Category Archives: Government Fraud

Have US Officials agreed to “clean routes” for Mexican drugs into America?

By Jon Rappoport

September 22, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

In Chicago, Mexican Sinaloa drug-cartel member, Jesus Vicente Zambada Niebla, sits in prison.

He’s waiting for his October trial to begin, after three years of delays. DEA agents arrested him in Mexico City in 2009, on drug-trafficking charges.

Why all the postponements? US national security issues are involved.

Niebla wants to introduce evidence he says will show he, and the entire Sinaloa cartel, the most powerful drug-trafficking organization in Mexico, were given immunity from prosecution by the US government.

In return, Sinaloa has been providing US officials with intelligence on lesser drug cartels in Mexico, so they can be taken down.

If this sounds like a deal to permit Sinaloa to bring huge quantities of drugs into the US, that’s exactly what defendant Niebla is implying.

Federal prosecutors admit there are national-security issues in the Niebla trial. They deny Niebla or Sinaloa were ever granted immunity by the US government. However, they have made motions to keep unspecified classified information out of court proceedings.

Bill Conroy, who has been writing groundbreaking articles for The Narco News Bulletin (twitter), quotes Niebla’s lawyers: “The United States government considered the arrangement with the Sinaloa cartel an acceptable price to pay, because the principal objective was the destruction and dismantling of rival cartels by using the assistance of the Sinaloa Cartel—without regard for the fact that tons of illicit drugs continued to be smuggled [by Sinaloa] into Chicago and other parts of the United States and corruption continued unabated.”

US, Mexican Officials Brokering Deals with Drug “Cartels,” WikiLeaks Documents Show: Revelation Exposed in Email Correspondence Between Private Intelligence Firm and Mexican Diplomat

Does this in part explain the rising tide of violence in Chicago? Are we looking at an exact parallel to what the late journalist Gary Webb described, in his explosive Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion, about US officials opening the door to massive drug-trafficking in South Central Los Angeles?

Journalist Conroy goes on to reveal a number of relevant emails captured by Wikileaks from Stratfor, a private intelligence company based in Austin, Texas. Stratfor refuses to comment on the emails. The company indicates that, in general, this type of email may be factual or may be intentionally fictitious.

The emails are the observations of a Mexican diplomat code-named MX1. Noting his probable identity has already been published online, Conroy writes, “[Fernando de la Mora Salcedo is] a Mexican foreign service officer who…served in the Mexican Consulate in El Paso, Texas, and is currently stationed [or has recently been recalled] in the Mexican Consulate in Phoenix.”

Here are choice excerpts from Salcedo’s emails, allegedly sent to Stratfor between 2008 and 2011. They bolster the idea that the US government is supporting the Sinaloa Cartel.

April 19, 2010: “…I think the US sent a signal that might be construed as follows: ‘To the VCF [Vicente Carrillo Fuentes] and Sinaloa cartels: Thank you for providing our market with drugs over the years…please know that Sinaloa is bigger and better than VCF…let’s all get back to business [and stop the violence.]’”

June 3, 2010: “They [the US and Mexican governments] want the CARTELS to negotiate with EACH OTHER…if they can do this, violence will drop and the [US and Mexican] governments will allow controlled [drug] trades…The major routes and methods for bulk shipping [of drugs] have already been negotiated with US authorities. In this sense, the message that Sinaloa was winning was, in my view, intended to tell SEDENA [the Mexican military] to stop taking down large trucks full of dope as they made their way into the US. These large shipments were Sinaloa’s, and they are OK with the Americans.”

The explosive nature of the upcoming Niebla trial in Chicago could shed light on Operation Fast&Furious. After all the reasons that have been given for walking guns into Mexico, suppose the true explanation is the most simple? The US government supports Sinaloa, the biggest drug cartel in the world. Therefore, they gave Sinaloa guns.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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

The government’s demonic strategy against parents of autistic children

The government’s demonic strategy against parents of autistic children

by Jon Rappoport

September 13, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Let me start with this controversial statement: The worst thing parents can do is obtain a diagnosis of autism for their vaccine-damaged child.

The primary fact to keep in mind is: the government must deny any link between vaccines and autism, because to admit the connection would force it to pay out gigantic sums of money to parents, under its Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).

VICP was created in 1988, through an agreement between the US government and pharmaceutical companies, to funnel all law suits for damage away from those companies, and into a bureaucratic maze of government madness, where the parents’ chances of compensation are minimal, where the deck is most assuredly stacked against them.

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)

Once parents enter the maze, hoping to gain funds to care for their children, they are immediately confronted with a list of disorders and diseases. This list essentially tells them:

“If your vaccine-damaged child has been diagnosed with any of the following medical conditions, you may be able to win financial support. If not, you’re out of luck.”

Autism isn’t on the list.

Here is the list:

Vaccine Injury Table

(See also the “About the Omnibus Autism Proceeding,” here).

Can things be any clearer than that? A diagnosis of autism is a trap.

One: a young child receives a vaccine.

Two: he suddenly withdraws from life.

Three: a doctor makes a diagnosis of autism.

Four: the parents want to sue the company that makes the vaccine, but they can’t; they must apply to the VICP for funds to care for their child for the rest of his life.

Five: as soon as they enter the VICP system, they learn that the label “autism” is the very thing that will keep them from the funds they desperately need.

That is the long and short of it.

Forget about the fact that the parents never wanted to involve themselves with a federal government program. They wanted to sue the vaccine maker. They wanted a court award. But they were barred from suing.

At this point, you might say, “But if their child really does have autism and it was obviously caused by a vaccine, then they should be able to find justice somehow.”

You don’t understand how deep this deception goes. You don’t understand how criminally insane it is.

Because, you see, the label of “autism,” the very label that keeps parents from getting help for their children, is an arbitrary word that means nothing.

A deviously designed word that means nothing is keeping parents in a lifelong state of desperation, as they go bankrupt trying to care for their vaccine-damaged child.

We begin here: all 297 official mental disorders, listed in the (DSM) publication of the American Psychiatric Association, are defined and approved by committees of psychiatrists. Whether it is schizophrenia or autism or ADHD or clinical depression or bipolar disease, the definitions consist wholly of described behaviors. That’s all.

Psychiatrists will tell you these symptomatic behaviors are signs of underlying chemical imbalances or genetic aberrations, but they have no tests to back up this assertion. Therefore, all they are left with are the behaviors, their own menu-like clusters of those behaviors, and the “mental disorder” label they place on each cluster.

If they had more, if they had blood tests or brain scans or genetic assays, they would publish those tests and claim they are definitive for diagnoses of mental disorders. But they don’t.

Here is an exchange between a respected psychiatrist and a PBS interviewer, which occurred during a Frontline report titled, “Does ADHD Exist?”

