Shocker: court document asserts Hawaii inspectors clueless about what Monsanto is spraying

Shocker: court document asserts Hawaii inspectors clueless about what Monsanto is spraying

by Jon Rappoport

May 2, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“So we found stuff… but we don’t know what it means.”

On Thursday, April 30th, the Shaka Movement filed a brief with the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

(Appeal No. 15-15641, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Case No. 1:14-CV-00511-SOM-BMK)

Essentially, it argued for an end to delays and, instead, some real action toward implementing what the voters of Maui demanded last November:

A temporary stoppage of all Monsanto/Dow GMO experimentation in Maui County, and a true investigation of what those corporations have been doing to endanger human health.

In that brief to the Ninth Circuit Court, there is the following statement about the previous work of Hawaii Dept. of Agriculture inspectors—work done before the November vote.

Buckle up. It’s a shocker:

“…no testing has ever been conducted in Maui County to demonstrate that the GMO practices are not harmful, nor are there any permitting requirements addressing these harms. (2ER 158-159). The federal and state agencies that Monsanto and Dow claim are overseeing these activities admittedly do not protect against any of these harms, nor do they have any rules setting standards for safety. (2ER 021-027). According to the Hawaii Department of Agriculture (“HDOA”), the agency which Monsanto and Dow have pointed to as the agency responsible for regulating the safety of these activities:

“’We looked into stream sediments specifically for glyphosate, for Roundup, and we found Roundup in all of the samples that we took. All in all, we found 20 herbicides, 11 insecticides, 6 fungicides, 7 locations with glyphosate but no EPA benchmarks, there are no EPA benchmarks for sediment, for glyphosate. So we found stuff but, frankly, we don’t know what it means and no one in, we don’t know how to compare that to any kind of health standards. So there’s additional work that needs to be done there. (2ER 268)’”


power outside the matrix


No guiding rules, no guiding standards, and no clue about what these inspectors were finding, other than glyphosate, which the World Health Organization has just declared a probably carcinogen.

You can read the full Shaka brief here.

The bottom line is: what the hell is going on in Maui County? Who’s minding the store? Apparently, no one. And the spraying of experimental pesticides continues in the open-air laboratory of Maui. The federal judge in the case, Susan Oki Mollway, appears to be doing everything in her power to cater to Monsanto and Dow, and discount, step on, and destroy a legal vote calling for a real investigation.

Justice? Never heard of it.

Jon Rappoport

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

A totalitarian society has totalitarian science

A totalitarian society has totalitarian science

by Jon Rappoport

April 30, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

And vice versa.

Totalitarian science lets you know you’re living in a totalitarian society.

The government, the press, the mega-corporations, the prestigious foundations, the academic institutions, the “humanitarian” organizations say:

“This is the disease. This is its name. This is what causes it. This is the drug that treats it. This is the vaccine that prevents it.

“This is how accurate diagnosis is done. These are the tests. These are the possible results and what they mean.

“Here are the genes. This is what they do. This is how they can be changed and substituted and manipulated. These are the outcomes.

“These are the data and the statistics. They are correct. There can be no argument about them.

“This is life. These are the components of life. All change and improvement result from our management of the components.

“This is the path. It is governed by truth which science reveals. Walk the path. We will inform you when you stray. We will report new improvements.

“This is the end. You can go no farther. You must give up the ghost. We will remember you.”

We are now witnessing the acceleration of Official Science. Of course, that term is an internal contradiction. But the State shrugs and moves forward.

The notion that the State can put its seal on favored science, enforce it, and punish its competitors, is anathema to a free society.

For example: declaring that psychiatrists can appear in court as expert witnesses, when none of the so-called mental disorders listed in the psychiatric literature are diagnosed by laboratory tests.

For example: stating that vaccination is mandatory, in order to protect the vaccinated (who are supposed to be immune) from the unvaccinated. An absurdity on its face.

For example: announcing that the science of climate change is “settled,” when there are, in fact, huge numbers of researchers who disagree. —And then, drafting legislation and issuing executive orders based on the decidedly unsettled science.

For example: officially approving the release and sale of medical drugs (“safe and effective”) which go on to kill, at a conservative estimate, 100,000 Americans every year. And then refusing to investigate or punish the purveyors of these drug approvals (the FDA).

