Memo to Governors: Free states vs. Slave states

by Jon Rappoport

April 13, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

US Supreme Court Justice, Louis Brandeis, 1932: “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.”

You governors are now seeing, whether you like it or not, a competitive situation developing among the states.

Some states are loosening the COVID restrictions; others are tightening them.

In this ongoing process, for example, a remarkable exodus is occurring—from New York to Florida. From lockdowns to freedom.

Some of you governors who demand lockdowns, masks, distancing, immunity certificates, etc., are betting the federal government will somehow intercede, back you up, and force the free states to fall in line with your brutal COVID tactics—thus “leveling the playing field.”

This is unlikely to happen. The White House and the Congress understand there is a limit to how far they can push the states, without fomenting uncontrollable rebellion.

That means you’ll be caught with your pants down, as your citizens emigrate, in ever larger numbers, to freer states.

What business owner wouldn’t prefer to set up shop in an open state economy, rather than shutting down and descending into bankruptcy in your state?

And if you believe the brigades of Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube users who demand the harshest COVID policies are going to win the day, you’re entertaining a delusion.

You’re going to stand by and watch your economies continue to shrink, while other states flourish.

Believe it not, this is one of the eventualities the Founders foresaw, when they enshrined the federal/state structure in the Constitution. Limiting the power of central government meant that various individual states could choose their own paths.

This is happening now.

It is happening, regardless of media moaning, regardless of Fauci-ist objections and CDC pressure to conform to suicidal COVID policies.

If you governors of freer states have the courage to double down, and do something that will lift your economies to even greater heights, I have a suggestion.

Push through a law that permits any healing practitioner to treat patients for any given condition, as long as his remedy creates no greater harm than the orthodox treatment for that same condition.

You’ll see a huge influx of practitioners and patients to your state. It’s called Health Freedom—and it’s a policy that welcomes adults who are willing to take responsibility for their own health choices. Health Freedom also booms the economy.

It’s the opposite of forced medical mandates.

And when, five years from now, that new law provokes an upsurge in the overall vitality of your citizens—with no significant downside—you will have proven something more than the absurdity of the COVID restrictions.

You will have proven that the overall medical apparatus out of which those restrictions flowed is, in fact, inherently biased, undeservedly monopolistic, financially driven, scientifically corrupt, inhumanly cruel, and politically motivated as a covert means of controlling the lives of The People.

You will have restored a great portion of the freedom for which men and women have fought, for centuries.

Isn’t that a goal worth pursuing?

CODA: As evidence for my assertions about the US medical system, I’m printing here my 2009 interview with the late Dr. Barbara Starfield, a revered public health expert who spent many years at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published her review, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”

Her conclusions: Every year, in America, the medical system kills 225,000 people. 106,000 as a direct result of the administration of FDA approved drugs; 119,000 as a result of mistreatment and errors in hospitals.

Extrapolate those numbers out to a decade, and the death toll is a staggering 2.25 million people.

Here is my email interview with Dr. Starfield:

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

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

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

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

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

NO.

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

Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—end of interview—

Dr. Starfield’s published JAMA review, and this interview, raise mind-bending implications. Among them: prestigious medical journals routinely print glowing reports on many drugs which are, in fact, killing and maiming patients in great numbers. This means that the journal reports, and the studies on which they are based, are rank with fraud and corruption.

In that regard, here is a comment from a doctor who has, no doubt, perused as many such studies as any person in the world:

Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption”: “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.”

This is the overall system that sustains the leading lights who sell COVID policy and “science.”

Let the buyer beware and rebel.


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.

My original position on the non-existent virus

by Jon Rappoport

March 18, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

About a year ago, I wrote and published my position on the existence of SARS-CoV-2.

I still stand by it.

It’s worth revisiting. File it under: “follow the actual science.”

If researchers had actually been interested in proving the virus exists, they would have a conducted a large-scale study. Here it is.

Take 500 people who have been diagnosed with the pandemic disease, line them up, and take swab samples from them.

Using correct and meticulous procedures, which involve centrifuging those samples, produce 500 clear electron microscope photos—one good photo for each sample.

Place the 500 photos side by side, and answer the following questions:

One: In each and every photo, do you see MANY particles of what is unmistakably a virus?

Two: In each and every photo, are these particles the same virus?

Three: Are these particles of a virus you’ve never seen before?

If you answer any of the three questions with a no, you go back to the drawing board. Your attempt to prove the existence of a new virus which is causing disease has failed. (You might have shown a new virus exists, but it is non-relevant, because you haven’t shown it is causing disease.)

