Category Archives: Press Fraud

The hypnotic use of color in television news

The hypnotic use of color in television news

by Jon Rappoport

December 11, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Some people would call it simply an effort to please the audience. Well, pleasing the audience during a national news broadcast isn’t the objective, unless ratings and viewer numbers and ad revenues and distraction from facts is actually the plan…and of course it is.

Just now, I forced myself to watch a rebroadcast of Wednesday night’s NBC News with the golden boy, Brian Williams.

But Brian wasn’t golden, he was blue, which happens to be people’s favorite color in multiple surveys. Restful calming blue.

Here is what I saw in the first five minutes. I couldn’t handle more. (I urge you to go to NBC and look for yourself.)

Brian was wearing a blue suit. All the backgrounds for captions were blue. Small screens behind Brian were blue. Brian’s desk panels were blue. The surface of the desk reflected vague blue tints.

The lead story, the CIA torture report, featured blue in the CIA seal. Andrea Mitchell, who was covering the report’s release, was wearing a dark blue outfit. Behind her, the Capitol dome sat in a blue sky. A psychologist named Mitchell, an architect of the torture program, was interviewed. His shirt was partly blue. He was wearing blue jeans. The NBC reporter interviewing him was wearing a light blue shirt. A map of the world appeared onscreen, sitting in a field of blue. Behind Andrea, the background was filled with objects of different blues. Reporter Dana Priest was interviewed for the story. A piece of the background behind her was blue. Michael Hayden was interviewed. He was wearing a blue suit.

I watched the beginning of the next story: the NFL’s new policy on player discipline. Commissioner Roger Goodell stood in front of a blue background. He was wearing a blue suit.

The Matrix Revealed

Again, I emphasize—all this was in the first five minutes of the newscast.

You could say the news itself was merely an occasion for the transmission of blue.

“Let’s have dinner in front of the TV and watch the news. I like the blue.”

“Which channel?”

“NBC. Their blue is better than the CBS blue.”

“You’re right. It makes me feel restful. The CIA torture couldn’t have been that bad. It’s blue. I’m reassured.”

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.

Ebola, Monsanto, James Holmes: basis of psyops

by Jon Rappoport

November 6, 2014

(To join our email list, click here.)

“People have to have immediate updates on stories of the day. It’s an addiction. And for an addict, his own state of mind is far less important than finding his next jolt. He only knows Need. And the last thing he wants to consider is that, at bottom, he is inventing that Need.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Reality is a psychological operation.

“Reality” basically means some group has force, money, and access to fawning media. They can define what exists.

A psyop depends on being able to engineer one story line.

A psyop depends on selling one centralized story.

In the case of Ebola, the whole unfolding storyline depends on selling basic assumptions: a) there is an outbreak; b) the outbreak is caused by a single virus.

As you can see, these assumptions and the ensuing storyline are being sold by major media, with no exceptions. There are no defectors.

If, tomorrow, the head of the CDC announced that no one had ever extracted the Ebola virus from a human being, isolated it, and seen it, he would be locked up in a psych ward.

He defected from reality, which is to say, the psyop.

If, tomorrow, the head of the FDA announced that GMO crops and the herbicide Roundup were a clear and present danger to the population of the world, and constituted a grave crime, he would be locked up in a psych ward.

If, tomorrow, the governor of Colorado announced that the shooter(s) in the Aurora theater was not James Holmes, he would be run out of office and possibly locked up in a psych ward.

If, magically, overnight, you found yourself in possession of overwhelming force and a direct pipeline to elite media anchors, you could tell your story about what exists, and you would find millions of people believing you.

This is how reality works.

What would happen if the three major networks, each with considerable power, had come up with three vastly different versions of the Boston massacre?

CBS: “FBI and local police killed one terrorist and captured the other in what observers are calling one of the bravest days in the history of law enforcement in America.”

NBC: “After a violent gun battle on the streets of a great American city, during which a suspect in the Boston massacre was killed, an FBI source stunningly revealed they had ended the life of a cooperating informant. He put it this way: ‘The Tsarnaev brothers were recruited by a secret Bureau unit to plant the bombs. The plan was to blame the bombing on so-called patriots, but that fell through, so the Bureau exercised their only option. They put their informants front and center and blamed the whole thing on them’…”

ABC: “Today, the tragic loss of life and wounding of more than 180 persons at the Boston Marathon were partially redeemed, when, amazingly, Boston police traced three pipe bombs to a CIA storage locker in Maryland…”

Suppose, in the midst of an uproar heard and echoed around the world, the networks stood by their contradictory versions of events and wouldn’t back down.

A massive blow would hit psyop-land. Centralized story? Poleaxed.

People wouldn’t know what to do. They expect one story line and they get three, from the highest hypnotic and influential media giants.

In a literal, though unconscious, sense, familiar time and space would begin to fall apart.

But actually, it’s far more surreal for the three major television networks to agree on the substance of every significant event than to come to radically different conclusions.

Unfortunately, people don’t see it that way. They don’t see that three behemoths dispensing the same information represents a highly unnatural state of affairs.

The Matrix Revealed

On this subject, here are a few notes from a work-in-progress, The Underground:

“Fractured reality is approaching like a huge wave. Defections from the ranks of consensus are exploding. Therefore, the space of the mind is changing. Those who are holding the fort are trying to minimize the effect. That’s why they’re staging more ‘crises’. Crises are magnets. They attract the mass, the collective, the reality-addicts, the joiners, the people who will buy official ideas pumped out of the central factory.”

