Dr. Tom Cowan explores the COVID virus invented out of sheer nonsense

—Cowan analyzes yet another key document posted by the CDC, in their journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases: “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States”—

by Jon Rappoport

October 19, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

The hits keep coming. The CDC used an arbitrary computer “tinker-toy” process to invent a description of the virus. The virus that no one has proven exists. This is the basic conclusion of Dr. Tom Cowan.

The CDC article was discovered by Sally Fallon Morrell. Her co-author, Dr. Cowan, fleshes out the fraud. Cowan’s article is titled, “Only Poisoned Monkey Cells ‘Grew’ the ‘Virus’.”

Dr. Cowan: “[The CDC journal article] was published in June 2020 [original publication, March 2020]. The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research. A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.”

“First, in the section titled ‘Whole Genome Sequencing,’ we find that rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end, they found 37 base pairs from unpurified samples using PCR probes. This means they actually looked at 37 out of the approximately 30,000 of the base pairs that are claimed to be the genome of the intact virus. They then took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs.”

In other words, the sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was done by assumption and arbitrary inference. If this is science, a penguin is a spaceship.

Cowan: “To me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn’s hair, hooves and horn.”

“The researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by ‘consensus,’ sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary ‘unicorn,’ so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn.”

As I’ve been stating, the “discovery” of the “new virus” was actually the foisting of a PRE-DETERMINED STORY ABOUT A VIRUS. Nothing real or believable about it.

But once the official pattern is laid down, others follow it dutifully.

Dr. Cowan uncovers more insanity in the CDC journal article. Using the ASSUMED new virus, in an UN-ISOLATED STATE, the researchers try to prove it is harmful by injecting it on to several different types of cells in the lab:

Cowan: “The real blockbuster finding in this study comes later, a finding so shocking that I had to read it many times before I could believe what I was reading. Let me quote the passage intact:”

“’Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells [monkey cells]. … Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero [monkey] cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells [human cells] were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection’.”

“What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible ‘hosts’ or models on which they can test…”

“The third method virologists use to prove infection and pathogenicity — the method they most rely on — is inoculation of solutions they say contain the virus onto a variety of tissue cultures. As I have pointed out many times, such inoculation has never been shown to kill (lyse) the tissue, unless the tissue is first starved and poisoned.”

“The shocking thing about the above [CDC journal] quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this ‘new coronavirus’ is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix.”

“My friends, read this again and again. These virologists, published by the CDC, performed a clear proof, on their terms, showing that the SARS-CoV- 2 virus is harmless to human beings. That is the only possible conclusion, but, unfortunately, this result is not even mentioned in their conclusion. They simply say they can provide virus stocks cultured only on monkey Vero cells, thanks for coming.”

So first…use a process of genetic sequencing that involves concocting, out of an arbitrary computer program…

The existence and structure of the “new virus”…

And then, taking a soup that the researchers claim contains the virus, in an un-isolated state, inject the soup into several types of cells in the lab…

And discover the prime target—human cells—are not infected by the imaginary virus.

And after this good day’s work, walk away and pretend nothing odd or self-incriminating happened.

And oh yes, lock down the planet based on this “science.”

Naturally, we MUST take a toxic vaccine that prevents non-infection by the non-virus.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

If the virus isn’t there…why do they believe it is?

by Jon Rappoport

October 15, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

For the past eight months, I’ve been providing evidence that no one has proved the COVID virus exists.

Over the past week, I’ve quoted two major sources—the CDC and the authors of a major European study—who admit they did not have any virus. [1] [2] [3] And both of these groups were, at the same time, constructing a way to do a diagnostic test for that very virus which wasn’t there.

I’ve also pointed out that scientists throw around the phrase, “isolation of the virus,” like short-order cooks slinging hash in a diner. The phrase is used with incredible carelessness and deceptive imprecision.

Likewise, researchers’ claims of having “sequenced” the genetic structure of the virus are very misleading, because the sequencing is done without direct observation of the virus. It is INFERRED from analyzing a piece of RNA which is ASSUMED (not proved) to come from the virus.

Most of these scientists are true believers. They accept, like dogma, the standard and non-valid procedures for “isolating” and “sequencing” the virus.

A smaller number of scientists understand the hoax, but they remain criminally silent—or they are actively perpetuating the hoax.

In a similar vein—but without the absurd certainty—astronomers make all sorts of inferences about what is occurring on distant planets; but they support sending probes into space to actually see and record what is happening there; and they admit they are frequently surprised and shocked by what they find: a picture that contradicts many of their inferences.

Not so with virologists and geneticists. They utilize a closed system of analysis, which automatically confirms what they already believe. This is the furthest thing from science. This would be on the order of claiming the devil is causing hurricanes, and then “proving it” with a gibbering brand of abstract theology.

Of course, when it comes to viruses, the follow-up is censorship or ridicule of those who doubt theological “biology.”

If a prestigious medical journal opened up its pages to an intelligent debate about the existence of the COVID virus, remarkable things would happen. In the light and fresh air of honest debate, all sorts of skeletons would emerge from the closet. But such a debate is not permitted.

Why? Obviously, because the result would be devastating.

Because of the absence of such open and frank discussion, people are left with two thoughts: a pandemic based on nothing is too astonishing to consider; and a hundred years of official propaganda about germs (and genes) as the ominous ever-present source of all disease is too formidable to reject.

