Category Archives: Government Fraud

The CIA, James Holmes, MKULTRA, and truth-serum torture

By Jon Rappoport

March 18, 2013

(To join our email list, click here.)

In 2002, author Martin Lee wrote an article for Common Dreams: “Truth Serum and Torture.”

It could have been written yesterday, because now a Colorado judge has stated that, if James Holmes pleads not guilty by reason of insanity to the Aurora murders, state psychiatrists can subject him to drugs that will “help him remember his state of mind” at the time of the shootings. The drugging will reveal whether he really was insane that night last summer at the Aurora theater.

Well, when it comes to so-called truth drugs like sodium pentothal, sodium amatyl, scopolamine, mescaline, LSD, and hypnotic benzodiazepines, where are the pros with real experience?

At run-of-the-mill psychiatric wards? No. Those hacks in the Colorado state hospital system have rarely if ever tried out the drugs for the purpose of getting at the truth.

But the CIA has up-to-date interrogators around, and thousands of pages of MKULTRA (mind control) literature, that constitute the best experience in this dark art.

Therefore, it’s highly probable the CIA or their independent contractors will be sitting in on James Holmes’ drug-induced sessions, supervising them, giving advice. It’s the Ghostbusters motto: “Who ya gonna call?”

Martin Lee points out that, even before the CIA was created, its forerunner, the OSS, tried out a cannabis extract as a truth serum. This was back in the 1940s. Lee goes on to trace US intelligence-agency and military “leadership” in truth-drug testing.

In 1947, the US Navy Project Chatter, borrowing from Nazi studies, moved on to experiments with mescaline as a truth drug.

Shortly after its inception, in the late 1940s, the CIA used drugging with sedatives, plus hypnosis, to extract secrets from agents. This method, and barbiturates alternated with amphetamines, were soon rolled up into the infamous and overarching MKULTRA mind-control program, with its hundreds of sub-projects. MKULTRA was all about developing chemical means of eliciting truth from prisoners, along with creating unconscious assassins.

In the 1950s, the CIA employed LSD in Operation Artichoke. People don’t know or forget that, while LSD failed to qualify as a reliable truth serum, its use in very high doses produced extreme terror in people being interrogated. It was this effect, as straight-out torture, the CIA capitalized on. The idea was simple. Demand the truth and threaten with extreme-dose LSD as the alternative.

We shouldn’t discount the possibility that James Holmes, once he enters an insanity plea, and is sent away to a secure hospital for psychiatric eval, will be given drugs that produce the kind of mad panic that will convince him to say, in court, exactly what his handlers want him to say.

Back in 2002, Martin Lee wrote that William Webster, former head of the CIA and FBI, was recommending the use of truth drugs on terrorism suspects under US detention. This statement spurred a significant amount of media coverage at the time.

But in the ensuing years, very few people have bothered to ask the key question: Why should we assume that waterboarding and isolation tanks and sleep deprivation are the only torture methods the CIA/military are employing on these prisoners? What about the drugs?

In particular—because no drug has ever been found to reliably elicit the truth—what about the use of drugs to produce panic and wild terror, as a way to force people to tell what they know, or confess to what they’re told to.

It’s obvious, given the history, that US interrogators have, in fact, been using these drugs on detained terrorism suspects.

Lee ends his prescient article with a chilling quote from former CIA chief of counterterrorism, Vince Cannistraro, that reflects directly the James Holmes situation in 2013:

“Once you’ve used [truth drugs] for national security cases, then it becomes a standard. Sodium pentathol is not that effective, and so you have to use something stronger, It’s a short skip and a hop to LSD, or something worse.”

These drugs are certainly being used in national security cases. Therefore, as Cannistraro predicts, they are now entering the mainstream as the standard. The astonishing statement from the court judge in the James Holmes case, ordering his truth-drug interrogation, couldn’t be a clearer signal:

full-speed ahead in chemically inducing a suspect to give up his right not to incriminate himself;

forget the fact that such truth-drug interrogations are notoriously unreliable;

forget the damage suspects can incur from the effects of the drugs;

and most of all, forget the fact that, although truth drugs don’t work reliably, they can be used to create such terror that the suspect will do or say anything to escape more dosing.

Many people have observed that James Holmes already looks like a man who has been heavily drugged, while in custody.

Whatever Holmes knows about what happened last summer at the Aurora theater; whatever he doesn’t know; whatever role he played or didn’t play; whether he was in the theater doing the shooting or was the patsy set up by professionals to take the fall for the murders…

All of this can be twisted, on strong enough drugs, to cause him to say anything his handlers want him to say in court.

The psychiatrists who are working on Holmes will need advice on methods. They’ll go to, or be approached by, the people who have the track record, the history, the experience: the CIA.

And once that move is made, it will be very much like saying the Holmes case has national-security implications.

In so far as the Aurora murders have been used to try to snuff out the 2nd Amendment, the case is definitely the gun-grabbers’ version of national security. They want no mistakes in Holmes’ performance.

They want him to enter a plea of non-guilty by reason of insanity. Then they want him, after his stay in a mental hospital for “testing and observation,” to come back to court, and state that is now aware he killed and wounded many people. Then the State will dispose of him one way or another and he will never again see the light of day.

The Matrix Revealed

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

Naïve people place false barriers between the practice of psychiatry, institutional confinement, coerced admissions of guilt, torture, brain-twisting drugs, and the CIA’s MKULTRA. They swim together in the same stream far more often than Americans want to admit, or want to know about.

This horrendous stream flows through the James Holmes case.

Other than using drugs to force him to follow orders, what possible value can this “narcoanalytic review” have in a court of law? Think about it. If Holmes enters an insanity plea, thus triggering the ensuing truth-drug interrogation, he’ll already be stating he is crazy. So the drugs will be administered to a crazy man, on the premise that can he recall correctly, or reveal correctly, his state of mind at the time he committed murders.

Is there any defense lawyer in the country who couldn’t cast doubt on the reliability of such evidence?

No, the Holmes case is now being used to put straight-out drug-torture of defendants, in order to gain confessions, into the mainstream of American legal practice.

There is one more long-shot factor here. It’s nearly unthinkable, but it should be mentioned. Many people have found evidence that the Aurora murders were staged. Without recounting the details, suppose there is one more piece of stagework left: the truth drugs used on Holmes are shown to have created brain damage.

If Holmes’ lawyers claim that the prosecution irreparably destroyed their client, they can move for a mistrial.

Can you imagine the uproar, chaos, and destabilization that would result from a declaration of a mistrial, a no-verdict in the case, and Holmes walking out of prison? Or his remand to a psychiatric facility as a permanently damaged person—but without a guilty verdict?

Jon Rappoport

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

There WAS a recount on the Prop 37 vote, and it was stopped cold

There WAS a recount on the Prop 37 vote, and it was stopped cold

by Jon Rappoport

March 17, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

The relentless Brad Friedman of TheBradBlog ran this story down and broke it. There was, indeed, a recount of the Prop 37 vote.

Prop 37, the ballot measure that would have mandated labeling of all GMO food sold in California, went down to defeat last November, under suspicious circumstances.

So a small group, headed by Tom Courbat, former senior budget analyst for LA County, decided to challenge the vote.

In California, any voter can do that, if they’re willing to pay for it. And they have to pay for the recount county by county. They pick the counties they want to start with, they contact the county registrars, and they’re told what the price is. It’s different in each county.

So the group picked Orange and Sierra Counties. They paid the fee. The votes were recounted, and there was no appreciable change in the numbers.

The group decided Fresno County should be next. That’s when trouble came and whole thing blew up. The county clerk in Fresno, in charge of all voting processes, is Brandi Orth.

As The Brad Blog reveals, Orth came up with a staggering price for a vote recount. Here are a few of the details:

Orth stated there would be an up-front fee, due before the recount even started, of $18,000.

The cost per DAY of doing the recount? $4,000. This included five vote counters who would each be paid $46 an hour—to sit and count. Then there would be a three-person executive staff, each of whom would be paid an astonishing $92 an hour.

Note: In Orange County, the Prop 37 recount didn’t cost $4,000 a day. The fee? Only $600 a day!

But here is the best part. As Tom Courbat, the leader of the Prop 37 recount group, spoke with Fresno County Clerk, Brandi Orth, he suddenly learned he was being charged for the phone conversation—and also for Orth’s staff “getting ready” for a recount!

