“We lost contact with the plane.” Really?

by Jon Rappoport

July 24, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Today—Air Algerie Flight 5017, from Burkina Faso to Algiers crashed, according to “officials.”

Some of these officials state contact with the plane was lost an hour after takeoff.

You can probably remember similar statements about other doomed flights: lost contact. Wasn’t that the case on 9/11?

“Lost contact” appears to cover all available means of communication. Nothing on radar screens. Radio inoperative. No transponder signals picked up.

In this day and age, with a blizzard of technology available to track and surveil, what is going on?

Commercial jets have only one transponder? Isn’t it possible to embed dozens of GPS-type devices at various points in the craft? And wouldn’t those devices report a plane’s location, no matter how far it strayed off course?

Even underwater? Isn’t the US Navy able to keep tabs on its own submerged submarines?

So either we are looking at an international scandal, in which modern tracking technology is not being fully applied to commercial planes…or officials are lying when they say: lost contact.

Assuming cutting-edge tracking tech is, without public knowledge, being used on modern commercial jets, do hijackers have the ability to jam all signals emanating from the planes? If so, passengers would like to know.

“Attention, passengers. Before boarding this flight, you should realize only one transponder is being deployed. Although the device, plus radar, plus radio will help track your location, there are dozens of other devices we could use to make sure we know where you are. Unfortunately, the manufacturer has not yet installed them. Consult the 800 number on your ticket. Feel free to contact the manufacturer and make inquiries.”

If the NSA can simultaneously tap every phone in America, somehow I think they can track a giant jet, if they want to. Unless perhaps, these planes are still using a primitive communication apparatus from the 1950s.

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

The significance of a forgotten CIA document: MKULTRA

Jul23

The significance of a forgotten CIA document: MKULTRA

by Jon Rappoport

July 23, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

This June 27, 1994, document is stored at the National Security Archive at The George Washington University.

It was written by a CIA advisory committee, and forwarded to the Presidential Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, which was preparing public hearings at the time.

The document has many interesting implications. In this article, I want to focus on two. The first point concerns the CIA mind control program, MKULTRA.

Here is a key quote:

“In the 1950s and 60s, the CIA engaged in an extensive program of human experimentation [MKULTRA], using drugs, psychological, and other means, in search of techniques to control human behavior for counterintelligence and covert action purposes… Most of the MKULTRA records were deliberately destroyed in 1973 by the order of then DCI Richard Helms, who waived the internal CIA regulation (CSI-7O-l0) governing retirement of inactive records… Helms testified that he agreed to destroy the records because ‘there had been relationships with outsiders in government agencies and other organizations and that these would be sensitive in this kind of a thing but that since the program was over and finished and done with, we thought we would just get rid of files as well, so that anybody who assisted us in the past would not be subject to follow-up questions, embarrassment, if you will.’”

Helms was not only admitting he destroyed the records, he was stating that the MKULTRA program deployed, through contracts, “outsiders” to carry out mind control experiments. He was determined to protect them, to keep their identity and work secret. He was also dedicated to prevent these people from exposing the nature of their mind-control work. And finally, Helms knew that some of these outside researchers had no idea they were involved in MKULTRA—in other words, the CIA had tricked them into thinking their work was designed for other purposes.

Subsequently, some of these “outsiders” have been revealed. But no one really knows how deep, far, and wide the CIA penetrated into academic and research communities to enable MKULTRA.

The second point I want to cover is made clear by this quote from the 1994 CIA document: “The Church Committee [investigating the CIA] reports that one of the three principal functions of the Special Operations Division (SOD) of the U.S. Army Biological Center at Camp Detrick, Maryland was to conduct ‘biological research for the CIA.’ Church Committee, Book I, at 395. In early 1952, SOD agreed ‘to assist CIA in developing, testing, and maintaining biological agents and delivery systems. By this agreement, CIA acquired the knowledge, skill, and facilities of the Army to develop biological weapons suited for CIA use.’”

In other words, biowarfare research wasn’t limited to the Army and the Pentagon. The CIA actually became a second center for developing biological agents they could use for covert actions.

It’s important to note that the assumed termination point of MKULTRA, 1962, is false. In or around that year, the CIA shifted its entire mind control operation to its Office of Research and Development.

John Marks, who wrote the breakthrough book on MKULTRA, “The Search for the Manchurian Candidate,” told me that his access to CIA documents was abruptly cut off after the publication of his book. A CIA employee told him he’d never see another document, from a cache of 100 boxes, that described MKULTRA projects when they went super-dark after 1962.

