The virus that doesn’t exist: lies and consequences

by Jon Rappoport

October 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Throughout this false pandemic, I’ve been listing and explaining the falling dominos:

The false claim that a virus exists.

The development of a diagnostic test to detect the virus that doesn’t exist.

Based on the test, the publishing of sky-high case numbers, all of which are obviously meaningless.

Based on the false case numbers, and absurd computer projections of cases and deaths to come, the imprisoning of people in their homes, the closure and destruction of businesses, the torpedoing of economies, and then…

The introduction of a highly destructive vaccine as the solution.

These are the consequences that flowed from the fake “discovery” of a new virus.

Lately, there has been a resurgence of interest in one or two documents I cited months ago. These documents reveal the hoax at the bottom of the test for a virus that doesn’t exist. The documents, written by the builders of the test, admit an isolated specimen of the virus is NOT AVAILABLE. But they’re going to devise a test for it anyway.

This is on the order of a doctor telling a patient, “I’m going to test you for Disease XQ.”

The patient asks, “What is disease XQ?”

The doctor answers, “We have NO IDEA. But we want to find out whether you have it.”

Let’s go to the first Smoking Gun.

The CDC document is titled, “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel.” It was originally published in February 2020, in the very early days of the “pandemic,” and it’s latest revision was published in July 2021 (rev: 07, 7/21).

Buried deep in the document, in a section titled, “Performance Characteristics,” we have this: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV [SARS-CoV-2] are currently available, assays [diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA…” (document page 40, pdf page 41)

The key phrase there is: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV [virus] are currently available…”

Every object that exists can be quantified, which is to say, measured. The use of the term “quantified” in that phrase means: the CDC has no virus, because it is unavailable. THE CDC HAS NO VIRUS.

One of the two most powerful public health agencies in the world can’t obtain the virus from anywhere. Why? Obviously, because no one has it.

A further tip-off is the use of the word ‘isolates.” This means NO ISOLATED VIRUS IS AVAILABLE.

Another way to put it: NO ONE HAS AN ISOLATED SPECIMEN OF THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

NO ONE HAS ISOLATED THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

THEREFORE, NO ONE HAS PROVED THAT IT EXISTS.

As if this were not a revelation to shock the world, the CDC goes on to say they are presenting a diagnostic PCR test, in that very paper I’m citing, to detect the virus-that-hasn’t-been-isolated…and the test is looking for RNA which is PRESUMED to come from the virus that hasn’t been proved to exist.

And using this test, the CDC and every other public health agency in the world would go on to count COVID cases and deaths…and governments instituted lockdowns and economic devastation using those case and death numbers as justification.

The pandemic is a fraud, down to the root of the poisonous tree.

And now, let’s move on to a second key document. This one formed the basis for the first PCR test aimed at detecting the COVID virus all over the world.

READ WHAT THIS STUDY SAYS. These quotes should be engraved in stone above the entrance to a museum dedicated to the history of medical fraud.

“We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology [a test for a virus] for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available.”

TRANSLATION: We want to develop a test to detect the new COVID virus without having the virus.

“Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV [SARS-CoV-2] its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with [the older 2003] SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.”

TRANSLATION: We HAVE developed a diagnostic test to detect the new COVID virus. We ASSUME this new virus exists and is closely related to an older coronavirus. We ASSUME we know HOW it is related. We ASSUME, because we don’t have the new COVID virus. Therefore, all our assumptions are made out of nothing. Actually, we have no proof there is a new coronavirus.

“The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from [the older 2003] SARS-CoV.”

TRANSLATION: Our new test to detect the new virus? We don’t have the new virus. We’ve never observed it. We can’t study it directly. There is no proof it exists. But we will create and use a test to detect it.

The study is titled, “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR.” [Euro Surveill. 2020 Jan;25(3):2000045. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045.]

Those quotes from the study are astounding. A diagnostic test for the virus, but there is no virus. No standard against which to compare the reliability of the test.

The authors blithely assume they can somehow infer that the virus exists in the first place, without having an isolated specimen.

Then they assume they can understand the structure of the virus that isn’t there.

The virus isn’t there. It has NOT been isolated. It has NOT been separated out from other material. Therefore, it has not been observed and its existence has not been proved.

And yet, the test which these authors have developed is launched, all over the world, to detect that virus; to promote the unproven notion that there is a pandemic; to form the basis for counting COVID case numbers; and ultimately to justify all the lockdowns which have crashed the global economy and destroyed millions upon millions of lives.

A great deal of confusion has been created, because scientists talk about the “new virus” as if they understand its structure and genetic sequence. No. They’ve built a hypothetical structure, AS DATA. Nothing more. And then they gibber about what it means.

As far as what is actually going on in labs where researchers are making vast assumptions and proclamations; don’t talk to me about science. Talk to me about liability and prison.

At the site, fluoridefreepeel.ca, you will find roughly a hundred FOIA requests to public health agencies. These requests are asking for records showing that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated. The repetitive and routine reply is: “We have no records.” Taken together, they paint a picture of egregious fraud.

Mainstream scientists will make two claims: one, we have isolated the virus; and two, it is not necessary to isolate the virus, because we’ve discovered its genetic sequence. Both claims are false.

From reading the arcane language surrounding claims of having sequenced the virus—there is a multi-layered scam composed of leaps of unwarranted assumptions. The researchers say they are using tools that allow them to closely approximate the structure of SARS-CoV-2, even though they don’t have that virus in hand. This is absurd.

It’s like saying: There is a new planet in the solar system. We don’t know where it is or what it looks like. We don’t know what processes are at work on this new planet. But we do know the moon is a very close approximation of the planet. Therefore, we can know everything we need to know about the new planet from our knowledge of the moon.

And a rabbit is spaceship. And there are condos for sale on Jupiter. And new element #267587, in the Periodic Table, which no one has ever seen, is almost an exact copy of Philadelphia Cream Cheese.

And now we come to a third document, which bulges with devastating admissions. It was issued by the CDC.

The release is titled, “07/21/2021: Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.” It begins explosively:

“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.”

Many people believe this means the CDC is giving up on the PCR test as a means of “detecting the virus.” The CDC isn’t saying that at all.

They’re saying the PCR technology will continue to be used, but they’re replacing what the test is looking FOR with a better “reference sample.” A better marker. A better target. A better piece of RNA supposedly derived from SARS-CoV-2.

CDC/FDA are confessing there has been a PROBLEM with the PCR test which has been used to detect the virus, starting in February of 2020—right up to July 21, 2021.

In other words, the millions and millions of “COVID cases” based on the PCR test in use are all suspect. Actually, that statement is too generous. Every test result of every PCR test should be thrown out.