“In a vast subterranean cavern of the unconscious, people are hoping an artist will step forward who can paint an apple so real it can’t be distinguished from an apple on a tree. That, hopefully, will put an end to all creation, invention, imagination. Then everyone can say, ‘Imagination at its highest point gives us nothing beyond what is already there, and we already have that.”

“Group-ideas which are obviously foolish and depleting and destructive are relatively easy to reject. But group-ideas that seem to herald a better world are the big deceptions. These ideas, in a vacuum, may be attractive and interesting, but because they emerge from a group they are going to induce a deep trance, in the long run.”

“Bargain price! We’ll shave down your perceptual field so you can fit in with eight billion androids. You’ll never miss what you can’t see. Yes, folks, we’ll cement you into the limited spectrum, where all the action is. There is a sense of family in this reality. People liking people. We’re all in this together.”

“Asking someone to imagine what his mind would be like if it were missing its entire collection of consensus-ideas goes over like lead matzos balls at a Catholic communion.”

“Very few people care about the space, time, and energy of psychological propaganda. They think it’s just lies. It isn’t. It’s a parallel 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 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 www.nomorefakenews.com

The invention of political reality

The invention of political reality

by Jon Rappoport

October 31, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

From the 2010 Rockefeller Foundation brainstorming exercise “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” (pages 18 – 19) (note: this is a .pdf document at rockefellerfoundation.org. Go to startpage.com and type-in the title to access the document):

“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit… national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”

As you read this article, keep in mind that the Rockefeller Empire is very much a medical empire.

The Rockefeller Foundation, along with the Carnegie Foundation, changed the course of modern medicine, reinventing it as a global pharmaceutical colossus, whose rationale was: kill germs.

Therefore, every so-called viral epidemic, hyped to the hilt, assists in the promotion of the germ as the invisible terrorist, thereby reinforcing toxic medical drugs as the only answer for humankind.

Every phony epidemic also helps to engender a larger and tighter medical surveillance system for the world—much like a medical NSA.

The infamous Trilateral Commission (TC) still exists.

Many people think the TC, created in 1973 by David Rockefeller, is a relic of an older time.

Think again.

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America. Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration.

The original stated goal of the TC was to create “a new international economic order.” Knowing that you have to break eggs to make an omelette, consider how the following TC members, in key Obama posts, can help engender national chaos, and install binding international agreements that will envelop our economy and money in a deeper global collective: a new world order:

* Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;

* James Jones, National Security Advisor;

* Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;

* Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.

All Trilateralists.

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

In the US, since 1973, author Wood counts eight out of 10 US Trade Representative appointments, and six out of eight World Bank presidencies, as American Trilateral members.

Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote, four years before birthing the TC with his godfather, David Rockefeller:

“[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Several other noteworthy Trilateral members: George HW Bush; Bill Clinton; Dick Cheney; Al Gore. The first three men helped sink the US further into debt by fomenting wars abroad; and Gore’s cap and trade blueprint would destroy industrial economies, while vastly increasing the numbers of people in Third World countries who have no access to modern sources of energy.

Does all this offer a clue as to why the US economy has failed to recover from the Wall Street debacle of 2008, why the federal bailout was a handout to super-rich criminals, and why Obama took actions which prevented a recovery? (Does it also offer a clue about why we are seeing the ferocious promotion of a phony Ebola epidemic?)

A closer look at Tim Geithner’s circle of economic advisers reveals the chilling Trilateral effect: Paul Volker; Alan Greenspan; E. Gerald Corrigan (director, Goldman Sachs); and Peter G Peterson (former CEO, Lehman Brothers, former chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations). These men are all Trilateral members.

How many foxes in the hen house do we need, before we realize their Trilateral agenda is controlling the direction of our economy?

The TC has no interest in building up the American economy. They want to torpedo it, as part of the end-game of creating a new international currency, ushering in a de facto Globalist management system for the whole planet.

Any doubt on the question of TC goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003):

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Even in what many people mistakenly think of as the TC’s heyday, the 1970s, there were few who realized its overarching power.

power outside the matrix

Here is a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment from out of the past. It’s a through-the-looking-glass secret—in the form of a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper. The interview took place in 1978. It concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating US economic and political policy.

The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”

NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this [Trilateral] committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations, and they would resent such coordination [of policy].

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

SOURCE: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.

Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed the Trilateral takeover of US domestic and foreign policy was already out in the open, it wasn’t.

Their interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. It didn’t become a scandal on the level of, say, Watergate, although its essence was far larger than Watergate.

The Matrix Revealed

US economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission had been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.

Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We’ve lost. And I’ll quit.” Lost—because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.

Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

Now consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.

From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has had the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force. A central engine of that force is the Trilateral Commission.

And, as one strategy for pushing the planet into that networked coagulated mass—and weakening it through the ubiquitous use of toxic medicines—we have seen a parade of phony global epidemics, promoted as threats requiring “a single universal response.”

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

Industrial-strength scare-propaganda: mind control

Industrial-strength scare-propaganda: mind control

by Jon Rappoport

October 30, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

From time to time, I reprint my interview with Dr. Barbara Starfield. Each time I try to write a new introduction.

