CDC vaccine whistleblower: the silence that kills

by Jon Rappoport

August 23, 2015

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

It’s now been a year since William Thompson, long-time CDC researcher, publicly admitted he concealed evidence that indicted the MMR vaccine for its connection to autism.

It’s been a year since Thompson publicly accused his colleagues at the CDC of doing the same thing. Two of those colleagues, Frank DeStefano and Collen Boyle, are high-ranking CDC executives in the area of vaccine safety.

During this past year, mainstream reporters and defenders of the realm have taken two approaches: silence; and vague claims that Thompson’s statements are false.

Both of these approaches are slimy and disingenuous, because the man we want to hear from is Thompson himself. And we have not.

We want to hear from him in a public setting, in front of a hearing where he can speak at length, where he can fill in details, where he can air all his claims without censorship.

At the moment, the possibility of such a hearing is remote, because the US Congress is bought and sold.

Short of a hearing, we want Thompson to sit down with a reporter and speak on camera, extensively, and submit himself to questions.

He has said he will not do this. He and his lawyer, Rick Morgan, know there are a number of reporters who will do a proper interview, without edits. I could easily name a dozen reporters who would conduct an in-depth interview, live, online, for the whole world to see.

Thompson’s reluctance? It appears he believes his public testimony, under oath, in front of a Congressional committee, will protect him from harm. I’m talking about harm from people who will do anything to maintain the reputation of vaccines.

But what if there never is a full-blooded open Congressional hearing? What then? Will Thompson maintain silence for the rest of his life?

More is at stake here than the danger of the MMR vaccine. The CDC has done hundreds of key studies on vaccine safety. They are all thrown into doubt by Thompson’s assertion— recently quoted by Congressman Bill Posey on the floor of the Congress—that Thompson and his colleagues brought a garbage can into a CDC office and threw out documents that would have shown the MMR connection to autism.

This speaks of a massive indifference to human life and safety.

Thompson should also know, and certainly does know, that Congressional hearings have a way of soft-pedaling accusations against government agencies. There is no guarantee that, in such a setting, he would be able to air his confession and his grievances in full.

Whereas, in an interview with independent investigators/reporters, he would have complete latitude. Time constraints would not apply. He would be asked for many, many details. The full story, from his point of view, would emerge.

It is my conclusion that Thompson entered into an arrangement with his bosses at the CDC. After his public confession of a year ago, it was too late to put the genie back in the bottle and cork it. But damage control could be undertaken.

Thompson could say (and he did) that he was willing (and only willing) to work with Congress to present the truth. His CDC bosses were confident that they could, with the help of powerful friends in government and in the pharmaceutical industry, prevent serious Congressional exposure.

And if Thompson maintained silence otherwise, refusing to talk to reporters, there would be little or no coverage of the scandal.

The CDC assured Thompson that he could continue to work for them and retire and receive his full pension.

That’s my conclusion. If I’m in error, let Thompson or his lawyer, Rick Morgan, correct me.

Beyond Thompson’s year-old confession, there are taped phone calls between him and Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield. In these fragments, Thompson expresses his outrage about the use of mercury (thimerosal) in vaccines. He makes other damning statements about vaccines.

These statements should also be the springboard for an in-depth interview with Thompson, on camera.

Then there is the matter of a 2004 letter Thompson wrote to the head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding. He informed Gerberding that he had data about the MMR vaccine that was very sensitive and troubling. He was surely referring to the suppressed truth about the MMR-autism connection. Thompson was about to present these data at a major CDC vaccine conference

Apparently, Gerberding never answered the letter and instead stonewalled Thompson. His presentation was cancelled. But some five years later, when she left the CDC, Gerberding did go to work for Merck as the president of their vaccine division…

And Merck does, in fact, manufacture the MMR vaccine.

What are the odds that this potential stick of dynamite would be permitted to explode during an open Congressional hearing, with Gerberding on the stand under oath?

The likelihood is on the level of the full moon turning into a cowboy on a horse in full view of the whole world.

So we have the silence of the Congress, the silence of the major media, and the silence of Thompson himself.

I have no doubt he fears for his life. On the other hand, can he maintain invisibility forever?

At stake is the severe neurological damage caused by the MMR and other vaccines.

The pretense of major media in all this is preposterous. After 30 years of working as a reporter, I know what makes a story. I know that a major researcher (which Thompson is) at a major government agency (the CDC) admitting to gross fraud, is, without further ado or parsing, a blockbuster, a page-one headline. There is absolutely no doubt about it.

We aren’t talking about somebody coming in from the outside and claiming the CDC is cooking their research books. No, this is a house man, a valued member of the research club, blowing the whistle on himself and his highly placed colleagues, at considerable risk to himself.

This is already a huge story, without taking another step.

To achieve the stunning media silence of a year, there was active repression and collusion and pressure, and lies told and excuses made.

The bulk of America, card carrying members of the Idiocracy, heard nothing and saw nothing, so nothing happened.

In retrospect, we can understand why a major push for mandatory vaccination has been launched. Thompson was cutting close to the bone with his revelations. Alternative news sites have been bristling with stories exposing the dangers of vaccines. The powers-that-be decided it was time to double down.

It was time to overwhelm the noise and go all-out. It was time to pass new laws eliminating vaccine exemptions, and it was time to hurl waves of vicious accusations against truth tellers.

The Thompson case remains in limbo. Will he ever speak out and spill all the secrets? Will he emerge from the shadows?

This isn’t over. It’s far from over.

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.

Media Matrix: an ancient Tibetan perspective on the evening network news

Jul3

by Jon Rappoport

July 3, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“A long time ago, teachers and students in Tibet considered themselves artists of reality. They practiced inventing it. And then, separating themselves from every other spiritual system, they practiced destroying what they created. Back and forth, back and forth, with the goal of achieving an intimate knowledge of their own existence.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

For the early Tibetan adepts, the Void was a vital concept.

Stripped of its metaphysical baggage and embroidery, Void was the place where creating stopped. The constant “noise of existence” went away.

The ongoing parade of inner thoughts, sentiments, propensities—vanished.

For as long as a person wanted to stay there. And experience the greatest “vacation” he’d ever known. If he could handle it.

But humans felt a great need to avoid the Void. They demanded activity, flow, information.

They eventually sank to the level of passivity…and then they simply wanted input, more input, and still more input.

From an authoritative unimpeachable external source.

Hence, from the earliest societies onward, there was a thing called: the news.

It was updated. It was ongoing. It was forever.

Priests delivered it. Kings delivered it. Their minions delivered it.

If the news stopped, people felt anxiety, which, at bottom, was a fear of Void.

There is much more to say about the Tibetans and their understanding of Void and its twin, ongoing Creation, but I’ll save that for another time.

Now, in these times, the global population has television news.

The imitations of life called anchors are the arbiters. How they speak, how they look, how they themselves experience emotion—all this is planted deep in the minds of the viewers.

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

That’s how solid the long-term brainwashing is.

The elite anchors, from John Daly, in the early days of television, all the way to Lester Holt and Scott Pelley, have set the style. They define the genre.

The anchor taps into, and mimics, that part of the audience’s psyche that wants smooth delivery of superficial cause and effect. (In the Void, of course, cause and effect dissolve.)

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

Ultimately, he is paving over Void.

On air, the anchor is neutral, a castratus, a eunuch.

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

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

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

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

Television news is really all segue all the time. That’s what it comes down to.

The word “segue,” pronounced “segway,” refers to a transition from one thing to another, a blend.

Ed McMahon once referred to Johnny Carson as the prince of blends, because Carson could tell a clunker of a joke, step on it three times, and still move to the next joke without losing his audience.

Television news is very serious business. A reporter who can’t handle segues is dead in the water. He’s a gross liability.

The good anchors can take two stories that have no connection whatsoever and create a sense of smooth transition.

Brian Williams could say, “The planes were recalled later in the afternoon…And a man was cut in two in a horrific accident in Idaho today…And in Seattle (smile), three people reported seeing turtles falling from the sky.”

And it works. The segue works. The blends from one story to another seem reasonable somehow.

The networks basically have, on a daily basis, radically fragmented stories, and they need an anchor who can do the blends, the segues, and get away with it, to promote the sense of one continuous flow. So the audience doesn’t say, “This is just an odd collection of surreal moments, this is Salvador Dali on my television screen.”

The news is all segue all the time.

Not just nationally. On the local level, too. The pounding lead-in music at the top of the show prepares the audience. A) Music. B) “Tonight, our top story: a man ate a hot dog and died …”

The voice of the anchor is the non-stop blending machine that ties all news stories together. That’s why the elite network stars earn their paychecks.

Good segue people are stage magicians. They can move the viewer’s attention from item A to item B without a tremor or a doubt.

