Category Archives: Globalist

Inside the liberal minds of Clooney, Streisand, Julia

Inside the liberal minds of Clooney, Streisand, Julia

And the whole Left Hollywood crowd

by Jon Rappoport

April 11, 2016

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

“The complexity of any mind-control program is a function of the people who are meant to be controlled. In Hollywood, you’re dealing with the most gullible, and therefore the tactic is simple. One feint, and then deliver the poison to the target.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

I’ll keep the introductory background brief: political rulers need dupes. They court the famous and rich for their money; and for their vocal support, because the majority of the public adores stars. Stars are archetypes who live the lives “regular people” dream about. So if stars are fawning at the feet of a certain brand of politician, the public will tend to fawn as well. By proxy. By extension. By default.

At a Hollywood fundraiser a few days ago, Obama mingled with Julia Roberts, Gwyneth Paltrow, James Brolin, Julia Louis-Dreyfuss, and Barbara Streisand. There was no mention of George Clooney. But don’t worry; next month, he’s co-hosting a Hillary event with Steven Spielberg.

Liberal lovefests, check-writing bonanzas.

Let’s brush aside the obvious fact that, in Hollywood, it’s good to be on the Left. Good for the career.

Let’s also dispense with the sober: “Given two choices, the Democrats are better than the Republicans.”

Inside the minds of these stars, something else is going on. And it certainly isn’t a preoccupation with limiting the power of mega-corporations, who roam the world and feast on vulnerable populations, their lands and resources. The Democratic leadership (Obama, Hillary) have no interest in curtailing that operation. They’re all for it.

So what is happening in the skulls of these liberal stars, beyond political-Left conditioned reflexes?

You might say: not much. And you’d be right. But still…

It all goes back to this: “help others.”

That’s the mantra.

“Help the less fortunate.”

Tucked away in stars’ minds, you might find a few socialist ideas, a few Marxist sentiments, but the big one is: “help the less fortunate.”

This vague nugget has been with them for a long time. It isn’t thought out. It certainly isn’t the lead sentence in a comprehensive understanding. Are you kidding?

For some stars, there are crusty bits of motivating image: the old Hollywood blacklist, the McCarthy hearings, the board that used to censor movies, the early civil rights movement.

For others, it’s more recent material. The anti-war protests of the 60s, smoking weed, Watergate and Nixon, the “unfair pummeling” of Bill Clinton over his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

Mainly, “helping the less fortunate” casts a wide, wide net; and not much thinking is required. That’s a plus. Let the best politicians on the Left work out the details.

However, an unlimited number of crimes are cooked up behind this Humanitarian Hustle. For example, through “greater-equality” Globalist trade treaties, we have the creation of an expanding unemployed American underclass, terminally dependent on government for survival. For example, bringing “democracy and freedom” to backward nations actually results in predatory empire-building, destabilization, chaos, pain, death. That sort of thing.

“We pity those who can’t survive on their own” holds a foul patronizing odor, especially when the political implementation of that self-righteous notion buries the less fortunate in a swamp worse than the one they’re trying to get out of.

But again, these Hollywood stars aren’t noted for thinking things through.

Instead, they jump from the central mantra to other empty generalities: e.g., more access to education and healthcare and community programs.

Yes, that’ll solve it. The US medical system kills 225,000 people a year, dispenses highly toxic psychiatric drugs like candy; education produces lower literacy rates, is little more than baby-sitting and indoctrination-in-values; and community programs are just a way of saying, “Look, we’re doing something.”

But now we’re going too deep for Hollywood. Please. Back off. Let’s stick with the high-flying generalities. “It allows us to feel good. And we must feel good. We’re rich and we’re sensitive human beings, so we need to hitch our wagons to a fairy tale of progress, even if there isn’t any.”

George Clooney, I have to say, is a real piece of work. He can make a movie like Syriana, which excruciatingly tracks a mega-corporate/political/intel monstrosity collaborating to produce planetary tyranny, and he supports Hillary Clinton, who’s never seen one of these monstrosities she didn’t love in real life.

And here I have to return to a story I’ve been pounding on for the last week or so: the film Vaxxed (trailer), which exposes criminal fraud at the CDC, where fake science was consciously deployed to give the MMR vaccine a free pass and pretend it had no connection to autism.

But forget the message for a moment. The film itself was shut down, canceled, closed out at two film festivals; the Tribeca in New York and the WorldFest in Houston. That’s called censorship. Of a film.

Free speech? Never heard of it.

So naturally these liberal Hollywood stars would stand up and scream. They would denounce, with all their power, the blackout. Because, if there is finally a concrete issue which these Lefties comprehend, it’s free speech in the arts.

Sorry. Not so. Not true. The defenders of the just and the righteous turn out to be cowards of the first order. They move on with their eyes straight head and they say and do nothing.

Why? Because it happens that the Left is virulently pro-vaccine. And that issue takes precedence over the inherent right to see a film.

As a matter of fact, all the Left’s programs, every single one, as enacted in Washington to support the idea of “helping others,” negates that very idea—because Help is just a cover story. It isn’t real. It never was, in Washington.

Here’s how it works. You, a venal venomous scumbag of a politician, descend on Hollywood and connect with the vague sentiments of stars: you and they feel the little people’s pain. Establishing that, you croon and moon and get them to open their checkbooks. Then you fly away, and you push programs that, while appearing to help, actually cause more misery.

Does this create an embarrassment the next time you, the politician, shake your sticky wings and tune up your fangs to dive on Hollywood and extract more money? Not in the slightest.

Mainly because the stars you harvest don’t want to know the particulars of what you do. They really don’t. And even if they did, they’re not smart enough to track the deceptions you’ve worked on them. And even if they could, why would they want to stand up and admit how they’d been bilked and conned and shucked?

They’re only smart and they only have courage on the screen.

Ask them to admit they really have no idea what the pols they’re writing checks for are doing in Washington? Fat chance.

Predictive programming in movies and the deployment of secret-society symbols? At the level at which Hollywood stars operate, things are much simpler: their minds are juvenile to the extreme. They’re politically naïve and they’re afraid.

(And if you think I’m reserving praise for the stars who are on the Right, you’re wrong. They, too, are numbskulls. They see wars and empire-building as national-security imperatives. They clamor for conquest. Hell would freeze over before they could adequately distinguish a military built for defense of the nation from a force that roams the world on behalf of corporate objectives.)

In Hollywood, there’s a political playbook that every successful actor on the Left reads. It’s only one line, so they can all understand it: “Support the politicians who say they’re helping the less fortunate.”

It works.

It only remains for the stars to make their political support sound convincing. Well, convincing is what they’re trained to do.

When they leave one of these political soirees, after the mingling and the donation-acknowledging and the champagne-sipping and the Presidential chatting, they may for a moment wonder what it was all about. But having attended so many such staged goofs, the wondering is inconsequential. Lesser power brushed up against greater power, a tingling was felt, certain niceties were exchanged and vague questions were answered vaguely. It was an event. They, the stars, were seen by other stars, who were also looking to be seen. And The Most Important Person, the pol, the President, held their attention.

A dedication to The Good was mutually made, even if no one actually understood what it was, except The Most Important Person, who had been briefed a long time ago by his superior secret princes and kings, to whom he swore his fealty.

But don’t worry about that.

It’s in another league, to which you, the stars, have no access.

Just know your place, your beautiful place. And all will be well.

Of course, on a quiet night, when you’re alone and bored, you might look into, or at least think about, the 50-year War on Poverty, which has sucked up something on the order of two trillion dollars to turn around the plight of inner cities. You might wonder why those inner cities seem to be in far worse shape than they were in 1966, when Lyndon Johnson, the prototype of a Left share-and-care President, grandly announced the War, while he was also escalating the other war in Vietnam.

You might think about President Obama and Hillary Clinton turning Libya into a sea of chaos and pain, and sustaining ISIS in Syria while “attacking ISIS.” All on behalf of helping the less fortunate.

You might ponder Obama and Hillary standing firmly on the side of that helping-hand corporation, Monsanto, which spreads its carcinogenic Roundup from one end of the planet to the other.

exit from the matrix

And again, you might pause for a few moments and consider the unshakable Obama-Clinton support of Globalist trade treaties, which sacrifice millions of American workers on the altar of mega-corporate profits piling up in Third World countries, where, day in and day out, virtual slaves turn out products for penny-wages—no unions, no safety regulations, no environmental concerns. What a boon for the less fortunate.

You might contemplate these and other examples of liberal sentiments in action.

You might, but you won’t. You’ve acted in movie after movie where the con and the shuck and the jive were central to the plot, but somehow, in life, you just can’t pick up the same thread. You can’t see the hustler and his mark.

Because the hustler’s mark, his target, is you.

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.

5 threats Trump poses, and 6 plans to stop him

Underneath all the familiar charges leveled at Trump, there is one that has the shadow government deep in thought.

Trump: the loosest cannon.

by Jon Rappoport

March 20, 2016

(To join our email list, click here.)