The 1994 document I’m quoting in this article was part of preparation for 1995 Presidential hearings on secret human radiation experiments. The CIA stated that, after extensive searching of its files, it found no evidence that radiation was used in MKULTRA projects.

However, at the 1995 hearings, two women, Claudia Mullin and Chris De Nicola, testified that, indeed radiation had been used on them (as torture), in a wide-ranging program of mind control to which they were subjected, starting when they were young children.

Jon Rappoport

The war inside the war in Afghanistan

Jul11

by Jon Rappoport

July 11, 2014

(To join our email list, click here.)

Well, there are several wars inside the war in Afghanistan. Ensuring the flow of opium to the world. Having US bases close to Russia. Protecting and gobbling up vast mineral reserves. Keeping alive the proposed oil pipeline.

Still another war is quite different. It’s a test program, through which the US Armed Forces is trying to obtain a biometric record of every human living in Afghanistan.

It doesn’t take a genius to connect the dots, to realize the program is applicable to other countries, including the US and its ubiquitous Surveillance State.

The US Army document that spells out the strategy is titled, “Commander’s Guide to Biometrics in Afghanistan: Observations, Insights, and Lessons.”

It is marked: “US Unclassified/For Official Use Only; Exempt From Mandatory Disclosure under FOIA Exemptions 2 and 5.” The document and an accompanying report are posted at publicintelligence.net, here.

Through the use of cameras, electronic devices, fingerprinting, DNA collection, and personal interviews, the Army is striving to achieve a mind-boggling goal: identify and profile every one of the 25 million people living in the cities, villages, rugged mountains, and crevices of Afghanistan. The profiles of individuals include an assessment of threat-risk.

Here are several key quotes from the publicintelligence.net report:

“The stated goal of the Afghan effort is no less than the collection of biometric data for every person living in Afghanistan.”

“All biometric data collected in Afghanistan is ultimately sent back to the DOD’s Automated Biometric Identification System (ABIS) located in West Virginia, where it is stored and also shared with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and FBI. Partnerships with other nations also allow the DOD to run data against biometrics collected by foreign governments and law enforcement.”

“[The Commander’s Guide] advises soldiers to ‘enroll everyone’ including the dead, from which DNA is often collected using buccal swabs to capture the cells that line the mouth…[The] ‘payoff to U.S. and coalition forces is so great in terms of securing the population and identification of bad actors in the country, that commanders must be creative and persistent in their efforts to enroll as many Afghans as possible.’”

“The U.S. military currently uses three devices for collecting the bulk of the biometric data harvested in Afghanistan: the Biometrics Automated Toolset (BAT), Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment (HIIDE) and Secure Electronic Enrollment Kit (SEEK). The BAT is used primarily by the Army and Marine Corps and consists of a laptop computer and separate peripherals for collecting fingerprints, scanning irises, and taking photographs. The HIIDE is more mobile, providing a handheld device capable of collecting fingerprints, scanning irises and taking photographs. Like the BAT, the HIIDE can connect to a network of approximately 150 servers throughout Afghanistan to upload and download current biometric information and watchlists.”

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

Many lessons will be learned in this monumental effort, among them strategies for identifying, recording, and assessing the identity of humans living in all parts of world where populations are scattered and technology is primitive.

No doubt there are IT people and technocrats at the Pentagon and the NSA who consider the biometric identification project more important, in the long run, than the shooting war in Afghanistan.

Their lunatic goal is the tracking and control of every human on the planet.

Jon Rappoport

Dept. of Homeland Security: feel safer, sucker?

Jul2

Dept. of Homeland Security: feel safer, sucker?

by Jon Rappoport

July 2, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Your big-government-at-work scores again.

In 2003, Congress began pouring money into a program of fusion centers. These 70 outposts, scattered across America, were supposed to coordinate federal, state, and local efforts to gather counter-terrorism intelligence.

You know, to protect America against al-Qaeda.

The lead agency in this program is the US Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS).

In 2012, the Senate Permanent Committee on Investigations issued a chilling report on how this has worked out.

First and foremost, the report indicates that DHS has claimed certain fusion centers exist that don’t exist at all. This should give you a clue about what we are dealing with.

“So how is fusion center #32 doing?”

“Pretty good.”

“Really? Fusion center #32 doesn’t exist.”

“Oh.”

Here is the exact statement from the Committee: “…DHS officials asserted that some fusion centers existed when they did not.”

