Google Glass: obedience to the Matrix

by Jon Rappoport

April 14, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

It’s now being suggested that Google Glass, the computers worn over the eyes, can be used to catch rogue stock traders before they wander off the reservation and destroy the firms they work for.

Google Glass records everything the wearer sees and says. So if all brokers are ordered to have them, their every move can be observed by company spies. Wonderful, right?

And if traders can be kept in line, how about bank tellers and nurses and teachers and gun shop owners and chefs and cab drivers and lifeguards and blackjack dealers and realtors and assembly-line workers and kindergarten kids? How about everybody?

This could be the new media. Put it all online. “Here’s what happened at Wal-Mart today, as seen through the eyes of a checkout clerk.”

Believe me, there are many people who would welcome Glass-security measures as a necessary innovation. Destroying freedom and privacy would be counted as “regrettable side effects.”

Glass: One more move in the development of a complete android society.

In case you’ve been living on the moon, this evolution has been underway for a long, long time.

Here are some personal observations on this recent history…

The major media are proof there is life after death. But that life isn’t pretty. Oh, it may be dressed to kill, but it isn’t pretty.

I first became aware that television news was dead in 1974. I hadn’t watched television for 15 years, and then, for some reason that probably had to do with my addiction to popcorn, I bought a small black and white set and arranged the antenna with, yes, aluminum foil, and set it up on a bureau in my small apartment in Los Angeles.

One night, I turned it on. I watched the news and munched popcorn.

I can’t recall the newsmen, but I assume Cronkite, the man who had replaced George Washington as the father of our country, was front and center.

I tried various stations, national and local, for the news. I was sure I was looking at androids. The tones, the grins, the melting sincerity, the hectic elation, the droning “factual reports.” America had gone mad.

The news had died completely, and I was watching animated corpses. I didn’t think I was watching dead people. I knew I was.

How could anyone take this seriously? I expected half the screen to drop away and Laurel and Hardy or Salvador Dali to peek out and expose the ruse as a massive Disney-CIA operation.

After a few months of examining television news and other programming, I began to realize the plague of androids was moving from television to the populace. Or maybe it had started in big robotic corporations and then had been taken up by the news. Either way, it was a painted zombie.

Had I missed some mega-event in the country that killed off humans and replaced them with non-carbon substitutes?

Factually, of course, the news was getting worse. But I had known it was a con since the JFK assassination.

The anchors, though, and the reporters, the whole gang of “team news” people; where had they come from? Was there an underground base where they’d been operated on, to suck away active brain cells?

Was this all a consequence of the disintegration of language? Was it the result of a deep collective trauma (Vietnam?) that needed a bright shiny cover to induce amnesia? Was it merely a wholesale reflection of the advertising industry?

By 1982, when I began to work as a reporter, I had come to a provisional conclusion. America wanted to be a happy country. It was desperate to be happy. It felt it was entitled to be happy. It would do and say anything to be happy.

Even when horrible things happened, people wanted to smile. They wanted to live inside a short-circuited universe. There were two states: happy and temporarily blank.

And then there was something else peeking in at the edge; mindless rage. That was no surprise. How could a nation feast on Happy, day in and day out, without going crazy?

Television news was a perfect template and advertisement for all this. You had car crashes and mangled bodies, storms wiping out towns, famines, murders, but you still had Giggle on the screen. That was the mandate.

The whole country, or at least the myth of the whole country, was inventing itself as a porn-tinged sitcom. I met a fair number of people who’d emigrated here on the premise that they’d find an amusement park Nirvana, and I asked them why that appealed to them in the first place.

I expected them to say it was because of horrible conditions in their home countries, but no, that wasn’t the first answer I fielded. These people would point to shiny cars and apartment buildings and fast-food restaurants and even bowling alleys to make their self-evident declaration.

A cartoon of a cartoon of a cartoon. That’s what was evolving. And now there was an innovation: at each new level of the dream, the original and lost emotional range was being reintroduced—sadness, grief, exasperation, fear, frustration, outrage, joy, excitement—but as synthetic substitutes.

It was as if a film director decided to throw in the kitchen sink on his latest project, but without a shred of insight. Just cook up an emotion and ladle it on. Pour it on the screen.

And this was being accepted, welcomed, heralded.

People were learning how to live and react and think and talk through the movies and television and advertising, as if they’d come from some unknown devastated place where the experience of life had been wiped out and a new kindergarten was called for.

And this was what the news was playing to. This was the audience.

Since movies are part of media, it brings me to an experience I had last weekend. I watched a piece of dreck called Prometheus, directed by Ridley Scott, who had once been alive when he made Blade Runner, but was now obviously dead.

He doesn’t know he’s dead, because he’s still walking around, but he’s been reanimated in some quite incredible way, his IQ sliced in half, to be generous.

This is supposed to be a movie about man’s search for his maker, about the eternal questions. It’s supposed to be about the engineering of the human race from a distant world. It’s supposed to be a Deep examination of our abiding myths.

Instead, the high points of the drama are: a woman inseminated by alien fluid and rushing into a one-day pregnancy, at the end of which, with belly swelling like a marshmallow, she gives birth to a squiggly squid; a large explosion in a cave; an underground labyrinth turning out to be a giant spaceship; and one of the engineers (?) of our race, a rubbery-white Adonis with a fixed introspective face out of a mortuary, turning on a bunch of lights to make the alien ship come alive. There is also a heroine hanging from a ledge by her fingers.

That’s it. The critics lauded the sets. The sets were perhaps one cut above an original Star Trek studio cardboard layout.

Ridley Scott, the man who gave us the only noir science-fiction movie worth watching, Blade Runner, has gone into waking slumber.

At the end of Prometheus, the heroine doctor takes off with the mantlepiece head, just the head, of a highly intelligent android, to search for the home world of the Engineers who made us, paving the way for a sequel.

Like so many blockbusters these days, the elements of Prometheus are lifted from older movies which in turn are derived from still crustier movies, and not in a good way. With each new generation, the plot lines are shrinking, the lead-ins to the big money scenes (explosions, decapitations, aliens appearing) are shorter, as if to say: who cares, we know why you’re in the theater, you want the payoffs so here they are.

A great deal has been written about sci-fi disaster movies as predictive programming; the audience is being prepared for real-life monster false-flag operations, leading to greater government clamp-downs on freedom.

Well, I think the more important programming is in the area of behavior—as in, operant conditioning. “This is the way to think and behave.”

Be not-human. Imitate the characters in these movies. Be rigid, effective, shallow, mindless. It’s the latest cartoon of life.

Google Glass is a perfect extension of all this. Wear these special glasses and gain new powers. Access the Cloud in a microsecond. Step up your efficiency quotient. Merge with Glass. Experience androidal existence at a new level. Your own mind and imagination are minor qualities. What you really want is a ticket to miles and miles of useful information and you want it now, wherever you are, whatever you’re doing.

You need directions? Here they are. You need cues to improve your real-time social interactions? Here they are. You need to record the people in your vicinity, so you can play it all back later and see how you could have maximized those eight minutes in the conference room? Here it is.

Wear Glass and merge with Glass. You’ll be an unstoppable one-two punch. You’ll amaze your associates. You’ll be the first person on your block to own a Friend who guides your actions.

Because, make no mistake about it, the next step in Glass is anticipation. The machine will know what you want before you do, and it will give it to you, right in front of your eyes. Why wait? That’s old-school. Glass already has the answer before you ask the question. It’s more efficient that way.

Talk about conditioning. It will take and make a profile of You. Then it will know what to deliver and when. The profile will rub away your rough edges. It’ll delete your complexities. It’ll remake you as a streamlined pseudo-human and fulfill the needs of the imitation-you.

Eventually, you’ll catch on. You’ll enact the suggestions and demands of Glass before it passes them on to you. You’ll be entrained. At that point, Glass will re-form a better profile, based on your new reaction-time.

You and the machine together, in an enclosed meth-like bubble, moving and acting faster and faster to gain an edge.

They could, at that point, put you on an assembly line with all the other robots and you would perform admirably. And you might well want that, to test yourself against complete unthinking machines, to gauge your progress.

In fact, society itself will have moved light years beyond current androidal archetypes: delete all unnecessary action and thought. Do away with interior reflection. Blunt imagination down to a nub. Find the fastest route from A to Z and effect it.

You’ll want to watch a movie, and the holographic experience will be yours. It’ll last a few seconds. Through the latest version of Glass, you’ll be flooded with a download of basic sensation-essence. That will be the movie. You won’t even remember what you saw, but you’ll know it in some neurological compartment, and with Glass, you’ll be able to discuss it with your friends.

The world will be your stand-alone object of affection, no matter what events are occurring beyond your need to comprehend them. Glass will assess that need-to-know and wall you off from the inessentials, and you will assent and agree and comply. Willingly.

Looking back on today’s world, you’ll see an attenuated Dickens story line of no importance at all. How could those people have stood for the interruptions, the postponements, the false trails, the dead-ends?

How could they have put up with the dreary elongated social interactions? How could they have accepted the tonnage of irrelevant information?

How much better to tune up the nervous system to a form of predictive programming, whereby you not only get to the airport in record time, but you are the airport and the plane and the flight before they even happen.

It’s the fabled Zen merge. If you’re a tooled apparatus.

And somewhere in an underground NORAD-like bunker, a technician will be making a report: “Sir, we’ve boiled down the human species to 1,234,727 profiles or roles. Our information systems do an eval on the 18 billion inhabitants of planet Earth, assess parameters and habits of each person, and basically assign them, through Glass, the applicable profile. From that point on, every suggestion, advice, datum, and prediction funneled through Glass to the user will fall within the shape of the role/profile fitted to him. Our surveys indicate that, on the whole, this escalation will operate smoothly…people want it. They welcome it…”

Jon Rappoport

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

Obama’s new brain-mapping project is already a Lilliputian disaster

Apr11

Obama’s new brain-mapping project is already a Lilliputian disaster

by Jon Rappoport

April 11, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Why? It’s simple. The scientists don’t know what they’re doing. They have no clear objectives, and the notion of building an accurate picture of a few trillion neurons in action is as far from reality as a flea painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

The utopian technocrats, who’ve been predicting that, by the middle of this century, they will create an artificial brain that outstrips the one inside the skull, are suddenly on vacation. They’re mumbling and backing away.

It’s the old put up or shut up. They’re shutting up. They’ve got nothing.

I guess paradise is postponed. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

Obama’s Manhattan Project of the brain (known as The BRAIN Initiative (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies, also commonly referred to as the Brain Activity Map Project)), launched in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, is a sop to make suckers think science can stop murders by making accurate predictions based on some monumental, all-encompassing portrait of the mind.

The current debate, sparked by Obama’s launch, centers around “which paradigm” should be utilized in this Magellan voyage through our gray matter. That’s just a cover-up. Nobody has the faintest idea about which approach will work.