I want to give you an idea what it’s like to encounter researchers’ arcane descriptions of “isolating the virus.” Here is a section from a major Chinese study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, on February 20, 2020. This is the key study which “confirmed” that a new virus was causing an outbreak in China. Title: “A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019.” [4] The section is: “Isolation of Virus”. You’ll need hip boots and a machete as you wade your way through it—

“Bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid samples were collected in sterile cups to which virus transport medium was added. Samples were then centrifuged to remove cellular debris. The supernatant was inoculated on human airway epithelial cells,13 which had been obtained from airway specimens resected from patients undergoing surgery for lung cancer and were confirmed to be special-pathogen-free by NGS.14”

“Human airway epithelial cells were expanded on plastic substrate to generate passage-1 cells and were subsequently plated at a density of 2.5×105 cells per well on permeable Transwell-COL (12-mm diameter) supports. Human airway epithelial cell cultures were generated in an air–liquid interface for 4 to 6 weeks to form well-differentiated, polarized cultures resembling in vivo pseudostratified [!] mucociliary epithelium.13”

“Prior to infection, apical surfaces of the human airway epithelial cells were washed three times with phosphate-buffered saline; 150 μl of supernatant from bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid samples was inoculated onto the apical surface of the cell cultures. After a 2-hour incubation at 37°C, unbound virus was removed by washing with 500 μl of phosphate-buffered saline for 10 minutes; human airway epithelial cells were maintained in an air–liquid interface incubated at 37°C with 5% carbon dioxide. Every 48 hours, 150 μl of phosphate-buffered saline was applied to the apical surfaces of the human airway epithelial cells, and after 10 minutes of incubation at 37°C the samples were harvested. Pseudostratified [!] mucociliary epithelium cells were maintained in this environment; apical samples were passaged in a 1:3 diluted vial stock to new cells. The cells were monitored daily with light microscopy, for cytopathic effects, and with RT-PCR, for the presence of viral nucleic acid in the supernatant. After three passages, apical samples and human airway epithelial cells were prepared for transmission electron microscopy…”

I can guarantee one thing: If a medical journal opened up its pages to a frank and protracted discussion, from all comers, about this “process of isolation,” you would see fireworks exploding in all directions. Within a few months, there would be raging global debate about the authenticity of “isolation.”

The density of the description in the China study is exactly why, for months, I’ve been demanding a straightforward real-world experimental test of the “new virus.” [5]

You line up 1000 patients who have been diagnosed with the new epidemic illness. You remove tissue samples from all of them. You put these samples through the above “isolation process.” You decide which patients have a huge amount of virus in their bodies.

Those patients should certainly be ill.

Then LET’S SEE. Are they ill or are they running marathons?

Real world.

Not lab world.

This study will never be done for one obvious reason. Unlike the astoundingly complex manipulations that go on in the lab, this real-world experiment has a yes or no answer. Are the patients ill or healthy?

But that’s asking too much from these researchers. They would rather infer and assume whatever suits their fancy.

They never want the rubber to meet the road.


SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/08/the-smoking-gun-where-is-the-coronavirus-the-cdc-says-it-isnt-available/

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/09/covid-the-virus-that-isnt-there-the-root-fraud-exposed/

[3] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/13/yet-another-case-of-the-missing-virus-they-lied-and-locked-down-the-world/

[4] https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017

[5] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/10/12/the-fake-coronavirus-and-the-missing-study-the-secret-in-plain-sight/


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The fake coronavirus and the missing study: the secret in plain sight

by Jon Rappoport

October 12, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

NOTE: Readers have sent me electron microscope images of what are claimed to be “isolated COVID virus.” An image here, an image there—this is NOT the way science is done, as I will explain fully in this article.

I have also been sent a CDC document that claims the COVID virus has been isolated. However, that document is dated two months earlier than the CDC document that admits they do not have the virus. So it means nothing.

Last week, I wrote and published two articles (here and here) exposing the root of the poisonous tree: the CDC admits it does not have an isolated COVID virus.

Therefore, SARS-CoV-2, the pandemic virus, has never been proved to exist.

This shattering fact reveals the whole pandemic is a fraud. The virus, the test, the case numbers—all fraud. And the lockdowns were unnecessary and criminal.

Now I want to reveal the study that should have been done, at the outset, when scientists were first claiming there was a pandemic based on the discovery of “a new virus.”

Here’s what you would do if you were an actual scientist: you would line up a minimum of 500 people who have been diagnosed with the epidemic illness. From each of them, you would extract tissue samples.

Then you would correctly and meticulously put each sample through a procedure that would result in 500 viewable electron microscope photographs—one from each patient. You would lay all these photos side by side.

You would answer three burning questions: do you see, in each and every photo, MANY particles of the same virus? Do you see, in all 500 photos, that same virus? Do you see, in all 500 photos, a virus you’ve never seen before?

If your answer to any of these questions is no, you go back to the drawing board. You haven’t found sufficient evidence of a new virus that is causing widespread illness.

If your answer is yes to every question, other researchers will then line up 500 new volunteers who have been diagnosed with the epidemic illness, and they will perform this same experiment, in order to confirm or deny the findings of the first team of scientists.

If they, too, answer every burning question with a yes, then a third team of researchers performs their own experiment on 500 more volunteers. And if their answer to every question is yes, then you have something. Then you have an indication, according to conventional and traditional methods, that a new disease could be on the rise.