In this case, I’ll highlight the arbitrary nature of scare-propaganda. And by arbitrary, I mean “has a covert agenda.”

For instance, suppose you learned that a single source in the US, every year, like clockwork, kills 225,000 people. That would be 2.25 million killings per decade.

Wouldn’t you think we’d hear about it? Wouldn’t public health agencies make a big deal about it? Wouldn’t they call it an epidemic?

After all, we supposedly have a handful of “Ebola cases” in the US, and the media are hyping this “fact” to the skies.

Suppose they had far, far bigger numbers to work with? Suppose they had 225,000 deaths, not just once, but every year, as the raw material for their stories?

Suppose they could say, “We now have 225,000 deaths in the US as a result of Ebola, and the authorities are quite sure that next year, and the year after that, and every year we’re going to have 225,000 more.”

Can you imagine the reaction at every level of society? The insane panic? The madness in the streets? The attacks against institutions tasked with preventing such a cataclysm? The collapse of the stock market and the healthcare system? The predictions of the end of the world? The churches on roaring business highs?

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published Dr. Barbara Starfield’s review, “Is US health really the best in the world?”

The Starfield paper can be downloaded freely (as a .pdf) from here (via drug-education.info). The paper is fully cited as Starfield B. Is US health really the best in the world?. JAMA. 2000; 284(4):483-4.

In it, Starfield, who was a respected public health expert working at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, stated that:

* The US medical system kills 225,000 Americans a year.

* 106,000 deaths per year from FDA-approved medical drugs.

* 119,000 deaths per year from error-ridden treatment in hospitals.

I’m aware that independent research puts those death figures much higher, but I focus on Dr. Starfield’s work because no mainstream reporter or government official could challenge her credentials or the credentials of the journal that published her findings.

And yes, there were stories in the press at the time, in 2000. But the coverage wasn’t aggressive, and it faded out quickly.

And none of the mainstream coverage did the obvious extrapolations. For example, we are talking about 2.25 MILLION deaths per decade. And over a MILLION deaths per decade from medicines the FDA has approved as safe and effective.

The US government is aware. You can search for an FDA page titled, “Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs)?”

It states: “Over 2 MILLION serious ADRs yearly.” And “100,000 DEATHS yearly.” (The capital letters are the FDA’s, not mine.)

The FDA, of course, is the single federal agency responsible for certifying all medical drugs safe and effective before they are released for public use. They readily admit the human death-and- maiming devastation…but take no responsibility for it.

The Matrix Revealed

On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here are excerpts from that interview.

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

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

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

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

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

BS: NO.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—end of interview excerpt—

Comment: Hyping death is an industry. It cuts two ways. The people who do the scare-propaganda also delete the uncomfortable truths.

As always, they are fronting for an agenda.

They are inventing reality for the public.

Reality-invention is the biggest business in the 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 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.

CDC whistleblower: “Oh my God…what we did”

by Jon Rappoport

October 25, 2014

(To join our email list, click here.)

On October 14, Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield sent an official and detailed complaint to the CDC and the US Dept. of Health and Human Services.

The devastating and explosive complaint concerns scientific misconduct in a now-infamous 2004 CDC study, which gave the MMR vaccine a free pass and concluded the vaccine had no connection to autism.

CDC whistleblower William Thompson was a co-author on that study, and on August 27 he admitted he and his co-authors committed fraud and covered up the vaccine-autism connection.

(The full 34-page complaint can also be accessed via Age of Autism, here)

The complaint references a 5/24/14 phone call between whistleblower Thompson and Brian Hooker. The call was recorded.

Thompson references one aspect of the fraud, a group of children with “isolated autism,” who were at higher risk of developing autism after receiving the MMR vaccine—the true data on these children were intentionally omitted from the study. Thompson says to Hooker:

“…the effect [autism] is where you would think it would happen. It is with the kids without other conditions [“isolated autism”]…I’m just looking at this and I’m like ‘Oh my God….I cannot believe we did what we did…but we did [bury the data on these children]…It’s all there…It’s all there. I have handwritten notes.’”

Concerning the overall fraud he committed in the 2004 study, Thompson states, in another phone conversation with Brian Hooker, “I have a boss who’s asking me to lie…Higher ups wanted to do certain things and I went along with it. In terms of command, I was 4 out of 5.”

Thompson named several of those higher ups. They were his co-authors on the 2004 study: Coleen Boyle, Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsop, and Frank Destefano.

In other words, those co-authors were among those who wanted Thompson to commit fraud.

This is highly significant, because Destefano and Boyle are not merely researchers. They are also high-ranking executives at the CDC, in the area of vaccines—director of the Immunization Safety Office (Destefano) and director of the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (Boyle).

power outside the matrix

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

As the complaint states, Thompson wrote a note to the head of the CDC at the time (2004), Julie Gerberding. He was very nervous about a presentation he was due to make at a large Institute of Medicine vaccine-autism meeting.

Thompson wrote: “I will have to present several problematic results relating to statistical associations between receipt of the MMR vaccine and autism.”

Thompson was considering blowing the whistle, in public.

Gerberding never answered his note. Thompson did not make his presentation.

But we know this. After Gerberding stepped down as head of the CDC in 2009, she went to work for Merck, assuming the position of president of Merck Vaccines.

Merck manufactures the MMR vaccine.

That was, of course, the vaccine at the center of the whole 2004 fraud at the CDC. The vaccine whose connection to autism was buried.

