Category Archives: Matrix Revealed

Sandy hook actors, robots, androids, television creations

Sandy Hook actors, robots, androids, television creations

by Jon Rappoport

January 21, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

First, I need to comment on a rumor that George Soros has been a key player in buying up gun manufacturers, with the intent of exercising “corporate gun control.”

Cerberus Capital Management, based in New York, owns a company called The Freedom Group. Freedom Group bought up Bushmaster Firearms, Remington Arms, and several other gun manufacturers.

So far, attempts to connect Soros to Cerberus or Freedom Group have fallen short. The NRA and factcheck.org state that Soros isn’t connected. If I find out otherwise, I will report it.

Right now, though, Freedom Group states it is getting out of the gun business. It is putting its stake up for sale.

That is highly significant. We are seeing disinvestment as an emerging strategy in the effort to reduce gun ownership. The plan is to convince more and more shareholders to walk away from their stake in gun and ammunition manufacturers, with the goal of starving these companies, destroying their stock-trading price on exchanges, and turning them into pariahs.

Disinvestment is a powerful approach. It applied huge pressure, for example, against apartheid, as private investors and funds disengaged themselves from any corporations doing business with South Africa.

Okay. On to the main subject of this article.

Online investigations of what really happened at Sandy Hook easily number in the thousands by now. Among other reporters, I have listed and described many contradictions and lies in the official scenario, and I’ve offered alternative explanations.

People have concluded:

no one was really killed in Sandy Hook, it was all faked;

the killings were real, but Adam Lanza wasn’t the shooter, he was the patsy;

Lanza was the killer, compelled by psychiatric drugs;

a Satanic group was behind the killings;

the federal government secretly contracted the killings in order to take guns away.

No matter what the conclusion, many of the investigations and analyses have turned up startling and useful information.

On YouTube, clips of Sandy Hook parents and teachers being interviewed reveal astonishing reactions and non-reactions that are light years away from what you would expect to see in the immediate wake of such a tragedy.

You can hear an important conversation between Jay Weidner and Jeff Rense on this subject. Some of the key interviews are referred to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJj_wZtQb_k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T76WAh9zVAY

You can also look for YouTube interview clips featuring “the people of Sandy Hook”: Robbie Parker, the Sotos family, Sally Cox, H Wayne Carver, Gene Rosen, Kaitlin Roig, etc.

These are all people who were intimately involved and affected. Their reactions, non-reactions, strange behavior, inexplicable attitudes are stunning.

This is what I want to comment on.

First of all, you have to realize that only certain people get on television. That’s fact #1, and it’s a major key. Only certain people are interviewed.

Television is the filter through which we see.

Parents who are completely grief-stricken, who have fallen apart and are incoherent (which is what you would expect): not interviewed.

Parents who are very angry and outraged: not interviewed.

Parents who demand answers from a full investigation, who aren’t satisfied with the emerging media-controlled story line: not interviewed.

Then we have parents who are in a close-to catatonic state, or parents who refuse to be engaged by any media person, who feel any media contact is insane and invasive and massively insensitive: obviously not approached for an interview.

The same exclusionary “rules for appearing on television” can be applied to neighbors, teachers, other school personnel, and friends of families who had children at the Sandy Hook School.

We don’t see these people, because they aren’t on television. So making some vast generalization about all of Sandy Hook is sketchy at best.

Then, on top of that, television news people are creating a story line about what happened at the school and in the town, and they are finding people who will corroborate that plot line, or can be convinced by news producers to corroborate it. This further narrows the field of acceptable interviews.

The third important fact about how television shapes the event is provided by the interviewees who have never been on television before, but have watched thousands of television interviews. These people have a strong tendency to “act like people are supposed to act” when they are put on camera—which is to say, artificial.

That is generally what television does to the whole society. It presents artificial sequences of emotions and responses, phony from the ground up. It presents them on the news, in sitcoms, in dramas, in magazine shows, in cartoons, in ads, in sports programming.

Television creates a model of behavior that is androidal: flattened and cooked and bent and short-circuited and averaged out. This is what television gives us, and this is what many viewers accept. Not only accept, but IMITATE in their lives:

They speak like television, they act like television, they think like television, they admire what television admires. They learn how to behave from television. They learn what is appropriate from television.

In this sense, television is the Stepford Village. It invades a town during a tragedy, it sets up, it rolls out a story line that is independent from reality, and it cues selected people to be the robots who confirm that story line, no matter how grotesque the distortion.

Television invents its shoddy, mindless, false, lying, reduced, “normalized,” hyped version of life, and then people who watch television accept and imitate it.

“I know you’ve just lost your daughter, and I can’t imagine how you feel at this moment, but you see, when we interview you, we want to honor her life. This is your chance to let people all over the world know what and who she was. Her spirit, her interests, her hobbies, what her friends felt about her. You can show the world how alive she was and how happy she was, and you can remember that and you can even smile…”

And the mother of that daughter hesitates, pauses, thinks about what she really feels, and then decides the television producer is right and she’ll go along with it.

Nevertheless, in the interviews with those people (and others) whom I’ve mentioned above, something else is also happening. Something beyond the pale. Something that includes the power and force and influence of television, but something that goes past that.

Disconnection from reality? Denial of reality? Yes. Something more? Yes.

Something inhuman. Something mechanical. As if, on some interior level, these people are programmed.

Programmed to do what?

To respond not as an individual, but as a “type of person.”

It’s as if these people have been manufactured, and the roles they’ve been outfitted with are grotesque cartoons.

As if they are machine-made cartoons. Something leaps out of them when they appear on television. They laugh, they smile, they act casual, they act “efficient” and stone-faced, they act placid and calm, they act polite, they act happy, they act as if they’ve been cast for a stage play that has nothing to do with the horrific events of the past hours and days in Sandy Hook.

They act as if they have no resource or experience that allows them to contact what they actually are. As if a wall has been built between what they are and how they are behaving.

In my opinion, this is a lot worse than if they had been (badly) trained at an actor’s school to intentionally provide material for an all-out hoax.

It’s a lot worse, because the manufactured front is their only reference point. They’re functioning robots. As such, it takes only minimal direction to move them to any chosen square on the media-controlled checkerboard.

“How do I need to behave to fit myself into the situation as an acceptable person?” This is the guiding question they ask themselves. The answer plugs in immediately. It is always going to be wrong, because every situation is, to some degree, alive, and the answer dictates dead behavior. Machine behavior.

We need to understand that these extraordinary and stunning and bizarre interviews from Sandy Hook are mirrored in other places. For example, what are we to say about thousands of soldiers who are duped into a war that had no sane reason to exist in the first place?

But there the soldiers are, on the battlefield. They are living and breathing and mouthing sentiments that have absolutely nothing to do with the situation in which they have been placed.

The war has nothing to do with defense of the nation. It is cast in that false light. It is promoted as necessary. It is heralded as an opportunity to do service, to protect freedom, but those are gross lies.

Is a typical soldier in such a war going to look any less grotesque than one of those parents interviewed at Sandy Hook?

Here’s another situation. A news anchor is covering a major tragedy, like the murder of JFK or 9/11, and it dawns on him that there are gaping holes in the story, contradictions, lies. As the hours and the reports pile up, he becomes more sure that what actually took place was a conspiracy.

But he continues to sit at the news table and impart the official line. He keeps on going. In his case, he’s able to affect what everyone accepts as the “authoritative news voice,” but does that make his broadcasts any less grotesque, for those who can see, than the interviews at Sandy Hook?

I’m not saying that all the factors I’ve described in this article explain the actions of every person interviewed on television at Sandy Hook. In particular, two of the most egregious interviews, with Robbie Parker, father of a six-year-old girl who was killed in the school, and with H Wayne Carver, the Connecticut medical examiner, are mind-boggling.

First of all, you can confirm that Parker is a real person with a real background by searching Utah newspapers; e.g., The Deseret News. Parker is seen, in his now-famous interview, smiling broadly and chuckling and having a good time just prior to stepping in front of the microphone to make a public statement, at which point he huffs and puffs and tries to get into the character of a grieving father.

It’s hideous.

Carver, in response to press questions, not only gives absurd and completely inappropriate answers, he guffaws once or twice, as if he’s out of control.

In Carver’s case, I would say he’s covering up some gigantic medical lies about the case. He’s trying to dissemble and, underneath his shaky exterior, he’s very nervous and scared that something is going to jump out of the hopper and bite him hard. He’s at sea. He doesn’t know what to do. At moments, it looks as if he’s going to come apart at the seams.

In Robbie Parker’s case, the man is certainly acting when he tries to pass off his grief as real. But why and on what level? I can only guess and speculate and ask questions.

Was he a plant? For reasons unknown, was he inserted into the situation? Or was he programmed from an early age to believe implicitly in the religious notion that he and his family would always and forever be united, here and in the afterlife? Was that programming so deep that his attitude could never accept and countenance grief, even when his own child is killed?

But then I have to ask this. If by some miracle, we had been able to see interviews with ALL the parents who lost children at Sandy Hook, and with all the brothers and sisters; if we could see all the very human feelings and emotions that television takes away from us and hides, because their story line is geared to condition the public to the inhuman; if we could see, unvarnished and uncensored, everything the people of Sandy Hook felt and experienced; would we still think the whole town was demented and phony and nothing but a twisted act?

I don’t think so.

Whatever the truth is about the actual crimes and murders committed in that town, whatever the cover-ups, whatever the true operation that was mounted and carried out there, the role of television is central.

It is the prime programmer. It tells the false story. It obscures the truth. It hijacks the truth.

Television reduces the potential of life. It is the calculated average on display for the average viewer. It is the hyper-normal maniac at loose in society.

The people who own and run television for the masses are bringers of emotional disaster. They make a wasteland out of the hypnotic screen of reality.

Why are they successful?

They plug into a deep cynicism that underlies the robotic behavior and thought of millions of people.

This inner cynicism comes about because people already feel cut off from their own wide emotional range.

Television magnifies and exacerbates that disconnectedness.

People feel cut off from their own deeper currents because they are living lives and feeling emotions that go around and around in circles.

They see nowhere else to go. This sets the stage for dehumanization.

What’s missing in all this is the human faculty that can vault life up on to another level of brilliant success.

I’m talking about the creative faculty and force, the soul of imagination, from which people can invent realities that make television look like a discarded tissue in an old railroad station.