Note: When I say “GOP,” I also include “Globalist.” Both major Parties are in the pocket of Rockefeller Globalists (Bilderberg, WEF/Davos, CFR, Trilateral Commission).

—Here cometh the loose-talking cowboy and hustler, walking into the saloon; The Donald; and the customers are cheering.

Cheering?

What?

What went wrong? What in the world went wrong?

The first 4 threats Trump poses:

Threat One: The way he talks. It isn’t measured sing-song generality, which is the standard form of hypnotic prose in America for both politicians and media. The rise and fall of empty words isn’t his style, and believe me, that is disturbing to the establishment.

Big-time politics and news in the US must be delivered in hypnotic cadence—otherwise they fall apart, because they have no inherent substance. But everything Trump is advocating is carried on the waves of far different rhythms—casual, direct, non-teleprompter, jump-around, zig-zag, off the cuff; as if, out of some bygone era, he’s saying: “Hey kid, here’s a dime, run down to the corner and get me a newspaper, and here’s a nickel for yourself…”

Blown dry, androidal, high-flying, empty, sentimental, super-clean, sing-song—these are qualities drilled into, or already possessed by, successful pols and media stars. Trump cuts across and buries that style. He’s a disruptor, and he violates the cardinal rule, which is:

Don’t wake the children.

I can’t emphasize too strongly what a threat that poses to the status quo, which can only sustain itself through a tacit agreement, on all sides, to engage in trance-inducing speech.

On top of all this, Trump is delivering messages that are beyond the pale, according to current standards of political correctness. Another jolt.

Trump is doing one of these:

“Listen, folks, they’re all lying to you. You know who I’m talking about. Last month I was in Cincinnati and this reporter came up to me, I could see she was all ready to do me in, you know? She had this big question she wanted to ask me, like she was going to kill me with it—I’ve known lots of people like that, you have, too. People all over the country are out of work but all she can think about is her pet question…jobs, we’ve got to bring them back…I’m calling those companies that went overseas and telling them, pack your bags and come back or you’re going to face…(pointing) he knows what I mean…I can see it on your face, what’s your name?…I’ll bet you know someone close to you who was thrown out of his job, or maybe you were…”

Trump comes across every which way. Right side up, inside out, sideways.

Threat Two: He gets in the face of media personalities and slaps them down and topples them from their pedestals. He doesn’t bow. He doesn’t play the game. On a moment’s notice, not by script, he attacks when ruffled. He doesn’t care. This amounts to a declaration of war against media hegemony and media hypnosis. This is akin to a person telling a hypnotist, “Hey, take that pendulum out of my face, you idiot. I don’t need to go to sleep. I’m awake.” Media are supposed to be the providers of every slice and tidbit of information that’s important. They’re the eyes, ears, and mouths for the public. Trump is telling them to shut up and go away. His attitude flies in the face of the Program.

Threat Three: He knows what Globalist trade treaties have done to destroy jobs in America. He knows the American economy hasn’t come back after the 2008 crash. He doesn’t care who has signed on to these treaties. He says he’s going to make new deals and change the landscape and bring back jobs.

Whether he will or not, whether he can or not, he’s exposing the Globalist agenda, as well as the politicians on both sides of the aisle who have surrendered their minds and souls to it.

This Globalist agenda is the real third rail of politics, and Trump is not only stepping on it, he’s licking his fingers and putting his hand on the electricity and living (so far) to tell the tale. Once again, he doesn’t appear to care.

Is he for real? Is he a fake? Regardless, he’s talking about what is supposed to remain hidden, and he’s clicking with people all over the country who have lost their jobs to the insane trade policy of the Rockefeller forces.

This is verboten. This can’t happen. But it is happening.

And he isn’t going into a long song and dance about the theory of Globalism. He’s keeping it tight and simple. He’s keeping it emotional. He’s actually speaking a real language real people can understand and want to understand. In other words, he’s committing a grave crime.

He’s telling people their jobs and money and prosperity have been stolen and he’s going to get them back.

Threat Four: Immigration. In a nation that already has 60 million immigrants living here, which makes it the number one “importer” of immigrants, per capita, in the world, and generous to the hilt by most standards, he’s saying: yes, but now there is a problem, a very serious problem—and he’s going to solve it. The problem is crime, drugs, potential terrorism. And since the federal government admits it has no proper screening program to spot terrorists, he’s going to put a pause on allowing Muslim immigrants to enter the US. What could the man say that is more politically incorrect?

Whether you agree or disagree with any or every item of his proposal, consider what he’s wreaking on his comfortable liberal opposition—the people who believe open borders should be endless and forever, people who would never, under any circumstances, put a ceiling on it, because they only care about being seen as tolerant and kind and generous and self-effacing and wonderful…people who would, if necessary, walk down streets naked in the rain carrying whips and flagellating themselves to prove their motives are pure.

Based on these four points (I’m saving the best for the end, for later), Trump is a clear and present danger to the political establishment—both Parties and their Globalist handlers.

He’s a “narcissist, a Hitler, a Mussolini, a Stalin, a loon.”

The GOP, his own Party, is the first line of defense. They must try to sweep him off the board. What can they do?

One: Change the nominating rules so Rubio and Kasich can easily shift their delegates to Cruz. Right now, for example, those three men have 703 delegates among them. Trump has 671. (Rolling update here.)

Two: Induce a complete deadlock at the Convention and bring in a “compromise” candidate from the closet. For instance, Mitt Romney. Creating that deadlock could involve more rule changes that would strip delegates away from Trump by declaring they aren’t bound to vote for him.

Three: Let Trump have the nomination, but then back/encourage a third-party or independent candidate to run. This would be a person who’d obviously suck votes away from Trump in the general election, giving Hillary a walk in the park to the White House.

Or alternatively: allow a straight-on Trump vs. Hillary contest, and rig enough voting machines to make sure Hillary achieves victory in key states.

Four: Covertly back more riots leading up to the Convention, casting Trump as the cause, as the “divisive one” leading the nation over a cliff. The “law of consequences”—support Trump and this is what you get; you get fear; you get looking over your shoulder as you walk down the street.

Another version of the op: stage a grisly crime and set up a “racist Trump patsy” as the perpetrator.

Another version: stage so many violent protests the message is clear: vote for Trump and this will be a nation in permanent chaos.

Five: If all else fails, the campaign to stop Trump could be taken out of the GOP’s hands, and he would be rubbed out.

Those people calculating the success of any of these five strategies would certainly be considering blowback from Trump’s supporters. The risks are many. Exposure is a virtual certainty.

“Cooler heads” would be saying: “Look, give him the nomination. Hillary’s going to win anyway.”

And if by a miracle Trump somehow gains the Presidency, the sixth option is:

“Let’s get serious.” People with deep knowledge of the political establishment and significant clout would approach him and let him know, in no uncertain terms, that his radical plans are destined to fail. Therefore, compromise is in order. What would President Trump settle for in the real world? What would he give up?

Those are questions whose answers would define his Presidency. He could just step back into his familiar role as the ordinary maker of the ordinary deal.

But before deciding whether to capitulate, Trump might, on the spur of the moment, arrange a sit-down with, say, President Putin. He might lay his cards on the table and say, “Look, this is what I’m trying to do at home, and this is the opposition I’m facing. I think we have issues in common. How can we help each other?”

If that happened, Trump would drive the American neocons out of their minds.

And so now we’ve come to the fifth and greatest threat Trump poses:

His unpredictability.

As President, he could meet with any world leader at the drop of a hat. He could consult all sorts of unconventional sources. He could find out that solutions to national problems are available outside normal channels. Who knows?

Who knows what an un-vetted President, with a large sense of curiosity, might find out, vis-a-vis a number of issues the public is also quite curious about?

This is why men who have operated in the shadows for a long time are truly worried.

Trump has no visible pattern. When he talks, one idea sparks another and then he goes off on a third. A man like that, with the clout of the Presidency, rummaging around in the halls and basements of power and secrets? Are you kidding?

Pick your issue. Chemtrails? Black-budget ops? The extent of NSA spying on US government officials and subsequent blackmail? Extant technologies far in advance of what has been shown to the people? Including suppressed energy technologies?

Might Trump be just the sort of unhinged cowboy who would wander into one of these forbidden areas and start shooting his mouth off?

What does he care about propriety or the rules of the game? He’s Donny Trump who came out the Bronx, where he was hustling commercial buildings; he parlayed his wins into bigger and bigger properties downtown, he went bankrupt three or four times, he dealt with the mafia princes of concrete in NYC, he fired everybody in sight on The Apprentice…

He’s the loosest cannon.

Conspiracy researchers cite their prime reasons for the 1963 assassination of JFK, but there is one possibility they rarely, if ever, mention. It’s just the sort of project a wandering bored-in-the-middle-of-the-night Trump might come upon.

Passamaquoddy.

For some 90 years, it’s lain fallow, up in the state of Maine. The basis of it is quite simple. It’s a way to provide energy for the people that doesn’t involve conventional resources buried under the ground:

Off-shore turbines.

