Category Archives: Science Fraud

New York Times launches Vaccine Fantasy Island

by Jon Rappoport

June 1, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

(Episode 10 of Rappoport Podcasts — “Hottest Medical Crimes No One Else Will Cover; Plus New Monkeypox Revelations” — is now posted on my substack. It’s a blockbuster. To listen, click here. To learn more about This Episode of Rappoport Podcasts, click here.)

I’m loving this one.

The Times has a new piece about the anti-vaxx movement:

“The Anti-Vaccine Movement’s New Frontier: A wave of parents has been radicalized by Covid-era misinformation to reject ordinary childhood immunizations — with potentially lethal consequences.”

And Friday morning, they sent out an email blast to promote the article.

Here’s their promo. The Times really had to stretch to come up with such a load. My comments are in brackets.

“This week, Moises Velasquez-Manoff reports on a wave of parents who have been radicalized by Covid-era misinformation to reject ordinary childhood immunizations — with potentially lethal consequences.”

[Wow. The author has three names. Impressive. I feel I need at least three to reply. Jon The Rebel on Vaccine Fantasy Island Just Say No to Bill Gates Rappoport.]

“In 2019, even before the pandemic struck, the World Health
Organization listed growing vaccine hesitancy as one of its top 10 threats to global health. Now the pandemic has given anti-vaccine advocates an opportunity to field-test a variety of messages and find new recruits.”

[Yes, our anti-vaxx squadrons use dozens of human and AI analysts to float our messages and then test the results. We use polls, surveys, in-home visits, NSA-type surveillance tools, and even covert assets in the press to expand our reach. Elite foundation money pours into our coffers.]

“’There’s a lot of misinformation about the Covid vaccines, and it just bleeds into everything,’ one doctor told us. ‘These fake stories and bad information get stuck in people’s heads, and they understandably get confused’.”

[One doctor told the Times that. Well, case closed. Verdict? We’re guilty. The doctor is always right. Wait a minute. I just called a doctor. He told me the Times’ doctor is wrong. Duel at dawn. Choice of weapons.]

“If this dynamic continues, it could threaten decades of progress in controlling infectious disease — a triumph that has, paradoxically, hindered the effort to counter vaccine skepticism. In the developed world, only a small portion of the population has seen the death and suffering caused by the diseases of eras past; vaccines, in the minds of many, have come to pose a greater threat than the diseases that they have helped nearly vanquish. In a sense, vaccines have become victims of their own success.”

[Obviously, the Times writer is a gymnast. Probably practices yoga. He can bend and stretch and twist with the best of them. Also, notice how he characterizes the parents who “have been radicalized”: They’re people who don’t have a brain in their heads. They’re massively ignorant robots, dupes and yokels just waiting for vaccine misinformation, which they grab like kids going for candy. Parents actually thinking for themselves? Never happens.]

On the other hand, readers of the Times are DISCERNING. They’re COLLEGE GRADS. They take their vaxx info from the paper’s pros, who have perfected the ability to look down their noses at the great unwashed and cluck and tsk tsk and express a modicum of sympathy.

Nowhere in the Times—ever—will we read an actual debate on the subject of vaccines, in which two sides are adequately represented and given ample space to present a little thing called EVIDENCE (or fake evidence).

To host such debates would be demeaning for the Times. It would signal a departure from their perch which constantly advertises: if-we-say-it-we-know-it.

Maintaining that pose month after month, year after year, decade after decade is debilitating.

Which is one reason why so many mainstream reporters are drunks.

power outside the matrix

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

To read Jon’s articles on Substack, click here.

Jon Rappoport

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

Why can’t all viruses be fakes?

by Jon Rappoport

May 27, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

As you know, I’ve spent two years presenting evidence that the discovery of SARS-CoV-2 was a fake.

But I still press on. I examine the reality machine to see why people have such a problem acknowledging the virus—and by extension, all viruses—are nothing more than fairy tales.

I’ve come up with a number of explanations.

For example: DOCTORS.

Rejecting viruses is rejecting doctors. Doctors are security guards around the reality machine.

“Doctors can’t be wrong.”

“I can’t live in a world where doctors are so wrong.”

“I would never be able to stop weeping for the doctors who are so wrong.”

“If I told my doctor I didn’t believe in viruses, he would cut me off, and I couldn’t stand that.”

“I’m a journalist, and my best sources are doctors. The good doctors. And they all say viruses are real. I need my sources.”

“Without information from doctors, the world would spin into chaos.”

“My mind instructs me to believe doctors are only guilty of making mistakes up to a certain threshold. Beyond that, they simply can’t be criticized.”

OK, that takes care of the doctor fixation. But then we have what I call the world-view fixation:

“I don’t want to live in a world where there are no viruses. I would feel lonely and afraid.”

“I need the assurance that this world of ours is filled with tiny invisible killers. When I accept that, I can maintain equilibrium. You know, their threat and our response. It makes sense.”

“I love the idea of tiny killers. It comforts me.”

“I know precisely what to be afraid of in this world. Otherwise, I would start to see ghosts in closets at night again. I remember them from childhood. Those bastards were PERSONAL. They were coming for ME. Viruses are neutral. They don’t know me. To them, I’m just cells. They don’t PREFER me. They’ll take anyone. I like that.”

“Even if viruses are bullshit, they’re sophisticated bullshit. I favor that over some sort of primitive bullshit.”

“Rejecting viruses would equal rejecting my college education. I need that education to assert my superior position against the Lower Ignorant Ones.”

“The ecological chain of life includes viruses. If we remove them from the chain, Nature makes no sense. That’s what I hear.”

“The world is a dangerous place. This is good, because it helps me to explain my problems and lack of determination. Without viruses, the danger factor would be reduced, and I can’t have that.”

“The nature of reality dictates that when you’re right, you should be psychotically nasty about being right. If I’m not right about the existence of viruses, I can’t be as nasty as I want to be. And that would be a tragedy.”

“My father is a doctor, and he is a great man. At least as great as Al Capone.”

power outside the matrix

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

“Stop arguing about the existence of the virus”

by Jon Rappoport

May 20, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

The headline of this article has become a battle cry among some “alternative journalists,” activists, lawyers, and doctors.

As my readers know, I’ve devoted considerable space, over the past two years, to presenting evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is a scientific fairy tale, a con, and the virus doesn’t exist.

So when I hear this battle cry, I’m motivated to mention a few significant points.

Let me start by countering the claim that debating the existence of the virus is wasting time.

Here’s a shocker. A person can do more than one thing at the same time. For example, he can expose/oppose the toxic vaccine. He can expose the murderous COVID treatments (ventilators, sedatives, antiviral drugs). He can expose using simple flu-like illness to create fraudulent COVID case numbers.

And he can ALSO expose the fact that the virus has never been isolated (discovered) or sequenced.

So highlighting the non-existence of the virus doesn’t rule out dealing with other vital concerns.

This may come as a surprise, but it’s even possible to go to court to challenge a vaccine mandate, while ALSO arguing elsewhere that the virus doesn’t exist. I know. Amazing, right?

Those alarmed by “the virus doesn’t exist” also say: making that statement leaves us open to being called whackos, and leaves us unable to convince people that all our other criticisms of the pandemic are true.

I would counter that in two ways. Millions of people already believe we’re whackos, even those of us who take a sacred blood oath that the virus is real.