To confirm this, the CDC document links to an FDA release titled, “SARS-CoV-2 Reference Panel Comparative Data.” Here is a killer quote:

“During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical specimens [of the virus] were not readily available to developers of IVDs [in vitro diagnostics, the PCR test] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs [tests] based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation. While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: We, at the CDC, did not have a specimen of the SARS-CoV-2 virus when we concocted the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. Yes, and that’s the test we’ve been using all along. So we CONTRIVED samples of ‘the virus’. We fabricated. We lied. We made up [invented] synthetic gene sequences and we SAID these sequences HAD TO BE close to the sequence of SARS-CoV-2, without having the faintest idea of what we were doing, because, again, we didn’t have an actual specimen of the virus. We had no proof THERE WAS something called SARS-CoV-2.

This amazing FDA document goes to say the Agency has granted emergency approval to 59 different PCR tests since the beginning of the (fake) pandemic. 59. And, “…it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: Each of the 59 different PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 told different lies and concocted different fabrications about the genetic makeup of the virus—the virus we didn’t have. Obviously, then, these tests would give useless and meaningless results. It was all a fantasy.

BUT, don’t worry, be happy, because NOW, the CDC and the FDA say, they really do have actual isolated virus samples of SARS-CoV-2 from patients; they have better targets for the PCR test, and labs should start gearing up for the new and improved tests.

In other words, they were lying THEN, but they’re not lying NOW. They were “contriving,” but now they’re telling the truth.

If you believe that, I have Fountain of Youth water for sale, extracted from the lead-contaminated system of Flint, Michigan.

We KNOW they are lying now, because they continue to torture the meaning of the word “isolate.” Here, once again, I report virology’s version of “we possess isolated specimens of the virus”:

They have a soup they make in their labs.

This soup contains human and monkey cells, toxic chemicals and drugs, and all sorts of other random genetic material. Because the cells start to die, the researchers ASSUME a bit of mucus from a patient they dropped in the soup is doing the killing, and THE VIRUS must be the killer agent in the mucus.

This assumption is entirely unwarranted. The drugs and chemicals could be doing the cell-killing, and the researchers are also starving the cells of vital nutrients, and that starvation could kill the cells.

There is no proof that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup, or that it is doing the cell-killing, or that it exists.

Yet the researchers call cell-death “isolation of the virus.”

To say this is a non-sequitur is a vast understatement. In their universe, “We assume, without proof, we have the virus buried in a soup in a dish in the lab” equals, “We’ve separated the virus from all surrounding material.”

Virology equals “how to spread bullshit for a living and scare the world and lock it down and shoot it up with a devastating destructive vaccine.” Other than that, it’s perfect.

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

Medical weapons and fake data sets; how destruction multiplies

Oct6

by Jon Rappoport

October 6, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

The mainstream reports I’m including in this article—I’ve written about them before. They form a grotesque track record of medical-cartel harm inflicted on the population.

I give you these reports again to point out how fake data sets multiply and spread, causing even more destruction.

For example—let’s consider a drug called X. In fact, it is killing patients. However, studies of X published in leading medical journals report glowing results.

Those studies are then cited by researchers who publish more positive material on the drug.

Doctors, reading all these studies, continue to prescribe the killer X to their patients.

Pharmaceutical companies, seeing the profit picture of X, formulate their own versions of the drug, and market them—multiplying the killer effects throughout the population.

In the burgeoning field of AI medicine, which is increasingly used to automatically diagnose symptoms and prescribe drugs, X takes its place in MANY data sets as a powerful and safe remedy.

Medical schools, internship and residence programs blindly follow suit, using X and its knockoffs in standard treatment protocols.

Insurance companies, in their data sets, favor X and its cousins and cover claims based on the prescription of these drugs.

In every venue, data sets that mention killer X laud it as a useful tool in treating patients.

The fraud is deeply embedded, and the murders expand.

It’s an example of the old adage, “Garbage in, garbage out,” except in the field of medicine it’s, “Killing in, killing out.”

All right, here we go. MEDICAL WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Medical crimes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jon Rappoport

The fixation on the One, and the obsession with a Virus; the Individual vs. the Collective Trance

Oct4

by Jon Rappoport

October 4, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

More than anything, this piece reflects my approach to my work. My work as a reporter, as a poet, as an individual.

When I wrote my first book in 1988, AIDS INC., I showed that HIV was not the cause of AIDS. In fact, there was no AIDS. That was a label slapped on a variety of health problems all stemming from lowered immunity.

These health problems were caused by a variety of factors, none of which had anything to do with “the virus.”

The major resistance to the book came from people who were conditioned to believe that every announced new disease had to be real, and every new disease had to have a single cause. I would call this ill-fated belief informational Hypnosis.

It’s very effective.

Look at the history of organized religion. Each Church has its single First Cause. Meaning God. “Our God is real. Yours isn’t.” “Our God is the One.”

Behind this farce is each organization telling individuals, “We have God. He is the One you should worship. Don’t go off on your own and find your own God. That doesn’t work.”

People are fixated on The One. The one God. The one Cause. The one Virus. And because they are fixated, leaders can sell them this One and that One and the other One.

In 1988, I saw the full absurdity of that con, with HIV.

During the decade following the publication of AIDS INC., I discovered that no one had proved HIV existed. There was no reason to believe it did. After all, you could say a man with purple hair and six arms lives on the moon, but then you carry the burden of proof, and if you can’t supply any, your hypothesis is null and void.

So the fixation on the One extends to the One that doesn’t exist at all.

At that point in my work, I could see I was plunging headlong into territory that was going to place me outside any semblance of the mainstream or even an acceptable alternative universe.

Why? Again, because people were fixated on the One, and I was calling that fixation Mind Control.

In a similar vein, in my work as a reporter, I was using up-against-wall logic to refute medical and political lies and cover stories. But then, when I was writing poetry, I was abandoning the traditional forms and thought processes (the “logic” of poetry) because they were stale and decaying. I wanted to take imagination to other places, without limit, and if the preferred hidebound internal connections in my poems were missing, so what?

This distinction between my work as a reporter and a poet confuses some people. They want one or the other. Not both, side by side. But I say this confusion is good. It can be productive. It can stimulate readers to think along new tracks.

I’m not obeying some arbitrary external standard that describes what I’m supposed to do. Whenever I sense I’m giving in to that standard, when I feel The Mechanical setting in, I stop. I stop and put myself back in the basic bath of WHAT DO I REALLY WANT TO DO? Answering that question sets me back on track(s).

A long time ago I figured out something. If I went along with the tide and tried to carve out a career as a conventional writer, I might succeed or I might fail. If I failed, it would be a double disaster, because I had failed at something I really didn’t want to do in the first place. If I failed to find an audience by writing what I wanted to write, I would have DONE WHAT I WANTED TO DO. I WOULD HAVE CREATED WHAT I WANTED TO CREATE.

Centralized authority wants to build a collective trance in which people believe they must think and do what falls inside certain boundaries.

Nowhere is this more evident, these days, than in the promoted idea that a virus is loose in the world. The one virus causing the one disease. In many articles, I’ve taken apart the myth of SARS-CoV-2 and disposed of it. In the process, I’ve discovered that the whole branch of medicine called Virology is a hustle and a broken down Church of true believers, who can’t and won’t shake off their delusions.

