Dispatches from the War: the pharmaceutical/medical troops occupy planet Earth

How many drug scripts do doctors write per year?

by Jon Rappoport

June 23, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

I wrote the following piece in 2017. It details the massively successful infiltration of pharmaceutical armies among the population.

These men and women are war criminals.

Here we go:

Medical News Today reports that, in 2011, there was a modest uptick in the number of drug prescriptions written in the US. [1] [1a]

The increase brought the total to: 4.02 billion.

Yes, in 2011, doctors wrote 4.02 billion prescriptions for drugs in America.

That’s an average of roughly 13 prescriptions for each man, woman, and child.

That’s about one new prescription every month for every American. (Update: the Kaiser Family Foundation reports that in 2016, 4,065,479,343 drug prescriptions were written by US doctors—an increase of 65 million. [2])

The Medical News Today article concluded, “…the industry should be heartened by the growth of the number of prescriptions and spending.” Yes, I’m sure the drug industry popped champagne corks.

We’re talking about prescriptions here. We’re not talking about the number of pills Americans took. We’re also not counting over-the-counter drugs or vaccine shots.

Pharmacopoeia, a 2011 exhibition at the British Museum, estimated that “the average number of pills a person takes in his or her own lifetime in the UK is 14,000.” That’s as a result of prescriptions. Including over-the-counter drugs, the 14,000 number would swell to 40,000 pills taken in a lifetime. [3]

What are the effects of all these drugs?

We are looking at a supreme Trojan Horse that is rotting out America and all other countries from the inside. Wars, no wars, economic deprivation, economic prosperity, the drugs continue to do their work, debilitating and ruining and terminating lives.

Many sources can be cited to confirm this assessment.

On January 8th, 2001, the LA Times published an article by one of the best medical reporters in the business, Linda Marsa: “When Good Drugs Do Harm.” Marsa quoted researcher Dr. David Bates, who indicated that, in the US, there are 36 million serious adverse reactions to medical drugs per year. [4] [4a]

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published the most stunning mainstream estimate of medical-drug damage in history: “Is US health really the best in the world?” The author was Dr. Barbara Starfield, a respected public-health researcher at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. [5] [5a]

Starfield concluded that medical drugs were killing Americans at the rate of 106,000 per year.

That’s a million deaths per decade.

This is a conservative sketch of the Trojan Horse that has been placed in the center of every country in the world.

The pharmaceutical juggernaut will continue, no doubt about it. The only question is, how many people will wake up and seek another way?

The destruction of societies by medical drugs goes far beyond what some people call “over-prescribing.” This isn’t just a tilt in the wrong direction. It isn’t simply errors of judgment compounded by the number of doctors dispensing medicines.

Those are all polite terms suggesting the situation can be corrected through a show of better professional judgment. That will never happen.

Countries of the world are literally being assaulted by pharmaceutical companies and their foot-soldier doctors. It’s chemical warfare.

To even begin to see light at the end of the tunnel, hundreds of millions of people must add themselves to the rolls of those who already are pursuing better health through natural means.

Not even the Nazis and their dearly beloved cartel, the monster IG Farben, dreamed of the day when the citizenry would line up and demand to ingest more and more life-destroying chemicals.

What about the FDA, the federal agency responsible for certifying all medical drugs “safe and effective,” before release for public use in the US?

The FDA is completely aware of the monstrous death toll and the injuries stemming from the very drugs they’re approving—but they take zero responsibility.

On an FDA website page, “Preventable Adverse Drug Reactions: A Focus on Drug Interactions,” [6] the agency discusses the “problem”—but as you can see from the title, they’re framing the conversation in terms of “interactions,” as if drugs are maiming and killing people because they are accidentally combining effects. This is a gross lie.

Here are quotes from the FDA page, which come just after trying to pawn off absurdly low drug-death and injury numbers:

“However, other studies conducted on hospitalized patient populations have placed much higher estimates on the overall incidence of serious ADRs [adverse drugs reactions]. These studies estimate that 6.7% of hospitalized patients have a serious adverse drug reaction with a fatality rate of 0.32%.2 If these estimates are correct, then there are more than 2,216,000 serious ADRs in hospitalized patients, causing over 106,000 deaths annually. If true, then ADRs are the 4th leading cause of death—ahead of pulmonary disease, diabetes, AIDS, pneumonia, accidents, and automobile deaths.”

“These statistics do not include the number of ADRs that occur in ambulatory settings. Also, it is estimated that over 350,000 ADRs occur in U.S. nursing homes each year.3 The exact number of ADRs is not certain and is limited by methodological considerations. However, whatever the true number is, ADRs represent a significant public health problem that is, for the most part, preventable.”

Yes, preventable, if any government were determined to neutralize the pharmaceutical armies ravaging humanity.

But that is not the case.

Governments are backing the killers.


SOURCES:

[1] http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/250213.php

[1a] https://web.archive.org/web/20120918225216/http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/250213.php

[2] (forth coming)

[3] https://humanitiesandhealth.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/pharmacopoiea-or-how-many-pills-do-we-take-in-a-lifetime-a-wellcome-trust-exhibition-at-the-british-museum/

[4] http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jan/08/health/he-9609

[4a] https://web.archive.org/web/20130215182710/http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jan/08/health/he-9609

[5] https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-primary-care-policy-center/Publications_PDFs/A154.pdf

[5a] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2009/12/09/an-exclusive-interview-with-dr-barbara-starfield-medically-caused-death-in-america/

[6] https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-interactions-labeling/preventable-adverse-drug-reactions-focus-drug-interactions


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

O Canada, you’ve got medical Nazis; their stench is rising into the sky

Scum

by Jon Rappoport

June 10, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

They’re called the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO).

As their home page states, they “regulate the practice of medicine in Ontario. Physicians are required to be members to practice medicine in Ontario.”

In other words, CPSO is THE medical board. They run the show. If practicing doctors make a wrong move or say the wrong thing, CPSO is there to step on their faces and discipline them and even cancel their licenses to practice.

But now a new rebel group of Canadian MDs has emerged. Why? Because CPSO has issued a fascist edict threatening practicing doctors. Read the threat carefully.

College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario [CPSO] Statement on Public Health Misinformation (4/30/21): [1]

“The College is aware and concerned about the increase of misinformation circulating on social media and other platforms regarding physicians who are publicly contradicting public health orders and recommendations. Physicians hold a unique position of trust with the public and have a professional responsibility to not communicate anti-vaccine, anti-masking, anti-distancing and anti-lockdown statements and/or promoting unsupported, unproven treatments for COVID-19. Physicians must not make comments or provide advice that encourages the public to act contrary to public health orders and recommendations. Physicians who put the public at risk may face an investigation by the CPSO and disciplinary action, when warranted. When offering opinions, physicians must be guided by the law, regulatory standards, and the code of ethics and professional conduct. The information shared must not be misleading or deceptive and must be supported by available evidence and science.”

WE’RE YOUR BOSSES. YOU DO WHAT WE TELL YOU TO DO. SHUT YOUR MOUTHS. MARCH STRAIGHT AHEAD. KILL YOUR PATIENTS IF YOU HAVE TO, BUT OBEY US.