If you answered yes to the three questions, you bring in a new team of researchers, who enroll a new group of 500 volunteers who have been diagnosed with the pandemic disease, and they conduct the same experiment. Why? Because confirmation of results by an independent group is part of what is called the scientific method. At one time, every high school student was taught the scientific method.

If this new group of researchers carries out the study and answers no to any of the three questions, the attempt to prove a new virus exists and is causing disease has failed.

If the new group answers yes to the three questions, a third group of researchers would enlist 500 new volunteers and carry out the test once again. This would constitute further confirmation.

If this third group answers yes to the three questions, then you have strong evidence. (Of course, the electron microscope is registering dead virus. It isn’t looking at viruses in action or motion in the body. So it isn’t infallible.)

Now you see the futility of claiming that samples taken from one, two, or three patients in a study prove anything at all.

Correct studies of this kind should always use large numbers of people. For example, what would you say to the clinical trial of a new drug that only enlisted three people as volunteers? Would the outcome be sufficient to apply for FDA approval of the drug? Of course not.

The large-scale study—with confirmation—I’ve described above has never been done in the case of “COVID-19.”

Therefore, no proof exists that SARS-CoV-2 is real and is causing disease.

The burden of proof rests with the researchers who assert that SARS-CoV-2 is real and is the cause of a pandemic.

They have told that story. Since their story can’t be backed up, there is no reason to believe in the existence of SARS-CoV-2.

I could say a new measles virus or a new hepatitis virus or a new virus from outer space is causing a pandemic, but that, too, would just be a story.


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 non-existent virus: it undercuts all other stories

by Jon Rappoport

February 1, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

In this article, I continue to trace the implications of the missing virus; I’m referring to the fact the no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists.

Here I take a wider look at the situation.

Apparently, the notion of a virus was born when germ theorists ran out of bacteria to explain illnesses. So they claimed there had to be a smaller invisible particle, which came to be called “virus.”

Since that fateful choice, researchers have encountered various problems. Chief among them: how do you to prove, in specific instances, that these viruses exist and cause illness?

Flashing forward—two modern avenues of proof have been invented. One, twist and reverse the meaning of “isolation.” And two, sequence the genetic structure of viruses by using pre-set computer programs to build, out of thin air, without justification, collections of genetic information, ending up with nothing more than virtual entities.

In past articles, I’ve analyzed and rejected both avenues of “research.”

In the first case, there is the unjustified presumption that the virus is contained in a soup in a dish in a lab, and this is called “isolation,” when it is actually non-isolation. In the second case, there is no true sequencing. It’s all made up out of unmerited supposition and guesswork.

However, 99.9% of mainstream scientists are true believers in their own methods and fabrications. They actually accept what they’re doing as science.

Therefore, in virology labs all over the world—including bio-weapons facilities—THE RESEARCHERS HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THEY’RE DOING. THEY DON’T KNOW HOW FAR FROM REALITY THEY ACTUALLY ARE.

THEY HAVE NO CLUE AS TO THE ABSURDITY OF THEIR OWN WORK.

They’re taken in and fooled and bamboozled by their own theories.

It’s as if explorers tasked with mapping the moon, on site, up close and personal, are carrying out their jobs in underground coal mines. And they don’t recognize there is a problem.

The tenth of one percent of the researchers who do see a problem understand they have to keep their mouths shut.

Am I claiming, with finality, that ALL “viruses” have no physical existence? No. At least, not yet. That’s an open question.

In the case of SARS-CoV-2, I see no legitimate evidence for its existence.

And what’s worse, scientists are hypnotized by their own assumptions; and therefore, they’re immune from re-thinking what they’re doing.

It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a system trapped the practitioners working inside it.

It’s how you train humans to be robots.

At first, the humans follow the rules that define the system. Then they graduate to enforcing the rules. Their minds become excessively literal. They view alternatives as heresies.

“Sir, you have no idea what you’re doing. You think you’re discovering new viruses. You think you’re manipulating them to create new forms.”

“Don’t bother me, I’m busy.”

“You’re saying non-isolation is isolation. You’re using algorithms to invent ‘viruses’ made up of irrelevant data. They’re data constructs, nothing more.”

“You’re a blasphemer. Don’t bother me, I’m busy.”

“You’re fiddling with processes that have nothing to do with what you think they have to do with…”

“How did you get into my lab?”

“I brought a camera crew. We want to film and document every single step you take to ‘discover a new virus’.”

“Absolutely not. You’re not official. This is a high-security facility.”

“In other words, sight unseen, we have to accept your claims as if they were law.”

“Yes, that’s the rule. We’re not running a debating society. We’re doing science.”