And second, people going against the grain, when their vital issue is still in the budding stage, are always called nuts. Trust me, there was a time when criticizing vaccines made people look like total whackos in the eyes of the general public—and it took decades of fighting the consensus to bring that criticism into the open, where many people saw the truth about jabs.

Here’s another fun fact. The entire medical cartel thrives on the insane proposition—launched with fervor more than a hundred years ago—that people suffer from thousands of distinct diseases, each of which is caused by a single germ, which must be treated by a toxic drug and prevented by a toxic vaccine.

It is this great lie that that has killed millions upon millions upon millions of people.

Therefore, the very real question about the existence of viruses in general is more than a weird preoccupation.

Next, those who claim, “OF COURSE viruses exist,” don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. They’re merely PARROTING what they learned in school or what researchers baldly claim in studies.

“Well, all virologists can’t be wrong.”

Yes, Virginia, they can all be wrong. Just as vaccinologists can all be wrong about “the remarkable safety and efficacy of vaccines.”

Some of the OF COURSE VIRUSES EXIST people are new to the way blogs and videos work. They’ve never encountered commenters in any great numbers before. So when a few dozen committed people suddenly tell them they should examine their premises more carefully and consider what really goes on in virology labs, these OF COURSE people are annoyed and irritated. They don’t like being challenged on basic issues. They don’t like feeling that the floor might suddenly shift under their feet. So they turn on their arrogance machines.

So be it.

The issue isn’t going away. Nor should it.

Despite growing digital censorship, the internet is still the Wild West in certain respects. People are going to say THE VIRUS DOESN’T EXIST, and VIRUSES DON’T EXIST.

And foundations will shake.

Foundations of the medical cartel, and foundations underlying people’s cherished assumptions.

In any area of human life, there are conflicts between “this is strategy” and “this is the truth.” There always will be.

Trying to shortchange the truth or casually say the truth is a lie doesn’t work.

NO ONE who is reading this article has ever been in a virology lab and witnessed the step by step process of “discovering a new virus.” I find that stunning. And yet all sorts of people are quite ready to assert with great finality that they know all about isolating viruses.

If by chance, someone reading this article HAS actually been in a lab and “discovered a virus,” you can bet your bottom dollar he won’t let you or me in there with a full film crew and our outlier experts asking very pointed questions about each “scientific” move he makes, as he “isolates a virus.”

To which somebody might reply: “Well, I’ve never seen a car being made in a factory, but I drive one with full confidence.”

Yes, but when the “virus discovered in a lab” results in you or someone you love being dosed with a drug or vaccine that maims you or kills your family member, you damn well should want to get into “that factory where the car is made.”

But you can’t. They won’t let you…

…Despite the fact that, as I’ve documented many times, the US medical system kills, by a very conservative estimate, 225,000 people a year, or 2.25 million people per decade. [0]

Chew on THAT for a while.

Here is one of my articles on the subject of virus isolation:

—Dr. Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the virus exists—

The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”

But what if the virus doesn’t exist?

People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.

“Isolation” should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”

I took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to Dr. Andrew Kaufman [1], and he provided his analysis in detail.

I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 — June 2020)” [2].

First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.

The researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number of compounds. Human cells, monkey cells, antibiotics, other chemicals, random genetic material.

The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup, because they’re dropped a mucus sample from a patient in the soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not occurring.

They set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the soup are dying. This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.

There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.

Finally, the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus.”

Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:

STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”

KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”

STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”

KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”

STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”

KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”

STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”

KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”

KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO) [3]. Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”

STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols…”

STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”

KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”

STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”

KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”

—end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis—

My comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not occurring.

Dr. Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr. Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that “the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.

And finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of “the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists, and you don’t have an isolated specimen of it?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 375 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [4]) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?

The answer is no.

SOURCES:

[0] https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-primary-care-policy-center/Publications_PDFs/A154.pdf

[1] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/

[2] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

[3] https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home.html

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/covid/

FURTHER READING:

Is the virus real? Steve Kirsch suggests a debate

blog.nomorefakenews.com/2022/01/25/is-the-virus-real-steve-kirsch-suggests-a-debate/

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.

Podcast: The Whole COVID and AIDS Fraud: My 35 Years of Investigation

The complete story for the first time

by Jon Rappoport

May 3, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

The podcast is now up at my substack page. It’s a blockbuster. Four hours (part-1, part-2). The deepest myths of COVID and AIDS—exploded.

Kick in a few bucks, subscribe, and listen to it.

When I began exposing COVID as a complete fraud—right at the beginning, in the winter of 2020—people asked me how I could describe the whole picture of the fake pandemic so quickly.

My answer was: AIDS.

I had done all the heavy lifting back in 1987-88, which resulted in my first book, AIDS INC., SCANDAL OF THE CENTURY.

COVID, in key respects, is a mirror image of AIDS.

Two gigantic scientific and medical frauds.

Now, in the podcast, I’m telling the whole story of my research, how it developed, how I rooted around in the dark, in 1987, and finally found the key clues that broke down the barriers.

I’ve wanted to put all this on the record for years, and now I have.

And in the podcast, I dismantle the deepest frauds of COVID as well.

COVID, scientifically speaking, is a rerun of HIV/AIDS.

The COVID virus story, the test, the case numbers, the treatments, the targeting of populations, the use of “the virus” as a vast cover story to conceal boggling ongoing crimes—it’s all one CONSTRUCTION with connected parts.

For 35 years, I haven’t stopped exposing the medical cartel. And I’ve made it VERY clear, since 1988, that political reporters who want to expose deep political truth MUST understand the titanic medical issues at the root of what’s being done to our world.

The method of analysis I employed and refined in 1987-88 applies today, without changing a single thing. In the podcast, I describe how I arrived at that method.

There are heroes I learned from along the way, and I bring them up in the podcast. They’ve stood firm against storms of attacks from the establishment, and their contributions must not be forgotten.

Starting 35 years ago, my position has been: when I find the truth, I don’t just bite off a piece of it and show it to people.

I lay it ALL out.

I don’t decide what is palatable and what is “too much to expose.” I don’t make that calculation.

This means that certain facts I lay out on a silver platter disturb all sorts of myths and legends and fairy tales that are universally accepted.

So be it.

Ever since I started working as a journalist, in 1982, at the age of 44 (I just turned 84), I took that approach. Dig, keep digging, and report everything I find. IGNORE “NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.”

There is only the choice of whether to hold back or go all the way.

Holding back entangles a writer in “career decisions” and judgments about what “audiences can handle.” When you go that route, you end up cutting your own throat and stifling your own energy.

To me, a good day for a journalist is seeing something big you didn’t know. You found it out and you told people about it. The bigger the better. The more apple carts you upset, the better.

And when it comes to medical apple carts, the shockers are astonishingly profound.

So take a ride with me in this podcast. I’m blowing the cover off the very biggest and deepest myths I’ve found. Including the secret temple of virology.

As always, thank you for your support.

Jon

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 extinction of species, Bill Gates, and the US military

by Jon Rappoport

May 2, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

There is a technology called gene drives.

It asks the question: what species should we make extinct today?

Why are Bill Gates and the US military involved in forwarding that technology?

A gene-drive scientist might say, “I have a plan. By manipulating genes, we can make invasive rodents extinct, on an island where humans are living.”

In the next fraction of a second, a flurry of questions pops up.