For example: permitting the widespread use of genetically modified food crops, based on no long-term studies of their impact on human health. And then, arbitrarily announcing that the herbicide, Roundup, for which many of these crops are specifically designed, is non-toxic.

For example: declaring and promoting the existence of various epidemics, when the viruses purportedly causing them are not proven to exist and/or not proven to cause human illness (Ebola, SARS, West Nile, Swine Flu, etc.)


The Matrix Revealed


A few of you reading this have been with me since 1988, when I published my first book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century. Among other conclusions, I pointed out that HIV had never been shown to cause human illness; the front-line drug given to AIDS patients, AZT, was overwhelmingly toxic; and what was being called AIDS was actually a diverse number immune-suppressing conditions.

Others of you have found my work more recently, since I started this site in 2001. I always return to the subject of false science, because it is the most powerful long-term instrument for repression, political control, and destruction of human life.

I thank you for your support and interest.

As I’ve stated on many occasions, medical science is ideal for mounting and launching covert ops aimed at populations—because it appears to be politically neutral, without any allegiance to State interests.

Unfortunately, medical science, on many fronts, has been hijacked and taken over. The profit motive is one objective, but beyond that, there is a more embracing goal:

Totalitarian control.

It aims to replace your freedom, consciousness, and intelligence with its own synthetic versions.

Resist.

Jon Rappoport

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

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

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

by Jon Rappoport

April 19, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

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

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

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

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

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

In other words, the science itself is fraudulent.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

How are these drugs approved?

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

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

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

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

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

The medical cartel rests on cataclysmic fraud, scientific fraud.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It would shake and destroy the SCIENCE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


The Matrix Revealed


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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

The buck stops at the FDA.


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

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

The power of the medical cartel is gigantic.

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

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

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

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

Various liars sell their lies through various strategies.

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

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

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

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


power outside the matrix


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

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

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

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

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

People want to believe in SCIENCE.


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

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

“I was threatened with prison.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“No,” she said.

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

“No,” she said.

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

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

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

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

Jon Rappoport

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

News vs. sub-news: how the game works

News vs. sub-news: how the game works

For example, in faking medical reality

Let’s start there…

by Jon Rappoport

March 30, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

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

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

That’s news.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here’s another quote from the same article:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Forgotten.


power outside the matrix


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

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

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

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

Jon Rappoport

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

Do atoms understand language?

Do atoms understand language?

Are you your brain and nothing else?

If so, mind-control programming is quite reasonable

by Jon Rappoport

February 19, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“The idea that somewhere in all the stacked-up universes, there might be a little corner that isn’t made out of matter or energy, but is truly independent of, and different from, sub-atomic particles… this idea confounds people, as if it might mean the end of all existence. It might mean a return to the old myths and fairy tales of the horrific priest-classes. It might mean everything science knows will vanish in a puff of smoke. But what if it doesn’t mean any of these things? What if it means that brutal power and domination could die out? What if it means there is an adventure waiting for all of us, beyond any and all pictures of conventional reality?” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Do atoms understand language?

Why ask such a question?

Because it goes to the heart of the slow-motion car crash that conventional physics has been experiencing for the past hundred years.

The question also puts philosophic materialism into a massive dither, from which it can’t hope to recover.

Conventional physics asserts that the universe is made entirely of particles. Atoms. Quarks, wavicles.

The universe includes the human brain.

Here is a sentence: “The Roman Empire collapsed, ushering in a Dark Age, a time of unprecedented chaos.”

Forget the truth or falsity of that sentence. It’s not at issue. What is at issue is the meaning of the sentence. You’re reading it now.

Do you understand it? Do you understand its meaning?

Of course you do. So do I.

But you see, your brain is made of particles that physicists would say have no comprehension of language. None. Zero.

These particles make up rocks, chairs, toothbrushes, asteroids, suns, brains. The same particles.

They have no understanding of sentences or paragraphs or books. No understanding of meaning, as expressed in language.

So?

Understanding of language must come from somewhere else. How can it come from the brain, if the brain is entirely composed of atoms?

“Hello, atom. It rained yesterday, but today it’s supposed to be sunny, and the temperature will reach 70. Do you understand what I’m saying?”

No answer.

“Hello, atom. I find the metaphysics of Kant impenetrable. How about you?”

No answer.