“But you see, that’s the point. You’re NOT doing science.”

“What are you saying?”

“You have no idea what you’re doing. You THINK you’re discovering new viruses. You BELIEVE you’re manipulating them. But you’re only working with self-generated fantasies.”

“I’ll tell you what. I’ll inject you with one of these fantasies and let’s see what happens.”

“You don’t possess an actual specimen of an isolated and purified virus, separated from all other material.”

“Here it is, in this dish.”

“No. LOOK AT IT. In that dish, there’s a soup. It contains human and monkey cells, toxic drugs and chemicals, and other genetic material. It’s the furthest thing from ‘isolated’.”

“We know the virus is there. Some of the cells are dying. The virus must be doing the killing.”

“No. The toxic drugs and chemicals could be doing the killing. Furthermore, the cells are being starved of nutrients. That alone can explain their death. Think it through.”

“There’s nothing to think about. Our procedures have been verified by thousands of studies and published scientific papers.”

“Consensus is not the same thing as truth.”

“Security, come to the lab. We have a non-certified intruder. Escort him from the premises.”

“That’s your bottom line?”

“Our work is classified. You’re a civilian. We pronounce; you obey.”

“And that’s science?”

“Absolutely. Didn’t they teach you that in school?”

“YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU’RE DOING IN THIS LAB. You’re a prisoner of your own illusions.”

“Security, hurry it up. This man is a subversive…”

“Suppose you believe you’re working with viruses, but you’re only working with IDEAS AND STORIES ABOUT VIRUSES?”

“What do you mean?”

“You’re not really isolating anything. And you’re not sequencing anything. The sequences are just INFORMATION cobbled together from genetic reference libraries by computer programs. It’s all, at best, a digital metaphor for what you believe exists. You’re generating fairy tales.”

“Even if that were true, it would be the closest we could come to reality. Nothing is perfect.”

“A rock is perfect. You see it, you kick it, you sit on it.”

“Viruses are very small.”

“Even more reason to be sure you’re dealing with something actual.”

“We use PCR technology.”

“But it only looks for a piece of RNA you ASSUME comes from ‘the virus’. Since you don’t have an isolated and purified virus, you have no reason to assume the RNA comes from ‘the virus’.”

“Security, take this man to his car. Take the film crew with him. They have no right to be here. This is a government-funded facility. Private citizens have no access to government.”

CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER: “Actually, I’d like to hear the rest of the conversation. My sister just took the vaccine to protect her against ‘the virus’, and now she’s in the hospital…”


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 coronavirus: using “animal models” as proof of infection; another lie

by Jon Rappoport

January 28, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

There are a number of badly informed scientists who believe current “animal models” prove SARS-CoV-2 is infectious. They’re wrong.

First of all, I’ve been demonstrating that no one has proved the virus exists. But putting that aside for the moment and assuming it does exist, for the purposes of argument only…what is an animal model?

Researchers take a group of animals and inject them with a serum which contains a purported virus. Then the researchers see whether the animals develop symptoms and (supposed) markers of the disease in question.

So far, I have only found evidence that researchers are using mice and, perhaps, another similar species for their model.

Yet they claim, because of the mice’s reactions, that, yes, the virus is infectious.

This is absurd.

The whole point of animal models is: you work your way up the tree of species, from mice, rabbits, dogs, cats, and so on, until you arrive at the species which most closely resembles humans, which would be chimps. The reactions of chimps are what you’re looking for.

After all, the entire enterprise is geared to estimate whether the virus will infect humans. Since injecting humans with a virus is verboten, you work with chimps.

So, asserting that infecting mice is proof of anything is a gross lie.

Any conventional scientist would know that.

Another issue: quite often, you’ll find that the mice in these experiments have been genetically altered. Why? Why can’t researchers work with ordinary wild mice?

Obviously, because they want to prep the mice in a way that would make them more vulnerable to viruses. Another absurdity. In that case, the researchers are not really working with animals at all. They’re working with artifacts modified in the lab.

Using a mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 to prove the virus is infectious is a con. A farce.

Back in 1988, when I was writing my book, AIDS INC., I looked into HIV experiments using chimps. I spoke with the man who was monitoring all the facilities in the US where groups of these chimps were held.

Keep in mind, this was four years after HIV had been announced as the cause of AIDS. So the chimps had been in cages for a while. Cut off from their companions and families, in a completely alien environment, imprisoned, isolated. These circumstances alone would have contributed to a grossly reduced state of immune-system capability. And yet…

The chief monitor over all these chimp facilities told me that, thus far, none of the injections of HIV (assuming the virus actually exists) had caused any symptoms which could be aligned with the wide-ranging definition of AIDS.