Part of the reason? The titanic complexity of brain activity is always changing, moment to moment. So even a perfect snapshot, frozen in time—which scientists have no idea how to execute—means almost nothing in the next split-second. The adage about never stepping the same river twice applies perfectly to the brain.

To illustrate the whirlpool into which scientists are stepping, their sheer incompetence, and their wretched reductionist philosophy, we have only to look at what they’ve done with the concept of a mental disorder.

In past articles, I’ve demonstrated that, of the 297 official mental disorders, none can be tested for. The diagnosis in every case is a fiction.

That is to say, there is no scientific basis for labeling a person with such a condition or prescribing a drug.

I’ve also written extensively on the toxic destruction wrought by the drugs.

Behind all of this, then, what is a mental disorder?

It’s a social construct invented by psychiatrists and their allies to carve up the concepts of mind, brain, behavior, and thought. This construct is primarily inhibiting, which means that a kind of ceiling is created on human experience and consciousness.

“If you go there, or there, or there, or there, you have an illness, a disease, a disorder.”

Control.

“Stay here, don’t go there. This area means you’re all right; that area means you’re not all right.”

But of course, millions of people like the fiction. They like it for various reasons. And they absolutely insist on equating the fact that people suffer, have problems, lose control, can’t fit in, feel pain, are confused, with the idea of mental disorders.

They feel compelled to make that connection. They’ll die making that connection.

These people want to be inside the prison called super-organized society, where “mental disorders” make sense. That’s where they’re comfortable. That’s where they feel they belong. That’s their “area of expertise.” That’s where they know how to maneuver.

Labels make them feel safe. The more labels the better. They enjoy tossing the labels around, as if they’ve attained special technical knowledge that equips them to make important judgments. As if there is any basis for those judgments, when of course there is no basis at all. But delusions can be friends.

The greatest ops in the history of planet Earth have always focused on the mind, because that’s where the action is. That’s where people learn to give in. That’s where people learn how to adjust, perceive, and settle on some basic notion of what reality is all about.

The basic purpose of a psyop is this: “2 plus 2 equals 5, AND that is really saying 2 plus 2 equals 4.” There it is. That’s what a psyop does.

So when Pavlov and Freud began to publish their “findings,” other men who were quite interested in societal control and organization peeped in and realized they had something astonishing on their hands: a false way to educate the masses about the mind itself.

What an enterprise that would be!

“You see, this is what your mind is. This is how it is structured. And there are these disorders, and they help define the mind. They make things clear. Learn about this. Accept it. Live with it. Understand your own mind. Here’s how to do it.”

Just as the Roman Church (the old Roman empire, reorganized to conquer by other means) once took all of history, took key events in history and recast them as mere symbols of underlying metaphysical Church doctrine, thereby cutting off adherents from the richness and vitality of the past, so this 20th-century psyop has distanced people from the free and untrammeled energies of their own minds.

Today’s psychiatrist, the secular priest in a white coat with a medical degree, with 297 mental disorders to play with, and patients lining up for drugs, is the foot soldier in a vast op to train the mind to think about itself in very specific and narrow terms.

Moral and intellectual midgets like Hillary Clinton and a bevy of beautiful celebrities, enlisted as dupes, work the angle of “removing the stigma” from a mental-disorder diagnosis, as if that were a real problem, instead of a down-and-dirty 2am infomercial hustle.

Gone are the days when psychologists and psychiatrists made statements like this:

“The cry for freedom is a sign of suppression. It will not cease to ring as long as man feels himself captive. As diverse as the cries for freedom may be, basically they all express one and the same thing: The intolerability of the rigidity of the organism and of the machine-like institutions which create a sharp conflict with the natural feelings for life.”

(Wilhelm Reich, Work Democracy, 1937)

“Rooting [yourself] in work is crucial to any accomplishment. Rooting in mere enthusiasm will in the long run force illusory measures to keep the fires of empty enthusiasm going. And this makes politics and politicians.”

(Reich, Writings, 1951)

“If the psychic energies of the average mass of people watching a football game or a musical comedy could be diverted into the rational channels of a freedom movement, they would be invincible.”

(Reich, The Mass Psychology of Fascism, 1933)

A terrorist is the product of our education that says that fantasy is not real, that says aesthetics is just for artists, that says soul is only for priests, imagination is trivial or dangerous and for crazies, and that reality, what we must adapt to, is the external world, a world that is dead. A terrorist is a result of this whole long process of wiping out the psyche.”

(James Hillman, psychologist)

Instead, we have this (an opening statement in a recent psychiatric study): “Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) is highly comorbid with alcohol disorders (AUDs) and cannabis dependence. However, the temporal sequencing of these disorders has not been extensively studied to determine whether SAD serves as a specific risk factor for problematic substance use.”

This is the language of the machine, adapted for human use, with the human “under observation” viewed as a machine. It is the language whose basic building blocks are categories of scientifically non-existent disorders. It is a tinker-toy language applied to the mind.

It is to the actual mind and imagination as a junk-heap robot is to Keats or Yeats or Dylan Thomas.

It is a sign of a fool’s errand such as the world has never seen.

Yet, it captivates. People want to learn more, as they might want to learn more about how a dinner table was set in an old English manor; where each fork was placed and what it was for, how the napkins were folded, how many glasses went with each place setting.

People think they are being given a window on the brain.

However, they are being instructed in a reduction of energy, life, and joy with each lesson, with each little foray into mechanistic sophistry.

Psychiatry is the language of bureaucracy. Every sentence sits on a presumption that in turn refers to a department where people bend over work they will transfer to a division which will rearrange it and coordinate it with other incoming streams of senseless calculation.

“Yes, well, we thought that disorder A preceded B 37% of the time, but we were mistaken. A more accurate figure would be 41%, and even then we have to take into account the overlapping symptoms of disorder C…”

Not only is psychiatry a grand op, it’s also a phenomenon arising from the fact that people want to submerge and bury their discontents, which they see no way to explore. In this sense, psychiatry and psychology become theater. The participants take on roles based on the premise that there is no way out. No way out of being a dutiful citizen inside a highly organized prison of social and political choices.

Be a person with a disorder. Be a person who can express emotion within the context of “having problems.”

In the middle of writing this, I went into the living room and turned on the TV set. I saw a close-up of a woman crying on the Dr. Phil show. I have no idea what she was crying about, but I did see, quite clearly, that she was having the time of her life, the only time of her life. She was digging her hole deeper, because it was something to do. It was something far better than the routine of a day spent distracting herself from a mysterious X she knew nothing about and wouldn’t dare inhabit.

That X is boredom of the soul. It can extend light years in every direction, because it has nothing to do with society. Society becomes the occasion, the means to express boredom.

“Show me a place where the people always follow the rules and the customs and I will go there, because then I can reveal how exhausted I am.”

This is a grand tradition. It is even expressed in the ancient Greek myths. Behind all the power and action and rage and lust of the Olympian gods, those great myths invented by the Greek poets, there was the unmistakable scent of weariness. The immortals had nothing better to do than interfere with the humans below. The gods would invent the slightest infraction they could interpret as a slight, deserving punishment.

He wandered through the forest and by accident came upon me when I was naked, so I turned him into a stag.”

Psychiatry and its allied therapies feed on boredom. They stretch it and twist it and cut it and label it. They may say that, indeed, they are concerned with the soul, but it is a lie. They are dealing with a synthetic imitation, fabricated within the structure of a dwindling civilization cut off from its vital energies.

People who choose to live inside that structure are emotionally bored, cosmically bored, universally bored, psychically bored. .

The breakout of the individual, the Soul, is not going to be accomplished through the help of a university-trained acolyte with an advanced degree.

Instead, inside the ever-more structured rules-and-regulations civilization, progress is defined within the space of a freeze-dried concentrate, a commercial package, a mechanical artifact that is never you, never me, never any of us, but only seems to be.

Under the terms of the implied contract, the professional expert says to the patient: give me a you that isn’t you and I can help him; give me a cartoon of yourself and I will cure it.

And the patient says: here it is; go to work on it; just don’t touch the real center of the storm, my psyche; don’t set sail for that place and neither will I; we both know that land is beyond any adjustments you or I, as representatives of this shrunken society, can engineer.

It’s not quite like the myth of the knights of old, crossing the threshold into the Mystery, where life itself takes on larger meaning, and great spontaneous creation rises in the unending sky every morning.

It’s not anything like that. It’s not meant to be. It’s meant to be a virtual fraud that operates on a shrunken desiccated version of ourselves.

It’s meant to be a scientific expedition to catch life in a net and pin it to a board.

It’s meant to be a potion we drink, whereby we shrivel to tiny dimensions, and then discover everything looks bizarre, precisely because we’ve reduced ourselves. And then we need help. Then we need experts.

Then we need a brain-mapping project, a preposterous babble of assurance that our experience is comprehensible and curable.

Of course, the real cure is finding a way to attain our actual size, which is without boundaries. Then and only then do we begin to see our lives. Then we see the skies beyond the cartoon sky. Then we see the great adventure. Then we feel the cosmic boredom of the soul disintegrate. Then we feel Freedom, not freedom. Then we shrug off these fools and operators who are trying to enthrall us with their yak-yak-yak sewing machines of false knowledge.

Jon Rappoport

It was nice knowing you, America

Apr5

It was nice knowing you, America

by Jon Rappoport

April 5, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

There are now an astonishing 90 million people absent from the US labor force.

NPR reports: “Every month, 14 million Americans get a disability check from the government.”

“In Hale County, Alabama, nearly 1 in 4 working-age adults is on disability.”

As of December 2012, 47 million Americans were on food stamps. The USDA assesses the annual cost of the program at $71.8 billion.

Separate from food stamps, and apparently not including other members of a household where at least one person is receiving government payments, we have 4.3 million Americans on welfare.

Medicaid, the government medical-care program for the poor, lists 50.1 million people enrolled in 2011. If you include Americans who were on Medicaid for at least one month in that year, the number swells to 70.4 million. As a result of Obamacare, the US Dept. of Health and Human Services predicts 20 million new people will be added to Medicaid in 2019.

Forbes Magazine states the annual cost of healthcare in the US is $2 trillion. And yet, concealed from the public, this money is used to wreak incredible destruction on the people.

In 2001, a landmark article in the LA Times, written by Linda Marsa, reported that 100,000 Americans are killed by FDA-approved pharmaceutical drugs every year, and 2.1 million more people are hospitalized as a result of adverse reactions to the medical drugs. In all, there are 22 million significant adverse reactions each year in the US.

The Times article was based, in part, on a July 26, 2000, review by Dr. Barbara Starfield, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association: “Is US health really the best in the world?”