The overarching question is: Does this mean genetic manipulation can make ANY species extinct?

Here is a passage from Gene Drive Files, a site with a referenced information on the subject:

“Gene drives are a gene-editing application that allows genetic engineers to drive a single artificial trait through an entire population by ensuring that all of an organism’s offspring carry that trait. For example, recent experiments are fitting mice with ‘daughterless’ gene drives that will cascade through mouse populations so that only male pups are born, ensuring that the population becomes extinct after a few generations.”

“Proponents have framed gene drives as a breakthrough tool for eradicating pests or invasive species. However, the Gene Drive Files reveal that these ‘conservation’ efforts are primarily supported by military funds.”

Gene drive technology could be deployed to wipe out troublesome plant-parasites, weeds, crops, animal pests, animals, and…what about humans? Mull that over with your morning coffee.

Several years ago, UN member nations were considering a recommendation to call a moratorium on the use of gene drives. However, Bill Gates showed up to try to squash the moratorium.

The Gene Drive Files reports: “Documents received under Freedom of Information requests reveal that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation paid a private agriculture and biotechnology PR firm $1.6 million for activities on Gene Drives. This included running a covert ‘advocacy coalition’ which appears to have intended to skew the only UN expert process addressing gene drives…”

“Following global calls in December 2016 from Southern countries and over 170 organizations for a UN moratorium on gene drives, emails to gene drive advocates received under a Freedom of Information request by Prickly Research reveal that a private public affairs firm ‘Emerging Ag’ received funds from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to co-ordinate the ‘fight back against gene drive moratorium proponents’.”

There’s more from the Gene Drive Files. It involves the military:

“A trove of emails (The Gene Drive Files) from leading U.S. gene drive researchers reveals that the U.S. Military is taking the lead in driving forward gene drive development.”

“Emails obtained through a freedom of Information request by U.S.–based Prickly Research reveal that the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has given approximately $100 million for gene drive research, $35 million more than previously reported, making them likely the largest single funder of gene drive research on the planet. The emails also reveal that DARPA either funds or co-ordinates with almost all major players working on gene drive development as well as the key holders of patents on CRISPR gene editing technology.”

“These funds go beyond the US; DARPA is now also directly funding gene drive researchers in Australia (including monies given to an Australian government agency, CSIRO) and researchers in the UK. The files also reveal an extremely high level of interest and activity by other sections of the U.S. military and Intelligence community.”

For the moment, put aside the notion of intentional extinction of species. Consider unintended consequences.

As I’ve shown in past articles, the latest and greatest gene-editing tools (e.g., CRISPR), which are used for gene drives, are far from slam-dunk precise, despite official assurances.

For example, this study: Genome Biology, July14, 2017, titled, “CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing induces exon skipping by alternative splicing or exon deletion.” An exon is “a segment of a DNA or RNA molecule containing information coding for a protein or peptide sequence.” So you can see that exon skipping or deletion is a very bad outcome.

ANY gene editing done on ANY species opens the door wide to all sorts of errors and unforeseen consequences.

As for intentional destruction, we have this: MIT Technology Review, 2/8/16: “We have the technology to destroy all Zika mosquitoes.”

“A controversial genetic technology able to wipe out the mosquito carrying the Zika virus will be available within months, scientists say.”

“The technology, called a ‘gene drive,’ was demonstrated only last year in yeast cells, fruit flies, and a species of mosquito that transmits malaria. It uses the gene-snipping technology CRISPR to force a genetic change to spread through a population as it reproduces.”

“Three U.S. labs that handle mosquitoes, two in California and one in Virginia, say they are already working toward a gene drive for Aedes aegypti, the type of mosquito blamed for spreading Zika. If deployed, the technology could theoretically drive the species to extinction.”

“…a gene drive [gene editing] can…make mosquito populations disappear. The simplest way to do that is to spread a genetic payload that leads to only male offspring. As the ‘male-only’ instructions spread with each new generation, eventually there would be no females left, says Adelman. His lab discovered the Aedes aegypti gene that determines sex only last spring. The next step will be to link it to a gene drive.”

Bill Gates favors this technology. So shouldn’t we? After all, Bill is the number one humanitarian on the planet, right?

Right?

No?

Oops.

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 New Human created by technocracy: bio-digital convergence

by Jon Rappoport

April 13, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

We have a stunning February 2020 report, “Exploring Biodigital Convergence,” released by “Policy Horizons Canada… a strategic foresight organization within the Government of Canada…”

The report lays out a pattern of joining biology and digital technology to create new humans.

This IS the planned future.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that this is the far shore of a global control grid.

I’ll start with a sprinkling of quotes from the report; they give you a general notion of what this “revolution” is about:

“Biological and digital systems are converging, and could change the way we work, live, and even evolve as a species.”

“More than a technological change, this biodigital convergence may transform the way we understand ourselves and cause us to redefine what we consider human or natural.”

“Digital technologies and biological systems are beginning to combine and merge in ways that could be profoundly disruptive to our assumptions about society, the economy, and our bodies. We call this the biodigital convergence.”

“Full physical integration of biological and digital identities.”

“Biodigital convergence is opening up striking new ways to: Change human beings – our bodies, minds, and behaviours…Change or create other organisms …”

Now here is a passage that should pull you up short:

“Digital technology can be embedded in organisms, and biological components can exist as parts of digital technologies. The physical meshing, manipulating, and merging of the biological and digital are creating new hybrid forms of life and technology, each functioning in the tangible world, often with heightened capabilities.”

“Robots with biological brains and biological bodies with digital brains already exist, as do human-computer and brain-machine interfaces. The medical use of digital devices in humans, as well as digitally manipulated insects such as drone dragonflies and surveillance locusts, are examples of digital technology being combined with biological entities. By tapping into the nervous system and manipulating neurons, tech can be added to an organism to alter its function and purpose. New human bodies and new senses of identity could arise as the convergence continues.”

That last paragraph has citations referring to published studies. I plowed my way through one, which detailed experiments with rats. The researchers found new ways of embedding many, many “threads” in the rats’ brains. These threads can presumably deliver information/commands to the brain. That would be the goal.

So this report on biodigital convergence is more than theory. It’s more than speculation. It’s extrapolation from current research. And it’s “forward looking.” At times, it barely contains its enthusiasm for a future in which humans aren’t humans anymore. Humans are “more.”

Here are several other quotes from the report:

“…biology is subject to influence and manipulation that was not possible a few years ago.”

“For example, gene sequencing [enabled by digital technology] combined with artificial intelligence (AI) leads to understanding genetic expression, which is then used to alter existing organisms to create organic compounds in new ways or even entirely synthetic organisms.”

“Neural nets – computer systems that are designed based on biological brains – are an example of how biological understanding is shaping digital technology.”

One hand washes the other. The biological and the digital hands collaborate.

But surely, people still understand that biology is fundamentally different from digital technology. Right? Read the next quote from the report:

“As we continue to better understand and control the mechanisms that underlie biology, we could see a shift away from vitalism – the idea that living and nonliving organisms are fundamentally different because they are thought to be governed by different principles. Instead, the idea of biology as having predictable and digitally manageable characteristics may become increasingly common as a result of living in a biodigital age. Any student of biology today will have grown up in a digital world and may consciously or subconsciously apply that [new] frame of reference to bioinformatics and biology generally.”

The report is talking about a cultural shift.