To say this merging of facts is explosive is a vast understatement.

But the major media, who will report and trumpet flimsy scandals with great enthusiasm, have instituted and maintained a total blackout on this one.

Can they begin to imagine what parents of children who received the MMR vaccine, and then developed autism, think and feel about all this?

Jon Rappoport

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

The incredible liars who lie about psychiatry

The liars who lie about psychiatry

by Jon Rappoport

October 14, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“The Reality Manufacturing Company not only turns out the past, present, and future for mass consumption. It explains why things are the way they are. It appoints itself the master of attributing causes, the king of cause and effect.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

I’m posting this piece to derail the notion that “the authorities” know what causes things.

In the Ebola hysteria, millions of people blithely accept the notion that the “cases and the deaths” are caused by the Ebola virus.

“What else could it be? The authorities must be right.”

Here is an analogy that is far more shocking dangerous, and long-lived than Ebola.

Psychiatry.

If psychiatrists are experts on the human mind, mice can pilot oil tankers across the ocean.

An open secret has been slowly bleeding out into public consciousness for the past ten years.

THERE ARE NO DEFINITIVE LABORATORY TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.

And along with that:

ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE CONCOCTED, NAMED, LABELED, DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by a committee of psychiatrists, from menus of human behaviors.

Their findings are published in periodically updated editions of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), printed by the American Psychiatric Association.

For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of “research.”

Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly toxic drugs to treat every one of these “disorders,” are leading the charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can sell more drugs and make more money.

But we have a mind-boggling twist. Under the radar, one of the great psychiatric stars, who has been out in front in inventing mental disorders, went public. He blew the whistle on himself and his colleagues. And for several years, almost no one noticed.

His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: “Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.” (Dec.27, 2010).

Major media never picked up on the interview in any serious way. It never became a scandal.

Dr. Allen Frances is the man who, in 1994, headed up the project to write the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental disorder. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.

In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, “Scientist At Work,” Daniel Goleman called Frances “Perhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment…”

Well, sure. If you’re sculpting the entire canon of diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the government, for Pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297 DSM-IV diagnoses), you’re right up there in the pantheon.

Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired’s Greenberg and said the following:

“There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

BANG.

That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

Frances might have been referring to the fact that his baby, the DSM-IV, had rearranged earlier definitions of ADHD and Bipolar to permit many MORE diagnoses, leading to a vast acceleration of drug-dosing with highly powerful and toxic compounds.

Finally, at the end of the Wired interview, Frances flew off into a bizarre fantasy:

“Diagnosis [as spelled out in the DSM-IV] is part of the magic…you know those medieval maps? In the places where they didn’t know what was going on, they wrote ‘Dragons live here’…we have a dragon’s world here. But you wouldn’t want to be without the map.”

Translation: Patients need hope for the healing of their troubles; so even if we psychiatrists are shooting blanks and pretending to know one kind of mental disorder from another, even if we’re inventing these mental-disorder definitions based on no biological or chemical diagnostic tests—it’s a good thing, because patients will then believe and have hope; they’ll believe it because psychiatrists place a name on their problems…

Needless to say, this has nothing to do with science.

If I were an editor at one of the big national newspapers, and one of my reporters walked in and told me, “The most powerful psychiatrist in America just said the DSM is sheer b.s. but it’s still important,” I think I’d make room on the front page.

If the reporter then added, “This shrink was in charge of creating the DSM-IV,” I’d clear more room above the fold.

If the reporter went on to explain that the whole profession of psychiatry would collapse overnight if the DSM was discredited, I’d call for a special section of the paper to be printed.

I’d tell the reporter to get ready to pound on this story day after day for months. I’d tell him to track down all the implications of Dr. Frances’ statements.

I’d open a bottle of champagne to toast the soon-to-be-soaring sales of my newspaper.

And then, of course, the next day I’d be fired.

Because there are powerful multi-billion-dollar interests at stake, and those people don’t like their deepest secrets exposed in the press.

And as I walked out of my job, I’d see a bevy of blank-eyed pharmaceutical executives marching into the office of the paper’s publisher, ready to read the riot act to him.

Dr. Frances’ work on the DSM-IV allowed for MORE toxic drugs to be prescribed, because the definition of Bipolar was expanded to include more people.

Adverse effects of Valproate (given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:

acute, life-threatening, and even fatal liver toxicity;

life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas;

brain damage.

Adverse effects of Lithium (also given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:

intercranial pressure leading to blindness;

peripheral circulatory collapse;

stupor and coma.

Adverse effects of Risperdal (given for “Bipolar” and “irritability stemming from autism”) include:

serious impairment of cognitive function;

fainting;

restless muscles in neck or face, tremors (may be indicative of motor brain damage).

Dr. Frances’ label-juggling act also permitted the definition of ADHD to expand, thereby opening the door for greater and greater use of toxic Ritalin (and other similar compounds) as the treatment of choice.

So what about Ritalin?

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

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

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

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

A recent survey revealed that a high percentage of children diagnosed with bipolar had first received a diagnosis of ADHD. This is informative, because Ritalin and other speed-type drugs are given to kids who are slapped with the ADHD label. Speed, sooner or later, produces a crash. This is easy to call “clinical depression.”

