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

Raw Milk Seller Tortured In Jail

ALERT! Get this story out far and wide! Don’t wait!n

by Jon Rappoport

March 11, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

James Stewart, 65 years old, a seller of raw milk in Los Angeles. the head of Rawsome Foods, was put through the system at LA County jail, while awaiting a hearing on the charge…of selling raw milk!

The system was something he wasn’t prepared for! Cuffed very tightly for hours with his hands behind his back, shackled with chains, unable to move more than a few inches, placed in a cell, unable to sleep because of screaming from other cells—and finally that whole area of the jail WAS FLOODED WITH RAW SEWAGE CONTAINING FECES an inch or two deep on the floor…

Ordered to clean up his floor with a squeegee and a mop that had already been used to clean up the sewage…

Go to Natural News to read about it and hear the interview.

Hear the whole interview here.

James Stewart survives torture in LA County jail – hypothermia, food deprivation, raw human sewage

If You Tube takes down the link, get other working links at NaturalNews.com.

Here are paraphrases and quotes from James Stewart’s interview with Mike Adams at Natural News:

I’m gonna die in here…shit floating on floor…somebody has flooded the whole area with raw sewage…day and half in that cell…I was freezing and shivering…wanted to call my attorney…no one paid attention….seems like you’re in a Gulag…like Midnight Express…this is supposed to be America…they put a red band on my arm…they said, are you a sovereign….I said what?…I didn’t know what they were talking about…they put me in a section of the jail for people who were supposed to be a danger to others…I’m 65 years old….no criminal record….

Some of what Mr. Stewart is reporting appears to be par for the course at the LA County jail. But in his case, he was subjected to all of it because HE WAS SELLING RAW MILK.

Yes, it was torture. Maybe not the worst thing you’ve ever heard of or seen in movies, but what would you think if you were painfully cuffed with your hands behind your back, shackled so you couldn’t move, deprived of sleep, water, and food, and then flooded with raw sewage containing feces, cut off from family and friends and your lawyer, lost in the system for a few days.

FORCE THIS STORY TO GET OUT THERE.

Somebody might say, “Well, how do we know all this is true? How do we know Mr. Stewart underwent all this? We only have his word for it.”

Okay. Let’s find out. Let’s see. Let’s put his own words in his interview on the record and expose EVERYTHING TO THE LIGHT OF DAY. NOW.


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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

RAWESOME IN BACK ALLEYS

 

RAWESOME IN BACK ALLEYS

 

AUGUST 8, 2011. The truth has finally surfaced. The members of the Rawesome buyer’s club are all addicts, and their drug of choice is raw milk.

 

The raid on their shooting gallery in Venice was just a prelude to a much larger bust, which will no doubt require the cooperation of the Mexico state police.

 

How many tons of raw milk are coming up through the Tijuana border?

 

And how many kids outside schools in LA are being given little pints of milk, as a come-on, to reel them in?

 

There’s a rumor circulating, at local hair dressers and nail emporiums, that a bunch of soccer moms are supplementing their income with “floating SUV” operations in Beverly Hills and Encino.

 

They say it’s the separated cream at the top of the bottle that really creates the addiction.

 

The symptoms to watch for are: temporary euphoria; improved hair luster; and skin sheen.

 

Long-time observers of the scene believe top Hollywood celebrities are fleeing town to avoid questioning and possible arrest.

 

Early this morning, I was told the actual reason CBS interceded to fire popular actress Maura West from The Young and the Restless was her raw milk habit, which was peaking at two quarts a day.

 

And stories about Frank McCourt, embattled owner of the LA Dodgers, suggest a raw-milk laundering operation was at the heart of his troubles.

 

A reliable source, who recently kicked at the Malibu Promises rehab compound, told me, “Shit, the whole city’s floating on raw milk. If they cut the pipeline, a lot of people are going to be hurting. Plus, the economy will collapse overnight. How do you think all those movies get financed? Illegal raw-milk profits.”

 

The FBI is in town. They’re swarming over the Ramparts station and interviewing LAPD detectives about the removal of large quantities of raw milk from evidence lockers. Apparently, on the street, the product is being stepped on numerous times, with 2%, non-fat, and distilled water. Denizens simply call it RAW, which also, in the vernacular, stands for “runaway wonderful.”