People immersed in “the digital world” will no longer view biology as VITAL AND ALIVE and the digital as MECHANICAL AND DEAD.

Instead, living biology will just be one more territory to be manipulated; like a machine that can be improved.

Therefore, the whole concept that LIFE IS VIOLATED by manipulating it and altering it radically…will fade out and go away.

The idea that biology is one thing and the digital is another will vanish.

Continuing to quote from the report:

“As digital technology became more complex and connected, the system began to mimic the characteristics of the biological world, leading to the notion of technological ecosystems. Biological models are also being used to develop digital tools, such as AI based on neural nets.”

Did you catch that phrase, “technological ecosystems?” Suddenly, the non-living—machines and data—is thought of as living. And many tech oriented people would say, “Well, of course. The systems ARE living. And if you don’t agree, you’re hopelessly old-fashioned and holding on to an irrelevant paradigm.”

The report: “Biodigital convergence is…moving away from the centralized models of pharmaceutical and industrial biotech toward widespread commercial and consumer use. These range from bioprinters that create organic tissue, to synthetic biology machines that can be programmed to create entirely new organisms. For example, Printeria is an all-in-one bioengineering device that automates the process of printing genetic circuits in bacteria. It is intended to be as easy to use as a domestic desktop printer and is projected to cost $1,500.”

Anyone can EXPERIENCE the blending of digital and biological by carrying out experiments at home.

And speaking of home, here from the report is a “possible scenario” occurring in the new biodigital world; up close and personal.

Note: Given what you’ve already read so far, this scenario is a decidedly Lite and cheery version of what it would be like to live in the new world. Further, there are all sorts of pseudoscientific assumptions about medical/health solutions and climate change EMBEDDED PERMANENTLY in the AI programs that govern daily life:

From the report: “I wake up to the sunlight and salty coastal air of the Adriatic sea. I don’t live anywhere near the Mediterranean, but my AI, which is also my health advisor, has prescribed a specific air quality, scent, and solar intensity to manage my energy levels in the morning, and has programmed my bedroom to mimic this climate.”

“I send a brain message [a thought] to open the app that controls my insulin levels and make sure my pancreas is optimally supported.”

“I check my brain’s digital interface to read the dream data that was recorded and processed in real time last night. My therapy app analyzes the emotional responses I expressed while I slept. It suggests I take time to be in nature this week to reflect on my recurring trapped-in-a-box dream and enhance helpful subconscious neural activity. My AI recommends a ‘forest day’. I think ‘okay’, and my AI and neural implant do the rest.”

The neural implant, triggered by a mere thought from the compliant citizen, creates the virtual “forest day.”

“The summary of my bugbot surveillance footage shows that my apartment was safe from intruders (including other bugbots) last night, but it does notify me that my herd of little cyber-dragonflies are hungry. They’ve been working hard collecting data and monitoring the outside environment all night, but the number of mosquitoes and lyme-carrying ticks they normally hunt to replenish their energy was smaller than expected. With a thought, I order some nutrient support for them.”

“Building codes and home energy infrastructure are synchronized, and require all homes be autoregulated for efficiency. Because houses and buildings are biomimetic and incorporate living systems for climate control wherever possible, they are continuously filtering the air and capturing carbon. I check my carbon offset measure to see how much credit I will receive for my home’s contribution to the government’s climate change mitigation program.”

“I replace the smart sticker that monitors my blood chemistry, lymphatic system, and organ function in real time. It’s hard to imagine the costs and suffering that people must have endured before personalized preventative medicine became common.”

“Today’s microbiome breakdown is displayed on the front of my fridge as I enter the kitchen. It’s tracking a steady shift as I approach middle age: today it suggests miso soup as part of my breakfast, because my biome needs more diversity as a result of recent stress and not eating well last night.”

“I take my smart supplement, which just popped out of my bioprinter. The supplement adjusts the additional nutrients and microbes I need, and sends data about my body back to my bioprinter to adjust tomorrow’s supplement. The feedback loop between me and my bioprinter also cloud-stores daily data for future preventive health metrics. The real-time monitoring of my triglycerides is important, given my genetic markers.”

“As my coffee pours, I check my daughter’s latest school project, which has been growing on the counter for the past week. She’s growing a liver for a local puppy in need as part of her empathy initiative at school. More stem cells are on the way to start a kidney too, because she wants to help more animals. I grab my coffee, brewed with a new certified carbon-negative bean variety, and sit on the couch for a minute.”

Many people reading this scenario would jump at the chance to live in that world—blithely assuming all would be well.

They would never guess their neural implants OVERRIDE decisions they themselves make that run counter to government “recommended behavior.”

Nor would they imagine the varieties of strange hybrid creatures that abound in this Brave New World. Animal-human-machine creatures, whose functions are assigned by technocratic rulers.

And the last thing they’d realize is that they could very well BE those animal-human-machine creatures.

Finally, for now; there is one element which keeps people from admitting that “science fiction” can actually come to pass. They believe people living in a dystopian science fiction world would KNOW it was horrible and life-destroying—and would rebel.

But the Canadian report points out that our culture is burying that knowledge. People of the near-future could hold beliefs which affirm the biodigital convergence as a major ADVANCE. As PROGRESS. As an Evolved Reality. As Truth.

With the memory of the past…gone.

CODA: Under several headings, the report lists biodigital strategies. They’re chilling. You can easily discern the implications.

HEADING: “What new capabilities arise from biodigital convergence?”

“Altering the human genome – our core biological attributes and characteristics.”

“Monitoring, altering and manipulating human thoughts and behaviours.”

“Neurotechnologies read brain signals to monitor attention and manage fatigue.”

“New ways to monitor, manage, and influence bodily functions, as well as predict, diagnose, and treat disease.”

“Digital devices can be worn or embedded in the body to treat and monitor functionality.”

“Biohacking with implanted digital devices to enhance bodily functions.”

“Nanobots and nanomaterials can operate and precisely deliver drugs within living creatures.”

HEADING: “New ways to change or create other organisms”

“Changing the type or amount of inputs that organisms need to grow.”

“Synthetic biology draws inspiration from biology, engineering, computer science, and physics for the design and construction of new biological entities.”

HEADING: “new ways to alter ecosystems”

“Changing and eradicating entire species.”

“Altering the natural environment at scale.”

HEADING: “New ways to sense, store, process, and transmit information”

“Turning organisms into biocomputers.”

In the ENDNOTES section of the report, you can find links to published research on biodigital experiments.

Example: “Brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) hold promise for the restoration of sensory and motor function and the treatment of neurological disorders, but clinical BMIs have not yet been widely adopted, in part because modest channel counts have limited their potential. In this white paper, we describe Neuralink’s first steps toward a scalable high-bandwidth BMI system. We have built arrays of small and flexible electrode “threads”, with as many as 3,072 electrodes per array distributed across 96 threads. We have also built a neurosurgical robot capable of inserting six threads (192 electrodes) per minute. Each thread can be individually inserted into the brain with micron precision for avoidance of surface vasculature and targeting specific brain regions.”

Example: “A project called DragonflEye, conducted by the research and development organization Draper in conjunction with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, is turning the insects into hybrid drones. Live dragonflies are equipped with backpacks containing navigation systems, which tap directly into their nervous systems. The dragonflies can then be ‘steered’ to fly in certain directions. The whole thing is powered by miniature solar panels in the backpacks.”