Taking advantage of the daily difference between high and low tides, ocean water literally turns the wheel and produces electricity.

For decades, utility companies and governments in the US and Canada and town councils and all sorts of other players have fought and delayed and blocked Passamaquoddy. JFK’s interest in it started when he was a Massachusetts Senator, and when he was President he ordered a report on its status. He was more than interested in it.

He saw the implications. If off-shore turbines in Maine could produce a great deal of electricity, how many other inlets off the coast of America could fit that bill? And why only in America?

Since JFK’s death, technical research has been done, in fact, on very small turbines that would sit in the flow of rivers and yield up electricity for small communities all over the world.

Bone-headed academics have declared that water-turbine energy isn’t cost effective. The truth is, with a tiny fraction of the government money and a fraction of the favors and loopholes that have been bestowed on the oil and nuclear industries, water-turbines could change a great deal of the energy picture today.

I point this out as merely one example of the sort of secret a properly vetted US President isn’t supposed to query or expose. Presidents know the rules of the game. In most cases, they behave.

But suddenly…an intruder in the Oval Office? A man who is either pretending to be, or is, a rabid populist? A man who loves to talk and talk and talk in front of his people? A man who doesn’t seem to assess consequences in the way that other groomed candidates do? A man who has no discernible pattern?

“Listen, everybody, I just found out about something JFK was working on. It’s fantastic. In fact, it’s super-fantastic. Let me tell you all about it. Those media jerks and professors will say it doesn’t work, but President Kennedy, who was a truly great guy, thought it would. Some super-educated friends of mine have been studying it and they agree. They’ve got a whole lot of degrees and credentials behind their names…It’s called Passamaquoddy…”

There are people in the shadows with a great deal of power who couldn’t care less about the morality of Trump’s stance on immigration. What they do care about, what they do guard are the boundaries of this propped-up fantasy world of scarcity we live in together. That is their first concern.

The idea of a sitting President hunting and pecking and stumbling around in secrets whose exposure would crack that system puts their teeth on edge.

What about this strange man, Trump, who, for whatever reasons, likes to stick his hand in dark places and pull rabbits out of rabbit holes?

That would be a cause for great concern.

That would be a threat that demands action.

To grasp this situation, you have to look past the op to divide America into two warring camps. You have to look past the media piling on as they try to make Trump into the destroyer of all human civilization. You have to look past the attempt to elevate his enemies into saviors of humanity. You have to look past obvious strategies to bring in agents to stir the pot, step up violence, and threaten peaceful communities.

According to the unspoken rules of political life in this country, no un-vetted President must ever move into the White House. It must not happen. Presidents have to understand their roles and their assignments.

Trump isn’t merely another puppet set up to hand the election to his opponent, Hillary Clinton. At the start, Hillary’s allies may have seen it that way, encouraged him, helped push him out on the national stage. But then things spiraled out of control.

Once in a while, that happens. A plan falls apart and the supposed dupe takes on a life of his own. He exceeds the limits. He strikes a nerve in the public. He starts listening to himself and realizes he might actually believe in his own ideas.

As of now, the men who operate the levers of this country at several upper strata see Trump as a wild card.

And they don’t like what they see.

They don’t like it at all.

power outside the matrix

In his better moments, this crazy cowboy seems to have a penchant for solutions that actually work. He isn’t mired down in standard actions designed to yield up more stagnation and more despair.

That makes him both unpredictable and dangerous, because there are real secrets that have been buried over the years—secrets that could restore prosperity and abundance for populations.

He might be crazy enough to unearth them and hold them up and talk about them, and new allies might come to his aid.

This is what is at the bottom of elite fear about the candidate who was never supposed to jump up out of nowhere.

Don’t assume such a threat could never, ever come in the form of a wise-cracking self-inflating hustler from way back. Don’t assume there is some correct archetype of the person who will blow the lid off the grave of secrets. This isn’t a spy novel in which the hero fits the reader’s fantasy. This is the American Empire, and it has been ruled, for a long time, by lunatics.

It might not be a surprise that a wild-talking cowboy exposes a few of their holy of holies.

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.

Sharyl Attkisson reports shocking US immigration stats

Sharyl Attkisson reports shocking US immigration stats

Plus: the Bernie Sanders/Donald Trump divide-and-conquer operation

by Jon Rappoport

March 16, 2016

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

In a column on her site (“Fact Check: Media claims that Trump is anti-immigrant,” 3/13/2016), ex-CBS News investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, writes:

“For example, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reported that 2013 and 2014 alone, it set loose in the U.S. more than 66,500 illegal immigrant criminals who had been arrested in the U.S. for additional crimes and had over 166,000 convictions among them: 30,000 for drunk or drugged driving, 414 kidnappings, 11,301 rapes or other types of assaults and 395 homicides. In a fairly short time period, ICE reported 2,423 of those illegal immigrant criminals had already been rearrested and convicted of new crimes in the U.S.– including felonies and gang offenses.”

I queried Attkisson about those 66,500 illegal immigrants’ 166,000 convictions. Did the convictions take place in their home countries before they came to the US? This was her reply:

“The [166,000] crimes were committed here in US —NOT in their home country. We don’t know about crimes they committed in their home country. These are people who were jailed here NOT for being illegal, but for additional crimes they committed here after coming illegally. Then they were released instead of deported or kept in prison…”

But you see, statistics like these can act as a bias against open borders and unlimited immigration. Therefore…

The numbers must be discounted. They must be ignored. Otherwise, one could be accused of intolerance, at the very least.

Actually, with open borders and no limitation on immigration, why are Mexico and US separate countries? Of course. Let’s have Mexerica or Americo and be done with it. That’ll solve the whole problem all at once.

Vicente Fox, the former head of Coca Cola operations in Latin America (a very healthy beverage), and former President of Mexico, who recently said, “I’m not going to pay for that fucking wall,” once suggested Mexico and the US should erase the border between them and form a bond with Canada, much like the European Union. He was right on the money. Mega-corporate Globalist money.

Consider the NAFTA trade treaty and the Rockefeller Globalists, who sit above this whole fray; and how they have helped cause a human flood at the southern US border.

Two years ago, on the 20th anniversary of NAFTA, Lori Wallach, of Public Citizen, wrote, at the Huffington Post (“NAFTA at 20: One Million U.S. Jobs Lost, Higher Income Inequality,” 1/6/2014):

“…outcomes include a staggering $181 billion U.S. trade deficit with NAFTA partners Mexico and Canada and the related loss of 1 million net U.S. jobs under NAFTA, growing income inequality, displacement of more than one million Mexican campesino farmers and a doubling of desperate immigration from Mexico…”

Nice and neat.

This is an elite Globalist operation on behalf of chaos.

power outside the matrix

A final note, concerning the loss of 1 million US jobs Lori Wallach mentioned. We’re talking about angry people. Some of them have gone over to Bernie Sander’s side, and some of them to Trump, because both men are talking about the loss of US jobs owing to horrendous Globalist trade treaties. These displaced out-of-work Americans are now opposing each other in the election season.

That’s a fine example of divide and conquer.

Who benefits? Hillary Clinton (rabid Globalist).

If only one highly visible anti-trade-treaty candidate were running in this Presidential election, who knows much support he might gain, as more and more Americans wake up to how they’re being used, abused, and cast aside during the march to the Globalists’ tune?

But when split apart between two oddball candidates (Trump and Sanders), who are polar opposites, anti-Globalist Americans battle each other, fracture the power they could amass together, and bury the victory they need—the victory everybody needs.

If Hillary Clinton coughs, splutters, grins, and cackles her way into the Oval Office in November, the divide-and-conquer op will have been successful.

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 Matrix of technocracy: the roots of the conspiracy

The Matrix of technocracy: the roots of the conspiracy

by Jon Rappoport

March 15, 2016

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

“The cartels of the world become the cartels of the mind.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

“If you are nothing more than a biological machine, then what you think doesn’t matter. There is no you. Confirming this, deciding this, is the technocrat’s wet dream.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

Many independent researchers, writers, and broadcasters have exposed the operation called technocracy. I want to give particular thanks to Patrick Wood, whose investigations are essential. His most recent book is Technocracy Rising.

Consider the term “scientific humanism.” The Oxford Dictionary offers this definition: “A form of humanist theory and practice that is based on the principles and methods of science; specifically the doctrine that human beings should employ scientific methods in studying human life and behaviour, in order to direct the welfare and future of mankind in a rational and beneficial manner…Origin mid-19th century.”

Two items jump out from the page: “…in order to direct the welfare and future of mankind,” and “Origin mid-19th century.”

The first phrase obviously refers to a plan. And the plan emerges from being able to study, at a great height, populations and nations—in order to direct their behavior, in order to place them and move them on a chessboard. “Scientifically.”

Free will? Not important. Free exchange of goods and services? Not important. The unique vision and desire of the individual? Not important. Only science is important—whatever that means.

Science/rule by technology/technocracy becomes the justification for control.

For example: “We have studied the amount of energy that can be utilized by humans on planet Earth. Given the results, we will plan how to distribute it most humanely and rationally.”