Of course, physicists will dodge and tap dance and offer diverting explanations: “We’re just beginning to understand the mysteries of the brain…we’re making enormous strides…” And this one, my favorite:

“Humans are conscious and understand meaning and language, we know that. And the only place this understanding could possibly come from is the brain. Therefore, the brain is conscious…”

That’s called circular reasoning, which means you assume what you’re claiming to prove. It’s one of the first fallacies a student learns about, when he’s studying logic (if anyone studies logic anymore).

Some “experts” will make this assertion: “There is no such thing as consciousness or understanding. They’re delusions. So it’s quite all right for the brain to be composed of non-conscious atoms…”

In other words, you and I, sharing the words and sentences of this article, are completely deluded into “thinking” that we understand them. We don’t. We’re just machines made of atoms.

If you buy that argument, I’m looking for investors in my new Thorazine-cookie company.

No, I’m afraid the conscious understanding of language is quite real; and that understanding, that knowing, right here and right now, isn’t emanating from the brain, couldn’t be emanating from the brain.

Where it does come from…well, all sorts of opinions can be offered. But one thing is clear. If the whole universe is composed of atoms, and if atoms have no conscious understanding, then consciousness and understanding come from someplace else. A non-atom place.

For example…

From you.

And by you, I mean a non-material being.

Unmeasurable. Unanalyzable.

No big deal. Just the difference between a squashed collapsed view of existence and an infinite view…

Here is a statement attributed to Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, 1937 Nobel Laureate in Physiology and Medicine:

“In my search for the secret of life, I ended up with atoms and electrons which have no life at all. Somewhere along the line, life has run out through my fingers. So, in my old age, I am now retracing my steps…”

How many other scientists would admit they, too, have come to the same crossroad? The deeper they probe, the farther they find themselves from what life is?


power outside the matrix


How many of them would say, “For the past fifty years, I’ve been quite sure everything is made out of something. Know what I mean? Everything is made out of atoms and electrons and quarks and so on. But those little particles don’t understand anything. They just move through space. Something non-material must possess the quality of being able to understand meaning. And that upsets all applecarts…”

How many scientists would say that?

Again…why does any of this matter? Well, here’s one reason. There is an enormous amount of mind-control brain research occurring all over the world. This research is based on the premise that, when it comes to humans, there is no one home. There is just the brain, and the functions of the brain can be manipulated and carved up and reduced, in order to make “the human machine function normally.”

No problem. No conscience. No guilt. It’s just tinkering with the apparatus.

Welcome to the century of the brain. Welcome to philosophic materialism taken to its obvious conclusion.

Welcome to official insanity.

Jon Rappoport

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

The CDC: mind control on a vast scale

The CDC: mind control on a vast scale

by Jon Rappoport

February 16, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Mind control has one basic purpose: the construction of false Reality. The embedding of false Reality to such an extent that it seems absurd to question it or even notice it. Purple and pink raccoons? Of course there are purple and pink raccoons. Why do you even bring it up? Without purple and pink raccoons, the world as we know it would collapse.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

In recent articles (see here and here), I’ve been pointing out that the current “measles outbreak” is a CDC fabrication.

On and off, since 1987, I’ve been following the CDC and its astonishing trail of lies. Lying is its business.

Here is yet another example—-

Once upon a time, the CDC claimed that roughly 36,000 people in the US died every year from the flu. Media sources parroted this figure over and over.

Lately, the CDC has chosen to change that estimate. It’s now between 3,000 and 49,000 flu deaths per year. That’s quite a loose range. Why does the CDC now waffle so egregiously?

Perhaps because they’ve been exposed…

In December of 2005, the British Medical Journal (online) published a shocking report by Peter Doshi, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?”, which spelled out a delusion and created tremors throughout the halls of the CDC.

Here is a quote from Doshi’s report:

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”

You see, the CDC had created one category that combined flu and pneumonia deaths. Why did they do this? Because they self-servingly assumed that the pneumonia deaths were complications stemming from the flu.

This is an absurd assumption. Pneumonia has a number of causes. But even worse, in all the flu deaths, only 18 were traced directly to a flu virus.

Therefore, the CDC could not say, with assurance, that more than 18 people died of the flu in 2001.

(Note: In several articles, I erred and reported “18 flu cases in 2001” instead of “18 flu deaths in 2001”.)