The new rebels against this monster call themselves the Canadian Physicians for Science and Truth. This is a brief excerpt from their response: [2]

“On April 30, 2021, Ontario’s physician licensing body, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO), issued a statement forbidding physicians from questioning or debating any or all of the official measures imposed in response to COVID-19.”

“We regard this recent statement of the CPSO to be unethical, anti-science and deeply disturbing.”

“As physicians, our primary duty of care is not to the CPSO or any other authority, but to our patients.”

“The CPSO statement orders us to violate our duty and pledge to our patients…”

I wondered what medical treatments, in general, CPSO supports and tolerates. It took me three minutes to find a Toronto outfit called the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Foundation (CAMH). They promote electro-convulsive therapy. In other words, shock treatment.

In other words, delivering electric shocks to the brain. As a cure for “mental illness.” I call it torture.

Apparently, this treatment is just fine and dandy, but telling patients the COVID lockdowns are criminal is forbidden by the Nazi bureaucrats at CPSO. Saying the vaccine is dangerous is forbidden. Saying masks are useless and harmful is forbidden.

What would happen if these medical rebels, the Canadian Physicians for Science and Truth—say, 10,000 of them—took this war to the wall?

Practiced non-harmful medicine, kept warning their patients about the sociopathic COVID regulations and the vaccine, refused to knuckle under to the Nazi bureaucrats, even to the point of having their licenses stripped and going to jail?

What would happen, as many thousands/millions of Canadians rallied to their side?

I’ll tell you what would happen. Sanity. Revolution. The downfall of the scum.

We’re at Nuremberg 2.0, people. If you don’t know what that means, look it up.

Doctors clear their vision and their brains and do their level best to HEAL, or they follow orders of the Commandants and maim and kill. It’s one side or the other.

In my 83 years, I’ve known a few very good doctors, and a number of The Cold Ones. The Cold Ones administer, without feeling or remorse, the Book of Death.

They’re ice on the outside, and rotting fungus and stench within.

Many of them sit at the top of medical boards.

They turn open societies into concentration camps.

REBEL.


SOURCES:

[1] https://twitter.com/cpso_ca/status/1388211577770348544

[2] https://www.globalresearch.ca/declaration-canadian-physicians-science-truth-2/5744810


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Data Sets, Fraud, and the Future

by Jon Rappoport

June 4, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Right off the bat, here is a scene from the near-future: AI takes a look at John Jones’ medical records, does instant collating, and comes up with a disease diagnosis.

Jones’ doctor’s office contacts Jones. Via Zoom, the doctor’s AI assistant slaps on a diagnosis, and an hour later, two bottles of medical drugs arrive at Jones’ door.

One problem: the data set assembled by AI is preposterous. Jones’ so-called symptoms don’t add up to a disease. Only in another data set, held by the CDC, do the symptoms require a disease-label.

There was a saying at the dawn of the Internet: garbage in, garbage out. But that was never the case. The predominant theme was always: garbage in, garbage eaten and digested and deployed.

The public is being treated to an awesome amount of propaganda, indicating that faster and more comprehensive handling of data means progress.

“We can profile this, we can predict that, we can discover what groups believe and don’t believe, we can organize efficient approaches to public safety, we can control traffic patterns, we can diagnose mental disorders, we can present customized ads to individuals, we can make cash completely electronic, etc.”

As if slicker manipulation of larger and larger data sets is, in some sense, “more accurate.”

Rube/yokel response: “Well, that’s good. Remove the human factor. AI is neutral. Data are analyzed objectively. Follow the science.”

When in fact, this manipulating and coordinating and organizing is an attractive cover for: bias based on the obsession to control populations.

Example: The psychiatric data set contains 300 labeled mental disorders. Clusters of behavioral symptoms are listed for each disorder. There are no lab tests. All the disorders are fakes. John Jones’ life has been profiled 16 ways from Sunday. He is diagnosed with mental disorder X-165 and prescribed a toxic drug that actually enhances the “symptoms” used to make the diagnosis—on top of which, he suffers brain damage. He’s now under control.

But the op is clean, bright and shiny, no human input. AI does it all. What yokel would object?

AI contacts Jones by Zoom: “Mr. Jones, we’ve carefully analyzed over a billion records of employment in the country. Yours was one of them. For the greater good—of which you’re a contributing member—your job has been deleted. However, we’ve found a somewhat comparable position in Duluth. You and your family will be moving there in two weeks.”

Wow. AI analyzed a billion records. Digested their import, mixed and matched a few hundred thousand other data sets labeled “greater good,” and came up with a solution. No Democrats, no Republicans, just engineers. Planners. Humanitarian AI.

Example: “We’re evacuating the area. A new coronavirus has been isolated. The danger of spread must be curtailed. Details to follow in the next hour. Prepare. All is well.”

Formidable early warning. Except, no new virus was isolated.

Example: “The planetary AI grid is modulating energy use in Germany and France. For the next 48 days, users will experience three brownouts per day. Schedule to follow. Brownouts in Tanzania and Argentina have been lifted.”

Three billion data sets were analyzed to arrive at those conclusions. The AI analysis took 58 minutes. Next month, the analysis will take 41 minutes.

The New York Times: “Earth climate-change programs 30% faster, Microsoft reports.”

MIT: “No human brain could calculate energy-use needs.”

A thousand new Fauci’s appear on the scene to explain to the public the wonders of data analysis, AI, and greater good.

A series of doddering Bidens and hammerhead Merkels are replaced by publicists fronting for AI engineers.

Data sets and AI are a million-layer cake sitting on top of, and concealing, false and sociopathic premises.

That’s the 21st century cover story.

There will be many types of blowback. For example, data warriors will arise; they’ll corrupt data sets, making them patently ridiculous, and disrupt the AI logic.

And in response, the System will keep developing new layers of AI control; replacing as many humans (potential rebels) as possible.

This article supplies context for my work exposing virus-isolation. “New viruses” are data constructs, cobbled together by AI programs from historical libraries of old gene-sequences. Those sequences, in turn, are nothing more than hypothetical strings of data, once upon a time assumed (without evidence) to describe other viruses.

Data sets, fraud, AI. Pillars of modern civilization.

“But…but AI has uses that are beneficial…”

Indeed. If that weren’t the case, the whole effort to establish AI technocratic tyranny would be exposed in two weeks.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Wuhan Lab, bioweapon, gain of function, but…the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist in the first place

Putting the paradox together

by Jon Rappoport

May 31, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

What I’m about to lay out might seem “too staggering to believe.”

Fortunately, what people do or don’t believe isn’t the issue.

And with that, here we go. Buckle up.

For the past year, I’ve been presenting evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist. It’s never been proven to exist. [1]

Those who claim it does exist have two legs to try to stand on. One: the virus has been isolated (discovered). [2] And two: its genetic sequence has been found. [3] [3a]

However, the mainstream scientific definition of “isolated” turns out to mean: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in a lab. The soup contains all sorts of material. We never extracted the virus from the soup.” In other words, “isolated” means its opposite.

In the soup, in addition to the purported virus, there are human and monkey cells, toxic drugs, chemicals, and other genetic material. When the cells begin to die, researchers assert (with no proof) that the cause of cell-death must be the virus.

Therefore, the virus IS in the soup, and it is deadly.

