Category Archives: Government Fraud

OBAMACAREIFICATION

 

OBAMACAREIFICATION

NOTES ON THE BUILDING CRISIS

by Jon Rappoport

July 3, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

My recent notes are burgeoning. Here they are…

 

Yes, the nullification of Obamacare is possible. The states can do it. Several state governments (e.g., Missouri and Louisiana) are trying to move in that direction.

 

The 10th Amendment Center works toward nullification of federal law that violates the Reserve Clause of the Constitution (powers not specifically enumerated as federal are reserved for the states and the people).

 

You can volunteer and help them.

 

The idea isn’t to parse sections of Obamacare and keep certain clauses. The goal is to throw the whole 2000-page stinking mess in the ocean.

 

Volunteer for the 10th Amendment Center. If you don’t like them, start your own nullification group.

 

Nothing in the Constitution gave the federal gov the power to create a national health insurance program. It’s illegal. The Supreme Court is thinking and deciding within an already bloated grotesque horrific distorted federal fungus.

 

Violating the 10th Amendment once or twice? Okay, mistakes. The central government violating it hundreds of times, thousands of times? Then you have a criminal organization posing as a legitimate constitutional authority. Justice Roberts was simply continuing a grand Mafia tradition.

 

Was Roberts brain-addled by his use of anti-epilepsy medication? Was he blackmailed? Threatened? Was he scared of the public reaction to a ruling against Obamacare? Was he trying to “preserve the reputation of the High Court?” He’s just another functionary of the Mob. A water carrier.

 

When the Constitution was written and ratified, it was the States (former Colonies) who ceded certain powers to the new federal government. The conditions of that compromise have been smashed over and over. The States taking back power and nullifying federal laws is not only legal, it’s required.

 

But the States accept payoffs. Bagmen from Washington deliver $$ to the States every day. Grants. Pork. In return, the Mafia leaders in the nation’s capitol demand acquiescence. In other words, the States are complicit. They’re criminal organizations, too.

 

It’s no accident, for example, that Obama, the current puppet front man for the Mob, was heavily supported by Goldman Sachs in his 2008 campaign for president. If you look at the debt accumulated by the State of California, you’ll discover that continued State borrowing has been underwritten (repayment guaranteed) by Goldman Sachs. GS plays the game at all levels. If California dared to start nullifying federal laws, GS would hold some heavy private meetings with State officials.

 

“Look, Governor Puppet, if you try nullification, you’re essentially saying you don’t want to accept federal payoffs anymore, and that’s not permitted. GS underwrites your debt because we know money keeps flowing into the California state government. Get it?”

 

So no, nullification isn’t an easy road. But if enormous pressure were exerted by regular people, things could get very interesting.

 

State governors are important lieutenants in the Washington DC Mob operation. They receive federal $$ and they’re expected to perform. Which means maintaining their State’s status as a sub-department of the central government. When governors act up and defy Washington, people get a little nervous.

 

If you’re familiar with The Godfather film saga, at first glance it might seem as if Obama and Romney are the Corleone and Barzini crime families, dueling it out. But Obama and Romney are PR agents for these families, who in turn are both controlled at a distance by Hyman Roth. When Roth is killed, there is someone else to take his place. The vacuum is filled.

 

Roth is a front for huge banks, who essentially invent money out of thin air. When the Great Depression of 1929 was engineered, about 1500 private currencies were invented in America. Communities got together, looked around and saw that they possessed resources that were independent of Washington’s pronouncements of bankruptcy and money troubles.

 

There are a number of private money systems operating in the US right now. You might like to start one. Check into Ithaca Hours. It’s been around for years. Any of these private currencies can be adapted to your needs and objectives.

 

DON’T VOTE FOR PRESIDENT IN 2012 needs a push. I’m sure some of you know how to use Photoshop. Make up some posters and post them online. Put together a whole string of posters and assemble a video and throw it on YouTube or Vimeo.

 

If you haven’t already, go to www.youtube.com/jonrappoport and take a look at our animated videos, parts 1 and 2, of the Obama-Romney debates.

 

Obamacare and one drug and one invented “mental disorder” — a case study to think about:

Recent reports that ADHD diagnoses are increasing in the US (along with prescriptions for Ritalin) illustrate one small aspect of Obamacare as it moves up the road into the future. Conditions like ADHD will eventually gain the power of mandatory assessments—in the sense that parents will be forced to accept them AND the toxic drugs for their children. Coercion is, in fact, the whole point of Obamacare, as it evolves.

So here is some very relevant information on ADHD and Ritalin.

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

. Paranoid delusions
· Paranoid psychosis
· Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
· Activation of psychotic symptoms
· Toxic psychosis
· Visual hallucinations
· Auditory hallucinations
· Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
· Effects pathological thought processes
· Extreme withdrawal
· Terrified affect
· Started screaming
· Aggressiveness
· Insomnia
· Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
· Psychic dependence
· High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
· Decreased REM sleep
· When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
· Convulsions
· Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Many parents around the country have discovered that Ritalin has become a condition for their children continuing in school. There are even reports, by parents, of threats from social agencies: “If you don’t allow us to prescribe Ritalin for your ADD child, we may decide that you are an unfit parent. We may decide to take your child away.”

This mind-boggling state of affairs is fueled by teachers, principals, and school counselors, none of whom have medical training. Yet even if they did…

The very definition of the “illness” for which Ritalin is prescribed is in doubt (is completely bogus), especially at the highest levels of the medical profession. This doubt, however, has not filtered down to most public schools.

In commenting on Dr. Lawrence Diller’s book, Running on Ritalin, Dr. William Carey, Director of Behavioral Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, has written, “Dr. Diller has correctly described… the disturbing trend of blaming children’s social, behavioral, and academic performance problems entirely on an unproven brain deficit [ADHD]…”

On November 16-18, 1998, the National Institute of Mental Health held the prestigious “NIH Consensus Development Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD].” The conference was explicitly aimed at ending all debate about the diagnoses of ADD, ADHD, and about the prescription of Ritalin. It was hoped that at the highest levels of medical research and bureaucracy, a clear position would be taken: this is what ADHD is, this is where it comes from, and these are the drugs it should be treated with. That didn’t happen, amazingly. Instead, the official panel responsible for drawing conclusions from the conference threw cold water on the whole attempt to reach a comfortable consensus.

Panel member Mark Vonnegut, a Massachusetts pediatrician, said, “The diagnosis [of ADHD] is a mess.”

The panel essentially said it was not sure ADHD was even a “valid” diagnosis. In other words, ADD and ADHD might be nothing more than attempts to categorize certain children’s behaviors – with no organic cause, no clear-cut biological basis, no provable reason for even using the ADD or ADHD labels.

The panel found “no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction [which malfunction had been the whole psychiatric assumption].”

The panel found that Ritalin has not been shown to have long-term benefits. In fact, the panel stated that Ritalin has resulted in “little improvement on academic achievement or social skills.”

Panel chairman, David Kupfer, professor of psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh, said, “There is no current validated diagnostic test [for ADHD].”

Yet at every level of public education in America, there remains what can only be called a voracious desire to give children Ritalin (or other similar drugs) for ADD or ADHD.

The 1994 Textbook of Psychiatry, published by the American Psychiatric Press, contains this review (Popper and Steingard): “Stimulants [such as Ritalin] do not produce lasting improvements in aggressivity, conduct disorder, criminality, education achievement, job functioning, marital relationships, or long-term adjustment.”

Parents should also wake up to the fact that, in the aftermath of the Littleton, Colorado, school-shooting tragedy, pundits and doctors began urging much more extensive “mental health” services for children. Whether you have noticed it or not, this no longer means, for the most part, therapy with a caring professional. It means drugs. Drugs like Ritalin.

In December 1996, the US Drug Enforcement Agency held a conference on ADHD and Ritalin. Surprisingly, it issued a sensible statement about drugs being a bad substitute for the presence of caring parents: “[T]he use of stimulants [such as Ritalin] for the short-term improvement of behavior and underachievement may be thwarting efforts to address the children’s real issues, both on an individual and societal level. The lack of long-term positive results with the use of stimulants and the specter of previous and potential stimulant abuse epidemics, give cause to worry about the future. The dramatic increase in the use of methylphenidate [Ritalin] in the 1990s should be viewed as a marker or warning to society about the problems children are having and how we view and address them.”

In his book, Talking Back to Ritalin, Dr. Peter Breggin expands on the drug’s effects: “Stimulants such as Ritalin and amphetamine… have grossly harmful impacts on the brain — reducing overall blood flow, disturbing glucose metabolism, and possibly causing permanent shrinkage or atrophy of the brain.”

In the American press, although many articles have appeared covering “the debate” about Ritalin and ADHD, no newspaper or TV network has taken it upon itself to hammer on all the lies, day after day, month after month. That kind of campaign could turn around the whole nation on this vital subject—but of course, pharmaceutical advertising is a more powerful force.

And one should not forget that Ritalin came out of a Swiss drug giant called Ciba Geigy (now Novartis) fifty years ago. That company once had very close business ties with the infamous Nazi cartel, IG Farben. Farben stood for inhuman experiments on human beings. Read the adverse effects of Ritalin again, and consider that millions of little kids take those pills every day.