This is quite a lie, even for an intelligence agency whose business is lying.

The Committee also found that DHS hid their own “evaluations highlighting a host of problems at fusion centers and in DHS’ own operations.”

Or in plain language: a) we screw up big-time; b) we cover it up.

But even with all this lying, surely the fusion centers produced useful intelligence, right?

“…the Subcommittee investigation could identify no DHS reporting which uncovered a terrorist threat nor could it identify a contribution such fusion center reporting made to disrupt an active terrorist plot.”

What?!

It gets even worse. For the period between April 1, 2009, and April 30, 2010, a third of all fusion center reports weren’t even published for use by DHS or other US intelligence agencies. Why? Because the reports often “lacked any useful information or potentially violated department guidelines intended to protect Americans’ civil liberties or Privacy Act protections…”

In fact, the Committee found, DHS launched an internal review of its own illegal actions infringing on citizens’ privacy and civil liberties, but the review was extended in time, in order to conceal “most of the troubling reports” and keep them “from being released outside of DHS…”

Translation: a) we violate citizens’ Constitutional rights; b) we cover it up; c) we investigate our own cover-up; d) we conceal our own investigation.

As the capper on the Committee report, Congressional investigators discovered that “DHS required only a week of training for intelligence officials before sending them to state and local fusion centers to report sensitive domestic intelligence, largely concerning US persons…”

Meaning: incompetent raw DHS employees are deployed to accuse US citizens of being terrorists or aiding terrorists.

Feel safer now?

The bumbling stumbling fusion centers are actually evidence of something far more sinister: the hidden mission of DHS is not intelligence. Instead, DHS was secretly tasked with creating its own army, to be equipped with hundreds of millions of rounds of ammo, guns, tanks, and the like. The “gathering of intell” is a secondary mission, and a cover story to conceal DHS’ ongoing war on the American people—because, in its eyes, anything or anyone that moves is a potential threat.

The impulse to control has that result: eventually “public safety” devolves into an anti-human system. “People, all people, are trouble. Watch them. Regulate them. Police them. Exercise zero tolerance.”

You can read the Committee report at:

http://publicintelligence.net/hsgac-fusion-centers/

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

Fluorides, the Atomic bomb, and a spy

Jun25

by Jon Rappoport

June 25, 2014

(To join our email list, click here.)

In 1997, Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson, two respected mainstream journalists, peered into an abyss. They found a story about fluorides that was so chilling it had to be told.

The Christian Science Monitor, who had assigned the story, never published it.

Their ensuing article, “Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb,” has been posted on websites, sometimes with distortions, deletions, or additions. I spoke with Griffiths, and he told me to be careful I was reading a correct copy of his piece. (You can find it—“Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb,” at fluoridealert.org.)

Griffiths also told me that researchers who study the effects of fluorides by homing in on communities with fluoridated drinking water, versus communities with unfluoridated water, miss a major point: fluorides are everywhere—they are used throughout the pharmaceutical industry in the manufacture of drugs, and also in many other industries (e.g., aluminum, pesticide)—because fluorine is very active and binds with all sorts of other substances. Therefore, there is extremely wide public exposure to fluorides.

I want to go over some of the major points of the Griffiths-Bryson article.

Griffiths discovered hundreds of documents from the World War 2 era. These included papers from the Manhattan Project, which was launched to build the first A-bomb.

Griffiths/Bryson write: “Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production…millions of tons…were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War.”

The documents reveal that fluoride was the most significant health hazard in the US A-bomb program, for workers and for communities around the manufacturing facilities.

Griffiths/Bryson: “Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses was generated by A-bomb program scientists, who had been secretly ordered to provide ‘evidence useful in litigation’ [against persons who had been poisoned by fluoride and would sue for damages]… The first lawsuits against the US A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the [government] documents show.”

So A-bomb scientists were told they had to do studies which would conclude that fluorides were safe.

The most wide-reaching study done was carried out in Newburgh, New York, between 1945 and 1956. This was a secret op called “Program F.” The researchers obtained blood and tissue samples from people who lived in Newburgh, through the good offices of the NY State Health Department.

Griffiths/Bryson found the original and secret version of this study. Comparing it to a different sanitized version, the reporters saw that evidence of adverse effects from fluorides had been suppressed by the US Atomic Energy Commission.

Other studies during the same period were conducted at the University of Rochester. Unwitting hospital patients were given fluorides to test out the results.