Understand this. No recount had begun. Courbat hadn’t given the green light for a recount. But, he was informed, he was already $4000 in the hole.

Courbat estimated a vote recount in Fresno County was going to cost his group $78,000 by the end of three weeks worth of work. They didn’t have the money.

The Fresno County recount was toast. And with it went any chance (even if one assumes a recount would be honest) that Prop 37 could be fairly reviewed in California.

At this point, I ran down a few facts about Fresno County. It’s the number-one county in the US for agricultural production; in 2007, $5.3 billion. Major employers? Kraft Foods, Del Monte Foods, Foster Farms, Zacky Farms, Sun-Maid. A local outfit, David Sunflower Seeds, is owned by the giant ConAgra.

Beginning to form a picture? Fresno is Big Agriculture, and the last time I looked, Big Ag isn’t rushing to support GMO labeling. They love Monsanto, crime boss of the GMO world.

Brandi Orth, who blocked the recount, was installed as Fresno county clerk a mere 10 months before Prop 37 went up before California voters. This happened, as The Brad Blog points out, because the previous county clerk, Victor Salazar, suddenly announced his retirement with three years left on his contract.

Who picked Orth as the new county clerk? The five members of the Fresno board of supervisors. I noticed that two of them, Phil Larson and Debbie Poochigian, were members of the Fresno County Farm Bureau.

That’s quite interesting, because in the run-up to the November Prop 37 vote, the Farm Bureau was one of the organizations that signed on to a large NO on 37 print ad.

The Matrix Revealed

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

Let’s recap. The recount on the Prop 37 vote is stopped cold in Fresno County (a major center of Big Ag), because the county clerk, Brandi Orth put up absurd, incredible, and arbitrary obstacles. Orth was selected for her job, in the first place, by a board of supervisors on which, at the very least, two of the five members were opponents of Prop 37.

Does the California state government and, in particular, the state attorney general’s office give this foul-smelling situation even a sniff? No.

Does the California Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, who is in charge of all voting in the State, budge from her office and investigate, or better yet, go down to Fresno and personally install a fair and equitable and affordable recount of Prop 37? Of course not. She moves right along to other matters.

What does that tell you?

The stink from the blocked vote-recount goes all the way from Fresno up to the capital city of Sacramento and back down again.

Naturally, the major media give this story no play. They remain silent.

As I’ve detailed in other articles (under the ~/category/yeson37/ section of my blog), there are many reasons to reject the truth of the original Prop 37 vote in California, as well as any election in the State. But after these revelations, if you accept California vote-counts as real, you should check your sanity.

Source: The Brad Blog, “Forget About Fresno: How One CA County Clerk Stopped Prop 37’s Oversight ‘Recount’”

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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

Bloomberg hits the jackpot: NYC students can’t read, write, or do arithmetic

Bloomberg hits the jackpot: NYC students can’t read, write, or do arithmetic

by Jon Rappoport

March 12, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Is this a ploy to supply more workers for McDonald’s?

Mayor Bloomberg, so focused on the social engineering of New York City, seems to have added a forceful item to his list:

a staggering 80% of high school grads entering the City’s community college system can’t perform well enough to take college courses.

The failure applies across the board: reading, writing, and math.

Bloomberg isn’t even announcing an investigation into this horrendous situation. Nor is there any word of teacher or principal firings.

Why not? Because the outcome of a probe would reflect disastrously on the school system and the Mayor. Students are being promoted from grade to grade without learning what they’re supposed to learn. Students are fraudulently “earning” high school diplomas.

A detailed examination of how this fake education operates could turn up all sorts of nasty facts. Are many teachers changing students’ test scores to make them look better? Are teachers grading on such a ridiculous curve that failure equals success? Are principals pretending they don’t know what’s going on? Are they actively aiding teachers in the massive fraud?

If the truth were known, government funding of the City’s public school system could be cut. The feds might even come to town to find out how deep the lying and cheating goes. And once investigators sit down with teachers and ask them serious questions, the lid on the scandal would surely come off, and the explosion would be heard far and wide.

None of this begins to register how students feel, as they move from grade to grade in elementary school and high school, and don’t know what they’re doing in the classroom. It’s a Twilight Zone of pretense from A to Z.

Forget the absurd “self-esteem” argument. Pushing students ahead in school when they don’t deserve it is a ruse the kids understand. They know their “achievements” are built on a foundation of sand. They know it’s all about gaming the system.

“Sure, I feel a lot better about myself, because my teachers cheated and gave me grades I didn’t really make.”

For several years, I worked as a tutor at Santa Monica College, and I saw students wandering into my area because their lower-level education had failed. It was a mess.

At that point, the faking was over. I had students who could barely read at a sixth-grade level. What’s the answer? Give a kid six years of reading work in a month? Are you kidding? And if you think that’s bad, try moving a student’s writing level up the same distance just as quickly. You’d be better off pushing a big truck from sea level to the top of a mountain with your bare hands.

Spokespeople for the NYC community colleges make it sound as if they’re handling the remedial training of these failed students with aplomb. I can tell you it’s a tremendous strain, and in many cases it doesn’t work at all.

You aren’t merely reminding students of what they once learned but then forgot. You’re supplying them with what was never imparted. You’re also trying to break through powerful resistance, because the kids don’t want to admit how little they know. They sense how deep and wide the abyss is. Understandably, they want to stay on firm ground. But there is no firm ground.

They never learned how to read, write, and do math well. It never happened. Try saying, “Well, kid, you have to go back to sixth-grade-level stuff.” Right away, at the age of 18, they picture themselves at little desks with children who are 11 and 12.

Bureaucrats, of course, solve these problems by throwing more money at them. Billions and billions of dollars. And they cook up fancy names for new programs. No child left behind. Equal opportunity. They pretend to discover mechanical fixes.

“Oh, you see, the real reason the kids are having trouble is they don’t have computers. So we’ll pay for computers.” That’s on the order of a doctor telling a patient, “Your arm isn’t working right, so I’m going to give you a pair of glasses. Finally, you be able to see what’s on television.”

The Matrix Revealed

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and a CD to guide you. I was previously selling the course for $375. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades. For more information on how increasing your command of Logic can help you navigate your convictions more clearly, see the FREE article I wrote entitled “Matrix programming 101: destroy logic”.

After the damage is done, and you have huge numbers of kids who graduate from high school and can barely read, setting up a remedial program that will really work is quite a challenge. You need lots of staff, and your people have to be good. They have to know what they’re doing. You have to get back to basics. No fancy aids and machines. This is intense one-on-one tutoring. You’re in it for the long haul. In the failed schools, the teachers were inattentive at best, and at worst they were cheaters. You can’t go that way again. You can’t skip the hard parts just to make yourself look good. You can’t screw the kids over again.

But you can’t assume the kids were never complicit in their own downfall. They were. They were there. They played their part in the con. That has to be overcome, because many kids will try to skate, glide, and slide through their second-time-around education.

They’ll hope against hope they can wangle their way through by faking it. It’s what they know how to do best.

Bloomberg can deal, from his high balcony, with sodas and sugar and coffee and guns by making proclamations. But when it comes to education, he’s taking on (ignoring) a real tiger.

It’s likely he’ll cheat just as teachers and principals and students have been cheating. He’ll skate, too. When his term as mayor is done, he’ll walk into the sunset, after issuing a parting statement loaded with salesman’s bluff. But the cage will open and the tiger will come out.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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

School now offering counseling to kids upset by strawberry-tart gun!

School now offering counseling to kids upset by strawberry-tart gun!

by Jon Rappoport

March 8, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

It’s called doubling down. First, a teacher at the Park Elementary School in Baltimore flips out, because 7-year-old Josh Welch bites his strawberry tart, trying to make it look like a mountain—but it ends up looking (sort of) like a gun.

The teacher reports Josh, who is then suspended for two days.

Now, an assistant principal at the school has sent a letter to parents offering counseling to kids who may have been upset by the incident. I kid you not.

“…If your children express that they are troubled by today’s incident…our school counselor is available to meet with any students who have the need to do so…”

What happens when a little kid shows up in the counselor’s office and says he’s angry at the lunatic teacher who upbraided Josh Welch?

Does the school suspend that little kid, too?? Does the counselor try to convince the kid he was really upset because he saw a danish bitten into a few right angles?