People continue to send me an occasional electron microscope photo from a research study on “the coronavirus.” Of course, as you can see, that is not what I’m talking about at all. A single photo from here, from there—irrelevant.

If you were an honest medical researcher, would you claim the result of giving a new drug to three patients justified the approval of that drug for use on a few hundred million patients? Not a chance. The same basic principle applies here.

The study I just described, with 500 patients each time, done several times with new teams, is what the scientific method demands: large studies; clear results; and then confirmation or rejection of the initial finding, by more scientists employing the same methods and materials.

One critic, after reading my description of the proper way to do a study on the purported “new coronavirus,” said, “This wouldn’t work because it is extremely labor-intensive.” Well, guess what? The result of declaring a pandemic caused by a virus that isn’t there…and the ensuing lockdowns and economic and human destruction stemming from that declaration…is “labor-intensive” to a far greater degree.

Stopping the production engine of the world on the pretext of finding a new virus, when no new virus has been correctly found and isolated, is a crime that supersedes the sweat and effort of doing proper science.

As far as what is actually going on in labs where researchers are fiddling with genetic sequences of this and that and making vast proclamations; don’t talk to me about science. Talk to me about liability and prison.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

When will hysterical defenders of “science” face up to the destruction the US medical system is causing?

by Jon Rappoport

September 28, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Millions of masked people, who border on hysteria, believe they know COVID science.

On closer examination, these people believe what their television sets tell them. They believe Fauci because he’s on television, and he’s talking from the White House, and he disagrees with Trump. These elements are not exactly what Galileo had in mind when he challenged the Roman Church on the issue of the Earth revolving around the sun.

Of the millions who believe in Fauci television science, there are many who will say science is “studies.” They are quite sure these studies back up what Fauci and Redfield are spouting, and any contradictory studies would be artifacts dreamed up by secret minions of Trump. This sort of argument is not exactly what Galileo had in mind, either.

I recently analyzed COVID-19 from the point of view of false data.

COVID case numbers and death numbers are being fraudulently inflated to the skies. That’s an enormous crime, because the lockdowns and the economic devastation have been based on these data.

Now I want to apply that same direct analysis to the entire US medical system. In this instance…

True data are buried, hidden, and ignored.

What data? Actual numbers of deaths and maiming CAUSED by medical treatment.

When you see the dimensions of this crime and this mass human tragedy, you’ll also see further implications—titanic insurance fraud, tax fraud, and, indeed, millions upon millions of work-hours irretrievably lost to the nation’s economy.

Insurance companies are paying out billions of dollars for medical treatment that is destructive, not helpful.

Insurance companies are also paying billions in death benefits as a result of doctors, not diseases, killing people.

And all this medical destruction is being subsidized by the taxpayer.

No one has calculated the $$ cost. No one can calculate the tragic human cost.

Now here is the analysis. Understand that the vital data in these mainstream reports have been briefly revealed, then hidden.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I interviewed Starfield in 2009. I asked her whether she was aware of any overall effort by the US government to eliminate this holocaust. She answered a resounding NO. She also said her estimate of medically caused deaths in America was on the conservative side.

FOUR: BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989). Author, Jeanne Lenzer. Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices: “It [the Institute] calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

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

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

Therefore, to say the FDA isn’t aware of this finding would be absurd. The FDA knows. The FDA knows and it isn’t saying anything about it, because the FDA certifies, as safe and effective, all the medical drugs that are routinely maiming and killing Americans. Every public health agency knows the truth.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Medical crimes.

Medically caused deaths of friends, family members, loved ones, who are buried along with the truth.

No criminal investigations, no prosecutions, no guilty verdicts, no prison sentences.

But of course, you can believe everything leading lights of the US medical system tell you about COVID.

You can believe everything the press—who buries the truth about this medical holocaust—tells you about COVID.

Given the reports on medically caused death and maiming I’ve just cited and described in this article, it’s obvious that…

Leading medical journals around the world, which routinely publish glowing accounts of clinical trials of medical drugs…

Are spilling over with rank fraud, on page after page.

Indeed, here is a stunning quote from a woman who has quite probably read and analyzed more medical-drug studies than any doctor in the world:

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

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

Sure, Tony, sure.

Now put on your mask and get lost.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Why didn’t researchers do a proper study to discover whether the COVID virus exists?

by Jon Rappoport

August 26, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Imagine this fantasy: “After the published results of a new comprehensive study, which rejected the theory that a new pandemic coronavirus exists, a thousand infectious disease experts claimed they never said there was a new virus. One of these veteran researchers stated, ‘Virus? I was misquoted. I said “tires.” I was talking about car problems. I had a flat tire on the highway. Germs? Bacteria? Fungi? These are gossamer entities. No one is sure where they are or what they do. It would be irresponsible to assert they infect people. I need to find a job. I have two kids matriculating at Harvard. Do you have any idea how much that costs? Please visit my GoFundMe page. The money will be forwarded to me in my bunker at an undisclosed location…’”

I’ve been going back to the beginning of this “pandemic,” to examine the root of the fraud.

I’ve described, in full, what a proper, large-scale study would look like, if researchers were actually interested in knowing whether there is a new and unique virus causing illness and death across the world. A study using a thousand volunteers, and electron microscope photographs of samples taken from human tissue.