The segue, the blend not only connects wildly disparate pieces, it keeps the viewer from brushing up against the Void. The blend is the primary mechanism for creating an endless river of “information” linoleum with no cracks.

It’s often been said of certain actors, “He could read from the phone book and you’d listen.” Well, an elite anchor can hold the viewer’s mind as he reads a sentence from the phone book, another one from a car-repair manual, a third from a cookbook, and a fourth from a funeral-home brochure. Without stopping.

And afterward, the viewer would have no questions.

The news is surreal because the stories are mostly fool’s gold to begin with; and they’re unrelated. They’re rocks lying around. The anchor picks them up and invents the illusion of One Flowing Stream.

This is what the audience wants. The news feels like a story. It feels like unity. It feels like a stage play or a movie. It feels, when all is said and done, good.

You can’t pull just anyone off the street and have him describe car crashes, murders, storms, threats of war, political squabbles, 300 cats living in a one-room apartment, a new piece of Medicare legislation, genitalia picture tweets, and the dedication of a new library, while keeping the audience in a light trance.

Katie Couric couldn’t do it. People were waiting for her to break out into an attack of Perky and giggle and cross her legs. Diane Sawyer had her bad nights. She seemed to be affecting somber personal grief as her basic segue-thread. Scott Pelley is competent, but he has his off-moments, too, when he’s suddenly sitting like a surgeon ready to signal the anesthesiologist to clamp a mask on your face, before he cuts into your stomach.

Whereas, a true version of the news would go something like this: “Well, folks, just now I moved from a tornado in Kansas to the removal of restrictions on condom sales, and I’m blending directly into penguins in Antarctica. I’m doing Salvador Dali and you’re not noticing a thing.”

The anchor is basically saying to the audience, “I’m a few feet inside your personal landscape, your mind, feeding you all the turns in the river, and I’ll always be here…papering over the Void.”

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

Elite anchors invent and maintain certain tones of voice, certain rhythms, certain cadences, certain variations of musical pitch, in order to sustain the sense of continuity.

They’re mechanics of voice.

They use their skills to report the false facts handed down to conceal ops and staged events.

They can know they’re actors on television, but they can believe (in direct contradiction) they’re delivering the truth.

“Okay, look,” the producer says to the veteran actor he’s interviewing for the lead, in a billion-dollar production called the news. “This may sound strange, but you’re going to have to do Normal as it’s never been done before. That’s what the audience wants. You’ve got to come across as very, very smart and very, very Normal. Get it? Pretend you’re the brain of every other brain. You’re the conscience of every other conscience. You’re just as walled off from the conspiracy to own every inch of America as Americans are walled off from knowing about it. You know as little as they do. You’re clean, sanitary, loyal as a dog, dumb as fog but very smart. You spew absolute nonsense every second of your time on stage, but it sounds eminently plausible. You constantly change subjects, and the subjects are in no way related to each other, but you make it all Liquid Flow. It’s a joke. But you’re serious. And you’ll get rich.”

And people, with their inordinate and strange fear of dropping down into the gorgeous silence of Void, will watch and listen. They’ll roll up their sleeves and shoot themselves up with the news every night.

Here’s a parting tidbit: The early Tibetans, with their stout, strong, and implacable techniques and exercises, were artists of reality. They were saying, “If you practice inventing reality to the hilt, with great intensity, and then practice not inventing it, you’ll grasp the twin pillars of this existence. You’ll become immune to fear of the Void. You’ll recognize bullshit, on both the daily and cosmic levels, as you’ve never known them before. As a side effect, you’ll be able to analyze information with a keener gaze than you imagined was possible.”

Or you can have the network evening news.

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.

Facebook becomes Godzilla news outlet for disinformation

Jun24

Facebook becomes Godzilla news outlet for disinformation

Will try to save Mockingbird mainstream news

by Jon Rappoport

June 23, 2015

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

“Bottom line, every large mainstream news source is in the business of disinformation. That’s the heavy freight they transport, every day. Stories with no context. Outright lies. Omission of vital data. Claims of ‘overwhelming consensus’ on issues where no such consensus exists. Internal censorship of their own budding investigations into high-level crimes. Disguised partisan opinions. Utter reliance on ‘experts’ as sources, who deliver official propaganda as if it were fact. They manufacture reality for governments, corporations, and other controllers of society. And yet… many of these outlets are drowning in red ink. They’re going broke. The ‘greatest news outlet in the world’, the New York Times, keeps refinancing its debt to stay afloat. The powers-that-be must rescue mainstream media, in order to keep broadcasting their false pictures of reality. Who will step up to the plate? Perhaps some social-media Godzilla with CIA connections…” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

From softonic.com, November 15, 2013: “Reddit is only used by 3% of Americans, so it’s right near the bottom of the table. Facebook is the winner, with 64% of the population using the site, and 30% of those users getting news from it.” (emphasis added) (See also this journalism.org article: “News Use Across Social Media Platforms”.)

If those stunning statistics don’t give you pause for thought, consider this: worldwide, 1.25 billion people use FB’s mobile platform.

And now, FB has plunged into the news business, with a program called Instant Articles.

The basic set-up: mainstream media outlets put their news stories on Facebook’s platform…and by that simple transfer, more than a billion FB users will see those stories, absorb them, believe them, accept them. It’s a lifeline for traditional media companies hemorrhaging viewers and readers.

The New York Times and BuzzFeed have already signed up. Soon to follow: The National Geographic, NBC News, BBC News, the Guardian, the Atlantic, Spiegel, Bild. More will come on board.

“Uh…I’m a Facebook user. I don’t have the energy or patience to go to another site and click on a news article, but now it’s great: I can get all my news on Facebook, right there. I mean, the Internet? I’m not even sure what it is. Facebook is the Internet, right? It’s my world. My virtual bubble. I live in it…”

Facebook comes to the rescue of mainstream news and enables its continuous flood of disinformation. (And also Apple. See “Apple mind-control News App is on the way”.)

Well, what is Facebook?

Start here: the big infusion of cash that sent Mark Zuckerberg and his fledgling college enterprise on their way came from Accel Partners, in 2004.

Jim Breyer, head of Accel, attached a $13 million rocket to Facebook, and nothing has ever been the same.

Earlier that same year, a man named Gilman Louie joined the board of the National Venture Capital Association of America (NVCA). The chairman of NVCA? The same Facebook $$ angel, Jim Breyer. Gilman Louie happened to be the first CEO of the important CIA start-up, In-Q-Tel.

In-Q-Tel was founded in 1999, with the express purpose of funding companies that could develop technology the CIA would use to “gather data.”

That’s not the only connection between Jim Breyer and the CIA’s man, Gilman Louie. In 2004, Louie went to work for BBN Technologies, headed up by Breyer. Dr. Anita Jones also joined BBN at that time. Jones had worked for In-Q-Tel and was an adviser to DARPA, the Pentagon’s technology department that helped develop the Internet.

With these CIA/DARPA connections, it’s no surprise that Jim Breyer’s jackpot investment in Facebook is not part of the popular mythology of Mark Zuckerberg. Better to omit it. Who could fail to realize that Facebook, with its endless stream of personal data, and its tracking capability, is an ideal CIA asset?

Soon after its initial IPO launch, in May 2012, Facebook stock tanked. On Friday, August 17, it weighed in at half its initial price [down from $42.05 to $21.81]. For the first time, venture-capital backers were legally permitted to sell off their shares, and some did, at a loss.

At that time, I wrote:

“This has the earmarks of classic shakeout and squeeze play. It’s how heavy hitters gain control of a company. First, they drive down the price of the stock, then they scoop it up and trade it at low levels that discourage and demoralize the public and even semi-insiders. As the stock continues to tank, they quietly buy up as much of it as they can. Finally, when the price hits a designated rock bottom, they shoot it up all the way to new highs and win big.

“…The company [Facebook] is too important as a data-mining asset of the intelligence community to let it fall into disrepair and chaos. The CIA and its cutouts will save it and gain more power over it. It’s what they’ve wanted all along.”

That was my prediction. Well, today, after a long upward run, Facebook stock sits at $87.88, four times what it was selling for when it tanked in 2012. FB was rescued, and then some.

From the time Mark Zuckerberg was a child and attended the summer camp for “exceptional children,” CTY (Center for Talented Youth), run by Johns Hopkins University, he, like other CTY students, Sergey Brin (co-founder of Google), and Lady Gaga, have been easy to track.

CTY and similar camps filter applications and pick the best and brightest for their accelerated learning programs. Tracing the later progress of these children in school and life would be a standard operation for agencies like the CIA.

When Zuckerberg founded an interesting little social network at Harvard, and then sought to turn it into a business, the data-mining possibilities were obvious to CIA personnel. Through their cutouts, as described above, they stepped in and lent a helping hand.