Starfield stated that the American medical system kills 225,000 people a year, or 2.25 million people per decade. Of these, slightly less than half are killed by FDA-approved medicines, and the rest meet their deaths as a result of malpractice and errors committed in hospitals.

Of course, there are also the untold numbers of Americans exposed to GMO crops, fluorides, and toxic pesticides.

And then there is the number of people US troops have killed and maimed in recent foreign wars. Economic sanctions alone, between the two Iraq wars, killed 500,000 Iraqi children.

How did this culture of death and disability take over?

Could one possibly attribute the great change to a deterioration of principle? And its replacement with a sheer intent to conquer, sell, consume, profit, gorge, and cheat no matter what the outcome?

Given the fact that more and more Americans don’t even know what a principle is, it’s obvious that a deterioration has occurred.

Forget the idea of help from central government. It continues to rot as it expands. It enables spokespersons who wouldn’t be able to wake up in the morning if they didn’t have at least a dozen lies to tell during the coming day.

The commander-in-chief of lies is the president. Bush, Obama, it makes no difference. Lies, obfuscations, omissions, pretenses, excuses, cover stories. They’re a president’s stock in trade. Some presidents lie more convincingly than others.

It’s exactly what you would expect from any major corporate CEO. The federal government is basically a self-generating bank with an army.

A public official is a person who a) cultivates a corrupt objective and then b) drapes it in false Caring. Heaven slowly reveals itself as Hell.

A public official is a fragment of scum seeking to join a larger lake of scum.

A public official attempts to earn entrance to a circle of people far more corrupt than he ever dreamed he could be.

Media anchors are barnacles on public officials.

Viewer-adherents to the nightly news are androids who, as they sit mute before their screens, experience a weak electric signal they interpret as satisfaction.

Sensorily, telepathically, intellectually, the androids transit to their young the value of these signals.

The official apparatus of information merges with the human nervous system to illuminate a desolate cartoon that plays over and over and produces movements in ligaments, tendons, and muscles called “life.”.

From brain to brain and mind to mind, without sound or word, the affirmation of an existence empty of principle is transmitted at a speed beyond that of light.

The collective consciousness anticipates the next hyper-sentimental tragedy in the circus maximus.

Technocrats are busy designing a machine-brain that will mimic all these reflections, and this machine will be called utopia.

With eyes averted, the populace studiously ignores the figure standing in the wings:

The individual. The awake individual.

The alive and intensely creative individual, who is free.

The individual who refuses to join the crippled parade.

Why would he join it? For the barely traceable comfort of a wan washed-out hope?

The principle of the free and powerful individual was once a barrier against the assault of the government-corporate State. It was a reminder that we could live beyond the shadow of collectivist destruction emblazoned in the statistics I cited above.

The principle offered the promise that groups of such free individuals, without compromise, could band together and embody achievement, strength, and independence from entrenched authority.

But an intense psychological operation was underway and has continued to this day. Its essence is: the collective is everything, the hive is everything, the individual is nothing, the individual is the cause of all our trouble.

Turning the truth upside down and deserting the principle of the individual has done as much harm to the house of this nation as any bomb could. More actually, because of the effect on the mind and spirit.

The answer to this massive crime and its effects has to begin with a renaissance of the individual, no matter how distant the prospects of success may seem.

Waking up isn’t a group phenomenon. The building block is the single human being. The layers and webs and networks of collectivist illusion have to be wiped away from his eyes.

The Group as the basis for all life is the lie that has gotten us this far down the road to perdition. It is the image promoted by the psyop. It is the false dream that has been used and twisted to push an agenda of endless Need which must be fed from Above.

From the earliest days of history on this planet, top-down authority, aided and abetted by a privileged priest or intellectual class, has monopolized power by defining the population as a mass and a group, and that formula has been assiduously followed in every society and civilization.

It is being followed now, to squelch the consciousness of the individual, and demote that from a cardinal principle to an “outmoded and primitive evolutionary dead-end.”

The results, in this country, are there for anyone to see.

So is the solution.

Life, power, and consciousness begin with the individual.

We can try to tap dance our way past that, we can make excuses and proclaim theory after theory of disability, we can raise flag after flag on behalf of “group security,” but nothing will change.

We are at the same gate, the same doorway, the same starting point. And in that place, we have a choice. To live with the spirit, energy, and imagination of the free individual, or to enroll in the amorphous collective and shove in all our chips on the future that will bring.

“Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value.” Tom Paine, December 23, 1776

Jon Rappoport

Chemical warfare against the nation right under our noses

Apr2

Chemical warfare against the nation right under our noses

by Jon Rappoport

April 2, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Thirty years ago, Nancy Reagan launched her version of the war on drugs: “just say no.”

She campaigned on that slogan all over America.

She was lampooned as an idiot.

Now, some researchers estimate that 60% of the Mexican economy would crash if the drug business disappeared there. We have US street gangs operating as retailers for Mexican cartels. We have Mexican cartel soldiers living in suburban homes outside American cities, guarding rooms piled to the ceiling with cash.

US banks are laundering drug money. In Mexico, battling cartels have murdered 50,000 people over the past several years.

We have scores of serious reports from former DEA agents about the collusion of US federal agencies in the drug trade.

Right now, in Chicago, US attorneys are winning delay after delay in the trafficking trial of Jesus Niebla, a Sinaloa cartel lieutenant who was busted in 2009. The issue? Niebla’s lawyers claim the US government granted Sinaloa immunity from prosecution, in return for intell on rival cartels. The government doesn’t want possible evidence of this claim to see the light of day.

The war on drugs was lost a long time ago.

How many lives do you think have been destroyed, how many marriages ruined, how much violence committed, on the basis of booze since 1933, when Prohibition was lifted?

Legalize drugs, don’t legalize them, people find them and buy them and ingest them. They develop physical illnesses. They deteriorate.

The number of lives destroyed by drugs, and the peripheral ripples, continue to increase.

We’re left with: just say yes or just say no. And it isn’t some Sinaloa chief who says it. It’s the user, the person who swallows it or snorts it or shoots it. It always was.

For those people who love citing poverty, abuse, lack of education as the social causes of drug use, the answer is a program to lift up the poor. But despite billions of dollars in aid, over decades, such a program, in the hands of the government, hasn’t shown results. The actual intent to foster dependence on government is the covert purpose of this op.

It may be insensitive and cruel to suggest that the poor have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and revolutionize their own communities, but it is another hard fact of life. The government isn’t going to do it. All previous attempts have ended in disaster. The condition of the poor in this country is worse than it was 30 years ago.

So even at that level of society, “just say no” applies. People who are better off may find this intolerable. They may say we can’t consign the poor to making their own hard decisions. They may say it’s inhuman. They may say Bill Gates can save Detroit with computers in every classroom. They may say anything. But what they’re saying isn’t making any difference.

I fully realize that making no difference doesn’t deter these caring individuals from their idealism. They wear it as a badge of honor, and they don’t give a damn what the results show.

The federal government is fully aware, for example, that drug gangs in inner cities are causing enormous destruction. But are these gangs the targets of any successful program of deterrence or elimination?

On a larger scale, is Mexico going to destroy its drug business? The answer in both cases is no.

People speak of high-level corruption. Of course it exists. Governments and banks profit from drugs. In many ways. You could say banks are leaders in the drug business. You could say they ultimately run it.

But what does that do for the addict, for the chronic user?

The person at the end of the supply line, the user, says yes or no. If you think there is no wisdom in that, you’re surrendering far more than lives destroyed by drugs. You’re advocating the destruction of lives in which the freedom to choose is eliminated by a social construct that, in one way or another, denies such freedom exists.

It’s a hell of a lot harder to affirm freedom in Iraq than it is in Scarsdale or Beverly Hills. But that doesn’t mean we should have invaded Iraq and mangled millions of lives. If we really wanted freedom to exist there, we would have left those people to their own devices. Why? Because you can’t deliver freedom like a steak on a plate to someone else.

They have to take it. And sometimes that means risking life and limb.

My best friend, when I was 20, killed himself on drugs. He could have chosen a different road. He didn’t. It was expected, by his wife and friends, that he would kill himself. Naturally, they wanted him to get healthy and strong instead, but he went another way. They were there to help him, but he didn’t take the help. So they knew he would do himself in.

He was smart enough to know he had a choice. He chose. On some level, everyone is that smart. To keep saying, over and over and over and over, that people can’t choose to stop taking drugs, is a fatal position.

Yes, families help, and yes, friends can help, and yes, there are groups that can help. But the user is the one who decides.

You have to ask yourself this: what culture is better and stronger and safer? The one that regards freedom and choice as primary values, or the one that claims these qualities don’t really exist at all?

So now we come to pharmaceutical drugs, which in the US kill, at minimum, 106,000 people a year. (See Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”)

The CDC has just reported that a staggering 6.4 million American children under the age of 17 have been diagnosed with ADHD. This figure includes one out of five boys of high school age. Every one of these children has, of course, been prescribed Ritalin or Adderall.

This corporate-government juggernaut wants more control than it has now. By legislation, by edict, by regulation, people will no longer be able to refuse medication—that’s its goal. Under Obamacare, the ability to achieve this objective improves.

Patients can be intimidated. They can be told they must obey their doctors if they want to stay in the program. They can be exiled if they’re labeled “resistant” or “non-compliant.”

But as with street drugs, the onus would fall on the user, and he would make the choice. Say yes or no to a drug. Regardless of consequences, the choice is there.

Freedom and choice. This society is moving away from these values like an express train. The ticket to ride is “victim status.” You buy that, you’re on the train.

You keep telling people who live hard lives they have no choice, they’re suffering from social injustice and diseases of addiction, and so forth, and you draw in believers. Whether you’re right or wrong in your assessments of other people’s problems, if you deny choice and freedom, you’re helping to kill hope at the deepest level.

You may like what you’re hearing yourself say, you may believe you’re on the side of the angels, you may feel better, you may be able to argue your position cogently, but you’re in the killing fields with a scythe.

The pundits on television with their careful hair and their bland smiles and their earnest expressions are waving scythes, when they cite all the social and economic reasons people can’t rise up on their own. These social critics are trying to create a culture in which only the powerful criminals survive. They may as well be peddling crack on a street corner.

“We just want to help the less fortunate,” delivered with a goonish thrust, is the same lie it always was. It’s superiority in sheep’s clothing.

The drug dealer sees through that in a second. Put him on television and let him speak uncensored, and very soon you’ll notice a real and inconvenient truth swim to the surface: people make choices.

The dealer knows that. His job is to make those choices as hard as possible. He works that angle all day and all night. If he bothers to listen to the pundits, he celebrates their lies. They’re helping him do business. They’re peddling the psychological equivalent of physical addiction.