So that’s just one drug and one invented “mental disorder.” The whole vector of Obamacare is to cement in these diagnoses and false diseases and toxic drugs, for both psychiatric and ordinary physical problems. This is the op. List and label all the official diseases and disorders, and then the permitted (toxic) drugs to treat them, and then put everybody in that cage and hammer them from cradle to grave.

When I say cradle, I mean it. In 2010, US doctors dispensed 358,000 prescriptions for Prevacid, for babies under one year of age, for “acid reflux.” This, despite the fact there are no studies that show the drug is useful in babies that young, and despite the fact that the drug can cause severe stomach problems and pneumonia. And Australia has now started screening kids as young as three for “mental illnesses.”

This is the Nazi program reborn. It’s nothing short of that.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

LET US SING OF THE OBAMACARE RELIGION!

LET US SING OF THE OBAMACARE RELIGION!

by Jon Rappoport

July 1, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Many people swoon for Obamacare:

O profound surpassing beauty, surpassing justice.

O universal healthcare, merely the IDEA of it…a force so strong it sweeps away all objections like a storm from the heavens.

O notion of universal healing…undeniably good; therefore, the program to enact it must be good. It will work. It will signal deliverance from pain. The future will confirm that.

O because the IDEA is good, the noble essence will eventually shine through. All will be served in the unfolding.

O this is more than law. It is an expression of the collective soul of humanity, and therefore it will bear fruit.

And O those who oppose the Plan are straying from the righteous path. They are exiled from The Group Mind.

Amen.

Okay. There are millions of people who are convinced that a transforming Event is on the horizon. Its arrival will revolutionize life on planet Earth. The Change will be Good.

Possessed of that mindset, these people search for clues and signs. In Obamacare, they find one of those clues. It’s a little piece of heaven. It embodies faith, hope, and charity. It speaks to our better nature.

The facts don’t matter. How Obamacare will actually play out doesn’t matter. It only matters that these millions of acolytes can hear music and choirs.

Ever since an unknown Obama took the stage at the 2004 Democratic Convention, to deliver the keynote address, he has been imparting religious lingo, intoning religious rhythm, embodying the persona of the prophet and the healer of wounds.

That has been his shtick. His healthcare plan was and is a sub-category of his religious approach to “the downtrodden of the world.”

Who cares about the unpleasant fact that the US medical system kills 225,000 people a year? Who cares that the medical system is the third leading cause of death in America? Who cares that Obama’s lambs are being led to the slaughter?

This is RELIGION, which rises above such nasty inconveniences.

This is HOPE, TRANSFORMATION, and RESURRECTION in the doctor’s office.

Finally, “Americans who really care” have something to be proud of.

That’s the important thing, isn’t it? Why quibble about the difference between hope and false hope? Why worry about who is selling and who is being sold out?

I don’t know whether, in the fullness of time, pharmaceutical companies will erect a statue to Obama, but they certainly should, because their bottom-line abundance has just multiplied like sheaves of wheat.

Staying with agricultural metaphor for a moment, the dumbed-down chickens of our educational system are coming home to roost. Vapid cliches and stereotypes are clucking gloriously in the sun:

TREATMENT NEEDS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ALL.

NO ONE SHOULD BE DENIED HEALING.

JUSTICE MUST RING OUT ACROSS THE LAND.

EVERYONE HAS A SACRED RIGHT TO A DOCTOR.

These are chapter headings in the new bible of medicine.

And people respond! They respond! They don’t comprehend the devastating effects of the medical cartel on human life, and they don’t want to comprehend them. The truth would disturb their reverie and their joy.

It would interrupt the organ music and the stately progression of adverse drug effects all the way to the funeral and the grave.

Leave us alone! We want hope and medicine! We want our fairy tales!

On a final practical note, because I don’t care to devote a whole article to the subject, the little shell game the US Supreme Court played the other day should make judges across the land want to burn their robes.

If people won’t buy Obamacare, they pay a penalty. But no, it’s not a penalty, because that would be unconstitutional. So let’s call it a tax. Let’s say you can now be taxed for NOT buying something.

Fom this day forward, the government can come after you on a brand-new basis: because you didn’t make a purchase you should have made.

“Sir, are you telling me you don’t want this Chevy Volt? It runs like a dream, although the dream can rapidly turn into a nightmare. But we all need to praise the Volt. It will add to the car’s sense of self-esteem, and as we all know, self-esteem builds performance. Making the Volt run well, without horrible problems, DEPENDS on the amount of praise we can heap on it. Therefore, if you don’t buy it, we will tax you. Sir, we’re not just talking about the sticker price, we’re talking about avoiding the “non-purchase tax” on top of the sticker price. You really need to think this through. Pay the tax and get nothing, or pay the sticker price and get the car. It’s up to you. If you walk out of the showroom without the Volt, when you get home an IRS agent will be waiting on your doorstep.”

I’m sure this has old-time religious parallels.

Donate generously to the Roman Church or go to Hell is one I can think of off the top of my head.

And if we want to extend the comparison to torture (bringing in The Inquisition), we have examples. I give you one now. It is not an isolated case. It is not something that only rarely happens in the US medical system. It is quite instructive, vis-a-vis medical destruction.

Take the case described by psychiatrist, Peter Breggin, in his landmark 1991 classic, “Toxic Psychiatry: Why Therapy, Empathy and Love Must Replace the Drugs, Electroshock, and Biochemical Theories of the ‘New Psychiatry'”. A young patient, Roberta, had been treated with a host of so-called major tranquilizers [AKA neuroleptics]. Peer-reviewed published studies support the use of these drugs: Haldol, Mellaril, Prolixin, Thorazine.

Breggin writes: “Roberta was a college student, getting good grades, mostly A’s, when she first became depressed and sought psychiatric help at the recommendation of her university health service. She was eighteen at the time, bright and well motivated, and a very good candidate for psychotherapy. She was going through a sophomore-year identity crisis about dating men, succeeding in school, and planning a future. She could have thrived with a sensitive therapist who had an awareness of women’s issues.

“Instead of moral support and insight, her doctor gave her Haldol. Over the next four years, six different physicians watched her deteriorate neurologically without warning her or her family about tardive dyskinesia [motor brain damage] and without making the [tardive dyskinesia] diagnosis, even when she was overtly twitching in her arms and legs. Instead they switched her from one neuroleptic to another, including Navane, Stelazine, and Thorazine. Eventually a rehabilitation therapist became concerned enough to send her to a general physician, who made the diagnosis [of medical drug damage]. By then she was permanently physically disabled, with a loss of 30 percent of her IQ.

“…my medical evaluation described her condition: Roberta is a grossly disfigured and severely disabled human being who can no longer control her body. She suffers from extreme writhing movements and spasms involving the face, head, neck, shoulders, limbs, extremities, torso, and back—nearly the entire body. She had difficulty standing, sitting, or lying down, and the difficulties worsen as she attempts to carry out voluntary actions. At one point she could not prevent her head from banging against nearby furniture. She could hold a cup to her lip only with great difficulty. Even her respiratory movements are seriously afflicted so that her speech comes out in grunts and gasps amid spasms of her respiratory muscles…Roberta may improve somewhat after several months off the neuroleptic drugs, but she will never again have anything remotely resembling a normal life.”

Oh, this could never happen. Oh, this is impossible.

Not only did it happen, it happens far more frequently than we imagine. The press does not cover it. The press is the PR arm of the secular medical religion, and Obamacare, bringing millions more people into the fold, is the new staircase into 225,000 deaths a year, 2.25 million deaths per decade, two million severe adverse drug reactions per year, 20 million severe reactions per decade.

But those figures illuminate the old church. The new church will be far bigger and therefore far more punishing.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Another smoking gun: the FDA vs. the American people

Another smoking gun: the FDA vs. the American people!

By Jon Rappoport

June 12, 2012

Breaking News: Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

If you worked for a federal agency that was killing people at the rate of 100,000 a year, every year, like clockwork, and if you knew it, wouldn’t you feel compelled to say or do something about it?

At the FDA, which is, in fact, killing Americans at that rate, no one has ever felt the need to step forward and speak up.

Let’s shift the venue and ask the same question. If you were a medical reporter for a major media outlet in the US, and you knew the above fact, wouldn’t you make it a priority to say something, write something, do something?

I’m talking about people like Sanjay Gupta (CNN, CBS), Gina Kolata (NY Times), Tim Johnson (ABC News), and Thomas Maugh II (LA Times).

And with that, let’s get to the latest smoking gun. The citation is: BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989). Author, Jeanne Lenzer. (See http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e3989).

Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices: “It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

The report called this “one of the most significant perils to humans resulting from human activity.”

And here is the final dagger. The report was compiled by outside researchers who went into the FDA’s own database of “serious adverse [medical-drug] events.”

Therefore, to say the FDA isn’t aware of this finding would be absurd. The FDA knows. The FDA knows and it isn’t saying anything about it, because THE FDA CERTIFIES, AS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE, ALL THE DRUGS THAT ARE ROUTINELY MAIMING AND KILLING AMERICANS.

Previously, I have documented that the FDA knows, because the FDA has a page on its own website that admits 100,000 people are killed every year by medical drugs, and two million more people are severely injured by the drugs. (Google “FDA Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions” or click here to be taken directly to the FDA page in question).

And for the past five years or so, I have been writing about and citing a published report by the late Dr. Barbara Starfield that indicates 106,000 people in the US are killed by medical drugs every year. Until her death last year, Dr. Starfield worked at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. Her report, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, was published in the Journal of American Medical Association on July 26, 2000.