Then comes Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft. These drugs can produce temporary highs, followed by more crashes. The psychiatrist notices the up and down pattern—and then produces a new diagnosis of Bipolar (manic-depression) and prescribes other drugs, including Valproate and Lithium.

In the US alone, there are at least 300,000 cases of motor brain damage incurred by people who have been prescribed so-called anti-psychotic drugs (aka “major tranquilizers”). Risperdal (mentioned above as a drug given to people diagnosed with Bipolar) is one of those major tranquilizers. (source: Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Peter Breggin, St. Martin’s Press, 1991)

This psychiatric drug plague is accelerating across the land.

Where are the mainstream reporters and editors and newspapers and TV anchors who should be breaking this story and mercilessly hammering on it week after week? They are in harness.

And Dr. Frances is somehow let off the hook. He’s admitted in print that the whole basis of his profession is throwing darts at labels on a wall, and implies the “effort” is rather heroic—when, in fact, the effort leads to more and more poisonous drugs being dispensed to adults and children, to say nothing of the effect of being diagnosed with “a mental disorder.”

I’m not talking about “the mental-disease stigma,” the removal of which is one of Hillary Clinton’s missions in life. No, I’m talking about MOVING A HUMAN INTO THE SYSTEM, the medical apparatus, where the essence of the game is trapping that person to harvest his money, his time, his energy, and of course his health—as one new diagnosis follows on another, and one new toxic treatment after another is undertaken, from cradle to grave.

The result is a severely debilitated human being (if he survives), whose major claim to fame is his list of diseases and disorders.

Thank you, Dr. Frances.

Here is a smoking-gun statement made by another prominent mental-health expert, on an episode of PBS’ Frontline series. The episode was: “Does ADHD Exist?”

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

BARKLEY (Dr. Russell Barkley, clinical professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston): That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid… There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]

Without intending to, Dr. Barkley blows an ear-shattering whistle on his own profession.

So let’s take Dr. Barkley to school. Medical science, and disease-research in particular, rests on the notion that you can make a diagnosis backed up by lab tests. If you can’t produce lab tests, you’re spinning fantasies.

These fantasies might be hopeful, they might be “educated guesses,” they might be launched from traditional centers of learning, they might be backed up by billions of dollars of grant money…but they’re still fantasies.

If I said the moon was made of green cheese, even if I were a Harvard professor, sooner or later someone would ask me to produce a sample of moon rock to be tested for “cheese qualities.” I might begin to feel nervous, I might want to tap dance around the issue, but I would have to submit the rock to a lab.

Dr. Barkley is essentially saying, “There is no lab test for any mental disorder. But if a test were the standard of proof, we wouldn’t have science at all, and that would mean our whole profession rests on nothing—and that is absurd, so therefore a test doesn’t matter.”

That logic is no logic at all. Barkley is proving the case against himself. He just doesn’t want to admit it.

Close to 50 years ago, psychiatry was dying out as a profession. Fewer and fewer people wanted to see a psychiatrist for help, for talk therapy. All sorts of new therapies were popping up. The competition was leaving medical psychiatry in the dust.

As Dr. Peter Breggin describes, in his landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, a deal was struck. Drug companies would bankroll psychiatry and rescue it. These companies would pour money into professional conferences, journals, research. In return, they wanted “science” that would promote mental disease as a biological/chemical fact, a gateway into the drugs. Everyone would win—except the patient.

So the studies were rolled out, and the list of mental disorders expanded. The FDA was in on the deal as well, as evidenced by their drug “safety” approvals, in the face of the obvious damage these drugs were doing.

So this is how we arrived at where we are. This was the plan, and it worked.

Under the cover story, it was all fraud all the time. Without much of a stretch, you could say psychiatry has been the most widespread profiling operation in the history of the human race. Its goal has been to bring humans everywhere into its system. It hardly matters which label a person is painted with, as long as it adds up to a diagnosis and a prescription of drugs.

300 so-called mental disorders caused by…what? No lab evidence. No diagnostic tests. No blood tests, saliva tests, brain scans, genetic assays. No nothing.

But psychiatrists continue to assert they are the masters of causation. They know what’s behind “mental disorders.” They’re in charge.

What about the generalized “chemical imbalance” hypothesis stating that all mental disorders stem from such imbalances in the brain?

Dr. Ronald Pies, the editor-in-chief emeritus of the Psychiatric Times, laid that hypothesis to rest in the July 11, 2011, issue of the Times (“Psychiatry’s New Brain-Mind and the Legend of the ‘Chemical Imbalance’”) with this staggering admission:

“In truth, the ‘chemical imbalance’ notion was always a kind of urban legend — never a theory seriously propounded by well-informed psychiatrists.”

Boom.

Dead.

The point is, for decades the whole basis of psychiatric drug research, drug prescription, and drug sales has been: “we’re correcting a chemical imbalance in the brain.”

The problem was, researchers had never established a normal baseline for chemical balance. So they were shooting in the dark. Worse, they were faking a theory. Pretending they knew something when they didn’t.

In his 2011 piece in Psychiatric Times, Dr. Pies tries to cover his colleagues in the psychiatric profession with this fatuous remark:

“In the past 30 years, I don’t believe I have ever heard a knowledgeable, well-trained psychiatrist make such a preposterous claim [about chemical imbalance in the brain], except perhaps to mock it…the ‘chemical imbalance’ image has been vigorously promoted by some pharmaceutical companies, often to the detriment of our patients’ understanding.”

