Category Archives: Globalist

Globalists interviewed: they admitted they controlled the government

Globalists interviewed: they admitted they controlled the government

by Jon Rappoport

March 2, 2017

This is a bombshell. It’s a crucial piece of history that has been ignored by mass media.

I’ve published this interview before. Here I want to make new comments.

First of all, David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission was born in 1973, in part because the Globalist plan to ensure “free trade” (no tariffs paid by predatory mega-corporations) had run into a glitch.

That glitch was President Richard Nixon. He began laying tariffs on certain goods imported into the US, in order to level the playing field and protect American companies. Nixon, a substantial crook in other respects, went off-script in this case and actually started a movement to reject the Globalist vision.

After Nixon’s ouster from the White House, Gerald Ford became president, and he chose David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller as his vice-president. It was a sign Globalism and free trade were back on track.

But David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, wanted more. They wanted a man in the White House whom they’d created from scratch.

That man was a peanut farmer no one had ever heard of: Jimmy Carter.

Through their media connections, David and Brzezinski vaulted Carter into the spotlight. He won the Democratic nomination (1976), spread a syrupy message of love and coming together after the Watergate debacle, and soon he was ensconced in the Oval Office.

Flash forward to 1978, the second year of Carter’s presidency. An interview took place.

It’s a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment. It’s a through-the-looking-glass secret—in the form of a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper.

The interview concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating and controlling US economic and political policy.

The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”

NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations [!], and they would resent such coordination [of policy].

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

SOURCE: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.

Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed everything being manipulated by the Trilateral Commission committee was already out in the open, it wasn’t.

Their interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. It didn’t become a scandal on the level of, say, Watergate, although its essence was far larger than Watergate.

US economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission had been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.

Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We have lost. And I will quit.” Lost—because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.

Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

Flash forward again, to the Obama administration.

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

Four years before birthing the Commission with his boss of bosses, David Rockefeller, Brzezinski wrote: “[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Goodbye, separate nations.

Any doubt on the question of Trialteral goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington and Technocracy Rising, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America.

Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration.

For example: Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;
James Jones, National Security Advisor;
Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;
Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.

Here is the payoff. The US Trade Representative (appointed by Obama in 2013), who was responsible for negotiating the Globalist TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) treaty with 11 other nations, was Michael Froman, a former member of the Trilateral Commission. Don’t let the word “former” fool you. Commission members resign when they take positions in the Executive Branch of government. And when they serve in vital positions, such as US Trade Representative, they aren’t there by accident. They’re operatives with a specific agenda.

Flash forward one more time. Trump, who squashed the Globalist TPP treaty as soon as he was inaugurated, has been busy making staff appointments. Patrick Wood writes (2/6/17):

“According to a White House press release, the first member of the Trilateral Commission has entered the Trump administration as the Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, where he will sit on the National Security Council:

“Kenneth I. Juster will serve as Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs. He will coordinate the Administration’s international economic policy and integrate it with national security and foreign policy. He will also be the President’s representative and lead U.S. negotiator (“Sherpa”) for the annual G-7, G-20, and APEC Summits.”

Juster’s duties will take him into the heart of high-level negotiations with foreign governments on economic policy.

Keep your eye on Mr. Juster. Will he take actions in line with Trump’s avowed anti-Globalist stance?

Or will Juster work as one more covert Trilateral operative in the center of American decision-making?

If the answer is “covert operative,” does Trump know this? Does he condone what Mr. Juster will do?

Or is this a case of secret infiltration, on behalf the most powerful Globalist group in the world, the Trilateral Commission?

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Globalist corporations are blind in the face of doom

by Jon Rappoport

February 23, 2017

(To join our email list, click here.)

People don’t fully appreciate the capacity of mega-corporations. The 300 largest companies account for roughly 25% of all international trade.

And, even more startling, these behemoths are operating their production lines at half-strength. Why? Because only 1.5 billion people in the world have enough money to rate as true consumers.

So these corporations, which are the leading lights of the Globalist agenda, are looking and hoping for many more customers.

Meanwhile, Rockefeller Globalists are hyping the pseudoscience of manmade warming, in order to convince nations to cut their energy production. That plan, of course, would further erode the ability of mega-corporations to find new consumers. Indeed, Globalists are all for wrecking economies and deepening poverty—aims which infect the lifeblood of corporations.

We are looking at a huge crack—a contradiction—in the very foundation of the Globalism.

And if you want to take this farther, the notion of radical depopulation across the planet would do even graver harm to corporate dreams and ambitions. Far fewer consumers.

There are wild and woolly solutions. For example, provide a basic income to every human on Earth; or make governments the sole payer to corporations for their products, which are then dispensed to the population in a mad universal welfare scheme. In either case, you would have a new currency system. Governments would openly and blandly create money out of thin air, as needed, to fund these harebrained schemes. Governments already invent money, but this would be occurring on a far larger scale, and without any pretense of legitimacy.

Given the propensity of governments to run their programs according to dizzyingly psychotic guidelines, I see no way the mega-corporations would welcome these “innovations.”

In short, the corporations are buying a pie-in-the-sky con. They insist on believing the favors and concocted advantages the Globalists are offering them in the marketplace are wonderful; but in fact, the long-term situation is a no-win. It’s a narrowing road, and a crack-up is coming.

Globalists are shrinking the worldwide consumer base. They want a chaos-ridden dystopia, which they will control with an iron hand.

In that scenario, the mega-corporations will also shrink to shadows of their former selves. Their usefulness will rapidly decay.

Memo to CEOs: why don’t you try waking up?

Your whole elite movement is a walking contradiction, and you’re on the downside.

Why don’t these CEOs wake up? Because their short-term greed exceeds their long-term vision. For them, it’s an easier way to live. Take the money and run.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Trump, Watergate, Nixon, Rockefeller: the real lesson

Trump, Watergate, Nixon, Rockefeller: the real lesson

—Two very different men, two very different presidents, Trump and Nixon; but the real reasons for attacking them are the same—

by Jon Rappoport

February 22, 2017

Watergate eventually became the story of two young rookie reporters who exposed and took down a president. Nixon.