Since the Department of Homeland Security is working its way into every nook and corner of American life, hyper-extending its mandate to protect all of us from everything, why shouldn’t I go along with Janet Napolitano’s advice: SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING.

This is what I see and this is what I’m saying. Maybe DHS would like to investigate the FDA as a terrorist organization.

How many smoking guns do we need before a sitting president shuts down the FDA buildings, fumigates the place, and prosecutes very large numbers of FDA employees?

Do we need 100,000 smoking guns? Do we need relatives of the people who’ve all died, in the span of merely a year, from the poisonous effects of FDA-approved medical drugs, to bring their corpses to the doors of FDA headquarters?

And let me ask another question. If instead of drugs like warfarin, dabigatran, levofloxacin, carboplatin, and lisinopril (the five leading killers in the FDA database), the 100,000 deaths per year were led by gingko, ginseng, vitamin D, niacin, and raw milk, what do you think would happen?

I’ll tell you what would happen. SEALS, Delta Force, SWAT teams, snipers, predator drones, tanks, and infantry would be attacking every health-food store in America. The resulting fatalities would be written off as necessary collateral damage in the fight to keep America safe and healthy.

But you see, the routine deaths of 100,000 Americans a year, after the FDA has certified the drugs are SAFE, isn’t a recognized political issue. It doesn’t play in a debate between Romney and Obama. It isn’t perceived as a left-versus-right, liberal-versus-conservative topic.

Such is the power of the medical cartel. All those phony stories in the press, reported dutifully by so-called medical reporters? The stories about maybe-could-be-possible-miracle breakthroughs just over the horizon of state-of-the-art research? Those stories are there to obscure the very, very hard facts of medically-caused death on the ground.

The buck stops at the FDA.

Except in the real world, it doesn’t. Which tells you something about the so-called real world and how much of it is composed of propaganda.

Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy, once said to me, “Find a truly explosive hidden fact and put it in front of a person’s eyes, hold it there, and see what happens. The person will go blank. He’ll go blank because on a barely conscious level, he’s rapidly calculating how many deceptions he’s swallowed about all sorts of related subjects. Then he’ll blink and tell you what you just showed him is impossible…”

I would add: after he says it’s impossible, he’ll actually make excuses for the perpetrator of the crime you’ve just exposed. He’ll give you a dozens reasons to let the perpetrator off the hook. He’ll really warm up to the perpetrator and say he’s a wonderful human being. He’ll spin gossamer and rainbows from here to the moon.

It’s quite something to behold. But here is the situation. No medical drug in the US can be released for public use unless and until the FDA says it is safe and effective. That’s the rule. Therefore, if the FDA is spitting out drug approvals month after month and year after year, and if the drugs are routinely killing 100,000 people a year and maiming two million more, which adds up to a million deaths per decade and 20 million maimings per decade, and if the FDA and the federal government are doing nothing about it, even though they know what’s going on, then you have a holocaust. Murder. Not accidental death. Murder.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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.

IS RON PAUL FINISHED ON THE NATIONAL STAGE?

 

IS RON PAUL FINISHED ON THE NATIONAL STAGE?

by Jon Rappoport

June 11, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

Last week, Ron Paul announced he had lost his battle for the nomination. He urged his troops not to disrupt the Republican Party machinery in Tampa at the convention. In a coordinated declaration, his son, Senator Rand Paul, endorsed Obama’s twin, Romney, for president.

 

This has caused an explosion in the ranks of Ron’s supporters, Tea Parties, other Constitutionalists, and people who prize individual freedom and also vote. That’s a lot of people.

 

But was Ron ever intending to re-shape the Republican Party? Was that his proactive goal? Was he campaigning to win the nomination and become the titular head of the Republican Party and call the shots? Was he truly working to become the next president? Was he striving all-out to clean out corruption in Washington? Those are all heavy objectives.

 

Most importantly, when it surfaced there was the possibility he had actually won the Primaries in the first several states and had been robbed by his own Party; and when, much later, his campaign workers were going into states where delegates weren’t legally bound to vote for the announced Primary winner and grabbing off those delegates, did Ron come out and say, YES, LET’S DO IT, LET’S RECLAIM THE STATES THAT ARE OURS AND LET’S UPSET THE WHOLE APPLECART? DID HE? DID HE STAGE AN ALL-OUT REVOLT? DID HE SAY THE MAJOR POLITICAL PARTIES ARE ONE BODY WITH TWO HEADS? DID HE LEAD THE CHARGE FOR A PALACE REVOLUTION?

 

Was that his goal?

 

We saw no real evidence of it.

 

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT0TQSZhwfM&w=415&h=241]

 

Unless Ron comes out now and makes a tremendously convincing speech that explains his current position and reaffirms his underlying values, his political career on the national stage is finished. And if he imagines his son, Rand, who has just sold out by endorsing Romney, can take up the sword of the father in the future, he’s delusional. In one day, Ron has ditched his own political career and his familial legacy.

 

By 2008, Ron Paul had enough cache to start a run at the presidency on his own terms as an Independent, but he didn’t do it. He would have blown apart his status as a (barely) mainstream voice, but so what? Was there ever a chance the GOP establishment and its media allies would have permitted him to gain the Party’s nomination for president?

 

Running as an Independent is a different game. You’re no longer “a lone voice in the wilderness” of the two-Party system, because you have stepped outside the system. Something more is required of you. In this day and age of Internet access, you need to reach out for every inch and minute of space and time you can get online. You are supposed to stand strong and establish your beachhead and state your claim to, yes, power. The power to make real, not phony change happen.

 

Is this Ron Paul? Or has Ron decided that he has to shape his son’s future within the framework of the Republican Party?

 

Is Ron ready, as an Independent, to take the slings and arrows that would be shot his way by those who claim he’d be handing the presidency over to Obama by splitting his own Party’s vote?

 

The Republicans now have their ducks in a row for the convention. There are no candidates who are holding out. (Ron’s supporters could make some serious noise at the convention on their own, of course.) But the GOP has taken out its last symbol of opposition.

 

Think about this. Ron and Rand could have kept their mouths shut between now and Romney’s nomination. They could thus have given the impression of being “beautiful losers” and retained their base. But something intervened. Was that something Rand’s political future? Were the Pauls, father and son, told by GOP operatives that Rand would be blackballed and shut out of the Party forever if he didn’t climb on board and prove that he was a good Party man? Was that it?

 

Is membership in the Club now the overriding factor for Rand? And, therefore, for his father?

 

Months ago, someone from the Ron Paul camp gave (and/or sold) the very valuable and large list of its supporters to the GOP, a list that is worth millions of dollars. Whether Ron knew it at the time, he certainly found out. Did he come forward and speak up and fire people? Did he publicly say this was a betrayal of his campaign? No.

 

If Ron Paul wants his voice to mean something from this point on, he would need to leave his Party and run as an Independent. So far, there is no inkling that is in the cards.

 

I know a little about electoral politics. In 1994, I ran for a seat in the US Congress, from the 29th District of California, which was overwhelmingly Democrat and had elected Henry Waxman to the seat for 20 years. I decided I had no chance as an Independent or a Republican. My only shot was to go up against Waxman in the Democratic Primary. As a Democrat.

 

That was a mistake. The true path would have been as an Independent.

 

It always is, in this landscape.

 

Aside from the obvious insanity of trying to convince Democrats that, for example, the 2nd Amendment is a key and vital fact of life, running within the two-Party framework allows voters to think, in their sleeping state, that you somehow represent interests and ideas that fall within the mainstream, you believe answers lie within the fundamentally corrupt framework of the One Party With Two Heads, you are in the same space and time Democrats and Republicans occupy.

 

Which is not true, if you are really an Independent.

 

By the end of my campaign in 1994, and about to lose to Waxman and witness what I would decide was vote-count fraud, my position had radicalized to the point where my main ambition—if I won—was to go to Washington and hire large trucks that would circulate the city every day all day. On the sides of these trucks we would place huge posters titled:

 

CORRUPT CONGRESSMAN OF THE WEEK.

 

Below the name and photo of the “winner” of the week, we would list his key conflicts of interest, his sources of funding and his votes magically aligned with those monies.

 

I’m sure we would have thought up even more enjoyable torpedo-efforts.

 

I had come to the conclusion that the whole political system of the country was terminally rotten, corrupt, deceptive, and sold out, and therefore the duty of any elected official, first and foremost, was to expose that corruption in specific detail.

 

I had become an Independent.

 

If you listen to mainstream voices, everything outside the mainstream is impossible. That’s the message. It’s sometimes calculated and sometimes reflexive, but the gist of the message is: stay in the system.

 

But a lie is lie. A con is a con. A piece of crap is a piece of crap. A delusion is a delusion. It doesn’t matter where it’s sold or who sells it.

 

In the political arena, one has the option of nurturing the disappointment that comes with watching an idol fall, of cultivating a despair that looks like innocence-lost, until it becomes a pool of ugly misery. There is that option.

 

Or one can find roads to walk where the fallen do not go.

 

A little history is instructive here. In 1976 and 1980, Ron Paul supported Ronald Reagan. But after seeing that Reagan’s budget was leaking a huge deficit, Paul criticized Reagan heavily and eventually resigned from the Republican Party and ran for president in 1988 on the Libertarian Party ticket. So he has, in fact, been willing to leave the Republican orbit.