 

Several local banks are being investigated for receiving large amounts of cash from illegal raw milk sales. Authorities in Panama and Geneva have been contacted.

 

Sports Illustrated is preparing a major story on the sudden lapse of LA Laker star Pau Gasol in the playoffs this spring. Gasol was cut off from his raw milk supply when his dealer was detained by authorities, after a car accident near Staples Center. Several cases of raw milk fell out of the dealer’s trunk during a collision with a catering van. By the time police officers reached the scene, all but a few bottles of milk had been stolen by neighborhood residents.

 

LA Police Chief, Charlie Beck, states, “At least one drive-by shooting this year, in Bel-Air, was milk-related. Normally, these people keep their business to themselves. They’re well organized. But things got out of control last February, and two yuppies in a milk truck opened fire on a house on Roscomare Road. One of the bullets hit a huge container of milk in the front living room, and the whole place went up in a fireball.”

 

TRIPLE BREAKING…

 

…Jamie Oliver, star of the ABC television series, “Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution,” is being investigated by the DEA… Pursuant to a federal warrant, footage of his shows and outtakes has been confiscated, to see if any mention of “raw milk” was made…Oliver was stopped at LAX yesterday, as he was about to board a plane for London…

 

…FBI Director Robert Mueller announced today that a new test for raw milk has been developed at the Bureau’s main lab… It can analyze and identify “residue on the skin or clothing, and in some cases a colonoscopy can ferret out the presence of RAW in the lower tract…”

 

…LAPD officers have broken up a ring staging private parties in the exclusive upper reaches of Benedict Canyon…RAW is consumed in great amounts at the gatherings, resulting in what’s called “trampoline orgies”…a UCLA professor of Zoology and his wife, a divorce attorney, have been taken in for questioning…

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

DIRTY SECRET BEHIND RAWESOME RAID

 

DIRTY SECRET BEHIND RAWESOME RAID

 

AUGUST 7, 2011.

 

I won’t keep you in suspense.

 

Here it is: THE FDA WAS ONE OF THE AGENCIES THAT RAIDED RAWESOME.

 

Why is that dirty? Because while FDA is clucking about raw milk, it is continuing to hide THE LARGEST CRIME IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

 

THE FDA, YOU SEE, HAS APPROVED DRUGS, AS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE, THAT KILL 106,000 PEOPLE A YEAR.

 

Yes, you heard that right.

 

The citation on this is: Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”

 

I have interviewed Dr. Starfield, and she has confirmed that since her paper was published, the FDA has made no contact with her to enlist her help in remedying the situation (the ongoing crime). There has been no remedy.

 

(See Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, and, click here to read my interview with Dr Starfield.)

 

Add it up. Over each decade, the medicines the FDA certifies as safe kill a million Americans. A MILLION. PER DECADE. LIKE CLOCKWORK.

 

The FDA is the gatekeeper. It is the single government agency responsible for protecting the public from dangerous pharmaceuticals.

 

And they are worked up about raw milk.

 

In 1994, while I was running for a seat in the US Congress, I made many statements urging the nutritional industry and allied natural health interests to form and fund a true PR wing that would attack the FDA for its unconscionable crimes, that would get accurate stories about this in the press, come hell or high water.

 

I was met with apathy, excuses, and fear. It was disgusting.

 

WITH SO MANY LIVES LOST AND SO MANY MORE HANGING IN THE BALANCE, you don’t play this game by waiting. You play OFFENSE. You play to win. With the truth.

 

The FDA must be forced back against the wall, and feel the great need to admit its massive culpability and surrender to the criminal consequences.

 

That’s what I said in 1994, and that’s what I say now.

 

Let’s get real. If you knew that a federal agency was directly responsible for a million deaths per decade, wouldn’t you feel that agency should be disbanded, from the ground up, and rebuilt along moral lines, while its leaders and so-called executives are dealt severe and crushing criminal penalties?

 

Wouldn’t you?

 

Is anyone out there?

 

Is there a potato head at the LA Times with enough active brain cells and enough guts to take this on, while the FDA is raiding raw milk in your city?

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

THE RAWESOME DEFENSE STRATEGY

FOR THE DEFENSE

THE RAWESOME RAID

by Jon Rappoport

August 7, 2011

(To join our email list, click here.)