Try to think of another major story in your lifetime where the reporters themselves took center stage, and in the process nearly eclipsed their own work. Odd.

One of them, Bob Woodward, expanded his fame. The powers-that-be permitted him to go on and, with extraordinary access, write books criticizing future presidents. Woodward became the in-house attack dog. Mr. Limited Hangout.

The other reporter, Carl Bernstein, faded into relative obscurity. Well, after all, he began exposing many journalists’ connections to the CIA. That wasn’t a productive career move. It was, perhaps, a case of him biting the CIA hand that, without his knowledge, had fed him during his Watergate investigation.

What Woodward and Bernstein didn’t know, during Watergate, was this: On the mega-corporate front, the Rockefeller proposal for world control—“free trade, no tariffs”—was advancing toward fruition, and Richard Nixon was standing in the way.

This man, a crook, a president, a liar, an insecure parody of a head of state, Richard Nixon, had gone off script. He had REALLY gone off script.

In an effort to bolster US companies and protect them from foreign competition inside the United States, Nixon began (Aug 15, 1971) erecting tariffs on a range of goods imported into the US.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRzr1QU6K1o&w=415&h=311]

If this Nixon economic plan spread to other countries, the entire global program to install “free trade” and mega-corporate emperors on their thrones for a thousand years could crash and burn.

Nixon was a Rockefeller man. He was owned by them. He’d been rescued from financial ruin by The Family, and now he was in the White House undermining their greatest dream. You can’t overstate the degree of the betrayal, from the Rockefeller point of view. You simply can’t.

Something had to be done. The president had to go. This was the real motivation behind Watergate. This was the real op. Yes, there were sub-motives and smaller contexts, as in any major op, but the prime mover was: get Free Trade back on track, and get suitable revenge on the puppet in the White House who went off the script.

Any historian who overlooks this is an outright fool or a deceiver.

Whether the Watergate break-in was planned to serve the higher goal or was pounced upon, after the fact, as the grand opportunity, is beside the point. It was there, and it was used. It became the starting point for the Washington Post, its publisher, veteran editor, and two cub reporters to break Richard Nixon into pieces.

And if the Rockefeller people needed an inside man at the White House to report on the deteriorating mental state of the president as he heated up in the pressure cooker, they had Henry Kissinger, who was another Rockefeller operative.

The Washington Post was owned by Katharine Graham, who was herself a very close friend of the Rockefeller Family. Years later, she would be awarded a medal of honor by the University of Chicago, an institution founded by John D. Rockefeller. On her death, a paid heartfelt obituary was inserted in the NY Times by the trustees, faculty, and staff of Rockefeller University, where she had served on the University Council.

And she and Nixon already hated each other by the early 1970s.

The managing editor of the Washington Post, Ben Bradlee, was an old hand at writing promotional material, having worked in Europe crafting releases for a CIA front group. A former Naval intelligence man, he liked one of his cub reporters, Bob Woodward, who had also worked for the Navy in intelligence.

When Woodward came to Bradlee with a story about a man in a parking garage who was passing secrets from the White House/FBI about Watergate, we are supposed to believe that Bradlee naturally responded by giving the green light to a major investigation. Woodward and Carl Bernstein, another cub, would undertake it—with nothing more than Bradlee’s reputation and the future survival of the Post and Katharine Graham’s empire on the line if the cubs got it wrong.

We are supposed to believe Bradlee gave the green light, without knowing who the man in the garage was, without knowing whether Woodward could be trusted, without even getting permission from Graham to move ahead.

Bradlee, a grizzled veteran of Washington, understanding exactly what Washington could do to people who told secrets out of school, just said to Woodward and Bernstein, “You’d better be damned sure you’re right, because otherwise we’re all in trouble.”

Two untested cub reporters set loose in a cage with tigers.

The odds of that happening were nil. Bradlee had to know a great deal from the beginning, and he had to have Katharine Graham’s signal to move. The series of breaking stories would be spoon-fed to the unsuspecting young reporters. They would be consumed by their ambition to advance their careers. Bradlee was confident because he had the essentials of the scandal in hand—all the way up to Nixon, the target—well in advance of his two reporters.

To have proceeded otherwise—Bradlee was simply not that kind of fool. Whatever Deep Throat, the man in the garage, was dishing out to Woodward didn’t really matter. Bradlee already had it in his pocket. Deep Throat was merely a contrivance to allow the story to expand and grow by steps, and to permit Woodward and Bernstein to believe they were peeling layers from an onion.

The man behind the curtain was David Rockefeller.

After the whole scandal had been exposed and Nixon had flown away, in disgrace, from the White House for the last time, David Rockefeller addressed a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce of the European Community (October, 1975). He was there to allay their fears about Nixon’s betrayal of the new economic world order. There was really very little he needed to say. David had already created (1973) the free-trade Trilateral Commission, an exceedingly powerful force. And a new puppet, Gerald Ford was in the White House; and Ford had appointed David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller, as his vice president.

David told the European attendees, “Fortunately, there are no signs that these anti-[free] trade measures [of Nixon] are supported by the [Ford] Administration.”

And that was that. The global mega-corporate colossus was back on track.

The temporary rip in the Matrix had been repaired.

On a far lower level of power politics, everyone and his brother were consumed with the contrails of the scandal that had driven away Nixon and his colleagues. People were congratulating each other on the expunging of a corrupt conspiracy from public life.

The real players, of course, were still in place, stronger than ever. David Rockefeller and his aides were preparing for an even greater coup. They had chosen an obscure man with zero name recognition to be the next president of the United States. Jimmy Carter. Carter would function to forward the goals of the Trilateral Commission in bold view of anyone who knew the score.

And every president since Carter, regardless of party affiliation, has supported and extended those Globalist-corporate goals. No questions asked. Obama, who fatuously remarked during his 2008 election campaign that NAFTA “needs to be revisited,” has taken his cues like any other puppet.