Because it comes down to this. If you don’t have the wherewithal to invent the realities you most deeply desire, someone else will do it for you. On their terms.

They will do it for you every time.

Some high priest, some dictator, generalissimo, president, elite news anchor, some numbers cruncher who sees this modern world as a playground in which to forward market research, will find the golden average, the emotional sweet spot on which the gobbling maggots can prey.

And when the individual creative force is tamped down, dampened, squeezed, and sat on, people will take what they can get.

The Matrix Revealed

I have no ax to grind here. The people who honestly conclude that Sandy Hook was one great hoax from the beginning and no one died; the people who conclude that Lanza was the patsy for professionals who did the killing at Sandy Hook Elementary School; the people who believe Lanza was the killer driven over the edge by psychiatric drugs: the people who believe the Sandy Hook killings were a secret-society operation or a black-ops horror designed to grab the guns of Americans; all these people will continue to explore their paths and they will unearth important information.

What I’m offering here is a perspective on how much of what we see is delivered to us through the twisted dehumanized lens of television, presented as if it is the whole picture and the whole story.

In Sandy Hook, what still remains off-camera, never seen, never mentioned, never named, never broadcast, never permitted to find the light of day? The answer is: whatever is spontaneously alive, whatever exceeds a simple series of machined reflexes.

The great goal of media and its controllers is mechanical reduction, so populations will accept whatever seems “more efficient,” more ordered, more systematic, more bureaucratic, more automatic, more predictable, more repetitive.

With that as the merciless foundation, the population will accept whatever comes down from the top as a command. The actual content of the command is unimportant.

The machine accepts instructions.

Jon Rappoport

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

Matrix programming 101: destroy logic

Matrix programming 101: destroy logic

By Jon Rappoport

January 10, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Once upon a time, in medieval universities, new students enrolled in the Trivium. It was the foundation curriculum. It was required. Its parts were: grammar, logic, and rhetoric.

Grammar: the interior construction of language; the parts of speech; the proper agreement of parts of speech.

Logic: the valid and invalid connections in the course of an argument; the method of proper reasoning; the deductive links in a chain, at the end of which is a conclusion.

Rhetoric: oral presentation; the use of language to make a case; the capacity to persuade, even in the face of counter-argument.

Today, the subject matter of the Trivium is not only downplayed. It has been shattered.

This article focuses on the death of logic.

When the intensive handling of ideas is seen as a laughable goal for education, indoctrination is plugged in as the only alternative.

The mind of the student shifts from being an active force to being a container.

The destruction of logic is a conscious strategy, a game plan. Its goal is to pervert rational thought at its core and insert ideology masked as insight.

The game plan was cooked up a long time ago at the Carnegie Foundation, where the undermining of American history was the number-one pastime.

Instead of merely erasing knowledge of American history, it was decided that the basic way ideas are studied should be torpedoed.

The actual meaning of an idea was firmly placed on the back burner. Front and center would be: relentlessly assess and attack the people who forwarded those ideas.

And sure enough, this strategy has gained great prominence.

“The revered Founders of the Republic? Shysters, con men, slaveholders, monopolists who saw rebellion from England as the way to win greater power for themselves, at the expense of everyone else living on American soil.”

Therefore, the argument continues, and this is crucial, the Founders’ ideas, as expressed in the Declaration and the Constitution, were rotten to the core. The ideas can be dismissed out of hand as coming from “a bad source.”

If you want to see that sleight-of-hand trick in action, just visit a few American studies classes in universities and catch the wave.

Ideas no longer need to be judged on their sense, merit, and alignment with basic principles. Nor are they judged by their position in a well-formed argument. All that is out. Now, you have to “look to the source” and make all your decisions based on “who these people really were who expressed the ideas.”

And since that’s the case, learning to think or reason is unnecessary.

New education, then, once you strip away the old essentials, is really nothing more than learning who the bad guys were and the good guys were. This can be taught by ideologically motivated professors in a few hours.

In logic, this used to be called the fallacious ad hominem argument. Now it’s not called anything. It’s praised as the insightful way to do intellectual business.

In the case of the Founders’ ideas, we have, among others: the free market; individual freedom; private property; severely limited central government.

No need to examine these concepts. No need to assess, for instance the success of the free market, despite its corruption by criminals and monopolists, in providing a better standard of living for millions of people. Forget it. All you have to know is that the free market was proposed by phony American aristocrats who wanted more power for themselves. On that basis alone, you can reject the free market.

How about private property? Same thing. The same phony Founders put that idea forward; therefore, it must be wrong.

Thomas Jefferson? He owned slaves. Therefore, as the night follows day, everything he said or thought or did was wrong.

See how easy education has become?

Individual freedom? Another absurdity proposed by the crooked Founders. Reject it. Don’t bother thinking about what that freedom has allowed you to express. Who cares?

So, one by one, these core ideas fall to the ax, and criticizing America becomes destroying America.

To argue that very bad people have taken over an idea, and therefore the idea itself was never good, is like arguing that, since hijackers took over a plane, the plane was a despicable object altogether and probably deserved to be stolen or blown up.

Once the core ideas and ideals of the American Republic are destroyed, new ideas inevitably take their place. The possibilities are endless. But here is, in fact, what has happened:

Instead of the sanctity of private property and right of its owner to protect it, we now have, coming into vogue, “assigned use.” This means someone somewhere, at the top of the food chain, will decide how property should be deployed, for the greatest good of the greatest number.

He determines the definition of greatest good.

Instead of individual freedom, we have the collective need. Behavior should be adapted to the group. How this is defined falls to our leaders.

The free market becomes central planning and distribution of goods and services.

It can be quite interesting to discuss these matters with people who have been educated “in the new way.”

On the issue of the free market, I had a PhD candidate tell me this: The idea of the free market was a smokescreen. It was proposed as a way for the very rich to dominate commerce. The “free market” was a non-concept. It never existed. It was an illusion, like people sprouting wings and flying.

You might be surprised by the number of people who believe this. They are essentially saying that the very EXISTENCE of an idea depends on WHO expressed the idea. If the wrong person first expressed it, it was never real.

Students with a vast sense of self-entitlement and meaningless self-esteem love this stuff. It allows them to parade around and call the shots and decide which ideas are worthy and which aren’t, without reflection. They have a scorecard of good guys and bad guys and that’s all they need.

In the world of social engineering, here is the larger program:

first make every idea dependent for its value on who proposed it;

attack the men who created the Constitution and thereby trash all the founding ideas of the Republic;

instead, substitute the notion of oppressors and the oppressed—all the bad people who founded the Republic were the oppressors;

cultivate, encourage, and create many groups within society as “the oppressed”;

come in behind that with big government as the answer to the problems of the oppressed;

ratchet up dependence and government control to new heights.

Of course, big government, under its humanitarian banners, is a dictator. To maintain the illusion that it is not, there must be new oppressed people, new victims, new helpless people coming out of the woodwork all the time whom the government can help.

From this angle, it doesn’t matter whether the ever-growing dependent population is genuine or not. Sorting out the real from the imaginary obviously isn’t part of the program. Nor does it matter how government is disenfranchising people to make them into victims.

Some people see labeling themselves victims as a winning strategy for their lives. Others actually are getting their noses shoved down into the mud.

In our teaching institutions, you could look in vain to find courses on the individual, his freedom, his power. That’s gone.

It’s all about: what group do you belong to? What are the needs of that group? Who is oppressing your group? How can you get government to solve the problem?

Once the oppressor-oppression model is set in stone, everything that follows is a disaster.

Oppressor-oppression equals victim-rescuer. The rescuer turns out to be a tyrant. He gives and he takes. He makes the rules. He builds his power.

If you can educate the young to make snap judgments about core ideas, you eliminate their capacity to reason. You own them.

You turn them out as programmed androids. They follow your game plan.

From that point on, they hold a hostile attitude toward anyone who can discuss and analyze ideas. They look at such people as an entitled and privileged class who is speaking a foreign language. If overnight, you discovered that the most elevated members of society were all speaking Hungarian and nothing else, do you think you could maintain a friendly attitude toward them?

Here is another tool of the new education. Blur over the distinction between a widespread condition and a universal defining condition. For example, yes, there are oppressors and there are people they are oppressing. True. But to move from that and say the very ideas at the core of society were designed, everywhere and at all times, to create only oppressors and the oppressed…that’s a vast generality which leads to all-inclusive programmatic general solutions.

And those solutions, voila, turn out to be the means of making slaves.

Criticizing America is productive only when it has a reference point for comparison. A rational discussion to establish the reference point is essential. Are we going to hold up a mirror to the founding ideas of the Republic, or are we going to say, for example, that the true and proper purpose of government should be to alleviate suffering? And if the latter, what exactly does that alleviation entail? How far does it go? Who does it punish in the process?

This isn’t a brush-off conversation. In order to participate in it, people have to be able to follow a train of thought. If they can’t, because they were educated not to, where are we? We’re in the dark. We’re living by slogans.

Freedom? Liberty? Collective need? Responsibility? It doesn’t matter what ideas are on the table, because the overwhelming number of people don’t know what an idea is. They don’t know how to walk up to one and look at it from several sides. They don’t know how to trace its implications. They don’t know how to fit that idea alongside its cousins. They don’t see a Whole. They see the ceaseless spinning machinery of an alien process, from which they’ve been excluded.

Then, no matter what shape society takes, it’s a dumbshow, as far the majority of its citizens are concerned.

Who solves that?

The invasive State takes charge. It picks up the pieces of the wreckage it was a key actor in delivering.

Ever since the ratification of the Constitution, the actions of the federal government have confirmed the need for the limitations written into that document. New needs and crises have “demanded” illegitimate expansion of federal power.

In order to convince the people that this expansion was, at every turn, vital, the goal of educating citizens about what it means to take part in a Republic had to be blunted. This was done, a step at a time, through education.

Dismantling the ability to reason, employ logic, and handle ideas was the prow of that destructive campaign.

And yet…logic isn’t only a subject that’s taught to students whose minds are a blank slate. There is an inherent tendency toward rational thought that persists, despite programming to the contrary.

For example, if a television station or web site offered a prolonged debate between two intelligent people on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment—a real debate, not just a brush-off—many viewers would be intensely interested.