Example: “Scientists have created the world’s first living organism that has a fully synthetic and radically altered DNA code. The lab-made microbe, a strain of bacteria that is normally found in soil and the human gut, is similar to its natural cousins but survives on a smaller set of genetic instructions.”

Example: “…we built a dual-core CPU combining two orthogonal core processors in a single cell. In principle, human cells integrating multiple orthogonal CRISPR/Cas9-based core processors could offer enormous computational capacity.”

Example: “The daring Chinese biophysicist who created the world’s first gene-edited children has been set free after three years in a Chinese prison. He Jiankui created shock waves in 2018 with the stunning claim that he’d altered the genetic makeup of IVF embryos and implanted them into a woman’s uterus, leading to the birth of twin girls. A third child was born the following year.”

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.

Massive lawsuit: pesticide causes Parkinson’s; how lawyer-logic and medical-hustle perform stage magic

by Jon Rappoport

March 14, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

Watch closely. The hat is completely empty, see? But now, as I wave this handkerchief across it and intone a spell derived from ancient Babylonian high priests, poof, here is a large white rabbit crawling out of the hat. And now again, as I wave the cloth, boom, the rabbit is gone. And that is how 400 billion dollars of plaintiffs’ claims are asserted and then rejected. Case dismissed.

Children’s Health Defense, 3/4/22: “A hearing today in federal court will set the stage for upcoming litigation against Syngenta, manufacturer of Paraquat. More than 600 lawsuits alleging the agrochemical giant knew its flagship weedkiller causes Parkinson’s were combined into what is known as multidistrict litigation.”

What is Parkinson’s disease (PD)?

Parkinson.org: “Scientists believe a combination of genetic and environmental factors are the cause of Parkinson’s disease (PD). PD is an extremely diverse disorder. While no two people experience Parkinson’s the same way, there are some commonalities. PD affects about one million people in the United States and ten million worldwide. The main finding in brains of people with PD is loss of dopaminergic neurons in the area of the brain known as the substantia nigra.”

There is no cure. And as you can see from that quote, no definite cause has been established. But it’s a disease. We know that because it has a label. PD. And the label is the proof.

If you buy that, visit my site, ConJobCondosontheMoon.com.

For the moment, let’s go with the notion that PD is defined by loss of those dopaminergic neurons in the brain.

If I’m a lawyer defending Syngenta, the maker of the toxic pesticide Paraquat, part of my argument will go this way:

ONE: There are people who have this neuron loss who’ve never been exposed to Paraquat.

TWO: And there are people who’ve been exposed to Paraquat who don’t develop this neuron loss.

THREE: Therefore, the claim that Paraquat causes PD is unfounded.

FOUR: Therefore, blaming Paraquat for the plaintiffs’ PD has no merit.

Poof. Magic.

Once you accept the notion that PD is a distinct disease, even though no definite cause has been found and no cure exists—and even though the neuron loss could occur for who knows how many different reasons—you’re in a hole.

Why?

Because of the above lawyer’s argument I just sketched out. In fact, the same argument has been used many times to deny compensation to parents of vaccine-injured children:

“Your son has been diagnosed with autism. You claim it was caused by the injection. But we know there are many autistic children who never received that particular injection. And there are many children who received the injection who never developed autism.”

Rejection by definition. By sleight of hand. By con.

“We say we have a distinct disease. Our definition of the disease AUTOMATICALLY precludes law suits, because we can claim the purported cause of the disease cited in the law suits is unproven…”

Whereas, there is a much simpler way to assess causation—if the courts would allow it. It goes this way:

“The defendant struck my son on the head 12 times with a heavy hammer. My son’s brain was damaged. Aside from criminal charges, I want the man who destroyed my son’s life to pay. To pay everything he has.”

See? No disease label at all. No magic trick.

A worker in the field sprayed Paraquat all day long. That’s the hammer. Now he can’t walk, he has uncontrollable tremors, he can hardly speak, and he needs around the clock care for the rest of his life.

No PD, no disease label, no neuron loss, no doctors and researchers on the witness stand. Just the plain facts.

Because in the end, when you put all the medical and legal mumbo jumbo aside, that’s the best case anyone can make. It may not be absolute perfection—which is impossible—but it’s the closest thing to it.

The worker, who was healthy, used Paraquat. Now he’s very badly damaged. Period.

The young boy was injected with a vaccine. Then he checked out of the world and sat in a corner for the next year. Period.

No disease labels. No magic tricks.

I’ll run this by you one last time:

PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY: My client, Jim, worked in the fields for six months. He sprayed Paraquat dozens of times. Now here, as you can see from the brain scans, he then experienced a loss of neurons…”

SYNGENTA ATTORNEY: And here are 20 studies that show the same brain scans and same loss of neurons in people who never sprayed Paraquat or even worked on a farm…”

That’s not evidence. That’s a trap.

The good news is: playing the legal-medical game can have a self-incriminating rebound effect.

Since the Syngenta scientists accept their own non-scientific disease-labeling approach as Holy Scripture, there will be memos in internal Syngenta files that show these scientists were “warning of Parkinson’s as an effect of Paraquat for years.”

And THAT could very well sink them in court.

But, again, the truth is much simpler. It’s the hammer and the head. The hammer strikes the head. Then, DAMAGE.

No hats, no handkerchiefs, no ancient spells, no rabbits. Just straight-out CRIME.

CODA: If the pseudo-scientific fog were cleared away, and if stripped-down straight-out CRIME were accepted as the argument in court, there would be a righteous bonus. The corporation executives and scientists who knew they were major criminals would be sent to prison for 50 years.

That BANG would wake up the world.

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.

Another article too hot to handle; even vaccine critics won’t run with it

by Jon Rappoport

February 23, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

A few days ago — in my article The Test for Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum, I republished my proof that the medical cartel has been routinely killing millions of people, with its treatments, for at least the past 20 years.

And when I say proof, I’m talking about clear mainstream research.

Virtually no one has taken those research citations and run with them, despite the fact that I’ve highlighted them for years. I’ve highlighted them in articles and interviews.

What’s the problem?

Apparently, even many “alternative” journalists and doctors are keeping a piece of their souls in the official prison of fake medicine and fake science. On purpose.

They want to hedge their bets. They want to go halfway, but not all the way.

They want to admit some things, but not other things.

So today, I’m posting another one of my “too hot to handle” pieces. I’ve published this article at least four times. Even doctors who oppose the COVID vaccines won’t pick up on it.

Why?

It’s too REAL, because it proves the RNA injections were DESIGNED to fail, to be useless, from the get-go.

That’s right.

And if you expose THAT, you burn the whole house down.

The vaccine establishment collapses.

No one will believe anything the establishment says about vaccines. Nor should they.

And many journalists and doctors of all stripes want to “protect the public” from THE TRUTH.

I don’t want to bury the truth. I’m not settling for half.

Buckle up—

I wrote and posted this piece while the clinical trials of the COVID vaccine were in progress. It reveals how and why those trials were constructed and designed to fail. They did fail.

The vaccine makers DESIGNED a series of clinical trials that, even on their own terms (“the virus is real, fear the virus”) were destined to be a complete flop.

PART ONE

Peter Doshi, associate editor of the medical journal BMJ, and Eric Topol, Scripps Research professor of molecular medicine, have written a devastating NY Times opinion piece about the ongoing COVID vaccine clinical trials.