However, the drugs and chemicals could be killing the cells, and the cells are being starved of nutrients, so that could certainly account for their death.

Bottom line: There is no proof of isolation. It isn’t even close. There is no evidence that the purported virus is in the soup.

I’ve published a typical account of virus-isolation from a study, and Dr. Andrew Kaufman did a step-by step analysis of this process and tore it to pieces. I published his analysis. Dr. Kaufman showed there was no merit to the claim that SARS-CoV-2 had been isolated. [2]

What about the genetic sequencing of the virus? You can’t sequence something you haven’t isolated (discovered). To claim you have sequenced it would be like saying, “We have a generic fragment of iron dust, and we know it comes from a 1932 Ford Moon Rover fender.” There was never a 1932 Ford Moon Rover.

Researchers presume, assume, guess, pretend that “SARS-CoV-2” WOULD HAVE certain pieces of genetic material, and referring to libraries which contain data about such material, they use a computer program to cobble together pieces of data and present a genetic portrait of “SARS-CoV-2.” [3] [3a]

If we were discussing a science fiction novel about a virus, we might say, “That’s an interesting genetic sequence. An interesting castle in the air.”


Now—to bridge over from this part of the article to the Wuhan lab, gain of function research, tweaking a coronavirus to produce a dangerous entity, we need to know one thing:

Mainstream researchers—virologists, molecular biologists—BELIEVE they are working with a real virus. Most of them certainly believe this. They are married to their fallacious and fantastical processes of proving a given virus exists.

And because they believe, so do politicians and public health officials and military leaders.

Therefore, we could certainly say, if the evidence is convincing, that there has been an effort to ramp up the function of a coronavirus in Wuhan.

But EFFORT and TRYING have nothing to do with the truth.

Based on unproven and untenable beliefs, people have TRIED TO DO all sorts of things. And some of those people have CLAIMED that they SUCCEEDED.

Therefore, it’s really quite easy to see how a) the virus has never been proven to exist and b) some researchers have been trying to ramp up the function of a fantasy they call a virus.

“But…but if the virus doesn’t exist, what are these researchers in their lab in Wuhan doing? What are they working with? What’s going on?”

Yes, I like that question. But you see, in the Church of the Virus, the inner sanctum, the holy of holies—THE HIGH-SECURITY LAB—is not open to you or me or anyone from the outside.

We (and dissenting scientists) can’t look over researchers’ shoulders. We can’t film every step they take. We can’t stop them at any point and make them explain what they’re actually doing. We can’t say, “You just fabricated a conclusion out of thin air, so justify it.” We can’t challenge their ironclad beliefs about the truth and validity of their procedures as they’re actually carrying out those procedural steps.

“What? You call that isolation? You didn’t isolate anything. You just stirred the soup in the dish. Explain yourself. And the gene you say you just tweaked? What gene? Let’s go back over that again. You just fiddled with DATA about a gene in a so-called virus. Makes no sense. Let’s review that move. Let’s break it down.”

No, we can’t do any of this.

Instead, we’re supposed to have faith in what these researchers have faith in.

If this amounts to science, Kool-Aid is the nectar of the gods.

“Excuse me, Doctor Towering-Arrogant, but you just plugged your latest ‘finding’ into a computer program, which is supposed to spit out the genetic sequence of the ‘new tweaked virus you just created’.”

“Yes? So?”

“First of all, you’re working with DATA here, not actual physical material. But we’ll put that aside for the moment. I want to know exactly what’s in this computer program. These five people standing with me here in the lab? They’re software pros. They have no allegiance to any government or funding entity. I want them to take the computer program apart and analyze it.”

“I’m not responsible for the program.”

“Who is?”

“Colleagues. I don’t know them personally.”

“Well, get them in here now. All research stops until we have them here in the lab. They’ll open the whole computer program to the light of day, explain it, and then I’ll have my people go through it with a fine-tooth comb.”

“That’s outrageous. Why?”

“To see if the program is credible, or just another fantasy constructed to give the false appearance that you’re actually sequencing something.”

We’re not permitted to do that, either.

We’re in Church. We must accept all the prescribed articles of faith.

For those people who not only claim SARS-CoV-2 was tweaked or invented in a Wuhan lab, but was made deadly there…they should consider the extraordinary lengths to which public health officials have gone to FALSELY pump up COVID case and death numbers.

None of that pumping would be necessary if an actual PANDEMIC virus existed and were loose in the world.

During the past year, I’ve covered all the criminal schemes to inflate case numbers. To cite just one scheme: Running the PCR test at an unconscionably high sensitivity has automatically created millions and millions of “positive COVID cases.” In concert with this fraud, the CDC has changed its definition of “a case,” so people who test positive but remain healthy with no symptoms can be counted as “COVID cases.” [4] [4a] [4b]


Now, I’m going to present a Part Two to this article. It isn’t necessary, but some people are thinking: “If it isn’t the virus, why are so many people dying?” I’ve written perhaps a dozen pieces that answer this question. Here is a shortened version:

—The disease switcheroo; they don’t teach this in medical school.

I’ve mentioned this shell game hundreds of times in articles and lectures over the years. Here I want to boil it down to a protocol that has earned the medical cartel trillions of dollars.

We begin the story with an “outbreak.” Somewhere on Earth, we are told there is a cluster of unusual cases of illness.

The key word is “unusual.” Otherwise, who would care? People would instead say, “Forty people in Wuhan have lung congestion.” And that would spark no interest.

In Wuhan, it was “unusual pneumonia.” How so? No convincing answer. Some people have cited a “ground glass” appearance in pictures of patients’ lungs. Meaning gray areas, or opacity. Another claim: patients had extreme shortness of breath.

But opacity and shortness of breath were mentioned and described in medical literature long before COVID.

Something else must be offered, to justify the term “unusual cases.” And we get it almost immediately, while we’re still trying to figure out what makes these patients’ illness new and different:

It’s a virus. A never-before-seen virus.

Already a switcheroo is in progress. There is actually nothing unusual in the Wuhan cluster of cases. And just as we’re about to realize that, we’re hit with “new virus.” And then we forget there was no reason to look for a new virus in the first place.

Deadly air pollution has been hanging over Wuhan for a long time. It explains all sorts of lung infections, including pneumonia, the cardinal COVID symptom. And by the way, roughly 300,000 people in China die every year from pneumonia. [5] [5a] [5b] [5c] [5d]

The “new virus” is trumpeted. But of course, as I’ve demonstrated many times, it hasn’t actually been found. No one isolated it. The so-called genetic sequencing of it was a fictional castle in the air based on supposition. How could it be otherwise? No one has an isolated and purified specimen of the virus that can be analyzed.

Accepting “new virus” as fact produces this situation: a list of very familiar clinical symptoms can now be called unique, because the cause is unique.

Suddenly, cough, chills, fever, fatigue, congestion, shortness of breath—which have been called flu, or just infection, or other names—are COVID. That’s the big switcheroo.

Next step: provide a diagnostic test for “the virus” that would automatically spit out false-positives like water from a firehouse. That’s the PCR. I’ve taken the PCR apart six ways from Sunday and exposed it as a fraud.