When, from this perspective, you examine the global takeover of land and resources by GMO agribusiness, the destruction of small family farms, the plundering of natural resources in the Third World, the use of UN “peacekeepers” and “humanitarian groups” and intelligence agencies to create a wedge, for corporations, into these areas, you see the hand of the Rockefeller plan.

When you see the destruction of currencies and the escalation of insupportable debt, the incursion of a bewildering number of UN-affiliated groups sinking their teeth into local communities all over the planet to “manage sustainable development,” you see the plan.

And when you see “free trade” and no tariffs, you see the essentials nuts and bolts of the plan.

The innocuous-sounding “free trade” policy is the number-one priority of every American president. He must do two things: rarely speak of it, and allow it to move forward. That’s all. In return, he gets to act as if he’s the most powerful man in the world.

But if he wobbles and considers taking up a position against free trade (corporate domination of the planet), he can look back and see what happened to Richard Nixon. He can learn from that example.

He can re-learn the famous words of Zbiggie Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission and David Rockefeller’s intellectual flunkey: “The nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.”

Like Jimmy Carter, a president can espouse the most wide-ranging humanitarian philosophy and ascend to a cloud of beautiful altruism, admired by all. As long as he sticks to the plan.

If not, agents and reporters coming out of nowhere will try to demolish him.

The Matrix Revealed

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

—Suddenly, a swaggering, self-congratulatory, fast-talking cowboy named Donald Trump appeared as a presidential candidate. And lo and behold, he attacked Globalism by name. He claimed he would dump it in favor of American nationalism. He repeated this oath many times. And he won the election, unseating a lifelong Globalist named Hillary Clinton.

Whether Trump intends on keeping his promises and going up against the Rockefeller colossus, he has spoken of that which must not be uttered in public: the crimes of Globalism and free trade.

He has let the secret cat out of the bag. He has made people aware…

And for that, he must be punished.

What people are calling the Deep State is the collection of agents who are committed to the Rockefeller plan. They, and their media flunkeys, are swinging for the fences every time they mention Trump. They are doing everything they can to take him down.

***From their perspective, they are launching another Watergate-type operation against another Nixon in the White House.

Another time, “another Nixon”; same basic op.

—In order to protect the titanic, Globalist, corporate control of planet Earth.

This time, the rhetoric and the sentiment for nationalism and against Globalism has already spread across the world. It is percolating and boiling in many places.

Putting the lid back on is a herculean task. Therefore, the agents and reporters are doubling and tripling down on Trump. Even if he turns out to be no more than a symbol of anti-Globalism, they are determined to crush him.

They have their marching orders.

Mere blocks away from the Oval Office, the Community Organizer in Chief, after serving eight years in the White House, is now setting up a parallel presidency, with 30,000 ground-and-pound Leftist dupes at his disposal—all for the purpose of taking down Donald Trump.

You can bet Obama’s bosses have reminded him that he failed at his most important task: shepherding through the free-trade Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty. They intend to collect on their investment. They put him, a no-name, in charge of the nation, in 2008, and he is still their agent. They want results.

Soon.

They want a 2017 version of Watergate.

Jon Rappoport

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

Michael Flynn: minding our own business vs. saving the world

Michael Flynn: minding our own business vs. saving the world

The global snake wears a sneer because it’s his party.

by Jon Rappoport

February 16, 2017

Flynn talked to some Russian and said the US under Trump might ease sanctions against Russia? This was the high crime? This was why he had to go?

What sanctions? Imposed for what purpose? What are all these people in Washington talking about?

Let’s go back to the beginning.

At the founding of the Republic, there was a chance to mind our own national business, and a few years later, outgoing President George Washington warned the country to stay away from entangling foreign alliances.

But of course he was ignored.

So flashing forward, now we hear about interconnected, global, “inevitable situations” which require our attention.

Interest rates, trade imbalances, taxes, wars, foreign military bases, binding treaties, unfriendly regimes, national debt, loans unpaid; on and on it goes—as if these cluster-problems arose out of some sacred duty to solve other people’s difficulties; and we’re locked in, we have to meddle, we have to be the meddling messiah, we’re deep in a massive soap opera called interdependence.

Well, sure, once you start walking down that road, things will pile up. They’ll get worse. Last year’s obligations will double this year. You have to speak sixteen languages at once to satisfy all your global partners, and you speak them out of the side of your mouth because you’re conniving and cheating and stealing and killing along the way. Just as they are. It’s all one big terminally failing family called It Takes a Village.

The sun can’t set outside your home anymore, it has to set on every conniving government on the face of the Earth, and we’re on board.

Newsflash: This isn’t planetary love, it’s not one united human race, it’s an infection.

Take the recent case of Michael Flynn, who was forced out of the Trump administration because he possibly talked with some Russian ambassador about easing US sanctions against Russia.

The US sanctions were launched in the first place because Russia annexed the Ukrainian territory of Crimea. And that was our business because…?

Here from Wikipedia is a bit of background on the annexation. Note the jungle of entangling alliances involved, the agreements, the rules and regulations—NONE of which America needed to be concerned about. Therefore, why did we lay on sanctions? My comments below are in brackets.

“Ukraine considers the annexation to be a violation of international law [international law? who cares?] and agreements by Russia, including Agreement on Establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States in 1991 [the what?], Helsinki Accords [so what?], Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1994 [and this relates to Crimea how?] and Treaty on friendship, cooperation and partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine [none of our business].”

“The event was condemned by many world leaders [so what?] as an illegal annexation of Ukrainian territory, in violation of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum [the what?] on sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, signed by Russia. It led to the other members of the then G8 [who cares about the G8?] suspending Russia from the group, then introducing the first round of sanctions against the country. The United Nations General Assembly [your basic global meddlers] also rejected the vote and annexation, adopting a non-binding resolution [busy work by meddlers] affirming the ‘territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders’.”