“You see, Jimmy, this is classic case of displacement. You think you’re bothered by the teacher. But really, it was that tart. Do you get it? Your agitation may be sign of ADHD. I’m going to refer you to a psychiatrist. He can give you medicine. It’ll make you feel better.”

Park Elementary school isn’t retreating from their suspension of Josh Welch. They’re doubling down. And what are the parents of the students doing ? Nothing. They’re knuckling under. They’re shrugging it all off. Why? Let’s see. Oh yes. They’re rank cowards.

And do you think their kids realize that? Are you kidding? Of course they do. The kids are registering how easily their mothers and fathers are copping out. The kids see there’s a robot-setup at work. The school does something that makes no sense at all. A kid is being punished for no reason at all. And the parents are taking it. The parents are mush.

It’s all a joke, yes. The strawberry tart. The gun shape. But beyond that, the two-day suspension of Josh Welch wasn’t a joke. And nobody cares.

This is the real lesson the school is imparting. “See, we can do anything we want to. We can do the most ridiculous thing in the world. And nobody will lift a finger to stop us.”

Now the kids think, “What else can we be suspended for? Suppose we don’t like those tarts and don’t eat them? Can they kick us out for that? If a shoe lace is untied? Can one of the prison guards report us to the principal?”

Good work, parents. You’re teaching your children invaluable lessons. You’re showing them all sorts of things. A few of you are even asking your kids, “Were you upset by the strawberry tart gun? If you were, you can go to the school counselor and tell her how you feel.”

And that look your kid is then giving you? That stare? Do you know what it means? It means he’s lost faith in you. He knows. He knows you have no courage. He knows you have no balls. He knows you’re useless when it comes time to stand up and be counted. He knows you preach one thing but do another. He knows you don’t really care.

At that point, he can do one of two things. He can grow up to be just like you, which you understand, at some level, is a terrible choice. Or he can go the other way and opt for the courage of his convictions, in which case you’ve lost him. He’ll never be as close to you as he was.

You can’t like either choice, if you have the guts to think about it. But you don’t have the guts, do you? You made your own choices a long time ago. You surrendered.

“Oh, well,” you say, “this is foolish. It was just a stupid little episode with a pastry. Ha-ha. Everybody knows it’s silly.” Yes, they do. But it’s moments like this that change things.

Kids aren’t as stupid as you are. They look around, they size up what’s happening, and they come to conclusions. They make and break their own futures based on what they conclude.

You parents could come together and march into the school and into the office of the school board and say, “Enough.” You could threaten to pull your kids out Park Elementary and put a serious crimp in the school’s state and federal funding.

Better yet, you could yank your kids out of Park and start your own school. Or you could home school.

But that would be inconvenient, wouldn’t it? You’re so busy these days, and the school baby-sits for five hours a day.

And it was just a pastry.

Why get riled up?

This, too, shall pass.

Yes, everything always passes. But in the wake of those moments, subterranean decisions are made.

No, its not like a war with bombs falling. No, it’s not mass starvation. But where you live, it’s real. It happened. And you skated. You closed your eyes and thought about something else.

You’re good at that. Most of your kids will become good at it, too. And that’s what you want for them, isn’t it? The ability to skate and slide and glide past what we used to call Character.

Character is old-fashioned. It doesn’t exist anymore. It’s an ideal that doesn’t fit into today’s world, because we have no more individuals. We only have groups and communities, and in that atmosphere other traits are valued.

The traits you’ve cultivated. You’ve been imparting the substance of your lesson plans to your kids ever since they could crawl. And now, when the school provides you with the opportunity to break out and wake up and turn it all around, you do the predictable thing. You step away.

Do you want to know where all this leads? You don’t, but I’ll tell you anyway. The population of this country will melt down into one great glob of goo. This collective will look to whatever is defined as leadership, and the collective will follow along without hesitation.

Chances are good your child will be a molecule of that Unity.

So congratulations. You’ve made your statement. You’ve succeeded with all your adjustments to reality.

The tart that wasn’t a gun and didn’t look anything like a gun was a gun. Ignorance is strength. 2 plus 2 equals five. Bad is good.

You’re a teacher.

You’re hired. You’re in.

When you think about it, the school is doing exactly what you want it to, isn’t it?

Secretly, you approve.

I’m not talking about tarts or guns now. I’m talking about that Something you gave in to many years ago. You may not be able to name it, but you know what it is. You worship it every day of your life. You may go to church on Sunday, but this Something is what you really bow down to.

It’s really very mild. It’s pleasing, in a way. It puts you in the driver’s seat, as long as you agree to allow the car to drive itself. It’s more automatic than any gun ever invented. It pings your nervous system and your brain. You receive the signal and you do what’s expected of you. And therefore you fit in. You have your place. And really, it doesn’t matter what particular action or what particular silence is expected of you. It only matters that you go along.

The school issues its edict, and you must follow. The more absurd the edict, the more significant the test. That’s the point. How can the system be checked unless it gives absurd commands?

You understand that crucial point and you concur.

It’s not enough to ring a bell and see a dog drool because he expects to be fed. That’s just step one. Anyone can accomplish that. You need to ring the bell and have the dog drool because he’s been taught the moon is made of cheese or a tart is a gun. Then you really have something.

And this is what you want. You want to feel the security that comes from knowing the system is tight and fully operative from top to bottom. It can make ANY command and people will respond as expected.

Then your worship of obedience is vindicated. You know everyone else is on the same page. There are no leaks. You were right all along.

This is the only way to live life.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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

Monsanto and the FDA: 2 crime families working a trillion-dollar hustle

by Jon Rappoport

March 1, 2013

(To join our email list, click here.)

Perhaps you remember the ill-fated Just-Label-It campaign. A number of activist groups petitioned the FDA for a federal regulation that would make labeling GMO food mandatory.

The petition amassed over a million signatures. But the FDA decided only 394 of these were legitimate, because all the others were electronically submitted in one document.

Infuriating? Of course. But that was nothing. Let’s get down to the core of the crime.

Imagine this. A killer is put on trial, and the jury, in a surprise verdict, finds him not guilty. Afterwards, reporters interview this killer. He says, “The jury freed me. It’s up to them. They decide. That’s what justice is all about.”

Then the press moves along to members of the jury, who say: Well, we had to take the defendant’s word. He said he was innocent, so that’s what we ruled.

That’s an exact description of the FDA and Monsanto partnership.

When you cut through the verbiage that surrounded the introduction of GMO food into America, you arrive at two key statements. One from Monsanto and one from the FDA, the agency responsible for overseeing, licensing, and certifying new food varieties as safe.

Quoted in the New York Times Magazine (October 25, 1998, “Playing God in the Garden”), Philip Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications, famously stated: “Monsanto shouldn’t have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”

From the Federal Register, Volume 57, No.104, “Statement of [FDA] Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties,” here is what the FDA had to say on this matter: “Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety.”

The direct and irreconcilable clash of these two statements is no accident. It’s not a sign of incompetence or sloppy work or a mistake or a miscommunication. It’s a clear signal that the fix was in.

Passing the buck back and forth was the chilling and arrogant strategy through which Pandora’s box was pried opened and GMO food was let into the US food supply.

In order for this titanic scam to work, the media had to cooperate. Reporters had to be a) idiots and b) sell-outs.

With few exceptions, reporters and their editors let the story rest there, as a “he said-he said” issue. No sane principled journalist would have cut bait at that point, but who said mainstream reporters are sane or principled?

Underneath the Monsanto-FDA buck-passing act, there was a conscious deal to give a free pass to GMO crops. This had nothing to do with science or health or “feeding the world.” It was about profits. It was also about establishing a new monopoly on food.

Not only would big agribusiness dominate the planet’s food supply, it would strengthen its stranglehold through patents on novel types of seeds which were technologically engineered.

It’s very much like saying, “A cob of corn is not a plant, it’s a machine, and we own the rights to every one of those yellow machines.”

How was Monsanto able to gather so much clout?

There was one reason and one reason only. Putting the world’s food supply into fewer hands was, and is, a major item on the Globalist agenda. If it weren’t, the FDA-Monsanto scam would have been exposed in a matter of weeks or months.

Major newspapers and television networks would have attacked the obvious con job like packs of wild dogs and torn it to pieces.

But once the scam had been given a free pass, the primary corporate-government tactic was to accomplish a fait accompli, a series of events that was irreversible.