And now Facebook, having grown to gargantuan proportions, is reaching out its hand—to major mainstream news outlets. To rescue them, so they can continue to bombard the global population with a daily attack of disinformation.

It’s business as usual for the intelligence community: from the earliest days of the CIA, Operation Mockingbird was designed to use mainstream media to promote Agency objectives and hide Agency operations. By 1953, Allen Dulles, Cord Meyer, and Frank Wisner had gained enormous inside-access to at least 25 newspapers and news services, including the New York Times, CBS, Time, Life, Newsweek, the Washington Post, the Copley News Service, and the Christian Science Monitor.

This CIA access was not only achieved through reporters. For example, the heads of CBS, Time, Life, the New York Times, Copley, and the Washington Post (editor) were brought into Mockingbird: Bill Paley, Henry Luce, Arthur Sulzberger, James Copley, and Al Friendly.

This was an all-hands-on-deck enterprise.

And now we have, in the digital age, Facebook, propping up an entire Mockingbird-disinformation media industry in decline.

The CIA rides again.

Consider just a small sample of the major-media coverage/disinformation of the past 7-8 years which has been ridiculed and exposed by alternative Internet reporting: Fast&Furious, Benghazi, Swine Flu, Obamacare, GMOs, trade treaties, vaccines, the CDC, quantitative easing, unemployment figures, psychiatric medications, Common Core, global warming, NATO, the militarization of police, etc. It’s a much longer list.

The effect has been stunning, in terms of public disaffection from mainstream media.

It’s long past time for a counter-offensive. And Facebook, with its captive global audience, is spearheading the attack.

It’s the latest edition of Mockingbird, and it looks benign. But under the surface, it’s breathing new life into a very old business: creating false reality for the public.

More than a billion people, most of whom are preoccupied with posting pictures of themselves and talking about superficial this and that, are turned into hypnotic subjects sucking through a pipeline a mighty flow of invented news shaped to appear factual, important, and final.

Passive minds made more passive by data-packet elements of a virtual world pretending to be the actual world.

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.

Apple mind-control news is on the way

Jun22

Apple mind-control News App is on the way

The globalization of media: a strike force

“Decentralized Centralization”

by Jon Rappoport

June 22, 2015

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

“There is a media metaphysics. Its basic principle states that nothing exists until it becomes information. Now we have a new twist: information only becomes real when it reaches a mind already attuned to it. In other words, the tree falling in the forest makes a sound only if a user/consumer who wants a tree to fall receives video and audio of the event…” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Two years ago, I wrote: “Tech blather has already begun, since Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, bought the Washington Post at a fire sale. Jeff Genius will invent new ways to transmit the news to ‘people on the go’ and make the Post a smashing success. Mobile devices. Multiple platforms. Digital, taking over from print. Ads customized to fit readers’ interests (profiling). News stories customized to fit readers’ interests (more profiling).”

In other words, non-news. If you thought media were irrelevant and deceptive before, you haven’t seen anything. The “new news” will create millions of virtual bubbles in which profiled users can float contentedly, under the cozy cottage roofs of their favorite little separate paradigms.

Now, the tech giant Apple is wading into this territory with an app that will deliver news to users. Yahoo (6/20), in “With revamped app, news to be at core of Apple,” reports:

“Apple News, part of the upcoming iOS 9 operating system, aims to be the primary news source for users of the iPhone and iPad… Apple says its news app ‘follows over a million topics and pulls relevant stories based on your specific interests’… Joshua Benton of the Nieman Journalism Lab said the app will be important because ‘through the awesome power of default, Apple distribution puts it in an entirely other league. This [news] app will be on hundreds of millions of devices within 24 hours of its debut’.”

Translation: Profiling their users down to their toenails, Apple will present them with virtual bubbles of news they want to see and read.

Not just one overall presentation for all; no, millions of different “news outlets” for Apple’s audiences.

This introduces a whole new layer of mind control.

“You’re an Obama fan? Here are stories confirming your belief in the Prophet.”

“You want neo-con on the rocks with a conservative Republican twist? Here’s some war footage that’ll warm your heart.”

“Do you believe ‘government gridlock’ is our biggest concern? Congress can’t get anything done? We’ve got headlines for that from here to the moon.”

“Tuned into celeb gossip? Here’s your world in three minutes.”

The idea: convince users, one day at a time, that what they already believe is important IS the news of the day.

It’s Decentralized Centralization. One media giant carving its global audience up into little pieces and delivering them a whole host of different algorithmically appropriate lies and fluff and no-context psyops.

And for “fringe users?” “You’re doubtful about GMOs? Well, look at what Whole Foods is planning for their healthier produce section. Cheer up.” Nothing about Maui voters declaring a temporary ban on devastatingly toxic Monsanto/Dow experiments or the dangers of Roundup. “You’re anti-vaccine? Sorry, you don’t count. You’re not a recognized demographic. But here’s a piece about a little unvaccinated boy who was involved in car crash on the I5.”

Does this sound like science fiction? It isn’t. It’s the mainstream look of the near-future. Search engines are already “personalizing” your inquiries. US ABC national news is climbing in the ratings because it’s giving viewers “lighter stories,” and spending less time on thorny issues like the Middle East.

The mainstream news business is desperately looking for audience, and treating every “user” as a profiled social-construct-bundle of superficial preferences is their answer.

“Mr. X, we’ve studied the little virtual bubble you live in, and now we can sell you your own special brand of truth.”

There is a next step, and it’s already well underway. In fact, it’s a prior step that’s been underway for more than a hundred years.

“Hello, audience. A) We’re going to pitch you on what we think you should know about and what you shouldn’t want to know about. It’s called PR. We’re going to flood you with ads and other nonsense to make you over into a full-fledged obsessed consumers—and then B) we’re going to profile you from top to bottom, to find out exactly what kind of obsessed consumer you are, so we can hit you and trigger you with information that uniquely stimulates your adrenal glands…”

The one-two punch.

Any actual event occurring in the world will be pre-digested by media editors and profilers, and then split up into variously programmed bits of information for different audiences.

Who cares what really happened? In the new world, there is no ‘what really happened’. That’s a gross misnomer. A faulty idea. A metaphysical error. No, there is only a multi-forked media tongue that simultaneously spits out a dozen or a hundred variations of the same event…because different viewers want and expect different realities.

In 1984, Orwell’s Big Brother was issuing a single voice into the homes of the population. That was old-school. That was primitive technology. That was achieving unity by hammering unity into people’s skulls. This, now, is the frontier of unity through diversity.

“We want to make all of you into androids, through basic PR and propaganda and a pathetic excuse for education. However, we recognize you’ll become different varieties of androids, and we’ll serve that outcome with technological sophistication. Trust us. We care about what you prefer.”

User A: “Wow, did you see the coverage of the border war in Chula Vista?”

User B: “War? They had a fantastic exhibit of drones down there. At least a hundred different types. And then I watched an old WW2 movie about aerial combat.”

User C: “Chula Vista? They had a great food show. This woman made a lemon pie. I could practically taste it.”

User D: “That wasn’t a border war. It was a drill. And then afterwards, these cops gave a demonstration of all their gear. Vests, shields, communication devices, flash-bangs, auto rifles with silencers, batons. I watch drills all over the country. Love them.”

Jon Rappoport

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

Charleston church shooting: the larger covert op

Jun18

Charleston church shooting: the larger covert op

by Jon Rappoport

June 18, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Long-term covert ops sometimes disguise themselves by claiming that the hidden cause of a problem is the cure. So it is with psychiatric drugs, like SSRI antidepressants, which push people into committing murder. In the aftermath of these killings, leaders call for expanded psychiatric screening—which will result in further prescription of those very same drugs.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Police report the suspect in the Charleston church shooting, Dylann Roof, has been captured.

This is the latest in a string of crimes in which black-white conflict has been highlighted, pressed, argued, and used, for the purposes of: fanning flames of racial discord, exercising further gun control, and fatuously claiming that universal psychiatric screening and drugging is an answer.

In this brief article, I focus on black-white conflict.

In the 1960s, in America, the burgeoning drug culture and the Vietnam War became the occasion for protests and riots that shook the nation. In that case, the main target was the federal government.

Even though the “revolution” was pro-left, the 1968 Chicago riots were staged at the Democratic nominating convention. That gives you some idea of the degree of overall and virulent anti-government sentiment.

From the point of view of elite planners, the 1960s should not be repeated; at least not in the same way.

This time, the government should be seen as the hero, the rescuer, the mediator.

For that to happen, Americans would turn on and target each other.

There is no better way to accomplish that than to strike at the issue of race.

