What law says the text of the TPP must remain secret?

What law says the text of the TPP must remain secret?

To the US Congress: reveal the contents of the TPP now

by Jon Rappoport

May 15, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

It seems like a case of mass hypnosis. People claiming they can’t say what’s in the TPP trade agreement. And mainstream media accept this premise.

“That’s right. Congress must stay silent.”

Pop quiz: who says the text of the TPP must remain secret?

Under what authority?

Members of Congress are scuttling around like weasels, claiming they can’t disclose what’s in this far-reaching, 12-nation trade treaty.

They can go into a sealed room and read a draft, but they can’t copy pages, and they can’t tell the public what they just read.

Why not?

If there is a US law forbidding disclosure, name the law.

Can you recall anything in the Constitution that establishes secret treaties?

Is there a prior treaty that states the text of all treaties can be hidden from the people?

I see no authority anywhere that justifies withholding the text of the TPP.

Government legislators in the other 11 nations: why can’t you reveal what’s in the TPP?

Mass silence around the world. “Sorry, we can’t say what’s in the treaty. We’ll vote on it, but you the people have no input. You have to take what we do on faith.”

Who says so? By what authority?

If a US Senator held a press conference today and explained everything he read in that sealed room about the TPP, what exactly would happen to him? Would he be arrested?

Would he be charged with a federal crime?

What crime?

If he used his cell phone to take pictures of pages of the TPP, and came out of the room and sent the pictures to 500 press outlets, what would happen?

Would the DOJ roll a few tanks up to his house and put him in cuffs? Would he be placed on trial?

If so, on what charge?

Would the trial itself be secret?

Or would everyone suddenly look at each other and say, “We never realized it before, but the emperor has no clothes!”

What would happen if a Senator went into the sealed room, picked up the whole TPP text or the laptop on which it’s stored, bulled his way out of the room, passed the text to his security staff, and had them forward every page to a few hundred media outlets around the world?

Would DHS agents shoot these people in broad daylight, just to protect the interests of David Rockefeller and his Globalist heavy hitters?

Why haven’t the New York Times, the Washington Post, CBS, NBC, ABC, the BBC and other outlets run major stories that detail under what precise authority the TPP text is being kept secret?

What are we missing here?


power outside the matrix


Is it simply that a bunch of national leaders and corporate big shots and trade representatives nodded and said: “Keep the text a secret”?

Did they arbitrarily give the TPP negotiating process a name, a label, with the word “authority” in it?

I just met with myself and decided to establish The Naked TPP Authority. I gave it primacy over all other negotiating bodies, and by its declaration, the full text of the TPP must be published for the whole world to see, for two years, before any further votes take place.

There. It’s done.

I fully believe my Naked Authority carries more Constitutional justification than the current scheme, which is clearly criminal.

US Congressman: “I’m sorry, my lips are sealed, I’m bound, I can’t reveal what’s in the treaty that will adversely affect the lives of hundreds of millions of people.”

“Wrong. You’re lying. You can reveal secret text. In fact, it’s your duty. Otherwise, you’re guilty of cooperating in a RICO criminal conspiracy. Now, let’s start at the beginning. Who told you that you had to remain silent? What US law did they cite? Take your time. We’ll stay here as long as it takes.”

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the US Constitution states: “[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…”

Nothing there about secret treaties. Nothing there about the President having the discretion to keep the text of treaties secret.

Of course, a President could argue that treaties, if exposed to the light of day prior to a Senate vote, would face so much criticism and cross-talk that they would never pass.

But that’s a practical issue and problem. It’s called “free speech.” It’s also sometimes called “dissent.”

Jon Rappoport

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

The medical cartel: too big to fail, too evil to expose

The medical cartel: too big to fail, too evil to expose

by Jon Rappoport

April 19, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

There are several reasons why the medical cartel is too big to fail: the enormous amount of money at stake; its aim to control populations.

In this article, I want to examine a related reason.

Suppose it was discovered that thousands of bridges around the US were in imminent danger of collapsing? Not because maintenance and repair were lacking, not because the materials used to build them were cheap and shoddy. But because the original designs were inadequate and broke basic rules of engineering.

Suppose five or six major manufacturers built their automobiles so the vast majority of power derived from the engines was transferred to one wheel?

Suppose the US Dept. of Agriculture recommended that all farmers spray their crops with heavy chlorine instead of water?

In other words, the science itself is fraudulent.

This revelation, above all, is what the medical cartel tries to guard against. Their profession has shoved in all its chips on the propaganda proposition that it does impeccable science.

Science sells. The appearance of it sells. It’s the foundation stone of many industries.

Were that stone to crack and shatter, all bets would be off. A titanic fraud would come to light. The kind of fraud that would both freeze people’s minds and blow them away.

Science is the most powerful rationalization in the modern world. Consensus reality would fail and disperse without it.

As I’ve covered before, the most conservative mainstream estimate of medically caused death in America is 225,000 people per year. Every credential behind that figure is immaculate.

The author of the paper that presented the statistics was the late Dr. Barbara Starfield, a revered public health expert who worked for many years at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

Her review, “Is US health the best in the world?”, was published on July 26th, 2000, in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Starfield’s breakdown was as follows: the medical system kills 119,000 people a year in the US as a result of maltreatment in hospitals. The other 106,000 people are killed by FDA-approved medicines.

The FDA must approve every drug as safe and effective before it is released for public use.


It’s the medicines I want to focus on in this article. 106,000 deaths a year translates to an astonishing 1,060,000 deaths per decade.