In this case, it was about gene drift. From the beginning, it was well known that GMO plants release genes that blow in the wind and spread from plant to plant, crop to crop, and field to field. There is no stopping it.

Along with convincing enough farmers to lock themselves into GMO-seed contracts, Monsanto bought up food-seed companies in order to engineer the seeds…and the gene-drift factor was the ace in the hole.

Sell enough GMO seeds, plant enough GMO crops, and you flood the world’s food crops with Monsanto genes.

Back in the 1990s, the prince of darkness, Michael Taylor, who has moved through the revolving door between the FDA and Monsanto several times, and is now the czar of food safety at the FDA—Taylor said, with great conviction, that the GMO revolution was unstoppable; within a decade or two, an overwhelming percentage of food grown on planet Earth would be GMO.

Taylor and others knew. They knew about gene drift, and they also knew that ownership of the world’s food, by a few companies, was a prime focus for Globalist kings who intended to feed the population through Central Planning and Distribution.

“We feed these people; we hold back food from those people; we send food there; we don’t send food here.”

Control food and water, and you hold the world in your hand.

Here is evidence that, even in earlier days, Monsanto knew about and pushed for the Globalist agenda. Quoted by J. Flint, in his 1998 “Agricultural Giants Moving Towards Genetic Monopolism,” Robert Fraley, head of Monsanto’s agri-division, stated: “What you are seeing is not just a consolidation of [Monsanto-purchased] seed companies. It’s really a consolidation of the entire food chain.”

And as for the power of the propaganda in that time period, I can think of no better statement than the one made on January 25th, 2001, by the outgoing US Secretary of Agriculture, Dan Glickman. As reported by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Glickman said:

“What I saw generically on the pro-biotech side was the attitude that the technology was good and that it was almost immoral to say that it wasn’t good, because it was going to solve the problems of the human race and feed the hungry and clothe the naked. And there was a lot of money that had been invested in this, and if you’re against it, you’re Luddites, you’re stupid. There was rhetoric like that even here in this department. You felt like you were almost an alien, disloyal, by trying to present an open-minded view on some of these issues being raised. So I pretty much spouted the rhetoric that everybody else around here spouted; it was written into my speeches.”

Glickman reveals several things in these remarks: he was spineless; people at the Dept. of Agriculture were madly buying into the Monsanto cover story about feeding the world; and there had to be a significant degree of infiltration at his Agency.

The last point is key. This wasn’t left to chance. You don’t get a vocal majority of Dept. of Agriculture personnel spouting the Monsanto propaganda merely because the fairy tale about feeding the world sounds so good. No, there are people working on the inside to promote the “social cause” and make pariahs out of dissenters.

You need special background and training to pull that off. It isn’t an automatic walk in the park. This is professional psyop and intelligence work.

I’ve done some investigation of various groups on both the left and the right, and I’ve seen some pros in action. They’re good. They know how to leverage ideas and slogans and ideals. They know how to defame opponents and find just the right words to sink them. They know how to turn high-flying but vague words about “humanity” into moral imperatives.

This isn’t rinky-dink stuff. To tune up bureaucrats and scientists, you have to have a background in manipulation. You have to know what you’re doing. You have to be able to build and sustain support, without giving your game away.

Truth be told, governments are full of these pros, who will take any number of causes and turn them into what falsely sounds like good science, good government, good morality, all the while knowing that, on the far shore, sits the real prize: control.

These psyop specialists are hired to help make overarching and planet-wide agendas come true, as populations are brought under sophisticated and pathological elites who care, for example, about feeding the world as much as a collector cares about paralyzing and pinning butterflies on a panel in a glass case.

Here is David Rockefeller, writing in 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.”

The Globalists play for keeps.

Owning the food of the world is part of their strike-force action plan, and Monsanto is the technocratic arm of that plan.

Meanwhile, the controlled press treats the whole sordid Monsanto story with its time-honored policy of “he said-he said.” This policy dictates that stories merely present both sides of a conflict without drawing conclusions.

It applies across the board—except when it doesn’t. For example, for reasons too complex to go into here, the Washington Post decided to suspend its policy in the Watergate case. Woodward and Bernstein were assigned to investigate what was going on behind White House denials and obfuscations.

The same thing could be done with Monsanto, and it would be far easier. The lies and crimes and cover-ups are everywhere. You could wear sunglasses and find them in the dark.

The NY Times and the Washington Post could sell millions more papers on the back of the Monsanto story alone. It would be a bonanza for them. But no. They don’t care. They’d rather keep declining and losing readers. They’d rather die.

Normally, a business doesn’t commit suicide, especially when it sees exactly how to resuscitate itself. But here we are dealing with an agenda which can’t be disturbed. Globalism, and its agri-techno partner, Monsanto, are creating a planetary future. Major media are part and parcel of that op. They are selling it.

Even as their bottom lines erode, these newspapers and television networks have to stay on their present course. By pretending they’re reporting the real news, they’re giving the impression that Monsanto and the FDA are home free.

Again, we aren’t talking about sloppy reporting or accidental omissions of fact or boggling incompetence or ignorance about science. We are talking about conscious intent to deceive.

Yes, now and then the controlled media will release a troubling piece about Monsanto. But placement and frequency are everything. How often do these stories run? Do they run as the lead or do we find them on page 7? Are reporters assigned to keep pounding on a basic story and reveal more and more crimes? Does the basic story gather steam over the course of weeks and months?

These are the decisions that make or break a story. In the case of Monsanto and the FDA, the decisions were made a long time ago.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Part of every new reporter’s training, if he has any ideals at all, is marching into his editor’s office with his hair on fire demanding to be given an assignment to expose a crime. The editor, knowing the true agenda of his newspaper or television network, tells the reporter:

“We’ve already covered that.”

“It’s old news.”

“People aren’t interested in it.”

“It’s too complicated.”

“The evidence you’re showing me is thin.”

“You’ll never get to the bottom of it.”

“The people involved won’t talk to you.”

And if none of those lies work, the editor might say, “If you keep pushing this, it would be bad for your career. You’ll lose access for other stories. You’ll be thought of as weird…”

This is how the game works at ground level. But make no mistake about it, the hidden agenda is about protecting an elite’s op from exposure.

If NBC, for example, gave its golden boy, Brian Williams, the green light, he would become an expert on Monsanto in three days. He’d become a tiger. He’d affect a whole set of morally outraged poses and send Monsanto down into Hell.

Don’t misunderstand. Brian hasn’t been waiting to move in for the kill. He’s a neutral entity. Wind him up and point to a target and he’ll go there.

But no one will point him at Monsanto or the FDA.

All the major reporters at news outlets and all the elite television anchors are really psyop specialists. It’s just that most of them don’t know it.

One outraged major reporter who woke up and got out of the business put it to me this way: When he was in the game, he looked at the news as a big public restroom. His one guiding principle was: Don’t piss on your shoes. Stand closer to the urinal. Pissing on your shoes was covering a story that was considered out of bounds. If you pissed on your shoes and walked into the boss’s office, he’d look at you and see the telltale sign. He’d say, “Hey, you pissed on your shoes. That’s disgusting. Get out of here. You’re fired.”

Jon Rappoport

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

The hideous BAM in Obama: map your brain for your own good

The hideous BAM in Obama: map your brain for your own good

by Jon Rappoport

February 18, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

First they map your brain. And by you, I mean everybody.

President Obama has just greenlighted a 10-year Manhattan Project for the human brain. I warned it was coming years ago.

The new billion-dollar enterprise is called BAM, the Brain Activity Map project. The fact that DARPA is one of the agencies involved tells you a great deal. DARPA is the cutting-edge military outfit in charge of new technologies for the Armed Forces. They want to create The Enhanced Soldier and all that that implies. Think “android.”

Behind the front of claims that BAM will create new therapies for mental disorders (for which no defining diagnostic tests even exist), the plan is to forward artificial intelligence (AI), which means creating a computer that works at least as well as the one inside your skull.

This is the technocrats’ wet dream: “We can now power up an artificial brain of such power and intelligence that it can make all crucial decisions for the human race from Central Planning.”

In the wake of Sandy Hook, other implications are also clear. BAM will be used to devise a Minority Report society, in which purported markers of future violence will be utilized to forcibly treat (with toxic drugs), contain, and prevent “predicted criminals” from carrying out fantasies percolating in their subconscious. Would those fantasies, if left alone, ever rise to the level of action? Irrelevant. Cast a wide net, in the name of Prevention.