 

In 2008, after ending his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, Ron refused to endorse John McCain. He told his people to vote for any of the third-party candidates: Cynthia McKinney, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, or Ralph Nader. Eventually, Ron decided to support Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate. So Ron has been willing, after dropping out of the Republican presidential race, to withhold support for the eventual Republican nominee.

 

What about now? Because his senator son Rand has closed ranks with the Republican Party, will Ron refuse to endorse a third-party candidate? Will he simply remain mum on the subject of Romney?

 

This is 2012. The sheer volume of online communication is far greater than in 2008. There are many more people who are fed up with the perverted de facto political system America is operating under. It’s much harder to remain silent. Ron Paul needs to say something, and soon.

 

As hard as this may be to swallow, the best option for freedom may be to not vote at all. Every person who values freedom and knows what it is has to ask himself this practical question: are we closer to electing a president who is truly independent, who will go into the White House and lay waste to the criminal insanity that has become American politics, or are we closer to recording new drastic levels of non-participation in the vote for president? Of these two long shots, which is longer? I know my position. It has been the same since 1994. Don’t vote for president. Make the election a farce, if possible, by revealing that we refuse to condone business as usual.

 

I realize this goes against every impulse to take action for positive change. Abstention is not a strategy I employ in any other area. But when the presidency of the United States is so heavily controlled, vetted, and filtered, when every president who gets access to the Oval Office has had to agree to a philosophy of globalism, with all that it implies, we need to open our eyes and see the truth.

 

The people of the United States are, as usual, being whipsawed between two ridiculous alternatives. Every four years, this happens by design. Stir up the hatreds and the rancor, make it appear that a new face is the answer, pin hope on Hope, vote for a better day, pick a leader who will take us to the promised land.

 

This con game has been operating since the dawn of time, wherever and whenever the people have had a choice. Do we need to keep falling for it until the whole planet is structured under one roof, until we’ve sold freedom all the way to the end of the line, because we think we see a Daddy we can believe in?

 

The only answer to this eternal dilemma is decentralization of power along every possible front.

 

Update: Infowars is reporting that Jack Hunter has posted a video (entitled: “Why Rand Was Right to Endorse Romney”) on Ron Paul’s campaign site explaining why Rand Paul needs to endorse Romney: if Rand runs for president in 2016, he’ll have zero Republican support if he doesn’t get behind Romney now. This is more delusional thinking. It’s postponement of principle now on behalf of invoking principle later. And it works about as well as wearing a sign on your chest that says: I’M LYING.

 

“Well, yes, I’m endorsing Romney, even though I don’t support him. I don’t support him at all. I think he’s a miserable excuse for a presidential candidate. But I’m endorsing him, because I want to run for president myself later. I’m sure all you Republican stalwarts will support me later, after my completely disingenuous support of your man Romney now. Right?”

 

I don’t know whether Ron Paul’s people vetted this Jack Hunter video before posting it, or whether this is really Rand’s strategy, but are Ron and Rand’s operatives trying to commit political suicide? If so, they’re doing a pretty good job.

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

A Staged Bioterror Attack

Clues to look for when determining if a bioterror event has been staged or not

by Jon Rappoport

June 10, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

There are certain future scenarios which, with enough exposure BEFORE THEY HAPPEN, can be stopped, or at least analyzed correctly when they occur.

A staged bioterror event is one of those, and I want to spell out a scenario for you.

This goes along with what I’ve been discussing in my last few articles about germ theory (click here and here). First, the germ theory of disease is wrong. I don’t care what kind of germ you’re talking about or where it came from, releasing it intentionally does not create predictable results.

People whose immune systems are at different levels of strength are going to react differently.

The perpetrators may find that less than 2% of people exposed get sick and die.

Furthermore, spreading a germ poses the serious problem of containment.

How do biowar operatives confine the spread of a germ?

There is no easy answer.

BUT, there is another way. And this is something to look out for.

The use of a germ as a cover story for a chemical.

In other words, there is no germ attack. It’s called a germ attack, but that’s a lie. The perps bring in researchers, to the affected area, who go on to claim they have isolated a germ that is the cause of death and illness. It’s a sham. What really happened was the spread of a toxic chemical that is almost impossible to detect, unless you suspect it is there.

The chemical has severe and deadly effects for a week. Then it disperses and loses potency and the “epidemic” is done.

A chemical CAN be used in pinpoint fashion.

In some town, a fairly isolated community, the word goes out that people are suddenly falling ill and dying. The CDC and the Army are called in to cordon off the area and quarantine all citizens. A peremptory announcement is made, early on, that this is a biowar attack.

Major media are allowed outside the periphery. Network news anchors set up on-location and do all their nightly broadcasts “from the scene.”

The entire nation, the entire world is focused on the “event,” 24/7.

People inside the cordon fall ill and die. Reports come out from the town.

The networks report that “heroic doctors are taking samples of blood and the blood is being analyzed to find the germ that is causing the epidemic.” The DOD confirms this is, indeed, a biowar attack. A terrorist event.

Human interest stories pile up. This family lost three members, that family lost everybody. Tragedy, horror, and the desired empathic response from “the world community.”

It’s a soap opera, except real people are dying.

The medical cartel promotes FEAR OF THE GERM.

All controlling entities get to obtain their piece of the terrorist pie.

Finally, the doctors announce they have isolated the germ causing the death in the small town, and researchers are rushing to develop a vaccine (which they produce in record time).

Everyone everywhere must be vaccinated, now. No choice. Do it or be quarantined or jailed.

Now that the (phony non-existent) germ has been found, “relevant” (toxic) medical drugs can be shipped into the town for the residents.

In this declared martial law situation, the doctors are the heroes. The doctors and the Army. And the government and even the media.

Then, after a week, when the potency of the secret chemical has dispersed, it’s over.

When you think about it, this scenario is a cameo of what happens every day, all over the world, in doctor’s offices. The doctor has already diagnosed the patient with a germ-caused disease and prescribed a drug. The patient is coming back with new serious symptoms caused by the drug. The doctor says no, the symptoms are an escalation of the original germ-caused disease. So the doctor now prescribes a more toxic drug, and that will produce new effects, and at the next appointment the doctor will either continue to say the original disease has gotten worse or the the patient has a new disease. The chemicals (drugs) are the real culprits, but the doctor keeps saying it’s a germ(s). This is the template of much of modern medicine.

In other words, a chem-war attack is being leveled at people all over the world all the time.

A so-called bio-terror event in a small town is simply a repeat performance dressed up in a different way, to induce fear and compliance.

See Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, “Is US health really the best in the world?” 106,000 people in America are killed every year by FDA-approved medical drugs. That’s a MILLION people per decade (click here for more info). Also Google “FDA Why Should You Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions.” the FDA admits 100,000 people in America die every year from the effects of medical drugs. (Click here to go directly to the FDA page in question. See also this news roundup concerning the FDA in this regard.)

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.

HANG THE BANKERS? HANG THE FDA! EXHIBIT 2

 

HANG THE BANKERS? HANG THE FDA! EXHIBIT 2

By Jon Rappoport

May 24, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Breaking News: Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

With the recent revelation (exposed by yours truly) that FDA knows the drugs it’s approving are killing Americans at the rate of 100,000 a year (*), it’s time to shut down the buildings at Agency headquarters, fire all the employees, fumigate the place, and start over.

 

(*) Note: All articles pertaining to this breaking story have been placed under the “FDA category” on this blog (in typical reverse chronological blog order).

 

If we had a Department of Justice, I’d say prosecute the FDA offenders for mass murder, but DOJ is too busy putting pot smokers in jail, or selling guns to Mexican drug cartels, or something.

 

The FDA literally considers the pharmaceutical industry its Client, to which it owes remarkable and steadfast allegiance, through thick and thin (and it’s always thick), so shutting down the FDA would solve that corrupt love affair.

 

The close-out of this terminally corrupt Agency would also silence the tower of bullshit that ceaselessly pumps out limited hangouts to explain why drug after drug is killing and maiming Americans.

 

My number-one all-time hangout was voiced by FDA Commissioner David Kessler, in 1993 (JAMA): “If an adverse event occurs in perhaps one in 5,000 or even one in 1,000 users, it could be missed in a clinical trial but pose a serious safety problem when [the drug is] released in the market.”

 

I see. We should forget drug companies burying studies that show their drugs kill. Forget FDA drug-approval panels being stacked with doctors who take money from those drug companies. Forget researchers literally inventing diseases and disorders that “require” new drugs. No, it’s just that pesky one in a thousand in trials that has a bad reaction that’s missed. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

 

But hey. Only a million Americans die every decade from the drugs. Only 20 million experience strokes, heart attacks, neurological damage, etc., from the drugs.

 

And it’s only the FDA who looks the other way and instead goes after sellers of food supplements, which kill nobody.

 

The FDA. We’re looking at a criminal racket. Posing as Science.

 

Exhibit 1, the smoking gun, is the FDA’s own web page on which it admits the 100,000 yearly deaths. Google “FDA, Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions.”

 

I’m ready to roll out Exhibit 2. This one takes a bit of thought, so follow closely as I take you through it.

 

In the last few months, I’ve offered devastating evidence that all so-called mental disorders are sheer inventions, brazenly concocted by committees of psychiatrists. These committees arrange menus of human behaviors and label them with names like Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

 

THERE IS NO BIOLOGICAL OR CHEMICAL TEST FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.