I’m talking about an old-style debate, one that lasted at least several hours, with each proponent allowed sufficient time to make his case fully. No name calling or shouting of slogans. No interruptions from either side. No stupid moderators.

This traditional long-form format would serve to wake people up to the fact they have minds, they can think, they can spot contradictions and non-sequiturs.

Or, as I’ve suggested before, why not a Debate Channel, devoted exclusively to key issues of our time, taken up in the long-form?

True, many viewers would tune out. But others would feel a jolt of inspiration. A sense of deja vu. “I’ve been here before. I can’t remember when.”

Yes, they’ve been here before, when they could think and reason, before the curtain was lowered.

Actual reasoned debate could become a growing trend. And by contrast, the insane nonsense that presently passes for argument on television would be highlighted as a counterfeit substitute, a fool’s errand.

You can make your own list of vital issues you’d like to see debated, in the long-form, by people who know their material (not merely the usual dome heads and pundits). I have my list.

It’s never too late to wake up. It really isn’t.

For instance, suppose we had a ten-hour reasoned debate, over the course of two days, on television, or on the Web, on this simple question:

What really happened at Sandy Hook?

Do you think that might draw a few viewers?

Are you kidding?

It would outrank many major network programs. It would put the networks’ coverage to shame.

Never a bad thing.

The Matrix Revealed

One of the two bonuses in THE MATRIX REVEALED is my complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and a CD to guide you. I was previously selling the course for $375. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

Coda: Here is an illustration of no-logic in action:

It occurs in a recent article in the Washington Post, “Uncle of young Newtown shooting victim turning tragedy into action.”

From the headline alone, we pick up the slant of the article. It’s going to praise the uncle for being able to turn grief into action.

The uncle is attorney Alexis Haller. His nephew, Noah Pozner, was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting.

The Post article tells us that Haller has worked as a lawyer for the Vatican. We don’t learn exactly what he did for the Vatican, but it’s more or less suggested that, because Haller has a keen interest in “reporting requirements,” where child abuse is occurring, he may have had something to do with the Vatican now “expecting” (requiring?) bishops to report pedophile priests to law-enforcement authorities.

This is quite fuzzy. The Post doesn’t clarify what role, if any, Haller played in the new Vatican expectations/requirements.

Nevertheless, the article presses on to indicate that Haller saw a way to codify reporting requirements in situations of imminent violence, like Sandy Hook. In fact, Haller has written (or made notes on?) a bill:

When a person “has knowledge of a grave or imminent threat of serious harm or death made by someone with access to a gun,” that person must notify the police within 24 hours.

Haller has met with Joe Biden’s committee and discussed his proposal.

The article doesn’t bother to take up how this bill, if made into law, would be enforced, or what implications might flow from it—such as the birthing of an expanded snitch mentality; and excessive, wrong-headed, or even malicious reporting in cases where the threat of imminent violence wasn’t real.

No, this article, we learn, is more a human interest story about Alexis Haller and what’s he’s motivated to do in the wake of the death of his nephew.

The Post article doesn’t bother to cover Haller’s actual history as a defense lawyer for the Vatican. For example, in a case involving the sexual abuse of a Portland, Oregon, boy, in the 1960s, where a 2011 suit was filed against the Holy See, Haller was defending the Vatican, claiming that the pedophile priest, Andrew Ronan, was committing crimes against children without the knowledge of the Holy See, and was not an employee of the Vatican.

Why is this significant? Because the Post article states: “Haller had crafted and forwarded several proposals to prevent future gun violence that were shaped by his experience as a lawyer for the Holy See.”

Which part of that experience? Ahem, cough-cough.

By the end of the article, we know nothing about the precise wording of Haller’s new bill to limit gun violence.

We do know that he was tragically connected to the Sandy Hook shootings. We know his initial efforts to have input in new gun legislation were ignored. We know he overcame that problem. We see his posed picture above the article, in which he’s walking in the rain under an umbrella.

We understand the Post is “on his side.”

This is the old Ad Hominem argument, in which the person forwarding an idea is more important than the actual content of the idea…except in this case, the person isn’t being attacked, he’s being praised.

As if that gives more credibility to his idea, the precise legal content of which we don’t know.

Perfect.

Jon Rappoport

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

How the Matrix deals with power

How the Matrix deals with power

by Jon Rappoport

January 12, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

In previous articles, I’ve been making clear how THE VOICE narrates the story of our times through television anchorage (See here, here, here, here, here, here).

The elite anchor is groomed to be able to induce a seamless hypnotic trance in viewers and make HIS voice THEIR voice.

There is power in a voice.

A voice can change reality.

Your voice is the voice that destroys the narrative that has been sculpted for us. Your voice is the voice that rolls over the voice of the elite anchor and the other elite leaders who speak for us.

When your voice becomes your VOICE, you connect with something oceanic that rips away false separations and false systems and false ideas and deserts of sand on which our fake reality is built.

We pretend to be small. We pretend to be whispers. We pretend to be confused. We pretend to be creatures living inside the space of this deluded society. We pretend to be clueless. We pretend to have such limited power.

We pretend.

We pretend that some overriding system or structure SUPERSEDES OUR OWN VOICE. We bow down to that system, and then we see what that does to our own power. It diminishes it. It makes our voice small. It makes our voice thin. It makes us into weaklings.

It makes us walled off from each other, from THE REAL EACH OTHER. The real each other is each one of us with power, with A VOICE.

The word “rant” is interesting to analyze. It originally referred to someone speaking in a completely unhinged way. Its recent online meaning was invented by tech heads, who adopt a “cool” attitude toward problems and answers. These cerebral types consider any outward display of passion or outrage to be a rant. For them, the “ranting voice” is suspect.

Try this experiment. Find a piece of writing you love that expresses great passion and poetry. Read it out loud while you’re alone. Read it out loud 50 times over the course of a few days. Put your own passion into the words. If you’re not already lying in a coffin, something unexpected will happen to you. You’ll find yourself coming alive in a larger way. You’ll experience glimpses of your VOICE.

This has to do with BEING ALIVE.

You’ll experience the absence of little structures and systems.

Keep reading that passage over and over. Put everything you have into it. Don’t stint. Put more and more feeling into it.

Then, watch the evening network news. Listen to the tone of the anchor. Pay attention to how he establishes a continuity. No matter how absurd you thought the evening news was, you’ll now comprehend that absurdity from an entirely new perspective.

As you expand your own VOICE, and as you EXPRESS WHAT YOU TRULY WANT TO EXPRESS—-YOUR OWN THOUGHTS, YOUR OWN IDEAS, YOUR OWN FEELINGS, YOUR OWN INVENTIONS—you are cutting away layers of stagnant consciousness. Each one of those layers says: “reality is THIS.” Each layer has a different restrictive portrait of reality, and as it disintegrates and tumbles away into space, you become freer.

The VOICE.

A path to greater power, greater aliveness, greater empathy, greater engagement, greater self, greater community, greater wholeness.

Your voice, not the anchor’s voice. The anchor’s voice operates on behalf of the established corrupt order, as a mesmerizing tool. Your VOICE liberates you and others.

The Matrix Revealed

Many years ago, I was teaching a small class in a school in New York. The kids were all retreads from other schools, where they didn’t make it for a variety of reasons.

They were in a constant state of distraction. Unteachable.

So I picked a short passage from a poem by Dylan Thomas. A few lines. A few great lines. I had each student read the passage out loud. Then we all read it together. Then we went around and around with each child reading it—I urged more feeling, more expression.

It was like trying to break through an iron ceiling. Each kid read the lines in a monotone. It was eerie, as if they were all in a trance. But I kept going anyway.

Nothing doing. Nothing happening.

Then I said, “I’m going to read these lines like a newscaster would read them.” I gave a pretty good impression of an anchor.

The kids cracked up. They thought it was very funny. They immediately grasped how ridiculous the anchor’s voice sounded trying to give feeling to poetry.

The kids began reading those lines as if they were news anchors. They had a great time with it. That’s what broke the ice.

“Now,” I said, “stop conning me. Read the lines with your own feeling. Come on. Put something into it.”

And they did.

Around and around we went. Each kid must have read those lines a dozen more times. They got into it. They shed their embarrassment.

The VOICES that emerged that day in class convinced me that everyone has a VOICE, and it is magnificent and powerful and it cuts through layers of conditioning like a knife through butter, once it’s unleashed.

These kids were titanic.

When we were done (I was reading the lines too), we all sat there and looked at each other in amazement. We knew. We knew we had cracked the egg. The spell of “flat reality” had been broken. We were all alive in a new way. We had come into power, into our VOICES. It was undeniable.

The famous lines we read?

Do not go gentle into that good night,

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Rage, rage, against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,

Because their words had forked no lightning they

Do not go gentle into that good night…

Although the overall sentiment of that poem might appear to be a kind of futility, when we read the lines over and over, WE came to a different place. A place where we knew that our words COULD fork lightning.

And then we read, from Fern Hill:

Now as I was young and easy under the apple boughs

About the lilting house and happy as the grass was green,

The night above the dingle starry,

Time let me hail and climb

Golden in the heydays of his eyes,

And honoured among wagons I was prince of the apple towns

And once below a time I lordly had the trees and leaves

Trail with daises and barley

Down the rivers of the windfall light…

the calves

Sang to my horn, the

Foxes on the hills barked clear and cold,

And the Sabbath rang slowly

In the pebbles of the holy streams.

To be astonished by something you see on a screen is one thing. To be astonished by what your VOICE can establish is light years beyond that.

VOICE is relentless life.

Jon Rappoport

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

Ready? Let’s pretend Collectivism doesn’t exist

Ready? Let’s all pretend Collectivism doesn’t exist

by Jon Rappoport

January 5, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Let’s all get together and pretend Collectivism doesn’t exist, it’s an outmoded idea, and only the USSR ever took it seriously.

Actually, denying the reality of Collectivism is already a powerful collectivist movement in America. It has been for some time.

There is a good reason for this. The word collectivism has hideous connotations. It suggests that political power, at the top of the food chain, intends to hold down people who can make a living on their own.

It suggests that these entrepreneurs, especially if they can garner significant profits from their efforts, are evil and selfish. They are intentionally screwing over “the less fortunate.”

It’s all right for a majority of Congress and even the president to believe these hideous things, along with the three or four quadrillion people who hold down civil service government jobs, but they can’t say it.

