 people died. Researchers at health agencies insisted there had to be germ at the bottom of it. They looked and looked and looked.

Meanwhile, other researchers found out Pellagra was mainly a deficiency of niacin. They were pushed into the background. “A bunch of fools. Pay no attention to them.”

Finally, after 100,000 deaths, most of which were unnecessary, the “experts” grudgingly admitted, “Yes, it’s niacin.”

Fifty years ago, there was a massive outbreak of a nervous-system disorder in Japan. It was called SMON (subacute myelo-optic neuropathy). Tens of thousands of cases, many deaths. People were in an uproar.

Researchers were told to look for a virus. So they did. And did. And did. It had to be a virus.

Against much opposition, a small group of investigators and lawyers publicly proposed a different answer. SMON was the result of a drug Ciba-Geigy was selling to alleviate gastrointestinal distress. The drug was Clioquinol.

Finally exposed in court, Ciba paid out large $$ damages.

It wasn’t a virus. Even though everybody thought it was. Knew it was.

Here’s another reference. Jim West, writing at the Weston A Price Foundation, “The SARS Epidemic: Are Viruses Taking the Rap for Industrial Poisons?”

“An insider, Dr. Frank Plummer, spilled the beans: ‘The director… told The Scientist yesterday (April 10) that the new coronavirus implicated as the cause of the disease is certainly around in the environment but is unlikely to be the causative agent. Frank Plummer is director of Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.’

“Plummer stated, ‘we are finding some of the best-characterized [SARS disease] cases are negative [for the SARS virus]. So it’s puzzling. As is the fact the amounts of virus we are finding, when we find it, are very small—only detectable by very sensitive PCR [testing].’”

Even when the so-called cause of SARS was found in patients, the amount was so small there was no way to say it would create disease. Plummer eventually admitted that the percentage of SARS cases in which the virus was present was approaching zero. Translation: the viral cause of SARS couldn’t be the cause.

Here is a brief edited excerpt—the entire interview is published at primitivism.com:

CJ [Christine Johnson]: Does HIV cause AIDS?

EPE [Papadopulos]: There is no proof that HIV causes AIDS.

CJ: Why not?

EPE: For many reasons, but most importantly, because there is no proof that HIV exists.

…

CJ: Didn’t Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo isolate HIV back in the early eighties?

EPE: No. In the papers published in Science by those two research groups, there is no proof of the isolation of a retrovirus from AIDS patients…

CJ: They say they did isolate a virus.

EPE: Our interpretation of the data differs…To prove the existence of a virus you need to do three things. First, culture cells and find a particle you think might be a virus. Obviously, at the very least, that particle should look like a virus. Second, you have to devise a method to get that particle on its own so you can take it to pieces and analyze precisely what makes it up. Then you need to prove the particle can make faithful copies of itself. In other words, that it can replicate.

CJ: Can’t you just look down a microscope and say there’s a virus in the cultures?

EPE: No, you can’t. Not all particles that look like viruses are viruses.

CJ: So where did AIDS research go wrong?

EPE: It’s not so much a question of where the research went wrong. It’s more a question of what was left out. For some unknown reason the decades-old method of retroviral isolation…developed to study animal retroviruses was not followed. Retroviruses are incredibly tiny, almost spherical particles with diameters of about one hundred nanometers (one ten-thousandth of a millimeter). Millions would fit comfortably on the head of a pin.

…

CJ: What do we see in [electron microscope pictures of HIV]… published in 1997?

EPE: These photographs vindicate the position we have held ever since the beginning. Two groups, one Franco/German…and one from the US National Cancer Institute…published pictures…The first thing to say is that the authors of these studies concede that their pictures reveal that the vast majority of the material…is cellular. The authors describe all this material as “non-viral”, or as “mock” virus or “microvesicles,” which are encapsulated cell fragments.

CJ: Are there any viral particles in these pictures?

EPE: There are a few particles which the researchers claim are retroviral particles. In fact, they claim these are the HIV particles, but give no evidence why.

CJ: Are there lots of these HIV particles?

EPE: No…when you take an electron micrograph they [HIV particles] should fill the entire picture. Instead, these candidate retroviruses are minority constituents of the published electron micrographs. Thus, molecules extracted from these samples can not be assumed to come from those retroviral-like particles.