Once again, I’ve come to grips with people who are so hardwired in their trance they can only bray, “People are dying, it must be the (one) virus.” The logic of that proposition belongs in a garbage dumpster in a blind alley at midnight.

It’s right next door to, “They diagnosed Harry with COVID, he had shortness of breath, so they put him on a ventilator and sedated him with a drug that radically suppresses breathing and left him on the ventilator and he died because of the virus.”

In the realm of propaganda, willing victims select their preferred one idol. For example, Tony Fauci. His adoring worshippers need The One, so they choose him because he’s there on television, being interviewed by “the best people,” and he has a seal of approval from the White House, and he disagreed with Trump. This is called “following the science.” I would call it trailing behind a horse’s ass.

Over the decades, I’ve encountered many artists who stand for the widest freedom of expression and yet, when it comes to politics, they insist on absolute loyalty to the “prevailing culture.” Meaning the Left. I’ve also seen political libertarians who insist on freedom of thought, but believe all art since the 16th century is a perverse plot against “traditional values.”

At the bottom of these contradictions is, again, a fixation on The One. The one political point of view, the one acceptable art, the one acceptable Church…

And now we’re all dealing with the one tyranny that spells out “the one solution to the one virus.” And this tyranny is bent on subjugating many nations and imposing one government for one planet.

On every level, from the political to the psychological to the spiritual to the creative, THE ONE has always been the conditioned mind control reflex that imprisons the individual.

I’m against it. Always have been. Always will be.

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

Jon Rappoport

Dangerous speech versus free speech; mobs of ignoramuses

Sep30

by Jon Rappoport

September 28, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

“For if Men are to be precluded from offering their Sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of Speech may be taken away, and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter.” George Washington, 1783

Many, many people believe that spreading COVID falsehoods can be so dangerous that censorship is absolutely necessary.

This view happens to be the central refuge of liars.

It turns out that big-time liars always want to censor their opponents. It’s the only leg they have to stand on. In an atmosphere of free discourse, they would fall.

And of course, who decides what is false and what is true? Who hangs out that shingle and makes judgments that affect the lives of millions of people?

There is an astounding level of ignorance here: many people believe “the truth” should carry the day. Once it is established, there is no need to permit freedom of speech.

These people have a very low ceiling of understanding. They’ve never explored what freedom of speech is all about. They’re citizens in name only.

“If someone says the vaccine is harmful, people will be dissuaded from taking it. That would be dangerous.”

Putting aside the fact that the vaccine is a destroyer, free speech implies living with danger. The remedy is intelligence and knowledge. The only workable remedy is raising people’s ability to consider all sorts of judgments, opinions, and conclusions, without being irrationally swayed to one side or another.

Otherwise, we have Fascists on parade. Mobs of clueless ignoramuses.

Once upon a time, there was a never-never land called Dolt with millions of traffic lights. A writer penned, “Always cross the street when you’re facing a red light. Stay on the curb when the light is green.”

Outrage followed. The writer was censored for dangerous speech.

The rulers and their followers were so impressed with this victory, they established a national task force to root out falsehoods of all kinds and censor them. Pursuing this path, the society turned into a police state. And the majority of people approved.

We’re heading in that direction now.

“Strange it is that men should admit the validity of the arguments for free speech but object to their being ‘pushed to an extreme,’ not seeing that unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for any case.” John Stuart Mill, 1859

It’s no surprise that modern civilization, intellectually based on a fool’s version of “science,” has built science as a new religion, with all the restrictions that organized religions have enforced.

After all, when the teachings of a man called Jesus were incorporated into a powerful Church, that Church set about censoring, imprisoning, torturing, and burning dissidents. As if Jesus would have approved.

Centuries later, people were shocked to learn this Church was rife with pedophile priests. I would be shocked to learn the Church isn’t filled with pedophiles.

Many are the OTHER secret crimes the men in power today are committing, given that they’re already relentlessly pushing a highly destructive vaccine into the arms of a billion people.

They HAVE TO demand censorship of dissidents.

So no, I’m not surprised that the press and social media and politicians are trying to censor COVID information which doesn’t serve their purposes.

Consider this. A week ago, at a standard FDA conference to discuss recommending COVID boosters, several scientists testified that convincing data to support the additional shots were entirely lacking. Two leading in-house FDA scientists had just resigned because they opposed the push for boosters. And finally, the FDA committee as a whole rejected the present need for boosters.

Yet the following day, the head of the NIH, and the White House itself, ignored the FDA and said that boosters were coming. Even the FDA was effectively censored.

There are thousands of scientists all over the world who strenuously oppose the official COVID narrative, and they can’t even get a glance from editors of medical journals, when they submit papers.

Talking news heads are feeding the population fast-food COVID science—a manufactured product consisting of synthetic bullshit about cases, deaths, the virus, the vaccine. It’s cardboard. And no dissenters allowed.

Since I stopped writing for mainstream and so-called alternative outlets in the early 1990s, I’ve gone my own way. As of this writing, I’m still here. My videos have been taken down. My site was hacked. We restored it. I’m still here.

I take freedom of speech seriously. No matter what.

Only low scum want to censor us. They make an absurd pretense of claiming WE’RE liars. But we don’t want to censor THEM. That’s called a clue.

Right now, as I write this, Australian men with balls, union construction workers, are staging an insurrection against their union bosses, who are colluding with corrupt politicians to enforce COVID restrictions and vaccine mandates. The workers are facing off against cops in the street. This is one of the biggest stories in the world.

The New York Times and the Washington Post and the news networks should be leading with it and covering breaking developments wall to wall. Instead, they’re downplaying and hiding it. These news whores and their pimps are holding the line for Fascism.

I’ll close, for now, with this story. Months ago, an “alternative journalist” approached me, urging me to stop saying the pandemic virus doesn’t exist.

I sized up the complaint. It seemed to have several roots. One, I was “confusing people,” who couldn’t decide what to believe. Two, there were far more important COVID issues that needed to be explored. And three, that journalist was receiving emails citing my work and asking for clarification—and this was bothersome, especially when the emailers agreed with me.

The journalist off-handedly and blithely assumed I would obey and stop writing about the existence of the virus.

Of course, I reacted oppositely. I always do. I dig deeper and farther along the track I’m pursuing. In this case, I found and wrote about more evidence for the non-existence of the virus.

That issue happens to be CENTRAL and BASIC to the whole COVID story. And if writing about it confuses some people, that’s what happens when free speech is still possible. There’s nothing wrong with confusion. It’s productive. It’s supposed to be a prelude to more profound understanding.

I’m not running some sort of operation that seeks uniformity.

That journalist was trying to censor me by having me censor myself.

No dice.

“He who stifles free discussion, secretly doubts whether what he professes to believe is really true.” Wendell Phillips, 1870

Those fools who can only “opt for the truth” will never grasp the meaning of the 1st Amendment. They’ll never see the freight train of Fascism coming.

