A fantasy that explains Globalism

by Jon Rappoport

May 6, 2015

Imagine this fantasy. In Indiana, all citizens are under the gun. They must work in factories where the wage is 20 cents an hour. There are no unions. When unions start to form, the leaders are arrested or killed. Employers and the state government provide unsanitary crowded dormitories for worker housing. No citizen of Indiana can leave the state legally without a special passport.

In Delaware, citizens can come and go. Through collective bargaining and other measures, the average wage for a factory worker is $27 an hour. The worker lives in his own home.

There is a shoe-manufacturing company in Indiana, and also in Delaware.

The Delaware state government suddenly passes a law saying that importers can buy shoes from the company in Indiana and bring them into Delaware for sale. There will be no import tariffs of any kind.

The citizens of Delaware protest. They point out that this law will kill the shoe company in Delaware. Their state government tells them; the law is the law.

And this whole Indiana-Delaware arrangement is mislabeled free-market capitalism or free trade.

It’s a market, but it isn’t free. The workers carrying the load in Indiana are under the gun. Nowhere in their state can they earn more than a few cents an hour.

This isn’t capitalism. It’s Globalism.

Capitalism doesn’t work when the two partners live in areas where the working conditions are vastly different.

It never did.

This is the reason treaties like GATT and NAFTA and CAFTA and the upcoming TPP have been launched: mega-corporations want to roam free. They want to be able to inject money into any entity in the world and suddenly remove it at will. They certainly want to be able to ship goods from one nation to another without paying tariffs, which otherwise would cost them an extraordinary amount of money. For these corporations, nations don’t really exist anymore—they are convenient fictions. These corporations don’t want any restrictions on their plundering of the Global Village.

On the mega-corporate front, this plan for world control remains the Rockefeller template. “Free trade.” The plan was advanced, ceaselessly, for 40 years until, on January 1, 1995, the World Trade Organization was fully formed and took charge of the criminal rules of global commerce: the crowning moment.

However, back in the early 1970s, the whole operation had been “infected.” One man, a crook, a President, a liar, an insecure parody of a head of state, Richard Nixon, went off script. He REALLY went off script.

In an effort to bolster US companies and protect them from foreign competition, Nixon (on Aug 15, 1971) began erecting tariffs on a range of goods imported into the US (and took American money off the gold standard).

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

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

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

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

The man behind the curtain was David Rockefeller.

After the whole Watergate scandal had been exposed and Nixon had flown away, in disgrace, from the White House for the last time, Rockefeller addressed a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce of the European Community (October, 1975).

He was there to allay their fears about Nixon’s betrayal of the new economic world order. There was really very little he needed to say. David had already created (1973) the Globalist Trilateral Commission. And a new puppet, Gerald Ford was in the White House, and Ford had appointed David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller, as his vice president.

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

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

The temporary rip in the Matrix had been repaired.

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

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

He can recall the famous words of Zbiggie Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission and David Rockefeller’s intellectual flunkey:

“The nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.”

Yes, and that planning includes every possible advantage for mega-corporations in a borderless world.

Jon Rappoport

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

Obama, Hillary/Bill, Bush, “income inequality and violence”

May3

Obama, Hillary/Bill, Bush, “income inequality and violence”

The big lie

by Jon Rappoport

May 3, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“There are lots of ways to destroy communities. One of the most successful is: take jobs away. Cancel jobs. Then, cover this plot with lies about poverty and inequality. Set race and against race: tap into human feelings and the mind in their vulnerable areas—where hatred and rancor can be stimulated. Thus, distract everyone from the truth.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

The US, England, Australia, Canada— everywhere you go you see the same specter and the same lying politicians:

The specter is Globalism and its effects—the open secret mainstream pols refuse to talk about.

The Globalist truth is simple, and it has been simple since the 1940s: If a government pushes a policy that sends jobs to foreign countries where labor is cheap, economic ruin follows at home.

It doesn’t take a genius or even an economist to figure it out.

Here in the US, Presidents and would-be Presidents babble on about wanting to reduce poverty while they covertly support stealing jobs and more jobs from US cities and towns.

This is Hillary Clinton. This is her husband, Bill, and George W Bush and Barack Obama.

“Weep for the poor. Pump in more welfare cash. Fix income equality. (Steal jobs).”

They know exactly what they’re doing, they know the lies they’re telling, they know the transnational corporations they’re backing, they know where the jobs are going.

In the process, whole nations are being sucked dry.

You own a company that makes widgets. Suddenly, a giant competitor opens up a factory in a country five thousand miles away and pays the workers six cents an hour.

That competitor floods the market in your country with widgets at his price. He gets away with it, because he pays no tariffs to ship the widgets into your country. The tariffs are illegal.