“Following a Crimean referendum [none of our business], held on 16 March 2014, in which separation was favoured by a large majority of voters, the UN resolution [who cares?] also ‘underscores that the referendum having no validity, cannot form the basis for any alteration of the status of Crimea.’ The resolution calls upon all States and international organizations [who cares?] not to recognize or to imply the recognition of Russia’s annexation. In 2016, UN General Assembly [major meddlers] reaffirmed non-recognition of the annexation and condemned ‘the temporary occupation of part of the territory of Ukraine — the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol’ [blah blah].”

We could take all this back further to the 2014 uprising/coup in the Ukraine, and the role of outsiders (e.g., CIA). But you get the idea.

Once you start down the road of making alliances and agreements with other governments, you’re in the web. You’re in the nest of vipers. You are a viper.

The US population has been thoroughly conditioned to expect their government to intervene in crises at the drop of a hat, “on the side of the angels,” of course.

But each “solution” digs us deeper in the fundamental problem. Meddling.

Once meddling is established as a way of life, the military-industrial complex and the Deep State can feel secure in the knowledge that any intervention and any war will play well—because all they have to do is promote war as a way of offering “freedom and peace to the less fortunate.”

War is peace.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Foreign entanglements are justified on the basis of high-level, complex, sophisticated baloney cut six ways from Sunday.

This is the swamp nobody in Washington wants to talk about.

Well, there was one man who did. Ron Paul.

He saw through the whole hissing, hideous, life-sucking, money-making, evil scam.

He was cut off at the knees by the media networks when he ran for president. And the movement behind him paved the way for Trump.

As I’ve written before, Trump needs to sit down and have a long talk with Ron.

A very serious talk.

If Trump actually cares.

Trump is the target in the cross hairs for the entire US intelligence community, the State Department, parts of the Pentagon, the defense contractors, and numerous other Washington and media sluts. To say nothing of the Rockefeller Globalists. They want wars. They need to know he’ll play ball. They don’t like even a hint that he’ll go in a different direction. They want the whole pie.

Foreign entanglements.

George Washington warned against them.

And ever since he was ignored, the chickens have been coming home to roost.

Jon Rappoport

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

“Border tax”: word-manipulation used to destroy Trump’s economic plan

“Border tax”: word-manipulation used to stop Trump’s economic plan

by Jon Rappoport

February 15, 2017

I’ll get to the devious word-manipulation in a minute, but first a bit of background.

Corporate Globalists are now gathering their forces to destroy Trump’s economic plan.

Their goal: stop Trump from laying tariffs on goods exported to America.

Trump has announced a simple and straightforward idea. If US companies shut down factories here and set them up in Third World hell holes, with slave labor and no environmental rules, and then export those goods back to the US, they’ll have to pay a stiff tariff.

That tariff will cut them off at the knees. They won’t be able to sell their products so cheaply here. In fact, they’d be better off re-opening their factories in the US and re-employing all those workers they threw out of jobs when they left the US.

Trump’s other obvious idea: countries where the labor is cheap have their own native companies, of course, who are producing goods and exporting them to the US—undercutting American companies who make the same products. Those foreign companies would also have to pay a stiff tariff, putting them on an equal footing with US manufacturers.

Globalists hate these plans. They want predatory corporations to roam free all over the world, gutting economies, and exporting their products to one and all, without paying tariffs.

This is what 50 years of conferences (1945-1995) on the treaty called GATT were all about. Knocking out tariffs. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade culminated in the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), a pillar of the new world economic order.

Now, there is panic as Trump appears to be going after the WTO and its grand foundation.

And so we come to the word-manipulation.

Here are current news headlines. Read them and then I’ll explain.

New York Times: “Profitable pickups may be in cross hairs of Trump’s border tax.”

Marketwatch: “Target, Gap, Best Buy and other retailers going to DC to oppose border tax…”

Reuters: “Retail CEOs head to Washington to try to kill US border tax.”

Automotive News: “US border tax could raise vehicle tax…”

Wall St. Journal: “Border tax could upend global markets…”

Drudge summary of Financial Times: “BRUSSELS GEARS UP FOR HIGH-STAKES CHALLENGE TO ‘US BORDER TAX’ PLAN… Biggest case in World Trade Organization history…”

There are many more headlines along the same line. And they all mention “border tax.” What are they talking about?

Well, “border tax” equals “tariff,” a word that has been used since the founding of the American Republic. But suddenly the memo has gone out to mainstream news to use this other term instead.

Why? Because “border tax” suggests the idea of a tax connected with immigration, as in “border.” Yes, tariffs are traditionally collected at a nation’s border (a port) when imported goods arrive. But no one had been calling a tariff a border tax until now, when Trump is under heavy fire for his temporary immigration ban.

In order to pile on, and give a negative twist to the idea of a tariff, conflating it with immigration, we have “border tax.” Another bonus: everyone dislikes more taxes. So “border tax” has two negatives.

It’s called mind-control propaganda by word association.

War is peace.

Ignorance is strength.

And tariffs are (immigration) border taxes.

In the same way, sheer corporate greed (demanding an end to tariffs) has long been called “free trade.” It sounds positive. It’s the opposite of “slave trade.” More language manipulation. Wouldn’t you prefer being free to being a slave?

When “new world order” and “new international economic order” came into vogue, decades ago, the psyop was based on the idea that “new” was preferable to “old,” and “order” was much better than “chaos.”

Of course, “new world order” backfired, because millions of people saw through it.

Hopefully, the same thing will happen now to “border tax.”

As in: “Why yes, borders are good. They should be solid and well defined and protected. And that’s where tariffs are collected. Plus, draconian corporations should pay their taxes. Border-tax. It’s a terrific idea. Let’s do it.”

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

To the people of Europe who still believe in freedom

To the people of Europe who still believe in freedom

by Jon Rappoport

February 8, 2017

You can say all you want to about the history of Europe, but you also have to say that Europe was the cradle of liberty for the whole world.