This study was never done. It will never be done.

Here is why.

The official symptoms of COVID-19 line up with many traditional conditions: flu, pneumonia, TB, other lung infections, common colds.

Millions of so-called “COVID cases” are not anything new. I’ve been writing about this for months. Traditional illnesses are being re-packaged under the meaningless “COVID” label.

So what do you think would happen in a large-scale study of such “COVID” patients?

The fraud would be exposed. You would eliminate these people from any association with a new virus. There would be no sign of a new virus.

“Let’s do a really correct, electron microscope study of a thousand patients, and settle, once and for all, the question of whether or not there is a new coronavirus causing people to fall ill and die.”

“Are you kidding? Do you know what the result would be? We’d land in prison.”

Take, for example, all the elderly people in nursing homes and other long long-term facilities, in hospitals, in their lonely isolated apartments. You know, people who have been suffering from multiple serious health conditions for decades, who’ve been treated with loads of toxic drugs, whose immune systems are already on the verge of collapse—who have been labeled “COVID.” Take tissue samples from them. Put them under an electron microscope.

“This is amazing, Fred. We see no signs of a new virus.”

“Yes, it’s so amazing, we’re going to bury this study. Otherwise, you and I will be hung from a lamppost.”

When you have no sign of a new virus, you have no diagnostic tests, because all those tests are aimed at registering a virus that isn’t there. And therefore, you have no meaningful case numbers or death numbers. What you have is a house of cards out in the open, in a strong wind.

You have millions of public health officials and politicians and computer modelers and medical journal editors and researchers and doctors and PR people and television talking heads and foundation funders and mask-wearing devotees all desperately trying to grab hold of NOTHING.

Yes, I’m predicting what would happen if a truly proper study were done. But this prediction can be confirmed or denied by DOING THE STUDY…

…NOT by affirming that labs all over the world have “sequenced the virus”…

…NOT by referring to five or ten electron microscope photos of five or ten patients’ tissue samples. THAT’S NOT A LARGE-SCALE STUDY.

I’m saying to the experts: put up or shut up. You claim there are millions of people who are infected with a new virus; so pick a thousand of them, line them up, and under close observation from truly independent non-conflicted expert observers, run through all the correct steps of removing tissue samples from them and placing relevant bits of that material under electron microscopes, take the photos, and examine the photos.

Do you see, side by side in all thousand photos, many, many particles of the same unique virus which you’ve never seen before? Yes or no?

And if you do, then have other researchers do another three or four such large studies and see if they replicate those original findings.

THIS IS CALLED THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

Not “I talked to my doctor and he said…”

Not “I spoke with a very smart virologist and he said…”

Not “What do you think of this single electron microscope photo…”

Not “Here is what Wikipedia says…”

Not “But Doctor Blah-Blah is an expert…”

Not “I have a framed photo of Anthony Fauci in my kitchen…”

If conventional researchers are so sure their “sequencing of the genetic structure of the virus” is proof that the new virus exists, they should be very calm and confident about doing the large-scale study I insist on.

Sure. You bet. They’re so confident and calm they’re not doing the study, and they will never do the study.

As far as that study is concerned, they’re so calm they’re paralyzed.

And under the paralysis, there is fear.

Fear that the titanic exposure of a titanic fraud will visit them and sweep them away in the blink of an eye.

“How can you possibly say all these experts are wrong and their work in the lab is misguided and irrelevant?”

DO. THE. STUDY.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

“No need to isolate the new virus, we have its genetic sequence”: Really?

“Isolate” means: “There it is, we see DIRECT evidence of it, it’s not attached to anything else, it’s not possibly hidden in a glob of cellular material, it’s not just a piece of some decaying old virus, it’s not a random chunk of DNA or RNA, it’s not a Maybe floating in a soup of cells in a dish, it’s not an assumption based on what we’re predisposed to find…”

by Jon Rappoport

August 25, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

The headline of this article is a typical defense offered to “prove” researchers actually discovered a new pandemic virus, SARS-CoV-2.

It’s laughable.

They have the genetic sequence of the virus? Well, where did they get it? From the man in the moon? An old 10,000-dollar bill in Bill Gates’ wallet?

You need a pure specimen of the virus to start with, if you want to make sure you’re fleshing out its genetic sequence.

A piece of RNA, as a starting sample, doesn’t work. It’s somewhere between a random shot in the dark and a preconceived notion.

Let’s say, instead of a purified and isolated virus, separated from all surrounding material, we’re talking about a gun used in a crime. At trial, a lab technician from the vaunted FBI lab is testifying.

Defense Attorney: So you’re sure the gun was recovered from my client’s car?

FBI tech: Absolutely.

Defense Attorney: Please explain how you located the gun.

FBI tech: It was in the junkyard.

Defense Attorney: Excuse me?

FBI tech: Well, you see, the defendant’s car was in an auto junkyard, along with about a thousand other cars. His car wasn’t actually in one piece. It had been taken apart. And then there was the dog.

Defense Attorney: The dog?

FBI tech: The watch dog. He roams over the whole junkyard. He picks up objects in his mouth and runs around with them. We found his saliva on the gun.

Defense Attorney: The gun used in the crime.

FBI tech: As far as we know. The weapon was pretty banged up. Apparently, it had been in a car that was crushed in one of those machines.

Defense Attorney: I see. Did you actually discover DNA from my client on the gun?