Doshi continues his assessment of published CDC flu-death statistics:

“Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data show an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).”

However, as Doshi showed from the year 2001, the CDC actually finds the flu virus in a tiny proportion of people who are estimated to have died from the flu. So the CDC range of flu deaths—257 to 3006—is much, much lower when lab confirmation is required. And confirmation needs to be required, unless hocus-pocus guesswork is sufficient.

To the overwhelming percentage of Americans, the idea that only 18 people were positively identified as flu deaths in a year is staggering.

It’s so staggering, they reject it. It must be wrong. It has to be wrong. If it isn’t wrong…

A pillar of reality collapses.


The Matrix Revealed


And we’re not just talking about a Brian Williams pillar of reality or a went-to-war-for-the-wrong-reason pillar of reality. We’re not just talking about the CIA lying or the NSA lying or the President lying.

No. We’re talking about a medical pillar collapsing.

And the medical cartel is the modern Church of Reality. It has its priests in white coats and its CDC bishops and its ceaseless propaganda about an “overwhelming concern for the well-being of humanity.”

Therefore, when many people read this, when they see that only 18 flu deaths in America were confirmed in the year 2001, it doesn’t register at all in their minds.

It’s invisible.

This isn’t “cognitive dissonance.” It’s much, much deeper. It’s “I never read that.” “I don’t remember reading that.” “18 confirmed flu deaths in one year? I never heard of that.”

Mind control par excellence.

It’s on the order of half a major city disappearing overnight and the citizens saying, “Of course, nothing disappeared. How could anything disappear?”

Going even deeper, there are two factors at work here. One, a person’s stubborn refusal to reject reality as he receives it; and two, his refusal to invent a better reality to replace the one that has just crumbled and vanished.

Those two factors underlie the success of mind control.

Jon Rappoport

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

Mind-control media: Brian Williams, fake science, and the reality egg

Mind-control media: Brian Williams, fake science, and the reality egg

Brian William caught in his own trap

Cracking the reality egg

Notes and thoughts

by Jon Rappoport

February 5, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“If you want a winning role, act like a scientist. Talk like a scientist. Imagine that everything you say is backed by a study published in a peer-reviewed journal.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Objectivity. What more could you want? What could be more objective than science? What could be less open to dispute? Who could be more authoritative than a scientist? What could influence public opinion more thoroughly than a whole group of scientists, an establishment of scientists, backed by the government?

Notice that when a news anchor takes an unimpeachable statement from a scientist, they both sound like scientists. The double whammy.

It impresses the rubes and yokels and even the well-educated viewers.

This is no accident.

It’s a system of persuasion.

I published this quote yesterday. Here it is again:

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

Essentially, Angell is saying that fraud dressed up to look like science is pervasive in official medical media.

So it is in the news business.

The veneer and the tone and pose of objectivity are a front, a con.

Take the breaking story of NBC’s Brian Williams, “the most trusted name in news.” He lied about being in a helicopter taking fire in Iraq in 2003. He admitted the lie yesterday, and in his confession he apparently lied again, giving the false impression that the helicopter right in front of his took the fire, when at least one soldier on the scene states that Williams’ helicopter wasn’t even in the same formation, but landed some time later.

The impact of Williams lying is magnified by his persona of objectivity, which is on display every night on NBC. The objective man was lying. He was making it up. He was faking it.


Consider the 2004 Pediatrics study which exonerated the MMR vaccine and claimed it was in no way connected to autism. Objective science. But last August, one of the authors of the study, William Thompson, a long-time researcher at the CDC, released a statement through his attorney, Rick Morgan, confessing that he and his co-authors had lied, omitted vital data, rigged the study, in order to give the vaccine a free pass.

An objective expert—a rank liar.

Centuries ago, when a ruling priest addressed an audience and shouted and pointed at the sky and warned of great danger and destruction, and told of curses, and laid out a path for appeasing the gods, he was considered an “objective authority.” He wasn’t accused of ranting.

Today, the appearance of scientific objectivity is the key. Whoever holds that key is considered an authority. Therefore, many, many people affect that pose. Especially in the news business.

In days gone by, priestly shouting was accepted as a truth-indicator and thus induced a trance. Today, the pose of science induces the trance.