How are these drugs approved?

Clinical trials are conducted. Reports of those trials are written. The reports, the studies, are published in peer-reviewed medical journals. The studies ARE the science.

If a million people per decade are being killed by the drugs, then a huge number of published studies proclaiming the drugs are safe are sheer fraud. There is no other way to put it.

This statement from Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, echoes the fact:

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

(Marcia Angell, MD, The New York Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption”)

The medical cartel rests on cataclysmic fraud, scientific fraud.

Imagine what would happen if just one major media outlet decided to take on this story and push it for all it’s worth. Not merely an article or two—an ongoing campaign of relentless exposure.

The silence from that quarter speaks volumes about the controlled press and what it stands for.

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

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

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

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

The FDA website page is available under the heading, “Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions.” You can search for it using the Startpage.com search engine.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The FDA website page also states there are 2 million serious adverse reactions (ADRs) from the ingestion of medical drugs, annually, in the US. That would be 20 million ADRs per decade.

When the FDA says “serious,” they aren’t talking about headaches or slight dizziness or temporary nausea. “Serious” means stroke, heart attack, neurological damage; destruction of that magnitude.

Examining these figures for death and debilitation, can you find any comparable documented crime in the American landscape? This is the kind of story that would make Watergate look like a Sunday-school picnic.

If a paper like the New York Times let loose their hounds to relentlessly explore the horror, I assure you that, in time, doctors and medical bureaucrats and even drug-company employees would come out of the woodwork with confessions, and the resultant explosions and outcries would shake the medical/pharmaceutical foundations of America and the planet.

It would shake and destroy the SCIENCE.

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

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

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

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

It is time for the public to realize that 100,000 people dying every year in the US, because they take medical drugs, is the equivalent of 33 airliner crashes into the Twin Towers, every year, year after year.

If you were a medical reporter for a major media outlet in the US, and you knew the above fact, wouldn’t you make it a priority to say something, write something, do something?

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


The Matrix Revealed


And with that, let’s get to another smoking gun. The citation is: BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989), Anticoagulants cause the most serious adverse events, finds US analysis. Author, Jeanne Lenzer.

Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices:

“It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

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

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

Therefore, to say the FDA isn’t aware of this finding would be absurd. The FDA knows.


Since the Department of Homeland Security is working its way into every nook and corner of American life, hyper-extending its mandate to protect all of us from everything, maybe DHS should stop tracking every move we make and simply raid and arrest all employees of the FDA as terrorists. The details could be sorted out later.

How many smoking guns do we need before a sitting president shuts down the FDA buildings, fumigates them, and builds a monument to dead Americans the FDA has driven into their graves?

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

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

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

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUDGdK29SIE&w=560&h=315]

BTW, who are the video editing specialists that DHS hired to ‘sex up’ this video?


But you see, the routine deaths of 100,000 Americans a year, after the FDA has certified the drugs are SAFE, isn’t a “recognized political issue.”

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

The buck stops at the FDA.


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

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

The power of the medical cartel is gigantic.

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

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

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

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

Various liars sell their lies through various strategies.

I assure you, there are doctors out there who know the statistics on medically caused death in the US. They know about the drugs that kill. They know what’s going on. They know the FDA is accountable. They remain silent. They feel no pressure to make a public statement. They’re living under the umbrella of protection provided by the government and the press and the medical system.

These doctors are silent witnesses to ongoing mass murder. Just as the FDA is a silent witness to its own mass-murdering practices. And of course, the doctors write the prescriptions for the drugs.

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

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


power outside the matrix


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

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

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

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

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

People want to believe in SCIENCE.


In a stunning 2012 interview with Truthout’s Martha Rosenberg, former FDA drug reviewer, Ronald Cavanagh, exposed the FDA as a relentless criminal mafia protecting its client, Big Pharma, with a host of mob strategies.

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

“I was threatened with prison.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As I mentioned above, the original study-review on medically caused death in America was written by Dr. Barbara Starfield and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Three years ago, shortly before her death, I interviewed Dr. Starfield. I asked her whether any government agency had ever contacted her about her findings, in the nine years since publication

“No,” she said.

I asked her whether she was aware of any federal agency undertaking action to remedy the horrific killing effects of the US medical system.

“No,” she said.

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

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

But of course, the people at the FDA are just like us. They wouldn’t do THAT, they wouldn’t do THAT, they wouldn’t do that…

But they did. They do. They continue to do it.

Jon Rappoport

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

75 plane crashes into Twin Towers every year

by Jon Rappoport

April 19, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

3000 people killed on September 11, 2001.

What would happen if there were 75 attacks of that magnitude every year? Not just one year, every year.

Roughly one attack every five days.

Mad uncontrollable chaos. That’s what would happen.

Military dictatorship right out in the open; absolute and official gutting of the Bill of Rights; mass arrests and disappearances on the slightest of pretexts, huge riots, global war…

And still, the attacks would continue to take place. No measure, no amount of force would stop them.

The news would cover nothing else. Every day, all day, television and print news would yell, shout, scream, wail.

Well, consider these figures, which I have published many times—

Author, Dr. Barbara Starfield, John Hopkins School of Public Health, Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”:

Every year, in the US, the medical system kills 225,000 people. 106,000 die as a direct result of ingesting medical drugs. 119,000 die as a result of mistreatment and medical errors in hospitals.

Do the math.

225,000 deaths a year caused by the US medical system. Imagine 75 September 11th attacks, each with a death toll of 3000, and you have 225,000 annual deaths.

