Hidden in plain view: FDA murder

May17

Hidden in plain view:

FDA-approved drugs kill a million Americans per decade!

The FDA is a rogue criminal agency

by Jon Rappoport

May 16, 2012

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

May 19, 2012 Update:

* To listen to my discussion of this breaking news with Robert Scott Bell, click here to access the podcast — and, see also this article.

* To hear my discussion of this breaking news with Alex Jones, click here to access the video — and, see also this article.

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.

The FDA website page is currently available under the heading, “Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions,” and it can be Googled. (Click here to go directly to the FDA page.)

The implications of this Smoking Gun are hard to grasp in any rational way.

The FDA takes no blame, no responsibility for its 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 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 responsible for 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 in a relentless exploration of the horror, I can 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. If the new national health insurance plan goes into effect, 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 has 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)

Be forewarned. If this story of FDA-caused deaths finally, now, breaks through into the public consciousness in a major way, the official team for the defense will try to obfuscate the naked facts:

“A low-level FDA employee mistakenly posted those numbers, which are false.” “People die because the drugs are incorrectly combined, because patients don’t follow prescribing instructions, because sometimes doctors prescribe a drug for off-label uses, but the drugs themselves are safe.” “The FDA has a remarkable track record of safety.” And so forth and so on. None of these defenses are dealing with the truth head-on. They are all attempts to deflect and escape accountability.

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.

But in this case, 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.

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 OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

NANCY PELOSI EXPOSES OBAMACARE

May14

NANCY PELOSI EXPOSES OBAMACARE

by Jon Rappoport

May 13, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZL9vNmUKyU&w=415&h=241]

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new 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, and creative action to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Medical Murder in the Matrix

Apr17

Medically caused death in America: An exclusive interview with Dr. Barbara Starfield

by Jon Rappoport

April 17, 2012

Breaking News: Click here to access all the articles on this FDA Genocide Murder news story.

Once in a while, I insert a plug for myself in an article. The purpose of this is to sell my products at www.nomorefakenews.com. Since the year 2001, I’ve probably written as many articles as anyone on the internet. They’re all free. So visit my store. End of plug.

I rerun this Dr. Barbara Starfield article — wherein I show you the email interview I did with Dr. Starfield in December 2009 — regarding her paper published in JAMA in July 2000 entitled Is US health really the best in the world?, just to push the wheel another turn.

The Starfield paper can be downloaded freely (as a .pdf) from here (via www.drug-education.info via en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Starfield). The paper is fully cited as Starfield B. Is US health really the best in the world?. JAMA. 2000; 284(4):483-4. Dr. Barbara Starfield’s wiki page is here.

Each time I do this, I try to write a new introduction. Here is one…

After working as a reporter for 30 years, I’ve come to understand a few things about public reaction to the truth. People like to say they’re enlightened. They like to say they’ve seen through the major propaganda operations that are launched and are spinning all around us. But when you bulldoze a hole in a part of the Matrix where certain subjects are engraved on stone pillars, and when those subjects are firmly entrenched in the public mind as foundations of Reality, the usual response is silent shock.

Even when people are able to accept the truth, they tend toward silence. They don’t pass the truth on.

Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy, whom I interview in THE MATRIX REVEALED, once explained it to me this way:

“You’ve taken them out of a state of hypnosis, a state of trance, but the truth you’re giving them puts them in another trance. In that part of their mind where they’ve been asleep for so long, they’re used to that narcosis. So even though they see truth now, they respond with new sleep. It’s not really an awakening at all. It’s as if they’ve walked out of one war zone into another, dazed.”

Ellis describes perfectly what happens to many people when they see the truth of medical murder in the US. It particularly happens because there is no logical way to understand it, given the expectations people have about what murder is, what murder means.

And there’s another problem. As you’ll see, the figures on medically caused death in America I’m citing come from an author with absolutely impeccable mainstream credentials. The review she wrote was published in one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world. It was all “on the up and up.”

That’s precisely why I use her figures, rather than those compiled by outsiders, who, by the way, probably have better numbers that are even more chilling.

I’ve had people stare blankly at me after a discussion of the interview below and say, outright, “This is impossible. It can’t be true. You see, if a really respected doctor is making these claims, and if her review is published in a prestigious journal, then mainstream doctors and medical schools and government would have to react. They would have to clean house.”

But they don’t.

And that is called a clue. We are talking about something similar to the experience of the German people during the rise of Hitler. They went along. They told themselves stories to make it all right. They used the familiar tricks of denial.

This is what makes the Matrix the Matrix. I’m speaking generally now. A grand illusion is accepted because people can’t believe Reality is fundamentally different than it appears to be.

They also can’t believe—and this is far more staggering—that on the other side of the Matrix THEY THEMSELVES have a power that is stunning. They may sense that’s true, but they’ve been taught to deny it. They’ve been taught that individual power is dangerous. They’ve been taught that having and using power beyond a certain point will cause them to be exiled by their peers, their friends, even their families. So it’s better and far more comfortable to cede that power to Someone Else and sleep on…

You see, it’s one thing to rightly accuse an elite group of exercising unlawful and destructive power, to see how huge that power is. But it’s a far different thing to know that you have tremendous power.

The Matrix is built and sustained on a reversal of power relationships.

My work is all about setting those relationships straight. That’s why I do this every day.

It’s especially why I go after the medical cartel again and again. Because they are exercising priestly hypnotic powers with their aura of science.

Okay. Let’s proceed to the issue at hand.

As you read what Dr. Starfield has to say in this interview, know that until her death last year, she was one of those people with impeccable mainstream credentials. She was respected and revered by her colleagues. She was a woman who had set off an explosion TEN years earlier, in one of the most high-profile medical journals in the world, and the media silence that followed was profound, eerie, and deafening.

If the mighty newspapers of our age had jumped in with both feet, Dr. Starfield would have become one of the most famous people in America. Her work would have shaken the medical cartel down to its foundations. She would have saved more lives and averted more suffering than anyone else in this nation. With no exaggeration, we would now be living in a different world.

The American healthcare system, like clockwork, causes a mind-boggling number of deaths every year.

The figures have been known for ten years. The story was covered briefly when Starfield’s landmark study surfaced, and then it sank like a stone.

The truth was inconvenient for many interests. That has not changed. “Medical coverage for all” is a banner that conceals ugly facts.

On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock to the system, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, came to the following conclusions:

Every year in the US there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

2.25 MILLION PEOPLE KILLED PER DECADE.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer.

The Starfield study is the most disturbing revelation about modern healthcare in America ever published.

On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this situation preferred to ignore it.

On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email.

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

My papers on the benefits of primary care have been widely used, including in Congressional testimony and reports. However, the findings on the relatively poor health in the US have received almost no attention. The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

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

The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency). They, of course, would like an even greater share of the pie than they now have, for training more specialists. (Of course, the problem is that we train specialists–at great public cost–who then do not practice up to their training–they spend half of their time doing work that should be done in primary care and don’t do it as well.)

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

NO.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Do medical schools in the US, and intern/residency programs in hospitals, offer significant “primary care” physician training and education?

NO. Some of the most prestigious medical teaching institutions do not even have family physician training programs [or] family medicine departments. The federal support for teaching institutions greatly favors specialist residencies, because it is calculated on the basis of hospital beds.. [Dr. Starfield has done extensive research showing that family doctors, who deliver primary care—as opposed to armies of specialists—produce better outcomes for patients.]

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

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

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

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

Has anyone from the FDA, since 2000, contacted you about the statistical findings in your JAMA paper?

NO. Please remember that the problem is not only that some drugs are dangerous but that many drugs are overused or inappropriately used. The US public does not seem to recognize that inappropriate care is dangerous–more does not mean better. The problem is NOT mainly with the FDA but with population expectations. …Some drugs are downright dangerous; they may be prescribed according to regulations but they are dangerous.

Concerning the national health plan before Congress–if the bill is passed, and it is business as usual after that, and medical care continues to be delivered in the same fashion, isn’t it logical to assume that the 225,000 deaths per year will rise?

Probably–but the balance is not clear. Certainly, those who are not insured now and will get help with financing will probably be marginally better off overall.

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

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

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

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

106,000 people die as a result of CORRECTLY prescribed medicines. I believe that was your point in your 2000 study. Overuse of a drug or inappropriate use of a drug would not fall under the category of “correctly prescribed.” Therefore, people who die after “overuse” or “inappropriate use” would be IN ADDITION TO the 106,000 and would fall into another or other categories.

‘Appropriate’ means that it is not counter to regulations. That does not mean that the drugs do not have adverse effects.

INTERVIEWER COMMENTS:

This interview with Dr. Starfield reveals that, even when an author has unassailable credentials within the medical-research establishment, the findings can result in no changes made to the system.