They expose the fatal flaw in the large Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna trials.

September 22, 2020, the Times: “These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know” (also, here):

“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications?”

“The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”

“But that’s not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the problem.”

“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”

BOOM. THE CLINICAL TRIALS WERE NOT DESIGNED TO SHOW THE VACCINE COULD PREVENT SERIOUS ILLNESS. OR HOSPITALIZATION. OR DEATH.

The Times: “To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials will determine.”

BOOM.

This means these clinical trials are dead in the water.

And I could stop this article right here and walk away. Done. Finished. Nothing more need be said.

And you the reader could walk away. OK, done. The clinical trials of the vaccine were never intended to prevent serious illness of any kind. Never intended to prevent hospitalizations or deaths. End of story.

Goodbye. Forget the vaccine. Why would anyone want to take it?

But if you want to know WHY the clinical trials were designed this way, and HOW the con was played, and why it was actually necessary to design the clinical trials to be useless, read on.

The whole vaccine house is ALREADY burned down, but I’m going to say a lot more. I’m going to burn the ashes.

First of all, make sure you understand the clinical trials of the RNA vaccines were only designed to show effectiveness in preventing “mild cases of COVID,” which nobody should care about, because mild cases (cough, fever, chills) naturally run their course and cause no harm. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.

Now let’s go deeper. Read the next section from the Times piece, and then I’ll make comments.

“The Moderna and AstraZeneca studies will involve about 30,000 participants each; Pfizer’s will have 44,000. Half the participants will receive two doses of vaccines separated by three or four weeks, and the other half will receive saltwater placebo shots. The final determination of efficacy will occur after 150 to 160 participants develop Covid-19…”

Now pay close attention. Here’s how it works. The vaccine companies are looking for a total of 150 mild COVID cases to occur, combined, in the two groups— those receiving the placebo and those receiving the vaccine. How would that happen? The researchers believe “the coronavirus is spreading everywhere” and it will pounce on some of the volunteers during the clinical trial.

Let’s say that, during the trial, 100 people receiving the placebo develop mild COVID-19 (cough, chills, fever), and only 50 people receiving the vaccine develop mild COVID.

The vaccine companies would say, “We just proved the vaccine is 50% effective in preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to do, in order to win emergency authorization from the FDA. Release the vaccine. Inject the world.”

The outcomes for ONLY 150 people equal “let’s shoot up seven billion people.”

That’s staggering.

But it gets even worse. The magic number of 150 COVID cases? How is a COVID case defined? The authors of the Times piece have the answer:

“In the Moderna and Pfizer trials, even a mild case of Covid-19 — for instance, a cough plus a positive lab test — would qualify and muddy the results. AstraZeneca is slightly more stringent but would still count mild symptoms like a cough plus fever as a case.”

But wait. The NY Times itself recently published an article stating that up to 90% of US COVID cases could very well be false positives—in other words, not cases at all. Why? Because the diagnostic PCR test, as it is performed by labs, is too sensitive. It registers “positive for COVID” when it shouldn’t.

So, in these vaccine clinical trials, the whole process of determining that “150 people developed COVID-19” is completely unreliable, useless, absurd, and nonsensical.

On the one hand, a positive PCR test is unreliable and means nothing. On the other hand, a cough and fever (“mild COVID”) are nothing to worry about, and don’t require a vaccine at all. We’re talking about 150 cases of “who cares.” That’s what the COVID vaccine is DESIGNED to prevent.

“So, Doctor, the magic number is 150 ‘who cares’ mild cases? That’s the number that will decide the immediate fate of the planet?”

“Of course.”

“And these 150 people, who you say develop mild COVID-19…no one should care, because those symptoms cure themselves, and no vaccine is needed.”

“Correct.”

“And come to think of it, the people receiving the vaccine in the clinical trials could develop symptoms indistinguishable from mild COVID-19, as a result of the effects of the vaccine.”

“Yes, that’s right.”

“But you’re very confident in the success of the vaccine.”

“Indeed.”

“Why?”

“I have to be confident. If we’re exposed as incompetent frauds, our bottom line will take a huge hit. And we’ll wind up in prison.”

PART TWO: THE DEVIOUS TRICK

Now I’m going to go over the vital information again, but this time I’m going to show you how…

The vaccine companies can use the fatal flaw in their protocol design to…

Actually win approval of their COVID vaccine.

Stick with me. This is big.

Only 150 people are needed to make the major clinical trials of a COVID vaccine look like a success.

Out of 30,000 volunteers in a trial, researchers are waiting for 150 people to “come down with COVID-19.” MILD cases. They assume this will happen because they believe the coronavirus is everywhere, and it’ll infect some of their volunteers.

Of course, their definition of a mild case of COVID-19 is meaningless. Cough plus fever, and a positive PCR test. The test spits out false positives like a rigged slot machine, and the visible mild symptoms could result from flu, polluted air, or too many candy bars.

Nevertheless, the researchers are waiting for a total of 150 people to “catch a mild case of COVID.” When that number is reached, everything stops.

Now comes the big moment. How many of those 150 COVID cases occurred in the group that received the vaccine, and how many in the group that received the placebo shot of salt water?

Let’s say only 50 COVID cases occurred in the vaccine group, and 100 in the placebo group. The researchers pop champagne corks. They say, “Look, the vaccine is 50% effective at preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to win emergency authorization from the FDA.”

BUT suppose 75 cases occurred in the vaccine group and 75 in the placebo group? No good. No good at all. No way to call the vaccine effective.

Now comes the “reshaping of the data.”

HERE WE GO.

The researchers say, “Wait. Thirty of the COVID cases in the vaccine group were REALLY just adverse reactions to the vaccine. They weren’t cases of COVID. You see, the vaccine can cause symptoms that are indistinguishable from mild COVID. Cough, fever, chills. ACTUALLY, there were only 30 cases of COVID in the vaccine group. There were 75 in the placebo group. That’s good enough. The vaccine IS effective. We’re golden. We can get emergency authorization from the FDA right now to shoot up everybody.”

Vaccine manufacturers HAVE KNOWN ALL ALONG that they could pull this trick.

Why leave things to chance?

Why risk a few hundred billion dollars of profit on a random distribution of mild COVID cases among the volunteers in their clinical trials?

The definition of a mild COVID case is EXACTLY what the vaccine manufacturers needed. It enabled them to hatch a plan, to make sure they didn’t fail.

They could pawn off a MILD case of COVID as a reaction to the vaccine. They could fake that without causing ripples. The FDA would say, “The vaccine reactions aren’t serious. All right, no problem. We’ll approve this vaccine for emergency use.”

However…If the manufacturers designed their clinical trial protocol to prevent serious cases of COVID—-very serious pneumonia—then first of all, they would be waiting to see 150 cases of really sick people to occur among the volunteers.

That might never happen. In 100 years.

And second, if it did happen, and the manufacturers had to pull their devious switcheroo trick and blame the vaccine for some of these SERIOUS cases…

They would have to tell the FDA that their vaccine was causing life-threatening pneumonia; and the FDA, under a lot of scrutiny these days, would find it very difficult to overlook that.

FDA: “We can’t approve this vaccine. It could cause a few million cases of dire pneumonia…”

The vaccine companies didn’t make a titanic stupid mistake in their protocol design. In gearing the protocol to prevent MILD COVID cases, they did what they did on purpose. It allows them to “reshape their data” and win FDA emergency approval for their vaccine.

