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.

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

Matrix governments pretend to be real

Jan4

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 20^th 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?

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 Nazi roots of the European Union

Jan2

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.

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

The ideal television anchor and his role in the Matrix

Jan1

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.

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

Prometheus, the artist who opened the prison door

Dec29

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.

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

Murder in the medical Matrix: the FDA

Dec27

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.

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 29^th 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

www.nomorefakenews.com

The artist against the system

Dec25

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.

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 “glue” that makes us all average, normal, and clueless

Dec23

by Jon Rappoport

December 23, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

Tragic events, crises, threats are designed to capture our minds and hold us in a state of emergency, whether or not such a state is officially declared by our august leaders.

This “glue” is one aspect of the Matrix.

And of course, when events seem to threaten our very existence, these leaders are all too eager to enact responses and solutions that make the original crises pale by comparison.

We couldn’t be blamed for defining “solution” as “whatever is worse than the problem.”

In this sordid mix, what part of ourselves is being held down? What capability are we unwilling to exercise? What does fear keep us from doing?

It’s obvious that freedom takes a hit. We become more cautious about exercising our freedoms. However, freedom isn’t just an idea or an empty condition. Freedom implies power. Individual power.

If it didn’t, who would care one way or another about freedom? Who would make an issue out of it?

If each one of us didn’t have power, freedom would be no more than a fairy tale with which we could amuse ourselves.

The exploration of power is not something you’ll find in a school or in the workplace or in a community group. It’s a kind of taboo. People don’t talk about it.

Not talking about it makes as much sense as writing a book about the sun and neglecting to mention it gives off heat.

The repressed conversation about power is a cultural artifact. We’re somehow led to believe it’s impolite to bring up the subject. It’s self-aggrandizing. It runs against the grain of appearing humble. It seems to legislate against the mandatory premise that “we’re all in this together.”

What does this taboo conceal?

Power is the capacity to imagine and create.

Rather than being about “the truth,” power is about inventing new truth, in the sense that, when you create, you bring something into the world that wasn’t there before.

After a great artist or scientist makes imagination into fact, others then gather around and analyze the truth of what has just appeared. But the cardinal happening was the invention itself.

Even more important was the capacity to make imagination into fact.

Power.

Flowing from freedom.

This is what crisis and threat and tragedy seem to blanket with despair. But that is an illusion.

Nothing can happen in this world that changes or diminishes your inherent power, unless you decide it does.

Staged crises are also an example of power. They are perverse art flung up on the screen of our perception, designed to make us feel we have to give in. Give in to what? To the sacrifice of our own capacity to imagine and create reality.

“Somebody else made reality for me.”

That idea is also the hallmark of hypnosis. The subject, in a trance, accepts what is already real as the final summing up of his life. His only job is to adjust his actions to the world as it is.

There are many examples. Look at the mesmerizing tonnage of legend launched to convince the population of ancient India that the caste system was a cosmological necessity, given the rules of universal justice and the regulations governing reincarnation.

This “spiritual system” was, finally, a cosmic fascism. It was a work of art designed and managed by the aristocratic and priest classes, to cement their control over the population. In other words, these rulers invented a reality for the masses that thereafter commanded:

“We made reality for you. Your job is now to live inside it.”

Likewise, in recent centuries, the rise of science was twisted and extrapolated into its own legend: materialism.

“There is nothing beyond particles whirling in space. That’s it. That’s what is real, everywhere. You live inside this idea. Adjust. Reject any thoughts that don’t mesh with it.”

And against all this is, if we want it, freedom. Power. The individual capacity to imagine and create reality.

How far does this power extend?

Life on planet Earth appears to mandate against any far-reaching exercise of creative power. That, too, is an illusion.

There are no limits.

The whole repeating covert op of tragedy, tragedy, tragedy, grieving, grieving, grieving, coming together, healing…the whole endless and repeating ceremony is put there to assure us that we are little creatures with nowhere else to go but Acceptance. This, we are told, is our only option for redemption.

This idea has been sold in the marketplace of spiritual commerce since the dawn of time.

It’s a straight-out lie. It’s told, again and again, to serve rulers.

And rulers want to make sure that the number of creatively powerful individuals is kept to a bare minimum. Otherwise, the single monolithic reality they have invented and sold would shake and fall apart.

Drowned in a multidimensional triumph of many powerful individuals creating many brilliant and simultaneous realities.

That is the true unalloyed meaning of an open society.

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

Jon Rappoport

Five questions you should ask about your destiny

Dec22

Five questions you should ask about your destiny

by Jon Rappoport

December 21, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

How you look at your life, what you do in life, where you go in life, and with whom…all these decisions are wrapped up in what you think about your destiny.

Granted, this isn’t a subject that pops up on the radar of most people. But you aren’t most people.