That’s not science. That’s fake science. Whoever determines what is “humane” isn’t doing science. Whoever presumes to know how much usable energy exists on Earth, despite ongoing technological breakthroughs, isn’t doing science. But no matter. Pronouncements can be made to look like science. On behalf of top-down control.

As the Oxford Dictionary mentions, this kind of program had its roots in the mid-19th century.

Well, Darwin published his hypothesis about evolution in 1859. Marx and Engels published The Communist Manifesto in 1848.

Let me now try to summarize thousands of pages of scholarship in a few paragraphs.

Prior to Marx, Engels, and Darwin, the word “humanism” referred to a tradition of philosophy, knowledge, culture, education, and art birthed by the ancient Greeks—coming forward through Rome to the European Renaissance. It elevated human beings. It tended toward greater freedom, less Church repression.

But then, in the mid-19th century, humanism took a sharp turn. It became identified with “the march of science,” the triumph of philosophic materialism (Darwin), and the complete restructuring of nations and societies according to a social, economic, and political plan that would “benefit all” (Marx, Engels).

Humanism was stripped down to “scientific humanism.”

In succeeding generations, all the way up to today, intellectuals and scientists and technologists have adopted the viewpoint that, since they can see the whole of society from above, and since they can understand its workings in clearer and evermore specific terms, and since they understand the vast field of natural resources, they can and should, quite naturally, and as a matter of course, plan and plot the future of humanity.

Their impulse was, behind the scenes, aided and abetted by a quite different cast of characters, who wanted a new world order, a political and economic management system for the entire planet (now known as Globalism).

This is, in effect, a two-tier operation. At the top are the Rockefeller Globalists; and under them, millions of useful high-IQ idiots who love to play chess with the world population.

The propaganda wing of this operation insists, at every turn: the only “solution” for planet Earth is the group solution. The group, the mass, the collective.

It is unthinkable that The Individual would have anything to contribute.

Well, when you stop and consider it, this is the mantra of today’s collective society: the individual is extinct.

The staging of civilization’s ebbs and flows, victories and defeats, always has the aim of discounting and reducing the role of the individual. Whatever else is intended, that is intended.

I’m not trying to discourage any and every group response—but I am saying, without question, that every major covert op is played in order to eradicate the idea of the individual. This is basic mind control. This is the reason mind control exists: to elevate “group” over “individual.”

Mind control tries to make individuals think of themselves as helpless pieces on the chessboard. Mind control tries to make individuals surrender their free will. Mind control tries to make individuals believe they have no place in the modern world. Rather, they must be part of a group; otherwise, they’re invisible.

If you could walk into a person’s mind, as if it were a post office, and if you could get rid of every letter and package that extolled, or surrendered to, The Group, you would see that person rise to a new height. You would see a renewal on a grand scale.

But introduce a fact or idea that challenges The Group and alarms go off. “Reject that fact! Reject it! It’s false! It has to be false! Maintain stability!”

“Stability being restored. The structure is intact. Standards are being rebooted. Normality is being reasserted. Resume standard operations.”

In Adjustment Team (1954), Philip K Dick wrote:

“You were supposed to have been in the Sector when the [mind control] adjustment began. Because of an error you were not. You came into the Sector late — during the adjustment itself. You fled, and when you returned it was over. You saw, and you should not have seen. Instead of a witness you should have been part of the adjustment. Like the others, you should have undergone changes…something went wrong. An error occurred. And now a serious problem exists. You have seen these things. You know a great deal. And you are not coordinated with the new configuration.“

What I call the Reality Manufacturing Company wants everyone to have the same inner configuration.

That is the basis of collectivism at the deepest level.

At the outbreak of World War 2, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) began making plans for the post-war world.

The question it posed was this: could America exist as a self-sufficient nation, or would it have to go outside its borders for vital resources?

Predictably, the answer was: imperial empire.

The US would not only need to obtain natural resources abroad, it would have to embark on endless conquest to assure continued access.

The CFR, of course, wasn’t just some think tank. It was connected to the highest levels of US government, through the State Department. A front for Rockefeller interests, it actually stood above the government.

Behind all its machinations was the presumption that planned societies were the future of the planet. Not open societies. (And “the interests of the US” would ultimately be subordinated to the domination of one-planet, new-world-order Globalists.)

Through wars, clandestine operations, legislation, treaties, manipulation of nations’ debt, control of banks and money supplies, countries could be turned into “managed units.”

Increasingly, the populations of countries would be regulated and directed and held in thrall to the State.

And the individual? He would go the way of other extinct species.

Nowhere in these formulas was the individual protected. He was considered a wild card, a loose cannon, and he needed to be demeaned, made an outsider, and characterized as a criminal who opposed the needs of the collective.

As the years and decades passed, this notion of the collective and its requirements, in a “humane civilization,” expanded.

On every level of society, people were urged to think of themselves as part of a greater group. The individual and his hopes, his unique dreams, his desires and energies, his determination and will power…all these were portrayed as relics of an unworkable and deluded past.

In the planned society, no one rises above the mass, except those men who run and operate and propagandize the mass.

The onrush of technocracy gears its wild promises to genetic manipulation, brain-machine interfaces, and other automatic downloads assuring “greater life.” No effort required. Plug in, and ascend to new heights.

Freedom? Independence? Old flickering dreams vicariously viewed on a screen.

Individual greatness, natural imagination, natural creative power? A sunken galleon loaded with treasure that, upon closer investigation, was never there to begin with.

The Plan is all that is important. The plan involves universal surveillance, in order to map the lives of billions of people, move by move, in order to design systems of control within which those billions live, day to day.

But the worst outcome of all is: the individual cannot even conceive of his own life and future in large terms. The individual responds to tighter and control with a shrug, as if to say, “What difference does it make?”

He has bought the collectivist package. His own uniqueness and inner resources are submerged under layers of passive acceptance of the consensus.

And make no mistake about it, this consensus reality, for all its exaltation of the group, is not heraldic in any sense. The propagandized veneer covers a cynical exploitation of every man, woman, and child.

Strapped by an amnesia about his own freedom and what it can truly mean, the individual opts for a place in the collective gloom. He may grumble and complain, but he fits in.

He can’t remember another possibility.

Every enterprise in which he finds himself turns out to be a pale copy of the real thing.

The deep energies and power and desire for freedom remain untapped.

—Yet a struggle continues to live.

exit from the matrix

It lives in the hidden places of every individual who wants out, who wants to come back to himself, who wants to stride out on a stage.

Freedom and power again. The shattering of amnesia.

In this stolen world.

A new stage play, titled:

The Extinct Individual Returns.

In this new play, dominoes of the collective begin to fall. The stinking structure collapses, a wing here and a wing there.

The vast sticky web called “the people” begins to disintegrate.

A new instructive message appears on screens: “The Collective=Crazy.”

The pseudo-scientific plot to make humans pieces on the grand chessboard, biological machines to manipulate at will, with “inputs” that “elicit predictable responses”—this great plan and great deception eventually becomes a burnt cinder in the annals of failed histories.

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.

Who is in charge of destroying economies?

Who is in charge of destroying economies?

A dog whistle to Trump supporters.

by Jon Rappoport

March 11, 2016

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

Who sets that policy? Who keeps it intact, despite new legislators and Presidents exiting and entering office?

Who keeps pushing new economy-destroying trade treaties, like the upcoming TPP? Who demands that these treaties must be ratified?

A number of groups—but one group has been virtually forgotten. Its influence is enormous. It has existed since 1973.

It’s called the Trilateral Commission (TC).

In a minute, I’m going to print a stunning piece of forgotten history, a 1978 conversation between a US reporter and two members of the Trilateral Commission.

I discovered the conversation in the late 1980s, and ever since then, I’ve been looking at it from various angles, finding new implications. Here, I want to point out that the conversation was public knowledge at the time.

Anyone who was anyone in Washington politics, in media, in think-tanks, had access to it. Understood its meaning.

But no one shouted from the rooftops. No one used the conversation to force a scandal. No one protested loudly.

The conversation revealed that the entire basis of the US Constitution had been torpedoed, that the people who were running US national policy (which includes trade treaties) were agents of an elite shadow group. No question about it.

And yet: official silence. Media silence. The Dept. of Justice made no moves, Congress undertook no serious inquiries, and the President, Jimmy Carter, issued no statements. Carter was himself a covert agent of the Trilateral Commission in the White House, a willing pawn, a rank con artist, a hustler. He had been plucked from obscurity and, through elite TC press connections, vaulted into the spotlight as a pre-eminent choice for the Presidency.

To boil down the 1978 conversation between the reporter and two Trilateral Commission members, and the follow-on response:

“The US has been taken over.”

“Yeah, so?”

Many people think the TC, created in 1973 by David Rockefeller, is a relic of an older time.

Think again.

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington, 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

Several other noteworthy Trilateral members:

* George HW Bush

* Bill Clinton

* Dick Cheney

* Al Gore

Keep in mind that the original stated goal of the TC was to create “a new international economic order.”