Addiction to the idea that there really is no freedom:

“Nobody can say no and nobody can say yes. It’s all up to the machinery turning in the brain. It’s all social and economic. It’s all predetermined.” That’s the big infomercial and the big sales campaign and the big lie.

It’s taken root. The roots are so deep even middle-class kids are trying to figure out how they can qualify as victims with a disability. ADHD is right up there on their list.

The street drug dealer and the doctor are basically operating on the same premise. Use every available strategy to cut off the possibility of choice by the user.

But the eternal fact about freedom is anybody can choose it at any time. No permission required.

If the government really wanted to start solving the problems (including drugs) of inner cities in America, you would see a completely different approach. It would be based on encouraging at least some degree of freedom and strength—which runs counter to government’s aims. Instead of the interminable agency and task force bullshit which is par for the course in poverty programs, you would see, for a millionth of the $$ now being doled out, people participating in building their own homes, growing their own food in vast urban farms, making their own clothes.

But instead, you see funding, funding, funding, drugs, drugs, and drugs, more and more poverty.

You hear generality after generality after generality, about “the moral imperative to help the downtrodden,” dissolve into nothing. No progress, no betterment, only destruction.

It’s a straight con.

Freedom, power, and choice are the only way out.

Take a bombed-out destitute city like Detroit. To the precise degree the residents of Detroit have bought the idea that help and liberation are on the way and they have no power of choice over their own future, they’re paralyzed and doomed. That’s the plain fact. You can try to weasel your way around it and make excuses and say you’re for “a humane answer” and “there is a moral obligation,” but that rides on the wind like dust.

If tomorrow, the people of Detroit said ENOUGH and came out of their homes on to the dangerous streets, whose drug-thugs are keeping them hostage and guaranteeing their long slide into sickness and death; if the people of Detroit took over large swathes of land and started growing food, because food is survival, and if those who had guns stood guard over that land around the clock and protected it as their last refuge against decimation, they could begin to reverse the tide. That is a choice called freedom. It’s a choice called power.

I once interviewed a crack dealer who told me, “I live on that government bullshit.” He was saying the promises and the humanitarian clap-trap and the sentimental musings and oozings were the staple that kept the poor in check, in the middle of nowhere, in a squeeze play. Ripe for drugs.

He was saying the government wants people to be addicted to drugs.

And this is true, all the way from crack to Prozac.

So if the government of the United States hadn’t made a deal to keep Sinaloa, the largest drug cartel in Mexico, out of prison, that would truly be a shock. The Sinaloa is a key element of US government domestic policy.

So is Big Pharma. They are the two pillars of the real structure of government.

This is why, for instance, you can read studies about levels of depression among residents of inner cities. Calling depression in those areas a brain chemical imbalance is like saying a pilot in a plane that’s just dropped a flaming engine into the sea is suffering from Panic Disorder.

The latest “humanitarian” program in these blighted neighborhoods is giving kids Ritalin without even bothering to diagnose ADHD, in order to “level the playing field.” Despite studies that show ADHD drugs do no good and are highly toxic, psychiatrists are feeding these kids cheap speed to “help them in school.”

Street drugs aren’t enough. Pharmaceutical psychotropics have to be introduced.

The best definition of depression is: a person won’t fight his way out of feeling depressed. That also is considered a cruel assessment. Maybe it is, but it’s accurate. It’s accurate in Beverly Hills and the south side of Chicago and the slums of Bombay. It’s accurate in the American midwest where farms have been hit by long droughts and in parts of Ethiopia.

People change their circumstances by choosing to take action and then taking it. Nothing can alter that formula.

Yes, help can arrive, and help can help, but whether it does or doesn’t, people have to pull themselves up. They can do it, or they can refuse to do it. If they refuse, they pay the price.

Relying on government for a solution is dangerous. Waiting for idealists to change government’s mind about helping is very dangerous.

Just ask people in parts of Africa where, like gifts from heaven, doctors arrive with drugs and vaccines. The vaccines push already compromised immune systems over the edge into failure, and the drugs, many of them past expiration date, spoiled from lack of refrigeration, and toxic to begin with, kill and maim.

It’s chemical warfare. It’s chemical warfare on the streets with drugs sold by cartels, and it’s warfare from Big Pharma. The promise is always Relief, but the tightening spiral takes people down into destruction.

Governments are basically selling less freedom and more drugs as an answer, and they’re packaging it as We Care.

For people who really want to lift the poor, here is a piece of advice. Ask yourself, what would really help people become freer, stronger, and more self-reliant? Find answers that actually fit that bill, and then put those answers into action. Don’t wait. Forget the government. Organize on your own, and launch.

Freer, stronger, more self-reliant. Able to choose. Able to say yes or no. Those are qualities that represent a platform from which a life can be lived.

Anytime you see a program based on “we’re going to give you what you need, and then we’re going to do that again and again and again and again,” know you’re looking at an op designed to torpedo the core of what a human being is.

Turn your telescope around. You’ve been looking through the wrong end.

Try reading a history of drug companies like Hoffman La Roche, Sandoz, and Boehringer. Starting in the early years of the 20^th century, they shipped large quantities of heroin and cocaine to the Far East. When necessary, they used falsified records, shell companies, and foreign staging areas to circumvent confiscation and arrest.

Little has changed since the British Opium Wars against China. These days, the PR is much better. So are government connections and support. The main players have better teeth and smile often. It’s still More Drugs, More Human Destruction, More Profits, Less Freedom.

Here’s another factor to contemplate. For corporations listed on The New York Stock Exchange and the NASDAQ: if the extent to which these companies relied on laundered street-drug cash were known, trading markets across the world would crash in 24 hours.

That tells you two things. Governments aren’t going to fight a real war on drugs, no matter what. And the end user of those drugs, the person who snorts and shoots and swallows them, is funding those corporations and holding up the global trading markets, on his back, as he goes down the tunnel to oblivion, to be replaced by a fresh customer.

So if you think that, somehow, help is on the way to users, rich or poor, and the choice to take or not take drugs is in the hands of people other than the users, think again. And again.

Bill Hicks, one of the truly great comedians of our time, used to say:

“Here’s what we can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money we spend on weapons and defense each year and instead spend it feeding and clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace.”

Yes, we could. And we could repeat what Bill said many times, and still the “we,” which turns out to be the government/corporate nexus, would have no intention of producing Christmas on Earth.

That’s why the burden falls on the end user. The end user of drugs, the end user of intelligence, of hope, of desire, of courage, of whatever he uses and decides to use.

The true cruelty is omitting that factor from the equation, omitting it in what we teach ourselves and those we profess to care about.

Sometimes freedom and choice are easy. Sometimes they’re very hard. But no matter who you are, no matter what your circumstances, no matter where you live, you always choose. You can default that natural right and fact, in which case that was your decision.

Whether we’re talking about street drugs or pharmaceuticals, whether we’re talking about people who live in Beverly Hills or South Central LA, whether we’re talking about Fair or Unfair, the building block is freedom. The individual chooses.

The most basic psyop of our time is the denial of the existence of freedom. And in many ways, life seems to cooperate with that psyop. It seems to say, as it always has, since the beginning of time: you have no freedom, you have no choice, you must give in.

That is the grand illusion.

People say, “That’s not right. Many people simply don’t have the means to make choices. They’re at the bottom of the ladder. They can only climb it with outside help, lots of it.”

I point out, again, that this notion, no matter how well-intentioned, can’t ever replace the individual’s courage to take his freedom in his own hands.

I began this article to expose the obvious but overlooked fact that the population is a target of chemical warfare from drugs. And yes, I know there are still other chemicals involved. Fluorides, chemtrail heavy metals, pesticides. But I wanted to go for the most basic thing. I ended up at freedom, because our society is leaving it behind.

And the stark truth is, when for any reason under the sun, a person denies or gives up his own freedom to choose, he is doomed. He is waiting for the war to end, and it won’t. The quality of help he might or might not receive is always in doubt.

There are thousands and thousands of talk-show hosts and pundits and reporters and academics who, armed with “superior understanding,” are ready to take up the cudgel and beat down any attempt to say people must use their freedom to escape their problems and dire circumstances.

These professional liars earn their bread by making it seem obvious that people can’t be free, they can only function through massive outside help.

Yes, and that help, of course, would come from the precise people and agencies and companies that are waging the all-out chemical war against the populace.

Makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

A totalitarian closed circle always does, until you have to live inside it.

Jon Rappoport

The fatal flaw in the human-machine interface

Mar21

The fatal flaw in the human-machine interface

by Jon Rappoport

March 21, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

There is a great deal of research going on in the area of artificial intelligence (AI) merging with the brain.

Exuberant cheerleaders like Roy Kurzweil are quite confident that we are approaching a moment when a computer will exhibit all the power of the human brain.

The definition of “power” in this context is fuzzy. But Kurzweil and others are sure we’re about to uncover the “algorithm” that underlies all brain activity.

They couldn’t be more wrong. Neuroscience has barely scratched the surface of understanding how the brain operates. Cracking the code is not on the horizon.

This fact reflects a much deeper problem. PR is not science. Predictions about what is imminent are not the same thing as verified research results.

PR is not information.

In exactly the same way, were a human-computer interface with awesome capability endowed with access to a hundred galaxies of stored data, it would run up against the problem of vast chronic misinformation in those cosmic warehouses.

This is not something that can be deleted with a program or a committee tasked with making corrective changes.

For example, and this is just one area, medical science is so rife with fraud, at so many levels, as I’ve demonstrated over and over again for the past 10 years, that it would take humans decades to expose a significant part of it. And AI wouldn’t even know where or how to begin looking, because…who would set the parameters of such an investigation?

There is an inherent self-limiting function in AI. It uses, accesses, collates, and calculates with, false information. Not just here and there or now and then, but on a continuous basis.

Think about all the entrenched institutions and monopolies in our society. Each one of them proliferates false information like a Niagara.

No machine can correct that. Indeed, AI machines are victims to it. They in turn emanate more falsities based on the information they are utilizing. I’m sure someone can make a little model of the exponential expansion of this disaster.

Each and every false datum generates a wider and wider stream of lies, and the streams, becoming rivers, overlap and produce exceptionally large numbers of contaminated eddies, polls, and rapids.

When personal computers entered the marketplace, people began a clamor about the Age of Information.

There were cultural reasons for this enthusiasm. They could all summed up by the fact that we are living in a technological society, and technology walks hand in glove with information.

But as the messianic postulations and predictions reached new heights, and the drive began to marry machine and human brain, the gaping holes and rips in the utopian fabric of dreams loomed up for any intelligent person to observe.

When a corporation or government expands to a certain size, it dedicates itself to survival, not of its principles, not of its original mission, but of Itself as an entity. Therefore, it spins lies.

As Dr. Peter Breggin and I discussed on his radio show yesterday, when it comes to the newly announced federal brain-mapping project (B.A.M.), the scientists will very rapidly begin drowning in their own ignorance about the very organ they are investigating.