Well, with Obama, we have to amend that. Our leaders can say these things now. They can say that everybody has to feed from a common trough. They can say that any neighborhood in America where most of the residents have savings accounts is a criminal enterprise, and should face RICO prosecution, unless it “alters its unbalanced population demographic.”

They can say that unless everyone is free and happy and taken care of, no one should be free. (Except actors and politicians.)

So they’re letting the cat out of the bag, and that’s why we need more of us to step up to the plate and declare that Collectivism in America doesn’t exist. To provide cover for our leaders.

We all want to help this massive denial persist, don’t we?

But here’s the downside and the threat. We have millions of young people coming up through schools programmed with sugar-plum idealism on behalf of “save everybody all the time everywhere in all cases for Mama Gaia.”

Those kids are formidable. They’re in lock step like any good rank and file. With just a little push, they’d all gather in Times Square at high noon and sing the Internationale.

We have to get them to mouth a whole different set of platitudes, to give themselves and us the aforementioned cover.

Then, when everything’s ready, and our glorious leaders sense the moment has arrived, we can all step out into full view and declare we are one with Marx and Lenin.

I mean, we are, right?

Isn’t this what we want?

I foresee the day when all the 24/7 surveillance of the American people will be used to assess and cap assets. They’ll cook up a sweet algorithm for it. X3s/5drt+32sv**-cfq equals: you have too much, give the excess to the government for redistribution.

The kindness and the humanity of it makes me weep.

Yesterday, I wrote an article titled, “Matrix governments pretend to be real in the fantasy called democracy.” I asserted, among other things, that all these share-and-care government programs are fakes. It’s all about the contracts let out to corporations to create utopia.

The contracts are awarded, but money leaks out of them, on purpose, like a sieve. Millions and billions of bucks disappear down into holes, laundry trucks arrive, load up cash, and start washing it.

I said many ungrateful things in that article.

Today, I have come to my senses. Mea mea culpa.

I’m sitting here with a whip flagellating myself on the back (which is a good trick, while typing). Later this afternoon, I plan to visit a pond filled with garbage and mud and sink myself up to my neck in it.

Then, starting tomorrow, I’ll enroll in a self-humiliation seminar, and pay my dues. Yes, I’ve had a real revelation.

I’m turning in my tank and my howitzer to the local police. They need these weapons, I don’t.

I’m air-mailing my 6000 dairy cows to Ted Turner. He has room for them on his 2,000,000 acres. By the way, Ted’s land is just a cover story for him. He can pretend to be awfully rich while, behind the scenes, he works to bring down the 400 people who’ve seen Atlas Shrugs, Part 2.. Ted’s with us. He wants to destroy the present money system and start over, allotting $3,000 to every man, woman, and child in America, so we can be free.

He has CNN rewriting MLK’s famous speech, so it now reads: “judged by the color of their skin, not by the content of their character.”

See, the more black people can be demeaned and cast in the light of absolute helplessness, the easier it is to present the American people with a lowest, lowest common denominator…a bottom class by which our progress as a nation can be measured.

It’s cruel, but sometimes scapegoating is necessary in the service of the Cause. Am I going too fast for you?

The underclass has to be pushed further and further down, so the government can point to it as a wretched failure and justify crashing the whole system and everybody in it, in order to institute absolute equality for all.

By the time those who are perceived to be the most unfortunate among us are rehabilitated, we’ll look around and notice that we’re all residents of a Christ-like police state.

For the common good.

Jesse and Al are definitely on board with the program. They’ve been doing this kind of shuffle-hustle for decades. They’re the pros. When it comes to making “their own people” look bad, they’re without peer.

There’s a rumor going around that Jesse wants EBT food-stamp cards to be the new money. Maybe even the global oil reserve currency.

Anyway, here’s the thing about Collectivism. It’s basically a movement to wipe out the very idea of the individual. The human of the future will only be visible as a member of a group. Otherwise, no one will see him, except to report him to Homeland Security.

Eventually, all singular nouns and pronouns will be scrubbed from the English language. On Thanksgiving, people will say, “Pass the turkeys.”

You’ll be standing alone on a street corner and a guy you know will come up to you and say, “How are you folks today?”

Obviously, this will be a wonderful improvement. But in the meantime, we have to keep promoting individuals, like athletes and movie stars, to hide the fact that, soon, we’re going to spring the trap and eliminate all unique references, all singularities, and all individuals.

Remember that.

Ridicule is the best weapon to use against those who claim we’re all living in a collectivist state right now. “Typical white male” is a good insult to shoot at somebody if you’re white. It suggests a fine degree of insight on your part.

If you’re going after a black person who’s defending individuality and freedom, you’ve got the old standby, Uncle Tom. You can also say he’s betraying his own people, his own race. Not only does it cut deep, it also suggests that black people aren’t capable of being free individuals. This is good because, again, it bolsters the idea of an intransigent, oppressed, and completely helpless underclass.

And to lift up that underclass will require the establishing of universal Collectivism. But of course you omit that part.

This might be a good time to spell out our rights under a collectivist state. The principal right is experiencing the warm feeling from knowing that we’re all in this together. It trumps everything.

Now some people might say this isn’t really a right, but they’re adhering to the classical definition of what a right is. That is exactly what we have to wipe out.

A right isn’t a right. It’s a higher degree of consciousness and a feeling. Make sure you understand that.

For example, in being willing to give up your assets, earnings, and property to the state, you’re feeling honor. And love. Especially love. And after all, that’s a Christian virtue. Not the throwing-the-money-changers-out-of-the-temple kind of love. The homogenized, melted-down, undifferentiated, jelly love.

The glazed-donut love that seeks nothing for itself.

The Matrix Revealed

Here’s how it works. You look out at the world and you see that, in some country you know nothing about, there are a lot of people starving and dying. You insist they be saved. You insist that, in order to save them, we have to revolutionize the entire political, economic, and social system of the planet. That’s real love. And it helps bring the world closer to being one collectivist glob of cheese.

The underlying right of all people is: to melt down in love.

Karl Marx was simply Jesus with a plan.

Here’s one more thing we need to wipe out. The old idea of will power. Ban it wherever possible. Make it a speech crime and a thought crime. Replace it with: waiting for the universe to implement the next step of its plan for the future.

This puts everybody into a passive holding pattern. Easier then to run them over with the collectivist juggernaut.

Our leaders are ready. They have the wisdom to distribute all goods and services from Central Planning. They have the discernment to take from us what should be given to others. They just need to know enough of us are on board. Until that day, we give them cover.

We firmly assert that Collectivism doesn’t exist. It’s a fiction. A fairy tale. A ruse. A paranoid delusion requiring treatment. The people who believe Collectivism is here are rigid and warped. They are cut off from being able to love.

And they are. We are the only ones who can really love. That’s why the future is ours.

Collectivism? Never heard of it.

Deny it, deny it, deny it, until all of a sudden…zap ZAP, and the trap is sprung. And then we’re all in it together, where we’ve really always been, except now we have the laws and the leaders and the plan and the personnel and the guns and the bullets to officially make it so.

On that day, we’ll stand on the peak of the mountain and raise a new flag and all will be well, all will be tranquil, and the seas will part and a man wearing desert robes emblazoned with a red Chinese star and a Star of David and a Hammer and Sickle and a photoshopped picture of Thomas Jefferson embracing David Rockefeller will come striding toward us…and angels and cherubs will dance around his head, and squadrons of mosquito drones will glow in his energy field, and synthetic electromagnetic love will pour out of his every cell, and holographic ads for Goldman Sachs and Morgan Chase and Citi will light up the sky, and we will fall to our knees and submit.

That’s the money shot.

Hang in, we’re almost there.

Jon Rappoport

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

Matrix governments pretend to be real

Matrix governments pretend to be real in the fantasy called democracy

By Jon Rappoport

January 4, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

In the Matrix, cover stories are everything. There are layers of them.

When it comes to so-called democratic governments, the lies and legends and fairy tales and half-truths and limited hangouts are nearly endless.

Imagine a bank robber posing as a hundred different people, with a history for each identity. Every identity’s story is a limited hangout, a partial exposure of who he really is…you get some truth about his mistakes, his problems, his struggles, his hopes and dreams, but the one thing you don’t get is the naked details of his bank robberies.

Intro: Robert Stuart, a US software developer, has been charged with a felony. He sold software to a firm outside the country, who used it to promote and facilitate online gambling. All legal. No problem.

But US authorities claim the software was then grabbed and deployed by American business people, who, without permission, used it to enable illegal online betting within these shores. Hence, charges have been filed against…Stuart!

Absurd on the face of it, so far.

“I grew tomatoes in California, sold them to a French wholesaler, but three guys in New Jersey somehow got hold of a few of the tomatoes, threw them in the face of an Atlantic City housewife—so I’m charged with assault.”

However, all this makes perfect sense, if you realize the government is incensed because they’re not getting a piece of the gambling action. And they have to punish somebody, anybody for that. It’s the money.

The money. Okay?

In the year 2000, I went to Nevada, the casino state, to testify at a sub-sub-committee hearing on harmful children’s meds.

My testimony was cut short by a legislator, when I began doing a stand-up routine on the packaging of a cortisone drug that looked like a Disney cartoon.

The representative objected when I mentioned Pfizer. She said, in the interest of full disclosure (as if that were possible), that she owned stock in Pfizer, but I was out of bounds in my excoriation of the company in front of a government committee.

I laughed.

I went on, that afternoon, to testify at another, larger hearing that was looking into school safety, in the wake of the Columbine shootings.

As I sat in the room, waiting for the proceedings to begin, the attorney general of the state of Nevada, Frankie Sue Del Papa (a glorious name I still repeat to myself because it should be a mantra of some kind), made her entrance.

Immediately, she was surrounded by fawning committee members, because, in that state with a permanent population of perhaps 600, she was a star.

Iron filings to a magnet. With a look on her face that bordered on holy awe, Frankie Sue, in turn, told a story about Bill Clinton visiting Vegas, and I couldn’t catch the punch line, but everybody laughed, as if Bill had unzipped his pants in the AG’s office just to prove he didn’t care what anybody said.

I thought to myself, this is what political force really looks like: lessers clinging to greaters. Forget separation of powers.

Lesser government money clings to greater government money. Lesser money runs up to greater money and embraces it.