In prosecuting the Rawesome defendants–if the case goes to trial–the feds may bring in their “science.”

 

They would focus on two points of attack. One, raw unpasteurized milk is inherently unsafe. And two, Rawesome and/or its suppliers were running an unclean operation that, even by conventional standards, broke safety laws.

 

Rawesome hopefully can stand on its record vis-a-vis the second charge.

 

Point one, the “inherent danger of raw milk,” will be adjudicated without permitting the defense team to introduce evidence showing pasteurized milk is unhealthy. Nor will the defense be allowed to cite instances where pasteurized milk was actually contaminated.

 

The Rawesome defense team presumably understands this. They would be very lucky if the judge gave them the green light to examine pasteurized milk in any way.

 

There are laws in California making it legal to sell raw milk. So on the face of it, an argument that raw milk is always dangerous wouldn’t seem to fly. But if this case is prosecuted on a federal level, all bets are off. For example, even though medical marijuana is legal in California, the feds insist it isn’t legal anywhere in the US. So a federal case against Rawesome could take on 10th Amendment implications, where the defense team is arguing for state jurisdiction, but the feds are insisting their own supremacy trumps that. Feds win.

 

Mike Adams, at naturalnews.com, has received information that Rawesome defendants could be prosecuted for a wide range of “environmental crimes.” Mike states this is not certain. He’s keeping an eye on the situation.

 

What would these environmental crimes be? They would fall under the general category of endangering health. For example, by “spreading contagious germs” in the population, through the sale of milk that has not been licensed as safe by federal standards.

 

Sometimes—and I have seen this happen in an LA courtroom, in a federal trial where the issue was the sale of nutritional supplements—the whole procedure is a slam-dunk for the feds, because the ONLY issue allowed in evidence or debate is: did the defendant violate a federal law or regulation? If the answer is yes, the trial is over.

 

The defense team needs to figure out whether things will go this way. If so, they’ll have to find some very bright strategy before the judge opens the case.

 

One of the best defense tactics is public pressure, because sometimes the feds will back down in the face of it and settle the matter without a trial, on a lesser and minor charge, to save face and avoid blowing up the story beyond their ability to control it.

 

None of what I’ve detailed so far is fair, just, or rational. Those issues went into the wind the morning of August 3, when agents of the FDA, the US Dept. Of Agriculture, the CDC, and LA County sheriffs entered Rawesome and took the place apart.

 

The presence of the CDC and the Dept. of Agriculture indicates, of course, that there will be extensive lab studies done on the milk samples confiscated. And with lab tests, there is always the possibility of fraud or pseudo-science.

 

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubbmbx390yA&w=470&h=297]
(At 1m33s into the video, a witness reports: “They’re leaving product out in the sun…. Our food is [now] technically contaminated by heat damage…. [Coolers have been left open by the agents since 7:15am. It is now 12:42pm]” (emphasis added)

(Another witness at 2m49s in the video, addressing what appear to be plain clothes FDA and USDA federal agents: “You know that food has been in the sun (*). You can’t test that food; it’s been in the sun. It’s ruined.” [(*) Note: The food became exposed to the sun for long periods due to the actions of the federal agents]. Continuing, another witness… “Yea, did you guys leave [(our) previously refrigerated food] [out] in the sun so that when you test it, it will test [as being] ‘bad'”?)

 

Fraud means the labs will report serious contamination where none existed. Pseudo-science means the tests used to determine whether there was contamination are generically deceiving—resulting in a conclusion of contamination based on irrelevant factors.

 

For example, the PCR test can be used to detect the presence of microbes, based on amplifying, to an extraordinary degree, tiny fragments of what may or may not be germs at all—blowing them up and then (incorrectly) claiming them as evidence of massive presence of infectious substance.

 

This was employed in the recent Swine Flu fraud, where such minute amounts of viral material (if it was viral at all) were grossly magnified and then pronounced as the cause of virulent illness. In fact, the original bits of material analyzed were insufficient to initiate any illness whatsoever.