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

Jon Rappoport

The failure to prove the virus exists

Sep20

by Jon Rappoport

September 20, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Over a year ago, I proposed (insisted on) a procedure to prove SARS-COV-2 exists.

This procedure is essential—and needless to say, it hasn’t been done, and will never be done.

Why? Because the outcome could completely and utterly destroy the COVID narrative.

Here is the procedure: You line up 500 people who have been diagnosed with COVID-19, and you take tissue samples from them.

You properly process these samples, through centrifuging, etc., in order to extract and arrive at what you believe is the virus.

You put that material under an electron microscope and photograph it.

You then place the 500 photos from the 500 “pandemic patients” side by side.

You ask yourself three burning questions.

One: In each and every photo, are there many identical viruses?

Two: Are these viruses in every one of the 500 photos?

Three: Is the virus one you’ve never seen before?

If the answer to question one and two is yes, you appear to have found a common virus for the 500 patients. If the answer to three is yes, it’s a virus never seen before.

If the answer to either question one or two is no, you’ve failed to find the common virus you’re looking for. You’ve failed to prove a viral cause for what you’re calling COVID-19.

If you see many identical virus particles in some, but not all, of the photos, you may or may not have found a virus. To decide that issue, you need three conditions: the researchers are honest and independent; a new team of such researchers will repeat the whole procedure, from the beginning, to see whether their findings match those of the original team; and you need truly qualified experts to determine whether the particles in the electron microscope photos are actually viruses or something else.

Note: This is why one or two photos from a study mean NOTHING.

All right. Moving on, there are other factors involved in the process of discovering a virus. These factors are ISOLATION and GENETIC SEQUENCING.

They’re both covered in a Statement on Virus Isolation, authored and published by Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, and Sally Fallon Morell. I reprint it here in full:

Statement On Virus Isolation (SOVI) [1]

“Isolation: The action of isolating; the fact or condition of being isolated or standing alone; separation from other things or persons; solitariness.” — Oxford English Dictionary

The controversy over whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus has ever been isolated or purified continues. However, using the above definition, common sense, the laws of logic and the dictates of science, any unbiased person must come to the conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. As a result, no confirmation of the virus’ existence can be found. The logical, common sense, and scientific consequences of this fact are:

* the structure and composition of something not shown to exist can’t be known, including the presence, structure, and function of any hypothetical spike or other proteins;

* the genetic sequence of something that has never been found can’t be known;

* “variants” of something that hasn’t been shown to exist can’t be known;

* it’s impossible to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19.

In as concise terms as possible, here’s the proper way to isolate, characterize and demonstrate a new virus. First, one takes samples (blood, sputum, secretions) from many people (e.g. 500) with symptoms which are unique and specific enough to characterize an illness. Without mixing these samples with ANY tissue or products that also contain genetic material, the virologist macerates, filters and ultracentrifuges i.e. purifies the specimen. This common virology technique, done for decades to isolate bacteriophages [2a] and so-called giant viruses in every virology lab, then allows the virologist to demonstrate with electron microscopy thousands of identically sized and shaped particles. These particles are the isolated and purified virus.

These identical particles are then checked for uniformity by physical and/or microscopic techniques. Once the purity is determined, the particles may be further characterized. This would include examining the structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the particles. Next, their genetic makeup is characterized by extracting the genetic material directly from the purified particles and using genetic-sequencing techniques, such as Sanger sequencing, that have also been around for decades. Then one does an analysis to confirm that these uniform particles are exogenous (outside) in origin as a virus is conceptualized to be, and not the normal breakdown products of dead and dying tissues. [2b] (As of May 2020, we know that virologists have no way to determine whether the particles they’re seeing are viruses or just normal break-down products of dead and dying tissues.) [2c]

If we have come this far then we have fully isolated, characterized, and genetically sequenced an exogenous virus particle. However, we still have to show it is causally related to a disease. This is carried out by exposing a group of healthy subjects (animals are usually used) to this isolated, purified virus in the manner in which the disease is thought to be transmitted. If the animals get sick with the same disease, as confirmed by clinical and autopsy findings, one has now shown that the virus actually causes a disease. This demonstrates infectivity and transmission of an infectious agent.

None of these steps has even been attempted with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor have all these steps been successfully performed for any so-called pathogenic virus. Our research indicates that a single study showing these steps does not exist in the medical literature.

Instead, since 1954, virologists have taken unpurified samples from a relatively few people, often less than ten, with a similar disease. They then minimally process this sample and inoculate this unpurified sample onto tissue culture containing usually four to six other types of material — all of which contain identical genetic material as to what is called a “virus.” The tissue culture is starved and poisoned and naturally disintegrates into many types of particles, some of which contain genetic material. Against all common sense, logic, use of the English language and scientific integrity, this process is called “virus isolation.” This brew containing fragments of genetic material from many sources is then subjected to genetic analysis, which then creates in a computer-simulation process the alleged sequence of the alleged virus, a so called in silico genome. At no time is an actual virus confirmed by electron microscopy. At no time is a genome extracted and sequenced from an actual virus. This is scientific fraud.

The observation that the unpurified specimen — inoculated onto tissue culture along with toxic antibiotics, bovine fetal tissue, amniotic fluid and other tissues — destroys the kidney tissue onto which it is inoculated is given as evidence of the virus’ existence and pathogenicity. This is scientific fraud.

From now on, when anyone gives you a paper that suggests the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated, please check the methods sections. If the researchers used Vero cells or any other culture method, you know that their process was not isolation. You will hear the following excuses for why actual isolation isn’t done:

1. There were not enough virus particles found in samples from patients to analyze.

2. Viruses are intracellular parasites; they can’t be found outside the cell in this manner.

If No. 1 is correct, and we can’t find the virus in the sputum of sick people, then on what evidence do we think the virus is dangerous or even lethal? If No. 2 is correct, then how is the virus spread from person to person? We are told it emerges from the cell to infect others. Then why isn’t it possible to find it?

Finally, questioning these virology techniques and conclusions is not some distraction or divisive issue. Shining the light on this truth is essential to stop this terrible fraud that humanity is confronting. For, as we now know, if the virus has never been isolated, sequenced or shown to cause illness, if the virus is imaginary, then why are we wearing masks, social distancing and putting the whole world into prison?

Finally, if pathogenic viruses don’t exist, then what is going into those injectable devices erroneously called “vaccines,” and what is their purpose? This scientific question is the most urgent and relevant one of our time.

We are correct. The SARS-CoV2 virus does not exist.

—end of Kaufman, Cowan, Morell Statement—

Finally, here is a repost of my article about a claim of virus isolation. Dr. Kaufman does a step-by-step analysis of a quote from a typical study that purports to describe how SARS-CoV-2 was isolated:

—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 [3], 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)” [4].

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. The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this 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. THAT’S THEIR KEY “EVIDENCE.” 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” they never isolated. “We didn’t find it, we don’t know anything about it, but we sequenced it.”