The money is passed around like drug profits, which it sometimes is. The money flows like honey.

Government smells like money up close.

That’s why officials don’t care a whit about Constitutional limits. Those restrictions are a joke to them. They know where their real power comes from.

When, on September 10, 2001, Don Rumsfeld, king of his own court, announced to the press that $2.3 trillion dollars of the Pentagon budget was unaccounted for, he was calm. He didn’t make a big deal out of it because he, like every pol from the small-town health inspector to the president of the United States, understands that missing money is a cardinal government operation.

Whether it’s CIA heroin cash from the Golden Triangle or black-budget billions that vanish down into concealed projects, it keeps things moving, if by things we mean massive bribes and payoffs, keep-your-mouth-shut hush cash, secret corporate accounts, bank solvency, advanced mind-control research, and anything else that relies on liquid assets.

The press paid scant attention when even Bernie Sanders, whose unshakable socialist principles were insulted, announced that the real US government bailout was hovering somewhere around $16 trillion.

That’s a figure that should have knocked people off their chairs. But it was just another number in the wind.

Big government dispenses big $$ that crosses all lines and floats all boats.

You’ve got foreign oil or drugs or copper or uranium or fertile ag land or cheap labor? The imperial USA government-corporation (and other big government-corporations) wants as much of it as it can get its hands on. And it will bribe you for it.

The federal government is a private bank and a sieve and a Santa Claus and a gangster. Constitution? Never heard of it.

Back in the early part of the 20th century, when the Carnegie Foundation decided that, other than war, the best way to change (destroy) a society was through education, and when the 1910 Flexner report, funded by Carnegie and Rockefeller, determined that pharmaceutical medicine should be the mandatory wave of the future, the federal government was standing by to back up those proposals with licensing boards and courts and guns, if necessary.

Trying to determine whose money then went where and to whom would have been like trying to decipher Finnegan’s Wake. Good luck. Payoff cash went flying in all directions to make public education and medical drugs into gov-corp empires.

When in 1913, the illegal Federal Reserve was created, untold amounts of $$ were passed to the officials who permitted it to happen.

Insiders didn’t think of this money as bizarre payoffs. Just business the way business is run.

Finance all sides of a war? It’s an investment with assured dividends. The people behind the NY Times and the Washington Post would take a piece of that action in a minute, if they knew the right guy to talk to. And of course, they do know. It’s not a direct outlay of cash to a strutting general. It doesn’t need to be. Money buys corporate and banking stocks, and those companies own other companies who make and sell weapons to everybody whose breath can show up on a mirror.

In other words, welcome to entangling alliances. The people who call isolationists racists and cave men don’t want to think about these matters.

But since the birth of the Republic, America has been undermined by criminals in high places, who have been dedicated to doing international business and all it entails.

As night follows day, this has meant imperial empire. Refraining from empire-building has been labeled “refusing to help those in need.”

That’s one major thread of the money game. The cover story is “aid to the less fortunate.” The real op is “find money wherever you can and use it to steal everything you can.”

In order to realize Obama’s program of elevating the poor and punishing the rich (which is just a con on both ends), massive federal contracts will be let out, because that’s the main action. That’s what the humanitarian messianic program really is.

Those contracts will leak cash like a rowboat battered by machine guns. They’re supposed to. Its federal-corporate biz.

It has nothing to do with executive, legislative, and judicial branches checking each other. That went out with the water wheel and the steam engine.

Whether some woman on a street corner is exulting in her Obama cell phone or some banker is hiding billions offshore, it’s hands in the till.

God bless America? Battle Hymn of the Republic? By the dawn’s early light? No, I’m afraid not.

Domestically, overseas, it’s money, money, where’s my friggin’ money?

The Matrix Revealed

Wal-Mart is taking heat for paying bribes to Mexican officials. Wal-Mart pieced off some of the right people, but it stupidly forgot a few others in Washington, and now it has to do a mea culpa and put its people through training programs in ethics, a let’s-pretend exercise.

Glaxo paid out a $3 billion fine for shady marketing of its drugs. That was just a drop in the bucket, given its profits on those drugs. And it was also a cost-of-doing-business payoff to the federal government.

Money, money, where’s my friggin’ money?

The so-called fiscal cliff? Translation: Sometimes the payoffs and the theft expand to enormous proportions, that’s all. And if the US government can maintain the dollar as the reserve currency of the planet, it can print new money for a long time to come.

Making sure the dollar remains the reserve currency? That takes more payoffs to the right people. Passed across the global table in newly printed invented bucks.

The real enduring question of modern democratic government is, who do we need to pay and how much?

Corollary: if they’re too stupid to take the $$, do we have the available military equipment and personnel to make our point?

Mossadegh, Arbenz, Lumumba, Trujillo, Diem, Goulart, Nkrumah, Allende, the Shah, Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad a) wanted too much money or b) wouldn’t take a bribe at all or c) wouldn’t give enough from their side.

Therefore, boom. They were attacked, shelved, killed.

Payoffs are serious biz. When the government-corporate monarchy comes calling and offers you $$, turning thumbs down can get you in deep trouble.

As they’re lowering your body in the grave, the payoff bagmen will shake their heads and mutter, “What was wrong with that guy?

What else in this world could he want, if not bucks?”

Jon Rappoport

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

The Nazi roots of the European Union

by Jon Rappoport

January 2, 2013

(To join our email list, click here.)

Once upon a time, there was an industrial combine in Nazi Germany called IG Farben. It was the largest chemical/pharmaceutical octopus in the world. It owned companies, and it had favorable business agreements with companies from England to Central America to Japan.

The author of The Devil’s Chemists, Josiah DuBois, traveled to Guatemala in the early days of World War 2, and returned with the comment that, as far as he could tell, Guatemala was “a wholly owned subsidiary of Farben.”

This article will refer you to two other riveting books, but first I want to make a few comments.

The pharmaceutical empire was and is one of the major forces behind the European Union (EU). It is no accident that these drug corporations wield such power. They aren’t only involved in controlling the medical cartel; they are political planners.

This is how and why Big Pharma fits so closely with what is loosely referred to as the New World Order. The aim of enrolling every human in a cradle-to-grave system of disease diagnosis and toxic drug treatment has a larger purpose: to debilitate, to weaken populations.

This is a political goal. It facilitates control.

IG Farben’s component companies, at the outbreak of World War 2, were Bayer, BASF, and Hoechst. They were chemical and drug companies. Farben put Hitler over the top in Germany, and the war was designed to lead to a united Europe that would be dominated by the Farben nexus.

The loss of the war didn’t derail that plan. It was shifted into an economic blueprint, which became, eventually, the European Union.

The European Commission’s first president was Walter Hallstein, the Nazi lawyer who, during the war, had been in charge of post-war legal planning for the new Europe.

As the Rath Foundation reports: In 1939, on the brink of the war, Hallstein had stated, “The creation of the New Law [of the Nazis] is ONLY the task of the law-makers!”

In 1957, with his reputation sanitized, Hallstein spoke the words in this manner: “The European Commission has full and unlimited power for all decisions related to the architecture of this European community.”

Post-war, IG Farben had been broken up into separate companies, but those companies were following a common agenda. If, for example, you want to know why the endless global debate over labeling GMO food has obscured the real issue—banning GMO crops altogether—you can look to these Farben allies: Bayer, BASF, and Sanofi, among others.

They are among the leaders in GMO research and production. BASF cooperates with Monsanto on research projects. Sanofi is a leader in GM vaccine research.

The original IG Farben had a dream. Its executives and scientists believed they could eventually produce, synthetically, any compound in a laboratory. They could dominate world industry in this fashion.

The dream never died. Today, they see gene-manipulation as the route to that goal.

I refer you to the explosive book, The Nazi Roots of the Brussels EU, by Paul Anthony Taylor, Aleksandra Niedzwiecki, Dr. Matthias Rath, and August Kowalczyk. You can read it at relay-of-life.org. It is a dagger in the heart of the EU.

At the Rath Foundation, you can also read Joseph Borkin’s classic, The Crime and Punishment of IG Farben.

In 1992, I was deeply engaged in researching the specific devastating effects of medical drugs. A comment made by an audience member at a lecture I was giving started me on the road to understanding the influence and history of Farben.

Eventually, I concluded that, at the highest levels of power, these drugs weren’t destructive by accident. They were intended to cause harm. This was covert chemical warfare against the population of the planet. The Rockefeller-Standard Oil-Farben connection was a primary piece of the puzzle.

It was, of course, Rockefeller (and Carnegie) power that forced the birth of pharmaceutical medicine in America, with the publication of the 1910 Flexner Report. The Report was used to excoriate and marginalize Chiropractic, Homeopathy, Osteopathy, and other forms of traditional natural practice, in favor of what would become the modern juggernaut of drug-based treatment.

In a recent article about the FDA, “Medical Murder in the Matrix,” I point out the fact that, if this federal agency has permitted at least 100,000 deaths of Americans, per year, from the direct effects of drugs it, the FDA, has certified as safe, and if the FDA knows these death figures (which it does), then “unintended” and “accidental” can no longer be applied to this ongoing holocaust.

The same can be held true for the pharmaceutical industry itself.

People are exceedingly reluctant to come to this obvious conclusion. They prefer to hem and haw and invent excuses or deny the facts.

To understand the dimensions and history of the ongoing chemical warfare against the population, in the form of medical drugs (and of course pesticides), one must factor in the original octopus, IG Farben.

World War 2 never ended. It simply shifted its strategies.

And just as one can trace extensive collaboration between major American corporations and the Nazi war machine, during the military phase of the war, today you see American corporations wreaking destructive havoc on the American people, as Dow, DuPont, Monsanto and others “work their magic for a better life.”

In any fascist system, the bulk of the people working inside the system, including scientists, refuse to believe the evidence of what is happening before their own eyes. They insist they are doing good. They believe they are on the right side. They see greater top-down control as necessary and correct. They adduce reasonable explanations for inflicted harm and death.

This is how and why conspiracies can exist. Only a few people, at the very top, need to know the true motives.

Everyone else tells themselves fairy tales. This deep-seated obsession is an integral part of mind control, and ultimately it is self-inflicted.

The self-created victim calculates: “I would rather stay in my dream than wake up to a nightmare.”

Yes, but acknowledging the nightmare is a step on the road to liberation from the Matrix.