With the PCR in hand, the switcheroo is deepened. That list of familiar illness symptoms—taken together with the test—paints the picture of millions of cases of a “new plague.”

All this fabrication is on the order of—“Hey, Jim, sales of our widget number 6 are in the toilet. What can we do? Unless…let’s call it widget number 7, put it in a new box…”

People say, “But there ARE mysterious COVID cases that can’t be explained away as repackaged lung infections…”

Of course there are. When you make the net big enough, it will sweep in groups of cases that seem to defy explanation. But when you move in close enough, you discover a variety of factors that cause illness and death. New poisonous vaccination campaigns, toxic pesticides, lagoons of feces in giant pig factory-farms, opioid drugs; even various electromagnetic technologies.

I first caught on to the switcheroo in 1987, when I was doing research for my first book, AIDS INC. Scientists in Africa were investigating a “new” outbreak among people who, “incidentally,” were suffering from protein-calorie malnutrition, hunger, and starvation.

The scientists, cheap con artists that they were, called this “wasting syndrome,” then “Slim disease,” and finally “AIDS.” They announced the cause was HIV—a virus no one had isolated.

And lurking in the background, if you needed another cause of illness and death, there was the infamous World Health Organization mass smallpox-vaccination campaign in Africa, one of the most dangerous mass medical experiments ever carried out on a population. That campaign had wrapped up injecting millions of people several years before “the discovery of AIDS.”

The campaign was so dangerous that, at a secret WHO meeting in Geneva, a decision was made never to use that vaccine again, because it had caused smallpox (or something that looked like it).

In 1987, I combed through volumes of medical journals at the UCLA bio-med library, and discovered that the single most prevalent cause of T-cell depletion (“AIDS”) in the world is MALNUTRITION.

In Africa, malnutrition, hunger, starvation, contaminated water supplies, lack of basic sanitation, toxic vaccines, grinding poverty, war, fertile farm land stolen from the people by major agricultural corporations, toxic medical drugs…were all repackaged as a new disease caused by a new virus, HIV.

I then went on to study every so-called high-risk group for AIDS. I found that in each group, all the “AIDS symptoms” could be explained by non-viral causes.

At that point, I realized I was looking at a classic intelligence-agency-type covert operation, applied within the medical universe. The virus was the cover story. It was being use to hide ongoing government and corporate crimes. For example—forced starvation.

A con is a con.

Only the disease-names are changed, to protect the guilty.

With COVID, you must also consider the following: an extraordinarily high percentage of cases and deaths are occurring in people over the age of 65. The elderly. Many of these people are living in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

IB Times, 7/27/20: “New research from the Kaiser Family Foundation has indicated that while adults 65 and older only account for 16% of the U.S. population, they make up 80% of COVID-19 deaths.” [6]

CDC, May 14, 2021: “8 out 10 COVID-19 deaths reported in the US have been in adults 65 years old and older.” [7]

Why are these older people dying?

Because they have long-standing serious health problems. And for years, even decades, they’ve been treated with an array of toxic medical drugs.

Then, in 2020, they’re terrified they might be diagnosed with COVID. And then they ARE diagnosed. Which ramps up their terror.

On top of all of this, they’re neglected by nursing home staffs, even handled brutally in some cases. They’re isolated “because of COVID,” imprisoned, cut off from family and friends. They’re alone.

So they give up and fold up and die.

No virus required as an explanation.

In a large study of New York state hospitals, it was discovered that people over the age of 65 who were diagnosed with COVID, and put on breathing ventilators, died at the rate of 97.2 percent. [8] [8a] [8b] [8c] [8d]

No matter what the prior condition of the patient, any treatment that has a death rate of 97.2 percent must be discontinued at once. But it wasn’t discontinued. It still goes on. This amounts to murder.

“People are dying, it must be the virus.” No. Wrong.

There is no “it.” People dying from various causes are fictionally brought under one umbrella, called COVID-19.

This is titanic fraud, tragedy, mass murder—murder compounded many times by the destructive vaccine, aka genetic treatment.

It didn’t originate in a lab in Wuhan.

But the story that it did originate there cements the premise, in many minds, that we are dealing with a virus.

Quite convenient.

The Wuhan lab, intentionally or unintentionally, becomes a cover story that obscures the truth.

For further reading, see “The China lockdown, Sun Tzu, and the Art of War” [9] and “Meet the Medical CIA” [10]


SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/05/20/the-pandemic-virus-that-doesnt-exist/

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/04/21/isolation-of-sars-cov-2-refuted-in-step-by-step-analysis-of-claim/

[3] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/22/the-virus-that-isnt-there-genetic-sequencing-and-the-magic-trick/

[3a] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/19/dr-tom-cowan-explores-the-covid-virus-invented-out-of-sheer-nonsense/

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/11/06/smoking-gun-fauci-states-covid-test-has-fatal-flaw/

[4a] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/02/22/fauci-states-covid-pcr-test-has-fatal-flaw-confession/

[4b] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/04/20/fauci-smoking-gun-evidence-pandemic-fraud/

[5] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/05/19/covid-jim-west-expands-his-research-on-pollution-not-the-virus/

[5a] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/03/03/more-on-china-pollution-and-the-coronavirus-cover-story/

[5b] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/02/23/wuhan-and-the-polluted-air-as-a-cause-of-epidemic-illness/

[5c] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/01/27/what-are-the-chinese-hiding-in-wuhan/

[5d] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/01/29/covid-if-there-is-no-virus-why-are-people-dying/

[6] https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/what-share-of-people-who-have-died-of-covid-19-are-65-and-older-and-how-does-it-vary-by-state/

[7] https://web.archive.org/web/20200515074622/https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/older-adults.html

[8a] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/06/12/military-nurse-at-covid-epicenter-hospital-its-murder/

[8b] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/06/30/death-by-killing-old-people-not-covid-the-basic-deception/

[8c] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/07/05/highly-dangerous-drug-being-used-to-sedate-covid-patients/

[8d] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/08/31/killing-fields-of-new-york-putting-cuomo-and-trump-on-notice/

[9] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/07/the-china-lockdown-sun-tzu-and-the-art-of-war/

[10] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/04/22/meet-the-medical-cia/


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Memo to medical bloggers living in Mommy’s basement

And to medical reporters living in New York and Georgetown pulling down nice paychecks

by Jon Rappoport

May 13, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

You see, bloggers and reporters, here is the problem (one among many, actually). You have no background.

You don’t understand that every time you write a medical piece, there is a context which should inform your every move:

The modern medical system kills and maims huge numbers of people.

To put it another way, THE MODERN MEDICAL SYSTEM KILLS AND MAIMS HUGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE.

Let me help you out.

ONE: “The Epidemic of Sickness and Death from Prescription Drugs.” The author is Donald Light, who teaches at Rowan University, and was the 2013 recipient of ASA’s [American Sociological Association’s] Distinguished Career Award for the Practice of Sociology. Light is a founding fellow of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2013, he was a fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard. He is a Lokey Visiting Professor at Stanford University.