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY (Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center): That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]

Yes, it actually DOES make all those disorders invalid, unless “science” suddenly means “the opinions of psychiatrists sitting in a room, collecting together various human behaviors, and labeling them.”

Here is a link to the official psychiatric definition of autism disorder. It’s worth reading:

https://www.firstsigns.org/screening/DSM4.htm

Notice that all the criteria for an autism diagnosis are behavioral. There is no mention of laboratory tests or test results. There is no mention of chemical imbalance or genetic factors.

Despite public-relations statements issued by doctors and researchers, they have no laboratory findings to establish or confirm an autism diagnosis.

But, people say, this makes no sense, because children do, in fact, withdraw from the world, stop speaking, throw sudden tantrums. Common sense dictates that these behaviors stem from serious neurological problems.

What could cause the behaviors listed in the official definition of autism disorder?

Vaccine injury; a toxic medical drug; a head injury; ingestion of a poison; an environmental chemical; a severe nutritional deficit; oxygen deprivation at birth; perhaps the emotional devastation accompanying the death of a parent…

There are many possible causes of the behaviors arbitrarily called autism.

However, then, why bother to say “autism?” Why not just say vaccine injury or head injury? Why not try to find the crucial event that brought on a specific child’s sudden and unique withdrawal from the world?

The answer should be clear. By establishing a label like autism, medical drugs can be sold. Studies can be funded. An industry can be created.

Something more can be done, too. The government can reject vaccine injury as a defining event in a child’s life, and reject the need to pay out compensation for it.

The government can say, “Since we know that some children who are diagnosed with autism have not received vaccines, or have not received vaccines containing a neurological poison (mercury), we do not compensate parents whose children are vaccine-injured on the basis that they have autism.”

Poof. It all goes away. Did you catch the sleight-of-hand trick?

Let me expose it. A child is given a vaccine. The child goes into a massive withdrawal from life and communication. A doctor, assessing the child’s behaviors, connects them with the official menu of behaviors labeled “autism.” The doctor then says, “This child has autism.”

Then the parents try to obtain government compensation through the VICP, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

The parents, who now have alarmingly high expenses for ongoing care of their vaccine-damaged child, go to the VICP and say, “Our child has been diagnosed with autism, and we want to collect funds for the vaccine-injury he sustained.”

The government replies, “This is impossible. You see, we know that autism isn’t caused by vaccine injury. We know it because many children who are diagnosed with autism have never been injured by vaccines. Some autistic children have never had vaccines.”

Do you see what is going on here? The parents stepped into a fatal trap. They said “autism” and the government said “vaccine injury does not cause autism.”

You might think the parents could back up and regroup. They could say, “We don’t care what you call it, we just know our child was severely damaged by a vaccine, and we need funds.”

But it’s not as easy as that. The government has no category called “vaccine damage.” The government demands some disease or disorder that is diagnosed and officially attributed to a vaccine injury. As I established earlier, the government has a specific list of diseases or disorders that it will allow—to even begin thinking about financial compensation.

The Matrix Revealed

But, you say, this is an evil word game. Of course it’s a word game. The whole notion of “autism” based on no definitive tests was a word game to begin with.

What is called autism (merely a label) is not one condition caused by one factor. It is a loose collection of behaviors that can be caused by various traumas.

Parents say, “My child’s life was stolen away from him. He must have autism.”

A label provides some measure of relief for the parents. It doesn’t prove that the label actually means something. In fact, the label can be a diversion from knowledge that would actually help the child. Suppose, for example, after receiving the DPT vaccine, the child went into a screaming fit and then withdrew from the world. Calling that autism tends to put the parents and the child in the medical system, where there is no definitive effective treatment. Outside that system, there might be some hope with, say, hyperbaric oxygen treatments, or other strategies.

If all this creates a sense of outrage in you, you are not alone.

If a hundred thousand parents of children who have been devastated by vaccines traveled to the headquarters of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, at the Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland, and if they stayed there and Occupied the area, and if they had a unified position that cut through the word game and the purposeful official delusion, perhaps this criminal insanity would end.

A doctor’s diagnosis of autism most assuredly does not end the insanity. It adds to it.

power outside the matrix

I once had a conversation with a parent whose child was vaccine-injured and then diagnosed with autism. She spent years trying to obtain compensation from the VICP and failed. Here is a paraphrase of how our conversation went:

“I found out my child wasn’t the point of the VICP proceeding at all. The government’s attorney was doing everything possible to deny us compensation. I felt I was up against a monster.”

“They denied you benefits because your son had been diagnosed with autism?”

“Yes. They said there was no established connection between the vaccine-damage and autism, so they rejected my claim.”

“So you see that the label ‘autism’ was the very thing they used to reject your claim.”

“I know it now. I didn’t know it then.”

“You also know there is no reason to use the ‘autism’ label. It’s an arbitrary word.”

“It’s a word that is ruining us.”

“Do you realize that, if your doctor had diagnosed your son with a different catch-all label, you would have stood a better chance of gaining compensation?”

“What label?”

“Encephalopathy, for example.”

“So you’re telling me it was all a game, and if I could have gotten the doctor to understand that, he might have written a different diagnosis in my son’s chart, and my chances [of compensation] might have improved.”

“That’s right. A different word.”

In a just world, a parent whose child is damaged by a vaccine would be permitted to sue the vaccine maker. In a less just world, the parent would be able to enter the VICP system and claim a right to compensation based on the simple stand-alone fact that her child was damaged by a vaccine.

In the world we live in, that parent has to prove her child was diagnosed with a condition that the government admits could be caused by a vaccine.

And if the doctor wrote down the word “autism,” the chances of compensation are suddenly very, very remote. They’re zero, unless the parent was able to obtain an accompanying word like “encephalopathy.”

Finally, people will insist that researchers are getting closer to discovering the true and basic cause of autism. This is just more arbitrary verbiage. The “symptoms” listed as definitive for autism are just a collection of behaviors. I could put together a list, and so could you:

“Fatigue, eye flutters, sadness, lack of desire to participate in school, loss of appetite, halting communication…” I could give these behaviors a name, “Remoteness Syndrome,” and call it a disorder, and then I could raise a few billion dollars to search for the underlying cause…but there would be no underlying single cause, because the list was a non-starter. It was just an arbitrary collection of behaviors.

“Autism” is nothing more than a catch-all phrase that indicates a variety of possible unconnected neurological insults. Each patient should be examined by a health practitioner who can really find the cause in that case. Then, perhaps, a treatment plan can be devised for that child.

Meanwhile, the government and its VICP program embroils parents and works them over and tortures them for years, and dumps most of them out on the street with no compensation.