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) [5]. 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?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 300 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [6]) 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:

[1] https://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com/sovi/

[2a] Isolation, characterization and analysis of bacteriophages from the haloalkaline lake Elmenteita, KenyaJuliah Khayeli Akhwale et al, PLOS One, Published: April 25, 2019. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215734 — accessed 2/15/21

[2b] “Extracellular Vesicles Derived From Apoptotic Cells: An Essential Link Between Death and Regeneration,” Maojiao Li1 et al, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, 2020 October 2. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2020.573511/full — accessed 2/15/21

[2c] “The Role of Extraellular Vesicles as Allies of HIV, HCV and SARS Viruses,” Flavia Giannessi, et al, Viruses, 2020 May

[3] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/

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

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

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

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

Jon Rappoport

The vaccinated sheep are being taken for a ride; how long before they jump off the train? Never?

Sep16

by Jon Rappoport

September 16, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Here’s how it goes, Mr. Jones.

First, they told you the vaccine was your way out of the dark, out of the lockdowns. And if enough of you took the shot, the pandemic would be over.

So you lined up and took the jab. And you took the second dose.

THEN they said wait. You could still transmit the virus. In fact, you could still catch COVID.

On top of that, your viral load could be as high as the unvaccinated.

Boom.

So you’d still need to wear a mask. You’d still need to distance.

And voila, boosters would be necessary.

How many boosters? Unknown. Maybe one a year, or one every eight months.

If you take the boosters, would you still need to wear a mask and distance? Apparently, yes.

They keep claiming the vaccine will protect you against severe illness and hospitalization, but…the clinical trials of the three major vaccines were structured to show the shots would only prevent MILD ILLNESS. Chills and fever, or a cough. They still haven’t told you THAT.

Let’s see, what else? Do you watch football? This past weekend, as college and NFL games swung into action, HUGE CROWDS of unmasked spectators filled the stands all over the country.

Do you really think officials vetted those people, to make sure they had vaccine passports before they entered the stadiums? Are you kidding?

So how do you like THAT? You’re acting like a good little sheep, you took your shots, but millions of people were attending football games, shouting and screaming, sitting cheek to jowl, with no masks on.

Droves of immigrants are streaming across the southern border of the US, and most of them aren’t are getting vaccinated. They’re being relocated to cities and towns from San Diego to Bangor.

And don’t forget, the number of reports of injuries and deaths from the vaccine is staggering. The experts admit they have no idea about the vaccine’s long-term effects.

Officials in some parts of the country are laying on new lockdowns. There’s no way to predict when such imprisonments might pop up in your area.

You thought that by taking the vaccine, you’d earn special privilege. You’d wear your badge with pride. But no.

You thought being vaccinated meant you wouldn’t catch the disease. But no.

You scoffed at the idea that the whole pandemic was a hoax, and you were sure there was no evidence that contradicted what the experts were telling you.

You chose not to look into the fact that no one has actually proved the virus exists, or that the test is meaningful, or that the case and death numbers are real. You assumed taking the vaccine would solve all your problems for you.

You were wrong.

You’ve chosen to ignore the destruction of freedom by vaccine mandate, by lockdown, by devastating financial ruin for millions of people. You’ve kept your mouth shut. You’ve settled for protection by obeying the rules and taking the shot in the arm.

A curtain of lies has been raised all over the world. The fraud is awesome. The fear is mindless.

You sided with the wrong people. They are promoting an absurd religion of ceremony and ritual. “First you do this, to protect yourself. Then you do that. Then, the third step is this. Then you’ll be blessed. But actually there are more steps, and if you take them, you may or may not be protected…”

These priests keep telling you they’re changing their minds about what is necessary because new data are emerging—and you believe them. You believe they and you are following science. It still hasn’t dawned on you that all this is about CONTROL.

You’re on the Tyranny Train, and with each mile the enveloping power of our so-called leaders tightens around you. You don’t want to know what the Great Reset or the New Normal means. You think somehow everything will stay the same, even though the evidence in front of your eyes is presenting you with real-life denials of what you think at every turn.

How did you get to be the way you are, Mr. Jones?

There are MANY answers to that question. Here is one:

Creating ADHD is the goal of education.

There is a form of mind control that is really mind-chaos. It shatters the processes of thought into, at best, vaguely related fragments. There is no direction, no development, no progress along a line of reasoning. This is how you disable a person. You disrupt his ability to move from A to B to C. At that point, he becomes passive. He’s willing to be programmed, because it’s easier. He wants to be programmed.

“I learned twenty-four new things today at school,” the child said. “One right after the other. I felt so happy. My teacher told me I was learning accelerated. I wrote on my iPad. I saw pictures. I did group harmony. I added. I divided. I heard about architecture. The teacher said we were filled with wonder at the universe. We solved a problem. We were all together. I ate cheese. A factory makes cheese.”

The new education is ADHD.

It’s a method of teaching that surrenders ground on each key concept, deserting it before it’s firmly fixed in the mind of the student.

It hops around from idea to idea, because parents, teachers, administrators, students, departments of education, and educational publishers have given up on the traditional practice of repetition.

Repetition was old-world. For decades, even centuries, the time-honored method of instruction was: introduce an idea or concept or method, and then provide numerous examples the student had to practice, solve, and demonstrate with proficiency.

There was no getting around it. If the student balked, he failed.

There were no excuses or fairy tales floated to explain away the inability of the student to carry out the work.

Now, these days, if you want to induce ADHD, teach a course in which each new concept is given short shrift. Then pass every student on to the next grade, because it’s “humane.”

Think of it this way. Suppose you want to climb the sheer face of a high rock. You know nothing about climbing. You engage an instructor. He teaches you a little bit about ropes and spikes and handholds. He briefly highlights each aspect and then skips to the next.

So later…while you’re falling five hundred feet to the ravine below, you can invent stories about why the experiment didn’t work out.

Since the advent of organized education on the planet, there has been one way of teaching young children…until recently. Explain a new idea, produce scores of examples of that idea, and get the students to work on those examples and come up with the right answers.

Subtraction, division, decimals, spelling—it all works the same basic way.

For the last hundred years or so, however, we’ve seen the gradual intrusion of Teacher ADHD.

School text ADHD.

Not enough examples. Not enough exercises.

Education has nothing to do with a full frontal attack to “improve the self-esteem” of the student. It has nothing to do with telling children they’re valuable. It certainly has nothing to do with trying to embed social values and team spirit in children.

And no matter how many fantasies educators spin, schools can’t replace parents.

If what I’m writing here seems cruel and uncaring…look at the other side of the picture. Look at what happens when a student emerges from school with a half-baked, dumbed-down education.

He can sort of read. He can sort of write. He sort of understands arithmetic. He tries to skate through the rest of his life. He fakes it. He adopts a front to conceal the large territory of what he doesn’t know.

He certainly can’t think straight. Give him three ideas in succession and he’s lost. He goes on overload.