Yes, many persons and organizations within the medical system contribute to the annual death totals of patients, and media silence and public ignorance are certainly major factors, but the FDA is the assigned gatekeeper, when it comes to the safety of medical drugs. The buck stops there. If those drugs the FDA is certifying as safe are killing, like clockwork, 106,000 people a year, the Agency must be held accountable. The American people must understand that.

As for the other 119,000 people killed every year as a result of hospital treatment, this horror has to be laid at the doors of those institutions. Further, to the degree that hospitals are regulated and financed by state and federal governments, the relevant health agencies assume culpability.

It is astounding, as well, that the US Department of Justice has failed to weigh in on Starfield’s findings. If 225,000 medically caused deaths per year is not a crime by the Dept. of Justice’s standards, then what is?

To my knowledge, not one person in America has been fired from a job or even censured as result of these medically caused deaths.

Dr. Starfield’s findings have been available for ten years. She has changed the perception of the medical landscape forever. In a half-sane nation, she would be accorded a degree of recognition that would, by comparison, make the considerable list of her awards pale. And significant and swift action would have been taken to punish the perpetrators of these crimes and reform the system from its foundations.

In these times, medical schools continue turning out a preponderance of specialists who then devote themselves to promoting the complexities of human illness and massive drug treatment. Whatever the shortcomings of family doctors, their tradition speaks to less treatment, more common sense, and a proper reliance on the immune systems of patients.

The pharmaceutical giants stand back and carve up the populace into “promising markets.” They seek new disease labels and new profits from more and more toxic drugs. They do whatever they can—legally or illegally—to influence doctors in their prescribing habits. Many studies which show the drugs are dangerous are buried. FDA panels are filled with doctors who have drug-company ties. Legislators are incessantly lobbied and supported with pharma campaign monies.

Nutrition, the cornerstone of good health, is ignored or devalued by most physicians. Meanwhile, the FDA continues to attack nutritional supplements, even though the overall safety record of these nutrients is excellent, whereas, once again, the medical drugs the FDA certifies as safe are killing 106,000 Americans per year.

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the whole literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.

Yes, that’s right. By Dr. Starfield’s published figures, FDA-approved pharmaceutical drugs kill over A MILLION Americans per decade.

Does that sound like a legitimate ongoing subject for journalism to you?

At its height, if I recall correctly, when I published this interview in 2009, Google entries ran to about 40,000. Other websites picked it up. I sent it to a well-placed CBS reporter. The overall major media response? ZERO.

You can take that as a reason to give up. Or you can press down harder on the gas pedal.

Jon Rappoport

Manipulating evolution from now on

Apr4

By Jon Rappoport

April 4, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

(August 2013 update: For TruthStreamMedia.com’s article entitled “DARPA to Genetically Engineer Humans by Adding a 47th Chromosome“, click here. For a pdf copy of the DARPA solicitation entitled “Advanced Tools for Mammalian Genome Engineering“, click here. See also Creating a genetic monster.)

“A study on rats published in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology showed that sound waves could be used to [reversibly] reduce sperm counts to levels that cause infertility in humans…The concept…is now being pursued by researchers at the University of North Carolina who won a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.” — (BBC News/Health, Jan.29, 2012, reported at naturalnews.com).

After Darwin cast his view of evolution upon the waters, a notion that humans were naturally selected bio-machines gained increasing consensus.

If Science could understand how a human was built, it could not only cure illness, it could change the inherent pattern of the body and brain. Evolution was merely a history of changes in the bio-machine.

Eventually, this position was taken to the full extreme. The Eugenics movement sprang up in America, and it was exported to Nazi Germany, where it was used for a program of pure destruction the American advocates could only dream of.

Now, the population is being softened up for another version of The Human as Bio-Machine. Through movies, through the press, through heavily promoted speculation— “we are on the verge of enormous breakthroughs in genetics”—the population is being primed for a pseudo-philosophy of selection: some people should live, and some people should die, or at the very least, not reproduce.

On the one hand we are fed “highly positive” assurances that designer genetics will enable the creation of smarter, more talented, stronger, healthier people of the future. On the other hand, we are told that the exigencies of “public health care” make it necessary to differentiate between “viable and non-viable” patients.

These two threads are woven together, and in the confusion people are giving in, more and more, to the idea of a New Eugenics.

At bottom is the un-debated question: IS A HUMAN A BIO-MACHINE AND NOTHING MORE?

Most academic philosophers will tell you the question itself is meaningless. That’s their way of skirting the issue of free will.

And it’s one reason many academics believe the Constitution is a badly outmoded document: it asserts that every individual can be free. Claiming that the existence of free will is preposterous, academia determines that any political document based on liberty and freedom can be trampled on with impunity.

“There are only brains and those brains operate purely by electrical/chemical inputs and outputs.”

And THAT opens the door to various versions of Eugenics. Because who can object to experiments on machines?

Lee Silver, an enthusiastic molecular biologist at Princeton, has written a book, Remaking Eden, about the future of gene science in society. This is how he sees things playing out:

“The GenRich—who account for ten percent of the American population—all carry synthetic genes. All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry are controlled by members of the GenRich class… .

“Naturals work as low-paid service providers or as laborers. [Eventually] the GenRich class and the Natural class will become entirely separate species with no ability to crossbreed, and with as much romantic interest in each other as a current human would have for a chimpanzee.

“Many think that it is inherently unfair for some people to have access to technologies that can provide advantages while others, less well-off, are forced to depend on chance alone, [but] American society adheres to the principle that personal liberty and personal fortune are the primary determinants of what individuals are allowed and able to do.

“Indeed, in a society that values individual freedom above all else, it is hard to find any legitimate basis for restricting the use of repro-genetics. I will argue [that] the use of reprogenetic technologies is inevitable. [W]hether we like it or not, the global marketplace will reign supreme.”

It’s interesting that Silver mentions the value of individual freedom. Would he be willing to discuss his view of the human being honestly? Does he claim the human is a bio-machine and nothing more? And if so, where does this freedom come from? Sub-atomic particles changing their minds every so often? Or does he have a different view of the human?

If we could bring these bio-ethicists and geneticists and academic philosophers out into the light of day, where the issue of free will would be discussed in depth, some very interesting things might happen.

For example: “Well, why shouldn’t we experiment on human beings to see what we can produce genetically? The human is merely sub-atomic particles in motion that have somehow acquired the delusion they have Identity and Free Choice.”

Yes, let’s get it all out into the open, where we can see the underlying assumptions and look at them straight on.

Ideas do move the world, even if the bulk of humanity is disinterested or unwilling to grasp them. To infer that such underlying ideas are a waste of time and should be discarded altogether is exactly the kind of default that leaves the playing field open; open to those who DO have ideas and are willing to act on them—to the detriment of all of us.

Thirty years ago, biotech companies looking for seed money began to hire scientists to shill for them. These pros began promising the moon, in terms of what the research in genetics could deliver in short order. Of course, the promises were completely overblown, but the stage was set for a major PR campaign that would add grants and research funding to the coffers of geneticists—and convince the public that the Brave New World had arrived.

That PR has grown to this day. The man on the street is now blithely ready to attribute all sorts of human behavior to genes and DNA. He’s an expert. He knows. He can repeat the latest promises about genetic cures for disease.

This, despite the fact there is NOT a single gene-treatment for a disease that works across the board. Can someone prove otherwise?

Go into a university department of genetics/molecular biology, or a department of philosophy, and try to find a real discussion and debate about whether humans have free will, whether the human being is only a bio-machine. Good luck.

The very basis of the American Republic, individual freedom, has been cut out of the equation.

But no one at the university level deems this a significant or disturbing fact. Teachers are far more interested in “group values” and “consensus” and the deconstruction of all ideas into an analysis of who benefits from having the ideas.

The rearranging of genes in humans has, for some time, been discussed openly in academic journals. The cat is out of the bag. Geneticists, biologists, social scientists, bio-ethicists are all weighing in. One typical argument: once upon a time, people were horrified at the prospect of doing in vitro fertilization; people said it wouldn’t work, it would produce monsters; now it’s accepted as normal and natural.

And THEREFORE, “we should look at genetic manipulation as the next stage of our self-directed evolution. We should try it. We should be ready to deal with failures, because the pursuit of the goal is good and valuable.”

All this presupposes honorable motives and humane objectives. Who cares about a realistic assessment of what scientists will countenance and promote?

We are told there are laws against dangerous gene experiments, and there are medical ethics panels ready to rule out potentially harmful practices. But among the experts, a tide is rising in favor of the overall goal of engineering our genetic future.