These companies have no intention of failing, starting over, and spending a year recruiting 30,000 new volunteers. They want success and money now. They want to win the race.

And they will win, if the truth isn’t known and shared widely.

The punchline:

Every “expert,” in August 2021, is instructed to say the vaccine is definitely protecting people against severe illness and hospitalization. This is their promotional message to the world.

“Yes, even if you’re vaccinated, you could become infected with the virus, you could develop COVID, and you could pass the virus to other people, BUT you must take the shot. It will protect you from becoming severely ill.”

As you can see from what I’ve written above, this is a straight-out lie.

It was always a fantastic lie, from the beginning of COVID vaccine development, because the design of the clinical trials had nothing to do with preventing serious illness.

—end of article—

OK, we’re back in the present now; 2022. Everything you’ve just read has been studiously ignored. Shoved to the side.

The vaccine was only designed, at best, to prevent mild cough, fever, chills. That’s it. A mild case of flu-like illness. Which cures itself.

That design was intentional. It allowed the vaccine makers to win approval for the injection.

If they had to wait around for 150 volunteers in the clinical trials to develop serious pneumonia, that could have taken years. Or forever.

The clinical trials proved nothing.

The vaccine, even in mainstream scientific terms, was worthless.

It was designed that way.

That’s a chunk of blockbuster news anybody with a half a brain should be shouting from the rooftops. Instead: SILENCE.

Why?

Again, because this blockbuster news burns the whole house down.

It takes down the whole vaccine establishment.

And there are lots of vaccine critics who DON’T WANT TO GO ALL THE WAY.

EVEN THOUGH THEY SHOULD.

They back away. They pretend they don’t know what they DO know.

They could shoot down, overnight, the whole basis for these COVID shots, and they would expose the vaccine that is maiming and killing of millions upon millions of people.

But they stay silent.

Show them this information.

Get them to tell you what their problem is.

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.

Email from a poisonous moron

by Jon Rappoport

February 9, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

It was perfect. Made my day.

Aside from all the cursing and accusing, this moron claimed I had no right and no standing to DISBELIEVE scientists who work in ultra-secret labs where they assert they’re discovering new viruses.

I have no standing because I don’t have the degrees.

Of course. A degree is an automatic certification of competency and honesty.

PhD. MD.

Only another person with those credentials can step up to the plate and question the experts in their labs.

THAT premise and that idea produces fascists.

That moronic and venomous notion produces fascists who are willing to fight to maintain the Police State.

That desperate clinging to AUTHORITY is why the war for freedom is forever.

That level of stupidity is why Fauci, whose sole reason for being is—“I’m on television”—can attract an army of worshipping idiots—and can lead the nation into a trap where slavery is supposed to be salvation.

The poisonous moron who sent that email is a representative of all the rubes and yokels and marks who are ready and willing to cancel centuries of the struggle for freedom.

The poisonous moron who sent the email would go to her DOCTOR, the competent one, and if he said she should have her leg cut off, she would salute and say, “How soon can we schedule it?” And she would be proud.

I salute her. She is willing to expose herself as a portrait on the wall; a portrait we can point to and say, “This is the key. This is what MKULTRA looks like. This is self-made mind control.”

Given the chance, she would have trained Hitler Youth.

Of course, she doesn’t know that. She thinks she stands for truth and justice.

And that’s the brilliance of it. The reversal. The day suddenly turns to night. Making life into death.

Every human has experienced this twist, on some level. Every human has found himself a buck private at the back of a line toting a gun and taking orders and—is then jolted into: WHAT AM I DOING HERE? HOW DID I GET HERE? I’M ON THE WRONG SIDE.

But some are never jolted. They march on. They keep obeying the commanders who have the DEGREES and the CREDENTIALS.

They say, “I’m marching to save lives.”

They say, “If you doubt the commanders, you’re killing the innocent.”

But they’re the ones firing their weapons. And holding the syringes and the needles.

And I want to say to my readers: For the past two years, many of us have been exposing the whole rotten edifice of the medical cartel as it’s NEVER been exposed before. And millions of people are seeing the rot and the collapse and they’re smelling the stench rising from the earth.

And so WE CAN EXPECT, and should even take as a positive sign, little fascists jumping out of their holes and accusing us OF HAVING NO STANDING AND NO RIGHT to disturb the edifice.

Would I prefer this struggle to be conducted like a charm school? I would prefer an entirely different world. But we’re here now with this one, so we fight.

More little creatures will try to stick their fangs in us; but we don’t back down. We use their blind stupidity as fuel for our fire.

In that regard, nothing had changed in the ten-thousand year war for freedom.

The more I write, the more I’m liking this woman who sent the poisonous email. She’s got will power. She’s burning her taper closer and closer to the end, where it turns into a large ash and falls off into the void. And then…silence. Great darkness.

I believe we’ve all been there as well.

How did we take ourselves out of that place?

Each person has his own answer.

I side with those who realize they invented their way into the Dark, and they’ll invent their way out of it.

Regardless, when the taper has burned out, you really don’t want to be stuck with the idea that only an official credentialed authority can reach down and give you what you need.

That’s unworkable.

Because, who shows up with official certifications? The screw and rack turner in the Spanish Inquisition. The mass murderer of peasants in 1930 Russia. The Jew and Gypsy killer in 1943 Germany. The Land Reform killer in 1950 China. The killer of millions with heralded medical drugs.

The de facto Medical President who locks down a whole country and carpet-bombs the economy and fronts for an injection that maims and murders.

power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, 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 bottom line on the existence of the virus, its isolation and sequencing

by Jon Rappoport

February 3, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

What proof would I accept? What sort of proof would convince me that SARS-CoV-2 exists?

Suppose, for example, a study described how researchers actually DID separate a virus from all the material surrounding it in their cell-soup in the lab?

Would that be enough?

And the answer is no.

Why?

Because I don’t trust studies based on research conducted in elite labs where no independent outsiders are allowed. And that’s the situation, when it comes to purported virus isolation.

These labs are like the famous bunkers where key government officials are taken, in the event of a massive attack against the country.

Try getting in off the street.

And who are these researchers in the super-secret labs? To put it another way, what sort of establishment do they represent?

Is it a clean establishment with a track record of honesty? Or is it a cartel with a criminal history?

If it’s a cartel, why should I accept the “scientific methods” of these researchers or their honesty?

As my long-time readers know, I’ve spent decades exposing lies and crimes of the medical cartel. Chapter and verse. (For example this: Medical weapons of mass destruction)

When it comes to vital issues that mean the difference between life and death—drug/vaccine-fueled destruction of human life; mistreatment and errors in hospitals; faked disease case and death numbers; inaccurate, meaningless, and deceptive diagnostic tests; the fabricated existence of a whole range of phony diseases and disorders and syndromes; the true numbers of medically caused deaths—medical authorities have been lying and sliming their way out of accountability for MANY decades.

And all this doesn’t touch on the history of public health declarations of epidemics that have turned out to be duds.

Nor does it include the overall history of Rockefeller medicine, which is based on the fatuous notion that there are thousands of separate and distinct diseases, each one of which is caused by a germ that must be treated by a profit-making drug.

Nor does it include the history of vicious suppression of innovative treatments developed by individuals who’ve worked outside the mainstream.