Donald Light: “Epidemiologically, appropriately prescribed, prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death, tied with stroke at about 2,460 deaths each week in the United States. About 330,000 patients die each year from prescription drugs in the United States and Europe. They [the drugs] cause an epidemic of about 20 times more hospitalizations [6.6 million annually], as well as falls, road accidents, and [annually] about 80 million medically minor problems such as pains, discomforts, and dysfunctions that hobble productivity or the ability to care for others. Deaths and adverse effects from overmedication, errors, and self-medication would increase these figures.” (ASA publication, “Footnotes,” November 2014)

TWO: Journal of the American Medical Association, April 15, 1998: “Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients.”

The authors, led by Jason Lazarou, culled 39 previous studies on patients in hospitals. These patients, who received drugs in hospitals, or were admitted to hospitals because they were suffering from the drugs doctors had given them, met the following fate:

Every year, in the US, between 76,000 and 137,000 hospitalized patients die as a direct result of the drugs.

Beyond that, every year 2.2 million hospitalized patients experience serious adverse reactions to the drugs.

The authors write: “…Our study on ADRs [Adverse Drug Reactions], which excludes medication errors, had a different objective: to show that there are a large number of ADRs even when the drugs are properly prescribed and administered.”

So this study had nothing to do with doctor errors, nurse errors, or improper combining of drugs. And it only counted people killed or maimed who were admitted to hospitals. It didn’t begin to tally all the people taking pharmaceuticals who died as consequence of the drugs, at home.

THREE: July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association; author, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revered public health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health; “Is US health really the best in the world?”

Starfield reported that the US medical system kills 225,000 Americans per year. 106,000 as a result of FDA-approved medical drugs, and 119,000 as a result of mistreatment and errors in hospitals. Extrapolate the numbers to a decade: that’s 2.25 million deaths. You might want to read that last number again.

In 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield. Here is an excerpt:

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

The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

NO.

Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into an untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

Are you sure it was a momentary stir? I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later! The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

Do the 106,000 deaths from medical drugs only involve drugs prescribed to patients in hospitals, or does this statistic also cover people prescribed drugs who are not in-patients in hospitals?

I tried to include everything in my estimates. Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs have been added to the marketplace.

—end of interview excerpt—

FOUR: BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989). Author, Jeanne Lenzer. Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices: “It [the Institute] 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.”

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 medical drugs that are routinely maiming and killing Americans. Every public health agency knows the truth.

FIVE: None of the above reports factor in death or injury by vaccine.

The US system for reporting severe adverse effects of vaccines is broken.

Barbara Loe Fisher, of the private National Vaccine Information Center, has put together a reasonable analysis:

“But how many children have [adverse] vaccine reactions every year? Is it really only one in 110,000 or one in a million who are left permanently disabled after vaccination? Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler observed in 1993 that less than 1 percent of doctors report adverse events following prescription drug use. [See DA Kessler, ‘Introducing MEDWatch,’ JAMA, June 2, 1993: 2765-2768]”

“There have been estimates that perhaps less than 5 or 10 percent of doctors report hospitalizations, injuries, deaths, or other serious health problems following vaccination. The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act contained no legal sanctions for not reporting; doctors can refuse to report and suffer no consequences.”

“Even so, each year about 12,000 reports are made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System [VAERS]; parents as well as doctors can make those reports. [See RT Chen, B. Hibbs, ‘Vaccine safety,’ Pediatric Annals, July 1998: 445-458]”

“However, if that number represents only 10 percent of what is actually occurring, then the actual number may be 120,000 vaccine-adverse events [per year]. If doctors report vaccine reactions as infrequently as Dr. Kessler said they report prescription-drug reactions, and the number 12,000 is only 1 percent of the actual total, then the real number may be 1.2 million vaccine-adverse events annually.”

SIX: Here is a stunning quote from a doctor who has quite probably read and analyzed as many medical-drug studies as any other doctor in the world:

“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.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)


Compare that quote with one from “the father of COVID science,” Tony Fauci. In an interview with the National Geographic, Fauci stated: “Anybody can claim to be an expert even when they have no idea what they’re talking about…If something is published in places like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, Cell, or JAMA—you know, generally that is quite well peer-reviewed because the editors and the editorial staff of those journals really take things very seriously.”

They take things so seriously at the New England Journal, they routinely publish glowing studies of medical drugs which, as evidence shows, are killing people in great numbers.

So…you medical bloggers living in mommy’s basement, and you medical reporters who live in New York and Georgetown and pull down nice paychecks, you now have some background. Every time you write a Mockingbird article (aka puff piece), you can fathom how deep your lies really go, and how much crime you’re really involved with.

It’s never too late to tell the truth. I’m offering you a way out.


SOURCES:

(forthcoming)


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Pandemic: follow the real money, the unthinkable amount of money

Financial shock and awe

by Jon Rappoport

May 12, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

For the past year, I’ve been demonstrating that every major scientific assertion about the so-called pandemic is a lie. This article is about something else.

The money.

Money that makes the bailout/stimulus sums look like chump change. Money that makes Bill Gates look like a guy on welfare scraping by.

To understand my line of approach here, you have to understand that people are conditioned, in many ways, to accept modern medical care.

One successful method of conditioning: a whole nation is invaded by medical propaganda and medical treatment, during a purported crisis. The bottom line: “only doctors can save the population.”

Think about that chunk of mind control. Think about the long-term implications.

And as you read on, picture very populous countries that, to a significant degree, still rely on non-modern traditional medicine—herbs, natural remedies, etc.

Do you really believe that when the authorities declare the medical/pandemic crisis is over, the populations of such invaded countries will just go back to their former beliefs and practices?

“Thank you for saving our lives with drugs and vaccines, but now we’ll return to our ancient Ayurveda and acupuncture…”

The invasion of the doctors and the public health authorities, during the crisis, is the point of the spear. The way in. The first planned stage of PERMANENTLY CONVERTING THE WHOLE COUNTRY TO MODERN PHARMACEUTICAL MEDICINE.

We’re talking about MARKETS.

New markets as targets of the invasion.

Where are these new markets?

China, India, Indonesia, for example.

Each of these countries still maintains, to a significant degree, traditional non-modern healing practices.

What will happen in the long term, beyond the current “pandemic,” if Big Pharma is able to gain a total monopolistic position in these nations?

What if the invasion of the COVID drugs and vaccines is successfully followed by new waves of modern medical/pharmaceutical ground troops, and a complete takeover of these nations is achieved?

How much money would we be talking about?

Here, from registerednursing.org — “Here’s How Much Your Healthcare Costs Will Rise as You Age” (12/25/20), is a startling assessment [1]:

“During one’s lifetime, over $400K will be spent on the average American’s healthcare in today’s dollars. And that is if medical costs rise [at] the same rate as inflation. If medical costs rise at 3% more than inflation, your healthcare will cost over $2MM, the vast majority of which will take place after the age of 45.”

Yes, healthcare costs in America are very high. So let’s cut that $400K in half. Let’s say the lifetime healthcare cost for the average person is $200K.

How many people, combined, live in China, India, and Indonesia?

Let’s peg that figure at 3 billion. [2]

Now, imagine that 30 years from now, each one of those people is being subjected to modern medicine, at the rate of $200K for a lifetime.

What is 3 billion people multiplied by $200K?

600 TRILLION DOLLARS.

That’s a market.

Is that a permanent market pharmaceutical companies and hospitals and public-health doctors think is worth fighting for?

A market to control and own?