Emphasize it, push it, make it stand out, tie it into political correctness, create absurdist “dialogue” that could have no other outcome than outrage. The “discussion about race” has turned into transparent provocation.

Divide and conquer is as old as the hills. The conqueror is the ruler. And, of course, as he wins, he enacts more downward pressure on freedom, in multiple ways, while pretending to be the healer.

This is the op.

This is the simplicity of it.

You can throw other logs on the fire: agents provocateur in the media; the release of violent immigrant criminals from US prisons; the seeding of the population with massive amounts of psychiatric drugs (SSRI antidepressants) that scramble brains and push people over the edge into committing violent acts, including murder.

And oh yes, you can also include the intentional expansion of poverty (and attendant resentment) through the departure of millions of jobs overseas: aka Globalism. That is provocation of the highest order.

The objective is shifting the target from government to the people themselves, along the familiar lines of race.

And the payoff message will echo the sentiments of 1995, after the Oklahoma City Bombing: “Come home to the government, we will protect you. Only we can protect you.”

If you believed mainstream media, you would think the entire race issue in America consists of a three-way conversation between Al Sharpton, a KKK high priest, and some demented college student who insists that every word in the English language contains a hidden racial element.

Update: CBS News is reporting that Dylann Roof was arrested on February 28 in a mall, while he was asking a store clerk “out of the ordinary questions.” At that time, he was found in possession of a medicine called Suboxone.

It is an addicting drug used to treat opiate addiction. Some adverse effects: agitation, hostility, hallucinations, attempted suicide, depersonalization.

Rapid withdrawal from Suboxone can be more dangerous than taking it.

Getting the picture?

Of course, the distinct possibility that the drug pushed Dylann Roof over the edge into committing murder isn’t part of the “correct” narrative aimed at accelerating racial hatreds.

The truth? Irrelevant.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

The Truman Show, Facebook, The Social Network: life under a dome

Jun8

The Truman Show, Facebook, The Social Network: life under a dome

by Jon Rappoport

June 8, 2015

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

“Huxley’s Brave New World trumps Orwell’s 1984, because it posits pleasure as the ultimate control device. Genetic and pharmaceutical innovators will engineer brains along a narrow bounded channel of satisfaction. Brave New World is a countrified suburb of the mind. Accept all the feedback signals and you’ll have your miniature package of ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’. You’ll have the outcome, as if you’d done something to gain it, when in fact no effort was necessary. Skip right to the end of the story. You’re already under the dome. There was no story.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

The 1998 film, The Truman Show, presents a character, Truman Burbank, who unknowingly stars in a 30-year soap opera/reality show about his own life, under a giant dome whose boundaries are hidden from him. The show is broadcast to a global audience of billions.

The fake town Truman lives in, Seahaven, is populated by a massive number of actors playing real people. Seahaven’s creator, director, executive producer, and god, Christof (“Cue the sun”), is convinced that the deception is benign, because Truman’s life in the synthetic town is far happier than anything he could find in the real world, a “sick place.”

As Truman begins to suspect he’s existing in an elaborate set, a movement arises, among the show’s audience, who avidly root for him to escape. That becomes the hook. That becomes the primary item of suspense and tension.

Watching the film, we see the false reality and the viewing audience hoping for Truman’s liberation.

That viewing audience, of course, is vicariously wishing and hoping for their own rescue, because they, too, are trapped. Their real world is very much like Truman’s. But, when all is said and done, audience is audience. For isolated moments, the adrenaline pumps, the highs are felt, and then “normality” sets in.

Truman escaped; wonderful; change the channel; find another program.

Now, if we had a Truman Show II, where Truman lives in the real world and talks with people and shares his 30-year illusion…we might find some truly interesting material.

The escapee reflects on his velvet-lined trap. The escapee recalls how it felt to discover, bit by bit, the trap. The escapee meets the creator (Christof). The escapee sits down with a few loyal viewers, who followed his artificial existence for the full 30 years, and they explain their fascination with the Show. They see Truman now, beyond the character they rooted for inside their television sets.

“You know, Truman, I don’t find you as interesting in the flesh.”

“Really? Why not?”

“Because the Show allowed me to look in on a whole different world.”

“But now?”

“You’re here, in my world. Now we’re both trapped in something we can’t see clearly. We’re inside it.”

Cue Facebook. It was inevitable that audience would want to become actor, and Facebook was invented, with CIA-connected money, in order to make that happen (while also providing an ideal voluntary framework of users to accommodate the voracious appetite of the Surveillance State).

Facebook is a safety valve: “Here, people, now you can star in your own media creation. Reveal mundane details about your lives and share them with other FB stars.”

The award-winning 2010 film, The Social Network, is a fictional representation of Facebook’s creation. At the heart of the film is a legal/money struggle over FB’s ownership. In other words, the film is a melodrama about who profits from a meaningless business that allows audience to become small-time actor.

Facebook is The Truman Show happening on the Internet. “Celebrate your lives under the dome by connecting with other inhabitants—picnic photos, vacation videos, all the acceptable details of a fabricated existence…and you can demean a few personal and petty enemies along the way.”

The Surveillance State, of which FB is a functioning piece, is The Truman Show control room, where directors and technicians deploy cameras to watch all the Truman Burbanks live out their lives.

In both cases, the promise is the same: toe the line and you’ll be happy and protected.

These days, we have another dome—the Capitol, under which the 535 members of the US Congress do their work. Several of these elected officials are protesting the secrecy surrounding the negotiations and content of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) treaty.

Yet not one of them is willing, so far, to step forward and reveal, in complete detail, what he knows about the treaty, which will create a form of international governance over the United States.

These 535 legislators are also living in a synthetic Seahaven. They’re Truman Burbanks, minus the desire to escape. They would doom the population of America to a future of mega-corporate oligarchy, rather than risk spending a night in jail for breaking silence.

Their Truman Show is playing 24/7. The viewing audience isn’t rooting hard for them to break protocol on the TPP, because the audience holds little hope for such an outcome, based on past performance.

The public approval rating for Congress is hovering at about 19%. You can’t get sink lower than that. But their Truman Show goes on. Ratings in that venue don’t matter.

Viewership and readership for large mainstream news outlets have been on a fade for years. That Truman Show endures because the media companies are actively constructing and maintaining the synthetic Seahaven. Without them, it would disappear.

Christof: “We accept the reality of the world with which we are presented, it’s as simple as that…If his [Truman’s] was more than just a vague ambition, if he [Truman] was absolutely determined to discover the truth, there’s no way we could prevent him…I’ve given Truman the chance to lead a normal life…Seahaven is the way the world should be…I am the creator…of a television show.”

As Truman is finally about to open the exit-door hidden in the fake sky of Seahaven, Cristof contacts him. His voice descends on Truman from that sky:

Truman: [to an unseen Christof] “Who are you?”

Christof: [voice-over] “I am The Creator – of a television show that gives hope and joy and inspiration to millions.”

Truman: “Then who am I?”

Christof: “You’re the star.”

Truman: “Was nothing real?”

Christof: “You were real. That’s what made you so good to watch.”

Of course; Truman was the only one, in all of Seahaven, who believed the town and the set and the actors were real. Until his moment of discovery, until he now exits.

What will therefore happen to Seahaven?

The show’s producers will have to turn off the lights. It’s of no use anymore.

It’s been exposed.

So it is with the matrix of consensus. Each person who sees through it can have an effect, beyond what is ordinarily supposed.

In the late 1980s, I embarked on an extensive research project with a brilliant hypnotherapist, Jack True. One of Jack’ strategies with patients involved having them invent “vignettes, dreams, alternate realities.”

Jack wrote: “These aren’t merely stories. Each vignette has its own space and time, and if the patient becomes acutely aware of it, he will then deal with this space and time, where we spend our days, in a different way. He’ll cease to feel trapped. He’ll begin thinking in a new fashion. He’ll spontaneously come upon ideas that otherwise would never have arisen. He’ll know more about freedom than he ever did before.”

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.

Network: Howard Beale, the last sane man in the world

Jun6

Television as a form of knowledge in the New Age

by Jon Rappoport

June 6, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“The media have substituted themselves for the older world… The new media are not bridges between man and nature —they are nature… The new media are not ways of relating us to the old world; they are the real world and they reshape what remains of the old world at will… In television, images are projected at you. You are the screen. The images wrap around you. You are the vanishing point… The whole tendency of modern communication… is towards participation in a process, rather than apprehension of concepts.” (Marshall McLuhan)

The best film ever made about television’s war on the population is Paddy Chayefsky’s scorching masterpiece, Network (1976). Yet it stages only a few minutes of on-air television.

The rest of the film is dialogue and monologue about television. Thus you could say that, in this case, word defeats image.