That’s one aspect of Globalism.

He wins, you lose. Your workers lose.

This is no accident. It’s by design. And the horrific consequences are part of the plan as well. The elite Globalist economic engineers aren’t idiots. They can see the future.

And the future is:

“Well, look at the world. Economies on the edge of a cliff, over the cliff. Vast inequality of income. There is only one way out of this. Central planning for Planet Earth, which will regulate the distribution of goods and services to all humankind…”

Totalitarian order from chaos.

Mega-corporations and governments in lock step, and behind them a small number of elite banks who create and loan money to favored cronies.

Welcome to Globalism.

When chaos breaks out in cities, pundits debate the “root causes” and manage to overlook the obvious, every time.

And political leaders, in a wretchedly failed attempt to sound noble, name their favorite “root causes” and their vague solutions.

The pundits, the political leaders, various academic dupes, talking news heads, foundations; they parrot the line: “Capitalism is causing all this, it’s evil.”

Capitalism is just the free and non-criminal exchange of goods and services for money. What’s causing all this is Globalism, which is the criminal and purposeful concentration of money and assets in fewer hands.

It’s the old Rockefeller/Carnegie pattern. First, by hook and by crook accumulate vast amounts of money. Then, attack that same unbridled money-accumulation (calling it capitalism) and promote “a more humane society,” which turns out to mean the Rockefellers and the Carnegies and their ilk run society from the top, “on behalf of the people.”

“We care.”

Sure they do. They care about control over the masses.

Globalism is David Rockefeller personified. Here is the kernel, in his own words, from his 2003 Memoirs:

“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.”

If you’ve been alert, you’ve noticed that, in the last 10 years, the word “Globalism” has been gradually drained from the vocabulary of the news. It’s replacement? “Capitalism.” This is intentional. It’s a distraction, part of the cover story.

Another distraction: “the national conversation about race.” It should be: “the conversation about who is stealing all the jobs and sending them elsewhere.”

A whole lot of people would have surprisingly intelligent contributions to make to that conversation.

Jon Rappoport

A single cartel for the whole planet

Apr2

A single cartel for the whole planet

Matrixology 101

by Jon Rappoport

April 2, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“It’s not always possible to find out ‘who started a fire or blew up a building’, but you can count on the State using such an event to escalate its control over the citizenry. Deploying any excuse to expand its power is what big government does. It’s an obsession. The State has the DNA of a fungus. It spreads. That’s what it does. To put it another way, the State hopes that by committing more crimes, it can escape notice for having committed prior crimes. And yes, this is the same government untold numbers of people put their trust in for a better future.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Let’s start here. In the wake of purported terrorist attacks, or crimes that appear to involve several nations, international cross-border cooperation is the watchword.

This means strengthening structural connections, permanent connections, among government agencies—intelligence, military, medical, and so on.

That’s the whole point.

Far more threatening than the loss of life and damage from the crimes, the integration of government agencies among nations forwards the plan to manage sectors of the planet from above.

Surveillance operates in the same fashion. Although there is friction when one government spies on another, the overall trend is toward multinational spying efforts, in which whole populations are the targets.

A metaphor for this is rendition: “We won’t set up torture sites inside our borders, but we’ll ship suspects to you, so you can hold, interrogate, and torture them, and share the information with us…”

Consider money, currencies, banking. On one level, there is fierce competition among nations. But on a higher level, there are continuing efforts to integrate international credit, financing, and digitized uniform “cash.”

One world, one money system, one army, one intelligence agency, one medical system… it’s the Globalist wet dream. Their moves in this direction meet with opposition. It’s not a slam-dunk. Two steps forward, one step back. But on the whole, they’re gaining ground.

The ideal for them is: corporation-government nexus; larger cartels; integration of those cartels into a single whole.

Many, many, many people in this world are systems-oriented. They always want larger systems, which of course deeply affect populations, rigidifying them. But this is not a problem for “systems-people.” The apparatus comes first; humans are secondary.

Systems-people aim for perfection. Their minds mirror this: excessively structured geometry, balance, equilibrium, symmetry, order.

They want everyone’s mind to operate from this foundation.

They believe any other basis is disruptive.

Now we are getting into a deeper level of Matrix—the embrace between external systems of control and the interior patterning of minds.

“Oh yes, I can recognize that system. It is shaped like my mind. That’s good. It must be good. I feel a harmonic relationship.”

At the deepest level, we are talking about a cartel of the mind.

This is the purpose of programming.

Analogy: a student of music is conditioned to approach the classics as systems to be analyzed. The effect, after years of training? The student no longer hears the music.

Deadened, he accepts structure as primary. He looks for structure everywhere. When he finds it in social, cultural, political, economic arenas, he enlists, he signs up, he gives in, he commits.