He operates on association. You say A and he goes to G right away. You go back to A and he responds with R. He’s up the creek without a paddle.

That’s what’s cruel.

Forty years ago, I was on the verge of landing a lucrative job with a remedial education company. The owner gave me a lesson plan and told me to write a sample “computer” program.

I did. He looked at it and said, “There are too many examples and exercises here. You have to move things along faster.”

I told him the students would never comprehend the program that way. They had to work on at least 20 exercises for each new concept.

He was shocked. “That’s not how it’s done now,” he said.

“Oh,” I said, “you mean now the student and teacher both fake it?”

And that was the end of that.

Several years ago, I explained teacher-induced ADHD to a sociologist at a US university. His response: “Children are different now. They don’t have patience. There are too many distractions. We have to operate from a new psychology.”

I asked him what that psychology was.

“Children are consumers. They pick and choose.”

I know how the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations torpedoed education in America. They cut off teachers and students from the history of the nation and the meaning of individual freedom.

What I’m talking about here is a different perversion. The unhinging of the young mind from any semblance of accomplishment and continuity. This goes far beyond the agenda of outfitting children to be worker-drones in a controlled society.

This is the induction of confusion and despair about what used to be called thinking. This is the imprinting of “gaps” that make it very hard for a person to operate, even as a drone.

In addition, if you seed children with all sorts of debilitating psychiatric drugs, you have a profound and dangerous mess that only dedicated parents can undo, one child at a time.

People may wish it weren’t so, but that doesn’t change the facts of the matter.

The upside is, when you explain a concept to a child, and you then take him through many exercises designed to help him understand that concept, he’ll achieve a victory.

Then you’ll see the lights go on in his mind.

And when education also includes getting children to use their imaginations broadly and widely and often—and you need a certain kind of teacher to accomplish THAT—you have independent, strong, adventurous, creative people, who aren’t controlled.

They don’t board other people’s trains and ride them to nowhere.

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

Jon Rappoport

The Galactic Tribunal grills Bill Gates

Sep14

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

We don’t know how Bill Gates was transported to a Galactic proceeding, and we only have fragments of the interrogation. But because no court on Earth would deliver justice, those distant powers intervened.

A judge read an unusual opening statement, which apparently is presented before every trial:

“In our high civilization, we’ve fulfilled the ancient prophecy, THE LOST SHALL BE FOUND. There is no barrier between those of us who live here in the flesh and those most close to us who’ve departed this life. We experience joy with them in dimensions far greater than this. Why then do we bother to conduct these trials? Because we also fight for justice. We will not turn our backs on that ideal.”

FRAGMENT 1: …Mr. Gates, it’s time for the truth. How long did you plan the pandemic before launching it?

Why am I forced to tell the truth?

Because this is a place for conscience.

Will you torture me if I decline?

We’ll keep asking until you answer honestly, no matter how long it takes.

Who can I pay? I’m rich.

Denied. We don’t want money.

How about land? I can deliver you a large colony on Earth. A whole country. Maybe even Europe.

No.

I could create a medical system for you that would dazzle your minds. On Earth, the Nobel Committee should give me the Prize for my efforts, but they don’t have the balls. Did Melinda put you up to kidnapping me? I demand my rights…

FRAGMENT 2: …The pandemic narrative was simply the occasion for establishing a worldwide dictatorship?

We needed a pretext. There were many meetings over the course of 25 years. We decided early on that a medical story was our best option. It appears to be politically neutral.

On Earth, the modern religion is science.

Exactly. So if we could get out in front of that trend and create a medical scenario of threat and impending destruction, we could apply just enough coercion to control the population.

But you weren’t conducting real science.

We were inventing the appearance of it. We had so-called experts in our camp. They would take the lead. The masses have no way of distinguishing science from fantasy…

FRAGMENT 3: In the planning stage prior to the declaration of a pandemic, what were the vital elements?

I’m most proud of our messaging organization. We had the news media. We had government leaders. We had recognized medical experts. But you see, in that type of operation, you can’t afford defections. The seal has to be tight. Ours was. Over the years, through money, through influence, in some cases through threats, we had built a network of unity and compliance.

You’re proud, you say?

Why, yes. It took work. Much work. You don’t lock up all the key sources of information on a planet overnight.

So it was the message you were aiming for, rather than the truth.

Of course. There was no pandemic. We had to make it seem there was. Convincingly.

You were heading a sales force.

Exactly. The whole idea was to make the buying compulsory…

FRAGMENT 4: …You had planned the lockdowns?

Years in advance. Then, at the right moment, China pulled the trigger, setting the example. When my World Health Organization praised China, other nations followed suit and imprisoned their populations.

So the Chinese regime’s lockdowns were definitely part of the advance planning.

Yes. That was crucial. The government there wasn’t fully on board with the globalist future we set our sights on. China is, first and foremost, for China. But we had enough cooperation from them to make it work.

And social media? You had them on your side from the beginning?

That was easy. Their leaders are willing and compliant. They’re afraid to go against our medical consensus. And they’re globalists. In the long run, they want world government, too.

As do the controlled media?

Yes. Putting the right people in place in the news industry has been a decades-long proposition.

You wanted a planet that was a prison.

Yes.

And the pretext again?

The scenario? There is a deadly virus sweeping across Earth, and in order to stop it, we have to lock down countries…and then inject everyone with a vaccine.

But there was no virus?

Among us, there were arguments on both sides of that question. But if it existed, it certainly wasn’t any more dangerous than the flu. We had to make it seem very, very dangerous.

Through pronouncements to that effect.

Yes…

FRAGMENT 5: …You want depopulation?

We have to have it. You can’t run a planet when 8 billion people are living on it. It’s impossible. The vaccine is the weapon. But not just the COVID vaccine. Vaccines before it and those coming in the future.

And all those deaths will be laid at the door of pandemics?

Yes. “The virus did it.”

And you’re willing to murder all those people.

Hard choices dictate the outcomes of events. A better life for some, rather than a terrible life for all. That’s my choice.

Are you listening to yourself, Mr. Gates?

I always listen to myself.

FRAGMENT 6: …I want to return to the messaging effect you created. It’s difficult for us to understand how you managed it…why so many leaders in their fields went along with your false science.

It was a combination of things. Many people are true believers. Scientists talk, and they believe. Other people wanted money. We paid them money. Certain resistant politicians were threatened. We set an example with several assassinations. As you build a consensus, you reach a threshold where the tide is in your favor. Then people ride it with you, out of fear of excommunication if they don’t. Media leaders were given to understand that the pandemic was the gateway into a global governance system. And the system was inevitable.

What about Anthony Fauci?

He’s a little man, a striver, who wants to be accepted in elite circles. I recruited him a long time ago…

FRAGMENT 7: …You yourself have given much money to media companies.

I praised their work, gave them money, and they showed loyalty to me. You see, life runs on stimulus-response. I make use of that principle on a worldwide basis. My colleagues and I provide calculated stimuli, and the population, in all areas of life, responds as we predict.