Absurd. First of all, many psychiatrists have explained and do explain to their patients that the drugs are there to correct a chemical imbalance.

And second, if all well-trained psychiatrists have known, all along, that the chemical-imbalance theory is a fraud…

…then why on earth have they been prescribing tons of drugs to their patients…

…since those drugs are developed on the false premise that they correct an imbalance?

Here’s what’s happening. The honchos of psychiatry are seeing the handwriting on the wall. Their game has been exposed. They’re taking heavy flack on many fronts.

The chemical imbalance theory is a fake. There are no defining physical tests for any of the 300 so-called mental disorders. All diagnoses are based on arbitrary clusters or menus of human behavior. The drugs are harmful, dangerous, toxic. Some of them induce violence. Suicide, homicide. Some of the drugs cause brain damage.

Psychiatry is a pseudo-pseudo science.

So the shrinks have to move into another model, another con, another fraud. And they’re looking for one.

For example, genes plus “psycho-social factors.” A mish-mash of more unproven science.

“New breakthrough research on the functioning of the brain is paying dividends and holds great promise…” Professional gibberish.

Meanwhile, the business model demands drugs for sale.

So even though the chemical-imbalance nonsense has been discredited, it will continue on as a dead man walking, a zombie.

Big Pharma isn’t going to back off. Trillions of dollars are at stake.

You can be sure major Pharma players are meeting behind closed doors with leaders of the American Psychiatric Association (APA). The mafia is making a house call.

They are reminding the APA that they have a deal. No cancellation allowed.

“You guys promoted the chemical-imbalance theory. That was the arrangement. So keep promoting it. We don’t care how many lies you have to tell. Don’t try to develop a conscience all of a sudden. This is business.”

The mafia doesn’t like it when people try to interrupt business.

power outside the matrix

Two questions always pop up when I write a critique of psychiatry. The first one is: psychiatric researchers are doing a massive amount of work studying brain function. They do have tests.

Yes, experimental tests. But NONE of those tests are contained in the DSM, the psychiatric bible, as the basis of the definition of ANY mental disorder. If the tests were conclusive, they would be heralded in the DSM. They aren’t.

The second question is: if all these mental disorders are fiction, why are so many people saddled with problems? Why are some people off the rails? Why are they crazy?

The list of potential answers is very long. A real practitioner would focus on one patient at a time and try to discover what has affected him to such a marked degree. For example:

Severe nutritional deficiency. Toxic dyes and colors in processed food. Ingestion of pesticides and herbicides. Profound sensitivities to certain foods. The ingestion of toxic pharmaceuticals. Life-altering damage as a result of vaccines. Exposure to environmental chemicals. Heavy physical and emotional abuse in the home or at school. Battlefield stress and trauma (also present in certain neighborhoods). Prior head injury. Chronic infection. Alcohol and street drugs. Debilitating poverty.

Other items could be added.

So…in this “Ebola crisis,” when the authorities—without relevant or reliable diagnostic tests—try to pin the cause as a virus, there is no reason to accept their assessment. No reason.

The announcement of a cause in any purported crisis should be the first occasion for doubt and independent investigation.

It’s a virus. It’s a chemical imbalance. It’s brain chemistry. It’s a mental disorder.

Spin, spin, spin, spin.

In the case of Ebola, if you want to understand precisely why the “science” is full of holes, and why people are dying, you can find a number of my articles at nomorefakenews.com. (click here for full access to all of my “Ebolagate” articles).

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

Hypnotic data: 4 essential features

Hypnotic data: 4 essential features

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Television news needs to create a hypnotic effect. Otherwise it would fall apart and shatter into a million nonsensical pieces.

One: the presented data must be repeated, of course. This is the time-honored strategy. When the viewer sees and hears the same nugget many times, he accepts it because—“how can they say it so often if it isn’t true?”

Close on the heels of this: “everybody else must be accepting it, who am I to make an objection?”

And then, finally, there is the after-image effect. At the edge of consciousness, the viewer remembers the nugget and—“anything in my memory is automatically real.”

Two: a significant percentage of all news stories are framed as he-said, he-said. Two opposing viewpoints. No resolution. Done often enough, this produces cognitive dissonance, which in turn shuts off the rational mind and puts the viewer into a light trance, a state of suspension.

At this point, he becomes more accepting of other news items. No deliberation; no questions. He’s a channel, sucking in the information.

Three: the blend, the segue, the smooth transition from one news story to the next, as if the entire newscast is a single narrative: car accident on the highway, holiday shopping, ISIS, defective car recall, slow hurricane season, new drug for arthritis, stock market jitters, Presidential approval ratings, dancing cat YouTube video.

Consciously, the viewer can’t connect any of these bits, but the anchor is an actor who can pretend to make them all into a flowing story.

The viewer chooses to succumb—otherwise he would have to face the fact that he is looking at unbridled lunacy.

He doesn’t want that. He wants story. He’s solidly addicted. So he’ll settle for the nightly pretense of a story.

His settling deepens his trance.

Four: the invisible threat. This is always a big seller. Whether it’s al Qaeda or ISIS or some other group he’s never heard of—and will never see—he’s buying.

At some interior level, he’s hoping for an enemy that will justify his ongoing generalized fear, suspicion, and anxiety—as a point of focus. “Ah yes, there it is. Got it in my crosshairs. Now I know why I feel this way.”