And this is quite understandable, because not only do scientists tend to have a sense of their own superior entitlement and intelligence, they believe they’re tinkering with machines. They might not phrase it that way, but that’s what it comes down to.

David King, writing at Human Genetics Alert, states:

“The main debate around human genetics currently centres on the ethics of genetic testing, and possibilities for genetic discrimination and selective eugenics. But while ethicists and the media constantly re-hash these issues, a small group of scientists and publicists are working towards an even more frightening prospect: the intentional genetic engineering of human beings. Just as Ian Wilmut presented us with the first clone of an adult mammal, Dolly, as a fait accompli, so these scientists aim to set in place the tools of a new techno-eugenics, before the public has ever had a chance to decide whether this is the direction we want to go in. The publicists, meanwhile are trying to convince us that these developments are inevitable.”

Inevitable. That’s the key idea. “There’s nothing we can do now. The march of progress is underway.”

King continues:

“One major step towards reproductive genetic engineering is the proposal by US gene therapy pioneer, French Anderson, to begin doing gene therapy on foetuses, to treat certain genetic diseases. Although not directly targeted at reproductive cells, Anderson’s proposed technique poses a relatively high risk that genes will be ‘inadvertently’ altered in the reproductive cells of the foetus, as well as in the blood cells which he wants to fix. Thus, if he is allowed to go ahead, the descendants of the foetus will be genetically engineered in every cell of their body.”

But the gene enthusiasts don’t care about what happens up the line to the descendants. It’s all part of the grand experiment. Spin the wheel, take a chance. If “we” don’t like the outcome, spin the wheel again and see what happens. Eventually, we’ll get it right.

One of the most enthusiastic proponents of human genetic engineering, Gregory Stock, former director of the program in Medicine, Technology, and Society at the UCLA School of Medicine, has written:

“Even if half the world’s species were lost, enormous diversity would still remain. When those in the distant future look back on this period of history, they will likely see it not as the era when the natural environment was impoverished, but as the age when a plethora of new forms—some biological, some technological, some a combination of the two—burst onto the scene. We best serve ourselves, as well as future generations, by focusing on the short-term consequences of our actions rather than our vague notions about the needs of the distant future.”

The Nazi elite, obsessed with the idea of creating a Master Race, serving that goal, were willing to try any horrendous experiment on any prisoner; they were willing to breed their “ideal” men and women to produce offspring that would fit their definition of “superior.”

Now we are being sold a soft version of Eugenics as the next step in evolution. It’s a kinder, gentler roulette. And why should individual free will be an obstacle; that’s just a superstitious fantasy; freedom was never real; there was always and only The Experiment; natural selection, intentional selection—what’s the difference?

Some who look at the future see Orwell’s 1984. Others see Huxley’s Brave New World. I’m here to tell you the scientific/medical/technological elitists are sitting at the table with many chips to play. They’re betting that, in the long run, they will win, because they are touting hypnotically entrancing “imperatives” of the Religion called Science.

And if by chance, they discover a reliable way to utilize gene insertion to produce sterility and infertility, they will see a path to quiet depopulation. And then who will control the technology? Wide-eyed futurists who teach at universities, or calculating operatives who work for the hardest-line Globalists?

Despite Gregory Stock’s advice to think only in the short term and disregard the broader future, I suggest you consider the implications of government-controlled and funded healthcare. Up the road, the prescribed list of treatments for all diseases will become mandatory. The doctor offers, you accept. You obey. He advocates gene therapy, you fall into line. You’re in the system.

Meanwhile, the current generation of scientists and academics who want to move full speed ahead on engineering evolution aren’t the old crusty scowling researchers from days gone by. They’re enthused, they’re daring, they look and dress like ex-hippies who’ve moved to the suburbs. They’re happy sociopaths spreading cheer. And they talk like software designers operating on the bright cutting edge.

What could go wrong?

And to cement in the argument for engineering humans, there is the ever-powerful fairness argument. Professor Julian Savalescu, of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics:

“Nature allots all sorts of abilities and talents in a random way. It’s not fair, and I don’t see why we should let people’s lives be determined by the throw of a dice.”

Unless throwing a pair of scientific dice results in multiplying catastrophes, or the use of workable genetic technology (if it really is workable) raises an unending roar and riot from millions, even billions of people who claim they’re being denied their right to be Equal.

A man on his way out of a restaurant trips on a stair and sues the owner; and he’s going to stay quiet when his rich cousin can suddenly play a Beethoven piano concerto?

I asked a retired professor of biology about the social effects of human engineering. His comment was: “These younger geneticists who see paradise over the hill? If they’re living over the hill in big houses, they’re going to need the Army to protect them.”

And will the Army protect them? I asked.

“Look,” he said, “this whole business of inserting genes to create talents is a fantasy (emphasis added). But assuming at some distant time it could come true, the soldiers would have their own synthetic genes, which would presumably make them follow orders to the extreme. The soldiers would do whatever the people who run things want them to do. It would be a tight world.”

When individual freedom is no longer discussed in great depth by people who should know better, when it is left to wither on the vine, many programs and structures are built to take its place. When freedom is not understood beyond a superficial level, the question, “WHAT IS FREEDOM FOR?”, goes begging. For the past 15 years, I’ve been exploring the question, and I believe, in the answer, we find the imagination and creative power that can allow us to enhance ourselves, without the need to desperately hope for genetic reprogramming.

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.

MEDS KILLING SOLDIERS BY HEART ATTACK

Mar30

PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS KILLING SOLDIERS BY HEART ATTACK

MILITARY COVERUP?

WHO IS PROFITING?

DAUGHTER OF SENATOR WINS DRUG-SUPPLYING CONTRACT WITH THE ARMY

By Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

MARCH 30, 2012. Is the US military employing a policy that is killing its own soldiers?

Dr. Fred Baughman published an explosive letter in the European Heart Journal (December 29, 2011) that detailed yet another aspect of death by medicine: “Psychotropic drugs and sudden death.” (See also Hundreds of Soldiers & Vets Dying From Antipsychotic–Seroquel published on Nov 7, 2011)

This time it’s American soldiers and fatal heart attacks, brought on by so-called antipsychotic drugs; for example, Seroquel, given for PTSD.

Baughman began his own investigation into four American soldiers who died in their sleep, in 2008. Baughman writes: “…all in their twenties…no signs of suicide or of a multi-drug ‘overdose’…as claimed by the Inspector General of the VA…All were on the same prescribed drug cocktail, Seroquel (antipsychotic), Paxil (antidepressant) and Klonopin (benzodiazepine).”

Baughman calls on the Surgeon General to embargo the use of all antipsychotics and antidepressants in the military.

Baughman’s initial inquiry suggests as many as 247 soldiers have died from cardiac arrest after ingesting these drugs.

He finds the US military has spent, in the last decade, $1.5 billion on antipsychotic drugs, despite the fact that these meds have never been approved for PTSD or sleep disorders.

Baughman writes, “From 2001, US Central Command has given deploying troops 180-day supplies of prescribed psychotropic drugs.”

This is like making each soldier a self-dosing pharmacy.

Finally, Baughman charges that the Army has no reliable record-keeping system to track the uses of these drugs or their harm.

Recently guest-hosting The Alex Jones Show, I interviewed psychiatrist Peter Breggin (www.breggin.com). Several startling points emerged in our conversation. Among them: a decade ago, the Army wouldn’t accept recruits who had taken psychiatric meds, including Ritalin. Now, according to Breggin, the whole policy has been reversed. Soldiers who are heading for the battlefield must agree to take these drugs.

If you were mounting a conscious plan to destroy a military force from within, the widespread prescription of psychotropic drugs would be an obvious choice.

The Army states that diagnosis of psychiatric conditions like depression among troops has escalated. But once you open the door to psychiatry in the services, it’s a fait accompli, because many human behaviors can be arbitrarily classified as mental disorders. As I have documented, over and over again, no labeled mental disorder is based on chemical or biological tests—because there are no such tests. There never have been. It’s pseudo-science. But with increased numbers of diagnoses, the drugs automatically flow. The harmful drugs.

And the pharmaceutical and military view of human beings merges: people are units, they’re bio-machines with identical chemistry, and drugs can be shoved down their throats with no real concern for the consequences.

The drug companies consider the military just another market; and the Pentagon is merely hoping that, somehow, the drugs can help exhausted soldiers maintain performance levels through increasing numbers of deployment assignments.

Here are excerpts from Dr. Baughman’s published letter: “ [I] opened and financed my own investigation into these unexplained deaths. Andrew White, Eric Layne, Nicholas Endicott and Derek Johnson, all in their twenties, were four West Virginia veterans who died in their sleep in early 2008…. All were on the same prescribed drug cocktail, Seroquel (antipsychotic), Paxil (antidepressant) and Klonopin (benzodiazepine) and all appeared “normal” when they went to sleep.