“We must organize society. Every person must have a function that contributes to the whole.”

And in order for this to work, there must be an upper level of management. It decides where food, water, energy, and other goods and services are distributed. This “problem” is solved.

The solution is presented as symmetrical, balanced, harmonious.

On the every-day level of events, such as epidemics, terror attacks, plane crashes, hacker incursions, mass shootings, racial conflicts, no matter how these events actually originated, the payoff is always: better, larger, more inclusive systems that will “prevent this from happening again.”

These systems are, more and more, propagandized and explained as “automatic.” Machines (computers and robots) will run them, to ensure there are no errors.

For many people, this notion is attractive, because their own minds are shaped in that direction, in that way, in that pattern.

It’s worth noting that the primary creative impulse in individuals, before it is stifled and buried and reconfigured, is:

asymmetrical.

Which is to say: the impulse is dynamic, forward-thrusting, highly energetic, exploratory, and “unfinished.” It is not patterned. It does not automatically seek balance.

Its outcome is unpredictable, open.

Therefore, from an early age, humans are taught symmetrical restraint. This “perfection” is portrayed as highly valued. Alternatives are characterized as crazy and incomprehensible.

It’s no accident that psychiatry has based its entire (false) hypothesis of mental disorders on the notion of a chemical Imbalance in the brain.

“Restoration of balance” plays well to the masses. It gives them a sense of rightness. Of course it does, because unthinking automatic symmetry/balance are key factors in the cartel of mind control.

In my 30-plus years of research and reporting, I have spoken, at length, with hundreds and hundreds of people who have seen through various ops, staged events, conspiracies, and elite strategies—and yet have absolutely no idea how to create something different.

They can’t imagine how they would begin.

This is because they are still dealing with their own minds, which have been indoctrinated into the all-systems all-the-time approach to reality.

They are prisoners to the symmetry/balance program. At best, they hope for a better system to replace the old one.

That dead-end is part and parcel of the Matrix.

Jon Rappoport

To people who still think Obama is the answer

Mar24

To people who still think Obama is the answer

Suppose he never intended to bring about a jobs recovery?

Suppose he’s been actively against it for at least six years?

by Jon Rappoport

March 24, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Create new solid US jobs?

End the unemployment crisis?

That was never, ever Obama’s agenda.

And people who think it is are being betrayed.

There are several ways to show this, but perhaps the most important way is to sketch in the effects of the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership), which Obama is fully supporting and fronting for and defending.

He wants Congressional approval for the TPP this year.

As Public Citizen (also know as tradewatch.org) reveals:

“The TPP is a massive, controversial ‘free trade’ agreement currently being pushed by big corporations and negotiated behind closed doors by officials from the United States and 11 other countries – Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam [and probably later, China will sign on].

“…And U.S. TPP negotiators literally used the 2011 Korea FTA [Free Trade Agreement] – under which [US] exports have fallen and [US] trade deficits have surged [and 85,000 US jobs have been lost] – as the template for the TPP.

“…We only know about the TPP’s threats thanks to leaks – the public is not allowed to see the draft TPP text. Even members of Congress, after being denied the text for years, are now only provided limited access. Meanwhile, more than 500 official corporate ‘trade advisors’ have special access. The TPP has been under negotiation for six years, and the Obama administration wants to sign the deal this year…”

Yes, secret deal. The public is not permitted to see what is in it. We only know some of what’s in it because of several partial leaks.

Obama wants Congress to fast-track the TPP with a strict up or down vote: no amendments permitted; no filibustering; the final vote must take place within 90 days of the TPP’s introduction on the floor of Congress; no Committee vetting first.

This is your transparent President.

From what we can glean about the TPP so far, these will be some of its effects (consider how each effect can impact employment in the United States):

Offshoring more US jobs; inviting more corporate pollution; importing more foods (unsafe, incompletely unlabeled); outlawing restrictions on GMO foods while expanding mega-corporate agriculture; encouragement granted to Wall Street to multiply the same kinds of insane investments that crashed markets eight years ago; US federal contracts to private companies will be forced to take competitive bids from any corporation in any TPP member country.

The TPP has been called “NAFTA on steroids.”

It is the newest edition of Globalism for planet Earth—control of the population by mega-corporations, who are in sync with their government partners.

Obama has known about, and supported the TPP, for at least the last six years. Quietly.

He knew a true campaign to create jobs for Americans—real jobs—would take a major hit. For at least six years he knew that. And he didn’t care.

So this is more than indifference. He was obviously opposed to an economic recovery.

Obama has been a willing puppet and front man for this elite Globalist plan (the TPP) to further undermine the US economy.