But that won’t do. This billion-dollar project is supposed to produce results, and the project must survive. Therefore, the researchers will cook up models to demonstrate their progress. These models will make assertions which are patently false.

Pharmaceutical companies will develop new drugs based on the false assertions about the brain, knowing full well they are operating in swamp of deception, and caring not one whit about it.

It is the same with the vaunted AI-human brain interface. It will gobble up and deploy untold numbers of lies already told by other institutions to defend and protect their own survival.

The complexity, on various levels, of false information will make the heralded AI-brain collaboration resemble an intelligence agency:

It lies about other lies, and then it lies about that.

The mathematics are packed with functions that automatically spiral out realities even Lewis Carroll’s Mad Hatter would find frivolous and repellent.

The field of information theory is about handling quantity of data and making that data readable. It’s not about the quality of the data.

AI can work successfully in engineering projects, but when the human interface is added, we are no longer merely talking about engineering. The whole purpose of the interface is supposed to be about somehow making humans better.

How can that happen when the hugely expanded access to data runs into billions or trillions of bits of false information?

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

I’ve been making notes for my second, more advanced logic course. The purpose of the course is to provide better ways of handling the flood of information we deal with every day. The first challenge is going beyond the rules and principles of classical logic, in order to analyze the quality of the data we are digesting and using.

There is no pat system for doing that. Certainly, accepting data based on the notion that “recognized authorities” are reliable would be a disaster. But that is exactly where the human-AI interface is heading, like a team of horses being driven toward the edge of a cliff.

The human-AI engineers are already fatally compromised. In journalistic terms, they are the mainstream reporters obeying the parameters laid down by their editors and corporate owners. They write their stories inside a bubble of illusory context. They go back, again and again, to the same sources, and those sources are permanently biased against popping the bubble and journeying out to where the truth exists.

Actually, an AI machine could write most of the articles that appear on the front page of the NY Times every day. It would save time and cut expenses. But the result would be the same: absurdly limited context, false information, deception, fatuous presumption of authority.

If, instead, you want to look for a program that would discount such a presumption and would reject institutional secrecy, a program that would undertake a relentless investigation of the quality of data, there is a potential candidate.

It’s called a human being. And it’s not a program.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Who will be the first killer wearing Google Glass?

Mar19

Who will be the first killer wearing Google Glass?

By Jon Rappoport

March 19, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

One thing is certain. He’ll say, “I thought I was in a movie.”

Either the judge will dismiss that excuse with a snort and huff, or he’ll create yet a new class of victims: the people who are brainwashed into believing the Real is merely a consequence-free artifact designed for them by Glass.

“Murder? It was merely virtual. Glass made me think so, Your Honor.”

A friend and I cooked up a Glass ad: “You’ll see exactly what you’re seeing now, only you’ll think you’re in a movie. And electromagnetic radiation will envelope your head and the NSA will see everything you’re seeing in real time.”

Entitled yuppie boomer spies for the national security State. Just what we need.

Then, up the road, we’ll have this. Suits filed by people whose lawyers insist their clients had a reasonable expectation of receiving information from Glass that didn’t, in fact, arrive:

when to take the next pill;

a quicker way to get to the airport to make their flight to a career-enhancing meeting in Macao (they missed the plane and the meeting);

a more accurate assessment of what the beautiful stranger sitting at a table in a restaurant is looking for in a prospective husband;

more convincing talking points transmitted before a conversation with a political adversary…

“My disappointment with Glass was so profound I spiraled down into a depression that ruined my life. After all, my Glass and I are One. When an intimate friend lets you down, it’s traumatic.”

Taking it further, the ontology of Glass and such future devices is: everything in the universe is connected. The way we say it is.

It’s the job of Glass to elucidate and demonstrate that by virtually hooking the wearer up to all of it. You’ll get the sizzle and dazzle. The life-path of giant redwoods, people shoveling snow in Mongolia, fish swimming around the Great Reef, pygmies dancing in Central Africa, new (fake) Arab Spring outbursts, moving stock prices, drug recalls, ice caps expanding and diminishing at the North Pole, sun spots, geothermal boil at the core of Earth, estimated germ-content in subsets of bodies walking around in Paris.

Now. In real time. Sequentially or all at once. In an ongoing Spiritual event of the highest order. (Sure it is.)

And this imparts to the Glass wearer a sense that he is a first-class citizen in the new Technocratic Paradise, as if he were part-human, part-machine.

“It’s amazing. When I put on Glass, I’m in satori. I’m plugged into the online bio-astro-neuro-meta-quantum orchestra called Universe. At least, that’s what they tell me.”

A human without Glass? Unthinkable.

Will the Pope wear Glass? Who will be the first president of the United States to wear it? You can be sure the police will. They’ll have access to the history of any citizen as if he were a Potential Suspect, and animated previews of any building or home as an assault target.

IRS agents in cars, on foot, sitting in restaurants will merely glance at another human, and immediately a complete tax history of that person will spring up before his eyes.

Staff psychiatrists will walk through office buildings and pick up instant psych evals on every worker.

And the military? “EVERYTHING is a battlefield. I finally figured that out when I started wearing Glass.”

Glass will inform any agriculture inspector anywhere on the globe that the GMO plant he is looking at is perfectly safe and equivalent in every way to conventionally-grown.

Doctors, relying on Glass-supplied medical images and data (all cooked and distorted, of course, by Big Pharma), will perform millions of unnecessary surgeries and dispense billions of useless and highly toxic pills to patients. Just like now, only worse.

But Glass is wonderful. How could we have lived without it?

You’ll meet somebody in a park and start a conversation. Suddenly, before your eyes, you’ll see: “His Twitter account temporarily suspended for providing questionable links; frequently employs terms like ‘freedom,’ ‘liberty.’ Belongs to no approved groups. Warning—you should consider this person dangerous.”

Or you’ll be shopping in a market and, as you pass down the aisle, a red light will go on in space in front of your face when you encounter a person whose approved vaccine status has lapsed. “Warning: herd immunity endangered.”

Two friends at a picnic:

“Hey, I just upgraded to the Glass C-16 program.”

“What’s that?”

“You don’t know?”

“No.”

“It contains Homeland Security profiles on four million Americans. Invaluable.”

“Where did you get it?”

“Through our office. We have a contract with the DOJ. So we have special access.”

“How can I get it?”

“Heh-heh. You can’t, unless you go through a special clearance exam. It’s expensive.”

Any Glass wearer who eats at a restaurant in New York will immediately be plugged into a Bloomberg app that displays, before his eyes, along with a sub-vocal whisper: “The next bite of steak will elevate your cholesterol level above allowed limits. Put down the fork. Don’t order coffee. Move the dish of sugar envelopes away from you. I see you’re a registered gun owner in Utah. You have three hours to leave the City.”

The state of mind, in which Glass wearers view reality as virtual, is the big one. People aren’t already disconnected enough from life? We need more illusion?

From ancient times, and especially since Plato, the faculty of vision, beyond the other four physical senses, has been elevated to the highest position of in-sight. The metaphors have been about “seeing the higher reality.”

So now, Google goes to eyeGlass, which is all about giving wearers a sense of being in charge, by placing a grid over the real world, and enhancing Vision.

Glass is the cocaine of computing.

And superiority? Is it any different from the status owners experience when they slide down Main Street in a Ferrari? They’re automatically Somebody because of their car.

Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Google, has famously said: “If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place…and it’s important, for example, that we are subject in the Unite States to the Patriot Act.”

As the NSA captures everything Glass wearers are seeing in real time, Schmidt’s statement will take on added meaning, won’t it? Glass is the Brave New World snitch of snitches.

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and a CD to guide you. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

Hidden behind all of this is the position and place of the individual. His creative power will be defined as the mere ability to receive “elite” information. That’s a passive formulation; precisely the opposite of what the creative life is.

The number-one guru of utopian technocracy, Ray Kurzweil, thinks human creativity, as a concept, is largely based on a misunderstanding about what computers can do. That’s all.

Because a computer beat a world champion chess player, because a computer can analyze the work of a poet and then spit out its own poems in that author’s style, because a computer can defeat two very good Jeopardy players on television, we know that human creativity is an illusion. Computers, machines can work the same “tricks” by simply accessing and collating information.

If you want an intellectual recipe for taking away the essence of what a human being is, you’ve just found it.

And Glass will help lead the way.

“I have so much information jumping in front of my eyes now, it’s amazing. What else do I need? I’m there.”

For centuries, artists and inventors proved that reality was only one (temporary) work of art. They proved it by creating something new and powerful, again and again and again. They committed body, mind, and soul to their work. They dynamically moved the human race ahead.

Now, the “new paradigm” is Instant Information. Tap in, and reality is yours.

Yes, but what reality?

The answer is: the one designed, not by you, but for you.

And by people who deserve your trust the way a wildebeest should trust a pack of lions.

Jon Rappoport

The disaster of manufactured consent in the Matrix

Mar15

The disaster of manufacturing consent in the Matrix

by Jon Rappoport

March 15, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

This article may seem to be about abstract theory, but it isn’t. It’s about how populations are viewed by psychological-operations specialists.

More importantly, it’s about how people are led to accept substitutes for their own highest ideals. The substitutes look like the real thing, but they’re actually very well drawn cartoons.

The most successful long-terms psyops are aimed at getting people to accept “good things, wonderful things.” Except, it turns out that these things magically evaporate and leave populations in the lurch.

Imagine for a moment that every crisis we now find ourselves in, every form of pollution and poisoning and every war and every mass destruction of life…was preceded and precipitated by…a psyop that looked like a golden destiny of fulfillment.

Okay. Let’s begin.

At some point, every intelligent human develops their own reality.

This reality isn’t usually a clear, articulated, and overall position. It tends to be a hodge-podge of linked ideas, preferences, feelings, principles, and morals.

Nevertheless, consciously and unconsciously, the person refers to it often, and uses it as a tool with which to navigate through life.

In the Matrix, there is pressure to have people connect their realities to each other. Why? Because groups can thus be created. Groups are easier to compromise than individuals.

We get the concept of hooked ideas. A hooked idea is one which will entice people to merge their realities into One. The hooked idea can be expressed as a slogan, a so-called meme, a principle. It is introduced by people who work psyops.

A psyop is a campaign to herd people into a place where their individual realities overlap.

For the propagandist, there is the eternal search for the good, better, and best hooking idea, the one that will collect the greatest possible number of people under one roof.

This has nothing to do with true progress or honest intent. It has everything to do with control.

Therefore, the actual content and substance and meaning of the hooking idea is irrelevant. A retired propaganda operative once told me, “If I could broadcast a piece of absolute gibberish from one end of the planet to the other, and have it picked up and consented to, I would do it.”