Mainstream television news has staged itself as a “conveyer of science.” Because it works.


power outside the matrix


This is the reality egg: the pose and appearance of scientific objectivity. This is how the egg is built.

But here is the truth. The egg, the enclosed dome are being built for us by messengers who appear to be objective. They’re the narrators. They’re the news princes and the “scientists.” They’re the key actors.

They can mix image and word and algorithm and computer model to prove anything, and in doing so they can act as if they’re reporting facts—rather than building the egg.

The egg is there for one reason: to convince us that each one of us can’t invent his own open realities, to convince us that we can’t find ways to cooperate, as free and independent and powerful individuals, and crack the egg.

Their strategy and pose is failing. Badly.

Now that’s a news story.

That has legs.

Jon Rappoport

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

Is consciousness an illusion?

Is consciousness an illusion?

by Jon Rappoport

January 26, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Cutting through disinformation about consciousness is vital, because neuroscience is moving toward a mind-controlled society, based on the idea that individual awareness is an illusion, and stimulus-response is the key to shaping a new Collective of synchronized ‘happy’ brains.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

A brief historical note: Roughly a century ago, as scientists and philosophers were attacking organized religion, they assumed that science would come to “rule” all knowledge, for the benefit of humanity.

Today, their descendants still believe in the simplistic dichotomy between religion and science:

If science fails to answer a metaphysical question, just wait a while and it will; otherwise, we will be thrown back into the opiate soup of religion, and that must never happen.

This is nonsense.

This either-or approach is fictitious garbage. Religion or science, as the only two choices, is a fraud.

So…here is one of those metaphysical questions:

What is consciousness?

Science has done nothing to explain it. It has tap-danced and speculated and made assurances, but explain it? No.

But here, a famous biologist faces the question head-on:

“How it is that anything so remarkable as a state of consciousness comes about as a result of irritating nervous tissue, is just as unaccountable as the appearance of Djin when Aladdin rubbed his lamp.” (Thomas Henry Huxley)

And here a modern philosopher retreats to the conventional position based on zero evidence:

“Above all, consciousness is a biological phenomenon. We should think of consciousness as part of our ordinary biological history, along with digestion, growth, mitosis and meiosis…Conscious states are caused by lower level neurobiological processes in the brain and are themselves higher level features of the brain.” (John R Searle, professor of philosophy, University of California at Berkeley)

Lower biological processes somehow “give rise” to “higher biological processes,” thus producing consciousness.

This is about as convincing as using your birthdate to buy a lottery ticket.

“Well, you see, we’ve learned a great deal about lower biological functions, so as we learn more about the higher functions, we’ll discover what consciousness is.”

Really? If this is logic, an ant is a spaceship.

Consciousness, as Huxley was implying, is a different KIND of reality; it isn’t merely atoms bumping into each other or forming structures.

For example, consciousness is you knowing you’re reading this page right now. It isn’t molecules spitting out a message that “you’re reading this page.”

Consciousness is you knowing you’re alive. It isn’t the brain somehow producing the words “you’re alive.”

Consciousness isn’t an illusion. The illusion is supposing the brain knows anything.

Physicists will readily admit that atoms and sub-atomic particles do not know anything. And since the brain is made up of those particles, there is no reason to assume the brain has the capability of knowing. It’s a system of systems that operates in wide-ranging ways.

Knowing you’re reading this page isn’t a brain- message you receive. It’s different. It’s not reducible. It’s not something you can break into small pieces.

You know you’re alive.

That consciousness, that awareness, that “act” of knowing is not physical. It’s non-physical. It’s not made up of particles. It’s beyond them.

It’s independent.


power outside the matrix


Consciousness isn’t a subject for study in a philosophy department or a physics or biology or chemistry department. It doesn’t fit into any category.

Is consciousness an illusion? No. The illusion is pretending it’s “the brain.” The illusion is the selling of a future in which all existence will be controlled by science. The illusion is “a better civilization” in which all brains are “harmonized.”

If consciousness is an illusion, then freedom is, too. If consciousness is just the atoms of the brain marching around and delivering pre-determined impulses, then freedom is a hoax.

And, under the surface, this is what neuroscience proposes. “Yes, humans believe in a quaint notion of freedom, but we know that’s ludicrous. There is no such thing. It’s merely particles in motion…”

While I’m at it, taking the particles-in-motion depiction of life as a first principle…then there is no you, either. There is no you, there is no me, there is no anyone. There is no individual, there is no group. All that is illusion as well.