Even when showing what happens on the TV screen, Network bursts forth with lines like these, from newsman Howard Beale, at the end of his rope, on-camera, speaking to his in-studio audience and millions of people in their homes:

“So, you listen to me. Listen to me! Television is not the truth. Television’s a god-damned amusement park. Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers, and football players. We’re in the boredom-killing business… We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true! But you people sit there day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds. We’re all you know. You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here. You’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube. This is mass madness. You maniacs. In God’s name, you people are the real thing. We are the illusion.”

Beale, coming apart at the seams, is a mad prophet. And because he shines with brilliance and poetry, he can affect minds. Therefore, the television network can make use of him. It can turn him into a cartoon for the masses.

It is Beale’s language and the passion with which he delivers it that constitutes his dangerous weapon. Therefore, the Network transforms him into a cheap religious figure, whose audience slathers him with absurd adoration.

Television’s enemy is the word. Its currency is image.

Beale breaks through the image and defiles it. He cracks the egg. He stops the picture-flow. He brings back the sound and rhythm of spoken poetry. That is his true transgression against the medium that employs him.

The modern matrix has everything to do with how knowledge is acquired.

Television, in the main, does not attempt to impart knowledge. It strives to give the viewer the impression that he knows something. There is a difference.

Knowledge, once established, is external to, and independent of, the viewer. Whereas the impression of knowing is a feeling, a conviction, a belief the viewer holds, after he has watched moving images on a screen.

Images… plus, of course, in the case of the news, the narrative voice.

A basic premise of New Age thinking is: “everything is (connected to) everything.” This fits quite well with the experience of watching film or video flow.

Example: we see angry crowds on the street of a foreign city. Then young people on their cell phones sitting in an outdoor café. Then the marble lobby of a government building where men in suits are walking, standing in groups talking to each other. Then at night, rockets exploding in the sky. Then armored vehicles moving through a gate into the city. Then clouds of smoke on another street and people running, chased by police.

A flow of consecutive images. The sequence, obviously, has been assembled by a news editor, but most of the viewing audience isn’t aware of that. They’re watching the “interconnected” images and listening to a news anchor tell a story that colors (infects) every image.

Viewers thus believe they know something. Television has imparted that sensation to them. That’s what news is all about: delivering a sensation of knowing to the audience.

There is no convenient place where the ordinary viewing audience can stop the flow of images or the story being told. They are inside it. They don’t have the leverage of a crystalized idea or the power of reasoning to get out.

They are inside the story. Knowledge thus becomes story.

The viewer is transfixed by the sensation that he is “inside” watching story.

This fixation produces a short circuit in his reasoning mind (if he has one). No time to stop, no time to think; just watch the flow.

When you take this pattern out to a whole society, you are talking about a dominant method through which “knowledge” is gained.

“Did you see that fantastic video about the Iraq War? It showed that Saddam actually had bioweapons.”

“Really? How did they show that?”

“Well, I don’t exactly remember. But watch it. You’ll see.”

And that’s another feature of the modern acquisition of knowledge: amnesia about details.

The viewer can’t recall key features of what he saw. Or if he can, he can’t describe them, because he was in the flow. He was inside, busy building up his impression of knowing something.

Narrative-visual-television story strips out and discards conceptual references. And lines of reasoning? To the extent they exist, they’re wrapped around and inside the image-flow and the narration.

Ideas aren’t as interesting as images. That’s the premise.

To grasp the diminishment of language, consider the current use of the word “text.” Suddenly it’s become a verb; it means a process of sending words. It also refers to paragraphs or pages of writing, as opposed to pictures. “Text” makes “writing” seem like nothing more than one functional (and machine-like) method of delivering information.

And since bone-dry information (e.g., “genetic sequences”) these days is practically considered a synonym for life, when a writer infuses his words with passion, they automatically become a “rant.” “Rant” was formerly applied to describe what a person did when he was totally unhinged to the point of making no coherent sense.

Image, not the word, is the now preferred means of acquiring what passes for knowledge.

McLuhan: “Media are means of extending and enlarging our organic sense lives into our environment… My main theme is the extension of the nervous system in the electric age.”

All our electronic devices operate as extensions of our senses. In the process, image predominates, and through feedback, the majority of those pictures are produced by media. As if knowledge were being transferred.

Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), once told me in an interview: “If you wanted to try a real revolution, you would produce thousands of videos consisting of written words on screens, with someone speaking those words. You would try to reinstate language as a medium. Poetry, formal arguments and debates, great speeches, dramatic readings. You would go up against image and try to relegate it to its proper place…”

These days, we are witness to an international treaty, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), being negotiated in secret, with the precise words of the treaty withheld from both legislators and the public. The TPP will create an overriding form of global governance for the US and 11 other nations.

The degree of outrage, so far, is on the order of a bonfire in a park.

If this were happening in the American colonies of the 18th century, where several hundred thousand copies of Tom Paine’s pamphlet, Common Sense, were distributed among a total population of only 2.5 million people, the earth would shake.

The word meant something then; thousands of pages of words, held in secret, determining the shape of the future, would have instigated a revolution.

Today, that secrecy of words causes minor flames, because generations of Americans have been suckled on images.

Howard Beale: “…we know that democracy is a dying giant, a sick, sick dying, decaying political concept, writhing in its final pain… What is finished is the idea that this great country is dedicated to the freedom and flourishing of every individual in it. It’s the individual that’s finished. It’s the single, solitary human being that’s finished. It’s every single one of you out there that’s finished. Because this is no longer a nation of independent individuals. It’s a nation of some two hundred odd million transistorized, deodorized, whiter-than-white, steel-belted bodies, totally unnecessary as human beings and as replaceable as piston rods.”

Paddy Chayefsky’s words. He made his pen a sword, because he was writing a movie about television, against television. He was going up against image as the primary form of knowledge. He was the man for the job.

When a technology (television) turns into a method of perception, reality is turned inside out. People watch TV through TV eyes. They observe their blessings the way crowds suck in the tautologies of a tinpot dictator.

Mind control is no longer something merely imposed from the outside. It is a matrix of a self-feeding, self-demanding loop. Willing devotees of the image want images, food stamps of the programmed society.

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.

Network: the last great film about media

Jun4

Diana the Huntress, Queen of Television News

by Jon Rappoport

June 4, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won’t have it!! Is that clear?!… You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today! And YOU have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU WILL ATONE!” (Arthur Jensen, to Howard Beale, “Network,” 1976)

In the brilliant 1976 film, Network, written by Paddy Chayefsky, the programming head of a giant television network, Diana Christensen, shifts the whole news department over to the entertainment division.

Thus emerge new shows with galloping ratings: Howard Beale, Prophet of the Air Waves; The Mao Tse-Tung Hour, in which a guerrilla group films itself carrying out armed bank robberies; and Sybil the Soothsayer, a Tarot reader.

Diana becomes the network’s new executive star.

There is no longer even a pretense of a need for news anchors to appear authoritative, objective, or rational.

Diana Christensen is unstoppable. She sees, with burning clarity, that audiences are bored to the point of exhaustion; they now require, as at the end of the Roman Empire, extreme entertainment. They want more crime, more violence, more insanity, out in the open. On television.

In promoting her kind of news division, she tells network executives:

“Look, we’ve got a bunch of
hobgoblin radicals called the
Ecumenical Liberation Army who
go around taking home movies
of themselves robbing banks.
Maybe they’ll take movies of
themselves kidnapping heiresses,
hijacking 747’s, bombing bridges,
assassinating ambassadors.
We’d open each week’s segment
with that authentic footage,
hire a couple of writers to
write some story behind that
footage, and we’ve got
ourselves a series…

“Did you see the overnights on the
Network News? It has an 8 in New
York and a 9 in L.A. and a 27 share
in both cities. Last night, Howard
Beale went on the air [as a newscaster] and yelled
bullshit for two minutes, and I
can tell you right now that tonight’s
show will get a 30 share at least.
I think we’ve lucked into something…

“I see Howard Beale as a latter-day
prophet, a magnificent messianic
figure, inveighing against the
hypocrisies of our times, a strip
Savonarola, Monday through Friday.
I tell you, Frank, that could just
go through the roof…Do you want to figure out
the revenues of a strip show that
sells for a hundred thousand bucks
a minute? One show like that could
pull this whole network right out
of the hole! Now, Frank, it’s being
handed to us on a plate; let’s not
blow it!”

Television in the “real world” isn’t all the way there yet, but it’s getting there.

In Network, Diana Christensen personifies the news. She is the electric, thrill-seeking, non-stop force that is terrified of silence.

She is walking talking hyperactivity. Sudden shifts. Her affairs with men are brief and inconsequential. She moves on.