For a psyop specialist, the jackpot is a large group of hooked ideas that, taken together, change the world, and bring a billion or more people’s realities into one overlapping space.

Here is a current ongoing group of such hooked ideas. Before you read them, remember that the aim of such ideas is collecting people under AN IMITATION OF THE REAL THING.

Whatever meaning these hooked ideas have, they are not searching out people to move them into actual individual choices. No, the objective is to rope them under a fake banner that looks real.

“Help others. Help the needy. Raise up the needy. We’re all in this together. Greatest good. Greatest good for the greatest number. Humanity as one. Peace. Let’s all cooperate. The human family…”

This is only a partial list of the group of hooked ideas.

These ideas are transmitted to the global population through every means possible: ads, public service announcements, political speeches, movies, articles, books, the news, television shows of every type, the education system. It’s a blitz, and it doesn’t stop. All the angles are played.

The psyop calculation runs this way: the majority of people who buy in and connect their realities to other people’s realities and achieve overlap—will go passive and accept “the new humane society.” All these people are complete pawns.

The sector of people who buy in and thus share realities, collectively, and then DO something about it…these people will follow a prescribed path. They’ll join the approved groups and campaign for the chosen causes. They’re dupes.

The very small fraction of people who buy into the group of hooked ideas and think of them as genuine and real, and also DO something genuine and real and good about it, will create a manageable amount of disruption to the scheme and the objective—which by the way is a completely collectivist planet. The operative word here is “manageable.”

This same retired propaganda operative, who goes by the pseudonym of Ellis Medavoy (I interview him 28 times in one section of my collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED), explained this “psyop calculation”:

“The target of a terrific psyop is yearning and longing. That’s what I looked for when I was working: what people long and yearn for. Something unformed and undefined but very powerful. That’s what I wanted to tap into.

“If I could tap into that, people would buy in and surrender a significant part of whatever their personal world looks like. Because they want to believe they’re coming together with like-minded others. They’ll also believe the path laid out for them is correct and proper and wonderful. This is really a fake religion we’re talking about.

“A fake religion. It’s really for children, and most people turn out to be children. Give them a group of high-minded ideas, and they’ll grab on and think everything they’ve done up to that moment is a prelude to THIS.

“We [operatives] are playing a symphony, you see, and once they listen to the prelude, they’re hooked. They stay. They long for the climax, which doesn’t exist; not the way they imagine it. To them it’s all about ‘arrival in the promised land,’ as if that’s some kind of gift that’s wrapped up under the tree, waiting to be opened.

“We give them a fake god, a dead-end god. If they were once burning with authentic faith, we derail that and take them to another place…”

In truth, there is no such thing as the sum of all personal realities. That concept is a delusion that is foisted on people.

As I stated at the beginning of this article, each person has their own reality. It may be a hodge-podge, it may be borrowed to some degree, but it IS the reality of the individual. Each person has the opportunity, if he takes it, to expand that reality and make it more profound, on his own terms.

But once he becomes mesmerized by the notion of overlapping his reality with others, he’s in a whole different pew.

Here is another very important distinction: you and I and others could, for example, decide to start a business. We could cooperate in this new enterprise. We could decide on common objectives. We could be inspired to a tremendous degree. But we are still—each of us—carrying along our individual realities. That’s what gives us our core individual strength. That’s what allows us to contribute to the group.

And we’re aware of what we’re doing. We’re choosing to do it.

That’s quite different from falling under the sway of a psyop. That’s quite different from buying into hooked ideas on a emotional level. That’s quite different from accepting the generalized idea of an emotional and spiritual merger of our personal realities.

In the latter case, what is happening is the supreme irony: people are buying the idea that their freedom actually equals their merging.

It is exactly this “merging” that obsessed technocrats are proposing. They see it in terms of humans and machines “coming together.” This is their envisioned promised land. The ability to instantly access trillions of pieces of information and do lightning-speed calculation and organize that information in countless ways is their version of personal revelation.

It’s their fake religion.

Humans and machines as One is, if you examine it, the sacrifice of personal reality.

Of course, technocrats don’t see it that way. But that’s what they’re doing. Information is only one component of personal reality—and they’re blowing that up into a god.

There is a sequence at work here. First, with the development of the computer, people could search and find information. Now, they can have computers anticipate what the desired information is and provide it. Finally, people will be given—quite apart from their desires—the information they require, as adjudicated by experts.

This has less and less to do with personal reality.

Manufactured consent in the Matrix is a bit of a misnomer. Manufactured consent IS the Matrix, at the most profound level.

The heart and soul of THE MATRIX REVEALED are the text interviews I conducted with Matrix-insiders, who have first-hand knowledge of how the major illusions of our world are put together. One of those Matrix-insiders is ELLIS MEDAVOY, master of PR, propaganda, and deception, who worked for key controllers in the medical and political arenas. 28 interviews, 290 pages.

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

Whatever a person has as his personal reality is something to build on. You might say it’s the engine by which he can set sail and voyage. And during his personally navigated voyage, he enlarges and changes his personal reality. It becomes more powerful. It becomes more a matter of imagination and a life lived through and by imagination.

In this light, cooperation with others takes on a whole new meaning. The longing and obsession to overlap his reality with that of others fades in importance.

His immunity to hooked ideas becomes stronger.

The very notion of what personal reality is changes. It is no longer simply a fixed configuration set in concrete.

The psyop is aimed at disintegrating the personal voyage.

It is aimed at flattening the emotions and shortening the perspective and short-circuiting the fire in the soul.

Hooked ideas and manufacturing consent and overlapping realities and merging are the tools used to deaden life and invent the collective future.

In that future, each person becomes a mirror that reflects every other person. And it turns out that there is no substance at all in the trillions of rebounding reflections.

The endless overlapping deletes all content.

Personal reality and the personal voyage are the WAKING UP that breaks the trance.

A great deal of history of the human race, littered as it is with suffering and pain and war and hunger, was produced by competing psyops.

Each side was utterly convinced that its ideals were superior. What neither side realized was that everybody, on all sides, was accepting a psyop substitute of their own personal reality. That was the big switch.

Each person on each side had bought into a hooking idea that looked so good and so right and so wonderful.

And each person was operating on a false basis. Each person had, without noticing it, misplaced his own personal reality.

You could accurately write, on many gravestones: “I died for a psyop.”

In this day and age, political leaders have entirely given up the notion of personal reality, if they even understand what it means. For them, it’s all about psyop, because they are thinking about mass and number and population. They are looking for central hooking ideas—the very best they can find—and how to express them and transmit them as convincingly as possible.

The major differences between these leaders are to be found in how well they function as mouthpieces for hooking ideas.

Freedom? Democracy? The will of the people? A better future for all? Equality? Justice? These are merely concepts in search of ways to run psyops.

Jon Rappoport

Two words that don’t go together: “medical” and “journalism”

Mar6

Two words that don’t go together: “medical” and “journalism”

by Jon Rappoport

March 6, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Yesterday, I was scanning through medicalnewstoday.com, catching up on the wacky and highly dangerous world of medicine.

What caught my attention were the story headlines themselves. In the news biz, everything depends on those headlines and what they mean, imply, suggest. They’re magnets.

So take a trip with me through one day of the magnetic field.

First, let’s get a few OOPS headlines out of the way:

“Common Cancer Vaccine Ingredient Diverts T-cells From Tumors”

“Shelf Life of Blood Nearer 3 Than 6 Weeks”

“One-Third of Doctors Miss Electronic Test Results”

These headlines should be rewritten and blasted across the front pages of newspapers and jammed into the top spots on the evening television news. But no. They aren’t. They might disturb the sleeping masses.

GIGANTIC CANCER VACCINE SCREW-UP

ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO GET A BLOOD TRANSFUSION?

DOCTORS ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL…AGAIN

The common cancer vaccine ingredient referred to in the first headline is mineral oil. It’s used in experimental cancer vaccines being tested on animals. Seems the T-cells in the body, stimulated by the vaccine, fail to attack the cancer tumors. Instead, they attack the injection site. Where the vaccine was jabbed. Oops.

The T-cells are attacking the mineral oil!

You mean, all these studies of cancer vaccines, for all these years, were goofing on a monumental stupidity? The immune systems of all these mice were turning around and attacking the hole where the vaccine went in? Yes, the T-cells, in fact, were attracted to the mineral oil. Wonderful. And for a bonus, the result was infection. Good work. Splendid work.

In case mineral oil is ever found to be lethal, we can make the body attack it.

The next headline refers to the fact that, finally, researchers have figured out something important about blood used for transfusions: better not use blood stored for six weeks—it’s not any good. Oops.

Hospitals have been using six-week-old blood forever. But that blood doesn’t transfer enough oxygen to the patient. No. Doctors shouldn’t be transfusing blood older than three weeks.

In fact, a Johns Hopkins newsletter drops this little nugget. “One previous, large study published in the New England Journal of Medicine has already shown that cardiac surgery patients who received blood stored longer than three weeks were almost twice as likely to die as patients who got blood that had been stored for just 10 days.”

Oops, oops, oops.

“Remember Frank? Hell of a guy. Always on the go. He went to the hospital for surgery and they gave him old blood. He died. Tragic. But hey, the doctors tried. They thought that, like wine, blood is best when it’s aged.”

The third headline has to do with the problem we all face in sorting through the ton of emails we get every day. In the wacky wonderful world of medicine, many test results on patients are now transmitted to doctors via email. How modern. One little problem, though. The doctors miss them. They don’t read the emails. Oops.

“Mr. Jones, your test results have been delayed. Don’t know why. So I’ll just wing it. Let’s see. I’ll put a blindfold on and reach into this cabinet full of different medicines and grab a bottle. Here, take this twice a day. And don’t call me. If you convulse, try 911.”

Now we come to a type of headline I love. The maybe-could be headline. Actually, it’s a lying headline, but it’s couched cleverly—if you have no more than three brain cells to work with:

“Obesity Gene Linked to Skin Cancer”

First of all, this assumes researchers have really found a gene that causes obesity. That’s sheer baloney. Generally, baloney causes obesity. Second, the word “linked” means, “Might be relevant, we don’t know, we’ll see, or maybe we’ll just drop the whole idea…but we did get some grant money for the research.”

“Investigators Identify Genetic Risk Factors for Age-Related Macular Degeneration”

Translated, this means: “There might be two or three or possibly six or 40 genes related to macular degeneration, we don’t know, but we can build a little model that quantifies what we call risk, which is a probability, but this makes no difference, because we don’t have a genetic treatment for macular degeneration; in fact we don’t have ANY genetic treatment which works across the board for ANY medical condition. But we did get grant money for this study.”