—end of interview excerpt—

So no, the experts aren’t automatically right when they say, “It’s a virus.”

In the case of Ebola, why should you believe them now?

I recently had an exchange of emails with David Rasnick, PhD.

You can read Rasnick’s bio at his site, davidrasnick.com. He obtained his PhD from the Georgia Institute of Technology, and spent 25 years working with proteases (a class of enzymes) and protease inhibitors. He is the author of the book, The Chromosomal Imbalance Theory of Cancer. He was a member of the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel of South Africa.

The subject of our conversation was the isolation of the Ebola virus from humans. Has it ever been done?

Direct isolation is far different from diagnostic tests such as antibody or PCR, which are both indirect methods of assessment. In previous articles, I’ve covered the irrelevance of these two tests.

Any discussion of the Ebola virus must begin with the question of direct isolation. The whole presumption of an Ebola outbreak and epidemic rests on that question.

Was the Ebola virus ever purified and isolated from a human?

Here is what Rasnick wrote, after his search of the published literature:

“I have examined in detail the literature on isolation and Ems [EM: electron microscope pictures] of both Ebola and Marburg viruses. I have not found any convincing evidence that Ebola virus (and for that matter Marburg) has been isolated from humans. There is certainly no confirmatory evidence of human isolation.

“I searched the CDC’s website and came up dry.

“The CDC claims 7728 Ebola virus cases have been ‘laboratory-confirmed’.

“I asked the CDC what constitutes isolation of Ebola virus from human specimens. I also asked for the protocol for isolating Ebola virus. [No convincing reply from the CDC as of this date.]

“Virtually everything that is known and done with these viruses is in animals and cell culture.”

Rasnick continued:

“There is the possibility that Ebola and Marburg viruses represent laboratory artifacts. I’m inclined to think this is the case. What I mean is the viruses are real but may exist at very low levels in wild animals and even humans, well-below pathogenic [disease-causing] levels. These ‘passenger’ viruses may be activated and amplified in laboratory culturing conditions designed for that purpose in order to produce enough viral particles to be characterized.

“Viruses causing real pathology are abundant in the diseased tissues. You can see them using EM on the primary tissue. You do not need to amplify the virus in cell culture. I’m always suspicious when cell culture is the only way a virus is observable by EM.”

Rasnick’s findings are a direct challenge to the basis of the whole “Ebola outbreak.” If indeed the Ebola virus has never been isolated from a human being, the so-called epidemic is unproven.

To say this is shocking would be a vast understatement.

When public-health officials and governments claim there is an epidemic, the burden of proof is on them.

At this point, they must, first and foremost, show someone, somewhere, correctly and directly and undeniably isolated Ebola virus from a human being.

Let’s see the evidence.

In past articles, I’ve demonstrated how people could become ill from factors other than viruses—factors which are ignored and even maintained, in order to keep populations in a debilitated state, unable to resist their political leaders and corporations intent on taking over land and resources.

Add to that, attributing fake viral causes to illness also opens the gate wide to the products of Big Pharma—toxic medical drugs and vaccines.

These fake viral “outbreaks and epidemics” also serve to keep populations in fear, at which point they look to their leaders to tell them what to do. This is programming for compliance.

One aspect of studying the matrix called civilization involves unearthing the most basic assumptions which people accept—assumptions they couldn’t possibly believe are false, much less intentionally false.

The analysis I’m presenting here is one corner on one street in a massive city-labyrinth called Matrix.

(For more information on analyzing and deconstructing false realities, see “Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation” in Power Outside The Matrix.)

Jon Rappoport

The invention of “virus reality”

Nov4

by Jon Rappoport

November 4, 2014

(To join our email list, click here.)

“Gods and viruses and other invisible movers and shakers; these are the preferred building blocks of the reality-makers. They say, ‘This is what you can’t see. We’ll describe it for you.’” (Notes for The Matrix Revealed, Jon Rappoport)

Reader, we’re moving into deep waters now. This isn’t just about Ebola. This is about the whole structure of false medical reality.

And that reality begins with the arrogant assurance that what’s killing very large numbers of people can be traced to a virus.

The “experts” present a unified front. They assert that their tests for these viruses are correct, pure, and extremely useful.

Yes, the tests are useful to the pharmaceutical companies who make the drugs that purport to kill the viruses and the vaccines that purport to give immunity to the viruses.