Jon Rappoport

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

THE ULIMATE GOAL OF THE SURVEILLANCE STATE

by Jon Rappoport

September 10, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

Surveillance is coming at us from all angles. Chips, drones, TSA checkpoints, smart meters, back-doored electronic products, video cameras, spying home appliances; our phone calls and emails and keystrokes and product purchases are recorded.

The government and its allied corporations will know whatever they want to know about us.

What then?

What happens when all nations are blanketed from stem to stern with surveillance?

Smart meters give us one clue. Public utilities, acting on government orders, will be able to allot electricity in amounts and at times it wishes to. This is leading to an overarching plan for energy distribution to the entire population.

Claiming shortages and limited options, governments will essentially be redistributing wealth, in the form of energy, under a collectivist model.

National health insurance plans (such as Obamacare) offer another clue. Such plans have no logistical chance of operating unless every citizen is assigned a medical ID package, which is a de facto identity card. In the medical arena, this means cradle-to-grave tracking.

Surveillance inevitably leads to: placing every individual under systems of control. It isn’t just “we’re watching you” or “we’re stamping out dissent.” It’s “we’re directing your participation in life.”

As a security analyst in the private sector once told me, “When you can see what every employee is doing, when you have it all at your fingertips, you naturally move on to thinking about how you can control those patterns and flows of movement and activity. It’s irresistible. You look at your employees as pieces on a board. The only question is, what game do you want to play with them?”

Every such apparatus is ruled, from the top, by Central Planners. When it’s an entire nation, upper-echelon technocrats revel in the idea of blueprinting, mapping, charting, and regulating the flows of all goods and services and people, “for the common good.”

Water, food, medicine, land use, transportation—they all become items of a networked system that chooses who gets what and when, and who can travel where, and under what conditions.

This is the wet dream of technocrats. They believe they are saving the world, while playing a fascinating game of multidimensional chess.

As new technologies are discovered and come on line, the planners decide how they will be utilized and for whose benefit.

In order to implement such a far-reaching objective, with minimal resistance from the global population, manufactured crises are unleashed which persuade the masses that the planet is under threat and needs “the wise ones” to rescue it and us.

We watch (and fight in) wars and more wars, each one exacerbated and even invented. We see (planned) drought and famine. We are told about desperate shortages and a frying Earth. We are presented with phony epidemics that are falsely promoted as scourges.

The only response, we are led to believe, is more humane control over the population.

On top of that, we are fed an unending stream of propaganda aimed at convincing us that “the great good for the greatest number” is the only humane and acceptable principle of existence. All prior systems of belief are outmoded. We know better now. We must be good and kind and generous to everyone at all times.

Under this quasi-religious banner, which has great emotional appeal, appears The Plan. Our leaders allocate and withhold on the basis of their greater knowledge. We comply. We willingly comply, because we are enlisted in a universal army of altruistic concern.

This is a classic bait and switch. We are taught to believe that service for the greater good is an unchallengeable goal and credo. And then, later, we find out it has been hijacked to institute more power over us, in every way.

The coordinated and networked surveillance of Earth and its people is fed into algorithms that spit out solutions. This much food will go here; that much water will go there; here there will be medical care; there medical care will be severely rationed. These people will be permitted to travel. Those people will be confined to their cities and towns.

Every essential of life—managed with on-off switches, and the consequences will play out.

An incredibly complex system of interlocking decisions will be hailed as messianic.

Surveillance; planning; control.

The surveillance is expanded, not because we are constantly under threat and must be protected from terrorists, but because we can then be labeled and entered on to 10 billion squares of the game board, to be moved around or held in place.

This is the vision.

It isn’t ours. It never was. But we are not consulted.

Instead we are made witness to watershed events: the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing; the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center; the 2001 assault on the Trade Center and the Pentagon. These ops paralleled the unleashing of better and more far-ranging methods of surveillance.

We are profiled down to the threads on our clothing and DNA in our cells. But what is our profile of the technocrats and their bosses?

They are divorced from human life. They live in a vacuum. They take pleasure from that vacuum.

In 1982, I interviewed Bill Perry, who had just left his job as PR chief at Lawrence Livermore Labs, where scientists design nuclear weapons. Perry had been given the kind of job PR people long for. But one day, when he passed the desk of a researcher and listened to his complaints about budget limitations, Perry said, “Listen, America already has the means to blow up the whole planet eight times. What more do you need?”

The researcher looked up at him with a genuinely puzzled expression. He said, “You don’t understand, Bill. This is a problem in physics.”

In the same detached sense, the technocrats who want to calculate and direct our future, move by move, minute by minute, see us as components of a complex and very interesting problem.

Yes, they indeed expect to exercise power and control. But they also live in an abstraction. They deal their answers from that realm. They exercise cool passion. They see, for example, that not every single twitch of thought of every person on earth is yet mapped, so they want to finish constructing the means by which they can chart those “missing elements.” They want to complete the formula.

They view their research as a wholly natural implication of the mathematics they can manipulate. They swim in technology and they want to extend its architecture. To abandon the program would be tantamount to denying their own intelligence. They climb the mountain because it is there.

They do perceive that one factor does not fit their algorithms: the free individual. It’s the wild card. Therefore, they are compelled to analyze freedom and break it down into DNA functions and brain processes. They assume, because they must, that the free individual is an illusory idea that flows from some older configuration of synaptic transmission, at a time in our evolution when we needed it. But now, they suppose, the engineering of human activity and thought has superseded such quaint notions. Now we all can be tracked, traced, and studied on a different and wider scale. Now we can be seen for what we really are: a hive.

Therefore, we must be instructed, within tight limits, about our various functions.

I’m reminded of a statement attributed to Nobel Laureate, Alfred Szent-Giorgi: “In my search for the secret of life, I have ended up with atoms and electrons, which have no life at all. Somewhere along the line, life has run through my fingers. So, in my old age, I am retracing my steps…”

Today’s technocrats will admit no such disappointment or existential crisis. They flourish with great optimism as they design the future world and its single society. If they run out of pieces of their puzzle to study, they’ll try to track the motion of every atom and electron and quark in the universe. They’ll delight in it.

Knowing all this, we know the terms of the war we are in.

The Central Planners have an equation: “free=uncontrolled=dangerous.”

By the gross terms of that equation, they lump us in with thugs and murderers and terrorists. They even see the normal functioning of the brain as a threat, as an intrinsically defective process, and they have long since decided that organ must be corrected with drugs.

We, on the other hand, must assert, in every way possible, that freedom is real and inviolable, and we must back that up with our actions.

When individual freedom is no longer discussed in great depth by people who should know better, when it is left to wither on the vine, many programs and structures are built to take its place. When freedom is not understood beyond a superficial level, the question, WHAT IS FREEDOM FOR, goes begging.

Of all the criticisms of our education system, this one should be primary. Thomas Jefferson envisioned public education purely as a way to teach children what being a citizen in a Republic meant—because, until the Constitution was enacted, there had never been an experiment in freedom on such a scale. It was a new premise.