The main struggle was held there. And finally, the clear idea of individual freedom emerged.

Then, gradually, in the wake of two World Wars, a new theme took hold. You could call it comfort, or security, peace for all, share and care, the good life.

Under a dominating tax rate, citizens had “services” provided by their governments. Many pleasant services.

Why not? All was well.

Even when these governments were placed under the umbrella of the European Union, most citizens of member countries perceived no real problems—as long as the services continued to flow.

But there was an addendum to the basic contract. The national governments, and their superiors at the EU…they were the Providers, and they could, at their whim, turn the screw and apply new oppressive rules to the citizenry. And they could, if resistance appeared, drop their pose of benevolence and take on the role of Enforcer.

And if they did, where would liberty and individual freedom go?

It would go away.

Escalating floods of migrants entered Europe. This was a turning of the screw. Brought about by “upper management” of the Providers. The crimes and disruptions of these migrants have been well documented in independent media. The people of Europe had no say about the invasion. In fact, it soon became a prosecutable offense to write about it or speak about it in a public forum.

The lords of government would brook no opposition.

The basic liberty—speaking freely—was on the line and under the boot heel.

In fact, for years, a campaign of political correctness in speech had been waged all over Europe. It covered many areas. The EU had been aiding and abetting it.

The “good life” was cracking at the seams. It wasn’t all good anymore.

The Provider was becoming the Enforcer.

Looking back on the change, it was always obvious that it was waiting in the wings. The Providers weren’t messiahs of a socialist utopia. That pretense was merely an intermediate phase in a much larger operation.

Mollify the citizenry for a time, “give them services,” and then when they were lulled into complacency, when they felt safe and secure, when they’d traded liberty for something that looks like liberty, start the chaos.

And clamp down. Assert overt control.

The EU structure was never extreme enough for the overlords. After all, it was a confederation of separate nations. The covert operation was One Nation of Europe, drained of separate traditions, with all former, distinguishing, national characteristics removed. The goal was one continental entity, seeded with enough migrants to eliminate visible differences, and roiled in conflicts.

To make a stew, heat and stir.

Eventually, eliminate the memory that, at one time, individual freedom was birthed in those countries. And one step further: eliminate the knowledge of what individual freedom is.

Bring in immigrants from cultures where authentic freedom, with its attendant responsibilities, means nothing.

The operation is well underway.

The lords of government never wanted utopia. They wanted, and want, submission. They achieved the soft version. Now they’re aiming for the hard.

This is modern European history not taught in schools. Schools would ban even a hint of it.

So the struggle begins again.

It has many faces—some of them ideological, which is to say, embedded in groups for whom national and ethnic identity is the foremost concern.

How long will it take before The Individual, defined by HIS OWN choice and vision, APART FROM SUCH IDENTITY, reemerges?

That was the original battle of the ages: the liberation of each individual.

It wasn’t easy then, and it won’t be easy now.

But it begins in the mind.

And not the group mind.

Not in any group.

In 1859, John Stuart Mill wrote:

“If it were felt that the free development of individuality is one of the leading essentials of well-being…there would be no danger that liberty should be undervalued.”

Escaping from, and dissolving the trap that is now Europe may be the work of cooperating groups; but the reason for the escape will ultimately come back to the individual, his power, and his independent self-chosen destiny.

He carries the torch.

Though it may not seem so, his flame vaporizes collectivism.

It was always so, and it is now.

Europe’s great thinkers and writers were the very people who made this clear: freedom exists and it pertains to the individual, not the group, not some shadowy entity, not a collective; freedom is not simply a word or a floating ideal waving its banner in the air; it is the soul’s platform, from which all good things become possible; it is the starting point of a life; it is the blood that runs through a dream of a created future, a better future; it is the brother of the individual’s accountability for his own actions.

Throw a blanket over freedom, and no one is accountable.

This is why so many people now deny freedom. They want to remain unaccountable.

They want everything for nothing, and they want the right to spend that everything, or burn it, tear it up, destroy it. And then ask for more.

For them, the countries of Europe are just places. Easy places to exploit.

Exit From the Matrix

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

But no matter the circumstances, the inner core of the struggle is the same: the liberation of the individual from all the forlorn hopes that lead him back to searching for the utopia he once believed was coming.

That painted illusion is going away.

The individual, falling back on his own resources, will need to relearn half-forgotten lessons. He will have to ignite his own energy.

The challenge can be bracing, and much more. It can awaken sleeping corridors of the spirit, where he once walked in power.

And can walk again.

Profound dissatisfaction and resistance can breed joy.

Once upon a time, he knew that, and then he abandoned the knowledge for a syrupy potion of a New Age; now the bottle is dry.

Now, he is the creator of his own enterprises; his own destiny.

I say Europe will live again.

Jon Rappoport

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

Nationalism, Globalism, Empire, and the vision of self-sufficiency

Nationalism, Globalism, Empire, and the vision of self-sufficiency

by Jon Rappoport

January 24, 2017

Nationalism is not Empire. Nationalism is solving problems at home.

Globalism is the non-partisan effort to immerse nations in a regional and planetary management system; mega-corporations and banks steer the ship.

Freedom includes the ability to choose between Nationalism and Globalism.

Globalism is not an organic grass-roots movement. It is imposed from above. (See my work on the Rockefeller Trilateral Commission to gain a view of “above.”)

Empire here implies the effort by a government (e.g., the US, China) to extend its control over other nations and peoples. It is not an intrinsic part of Nationalism. Dick Cheney was intent on building an American Empire. A factory worker in Ohio isn’t.

Nationalism doesn’t mean the government is running a vast Welfare State. It isn’t running a charity without limits. It isn’t promising a utopia based on “share and care.”

Solving problems at home implies restoring jobs stolen by corporations who left the country and set up shop in foreign lands. They committed this deed under terms of Globalist trade treaties. The corporations weren’t exercising freedom. They were navigating loopholes designed by their friends in high places. The major loophole was:

“You can manufacture your products in a hell hole overseas with slave labor, and then you can export those products back to your former home country and sell them without paying a tariff.”