This utter failure deterred no mainstream AIDS scientist. In other words, if the animal model fails, ignore it. Claim the virus is infectious anyway.

Welcome to big-time research.

—Oh, and one other thing. Newsflash: Chimps are not humans. ALL animal models are false.

Other than that, the system is perfect.


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: If they haven’t isolated the virus, how can they make a vaccine?

by Jon Rappoport

January 27, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Answer: They can’t.

“But…but, you see, we take a piece of RNA, and we inject it into the person, and the RNA forces the cells to manufacture a protein that’s very similar to a protein in SARS-CoV-2…and then the immune system swings into gear and produces antibodies to THAT protein, and THEN the person has achieved immunity from the virus…”

Sorry, no dice.

As I’ve been demonstrating for months now, there is no proof that SARS-CoV-2 exists [1] [2]. Therefore, “the piece of RNA” that’s injected can’t be assumed to be related to “the virus.”

Therefore, the protein which the cells produce in the body is merely CLAIMED to be similar to a protein in the unproven “SARS-CoV-2.”

There is no KNOWLEDGE here.

That piece of RNA which is injected into the body—why should we assume it has anything to do with a virus called SARS-CoV-2, when no one has an isolated specimen of this “SARS-CoV-2?”

We shouldn’t assume.

Therefore, everything that happens, inside the body, after the injection, is up for grabs. What is the immune system reacting to?

Why bother, in the first place, to make a vaccine against a virus when you don’t have the virus?

There are several ways to attack this absurdity, and they all come down to the same bottom line: no provable virus, forget the vaccine.

I keep coming up with analogies to explain the insanity of the COVID virologists—

“Three trains collided last night outside Chicago. Investigators who turned up at the scene this morning failed to find a shred of wreckage. But they insist the collision occurred, resulting in a vast explosion. The public is warned to stay away from the cordoned-off zone.”

That fanciful illustrations is LESS extreme than: “We’ve just released a vaccine for a virus that we never discovered.”

As I’ve explained in other articles and interviews, “discovering” the genetic sequence, the structure of the purported SARS-CoV-2, involves all sorts of conjecture [3] [4]. Researchers aren’t looking through some sort of cosmic microscope at rows of genes lined up like cars in a supermarket parking lot.

Researchers assume—on the basis of zero evidence—that certain older reference genetic sequences in libraries are contained in “the new virus.” They use a computer program to scavenge those sequences and build out the ASSUMED structure of “the new virus” and automatically smooth out any wrinkles or gaps.

This would be on the order of fabricating a hologram of a gun that the police will claim is the actual gun used in the commission of a crime.

“Yes, Your Honor, this image you see floating in mid-air IS the weapon Mr. Jones used when he held up the bank last month. It is not a ‘representation,’ as the defense counsel would have you believe. We’re talking about cutting-edge science. We have experts who will testify under oath…”

Judge: “In other words, sir, you’re telling this court that, if the bank teller had some sort of ‘anti-hologram’ program on his computer, he could have prevented the crime with a few clicks of his mouse. Very interesting. Let me ask you, which drugs are you on?”

Prosecutor: “None, Your Honor. Actually, such anti-hologram programs exist. In the area of COVID virology, they’re called vaccines, and they protect people against SARS-CoV-2…”

Above the entrances to virology institutes, they should inscribe: ALICE IN WONDERLAND.


SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/01/26/sars-cov-2-has-not-been-proven-to-exist-shocking/

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/01/the-sars-cov-2-virus-was-never-proved-to-exist/

[3] https://twitter.com/jonrappoport/status/1339769925402038273

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6-8VRGvNtQ


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.

SARS-CoV-2 has not been proven to exist: the shocking research of Christine Massey

by Jon Rappoport

January 26, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

You can view the work of Christine Massey at her site, fluoridefreepeel.ca (also, twitter: [1]). She deserves the thanks of every thinking person.

Quoting Massey [2]: “I (CM), along with some anonymous helpers, have submitted Freedom of Information requests to various Canadian institutions seeking records that describe the isolation of ‘SARS-COV-2’ (the alleged ‘COVID-19 virus’) from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

“My requests were intentionally worded to weed out the fraudulent, illogical and unscientific claims of having ‘isolated SARS-COV-2’, of which there are many…”

“My requests were not limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, and not limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to records of isolation performed by anyone, anywhere on the planet.”

“Colleagues in numerous other countries have obtained responses to the same and similar information requests from dozens of additional institutions.”