“Two genes linked to Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s Disease)”

Ditto. “Linked” means maybe, could be, we don’t know, and we have no genetic treatment for Lou Gehrig’s Disease and we don’t know whether we ever will. It also means: this disease may not be a disease at all; it could be head injury or exposure to a chemical, but we call it a disease because disease-names equal money.

Next, we have the DUH headlines.

“Sleeping Pills Raise Hip Fracture Risk in Nursing Home Residents”

Really? You mean people who live in a daze because they’re loaded with sleeping pills day after day actually fall down and break something? Astounding. And you discovered this by doing a full-bore study? Good for you. Here’s a suggestion for your next grant application: “Bright lights suddenly turned on, accompanied by sirens, cause people who are sleeping to wake up.”

“Inappropriate Use of Opoids, FDA Extremely Concerned”

Again, astounding to learn—people are using too many opoids. And the FDA concern is felt coast to coast. We appreciate that. While you’re at it, you (FDA) might express some concern about the fact that you’re certifying drugs as safe and effective that are killing, like clockwork, 106,000 Americans every year. And that’s a very conservative estimate.

There’s one more DUH headline. It took me an hour to figure out what it means:

“Optimism and Feelings of Vulnerability Skewed Following Tornado, Should Be Reflected in Emergency Preparedness”

As far as I can tell, they’re talking about people who feel optimistic after a tornado hit their town. Meaning: these residents say they don’t expect another one in the future. Wow. Researchers state this optimism is inappropriate, and therefore emergency responders should prepare for it…or something. Again, study completed, grant money deposited in bank account.

“Are you going to be home tonight for dinner, Daddy?”

“No, Jimmy, I’m going to be working. I have to drive to Small Town USA and nag the local residents, who were hit by a tornado last year, by asking them whether they feel optimistic about a lack of tornadoes in the foreseeable future. This is vital information I’m gathering. I can’t remember why at the moment, but it is putting food on our table. So clean your plate at dinner tonight.”

Then we have a feel-good headline. Maybe.

“Good Quality Hospital Care Indicated by Facebook ‘Likes’”

Well, isn’t that special. Forget hospital records. Forget the fact that hospitals kill 119,000 Americans every year (by conservative mainstream estimates). Who cares? Our hospital got 489 Facebook Likes from patients. Good work, guys. Here, let me read one Like to you:

“Although I was given a heart bypass for my broken ankle, the recovery period was highlighted by balloons which the staff brought into my room and the candy bars they placed on my night table. Was that a nurse who walked into my room at three in the morning, or was it a hooker paid for by the assistant director, who seemed very concerned about my well-being and had me sign some kind of waiver while I was drugged to the gills with morphine?”

Finally, we have this headline:

“Children with ADHD Require Long-Term Treatment Well Into Adulthood”

Let’s see. ADHD is a fake disorder for which no diagnostic test exists. The drugs used to treat it are cheap speed, which can cause very dangerous effects, like hallucinations, aggressive behavior, and deep sadness. But no problem. Keep drugging kids all the way into adulthood. Ruin their lives. It’s good for business.

Well, there you are. That’s just a partial list of one day’s medical headlines.

Kudos to the headline writers and the conscientious journalists who got their stories right and really let us know what’s what. We’re now much wiser, and we feel confident that medical science is marching forward into a future where, for example, tiny nanobots can be injected into our blood streams. These bots, armed and programmed with such useful and true medical information, will automatically make changes inside our bodies and correct any problems they discover.

We’ll feel better and be better. We’ll take a moment every day to bow down to the guardians of our health.

Give us more medicine! Give us more care! Heal us! We trust you! We love you!

Here are a few basic headline-rewrites that better reflect medical journalism in today’s world. I’m 100% sure that if the NY Times ran them across the top of the front page, day after day, the readership would explode and the Times would rescue itself from impending financial ruin.

HA-HA-HA; WHEN DOCTORS SAY ‘GENETIC LINKS FOUND’ THEY MEAN ‘WE HAVE NO IDEA BUT WE’RE BANKING $$$’

ADHD A FICTIONAL FANTASY, BUT THE DRUGS SELL LIKE CRAZY AND SCREW KIDS INTO PRETZEL SHAPES

VACCINE ATTACKS HOLE IN THE BODY WHERE THE NEEDLE WAS STUCK

MILLIONS OF PEOPLE STONED ON PAIN KILLERS ARE TURNING INTO ZOMBIES, HIP-REPLACEMENT BUSINESS SOARS

THOUSANDS OF DOCTORS DON’T READ YOUR MEDICAL TESTS, WING IT FOR FUN AND PROFIT

WANT A DEFICIT OF OXYGEN? GO TO A HOSPITAL AND GET SOME OLD BLOOD

FACEBOOK-LIKES CURE CANCER, ALTHOUGH DEATH MAY BE A SIDE EFFECT

I’m available for freelance headline work.

Jon Rappoport

The era of programming the mind

Feb22

by Jon Rappoport

February 22, 2013

(To join our email list, click here.)

If you want to track a civilization as it collapses, watch what happens to the concept of the rebel.

On a profound level, mass shootings and assassinations (whether staged or not) are used to define the ever-present “lone assassin” as the REPRESENTATION AND THE SYMBOL OF WHAT THE INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUAL IS.

You’re a separate and distinct individual? An outsider? Watch out. Overnight, you could turn into a raging killer.

You happen to know an outsider, a loner? He’s dangerous. He doesn’t live by the rules the rest of us accept. He’s deranged. Stay away from him. Shun him. And if you see the slightest indication of (insert your own term here), report him to the authorities.

“See a rebel, say something,” to paraphrase the DHS motto.

Any human being who has courage, intelligence, eyes to see, and a determination to express his power in uncompromising terms can now be redefined as a potential threat to the stability of society—if he criticizes the prevailing Authority.

From the 1960s onward—starting with Lee Oswald and the assassination of JFK—the whole idea of “the rebel” with power has been sequentially updated and repackaged. This is intentional.

The objective is to equate “rebel” with a whole host of qualities—e.g., runaway self-serving paranoia; random destruction; out-of-control drug use; generalized hatred; the commission of crimes—qualities that will defeat the very notion of honorable and righteous and powerful opposition to fascist authority:

On a lesser, “commercialized” level, the new rebel can define himself by merely showing up at a concert to scream and drink heavily and break something, having already dressed to make a dissident fashion statement. He can take an afternoon off from college classes and have his arms tattooed. All the while, of course, he functions as an avid consumer of mainstream corporate products.

You even have people who, considering themselves rebels of the first order, support a government that spies on its people 24/7, launches military attacks all over the world, and now funds a Manhattan Project to map every move of the 100 billion neurons of the brain, for the ultimate purpose of controlling it.

More than ever, the individual has to explore and discover, with intelligence, a position that is FOR himself and AGAINST the concocted and sustained illusion called consensus reality.

When the individual embarks on this path, the external false definitions of him as rebel or outsider or mentally ill or criminal no longer matter. Instead, what matters is his deepest nature.

Even going back as far as the 1950s, the so-called decade of conformity, psyops professionals sculpted notions of The Rebel: He was the person who didn’t want to take part in the emerging bland corporate culture.

He was presented as troubled and morose, a wobbly unfocused JD Salinger Holden Caulfield, or a beatnik, a Madison Avenue caricature of somebody who opposed Madison Avenue.

In other words, the people who were shaping the consumer culture were programming the image of the rebel as a cartoon figure who just didn’t want to buy into “the good life.”

Time Magazine ran a cover story on the beatniks, and characterized them as a disaffected trend. Marlon Brando, heading up a bunch of moronic motorcycle riders, invaded a town of pleasant clueless citizens and took it over, wreaking destruction. The 1953 movie was The Wild One. James Dean, who had the same trouble Brando did in getting out a complete sentence, was “the rebel without a cause” in the “iconic film” of the same name. He raced cars toward cliffs because his father couldn’t understand him.

These were all puff pieces designed to make rebels look ridiculous, and they worked. They also functioned to transmit the idea to young people that being a rebel should be a showbiz affectation. That worked, too.

Then the 1960s arrived. Flower children, in part invented by the major media, would surely take over the world and dethrone fascist authority with rainbows. San Francisco was the epicenter. But Haight-Ashbury, where the flowers and the weed were magically growing out of the sidewalks, turned into a speed, acid, and heroin nightmare, a playground for psychopaths to cash in and steal and destroy lives. The CIA, of course, gave the LSD culture a major push.

For all that the anti-war movement eventually accomplished in ending the Vietnam war crime, in the aftermath all those college students who had been in the streets—once the fear of being drafted was gone—scurried into counselors’ offices to see where they might fit into the job market after graduation. The military industrial complex took its profits and moved on, undeterred.

The idea of the rebel was gone. It later resurfaced as The Cocaine Dealer, the archangel of the 1980s.

And so forth and so on. All these incarnations of The Rebel were artificially created and sustained as psyops, for the purpose of deflating attempts at genuine and powerful rebellion. And, at bottom, the idea was to discredit the Individual, in favor of The Group.

Now, in our collectivist society of 2013, The Group, as a rapidly expanding victim class, is the government’s number one project. While extolling this group as heroic and in constant need of help, the government is doing everything it can to crash the economy and widen the population of victims. It’s a straight con. “We’re here to make you worse off while we lift you up.”

In the psyop to demean, distort, and squash the rebel, there is a single obvious common denominator: the establishment media are doing the defining; they are the ones who are setting the parameters and making the descriptions; they are the ones who build and program the cartoons; looking down their noses, pretending to a degree of sympathy, they paint one unflattering picture after another of what the rebel is and does and says; they have co-opted the whole game.

These days, the ultimate rebels, the media would have you believe, are the Tea Party and their affiliated “gun-toting racist bitter clingers who have religion.” Another distorted unflattering portrait, meant not only to drive people away from the Tea Party, but also to prove the guilt, by association, of any person who says the federal government is unconstitutional and out of control.

“All the fascism is on the political Right. There can be no fascism on the Left.” This is the major domestic policy of this administration—this absurd assertion.

The Rebel is real. But he has been covered up by media fabrications and caricatures.

You can take a whole host of political films and television series of the past 50 years, and look at them for signs of the Rebel: Seven Days in May, Advise and Consent, The Candidate, The Seduction of Joe Tynan, Dave, Primary Colors, The Contender, Good Night and Good Luck, The American President, West Wing, Scandal, The Newsroom…

Good acting, bad acting, drama, message—at the end you’re looking for the core. What do the rebel heroes really stand for? What are their principles? It’s all bland. It’s vague. It has the posturing of importance, but little else. It’s not meant to have real substance, only undefined affectation. The rebel takes action, but it’s based on superficial slogan. It’s another deflating caricature.

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

As I was finishing this piece, a friend wrote with a quote attributed to Robert Anton Wilson: “The universe is a war between reality programmers.”