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.

Brzezinski wrote, four years before birthing the TC with his godfather, David Rockefeller:

“[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.”

Any doubt on the question of TC goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, 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.”

Okay. Here is a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment from out of the past. It’s through-the-looking-glass—a conversation between reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper. The interview took place in 1978. It concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating 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.

This interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried.

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, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

When 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’ve lost. And I’ll 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.

Now consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.

From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has had the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force. A central engine of that force is the Trilateral Commission.

How does a shadowy group like the TC accomplish its goal? One basic strategy is: destabilize nations; ruin their economies; ratify trade treaties that effectively send millions and millions of manufacturing jobs off to places where virtual slave labor does the work; adding insult to injury, export the cheap products of those slave-factories back to the nations who lost the jobs and undercut their domestic manufacturers, forcing them to close their doors and fire still more employees.

And then solve that economic chaos by bringing order.

What kind of order?

One planet, with national borders erased, under one management system, with a planned global economy, “to restore stability,” “for the good of all, for lasting harmony.”

The top Trilateral players, in 2008, had their man in the White House, another formerly obscure individual, like Jimmy Carter: Barack Obama. They had new trade treaties on the planning table. Obama was tasked with doing whatever was necessary to bring those treaties, like the TPP, home. To get them passed. To get them ratified. No excuses.

That’s why, months ago, when anti-TPP criticism and rhetoric was reaching a crescendo, when Obama was seeking Congressional fast-track approval of the treaty, he was in a sweat and a panic. He and his cabinet were on the phones night and day, scrambling and scraping for votes in Congress. This was the Big One. This was why he was the President. To make this happen.

His bosses were watching.

These men run US policy, when and where it counts. They don’t tolerate failure.

This is also why, after Obama was inaugurated for his first term, he shocked and astonished his own advisors, who expected him, as the first order of business, to address the unemployment issue in America. He shocked them by ignoring the number-one concern of Americans, and instead decided to opt for his disastrous national health insurance policy—Obamacare.

Why? Because he never had any intention of trying to dig America out of the crash of 2008. That wasn’t why he was put in the Oval Office. He could, and would, pretend to bring back the economy, with fudged numbers and distorted standards. But really and truly, create good-paying jobs for many, many Americans? Not on the TC agenda. Not in the cards.

It was counter-productive to the TC plan to torpedo the economy further.

It still is.

The Matrix Revealed

Now you have deeper background on the source of the political/media establishment’s panic and hysteria about Donald Trump. That establishment has received its marching orders. Take Trump down.

As far as the Trilaterals are concerned, it doesn’t matter whether The Donald is just blustering and bloviating about bringing jobs back to America, creating new prosperity, and “making America great again.” What matters is, he is raising the issue forcefully, out in the open. And huge numbers of people are responding. They’re confirming that the Obama economic recovery is a lie.

Trump has opened up an unprotected front in the war to sink the US economy. Suddenly, his supporters, like shock troops, are pouring through.

The censorship blocking discussion of the true state of the union has been cracked.

The genie must be put back in the bottle.

But by whom?

What Presidential candidate can now convince the people that all is well, good jobs are plentiful, and the country is prosperous again? Who can float that absurd lie and make people believe it?

If she can stop coughing, sputtering, cackling, switching accents, and grinning like a circus clown on meth, the task falls to Hillary.

Good luck with that one.

Maybe she should come right out and say: “You know me. I love wars. Put me in the Oval, and I’ll launch more wars than you can shake a stick at. And then you’ll see some goddamn prosperity. Everyone has a job in a full-bore wartime economy.”

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.

Breakthrough: true populism in the age of instant time

Breakthrough: true populism in the age of instant time

What a populist would do in 2016 and beyond

What the “real Bernie and Trump” show could be

by Jon Rappoport

March 8, 2016

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

“In this age, populism, if it existed, could connect with the population every day. The wildly popular populist leader would crack the egg of propriety and give blow-by-blow Web accounts of his struggles with the oligarchy, in detail, in his car, outside meeting rooms, on staircases, at home, in his office, on the street, in restaurants; everywhere, speaking to millions of people each time…” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

This is about what a true populist could be in this era of instant unstoppable media and, therefore, instant time.

I’m talking about an understanding of moment-by-moment connection with the population, which is now possible on a grand scale, owing to the internet and the devices which connect to it.

To grasp the implications, you must conceive of one wildly popular person up against forces which absolutely deny the interests and desires of millions of people.

And the leading question is: what should he do, when suddenly thrust into the spotlight, having gained considerable influence—knowing that enormous forces are arrayed to stop him?

A true populist says, for example: no bad trade deals. Translation: stop Globalism in its tracks. Nullify its trade treaties, the cornerstones of its cathedral. Negate them. Destroy them.

If he really meant it, if he was intent on achieving the goal, by whatever means, against some of the most powerful men on the planet, and if he began that journey, in talks, in meetings, in conferences with members of Congress, with US trade representatives, with Washington insiders—

When should he go back to the people, his people, his supporters, and let them know what is happening? When?

The usual pattern is: behind the scenes, for a few months, he tries to turn the oil tanker of State around, he fails, he reports the failure in mildly irritated language during one or two press conferences, and he moves on to other issues. But a real populist now…

Would be going on webcasts to millions of people, his people, giving them updates, explaining his struggle, listing the barriers, pointing out who is building those barriers, how they are obstructing the will of the people…in vivid detail…creating a massive uproar.

This is populism on a scale never envisioned before. It would constitute a staggering breakthrough.

It would shred business as usual in Washington.

A true populist leader would accept the fact that working through usual channels, to bring about stunning changes, is a loser. The enemy is entrenched. The enemy controls the landscape. The enemy controls the machinery.

Where is the populist’s strength coming from? Only one place: the people who are supporting him. So he has to go back to that well, over and over again. And now he can. Live.

“You wanted me to get your jobs back. That’s why you rallied behind me. I want to get your jobs back. I’ve explained why these trade treaties are destroying jobs at home. Now I’m trying to move the rock up the mountain. A few hours ago, I had a meeting with Senator Smith, a staunch defender of the treaties. It went nowhere. I want to tell you what he said, because, in his eyes, you don’t count. Only big corporations count. This is what happened…”

And three, five, ten million people are watching and listening.

And that’s just today’s report.

Tomorrow, or three days from now, there’ll be another blow-by-blow talk about who is blocking people from getting their jobs back.

Imagine it. Think about it. This is the hero’s journey, in real time, detouring around the controlled media. And yet…

The media would respond:

“Hey, Mr. Populist, we just watched your latest webcast. Hell of a show. Maybe you’d like to do your next Report to the People on our network. I mean, you had six million viewers at midnight. Unbelievable. You were sitting in your car, right after your meeting with the Secretary of Commerce. We could do that. Sit in your car, and we’ll beam you to our audience…”

No, I’m not necessarily talking about Donald Trump. Whether you like him or hate him—not the issue here. I’m talking about any person who, for whatever reason, gains the support of millions of people, because he wants to restore something to them, something they once had, something that was taken away from them by the wolves, something they had earned—and now it’s gone. Like jobs. Something basic that no one can argue about.

A real and true populist, in this age, would keep going back to his people—and he could. Live, at any moment, day or night. He would have to.

He would put a level of pressure on his enemies that has never existed before.

“Well, people, as you know, Congressman Jones introduced a bill today that would cancel four giant trade treaties and take the US out of the trap it’s been in for the last 25 years. It would bring giant corporations home from foreign lands. They would re-open their factories here. Your jobs would come back. Under ordinary circumstances, this bill wouldn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell of passing. But we aren’t in ordinary circumstances anymore, because I have you and you have me. So let me tell you about the committee where this bill is going to meet its first big roadblock. I just got out of meeting with the head of the committee. This is exactly what happened…It’s a tragedy and travesty…”

“I want to ask you people a question tonight. What would happen if I, as President, decided to cancel all those trade treaties? Myself. With one stroke of the pen. By executive order. What would happen to me and to you and what would the Congress and the press do? I’m asking you. Is it a crime to give you your jobs back? Would somebody try to put me in jail or impeach me? Would they dare, with all of you behind me? Would they?”

“Some of you are telling me they’re going to shoot me. You’re warning me. I have to ask you this. With all of you behind me, do you really think they’d try? They may be crazy, but they aren’t stupid. Don’t you think they know what would happen?”

What I’m painting here isn’t only a different concept of media. It’s a different concept of political time. Time intervals.

Instead of six weeks or three months between general and vague reports and updates, the populist telescopes time. He shrinks the intervals. He makes his reports to the people every week, every few days. If he’s compelling, if he presents vivid details and names and events—instead of the usual hash of high-flying nonsense—he invents a new medium. A new way of connecting.

All right, take the two candidates in this year’s Presidential race who seem to be populists—Bernie and Trump—and forget for a moment whether they’re real or fake, sincere or con artists, ordinary politicians or a different breed. Forget that for the moment. Imagine what could happen if, between their usual speeches and interviews and debates, they went to the Web for live streaming every few days, building and building their audiences, and not just in the US, but globally.