Solving problems at home implies the robust expansion of independent media, who become a watchdog on government, corporations, and major media.

Solving problems at home implies the eradication of a Surveillance State which, under the cover of protecting the citizenry against terrorism, is actually collecting massive amounts of information on all citizens.

Solving problems at home implies eliminating gangs who are holding millions of citizens in inner cities hostage in their own residences.

Solving problems at home implies securing the nation’s borders against incursion by people intent on committing crimes, collecting free money and services from the government, and subverting freedom.

Solving problems at home implies doing whatever can be done to encourage a culture in which individual freedom and vision and power motivates as many people as possible to invent their own futures, in order to fulfill their most profound desires.

Solving problems at home implies prosecuting, to the fullest extent of the law, companies that pollute and poison the land, sea, and air with their “by-products.” This effort does not require a return to some universal Pagan religion of Nature.

Solving problems at home implies prosecuting, to the fullest extent of the law, companies who manufacture and sell compounds that purport to cure disease, but actually destroy health and life.

Historically, the first time a banker or corporate leader was discovered to have financed an American war on both sides, he should have been tried and convicted of treason. That would have sent a suitable message.

And so forth and so on.

This is all common sense.

It is obscured by waves of mouthy propaganda, featuring high-flying generalities and ideals, which turn into demands and vicious attacks: “Everybody has to love one another right now and share everything for free, and if they don’t, we’ll blast them into the stratosphere.”

These waves are planned, organized, and funded by people like George Soros, and they are meant to disrupt nations and push them into the arms of the Globalist agenda.

The number of unconscious dupes and pawns in this operation is legion.

In his 1796 Farewell Address, President George Washington provided exceptional recommendations about nationalism:

“It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world…”

“But even our commercial [trade] policy [with foreign nations] should hold an equal and impartial hand…diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing…constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character…There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.”

“…Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.”

“Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest…?”

“With me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.”

Whenever Washington mentions Europe, he is essentially referring to any foreign country.

Nationalism: stay at home. Strengthen the home country. No Empire. No entangling alliances.

And certainly, no Globalism, which amounts to surrender of the home country to foreign interests.

What is wrong with George Washington’s policy? Nothing.

The policy has been called isolationism, which, via propaganda, has been given a nasty edge. It has no edge. It has concern for America.

Every country could learn from George Washington’s wisdom.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Utopian dreams aside, no country’s history is pure. Its governments and leaders have committed terrible crimes. But that fact doesn’t imply that the country should be destroyed or dismantled, or attached to some deceptive supra-national program of “harmony for all.”

Nationalism, in George Washington’s description of it, is a practical vision for realizing a degree of self-sufficiency no modern country has ever achieved.

The vision is still there to be pursued.

It has always been there, since the ancient nomads first settled down in sunlit valleys and began to grow their crops.

Self-sufficiency, freedom, prosperity.

Advanced technology has complicated matters. I’m not talking about instant communication among all points on Earth. I’m talking about a surfeit of weapons which can destroy life at the push of a button. But even there, leaders will be far more likely to negotiate and talk in good faith if they have the genuine interest of their own people at heart, where they live, in their home nations.

In a half-sane world, there would be, by now, courses in taught in every school, on the meaning of greed, avarice, meddling, and the obsession for minding everyone else’s business…

Jon Rappoport

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

The Individual vs. Globalism

The Individual vs. Globalism

by Jon Rappoport

January 23, 2017

“Global solution” means the individual is cut out of the equation, he doesn’t count, he doesn’t mean anything in the larger scheme of things, he’s just another pawn and cipher to move around on the board.

And as more duped and deluded people sign on to this agenda, the whole concept of the individual shrinks and becomes irrelevant.

This is purposeful.

This is the script for the future: create problems whose only solution appears to be collective.

Psychologically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually divert the individual’s attention from his own vision, his own profound desires, his own imagination—and place it within The Group (“all of humanity”).

Propagandize the idea that, if the individual concerns himself with anything other than The Group, he is selfish, greedy, inhumane. He is a criminal.

More and more, this is how the young are being trained these days.

The grand “we” is being sold to them like a cheap street drug. They buy in. They believe this “we” is real, instead of a hollow con designed to drag them into a Globalist framework owned and operated by mega-corporations, banks, foundations, governments, and ubiquitous Rockefeller interests.

And what of the individual, his mind, his unique perception, his independent ideas, his originality, his life-force?

Swept away in the rush toward “a better world.”

I have breaking news. Earth is not a spaceship and we are not crew members. If Earth is a spaceship, it has serious design flaws, because it keeps making the same trip around the same sun every year.

Each one of us does not have a specified function, as a crew member would.

Going back as far as you want to in history, shortage and scarcity in the world that engendered a crisis was either created by some elite or maintained by them, for the purpose of eradicating dissent and fomenting a collectivist solution. Meaning a solution that came from the top. Meaning a solution that reduced individual freedom.

In recent human history, a different idea emerged: establish severely hamstrung government, in order to protect the individual against it.

This idea has had a very tough time. Collectivists have fought it every step of the way.

But regardless of circumstances, the individual can author his own freedom and what it implies. He can discover, within himself, extraordinary possibilities. He can contemplate what it means to create reality that expresses his most profound desires.

And then he can begin a voyage that no one and no group can stop.

Civilizations come and go, rise and fall; the individual remains.

The word “imagination,” when properly understood, indicates that the individual can envision and then create futures that never were, and never would be, unless he invented them.

Imagination is the opposite of “provincial,” “restricted,” “well-known,” “familiar,” “accepted.”

That is its challenge to the status quo.

That is the true threat the individual poses to all predictive systems.

Therefore, “it’s all just information” is a psyop code-phrase. Ideas, thoughts—nothing is original, nothing is new; we all “share” information floating in the collective consciousness; the individual invents nothing.