For those who whine and bleat, “He had no choice,” there is always a choice. Obama made his, long ago.

He, of course, is not the first President to sign on to the Globalist agenda. But, during his first run for the Presidency, he made his messianic case based on “a new day for the people.”

Forget it. This is the old day. The old way.

Like every US President since 1945, when negotiations on GATT began in earnest (the treaty that eventually established the Globalist World Trade Organization), Obama has mouthed a string of lies to conceal the core of his mission.

Face up to it.

Forget “friend of the people, supporter of the downtrodden.” That’s his cover story.

It was the cover story, from Day One.

Re the heinous spread of Globalism, Obama’s administration is just as sold-out as Bush’s administration was. There is zero difference.

Jon Rappoport

My response to Bob Livingston’s article, ‘Islamic terror and the great deception’

Feb18

My response to Bob Livingston’s article, “Islamic Terror and the Great Deception”

by Jon Rappoport

February 18, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

In his important personalliberty.com article, “Islamic Terror and the Great Deception,” Bob Livingston describes how recent US Presidents have continued to wage war against “terrorism,” when in fact their true goals have been quite different:

For example, keeping Middle East nations from nationalizing their precious oil supplies. For example, justifying tighter and tighter control over the lives of US citizens, in order to “protect them from terrorist attacks.”

I want to add a piece to the puzzle.

War is a permanent US government policy. Make no mistake about it. Who sets the policy? Who keeps it intact, despite legislators and Presidents exiting and entering office?

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 war) 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 in the White House, a willing pawn, a rank con artist, a hustler.

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):

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 (including war-making) run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission had been 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: keep making war. Destabilize nations. Invent endless enemies. Through war, create chaos.

And solve that chaos by bringing order. What kind of order?

One planet, with national borders erased, under one management system, “for the good of all, for lasting peace.”

Jon Rappoport

The medical cartel is king in a Globalist world

Nov2

The medical cartel is king in a globalist world

by Jon Rappoport

November 2, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Elites who invent reality need an unimpeachable operation, headed up by people who are relentlessly promoted as the sanest, most intelligent, competent, and caring representatives of the human race. Guess who that would be?” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

In 1976, the great critic of 20th-century society, Ivan Illich, wrote: “Modern medicine is a negation of health. It isn’t organized to serve human health, but only itself, an institution. It makes more people sick than it heals.”

The medical cartel is the answer to the question: what do you with the population of Earth once they are living under a globalist oligarchy?

It’s all about managing lives, from womb to grave, and no institution serves that management better than Medicine.

First of all, you have a system that dispenses toxic drugs in an endless stream, killing in the US alone, by conservative estimate, 100,000 people per year. On top of that, medical drugs cause anywhere from two to four millions severe adverse effects annually.

Beyond this straight-out destruction, there is the turmoil, suffering, grieving, and confusion that extends in ripples, from each one of the deaths and injuries, to families, friends, and co-workers. The overall effect? Demoralization and the inability to see and think past the emotional pain—which is exactly what you want if you are a psychopath running a planet.

The medical cartel (drug companies, public health agencies, medical schools, doctors) wants to assure cradle-to-grave treatment of every person. This means 30 or 40 diagnoses of illnesses and mental disorders during a lifetime, and treatment with toxic drugs. It also means medical issues are at the forefront of every person’s mind as he/she wends through life, believing that Disease is the most important aspect of living.

People become proud, yes, proud of their diagnoses and treatment. They wear the diagnoses like badges of honor, and every social communication is an occasion for displaying badges and discussing treatments and comparing notes.

“You know, at first my doctor thought it was ADHD, but then he did one of those new brain scans, and realized it was Bipolar with a trace of genetically inherited Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Once he had the ODD under control with a major tranquilizer, he could go after the Bipolar. But then I developed tremors. So he implanted a chip…”

It’s not only a sick society, it’s a society about sickness.

Medical care is free, if by free one means: paid for by extraordinary levels of taxation.

The basic collectivist slogan, “We’re all in this together,” achieves its most fervent support from the axiom that Disease is our primary opportunity to help each other by accepting awesome tax burdens.

Of course, huge segments of the world population won’t be able to participate in modern, up-to-date, cutting-edge “care.” For them, there are several solutions. The first is vaccines seeded with chemicals and genes that reduce fertility and potency. As birth rates gradually decline, cover stories are invented to explain the phenomenon: stress; rising employment rates; the social effects of urbanization; the dissolution of the nuclear family.

The second solution is epidemics that purportedly kill off large numbers of people. These epidemics are routine frauds, based on concocted science. In the poverty-stricken Third World, announced epidemics are nothing more than cover stories; people aren’t dying because of germs; they’re dying because their water is contaminated, because of overcrowding, lack of basic sanitation, generation-to-generation starvation. They’re dying because their fertile growing lands have been stolen. While medical experts crow about attacking the germ of the moment with (toxic) drugs and vaccines, these actual causes of death can be ignored and even enhanced.