 

RAW MILK CAUSES DISEASE

 

RAW MILK SPREADS GERMS IN THE POPULATION

 

RAW MILK UNSAFE

 

These and other similar tag lines or headlines are what the defense should be ready for. (For example, see FDA spokewoman Siobhan DeLancey‘s statement regarding the safety of raw milk made to New York Times reporter Ian Lovett (published by the New York Times on 8/4/2011, “Raw Food Co-op Is Raided in California”))

 

They would do well to find California scientists who can explain, at trial, why there is a law in this state allowing sale of raw milk in the first place. In a jury trial, the jury can at least watch state experts pitted against federal experts.

 

It wouldn’t surprise me to see the feds, if the trial is delayed, begin to reassess its presumption of overwhelming victory, particularly if the defense team, through the press and public outcry, begins to make its case. Although federal prosecutors have good track records in courtrooms, they sometimes bulldoze cases beyond the boundaries of their evidence, because the pressure that forced them to bring the cases in the first place flowed from political interests above them. (See the Barry Bonds trial, as well as the strange ending of the Roger Clemens case.)

 

So far, one charge has been brought against James Stewart, the founder of Rawesome: processing and selling unlicensed raw milk. Stewart pled not guilty. If the feds want to make a full-blown example of Stewart, they will bring other charges as their lab tests come in.

 

But that first charge speaks to the strategy I mentioned above. “You violated a provision requiring licenses? Guilty.”

 

Now, unless we are dealt surprises, such as investigations of the financial records of Rawesome turning up irregularities, or any misrepresentation by Rawesome to its members, what I’ve described here pretty much covers the waterfront.

 

One can argue all day long about whether raw milk is safe, but the fact is Rawesome is a private club, and its members agree to buy the milk. If the feds decide to skirt that issue, chances are the judge will deny Rawesome the opportunity to argue that private clubs and their agreements take precedence over regulations governing businesses.

 

As I’ve said, the defense has to anticipate a quick and nasty verdict, based solely on a literal reading of regulations and laws and an accusation that Rawesome disobeyed them.

 

If you can lure him out of retirement in Wyoming, your man for a trial or for gaining press and public attention, is attorney extraordinaire, Gerry Spence. He’s an ultimate game changer.


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.

ONLY CRAZY PEOPLE DRINK RAW MILK?

 

ONLY CRAZY PEOPLE DRINK RAW MILK?

 

THE WIDER IMPLICATIONS

 

AUGUST 5, 2011. The federal raid on Rawesome Foods in Venice, California, is based on the insistence (with guns) that private citizens can’t make contracts with each other to buy and sell raw unpasteurized milk.

 

Some uninformed types believe the raid was solely focused on the fact that Rawesome doesn’t have a business license. But it is a private club, and the last time I looked, a club doesn’t need a license to carry on its activities.

 

Do private citizens have the right to form an association, by contract, and then engage in exchange of goods and services, among its members, regardless of the opinion of the State?

 

Well, if we return to the basic document, the Declaration of Independence, can we interpret the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without understanding that private contracts are fundamental to this pursuit?

 

In the case of Rawesome, the government believes it can garner wide public support, and therefore it feels confident its prosecution will make no one nervous. Whereas, if the product Rawesome club members were buying and selling was homemade oatmeal, the public might balk and see the intrusion on Rawesome as invasive and quite insane.

 

Speaking of which, the government is using what I call the The Crazy People Doctrine.

 

If more than, say, 60% of the American people believe Rawesome is crazy, the government is good to go in court. If that wide majority thinks raw-milk dealing would only be carried out by nutcases, then the whole issue of whether private contracts are inviolate can be set aside and dropped in the trash.

 

Well, we know government agencies have been warning the public about raw milk for at least 70 years, and claiming that pasteurized milk is wonderful and safe and scientific. So The Crazy People Doctrine seems like a slam-dunk here, regardless of how the specific charges against Rawesome’s owner are eventually worded.

 

He’s crazy, who cares whether we (the prosecutors) say he was doing business without a license or was selling a dangerous product or was making a contract he had no right to make.”

 

And the public will say, “Find him guilty, he’s a whacko. Nobody in his right mind would sell raw milk.”

 

As usual, I’ll resort to one of my extreme bizarro analogies:

 

Let’s say eight of us form a private club, and we buy and sell, among ourselves, little gold balls of plant matter which, when ingested, have been shown, invariably, to cause severe one-hour headaches. The balls have been tested, over and over again, and amazingly, the verdict is precise across the board. Eat a gold ball of this plant substance, you get a one-hour headache.