You view humans as machines.

Well, they are.

But you and your colleagues aren’t.

We’re of a higher order. We can stand outside stimulus-response and operate the levers.

As you sit here, Mr. Gates, you don’t believe you’re confessing to crimes. You’re proud of what you’ve done.

Of course.

Listen to me carefully now. We know enough of what you are, in order to pass sentence on you. But we know a great more than that. Like every individual, you have a greater dimension. We could show it to you. We could compel you to experience it. If we did, you would come apart at the seams. You would understand your own evil actions in a way that is undeniable.

…I don’t like the sound of that. What are you talking about?

I think you have an inkling of what I mean. The experience we could compel you to have is one you yourself, on your own, will come face to face with, some day. Not in your present life. Afterwards, at some point. There is no telling when, but it will happen.

You mean some supposed higher power will force it on me?

No, Mr. Gates. It’s much worse than that. You’ll force it on yourself.

Why would I do that?

Because although you’ve embraced crime and destruction, somewhere inside yourself you also understand The Good. And in that understanding, you can potentially live in joy and peace. As anyone can.

You’re not making sense.

You’re beginning to see I am making sense.

I don’t like this.

Why would you like it, given what you’ve made of your life and lives of others?

You’re trying to pass off some kind of religious nonsense on me.

Far from it. We don’t have churches in this place, Mr. Gates. We don’t need faith in things unseen. We’ve already seen.

I want to go home.

You will.

You’re not going to kill me?

So you can blame us for what you’re doing to yourself?

You’re insane.

We’ve opened up just a bit of light here for you.

Why?

Because although we’re a just people and don’t need justice for ourselves, we will exercise it on behalf of others, who’ve been harmed.

This is ridiculous.

Even the worst murderers have it in themselves to become good. They can cross that bridge.

No they can’t.

We can hear voices, Mr. Gates. Many voices are telling us to put you to death.

Then why don’t you? Go ahead.

We’re doing something much worse. We’re imposing this sentence…YOUR FATE IS IN YOUR OWN HANDS. That sentence is real. It carries weight. As you’ll discover.

It’s meaningless.

Take Mr. Gates away. He’s about to become ill. Take him home…

You don’t have the courage to kill me. You’re cowards.

I’ve heard that refrain from hundreds of murderers in this court…they all want a quick death. We don’t give it to them…

Kill me.

Take him home.

You did something to my mind.

We heard your confession of crimes. Mass imprisonment and murder.

Then destroy me. I throw myself on the mercy of this court.

Goodbye, Mr. Gates.

This is just a dream.

If it is, it’s your dream. You have to ask why you’re presenting it to yourself…

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

Jon Rappoport

The Individual vs. the digital platform; the global rebellion vs. the machine

Sep8

Washing away the stink of obedience

by Jon Rappoport

September 8, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Using fascist vaccine mandates and passports, governments are expanding their digital platform, which is a surveillance and control system.

The excuse is: “We have to keep track of everyone who receives the vaccine…we have to make sure they update their booster shots…we have to know the people who are refusing the vaccine… ”

Of course, the platform reaches out into, and collects, all sorts of personal information about every person. Medical records, social media presence, consumer habits, political preferences, etc.

Underlying this massive and ongoing effort is the assumption that The Individual is a social construct. A unit. An assemblage of data.

This unit is entered into algorithms governing millions of units.

Thus, the living individual disappears. He is now an abstraction.

The repressive State takes on the shape of a technocracy:

“We regulate what units (humans) can and can’t do. We fit these units into an overall pattern of enforced behavior that achieves the greatest good for all…”

It turns out that many people, badly educated, trained to think of themselves as eternal victims, and resentful toward Constitutional liberties, are content to be plugged into systems that track them and tell them what to do.

These are the people who are always thinking about what other people are thinking of them. They are the foot soldiers of the Great Reset.

On the other hand, The Individual who knows he is alive, independent, and far more than a biological machine, who wants freedom…that Individual has a vision of his existence that outstrips any platform, algorithm, or fetid version of “greatest good.”

That Individual is who I write for.

I don’t write for ant colonies of the 21st century.

In 1928, the father of modern propanda, Edward Bernays, stated: “This is an age of mass production. In the mass production of materials a broad technique has been developed and applied to their distribution. In this age, too, there must be a technique for the mass distribution of ideas…The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.”

For Bernays, and his political descendants, “smoothly functioning society” has meant mass mind control.

Indeed, Bernays also wrote: “It is sometimes possible to change the attitudes of millions but impossible to change the attitude of one man.”

The one man is the disrupter of the machinery.

The vaccine mandates and the passports are a large jump in the direction of mass/group surrender.

In this expanding technocracy, it’s no accident that the main component of propaganda is “science.” Technocracy itself is based on the misapplied “scientific” notion that, since a properly functioning machine is composed of many connected and integrated parts, human society should be built in the same fashion.

COVID “science” is a structure made up of interconnected facts—all of which turn out to be gross lies. I’ve spent the past year exposing those lies (see here and here for boil downs).

The best propaganda appears to be true to those who can’t think, who can’t summon up the desire and will to break out of the system.

The life-force inside every person, whether he knows it or not, wants to break out.

Rock-bottom materialists, who try to deny this force exists, will sooner or later succumb to some piece of propaganda and surrender to The Group.

In these times, The Group wants a digital platform to control their actions. The Group wants to submit to authorities who claim to have altruistic motives. The Group wants to fight for the right to be slaves.

However, as the vise tightens on the population, more and more individuals are realizing the mass and the group and collective and the digital platform and the prevailing propaganda narrative are spelling doom for them. They made a mistake in joining up and surrendering.

The altruism they’ve been supporting is a fake.

Their false gods have gone too far.

Before they slip into the final Big Sleep, more and more Individuals are stirring and waking up.

Their mind shackles are loosening.

More and more Individuals are realizing the talking news heads and the governors and presidents and prime ministers and premiers are puppets. The governments and bureaucracies are Police States. The promised new day is really a long night.

And so comes the rebellion. It is widening.

There is now a clear choice. Be a free and independent Individual, or be a loser, an ally of inhuman technocracy and tyranny.

History.com: “’These are the times that try men’s souls; the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph’.”

“When these phrases [written by Thomas Paine] appeared in the pages of the Pennsylvania Journal for the first time, General George Washington’s troops were encamped at McKonkey’s Ferry on the Delaware River opposite Trenton, New Jersey. In August, they had suffered humiliating defeats and lost New York City to British troops. Between September and December, 11,000 American volunteers gave up the fight and returned to their families. General Washington could foresee the destiny of a rebellion without an army if the rest of his men returned home when their service contracts expired on December 31. He knew that without an upswing in morale and a significant victory, the American Revolution would come to a swift and humiliating end.”