This is exactly where the real rebel enters the scene. He’s not trying to program people. Freedom means cutting loose from programming.

The rebel dismantles inhibiting and artificial structures.

He doesn’t go to the market and choose which reality program he wants. They’re all used up as soon as they come out of the package.

The political fancy or trend or program of the moment is a hardened dream somebody borrowed to make mince meat out of the population. The rebel has no allegiance to any of this.

Albert Camus one wrote: “The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.It would be easy, however, to destroy that good conscience by shouting to them: if you want the happiness of the people, let them speak out and tell what kind of happiness they want and what kind they don’t want! But, in truth, the very ones who make use of such alibis know they are lies; they leave to their intellectuals on duty the chore of believing in them and of proving that religion, patriotism, and justice need for their survival the sacrifice of freedom.”

“THIS or THAT” is the modern history of civilization: choose reality program A or B. The choice was always a con.

We’re well into a time period when the experts and scientific authorities are settling on the human being as a biological machine that can only respond to programming. That’s their view and their default position.

It’s sheer madness, of course, but what else do you expect? We’re in an intense technological age, and people are obsessed with making things run smoother. They treat their precious little algorithms for control like the Crown Jewels. They’re terribly enthusiastic about the problem they’re solving, and that problem is us.

We’re the wild cards, a fact which they take to be result of our improper and incomplete conditioning. They aim to fix that.

There is—and has been, for a long time—a blended sequence in operation: a) observe; b) predict; c) control; d)re-create. “Well, we can see many patterns in this society. So we can make some predictions about what is going to happen. Actually, if we covertly introduce certain elements from the outside, we can control what happens. Why not stop diddling around and just make the whole thing over? Why not reshape humans?”

Having decided that, the battle begins between competing programmers of the mind. Which program for humans is better?

The rebel is against all such programming, no matter how “good and right” it sounds. Good and right are the traps:

“Well, certainly we could make a list of qualities we want all people to have. You know, the best qualities, like bravery and determination. Who could be against that? So suppose we could actually program such qualities into humans? Wouldn’t that be a fine thing? Then people would just BE that way…”

The ultimate rebellion is against programming, whatever it looks like, wherever it occurs.

Jon Rappoport

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

This is your brain on neuroscience

Feb20

This is your brain on neuroscience

by Jon Rappoport

February 20, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

The Obama administration has just announced a far-reaching 10-year program to map the human brain down to the last neuron of activity.

So let’s begin with this:

“The mind is not a material object at all. The mind is not the brain.”

If you made that statement to a modern neuroscientist, the odds are overwhelming he would look at you as if you were visiting from the Stone Age.

“The brain emits the electrical consequences of what the mind originally produced.” Same response from the neuroscientist: you’re crazy.

Backing up still further, you could say that mind is a series of spaces the person himself creates, in order to think, in much the same way a canvas is a space on which the painter imagines and creates.

From at least the time of the classic Bhagavad Gita (written perhaps 2000 years ago), and in ancient Egyptian texts, writers and philosophers have been describing the soul, the spirit, the psyche in various terms.

In the Gita, as Krishna engages Arjuna in their famous debate about war and duty, Krishna moves back and forth between depicting the individual as distinctly and separately and powerfully immortal—and then as part of a greater spiritual Whole.

In either case, the individual is not physical, but inhabits a physical form, and after the body passes away, the individual survives and usually returns for another incarnation.

The soul or spirit or mind are not explainable in physical terms. This is the basic view expressed over and over by philosophies and religions from the dawn of time on this planet.

In the 20th century, that view was subjected to the bulldozer of science.

The chief implication of scientism is: freedom is an illusion.

If you assert that all of life’s processes are ultimately reducible to tiny particles in motion, you are saying this is true of the brain and the mind as well. And that means everything we believe and experience about our own freedom and choice is nothing more than an absurd dream.

And how is that delusional dream produced? It is somehow fired up by these tiny cause-and-effect particles that swim through the universe. The particles are not free. Therefore, neither is the brain, which is made up of such particles.

It gets worse. The tiny particles that compose rocks and concrete and plastic and stars and galaxies have nothing in them that could be called alive.

No research discovers anything in the electron or quark or wavicle that can be identified as Life.

These are the same particles that constitute our brains and our DNA.

The rarely expressed neuro-scientific conclusion? We are all robots made out of flesh with no freedom and no “extra quality” called life.

People profoundly fail to understand this conclusion of neuroscientists and others who tinker with the brain, who now intend to map the brain and its activity down to the last neuron. These scientists don’t care what changes they make in the brain, to render it more “normal and healthy.”

There is, as far as conventional science is concerned, nothing inviolable about the brain.

I’m not talking science fiction. This is the way most neuroscientists, if forced to admit it, see us.

And they are the ones steering the ship of research. They are the ones who will guide the newly announced government Manhattan Project of the brain for the next 10 years. It’s called Brain Activity Map (BAM).

Under the banner of “improved mental health,” BAM looks benign. But it isn’t. It looks like the way to stop the next James Holmes or Adam Lanza, but it isn’t.

It is a far-reaching State program to create The Neurological Society. This is the goal. It now has a major jolt of funding and the blessing/mandate of the federal government.

Think about this. We have a problem posed by the Constitution versus the underlying premises of modern brain science.

On the one hand, we have the founding document which guarantees freedoms. On the other hand, we have the assumptions of science, which cannot affirm the existence of those freedoms.

Well, I can tell you with certainty that the government has just taken a giant step toward Brave New World, and again, this isn’t science fiction. It’s real. BAM is unconstitutional, of course. The notion of the central government using monies to fund a program that will map the brain is so far outside the powers granted to it, it’s absurd.

But why should federal neurological scientists care? They don’t really believe the freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution exist or could exist or might exist. As far as they’re concerned, freedom is a dead issue. It was just a story we told ourselves to feel stronger, better, happier.

Now they have drugs for that. They can change the brain. They will develop new drugs and new electromagnetic strategies for brain alteration. They will develop the ability to remotely observe the brain in much, much greater detail. And from this will spring the means to tweak and change what they observe, on the level of neuronal activity.

Their basis for making those changes will remain obscure, hidden in a welter of technical language. But we know what their fundamental premises will be.

They will involve control of behavior. Parameters will be drawn. Any person whose brain registers activity beyond those boundaries will be judged as a danger, a threat. The threat will be curtailed by limiting and diverting neuronal/synaptic processes.

Thus, good citizens of the State will be created and monitored.

But if soul and spirit and psyche and freedom do exist (and they do), they will be beyond control, since they are non-material.

Thus, efforts at control will have to be more radical and destructive, in order to induce deeper levels of physical stress and glue the consciousness of the individual human being to these artificially created brain states.

And that’s where the gloves come off and the mask comes off. Then we see the real controllers. Far from being sophisticated and subtle and humane guides into our future, they are just the old tyrants in new costumes.

Their major trump card is this. They have, through sheer propaganda, hypnotized a significant percentage of the population into believing that science and research are always good things.

The mere mention of the word “science” is connected with “help.” A better day is coming. More knowledge is always beneficial. People’s needs will be met.

Nowhere is this propaganda more successful than in the arena of medical science.

That is why most people will shrug off the federal brain mapping project as a promising development. “Sure, sounds good.”

Does it? Does a future, up the road, in which all brains are monitored for “problematic activity” sound like a humanitarian system?

Does it suit your personal view of life, soul, spirit, freedom?

Consider this quote from neurologist VS Ramachandran. Read it carefully:

“How can a three-pound mass of jelly that you can hold in your palm imagine angels, contemplate the meaning of infinity, and even question its own place in the cosmos? Especially awe inspiring is the fact that any single brain, including yours, is made up of atoms that were forged in the hearts of countless, far-flung stars billions of years ago. These particles drifted for eons and light-years until gravity and change brought them together here, now. These atoms now form a conglomerate- your brain- that can not only ponder the very stars that gave it birth but can also think about its own ability to think and wonder about its own ability to wonder. With the arrival of humans, it has been said, the universe has suddenly become conscious of itself. This, truly, is the greatest mystery of all.”

No, the greater mystery is how a scientist can believe the brain alone is really capable of all these things—the brain that is nothing but atoms in motion.

Here’s another statement from a well-known neuroscientist, David Eagleman:

“Imagine for a moment that we are nothing but the product of billions of years of molecules coming together and ratcheting up through natural selection, that we are composed only of highways of fluids and chemicals sliding along roadways within billions of dancing cells, that trillions of synaptic conversations hum in parallel, that this vast egglike fabric of micron-thin circuitry runs algorithms undreamt of in modern science, and that these neural programs give rise to our decision making, loves, desires, fears, and aspirations. To me, that understanding would be a numinous [spiritual] experience, better than anything ever proposed in anyone’s holy text.”

It might be a numinous experience if it were true. But it isn’t. The brain, composed of tiny particles, isn’t producing our decision- making or our greatest thoughts. It can’t. There is nothing about atoms that allows for those grand realities.

For the numinous experience, we need spirit, psyche, mind, soul.

And these two neuroscientists I’ve just quoted? They’re the good guys. They’re the people within that community who even try (wrongheadedly) to make something poetic out of the brain.

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and a CD to guide you. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

The overwhelming majority of their colleagues are mechanics, obsessed with tinkering and tweaking and derailing and re-channeling brain activity.

Into their hands, the federal government has just dropped the task of mapping everything that goes on inside our skulls—as a prelude to changing it.

These scientists are, despite their education, Luddites of consciousness. Instead of studying the great works of human history, the art and literature and invention, and trying to grasp our greater non-material faculties, neuroscientists jump to the naked assumption that it all proceeds from the brain.

They believe it must be so. They then dedicate themselves to mapping and charting.

Who is the real threat, the real danger?

They are.

If any monitoring should be done, it should be of them.

Coda: To take this even further, were we to acknowledge our own non-material aspects, beyond the physical, it would imply that we have capabilities that exceed the so-called normal range.

We would realize that, beneath the surface of our social relationships, beneath this culture, we are concealing powers that not only make us free and independent, but open out into creative vistas where we invent formidable and awesome realities.

This is still largely unexplored territory, and it makes what the neuroscientists are doing look like child’s play in a demented sandbox.

For us to understand what we are actually capable of is the controllers’ worst nightmare.

In a subterranean psychic landscape, this is the crossroads where a prime struggle has been taking place for at least 20,000 years of human civilization.

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Matrix Revealed

Google Glass: obedience to the Matrix

Obama’s new brain-mapping project is already a Lilliputian disaster

It was nice knowing you, America

Chemical warfare against the nation right under our noses

The fatal flaw in the human-machine interface

Who will be the first killer wearing Google Glass?

The disaster of manufactured consent in the Matrix

Two words that don’t go together: “medical” and “journalism”

The era of programming the mind

This is your brain on neuroscience