“As of January 22, 2021 46 institutions and offices have responded to said requests. Every institution has failed to provide, or cite, even 1 record describing the actual isolation of any ‘SARS-COV-2’ from a patient sample by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever.”

Here is a typical response to a Massey request, from the Ontario Ministry of Health. The response arrived after four months: “This is to inform you that no responsive records were located. A reasonable search of the ministry was conducted, and no responsive records were found. Dr. David C. Williams, Chief Medical Officer of Health, is responsible for this decision.”

NO records indicating SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated. “Isolated” means “separated from other material.” It means “we actually found the virus and could identify it.”

ACTUAL ISOLATION MEANS THE VIRUS EXISTS. INABILITY TO ISOLATE IT MEANS THERE IS NO PROOF THE VIRUS EXISTS.

When, as Massey indicates, 46 separate agencies say the same thing—“no records of isolation available”—we are past wondering what is going on. We’re firmly in the territory of FRAUD.

As I’ve stated many times [3] [4], virologists are twisting and torturing the meaning of the word “isolated.” They claim they have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. “In a soup” is the very opposite of “isolated.”

The soup contains animal and human cells, toxic chemicals and toxic drugs, and other genetic material. Some of the cells are dying. The researchers preposterously state the dying must be the result of the virus attacking these cells.

However, the chemicals and drugs could be doing the killing. And the human and animal cells are being starved of nutrients—which fact alone is enough to cause them to die.

Therefore, there is no evidence that the purported (and un-isolated) virus is in the soup in the dish in the lab.

This “proof of isolation” is on the level of claiming the sun is the moon, Alaska is a small town on Saturn, and a rabbit is a spaceship.

It’s no accident that Christine Massey’s relentless investigation has turned up zero records of actual isolation.


SOURCES:

[1] https://twitter.com/ChrisMasseyFOIs

[2] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/foi-reveals-ontario-ministry-of-health-has-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-by-anyone-anywhere-ever/

[3] https://twitter.com/jonrappoport/status/1339769925402038273

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6-8VRGvNtQ


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 vaccine secret, a stunner

by Jon Rappoport

January 15, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

From the off-guardian, January 3, 2021, “What Vaccine Trials?” by Iain Davis:

“…the WHO protocols Pfizer used to produce the mRNA [for the vaccine] do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. When investigator Fran Leader questioned Pfizer they confirmed: ‘The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person’.”

And there we are, right back where I started, some time ago. If you don’t have the isolated virus, how can you claim you’ve sequenced it?

And if you’ve sequenced it by ASSUMPTION and GUESS, how can you claim the sequence—or the virus—is real?

Answer: You SAY the sequence and the virus are real, but you have zero proof. Because you’re a “scientific authority,” people automatically believe what you SAY.

A man visits a vast auto junkyard looking for parts. Over the office door, he sees a sign: “1972 Ferrari 365 GTB/4 Daytona Spider. Inquire within.”

The owner of the junkyard tells him, “We’re offering shares in the Ferrari. Three thousand a share. When we eventually sell it, you’ll make at least double your investment.”

The man says, “Where is the car? I’d like to see it.”

“Well,” the junkyard owner says, “look around you. We’ve got several square miles of cars and parts. The Ferrari is out there somewhere. We recently ran a test on exhaust fumes with a special instrument. It concluded that the ’72 Ferrari had recently been driven through the yard here…”

This is the sort of thing that happens in virology.

Of course, no mainstream virologist would admit it. He would talk about analogues and gene banks and PCR and representative samples and in silico (computer modeling).

But the stark reality is clear.

Assumption and guess and slippery inference do not carry the day.

You either have the isolated virus or you don’t. If you don’t, anything you say about “it” is useless. You can’t validly claim it exists.

As I’ve written and said dozens of times now, the virological meaning of the word “isolate” is quite different from the ordinary meaning.

In the technical world of the con and the hustle, “isolated virus” means: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. The soup contains human and monkey cells, toxic drugs and chemicals, and other genetic material. Some of the cells are dying. This means the virus is killing them.”

That assertion is false. The drugs and chemicals can be killing the cells. And the cells are being starved of vital nutrients. That alone could explain the cell-death.

Furthermore, a supposed virus mixed in a soup in a dish in a lab is definitely not “isolated.”

Bottom line: there is no persuasive evidence that a virus is in the soup.

What’s in the COVID vaccine? Among other material, a supposed fragment from a supposed virus that hasn’t been proven to exist.

Consider the PCR test. Several levels of valid criticism have been aimed at the test.

First, different labs will come up with different contradictory test results. This is true.