Here’s another citation.Author, Jeanne Lenzer. British Medical Journal, June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989), Anticoagulants cause the most serious adverse events, finds US analysis.

Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices:

“It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

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


The Matrix Revealed


I’m fully aware that independent analyses have pegged the death toll racked up by the US medical system at far higher levels. But I’m using mainstream sources and citations, to show that, even within the hallowed halls of the medical complex, the knowledge of medically caused death is widespread.

In the US, we have the equivalent of 75 September 11th attacks every year, and the ongoing response of the mainstream press is:

Nothing.

Silence.

That takes a stunning degree of control, in order to suppress the truth. Stunning.

It takes an extraordinary degree of collaboration, to keep this information from the people.

This would be like concealing the fact that the US has been fighting a war in Europe for the past 15 years, and 225,000 US soldiers have died each and every year.

And this is the medical system that purports to tell Americans everything they need to know about drugs and vaccines and disease-diagnosis… the authoritarian system that knows what’s best for Americans.

This is a federal government that is doing nothing to change the medical system it backs and funds.

You know, the federal government that really cares about you.

Jon Rappoport

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

Why I keep writing about Monsanto vs. Maui

Why I keep writing about Maui vs. Monsanto

Tearing away the curtain

by Jon Rappoport

April 16, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

First, an important development in the case I’ve just become aware of. There has been virtually no discovery process.

Meaning: The people of Maui want to know specific details of Monsanto’s years of experiments with unapproved pesticides and GMOs in their county. They want records, files, internal communications; the whole nine yards.

They’re getting nothing.

Monsanto’s history of unbridled human experimentation is still obscured in a cloud of mystery. And danger.

And this is five months after the people of Maui voted in favor of putting a temporary ban on all such experimentation.

That vote has been suspended in a void, while Monsanto and its allies have been suing Maui.

I keep writing about this case because, for one, the people of Maui voted for something far stronger than labeling GMOs. They voted to ban Monsanto’s experiments, until a complete independent investigation could be done that would unearth the range of those ongoing pesticide/GMO experiments, thus assessing the danger and the harm.

The vote last Election Day was a victory. It wasn’t an “almost.” It wasn’t “we’re getting there and we’ll do better the next time,” it was: We Won.

And because Monsanto sued immediately and hung up the case in federal court, the result of the legitimate vote was not implemented.


I keep writing about Maui vs. Monsanto because the people of Maui are acutely aware they’re the targets of Monsanto experiments, and they did something about it, against all odds.

I keep writing about the case because Maui County, the Big Island, and Kauai are very important Monsanto research centers, and a blow against those centers is a blow against the whole GMO empire.

I write about this case because the old tradition in Hawaii is respect and love for the land. In a half-sane world, that land would never have been taken by force, in the first place, from the native people who made it their home.

A monstrosity of a corporation, Monsanto, backed up by the US federal government, has seen fit to spray toxic chemicals and deploy experimental GMOs in Hawaii, for its own profit, with no benefits for anyone anywhere.

This is a case with enormous implications. It isn’t about labeling poisons and health hazards; it’s about banning them and opening up Monsanto’s secret records and finding out exactly what they’ve been doing.

Time is of the essence, because Monsanto is undoubtedly shredding and transferring its documents, just in case it loses this legal battle.

International pressure is necessary. International outrage is necessary.

The result of the Maui vote is on the record. That vote established new law. The vote has been denied—and the County Government of Maui has joined the case on the side of Monsanto, thus betraying its own people.

From a simple journalistic perspective, if this isn’t a “lead paragraph,” nothing is.

Sometimes, the future hangs by a thin thread. What will happen and what won’t happen depends on what people become aware of, and what they do about it.


Mainstream reporters, if they are paying any attention at all, cover the case as a puzzle of complexities stemming from arguments on both sides. They stand back and paint a thin veneer on the whole proceeding. They invoke their tradition of “well, we’ll see what happens next.”

Of course, striking a deep blow against Monsanto is forbidden because, after all, the world of biotech intersects with the world of media corporations.

In the Monsanto vs. Maui case, there is a great deal of gibberish about “jurisdiction.” Which government entity—county, state, federal—controls the regulations on agriculture.

The answer to that question is simple: jurisdiction is in the hands of the people on the ground who are harmed.

The other answer is: this is not a case about agriculture and farming at all. It’s about massive human experimentation with unapproved non-commercial GMOs and chemical pesticides. With no informed consent.

If you lived in a neighborhood where a giant corporation was spraying chemicals whose names you didn’t even know, you wouldn’t be delighted to let the experts diddle each other over the fine points.

You would want action. A ban. An independent and full investigation. A prosecution of crimes. If you could vote for all that, you would.

The people of Maui did.

That’s exactly what they did.

And they’ve been denied.

Simple enough?


power outside the matrix


Anyone with a nose for news understands that Monsanto is holding, in Hawaii, vast secret records on its experiments—records that, if released, in the open, could blow the doors off Monsanto’s global operations.

Some people still remember that, during the Vietnam War, Monsanto manufactured Agent Orange, a highly toxic substance (cancer, birth defects) that was sprayed all over Vietnam.

Agent Orange was a plant killer, an herbicide. So is Monsanto’s Roundup, which the World Health Organization has just declared a probable carcinogen. Roundup is the most popular herbicide in the world.

The unknown experimental chemicals Monsanto has been spraying on Hawaii for years are herbicides.

And the people of Maui are being sued because they voted to find out what those chemicals are?