Which is the opposite of the truth. The individual invents everything.

He can’t be predicted when he is himself. He is not a pattern. He is not a system.

He is not anyone else.

He thrives on his own inspiration.

He is the ultimate riverboat gambler. He bets the house on his own as-yet uncreated future.

He is not a piece of universe.

He is not a humble servant of Order.

He invents the space and time of his own time to come.

Exit From the Matrix

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

As early as 1961, a brilliant healer, Richard Jenkins, whom I write about in my book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies, explained what was to come. He wrote me a note, which I’m paraphrasing from memory: “People are confusing their own empathy for others with some overblown idea about group-identity. They aren’t the same. People are becoming afraid of their own unique and distinct existence. This is a social fear. A new social contract is being foisted on the population. Either you belong, or you have no rights. This is a totalitarian concept. It’s coming in through the back door.”

Well, now, it’s right there at the front door.

The individual still has a choice. But he has to make it.

Explore his own power, or give it away for nothing more than an illusion of belonging.

Stoke the fires within, or form a diluted image of self, and bow down to The Group.

The “I” is not isolated. He can reach out to others whenever and however he wants to. The question is, is he moving on the ground of his own independence, or is he searching for a group life raft, to which he will attach himself without thought or hesitation?

Beyond economics or politics, Globalism is a system that offers a life raft which is heading toward a machine-future. Disembark and find the great We, a construct of integrated parts, each of which is an individual, in a state of spiritual amnesia.

Happiness there is function and sedation, immortal and shadowless, wiped clean of distinctions.

This is the elitist end game of social justice and equality.

Jon Rappoport

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

Obama’s farewell: soap opera for liberals and minority pawns

Obama’s farewell: soap opera for liberals and minority pawns

January 12, 2017

Here are a few snippets from Obama’s goodbye speech to the American people:

“Going forward, we must uphold laws against discrimination…But laws alone won’t be enough. Hearts must change…For blacks and other minorities, it means tying our own struggles for justice to the challenges that a lot of people in this country face – the refugee, the immigrant, the rural poor, the transgender American, and also the middle-aged white man…For white Americans, it means acknowledging that the effects of slavery and Jim Crow didn’t suddenly vanish in the ‘60s; that when minority groups voice discontent, they’re not just engaging in reverse racism or practicing political correctness…”

The question is: do people want empty sentimental sop from Obama or do they want action?

Well, it’s too late for action, because Obama’s presidency is done. And it makes no difference whether, as a result of his final speech, people view him as a great and honorable man who did his best, or as a con artist, because again, he’s on his way out the door.

Needless to say, his supporters were deeply moved by his words. They want to be moved. They don’t want to look at uncomfortable facts.

For example, let’s go to CNN, which is going to offer the best possible interpretation of economic indicators for black people in America.

“Blacks have seen their median income stagnate, along with the rest of the population…Median income [for blacks] stood at $35,398 in 2014, just a touch below where it was in 2009, when Obama took office. But it has climbed back from [a low of] $33,926 in 2011…The Great Recession sent many Americans into poverty, but blacks were hit particularly hard. The [poverty] rate for blacks hit 27.6% in 2011, nearly 2 percentage points higher than what it was when Obama was sworn in. It has since receded to 26.2%.”

If you call that a ringing endorsement of Obama’s performance as president, you’re in need of help.

Let me put it this way. For all Obama’s talk about racism and prejudice and justice, Americans of every description and color have been willing, for a long time, to work alongside each other and get along—IF THERE IS WORK TO BE HAD. DECENT PAYING WORK.

Obama is, in effect, trying to move back to another time, before that was the case.

When he was elected, in 2008, during the recession, his closest advisors thought he would come out swinging and do everything possible to create jobs. That was the number-one concern of Americans.

They were absolutely shocked when he opted for Obamacare out of the gate, as his first priority. And look what it has led to: a massive mess.

Gazing at his presidency head-on, without excuses, it’s clear that Obama chose to IGNORE jobs. He didn’t want to make a move in that arena.

Why?

The answer is stark and simple: the Globalist agenda forbids the creation of new jobs, and Obama is a Globalist. He was plucked out of nowhere by Ted Kennedy and mentored by Zbigniew Brzezinski, the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, along with David Rockefeller. The Trilateral Commission is the single most important Globalist force in the world. And of the 87 members of the Commission who live in the US, Obama appointed 11 of them to key posts in his administration.

This is no accident. This is intentional.

The idea that Obama would launch a no-holds-barred effective crusade against corporations leaving the US and throwing huge numbers of Americans (of all colors) out of work, is laughable. Look at the record, if you need verification. It never happened. It was never going to happen.

The man can talk forever about discrimination and prejudice and social justice, but those words fall flat, because he has never taken action to correct the true crime—which is there for all to see: Globalists are committed to torpedoing economies.

Obama can be a master of overly sentimental rhetoric—but this is merely a diversion.

And aside from the massive loss of jobs, if he has been talking about the inner cities of America, he should have focused on the enduring disasters that destroy life in those places and hold law-abiding citizens hostage: gangs, the murders they commit, their other crimes, drugs, and the absence of fathers in homes. That’s where he would have started. And he would have launched solutions.

But he didn’t.

In various ways, over and over, he simply said: “We’re all in this together.” That and $2 will get you a bus ticket in Chicago.

We’re all in this together doesn’t destroy pernicious Globalist trade treaties or create jobs for people who are willing and ready to go to work and support their families.

We’re all in this together doesn’t eliminate gangs, killings, drugs, and highly dangerous neighborhoods.

We’re all in this together doesn’t start a national program of urban farms in inner cities, and suddenly give people the opportunity to grow their own fresh clean food, eat it, and make money by selling the excess.

We’re all in this together doesn’t help create a culture in which fathers deserting their families is a cardinal offense.

We’re all in this together does pour a pleasant syrup of “deep concern” on the heads of people who, above all, want to appear virtuous. These are the people who can be led to believe in an imitation of actual solutions and action.