“On February 7, 2008, Surgeon General Eric B. Schoomaker, had announced there had been ‘a series, a sequence of deaths’ in the military suggesting this was ‘often a consequence of the use of multiple prescription and nonprescription medicines and alcohol.’ However, the deaths of the ‘Charleston Four’ were probable sudden cardiac deaths (SCD), a sudden, pulseless condition leading to brain death in 4-5 minutes, a survival rate or 3-4%, and not allowing time for transfer to a hospital…

“Antipsychotics and antidepressants alone or in combination, are known to cause SCD. Sicouri and Antzelevitch (2008) concluded: ‘…A number of antipsychotic and antidepressant drugs can increase the risk of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death…’

“I call upon the military for an immediate embargo of all antipsychotics and antidepressants until there has been a complete, wholly public, clarification of the extent and causes of this epidemic of probable sudden cardiac deaths.

“Pfc. Ryan Alderman was on a cocktail of psych drugs when found unresponsive, dying in his barracks at Ft. Carson, Colo. Sudden cardiac death was confirmed by an ECG done at the scene. Inexplicably, military officials de-classified his death and reversed the cause, calling it instead, a “suicide.” Again I challenge the military to produce the evidence.

“In June 2011, a DoD Health Advisory Group backed a highly questionable policy of ‘polypharmacy’ asserting: ‘…multiple psychotropic meds may be appropriate in select iniduals.’ The fact of the matter is that psychotropic drug polypharmacy is never safe, scientific, or medically justifiable. What it [is] is a means of (1) maximizing profit, and (2) making it difficult to impossible to blame adverse effects on any one drug.

“From 2001 to the present, US Central Command has given deploying troops 180 day supplies of prescription psychotropic drugs–Seroquel included. In a May 2010 report of its Pain Management Task Force, the Army endorsed Seroquel in 25- or 50-milligram doses as a ‘sleep aid.’ Over the past decade, $717 million was spent for Risperdal and $846 million for Seroquel, for a mind-blowing total of $1.5 billion when neither Risperdal nor Seroquel have been proven safe or effective for PTSD or sleep disorders.

“Heather Bresch, daughter of U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, (D-WV) was recently named CEO of WV drug-maker Mylan Inc., that recently contracted with the DoD for over 20 million doses of Seroquel.

“Defense Department Health Advisory Group chair, Charles Fogelman, warned: ‘DoD currently lacks a unified pharmacy database that reflects medication use across pre-deployment, deployment and post-deployment settings.’ In essence, through a premeditated lack of record keeping, mandated by law at any other pharmacy or medical office to track potential fatal reactions to mixing prescription drugs, the military is willfully preempting all investigations into the injuries and deaths due to psychiatric drugs.

“I call on the DoD, VA, House and Senate Armed Services and House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees to tell concerned Americans and the families of fallen heroes what psychiatric drugs each of the deceased, both combat and non-combat, soldiers and veterans were on? It is time for the military and government to come clean.”

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

THE BIO-CHEMICAL MATRIX

Mar29

THE BIO-CHEMICAL MATRIX

THE MYTHS OF MATRIX SCIENCE

by Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

The medical system kills 225,000 people a year. (Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”)

“In principle, gene therapy is a medical miracle waiting to happen…after 17 years of trying, scientists are still struggling to make gene therapy work. Complications include rejection of DNA carriers…[and] new genes end up where they shouldn’t, or behave unpredictably.” (“Gene Therapy: Is Death an Acceptable Risk?”, Wired, Brandon Keim, August 30, 2007)

MARCH 28, 2012. In discussing Matrix Science, I’m reminded of Philip Dick’s sensational novel, Lies, Inc. It proposes an invention that can teleport humans light-years to a planet where a better way of life exists. The author then spends the rest of the book deconstructing this utopian legend and revealing the truth and the titanic power-grab that sit behind it.

Then there is HG Well’s 1933 classic novel, The Shape of Things to Come, in which a world exhausted by war and economic collapse turns to a Global State as the only possible solution, after all other solutions have historically failed. This new ruling authority is based on Science. All religions are crushed. Education is designed to teach every child how to become a genius/global citizen. Eventually, the State withers away and is of course replaced by a spontaneous Utopia.

Science/technology: the final all-encompassing answer.

A significant aspect of Matrix propaganda revolves around myths about how human behavior can be transformed. Transformed through advances in biology and chemistry.

Populations are being trained to expect these momentous changes. A major selling point: no effort is required. Just ingest this tablet. Accept this new gene. All will be done for you by experts. Technocrats will design the future so you will fit into it happily.

The technocratic wing of Globalism has clout. It promises management of the planet through science, and who can argue with science? Central Planning will ensure proper benefits for all.

My late friend and colleague, hypnotherapist Jack True, once told me in an interview: “It’s all about managing expectation on a subconscious dream level—the idea is to insert a vision in the population about scientific improvements. Instead of each individual creating his own vision, we’re essentially being told it can be done for us, with care and concern and even love. All we have to do is go along with it. We’re being taught to accept what amounts to a new religion. It’s a fetish. Do you see? We’re buying an elaborate fetish about the future.”

My readers know I’ve spent a great deal of time exposing the destructive dangers of medical drugs, but now I’d like to home in on them from another angle.

We’re so used to their presence, we now take them for granted. Everyone ingests them. Many take them in combinations.

And yes, there are times when you may decide you need one.

But all in all, they are a fetish. A bizarre affectation.

We know about the enormous profits to be made by the pharmaceutical companies. We know these companies exploit and create markets. We know they also invent diseases in order to sell the drugs. We know many people use the drugs as a crutch.

But if we can back up far enough from all this, we can begin to see the fetishistic aspect.

What would you, for example, think if you saw the same person every day getting off a train, and every day he was wearing a different color paint on his face? And what if he was wearing a hundred large trinkets around his waist? And he was fingering these trinkets in deep contemplation? And what if he carried a large book with him and stopped strangers randomly and read passages to them? Passages about symbols from the sixth dimension. What if he bowed deeply every time he saw a bus and fell to his knees when a woman in a hat passed him on the street? What if he stopped after every fourteen steps and cupped his hands and then opened them, as if he was releasing a bird? And what if he also spun around 4.5 times at every street corner?

You would begin to realize he was in the middle of a strange ritual.

And this is what medical drugs have become. A ritual.

Their vast proliferation, apart from any effects they have, add to the fetish.

A space alien who knew nothing about medical practice would eventually notice the drugs and wonder what they were for. He would perhaps wonder whether swallowing them was part of an ongoing religious ceremony. He would see how dedicated people are to their medicines.

“I take this drug at six every morning. Then after breakfast, I take these two pills. Before lunch, I take three other pills. The green and the red and the white.”

Yes, people believe their bodies can do bad things to them, like demons, and they ward off these creatures with the pills.

The swallowing of the pills is a fetish.

“I love the small white capsules. They look so pristine, so pure, so elegant. Because they’re small, they must be very powerful.”

The doctor, the priest, prescribes them. He dispenses them. When he writes the prescription at his desk, the patient feels, for a moment, an elevated sense of importance. The patient has attained a special privilege. He is no longer common. A thread has been created that connects him to a higher reality. The “science” that lies behind every pill is sophisticated. Who can grasp it? Just bask in the sensation and accept the secret knowledge.

The scrawl on the prescription pad is incomprehensible. But the pharmacist, the acolyte and minion, will understand it. If the filling of the prescription took place in a cave with candles, the patient would understand.

When it comes to psychiatric drugs, the public is being instructed to believe that the pills, which flow from arbitrary diagnoses of unproven mental disorders, can make them whole again. The age-old dream achieved.

And now we are on the cusp of another medical fetish:

GENES.

They’ve solidly entered the lexicon. Everybody talks about them. Amateurs and professionals alike speculate and intone on their importance—despite the fact that no across-the-board successful gene treatment for any condition has ever been developed.

Academics and so-called bio-ethicists are arguing about how the future should utilize genetics. Should we have a society in which a privileged class can buy designer genes for their children and make them smarter, more talented, more powerful, while the lower class, which lives apart in separate dingy enclaves, stews in its own primitive juices?

Or should our leaders open the door to better genes for all?

The unproven concocted dream: everything is regulated by DNA; all aspects of human behavior are determined by this coding; free will is a cruel superstition supported by greedy capitalist thieves; society could evolve into a utopia with the correct distribution of genetic traits; disease would be a thing of the past.

Consider that the selling of these medical-drug and gene stories is really, underneath it all, a way of convincing the world that science is our best option for the future. Understand that.