Welcome to “expanded mental-health services.” You’re on a list? Oops. You must be treated. Here is your mandatory appointment slip. Yes, the drugs are highly toxic. Yes, they can and do cause you to commit horrendous acts of violence. But we don’t talk about that.

Of course, what I’m sketching out here is not happening by next week. But BAM is a giant step on the road toward this future. It’s far from trivial. The stated goal is the mapping of all neuronal activity in humans. This is science fiction coming alive now.

The American Psychiatric Association and Big Pharma are drooling with anticipation. This is precisely what they’ve been aiming for. Vastly expanded treatment options. More diagnoses. More drugs. More control.

BAM has been on the drawing boards for years. But after Aurora and Sandy Hook, the timing is right. The sub-text of BAM is: “People, we will protect you. We will gain access to the brain and re-channel it away from violence. You will be safe.”

BAM is the step before reconfiguring the brain, which is the long-term and underlying goal. These neuroscientists have no interest in the concept of freedom. They left that in the dust decades ago.

For them, the brain is merely a machine that needs a great deal of tweaking, because people are naturally mis-programmed, and corrections must be built into a new and better system.

Of course, “new and better” will pivot on non-scientific value judgments, masked behind masses of techno-speak. And you will have no input into the choice of values. You’re the experimental device; the neuroscientists are the operators.

Everyone who is anyone is on board for this one. The National Institutes of Health, private foundations, universities, drug companies. They’ll all wrangle a piece of the pie.

The White House is touting BAM as job-creation as well. Of course they are. Huxley left that out of Brave New World. “This is a wonderful way to bring up employment numbers. If we take the engineering of humans far enough, everybody can work.”

If you’re wondering what the hell the federal government is doing mapping the human brain, you’re back in the Stone Age. You’re probably interested in, what did they used to call it, oh yes, the Constitution.

Excessive interest in that moldy document probably has a correlation with certain brain activity, which can be mapped and charted. And then you’re on a list: “The subject shows typical neuronal dysfunction in sub-sector 254-A. This is the James Madison Disorder. Recommend immediate detention and treatment.”

“A new study from the BAM-plus group at Harvard has found a significant relationship between home schooling and an excess velocity in synaptic transmission. Such velocity surpasses recommended limits.”

Yes, it’s a joke. Right now. But we’re not just on the slippery slope. We’ve gone down the hill a few new miles, as of today.

Back when professionally praised scientific lunatics like Dr. Ewen Cameron and Yale’s Jose Delgado declared that the human being had no right to his own intrinsic personality, people thought such a notion was absurd. But now, the language is far more clever and densely obscure.

It’s quite possible, move by move, to propagandize inhuman research, with government press releases, right into the era of the “brain-adapted” population.

Just as the public has bought into the idea that all mental disorders spring from “chemical imbalances,” despite the fact that no normal level of balance has ever been established, so it will be easy to convince the population that the abnormal brain activity of 100 billion neurons can be measured, categorized, specified, and treated.

It’s science. It must be true. Science marches on. Science is the hand-servant of humanity. Greatest good for the greatest number.

The worshipers at the altar of big government who believe its function is that of a giving god will go along, gladly.

For those of that faith, BAM sounds right, and therefore it must be right. No thinking required.

What about the rest of us? A succinct “don’t touch my brain, mother****er” is a good start. It has a nice ring to it. I’m sure it correlates with quite healthy levels of neuronal activity.

The Matrix Revealed

Here’s a prediction. You can take it to the bank. On that day when BAM completes its vaunted mission, our esteemed leaders will manage to exempt themselves from brain scans that might reveal their own dark visions and objectives.

It might even be called The Obama Exception.

If you’re sitting in a pew on the Left and you don’t like that one, try The Bush Exception. Under his brilliant reign, we had the Teen Screen program, a maniacal project to test all children for mental disorders at a young age. It failed, and went out of business.

But BAM has a lot more juice. It aims to go the distance. It has the imprimatur of “hard science.” That’s the venue in which they cook up the biggest lies. The ones with real money behind them. And real Auschwitz experimenters.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 ruthless State of the Union: the current crime boss speaks

The ruthless State of the Union: the current crime boss speaks

by Jon Rappoport

February 13, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Perhaps it’s presidents running down the whole laundry list of issues, but it seems to me the last dozen or so State of the Union speeches by presidents could put a galaxy of insomniacs to sleep.

Originally, the State of the Union was the president talking to Congress. Now we all know no one from the Senate or the House is going to move a new inch by anything the president says in his speech.

It’s just a dog and pony show. It’s also a chance for the president to talk to the television audience. That’s the real event. The president’s on TV.

It’s a stage play and it closes the night it opens. The script is always too long. It should have been cut by nine-tenths in rehearsals.

The droning of the laundry list is, of course, a reflection of the fact that big government has its paws and nose in every facet of our lives. I was waiting for Obama to talk about an adequate supply of toilet paper and paper towels in public-park restrooms, and the danger of pictures of guns brought to school.

And how about those unsightly vegetable gardens growing on front lawns? Would he bring in the FBI and the ATF and DHS to solve that problem?

Would he push for free sex-change operations for all college students? Radioactive body scanners in coffee shops? I think the system for assigning names to hurricanes and blizzards should be subjected to a task-force study.

When tonight Obama said the only way to make progress was for us all to work together, he didn’t just mean the Congress. He meant the American people, aka the television audience. But I’ve never understood that idea. What are we all working together to accomplish? What’s the program? Giving away more of our income to the federal government? Agreeing to more surveillance of our movements? Supporting the invasion of more countries? Refraining from photographing the police making arrests? Restricting our Facebook posts to happy faces and rainbows?

Are we all working together to surrender our guns in exchange for movie tickets and candy? Are we pretending to be overjoyed that the federal government wants to force everyone to get vaccinated and eat GMO food, and take SSRI antidepressants that demonstrably cause people to go crazy and kill others? Is that it?

Are we somehow working together to print endless amounts of money? Are we working together to push the percentage of Americans collecting free government money from 40 percent to 60 percent? Is that the glorious goal?

Are we working together to give money to alternative-energy companies so they can go broke and declare bankruptcy? Are we working together to protect and defend the World Trade Organization, so ravenous mega-corporations can export jobs to China and roam the global landscape, raping and pillaging resources and labor?

Are we working together to accept Obamacare, which will steadily eliminate natural-health alternatives and enroll more people in a medical system that kills 225,000 people (actually a lot more) every year like clockwork? Is that the goal?

Are we working together to pretend we have two very different major political parties in the country, instead of one party with two heads?

Are we working to assure that no bankster is ever sent to prison for scamming the American people out of trillions of dollars?

Are we working together to take guns away from people who would only use them to defend themselves and their families against criminals, while at the same we work to ignore gang violence stemming in part from the fact that Mexican drug cartels use these gangs as subcontractors, under the protection of the federal government?

Are we working together to imagine that our troops are really fighting wars to protect and defend the nation?

Are we working together to hide the fact that, although interest rates are artificially low, we’re spending more and more money every month to buy what we need to survive?

Are we working together to hamstring every small business in America with red tape and taxes?

Are we working together to ignore the absurd insanity called climate-change science, so the government can install carbon taxes and penalties and lop the top off of American industry?

Are we all working together to frame attractive free incentive packages for unlimited numbers of immigrants who come to America, while untold numbers of Americans are going hungry every night, and people can’t find jobs anywhere? Is that the objective? Destabilization of society, under the cynical guise of humane gift-giving?

Are we working to dream that when the president says he’s going to focus on jobs in his second term, this means he’s actually going to do more than squint at the sun?

Are we working to find more foreign enemies we can invade, as our military advance teams pave the way for imperial corporations and continue to launch some sort of ridiculous “surround Russia” operation?

Are we all working together to drown the Third World in “free” medical drugs and vaccines that destroy immune systems, rather than cleaning up contaminated water supplies and installing simple sanitation systems (at a millionth of the cost of the drugs)?

Are we all working together just “to work together” and continue the fine tradition of destroying the nation from the inside?

That’s what I thought. Yes, that’s what I thought.

The Matrix Revealed

Hell of a speech, Mr. President. You and GW and Bill and Bush the Elder and Ronnie and Jimmy and Gerry and Nixon really know your laundry lists. You talk, and the government gets bigger. It’s magic.