 

Never has been. Not for ADHD, not for schizophrenia, not for clinical depression, not for Bipolar, not for any of 300 billable diagnoses shrinks hand out to patients.

 

ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE ARBITRARILY INVENTED, NAMED, LABELED, DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by a committee of psychiatrists, from menus of human behaviors.

 

Their findings are published in periodically updated editions of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), printed by the American Psychiatric Association.

 

For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of “research.”

 

Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly toxic drugs to treat every one of these fictional disorders, are leading the charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can sell more drugs and make more money.

 

But we have a mind-boggling twist. One of the great psychiatric honchos, who has been out in front inventing mental disorders, has gone public. He’s blown the whistle on himself and his colleagues.

 

His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: “Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.” (Dec.27, 2010).

 

Dr. Allen Frances is the man who, in 1994, headed up the project to write the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental disorder in the known universe. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.

 

In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, “Scientist At Work,” Daniel Goleman called Frances “Perhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment…”

 

Well, sure. If you’re sculpting the entire canon of diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the government, for pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297 DSM-IV diagnoses), you’re right up there in the pantheon.

 

Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired’s Greenberg and said the following:

 

“There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

 

BANG.

 

That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

 

After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

 

Wait, there’s more.

 

It’s another nugget, this time from PBS Frontline. The program was: “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 anymental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid.

 

BANG.

 

Actually, Dr. Barkley, that DOES make them invalid. And you just admitted, out in the open, that all mental disorders are concocted. Congratulations.

 

Yes, people have problems. Yes, people suffer and feel pain and confusion. Yes. We all understand that. But carving up human emotion and behavior into neat categories of “mental disorders” is one of the great con jobs of our time.

 

Especially since, what follows from these gratuitous diagnoses is TOXIC DRUGS, drugs that maim and destroy lives.

 

If you want the evidence, start combing the adverse effects of drugs like Prozac, Ritalin, Zoloft, Paxil, Lithium, Valproate, Risperdal.

 

All right. This is all background for the payoff.

 

Should we say the FDA experts are ignorant and confused, are well-meaning bumblers, or should we face the obvious truth and say, instead, that THEY KNOW ALL THESE MENTAL DISORDERS ARE CONCOCTED, THEY KNOW THERE ARE NO LEGITIMATE TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS?

 

The answer is obvious. THEY KNOW.

 

And yet they continue to approve, as safe and effective, all the toxic psychiatric drugs that treat these NON-EXISTENT conditions.

 

So here we have a compound crime. The disorders are fictional. And the drugs are toxic. And nobody at FDA blows the whistle. The silence is deafening.

 

Does this make you squirm a little? I know. We’re supposed to cut people a break. We’re supposed to say, reflexively, maybe they just don’t understand, they want to do the right thing but they’re making a mistake. They’re basically good people who are confused.

 

No.

 

In a half-sane world, the following conversation would take place:

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: Dr. Johnson, you have served on many FDA panels that have approved psychiatric drugs as safe and effective. Is that correct?

 

DR. JOHNSON: Yes, Senator.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: But now, under great stress, you’ve come forward to make a statement.

 

DR. JOHNSON: That’s right.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: You’re telling this Committee that none of the mental disorders these drugs are supposed to treat are real.

 

DR. JOHNSON: That’s correct, sir.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: And you’re also saying, under oath, that you have many colleagues at the FDA who know these mental disorders are fictions, that none of the disorders are diagnosed through legitimate tests.

 

DR. JOHNSON: Absolutely, Senator. It’s common knowledge at FDA that there are no tests. It’s also common knowledge among many doctors around the world.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: But you’re also here today to say something about the drugs.

 

DR. JOHNSON: They’re toxic, sir. Every one of them.

 

SENATOR BLAH-BLAH: This is a titanic revelation.

 

DR. JOHNSON: It is, sir. But only because it hasn’t been voiced in a public forum before. Everything I’m telling you is widely known.

 

This is what we’re talking about. This is the open secret.

 

And the FDA knows the secret.

 

And they’re doing nothing about it.

 

It’s yet another reason why they are a criminal organization. A mafia. They know how to pretty themselves up. They know how to speak nonsensical technical language. They know how to appear authoritative. But they’re a mafia.

 

And if you want an accomplice before, during, and after the fact, look no further than several miles away from FDA headquarters, where the Department of Justice makes its home. They, too, do nothing. THEY KNOW, TOO. Through their knowledge, they become a functioning part of the RICO operation that sustains grave injury and massive death-counts in Pharmaceutical America.

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Hidden in plain view: FDA murder

Hidden in plain view:

FDA-approved drugs kill a million Americans per decade!

The FDA is a rogue criminal agency

by Jon Rappoport

May 16, 2012

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

May 19, 2012 Update:

* To listen to my discussion of this breaking news with Robert Scott Bell, click here to access the podcast — and, see also this article.

* To hear my discussion of this breaking news with Alex Jones, click here to access the video — and, see also this article.

The day of the Smoking Gun has arrived.

The discovery of a page, on the FDA’s own website, proves the FDA is fully aware that:

the drugs it certifies as safe have been killing Americans, at the rate of 100,000 per year.

The FDA website page is currently available under the heading, “Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions,” and it can be Googled. (Click here to go directly to the FDA page.)

The implications of this Smoking Gun are hard to grasp in any rational way.

The FDA takes no blame, no responsibility for its actions, and yet it admits the death statistics are accurate.

As an investigative reporter, I have been tracking and writing about pharmaceutically-caused deaths for 10 years. I have, on numerous occasions, cited Dr. Barbara Starfield’s report in the July 26th, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, in which she presents the figure of 106,000 deaths per year, in America, as a result of these drugs. I have claimed that the federal government and, in particular, the FDA, are aware of these numbers.

And now the page on the FDA’s own website confirms the death toll. Yet, nowhere do we see the FDA taking one shred of responsibility for this ongoing holocaust.

Holocaust? Add up the figures. Medical drugs cause 100,000 deaths in America every year: that means a million Americans are killed every decade.

Understand this very clearly. No medical drug in America can be released for public use until and unless the FDA states it is safe. The FDA is the agency responsible for every such decision on every drug. The buck stops there.

Yes, the FDA has a “special relationship” with the pharmaceutical industry. Yes, the FDA utilizes doctors on their drug-approval panels that have ties to the pharmaceutical industry. But, in the end, it is the FDA official seal that opens the gate and permits a drug to be prescribed by doctors and sold in the US.

In all my research on this medical-drug holocaust, I have never found a case in which any FDA employee was censured, fired, or criminally prosecuted for the killing effects of these drugs.

That is a track record Organized Crime would be proud of, and the comparison is not frivolous.

On this FDA website page that has just come to light, the FDA also readily admits that deaths from medical drugs are the fourth leading cause of death in America, ahead of pulmonary disease, diabetes, AIDS, pneumonia, accidents, and automobile fatalities.

The FDA website page also states there are 2 million serious adverse reactions (ADRs) from the ingestion of medical drugs, annually, in the US. When the FDA says “serious,” they aren’t talking about headaches or slight dizziness or temporary nausea. “Serious” means stroke, heart attack, neurological damage; destruction of that magnitude. Therefore, per decade, that adds up to 20 million ADRs. 20 million.

Examining these figures for death and debilitation, can you find any comparable crime in the American landscape? And yet the major media have been silent. This is the kind of story that could make Watergate look like a Sunday-school picnic. If a paper like the New York Times let loose their hounds in a relentless exploration of the horror, I can assure you that, in time, doctors and medical bureaucrats and even drug-company employees would come out of the woodwork with confessions, and the resultant explosions and outcries would shake the medical/pharmaceutical foundations of America and the planet.

But these major media outlets are an intrinsic part of the Matrix that protects and sustains the crimes and the criminals. It isn’t just drug-advertising profits that keep the leading newspapers and television networks silent. It’s collusion to protect “a revered institution”—the medical system.

Also at stake is Obamacare. The connection is vivid and unmistakable. If the new national health insurance plan goes into effect, millions more Americans, previously uninsured, will be drawn into the system and subjected to the very drugs are killing and maiming people at such a horrific rate.

Where has the US Department of Justice been all these years? Is there any way, under the sun, that a million deaths per decade can be excused? Is there any way the FDA and the drug companies can float safely in the upper atmosphere of privilege, while the concept of justice has any meaning? Where are criminal prosecutions?

The revelations of ongoing knowledge to be found at the FDA website page stagger the mind. Here is yet another implication: what about all the studies on drugs that are published in prestigious medical journals, month after month? These studies unequivocally claim the drugs are safe. What level of fraud must exist for such peer-reviewed studies to attain the false status of medical fact?

Perhaps this quote from Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, will clarify that aspect of the scandal:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Marcia Angell, MD, The New York Review of Books, January 15, 2009)

The Matrix Revealed

Be forewarned. If this story of FDA-caused deaths finally, now, breaks through into the public consciousness in a major way, the official team for the defense will try to obfuscate the naked facts:

“A low-level FDA employee mistakenly posted those numbers, which are false.” “People die because the drugs are incorrectly combined, because patients don’t follow prescribing instructions, because sometimes doctors prescribe a drug for off-label uses, but the drugs themselves are safe.” “The FDA has a remarkable track record of safety.” And so forth and so on. None of these defenses are dealing with the truth head-on. They are all attempts to deflect and escape accountability.