That lawsuit is itself a crime; the court case, dragging on and on, is a crime; the two federal judges in the case, Barry Kurren and Susan Oki Mollway, are abetting a crime.

Where are the human rights organizations? Why aren’t they descending on the scene and holding press conferences and demanding justice?

Where are the groups who promote decentralization of political power away from the federal government and toward local communities? Here is a clear-cut illustration of local people winning a vote and winding up in federal court to defend themselves and their vote.

Where are the groups who defend victims of human experimentation?

Where are the groups who attack the monolithic power of the Corporate State?

Where are the websites who promote the right of people to control their own health?

Where are the so-called libertarians?

Where are the groups who ceaselessly investigate how big government hides its secrets? This is a case in which the federal government is backing the right of a giant favored corporation, Monsanto, to conceal all its data re chemical and genetic experimentation affecting a population.

Where are magazines once thought of as “dissident,” who could be sending reporters to Maui to dig into this case and come up with the grotesque details?

Where are the groups who relentlessly defend the rights of indigenous peoples all over the world—but ignore Hawaii?

Where are the thousands and thousands of environmental groups who attack anyone who dares to interrupt the life cycle of a fish or an insect?

Where are the vociferous critics of chemtrails, when there, in Hawaii, is a clear-cut, government-supported case of years and years of Monsanto spraying unapproved chemicals into the air, on the population?

Where are the GMO labelers, when in Maui County, the vote to put a temporary ban on GMO/pesticide experiments actually won?

And without the massive support of all these groups, what are the chances that one man or woman who works behind the fortress walls of Monsanto will leak the secret records of experimentation, chapter and verse, and let the world know what is going on?

I guarantee that such a man or woman, stepping out into the light of day with a trove of Monsanto documents, would face a storm the likes of which would make the pressure on Edward Snowden seem like a Sunday picnic.

That’s a fact to ponder.

It revels the priorities of the establishment, the status quo, the government, the State, the Globalists, the mega-corporate colossus, the Reality Manufacturing Company in their actual and correct sequence.

Jon Rappoport

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

Germanwings plane crash: major media cover-up

Germanwings plane crash: major media cover-up

by Jon Rappoport

April 1, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“When systemic fraud reaches a certain level where collapse of some basic institution is inevitable, the powers that be invent a different storyline. They tell an outright fairy tale and keep pushing it. They’ll even stage events that confirm the fairy tale. Anything to avoid the truth that would disintegrate the whole structure. For example: the structure called Psychiatry.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Airbus A 320 flight from Barcelona to Dusseldorf. Crashed in French Alps. All 150 aboard killed. Pilot Andreas Lubitz flew the plane into a mountain. Lubitz had seen a psychiatrist for depression.

Major media cover the story from several angles.

Should airline personnel have known one of its pilots was suffering from depression? Did they know? Did they cover it up, or ignore it?

These media outlets studiously ignore the elephant in the room: the drugs used to treat depression.

This blackout is intentional. Any decent reporter would look into the antidepressants, Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, etc., as the cause of the pilot crashing the plane.

Go to the site, SSRI Stories, for a huge list of suicides and murders connected to the drugs. Read the warning labels (listing, e.g., suicide) on the drugs. It’s all there.

Visit psychiatrist Peter Breggin’s site, breggin.com. Breggin blew the whistle on these drugs long ago. Read his classic, Toxic Psychiatry.

So where is the media coverage now, in the Germanwings case? It’s virtually nowhere.

The go-to media experts in the field of psychiatry are cover-up professionals. Drug Companies, of course, buy enormous numbers of TV ads.

But beyond these factors, exposure of the truth about antidepressants and their connection to suicides and murders would take down psychiatry itself. The whole profession would collapse.

The sleeping population would stir and sit up and take notice.

Governments would be forced to admit their overt support of psychiatry is based on fraud, from top to bottom.

That is what’s at stake here.


power outside the matrix


And if the major media lived up to their (mythical) role of investigators of truth, the Germanwings story would expand into every nook and cranny of psychiatry: fraudulent diagnoses of every so-called mental disorder, for which there are no physical diagnostic tests: no blood tests, no urine tests, no brain scans, no genetic assays.

Battalions of real reporters doing real probes, backed up by media giants, would force doctors and medical bureaucrats out of their closets, and confessions would pile up.

But this will never happen, because those media giants are committed to supporting the Establishment of which they are a member.

The entire system of psychiatry—fraudulent diagnoses, dangerous and toxic drugs—is a colossus sitting on an earthquake fault. A triggering event, however, is protected from happening by the very media who should be making it happen.

This is a circle of lies.

“Since I first began working as a medical expert in product liability cases way back in the early 1990s, I’ve spent innumerable hours culling the sealed data contained within the files of companies like GlaxoSmithKline and Eli Lilly. Among other things, I long ago found evidence that Paxil and Prozac cause suicidality in adults. These discoveries then led to settlements in product liability suits brought against the two companies brought by surviving family members.” —Dr. Peter Breggin

“I got involved in the Miller case. Matt Miller was a 13 year old boy who had just changed schools and was feeling nervous. His parents prompted by the teacher brought him to a doctor who put him on Zoloft. Seven days later he hung himself in the bathroom between his parent’s bedroom and his bedroom.” —David Healy, Professor of Psychiatry, Bangor university, UK

Any media outlet, aware of these two statements (and many other similar statements), who did not then dig much deeper into the recent Germanwings disaster, would be actively concealing vital truth.

In other words, they would be carrying on business as usual.