The subject of destiny has been defined by various cultures and religions since the dawn of time on this planet. Answers have been supplied. These answers are accepted for a period, and then new cultures and new answers appear.

But such collective solutions aren’t necessarily yours. You have to make your own inquiry. And in the end, you decide.

So here are five crucial questions to ask yourself.

One: Is my destiny determined by forces outside myself?

Two: Do I choose my own destiny?

Three: Is my destiny the result of some combination of my own choices and outside forces? If so, how does this “collaboration” work?

Four: Is my destiny inevitably wrapped up in the future of others?

Five: Is my destiny unique to me, apart from the future of others?

In the West, this spirit of inquiry emerged in the Dialogues of Plato, who presented conversations between his former teacher, Socrates, and citizens of Athens.

For the most part, Socrates chose abstract qualities like Justice and Piety to open his conversations; as in, what is Piety? What is Justice? What is the Good?

Now, in the second decade of the 21^st century, we are faced with a crisis which threatens to obliterate our civilization. Although I could choose many issues as examples of this threat, I select education itself.

For example, by designed omission, the whole question of The Group versus The Individual has been placed on a shelf where it receives scant attention.

Likewise, free will versus determinism has been excised from serious philosophical discussion.

People say, “Well, we don’t have time for all that ‘thinking’. It’s a luxury we can’t afford. We’re just trying to survive.”

But history proves that when the people leave these matters to a few elite thinkers, by default momentous currents are launched. And then the people are pulled along, whether they like it or not.

Ideas aren’t just luxuries or toys. They rescue or drown whole societies.

Of course, if education in all its forms doesn’t prepare people to be able to think beyond the ends of their noses, then the prospect of answering the big questions is rendered moot, because people aren’t equipped for the job.

The word “destiny” itself has mixed messages. It appears to be associated with a pre-fixed outcome. On the other hand, it can be shaped.

The kind of New Age material that was distorted and imported from the East during the 1960s has left a legacy of “surrender.” If you “let go” of enough preconceived perception, you’ll drift upward and connect with a greater universal consciousness. Is this so?

Does destiny involve merging into a larger whole? Does it rather involve extricating yourself from that whole?

These aren’t questions designed merely for the young. Answering them impacts your future and the future of your children in numerous ways. Neglecting to answer them is refusing to have navigational skills on the open sea.

Americans pride themselves on being practical and pragmatic. They opt for “what works” and discard everything else. But that approach has pitfalls. It excludes, for example, pursuing deep desires in the face of long odds. It ends up in shallow materialism, as if that were the totality of life.

John Dewey, the arch-pragmatist philosopher, defined American education for millions of people. He set its course along a stripped-down path that helped produce generations of dumbed-down worker bees.

Dewey accomplished this by default. His challengers were few, and they were weak. Their supply of counter-proposals was garbled and impotent. Dewey didn’t just win the day through top-down manipulation of the American educational system. He triumphed because his opponents were unprepared to argue that human destiny was far wider and deeper than the next practical decision of the moment.

So consider these five questions and understand that your future is, in a real sense, riding on your answers. It always has. This is the way progress happens. People undertake a significant inquiry and come to conclusions. The inquiry may, depending on how honest you are, take five minutes or it may take a year. In either case, the future comes into focus based on your answers.

One could simply ask himself, “What do I really want to do in life?” A very good question. But, as it turns out, the reply to that question is often obscured by prior unasked and unanswered questions.

In other words, a person’s prior view of his own existence is already limited, because he hasn’t found out what he really thinks about something big. Something like destiny.

These are the famous words Plato placed into the mouth of Socrates: “The unexamined life is not worth living.”

Americans are suspicious about this statement when they hear it or read it. They think it implies years of useless and even self-destructive internal wrangling that will come to nothing.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. There is productive thought. It’s motivated to take the ceiling off limited perception of what is possible in this thing called existence.

If you choose to, you have the natural right remove ceilings. Doing it is part of what and who you are.

Jon Rappoport

The mind-control qualities of Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, and Scott Pelley

Dec21

The mind-control qualities of Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, and Scott Pelley

by Jon Rappoport

December 20, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

In the wake of the Sandy Hook murders, I’ve been describing how the television coverage is a form of mind control.

Of course, it’s wall-to-wall mind control every day, no matter what stories the networks are focused on.

The best of the best mind control is applied by the three major network anchors: Brian Williams, Scott Pelley, and Diane Sawyer.

They don’t do it as well as Cronkite, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, and Edward R Murrow once worked their magic, but they’re fairly good practitioners of the art. Brian Williams is the current champion.

Here are the qualities you need to rise to the top of the charts.

You believe and don’t believe in what you’re doing at the same time.

You know it’s all an act, but yet you have firm faith in the importance of the material you’re presenting. You think the stories you’re covering, and the way you’re covering them, is unrivaled truth.