And of course, science must be controlled, like blessings from Rome, by those few who understand it and have the intelligence and compassion to plan the How and the Where of that dispensation.

Otherwise, we would have chaos. We would have money making all the decisions. We would have back-door deals, and cheaters and liars operating the levers of a free market for their own advantage.

And this must not be. No. With something as precious as science the prize, we need the best and the brightest to determine the method by which we can all benefit.

After all, the car and the plane and the light bulb and the refrigerator were magnificent technological advances. Therefore, all medical drugs and genes are, too.

The drugs? A hundred thousand Americans killed every year by government-certified medicines. (JAMA, July 26, 2000, Starfield)

A naked revelation about the overall devastation created by the drugs, and about the baldfaced lies being promoted on behalf of utopian gene engineering—a naked revelation would put a torpedo into the flank of the program to hypnotize the population about Science As Our Future. The technocrats can’t admit any spectacular failure. It would be like the Vatican confessing that all Eucharist wafers doled out to believers over the past 50 years were made by a company owned by Beelzebub.

When viewed factually, from an overall perspective, the key pronouncements about medical drugs and genes are false. But this must not see the light of day. It would derail the juggernaut. It would punch a wide hole in the Matrix. It would alert the population that they’d been had by con artists.

The spinning of the legends about transmuting the human, through official chemistry and biology, must continue. It must not be stopped. It must engender expectation. It must gather adherents. It must continue to entrance us. And naturally, unofficial science must be curtailed, because it suggests decentralization of power—and the WHOLE POINT of spinning the scientific legends is that they imply control of the future and the planet from a single high perch.

False science is Globalism’s most important product. It contains the “proof” that we must all submit to those wiser than we are.

You see, selling the so-called kindness of elite planetary control is not enough. The idea that a small group of men can avoid all wars by securing the reins of the Earth is not enough. The notion that our natural resources must be distributed from a central point, for the sake of sustainability, is not enough. These propaganda points don’t convince enough people.

But the legend that Official Science is the wonder key to a better life has legs. It has power. It has subconscious influence of a high order. It can eventually convince the global populace that a Technocratic Council should rule over them.

Therefore, that legend about Science must be shored up and extended and protected. It must tell whatever lies are necessary to push the agenda forward. Whether or not genes are the Holy Grail of biology is entirely beside the point. Sell it. Claim it. Pretend the evidence is there. And brain drugs? Spread the message: we will all be happier and more alive if we take them. They will cure our ills. They will untie the stubborn knots of discontent.

Welcome to the Science of the Matrix.

All those science fiction novels about civilizations run by technological elites? They were right on the money. That is where we are being led. And the defense-mechanism of the elite is: if you oppose our rational approach, you’re a cave man, a throwback, a Luddite, a superstitious fool grinding on with your phobias.

Meanwhile, it is this very elite that is peddling myth and fairy tale and illusion, and capitalizing on fetish.

We’ve all learned that divide and conquer is the controllers’ strategy; that funding wars on both sides is their method; that bankrupting nations is their technique; that owning the means of inventing money is their sinister operation; that dominating channels of information is their major form of mind control; that brainwashed education is their institution; that building the corporate-government embrace is their song. But these all bow before the altar of Scientific Myth, wherein we are persuaded to give up our own visions and our creative power to a Future that can only be run by Those Who Understand Technology.

How better to convince the people to surrender, than to equate science with truth and then claim that truth is beyond the common reach?

This was Plato’s basic argument in The Republic, and it has been echoed down through time. It has worked, through various phases, and now we have the most compelling version yet. Science is the truth about the truth, it is all based on observation, it is an open book, it is verifiable and demonstrable, no one need take anything on faith.

And yes, that is so, unless they are lying.

Unless they are lying about what they know.

And they are.

It doesn’t matter to them, but it matters to us.

Retired propaganda master Ellis Medavoy once told me in an interview: “Realize that big operations have layers. Each layer corresponds to a special interest that’s trying to squeeze out an advantage for itself. But when you peel away the outer skins, you get down to the prime material, the real reason the operation was mounted in the first place. And, in the case of propaganda about science, that reason is ridiculously simple. To promote science. That’s it. That’s all. Doesn’t matter whether it’s good science or bad science, or correct science or false science. The whole idea is to condition populations to accept science as the final judge on matters of importance. Why? Because the powers-that-be want to own and rule this world as Masters of Technology, Masters of Undeniable Truth. They see that as feasible. They can sell that. So they invent and dream up scientific visions that will impress people, make them excited. They peddle these visions as facts or soon-to-be facts. They tell stories, and they dress up those stories in expensive clothes. They’ll call ANYTHING science. They’ll paint it however they want it.”

Jon Rappoport

An investigative reporter for the last 30 years, Jon is the author of a new explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

OBAMACARE AND THE MATRIX

Mar27

THE MECHANICS OF THE MATRIX

MARCH 25, 2012. We are witnessing an intensified effort, on the part of elite groups, to manage THE MATRIX.

This involves shaping:

political realities;

social realities;

economic realities;

medical realities;

information realities;

psychological realities;

spiritual realities.

When all is said and done, the attack is on the power and energy of the individual.

One part of my work consists in showing how the evolving medical cartel is really waging chemical warfare on the population, with toxic drugs. At the highest level, behind the curtain, the objective is to grossly weaken, physically and mentally, the body and the brain.

For example–

THE DEVASTATING TRUTH BEHIND OBAMACARE.

National Health Insurance Before Supreme Court for Ruling.

Last week, guest-hosting The Alex Jones Radio Show, I discussed the case of a young Michigan boy, whose parents have been taken to court three times to force them to submit their child to intensely toxic chemo treatments—despite these facts:

The boy’s latest scans reveal no sign of cancer; the drugs that would be forced on him can cause cancer; the drugs have not been approved to treat children. [Go to 4m50s in the video.]

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ8Zd6DSQY8&w=400&h=233]

More about this case here.

And I warned: this is what waits for you and your children, up the line, if the Supreme Court allows Obamacare (National Health Insurance) to stand as law. [More on this in the above video segment and in what follows below.]

The “share and care” humanitarian mask will be peeled away. The US Dept. of Health and Human Services will create, as mandated, a complete list of approved treatments for every disease-label under the sun. And everyone in the insurance plan (everyone in America) will be forced to take what the doctor tells them to take.

For a bonus, unapproved treatments will eventually be banned. People and practitioners who try to use alternative treatments will find themselves in trouble.

This is the hidden agenda of Obamacare. This is what it will morph into in the future—unless it is struck down as unconstitutional.

I’m not dreaming or fantasizing. I’ve been following and reporting on the medical cartel for 30 years, and I know the mindset of these people, these medical bureaucrats, these pharmaceutical string-pullers behind the scenes. Obamacare is right up their alley. It’s about control, so it’s an answer to their prayers.

What do we know about their mainstream medicine, the hospital-based drug-addled modern version?

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of theAmerican Medical Association published a landmark paper by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.

Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZL9vNmUKyU&w=415&h=241]

In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.

So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise.

This is the dirty secret.

Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple.

The Obama Plan involves appointing an “expert panel” to decide what treatments Americans should be given for what diseases, under the new regime.

Only a certified idiot would assume that, over time, alternative non-mainstream therapies would survive such an ongoing vetting. Hope may spring eternal, but common sense makes it easy to grasp the realities on the ground.

In the long run, alternative therapies will be edged out. Those that remain will be permitted for a narrow range of conditions, or as adjuncts to standard drug treatments and surgery.

Chiropractors and acupuncturists, who are temporarily basking in the notion that Obama “really cares,” are in for a very rude awakening. Their careers and practices will be significantly reduced. Not today, not tomorrow, but it will happen.

Doctors, under the Plan, will be telling patients they may not take nutritional supplements while in treatment. This will assume the status of an irreversible edict. In many cases, “while in treatment” means years.

What happens to a person, conscripted into the mandated Plan, who is told by his doctor that he should/must receive a vaccine? Suppose this person says no? What are the consequences? Will he then be labeled a defector? What penalties will he suffer?

Does a diagnosis of cancer imply a patient must submit to chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery? Can these treatments be forced upon him?

Perhaps, in the early days of the Plan, nothing untoward will happen. But then, as time passes, and the system assumes tighter and tighter controls, the hand of government will close around the recalcitrant patient’s neck.

“Take this vaccine. Take this chemo drug. If you don’t, you’re out of the system, and that makes you a criminal, because everyone has to be in the system.”

Doctors, who are an integral part of the Plan, will surely be punished if they give unapproved (alternative) treatments to patients.

And in order to make the Plan operate on a day-to-day basis, the records and bookkeeping data of every health-care practitioner in America will be tracked on government computer networks.