Jon Rappoport

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

Message to a new generation of true science/medical reporters

Message to a new generation of true science/medical reporters

by Jon Rappoport

March 31, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

After covering medical/science scandals and deep fraud for over 30 years, I have some words of advice for people just entering the field.

I’m talking about independent reporters who want to discover the truth, no matter where it leads.

Let’s start with this: know the difference between an experimental hypothesis and actual science.

An experimental hypothesis can be disguised as official science, but it is actually in a nascent stage. It has little or no evidence to back it up.

No matter how many government agencies, courts, media mouthpieces, and bureaucrats promote it as “settled,” it is unconfirmed.

Take psychiatry, for example. It is a pseudoscience parading with bells and whistles and loud music.

I’m not going to recapitulate the many articles I’ve written demonstrating the pseudo-basis of this “discipline.” To summarize:

None of the 300 or so official mental disorders has any physical diagnostic test to justify its existence.

The general proposition that all mental disorders stem from a chemical imbalance in the brain is unproven.

Committees of psychiatrists meet and decide which disorder-labels to apply to which groupings of behaviors. This is their “science.”

And of course, all psychiatric drugs are toxic. Not only that, inexpert and sudden withdrawal from them can create very dangerous effects.

Psychiatry is, at best (without even going into the political ramifications of the profession), an experimental hypothesis.

As such, it should be governed by the stringent rules of informed consent, by which the patient learns of the drugs’ toxic effects and the non-scientific basis for diagnosing any “mental disorder.”

No government agency should have granted official protected status to the profession, its practitioners, or its drugs.

Psychiatry is human experimentation gone crazy.

I pick this example because so many people automatically assume psychiatry is a science.

The popular consensus is: it’s a workable and necessary approach to human problems.


power outside the matrix


Medical/science reporting involves more than exposing the latest limited scandal. It should dig far below the surface and go to the basic fraud.

Reporters should also be prepared to respond to their critics and official spokesmen (liars) who use bluster soaked in arrogance to a) attack and b) pump themselves up. Don’t be shy. Don’t adopt a defensive stance. Stick to your guns. Dissect critics’ illogic. Grind their arguments down to powder.

Assume nothing. Again, search out the most basic fraud you can find and expose it to the light of day.

In doing so, you’ll be miles ahead of the game.

So, for example, just as the latest pronouncement of an epidemic is launched from the bowels of the CDC, while others are arguing about how “the virus” can and can’t be transmitted, you’ll be looking for evidence that the virus was ever IDed at all, was ever isolated from a human patient. And finding no evidence, you’ll be entering the fray at the correct portal, where the initial boggling crimes are being committed. You’ll be undercutting others who are less astute and curious than you are.

Go deep. And deeper. Forget other people’s pre-set agendas. Your agenda is exposing the bottom-line pretense.

In case you hadn’t noticed, society, more and more, is constructed, concocted, and controlled via pseudoscience maxims and pretensions. This is a highly dangerous situation that is leading us into a lunatic future.

That makes your work more important than ever.

Jon Rappoport

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

News vs. sub-news: how the game works

News vs. sub-news: how the game works

For example, in faking medical reality

Let’s start there…

by Jon Rappoport

March 30, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

News is defined, within the media industry, as stories being reported as they’re happening.

Troops invade Libya. Germany protests over US spying. Car crash in fog in Indiana. President states plan to restructure jobs program.

That’s news.

Sub-news is any number of reports, statements, interviews that occur outside the news cycle, or express a summing-up of a problem.

In a half-sane media landscape, certain sub-news statements would become the basis for extensive investigation by media outlets. Sub-news contains, from time to time, a great deal of juice. It’s provocative, even astonishing.

But overwhelmingly, sub-news is left lying on the side of the road like discarded garbage. Why? Because it threatens established interests. Furthermore, the media outlets who could magnify sub-news are aligned with those established interests. Joined at the hip.

For example, here’s a staggering piece of sub-news:

On January 15, 2009, the NY Review of Books published a devastating quote from a woman who, for 20 years, was an editor at one of the most prestigious medical journal in the world:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” —Marcia Angell, MD, “Drug Companies and Doctors: A story of Corruption.” NY Review of Books, Jan. 15, 2009.

For any ambitious medical reporter, the quote could have been the jumping-off point for an investigation aimed at taking down medical journals and the whole peer-review system that underpins medical publishing.

But nothing happened. No dots were connected. The quote was left hanging in mid-air like a Hindenburg whose explosion had been indefinitely postponed.

Here is another Hindenburg quote of a similar nature, also published in the NY Review of Books (May 12, 2001, Helen Epstein, “Flu Warning: Beware of Drug Companies”):

“Six years ago, John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece, found that nearly half of published articles in scientific journals contained findings that were false.”

Here’s another quote from the same article:

“Last year, GlaxoSmithKline’s diabetes drug Avandia was linked to thousands of heart attacks, and earlier in the decade, the company’s antidepressant Paxil was discovered to exacerbate the risk of suicide in young people. Merck’s painkiller Vioxx was also linked to thousands of heart disease deaths. In each case, the scientific literature gave little hint of these dangers.”

And finally, here is yet another statement from Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine:

“A review of seventy-four clinical trials of antidepressants, for example, found that thirty-seven of thirty-eight positive studies [that praised the drugs] were published. But of the thirty-six negative studies, thirty-three were either not published or published in a form that conveyed a positive outcome.”

It turns out that the informational pipeline that feeds the entire perception of pharmaceutical medicine is a rank fraud.