FBI tech: Yes. Well, I mean, we found human DNA on the gun. The sample was mixed with other DNA from an unknown source. It was difficult to separate the two samples from each other.

Defense Attorney: How difficult?

FBI tech: Isolation wasn’t possible. We couldn’t make a positive ID. But we did find a tiny piece of red thread on the gun. We determined it came from a shirt.

Defense Attorney: My client doesn’t own a red shirt.

FBI tech: He might have discarded a red shirt. And he does own shirts. Generally speaking.

At this point, the judge leans over and says to the FBI lab tech, “Are you drunk?”

FBI tech: Certainly not, Your Honor. I might have had a few drinks with lunch. I sometimes do.

So much for isolation of the gun.

Or the virus.

Intelligent researchers, where they exist, do talk about isolation and purification of a new virus from surrounding material. And if they understand what those two terms mean, they know how important this process is.

It’s the difference between saying WE HAVE DIRECT EVIDENCE OF THE VIRUS and WE HAVE SOME STUFF THAT MIGHT CONTAIN A VIRUS IF WE’RE LUCKY.

In past articles, I’ve detailed how large coherent studies should be done (but aren’t), using electron microscopy, to determine a) whether or not a new virus has been discovered, and b) how probable it is that the virus, if it exists, is causing harm to some people (whose immune systems are already compromised).

Nothing is riding on all this except the immediate future of the human race—since political leaders have decided to destroy untold numbers of jobs, businesses, and lives, all based on a story about a new pandemic virus.

Talk about a sell-job. They don’t have to isolate the virus because they’ve found its genetic sequence. That’s called putting the cart before the horse.

Based on this reasoning, I believe I could say I’ve discovered a thousand viruses in my cellar. I have “their genetic sequences.” Meaning: I’ve found sequences from who-knows-what listed in old public reports.

In elementary logic, students are taught that inferences flow from prior premises and propositions and simple rules. If you erase those premises and propositions and rules, you have nothing. You have conclusions whose basis is missing.

The statement, “We have the genetic sequence,” is meant to hypnotize the uninformed, who have been trained to salute any claim which refers to genes, as if they’re magic.

For example, there was a period during which researchers tried to pass off the idea, “one disease, one gene is the cause.” Eventually, they were forced to admit this notion didn’t fly. It was a simpleton’s fantasy. They then retreated and concocted a different hypothesis: any given disease was caused by a collection of genes, acting in concert. This soupy assertion had the advantage of vagueness; it was hyped as a moving target. If one collection of genes didn’t work (and it inevitably didn’t), researchers, with a straight face, could say the cause must be another collection.

Junkyard science.

“We might have found something that resembled a gun near a piece of what was once someone’s car, in a location filled with tens of thousands of pieces of cars. And there was a dog.”

Brilliant precision.

“We’ve narrowed down the search for the killer, Chief. There’s a twelve-percent chance he was in New York last Thursday.”

“How many people were in New York last Thursday?”

“About seven million.”

“Keep going. You’re getting somewhere.”


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Where is the virus? Fear is the only virus.

by Jon Rappoport

August 24, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Conventional researchers “discover new viruses” in their hidden labs, without independent observers watching and filming every step and move, so virology has become a mystical farce.

They SAY they’ve found a new coronavirus that is infecting and killing people, justifying the fear and the lockdowns and economic and human devastation. But they may as well be saying they’ve found a pink and purple ghost in a closet, and we should huddle in the dark until it goes away.

Longtime friend, colleague, and relentless independent investigator, Harry Blazer wrote this in a blistering email to his list:

“…science has even co-opted and bastardized the term ‘isolated’ to mean putting a sample [from a patient] in a cell culture, adding various agents to create a reaction including antibiotics and various caustic chemicals to see if the cells die – REALLY!!! How could you possibly know what caused what to happen when you are adding all kinds of shit to cause something to happen? It is like adding adjuvants (poisons) to a vaccine in order to produce an antibody response to prove that the vaccine works. REALLY!…”

Yes, in that mystical lab ritual, researchers are putting together a cell culture, which includes what they claim is the new virus; and then to “prove” this supposed virus is harmful and kills those cells, they add caustic substances that do, indeed, cause harm to cells.

This reminds me of animal experiments back in the 1970s, at the US National Institutes of Health, where the obsessed (and failed) goal was proving viruses could cause cancer. To “prepare” the animals for injections of the purported viruses, all sorts of toxic chemicals were jammed into the animals—in an effort to weaken them to the point at which the viruses would hopefully “create uncontrolled cell growth,” the hallmark of cancer.

There’s a simple name for this sort of lunatic research: stacking the deck.

What Harry Blazer is referring to in his statement is just one piece of the arcane lab protocol designed to “find a new virus and prove it is harmful.” We need EVERY piece of the process brought out into the light for all to see and understand and analyze.

A hundred years of Rockefeller-medicine propaganda has entrained gullible populations to “fear the germ,” forget the inherent strength and resilience of their own immune systems, and forget what health is.

As I keep mentioning, if germs were the basic problem, we would all be dead a thousand times over, because the gigantic number of microbes in our bodies and the environment is incalculable.

In several key articles, I’ve described how a proper large-scale study should be done, utilizing electron microscopy, in order to demonstrate the likelihood that a new virus is present and causes illness. Such studies are never done. The reason is clear. The naked results would torpedo absurd hypotheses about supposed viral epidemics.