Drilling down a little deeper, the test, when it amplifies the tissue sample taken from a patient, is useless and dangerous when more than 34 cycles or steps of amplification are deployed. Why? Because then, huge numbers of false-positives occur.

Down yet another level, we discover that the PCR doesn’t detect a virus at all. It identifies a piece of RNA presumed to come from a virus.

And finally, the test identifies a piece of RNA from a virus that hasn’t been proven to exist.

This is the root of the poisonous tree.


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.

Medical weapons of mass destruction

A continuing tradition, in which COVID is the latest example

by Jon Rappoport

January 5, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

After a hundred years of intense propaganda promoting the idea that diseases are everywhere, and each disease is caused by a single germ, which must be killed by a medical drug…

The fallout has been extreme, to say the least.

Let’s start here:

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

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.

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.

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 or maimed 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.”

They take things so seriously, they routinely publish glowing studies of medical drugs that are killing people in great numbers.


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.

In case you thought the PCR test detects an actual virus…wrong

by Jon Rappoport

December 25, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

In a CDC document titled, “Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) 2020 Interim Case Definition, Approved April 5, 2020,” under the section, “Laboratory Criteria,” we have this: [1]

“Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ribonucleic acid (SARS-CoV-2 RNA) in a clinical specimen using a molecular amplification detection test.”

The test referred to is the PCR. And as you can plainly see, it is detecting, not the virus itself, but a piece of RNA.

A piece of RNA ASSUMED to come from the virus, SARS-CoV-2.

I say ASSUMED because, where is the actual virus? Where is the virus isolated from all surrounding material?

If you don’t have the virus, you can’t say, with any degree of certainty at all, that you have a piece of it (the RNA).

As I’ve described many times, “isolated” is a term that is tortured by researchers and public health officials, so that it means just the opposite of what it is supposed to mean. [2]

Numerous studies that claim the virus has been isolated actually turn out to mean: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. The soup contains various types of animal and humans cells, toxic chemicals and drugs, and other genetic material. The virus is completely surrounded, but it is there. We know this, because some of the cells are dying, and this dying must be the result of infection with the virus…”

This argument not only turns the definition of “isolation” on its head, it reveals, upon a moment’s consideration, that the dying of the cells could come from the action of the toxic chemicals and drugs; and on top of that, the cells are being starved of nutrients, so they could be dying as a result of that deprivation.

Therefore, to say “the virus must be in the soup in the dish in the lab” because is killing cells…well, that’s completely unproven, and therefore…

There is no reason under the sun to claim that the virus is there in the soup at all.

Hence, the claim that the PCR test is detecting a piece of RNA from the virus is unwarranted. Because, again…where is the virus? Where is the truly isolated virus?

Nowhere.

And on that basis alone, the PCR test is irrelevant, useless, and deceptive.

It is set up to look for and detect a piece of RNA material that has never been proved to come from this un-isolated phantom ASSUMPTION, called “SARS-CoV-2.”

A few more moments of clear thought, and you realize the whole string of “science” that leads to the lockdowns and the economic devastation is not science at all.

It is what is called, in the intelligence community, a cover story. A story launched to justify crimes.

In this case, capital crimes against humanity.


SOURCES:

[1] https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/case-definition/2020/

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6-8VRGvNtQ “Conversations with Dr. Cowan and Friends Episode 12: Jon Rappoport” (Dec 17, 2020)


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 vaccine—history matters

by Jon Rappoport

December 10, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Now that governments are going to roll out “a vaccine to save the world” (see here and here), people should become aware of a history they don’t know exists.

The article below was a small section of my book, AIDS INC., which I wrote in 1987-8. At the time, I decided to take a look at vaccines and see what I could find out about them.

My ensuing research led me into all sorts of surprising areas.

Since the period of 1987-8, much more has come to light about vaccine safety and efficacy. Here is what I discovered way back when—


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

“In a recent British outbreak of whooping cough, for example, even fully immunized children contracted the disease in fairly large numbers; and the rates of serious complications and death were reduced only slightly. In another recent outbreak of pertussis, 46 of the 85 fully immunized children studied eventually contracted the disease.

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

“Of all reported whooping cough cases between 1979 and 1984 in children over 7 months of age – that is, old enough to have received the primary course of the DPT shots (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) – 41% occurred in children who had received three or more shots and 22% in children who had one or two immunizations.

“Among children under 7 months of age who had whooping cough, 34% had been immunized between one and three times…

“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.

“A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987.