Suppose, for example, they both had good research teams who assembled extensive dossiers, chapter and verse, on the misdeeds and crimes of Hillary Clinton…and suppose they hammered on that dossier mercilessly in Web broadcasts. Chapter and verse. “This is specifically what you’d be getting if you elected Hillary. This is who she is. This is exactly what she’s done.”

Or: “Let me tell you about American jobs. This is exactly what happened to them. This is who did it.” Night after night. Chapter and verse.

Or: “Let me tell you something about one of those giant trade treaties. NAFTA. Listen up. Once it was passed, US companies could flood Mexico with cheap corn. And they did. Mexico had a lot of corn farmers. Guess what? All that NAFTA cheap corn put 1.5 million Mexican corn farmers out of business. Guess what they did and where they went, all those farmers. A lot of them came up across the border into the US. That’s something you won’t hear about the immigration problem. Come on. Wake up. These Globalist trade treaties are destructive in a lot of ways…”

Fireside chats via the Web. “Hi, everybody. Last night we had nine million people watching, as I sat here by my fireplace and talked about medical care in this country. Tonight, we predict it’s going to be 20 million on the Web, all over the world. So I want to explain how the US medical system kills 225,000 Americans a year. That’s right. You should know about this. Everybody should know about this. I have the reports in front of me. I’m not making this up. Chances are you know someone who has been affected, who has died, or one of their family has died. This affects everybody. The US medical system kills 2.25 million Americans per decade. Can you believe it? Where are the media in all this…”

On and on. The Trump Web blasts. The Sanders Web blasts. Night and day.

Obama could be doing this. Hillary could, too. But do they really have what it takes to keep going back to the well, to their people, and making a visceral impact? Or are they just too mired in lies and tired worn-out generalities—in which case, the rebound effect would be increasingly negative, as they bore their audiences to death.

Some of you are thinking about what might happen if a crazy and vicious populist made use of this approach. Of course. No one claims the world is without risks. There are always risks. This isn’t Rainbow Village with marshmallows and ice cream. Some of you are convinced that all politicians, no matter what they say, are already bought off and are merely props in the grand show. So? That doesn’t preclude the possibility of a new person suddenly coming on the scene who hasn’t sold his soul. The future isn’t already written. Claiming it’s a closed book is an attitude that works for the cemetery and the grave and little else.

Imagination, courage, and intelligence never go out of style. No matter what anyone says.

Taking the internet to a new level is THERE. Waiting.

exit from the matrix

Here’s a variation on a tune that’s been tried before—but with a new sense of spontaneity and urgency:

“Hi, folks, it’s me again. In case you’ve been living under a rock, and some people are, because the economy has gone down the toilet, I’m a candidate for the Presidency of the United States. I understand we have about 25 million people watching tonight. I just got off the 15 Freeway in Southern California, outside Rancho Bernardo, and as you can see, I’m standing in a 7-Eleven. I was just chatting with a guy named Frank, who works behind the counter here. Frank, what did you do before this job?”

“Well, I had quite a few jobs. But at one time, I was a line supervisor in a factory that made shoes. A lot of us were fired.”

“Why? Why were you fired?”

“Because the company went belly up. They couldn’t handle the competition. Companies in the US were going overseas to make shoes and bring them back here. Real cheap.”

“Do you know how they were able to pull off that scam?”

“Sure. They don’t have to pay a tax, when they bring the shoes back in. That’s called free trade, right? Well, it put me down. It put my family and me down on our backs. So we had to pull up stakes and move from state to state looking for work…”

“Is this a set up? Did my people search you out here at the store?”

“Hell, no. You just came in to buy a beer. We started talking.”

“Well, this is why I’m going to trample all over the treaties that made you lose your job. I didn’t need to search you out. I meet people like you all the time. So let me run down how this free trade thing works, and who the Globalists are. You’re sure you’re not an actor, Frank?”

“I’ll call my wife and kids and they’ll come over here and tell you what I’m telling you. Here’s my driver’s license. I’ll give you the name of the man who owned the shoe company. You can call him up. He’ll tell you the same thing. You can check him out. He went bust. He’s in Florida now, trying to sell real estate.”

“A whole lot of people will be checking you out tomorrow, Frank. They’ll want to say we’re making all this up.”

“Let them. If they want to, I’ll show them my bills. They can pay them and see if they’re real…”

“Okay, Frank, get your family over here. Why not? I do want to talk to them. And call your old boss at the factory. We’ll put him on the line, too. Meanwhile, I’ll talk about David Rockefeller and the Globalists, and his intellectual sidekick, Brzezinski. It’s quite an interesting story. Brzezinski once said independent nations are finished. He said banks and corporations are running things now. I don’t think so. I don’t think that’s what the American people want. Let’s expose this whole operation down to its shoes…”

That’s just one night of populism in America. For 20 million people.

Getting the picture?

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.

Scalia murdered? Sealed his fate 4 days before his death?

Scalia murdered? Sealed his fate 4 days before his death?

by Jon Rappoport

February 17, 2016

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

Four days before he died, Supreme Court Justice Scalia voted to stall Obama’s plan to force drastic climate-change rules on the American economy. The vote was 5-4.

With Scalia now gone, the vote would be 4-4.

With a new Obama Supreme Court appointee, if Obama could ram his choice through, the vote would be 5-4 in the President’s favor. Ditto, if the next President shares Obama’s position. And the climate-change agenda would roll ahead.

We’re not talking about small climate-change rules. We’re talking about the Big Ones.

And note: such rules could very well dovetail with the Brave New World spelled out in the upcoming TPP (the Trans-Pacific Partnership).

It’s a wedge formation, a squeeze play, a pincer movement featuring new EPA climate-change regulations on one side, and new draconian possibilities embedded in the TPP.

If Scalia was murdered, the above agenda was sufficient reason, because the climate agenda has the force to transform life on the planet.

If Scalia’s murder were a movie, he would have been told, as a warning: “You have no idea how big this thing is; you really don’t understand the forces you’re messing with.”

Of course, most Americans don’t believe a political murder along this line could happen in real life. They can only accept it in a movie, where it makes perfect sense. That tells you something about the schizoid nature of the public mind.

Adrenaline-driven in front of a screen; tranquilized and programmed to be passive and accepting of recognized authority, otherwise.

“Don’t be silly. Scalia, murdered, and murdered for that reason? It couldn’t happen. That’s so…barbaric. We’re civilized.” That opinion and $6 will get you a rainbow smoothie.

Obama’s climate-change plan uses the EPA to act out international agreements signed at the recent Paris summit. But in order to, yes, scam these agreements into force in the US, the EPA has to stretch and bend and distort already-existing US law. And it has done so.

However, a number of states have sued to stop the EPA, which wants to make all states cut CO2 emissions from electrical power production by 32% in the next 15 years. Aimed mainly at coal-burning plants, these regulations would create deep reductions in the overall US energy supply and output—a primary mission of the economy-wrecking Rockefeller Globalists.

The US Supreme Court, four days before Scalia’s death, with his vote, declared a narrow 5-4 halt to the Obama plan, pending a lower-court decision on the issue. The 5-4 vote didn’t knock out the plan, but it stalled it. And if Scalia had stayed alive, his vote going forward on the Obama plan could have remained crucial.

The pending TPP, another Globalist trade treaty, contains a section that allows endless changes and additions in the text as years pass. In other words, the passion for cutting energy production for the US, and the rest of the planet, can easily be expressed and ratified by the member nations.

The TPP also reveals a cynical attitude toward the “humanitarian goal of saving the planet from CO2 death.” Major corporations that burn coal and employ other ways of releasing CO2 can relocate to far-off lands (e.g., Vietnam) and spew CO2 to their hearts’ content, without messy environmental controls.

In other words, the true underlying Globalist scheme, vis-à-vis climate change has nothing to do with messianic rescue: it has to do with lowering energy production.

Drive economies further into despair. Move more jobs out of industrialized countries.

Create further poverty and chaos.

And then bring new order in behind that—one planet, under the tight rein of one worldwide political and economic management system.

That’s the true meaning of the climate-change agenda, notwithstanding solemn promises and heraldic pronouncements about replacing lost energy with new renewable technologies.

“I have an idea. Let’s cut our electricity-use in our home by 30%, while we figure out how to replace it with some new source. That’ll work. I’m sure of it.”

On top of all this, the entire manmade-warming hypothesis is riddled with fraud and guesswork dressed up to look like United Nations science. A hypothesis is supposed to be able to make useful and specific predictions. The warming hypothesis is a dud in this regard. It was never meant to be science—it was always a strategy designed to cut energy production on planet Earth, torpedo economies, heighten human suffering, and usher in an elite Globalist triumph.

This is what Justice Scalia was going up against.

If he was murdered, there was sufficient reason.

The FBI can do two kinds of investigations, depending on the orders of the Attorney General: heavy or lite.