Now, in one of our greatest cities, Chicago, people are scrambling to ensure that, during a teacher’s strike, schools can remain open as baby-sitting warehouses for half-days.

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.

Bombshell: 18 people died of the flu, not 36,000

Bombshell: 18 people died of the flu, not 36,000

by Jon Rappoport

September 8, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Time and time again, as an investigative reporter, I’ve had the job of informing readers that their most basic assumptions are wrong.

In the medical arena, this is compounded by public acceptance of lies that seem to be absolute science. However, the “science” turns out to be manufactured delusion. The subject of this article is another such case. It flies in the face of massive propaganda that medical authorities have launched to literally brainwash the population.

The flu season is approaching, and of course we will see the Centers for Disease Control urge all parents to act like good little robots and have the whole family jabbed with flu shots.

The usual warnings and predictions will be trumpeted by the CDC and their compliant media.

The one persistent fact that will be shoved across is: every year in the US, 36,000 people die of the flu. We’ve all read and heard that figure, over and over.

It’s a “necessary” statistic for the CDC. They need to promote it. They need to convince the population that seasonal flu is dangerous.

The American people don’t understand that it’s a lie, a grossly manufactured delusion that bears no resemblance to reality.

In December of 2005, the British Medical Journal (online) published a shocking report by Peter Doshi, which spelled out the delusion and created tremors throughout the halls of the CDC.

Here is a quote from Doshi’s report:

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”

You see, the CDC had created one category that combined flu and pneumonia deaths. Why did they do this? Because they assumed that the pneumonia deaths were complications stemming from the flu.

This is an absurd assumption. Pneumonia has a number of causes. But even worse, in all the flu and pneumonia deaths, only 18 were traced directly to a flu virus.

Therefore, the CDC could not say, with assurance, that more than 18 people died of the flu in 2001.

Doshi continues his assessment of published CDC flu-death statistics: “Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data show an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).”

This is obviously far lower than the parroted 36,000 figure. However, Doshi is only reporting numbers of flu deaths estimated by the CDC in those years. As he showed from the year 2001, the CDC actually finds the flu virus in a tiny proportion of people who are estimated to have died from the flu.

In other words, it’s all guesswork. It’s also promotion and hype.

But the overwhelming percentage of Americans buy the hype because it’s been repeated so often. To them, the idea that only 18 people were positively identified as flu deaths in a year is impossible.

Doshi goes on to mention a 2004 flu vaccine summit held by the CDC and American Medical Association. One of the important speakers at this conference, Glenn Nowak, lectured about generating interest and demand for the flu vaccine.

Nowak said this demand occurs when medical experts and public health authorities “state concern and alarm (and predict dire outcomes)—and urge influenza vaccination…[there should be] continued reports that influenza is causing severe illness and/or affecting lots of people, helping foster the perception that many people are susceptible to a bad case of influenza.”

Repeating the mantra that 36,000 people die every year from the flu is, of course, the key strategy for creating demand for the vaccine.

It’s an entirely false sales pitch. It always has been.

Naturally, many people will rally to the side of the CDC. They will tell you how difficult it can be to actually discover and isolate a flu virus from an ill human being and, therefore, label his death as a flu statistic.

The CDC annual budget hovers around the $10 billion level. With its resources, it can certainly do what’s necessary to determine whether people are dying from the flu or some other cause.

The CDC has been lying through its teeth to the American people about flu deaths. The exposure of that lie has been choked off by the press.

The CDC’s main job is accurately reporting statistics on illness and death. If it can’t perform that function, its duty is to admit it. The reality, however, is that the agency is fatally compromised. It is allied with the pharmaceutical industry, as part of the huge overarching medical cartel. Its reliability is, therefore, zero.

Virtually everything you’ve been told about flu deaths by the US government is unsupported by facts.

Jon Rappoport

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

OBAMA AND ROMNEY ADORE THE THIRD LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH IN AMERICA

OBAMA AND ROMNEY ADORE THE THIRD LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH IN AMERICA

By Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama have done everything they can to bring more people into the US medical system.  Radically changing that system has never occurred to these two clueless politicians.

Like much of America, they accept the cliches and slogans about American medicine.  “It’s the best in the world.”  “People are being denied treatment.”  “We must take care of our citizens.”

How about this accurate slogan: “Let’s force more Americans to die in the care of doctors.”

The American healthcare system, like clockwork, causes a mind-boggling number of deaths every year.

On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, came to the following conclusions:

Every year in the US there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

THAT’S 2.25 MILLION PEOPLE KILLED PER DECADE.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer.

The Starfield study is the most explosive revelation about modern healthcare in America ever published in the mainstream.  The credentials of its author and the journal in which it appeared are, within the highest medical circles, impeccable.

Yet, on the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, although media reporting was extensive, it soon dwindled.  No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation.  Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this mind-boggling situation preferred to ignore it.

On December 6-7, 2009, two years before her death, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email.  Here are excerpts from that interview.

What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it.  He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to [remedy] the effects of the US medical system?

NO.

Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into a untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

Can you offer an opinion about how the FDA can be so mortally wrong about so many drugs?

Yes, it cannot divest itself from vested interests. Again, [there is] a large literature about this, mostly unrecognized by the people because the industry-supported media give it no attention.

Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

Are you sure it was a momentary stir?  I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later!  The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies.  Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated…The US public does not seem to recognize that inappropriate care is dangerous—more does not mean better…Some drugs are downright dangerous; they may be prescribed according to regulations but they are dangerous.

Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

Do the 106,000 deaths from medical drugs only involve drugs prescribed to patients in hospitals, or does this statistic also cover people prescribed drugs who are not in-patients in hospitals?

I tried to include everything in my estimates.  Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs have been added to the marketplace.

Some comments from the interviewer:

Both presidential candidates ignore the truth about the US medical system.  They argue about whose plan is better for bringing more people into this killing machine.  And the major media play along.

There are reports, outside the mainstream, which conclude that far more than 225,000 people in the US die every year as a result of medical treatment.  For example, see the work of Carolyn Dean, Trueman Tuck, Gary Null, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio, Dorothy Smith.

http://www.webdc.com/pdfs/deathbymedicine.pdf

This interview with Dr. Starfield reveals that, even when an author has unassailable credentials within the medical-research establishment, the findings can result in no changes made to the system.

Yes, many persons and organizations within the medical system contribute to the annual death totals of patients, and media silence and public ignorance are certainly major factors, but the FDA is the assigned gatekeeper, when it comes to the safety of medical drugs.  The buck stops there.  If those drugs the FDA is certifying as safe are killing, like clockwork, 106,000 people a year, the Agency must be held accountable.  The American people must understand that.