Dan Rather was an interesting case. At one time, he was quite convincing. He was a “trusted voice.” But then he faltered and stumbled over the George W Bush military-service scandal, and he went down in flames. Even before that, you could see occasional cracks in his armor. He was doubting his own faith. He was flickering a bit here and there, like a doubting priest in the Roman Church who had no one to confess to.

When the elite anchor goes on air and digs in, he’s seamless. He could be transitioning from mass killings in East Asia to sub-standard air conditioners, and he makes the audience track through the absurd curve in the road.

In this respect, he’s a major surrealist painter. The audience sees objects on the canvas that obviously don’t go together and yet they’re intrigued and mesmerized.

Then there is the voice itself. The elite anchor has a voice that soothes just a bit but brooks no resistance. It’s authoritative but not cold. Scott Pelley is careful to watch himself on this count, because his tendency is to shove the message down the viewer’s throat like a pro surgeon making an incision. And Pelley also used to look down his nose at the great unwashed. He’s been working to correct that. He’s a high-IQ android who’s training himself to be human.

Diane Sawyer wanders into sloppiness. She pours syrup, as if she’s had a few cocktails before the broadcast. And she affects a pose of “caring too much.”

Brian Williams is head and shoulders above his two competitors. You have to look and listen very hard to spot even a speck of confusion in his delivery. He knows exactly how to believe his act is real. He can also flick a little aw-shucks apple-pie at the viewer. Country boy who moved to the big city.

If none of these anchors could have “pulled the country together” after JFK’s assassination, it’s in part because that country doesn’t exist anymore. America doesn’t want a daddy.

The vocal delivery of an elite anchor has to work poetic rhythms into prose. Shallow hills and valleys. Clip it here and there. Give the important words a pop. Make no mistake about it, this is hypnosis at work. Not the cheesy stage act with three rubes sitting in chairs, waiting to be made into fools by the used-car salesman waving a pendulum. This is high-class stuff. It flows with great certainty. It entrains and conditions brains. The audience tunes in every night to get their fix.

That’s the key. The audience doesn’t really care about content. They want the delivery, the sound, the voice of the face.

Brain Williams could do a story about three hookers getting thrown out of a restaurant by a doctor celebrating his anniversary with his wife, and it would come across like the Pentagon sending warships into the Gulf.

Diane Sawyer couldn’t. That’s why Williams’ ratings are higher.

Segueways, blends are absolutely vital. These are the transitions between one story and another. “Earlier today, in Boston.” “Meanwhile, in New York, the police are reporting.” “But on the Hill, the news was somewhat disappointing for supporters of the president.”

Doing excellent blends can earn an anchor millions of dollars. The audience doesn’t wobble or falter or make distinctions between what went before and what’s coming now. It’s all one script. It’s one winding story every night.

Therefore, the viewer doesn’t need to think. Which is the acid test. If the ratings are high enough and the audience isn’t thinking, we have a winner. Corollary: the audience doesn’t notice the parameters of stories, how they’re bounded and defined and artificially constructed to omit deeper themes and various criminals who are committing outrageous crimes that aren’t supposed to be exposed.

For example, pharmaceutical companies sell drugs that cause a few hundred thousand deaths in America every year like clockwork.

Brian Williams, with just a bit of his twanging emphasis, can say, “Today, pharmaceutical giant Glaxo was fined one-point-nine billions dollars,” but he can’t tie all the horrendous stories of medical-drug damage together in a searing indictment of the whole industry.

The audience needs to remain oblivious to this larger story. The anchor ensures and guarantees a clueless missing bottom line. That’s his job. That’s his underlying assignment.

It’s called, in intelligence circles, a limited hangout. You expose a piece of a crime, in order to transmit the illusion of guilt-and-justice, while the true RICO dimensions are kept out of view.

Elite anchors are the princes of limit hangouts. That is their stock in trade. Sell the illusion of justice while concealing the bulk of the iceberg that is under water.

The audience can watch and listen to hours of coverage on revolutions and counter-revolutions in the Middle East, but they can’t suspect that the US and NATO are funding terrorists dressed up as freedom fighters, in order destabilize and destroy nations in that region.

“More gunfire and explosions in the capital city today…”

Then there is a little thing called conscience. The elite anchor can’t have one. He has to pretend to have one, but it isn’t real.

Every year, the anchor covers dozens of scandals that are left to wither and die on the vine and fall down the memory hole, never to be seen again, except perhaps for a much-later task-force or commission report that equivocates and exonerates the major players.

The anchor has to deal with this. He has to develop memory loss. Yes, if interviewed by Charlie Rose or Brian Lamb, he can bring back details of prior stories left to the inhabitants of Wonderland, but on a day-to-day basis he has no memory.