Heavy means leaving no stone unturned. It means taking control of the Scalia’s body now and doing whatever can be done with it, in its embalmed state, to determine cause of death. It means raking wackaloon Judge Guevara over the coals, along with US marshals, to find out exactly how the verdict of “natural causes” was reached. It means extensive interviews with everyone at Poindexter’s ranch. Wall to wall forensic analysis of rooms and spaces at the ranch. And so forth and so on.

Lite means a brush-off, meant to avoid any disruption in the present scenario.

So far, from what I see, the FBI is doing Lite. Scalia’s body should already be on an autopsy table.

There continues to be no uproar inside the Beltway about the absurd, insane, useless declaration of death by “natural causes.”

And there is something else going on. It’s the convenient mind-control program that says, “Mustn’t disturb the dead. Don’t interrupt the expressions of sadness at his passing. Don’t dishonor the man by raising questions about his possible murder. Give the family their privacy during this period of grief.”

It’s the passivity of the obedient mind. Whatever induced mood, fabrication, lie, omission can feed and expand that passivity…is deployed:

“We need to be more accepting. He was an old man in ill-heath. He passed away. Natural causes. The great cycle of life. Be gentle. Nothing to see. Move along, slowly.”

“Possible murder of a US Supreme Court Justice? Please, not at this time. It’s a discordant idea. Unharmonious. Let the man go gently into that good night.”

power outside the matrix

Truth be told, this whole country has been subject to a “no-disturb” sign for a long, long time. Don’t think; agree. Don’t investigate; obey.

The “don’t-disturb-the-dead” program is really about the whole population. The implication is: “we’re all dead already; don’t disturb us.”

The lesson? Just because other people are mired in a hypnotic state, you aren’t obliged to pander to them. Their trance is their own.

Whether you’re alive and awake and alert and have power is a choice. Yours.

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.

If America were a car, it would be in the shop

If America were a car, it would be in the shop

by Jon Rappoport

February 11, 2016

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

And if it were in the shop, the mechanics would remove the defective transmission labeled Globalism and install a new one.

The free market, such as it was 60 years ago, was a kind of balancing act, imperfect, but functioning. US manufacturing plants and domestic workers were producing products and selling them at what would now be considered high prices. Compared to what? Compared to prices if the factories had been located overseas, where workers were paid far less, where safety and environmental laws were lax.

But those American workers in factories were making a living wage. They could afford to buy products made in America. Not all workers could, but a lot of them could.

In that “closed system,” the balancing act was: US wages vs. the price of goods produced in America. Could a worker make enough to buy enough of what he wanted? The answer, of course, wasn’t an unqualified yes, but it was a significant yes.

However, Rockefeller Globalists were looking for something else, and they began their earnest effort at transformation in 1945, when the first round of GATT talks took place. Fifty years later, that international treaty was signed and wrapped up, and the World Trade Organization was created.

Suddenly, tariffs were off the table. Foreign companies could export their goods to America, pay no tariff, and sell them cheaply. US companies could shut down domestic factories, go abroad, open up factories there, make goods cheaply, and export them to the US. The whole game changed.

The Globalists’ propaganda, spouted by men like the unctuous Bill Clinton, claimed that, on balance, this would be a good deal for American workers. They could buy what they wanted at lower prices.

Of course, many of those US workers were now out of jobs, because the companies they worked for here had shut down and moved to faraway places. The former balancing act between wages and buying power was destroyed.

And as more US companies moved out of the country, more US workers were unemployed. The old US “closed system” was no more. Everything was “global” now.

That old closed system had worked because, in America, if workers hadn’t been paid a decent wage, they wouldn’t have been able to buy products “made in America,” and the whole system would have collapsed.

But understand this: top-tier Globalists wanted to wreck the American economy. In the wake of the ongoing destruction, they wanted to shift as many economic control mechanisms as possible to the federal government. And they wanted to bulk up mega-corporations, which would operate internationally, with no allegiance to any government or nation.

Globalists were re-shaping the mission of government and corporations, so those twins’ true loyalties were pledged to the agenda of One Planet, under one overarching management system.

The Globalists are on their way.

There is just one problem. As they put a knife into the heart of one vibrant national economy after another (through expanding unemployment), the number of consumers who are able to participate in the new system declines, drops, dries up.

This is no accident. Even the mega-corporations, in the long run, are being used as pawns. They will eventually fail. Right now, many of them are operating their assembly lines at half-mast. They could produce enough for three planets, but they don’t have enough international customers.

What the Globalists actually want is: One Planet, In Poverty, with no liberty or justice for anyone—except themselves.

When you look at the real climate agenda, you see that, underneath the proposed carbon taxes and cap and trade, the goal is diminished energy production. For all. Everywhere. More poverty.

Why? Because a planet that looks more and more like the Third World is easier to control and easier to selectively depopulate.

Some mega-corporate CEOs undoubtedly see this end game. They’re jockeying and tap dancing and scheming to avoid it. They’re telling themselves, “The day of the big crunch is still a long way off, I don’t have to worry about it now, I’ll be gone to my grave when it happens, and there’s always the dream of selling big to China and India…”

The most popular product on the planet is Denial, and it’s free.

As an aside, you should now be able to see the true motive behind exacerbating racial conflict within America and within other countries. Whatever can be done to raise the level of conflict acts as a cover story—concealing the fact that what many poverty-stricken areas need now is what they had before: jobs.

When those jobs left, neighborhoods and communities were shattered. This must be covered up, kept silent, omitted from the official news. Instead, residents of those areas must be led to demand something they will (purposely) never get: justice.

All the gobbledygook about “a dialogue on race” and “privilege” and other politically correct notions are jacked-up propaganda, aimed at concealing the economic realities of Globalism.

The Matrix Revealed

That word Globalism was all over the news 20 years ago. Notice that now it has nearly disappeared. In its place are numerous cover stories, diversions, distractions, and even yes, a rising Presidential candidate who appears to understand the Globalist game.

But Bernie Sander’s solutions turn out to be quite in line with Globalists’ objectives: hand over more functions of the economy to the government.

—As you dig further and further down the rabbit hole, you find that all covert ops meet at the place where the Individual and his latent power are defamed and discounted. And that is where the counter-offensive, which is creative and innovative, begins.

It begins with the Individual seeing through the lies about himself.

The Matrix spins those lies, hoping to obscure something awesome that lives in the hidden psyche of every person, beyond the grasp of any and all mind control.

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.

Zika: Mega-power’s best friend: the virus

Zika: Mega-power’s best friend: the virus

by Jon Rappoport

February 1, 2016

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

Modern medicine has transferred the notions of evil, Satan, and even ‘terrorist’ to The Virus.

Unlike my previous articles about the Zika-virus-hoax, this one takes a larger view of what intelligence agencies call a cover story.

A cover story is a tale that conceals an operation and its true purpose. It’s a diversion, a distraction, as in the old con artist’s shell game.

“Look over here. Don’t look there.”

A cover story is a scenario that convinces an audience it is seeing all there is to see:

A lone deranged assassin, Lee Oswald, murdered John Kennedy. Beginning and end of story. There is nothing else to investigate. There was no coordinated operation.

Regarding the Zika virus, I’ve now established there is no proof it is connected with cases of microcephaly (babies with smaller heads and brain impairment). In fact, the actual number of cases of microcephaly in Brazil, “the center of the crisis,” has been overblown.

But in Brazil, there is certainly a deep and enduring health crisis. Add up grinding poverty, severe malnutrition, the enormous deployment of toxic pesticides, a lack of basic sanitation in areas, vaccine damage, among other factors, and you have a formula for human devastation.

Two long-term operations in Brazil (as well as many other countries) need to protect their secrets. I’m talking about a) modern medicine, and b) corporate giants who manufacture and sell pesticides. The use of pesticides has vastly expanded with the introduction of GMO crops, which require drenching with specific compounds, the most famous of which is Monsanto’s Roundup.

Modern medicine operates on the fallacious principle that treating poverty-stricken, chronically ill populations is life-saving and, indeed, messianic. This is a lie. The lie must be covered up.

These populations need productive work and money to survive. They need nutritious food. They need basic sanitation. They need a clean environment. Otherwise, their immune systems are constantly on the edge of collapse.

They aren’t ill because of viruses. In their condition, any germ coming down the pipeline will cause life-threatening infections, because their immune systems can’t respond.

Medical treatment in the form of drugs and vaccines makes things worse. The drugs are toxic, and the vaccines push immune systems over the edge.

Exposure of these simple facts would send a missile into the heart of the medical cartel. That must not happen.

Therefore, The Virus is constantly invoked as the culprit. The Virus is highlighted, promoted, and elevated to the status of public enemy number one. It is the cover story. It is essentially blamed for the horrendous living conditions I mentioned above.

“Well, of course we want to help all these people. But remember, two years ago, the virus that decimated them? And now, the new virus that has entered the scene? We’re doing everything we can to develop a vaccine, and in the meantime we have several drugs that can help. We’re building clinics…”

Only a rank idiot or a venal propagandist would suggest such “cures.”