Every person in America will have a traceable and trackable medical ID package. Government-issued. There is no way around it. The monitoring apparatus can’t work without it.

Orwellian consequences lie up the road in the field of psychiatric practice. In case you hadn’t noticed, the invention of “disorders” by committee is the preferred method for “discovering” more and more mental illnesses.

Yet, the science is completely fraudulent. For evidence, consult the many works of psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who has done more than any other person to expose the guts of his own profession (see www.breggin.com) Breggin establishes that mental disorders are not authoritatively diagnosed by a chemical or biological test. Conclusive tests do not exist. And worse, in this undefined and arbitrary territory, the drugs that follow diagnoses are killers: for example, 300,000 cases of motor brain damage, as a result of the administration of major tranquilizers.

Under the Obama Plan, you can bet your bottom dollar that psychiatric care will eventually become mandatory. A patient suddenly diagnosed with clinical depression or bipolar disease will be told he must take the drugs—and suffer their adverse effects.

Very young children will be given more and more debilitating and dangerous brain drugs.

Under the Obama Plan, it will be very convenient to declare new pandemics every few seasons, because these phony non-epidemics provide an opportunity to herd the sheep into clinics and remind them who is running the show. Go here, take this vaccine; go there, take that drug; the epidemic is endangering the herd, and you must help your brothers and sisters.

These are the figures on the last several “epidemics.” They are not yearly; they are grand totals, to date; global totals, except in the case of West Nile (US only):

SARS: 774 deaths.

WEST NILE: 1159 deaths.

BIRD FLU: 262 deaths.

SMALLPOX: (terrorist threat): 0 deaths.

SWINE FLU: 25,000 deaths.

To give perspective, globally, 250 thousand to 500 thousand people die of ordinary flu-like illness every year. Yet this higher death rate accrues no interest as an epidemic. It is only the “teaching (brainwashing) moments” of the phony epidemics that are promoted by health agencies (e.g., CDC and WHO) and their pharmaceutical allies, who rake in billions by manufacturing new vaccines.

Yes, under the Obama Plan, there will be more declared health emergencies, and they will serve to cement the citizen to his new role as eternal patient in the medical march along bleak streets of the future.

Can you perceive the loss of individual freedom implicit in this universal system of health control?

_________________________________

Sources and comments: I’m fully aware that people reading the facts in this essay will be shocked, and they will have doubts. Here are the sources for those facts. Things are not what they seem.

Barbara Starfield, “Is US health really the best in the world?” JAMA, July 26, 2000. Contains statistics on medically-caused deaths in the US.

On January 8, 2001, the LA Times ran a piece by Linda Marsa on the effects of medical drugs in the US. Predictably, the story sank like a stone. It provoked no Congressional hearings, no arrests.

The article described, in a few key paragraphs, a world of trouble. Adverse medical events, from med drugs:

“A 1998 University of Toronto study found that roughly 100,000 Americans die of adverse [medical-drug] reactions each year, and 2.1 million more are hospitalized.”

Marsa offered, in her Times article, a quote from an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, Dr. David Bates, an author of a 2000 study on drug effects. The study found that “18 percent of patients complained of drug-related complications,” Marsa wrote.

Here is the quote from Dr. Bates: “People often have [drug-caused] symptoms for months, but they’re either reluctant to let their doctor know or they weren’t sure if they just felt lousy…But these numbers translate to 36 million adverse drug events per year.”

To add up the death totals from recent phony epidemics:

SARS—See WHO “Summary of probable SARS cases with onset of illness from 1 November 2002 to 31 July 2003” (based on data as of Dec.31, 2003).

BIRD FLU—See WHO “Confirmed Human Cases of Avian Influenza A (H5N1)” (24 September 2009)

WEST NILE—See CDC, West Nile Virus, Statistics, Surveillance, and Control. Years are reported separately, 1999-2009. I included only US cases because I couldn’t find a good source for global cases.

To confirm that every year, between 250,000 and 500,000 people die from ordinary flu, see WHO Fact Sheet No.211, Influenza (Seasonal).

Read Dr. Peter Breggin’s classic, “Toxic Psychiatry: Why Therapy, Empathy and Love Must Replace the Drugs, Electroshock, and Biochemical Theories of the ‘New Psychiatry'” (St. Martin’s Press, 1991). Follow Breggin’s argument, through several chapters; labeled mental disorders are not based on factual biological evidence; and see p.89-91 for evidence that at least 300,000 people are suffering from brain damage (tardive dyskinesia) as a result of being administered major tranquilizers.

Founded in 1992, the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), a minor bureau of the National Institutes of Health (a federal agency), has managed to derail, stall, and divert the progress of real alternative medicine. It has forwarded no breakthroughs. It has bogged itself down in conferences, reports, and committee deliberations. It has fooled a number of so-called alternative-health advocates into believing that the federal government supports non-mainstream health strategies.

_________________________________

Imagine what would happen when healthcare in this country becomes centralized to a much greater degree under the Obama Plan. If this one tiny agency, NCCAM, can now befuddle the alternative field with a collection of inept and self-seeking bureaucrats, gargantuan power held at the top of the federal government will make that diversion look like a raindrop in a hurricane.

The history of the decline of infectious disease is a history of improved sanitation, alleviation of overcrowding, the rise of the middle class, and above all, the betterment of nutrition. This decline in disease occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread vaccination. (See Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis) Under massively centralized medical care, in an environment where chemically saturated agri-business grows our food in depleted topsoil, there is a greater and greater need for nutritional supplements. But this vital avenue will be narrowed and blocked in the ways I have indicated above.

_________________________________

Last but not least, medical-research fraud continues unabated, an out-of-control rampant crime.

See, for example, “20 Percent Of Cancer Studies Report Conflict of Interest,” ScienceDaily (May 13, 2009): “Nearly one-third of cancer research published in high-impact journals disclosed a conflict of interest, according to a new study from researchers at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center…”

Also, from the Boston Globe (Boston.com, August 15, 2005), “Flaws are found in validating medical studies; many see need to overhaul standards for peer review”:

“…after a study that sent reverberations through the medical profession by finding that almost one-third of top research articles have been either contradicted or seriously questioned, some specialists are calling for radical changes in the system…almost one-third of the top papers that appeared in top journals over a 13-year period from 1990 to 2003, had been either contradicted or found to have potentially exaggerated results. All the articles had [prior to publication] undergone vigorous peer review, leading to questions about whether problems should have been caught by reviewers…”

_________________________________

What does this epidemic of cheating and lying in medical research add up to? New dangerous drugs will continue to be approved for public use, by the government. The dangers of the drugs will be hidden in fabricated studies published in prestigious journals.

As the Supreme Court deliberates on whether the individual mandate in Obama’s healthplan implies a penalty or tax if people opt out, and as the Court mumbles its way through questions about the Commerce Clause of the Constitution—which was never written to permit Congress to command people to buy health insurance—the real secret is concealed.

This insurance plan will capture more and more of the population in the cross-hairs of chemical warfare. No amount of squirming or arguing is going to change that.

Jon Rappoport is the author of a new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

Jon has worked as an independent investigative reporter since 1982. The LA Weekly nominated him for a Pulitzer Prize, for a interview he did with the president of El Salvador University, where the military had taken over the campus and was disappearing students and burning books. He has written for In These Times, Village Voice, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, CBS Healthwatch, Stern. His work can be found at www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

GRIEF IS NOW A DISEASE

Mar23

GRIEF IS NOW A DISEASE

by Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

MARCH 23, 2012. The current issue of Psychiatric Times reports that the new bible of mental disorders, the DSM-V, will make grief a mental disorder.

Specifically, a parent who deeply mourns the loss of a child for more than TWO WEEKS will rate a diagnosis of clinical depression (and of course, drugging with one of the toxic SSRI antidepressants.)

This absurdity is even too much for some doctors, and they’re rebelling. For example, see Dr. Joanne Cacciatore’s blog post here.

But the “experts” who are assembling the upcoming DSM-V don’t care. They’re shrugging off the criticism so far.

Well, of course they would. There is a lot of money to be made by prescribing more drugs, in this case, to grieving parents.

The Psychiatric Times’ editorial attacking this lunatic classification of grief-as-disease is written by none other than Dr. Allen Frances.

Dr. Allen Frances has summed up position on the lunatic classification of grief-as-disease in this post on the Huffington Post Blog published on Mar 23, 2012.

Readers will remember my recent article about the good doctor. He is the man who was in charge of assembling the previous DSM-IV. His team expanded the definitions of ADHD and Bipolar, so that many more people would be dosed with toxic and destructive drugs like Valproate, Lithium, and Ritalin.