She lives and feeds on adrenaline. So does the viewing public. Overnight TV-show ratings reflect that fact.

Nothing else ultimately matters. Ratings are the top line and the bottom line. The individual and his thoughts are completely irrelevant.

Since television is the arch mass-medium, the mass reaction is calculated according to lowest common denominator, and by that standard the most extreme shows are courted.

Shock, violence, crime. Howard Beale, unhinged, a news man screaming about the insanity of the news, is perfectly acceptable, because the audience is simply responding to Beale’s inchoate outrage and their own. Nothing deeper is needed. What could have resulted in a true rebellion is short-circuited. Beale becomes a crazy loon, a novelty item. Yet one more distraction.

When, in a brief interlude of clarity, he begins telling his audience about the takeover of society by mega-corporations, his show droops. Ratings collapse. Diana is no longer interested in him; she wants to sack him.

However, Arthur Jensen, the head of the corporation that owns the television network wants to keep Beale on the air, as a messenger of the “galactic truth” about the beneficial integration of all human activity under the rubric of global money and global power. He converts Beale to his cause.

Diana sees only one way out of this ratings disaster: kill Beale; on air; during his show. And so it is done.

Network also shows us the audience becoming actor, player, participant. The audience is jumping out of its skin to be recognized, courted, adored as a mighty rolling force embodying no particular meaning.

Audience wants to be a star. Audience wants coverage. Audience wants its actions to be shown on television. That establishes its legitimacy. Nothing else is necessary.

Diana knows it, and she is more than willing to accommodate this frantic desire, if only her bosses will let her go all the way. She sees the journey from anonymity to fame can be achieved in a matter of minutes. She can arrange it.

The parallels between Network and the current state of mass/electronic media are numerous. Most importantly, the governments of “advanced” countries realize they can cement their control by dealing with their populations as groups.

Groups who are government-dependent, groups who demand special treatment, groups who insist on being heard, groups who want in on the action as players.

In this sense, governments are media companies. They give coverage. They give access. They grant popularity. They do this with full knowledge that they are staging charades. Authentic power will never be on the table—only the appearance, not the real thing.

This is how mass-media operate. They give fluff and sugar, which soon melt and vanish. It’s a magic trick.

Layers and layers of promise and distraction. Here one minute, gone the next.

The people, momentarily assuaged and victorious, are left holding the bag.

On to the next story, next show, next audience-rating report.

Hooray for Hollywood.

“Poetry and the arts can’t exist in America. Mere exposure to the arts does nothing for a mentality which is incorrigibly dialectical… The young today cannot follow narrative but they are alert to drama. They cannot bear description but they love landscape and action… Ads represent the main channel of intellectual and artistic effort in the modern world… After childhood, the senses specialize via the channels of dominant technologies and social weaponries.” (Marshall McLuhan)

Modern media are not only the landscape, they are shaping how reality is perceived. Generations of people are now prepared to believe that all events lead to new chapters of a drama without any conceptual reference whatsoever.

This is why people are more and more determined to get their news from video rather than the written word. They feel they are watching a show. The show will continue. There is no need to stop and consider what the show means.

The show will “explain” itself eventually, as any story does. This is the new meaning of the term “dialectical”: a process by which the story adds detail and more detail and arrives at a payoff.

Viewing the payoff frees the audience from having to remember the whole story. The story is just another experience, heightened by the fact that tensions and conflicts are portrayed and then somehow “resolved.”

Having that experience is also the new meaning of “knowledge.”

“I watch, I absorb, I digest; therefore, I know.”

This is the century of osmosis.

Osmosis is an exchange between programmed entities. In this case, we are talking about an exchange/embrace between the human mind and invented external reality—and that is the starting point of the Matrix.

Jon Rappoport

Media mind-control: case study: Arnold Schwarzenegger

Jun2

The television Matrix

by Jon Rappoport

June 2, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“Break down an event into fine enough particles, and you begin to see new things. You see the event is staged, of course, but you also find new key players, and they’re sometimes the ones you least expect to have an influence. When I say ‘influence’, I mean mind control, projected out like a great wave, rumbling over the populace, taking them to media heaven.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

This article is an example of what you can do when you watch a single television broadcast over and over, a dozen times, and analyze the effects blow by blow.

Over the years, I’ve written a great deal about media manipulation and television mind-control. (For example, see here and here.)

I thought I’d go back in my files and reprint my piece on a specific and egregious case of media brainwashing:

The Arnold Schwarzenegger announcement of his campaign for the governorship of California. That announcement took place (8/6/03) on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

I had watched the episode live, and I knew it was a piece of sheer propaganda, but I had no idea how cleverly integrated it was, until I obtained a tape of the broadcast from NBC and viewed it many times, stopping and starting, copying the dialogue word for word, and analyzing Leno’s key role and the role of his extraordinary studio audience.

First of all, the show had been hyped in advance, to the hilt, as the moment when Arnold would announce whether he was going to run in the recall election against California Governor Gray Davis.

Public anticipation was sky-high. No one seemed concerned that NBC was turning over its news division, for one night, to its entertainment division.

This was precisely the subject of the best movie ever made about television, Paddy Chayefsky’s Network. That fact didn’t register with the national media, either.

Of vital importance: If Arnold decided to run, he wouldn’t be announcing it during some second-rate press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, after a brief introduction from the always-boring LA Mayor Richard Riordan. No, Arnold would obtain a rocket boost from Jay Leno.

Keep in mind that talk shows warm up and prep their audiences to act and respond with amphetamine-like enthusiasm. And then, during the show itself, that audience transmits its glow and howling racket to the wider television audience, thereby exploding an artificially enhanced event across the landscape.

On the night of August 6, 2003, Tonight Show host Jay Leno devoted two six-minute segments to an interview with The Arnold.

Of course, it was more than an interview. Jay had been touting this night as the occasion for a key revelation in the comic play called the California Recall.

Arnold would say yes or Arnold would say no. He would run for the governorship or he would decline.

Bigger than conventional news, Arnold strode out on to Jay’s stage. A Tonight Show camera picked him up from a grossly complimentary low angle, making him appear even larger and more physically imposing than he was. Jay was positioned standing behind him, applauding, lending an affirmative gloss to the entrance. Already, it looked and felt political.

This was not a beginning; the impression was of something already in motion, a train to catch up with.

As the man of the hour sat down next to Jay, he commented that there was a big audience in the house (“Can you believe all these people here?”) and, capping his first gambit, he stated that every one of them was running for governor of California. (The recall ballot was bulging with candidates.) Audience laughter.

Quickly, Jay gets down to business. The business of making the evening extra-special: “Now, I don’t think we’ve ever had this much press at The Tonight Show for any—[let’s see] our press room—normally [the press] sit in the audience.”

Cut to a stark room, shot from above. About 40 reporters doing almost nothing at tables. Obviously, the room was set up for this event. It had never been done before on the show.

Jay cracks a couple of jokes about the press gaggle, lowers his voice and turns his full attention to Arnold: “…it’s been weeks…and people going back and forth…taken you awhile, and you said you would come here tonight and tell us your decision. So what is your decision?”

Arnold replies, “Well, Jay, after thinking for a long time, my decision is…”

Very brief pause, the sound cuts out, and then, pre-planned, the TV screen displays, in black and white, the old PLEASE STAND BY notice. Thick white letters against a background of an ancient station test pattern from the 1950s. There is an accompanying tone that plays for several seconds.

The audience laughs. There is applause, too.

Cut back to Jay and Arnold. Arnold says, “That’s why I decided that way.” Big audience laughter.

Jay shouts, “Right, good, right! I tell you I am shocked! I can’t believe it! I can’t believe it!” More laughter.

Jay then starts out from the bottom again. “[Whether you’re going to run has been] in my monologue…it’s been good for, like, a thousand jokes over the last couple of weeks…”

Once more, Jay gently poses the question. “What are you going to do?” It’s still too early for an answer, and everybody knows it.

Arnold wants another false start. He’s planned it.

“Well, my decision obviously is a very difficult decision to make, you know…it was the [most] difficult decision that I’ve made in my entire life, except the one in 1978 when I decided to get a bikini wax.”

Laughter, applause, whistles.

This may have been the most important few seconds of the interview. The studio audience warms to the fact that Arnold glimpses an absurdity about the whole proceeding.

“He’s our Arnie, laughing the way we laugh. Hell, all we’ve got are laughs in this life, and our boy isn’t going to go stuffed shirt on us.”

An absolutely important confirmation.

Arnold then gives his rehearsed political speech. He reflects that California was a grand land of opportunity when he arrived in 1968. It was the greatest state in the greatest nation.

However, now the atmosphere in California is “disastrous,” he says. There is a “disconnect” (thank you, pop psych 101) between the people and the politicians.