Meanwhile, the FDA pursues an agenda of attacking nutritional supplements, and the latest federal regulations classify these supplements as “potentially dangerous”—despite the fact that supplements have a record of safety that is astonishing.

It is time for these murderous government crimes to end. It is time for all responsible parties to be brought to justice, to real justice. It is time for the public to realize that 100,000 people dying every year in the US, because they take medical drugs, is the equivalent of 33 airliner crashes into the Twin Towers, every year, year after year.

But in this case, it is only necessary for Department of Justice officials to climb into cars and drive down the road to the headquarters of the FDA and start making arrests, on a charge of negligent homicide. At minimum.

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.

BREAKING….FDA AWARE OF ITS CRIMES!

 

ANIMATION/FINANCIAL MELTDOWN/SHRINK FRAUD

by Jon Rappoport

May 15, 2012

 

Breaking News: Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

19 May 2012 Update:

* To listen to my discussion of this breaking news with Robert Scott Bell, click here to access the podcast — and, see also this article.

* To hear my discussion of this breaking news with Alex Jones, click here to access the video — and, see also this article.

 

I have to insert this breaking story first….it’s a page on the FDA official website that describes that the FDA DOES, in fact, know about the horrific effects of the drugs they’ve been certifying as safe and effective!! Click here to see the FDA’s page.

 

The page is titled: WHY LEARN ABOUT ADVERSE DRUG REACTIONS?

 

It’s a header for a seminar of some kind, a module that is now a dead link.

 

And here is what the FDA confesses to on this page at their own site!!

* Over 2 million serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs) a year in the US.

* 100,000 deaths yearly from medical drugs.

* ADRs are the fourth leading cause of death in the US, ahead of pulmonary disease, diabetes, AIDS, pneumonia, accidents, and automobile deaths.

(Note: At the bottom of this FDA page, it says “Page Last Updated: 02/03/2010”)

 

For years, I’ve been presenting these figures, and I’ve said the FDA has to know about them. But here is the smoking gun!!

 

THEY KNOW. Yet, the FDA takes no responsibility for certifying and okaying the drugs that are killing and maiming people!!

 

This is astounding. This is mind-boggling.

 

Copy this link and save the page. It may disappear without warning from the FDA site.

 

http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/DrugInteractionsLabeling/ucm114848.htm

 

Okay.

 

Today, I have several topics.

 

First: ANIMATION.

 

I’m now, together with my colleague, Theo, creating cartoons. It’s quite an interesting medium. We’ve released two:

 

Nancy Pelosi Exposes Obamacare

 

Obama Speaks About Race and Color

 

Or you can just Google “Jon Rappoport YouTube” and you’ll see them.

 

There are more in the works.

 

Since, in certain key respects, we’re all living in a cartoon, the animation medium delivers some rather powerful resonances and reminders.

 

Topic two, HOW AMERICA CAN COPY GREECE’S MELTDOWN.

 

The blueprint is easy. Even the man on the street can understand it.

 

The government overspends. Then it overspends a lot more, and a lot more. Then it invests in worthless junk, which blows up in its face.

 

That’s the sketch, and Greece has performed admirably.

 

America is on the road. It just needs to keep going.

 

Senator Jeff Sessions recently ordered a report on the federal government’s unfunded liability stemming from Obamacare. “Unfunded liability,” translated, means:

 

“We will have to pay for it but we have no idea where we’re going to get the money, and even printing it out of thin air has to stop somewhere…”

 

Here is the cost for Obamacare, over the next 75 years. Remember, this is not the total plan, it’s just the unfunded-liability piece. Ready?

 

Seventeen trillion dollars.

 

Mainly, that 17 trillion will represent the feds subsidizing (paying for) health insurance premiums and (the feds paying for) increased numbers of people on Medicaid.

 

But wait, there’s more. During the next 75 years, the federal government will also incur a few more expenses that are dangling out there in the wind. Unavoidable expenses:

 

Social Security: $7 trillion.

 

Medicare: $38 trillion.

 

Medicaid: $20 trillion (in addition to the trillions of $$ it’ll take to deal with all the new people on the Medicaid program mentioned above).

 

Current federal debt: $17 trillion.

 

You add it all up and you get $97 trillion.

 

This isn’t the total of the federal budget. Not by a long shot.

 

But WE HAVE TO SPEND ALL THIS MONEY.

 

WE REALLY HAVE TO.

 

Why?

 

BECAUSE WE HAVE TO.

 

This is what collectivism gives you. This is what it costs. This is what it takes to make it work. This is Utopia, remember? This is the longed-for end product of courting votes—excuse me, I meant creating paradise.

 

What’s the obvious conclusion, aside from just melting down? We have to change the money system, right? Since the system we have can’t sustain such gargantuan outlays, we need to go on a different course.

 

Perhaps, we could have units called ALTRUSIM MONEY. These would be handsome certificates, suitable for framing, that would be given out as paychecks to those people who are designated as CARE GIVERS. You know, COLLECTIVIST contributors to the GENERAL WELFARE OF THE NATION.

 

And these caregivers, who by the way would number in the MILLIONS, would live in huge apartment complexes in cities, in tiny one-room apartments. Doctors, nurses, bus drivers, government bureaucrats. Firemen, cops, FBI, paramedics, military and ex-military. Street sweepers, teachers, hospital employees, community organizers. You get the idea.

 

With ALTRUISM MONEY, they would be permitted to obtain the essentials of survival from a government depot. And that would be their lives, the sum total of their assets. Period.

 

All for the common good, of course.

 

And the doctor who is performing emergency surgery on your brain after a car accident, who is wearing the same smock day after day, who earns the equivalent of a thousand dollars a month, will certainly do his very best to re-wire your synapses in this, his sixth operation of the day…

 

You bet.

 

And finally, the third topic of the day: SHRINK FRAUD.

 

The New York Times is running an an article about the soon-to-be-released fifth edition of the bible of the psychiatric profession, the DSM.

 

The DSM lists all the official mental disorders (over 300) which shrinks can bill insurance companies for, when they treat patients. It’s also “the best thinking” of the shrink world. It’s a dud and a hoax, of course, as I’ve been documenting rather relentlessly. There is no blood or urine test or any other kind of physical test that confirms a diagnosis of ANY of these mental disorders.

 

This fifth edition of the DSM will greatly expand the “mental disorder” called “addiction.” All sorts of new addictions will be officially labeled disorders, and therefore the pharmaceutical industry can develop and sell more and more (toxic) drugs to treat patients.

 

At this pace, most human behavior will end up in the DSM as disorders. Which is the whole point.

 

The public will buy into these diagnoses.

 

Somewhere, somehow, I believe Hillary Clinton sees herself as the Queen overseeing a planet where all 10 billion people are diagnosed as mentally disordered and receiving treatment. Just a thought.

 

Or a new cartoon.

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

OBAMA AND RACE AND COLOR

 

OBAMA AND RACE AND COLOR

AND OTHER ILLUSIONS IN THE “NEW” AMERICA

by Jon Rappoport

April 26, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

“Early in my career as a therapist, I had a Hispanic client who, under hypnosis, regressed into a life as a white settler in Michigan. At the end of the session, he was laughing so hard he almost fell off his chair. He told me later he laughed for about two days. I don’t have any opinion about what he experienced. I don’t say he regressed into an earlier life and I don’t say he imagined the whole thing. It makes no difference to me. All I know is, he went from earning twelve dollars an hour to owning his own business, and a few years later he was making more money than I was.” — Jack True, hypnotherapist, in THE MATRIX REVEALED.

 

Barack Obama’s mother was white.

 

As far as I know, that makes him the first white and black president.

 

This would have been a perfect opportunity to ascend to a “post-racial” presidency. Of course, that didn’t happen.

 

He could have said, “I’m black and I’m white.”

 

For reasons which remain obscure, this is apparently not permitted.

 

To me, “I’m black and I’m white” is an ideal place to begin a conversation that takes things to a whole new level.

 

It cuts across many preconceptions and taboos and prejudices.

 

It also, however, could change voter polls.

 

Still, I can see the upside of “black and white.”

 

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MiaiHffWFA&w=415&h=241]

 

I’m not up on the etiquette and the correct way to proceed, but somewhere I seem to have read that a mixed-race person can decide which race he wants to belong to. He can make a declaration. The biology of the situation remains what it is, but a person can choose.

 

If so, then why can’t anybody with a drop of blood from another race make a choice? Maybe you have a drop of Indian blood. You could say and declare you’re an Indian. Do percentages of blood factor in? Is that supposed to tip the scale? What are the numbers? Who decides? Is it true that in Brazil, if a dark-hued person has a drop of white blood, he’s considered white?

 

It’s a bit confusing.

 

Obviously, a lot of people in America wanted the first black president, and to them these distinctions are irrelevant. They wanted what they wanted, and they said they won. It was a landmark moment. I agree, but I don’t buy the accepted story line.

 

I think it’s clear the landmark event was this: Obama IS a black and white president. And I do believe, with his oratorical skills—at least judging from the early speeches—he could have made that stick. He could have made his presence on the scene transcendent.

 

But we have forces at work engaged in a far-reaching psy-op, the intent of which is to divide the nation into camps. The last thing these people want is a man in the Oval Office who stands on both sides of the divide and is willing to say so in convincing and unflinching fashion, come hell or high water.

 

With enough conviction, I believe Obama could have outdistanced those forces.