Flash forward. Enter Dr. Phyllis Mullenix (see also here), the head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston. In the 1990s, Mullenix did a series of animal studies which showed that, as Griffiths/Bryson write: “…fluoride was a powerful central nervous system (CNS) toxin…”

Mullenix applied for further grant monies from the National Institutes of Health. She was turned down. She was also told that fluorides do not have an effect on the CNS.

But Griffiths/Bryson uncovered a 1944 Manhattan Project memo which states: “Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect…it seems most likely that the F [fluoride] component rather than the T [uranium] is the causative factor.”

The 1944 memo was sent to the head of the Manhattan Project Medical Section, Colonel Stafford Warren. Warren was asked to give his okay to do animal studies on fluorides’ effects on the CNS. He immediately did give his approval.

But any records of the results of this approved project are missing. Most likely classified.

Who was the man who made that 1944 proposal for a rush-program to study the CNS effects of fluorides? Dr. Harold Hodge, who worked at the Manhattan Project.

Who was brought in to advise Mullenix 50 years later at the Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, as she studied the CNS effects of fluorides? Dr. Harold Hodge.

Who never told Mullenix of his work on fluoride toxicity for the Manhattan Project? Dr. Harold Hodge.

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

Was Hodge brought in to look over Mullenix’s shoulder and report on her discoveries? It turns out that Hodge, back in the 1940s, had made suggestions to do effective PR promoting fluoride as a dental treatment. So his presence by Mullenix’s side, all those years later, was quite possibly as an agent assigned to keep track of her efforts.

Getting the idea here? Build an A-bomb. Forget the toxic fluoride consequences. Bury the fluoride studies. Twist the studies.

More on Hodge. In 1944, “a severe pollution incident” occurred in New Jersey, near the Du Pont plant in Deepwater where the company was trying to build the first A-bomb. A fluoride incident. Farmers’ peach and tomato crops were destroyed. Horses and cows became crippled. Some cows had to graze on their bellies. Tomato crops (normally sold to the Campbell company for soups) were contaminated with fluorides.

The people of the Manhattan Project were terrified of lawsuits and ensuing revelations about the toxic nature of their work. A heads-up memo was written on the subject. Its author? Harold Hodge. Among other issues, he reported on the huge fluoride content in vegetables growing in the polluted area.

Also the high fluoride levels in human blood.

The farmers began to bring lawsuits. Big PR problem.

The lawsuits were settled quietly, for pittances.

Harold Hodge wrote another memo. Get this quote: “Would there be any use in making attempts to counteract the local fear of fluoride on the part of residents [near the A-bomb facility]…through lectures on F [fluoride] toxicology and perhaps the usefulness of F in tooth health?”

Griffiths/Bryson write: “Such lectures were indeed given, not only to New Jersey citizens but to the rest of the nation throughout the Cold War.”

This was a launching pad for fluorides as “successful dental treatments.”

In the film, Dr. Strangelove, Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper rails about the destruction fluorides are wreaking on the “pure blood of pure Americans.” Of course, this character is fleshed out as some kind of far-right-wing fanatic. How odd that he and other military men in the movie are, in fact, ready and willing to start a nuclear war. Odd because, unknown to the Strangelove script writer, fluorides were, in fact, very toxic and were an integral part of the very program that created atomic bombs.

Now you know why promoting toxic fluorides as a dental treatment was so important to government officials.

Jon Rappoport

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

When The Elite showed its hand

Jun16

When The Elite showed its hand

by Jon Rappoport

June 16, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

In a minute, I’m going to print a stunning 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 Constitution had been torpedoed, that the people who were running US national policy 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, and despite his proclaimed religious values, was nothing more than 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?”

By the way, the infamous Trilateral Commission 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.

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 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.

Jon Rappoport

Is this why no one found WMDS in Iraq?

Jun12

Is this why no one found WMDs in Iraq?

by Jon Rappoport

June 12, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Yes, prior to Gulf War 2, all sorts of people were lying about WMDs in Iraq. There was the whole business about the yellowcake and Niger, and Colin Powell speaking before the UN.

There was a WMD depot in Iraq that wasn’t a depot.

There were people who said they had secret evidence Saddam shipped weapons out of the country. And maybe they did have evidence.

But this is a different story. It involves the prospect of inspectors finding very serious weapons and then saying, “Wait! The weapons’ containers have American labels on them!”

That didn’t happen, but it could have. And then what a fiasco would have ensued, since the US government was about to wage war to “end Saddam’s threat.” Yet, the US had armed him.