There’s always more to do and the government has to make it happen. Otherwise, what are you there for?

I ask myself that question all the time. I’m still looking for an answer, other than, “We’re all in this together.”

Who is this WE you keep taking about? And what is this TOGETHER? You mean we who are watching on television and you who are talking on television? You mean you who are slicing the Constitution into little pieces while ridiculing it as a Neanderthal document? You mean you who are covert agents of Globalism? You mean you who have been vetted to make sure you’re on board with the op to take American down into a planetary management system that will bring a thousand years of peace to people made over into androids?

That’s what I thought.

You talk and the government gets bigger. You bankroll education and students are brainwashed into “uplifting social themes,” and become more dumb. You talk and the state-corporate media strain themselves into hernias to praise your erudition or passion. You talk and thousands of lobbyists who have the inside track on your souls parse your words and plan their new strategies. You talk and the American people desperately try to imagine you’re making a grain of sense. You talk and the winds blow and the snow falls and Somebody Actually Important, at a much higher level of the Mob, pats you on your shoulder and folds you up like a puppet and drops you in his pocket and walks upstairs to the Residence and puts you to sleep.

Asleep, you dream of a strange and alien thing: the freedom and power and independence of the individual. For you, it’s a nightmare.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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

National life without guns is a beautiful thing, isn’t it?

National life without guns is a beautiful thing, isn’t it?

By Jon Rappoport

February 2, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Vietnam was all right. No problem. So was the covert war in Nicaragua and El Salvador. Ditto for Iraq I and II and Afghanistan. All necessary and proper and good. Lives destroyed? Who cares?

The US government’s possession of weapons and their use? Well, of course they needed all those weapons. How else could the wars be fought?

Guns in hands of government are a completely different issue than guns in the hands of citizens. You do see that, don’t you? Government knows what to do with guns. Kill people. Lots of people. Citizens with guns are clueless and have to be dealt with.

US-government 24/7 surveillance of every US citizen? Again, no problem. No indication of bad intent at all. It’s just protection against terrorism.

So you see, the whole rationale for the 2nd Amendment—that Americans need to protect themselves against a tyrannical central government—goes right out the window.

That was easy.

And in case you’re wondering why our commander-in-chief doesn’t pinpoint the areas of the country where the major gun violence is taking place, since he wants to reduce that violence, it’s because he doesn’t wish to offend anyone. He’s merely being polite. An admirable quality.

Don’t worry your pretty little head about it.

Now, recently we’ve seen children suspended and expelled from school, and we’ve seen a school lockdown or two, because of the presence of a Nerf gun or a gun made out of fingers or the word “pow.” This makes perfect sense.

We all know imaginary guns are the gateway drug to real guns and real guns are a guarantee of death. So nip the situation in the bud. Eliminate all thoughts of guns. Slap the fingers of the finger guns.

This program of taking away imaginary guns proves our government is mentally acute. Another sign we can trust them and ignore the core purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

This next point is so heinous I hesitate to bring it up. But I must. It’s been suggested that if the federal government mandates all its vaccines for every citizen, and eliminates all exemptions, people will need to defend themselves and their families against government agents showing up at their homes with guns and syringes.

Preposterous, because no one has the right to his own body. You have no right to say what the government should put in your body. The government is allied with science, and science knows best.

So when the government says “take this vaccine,” you say “how many times?”

It’s simple. Fear not.

And when, up the road, you or your children find out Obamacare is really designed to exclude alternative/natural choices, and you have to take the drugs government doctors are prescribing, don’t sweat it.

Those natural alternatives are all hocus pocus and voodoo. The real cures are pharmaceuticals. The government is looking out for you. You won’t need a gun to fend off a government employee. He’s highly educated. He knows drugs.

You can only doubt the intentions of government if you’re paranoid. That’s a mental disorder, and it automatically disqualifies you from owning a weapon. So you’re good there. Just get treatment.

As everybody understands, this government has been bought and sold so many times it’s gone broke. But that’s just something that happens in business. Nothing to get bothered about. There’ll be new money, and you’ll get your share. Taxes might be higher, but so what? You’re paying for protection. If you need to understand that concept, just watch Godfather 1 again: shop owners were smart enough to realize owning a gun wouldn’t be a good move against four goombahs coming through the door to collect their cut every week.

Have you noticed the trend toward micro apartments? It’s wonderful. People in cities are moving into 200-ft.-square residences in new buildings. You can turn around twice in these places. That’s plenty.

The agenda involves crowding more people into cities, so they can be controlled more easily, because out in the country, they get strange ideas. You don’t want strange ideas floating around in your head. So don’t go pretending the government has some sinister plan. It’s just straight control.

After all, what do you expect the agenda of a government to be, when it has to rule 300 million people all at once? Freedom? Please. That’s laughable.

And if you’re under control, what need do you have for a gun? You’re already in thrall, just where you want to be.

If the government is taking care of you (and it is), are you going to draw your gun? That would be just plain crazy.

On the other hand, government officials, celebrities, and rich people do need protection. There are all sorts of crazies out there. So let the elites have guns and armed security guards. They need them. You don’t. They don’t want guns, it’s just something they have to put up with. If Diane Feinstein whacks some whacko, more power to her.

Now we come to black and Latino people who live in high-crime areas. We hear several pernicious myths about their circumstances. One, the police in those neighborhoods practice illegal brutality. Two, the police don’t bother entering the neighborhoods at all. And three, the streets aren’t safe, because gangs are everywhere.

The myths are obviously absurd. The residents of these areas only need to have a well-shielded bulletproof room in their homes, in case some drug addict breaks in. Call the police, hunker down in the safe room for a few hours, and things will be taken care of. What’s the problem?

In schools, the chances are slim anything untoward will happen. Teachers certainly don’t need guns. They just need training in communication skills, so they can talk a shooter down, if he ever shows up.

Ditto for churches, parks, and athletic fields.

Relax and just let things happen. Go with the flow.

It’s like chemo. Let me explain. Everybody knows that chemo causes cancer and wrecks the immune system. And then you die. But if you die, it was your time. Your number came up.

So it is on the street, in a church, or a park. If a shooter enters the scene and blows a few dozen people away, it was fate. It was meant to be. The idea that people in a park would be armed and able to put down a killer is, well, frightening. Suppose they shoot themselves instead, or hurt an animal? That would create a sense of panic.

Whereas, we know a mass killer is there to kill people. So when that happens, it’s just part of the weave of life.

I think I’ve covered enough bases to make you see you don’t need a gun. Nobody does. We all have our roles. Policemen protect you, killers kill you, and you steadfastly remain calm. And unarmed.

Accept it.

The Matrix Revealed

If you have to hunt or shoot skeet, use a bow and arrow, or a rubber band and a paper clip.

Listen, if you’re a schmuck, be a schmuck. Right?

If you need something to do, watch the latest government war on television. Just knowing a war is going on should give you sufficient vicarious pleasure. Somewhere, people are killing and people are dying. But you’re at peace.

And if you have any leftover anxiety you just can’t quell with drugs, take heart. Scientists are studying the DNA of Adam Lanza. When they discover the genetic flaw that caused him to commit mass murder, the government will be able to institute a universal program to alter the population.

In other words, violence won’t be an option anymore. No one will feel the urge to kill or do harm. Isn’t that what we want?

Whoever answers no to that question is surely deranged and should be forced to undergo the genetic change immediately.

Can you picture the near future? People all over America out for a stroll, moving through any and all neighborhoods without fear of danger. People everywhere smiling and saying, “Howdy, neighbor!” “Howdy neighbor!”

Who could possibly be against that?

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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 club of liberals, transhumanism, depopulation

The club of liberals, transhumanism, depopulation

by Jon Rappoport

January 25, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

By liberals, I simply mean those people who accept big government as a given, regardless of their political affiliation.

And yes, at certain key levels, they are a club. They come from major media, large corporations, banks, the military, well-funded foundations, investment houses, do-good non-profits, legal and medical societies, academic factories, think tanks, and of course the huge pool of government employees.

For them, big, bigger, and biggest government is a rock-bottom assumption that requires no thought. The sun comes up every morning, and there is big government.

This assumption supersedes anything written in the US Constitution explicitly limiting the power of central authority.

Where there is conflict between that document and the actions of government, the Constitution automatically takes a back seat. It is looked upon as a primitive, ancient, and worn-out set of ideas.