 

But he wasn’t ready for that and he didn’t want that, and neither did the usual suspects who were his money men.

 

Here is perhaps a clue: “I’m the first black and white president. I can therefore think from the black and the white perspective. I can reason as a black man and I can reason as a white man…”

 

At some point in this monologue, the whole thing would fall apart, wouldn’t it? We would see the black and the white stereotypes for what they are. Separate portraits forced on us by media and by politicians and by people obsessed with their own racial agendas.

 

I recall some years ago hearing a radio broadcast by a man who had spent years in South American jungles with several tribes. He was studying their use of plant drugs. When asked what these people were like, he said, “It’s like being with any other group. There are all sorts of characters there. Some are friendly. Some are bad people. Some are shy. Others are outspoken…”

 

Nobody appeared to be interested in that representation. It didn’t play into any myth. It was beyond myths.

 

“I met Buddha in a drug store. He was buying chewing gum and a pillow. He was looking for those very small batteries, but they were out of stock. We talked about the St. Louis Cardinals. He said he wished they had signed Albert Pujols to a long-term contract…”

 

No good.

 

Definitely no good.

 

Black, white, it really does come down to that remark of Martin Luther King—judging by content of character, not by color of skin.

 

And this may be considered radical, but a person’s thoughts, actions, decisions, visions for the future, power, independence, and imagination don’t emanate from pigment.

 

Unless he says they do. Unless he takes on that role. It’s a ROLE.

 

But we’re not supposed to notice that. We’re supposed to overlook the obvious.

 

Presidents take on roles. Bush was the shitkicker cowboy from Texas, who was actually part of the eastern establishment. Clinton was the good old boy from Arkansas. Jimmy Carter was the loving binder of people’s sorrows, the kind and endlessly sympathetic member of Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission. Nixon was playing a cartoon of a cartoon, difficult to follow. Obama is the first black president.

 

It’s a play.

 

None of these were good plays. On Broadway, all of them would have closed down in a week.

 

In politics, you need pundits to keep up a steady stream of good reviews to push ticket sales along. You need, for instance, Chris Matthews, to feel his leg tingle when he thinks about Obama. You need Sean Hannity to turn Bush into a quintessential American.

 

Every psy-op requires propagandists and their minions, and dupes who swallow the myths whole. It’s a clumsy dance, and everybody involved is faking it, and they’re not faking it well.

 

But the psy-op plows ahead. Divide America into hostile camps. Blow on sparks and ignite fires whenever possible. Keep people on edge and looking the wrong way while their rights and their property are stolen out from under them.

 

When the time and the president are right, talk about the utopia just up the road. When the time is right, talk tough.

 

Meanwhile, suck America up into a funnel of globalist madness, a far different play, produced by the men behind the curtain.

 

Put America into the pot with every other no-longer-sovereign nation and melt the whole mass down into a homogeneous bankrupt glob that needs rescue From Above.

 

A civilization reaches a point of no-return when its citizens begin to recognize THEY ARE ACTORS IN A PLAY. When that day comes, when the technology of the society is far enough along to provide a level of comfort for the majority, when there is time to think about things and look at the overall landscape, when media are reflecting images back at the people and unintentionally exposing the melodramatic and farcical elements of the whole show….a moment of danger is reached.

 

The awareness of the public must not be permitted to advance beyond that point. If it does, the whole structure of the psy-op will disintegrate. People will exit their normal and average roles. Society will move to places that can’t be controlled.

 

People will look for new plays. They will write them.

 

I mark a key moment of retreat as the early 1960s. I was there. I saw it happen. I saw the U-turn and the 180.

 

People, for example, who had little apparent interest in religion suddenly began to regress into hardened fundamentalist and orthodox camps. They backed up into their corners. People for whom race was never really a major preoccupation began to assert that skin color, any color was a magical source of opinion, conviction, thought, distinct insight, separate passion, unique talent, creativity, and disposition.

 

It was as if a light had been turned off. People retreated from the edge of seeing through the conventional melodrama of society and its propaganda signals. They stood at the bank of the clear river, but they didn’t drink the water. They ran back to their “tribes.”

 

Roles in a play of conflict.

 

Every group (as opposed to the individual) of the 1960s was oversold. That was done on purpose, to make grotesque extremism succeed, and to enhance conflict. Feminism was oversold. Drugs were oversold. Hippies were oversold. Revolutionaries were oversold. Communitarianism was oversold. Black power was oversold. Fundamental Christianity was oversold. Permissiveness was oversold. Environmentalism was oversold. Rock and roll was oversold. Sex was oversold. Affirmative action was oversold. Consumerism was oversold. Liberalism and conservatism were oversold. Sheer bullshit pretentiously and obviously parading as truth was oversold.

 

All that selling is still with us.

 

Many of the groups mentioned above were infiltrated by operatives, whose mission was to push them beyond any place of simple common sense, into hardened lunacy, so that inter-group conflicts and confusion were inevitable.

 

So…in case it’s not clear, Barack Obama isn’t black or white or both. He’s Barack Obama.

 

That’s lost, because the most profound objective of the overall psy-op I’m describing is the eradication of the idea of the Individual. That’s been the globalist target in America for many, many years.

 

And what better way to achieve that than to inject, over and over again, the notion that Groups and their movements and causes and demands and separate characteristics are the basic units of life, that Groups are everything, that Groups are all we have?

 

Children are now taught that the unbridled individual is the cause of all our ills. But no. The free individual doesn’t start wars. Oligarchs do. And from groups of oligarchs ruling from behind the scenes, all the way down to street thugs, it’s the stone-cold Group that has hitched its star to destruction.

 

These are all synthetic and invented groups, when you see them for what they are. The one natural category of group that promotes life—family and small geographic community—is under the same kind of attack that the individual is.

 

It’s not accidental.

 

But at the bottom of all this manipulation is the intense multi-front campaign to make the ideal of the free powerful individual a relic.

 

The social engineers, all the way from Plato to Marx to the Frankfurt School to the Tavistock Institute, to numerous academic institutions all over the planet, will do everything in their power to scrub out any traces of the free powerful individual. They must. Their whole pattern of impulse and thought is about the group and the mass. That’s where it starts and that’s where it ends.

 

Why is that? Because as individuals, these social engineers lost the thread. They lost the threads of themselves—except as elitists entitled to special treatment in the world they were and are making. That is their only hope. They are otherwise destitute. They otherwise have nothing, because they have lost themselves as individuals. That statement is true down to the bone.

 

It is equally true of the dupes they manage and command.

 

Those “rebels” who think their particular group with its yearnings and longings and sentiments are going to gain, in the long run, favored status in the new world order, are in for a rude shock. They are only temporary tenants. Their usefulness will come to an end and they will be cast out, hung out to dry.

 

Here’s another thing. When social engineers talk about mass psychology and group profiles and managing response and aptitude tests, and when they talk about the threat of climate change and green agendas and arranging population densities and sustainability and diversity and cities of the future, they are talking about synthetic and artificial groups. They are talking about forcing actors (people) into roles and forcing them deeper into those roles.

 

In other words, they’re betting on a self-fulfilling prophecy. “If we can define groups as we want them to be defined, and if we can predict and manage a future in which the population of the planet is led and coerced into these groups we define, then we can operate the levers of the next decade and the next century…”

 

I use Obama as an example, because by the rules and propaganda of the social engineers, he couldn’t be black and white even if he wanted to be. It wouldn’t be allowed. He would be violating a taboo. A created taboo. From an early age, he was loaded up as “an agent of change,” and in order for that to work, he had to play out a black role. Oh, certainly, he’s chosen to play that out. No doubt about it.

 

But looking at the parade of presidents you’ve seen in your lifetime, you’ll notice that all of them have chosen a role: president. NOT INDIVIDUAL. That would shake things up. That would really cause a stir. That would violate the rules.

 

The planners say, “Because of THIS social situation (which we’ve created) we need THIS kind of actor.”

 

And out rolls history. One social and political and economic situation after another, created and rigged and “fictionalized” into reality—each situation demanding a different actor playing a different role to maintain the illusion.

 

Right now, it’s “black.”

 

But…

 

If the ideal and the principle and reality of the free powerful individual is instated, the whole show collapses.

 

You have to take that power.

 

It’s yours.

 

It starts with freedom, and it jumps to imagination, that supposed childish toy everyone grows out of at the age of consent.

 

Imagination IS magic, but that doesn’t equate to snapping your fingers twice on day one and causing a hundred gold bars to manifest on your living room floor.

 

Imagination and what it can yield up to you is a lifetime operation and commitment.

 

Finding imagination and exploring it and using it isn’t a child’s game. It’s the next step after a personal declaration of independence.

 

Here are three significant approaches to consciousness. The first is FEEDBACK CONSCIOUSNESS. You take every signal reported to you by your body and your feelings and the environment, and you base all your actions on those signals, which answer the question, HOW AM I DOING? When feedback consciousness rules the roost, you’re a victim, pure and simple.

 

There is PROBLEM AND SOLUTION CONSCIOUSNESS. When this mode of operation is completely in charge, EVERYTHING looks like a problem that needs to be resolved. And resolutions never end, because in this state of mind, you’re always perceiving new problems on all sides that demand your attention and energy.

 

Then there is CREATIVE CONSCIOUSNESS. This is the endless sea. This is you inventing realities. This is you deploying and immersing yourself in imagination and bringing into being, in the world, your most profound desires.