 

And suppose the eight of us believe this activity of buying and selling and eating the gold balls is part of our pursuit of happiness. We’ll assume responsibility for the headache. Do we have the right to have our club and engage in our activity—or does the government have the legal power to destroy the club and prosecute us on a criminal charge?

 

The government says, “Gold balls are food products for sale. Therefore, they fall under our jurisdiction when it comes to the issue of safety. Period.”

 

The public says, “Put these crazies in jail, or in a mental institution, and drug them to the gills.”

 

Government says, “Citizens have no fundamental and overriding right to make private contracts among themselves. We can intercede at any moment we choose to. Any rule or law we make automatically trumps the so-called right to private contracts.”

 

If we accept this judgment, then we are admitting that private relationships are a thin illusion that can be swept away without notice.

 

If you and your friends own a piece of land and build a community vegetable garden there, and then exchange squashes and tomatoes and grapes and cucumbers with one another, from your individual plots, the government can send in a food safety inspector, he can walk on your land, and he can decide whether your vegetables are legal. Your contract with your friends is null and void and without meaning—and always was.

 

If I call in a friend to fix my car in my garage and he doesn’t have a license to do repairs, he could be arrested or cited with a fine.

 

If 50 of us form a health club, and buy and sell amino acids among ourselves, and if we happen to have printed a sheet, for internal distribution, claiming these products cure arthritis, the FDA could invade our office, confiscate the products, and charge us with practicing medicine without a license.

 

And if the public, by and large, believes we are “crazies,” the government feels confident it will escape blowback.

 

You now, perhaps, see one clear reason for government/media/science propaganda: “creating convenient crazies.”

 

Take, for instance, the arena of vaccines. If government succeeds in outlawing all claimed parental exemptions from the jabs, based on its own version of good science, how many people will rise up and revolt? Versus how many will say refusing vaccines was always just for Crazy People?

 

The Crazy People Doctrine, behind the scenes, is the standard of prediction that government employs—and propaganda is the tool it uses to manufacture perception about its targets…

 

So that the matter of private contracts is tossed into the garbage.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

FDA LUNATICS AND CRIMINALS

 

FDA LUNATICS AND CRIMINALS

 

AUGUST 5, 2011. In a 2010 action filed against the FDA, the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund sought to protect the freedoms and rights of family farms—particularly when it came to the right to ship raw milk across state lines.

 

The FDA responded to that filing in a most revealing way. In an astonishing way. Its position allows you to see into its bureaucratic/fascist soul, if an agency can be said to have a soul.

 

Read these words (from FDA) carefully, because they amount to a manifesto and a prediction about what is to come, if the people of this country don’t push back in overwhelming numbers:

 

Plaintiffs assertion of a ‘fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families,’ is simply unavailing because plaintiffs do not have any fundamental right to obtain any food they wish.”

 

And then the FDA made this assertion:

 

There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract.”

 

After you pick yourself up off the floor, think about why the FDA made the latter statement.

 

Small farms and consumers have been forming clubs in America, just like the club, Rawesome Foods, that was raided two days ago. These private groups are created to engage in contracts, agreements among themselves, about what foods they will buy and sell.

 

In the case of raw milk, in order to avoid interference by the government, the club members agree to take responsibility for their own health, and the consequences, if any, of drinking raw unpasteurized milk.

 

They are, in effect, saying, “We make the choice. The choice doesn’t involve the government, one way or another. This is a private contract.”

 

But the FDA steps in and issues their edict: you don’t have a fundamental right to a contract. You especially don’t have a right to a contract that contravenes one of our regulations. You are under US. We decide, not you.

 

Those are the battles lines. They have been drawn in stark terms. The federal government isn’t going to change. It needs to be able to obliterate any private agreement in order to expand its control. It needs to be able to say, YOU ARE NOT A GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE, YOU ARE A PEOPLE BY THE GOVERNMENT.

 

In these FDA comments, which deserve to be communicated far and wide so people can understand what is being done to them, the federal government has let its share-and-care mask drop, and has shown its face.