What’s going on here? Modern medicine is expanding its reach and its territory. And it is assisting those rulers and powers who want to keep populations in a wretched state.

For a fraction of the money that is being expended on “medical help,” you could go into a community, clean up the contaminated water supply, install basic sanitation, help create small farms, and watch people raises themselves up. That’s the start of a real cure.

In Brazil, as I’ve mentioned in previous articles, toxic pesticides are causing great harm. They’re poisons. The companies who manufacture and sell them, like Monsanto, have no intention of giving them up. These companies don’t care about human destruction or even the deleterious effects on huge cash crops. But the companies need a cover story, to explain the devastation they’re creating.

They, too, rely on The Virus. It’s their ace in the hole. Two years ago, it was Epidemic A. This year it’s Epidemic B. Highly publicized, heavily promoted.

“See all those sick and dying people? What a shame. Another virus has emerged. Bad luck. For some reason, these epidemics never start in Beverly Hills or Scarsdale. Oh well. Our corporation is happy to contribute to a fund for more medical care. You can count on us. We care.”

the matrix revealed

Whenever a new “outbreak” of disease occurs, people immediately begin looking for the single cause. Obvious cause, secret cause, it doesn’t matter. It always turns out to be a virus. They don’t bother looking at the conditions that have existed for a hundred years or more in the area of the “epidemic.” It’s as if these areas were previously brimming with prosperity, and suddenly people are laid low. How preposterous.

People in those areas have been falling ill and dying for a century. Now and then, things get even worse. It’s to be expected.

Giant agri-corporations and mining corporations and other corporations have been stealing good land from the local people for a long time. There’s a real virus for you. The corporations don’t want those people to turn to small farming. They want them to work on the plantations, and when they can’t work any longer because they’re too sick and too poisoned, other people will take their place.

That’s the operation.

The Virus is the cover.

It always was.

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 Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

The Clintons: is the Oregon standoff really about uranium?

by Jon Rappoport

January 27, 2016

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

Note: This article was written before the Oregon shootout in which one man was killed and another wounded.

Is uranium at the heart of the Oregon Malheur federal-protestor standoff? That’s the question I’m asking. It isn’t a flippant question.

I realize there are many other issues swirling around this event. The Hammonds, the Bundys, militias, the feds, cattle grazing on federal lands, federal land grabs, and so on. This article isn’t meant to take apart those matters.

It’s meant to follow up on my previous article, in which I present a circumstantial case for the Clintons’ heavy involvement in a scheme that’s transferred 20% of US uranium production to Putin and Russia. And the key company in that piece is Uranium One. Remember the name. It’s apparently a major clue in what I’m about to discuss.

I also want to say, at the outset, that I don’t know how many independent news outlets and websites are covering the uranium question, or which outlet initiated this line of investigation. I’m relying on one provocative January 23 article at intellihub, by Shepard Ambellas:

“Clinton Foundation took massive payoffs, promised Hammond Ranch and other publicly owned lands to Russians, along with one-fifth of our uranium ore.”

Down in the body of that article, the author provides a link to a page at the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which is a federal agency under the Department of the Interior.

On that BLM page (“National BLM > OR/WA > Energy > Uranium Energy”), in a section titled, “Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA,” [(image of webpage forthcoming)] is the following statement:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the ‘New U’ uranium claims.

“On May 7, 2012, Oregon Energy LLC made a presentation to the BLM outlining its plans for development for the mine.

“The Vale District has agreed to work with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife on mitigation for the ‘New U’ uranium claims, which are located in core sage grouse habitat. Although the lands encompassing the claims have been designated core, the area is frequented by rockhounds and hunters, and has a crisscrossing of off-highway vehicle (OHV) roads and other significant land disturbance from the defunct Bretz Mercury Mine, abandoned in the 1960s.

“However, by the fall of 2012 the company said that it was putting its plans for the mine on hold until the uncertainty surrounding sage grouse issues was resolved.”

The first sentence in that BLM section ties together several key elements of the story: Uranium One; a uranium mine; southern Malheur County. Southern Malheur is the general area of the federal-protestor standoff. Let me give you that first sentence again:

“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon.”

What does this have to do with Hillary and Bill Clinton? I’ll reprint my previous article so you can read the details, but the short version is: there’s a case to be made that they, through Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation, facilitated the sale of Uranium One to Putin and the Russians. And if so, and if this area of Oregon is projected to be part of that uranium mining deal, then we are looking at a stunning “coincidence”: the US federal government is coming down hard on a group of protestors who are occupying, for their own reasons, a very valuable piece of territory that goes far beyond the issue of private cattle grazing on government land.

It comes under the heading of those old familiar lines: you have no idea what you’re involved in; you have no idea who you’re messing with; this is way over your head; you just stepped into the middle of something that’s bigger than you can imagine.

Here is my previous article in full, “The Clintons: how Putin grabbed a fifth of all US uranium.” I’ll have a few important comments to make after the article:

—She’s the next US President, if an old socialist, a cowboy real estate hustler, and a bunch of emails can’t stop her.

He already was the President.

They’re married. Cue the dawn sunrise and violins for the beautiful first couple of American politics. Wow. In a land where they’re the first couple, does anybody have tickets to sell for the next flight to Mars?

Before I board my flight, what about the uranium scandal?

The what?

Before I quote a NY Times piece on this, consider—suppose, just suppose the beautiful first couple has been running a kind of parallel operation to the government, in the form of a foundation that is taking in major chunks of cash from people who want political favors. Just suppose. And a few donors who are ponying up those $$ want to sell a company to the Russians. But because this company sells a very, very sensitive product, and that product happens to come out of the ground in the US, agencies of the US government have to approve the sale. And one of those agencies that does approve the sale happens to be headed up by half of that beautiful couple. And this sensitive American product, well, the last person you’d want to control it is the head of a place called Russia—he can sit in Moscow and have complete dominion over this product that exists on US soil…and nobody thinks this is a problem, as half of the beautiful couple runs for President of the United States. It’s a yawn. It was a big story for a day or two, and then it sank below memory and everybody moved on. Forget about it. Who cares?

Memory is short. On April 23, 2015, the NY Times ran a story under the headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal”.

The bare bones of the story: a Canadian company called Uranium One controls a great deal of uranium production in the US. It was sold to Russia (meaning Putin and his minions). So Putin now controls 20% of US uranium production.

From the Times:

“…the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

From the Times:

“The [Pravda] article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

“Frank Giustra…a mining financier, has donated $31.3 million to the foundation run by former President Bill Clinton…”

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal [to sell Uranium One to Putin] had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

“At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.

“Whether the donations [to the Clinton Foundation] played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.

“In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said no one ‘has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.’ He emphasized that multiple United States agencies, as well as the Canadian government, had signed off on the [uranium] deal and that, in general, such matters were handled at a level below the secretary. ‘To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless,’ he added.”

—The US State Dept. had to sign off on the deal giving Putin control over US uranium. Hillary headed up the State Dept. Much money from Canadian mining executives, who obviously wanted the deal to go through, found its way into the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation concealed these donations.

That’s called a circumstantial case. Every such case is different, and has to be judged by assessing probabilities. But for example, if an examination of two involved prominent figures revealed they were serial liars, it would strengthen a verdict of guilty.

If you’re Putin and you’re sitting in Moscow, and the uranium deal has just dropped this bonanza into your lap, what’s your reaction—after you stop laughing and popping champagne corks? Or maybe you never really stop laughing. Maybe this is a joke that keeps on giving. You wake up in the middle of the night with a big grin plastered on your face, and you can’t figure out why…and then you remember, oh yeah, the uranium deal. The US uranium. Who’s running the show in America? Ha-ha-ha. Some egregious dolt? Maybe he’s a sleeper agent we forgot about and he reactivated himself. And this foundation—how can the beautiful couple get away with that? And she’s going to be the next President? Can we give her a medal? Can we put up a statue of her in a park? Does Bill need any more hookers?

You shake your head and go back to sleep. You see a parade of little boats carrying uranium from the US to Russia. A pretty line of putt-putt boats. You chuckle. Row, row, row your boat…merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily…life is but a dream.

Good times.

—end of article—

power outside the matrix

So we have the Clintons, and Uranium One sold to Putin, and that sale gives him control of 20% of US uranium production. Now we have an area in Southern Oregon which has uranium, and in this area, the feds are coming down on the protestors and the occupiers.

What are the feds really trying to protect? Are they just trying to stop cattle grazing and routine burns on that land, or is there something more far precious at stake?

The feds aren’t known for making delicate distinctions. People are raising a bit of hell in the general (or specific) area where uranium mining could commence. Get them out of there! Move them off! No more cattle grazing here! This is a matter of national security!

Or it was. Now it’s a matter of Russian national security.

Make deal, protect the dealers. It’s business.

Consider the potential scandal and the massive irony: US citizens are asserting their sovereign right to use federal land, land that should never have been co-opted by the federal government in the first place—and now it turns out to be Russian land.

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.