As for the other 119,000 people killed every year as a result of hospital treatment, this horror has to be laid at the doors of those institutions.  Further, to the degree that hospitals are regulated and financed by state and federal governments, the relevant health agencies assume culpability.

It is astounding, as well, that the US Department of Justice has failed to weigh in on Starfield’s findings.  If 225,000 medically caused deaths per year is not a crime by the Dept. of Justice’s standards, then what is?

To my knowledge, not one person in America has been fired from a job or even censured as result of these medically caused deaths.

Dr. Starfield’s findings have been available for 12 years.  She has changed the perception of the medical landscape forever.  In a half-sane nation, she would be accorded a degree of recognition that would, by comparison, make the considerable list of her awards pale.  And significant and swift action would have been taken to punish the perpetrators of these crimes and reform the system from its foundations.

Nutrition, the cornerstone of good health, is ignored or devalued by most physicians.  Meanwhile, the FDA continues to attack nutritional supplements, even though the overall safety record of these nutrients is superb; whereas, once again, the medical drugs the FDA certifies as safe are killing 106,000 Americans per year.

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies.  These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent.  In other words, the whole literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.

We are talking about crimes on the scale of holocaust and genocide.  Yet, we can hold a presidential election in which neither candidate even mentions the truth.  They sail on into the nominating conventions; they argue about issues on which they basically agree; they play the left-right paradigm like a harp; they practice the art of sounding sincere; they drag us further into a collectivist future in which murderous medical care will be required for all, from cradle to grave.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihm8NwzIZtg&w=480&h=270]

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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

Global society collapsing! Water shortages! Baloney!

by Jon Rappoport

August 30, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

A new study from the Stockholm International Water Institute claims the planet’s fresh water supply is buckling under the weight of population growth.  In 35 years, we’ll all be vegetarians or we’ll go under.  No more cow meat for you, Bubba.  Raising cows uses too much water.  Reach for the soy cakes.

These projections are being trumpeted by the same people who assure us the world is heating up so fast that, if we want to avoid frying, we’d better give Al Gore another Nobel Prize and worship at his feet on the tarmac, as he jets off, spewing toxic fuel behind him, to address another inconvenient conference.

The radical environmentalist stance is: cows are out as human food; find your protein elsewhere.  Better yet, eat no flesh at all.

Fully intending to sidestep an endless debate about which of ten thousand diets are best for the human species, I would merely point out that, when humans enter the zone of protein malnutrition, they function badly and they weaken.  Their thought processes blur.  This suits many governments and elites to a T.  Dictators want debilitated subjects.  (I would also suggest that most soy products, when consumed in extreme amounts, produce toxicity.)

But the answer to the planetary water problem is staring us in the face: desalination.  Turn sea water into fresh water for drinking and irrigation.

In fact, this holy grail of research isn’t a distant dream.  As of 2009, the International Desalination Association stated there were 14,000 desalination plants operating all over the globe.

There are more than a dozen technologies for water conversion, including multistage flash, multiple-effect distillation, vapor compression, reverse osmosis, solar desal, and seawater greenhouse.  In other words, people know how to convert sea water to drinking water.  And new methods are coming online every year.

The problem begins when multiple government agencies get into the act with task forces, reviews, press conferences, committee appointments, more press conferences, drawn-out requests for information, hearings, and further press conferences.

Every petty bureaucrat everywhere has to be allowed to get his/her two cents in, to justify position and salary.  Preferably the two cents are spent before cameras, after suitable time with a make-up artist.

This madness is only matched by corporate bunglers and liars, who seek to build desalination plants in typical corner-cutting fashion.

In Carlsbad, California, the Poseidon Corporation, the Coastal Commission, public utilities, and various environmental groups have been going at each other for a decade.  It’s hard to tell who is more incompetent.  The overriding agenda seems to be: “Listen to me.  I want to talk.”  And this is the just the run-up to deciding whether to build a desalination plant, in order to relieve the growing state water shortage.  Untold millions of words have been spoken and written, and a shovel has yet to break ground.

A reasonable person can isolate the key desalination issues in about an hour.  How much sea life will be killed in the intake pipes that bring ocean water to the factory?  How will the concentrated toxic brine, after processing, be disposed of?  How much energy is required to make fresh water and what will it cost, per cubic foot?  Who will buy the fresh water, and at what price?  How will the water be shipped to customers?

A real leader could command the warring groups to answer these questions truthfully in a timely fashion, while keeping their mouths shut and foregoing braying press conferences.

Of course there are people with agendas who don’t want to solve the problem.  For example, certain environmentalists long for the fresh water supply of the planet to run out, to prove we humans are horrible creatures who don’t deserve to share Mother Earth with zebras and goats and scorpions.

They would be willing to sacrifice a billion or two thirsty people to make their point.  If we can’t survive on roots and tubers and live naked in trees, we should be dead-ended as a species.

Then there are governments who, on “principle,” deny the right of any evil corporation to convert sea water.  Water should be free, which is to say, paid for by taxes.  So it isn’t free at all, but it appears to be a government service donated for humane objectives.  The government needs its PR face time and press conferences, too.

If desalination approaches the point of threatening to solve the planetary water problem, the United Nations will undoubtedly present a plan that insists on a share-and-care approach.  For every cubic foot of water converted in California and shipped to in-state customers, a cubic foot must be delivered to sub-Saharan Africa, at an outrageous price, which will be subsidized by the bankrupt California government.  Otherwise, shut down every desalination plant in the state.  A round of press conferences will explain this thinking.

Public utilities have their own agenda.  They would prefer water-conversion plants utilize electricity from already existing facilities.  They want in on the action.

And of course, to the degree that the federal government cares about desalination as a solution, it will want to create its own agency to oversee a national program, whose m.o. will be: no bureaucratic idiot or piece of red tape or budget dollar left behind.

On the international front, the IMF will have its say (and its press conferences).  Its strategy is: make loans to Third World countries, wait for the countries to default on their repayments, move in, initiate a bailout, on the condition that public utilities must be sold to multinational corporations, who in turn will jack up the price of electricity, gas, and water and drive populations deeper into poverty.  These corporate giants will consider investing in desalination only if their profit margins are through the roof.  Currently, desalination costs don’t yield such profits.

Finally, dyed-in-the-wool heavy-hitter Globalists, who back the most extreme environmental groups, don’t want desalination at all.  It runs counter to their agenda of sowing chaos on a grand scale and then coming in behind that to build their new world.  They don’t want the water to flow.  They prefer dry ashes, out of which their fascist management system will rise, to run planet Earth.

One small and simple solution to all these roadblocks might be enacted in a state like Texas.  An honest start-up company builds a small desalination plant, a pilot project, a showcase, to prove how well and quickly water conversion can go online and succeed.  From inception, ten thousand heavily armed citizens surround the plant and defend it against all incursions.