Expert propagandists know, and have stated, that the best lie to tell is a huge lie. Sell that one, and you’re in. For example, once the population has internalized religious faith in The Germ, reversing that belief seems preposterous.

“You mean they’ve been lying to us about THAT? No, that couldn’t be…”

Yes, it could be, and it is.

“You mean, they’re a selling a STORY about a virus?”

Bingo. We have a winner.

Back in the 1980s, when I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., I decided to check up on efforts to infect animals with (purported) HIV and produce AIDS. These animal experiments involved chimps kept in sealed facilities across the US.

Keep in mind, the chimps were no longer living in their native environments. They were no longer among their traditional communities. They were existing in cages, kept there for long periods. Years. In other words, every possible psychological assault on them was being deployed—in order to impair their immune systems.

I spoke with the scientist who was in charge of tracking every one of those lab chimps. I asked him whether the injections had caused any “AIDS effects.”

No, he said. Not in any of the animals.

Robert Gallo, the “co-discoverer of HIV,” was reported to have said: “Let me take a crack at those damn chimps! I’ll infect them!”

Who knows what horrors he would have unleashed on the animals, to make it appear their immune systems were failing from “the virus.”

Eventually, researchers did announce they had been able to “infect” some chimps. This is like saying, “We dropped bombs on the enemy and they continued to fight, so we dropped much, much bigger bombs, and then they gave in…”

Welcome to the science of virology.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

COVID: Going to the root of the poisonous tree

by Jon Rappoport

August 20, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Before I jump in, I want to point to a film that hacks away the leaves, the branches, the trunk and the roots of the poisonous tree of vaccination all at once: VAXXED II, directed by Brian Burrowes. I urge you to watch it. “Urge” is too light a word. What is coming down the pipeline at us, in terms of attempts at vaccine mandates…this film will only strengthen your resolve, even if you’re quite sure you don’t need strengthening. The film contains many interviews with parents of vaccine-devastated children, and the children are there, too. The children who have died are there as well. Nobody has ever made a film like this.

We DO need to drill down to the roots of the poisonous tree.

Some people make this calculation: “I don’t want my view of COVID to appear too radical. That would drive the audience away. So I’ll cut myself off at a certain point and try to give the audience pieces of the puzzle they can digest…”

For example, they would assert: “I’m not against vaccines. I just want to make them safer.”

They would say: “We have to agree there is a new virus spreading around the world. If we don’t, people will reject everything we say. So let’s focus on whether the virus is as dangerous as health officials claim it is.”

They would say: “We have to accept official case numbers as a starting point, even if untold numbers of people are being diagnosed with COVID by a casual glance at their symptoms, and even if the tests are inaccurate…”

Bit by bit, and piece by piece, people would be accepting the official COVID story, until there is very little to argue about.

Let’s take the issue of safer vaccines. How are they going to be made safer? Manufacturers are going to throw in the towel and just eliminate the toxic adjuvants? They’ll eliminate the injected germs which are the very basis of the exercise? They’ll make vaccines in outer space, where, hopefully, contamination with random viruses would be avoided? The synthetic genes they insert in the body will magically refrain from creating many horrendous ripple-effects?

Deeper still, why do immune systems need a “rehearsal for the real thing”—which is the foundational hypothesis underlying vaccination. Nature isn’t sufficient? We must fight off every conceivable germ with a shot in the arm?

Why not try to improve the strength of immune systems through non-medical means? Nutrition, for instance, was the key reason for the historical decline of traditional diseases. Along with improved sanitation.

“No, let’s not go there. Too many people will reject us if we reject vaccines.”

I beg to differ. We are in a long-term war against the medical cartel. It’s not going away. Think ten thousand years into the future. That’s a reasonable estimate of the length of the battle.

“Look, I know there are serious questions about the original discovery of the COVID virus. Maybe the researchers didn’t use the proper procedures. But let’s not awaken that sleeping giant. Too many people won’t be able to fathom what we’re talking about. It’s too far out. Then they’ll reject everything else we’re saying.”

Yes? And? So? Sooner or later we’re going to have to bring up the subject. Because this isn’t the only time “discovery” was faked. And it won’t be the last. So let’s jump in now. Don’t stint. Don’t hold back. Go to the root.

I think of my good friend and colleague, Robert Scott Bell. Go to his site, robertscottbell.com. Listen to his radio show. He’s been on the front lines of health for more than 20 years. Every day. He dives deep. He never lets people forget that the terrain vs. the germ is still one of the most important debates in human history. Are germs the basic problem, or is the overall condition of the body and its ability to remain vibrant and resilient the paramount factor?

That argument has been largely forgotten, even in the natural health community. Why? Because over time, too many people have said, “Oh, we can’t bring THAT up. It’s too radical for the masses.”

So now those “natural people” are wearing masks and fear the virus.

—Thus proving you can accept every “natural” slogan coming down the pipeline and still buy counterfeit science.

The issue isn’t the content of slogans. It’s the acceptance of any gross shortcuts that seek to avoid the need to do something called THINKING.

“Oh. But we must have slogans. People are too dim to figure out matters on their own.”

Good luck with that notion. Do you really believe you can win a long-term war, AT THE ROOT, by engaging in a contest of slogans? That’s like saying the failure to teach basic literacy in schools stems from older computers. We need better computers in classrooms. Idiot’s delight, brought to you by Bill Gates.