The Matrix Revealed

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

In centuries past, empires conquered foreign lands and made colonies out of them. When that era ended, a less overt style of military and economic conquest was initiated. But there is something most people don’t realize.

When richer nations now go into poorer nations, the so-called incidental goal of bringing “life-saving” medical care with them is a front and a pose.

One of the chief goals of the conquerors is, in fact, pharmaceutical. Changing the habits of populations, so they come to rely on these drugs is high on the to-do list. It rings up profit, of course, for the pharmaceutical empire, and it also poisons the poor into even greater desolation than they are already experiencing. They become even easier to control.

On top of that, the actual untreated causes of the routine desolation—starvation, generation-to-generation malnutrition, contaminated water supplies, lack of general sanitation, overcrowding, and previously stolen agricultural land—are shoved on the back burner of the global media.

Suddenly, we learn that various germ-caused diseases are the real scourges of these countries, and help is coming (slowly), in the form of drugs that kill the germs, along with the medical heroes who will deliver these drugs.

This is a cover story. It’s a preposterous lie. In the conditions of desolation mentioned above, it doesn’t matter what germs are present, and trying to attack them is futile and absurd.

The general conditions of desolation weaken and destroy immune systems. At that point, what would normally be completely harmless germs, any germs, can sweep through an area and cause death and severe illness, because the routine processes of the immune system, which would immediately neutralize the germs, are disabled.

The “medical intervention” is meant to defer, for yet another day, the remedying of the actual problems that keep causing disease—and the medical drugs create new and lethal toxicity, leading to more deaths.

This is the standard op of the modern pharmaceutical empire. To know it is proceeding apace, all you have to do is see foreign doctors getting off planes in Third World countries, or read about some drug giant that is undertaking a humanitarian program of supplying medicines and vaccines to “people in desperate need of them.”

Jon Rappoport

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

The ideal television anchor and his role in the Matrix

The ideal television news anchor and his role in The Matrix

by Jon Rappoport

January 1, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

Most of America can’t imagine the evening news could look and sound any other way.

That’s how solid the long-term brainwashing is. The elite anchors, from Douglas Edwards and John Daly, in the early days of television, all the way to Brian Williams and Scott Pelley, have set the style. They define the genre.

The elite anchor is not a person filled with passion or curiosity. Therefore, the audience doesn’t have to be passionate or filled with curiosity, either.

The anchor is not a demanding voice on the air; therefore, the audience doesn’t have to be demanding, either.

The anchor isn’t hell-bent on uncovering the truth. For this he substitutes a false dignity. Therefore, the audience can surrender its need to wrestle with the truth and replace that with a false dignity of its own.

The anchor takes propriety to an extreme: it’s unmannerly to look below the surface of things. Therefore, the audience adopts those manners.

The anchor inserts an actor’s style into what should instead be a relentless reporter’s forward motion. Therefore, the audience can remain content in its own related role: watching the actor.

The anchor taps into, and mimics, that part of the audience’s psyche that wants smooth delivery of superficial cause and effect.

Night after night, the anchor, working from a long tradition of other anchors, confirms that he is delivering the news as it should be delivered, in both style and substance. The audience bows before the tradition and before him.

The television anchors are, indeed, a different breed.

From their perch, anchors can deign to allow a trickle of sympathy here, a slice of compassion there.

But they let the audience know that objectivity is their central mission. “We have to get the story right.” “You can rely on us for that.”

This is the great PR arch of national network news. “These facts are what’s really happening and we’re giving them to you.” The networks spend untold millions to convey that false assurance.

The elite anchor must believe the basic parameters and boundaries and context of a story are all there is. There is no deeper meaning. There is no abyss waiting to swallow whole a story and reveal it as a cardboard facade. No. Never.

With this conviction in tow, the anchor can fiddle and diddle with details.

Then he can move on to the task of being the narrative voice of his time, for all people everywhere. The voice that replaces what is going on in the heads of his audience—all those doubts and confusions and objections in the heads of the great unwashed. The anchor will replace those and substitute his own plot line.

Some children are born with a narrative voice. Everything they say, from an early age, has the ring of authority and sounds like the news. It’s built in, as if it’s coming through a microphone. I went to school with a boy like that. He appealed to the gullible, because when they heard him speak they associated the tone and the seamless rhythms with truth.

The network anchor is The Wizard Of Is. He keeps explaining what is. “Here’s something that is, and then over here we have something else that is, and now, just in, a new thing that is.” He lays down miles of “is-concrete” to pave over deeper, uncomfortable, unimaginable truth.

The anchor is quite satisfied to obtain all his information from “reputable sources.” This mainly means government and corporate spokespeople. Not a problem. Every other source, for the anchor, is murky and unreliable. He doesn’t have to worry his pretty little head about whether his sources are, indeed, trustworthy. He calculates it this way: if government and corporations are releasing information, that fact alone means there is news to report. What the FBI director has to say is news whether it’s true or false, because he said it. So why not blur over the mile-wide distinction between “he spoke the truth” and “he spoke”?

Therefore, as night follows the day, the anchor is a mouthpiece for government and corporations.

The anchor must become comfortable with having very little personality of his own—and jarring idiosyncrasies are utterly out of the question. On air, the anchor is neutral, a castratus, a eunuch.

This is a time-honored ancient tradition. The eunuch, by his diminished condition, has the trust of the ruler. He guards the emperor’s inner sanctum. He acts as a buffer between his master and the people. He applies the royal seal to official documents.

Essentially, the anchor is saying, “See, I’m ascetic in the service of truth. Why would I hamstring myself this way unless my mission is sincere objectivity?” And the public buys it.

All expressed shades of emotion occur and are managed within that persona of the dependable court eunuch. The anchor who can move the closest to the line of being human without actually arriving there is the champion. These days, it’s Brian Williams.

The vibrating string between eunuch and human is the frequency that makes an anchor great. Think Cronkite, Chet Huntley, Edward R Murrow. Huntley was a just a touch too masculine, so they teamed him up with David Brinkley, a high-IQ medium-boiled egg. Brinkley supplied twinkles of comic relief.

The public expects to hear that vibrating string. It’s been conditioned by many hard nights at the tube, watching the news. When Diane Sawyer goes too far and begins dribbling (alcohol? tranqs?) on her collar, a danger light blinks on and a mark is entered against her in the book.

The cable news networks don’t really have anyone who qualifies as an elite anchor. Wolf Blitzer of CNN made his bones during the first Iraq war only because his name fit the bombing action so well. Brit Hume of FOX has more anchor authority than anyone now working in network television, but he’s semi-retired, content to play the role of contributor, because he knows the whole news business is a scam on wheels.

There are other reasons for “voice-neutrality” of the anchor. Neutrality conveys a sense of science. “We did the experiment in the lab and this is how it turned out.”

Neutrality gives assurance that everything is under control. And neutrality implies: the nation is so powerful we don’t need to trumpet our facts; we don’t need to become excited; our strength is that secure.

Neutrality implies: this is a democracy; an anchor is no more important than the next person (and yet he is—another contradiction, swallowed).

Neutrality implies: we, the news division, don’t have to make money (a lie); we’re not like the soaps and the cop shows; we’re on a higher plane; we’re performing a public service; we’re like a responsible charity.

In ancient Athens, if there were voices narrating the story line of the Polis, they belonged to the playwrights. They translated their current myths into tragedy and comedy.

Now, the voice belongs to the elite anchor. He is the polished predator drone that descends on the nation every night to make his case for What Is Important.

The anchor is the answer to the age-old question about the people. Do the people really want to suck in superficial cause and effect and surface detail, or do they want deeper truth? Do the people want comfortable gigantic lies, or do they want to look behind the curtain?

The anchor, of course, goes for surface only.

The Matrix Revealed

But it turns out that his answer is wrong. The people, at a profound level, want to be awakened. This is what they’re waiting for. This is what they’re hoping for, despite all appearances to the contrary.

They want to throw off the whole cloud of boredom and anxiety that surrounds them. They want to offload the whole stinking mess of lies.

If by some miracle, this revolution occurred on the evening news, the people wouldn’t collapse, the nation wouldn’t collapse. The news divisions of the networks would collapse.

They aren’t geared for the truth. Their sources don’t tell the truth. Their reporters aren’t given time to find the truth.

And the anchor is so accustomed to lying and so accustomed to believing the lies are true that he wouldn’t know how to shift gears. He would have to become a different kind of actor, one he has no training for.

“Well, folks, our top story tonight…it turns out that IG Farben, a famous chemical and pharmaceutical octopus that put Hitler over the top in Germany, was instrumental in planning what became the EU, the European Union. In other words, today’s United Europe is World War Two by other means.”

I don’t think Williams, Pelley, or Sawyer could deliver that line without going into a terminal coughing paroxysm.

At the end of the Roman Empire, when the whole structure was coming apart, a brilliant and devious decision was made at the top. The Empire would proceed according to a completely different plan. Instead of continuing to stretch its resources to the breaking point with military conquests, it would attack the mind.

It would establish the Roman Church and write new spiritual law. These laws and an overriding cosmology would be dispensed, in land after land, by official “eunuchs.” Men who, distanced from the usual human appetites, would automatically gain the trust of the people.

These priests would “deliver the news.” They would be the elite anchors, who would translate God’s orders and revelations to the public.

By edict, no one would be able to communicate with God, except through these “trusted ones.” Therefore, as far the people were concerned, the priest was actually higher on the ladder of power than God Himself.

In fact, it would fall to the new Church to reinterpret all of history, writing it as a series of symbolic clues that revealed and confirmed Church doctrine (story line).

For example, the famous event wherein King Solomon received the Queen of Sheba, would now officially be conceived as illustrative of The Arrival, a Church “headline” category, covering many disparate bits of the past.

Reinterpreted, Sheba and Solomon were nothing more and nothing less than the Church’s precise copyrighted and fully owned story of the entrance of Jesus into this world. One arrival became another arrival.

If this seems absurd, unbelievable, grossly puerile, and illogical to us today, it was very serious business for the Roman Church. Recasting history was an essential function of its news division.

You can go to a small church in the Tuscan town of Arezzo and see one of the greatest paintings realized in all of Western history, Piero della Francesca’s Legend of the True Cross. A panel of this fresco depicts King Solomon receiving the Queen of Sheba.