Meanwhile, in industrialized technological sectors of the planet, psychiatry ascends to new heights of control over the educated classes. Although no so-called mental disorder has ever been diagnosed by a real laboratory test, the experts who dominate the field continue to invent new disorders at the drop of a hat.

Psychiatric patients believe they have brain conditions that must be treated with (highly toxic) drugs. The patients also believe their own aspirations are limited by their disorders, and so they acquiesce to a psychiatric model that circumscribes their lives.

At the top-end of society, new medical inventions are applied to the wealthy. Genetic enhancement is the most highly touted of these. Despite the fact that, as yet, there are no genetic treatments for any disease that work across the board, experiments will be done to extend life, to seed the unborn with special talents, to cure a wide variety of illnesses.

There will be efforts to substitute technological components for biological nature. Limbs, organs, whole body systems, brains.

The workability of high-tech pieces is not really the issue. The aim is simply to involve the rich in the entire grand experiment, thereby swallowing them up as well in a medical paradigm of existence.

At the front door of medical cartel operations, a person will be enrolled in the system while in utero, and a path will be laid out that extends all the way to the grave. Once he is on record with a medical ID package, he will be tracked and treated and tweaked without let-up.

Finally, the inevitable proposal and program will come into view. Why risk natural birth, which is already considered a medical event? Why not create birth in a laboratory?

And if, at any point in life, a person experiences doubts and regrets about his membership in the universal medical control apparatus, he can obtain a prescription for drugs that target “pleasure centers,” and then check out of his worries and anxieties.

Huxley’s Brave New World would move in like a wave on a beach.

At every way-stop toward that day, sophistication, elegance, assurance, and concern will be the watchwords of the practicing doctor, the secular priest in this drama of human dismantling.

And yet, for those who remember, who know what the Individual is, who know what freedom is, who know what imagination and creative power are, the rigging and distorting and flattening and collectivizing will look like nothing more than a horrible cartoon.

And these people who remember will lead a revolution like no revolution ever seen before.

Or we can defect from, and withdraw our consent to, this mad matrix now.

Jon Rappoport

The invention of political reality

Oct31

The invention of political reality

by Jon Rappoport

October 31, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

From the 2010 Rockefeller Foundation brainstorming exercise “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” (pages 18 – 19) (note: this is a .pdf document at rockefellerfoundation.org. Go to startpage.com and type-in the title to access the document):

“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit… national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”

As you read this article, keep in mind that the Rockefeller Empire is very much a medical empire.

The Rockefeller Foundation, along with the Carnegie Foundation, changed the course of modern medicine, reinventing it as a global pharmaceutical colossus, whose rationale was: kill germs.

Therefore, every so-called viral epidemic, hyped to the hilt, assists in the promotion of the germ as the invisible terrorist, thereby reinforcing toxic medical drugs as the only answer for humankind.

Every phony epidemic also helps to engender a larger and tighter medical surveillance system for the world—much like a medical NSA.

The infamous Trilateral Commission (TC) still exists.

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.

The original stated goal of the TC was to create “a new international economic order.” Knowing that you have to break eggs to make an omelette, consider how the following TC members, in key Obama posts, can help engender national chaos, and install binding international agreements that will envelop our economy and money in a deeper global collective: a new world order:

* Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;

* James Jones, National Security Advisor;

* Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;

* Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.

All Trilateralists.

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.

In the US, since 1973, author Wood counts eight out of 10 US Trade Representative appointments, and six out of eight World Bank presidencies, as American Trilateral members.

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

Several other noteworthy Trilateral members: George HW Bush; Bill Clinton; Dick Cheney; Al Gore. The first three men helped sink the US further into debt by fomenting wars abroad; and Gore’s cap and trade blueprint would destroy industrial economies, while vastly increasing the numbers of people in Third World countries who have no access to modern sources of energy.

Does all this offer a clue as to why the US economy has failed to recover from the Wall Street debacle of 2008, why the federal bailout was a handout to super-rich criminals, and why Obama took actions which prevented a recovery? (Does it also offer a clue about why we are seeing the ferocious promotion of a phony Ebola epidemic?)

A closer look at Tim Geithner’s circle of economic advisers reveals the chilling Trilateral effect: Paul Volker; Alan Greenspan; E. Gerald Corrigan (director, Goldman Sachs); and Peter G Peterson (former CEO, Lehman Brothers, former chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations). These men are all Trilateral members.

How many foxes in the hen house do we need, before we realize their Trilateral agenda is controlling the direction of our economy?