And if the opening salvo in that fight needed some tremendous IMPACT, some serious conditioning and mind control, would the declaration of a global pandemic do the trick?

Would the masks and distancing and lockdowns and business closures and bankruptcies and travel bans; the wall-to-wall media fear-porn day after day; the contact tracing and antiviral drugs and vaccines; the heavy police presence to enforce all the restrictions; the inflated false case and deaths numbers—would that declared pandemic be the way to go…if the ultimate goal is a 600 TRILLION DOLLAR MARKET?

You bet it would.

And that’s the way corporations view the planet.

As markets.

Territories to capture.

And now you can see the financial reason why the powers-that-be are forcing this false pandemic on the whole world in every possible way:

THE MONEY that’s at stake.

CODA: A person could say a 600-trillion-dollar market is impossible; there isn’t enough fake money you can invent to cover it. And maybe that’s true. But however you need to cut that awesome figure to accommodate what banks can achieve, the final number is still going to be an overwhelming percentage of the global economy.

Which is why I’ve been saying for some years that we live in a medical civilization.

“But…but wait…you’re never going to get all three billion people into lifetime care in the modern medical system…”

“True. The three billion people and the 600 trillion-dollar market is the striven-for ideal, the far shore of the pot of gold.”

“And those three countries you mentioned—China, India, and Indonesia—they already have a significant amount of modern medicine.”

“Yes they do. But they also have a significant amount of non-modern traditional healing. And notice that I only mentioned those three nations, in arriving at the 600 trillion-dollar figure. I said nothing about about South America or Africa, for example.”

“Oh.”


SOURCES:

[1] https://www.registerednursing.org/articles/healthcare-costs-by-age/

[2] https://worldpopulationreview.com/en


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Police shootings vs. Medically caused death; how the news shapes public perception and controls minds

by Jon Rappoport

April 30, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Well, Mr. Wilson, I want to thank you for appearing before this committee today. It’s been many years since you served as the CEO of one of the largest news networks in the world.

Many years since I was ousted, yes.

We’re not here to discuss that today.

No.

We want your point of view on news media in general. How they shape public perception.

Mr. Chairman, let me start with this. Every year in the US, people commit about 1.2 million violent crimes. That would be murder, rape, aggravated assault, and robbery.

That many?

Yes. Have you ever seen a full-length news documentary revealing, step by step, the recovery of a victim of one of those crimes?

Why, no. I haven’t.

If such a documentary were produced, it would show the surgeries to repair the wounds, the hospital stay, the period of rehabilitation in another facility, the arrival at home, the anguish of friends and family, the economic hardship, the attempt at psychological recovery, and so on—over a long period of time.

I’ve never seen anything like that on television.

I’ll tell you why, Mr. Chairman. Viewers watching it would finally understand, up close, the effects of violent crime. And therefore, they would hold the perpetrators, the criminals, more accountable and responsible. And THAT would bring about a change in our culture. News media don’t want that change to occur.

Why not?

Because news media are devoted to enlisting public sympathy for the criminal. That’s their agenda. It’s a destructive agenda.

That’s a very serious charge, Mr. Wilson.

Yes, sir, it is. But it’s just the beginning of what I have to say here today. Let me continue. According to available statistics, the police in America shoot and kill about 1200 people a year. A few of those shootings cause major upheavals in society. Protests and riots. Every year, in America, the medical system kills 225,000 people. There is no upheaval. The news media don’t cover this fact in any way at all.

Are you sure about that medical statistic, Mr. Wilson?

It’s a conservative estimate, Mr. Chairman. I’ll offer one citation out of several. Author, Dr. Barbara Starfield, a revered public health expert at Johns Hopkins. July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association. Her review was titled, “Is US Health really the Best in the World?” She stated: 106,000 deaths result from the administration of FDA-approved medicines. 119,000 deaths come as a result of mistreatment and errors in hospitals.

That’s astounding, Mr. Wilson.

Yes, it is. Yet, no coverage from the news media. The police shoot and kill 1200 Americans a year. The medical system kills 225,000 Americans a year. So imagine would happen if the media covered the medical deaths in the same way they cover four or five police shootings that lead to protests and riots.

And you’re saying the news media intentionally ignore the medically caused deaths?

Yes. Of course.

Well, television news is supported to a great degree by pharmaceutical advertisers.

Correct. And those advertisers would remove their money if medically caused death suddenly became a leading story, night after night, on the evening news. But there is more to the story.

Which is?

The medical system is a cornerstone, a pillar, a foundation of society. People pay homage to it. In order to maintain the kind of society we have now, people must believe in the foundation. Otherwise…a collapse would occur.

You’re really saying the news media are propping up—

Yes, I am, Mr. Chairman. Take that figure—the medical system causes 225,000 deaths in America every year. That would be 2.25 MILLION deaths per decade. And we’re not even talking about the millions of other people who are maimed by the medical system and manage to survive.

I’m trying to picture what you’re—

Let me go even further, Mr. Chairman. Suppose one news network devoted a week of coverage to ONE PERSON killed by the medical system. Up close. The period of suffering, the death, the effect on family, the incredible emotional distress and pain and turmoil, the financial burden, and so on. And then, at the end of the week, the news anchor stated: THIS HAPPENS TO 225,000 PEOPLE IN AMERICA EVERY YEAR. 2.25 MILLION PEOPLE EVERY DECADE.

There would be a national uproar.

And, I suggest, Mr. Chairman, this is the only way the US medical system can be reformed and rebuilt from the top. But it will never happen. The news media will not permit it. Therefore, the medical system has to be rebuilt from lower levels—ultimately, by the people themselves.

So how are news media shaping the public perception of the medical system?

I hope that’s a rhetorical question, Mr. Chairman. The public is led to believe we have a system with only RARE adverse effects. This belief is created and cultured by news media. They are complicit in the crime.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The non-existent virus; and the implications

by Jon Rappoport

April 26, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Last week, I published Dr. Andrew Kaufman’s devastating critique of the claim that SARS-CoV-2 has been discovered.

Dr. Kaufman offered a blow-by-blow analysis of a typical description of “virus-isolation.” He showed that no such isolation has occurred.

In other words, “here it is,” “we found a new virus”—false. Unsupportable. Fraudulent.

Equally fraudulent, the claim that the “genetic structure of the virus” has been sequenced—-because, if you don’t have a purified isolated specimen of the virus, you have no way (other than fabrication) to claim you understand its structure.

What are the implications?

The COVID PCR and antibody tests are designed to detect a virus that isn’t there.

The COVID case and death numbers—stemming from the virus—are meaningless.

The lockdowns, masks, distancing, the closure of businesses, the economic destruction—all based on stopping the virus—are unnecessary, meaningless, vastly criminal.

People who have been dying have been dying for various other reasons—but their deaths have been relabeled and repackaged as “caused by the virus.”

The vaccine is supposed to protect against…what? The virus that isn’t there.

People who say this monstrous mountain of fraud is too large to be a fraud—well, that’s not an authentic argument. It’s just an expression of preference for established authority; and a preference for a sense of stability created by a lie.

For the past year, I’ve been making the case that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists. Mainstream researchers, in their published studies, have been SAYING they are proving it, but SAYING and PROVING are two very different approaches.