Why? Why is it there? Why was it part of the Legend of the True Cross? Because, suddenly, it was The Arrival. It had new official, historical, and technical meaning, as decreed by the Roman Church.

The Church’s news division had made it so, led by its universally trusted eunuchs, the priests, the bishops, the cardinals, the Popes, the elite anchors, weaving their Matrix.

Today, you could ask, how can people believe the popular stories of wars, when we know powerful financiers and corporations support both sides, for their own devious objectives?

People believe because the popular stories are delivered by contemporary castrati, every night on the evening news.

Jon Rappoport

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

Prometheus, the artist who opened the prison door

Prometheus, the artist who unchained humanity

by Jon Rappoport

December 28, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Through what mirror are we looking at ourselves in these ancient tales?

The Prometheus story makes absolutely no sense unless we acknowledge there is a reason for rebellion. But not just any rebellion. One man assaulting the supernatural mountain of the Olympians to steal fire, escape, and bring it back to man is more than audacious, if the Greek poets invented the pantheon of gods and their aerie in the first place.

In that case, the theft of fire is an acknowledgment that power is returned home.

“We invented the gods. Now we re-invent ourselves.”

Down through blood-soaked history, the priest class has said, “No, that is too much. That is hubris. Pride goeth before a fall. Don’t think too much of yourselves. Be humble. Submit. Through us, you can connect to the greatest force in the universe, but you must do it in the prescribed ways.”

PS: “Drop a few coins in the basket for the privilege.”

What is the fire Prometheus stole? What power does it signify? The power of money? Of position? Of control over others? Of domination? Is it the power to hypnotize? To make binding and cruel laws? To deceive? To claim divine right? To enslave? To impose limits? To blind the masses?

What Prometheus retrieved was what had been forgotten and surrendered by humans: their own power to imagine and create. The true fire.

We are the artists.

Imagine what might have happened if Freud had plumbed the Promethean myth for his nascent psychology, instead of the Oedipal tale.

“No, no, no,” our leaders say. “We can show you example after example of what happens when humans believe they have power. It always ends in horror. There is no way out except through obedience to the external Truth we peddle.”

Religion is frozen poetry. The poets began by writing outside the boundaries of the tribe, and the priests appointed themselves the sacking editors.

They hammered and cut and polished the wild free poems into tablets and catechisms and manuals of stern disapproval. They gathered up workers to build the temples where the new laws would be preached and taught. They established the penalties for defection. They staked an exclusive claim to revelation.

Prometheus wasn’t a thief. The priest-class were the thieves.

They established the false and synthetic universal centrality of myth disguised as revelation, and they sold it, and they enforced it, and they prepared a list of enemies who were threatening the Law of Laws.

And all that raw material, which they stole? It came from the poets. It came from the free and boundless creation of artists.

So Prometheus was setting the record straight. He was cracking the system like an egg. He was bringing imagination back where it belonged.

Of course, in the ancient myth, he paid a high price for his actions. But that’s merely more propaganda. The high priests write that retribution-ending on every story springing from freedom. They call the punishment by various names, and they naturally claim it is brought down by hammer from the Highest Authority. They work this angle with desperate devotion.

Prometheus was the liberator. He was the Chinese painters of the Dun Huang, the Yoruba bead artists, the Michelangelo of David, the Piero della Francesca of Legend of the True Cross, the Velazquez of The Maids of Honour, the Van Gogh of Irises and lamp-lit Arles, the Gauguin of Who Are We, the Yeats of Song of the Wandering Aengus, the Dylan Thomas of Fern Hill, the Walt Whitman of The Open Road, the Henry Miller of Remember to Remember, the Orson Welles of Citizen Kane, the Lawrence Durrell of The Alexandria Quartet, the de Kooning of Gotham News.

He was Tesla and Rife and Dr. William Koch.

Wherever individual human imagination was launched as the fire, Prometheus was there.

Of course, he wasn’t. He was the story we told ourselves about what we could do. That story is meant to remind us that all centralized collective vision is a fraud. It may not begin that way, but sooner or later, it becomes a gargantuan slippage into narcosis of the soul.

Prometheus is the story we tell ourselves to remember the line between what the individual can learn and what he can create, and how many horses have been pulled up to that line and refuse to cross it and drink from the wells of imagination.

Prometheus is the story of a recapture of what we are. We may have buried the understanding deep in our psyches, but it is there. How many ways we try to refuse it!

We huddle in groups and pretend all progress flows from the mass. We diddle and fiddle with this limit and that limit. We adjust and make more room for the Average. We build machines to think at a higher level than we can. We watch theatrical spectacles of “new hybrid humans.” We proclaim healing virtues and forget about what the healing of the spirit might actually entail, what revolution, what vital energies, what leaps of imagination, what assertions of our inherent power.

We keep thinking of peace, when peace means, as defined by the “wise ones,” the death of the soul. Their peace is what is left over after the war of the creative human has been surrendered without a single burst of energy being fired.

Their peace is syrup poured over the possibility of dynamic action. Their peace is submission to some Glob of “universal consciousness.” Their peace is a column of grinning idiots guarding a self-appointed tower of learning. Their peace is the survival and organization of damaged goods. Their peace is: “if it is meant to happen, it will.” Their peace is: the universe decides, we oblige. Their peace is a cosmic junk-heap.

Followers, little messianic morons, throng to their temples. Candles are lit, ceremonies are enacted, glazed-over joy is celebrated.

From this mob of singing castrati, Prometheus emerged, untangling himself from wet strands of delusion, resignation, and fear. He soared. He advanced. He took back our basic and vital character. He breathed crackling energy into bloodstreams. He tore away Central Authority from its perch.

From the Promethean perspective, Reality is waiting for imagination to revolutionize it down to its core.

This is not an invitation to manipulate and tinker. On the contrary, it’s a call to make Dream into Fact, again and again, without end.

Beyond systems. Beyond structures. Beyond authoritative teaching.

For most, imagination lifts the outer layers of desire and expresses a minor operation in a minor field of engagement. A flicker of a breath here, a struck spark there, and it’s done.

At that point, exhaustion sets in. People lean back and resume their precious expectation of 24 frames per second of emotional rescue from a vacuum.

Hope clings to, and is managed by, what happens on a screen.

The Matrix Revealed

But under massive boredom, energies churn in subterranean caverns. Where will those rivers run for the next thousand years or thousand incarnations?

What would create an internal revolution?

What would start the water wheels spinning and the torrents surfacing?

How would creation begin?

On that Promethean question rests the fate of every civilization, past, present, and future.

Every thread, atom, quark, and wavicle of this Matrix is imbued with the impression that “what already exists” is superior to what the individual can now invent. The causal chains of history seem to produce the present and the present seems to produce the future. Somewhere, we are told, there is an ultimate state of mind to which we can attain: a house we can move into. Once we take up residence, everything is settled. We have won.

These are the grand deceptions. These are the illusions of the Matrix.

Jon Rappoport

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

Murder in the medical Matrix: the FDA

Murder in the medical Matrix: the FDA

by Jon Rappoport

December 27, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

I have to begin this article with a bow in the direction of a remarkable site, SSRI Stories. There you will find a huge assembly of media articles documenting the death and destruction wrought by psychiatric drugs. In particular, read the index:

http://ssristories.com/index.php

It previews the whole picture. It connects the dots.

Keep in mind that all the indicted psychiatric drugs have been approved by the FDA as safe and effective.

Over the years, I’ve written much about the the FDA. I thought I’d assemble a small fraction of it in one place, to reveal what this federal agency is really all about and why it should be dismantled, amid a blizzard of prosecutions and convictions for negligent homicide and, yes, murder.

HIDDEN IN PLAIN VIEW

by Jon Rappoport

May 18, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

The day of the Smoking Gun has arrived.

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

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

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

The FDA website page is currently available under the heading, “Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Also at stake is Obamacare. The connection is vivid and unmistakable. Millions more Americans, previously uninsured, will be drawn into the system and subjected to the very drugs are killing and maiming people at such a horrific rate.

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

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

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

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

(Marcia Angell, MD, The New York Review of Books, January 15, 2009)

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

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

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

ANOTHER SMOKING GUN: THE FDA VS. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!

By Jon Rappoport

June 12, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The buck stops at the FDA.

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

The Matrix Revealed

WHEN MASS MURDER BECOMES ACCEPTABLE

by Jon Rappoport

May 23, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Five days ago, I broke a story about the FDA. On one of its own web pages, the agency admits that medical drugs kill 100,000 Americans a year.

Of course, none of those drugs would have reached the public, if the FDA had ruled them out as dangerous. The FDA is the single entity responsible for certifying medical drugs as safe and effective. On its web page, the FDA neglected to mention that fact.

Imagine this. You go to an FBI web page and read the following: “Murders committed by FBI agents are the third leading cause of homicides in America every year.”

Wouldn’t that set off alarm bells? Wouldn’t there be a public outcry? Wouldn’t the the press go crazy with the story?

Yet somehow, the FDA gets away with its crimes, its homicides. There are no alarm bells, no arrests, no hearings, no public statements, no press reactions, no shakeups at the Agency.

It’s a miracle.

As I’ve been saying and writing for a decade now, the power of the medical cartel is gigantic.

When I was running for a Congressional seat from the 29th District of California, in 1994, and during my participation in the Health Freedom movement of that period, I insisted we had to take the attack to the FDA. We had to make their crimes public.

I was told by the people who were leading the charge for Health Freedom that priority had to be given to passing a law that would protect us all from attacks on nutritional supplements. Then, when we had that law, we could think about going after the FDA.

Well, we got the law, which only gave us temporary protection, and afterward there was no “going after the FDA.” It was suddenly a dead issue.

I remember the people who said, “Don’t attack the FDA.” I remember their attitudes, their faces, their words. They were not my friends, and they weren’t your friends. Some of them were yuppies selling “let’s be nice” New Age sentiment. A few were most likely plants who had infiltrated the Health Freedom movement to water it down.

Various liars sell their lies through various strategies.

I assure you, there are doctors out there who know the statistics on medically caused death in the US. They know about the drugs that kill. They know what’s going on. They know the FDA is accountable. They remain silent. They feel no pressure to make a public statement. They’re living under the umbrella of protection provided by the government and the press and the medical system. These doctors are silent witnesses to ongoing mass murder. Just as the FDA is a silent witness to its own mass-murdering practices. And of course, the doctors write the prescriptions for the drugs.