In 1975, the US signed on to an international treaty banning the production, use, and stockpiling of biological weapons. Ditto for chemical weapons, in 1993. Another treaty.

Here’s a quote from the Washington Post (9/4/13, “When the US looked the other way on chemical weapons”): “…The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items…including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague…”

Between 1985 and 1989, a US 501C3 firm, American Type Culture Collection, sent Iraq up to 70 shipments of various biowar agents, including 21 strains of anthrax.

Between 1984 and 1989, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) sent Iraq at least 80 different biowar agents, including botulinum toxoid, dengue virus, and West Nile antigen and antibody.

This information on the American Type Culture Collection and the CDC comes from a report, “Iraq’s Biological Weapons Program,” prepared by the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS).

Then we have a comprehensive article by William Blum in the April 1998 Progressive called “Anthrax for Export.” Blum cites a 1994 Senate report confirming that, in this 1985-1989 time period, US shipments of anthrax and other biowar agents to Iraq were licensed by…drum roll, cymbal crash…the US Dept. of Commerce.

Blum quotes from the Senate report: “These biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction. It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the United Nations inspectors found and removed from the Iraqi biological warfare program.”

This 1994 Senate report also indicates that the US exported to Iraq the precursors for chemwar agents, actual plans for chemical and biowar production facilities, and chemical-warhead filling equipment. The exports continued until at least November 28, 1989.

Blum lists a few other biowar agents the US shipped to Iraq. Histoplasma Capsulatum, Brucella Melitensis, Clostridium Perfringens, Clostridium tetani–as well as E. coli, various genetic materials, human and bacterial DNA.

Blum also points out that a 1994 Pentagon report dismissed any connection between all these biowar agents and Gulf War Illness. But the researcher who headed up that study, Joshua Lederberg, was actually a director of the US firm that had provided the most biowar material to Iraq in the 1980s: the American Type Culture Collection.

Newsday revealed that the CEO of the American Type Culture Collection was a member of the US Dept. of Commerce’s Technical Advisory Committee. See, the Dept. of Commerce had to license and approve all those exports of biowar agents carried out by the American Type Culture Collection. Get the picture?

Now, as to other US companies which dealt biowar or chemwar agents to Iraq—all such sales having been approved by the US government—the names of these companies are contained in records of the 1992 Senate hearings, “United States Export Policy Toward Iraq Prior to Iraq’s Invasion of Kuwait,” Senate Report 102-996, Senate Committee on Banking Housing and Urban Affairs, 102d Congress, Second Session (October 27, 1992):

Mouse Master (Georgia), Sullaire Corp (Charlotte, North Carolina), Pure Aire (Charlotte, North Carolina), Posi Seal (Conn.), Union Carbide (Conn.), Evapco (Maryland), BDM Corp (Virginia), Spectra Physics (Calif.).

There are about a dozen more.

This also from the Blum article: “A larger number of American firms supplied Iraq with the specialized computers, lasers, testing and analyzing equipment, and other instruments and hardware vital to the manufacture of nuclear weapons, missiles, and delivery systems. Computers, in particular, play a key role in nuclear weapons development. Advanced computers make it feasible to avoid carrying out nuclear test explosions, thus preserving the program’s secrecy. The 1992 Senate hearings implicated [Hewlett Packard, Palo Alto, CA — among others].”

Hewlett Packard said that the recipient of its shipments, Saad 16, was some sort of school in Iraq. But in 1990, the Wall St. Journal stated that Saad 16 was a “heavily fortified, state-of-the-art [Iraqi] complex for aircraft construction, missile design, and, almost certainly, nuclear-weapons research.”

There has been a considerable debate about whether Saddam hid some of his bio/chem weapons in Syria, to evade UN weapons inspectors. If he did, then is it possible the current situation in Syria has a few of its roots in the US? Is it possible some of Syria’s WMDs originally came from America?

If you review and think about all these WMD shipments from the US to Iraq, you understand there were many US officials and corporate employees who knew about them. Knew about them then, in the 1980s, and knew about them later, during 2 US wars in Iraq, when American soldiers were sent to Iraq, and could have been exposed to the bio/chem weapons.

And these officials and employees said nothing.

Officials at the CDC and the Dept. of Commerce said nothing. People at the American Type Culture Collection said nothing. People at the Pentagon and the CIA and the NSA said nothing. Presidents said nothing. Employees of the corporations who supplied germs and chemicals said nothing.