In fact, the Club is surprised and shocked that anyone would try to impede government based on fanciful notions about powers reserved for the individual states, or readings of the 2nd Amendment.

Long ago, the Club decided that every statement made in the Constitution was subject to revision or outright dismissal, based on the arrogant concept that changing times require new measures and new solutions.

In their eyes, they are working with reality, whereas Constitutionalists have a quirky and disturbing obsession that clings to absolute Principle. If Principle isn’t a sign of a mental disorder, it at least indicates an unhealthy nostalgia about a fairy tale of days gone by.

The Club blithely assumes it has won its battle.

The Club is focused on what big government, in concert with its corporate allies, can do to further expand. This is where a disjunction of attitude occurs.

For some Club members, the mission of government is to do good, to give to those in need, no matter how many are in need or how much that need grows.

For other Club members, at higher levels, the massive giveaway and fulfilling of need is just a pose, a tactic to gain more adherents who will trade a great deal of their freedom for a little security.

But there is no debate within the Club about this matter. No one wants to rock the boat. Those at higher levels view the do-gooders within their ranks as useful and amusing dupes.

The do-gooders, if they glimpse the faces and intentions of the higher-ups, shrug it off, assuming that somehow, in the long run, the vision of “a shared and just world” will triumph, because the universe wants to make it so.

The Club has one major enemy.

Abundance.

The idea that there is enough for everyone who wants to work for it, the idea that individuals can pursue their deepest dreams and desires, and win…that is anathema.

Why? Because if that perception operated widely in the society, it would rule out the grasping need for invasive central government.

Therefore, creating artificial scarcities is at the top of the Club’s to-do list. Of course, this agenda must be masked behind false cover. The scarcities must seem to be inevitable, or at least caused by forces beyond our control.

Scarcity of money, health, prosperity, freedom, property, sanity, natural resources…they must appear to be naturally occurring crises, for which the only answer is parental control over populations.

When Buckminster Fuller offered his brilliant analysis of abundance and how we could achieve it on planet Earth, he was missing only one piece: who would implement it? Who would revolutionize life for all?

The obvious answer is: the people in charge. But that doesn’t work, for the simple reason that those people are dedicated to producing false scarcities.

To reject abundance, the elite Club of Rome published its famous study, “The Limits to Growth,” in 1972. It essentially used computer modeling to predict failure for civilization, and ushered in a tsunami of propaganda aimed at floating the planet’s only hope for survival: a recognition of global interdependence and the distribution of the world’s resources from a point of Central Planning.

This concept, in turn, was translated to mean “addressing needs.”

The conclusion? Big government was the addresser, the single most important institution for saving us all.

Hand in hand, elite planners and propagandists invented a loop that guaranteed the primacy of a bill of needs over a bill of rights.

Individual freedom stood accused in the dock as the criminal. It had led to the wealthy few and the poor many. A world out of balance.

Members of the Club, sitting in their massive London drawing rooms and their Park Avenue apartments, applauded this “progression of awareness.”

To say they were laughing up their sleeves would be a vast understatement.

From FDR to Truman, from Eisenhower to Kennedy, from LBJ to Nixon, from Ford to Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, Bush Jr., the Club watched their plans solidify. Regardless of what these presidents said or did, government expanded, and the official status of “fulfilling needs” was welded ever more securely to government’s mission.

Finally, in a considerable victory, to symbolically signify the emergence of the “lowest to the highest,” a man who represented former slaves on the American continent took up residence in the White House.

He, above previous presidents, would raise the sword to equalize all status in society. He would right past wrongs, square past debts, and fly the flag of humanity. Justice would be served.

No matter that the condition of “his own people” would worsen during his reign. No matter that the condition of all Americans would diminish. No matter that he was the agent of a operation designed to put the crown on government as the great provider.

From Buddha to Jesus to Karl Marx, the Club has borrowed sentiments of high hope and realization, in order to sell its program. The Club has cast its role as the messianic force. It has filled the pews of its church with followers, who have no clue as to the actual plan, but instead mouth the words and sing the songs and praise the gifts.

The marketing of these sentiments, their weave, fabric, tone, and flow are the substance of a trance induction.

And at the end of the line? America harmonized in its structure with other nations, and the subsuming of the USA under a regional and global arch of management.

As David Rockefeller, one of the designers of the plan, put it 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.”

There are millions of people who refuse to believe that a high humanitarian sentiment or ideal can be enrolled and deployed to defeat us. They automatically assume what stirs them is for the good.

They are crowded together in the middle of the trance. They clog the arteries of the body politic. They foment a disease of the public immune system attacking itself, and it is long past the time when they should wake up and cure their distorted perception.

But as far as the Club is concerned, they are useful. And useful they will stay, as long as they can be hypnotized into the future glory that lies just over the next hill.

And now we come to the technocrats.

The technocrats among Club leaders consider the overall mission in terms of a systems fix. There are flaws in the way humans have chosen to organize themselves, and these flaws need to be corrected.

With the important information entered into computers armed with algorithms, models can be obtained. These models will take into account vital resources, such as water, breathable air, earth minerals, fuel, food crops, transportation, housing, education, medical care, and so on. Planetary allocation quotas for all territories and regions can be arrived at.

Dispassionately, the human condition can be modified.

The technocrats consider this an interesting problem. It will take work, but it can be solved.

Certain factors, however, must be reduced or eliminated. Freedom, choice, personal decision-making have to be devalued in the new System, in order to avoid the introduction of random and unpredictable outcomes.

The very meaning of a technocratic system precludes freedom as an objective, because that quality of humans isn’t circumscribed and can’t be inserted as a pure passive object into calculations.

Technocrats value systems above all. They live to build self-referential closed structures. This fascination negates a whole range of emotions.

The technocrats aren’t admirers of emotion, which are unpredictable when it comes to the mathematics of a new planet.

Joy, for example. How would one enter joy into an equation? How could it be quantified?

Technocrats are, in a sense, a separate species. They are intensely cerebral. They view human beings as troublesome pieces of a puzzle. A system is erected on the basis of built-in controls. Humans tend not to fit.

This they find annoying. But there are ways to limit the trouble. Chemicals can be introduced into the brain. The chemicals will regulate behavior. This is another interesting problem awaiting a solution, a whole series of solutions. The drugs we now have are only a minor step in the right direction.

It’s all in the service of a better system, which is what technocrats must have. They would wither and die if they couldn’t have it. They would feel isolated and useless and rejected.

If you want to see a technocrat squirm and wriggle and scream, like a person being tortured, take away his access to systems.

The greatest acceleration of human organization took place in the century just past. The obsession for big, bigger, and biggest flowered as never before. Now, in this century, the push is for refinement. To the technocrat, that means much greater definition of roles for humans.

Specialization will take on new restrictions and regulations. Plugging people into a system is one thing; carefully ordering their limits and restraints is another.

Take the long view of this century. The overall aim is for a structure that will encompass the actions of every human on Earth; every person with a designated function rigorously placed in the correct slot.

This will be promoted as salvation. It will be floated as the genius of the species finally taking hold.

However, it’s clear that for such an enormous structure, machines will perform better as workers than people in most cases. As Bucky Fuller pointed out, automation is the wave of the future.

Then what is to be done with humans?

The obvious answer is massive depopulation.

The Matrix Revealed

This is on the drawing board. No doubt about it. It is being enacted in certain regions.

But there is a significant glitch. Among the most important Club members are heads and owners and financiers of mega-corporations.

Those corporations are already experiencing dead time in their operations. Their production lines are moving at half-mast, because the available consumer base is too small. Out of the world’s population, perhaps only a billion people have the means to participate in what is commonly understood as the consumer economy. Corporations can accommodate far greater numbers.

This is a genuine conflict. It has been brewing for some time.

If you have any knowledge about the men who run these companies, you know they will not go gently into the good night of major depopulation. That would reduce their consumer base to a much greater degree.

So far, all attempts to artificially create more consumers has failed. The overall picture hasn’t markedly changed, nor does it appear vast government giveaways will do the job in the future.

There is a thread of Globalist calculation that appears to be an answer to the problem. It’s based on the old Nazi presumption of a lost master race, a genetic strain certain Nazi leaders were dreaming and fantasizing about—and trying to recreate.

The new IG Farben (a vast chemical/pharmaceutical Nazi cartel) is a loose collection of corporations that now constitutes global leadership in pharmaceutical/genetic research. It certainly wants to invent “enhanced humans.” This is one of its prime goals. A laboratory-induced master race.