A ten-thousand-year war. Don’t shrink away from it.

Here’s an historical example of root vs. compromise. It’s called pellagra.

Among the symptoms: Large scaly sores. Huge areas of red inflamed skin. Diarrhea. Weakness. Loss of appetite. Abdominal pain.

In the early 20th century, several million people in the American South suffered from it. Public health officials asserted the cause was a germ.

The question was, which germ? A prestigious government commission was appointed to find the answer.

At the time, there were people who suspected a germ wasn’t the cause, but they kept their mouths shut, in part because they thought they couldn’t sell the idea. It was too radical. Better to argue about whether quarantines would work. Better to argue about whether case clusters were a fertile area for research. Better to argue about whether the germ might be carried in corn, across farms. Better to argue about unique weather conditions in the South, where the disease was concentrated. Argue about anything other than the existence of a germ as the causative agent.

Flash forward THIRTY YEARS. After fighting their own war, a few researchers correctly convinced the medical world that pellagra was the result of a niacin deficiency.

There was no germ. It didn’t exist. It was a pompous assumption, championed by arrogant scientists, who wanted to own the territory of disease research.

What if the few dissenting investigators, who endured three decades of utter rejection by the establishment, had decided, “Well, we can’t claim there’s no germ involved at all. That would be too much. We can’t go that far. We can’t go to the root. Let’s debate about the weather, the case clusters, the corn fields—issues where we can make a stand, where we can have an effect…”


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

COVID: Did they actually discover a new coronavirus? The question won’t go away.

by Jon Rappoport

August 17, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Recently, I’ve offered important evidence AGAINST the claim that researchers have discovered SARS-CoV-2, the new COVID-19 pandemic virus.

No large-scale electron microscope study has been done with, say, 1000 pandemic patients lined up; with tissue samples taken from all of them; with those samples carefully handled; with relevant material photographed under an electron microscope; with the particles in the photos examined to see if all of them are of the same unique virus, and have never been seen before.

Of course, researchers would argue against such a study, because they never perform it. They don’t want to. They’re afraid the results would make it clear they’re involved in enormous fraud.

“Well, we thought we had a new virus, but it turns out the particles in the photos are of all sorts of material. Different viruses, genetic fragments, cellular debris, exosomes, and so on. Back to the drawing board…”

If there existed a truly honest editor at a prestigious medical journal, this is what he would write, in an effort to get at the TRUTH. You know, the supposed goal of science—

“I must confess, after reflection and conversation, we here at the Journal don’t know how researchers discover a new virus. They make pronouncements, but what are they actually DOING in their labs?”

“You see, the steps they take, the procedures they engage in, are never captured on film, step by step. No truly independent observers are there as witnesses. It’s as if the lab is a holy of holies, and only loyal initiates are allowed in. This is an intolerable situation.”

“This mystery must be penetrated. For example, official researchers say they are working out the genetic sequence of a new virus, but what does that mean? What sample are they are starting out with and using? Do they already have a truly purified specimen of the new virus? If so, where did they get it, and how? They grew it in a culture of cells? Really? And they purified it from that culture? We refuse to accept these unexamined claims at face value.”

“Therefore, we’re opening our pages to an ongoing discussion and debate on the questions, HOW ARE RESEARCHERS ACTUALLY DISCOVERING A NEW VIRUS? HOW SHOULD THEY? We will accept submissions from many quarters. Not just the usual experts. We aim to break up the chokehold and monopoly of opinion on this vital subject.”

In the realm of so-called science, there is a veritable army of self-styled experts in charge, who say, “Of course we know what we’re doing when we discover a new virus.” And that, they think, is enough.

It isn’t.

It especially isn’t, when the issue is a claim of a global viral pandemic; and repressive containment measures are being imposed, which are destroying countless jobs and businesses and lives. All because of a story about a new virus.

We’ve heard the phrase, “the science is settled.” But settled for whom? Time and again, it turns out the purveyors of pseudoscience have a political or commercial agenda that is driving their assertions. They posture, they scoff at critics. They refuse to step forward and engage in honest and prolonged debate. They censor counter-arguments.

In the past 35 years, during the purported epidemics called AIDS, West Nile, SARS, bird flu, Mad Cow, Swine Flu, Zika, once official researchers announced they had found the cause, there has never been a truly PROPER large-scale study launched to confirm or deny those hypotheses about causation.

Over the past six months, a few readers have contacted me with references to COVID studies that show an electron microscope photo here, a photo there, along with the researchers’ statements that the new coronavirus has, in fact, been isolated and proven to exist. That’s not proof. That’s not what I’m talking about AT ALL.

If a drug company announced that six people, who had taken a new drug, showed major improvement in their illness-condition, would that constitute proof of anything? Would that be sufficient evidence for licensing the drug, as safe and effective, for widespread public use?

When I say LARGE-SCALE STUDY, that’s exactly what I mean. And one such study isn’t enough. Other studies must be done as well, to verify or disprove the finding of the first set of researchers. All the researchers must be free of conflicts of interest.

This is called the scientific method.

Let me break it down a little further, since nobody in the conventional scientific community will. Let’s say you do the large-scale electron microscope study I outlined above. And you find that, in 80 of the 1000 photos, you do see many, many particles of the same unique coronavirus, and you’ve never seen that virus before.