Relentlessly investigating that pipeline, over the course of a year or two, would uncover scandals that would rock the foundations of the medical cartel.

But no. The sub-news is cast aside, ignored, left to rot in the sun.

Forgotten.


power outside the matrix


To the terms “news” and “sub-news,” we could add, in parallel, “major consensus” and “minor consensus.” Major consensus is manufactured. It attempts to block out the sun.

People who encounter sub-news within the mainstream are often driven to distraction, when they expect major revelations to follow—and nothing happens. They can’t figure out what’s going on.

They need to realize their confusion is entirely proper and natural; and they should move on from there to challenge the builders of news and major consensus. They should become relentless.

From their ranks can be born the new generation of real reporters.

Jon Rappoport

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

The News: mind control through “cognitive dissonance”

The News: mind control through “cognitive dissonance”

by Jon Rappoport

February 24, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“When professionals broadcast one absurdity after another, they begin to see the effects are actually strengthening their own position of authority. It’s a revelation. It’s also a continuation of the tradition of the Trickster archetype. For example, with just a few minor adjustments, Brian Williams can be seen as the sly Reynard the Fox…” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

From the viewpoint of elite television news, controlling the minds of its audience depends on what’s politely called “cognitive dissonance”:

As the anchor recites a news story, the viewer sees an obvious hole through which he could drive a truck.

The story makes no sense, yet it’s being presented as bland fact. The trusted anchor clearly has no problem with it.

What’s the viewer to do? He experiences a contradiction, a “dissonance.”

For example, this year’s flu vaccine. The US government has admitted the vaccine is geared to a flu virus that isn’t circulating in the population. Therefore, even by conventional standards, the vaccine is useless. But the kicker is, the CDC says people should take the vaccine anyway.

The anchor relays all this information—and never seriously questions the situation, never torpedoes the government for recommending the vaccine.

The average viewer feels a tug, a pulse of discomfort, a push-pull. The vaccine story is idiocy (side one), but the trusted anchor accepts it (side two).

Dissonance.

The top chiefs of news—and top propaganda operatives—anticipate cognitive dissonance. In a real sense, they want it to happen. They make it happen. Over and over.

Why?

Because it throws the viewer into a tailspin. And in that mental state, in his effort to resolve the contradiction, he will normally choose to…give in. Surrender. Believe in the anchor. It’s the easier path.

The viewer will even doubt his own perception. “I see no good reason for Building 7 to collapse, but the news doesn’t bring that up, so…it must be me.”

This is the power of the news. It presents absurdities and then moves right along, as if nothing has happened.

For the viewer, it’s the equivalent of: “Don’t you see that pile-up of smashed cars on the freeway, and the smoke? No? Oh well, it must be me. I guess I was wrong. There isn’t any pile-up.”

The introduction of contradiction, dissonance, and absurdity parading as ordinary reality is an intentional feature of brainwashing.

On the nightly news, the anchor reports that US government debt has risen by another three trillion dollars. He then cuts to a statement from a Federal Reserve spokesman: the new debt level isn’t a problem; in fact, it’s sound monetary policy; it strengthens the economy.

The viewer, caught up in this absurdity, tries to make sense of it, then gives up and passively accepts it. Brainwashing.

Smoothly transitioning from this story, the anchor relays information from the CDC: vaccination rates must achieve 90% in the population, in order to protect people from dangerous viruses. The viewer thinks, “Well, my daughter is already vaccinated, so if she comes into contact with a child who isn’t vaccinated, why would that be a problem for her? Why does 90% of the population have to be vaccinated to keep her safe? She’s already vaccinated.”

The viewer wrestles with this absurdity for a moment, then gives in and accepts what the CDC and the anchor are saying. More passivity. More brainwashing.

The anchor moves right along to the next story: “The US is experiencing one of the coldest winters in history, further evidence of the effects of global warming, according to scientists at the United Nations.”

The viewer shakes his head, tries to deal with this dissonance, surrenders, and accepts what he is hearing. Deeper passivity is the result. Deeper brainwashing.

On and on it goes, day after day, month after month, year after year, on the news.

Contradiction, absurdity, dissonance; acceptance, surrender, passivity.

The same general formula is used in interrogations and formal mind control. It adds up to disorientation of the target.

Most disoriented people opt for the lowest- common-denominator solution: give in; accept the power of the person of authority.

When it comes to the news, that person is the anchor, the narrator, the presenter of reality.

He sows the ground with seeds of dissonance. That is how he gains compliance from the viewer.


power outside the matrix


If the news anchor experiences moments of conscience and self-doubt, he can tell himself he is doing the work of a journalist: he’s presenting information obtained from reliable sources. If these sources are spouting contradictions and absurdities, so be it. “Nothing better is available.”

Among the many supporters of conventional news is the education system. Most teachers never learn logic, and they don’t teach it. The result? Their students never gain the ability or the courage to reject the news and its dissonances.

What little these students gain from 12 or 16 years of schooling they eventually sacrifice on the altar of consensus reality—as broadcast every night on the screen before them.

In the face of absurdities that never add up or make sense, they surrender their minds.

If you gain enough distance from the news and watch it every night and pick it apart and see every dissonance, you realize the news is utterly Surreal. However, it is sold as utterly Normal. That is its trump card—the ability to sell itself as the ultimate in Normalcy.

That is its greatest achievement: overcoming its deepest contradiction.