Obama, Bush, Clinton; none of these men have indicated the slightest awareness of the “problem.” Did they know? Do they know? Just as I predicted, correctly, that the FDA knows, I say these men do know. They prefer to remain silent as well. They don’t want to touch this genocidal crime. They don’t have the character or the courage.

Presidents and deans of medical schools know. Teachers at these schools know. Pharmaceutical executives know. Medical researchers know. The CDC knows. The World Health Organization knows. Editors and reporters at major press outlets know. The DEA knows. The US Dept. of Justice knows.

And now, a growing segment of the Internet knows. Will this story, finally, build into an irresistible roar? Or will it again sink back into the shadows?

A Matrix of hypnotic effect and cognitive dissonance is the obstacle. People find it extremely difficult to believe that a federal agency, in broad daylight, year after year, countenances and sustains the unnecessary deaths of 100,000 people.

People find it extremely difficult to believe that, were such a story true, they would not have heard about it already.

People want to believe that a crime of this boggling magnitude would already have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

People want to believe the secular religion known as Medicine is devoted to healing in all its forms.

People want to believe that, since doctors can put accident victims back together in one piece and can set broken bones and temporarily reduce inflammation, the practice of medicine must be uniformly successful across the board.

To shatter all these firmly held conviction in one fell swoop is too much for many people to absorb.

FDA DRUG REVIEWER: “ONE FDA MANAGER THREATENED MY CHILDREN”

by Jon Rappoport

August 14, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

In a stunning interview with Truthout’s Martha Rosenberg, former FDA drug reviewer, Ronald Cavanagh, exposes the FDA as a relentless criminal mafia protecting its client, Big Pharma, with a host of mob strategies.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/10524-former-fda-reviewer-speaks-out-about-intimidation-retaliation-and-marginalizing-of-safety

Cavanagh: “…widespread [FDA] racketeering, including witness tampering and witness retaliation.”

“I was threatened with prison.”

“One [FDA] manager threatened my children…I was afraid that I could be killed for talking to Congress and criminal investigators.”

Cavanagh reviewed new drug applications made to the FDA by pharmaceutical companies. He was one of the holdouts at the Agency who insisted that the drugs had to be safe and effective before being released to the public.

But honest appraisal wasn’t part of the FDA culture, and Cavanagh swam against the tide, until he realized his life and the life of his children was on the line.

What was his covert task at the FDA? “Drug reviewers were clearly told not to question drug companies and that our job was to approve drugs.” In other words, rubber stamp them. Say the drugs were safe and effective when they were not.

Cavanagh’s revelations are astonishing. He recalls a meeting where a drug-company representative flat-out stated that his company had paid the FDA for a new-drug approval. Paid for it. As in bribe.

He remarks that the drug pyridostigmine, given to US troops to prevent the effects of nerve gas, “actually increased the lethality” of certain nerve agents.

Cavanagh recalls being given records of safety data on a drug—and then his bosses told him which sections not to read. Obviously, they knew the drug was dangerous and they knew exactly where, in the reports, that fact would be revealed.

Read the entire landmark interview for yourself and see what the FDA really is. We are not dealing with isolated incidents of cheating and lying. We are not dealing with a few isolated bought-off FDA employees. The situation at the FDA isn’t correctable with a few firings. This is an ongoing criminal enterprise, and any government official, serving in any capacity, who has become aware of it and has not taken action, is an accessory to mass poisoning of the population.

Twelve years ago, the cat was let out of the bag. Dr. Barbara Starfield, writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, on July 26, 2000, in a review titled, “Is US health really the best in the world,” exposed the fact that FDA-approved medical drugs kill 106,000 Americans per year.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2009/12/09/an-exclusive-interview-with-dr-barbara-starfield-medically-caused-death-in-america/

In interviewing her, I discovered that she had never been approached by any federal agency to help remedy this tragedy. Nor had the federal government taken any steps on its own to stop the dying.

Should we tread daintily when we know the federal agency responsible for drug safety is allowing 100,000 people to die every year? This is murder. It’s not really negligent homicide, not when it keeps happening. It’s murder. It’s on the order of a Nazi war crime.

Try this image: you are a gatekeeper. Your job, on the first day of every year, is to unlock the gate and leave it open, so people can pass through. But you know that, when you open the gate, 100,000 people who pass through will die in the following year. Yet, every January 1, you keep opening the gate.

That’s what the FDA is. That particular gatekeeper.

Jon Rappoport

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

www.nomorefakenews.com

The artist against the system

The artist against the system down through time

By Jon Rappoport

December 24, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Whatever his medium, the artist stands outside the group and group’s slogans.

If the group is living in Tuesday, he is living in Friday.

He sees invention everywhere, even in the faces that float by on the street. He sees their theatrical roles and the messages that are written on their lips before they speak.

He sees the preposterous crises that are concocted to lead to revelations that never come. Populations walk through one gate after another, deeper into an internal slavery that knows no limit.

The artist sees one genuine emotion after another parlayed into flashes of cheap sentiment.

In midst of all this, the artist doesn’t surrender. Nor does he only observe. Nor does he only point out the lies.

He CREATES.

He always has.

The artist opposes the most popular trends of the moment.

The trend now, under various guises, is the Collective.

We need to realize that the Collective, no matter how it is defined or shaped or covertly hidden, is seeking to marginalize the person who imagines and creates new realities.

The artist is able to spot the Collective. He opposes it.

This opposition can’t be settled and resolved with some absurd “rainbow philosophy” that pretends to include everybody. It can’t be dismissed or merged in a melting lump of happy-happy cosmic cheese.

Those pseudo-philosophers who speak about consciousness as if it were one all-embracing ocean, within which we are merely tiny and ineffectual drops of water, have already developed a convenient amnesia about the artist.

Down through time, in the face of every spiritual system devised by the priest-class, the artist has said no. Instead, he has built his own worlds. He has lived the life of imagination, immune to the latest and greatest “New Age.”

He has asserted his power.

This is the natural mantle worn by the person who invents, imagines, improvises, creates: power.

Power that is apart from the group.

The artist not only sees, with great clarity, the mindless brain-dead gatherings of Collectives; he not only sees how they are built; he not only sees how they import “the highest ideals” to flesh out their slave-programs and objectives; he not only rejects all this; he creates something entirely different.

He invents worlds of his own. Many worlds.

The artist proliferates. He doesn’t reduce.

The artist isn’t looking for the “one thing” that will unite us all under a banner of harmony. He knows all such harmonies wear out and are eventually co-opted to produce mass hypnosis.

The artist rebels. In rebelling, he reveals the uniqueness of the individual. He doesn’t pay lip service to this uniqueness. He demonstrates it.

The artist destroys the Matrix, over and over.

Whether in art, science, philosophy, healing, or any other field of human endeavor, the person who lives by and through imagination creates new realities. As the artist, he challenges the status quo on every level.

This isn’t a superficial undertaking. It isn’t an attempt to “do something pretty and nice.” It isn’t part of “being a good citizen.”

The Collective is a fungus that seeks to swallow up people and nations. It enlists the highest-flying ideals as a cover. It sweeps away resistance with what seems like the most honorable of intentions.

Humanity on this planet has been undergoing a transformation into one ten-billion-member cult. You can find its leaders just by listening to their voices and their sentiments. They all come from the same manual.

This is really war by other means.

The Matrix Revealed

In the dying days of the engorged Roman Empire, which had squandered its capital through wars of conquest, it was decided that these other means were necessary. And so the Roman Church was invented. It would employ all the idealisms of past ages.

It would actually produce an unprecedented version of mind control as the weapon of conquest.

And today, we have “the Global outlook.” This is the silky cover for drawing in populations to a perverse dream of unity for all.

“We will harmonize the world.”

This is exactly the kind of program the artist has always rejected.

The artist says: there are an infinity of worlds, and they can exist side by side; artists create them.

When that message is lost, we lose what we are and enter into amnesia.

ROBOT OR FREE?

There are some people who hear the word CREATE and wake up, as if a new flashing music has begun.

This lone word makes them see something majestic and untamed and astonishing.

They feel the sound of a Niagara approaching.

They suddenly know why they are alive.

The creative life is about diving in. It’s about a kind of transformation that shreds programming and gets down to the energy of the Fire.

Most people don’t want to travel to that grand arena because they have been trained like pets by some sector of this society to be good girls and boys.

The creative life isn’t about little changes done in little penguin steps. It’s about putting your arms and your mind around Deep, Big, and Wide Desire. It’s about making that Desire come to life.

99% of the world has been trained like rats to adore systems. Give them a system and they’re ready to cuddle up and take it all in. If they have questions, or if they want to argue, it’s about how to tweak the system to make it a little better. And with every move they make, they put another blanket over the Fire Within.

They sleepwalk through life and say yes to everything.

Maybe you once saw something truly free that didn’t care about consequences, and it blew you into tomorrow and turned on your soul’s electricity for an hour.

Maybe you’re sick and tired of bowing and scraping before a pedestal of nonsense.

CREATE is a word that should be oceanic. It should shake and blow apart the pillars of the smug boredom of the soul.

CREATE is about what the individual does when he is on fire and doesn’t care about concealing it. It’s about what the individual invents when he has thrown off the false front that is slowly strangling him.

CREATE is about the end of mindless postponement. It’s about what happens when you burn up the pretty and petty little obsessions. It’s about emerging from the empty suit and empty machine of society that goes around and around and sucks away the vital bloodstream.

People want a certain level of defined comfort, and they want to BELONG TO SOMETHING.

“I want to belong. It’s my reason for being. It’s my hole card. Therefore, I’ll sit on my imagination, so it won’t take me out beyond this thing I want to attach myself to.”

The propaganda machines of society relentlessly turn out images and messages that ultimately say: YOU MUST BELONG TO THE GROUP.

Day after day after day, year after year, the media celebrate heroes. They inevitably interview these people to drag out of them the same old familiar stories. Have you EVER, even once, seen a hero who told an interviewer in no uncertain terms: “I got to where I am by denying the power of the group, by denying the propaganda that says we all have to BELONG.”

Have you ever heard that kind of uncompromising statement?

I didn’t think so.

Why not?

Because it’s not part of the BELONGING PROGRAM, the program that society runs on to stay away from the transforming power of IMAGINATION.

Jon Rappoport

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