What makes Dr. Kaufman’s analysis so disruptive and accurate is: he took a detailed and typical passage from one of these studies, and he presented a step-by-step refutation of every significant laboratory procedure. He showed that every move the researchers made did NOT lead toward a legitimate conclusion that SARS-CoV-2 exists.

Indeed, Dr. Kaufman’s approach exposes the entire industry of virology. It torpedoes this pseudoscience.

The time-honored process for isolating (discovering) other viruses (e.g., HIV) comes under the same harsh spotlight: researchers say they’ve discovered a virus, but they haven’t come within miles of proving it.

Instead, all they have is the assertion that they are the authorities.

This is the same bald assertion the social-media industry uses to censor information that reveals SARS-CoV-2 has never been discovered.

I would summarize Dr. Kaufman’s analysis with this analogy: You have a large swamp next to a landfill on the edge of a city. The swamp contains a host of toxic chemicals, waste, and genetic material from a number of unknown sources. You observe small fish and insects in the swamp are dying. You decide, based on no evidence, that a virus must be in the swamp, and IT is killing the fish and insects. And THEN you claim that, THEREFORE, you have ISOLATED the virus and demonstrated that it is deadly. AND it is a new virus that no one has ever found before. AND you know the precise genetic structure of this virus.

In other words, you’ve shown the OPPOSITE of isolation. The soup in the swamp never delivers up any evidence of a virus. But you SAY it does.

And this is the basis for declaring a worldwide pandemic.

And no one is supposed to disagree.

And this is science.

And because you’re connected to every government in the world, and every major news source, and to the CDC and the WHO, and to untold numbers of law-enforcement entities, you try to shove this “science” down the throats of 7.8 billion people.

THIS is the gateway to the New Normal and the Great Reset. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the Brave New World will also shove its precepts and structure down the same throats.

And therefore, resistance on many levels—including opening up the economy every-which-way-possible—is necessary. And falls to us to make it happen.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Memo to Governors: Free states vs. Slave states

by Jon Rappoport

April 13, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

US Supreme Court Justice, Louis Brandeis, 1932: “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.”

You governors are now seeing, whether you like it or not, a competitive situation developing among the states.

Some states are loosening the COVID restrictions; others are tightening them.

In this ongoing process, for example, a remarkable exodus is occurring—from New York to Florida. From lockdowns to freedom.

Some of you governors who demand lockdowns, masks, distancing, immunity certificates, etc., are betting the federal government will somehow intercede, back you up, and force the free states to fall in line with your brutal COVID tactics—thus “leveling the playing field.”

This is unlikely to happen. The White House and the Congress understand there is a limit to how far they can push the states, without fomenting uncontrollable rebellion.

That means you’ll be caught with your pants down, as your citizens emigrate, in ever larger numbers, to freer states.

What business owner wouldn’t prefer to set up shop in an open state economy, rather than shutting down and descending into bankruptcy in your state?

And if you believe the brigades of Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube users who demand the harshest COVID policies are going to win the day, you’re entertaining a delusion.

You’re going to stand by and watch your economies continue to shrink, while other states flourish.

Believe it not, this is one of the eventualities the Founders foresaw, when they enshrined the federal/state structure in the Constitution. Limiting the power of central government meant that various individual states could choose their own paths.

This is happening now.

It is happening, regardless of media moaning, regardless of Fauci-ist objections and CDC pressure to conform to suicidal COVID policies.

If you governors of freer states have the courage to double down, and do something that will lift your economies to even greater heights, I have a suggestion.

Push through a law that permits any healing practitioner to treat patients for any given condition, as long as his remedy creates no greater harm than the orthodox treatment for that same condition.

You’ll see a huge influx of practitioners and patients to your state. It’s called Health Freedom—and it’s a policy that welcomes adults who are willing to take responsibility for their own health choices. Health Freedom also booms the economy.

It’s the opposite of forced medical mandates.

And when, five years from now, that new law provokes an upsurge in the overall vitality of your citizens—with no significant downside—you will have proven something more than the absurdity of the COVID restrictions.

You will have proven that the overall medical apparatus out of which those restrictions flowed is, in fact, inherently biased, undeservedly monopolistic, financially driven, scientifically corrupt, inhumanly cruel, and politically motivated as a covert means of controlling the lives of The People.

You will have restored a great portion of the freedom for which men and women have fought, for centuries.

Isn’t that a goal worth pursuing?

CODA: As evidence for my assertions about the US medical system, I’m printing here my 2009 interview with the late Dr. Barbara Starfield, a revered public health expert who spent many years at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published her review, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”

Her conclusions: Every year, in America, the medical system kills 225,000 people. 106,000 as a direct result of the administration of FDA approved drugs; 119,000 as a result of mistreatment and errors in hospitals.

Extrapolate those numbers out to a decade, and the death toll is a staggering 2.25 million people.

Here is my email interview with Dr. Starfield:

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

The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

NO.

Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into an untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

Can you offer an opinion about how the FDA can be so mortally wrong about so many drugs?

Yes, it cannot divest itself from vested interests. (Again, [there is] a large literature about this, mostly unrecognized by the people because the industry-supported media give it no attention.)

Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

Are you sure it was a momentary stir? I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later! The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

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

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

Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

Do the 106,000 deaths from medical drugs only involve drugs prescribed to patients in hospitals, or does this statistic also cover people prescribed drugs who are not in-patients in hospitals?

I tried to include everything in my estimates. Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs have been added to the marketplace.

—end of interview—

Dr. Starfield’s published JAMA review, and this interview, raise mind-bending implications. Among them: prestigious medical journals routinely print glowing reports on many drugs which are, in fact, killing and maiming patients in great numbers. This means that the journal reports, and the studies on which they are based, are rank with fraud and corruption.

In that regard, here is a comment from a doctor who has, no doubt, perused as many such studies as any person in the world:

Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption”: “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.”

This is the overall system that sustains the leading lights who sell COVID policy and “science.”

Let the buyer beware and rebel.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Senate meets AG nominee; treats her like lethal poison

by Jon Rappoport

March 29, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

On January 29, 2027, the new president announced his choice for Attorney General, Claire Washington. Five days, later, she appeared at her confirmation hearing. Senator Grove Fatheringill III opened his folder and consulted his list of questions—

First of all, Ms. Washington, I want to offer my congratulations on your nomination. It’s about time we had another woman of color as—

Senator, I consider that an insult. I’m not here because I’m black. I’m here because the president thinks I’m qualified to serve. My skin is black. I was raised in what you could call “black culture.” But I’m my own person, which is to say, I’m an individual. My thoughts and actions aren’t black and they aren’t white. And frankly, I don’t care what people think of that remark. I’m not fronting for a particular culture. I happen to believe in the US Constitution. And if I may raise a few more hackles among those people waving their banners of political correctness, I am a sister to two brothers in my family, but I’m a not a “sister” to anyone else.

Ms. Washington, I didn’t mean to imply that as an African-American, you—

I’m not African American. My ancestors have lived in the United States for four generations. Are you British-American, Senator?

No. I was just…Ms. Washington, why don’t you tell us what your background…how your background and education equip you for the position of Attorney General?