Jon Rappoport

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

Fake Disney measles outbreak: send in the clowns

Fake Disney measles outbreak: send in the clowns

by Jon Rappoport

February 15, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Lacking any real science proving we have a serious 2015 measles outbreak, and lacking any science supporting the idea that the measles vaccine is safe and effective, we’re looking at a psyop called The Disney Story. A fake horror movie happening at ‘the happiest place on Earth,’ Disneyland. It’s a perfect way to scare the moms into vaccinating their kiddies. If the happiest place on Earth isn’t safe, then where is safety? ‘Mickey Mouse infects children.’ Cue the ominous music. ‘Cotton candy dream turns into nightmare.’ ‘Send in the clowns, carriers of the virus.’” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

150 measles cases. No deaths.

Dangerous outbreak? Are you kidding?

Mainstream media recalling past problems with the measles vaccine? Are you kidding? The news brushes off what happened 24 hours ago.

Medical scholars and historians are no better. Most of them operate on behalf of entrenched money; and that money wants the population to believe all vaccines are remarkably safe and effective.

What follows are several past statements and reports about the measles vaccine and measles. In a half-sane society that tried to live up to its laws, these statements would spark deep investigations. But we have a different kind of society…

“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune [via vaccination], according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella [German measles], a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.” (Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.)

“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” (Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977.)

“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” (Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, ‘Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,’ 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.)


power outside the matrix


“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella (measles) vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” (Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.)

“Administration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” (JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer.) The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules…”

This last statement is particularly troubling. It suggests that vaccination can increase the likelihood of catching measles; and when that does happen, the illness is far more serious than the ordinary type.

So-called medical experts (see also this) and PR front men for vaccines are banking on an ignorant population composed of compliant androids.

Mainstream media aren’t the only culprits. Find one course in one college or medical school in America titled: “Vaccines Pro and Con, the Full Story.” You can’t? The very idea of such a course is ludicrous? That’s no accident.

Jon Rappoport

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

Every television newscast: staged reality

by Jon Rappoport

February 14, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“The news is all about artificially manipulating the context of stories. The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it. If you want to visualize this, imagine a rectangular solid. The news covers the top surface. Therefore, the mind is trained to work in only two dimensions. Then it can’t fathom depth, and it certainly can’t appreciate the fact that the whole rectangular solid moves through time, the fourth dimension.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Focus on the network evening news. This is where the staging is done well.

First, we have the image itself, the colors in foreground and background, the blend of restful and charged hues. The anchor and his/her smooth style.

Then we have the shifting of venue from the studio to reporters in the field, demonstrating the reach of coverage: the planet. As if this equals authenticity.

Actually, those reporters in the field rarely dig up information on location. A correspondent standing on a rooftop in Cairo could just as well be positioned in a bathroom in a Las Vegas McDonald’s. His report would be identical.

The managing editor, usually the elite news anchor, chooses the stories to cover and has the final word on their sequence.

The anchor goes on the air: “Our top story tonight, more signs of gridlock today on Capitol Hill, as legislators walked out of a session on federal budget negotiations…”

The viewer fills in the context for the story: “Oh yes, the government. Gridlock is bad. Just like traffic on the I-5. A bad thing. We want the government to get something done, but they’re not. These people are always arguing with each other. They don’t agree. They’re in conflict. Yes, conflict, just like on the cop shows.”

The anchor: “The Chinese government reports the new flu epidemic has spread to three provinces. Forty-two people have already died, and nearly a hundred are hospitalized…”

The viewer again supplies context, such as it is: “Flu. Dangerous. Epidemic. Could it arrive here? Get my flu shot.”

The anchor: “A new university study states that gun owners often stock up on weapons and ammunition, and this trend has jumped quickly since the Newtown, Connecticut, school-shooting tragedy…”

The viewer: “People with guns. Why do they need a dozen weapons? I don’t need a gun. The police have guns. Could I kill somebody if he broke into the house?”

The anchor: “Doctors at Yale University have made a discovery that could lead to new treatments in the battle against autism…”

Viewer: “That would be good. More research. Laboratory. The brain.”

If, at the end of the newscast, the viewer bothered to review the stories and his own reactions to them, he would realize he’d learned nothing. But reflection is not the game.

In fact, the flow of the news stories has washed over him and created very little except a sense of (false) continuity.

It would never occur to him to wonder: are the squabbling political legislators really two branches of the same Party? Does government have the Constitutional right to incur this much debt? Where is all that money coming from? Taxes? Other sources? Who invents money?

Is the flu dangerous for most people? If not, why not? Do governments overstate case numbers? How do they actually test patients for the flu? Are the tests accurate? Are they just trying to convince us to get vaccines?

What happens when the government has overwhelming force and citizens have no guns?

When researchers keep saying “may” and “could,” does that mean they’ve actually discovered something useful about autism, or are they just hyping their own work and trying to get funding for their next project?

These are only a few of the many questions the typical viewer never considers.

Therefore, every story on the news broadcast achieves the goal of keeping the context thin—night after night, year after year. The overall effect of this staging is small viewer, small viewer’s mind, small viewer’s understanding.

Next we come to words over pictures. More and more, news broadcasts are using the rudimentary film technique of a voice narrating what the viewer is seeing on the screen.

People are shouting and running and falling in a street. The anchor or a field reporter says: “The country is in turmoil. Parliament has suspended sessions for the third day in a row, as the government decides what to do about uprisings aimed at forcing democratic elections…”

Well, the voice must be right, because we’re seeing the pictures. If the voice said the riots were due to garbage-pickup cancellations, the viewer would believe that, too.

We see Building #7 of the WTC collapse. Must have been the result of a fire. The anchor tells us so. Words over pictures.