The tag-line?  Decentralize Power.

Now, those press conferences I would show up for.

We have the water.  We have the technology.  We have the solution.  Don’t believe the prophets of doom.  It turns out they want doom.

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.

HOW THEY CAN BRAINWASH YOU IN A PSYCH WARD

 

HOW THEY CAN BRAINWASH YOU IN A PSYCH WARD

by Jon Rappoport

August 27, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

In the wake of the Batman murders, there is much speculation about what psychiatric drugs James Holmes may have been taking. People are realizing, as never before, the power of these drugs to cause homicidal behavior and damage the brain.

 

In the case of the Marine, Brandon Raub, the “Facebook thought criminal” who was recently held against his will in a lockup and threatened with the drugs, we see how easy it is for the government to kidnap a citizen and subject him to Soviet-style incarceration.

 

Washington’s Blog, linked through infowars, has presented a compelling round-up of the reality of forced psychiatric care in America. It is clear that the federal government, on the vaguest of pretexts, can override state laws and put people in psych wards.

 

http://www.infowars.com/are-people-being-thrown-into-psychiatric-wards-for-their-political-views/

 

In the early 1990s, while researching the extension of the CIA MKULTRA (mind control) program, I had occasion to interview people who had been placed in mental institutions. This article is derived from their testimony, from numerous articles about the horrendous medical torture at two California prisons, Atascadero and Vacaville, and from Jessica Mitford’s landmark 1974 book, Kind and Usual Punishment.

 

The October 9, 1970, issue of Medical World News contained an article, “Scaring the Devil Out,” which revealed the use of a drug called succinylcholine at the Atascadero hospital for the criminally insane, and at the Vacaville Medical Facility. Succinylcholine (and a later drug, prolixin) were administered in a dosage “sufficient to induce general paralysis and respiratory arrest lasting up to two minutes.”

 

In a state of complete terror, the inmates would be lectured to by doctors, who told them they had to change their unacceptable behavior.

 

There is no essential difference between early basic CIA MKULTRA methods and the worst practices of psychiatrists in mental lockups. They both involve: isolation, duress, force, torture, and drugging.

 

There is no mystery about how and why these inhuman methods work. The patient is experiencing intense physical and emotional pain, and his response is often submission and compliance.

 

The patient wants to find out what is expected of him, and he agrees to it. A confession of a crime? Silence about what he knows? An expression of regret for what he has done or what he is accused of doing? A concocted story? He goes along.

 

This is why, for defendants like James Holmes, who is accused of mass murder and whose attorneys want to enter an insanity plea, the period of incarceration, during which he is “examined” to judge whether he is mentally competent, can be a very dangerous time.

 

As with the Arizona shooter, Jarod Loughner, the covert objective of this imprisonment can be the extraction of a guilty plea, which will eventually be entered in court.

 

The psychiatric drugs, particularly the so-called anti-psychotics, are used to put the patient in a state of semi-trance. Not only is he more suggestible and malleable, his brain is undergoing an assault, one effect of which is motor-damage. This is labeled tardive dyskinsia, to cover over the stark reality that the drugs are scrambling brain circuitry, often permanently.

 

Ordinary tranquilizers and sedatives can assist in this Nazi-like program.

 

Sometimes, friendly overtures from “good-guy guards” are used to make patients bond with their handlers, who then enlist patients’ cooperation in telling the right story and sticking to it.

 

Isolation from friends, family, and even lawyers makes the situation worse. The patient has to navigate his own way through a maze, deciding what to agree to and what to resist.

 

Early CIA MKULTRA experiments in the 1950s were not very sophisticated. Hypnosis, drugs, induced disorientation, force, threats, and suggestions were employed to forge “new personalities” for the victims. However, often the true result was simply victim compliance, offered with the hope of escape from the “treatments.”

 

It is the same in psych lockups. Barraged with crippling drugs, cut off from outside communication, the patient cooperates to avoid pain and fear.

 

One patient who had been held in a California psych ward told me: “I never lost track of the truth, but I could see they wanted me to agree with their diagnosis. They said I was a schizophrenic, and although I knew that wasn’t true, I went along after a while. I invented symptoms for the doctors. I played the part. I think they knew what I was doing, but they didn’t care. They just wanted to make sure their diagnosis would stick, so that when I was let out, my parents would be satisfied that I was crazy. That was the whole issue. My parents wanted to get off the hook. They wanted to believe they had never done anything wrong. They wanted to tell their friends I had a disease, schizophrenia, that’s all. I was ‘taking medication’ for it. I was ‘recovering.’”

 

Another patient from a mental lockup in the Midwest said: “They threatened me with electroshock treatments. I had heard how bad that could be. They just shoot electricity into your brain. It causes a seizure. They told me they could never be held responsible for it, because it was legitimate treatment. They said I could either be a very depressed patient who needed the shocks, or I could be a willing witness in a criminal case. I chose the second thing…”

 

He went on to say that, a year or so later, he realized “how much of a daze I had been in from the drugs,” particularly Haldol, a so-called anti-psychotic. “It was like slowly coming out of a blizzard, back into reality.”

 

These incarcerated people are not only placed in lock-up because their parents want to escape criticism, or the police want them to cooperate, or prosecutors want them to plead guilty to a crime. There are political prisoners as well. Law-enforcement agents are trained to believe these people, who speak out against the government, are inevitably holding dark secrets about terror plots.

 

Such a man, who was held for 72 hours after a court order, told me he was given “something like LSD or mescaline. They must have thought it was a truth drug, and I would spill my plans…I didn’t have any plans. I was just upset with the IRS. So I went on a weird trip from the drug. They interrogated me while I was high. I made up stuff. I don’t remember most of it. They were disgusted with what I was saying. I guess it didn’t make much sense. When they let me go, one guy told me they could get me back and give me a much higher dose of the drug, and then I’d be lucky to find my way home…”

 

None of the above touches on some of the worst horrors experienced by long-term mental inmates. Forced sex, frequent high-dose drugs that slam people into a barely coherent state, talk-therapy that degenerates into long hours of interrogation. Such a patient told me that, for a month or so, he actually believed he was “getting the best care in the world.” The interrogation was all about what he would reveal or not reveal about his treatment, if he was released from incarceration. Apparently, in his case, he was considered an experimental subject in a test of unapproved drugs.

 

Then there are the chronic casualties. After their confinement, they don’t have the competence to talk about what happened to them. They are too damaged to speak. In one such case, I was told by the patient’s parents, who were trying to pursue a lawsuit against the hospital, that as far they could tell, their son had received nothing but drugs. He hadn’t been overtly tortured. The drugs alone, which are prescribed by many psychiatrists in out-patient settings every day, had wrought so much destruction that the young man couldn’t finish his sentences or think in a straightforward fashion. He alternated between periods of silence and tantrums.