The Surveillance State implies there are untold numbers of terrorists hiding in our country. The CDC hypes a new invisible germ that could sweep away lives.

Perfect.

“I don’t want to see the threat. Let it remain invisible. I just want to know it’s there. Then I can explain why I have feelings that point to no apparent target. Tell me there is a target. Then I’ll be satisfied.”

In this kind of psyop, the viewer is quite happy to sit on one side of a line in the sand, where he doesn’t have to do anything.

The Matrix Revealed

Occasionally, the news, with pumped-up emphasis, pulls him across the line and tells him: get vaccinated; see something, say something; vote; donate to a good cause—then you can you return to your former trance.

Or, in extreme circumstances, the news will present a quick blitz of several simultaneous stories, all of which appear to be spinning out of control and bringing chaos.

This is a prelude to later assurances that order has been restored. Of course, the order always carries with it a retraction of some piece of freedom—characterized as a humane response.

To the degree that I watch, listen to, and read mainstream news, this is why: to observe these and other allied strategies in action.

Seeing how reality is being built among ladders, pulleys, ropes, utilizing workers, deploying front men, is the kind of education that energizes the mind and torpedoes the trance.

“Coming up after the break, more mind control. Stay with us.”

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

Vaccine wars: the censoring of Rob Schneider

Vaccine wars: the censoring of Rob Schneider

by Jon Rappoport

September 25, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Yesterday, I reported on State Farm dropping Rob Schneider from their TV ads because he’s alerted people to vaccine dangers.

Because he has a view about vaccines that departs from the norm.

“Punch a hole in consensus reality and you can’t be a spokesman for our products.”

“Cause a ripple among the sleeping populace and you’re out.”

What’s next?

Well, I’ll tell you what could be next, based on the fact that the Internet runs via an interlocking system of commercial companies.

Some companies that facilitate emails to large lists, and website hosts, to say nothing of Facebook, which is already censoring information, could decide, under pressure, or voluntarily, to close down “controversial data.”

A soft version of this is simply shunting emails whose subject lines contain “trigger words” into spam or trash of the recipient.

And what better subject to strangle than vaccination, which the medical-industrial complex ceaselessly promotes as absolutely necessary for the “humane” protection of humankind.

Pro-vaccine loons and fanatics of every stripe would welcome this kind of censorship with religious fervor.

For them, “everybody knows” vaccines are a wondrous miracle of modern science; and in order to shield children (who are already vaccinated and thus immune, but somehow still vulnerable) from unvaccinated devil-spawn, the whole of planet Earth must be jabbed.

Alien/ET comes down from his ship, observes, and reports back:

“They appear to have a Church of Injection. The ritual involves sending germs, metals, and toxic chemicals into the blood.

“They believe this wards off disease. The injections change the body’s response-pattern, so that certain symptoms will henceforth be stifled. This is called ‘immunity.’ Of course, as a result of the needle ritual, new symptoms will appear, and they catalog them under other disease-labels. They fail to see this as a problem. Or perhaps their high priests want to cause the problem…”

What will happen to Schneider’s career now remains to be seen. Will he get a modified free pass as an amusing Hollyweird type who, like Jenny McCarthy and Suzanne Somers, unaccountably “mouths off about modern medicine?”

Surely, he’ll get his share of: “the science proves he’s a menace to health.”

That’s the party line.

Media outlets are stacked with little loyalists who attach themselves to, and kiss the feet of, lying researchers.

I’m sure Schneider would be willing to engage in a reasonable discussion of his views on vaccines—but he is pre-judged for having those views in the first place.

power outside the matrix

In this war, the combination of a mainstream television news program and a talking doctor are supposed to produce, automatically, the ultimate truth.

“Tonight: a doctor says people who oppose vaccination are a danger to the community…”

The word from on high.

Or: “Tonight, a television news program and a staunch medical proponent of vaccines are a danger to the community…”

News corporations have determined that we can’t have both.

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 www.nomorefakenews.com

There are 2 other MMR vaccine whistleblowers

There are 2 other MMR vaccine whistleblowers.

by Jon Rappoport

September 24, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

We all know about CDC whistleblower William Thompson now.

On August 27, he released a statement through his lawyer, Rick Morgan, in which he admitted research fraud.

Thompson confessed he and his co-authors cooked the data in a key 2004 study, thereby exonerating the MMR vaccine from any connection to autism.

But what about Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski?

Who?

They’re two former Merck virologists who filed a qui tam suit against Merck, the manufacturer of the very same MMR vaccine.

The suit claims Merck defrauded the US government by selling the vaccine, under a federal contract, when Merck knew the mumps component of the vaccine was far less effective than advertised.

Of course, Merck disputed this claim, but on September 5th, Judge Jones, of the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, gave the green light for the suit to move forward.

Krahling and Wlochowski assert several levels of Merck fraud:

To achieve a slam-dunk success, Merck tested the effectiveness of the MMR vaccine against the version of the virus in the vaccine, rather than against the natural mumps virus a person would catch in the real world.

Merck irrelevantly and deceptively added animal antibodies to the test results, thus giving the false appearance of strong human immune response to the vaccine.

On top of that, Merck faked the quantitative results of the tests to which the animal antibodies had been added.