The TC has no interest in building up the American economy. They want to torpedo it, as part of the end-game of creating a new international currency, ushering in a de facto Globalist management system for the whole planet.

Any doubt on the question of TC goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003):

Even in what many people mistakenly think of as the TC’s heyday, the 1970s, there were few who realized its overarching power.

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

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this [Trilateral] 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].

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

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

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

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

Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed the Trilateral takeover of US domestic and foreign policy was already out in the open, it wasn’t.

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

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

Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We’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.

And, as one strategy for pushing the planet into that networked coagulated mass—and weakening it through the ubiquitous use of toxic medicines—we have seen a parade of phony global epidemics, promoted as threats requiring “a single universal response.”

Jon Rappoport

How many covert ops can dance on the head of a pin?

Jun27

How many covert ops can dance on the head of a pin?

by Jon Rappoport

June 27, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

These are notes on covert ops I’ve made over the years. They apply to any arena where deception is the name of the game.

Every covert op needs a cover story. That is, the public must be made to look in the wrong direction.

A cover story not only hides the identity of perpetrators, it also imparts the wrong meaning to the event being staged.

Example: a war is set in motion, in order to bankrupt several governments. But the public is told the war means: “protecting democracy.”

Major covert ops have more than one objective. A war will bankrupt governments; it will also result in a peace treaty that creates a larger cooperative structure than previously existed, spanning several nations—and the men who end up running that larger structure are the same men who triggered the war in the first place. They wind up with more control and power than they had before.

Covert ops of great size and importance must include the laying of false trails. Thus, in the wake of the op, investigators will find clues that lead them down roads that come, eventually, to alleys that dead-end against blank walls.

In the process, they discover perpetrators who weren’t really perpetrators. They discover motives that weren’t true motives. They pick up hints that were deposited like break crumbs to divert and mislead.

In case some element of the actual covert op is revealed, there is the limited hangout. This is a confession. It offers a mea culpa, but only concerning a relatively trivial factor.

“Yes, our agency did make mistakes, and those mistakes led to the loss of public funds. But we are taking steps to assure nothing like this ever happens again…”

And of course, in order to “take steps,” the agency needs a larger budget.

A massive series of connected covert ops, over a long period of time, are built, as a kind of hierarchy that leads to some ultimate objective. This is the “ops within ops” strategy.

Identifying and derailing a handful of ops will not stop the overall program.

For example, an ultimate objective would be: the triumph of Globalism. This means putting the nations and peoples of the world under a single management system.

That system, an enormous bureaucracy run at the very top by a small secret group, would eventually make all important decisions involving: politics; the economy; money; credit; production and distribution of goods and services; energy; military use of force; media/propaganda content; medical treatment; mega-corporate power; natural resources; food; water; geo-engineering; freedom of speech; education; geo-distribution of populations.

In order to create this overarching reality, multiple systems of mind control, indoctrination, self-policing, and operant conditioning must be enacted and expanded.

Such a conspiracy (Globalism) does not need the conscious cooperation of many people who are “in on the secret.” That childish position is repeated intentionally by idiots and dupes and pawns and infiltrators.

Compartmentalization is the key. You can take any group and assign it various separate tasks, each one masked by “humanitarian” slogans, and you will get eager compliance.

Only a few people in charge see the big picture and understand how the separate tasks (ops) combine to achieve the overall goal.

The art and skill of covert ops involve coordinating such machinery to yield the desired result.

The main propaganda/media approach is: “Events that are taking place in the world are unrelated. These crises and problems are separate fires breaking out, without a central cause.”

To view this in action, just watch the network evening news. It’s an exercise meant to engender partitioned minds, which nibble a bit here, a bit there. Stories break out, are covered, and then disappear, to be replaced by new material.

The elite anchors are inducers of short-term memory and long-term amnesia.

Alongside media, a continuous downpour of propaganda urges the primacy of the group and the mass and the collective beyond any “selfish” concerns.

This op is intended to erase the very concept of the individual.

Why? Because the free, powerful, and independent individual can expose how “the group” is being recreated every day as a mythological symbol.

A symbol of (false) hope, caring, dependence, passivity, acquiescence, surrender, and envelopment within the banner of “enlightened humane leadership.”

If it quacks and walks like an organized religion, it is some version of an organized religion. It doesn’t need a God. It just needs a priest class to preach Rescue For All People.

Quack, quack. Op, op.

Jon Rappoport

One day in 1913, Woodrow Wilson had a shocking thought

Jun26

One day in 1913, Woodrow Wilson had a shocking thought

by Jon Rappoport

June 26, 2014

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

President Woodrow Wilson was one of those men who saw a horrible danger to his country, looked it in the eye, and decided that, instead of trying to decentralize and dismantle that overarching power, he would hope against hope that greater cooperation among leaders of nations would bring sanity and peace and freedom of the individual.