 

Look at it.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

THE FELONIOUS VEGETABLE GROWERS

 

THE FELONIOUS VEGETABLE GROWERS

 

by Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

I was amazed

when they dismissed the charges

against my neighbor

after

they cited her

for growing a full vegetable garden

 

swallowing enveloping MANGLING

her front yard

 

I mean,

have you ever looked at

corn

tomatoes

squash

up close?

my children were traumatized

we had to take them to a therapist

the way tomatoes

cling to the vine

they dreamed

reptilian arms

thin

wrapped around their necks

in the dark house

some objects are only meant to be seen on shelves and bins

or sliced

on a plate in a well-lit dining room

the whole family

gathered around the table

property values

the neighborhood

now if you’re presenting

blue

plastic turf

smooth

clean

vacuumed twice a week

creates a whole different impression

ordered mind

 

then and only then

and if by chance federal inspectors

carrying out a routine sweep

observe

that smooth surface

they will know who lives here

 

under the sun

illusion 48-i-16

bought and paid for

sweat of brow

every right

to maintain it

without reminders

of a darker time

 

on this we make our stand

in the

bald universe

to which we pray

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE GREAT RAID OF 2011

 

THE GREAT RAWESOME FOOD RAID OF 2011

 

by Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

 

We may have

Sold a few thousand automatic weapons

To Mexican drug cartels,

Helping them murder and maim,

 

But this time

We’re launching a pinpoint operation against…

MILK!

 

GOT RAW?

YOU’RE BUSTED!

 

Hands up! Vacate the store!

 

Dump the milk,

Clear the shelves,

Take the cash,

Steal the records,

Cuff that mother,

Take him downtown

And book him, Danno!

 

Don’t worry your pretty little head,

John Q Android, we’ve got it covered.

 

 

Raw milk!

More dangerous than Fukushima!

 

At dawn,

Intrepid agents

Of the government,

Cloaked in black,

Armored,

Fully weaponized,

Held their final briefing.

 

 

They went over blueprints

Of the Venice

Private club

On Rose,

Checked their loads,

And swept out to their vehicles.

 

The enemy is clear this time.

This ain’t no Iraq or Afghanistan.

It’s milk!

 

The raw breast of cow.

 

A few hundred citizens dared

To form a private group

Knowingly

Outside federal rules and regs.

They cared nothing for the sacrament

Of Pasteurization!

 

They defiled the word and the holy process!

 

Destroy them!

 

WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT GODS!

WE LICENSE,

YOU OBEY!

 

WE GIVETH AND TAKETH!

 

WHAT YOU

AGREE TO

AMONG YOURSELVES

FOR YOUR OWN REASONS

IS

A

CARDINAL

SIN!

 

YOU HAVE PLACED YOURSELVES

BEYOND THE PALE!

 

EXCOMMUNICATION!

 

HERESY!

 

We are the black armor and the white coats of the lab, the corporate farm, the genes, the pesticides, the nutritional denominations of the sacred pyramid. We enact our wrath from a homogenized apex of power.

 

Wipe that raw mustache off your lip!

 

Get on your knees!

 

This is the new day!

 

The mask is off. We are the gods of sustenance. From our edicts alone flow the dispensations of the natural world.

 

What may pass into your bodies, in this paradise of planning, is by OUR decision.

 

Nothing defiled may enter your mouths!

 

ATTACK!

 

BUST THOSE BASTARDS DOWN TO THEIR SHORTS!

 

TAKE THEIR POSSESSIONS!

 

ENLIST THEIR NEIGHBORS AGAINST THEM!

 

MAKE THEM PARIAHS!

 

And now by the power vested in us, by the cracked and shattered Constitution of the United States of America, we arrest you. You have the right to remain astonished. You have the right to defend yourselves against an army of prosecutors. You have the right to speak along the narrow channel of what regulations permit you to enter as evidence. You have the right to

 

Realize the composition of the new world

 

Understand who and what is god

 

Pass through the valley of confusion and resistance

 

into the light of the all knowing brain

 

in the machine of justice

 

and regain your soul

 

at last

 

through the terms of your punishment.

 

Redemption is a hard road.

 

Life is pain

 

All the way up to the moment

 

Of illumination.

 

So

 

Put

 

Down

 

That

 

Milk.

 

Don’t

 

Dare

 

Suck

 

That

 

Inch of cream from the top.

 

Hideous!

 

Raw!

 

Vulgar!

 

UNHARMONIZED!

 

BLOW THOSE MOTHERS TO SMITHEREENS!