“The politicians are fiddling, fumbling, and failing.” Very big applause for Arnold, “a man of the people.” The audience is doing its job.

Close by, off camera, we hear Jay thumping his own personal hand claps. The host is pumping and egging on his studio crowd with glee, and giving his seal of approval to a remark whose veracity is supposed to be tested by the recall election itself.

It’s clear there is a phalanx of teen-age girls screaming at a very high pitch in the studio. They’re adding a major element of hysterical enthusiasm. Where did they come from? Are they a legitimate Arnold demographic? Were they pulled out of a mall to paper the crowd? Do they migrate from talk show to talk show? From this point forward, they will play a huge role in every audience outburst.

Arnold gathers steam. He tells one and all that the people of California are doing their job.

They’re working hard.

Paying their taxes.

Raising their families.

But the politicians are not doing their job.

Now he executes a decent blend around the far turn: “And the man that is failing the people more than anyone is [Governor] Gray Davis!”
The crowd goes wild. The girls scream at this political denunciation as if they’re at a kiddie rock concert in the magic presence of four sixteen-year-old pretty boys. It’s eerie.

And now the audience is suddenly on an edge.

They can handle the juice.

Arnold senses it.

He lets the audience-hysteria roller coaster die down and then, taking it up to heaven, announces that, yes, he, Arnold is GOING TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA.

Boom. Bang. Pow. Zow.

The studio audience cracks the ceiling. Wilder than wild. The girls are shrieking clouds of sound way above high C. Undoubtedly, the show is flashing applause signs.

Jay shakes his head and grins like a pro hypster who’s just witnessed a very, very good variation on bait and switch. As if Arnold was supposed to say no, but now he’s saying yes. (Yet Jay knew if Arnold declined to run, the whole show would have been a dud.)

The Tonight Show band lays down some heavy chords.

Jay shouts, “There you go! There you go! That woke ‘em up! That woke ‘em up!” We cut to the press room, and sure enough, the reporters are now on phones, typing at their keyboards. The story is live and good to go. A global event is underway.

Amid the roar and the music, Jay, smiling broadly and wisely, shakes his finger at Arnold and says to him, “You know something?”

It seems Jay’s about to utter, “That’s the best damn switcheroo I ever saw!” But he doesn’t do it. Instead, as the noise abates, he says it’s a good time to go to a break.

The band plows into a funk riff, under the applause, and the show cuts to commercial.

The sea has parted. The consecration has been performed.

The ax felled the tree in the forest, and everyone heard it.

Marshall McLuhan rolled over in his grave, sat up, grinned, lit a cigar, and sipped a little brandy.

In the next six-minute segment, Jay and Arnold attain a few more highs of audience madness.

High one: Arnold mentions that 1.6 million Californians have signed the recall petition and are saying, “We are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore!” Wowee.

No one notices or remembers this line was made massively famous in Network, a bitter satire on news as entertainment.

Is it remotely possible that Arnold recalls the 1976 Paddy Chayefsky film and its wacked-out news anchor, Howard Beale, who survives a ratings dive and firing by delivering a delirious populist message on air and becomes, for a short time, the most revered man in America?

Is it possible Arnold knows the TV network portrayed in the film gives its news division to its entertainment division—precisely what’s transpiring right there, for the moment, on The Tonight Show?

High two: Arnold clarifies his message to all politicians everywhere. “Do your job for the people and do it well, or otherwise you’re out. Hasta la vista, baby!” Zowee.

High three: After reminding the crowd that they all know Gray Davis can run a dirty campaign “better than anyone”—and that Davis has been selling off pieces of California to special interests—Arnold says with conviction and confidence, “I do not have to bow to any special interests; I have plenty of money; no one can pay me off; trust me, no one.” Audience hysteria. They love that he’s rich.

High four: Arnold says of Davis, “Everyone knows this man has to go!” Zow. Huge roar.

High five: Arnold plays a final joke card. “I will pump up Sacramento!” Yet another roar.

The band takes it out with more funk. Jay stands up and goes over and hugs Arnold, in profile, near his desk, and follows him closely toward an exit at stage left. Jay starts to whisper something in Arnold’s ear, but pulls back and smiles and, still on camera, applauds Arnold along with the audience.

It’s show biz in a bottle. Jay, Arnold, the crowd, the band, bouncing off one another and yielding the effect of absolute (synthetic) thrill.

Beyond the fact that Arnold made a political speech on The Tonight Show and announced his candidacy and cuttingly attacked his major opponent, there were the semi-subliminal aspects. The Tonight Show had created its own enormous esteem over decades—and then, out of nowhere, it provided the background for an actor to decide—as if on the spot—to run for office in the same state where the show originates. In the entertainment capital of the world. In front of the clear prime-cut admiration of the host.

And the studio audience, that specialized creature from whose maw instant credibility can be coaxed and birthed in seconds—the audience was very, very ready to go. All along.

The audience is not an isolated force. It distributes waves of simulated feeling to its initiated in-the-fold television viewers, in their apartments and homes and huts at all points of the globe. These waves also flow to every media outlet from Nome to Tierra del Fuego to Cape Town to Hong Kong.

Every nuance of expression on Arnold’s face, on Jay’s face, was registered and absorbed above the feverish in-house cheers and screams and shrieks.

This means something. Something huge.

“I know a guy who can introduce your message to the softest, wildest, water-cooler crowd this side of paradise.”

“Oh yeah? How many people?”

“Only a thousand or two. But they are instantly hooked up to, say, ten million people in the target area. It’s as infectious as Ebola.”

“Come on.”

“And that’s not all. I’ve got a host for that softest, wildest audience, and he has the whole world in the palm of his hand. When he exposes your message—for the first time anywhere—and when his audience goes nuts with glee, nothing will stand in your way. Your opponents will go down like bowling pins.”

“Too good to be true.”

“I know. And let me point out what I’m saving you from. If you tried to launch your campaign kickoff at a shopping center or a press club or a hotel ballroom or construction site or a movie-studio sound stage, you could get laughed right out of town. Really. Because, let’s face it, you do have a pretty vapid message when you boil it down. You need a unique venue, where the joke and the camp and the craziness are all folded into the event itself, and the shock and surprise and hoopla are integrated as well. You need an audience that celebrates bad and good jokes as all good, and the host has the ability to marry up every shred of this bizarre happening and take his crowd to orgasm.”

“And the contagion factor?”

“The audience in the television studio and the viewing audience at home are One. What stuns and delights the former incorporates itself into the living cells of the latter. Right now. The home audience is terrified of being left out of the party. They’ll go along. The host and his in-studio crowd give instant universal legitimacy to the moment. Believe me, it’s irresistible.”

“Like that McLuhan thing. The audience becomes the actor.”

“Precisely.”

That is how it happened. That is how Arnold S obtained his billion-dollar ad on Jay Leno, on August 6, 2003, and that was when he won the recall election. There was no counter-strategy for it.

Gray Davis was left with his putz in his hand.

Arnold’s announcement of his candidacy was the end of the election.

In the aftermath, media pundits did not critique this piece of mind control with any serious heat; nor did they immediately seek a heavy investigation of the ethics of NBC in allowing the Leno-Arnold event to take place.

It’s amusing that another NBC heavy hitter, Rob Lowe, left the liberal West Wing series and joined the Arnold campaign to add a little more sparkle to it.

The overwhelming media play that slammed into gear the day following the Leno-Arnold moment formed a synapse-welding juggernaut. It was, of course, all based on where Arnold made his announcement to run.

The Tonight Show was a perfect killing ground: Arnold, the earnest and powerful and Germanically jolly and occasionally self-deprecating soul, aware of the comic-book component of his success; Jay, the jokester, who can work as a homer and straight man at the drop of a hat; and Jay’s audience, willingly propelled into the late-night nexus of “we’ll laugh so hard at any old damn thing we’ll make a cosmic celebration out of it.”

Something out of nothing.

GE owned NBC at the time. GE: “We bring good things to life.”

On August 6, 2003, Reality was passed, hand to hand, mind to mind, adrenal gland to adrenal gland, from a concocted, groomed, cultivated, prepackaged television audience to California and the planet.

When private citizens show up in the studio to see Leno (or any late-night host) in person, they soon get the message. They are not just there as happy onlookers. They are drawn into the process. They are offered a trade-off.

If they become active shills for the show right there in the studio, they will become part of the story. They will attain a new status. Their laughs and squeals and shrieks and rebound guffaws, their revved-up salvational applause at those moments when a guest segment is falling flat—the audience is providing key segues and fillers and affirmations and speed candy for the larger audience at home. It’s a group collaboration.

And it’s overtly political when a fading movie action hero suddenly says he’s going to take over the reins of California.