Here is where these two Merck whistleblowers and Thompson, the CDC whistleblower, intersect:

In 2004, Thompson wrote a letter to CDC Director, Julie Gerberding, warning her that he was about to present troubling and sensitive data about the MMR vaccine at an upcoming conference on vaccines and autism.

Thompson’s meaning was clear. He had found a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Gerberding never answered his letter, and Thompson’s presentation at that conference was canceled.

Gerberding left the CDC in 2009.

She is now…

the president of Merck Vaccines, the manufacturer of the MMR vaccine.

Major media consider this a non-story, on the level of a can of overflowing garbage on a quiet street corner.

Well, they have to consider it a non-story. If they reported it and pressed it, they would fracture the pillars of the entire vaccine establishment.

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.

CDC whistleblower: behind the media blackout

CDC whistleblower: behind the media blackout

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Aside from a few bland stories about William Thompson, the CDC whistleblower, the major media have maintained a forced blackout.

Thompson has publicly admitted he and his co-authors committed gross fraud in erasing a vaccine-autism connection.

Consider the explosive angles on this story, angles which would ordinarily rate front-page coverage and top billing on the evening news.

Thompson, in writing, has admitted fraud. He was a co-author of the cooked and slanted 2004 study, published in the prestigious journal, Pediatrics.

That study gave a free pass to the MMR vaccine, and falsely denied the vaccine had any causal connection to autism.

This never happens—an author of a key study comes out in the open and says he and his co-authors are guilty of malfeasance and fraud. Are you kidding? That alone equals a big story.

Two of Thompson’s co-authors, Colleen Boyle and Frank DeStefano, also happen to be major executives at the CDC, in the area of vaccine safety. That’s another bombshell element.

The journal Pediatrics has refused to retract the 2004 study. After consulting the other authors, but not Thompson, the journal stands by the study. That’s more malfeasance and fraud.

In 2004, Thompson wrote to the head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding, warning her that he would soon be presenting troubling data at a major vaccine-autism conference.

His meaning was clear. He had found an MMR vaccine-autism connection and was going to speak about it.

Gerberding never responded to Thompson’s letter. His presentation at the upcoming conference was canceled.

Five years later, Gerberding left the CDC. She went on to become the president of Merck Vaccines, a position she holds today.

Merck manufactures the MMR vaccine.

That vaccine was the subject of the fraudulent 2004 study, and was criminally given a free pass.

If you were constructing a scandal to blow up in the press, a scandal that would contain all the elements, you would be hard-pressed to do a better job.

But what we get is silence. All the way across the board.

Want more? In a video, Thompson states that he would never give a vaccine containing mercury to a pregnant woman. He says there is “biological plausibility” for mercury as a cause of autism.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EK4ZE-SPIc&w=560&h=315]

Thompson and his co-authors on the 2004 study have also done other studies on vaccines. The CDC is reviewing none of them to see if they were fraudulent as well.

Let’s look at the reasons for the media blackout.

On one level, it’s all about the CDC, Thompson’s employer. The CDC is a major and continuing source for mainstream reporters. Irritate and anger that source, and you as a reporter are shut out from access in the future.

On another level, the mainstream press is utterly dependent on pharmaceutical advertising. Implicit and explicit threats of ad cancellations are enough to drive any media outlet to its knees, groveling and begging for forgiveness.

Yes, you will certainly find stories about pharma drug scandals in the press. But Thompson’s story strikes at the very heart of the medical complex: its claim to a scientific basis.

That supposed science is the foundation of “everything medical”—and it is reflected in studies published in peer-reviewed reputable journals.

Thompson isn’t coming in from the outside criticizing a published study. He was and still is working at the CDC, where the 2004 study was done. He’s an insider. He co-wrote the study.

He’s made a written confession of fraud re the study and released it through his attorney, Rick Morgan. He’s admitted to scientific fraud.

On yet another level, vaccines are a holy sacrament in the medical Church of Biological Truth.

Vaccines are lauded as the pre-eminent achievement of modern medicine.

The US government and its allies have, time and time again, asserted there is absolutely no connection between vaccines and autism.

And here is an insider, Thompson, who is essentially saying that is a lie.

He could be the key figure in unraveling fraud all the way through the vaccine establishment.

power outside the matrix

And finally, there is a constituency that already knows all about the lie: mothers and fathers of autistic children.

They know. They were there, when their happy, bright, alert children were vaccinated and then, their brains damaged, turned away from the world.

To publicly admit what these parents already know would set off a firestorm that would never end.

So the mainstream press remains willfully ignorant. Reporters, editors, and publishers aid and abet the ongoing crime of vaccine damage.

The entirety of mainstream media performs a specific function. It takes cues and orders from elites who are intent on building Reality for the masses, and it transmits that Reality on a continuing basis. There are certain stories which, if exposed, would engender contagion.

That is, such stories would not only reveal one set of secrets, they would suggest that other pillars of the overall false Reality are rotting as well.

The prime directive of major media: this contagion must never be allowed to happen.

Thus, the William Thompson saga is buried.

However, with enough pressure from alternative media, parents of autistic children, and the awakening public, surprises can occur.

Certainly, the exit from major media, by more and more of its audience, can accelerate beyond any possibility of top-down control.

All their boats, swamped.

This, in fact, is what happened during the 2009 Swine Flu hoax. Millions of people ignored the CDC’s fake science and demands to take the vaccine—and the “level-6 global pandemic” was revealed as a dud.

Stay tuned.

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.