Of course, he was wrong.

Wilson knew he was entangled with those very powers that were destroying the best of what American stood for.

Nevertheless, no modern President has made more revealing comments on the existence and nature of the shadow government, the real rulers of America.

This was his 1913 thought:

“…the control of credit…has become dangerously centralized…The great monopoly in this country is the monopoly of big credits. So long as that exists, our old variety and freedom and individual energy of development are out of the question.

“A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.

“This is the greatest question of all, and to this statesmen must address themselves with an earnest determination to serve the long future and the true liberties of men. This money trust, or, as it should be more properly called, this credit trust, of which Congress has begun an investigation, is no myth; it is no imaginary thing.

“It is not an ordinary trust like another. It doesn’t do business every day. It does business only when there is occasion to do business. You can sometimes do something large when it isn’t watching, but when it is watching, you can’t do much. And I have seen men squeezed by it; I have seen men who, as they themselves expressed it, were put ‘out of business by Wall Street,’ because Wall Street found them inconvenient and didn’t want their competition.”

(From “The New Freedom—A call for the emancipation of the generous energies of a people,” Chapter 8, “Monopoly or Opportunity,” 1913)

Actually, six years earlier, Wilson had another compelling thought:

“Since trade ignores national boundaries and the manufacturer insists on having the world as a market, the flag of his nation must follow him, and the doors of the nations which are closed must be battered down. Concessions obtained by financiers must be safeguarded by ministers of state, even if the sovereignty of unwilling nations be outraged in the process. Colonies must be obtained or planted, in order that no useful corner of the world may be overlooked or left unused.” (unpublished paper, 1907, quoted in “The Rising American Empire,” by Richard Warner Van Alstyne, 1960)

In a speech delivered on September 5, 1919, about the Peace Treaty ending WW1, Wilson stated:

“The real reason that the war that we have just finished took place was that Germany was afraid her commercial rivals were going to get the better of her, and the reason why some nations went into the war against Germany was that they thought Germany would get the commercial advantage of them. The seed of the jealousy, the seed of the deep-seated hatred was hot, successful commercial and industrial rivalry.”

And from “The New Freedom,” 1913, we have this blockbuster:

“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it. They know that America is not a place of which it can be said, as it used to be, that a man may choose his own calling and pursue it just as far as his abilities enable him to pursue it; because to-day, if he enters certain fields, there are organizations which will use means against him that will prevent his building up a business which they do not want to have built up; organizations that will see to it that the ground is cut from under him and the markets shut against him. For if he begins to sell to certain retail dealers, to any retail dealers, the monopoly will refuse to sell to those dealers, and those dealers, afraid, will not buy the new man’s wares.”

And again, from “The New Freedom”:

“American industry is not free, as once it was free; American enterprise is not free; the man with only a little capital is finding it harder to get into the field, more and more impossible to compete with the big fellow. Why? Because the laws of this country do not prevent the strong from crushing the weak. That is the reason, and because the strong have crushed the weak the strong dominate the industry and the economic life of this country. No man can deny that the lines of endeavor have more and more narrowed and stiffened; no man who knows anything about the development of industry in this country can have failed to observe that the larger kinds of credit are more and more difficult to obtain, unless you obtain them upon the terms of uniting your efforts with those who already control the industries of the country; and nobody can fail to observe that any man who tries to set himself up in competition with any process of manufacture which has been taken under the control of large combinations of capital will presently find himself either squeezed out or obliged to sell and allow himself to be absorbed.”

In case there is any question about whom Wilson is referring to, when he suggests that people of talent are being edged out of the marketplace, here is a follow-up quote, from The New Freedom:

“The treasury of America lies in those ambitions, those energies, that cannot be restricted to a special favored class. It depends upon the inventions of unknown men, upon the originations of unknown men, upon the ambitions of unknown men. Every country is renewed out of the ranks of the unknown, not out of the ranks of those already famous and powerful and in control.”

And finally:

“The dominating danger in this land is not the existence of great individual combinations, — that is dangerous enough in all conscience, — but the combination of the combinations, — of the railways, the manufacturing enterprises, the great mining projects, the great enterprises for the development of the natural water-powers of the country, threaded together in the personnel of a series of boards of directors into a ‘community of interest’ more formidable than any conceivable single combination that dare appear in the open.”

The suppression of Tesla, Royal Rife, Dr. William Frederick Koch, Dr. Joseph Gold, the FDA’s war against natural health, the sidelining of many energy solutions, such as tidal projects for the production of electricity, the alignment of universities and giant corporations with the National Security State, the trashing of the public education system, the federal backing of pseudoscientific and destructive medicine, the centralized control of major media…these and many more developments are covered by Wilson’s statements.