But as I’ve shown in prior articles, these tests (antibody, PCR) are far from accurate. Worse, they’re irrelevant.

And they mask the fact that actual isolation of the virus from the human body is not being done.

Several readers have asked me what “isolation of a virus” means. The most obvious answer is: you know you’re looking at virus, rather than something else.

Let me take you down a road that is rarely traveled and show you a few precedents where “everybody knows it’s a virus” turned out to be dead wrong.

Peter Doshi, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease,” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):

“…Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory [flu] specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.”

Translation: 84% of what is considered to be flu isn’t flu. Every year.

The flu virus isn’t there.

Here’s another Doshi reference, which I mentioned in a recent article—December, 2005, the BMJ Online, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412):

That’s 18.

At various times, the CDC has stated that, every year, 36,000 Americans die from the flu…or, after revising that estimate, the CDC states it could be anywhere from 3000 to 49,000.

But only 18 patients’ blood samples showed any sign of the presence of the flu virus.

Meanwhile, other researchers found out Pellagra was mainly a deficiency of niacin. They were pushed into the background. “A bunch of whackos. Pay no attention to them.”

Finally, after 100,000 deaths, most of which were unnecessary, the “experts” grudgingly admitted, “Yes, it’s niacin.”

Researchers were told to look for a virus. So they did. And did. And did. It had to be a virus.

Exposed in court, Ciba paid out large $$ damages.

It wasn’t a virus. Even though everybody thought it was. Knew it was.

Here’s another reference. Jim West, writing at the Weston A Price Foundation, “The SARS Epidemic: Are Viruses Taking the Rap for Industrial Poisons?”

“An insider, Dr. Frank Plummer, spilled the beans: ‘The director… told The Scientist yesterday (April 10) that the new coronavirus implicated as the cause of the disease is certainly around in the environment but is unlikely to be the causative agent. Frank Plummer is director of Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.’

Here’s another reference, which sheds much more light on what “isolation of a virus” means: Journalist Christine Johnson’s interview, “Does HIV exist?” with Dr. Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, “a biophysicist and leader of a group of HIV/AIDS scientists from Perth in Western Australia. Over the past decade and more she and her colleagues have published many scientific papers questioning the HIV/AIDS hypothesis. This interview by Christine Johnson looks at this work and especially her group’s views on the AIDS virus itself.” (Here is a brief edited excerpt—the entire interview is published at primitivism.com)

CJ: Does HIV cause AIDS?

EPE: There is no proof that HIV causes AIDS.

CJ: Why not?

EPE: For many reasons, but most importantly, because there is no proof that HIV exists.

CJ: Didn’t Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo isolate HIV back in the early eighties?

EPE: No. In the papers published in Science by those two research groups, there is no proof of the isolation of a retrovirus from AIDS patients…

CJ: They say they did isolate a virus.

CJ: Can’t you just look down a microscope and say there’s a virus in the cultures?

EPE: No, you can’t. Not all particles that look like viruses are viruses.

CJ: So where did AIDS research go wrong?

CJ: What do we see in [electron microscope pictures of HIV]… published in 1997?

CJ: Are there any viral particles in these pictures?

EPE: There are a few particles which the researchers claim are retroviral particles. In fact, they claim these are the HIV particles, but give no evidence why.

CJ: Are there lots of these HIV particles?

—end of interview excerpt—

So no, the experts aren’t automatically right when they say, “It’s a virus.”

In the case of Ebola, why should you believe them now?

As I posted yesterday, David Rasnick, PhD, has done a search of the literature on Ebola, looking for evidence that the Ebola virus has been properly isolated from a human being. He reports:

If you don’t isolate what you’re claiming is the cause of a disease, you’re making it up. You’re faking it.

The cover-up reaches into every corner of the planet and goes back in time.

It’s a scandal of scandals, a hoax of hoaxes.

The wholesale invention of false reality.

Jon Rappoport

For alert minds: the art of the covert narrative

Sep30

by Jon Rappoport

September 30, 2014

“Build it and they will come. Build a false narrative and people will come in droves.” —The Underground, Jon Rappoport

When a researcher or an investigator suspects he is looking at an artificial narrative, a storyline that is floated to achieve a hidden agenda, he has to deal with one overriding question:

How deep does he want to go, in order to root out the potential lies and false material?