Then it becomes a whole different twelve minutes. Then the studio-audience overreach of wild hysteria and laughter and clapping hands and standing O’s and the quality of the emotion are Everything.

The movie hero, Arnold S, is suddenly carrying an immense amount of good will to the moon.

He is outlined and underlined and haloed in what they used to call pure jive, but this jive is now viewed by millions of at-home viewers as the real thing. Because on television, very little is the real thing and you have to accept all substitutes. Otherwise, you are doomed and exiled to the dark realms where you will question the authenticity of what everyone else is buying.

Much better to invent an exuberance and roar from the belly and help this Arnold dude go for his coronation. Much better to experience a synthetic facsimile of emotional torque and bust a move that will shower sparks around his head and push him through a porthole into an ozone that just might be the closest thing you’ll ever find to immortality.

The signs are on in the TV studio, the final directions are being given, the musicians are ready, the applause fluffers are gesturing at the audience, the go-signal is given.

The audience has a hero, they know his name, they know what to do. What else do they need?

That’s television.

That’s a slice of programming for America.

The audience; kings and queens in a cartoon matrix. They enable reality to become a cartoon. And therefore, victory is achieved.

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.

Canada: scientists’ right to free speech shut down

May21

Canada: scientists’ right to free speech shut down

Canada catching up to USA re suppression of science

by Jon Rappoport

May 21, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

(To sign up for the FREE NoMoreFakeNews newsletter, click here.)

“’Government science’ has become an oxymoron. A better label would be Manufactured Reality. Does a mega-corporation need the seal of approval for its toxic crimes? There is a government agency on tap to provide it. Need fake science? You’ve got it. Need to pay a fine instead of going to prison? No problem. Whole worlds will be invented to cover up a few devastating facts.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Free speech for government scientists in Canada? The ability to issue warnings about public health and safety to the press and public?

Not anymore.

No. The scientists work for federal agencies, and only the designated spokespeople for those agencies can make public statements.

I’ll have some comments about my own experiences in this area, but first…

Here are shocking quotes about a Canadian survey of federal scientists — “Most Federal Scientists Feel They Can’t Speak Out, Even If Public Health and Safety at Risk, Says New Survey.”

The survey was carried out by a group called PIPSC, which states:

“A major survey of federal government scientists commissioned by the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) has found that 90% feel they are not allowed to speak freely to the media about the work they do and that, faced with a departmental decision that could harm public health, safety or the environment, nearly as many (86%) would face censure or retaliation for doing so [for speaking out].”

“The survey, the findings of which are included in a new report titled The Big Chill, is the first extensive effort to gauge the scale and impact of ‘muzzling’ and political interference among federal scientists since the Harper government introduced communications policies requiring them to seek approval before being interviewed by journalists.”

“In particular, the survey also found that nearly one-quarter (24%) of respondents [federal scientists] had been directly asked to exclude or alter information for non-scientific reasons and that over one-third (37%) had been prevented in the past five years from responding to questions from the public and media.”

“According to the survey, nearly half (48%) are aware of actual cases in which their department or agency suppressed [scientific] information, leading to incomplete, inaccurate, or misleading impressions by the public, industry and/or other government officials.”

What sorts of issues are off-limits for Canadian federal scientists? It’s not hard to figure that out: pesticide toxicity; pollution dangers; dangerous medical drugs. You know, areas where the profits of big industry would be threatened.

This destruction of free speech cuts close to home for me, because once upon a time I had considerable access to government (and university) scientists in the US.

In 1987-8, I was writing my first book, “AIDS Inc.: Scandal of the Century.” My first order of business was fleshing out the official scenario about AIDS; what caused the syndrome, and what was being done to treat it.

I had press accounts, of course, but I wanted explanations from the horse’s mouth.

Later on, after I was convinced the official scenario was built on egregious scientific fraud, I wanted to have conversations with the scientists who were either party to the fraud or were irrationally going along with it.

During a six-month period, I was able to speak with several researchers at the US National Institutes of Health, the center of AIDS research.

It was easy. I contacted a press person by phone, said I was writing a book about AIDS, and I was transferred to the office of the researcher I was looking for. The scientist and I spoke, sometimes at length.

Keep in mind that I had no press credential. I was writing the book for a very small start-up publisher. Up to that time, I had worked as a freelance reporter (for five years), writing pieces for papers and magazines in the US and Europe.

During this six-month period, I was also able to speak with an employee at the FDA, who turned around and sent me a crucial piece of information proving the vast unreliability of HIV blood tests.

I spoke with a key researcher at Harvard, who explained that the green-monkey hypothesis of HIV transmission, touted in the press, was overblown.

I spoke a number of times to a press person at the CDC. Depending on my question, he would either pass me along to a CDC researcher or dig up the answer himself and call me back. It became obvious to him, after a time, that I was in the process of debunking the whole notion that HIV caused AIDS. Yet, he continued to talk to me and get answers to my queries.

I had a number of fruitful conversations with Dr. Harvey Bialy, the scientific editor at the journal, Nature/Biotechnology. Harvey didn’t accept the HIV causation model of AIDS, and we clarified many points.

Even when fear was in the air, I was able to obtain statements off the record from scientists. For example, a highly respected virologist at UCLA told me that “many of us know the HIV-causation model of AIDS is riddled with holes, but we’re going to let this one pass. It’s dangerous to speak out…”

I was not alone in my ability to gain access to government/university scientists and editors of journals. Chuck Ortleb, who was publishing a small NY paper, New York Native, spoke with Robert Gallo and directly challenged Gallo on his purported discovery that HIV caused AIDS.

John Lauritsen, an independent reporter, managed to attend several professional AIDS conferences, where he confirmed that the government’s approval of toxic AZT to treat AIDS was based on a fraudulent clinical trial.

How things have changed.

These days, if you’re lucky enough to get through to a knowledgeable press person at a federal agency, you’re fed pap, or stonewalled, or referred to some online source of official information.

No federal scientist would risk his career speaking out of school to a freelance reporter who has a dissenting point of view.

It’s the big chill, the shutdown, the close-out. No comment. We have nothing to say. Look for an official release from our department on this issue. Consult our guidelines. We’ll try to get back to you.

To say official science has become politicized is a vast understatement. Science is politics, when it needs to be, and it needs to be much of the time.

The crimes that chemical/pharmaceutical/genetic-engineering/agriculture corporations defend, in their operations, in their methods, are often defended in the findings of government science.

It’s an embrace of mob brothers.

This is one reason why court cases against such corporations are shunned by many lawyers. The fix is in on the science, and that in itself creates a non-starter.

The government witnesses (researchers) can say, “Corporation X is doing no harm. Our studies show that actions ABCD and products EFGH are safe and pose no risk.”

Behind it all: “Well, Mr. CEO, on your behalf we’ve proved the moon is composed of green cheese, there are mosquitoes on Mars, and Roundup makes a delicious salad dressing. Anything else you need? We, the government, are here to serve you and strengthen our national economy.”

If this makes you wonder about the trustworthiness of government science agencies, when it comes to issues such as vaccine safety or GMO-food safety, it should.

Take the case of whistleblower William Thompson. A long-time vaccine researcher at the CDC, Thompson admitted, last August, in a written statement published at his attorney Rick Morgan’s website, that he and his co-authors violated the protocol on an MMR vaccine/autism study in 2004, cooked the data, and thereby concluded the vaccine had no link to autism.

Since that time, Thompson, who still works for the CDC, has refused to talk to the press. Speculation arose that there might be a Congressional hearing where he would testify.

But nothing has happened.

Why the need for a hearing? Why hasn’t the DOJ/FBI simply corralled Thompson and interviewed him extensively? He claims to have evidence of a serious federal crime.

The answer is obvious. CDC science is based on the predetermined premise that vaccines are safe and effective. In other words, it’s not science.

There are vaccine manufacturers to protect. The CDC itself purchases billions of dollars of vaccines.

When storm clouds gather, federal agencies circle the wagons, hunker down, and wait out the threat.

Whistleblower Thompson spoke out of turn. He has been superseded by his agency bosses, who claim there is no problem.

In general, the ladder of power climbs from researcher, to researcher’s government agency, to the corporations that agency is safeguarding.

The dream team.

If you like nightmares.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Press Fraud

CDC vaccine whistleblower: the silence that kills

Media Matrix: an ancient Tibetan perspective on the evening network news

Facebook becomes Godzilla news outlet for disinformation

Apple mind-control news is on the way

Charleston church shooting: the larger covert op

The Truman Show, Facebook, The Social Network: life under a dome

Network: Howard Beale, the last sane man in the world

Network: the last great film about media

Media mind-control: case study: Arnold Schwarzenegger

Canada: scientists’ right to free speech shut down