I’m not sure they do. But I will say this. My first act upon gaining confirmation would be to pursue wide-ranging RICO cases against major gangs in the inner cities of America.

Excuse me, what?

Termination. Ending. Abolishment. Cancelation. Disbanding. Prosecution. Incarceration. Of gangs. As continuing criminal enterprises. Gangs continue to destroy the quality of life wherever they make their money.

What are the socio-economic causes that lead to the formation of gangs?

I’m interested in what the gangs are causing, as they sell toxic drugs, shoot and kill people, recruit innocent children into their ranks, destroy families, and make streets lethally unsafe.

But—

For decades, the Department of Justice has failed to mount RICO cases against gangs. Do you know why? Because the gangs sell drugs for cartels, and the cartels launder their money in banks. The cartels and the banks are protected, because IMPORTANT PEOPLE are making huge profits from the drug business. If you confirm me, all that will end like the snow ends when spring comes.

Are you accusing—

Yes, Senator, I am. Whoever you were about to ask me about, I am accusing them.

I didn’t even get a chance to—

My second line of attack will be against the CEOs of major corporations that pollute the environment—not with CO2—which is not killing anyone—but with highly dangerous chemicals. Certain key pesticides, for example.

However, you surely understand that modern industrial-scale agriculture—

And three, I will make sure pharmaceutical companies that sell highly toxic medicines are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, which means their CEOs will go to prison for very long terms.

Opioids, for example? Because we’re already—

Senator, this goes far beyond opioids. Every year in the US, FDA- approved drugs kill at least 100,000 people. That’s a million deaths per decade. Since the year 2000, when those numbers were published, the federal government has done NOTHING to remedy what amounts to a continuing holocaust. Under my administration, the complacence and negligence will end. I assure you.

But highly reputable medical journals publish studies of those drugs and—

The most prestigious journals are complicit in the continuing crime. They knowingly publish studies which are criminally deceptive. I will relentlessly prosecute their editors and reviewers.

Hold on. Are you talking about—

I’m talking about the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, and other publications. I’m also talking about FDA executives, who will become prime targets for DOJ prosecutions.

Criminal charges against—

Yes, Senator. Very serious criminal charges.

Ms. Washington, what about the guns? We have to take away the guns from people.

After every mass shooting, the usual politicians bray about taking guns away from the people who didn’t commit the crime. That’s not going to happen under my watch. I look at a map—as any citizen can—and I see where, in this country, people are shooting other people in large numbers. We will go into those areas and clean out the killers. The gangs.

That doesn’t make any sense.

It makes perfect sense. If America were attacked by China, would you want us to respond by assaulting Greenland?

China? My God, what are you talking about?

As any person with a few brain cells would understand, I was making a comparison to illustrate a point. I don’t envision an attack against the US from China.

The press and social media will be all over that China remark.

So what? The press and social media take perverse delight in twisting people’s statements. I don’t run my life by fear of what others will say. Do you?

Of course not. But—

Senator, I’ve just sketched out the top issues on my agenda. If you confirm me as the next Attorney General of the United States, you can expect to see action against those crimes from day one. And any prosecutor in the Department of Justice who doesn’t take my assignments seriously and honestly and with great zeal will be fired summarily. I want tigers, not house cats.

There are so many other crimes that need—

Yes there are. And I will go after the perpetrators. I don’t care what color their skin is. I don’t care where they live. I don’t care about their position in life or their reputation.

When it comes to protests in the streets of America—

If crimes are committed during these protests and riots, such as looting, burning, and assault, the states should arrest and prosecute the criminals. If they don’t, we will sue the states in court. If we find judges who refuse to hear our serious cases, we will do everything possible to bring those judges to justice.

Judges?? But there are many peaceful protests that—

Peaceful protests are of no concern, except when local law-enforcement tries to squash them for obvious political reasons. Then we would become involved. And I mean INVOLVED.

Ms. Washington, I want to return to the subject of opioids—

So do I, Senator. Because in 2016, both house of Congress passed a bill President Obama signed—and I know, for a fact, that the unanimous vote on that bill in both the House and the Senate was a sham, and virtually no one read the bill—

How can you say that?

Because it’s true. The bill, which became a law, has made it almost impossible for the DEA to enter the premises of pharmaceutical companies that are clearly TRAFFICKING opioids and put a stop to the crime of murder. It’s a detestable law. It’s called the Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act of 2016, and it was signed by President Obama on 4/9/16. Perhaps you recall that the Washington Post ran an article on that opioid scandal.

I seem to remember—

The article mentioned an attempt was made to reach President Obama for a comment. He declined.

Ms. Washington, I don’t know about the other senators gathered here today, but I could never confirm you as the next Attorney General of the United States.

I assumed my confirmation would run into roadblocks. However, it occurs to me that the American people—many of them—would take a different view from yours. Who knows? If so, I suggest they contact your office.

Now wait a minute—

As we speak, several colleagues of mine are publishing, at my personal site, a list of all the bills you’ve voted to approve during your long and distinguished career in the Senate; and who, specifically, those votes benefited, and how much money in campaign donations you’ve accepted from those who’ve benefited. I assure you, the chart makes interesting reading.

THERE WAS AN UPROAR IN THE CHAMBER.

The networks cut the live feed.

Later that day, a bevy of reporters hungry for more red meat caught up with Claire Washington at her office. Before live television cameras, she said:

“Here it is, ladies and gentlemen. I don’t live or work on a plantation. Not in the fields, not in the house. I’m not black or white or red or yellow or purple or blue. I’m a free American. My only standard is the Constitution. For decades, the Department of Justice has served special interests. Under my watch, all that would end. I don’t fear the biggest corporate CEOs in the country, or the lowest gang killers in Chicago, or US Senators. If you want a racket and crime busting Attorney General, here I am. My bloodhound law partners are already preparing a case against Pfizer and Moderna for lying to the public about the safety and efficacy of their COVID vaccines—“

The television networks cut the live feed again.

But they had a bit of the problem, as they would discover in the next few days. Whenever the face of Claire Washington appeared on screens, ratings shot up to all-time levels…

Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other social media rabidly deleted posts that supported the AG nominee, but it didn’t seem to matter.

As Chris Wallace of FOX commented, “Something in the soul of American culture has been unleashed. We don’t know what it is, but it’s moving up and out like a hurricane. We’d probably like to say it’s a rerun of the Trump effect, but it’s bigger than that…”

Two weeks later, with the Senate confirmation hearings still in mysterious adjournment, Claire Washington sat down for an interview with 60 Minutes’ Tom Dooley. She jumped in with both feet:

“Censorship has overtaken America, Tommy. If I win appointment as the next Attorney General—and opinion polls are showing the American people want me in that office—I’m going to go after social media giants with a vengeance. They’re the public square and the town hall, whether they like it or not, and they have no right to set off a bomb in the middle of the 1st Amendment. Frankly, these CEOs are some of the scummiest aristocrats I’ve ever come across. I’ll tell you a little secret. Ending censorship would eventually put social media operations in a hole. With an adequate spread of opinion across the whole cultural and political spectrum, tension and drama would deflate like an old bag. Finally, nobody would care. It’s censorship that actually drives the popularity of these sleazy social media outfits…”

Mark Zuckerberg and his wife promptly left the country for a visit to China.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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