Into how basic a level of the narrative does he want to cut, to see what leaks out?

Case in point: the current Ebola storyline.

Many lies can be found there. I have written about them (archived here). But one statement in the Ebola narrative is almost universally accepted.

It is accepted in the case of Ebola, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, SARS, and West Nile.

Most recently, the story began this way: “In three West African countries, there has been an outbreak of Ebola.”

This is the crux: “the Ebola virus is killing people.”

The audience automatically accepts that premise.

Whatever else they may or may not accept, they buy that premise.

So many consequences, official and unofficial, can flow from the basic premise, you would think alert people would probe it—but they don’t.

They go for it hook, line, and sinker.

They don’t know whether it’s true, they don’t have any idea about the reality of the assumption, but they grab it and cling to it.

Then they say, “Since we know the Ebola virus is killing lots and lots of people, what else can we infer?”

Effective narratives work that way: slip in a basic idea, watch people buy it and build on it.

What about the kids in Denver now being reported with “muscle weakness?” Must be a virus, the experts say; just not sure which one. Really? Then how do they know it’s a virus at all? Or any germ?

Why is “the mystery illness that’s sweeping the US” caused by a germ? How do we know it’s one illness? The general symptoms that are always reported in these “outbreaks” could be caused by 6 different germs—or none at all.

I remember when Jim West, a fine independent researcher, correlated a so-called outbreak of West Nile with centers of spewing industrial pollution in the US.

Back in 2003, I discovered that at least a quarter of the cases of SARS in Hong Kong, one of the “epicenter” cities, were coming from the Amoy Gardens apartment complex, where feces were leaking into the internal water supply—a plumbing problem.

And “Swine Flu” was an environmental/corporate problem in La Gloria, Mexico, on a large commercial pig farm, where lagoons of pig feces were baking and festering in the sun—and then, on top of that, outside contractors were called in to spray the area with toxic chemicals, which made the local workers even sicker.

In three or four articles about Ebola, I’ve listed all the endemic, chronic, and long-term horrific conditions in West Africa which have been killing people—and none of those conditions is related to Ebola.

I’ve demonstrated, on many occasions, how the most frequently used tests for diagnosing viral diseases—the antibody and PCR tests—are totally unreliable, deceptive, and useless.

I’ve explained that when it comes to germs, the factor that determines health or illness in a human being is the strength of his immune system—not the germ itself.

Ever since 1988, I’ve been writing about the toxic effects of vaccines, which of course involve direct injection of germs, toxic metals, and chemicals into the body, bypassing channels of immune defense—and causing illness.

In West Africa, as elsewhere, vaccination campaigns have been standard operating procedure for decades.

But no. It has to be Ebola, Ebola, Ebola. That’s the narrative and people buy it.

Just as it has to be HIV, HIV, HIV in Africa. In that case, not only are the widely used diagnostic tests useless, but there are quite serious questions about whether HIV exists at all.

That’s right. At primitivism.com, you can read a long interview, by journalist Christine Johnson, with biophysicist Eleni Papadopulos Eleopulos of The Perth Group: “Does HIV exist?”

It tackles somewhat complex technical questions and makes them understandable for the lay reader. It is one of the best interviews on virus hunting I have ever read—a remarkable achievement.

Selling the “the germ and only the germ causes disease” narrative is one of the great propaganda triumphs of modern medicine. Well, if you had a few billion dollars, an army of compliant media journalists, tens of thousands of doctors, and the federal government at your beck and call, you could sell the idea that tomatoes are the preferred fuel for space travel.

In these narratives, always go back to the beginning. Root out the most basic assumptions, and investigate them.

You’ll be surprised.

And when it comes to medical narratives, remember that horror stories about germs are absolutely necessary in order to sell drugs and vaccines.

Some of the major propagandists on the planet ply their trade in that arena.

They succeed because they maintain that the “tiny terrorists” are invisible—except to the experts.

It would be comparable to asserting that data interception and spying are such technical matters that only the NSA and other official professionals are able to understand it—and therefore the public should never question the particulars.

There are untold thousands of capable people taking apart the NSA narrative these days—but how many are taking apart the statement, “The germ XYZ caused the outbreak?”

Jon Rappoport

The hypnotic power of germ propaganda

Sep9

The hypnotic power of germ propaganda

by Jon Rappoport

September 9, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

When perverse elites are building a false matrix for the masses, it’s always wise to find the elites’ most basic assumption and question it.