“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

“While 70-80% of British children were immunized against pertussis in 1970-71, the rate is now 39%. The committee predicts that the next pertussis epidemic will probably turn out to be more severe than the one in 1974/75. However, they do not explain why, in 1970/71, there were more than 33,000 cases of pertussis with 41 fatal cases among the very well immunized British child population; whereas in 1974/75, with a declining rate of vaccination, a pertussis epidemic caused only 25,000 cases with 25 fatalities.” Wolfgang Ehrengut, Lancet, Feb. 18, 1978, p. 370.

“… Barker and Pichichero, in a prospective study of 1232 children in Denver, Colorado, found after DTP that only 7% of those vaccinated were free from untoward reactions, which included pyrexia (53%), acute behavioral changes (82%), prolonged screaming (13%), and listlessness, anorexia and vomiting. 71% of those receiving second injections of DTP experienced two or more of the reactions monitored.” Lancet, May 28, 1983, p. 1217

“Publications by the World Health Organization show that diphtheria is steadily declining in most European countries, including those in which there has been no immunization. The decline began long before vaccination was developed. There is certainly no guarantee that vaccination will protect a child against the disease; in fact, over 30,000 cases of diphtheria have been recorded in the United Kingdom in fully immunized children.” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 58.

“Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is controversial, as the side effects have received a great deal of publicity. The counter claim is that the effectiveness and protection offered by the procedure far outweigh the possible ill effects… annual deaths, per million children, from this disease over the period from 1900 to the mid-nineteen seventies, shows that from a high point of just under 900 deaths per million children (under age 15) in 1905, the decline has been consistent and dramatic. There had been a lowering of mortality rates of approximately 80% by the time immunization was introduced on a mass scale, in the mid-nineteen fifties. The decline has continued, albeit at a slower rate, ever since. No credit can be given to vaccination for the major part of the decline since it was not in use.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 63.

“… the swine-flu vaccination program was one of its (CDC) greatest blunders. It all began in 1976 when CDC scientists saw that a virus involved in a flu attack outbreak at Fort Dix, N.J., was similar to the swine-flu virus that killed 500,000 Americans in 1918. Health officials immediately launched a 100-million dollar program to immunize every American. But the expected epidemic never materialized, and the vaccine led to partial paralysis in 532 people. There were 32 deaths.” U.S. News and World Report, Joseph Carey, October 14, 1985, p. 70, “How Medical Sleuths Track Killer Diseases.”

“Despite (cases) in which (smallpox) vaccination plainly failed to protect the population, and despite the rampant side-effects of the methods, the proponents of vaccination continued their attempts to justify the methods by claims that the disease had declined in Europe as a whole during the period of its compulsory use. If the decline could be correlated with the use of the vaccination, then all else could be set aside, and the advantage between its current low incidence could be shown to outweigh the periodic failures of the method, and to favour the continued use of vaccination. However, the credit for the decline in the incidence of smallpox could not be given to vaccination. The fact is that its incidence declined in all parts of Europe, whether or not vaccination was employed.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, pp. 6-7.

“Smallpox, like typhus, has been dying out (in England) since 1780. Vaccination in this country has largely fallen into disuse since people began to realize how its value was discredited by the great smallpox epidemic of 1871-2 (which occurred after extensive vaccination).” W. Scott Webb, A Century of Vaccination, Swan Sonnenschein, 1898.

“In this incident (Kyoto, Japan, 1948) – the most serious of its kind – a toxic (vaccine) batch of alum-precipitated toxoid (APT) was responsible for illness in over 600 infants and for no fewer than 68 deaths.

“On 20 and 22 October, 1948, a large number of babies and children in the city of Kyoto received their first injection of APT. On the 4th and 5th of November, 15,561 babies and children aged some months to 13 years received their second dose. One to two days later, 606 of those who had been injected fell ill. Of these, 9 died of acute diphtheritic paralysis in seven to fourteen days, and 59 of late paralysis mainly in four to seven weeks.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization, Athone Press, University of London, 1967.

“Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“At a press conference in Washington on 24 July, 1942, the Secretary of War reported that 28,585 cases of jaundice had been observed in the (American) Army between 1 January and 4 July after yellow fever vaccination, and of these 62 proved fatal.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“The world’s biggest trial (conducted in south India) to assess the value of BCG tuberculosis vaccine has made the startling revelation that the vaccine ‘does not give any protection against bacillary forms of tuberculosis.’ The study said to be ‘most exhaustive and meticulous,’ was launched in 1968 by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) with assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia.

“The incidence of new cases among the BCG vaccinated group was slightly (but statistically insignificantly) higher than in the control group, a finding that led to the conclusion that BCG’s protective effect ‘was zero.'” New Scientist, November 15, 1979, as quoted by Hans Ruesch in Naked Empress, Civis Publishers, Switzerland, 1982.