This is the inescapable conclusion of physics taken to its widest application.

It’s also the justification for manipulating the brain in any fashion: since “no one is home,” what difference does it make? Nullify a synapse here, rewire a connection there, dose this area with a drug, stimulate those neurons with electromagnetic impulses…and bring about more agreeable obedience.

There are many educated people who refuse to understand that both organized religion and bottomless faith in science lead to tyranny. They lack the imagination and curiosity to explore other alternatives.

Therefore, their ignorance is stunning.

Jon Rappoport

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

Death doesn’t =someone’s opinion about death

Death doesn’t=someone’s opinion about death

by Jon Rappoport

October 8, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“I saw people die of HIV.”

No. You saw people die. Doctors said they had HIV.

“I saw people die from Ebola.”

No you didn’t. You saw people die. You yourself have no idea what killed them. You can pretend you know, but you don’t.

“The doctors know what kills people.”

You win a gold star for your faith. You’re now a fully-fledged member of the Church of Biological Mysticism.

People who see other people die often assume they know why it happened. Certainly, when it comes to viruses, they don’t have a clue. They’re sure they know. That doesn’t make them right.

A parent’s healthy son returns from the doctor’s office, saying he just found out he’s HIV-positive. He tells his mother the doctor has put him on AZT. Three weeks later, the boy folds up, can’t get out of bed. He’s so weak he can hardly move. The doctor says, “HIV has spiraled out of control. It’s full-blown AIDS. He must continue taking his AZT.” Three months later, the boy is dead.

The mother says, “My son died of HIV.”

Does she know that AZT, a failed chemotherapy drug, was taken off the shelf for AIDS patients, and that it mercilessly attack all cells of the body, including the immune-system cells?

Of course not.

As I’ve repeatedly pointed out over the past 27 years (starting with my first book, “AIDS Inc., Scandal of the Century”), covert medical ops will use death and dying to construct a false picture of the cause of death and dying.

They know this strategy works, because people, seeing death, will accept what the authorities tell them caused it.

I’ve often cited the groundbreaking review, “Is US health really the best in the world?” Author, Dr. Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. Publisher: The Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000.

Starfield concluded that, every year in the US, the medical system directly kills 225,000 people. 106,000 die as a result of medicines the FDA has approved as safe. The other 119,000 die as a result of treatment in hospitals.

Add it up. That’s 2.25 million deaths per decade caused by the US medical system.

Now for the question: how many of those deaths… do you think doctors…voluntarily admit…to families of the dead patients…are medically caused?

I’ll tell you.

None.

In every case, a lie was cooked up. “I’m sorry, but the disease suddenly accelerated…”

That’s 2.25 million lies per decade about the actual cause of death.

But people continue to worship at the feet of doctors and medical experts.

If a doctor says a patient died of virus VCX-2QK-89tf, a supposed thing the mother of the patient will never see and never have a chance of seeing…and if the doctor says he knows the patient had the virus because a diagnostic test was run on the patient…the mother will believe the doctor…even though she has absolutely no idea what kind of diagnostic test was run or whether it is accurate or even relevant.

“I saw my son die of the virus.”

She didn’t. But she’ll believe it. We can understand why she believes it.


power outside the matrix


But that doesn’t affect our judgment when we look into a virus and investigate whether it is real, whether it actually causes disease, and whether the diagnostic tests for the virus tell a true story.

When you have hundreds of millions of people who assert that Ebola is killing people, you’re looking at faith.

Blind faith in authorities who don’t deserve it.

You’re looking at the construction of reality, which is then sold.

Take this example—a farming village in Liberia, one of the so-called epicenters of Ebola. The families manage to produce enough to get by. They live downstream from a giant Firestone rubber plantation.

For years, to no avail, the people of the village have been protesting the runoff of noxious elements into their water supply. Fish are dying. Crops are failing. That means malnutrition, hunger.

That means chemical assault on their immune systems.

People are developing sores, lesions, fevers, respiratory problems, digestive problems, including diarrhea.

How easy is it to call this Ebola, in light of the current hysteria?

“Everyone knows” it’s Ebola. But it isn’t.

People are obsessed by the idea that a whole population, in far-off nation, under the gun, must all be suffering from One Thing—in this case, a virus.