Time and time again, over the years, we hear about new germs and old germs and “mystery germs” that are afflicting people, suddenly, in various parts of the world.

And this news is met with nearly universal faith. Yes, there must be a germ. It must be what’s making people ill. When researchers speak about the germ, they are correct and truthful.

Really? Why?

Who said so?

I took my first serious germ-foray, when I was writing my book, AIDS Inc., in 1987. To my shock, I discovered that, even by the conventional rules of disease-causation, there was no reason to infer that something called HIV was causing something called AIDS.

Going a step further, I investigated every so-called high-risk group and found non-germ causes that accounted for all the symptoms of what was being called AIDS.

Without HIV as the lynchpin welding all these risk-groups together, “AIDS” was immune-system failure resulting from a variety of causes. Not one cause.

For example: T-cells are significant troops in the immune-system army. The biggest reason for T-cell depletion on the planet? Malnutrition.

The last time I looked, malnutrition is not a germ.

AIDS Inc. is replete with illustrations of germ-touting that turn out to be irrelevant.

But people are fascinated by germ-stories. They love them, they fear them, they add their own wrinkles, they behave as if they’re in a theater watching a horror movie.

When the dreaded SARS epidemic made global headlines in 2003, the germ was the “coronavirus.” Of course, SARS turned out to be a dud. As a horror movie, it didn’t deliver. Too few people died.

Frank Plummer, a Canadian microbiologist working for the World Health Organization, achieved a few moments of honesty when he told reporters that, strangely enough, he was seeing fewer people with SARS who “had the coronavirus.” Eventually, Plummer said, almost none of the people being diagnosed with SARS had the coronavirus.

Which is exactly like saying, “They’re all suffering from disease X, except none of them have what causes disease X.”

A contradiction. Garble. Gibberish.

Six years later, in 2009, there was the fabled Swine Flu H1N1 pandemic, another dud.

Sharyl Attkisson, writing for CBS, and Peter Doshi, writing at BMJ Online, exposed the Swine Flu fraud: most people across the US who were “likely Swine Flu cases” didn’t have the H1N1 virus. That’s what lab tests revealed.

Obviously, for both SARS and Swine Flu, doctors were making eyeball diagnoses based on “typical flu symptoms.”

The public wrongly believes that, when doctors and medical bureaucrats say there is an outbreak of a virus, accurate tests are being done on every patient to confirm the presence of the virus.

Because tests aren’t being done (or because the tests aren’t accurate and relevant), it’s the easiest thing in the world to take numbers of sick people who display very general similar symptoms—and claim all these people have the same disease caused by the same germ.

In the fall of 2009, during the “Swine Flu crisis,” Sharyl Attkisson was shut down at CBS. Her investigation was drilling too deep. She revealed that the CDC had stopped counting the number of Swine Flu cases in America.

Scandal. The sole federal agency tasked with keeping an accurate and updated count had ceased doing its job.

Why? The answer was obvious. As Attkisson reported, the overwhelming number of lab tests on Americans who were suspected of having Swine Flu were coming back negative.

The tests showed no sign of the H1N1 virus, the supposed cause of Swine Flu.

It was even worse than that. Those tests couldn’t find evidence of any type of flu virus.

Back up and think about that.

One of the consequences: even for people who believed in flu vaccines, there was a huge and embarrassing problem.

How could these vaccines make a difference if what was being called the flu wasn’t flu at all?

To which many people would respond: “I don’t understand. If people are sick, the cause has to be a germ.”

No.

There are many reasons for illness.

Don’t automatically buy into the “germ-language horror movie.”

The movie is designed to prey on people’s fears, while also stimulating a fascination for The Virus, the “tiny, invisible, diabolical force at work.”

Achieving both objectives is how the directors of that horror movie earn their living.

It’s how they make people into believers who flock to The Church of the Virus.

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Germ Virus Theory

Quick alert on genetically engineered mosquitoes

Canada and the great flu hoax

Vaccination: how the West invades the world

Boggling flu hoax: not for prime-time news

If a mainstream reporter told the truth

Virus fakery: my conversation with a virologist

Inventing viruses: a staggering hoax

The invention of “virus reality”

For alert minds: the art of the covert narrative

The hypnotic power of germ propaganda