Here is my opinion on how the hideous project could proceed:

Over time, through food, drugs, and definitely vaccines, genetic factors would be inserted in human beings to render them infertile. The gradually ensuing decline in new births would be explained away by false cover stories. These stories, particularly when they come from “eminent researchers,” would be rather easy to sell.

As the global population decreases, a re-seeding and replacement operation would be launched.

This would certainly include genetically enhanced humans, but it would also consist of favored body profiles and races, because the overall program is most assuredly a racialist scheme.

In those regions where the population is made to fall, import the favored humans and genetically enhanced specimens.

This isn’t ultimately a depopulation program at all. In its later stages, it is quite the opposite. The objective is to reduce and then bring back a full ten or 20 billion people on the planet.

It’s all about replacement. It’s all about the assumption that “superior humans” will flourish. They will buy and consume the products of the mega-corporations. They will carry out, to a T, their assigned roles in the new civilization, along side the machines of the technocrats.

It’s a plan to: rewrite the future; and, when things are humming again, to forget the genocidal past entirely, in four or five generations.

This would solve the conflict within the Club, among the technocrats, the mega-corporations, and the Rockefeller-type Globalists.

And somewhere today, a young person, filled to the brim with vague ideals and hope, buying the promise that everyone’s needs will be met, that suffering and pain and injustice will be solved, has no clue that such pretty thoughts can be hijacked in the service of building a system to eradicate what it means to be alive.

This young person thinks freedom, liberty, and the intentions of the Constitution are frivolous obstructions to a better world.

Dispense with the Constitution. It isn’t part of the modern trend.

Instead, join the crowd. Shout with delight for the political salvation that is only a few more joined hands from realization.

Forget. Believe. Go along.

Reject as absurd the possibility that elite planners have a completely different version of the world in tow.

Yell for equality, whatever that may be shaped to mean.

Think about nothing. Just swim into the days with faith born from what our leaders are selling on the shore of the new shining city.

Believe. Trust.

Your job isn’t to imagine and invent your own reality. That is a meaningless proposition.

No, your job is to love the State because the State loves you.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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

How television will shape the new gun-culture in America

How television will shape the new gun-culture in America

by Jon Rappoport

January 15, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Weapons are being fired all the time on television, but that happens on cop shows. Network programmers know the public will obsessively watch guns going off and bodies falling.

On the news, however, the issue of gun ownership is adjudicated independently of the glee that accompanies watching fictional people kill each other.

When it’s fantasy, the audience wants violence. When it’s real, the audience wants no violence.

Dealing with this schizoid condition would be a problem for the networks, were it not for the fact that there is a bridge between the two states of mind:

“The good guys win.”

They win in every episode of every cop show. They always have. Decades of this operant conditioning lead the audience to expect it will happen in real life, where crime and guns and cops are involved.

So in the wake of Sandy Hook, for the public, the resolution must belong to the cops.

The idea that it might somehow belong to private citizens doesn’t sit right.

The cops win by controlling the guns.

For the television-watching public, that fits. It makes sense. In every crime series, the guns of the cops turn out to be superior to those of the criminals…so to speak.

And in real life, it translates into: take the guns from private citizens. Make the good guys win.

Logic is not part of this. The vision is of cops (and their allies) taking guns away from bad guys, who are then left powerless to commit murder. It’s simple and obvious and conclusive and satisfying…to a mind that’s been captured by television cop shows at a nine-year-old level and frozen there forever.

Bad guys had guns. Therefore, they could kill people. Now they don’t have guns. They can’t kill people.

The nonsense and illegality and unworkability of this vision is beside the point.

The myriad ways in which thousands of criminals obtain weapons is off the table as an issue. It’s too complex for a nine-year-old to consider.

As a corollary to this puerile solution to crime (take the guns), we have an equally insane command: the solution must apply to all 315 million people living in America.

Again, nine-year olds don’t pause to reflect on the logistics.

Enter the elite television anchor. Whether it’s the slick momma’s boy who crafts the image of a “post-Newton era of gun control” (Brian Williams, NBC), or a gray man who looks down his nose like a tightly wound FBI agent about to raid a warehouse full of weapons (Scott Pelley, CBS), or a blond can of syrup dripping maple tears as she weeps for America (Diane Sawyer, ABC), the mission is the same:

By gesture, facial expression, careful placement of not-quite-neutral words, let the viewing audience know that a corner has been turned; the way guns are viewed has changed once and for all; the tragedy at Sandy Hook is too deep; we cannot move on as before.

From the three networks, the message is delivered. This is a watershed moment for the CULTURE.

It’s the 9/11 of guns.

We will not only see new laws, and new executive orders from the president. “All civilized people” will talk and think about guns differently, just as they changed their minds about wearing animal fur. This is the program coming out of the gate.

We’ll see it performed six ways from Sunday on the news and on news magazine shows. Forever.

However, there is a glitch. In the world of fiction, movies, television, video games, trillions of dollars are riding on the public fantasy about guns. How do you change the culture when people are still hungry to spend their money on vicariously living out the shoot-’em-up blow-’em-up legends?

What about Hollywood actors, who have made a handsome living portraying vicious pricks and relentless cops, blasting thousands of rounds from assault weapons? Do you expect them to boycott those roles in the future? What roles will they play to satisfy the audience’s desire to experience violence? Kung Fu masters fighting other Kung Fu masters? Animals tearing their prey to pieces on open plains?

How many comedies can you sell about four idiots taking a road trip to Vegas?

The elite television anchors will go up against the cop shows on their own networks.

The outcome won’t be decided in a month or a year.

Painting all gun owners as Neanderthals takes time.

It takes a crazy concealed-carry Texas uncle here and there on sitcoms.

It takes a few dozen episodes of Law and Order, in which parents leave guns lying around for children to pick up and tragically use.

It takes a Lifetime movie about a video game designer, who enters a moral crisis when he sees his game come to life on the streets of small-town America, as kids riddle each other with bullets outside a barber shop.

It takes a movie about a fur-wearing psychopath mowing down a gay household.

The shows people love will morph into updated teaching moments, as the networks pray their ratings will hold.

On cop shows, you’ll eventually see this sort of thing: a team of black, brown, yellow, and white community organizers, working to rid a neighborhood of guns, is murdered, one at a time, by a rogue “serial killer” cop, who drinks heavily and has a psychotic fixation about the 2nd Amendment. Finally, a DHS squad blows the cop away —afterward expressing deep regret they had to use their 60 weapons with 600-round magazines.

Brian Williams, who maintains his deep abiding empathy for men out west with guns, will give you this:

“Today in Moosehead, California, police retrieved the very last gun owned in that town by a private citizen. But it came at a price.

“John Anger, who at the age of 84 had been living all of his years in the house where he was born, was sitting on his back porch cleaning his grandfather’s Bushmaster rifle, when three children, cutting through his yard, as they always did, every day, coming home from school, saw Mr. Anger with his weapon, and obeyed those vital lessons they’d learned in school since the first grade.

“They called the police. And the police came. With the children safely out of the way, a squad of eight DHS-certified men and women issued an order to Mr. Anger, who unfortunately was deaf and wasn’t wearing his hearing aid, which neighbors later said he called an ‘annoying Medicare contraption.’

“Mr. Anger didn’t put down his rifle. This gave the police no choice.

“John Anger is now lying in the Soames Mortuary on McGillicudy Street, in Moosehead, the last person in that town to own a gun. He is gone, but the children are safe tonight in their homes with their parents.”

60 Minutes will run a story about a rich banker who lives on his large estate in Virginia, and has decided he no longer wants to skeet-shoot. Instead, he’s donating that acreage to a “research project,” in which former gun owners are re-educated in the ways of non-violence.

If you think all this is frivolous, look at a few hundred hours of television from the 1950s, and then compare the content to today’s network programming. You’ll understand that more than money drives the evolution of popular culture.

Influencing minds is an ongoing preoccupation of the television medium.

It’s all about creating a new culture, when the order comes down to make it so.

Reality-formation. Fabric realignment in the Matrix.

The Matrix Revealed

In the case of guns and violence, the blueprint for changing the culture has been on the drawing board for some time. The television networks have planned how to make citizens think about guns the way they now think about animal fur.

Sandy Hook was the green light to put the blueprint into effect.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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