They are content to think that a leader who espouses a lofty ideal has done enough. Everyone else should put the ideal into action. If they don’t, it’s not the leader’s fault. He flew the banner. He recited poetics. He wanted a better world. He was operating at a higher level—and unfortunately, the bulk of humanity couldn’t grasp its profundity.

That notion and $2.75 will get you a ride on a New York subway.

The Matrix Revealed

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

During his term in office, did the man who said, “If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon Martin,” ever walk through the devastated black neighborhoods of American cities and talk to long-term law-abiding residents (not self-appointed leaders or criminals) and ask them bluntly what their greatest concerns were, and press for real down-to-earth answers? Or did he think that food stamps, low-income housing, welfare checks, and other forms of government dependence were enough?

When he talked about “educational opportunities,” did he really think Common Core schools, with their lunatic indoctrination into “sustainable economies,” were going to function in communities where masses of unemployed people look over their shoulders in fear of their safety?

Who’s kidding who?

Who bought what he was selling? Liberals.

Who has paid the price? The people who live in the neighborhoods where sentiment gets you nothing.

And those who, still and always, assert how brilliant President Obama is believe his failure to make a difference was just a mistake? An oversight?

Does self-deception have no bounds?

The answer is blowing in the winds of Detroit and Chicago.

Jon Rappoport

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

Why fake news matters

Why fake news matters

Notes on major media blowing away in the wind

by Jon Rappoport

January 12, 2017

For the past 34 years, I’ve been working as a reporter, in order to expose fake news. My target: major media. Right from the beginning; and always.

The premise is simple: these liars are in the business of putting people into a false reality and keeping them there. How does that audience move out into truth if they’re basing their own ideas on a synthetically created artifact called The News?

Now we have a president-elect who, as I write this, is holding a press conference and calling CNN fake news. Regardless of who Trump is, that is a moment people should understand as a wild departure from what happens in politics. It never happens. But it is happening.

This is shaking the egg until it cracks.

It’s called an opportunity.

—An opportunity for all of us to keep shaking the egg and exposing the liars, until there is no more egg.

Some of my joy comes from knowing reporters and editors in the mainstream who have been parading around, for decades, believing they are untouchable and vital and necessary and beyond reproach. They never thought this day would come. But it is here.

And they know it now. That’s what makes them so crazy.

Out of view, “their children” (audience) have grown up, and aren’t buying what “the adults” are selling. Trump has simply brought all that to a head. He went over the edge with it. He didn’t care. You tell me that some other candidate, who presented himself as more balanced, more measured, more mature, could have pulled this off, and I’ll tell you you’re wrong. A wild cowboy was necessary, and he showed up. Hate him, love him, he showed up.

Don’t let this moment be wasted.

Part of the reason the major media are pulling out all the stops in attacking Trump and blasting him? They want to paint a portrait of a man who isn’t really president. “See, the guy who has been defaming us isn’t a president at all. He’s just a nut. Therefore, don’t take his assault on us seriously. It means nothing.”

Good luck with that strategy. It’s another fail. It’s another goof in a long history of media goofs. The media are saying: “Don’t look at us. We’re fine. We’ve always been fine. Instead, look at Trump. He’s the villain. He’s the loon.”

Yesterday, he was a Russian agent. Today, he’s a John with hookers he paid to desecrate a hotel bed Obama slept in. Tomorrow, he’ll be an alien from the Orion Belt who arrived in a space ship.

“His flying saucer landed on the US-Mexico border. Why wasn’t he vetted by Customs&Immigration? Why was he allowed into the US?”

Well, why is the NY Times in such bad shape that Carlos Slim has to be its largest investor? And why is Jeff Bezos, whose parent company, Amazon, has a $600 million contract with CIA to provide computing services, the sole owner of the Washington Post?

Because those two venerable papers were going down the toilet.

For that matter, why does David Rhodes, the president of CBS News, have a brother, Ben Rhodes, who is Obama’s deputy national security adviser for strategic communication?

Almost without exception, major media are liberal. This means, among other things, they are staunch (covert) supporters of Globalism, which means: a new planetary economic and political order, in which sovereign nations cease to exist—having being supplanted by mega-corporations and mega-banks.

The stories that major media spin have two basic aims: conceal the advances of Globalism, and support those advances under different names.

Working for these media outlets is a snap: aid in the cause and pick up a paycheck, while selling your soul.

No one will ever know what you’re really doing.

But that has changed. The operation has been exposed.

The egg has cracked.

And as in one of those remarkable Hieronymus Bosch paintings, all manner of strange and grotesque creatures are spilling out of the egg and showing their true colors.

Here is a quick quiz. All the following items are part and parcel of the Globalist agenda, because they imply far-reaching measures that help install planetary governance. On which item are major media most insistent and supportive? On which item do outside critics sustain the most virulent media attacks?

A. The green economy
B. Sustainable growth
C. The Smart Grid
D. Climate change

Yes, of course: D. Climate change.

It is the lynch pin for the radical plan forcing all nations to reduce their energy production, in order to “restrain global warming.” It is the most direct tactic for undermining and torpedoing economies.

Induce more drastic worldwide poverty and suffering; release a necessary plan for solving the crisis; make the plan embrace the whole world; quite naturally form an international body of “representatives” (elite Globalist partners) to put the plan into effect. You have a global management system.

The Matrix Revealed

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

So major media double down on global warming. Only morons, evildoers, fake scientists, and the selfishly rich would deny that “the science is settled.” The campaign is relentless. Even Hollywood stars are brought into the mix. They personally know as much about climate as ants know about building BMWs, but they’re given generous space in which to bloviate and signal their virtuous concern.

Whatever Trump is or isn’t, whatever he is going to do or not do, big media are now more vulnerable and exposed than they’ve ever been—and this is the moment.

Exposing their fake news operations is taking the blinders from the eyes of millions of people who never dreamed they would doubt the Egg.

Let us double down and triple down.

Jon Rappoport

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