The shadow power Wilson refers to are the “framers of reality” for the masses.

Jon Rappoport

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

Hillary on the 2nd Amendment: the “viewpoint” crime

Jun18

Hillary on 2nd Amendment: the “viewpoint” crime

by Jon Rappoport

June 18, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.” (William Burroughs, Grand Street no. 37, 1992)

Hillary on guns at a CNN town hall meeting:

“I’m well aware that this is a hot political subject. And again, I will speak out no matter what role I find myself in. [Ahem, a role like President, or President, or possibly even President.] But I believe that we need a more thoughtful conversation. We cannot let a minority of people – and it’s, that’s what it is, it is a minority of people – hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.”

I see. So the Viewpoint in favor of gun ownership is a hostile act. The Viewpoint itself terrorizes the population.

Could there be a more transparent illustration of political correctness?

Well, suppose I have the idiosyncratic viewpoint that schools who punish kids for bringing toy guns or bubble gum guns or poptart guns or screen saver guns to class—those schools should be shut down and the teachers and administrators who punish the kids should be shipped to a desert island?

Am I terrorizing the population?

Hillary then went on to talk about the need to protect students and teachers from someone who brings a gun to school and goes crazy and shoots people.

This is her example? This is her talking point? This is her rallying cry?

She doesn’t mention where the majority of gun violence takes place in America. She omits that. Where is it? The Southwest? Montana? The plains of Iowa? Key West? Maine? Are good old boys with pickups and shotguns mowing people down on back country roads? Is that the epicenter?

I guess the places where the most gun violence is occurring are on a special list, titled: “not responsible.”

No one shot anyone there.

Poverty pulled the triggers. Drugs pulled the triggers. Bad schools pulled the triggers. Broken homes pulled the triggers.

So those places don’t count—therefore, guess what? Statistically, we have very, very little human-caused gun violence in America. We’re in good shape. We don’t need new restrictions on gun ownership.

Issue solved. Case closed.

These unmentionable places where lots of people are shooting at other people and killing them and maiming them: they’re not real, they don’t exist. After all, Hillary didn’t talk about them.

But if those places did exist, where are the guns coming from? Gun shops? The guns are all legally obtained? Are they coming from the ATF? Oh, wait, no, that’s Mexico. The ATF runs guns into Mexico for the drug cartels. Fast&Furious, and before that, under Bush, Operation End-Around. But that op is also unmentionable now. It’s stale. Old news. Forget it.

And military weapons, including drones, in the hands of American soldiers and the CIA: that’s way off the reservation. It’s called war. Can’t discuss that as part of the gun problem.

Anything else we can’t discuss? How about the CIA program under Bill, when he was governor of Arkansas, whereby factories were secretly built in his home state to manufacture guns for the Contras? (See Terry Reed, John Cummings, “Compromised.”) Were those factories, at the very least, a viewpoint-crime? Seems like it.

Police forces all over America are now being outfitted with military hardware. Armored vehicles, heavy weapons. Does that constitute a hostile viewpoint-crime?

And then there’s this old (but true) saw: people like Hillary walk and drive around with formidable security. Those guards are packing heat. Somehow, it seems unfair. Regular citizens don’t have a cordon of protection. Hillary doesn’t need a gun because her people have them. So why should anyone listen to her pontificate on the subject of weapons?

She’s essentially saying, “See my guys? They’re armed. They’re always around. You people don’t have that. That’s tough. Too bad. Give up your guns.”

Appears to be another hostile viewpoint-crime. Very hostile, pretentious, and condescending.

Reminiscent of her recent comment that she and Bill were “broke” when they left the White House in 2000. Broke, except for a book contract and a house that magically appeared for them in posh Westchester County.

The Clintons are like that. They feel your pain, they’re just like you, except when they’re not, which is always.

But don’t worry. As the symbolic first woman President (every criticism against her will be labeled sexist), she’ll tirelessly work toward that shining day when all guns will be removed from the populace. The police and the military will have all the weapons. The streets will be quiet and serene.

She’ll come rolling into your town accompanied by a bevy of tanks.

Just to be on the safe side.

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Globalist

A fantasy that explains Globalism

Obama, Hillary/Bill, Bush, “income inequality and violence”

A single cartel for the whole planet

To people who still think Obama is the answer

My response to Bob Livingston’s article, ‘Islamic terror and the great deception’

The medical cartel is king in a Globalist world

The invention of political reality

How many covert ops can dance on the head of a pin?

One day in 1913, Woodrow Wilson had a shocking thought

Hillary on the 2nd Amendment: the “viewpoint” crime