Therefore, suspicion is warranted. Is absolutely necessary. And “suspicion” is a vast understatement.

I refuse to trust the researchers who simply claim they’re isolating viruses.

When it comes to the so-called basic building blocks of MANY so-called diseases—which ARE “the viruses”—all the discovery-research HAS BEEN conducted by insiders in their off-limit labs. Without independent witnesses. Without educated witnesses who can watch and question each and every step of “the accepted method” for isolation of new viruses.

Frankly, you would have to be crazy to accept anything coming out of these insider-club labs.

So NO. I don’t accept such findings.

Before I describe how outsiders SHOULD be allowed to witness and participate in secret lab work, let me give you two quotes to consider.

They come from decidedly mainstream and elite editors of elite medical journals. These editors have read and explored and probed and lifted the fake cover from published medical material for decades. Material they themselves have published. Therefore, these are CONFESSIONS.

ONE: “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)

TWO: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)

Suspicion is warranted. It’s absolutely necessary. And again, “suspicion” is a vast understatement.

More than a year ago, I mentioned how virus-isolation research—if the word “research” applies at all—should be done.

And I issue this now, as a challenge, to the entire insider-club of virologists, all of whom claim their established method of finding and sequencing new viruses is scientific and rigorous:

Let’s have a film crew on site. As you work. In your lab. Looking over your shoulders and recording every move you make.

And with the film crew, let’s have several knowledgeable, outside, independent researchers. People whom you would ordinarily refuse to give the time of day. People who are insightful. Possibly, people like Dr. Stefan Lanka, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan.

As the film crew works, and as you conduct and describe your step-by-step “isolation” of a new virus, these outsiders can stop you at any moment and question you. In depth.

“Why did you just do that?” “Why didn’t you record that step?” “Explain that answer you just gave me. It makes no sense.” “Exactly what did you just withdraw from the solution in the dish, and how do you know what it was?”

This is not a public relations exercise or an educational documentary for medical students. This is REAL. This is research about your research. No holds barred.

You give a slippery answer to a question; you evade with a vague generality; you try to pull rank; you get nailed to the wall. On film.

THIS is the procedure I want.

All the way from start to finish. Including the so-called sequencing of the “new virus.”

And then we would know a great deal more about what you’re actually doing and not doing in your labs. In the absence of what I’m proposing and demanding, THERE IS NO REASON TO ASSUME THE PROCESS OF VIRUS-ISOLATION IS LEGITIMATE.

Virologists, your work affects every human on Earth. Profoundly. To see this, all a person has to do is look around him these days, at what is called “COVID.” It proceeds from your so-called discovery of SARS-CoV-2.

I view you virologists as I would view the court magicians and soothsayers and high priests who surrounded and advised the leaders of tribes and nations in ancient times.

Those “experts” huddled with the leaders in their very private rooms and spun stories and predictions, and recommended strategies to deal with supposed ongoing and looming crises.

And then the leaders took actions that affected the lives of all the people.

So it is now. With you virologists.

So my demands are entirely within bounds. If you have a shred of honesty, and if you stop and think about it, what I’m demanding is prosaically simple:

You account for every step you take. In real time. Where you work. Right there, you submit yourselves to the detailed scrutiny of independent outsiders.

That’s my bottom line.

And I challenge any scientist, analyst, investigator, doctor, researcher, reporter, alt. reporter who says what I’m demanding is not necessary. You’re wrong. You’re dead wrong.

You either haven’t thought things through, or you’re lying.

Someone is going to tell me what I’m demanding, as proof, is impossible. It would never happen. “They” would never let it happen. They would never let independent outsiders into their holy labs.

You think I don’t know that?

If outsiders can’t get into their labs, what does that tell you?

And someone will say, “We just have to rely on the best evidence we have.”

No we don’t. Because the best available evidence is no evidence.

In a vast sea of death-dealing medical lies, a sea that has existed for more than a hundred years (actually much longer), if experts tell you they’re discovering viruses in labs you can’t enter, and they say you must believe them, and you buy that…

I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon. Full cash only, no payments.

Here it is: Virologists are saying and writing they’ve found a purple man with pink hair and green lips and four arms living a thousand miles under the surface of a planet in the next solar system over. And he causes disease.

Then they’re saying, “Prove us wrong.”

On top of that, they’re saying, “You can’t watch us work while we discover such creatures.”

Conclusion: the purple man doesn’t exist.

Virologists, text me when you’ll let my people into your lab.

Until then, get lost.

Dear reader, the elephant in the room is trust, not data.

When it comes to the “discovery of viruses,” there are no reliable data. We, on the outside, are told that what happens behind locked doors is irrefutable. Period.

We’re told we just can’t understand what the pros are doing. The problem is our lack of knowledge, our lack of training.

We’re the peasants toiling in the valley. Our better, the baron, is up in his castle on top of the mountain. He’s planning our lives, he’s taking care of us.

Sure. Of course. Uh-huh.

Sounds familiar. It’s pretty much the history of the world.

Or it was, until people who came before us finally staked out a territory called freedom, which involved opening locked doors and finding out what lay behind them.

Consider a parochial example: the mafia. They, too, plan behind closed doors. They concoct methods of carrying out crimes. They record their profits. Then, finally, a prosecutor announces, “We were able to get into their books. We saw the details. We made arrests.”

I want my independent accountants to get into the virologists’ books. But not after the fact. I want my people to BE there while the virologists are creating the books, entry by entry, in the lab.

“Why did you just make that entry? Where did your conclusion come from? Who are you trying to kid? You’re just fabricating this stuff? You know, that’s called RICO. That’s a RICO case. Continuing criminal enterprise. They’ll send you away for a long time…”

And all of a sudden, the high and mighty virologist, who’s been able to con the world with his hustle, who knows how to come off sounding superior in every way, feels a dent in his armor. A big dent. He smells his own blood.

And he starts talking.

He wants to make a deal. He’ll roll over on his colleagues. He’ll expose the whole sham.

“…You don’t understand. It’s the money. It’s all about the money. Where it comes from. We have to do this kind of work. Otherwise, we starve. They cut us off. I know the people on the funding committees. I’ll give you their names. They take orders, too. The whole thing is a system. I can draw you a map. I can’t go to jail. I have a family. I’m paying eighty grand a year just to send my kids to college. There’s the mortgage, and the cottage on the Cape…”

The whole bluff POPS and deflates, and we begin to hear words we understand, at last. The words of confession. The down-to-earth sordid truth.

There was never a towering mystery in the castle on the hill.

There was just the passing of the buck. The soiled buck. From hand to hand.

The “science” was the front.

“…You see, it works this way. The pharmaceutical companies have to have new viruses. For every fake virus, they develop a real drug and a real vaccine. It’s marketing. That’s what they’re doing. That’s what they’ve always been doing. This is much bigger than anyone realizes. I’m just a little fish. The big boys run the whole show. They pay the Congress and the FDA. They pay everybody…”

He keeps talking. He can’t stop. He’s way past “isolation, purification and sequencing.” They’re in his rear-view mirror. Now he’s fighting for his freedom from prison. Now he’s telling the truth.

And the ever-present storm clouds over the valley where we peasants toil are blowing away. The air is fresher.

We’re breathing easier.

The big-cheese baron is really a shrunken little man—when he takes his perp walk in chains.

power outside the matrix

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