 

And believe it or not, your creative consciousness is more powerful than all the ops and all the engineering in the world.

 

It’s the unlimited role in the unlimited play. It’s more than a role. It’s you as you are and could be.

 

This is what my work is all about.

 

Here is a brief excerpt from an interview I did with Jack True, hypnotherapist (1987). I interview Jack 40 times in my new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

 

“Hypnotizing a person isn’t the same thing as unleashing his creative potential. You don’t insert creative power into a person. It’s already there. You can help liberate it. That’s turned out to be my main thrust. But it’s there already. It’s in the closet. It’s like an engine that’s idling on low. Why low? Why not high? The reason is more than societal. It’s more than cultural. It’s more than religion or race or place of origin. It’s cosmic. (laughs) It’s about the person’s own conception of what he’s all about. It’s about how far his sense of space goes. It’s about how free he is from old wrinkled cultural space. It’s about thinking of himself as a creator. This is the great secret. What happens when a person thinks of himself as a creator? What happens then? What does he do? From my experience, he undergoes a revolution. It’s enormous. It’s electric. Now, creating something and thinking of yourself as a creator are two different things. You can create and still be largely unconscious. But when you decide you’re a creator and then you create, that’s when the electricity hits. That’s when tremendous transformation takes place…”

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Medical Murder in the Matrix

Medically caused death in America: An exclusive interview with Dr. Barbara Starfield

by Jon Rappoport

April 17, 2012

Breaking News: Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

Once in a while, I insert a plug for myself in an article. The purpose of this is to sell my products at www.nomorefakenews.com. Since the year 2001, I’ve probably written as many articles as anyone on the internet. They’re all free. So visit my store. End of plug.

I rerun this Dr. Barbara Starfield article — wherein I show you the email interview I did with Dr. Starfield in December 2009 — regarding her paper published in JAMA in July 2000 entitled Is US health really the best in the world?, just to push the wheel another turn.

The Starfield paper can be downloaded freely (as a .pdf) from here (via www.drug-education.info via en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Starfield). The paper is fully cited as Starfield B. Is US health really the best in the world?. JAMA. 2000; 284(4):483-4. Dr. Barbara Starfield’s wiki page is here.

Each time I do this, I try to write a new introduction. Here is one…

After working as a reporter for 30 years, I’ve come to understand a few things about public reaction to the truth. People like to say they’re enlightened. They like to say they’ve seen through the major propaganda operations that are launched and are spinning all around us. But when you bulldoze a hole in a part of the Matrix where certain subjects are engraved on stone pillars, and when those subjects are firmly entrenched in the public mind as foundations of Reality, the usual response is silent shock.

Even when people are able to accept the truth, they tend toward silence. They don’t pass the truth on.

Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy, whom I interview in THE MATRIX REVEALED, once explained it to me this way:

“You’ve taken them out of a state of hypnosis, a state of trance, but the truth you’re giving them puts them in another trance. In that part of their mind where they’ve been asleep for so long, they’re used to that narcosis. So even though they see truth now, they respond with new sleep. It’s not really an awakening at all. It’s as if they’ve walked out of one war zone into another, dazed.”

Ellis describes perfectly what happens to many people when they see the truth of medical murder in the US. It particularly happens because there is no logical way to understand it, given the expectations people have about what murder is, what murder means.

And there’s another problem. As you’ll see, the figures on medically caused death in America I’m citing come from an author with absolutely impeccable mainstream credentials. The review she wrote was published in one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world. It was all “on the up and up.”

That’s precisely why I use her figures, rather than those compiled by outsiders, who, by the way, probably have better numbers that are even more chilling.

I’ve had people stare blankly at me after a discussion of the interview below and say, outright, “This is impossible. It can’t be true. You see, if a really respected doctor is making these claims, and if her review is published in a prestigious journal, then mainstream doctors and medical schools and government would have to react. They would have to clean house.”

But they don’t.

And that is called a clue. We are talking about something similar to the experience of the German people during the rise of Hitler. They went along. They told themselves stories to make it all right. They used the familiar tricks of denial.

This is what makes the Matrix the Matrix. I’m speaking generally now. A grand illusion is accepted because people can’t believe Reality is fundamentally different than it appears to be.

They also can’t believe—and this is far more staggering—that on the other side of the Matrix THEY THEMSELVES have a power that is stunning. They may sense that’s true, but they’ve been taught to deny it. They’ve been taught that individual power is dangerous. They’ve been taught that having and using power beyond a certain point will cause them to be exiled by their peers, their friends, even their families. So it’s better and far more comfortable to cede that power to Someone Else and sleep on…

You see, it’s one thing to rightly accuse an elite group of exercising unlawful and destructive power, to see how huge that power is. But it’s a far different thing to know that you have tremendous power.

The Matrix is built and sustained on a reversal of power relationships.

My work is all about setting those relationships straight. That’s why I do this every day.

It’s especially why I go after the medical cartel again and again. Because they are exercising priestly hypnotic powers with their aura of science.

Okay. Let’s proceed to the issue at hand.

As you read what Dr. Starfield has to say in this interview, know that until her death last year, she was one of those people with impeccable mainstream credentials. She was respected and revered by her colleagues. She was a woman who had set off an explosion TEN years earlier, in one of the most high-profile medical journals in the world, and the media silence that followed was profound, eerie, and deafening.

If the mighty newspapers of our age had jumped in with both feet, Dr. Starfield would have become one of the most famous people in America. Her work would have shaken the medical cartel down to its foundations. She would have saved more lives and averted more suffering than anyone else in this nation. With no exaggeration, we would now be living in a different world.

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

The figures have been known for ten years. The story was covered briefly when Starfield’s landmark study surfaced, and then it sank like a stone.

The truth was inconvenient for many interests. That has not changed. “Medical coverage for all” is a banner that conceals ugly facts.

On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock to the system, 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.

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 disturbing revelation about modern healthcare in America ever published.

On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and 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 situation preferred to ignore it.

On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email.

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

My papers on the benefits of primary care have been widely used, including in Congressional testimony and reports. However, the findings on the relatively poor health in the US have received almost no attention. 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). They, of course, would like an even greater share of the pie than they now have, for training more specialists. (Of course, the problem is that we train specialists–at great public cost–who then do not practice up to their training–they spend half of their time doing work that should be done in primary care and don’t do it as well.)

Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] 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—which puts the FDA into an 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.

Do medical schools in the US, and intern/residency programs in hospitals, offer significant “primary care” physician training and education?

NO. Some of the most prestigious medical teaching institutions do not even have family physician training programs [or] family medicine departments. The federal support for teaching institutions greatly favors specialist residencies, because it is calculated on the basis of hospital beds.. [Dr. Starfield has done extensive research showing that family doctors, who deliver primary care—as opposed to armies of specialists—produce better outcomes for patients.]

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.

What was your personal reaction when you reached the conclusion that the US medical system was the third leading cause of death in the US?

I had previously done studies on international comparisons and knew that there were serious deficits in the US health care system, most notably in lack of universal coverage and a very poor primary care infrastructure. So I wasn’t surprised.

Has anyone from the FDA, since 2000, contacted you about the statistical findings in your JAMA paper?

NO. Please remember that the problem is not only that some drugs are dangerous but that many drugs are overused or inappropriately used. The US public does not seem to recognize that inappropriate care is dangerous–more does not mean better. The problem is NOT mainly with the FDA but with population expectations. …Some drugs are downright dangerous; they may be prescribed according to regulations but they are dangerous.

Concerning the national health plan before Congress–if the bill is passed, and it is business as usual after that, and medical care continues to be delivered in the same fashion, isn’t it logical to assume that the 225,000 deaths per year will rise?

Probably–but the balance is not clear. Certainly, those who are not insured now and will get help with financing will probably be marginally better off overall.

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.

106,000 people die as a result of CORRECTLY prescribed medicines. I believe that was your point in your 2000 study. Overuse of a drug or inappropriate use of a drug would not fall under the category of “correctly prescribed.” Therefore, people who die after “overuse” or “inappropriate use” would be IN ADDITION TO the 106,000 and would fall into another or other categories.

‘Appropriate’ means that it is not counter to regulations. That does not mean that the drugs do not have adverse effects.

INTERVIEWER COMMENTS:

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 ten 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.

In these times, medical schools continue turning out a preponderance of specialists who then devote themselves to promoting the complexities of human illness and massive drug treatment. Whatever the shortcomings of family doctors, their tradition speaks to less treatment, more common sense, and a proper reliance on the immune systems of patients.

The pharmaceutical giants stand back and carve up the populace into “promising markets.” They seek new disease labels and new profits from more and more toxic drugs. They do whatever they can—legally or illegally—to influence doctors in their prescribing habits. Many studies which show the drugs are dangerous are buried. FDA panels are filled with doctors who have drug-company ties. Legislators are incessantly lobbied and supported with pharma campaign monies.

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 excellent, 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.

Yes, that’s right. By Dr. Starfield’s published figures, FDA-approved pharmaceutical drugs kill over A MILLION Americans per decade.

Does that sound like a legitimate ongoing subject for journalism to you?

At its height, if I recall correctly, when I published this interview in 2009, Google entries ran to about 40,000. Other websites picked it up. I sent it to a well-placed CBS reporter. The overall major media response? ZERO.

You can take that as a reason to give up. Or you can press down harder on the gas pedal.

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