What conclusions would you draw? You would say, “Well, first of all, we don’t have PROOF of anything resembling a pandemic. Looks like a dud. Maybe…could be…eight percent of the 1000 people who have this list of GENERAL FLU-LIKE SYMPTOMS might be suffering from a new viral condition. MAYBE. If we’ve already made projections of how many people will contract this new disease, we’ll need to provisionally cut down those numbers by 92 percent. Hmm, no, that doesn’t sound at all like a global pandemic. Now we need to look at the 920 people who also have these flu-like symptoms, but show no signs of having a new virus, and compare them with the 80 people and see what we can discover. Let’s dig into this. Is it possible the 80 people have a new virus, but it isn’t actually causing any illness? How many of the 80 are already suffering from serious health conditions that have nothing to do with this purported virus? How many have been treated for years with toxic drugs? How many have lung conditions stemming from heavily polluted air? We need to make a list of possible reasons these 80 people are sick and look at those causes. Let’s go back and examine the electron microscope photos again. Are we actually seeing many particles of the same new virus from all 80 of the patients…? Do we have any CDC or WHO researchers on board? They always find a new virus…”

An approach like that would start to make some sense. More large studies would definitely be needed.

Of course, there wouldn’t be any MONEY in this. There wouldn’t be an opportunity for massive top-down CONTROL in this. You couldn’t wreck a global economy on this basis and try to usher in a new political system for planet Earth. You couldn’t convince seven billion people to take a destructive vaccine.

But you would be putting your feet on a road that resembles something called science.

And yet, in an era which is said to be characterized by science, you would be, guess what? An extreme outlier.

Odd.

That seems to be a contradiction.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Tony Fauci and the Swine Flu disaster; betrayal of trust

by Jon Rappoport

August 14, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

I take you back to the summer of 2009, when the CDC and the World Health Organization were hyping the “deadly H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic.”

They were, of course, also urging people to take the new Swine Flu vaccine. On that subject, here is an excerpt from Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense (3/27/20):

“For example, [Dr. Anthony] Fauci once shilled for the fast-tracked H1N1 influenza (‘swine flu’) vaccine on YouTube, reassuring viewers in 2009 that serious adverse events were ‘very, very, very rare.’ Shortly thereafter, the vaccine went on to wreak havoc in multiple countries, increasing miscarriage risks in pregnant women in the U.S., provoking a spike in adolescent narcolepsy in Scandinavia and causing febrile convulsions in one in every 110 vaccinated children in Australia—prompting the latter to suspend its influenza vaccination program in under-fives.”

Thank you. Dr. Fauci. Explain to us why you haven’t been downgraded to pumping gas in Death Valley or sent to prison?

However, that is only half the Swine Flu story. The other half—which involves an astounding hoax—was surely something Fauci was aware of at the time.

Fauci was, in fact, recommending a highly dangerous vaccine for protection against AN EPIDEMIC THAT DIDN’T EXIST AT ALL.

His friends and professional colleagues at the CDC were creating the hoax.

Let me run it down for you.

In the summer of 2009, the CDC was claiming there were thousands of Swine Flu cases in the US. But behind these statistics lay an unnerving secret. A major crime, considering the CDC’s mandate to report the truth to the American people:

Secretly, the CDC had stopped counting cases of Swine Flu.

What? Why?

CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, discovered the CDC secret; and she found out why.

The routine lab testing of tissue samples from the most likely Swine Flu patients was coming back, in the overwhelming percentage of cases, with: NO SIGN OF SWINE FLU OR ANY OTHER KIND OF FLU.

Attkisson wrote an article about this scandal, and it was published on the CBS News website. However, the next, bigger step—putting out the story on CBS television news—was waylaid. No deal. And CBS shut down any future investigation on the subject. Attkisson’s article died on the vine. No other major news outlet in the world picked up her article and ran with it deeper into the rabbit hole.

Here is what Attkisson told me when I interviewed her:

Rappoport: In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, [secretly] stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?

Attkisson: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was “the most original story” he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others pushed to stop it [after it was published on the CBS News website] and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.

—end of interview excerpt—

So…fake pandemic, CDC crimes, and a damaging vaccine.

But that wasn’t end of it. The CDC wanted to commit another crime. About three weeks after Attkisson’s findings were published on the CBS News website, the CDC, obviously in a panic, decided to double down. If one lie is exposed, tell an even bigger one. A much bigger one.

Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon).

Are your eyeballs popping? They should be.

Fast forward to 2020. Who in his right mind, armed with a little history, would believe anything the CDC is saying about COVID-19? The discovery of a new coronavirus. the case numbers, the accuracy of the diagnostic tests, the need for lockdowns and economic devastation, the safety and importance of a vaccine, the fear porn? Who would believe any of it?

And who would believe anything coming out of the mouth of Dr. Anthony Fauci, who hyped a highly destructive Swine Flu vaccine for an epidemic that didn’t exist at all?

Only a fool.

SOURCES:

childrenshealthdefense.org/news/dr-fauci-and-covid-19-priorities-therapeutics-now-or-vaccines-later/

cdc.gov/media/transcripts/2009/t091009.htm

cbsnews.com/news/swine-flu-cases-overestimated/

webmd.com/cold-and-flu/news/20091112/over-22-million-in-us-had-h1n1-swine-flu#1


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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