It’s clear that the US government shipped those bio/chem weapons to Iraq to aid it in its war against Iran. And yes, Iraq did use chemical weapons against Iran—and also against the Iraqi Kurds. Perhaps you remember that, much later, the US government repeated, over and over, “Saddam used chemical weapons against the Kurds, his own people,” as a reason for attacking Iraq.

So is there any limit beyond which the US government wouldn’t go to foment war, to wage war?

That’s a rhetorical question.

Jon Rappoport

How effective is electromagnetic thought control?

May27

How effective is electromagnetic thought control?

by Jon Rappoport

May 27, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

The number of methods of mind control has proliferated as funding for research has expanded.

Here, I want to consider what could be called thought substitution, one ongoing facet of this research.

My conclusions on this subject come from accounts of modern mind control research, which utilize forms of signal-broadcasting aimed at the brain.

More importantly, I’m drawing on my observation of the differences among people, when it comes to their awareness of their own thoughts and emotions.

First of all, we need to make the distinction between passive and active people. Passive people are either sedentary or going through the motions in life. They are easily controllable, and it doesn’t take sophisticated electronic measures to do the job.

Television, a few tranquilizing drugs, peer pressure to conform, and the game is over.

Such people will also mistake the invasion of outside thoughts for their own. It doesn’t really matter where the impulses come from or who delivers them.

By active people, I mean those who are passionately pursuing conscious objectives. They know why they’re doing what they do. They have energy. They’re inventing their own futures. They’re aware of repressive forces in the world.

They’re also quite familiar with their own feelings and thoughts.

Yes, mad scientists can affect these people via electronic harassment, no doubt about it—just as you can affect someone by kicking him in the ribs. But this is no monumental scientific achievement.

The early CIA MKULTRA programs were all about harassment and torture and disorientation, utilizing high-dose drugs, isolation, threats, hypnotism, and the provoking of fear.

The combination of these elements, according to witness (victim) statements, could result in programmed personae. Multiple personalities. But it should be understood that the primary driver in this operation was fear/pain—the very same combination that made the Catholic Inquisition successful.

Active people, as I define them here…could they be fooled into believing that electronic signals aimed at their brains are really their own thoughts?

This is an important question. And I must say, too many casual observers are eager to jump on the bandwagon and assert that, yes, this is eminently probable.

But I point out, mind control is not just about planting suggestions, it’s also very much about slipping them past a person’s overwhelming history of knowing how his own thoughts feel.

That’s the kicker. That’s the limiter.

The eager beavers who want to believe, full bore, in the efficacy of thought substitution, would rather not consider this limiter. But they should.

Active people would instantly become aware that an idea masquerading as their own is a charlatan. And they would reject it.

Researchers are attempting to use a person’s own brainwaves—capturing them and then outfitting them with thought-impulses and broadcasting them back to the brain. This is an effort to carry off a grand deception.

However, thought isn’t, for some people, a gross and crude activity. It has many subtleties and nuances.

And in its original and primary form, thought is not a material phenomenon at all.

It doesn’t start from the brain. The brain carries it forward, but the brain is an intermediary device.

Thought begins in a space that has no physical characteristics at all. Thought at its core isn’t physical.

What I’m discussing here isn’t mystical. Mystical is actually presuming that the brain is the seat of all consciousness.

So…what form of mind control can work against the non-physical? And now we’re back in the realm of early MKULTRA. Pain, fear, harassment.

That works on the brain, on a leg, on an arm, on a foot. It works on a non-material soul who inhabits and wears a physical form. It isn’t sophisticated at all, any more than spraying pepper on a crowd or blasting an acoustic weapon at protestors is sophisticated.

Yes, a thumb-screw is mind control. So is the rack and the threat of execution. So is fear of excommunication for a believer. So is a bullet in the shoulder. So is a disruptive burst of electronics from a transmitter.

They can grossly control a person because he exists, here and now, in a physical body. We already know about such physical effects. Humans have known about them since the dawn of time.

But to slip through, to achieve the smooth and seamless substitution of somebody else’s thought for your own, is an entirely different matter.

If you’re aware.

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Government Fraud

“We lost contact with the plane.” Really?

The significance of a forgotten CIA document: MKULTRA

The war inside the war in Afghanistan

Dept. of Homeland Security: feel safer, sucker?

One day in 1913, Woodrow Wilson had a shocking thought

Fluorides, the Atomic bomb, and a spy

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

When The Elite showed its hand

Is this why no one found WMDS in Iraq?

How effective is electromagnetic thought control?