 

I did find one man who, refusing to talk about what had happened to him during his months in a psych ward, claimed he was a “secret agent for the other side.” This new assertion was contradicted by every available fact. Yet he believed it. He was never prosecuted as a spy. It is possible that he was worked on as part of an MKULTRA experiment, just to see whether this absurd belief could be successfully planted in his mind.

 

We are presented with psychiatry as the epitome of advanced brain science, practiced for the good of humanity. This is a lie. It is a lie in the psychiatrist’s office, and in the mental institution.

 

As I’ve written before, there isn’t a single laboratory test to confirm the diagnosis of any of the 297 officially designated mental disorders. Yet, the drugs given after the diagnoses all carry the high risk of terrible effects on the body and brain. From Adderall and Ritalin to Paxil and Zoloft, from Valproate and Lithium to Haldol and Risperdal, the prescribing doctors are playing with fire.

 

The FDA, who approves these drugs as safe and effective, sits on a mountain of lies and crimes against humanity.

 

We must, at a bare minimum, maintain the inviolable freedom to refuse medication. It is a basic right, and we must protect it.

 

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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

Dear Dallas: No one ever proved West Nile disease exists!

Dear Dallas: No one ever proved West Nile disease exists!

By Jon Rappoport

August 17, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Now that Dallas officials have decided West Nile Disease has killed 14 people in the area and infected 557 more, the aerial spraying of a pesticide called Duet will begin (has begun). The objective? Wipe out mosquitoes that carry the virus.

But here’s the bombshell: there is no evidence that the supposed virus causing West Nile exists. This means there is no proof West Nile disease exists.

And this fact has been known for years. Scientists don’t like to talk about it. It’s extremely embarrassing.

The West Nile virus has never been isolated. “Isolated” means discovered. This is a simple notion. Just as you can ask whether an explorer on a ship, journeying to the tip of South America, ever arrived, you can ask whether researchers ever found the West Nile virus.

The answer is no.

Researchers state the virus in question is 0.04 micrometers. At the same time, they admit that the original fishing expedition for the virus employed filters that were 0.22 micrometers. The obvious conclusion? You cannot assume that whatever was trapped in the filter was West Nile virus. The filter was too porous. It was nearly six times larger than the virus.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=117258&page=4

In fact, Robert McLean, director of the National Wildlife Center of the US Geological Survey, told ABC’s Nick Regush, “We don’t have a purified form of the [West Nile] virus.”

A stunning admission.

The late ABC reporter, Regush, one of the few bright and independent minds in mainstream medical reporting, followed up on McLean’s pronouncement with this: “I find no evidence anywhere in the scientific literature that the rules of virus purification and isolation were thoroughly followed [in the case of the West Nile virus].”

The bottom line? In your search for a new virus, if you don’t purify the material in which you suspect the virus is contained and filter out everything except the virus, and if you don’t finally isolate it, you cannot claim to have located it at all. This is not a mere academic distinction.

Two questions immediately pop up. How are people being diagnosed with West Nile if the virus has never been proved to exist; and what is making people sick if not West Nile?

The answer to the first question is: antibody tests. These extremely unreliable diagnostic tests are indirect. They supposedly show that elements of the patient’s immune system have encountered, in this case, the West Nile virus, in the patient’s body.

But antibody tests can and do register positive for irrelevant reasons. It’s called cross-reaction. The test is pinging positive because other germs or debris in the patient’s blood have caused the sensitive material in the test to respond.

It’s a notorious fact in the case of HIV, for example. In the early 1990s, independent journalist Christine Johnson published a report showing that the HIV test could read falsely positive for 60 reasons—none of them having anything to do with HIV. Other researchers followed suit.

http://www.healtoronto.com/hivtest.html

A patient “testing positive” for West Nile proves absolutely nothing.

As to the second question, there are some good reasons people in the Dallas area are getting sick. These reasons have nothing to do with “West Nile.”

A decade ago, another independent journalist, Jim West, launched an original investigation into the so-called “West Nile epidemic” in New York City.

West Nile Virus: Horse Puckey?
http://www.naturalhorse.com/archive/volume4/Issue6/article_8.php

West correlated clusters of human and bird “West Nile” cases with several factors; among them, nearby polluting oil refineries, other air pollution (certainly exacerbated by hot summer weather), and the presence of toxic MTBE, an additive that makes gasoline in cars burn cleaner.

Citizens of Dallas should take a clue from Jim West’s work and examine their own environment for these factors.

There are listings for at least eight refineries in the Dallas area. There are also reports of increased air pollution coming from natural gas production in the Barnett Shale. The 2012 summer has been hot. As of of the year 2000, Texas refineries were producing 75% of all the MTBE in the United States.

Now that 20 states have banned or reduced use of MTBE, the domestic market has declined. However, there are new horizons for the chemical: China wants it. The Huntsman Corporation, which owns one of the largest MTBE-producing plants in the US, in Texas, has signed a licensing and production agreement with the Chinese chemical company, Yantai Wanhua.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/huntsman-and-yantai-wanhua-polyurethanes-sign-pomtbe-license-agreement-122577543.html

How embarrassing would it be for Huntsman’s burgeoning business if, in its own Texas backyard, MTBE was found to be contributing to illness and death?

Much easier to blame it on a virus that has never been found. And much easier if other Texas sources of air pollution are also let off the hook.

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.

www.nomorefakenews.com

Are black-budget Ops stealing their money from the stock market?

By Jon Rappoport

August 12, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

The Surveillance State has created an apparatus whose implications are staggering. It’s a different world now. And sometimes it takes a writer of fiction to flesh out the larger landscape.

Brad Thor’s new novel, Black List, posits the existence of a monster corporation, ATS, that stands along side the NSA in collecting information on every move we make. ATS’ intelligence-gathering capability is unmatched anywhere in the world.

At his site, www.BradThor.com, the author lists some of the open-source material he discovered that formed the basis for Black List. The material, as well as the novel, is worth reading.

On pages 117-118 of Black List, Thor makes a stunning inference that, on reflection, is as obvious as the fingers on your hand:

“For years ATS had been using its technological superiority to conduct massive insider trading. Since the early 1980s, the company had spied on anyone and everyone in the financial world. They listened in on phone calls, intercepted faxes, and evolved right along with the technology, hacking internal computer networks and e-mail accounts. They created mountains of ‘black dollars’ for themselves, which they washed through various programs they were running under secret contract, far from the prying eyes of financial regulators.

“Those black dollars were invested into hard assets around the world, as well as in the stock market, through sham, offshore corporations. They also funneled the money into reams of promising R&D projects, which eventually would be turned around and sold to the Pentagon or the CIA.

“In short, ATS had created its own license to print money and had assured itself a place beyond examination or reproach.”