“Between 10 December 1929 and 30 April 1930, 251 of 412 infants born in Lubeck received three doses of BCG vaccine by the mouth during the first ten days of life. Of these 251, 72 died of tuberculosis, most of them in two to five months and all but one before the end of the first year. In addition, 135 suffered from clinical tuberculosis but eventually recovered; and 44 became tuberculin-positive but remained well. None of the 161 unvaccinated infants born at the time was affected in this way and none of these died of tuberculosis within the following three years.” Hazards of Immunization, Wilson.

“We conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to test the efficacy of the 14-valent pneumococcal capsular polysaccharide vaccine in 2295 high-risk patients… Seventy-one episodes of proved or probable pneumococcal pneumonia or bronchitis occurred among 63 of the patients (27 placebo recipients and 36 vaccine recipients)… We were unable to demonstrate any efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia or bronchitis in this population.” New England Journal of Medicine, November 20, 1986, p. 1318, Michael Simberkoff et al.

“But already before Salk developed his vaccine, polio had been constantly regressing; the 39 cases out of every 100,000 inhabitants registered in 1942 had gradually diminished from year to year until they were reduced to only 15 cases in 1952… according to M. Beddow Baylay, the English surgeon and medical historian.” Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Reusch, Civitas Publishers, Switzerland, and Swain, New York, 1983.

“Many published stories and reports have stated, implied and otherwise led professional people and the public to believe that the sharp reduction of cases (and of deaths) from poliomyelitis in 1955 as compared to 1954 is attributable to the Salk vaccine… That it is a misconception follows from these considerations. The number of children inoculated has been too small to account for the decrease. The sharp decrease was apparent before the inoculations began or could take effect and was of the same order as the decrease following the immediate post-inoculation period.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, vol. 20, no. 1, 1987.

“So far it is hardly possible to gain insight into the extent of the immunization catastrophe of 1955 in the United States. It may be considered certain that the officially ascertained 200 cases (of polio) which were caused directly or indirectly by the (polio) vaccination constitute minimum figures… It can hardly be estimated how many of the 1359 (polio) cases among vaccinated persons must be regarded as failures of the vaccine and how many of them were infected by the vaccine. A careful study of the epidemiologic course of polio in the United States yields indications of grave significance. In numerous states of the U.S.A., typical early epidemics developed with the immunizations in the spring of 1955… The vaccination incidents of the year 1955 cannot be exclusively traced back to the failure of one manufacturing firm.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980, vol. 19, no. 4, “Story of the Salk Vaccine (Part 2).”

“Suffice it to say that most of the large (polio) epidemics that have occurred in this country since the introduction of the Salk vaccine have followed the wide-scale use of the vaccine and have been characterized by an uncommon early seasonal onset. To name a few, there is the Massachusetts epidemic of 1955; the Chicago epidemic of 1956; and the Des Moines epidemic of 1959.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980 vol. 19, no. 4.

“The live (Sabin) poliovirus vaccine has been the predominant cause of domestically arising cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States since 1972. To avoid the occurrence of such cases, it would be necessary to discontinue the routine use of live poliovirus vaccine.” Jonas Salk, Science, March 4, 1977, p. 845.

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

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

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


The above quotes reflect only a mere fraction of an available literature which shows there is a need for an extensive review of vaccination. It is certain that undisclosed, unlooked for illness occurs as a result of vaccines, or as a result of infection after protective immunity should have been conferred but wasn’t. A certain amount of this sort of illness is immunosuppressive in the widest sense, and some in a narrower sense (depression of T-cell numbers, etc.). When looking for unusual illness and immune depression, vaccines are one of those areas which remain partially hidden from investigation. That is a mistake. It is not adequate to say, “Vaccines are simple; they stimulate the immune system and confer immunity against specific germ agents.” That is the glossy presentation. What vaccines often do is something else. They engage some aspect of the body’s immune-response, but to what effect over the long term? Why, for example, do children who have measles vaccine develop a susceptibility to another more severe, atypical measles? Is that virulent form of the disease the result of reactivation of the virus in the vaccine?

Official reports on vaccine reactions are often at odds with unofficial estimates because of the method of analysis used. If vaccine-reaction is defined as a small set of possible effects experienced within 72 hours of an inoculation, then figures will be smaller. But doctors like G.T. Stewart, of the University of Glasgow, have found through meticulous investigation, including visits to hospitals and interviews with parents of vaccinated children, that reactions as severe as brain-damage (e.g., from the DPT vaccine) can be overlooked, go unreported and can be assumed mistakenly to have come from other causes.


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.