We see footage of Lee Harvey Oswald inside the Dallas police station. The anchor tells he’s about to be transferred, under heavy guard, to another location. Oswald must be guilty, because we’re seeing him in a police station, and the anchor just said “under heavy guard.”

Staged news.

It mirrors what the human mind, in an infantile state, is always doing: looking at the world and seeking a brief summary to explain what that world is, at any given moment.

Since the dawn of time, untold billions of people have been urging a “television anchor” to “explain the pictures.”

The news gives them that precise thing, that precise solution, every night.

“Well, Mr. Jones,” the doctor says, as he pins X-rays to a screen in his office. “See this? Right here? We’ll need to start chemo immediately, and then we may have to remove most of your brain, and as a follow-up, take out one eye.”

Sure, why not? The patient saw the pictures and the anchor explained them.

After watching and listening to a month or two of news planted with key words, the population is ready to see the President or one of his minions step up to a microphone and say, “Quantitative easing…sequester…”

Reaction? “Oh, yes, that’s right, I’ve heard those words before. Good.”

A month later, those two terms disappear, as if they’d never existed.

Eventually, people get the idea and do it for themselves. They see things, they invent one-liners to explain them.

They’re their own anchors. They short-cut and undermine their own experience with vapid summaries of what it all means.

And then, of course, when the news cuts to commercial, the fake products takes over:

“Well, every night they’re showing the same brand names, so those brands must be better than the unnamed alternatives.”

Which devolves into: “I like this commercial better than that commercial. This is a great commercial. Let’s have a contest and vote on the best commercial.”

“Hello. I’m staged reality and I’m doing ads to promote me.”

For “intelligent” viewers, there is another sober mainstream choice, a safety valve: PBS. That newscast tends to show more pictures from foreign lands.

“Yes, I watch PBS because they understand the planet is interconnected. It isn’t just about America. That’s good.”

Sure it’s good, if you want the same thin-context or false-context reporting on events in other countries. Instead of the two minutes NBC might give you about momentous happenings in Iraq, PBS will give you four minutes, plus congenial experts commenting abstractly, employing longer words.

PBS’ experts seem kinder and gentler. “They’re nice and they’re more relaxed. I like that.”

Yes, the PBS experts are taking Valium, and they’re not drinking as much coffee as the CBS experts.

Anchors deliver the long con every night on the tube, between commercials.

Staged.

They’re marketing thin context.


power outside the matrix


And of course, the “science” promoted on the network news is also derived from marketing efforts at major government agencies, such as the CDC.

The anchor says, “Medical experts are now taking a heavier approach to parents who refuse to vaccinate their children and deny the benefits of vaccines.”

What sits behind that statement?

The announcement of so-called epidemics and outbreaks are part of a strategy for marketing vaccines. It’s obvious.

For example, read this from the World Health Organization Fact Sheet, Number 11, dated March 2014:

“Influenza occurs globally…Worldwide, these annual epidemics are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 250 000 to 500 000 deaths.”

Now consider the current “measles outbreak” in the US. 150 cases, and no deaths.

In the case of worldwide flu, WHO and the CDC choose not to hype and propagandize; but in the case of the measles, it’s suddenly all hands on deck and fear, fear, fear.

Why?

Because it’s time. It’s time to inflate the seriousness of a standard childhood disease. It’s time to focus on “the children.” It’s time, once again, to offset the massive rebellion against vaccination exploding in the US population. It’s time to engender fear. It’s time to attack anti-vaccination researchers. It’s time to take another step in the direction of mandating vaccines. It’s time to introduce bills in legislatures that cancel legal exemptions from vaccines and cancel freedom of choice. It’s time for more medical fascism. It’s time to paint parents who don’t vaccinate as terrorists. It’s time to paint their children as little biowar weapons loose in the community.

It’s time to advance the medical police state.

And oh yes, it’s time to divert attention away from the fact that even conventional researchers and the CDC admit this year’s flu vaccine is geared to the wrong virus and is useless (but you should take it anyway).

The designation of “outbreaks” and “epidemics” is arbitrary. “We’ll take THIS as an epidemic and we’ll ignore THAT as an epidemic.”

It’s very much like marketing, because it is marketing.

“Let’s see, Bob. Which one of the items in our sales catalog should we push hard this quarter? The bikini or the leather boots?”

“You know, we haven’t hyped the measles vaccine for a while. How about an outbreak of measles? Can we sell that? Focus on the kiddies? We’ll need about 100 cases, we’ll say they all came from one source, like a playground or an amusement park, and we’ll claim it’s very, very serious…”

“Do we have a good front man to go on television and promote the fear factor? How about that maniac who thinks any kid can handle 10,000 vaccines? Or the schmuck from UCLA. Maybe a woman doctor, a mother with three kids. You know, soapy dopey.”

When the propaganda pros decide which way to go…they issue a statement, a press release, and this release is picked up by the news shows:

“Medical experts are criticizing parents who refuse to vaccinate their children and deny the proven benefits of vaccines.”


There are various forms of mind control. The one I’m describing here—the thinning of context—is universal. It confounds the mind by pretending depth doesn’t exist and is merely a fantasy.

The mind, before it is trained away from it, is always interested in depth.

Another way of putting it: the mind naturally wants more space, not less. Only constant conditioning can change this.

Eventually, when you say “mind,” people think you’re referring to the brain, or they don’t know what you’re talking about at all.

Mind control by eradicating the concept of mind. That’s quite a trick.

Jon Rappoport

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