In real life, whether the prime criminal source is one monster corporation or a consortium of companies, or elite banks, or the NSA itself, the outcome would be the same.

It would be as Thor describes it.

We think about total surveillance as being directed at private citizens, but the capability has unlimited payoffs when it targets financial markets and the people who have intimate knowledge of them.

“Total security awareness” programs of surveillance are ideal spying ops in the financial arena, designed to suck up millions of bits of inside information, then utilizing them to make investments and suck up billions (trillions?) of dollars.

It gives new meaning to “the rich get richer.”

Taking the overall scheme to another level, consider this: those same heavy hitters who have unfettered access to financial information can also choose, at opportune moments, to expose certain scandals and crimes (not their own, of course).

In this way, they can, at their whim, cripple governments, banks, and corporations. They can cripple investment houses, insurance companies, and hedge funds. Or, alternatively, they can merely blackmail these organizations.

We think we know how scandals are exposed by the press, but actually we don’t. Tips are given to people who give them to other people. Usually, the first clue that starts the ball rolling comes from a source who remains in the shadows.

What we are talking about here is the creation and managing of realities on all sides, including the choice of when and where and how to provide a glimpse of a crime or scandal.

It’s likely that the probe Ron Paul has been pushing—audit the Federal Reserve—has already been done by those who control unlimited global surveillance. They already know far more than any Congressional investigation will uncover. If they know the deepest truths, they can use them to blackmail, manipulate, and control the Fed itself.

The information matrix can be tapped into and plumbed, and it can also be used to dispense choice clusters of data that end up constituting the media reality of painted pictures which, every day, tell billions of people “what’s news.”

In this global-surveillance world, we need to ask new questions and think along different lines now.

For example, how long before the mortgage-derivative crisis hit did the Masters of Surveillance know, from spying on bank records, that insupportable debt was accumulating at a lethal pace? What did they do with that information?

When did they know that at least a trillion dollars was missing from Pentagon accounting books (as Donald Rumsfeld eventually admitted), and what did they do with that information?

Did they discover precisely where the trillion dollars went? Did they discover where billions of dollars, in cash, shipped to post-war Iraq, disappeared to?

When did they know the details of the Libor rate-fixing scandal? Press reports indicate that Barclays was trying to rig interest rates as early as January 2005.

Have they tracked, in detail, the men responsible for recruiting hired mercenaries and terrorists, who eventually wound up in Syria pretending to be an authentic rebel force?

Have they discovered the truth about how close or how far away Iran is from producing a nuclear weapon?

Have they collected detailed accounts of the most private plans of Bilderberg, CFR, and Trilateral Commission leaders?

For global surveillance kings, what we think of as the future is, in many respects the present and the past.

It’s a new world. These overseers of universal information-detection can enter and probe the most secret caches of data, collect, collate, cross reference, and assemble them into vital bottom-lines. By comparison, an operation like Wikileaks is an old Model-T Ford puttering down a country road, and Julian Assange, reviled as a terrorist, is a mere piker.

Previously, we thought we needed to look over the shoulders of the men who were committing major crimes out of public view. But now, if we want to be up to date, we also have to factor in the men who are spying on those criminals, who are gathering up those secrets and using them to commit their own brand of meta-crime.

And in the financial arena, that means we think of Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan as perpetrators, yes, but we also think about the men who already know everything about GS and Morgan, and are using this knowledge to steal sums that might make GS and Morgan blush with envy.

Exit From the Matrix

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Martial law shakes hands with the US vaccine program

by Jon Rappoport

August 1, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

Who knew the Pentagon had muscled into the US vaccine program?

DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) has been doing research on vaccine production. They’ve found a way to produce flu vaccines a lot faster than Big Pharma.

DARPA Effort Speeds Biothreat Response (Nov. 2, 2010, by Cheryl Pellerin, American Forces Press Service)

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=61520

DARPA’s Blue Angel – Pentagon prepares millions of vaccines against future global flu (28 July, 2012, RT.com)

http://rt.com/usa/news/future-vaccine-darpa-research-255/

Utilizing vaccines grown on tobacco cells, instead of the traditional chicken eggs, DARPA has turned out a staggering 10 million doses of flu vaccine in just one month.

This “Blue Angel” project, as it’s called, suddenly puts the Pentagon in the forefront of the vaccine business. The big question is: why is the Army involved in vaccines at all? And the answer is no surprise. According to DARPA, it’s all about readiness in containing bio-threats. Translated, that means terrorist attacks that could use flu viruses.

This is a sinister development. It creates a potential scenario in which the military can invent the “bio-threat” and then step in and provide the solution. It doesn’t really matter whether the bio-threat is real or imaginary.

The threat would offer the chance to initiate a martial-law scenario, after which the military vaccine would be made mandatory, destroying the right of each state in the union to permit, as is now the case, people to opt out of vaccination on religious, medical, or ethical grounds.

The Pentagon is famous for developing weapons and then lobbying for battlefield opportunities to use them. This is part and parcel of their “war is forever” mentality. Well, in this case, the vaccine becomes the defensive weapon, and you can be sure the Pentagon will strive to deploy it in a situation that “demands it”—a chilling prospect.

Several medical issues arise as well. First, what safety tests have been done to ensure that tobacco viruses don’t enter these DARPA vaccines through lab contamination, thereby finding their way into the human bloodstream, via injection, and causing uncharted health problems? No word about that, just as there was no word, historically, about various Pentagon weapons systems that later proved to be dangerous to the soldiers using them (e.g, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle).

Hidden in the story about the new means of vaccine production: the employment of a synthetic construction that is supposed to mimic the human immune system. To test the ability of the tobacco-vaccines to induce a “robust immune response,” this new chemical lab-version of an immune system becomes the guinea pig. But there is no proof that such an artifact works or is translatable to actual processes of the human body.

Finally, DARPA states that the vaccine it just produced contains aluminum. Toxicity for humans is thus guaranteed.

In the hands of the Pentagon, what could possibly go wrong with this Blue Angel program? Everything.

In case we need to review the most recent “epidemic” advertised by the CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO), it killed, by the most generous estimates, 20,000 people worldwide. Despite being labeled a catastrophic level-6 pandemic, the H1N1 Swine Flu turned out to be a comparative dud. WHO states that, every year, seasonal non-pandemic flu kills between 250,000 and 500,000 people.

The CDC and WHO relentlessly promoted Swine Flu as a monster menace that could invade and decimate the planet. Therefore, everyone needed to step up and take the vaccine. These civilian agencies are mere pikers compared to the Pentagon. Can you imagine what the Dept. of Defense would promote and launch to guarantee their vaccine finds a place in your bloodstream? The DOD regularly makes conflict of interest into an art form.

Martial law? No problem.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Jon Rappoport

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