Splitting this apart into a number of different causes in different regions—contaminated water, open sewage, severe malnutrition, decimating wars, toxic vaccine campaigns, the vast overuse of antibiotics, industrial pollution—this doesn’t have the compelling ring of: “It’s a virus.”

So people say, “Forget about all that. We don’t want to know about it. We know it’s a virus.”

No they don’t.

Jon Rappoport

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

UN climate change: 1000 scientists say no

UN climate change: 1000 scientists say no

by Jon Rappoport

September 18, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Read it.

It’s a shocking 321-page report assembled by The Climate Depot:

“More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims.”

It names names. It lists reasons for the dissent.

Reality is engineered consensus. But when that doesn’t work, “experts” just assert there is a consensus when there isn’t.

“What the hell, let’s just say that ‘everybody agrees’ manmade warming is destroying Earth and we have ten minutes to solve it, and let’s get our friends in the press to shut out the naysayers. You know, media blackout.”

Science is supposed to be about evidence and proof, not consensus. But that idea is now laughed out of court. Science is about PR and who sits on the important thrones.

Which is why the UN is holding Climate Summit 2014 in New York in a few days. Yes, the city that never sleeps will be hosting the gala and also kicking off Climate Week NYC 2014.

And then there is this. The UN Secretary General has appointed Leonardo DiCaprio a “…Messenger of Peace with a special focus on climate change.” Messenger of Peace. Wow. Will Leo appear out of a cloud hovering above the Chrysler Building? Will an angel anoint Leo? Will anybody call the Ghostbusters?

Will Obama show up and read from the teleprompter, “The science is settled, the science is settled…”

Will a CIA drone zoom over Times Square and launch gluten-free electromagnetic love bombs on the adoring crowds?

Will a blimped-out Al Gore waddle into the UN General Assembly hall, trailing fumes from his jet and casting oil leases to a few favored ambassadorial hustlers?

The latest climate science tells us that upcoming freezing weather or boiling hot weather are both reasonable inferences from the basic Climate Change hypothesis. This is, logically speaking, a new brand of tautological “research.” Round and round it goes, inside its bubble.

“Useful predictions? We don’t need no stinkin’ useful predictions. We just need dupes, and we got plenty of them.”


Here are a few excerpts from the boggling Climate Depot report:

“We’re not scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media, there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot statistically know for another 150 years.”
— UN IPCC’s Tom Tripp, a member of the UN IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] since 2004 and listed as one of the lead authors and serves as the Director of Technical Services & Development for U.S. Magnesium.

“Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself — Climate is beyond our power to control…Earth doesn’t care about governments or their legislation. You can’t find much actual global warming in present-day weather observations. Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does on its own without asking anyone’s permission or explaining itself.”
— Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin, who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1998, and was formerly a research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

“The dysfunctional nature of the climate sciences is nothing short of a scandal. Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.” The global warming establishment “has actively suppressed research results presented by researchers that do not comply with the dogma of the [UN] IPCC.”
— Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring of the Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Unit at Stockholm University.

“The whole idea of anthropogenic global warming is completely unfounded. There appears to have been money gained by Michael Mann, Al Gore and UN IPCC’s Rajendra Pachauri as a consequence of this deception, so it’s fraud.”
— South African astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe, a member of the Astronomical Society of Southern Africa (ASSA) and the Astronomical Society of the Pacific and a Fellow of the British Institute of Physics.

“In December 8 2009, 166 scientists from around the world wrote an Open Letter to the UN Secretary-General rebuking the UN and declaring that ‘the science is NOT settled.’”

“On May 1, 2009, the American Physical Society (APS) Council decided to review its current climate statement via a high-level subcommittee of respected senior scientists. The decision was prompted after a group of over 80 prominent physicists petitioned the APS [to] revise its global warming position and more than 250 scientists urged a change in the group’s climate statement in 2010. The physicists wrote to APS governing board: ‘Measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th – 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today.’”


power outside the matrix


Consensus on manmade global warming? Are you kidding?

The “consensus” is in favor of something else: staging and maintaining a media blackout to conceal the dissenters, to pretend they don’t exist, to pretend “the science is settled.”

Leo DiCaprio, messenger of peace. We’re living in a cartoon of a cartoon.

Jon Rappoport

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