In editorial meetings at his own network offices, if someone mentions trillions in government bailouts to banks, he can frown slightly and thus impart, “It’s stale, it’s old.” But if Brian Lamb interviews him about the “time of the bailouts,” he can recall the story in full…and tap dance on the head of a pin for five minutes, indicting no one, without losing a shred of credibility in the eyes of the American public.

And when it comes to the elites the anchor is pledged to? CFR, Rockefeller interests, Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, government-allied Big Medicine, Globalism, and so on? Nary a damaging word will be said. Nothing to see, nothing to say. No problem.

Therefore, the viewing audience doesn’t suspect these controlling entities are doing anything wrong or, in some cases, even exist.

Conspiracy? “Aw shucks, I really do have sympathy for the people who dig up this stuff. And I’m not saying all of it is wrong, either. But you know, journalism is about plumbing for facts and verifying them. That’s the hard truth we have to face in this business. Going on the air with a possible this and a possible that is ultimately irresponsible. If we who present the news feel an occasional impulse to wing it, we have to rein ourselves in. Restraint is part of our job…”

Show these jokers a few devastating books by Anthony Sutton or Caroll Quigley and they’ll nod and say, “I did read that one in college. It was interesting but a little thin, I thought…”

The anchors project a sense they’re doing science. Gathering facts, verifying, testing, repeating the study again to see if it holds up, checking the checkers, confirming the sources, tailoring the assertions to make there’s no wandering off the well-researched path.

It’s part of the act.

The elite anchor has to impart the impression that he’s personally familiar with the events he’s reporting. That’s nonsense. He isn’t touching actual events with a ten-foot pole. He isn’t doing journalism himself. But the audience must think he is.

“Washington has been the scene of many battles. But the current tussle at the top of the fiscal cliff is becoming an exercise in outrage on both sides. Today, behind closed doors…”

Some anchors are managing editors of their own broadcasts. That means they sit around like newspaper editors and listen to lesser editors present the stories of the day. The anchors ask questions and pick and choose which pieces they’ll cover on the evening news, and they decide the sequence, but their hands never touch the events themselves.

It’s more illusion. A well-trained and literate high-school sophomore from Nome could go on air, with a decent haircut, and read the news.

But backed up by expert technicians, a good set decorator, and a pro make-up person, Williams, Pelley, and Sawyer will give you the kind of living fiction that has become its own genre.

The audience is delivered clues about what they are supposed to feel at every turn in the road, and they respond with their own unalloyed faith.

When Paddy Chaevsky wrote the definitive film about news, Network, he had his anchor, Howard Beale, break from the format and tell people to stick their heads out of their windows and shout, “I’m as mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!”

Most people forget that Beale, with the highest ratings in news history, went on to host his own hybrid program, after the news division was turned over to the entertainment wing of the network. And this new show portrayed Beale as a kind of mesmerizing (wacko) priest, a religious figure.

The audience’s faith in the anchor was magnified.

Then, when confronted by a superior priest, Arthur Jensen, chairman of the holding company that owns the network, Beale learns that all of society is organized as one interlocked forever-corporation, and the universe itself wants it that way.

Beale succumbs and falls under Jensen’s spell. The anchor who hypnotizes millions of people every night becomes the hypnotized subject.

Today’s elite anchors have this dual aspect. They control minds and they also put themselves in a mind-controlled state, in order to believe in what they are doing. They don’t need an Arthur Jensen. It’s all self-inflicted. That’s one step better.

No need to censor stories from above. The anchors have a finely honed sense of what is permissible and what isn’t.

The mind-control flicker machine runs on its own.

In early human societies, the story teller was a principal figure. He wove the tribe’s experiences into a coherent whole, and built new layers of cosmology. Later, story tellers formed an elite priest caste and spun official metaphysical doctrine.

Today, people feel the same need for narrators. They are the anchors. Although these front men for the news no longer use metaphysics to control the masses, they do covertly obey the old rule: tell only part of story.

Guard the rest from public view.

In ancient times, the rationale for hiding key secrets was explained in terms of stages of privileged initiations into “the magic.” Today, we are led to believe our news narrators are giving us everything there is. Other than their stories, there is nothing. So in this secular media religion, we have two choices: swallow the reality, or face a vacuum.

Most viewers still accept that premise.

Their bottomless need for a story teller survives.

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Matrix Revealed

Ready? Let’s pretend Collectivism doesn’t exist

Matrix governments pretend to be real

The Nazi roots of the European Union

The ideal television anchor and his role in the Matrix

Prometheus, the artist who opened the prison door

Murder in the medical Matrix: the FDA

The artist against the system

The “glue” that makes us all average, normal, and clueless

Five questions you should ask about your destiny

The mind-control qualities of Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, and Scott Pelley