In fact, Dr. Frances, in a December 2010 Wired interview by Gary Greenberg (entitled Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness), stated: “There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.” [Emphasis added]

I’m not kidding. He actually said it. Here is the opening opening paragraph of the article:

“Every so often Al Frances says something that seems to surprise even him. Just now, for instance, in the predawn darkness of his comfortable, rambling home in Carmel, California, he has broken off his exercise routine to declare that ‘there is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.’ Then an odd, reflective look crosses his face, as if he’s taking in the strangeness of this scene: Allen Frances, lead editor of the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (universally known as the DSM-IV), the guy who wrote the book on mental illness, confessing that ‘these concepts are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the boundaries.’ For the first time in two days, the conversation comes to an awkward halt.” [Emphasis added]

The complete article can be found at wired.com here.

Which would be like the chairman of Exxon asserting, “We need to explore for more oil. Of course, cars don’t really work. They don’t go anywhere. They’re fictions. Delusions.”

The committees who put together these DSMs would be better off posting a list of a few hundred human behaviors on a wall and, blindfolded, throwing darts at them.

What lies below this latest psychiatric nonsense about grief is an entire industrial complex. It’s dedicated to brainwashing the public into accepting the notion of discrete and real mental disorders.

People have problems, they become frustrated and confused, they suffer, but the act of carving up behavior and thought into diseases is a way of a) expanding business and b) extending the Matrix.

More and more, as a result of relentless PR, the public believes there are a whole host of mental disorders that not only intrude on their lives but require pharmaceutical treatment.

The public believes they are victimized by these diseases and can alleviate them only through drugs.

The public believes it is “humane” to accept the existence of these diseases, and we must all join together to “remove the stigma of diagnosis.”

The public believes they are at the mercy of arbitrary shifts of brain chemistry that bring on these diseases.

The public believes, therefore, that life itself is limited by the potential onset of “psychiatric illness.”

The public believes we’re all, to one degree or another, disabled.

The public believes what they’re told to believe. Therefore, the fictitious existence of discrete mental disorders becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The Matrix op called psychiatry provides a focal point, around which are woven many strands of propaganda. The overall objective? A future world that resembles, to a remarkable degree, a Universal Hospital, in which the population, granted “free” care, lives through dozens of diagnoses of diseases and disorders, with (toxic) treatments—from cradle to grave. The eternal patient.

Further propaganda strives to label such a life the hallmark of What Humans Are.

That is the high-level objective of the medical/psychiatric cartel.

What makes psychiatry different is that it seeks to gain control and domination over the entire area of human behavior, through classification by labels and bogus claims of diagnosis.

As I mentioned in the article on Dr. Frances, there are no definitive chemical or biological tests for any so-called mental disorder. This fact is stunning to people. They automatically assume psychiatry is a science. It isn’t. It’s a shell game.

I refer now to the PBS FRONTLINE presentation, Does ADHD Exist? A quite revealing (and side-splitting) exchange occurs between the interviewer and Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center. Barkley is also the author of books about ADHD.

INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY: That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]

Live long and prosper, Dr. Barkley. And you might want to re-check the definition of science. Just a thought.

Here is a final prediction for you:

Author/psychologist Paul Babiak recently stated that a psychopath is someone with “a psychopathic personality.”

Quite informative.

My prediction?

We’re going to see an accelerated push to label many career criminals—on the street and in corporate boardrooms—as ill with the disease of psychopathy. Now, I’m old-fashioned. I believe you prosecute people like that to the fullest extent of the law.

The point is, though, the definition of psychopathy is going to be extended to those people who, in the view of mental health professionals, show a lack of empathy, who aren’t happy to live in the Global Village, where Share and Care are actually, at a high level, fronts for advancing the cause of Globalism.

Schoolchildren who don’t want to play the usual games, who don’t want to join the group are going to be examined for signs of incipient psychopathy.

The agenda will be to weed out people who are free and independent. Label them. Treat them. Drug them. Isolate them from the rest of us.

“Your son is what some people would call an outsider. But actually, he’s case of psychopathy in progress. We have to act now. I’m not saying he’s a Lee Oswald or a Jack the Ripper or a Bernie Madoff, but you never know. If we catch this early, we have a chance. He doesn’t feel sympathy for others. He doesn’t recognize his inclusion in the human community. When he looks at people, he doesn’t smile. He just looks. We have promising treatments. Let’s move quickly…”

Of course, Doctor. Perhaps you could melt a few of his brain connections and banish his unsympathetic aura.

Jon Rappoport

An investigative reporter for the past 30 years, Jon is the author of a new wide-ranging collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

DECONSTRUCTING THE NAKED FILMMAKER

Mar22

DECONSTRUCTING THE NAKED FILMMAKER

MARCH 21, 2012. The UK Telegraph (linked at infowars.com) gives us an update on Jason Russell’s condition.

Russell, the man who made the viral KONY 2012 video, was arrested on a San Diego street where he was running naked.

Russell is now in lock-down in a psych ward, and his wife suggests he may be there for a while receiving treatment.

If Russell was not under the influence of a psychiatric drug when he took off his clothes and wandered out into the city, it’s likely he is now. (See my interview with Dr. Peter Breggin yesterday on the Alex Jones radio show at the Alex Jones You Tube channel.)

It’s quite instructive to read what the UK Telegraph has to say about Russell’s condition. I’ll quote several paragraphs and put my comments in brackets and caps, so you can separate fact from utter fiction:

“Russell…was given a preliminary diagnosis of brief reactive psychosis, in which a person displays sudden psychotic behavior. [NO SUCH THING AS BRIEF REACTIVE PSYCHOSIS. NO PHYSICAL TEST FOR IT. IT’S A MADE-UP CONDITION. IT’S ABOUT AS TECHNICAL AND LEGITIMATE AS “HE FLIPPED OUT.”]

“‘Doctors say this is a common experience given the great mental, emotional and physical shock his body has gone through in these last two weeks…’ Danica Russell (Jason’s wife) said in a statement. [PHYSICAL SHOCK? WHAT PHYSICAL SHOCK?]

“Researchers do not know how many people suffer from the condition [CONDITION? FICTITIOUS CONDITION. PEOPLE HAVE PROBLEMS, THEY ACT IN UNUSUAL WAYS, THEY SUFFER, BUT THERE IS NO ‘CONDITION’], mainly because the symptoms are fleeting [THERE ARE NO ‘SYMPTOMS’, BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONDITION], but those with personality disorders [NO SUCH THING. LABELED ‘PERSONALITY DISORDERS’ HAVE NO PHYSICAL TESTS FOR A DIAGNOSIS. MORE MADE-UP TERMINOLOGY] are at greater risk for having an episode [THERE IS NO EPISODE BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONDITION. THERE ARE EXPERIENCES AND ACTIONS, THERE IS PAIN AND SUFFERING, THERE IS CONFUSION, BUT THERE IS NO CONDITION]. Brief reactive psychosis [THE FICTION WHICH DOESN’T EXIST] is triggered by trauma or major stress [THERE IS NO TRIGGER FOR THE CONDITION BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONDITION] such as an accident or the death of a loved one. Other triggers [NO TRIGGERS] can include sleep deprivation or dehydration.” [SLEEP DEPRIVATION OR DEHYDRATION CAN INDEED LEAD TO CONFUSION, ACTIONS THAT ARE OUT OF CHARACTER, AND SUFFERING, BUT NOT TO A ‘CONDITION’.]

Now that Russell is in lock-down in a psych ward, I hope they are giving him plenty of liquids and electrolytes, and I hope he is resting. Whatever drugs, however, they may be dosing him with will destabilize him further, in the short or long-term. If he’s receiving, SRRI antidepressants like Paxil, Prozac, or Zoloft, watch out for an amphetamine-like effect involving more wild actions on his part. If he’s getting so-called anti-psychotic drugs, he could develop tremors that indicate motor-brain damage. (See Dr. Peter Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry, and visit www.breggin.com.)

The whole strategy of psychiatric treatment is based on a) diagnosis of fictitious “conditions” that leads directly to b) toxic drugging.

That’s the plan, that’s the layout, that’s the sequence.

If indeed Russell was physically exhausted and dehydrated, and was also under stress, he could behave in ways that would satisfy the fictitious criteria for a fictitious diagnosis of a fictitious non-condition called “brief reactive psychosis,” as well as any number of other fictitious psychiatric “disorders.”

Any and all of which lead to the ingestion of dangerously toxic medical drugs.

Notice the role of the cops in this situation. They arrested Russell on a street in San Diego, and because they didn’t believe he was a threat, they turned him over to the doctors/psychiatrists. And he landed in lock-down. From the police point of view, this was the humane thing to do, but it wasn’t. Not really.

The young man needs to be in a peaceful place, away from the roaring crowds, resting, getting electrolytes, liquids, good food, and in the company of a few people who care about him.

Everything else is institutional insanity.

And, for further background and context on the Jason Russell story, read my recent blog post entitled BIGGEST LIAR IN AMERICA, which exposes Dr. Allen Francis — one of the key figures behind the FICTITIOUS CONDITIONS. It summarizes that part of THE MATRIX called “mental health”.

Thank you, Dr. Frances.

JON RAPPOPORT

Jon is the author of the new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, and, with Robert Scott Bell, a 10-hour audio seminar, VACCINES: ARMED AND DANGEROUS.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

MATRIX BRAIN DRUG EXPERIMENT

Mar19

MATRIX DRUG EXPERIMENT ON BRAINS

MARCH 19, 2012. From Nazi war camps to the CIA’s mind-control program—many people are aware that the brain has become a major target of medical madmen.

But not as many people realize that the entire arsenal of psychiatric drugs constitutes an ongoing experiment on the human brain.

And this program is a significant piece of THE MATRIX, because when perception and feeling are altered, when natural neuro-chemicals in the body are scrambled, when the very “disorders” that prompt the drugs are fictions devised by committees, you have a destructive illusion and invasion that changes the world.

Just to take one example, the Columbine school shooting that shocked the nation was perpetrated by two boys who were reported to be on Luvox, an SSRI antidepressant. Even psychiatrists have noted that these drugs can and do cause people to go on rampages.

But as the pharmaceutical connection with Columbine hit the press, it was squelched and sidelined in favor of: “it’s time to to heal.”

For extensive information on these antidepressants and other psy-drugs, go to www.breggin.com and dig into the work of Dr. Peter Breggin, the one man in the world most responsible for exposing the grotesque toxicity of the whole array of brain-changing pharmaceuticals.

Many times since the Columbine massacre, Americans have been bowled over by news of senseless violent murders, and in every case people weigh with the usual array of explanations. No one is satisfied.

However, just try to discover whether the killer was on a psychiatric drug, and if so, what the drug was. It’s almost always a hidden issue, carefully protected.

The effect of these crazed murders on the public is that of a successful psy-op. Confusion, fear, erosion of faith, demoralization, passivity. “Everything’s going to hell. What can anyone do?”

This is called ALTERING PERCEPTION.

And THAT is a major Matrix element: people see reality as something they must passively accept, something that’s beyond their capacity to control or direct.

Now, we have two incidents on which everyone and his brother are speculating. One, the US Army Sgt., Richard Bales, who is accused of killing 16 Afghan civilians, and two, the bizarre actions of Jason Russell, who is currently in lockdown in a San Diego psych ward, after running around naked in the street. Russell directed Kony 2012, the video-gone-viral about a Ugandan warlord.

No one knows what motivated their actions. (In Bales’ case, an Afghan inquiry states at least 20 US soldiers were involved in the killings.) But suppose Bales and Russell were on psychiatric drugs that drove them over a cliff?

Here is some background on just one such drug: Ritalin. You aren’t going to read this material in the mainstream press. Some estimates place young users of the drug as high as 5 million in the US alone.

The conventional wisdom about Ritalin is: it’s safe and effective; it helps curb hyperactivity; if there are side effects, they’re mild.

Really?

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

. Paranoid delusions
· Paranoid psychosis
· Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
· Activation of psychotic symptoms
· Toxic psychosis
· Visual hallucinations
· Auditory hallucinations
· Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
· Effects pathological thought processes
· Extreme withdrawal
· Terrified affect
· Started screaming
· Aggressiveness
· Insomnia
· Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
· Psychic dependence
· High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
· Decreased REM sleep
· When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
· Convulsions
· Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Many parents around the country have discovered that Ritalin has become a condition for their children continuing in school. There are even reports, by parents, of threats from social agencies: “If you don’t allow us to prescribe Ritalin for your ADD child, we may decide that you are an unfit parent. We may decide to take your child away.”

This mind-boggling state of affairs is fueled by teachers, principals, and school counselors, none of whom have medical training. Yet even if they did…

The very definition of the “illness” for which Ritalin would be prescribed is in doubt, especially at the highest levels of the medical profession. This doubt, however, has not filtered down to most public schools.

In commenting on Dr. Lawrence Diller’s book, Running on Ritalin: A Physician Reflects on Children, Society, and Performance in a Pill,… Dr. William Carey, Director of Behavioral Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, has written, “Dr. Diller has correctly described… the disturbing trend of blaming children’s social, behavioral, and academic performance problems entirely on an unproven brain deficit…”

On November 16-18, 1998, the National Institute of Mental Health held the prestigious “NIH Consensus Development Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD].” The conference was explicitly aimed at ending all debate about the diagnoses of ADD, ADHD, and about the prescription of Ritalin. It was hoped that at the highest levels of medical research and bureaucracy, a clear position would be taken: this is what ADHD is, this is where it comes from, and these are the drugs it should be treated with. That didn’t happen, amazingly. Instead, the official panel responsible for drawing conclusions from the conference threw cold water on the whole attempt to reach a comfortable consensus.

Panel member Mark Vonnegut, a Massachusetts pediatrician, said, “The diagnosis [of ADHD] is a mess.”

The panel essentially said it was not sure ADHD was even a “valid” diagnosis. In other words, ADD and ADHD might be nothing more than attempts to categorize certain children’s behaviors – with no organic cause, no clear-cut biological basis, no provable reason for even using the ADD or ADHD labels.

The panel found “no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction [which malfunction had been the whole psychiatric assumption].”

The panel found that Ritalin has not been shown to have long-term benefits. In fact, the panel stated that Ritalin has resulted in “little improvement on academic achievement or social skills.”

Panel chairman, David Kupfer, professor of psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh, said, “There is no current validated diagnostic test [for ADHD].”

Yet at every level of public education in America, there remains what can only be called a voracious desire to give children Ritalin (or other similar drugs) for ADD or ADHD.

The 1994 Textbook of Psychiatry, published by the American Psychiatric Press, contains this review (Popper and Steingard): “Stimulants [such as Ritalin] do not produce lasting improvements in aggressivity, conduct disorder, criminality, education achievement, job functioning, marital relationships, or long-term adjustment.”

Parents should also wake up to the fact that, in the aftermath of the Littleton, Colorado, school-shooting tragedy, pundits and doctors began urging much more extensive “mental health” services for children. Whether you have noticed it or not, this no longer means, for the most part, therapy with a caring professional. It means drugs. Drugs like Ritalin.

In December 1996, the US Drug Enforcement Agency held a conference on ADHD and Ritalin. Surprisingly, it issued a sensible statement about drugs being a bad substitute for the presence of caring parents: “[T]he use of stimulants [such as Ritalin] for the short-term improvement of behavior and underachievement may be thwarting efforts to address the children’s real issues, both on an individual and societal level. The lack of long-term positive results with the use of stimulants and the specter of previous and potential stimulant abuse epidemics, give cause to worry about the future. The dramatic increase in the use of methylphenidate [Ritalin] in the 1990s should be viewed as a marker or warning to society about the problems children are having and how we view and address them.”

In his book, Talking Back to Ritalin, Dr. Peter Breggin expands on the drug’s effects: “Stimulants such as Ritalin and amphetamine… have grossly harmful impacts on the brain — reducing overall blood flow, disturbing glucose metabolism, and possibly causing permanent shrinkage or atrophy of the brain.”

In the American press, although many articles have appeared covering “the debate” about Ritalin and ADHD, no newspaper or TV network has taken it upon itself to hammer on all the lies, day after day, month after month. That kind of campaign could turn around the whole nation on this vital subject—but of course, pharmaceutical advertising is a more powerful force.

And one should not forget that Ritalin came out of a Swiss drug giant called Ciba Geigy (now Novartis) fifty years ago. That company once had very close business ties with the infamous Nazi cartel, IG Farben. Farben stood for inhuman experiments on human beings. Read the adverse effects of Ritalin again, and consider that millions of little kids take those pills every day.

JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Jon is the author of the new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, and, with Robert Scott Bell, a 10-hour audio seminar, VACCINES: ARMED AND DANGEROUS.

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Medical Fraud

Hidden in plain view: FDA murder

NANCY PELOSI EXPOSES OBAMACARE

Medical Murder in the Matrix

Manipulating evolution from now on

MEDS KILLING SOLDIERS BY HEART ATTACK

THE BIO-CHEMICAL MATRIX

OBAMACARE AND THE MATRIX

GRIEF IS NOW A DISEASE

DECONSTRUCTING THE NAKED FILMMAKER

MATRIX BRAIN DRUG EXPERIMENT