“Thomas Paine was similarly astute. His Common Sense was the clarion call that began the revolution. As Washington’s troops retreated from New York through New Jersey, Paine again rose to the challenge of literary warfare. With American Crisis, he delivered the words that would salvage the revolution.”

“Washington commanded that the freshly printed pamphlet be read aloud to his dispirited men; the rousing prose had its intended effect. Reciting Paine’s impassioned words, the beleaguered troops mustered their remaining hopes for victory and crossed the icy Delaware River to defeat hung-over Hessians on Christmas night and on January 2, the British army’s best general, Earl Cornwallis, at the Battle of Princeton. With victory in New Jersey, Washington won not only two battles, but also the love and thanks of man and woman.”

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

Jon Rappoport

COVID vaccine, lab mistake, gene researcher

Sep3

by Jon Rappoport

September 3, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Last week at the world famous XXXX lab, a widely published gene researcher, Dr. XXXX, wandered into the wrong room and inhaled an experimental truth serum spray, under development by the CIXXXX.

I caught up with him a few hours later at a small restaurant in rural Virginia. We were the only customers. We sat at back table, ate oysters with mercury sauce, and talked for an hour:

—Doctor, why are you doing experiments aimed at producing single-sex litters of animals?

Isn’t it obvious? You want to eliminate a group of animals or people? You knock out procreation as an option. You perform genetic alterations, so all future members of that group are male or female.

Could you comment on a phrase often applied to genetic technology—“unintended consequences?”

Yes. You see, we know what we’re doing. But we don’t know what we’re not doing.

I’m not sure I understand.

We have a procedure. We follow it. But OFTEN the outcome of that procedure isn’t what we thought it would be. We wanted to make a fish glow, but instead the fish grew an extra eye. Or he did glow, but he also wriggled on to a beach and started eating sand.

And why did these unexpected changes occur?

Ripple effect. Down the line from where we edited a gene or inserted a gene or deleted a gene, other genes shifted. They turned on or off. They moved. They became cranky. That sort of thing.

And this was beyond your control.

There’s always something beyond our control. The question is, is it trivial or important?

What’s the answer?

We have no idea. What looks trivial today could become disastrous six months or six years from now. It’s roulette. A crapshoot.

That’s not comforting.

Think of it this way. You strike a simple chord on a piano and let go. A few seconds later, other keys on the piano press down and make sounds on their own. You walk out of the house and while you’re gone, five more keys make sounds. A year later, during the night, the piano plays seven chords.

So why do you keep on with this research?

Why does a dog obey his master?

What about CRISPR, the latest and greatest gene-editing tool?

For starters, it’s like having a pair of scissors. You cut out a section in a long genetic string. But then you have two ends in the middle of the string. When they grow back together, you get genetic distortions.

There are lots of amateurs and professionals playing around with CRISPR.

Yes. Those who are deeply dissatisfied with human beings as they are and want to reduce them, and enthusiastic utopians who believe genetic paradise is just over the hill. They cut and splice. They’re having a field day with the technology.

Is the RNA COVID vaccine a form of genetic treatment?

Of course. What else could it be? You inject a piece of RNA into a person’s arm. The theory is, nanoparticles of this RNA get into the body’s cells and make the cells produce a protein. That protein is similar to a protein in [fictitious] SARS-CoV-2. The immune system takes a mug shot of the new protein, thus preparing to meet the actual [fictitious] SARS-CoV-2 on the battlefield, if it comes along later. That’s gene therapy. Why would the cells produce a new protein? Because genes in the body are receiving genetic instructions from the injected RNA.

Can anything go wrong?

You’re kidding, right? All sorts of things can go wrong. The cells could produce a few dozen new proteins. Or they could stop making a vital protein. The immune system could go haywire. It could attack organs of the body. We’re not talking precision here. Get that through your head. With new genetic inputs, organisms will radically change their former behavior.

Some people say genetic engineering of plants is dangerous, but those general processes applied to humans are safe.

And some people say nuclear bombs are a global threat, but nuclear reactors that produce electricity like Fukushima are fine and dandy.

Have you taken the COVID vaccine?

I have a certificate that says I did.

Someone told me the RNA in the COVID vaccine doesn’t actually initiate a genetic change.

Really? You think the RNA operates like a grain of sand that irritates the oyster into making a pearl? If cells of the body suddenly make a new protein they would never otherwise manufacture, some genetic information and instruction are being given and received.

Can anyone prove the COVID vaccine is forcing the cells to make the one desired S-protein?

Didn’t we just cover that? Listen, we could take five thousand people who just had the Pfizer shot, and we could extract cells samples from them, and we could actually see what’s happening and not happening in the area of protein production. It might be quite shocking. But we won’t do that. We never do large-scale studies that could refute our own central claims.

Those central claims are the holy of holies?

You bet. In those instances, we have to be right, especially when we’re wrong. If not, our whole house of cards collapses.

So when people analyze the COVID vaccine for huge adverse effects…bleeding, miscarriages, heart failure, coma, death…

They should never overlook the genetics. It’s a gene shot. A GMO shot in the arm. If I make genetic changes in your brain right now, and an hour later you think you’re Magellan circumnavigating the globe, where should people start looking to figure out what happened to you?

Genetics is playing chess without understanding the rules?

It’s three-dimensional chess—actually four-dimensional, because unpredictable alterations happen over time. We understand a few of the rules, and then we assume we know a great deal more than we actually do. If we just stuck to what we knew, we’d be doing experiments in the back room of a dry cleaners. The truth doesn’t get you funding. Hype does.

The military is very interested in—

They want to create super-soldiers. Doing that through gene therapy is the pot of gold at the end of their rainbow. My guess is eventually they’ll come up with some very strong human robots. After a time of rigidly obeying orders, the robots will go crazy and attack their masters.

Have you ever considered changing your profession?

A couple of years ago, I met with a few political consultants. I was mulling a run for public office. But I couldn’t figure out which lies to tell, in order to win an election. In my lab, I know exactly which lies to tell, to keep my job.

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

Jon Rappoport

Bombshell: PCR tests can’t identify Delta Variant; it’s all fiction

Aug31

This is not a joke; it’s real

by Jon Rappoport

August 31, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Oooo. The Delta Variant. It’s everywhere.

Watch out. It’s under your rug. It’s in the clothes closet. It’s on your toothbrush.

And it’s The Unvaccinated who are spreading it. Those devils. We, who are pure, must be protected from the unvaxxed Unclean.

Fauci, god of soccer moms, rises every morning saying DELTA, goes on television saying DELTA, and goes to sleep praying to DELTA.

Read this from the Texas Department of State Health Services FAQ: “How can I tell if I have the Delta variant? Do labs report that to the state? That information may not be readily available. The [PCR] viral tests that are used to determine if a person has COVID-19 are not designed to tell you what variant is causing the infection. Detecting the Delta variant, or other variants, requires a special type of testing called genomic sequencing. Due to the volume of COVID-19 cases, sequencing is not performed on all viral samples. However, because the Delta variant now accounts for the majority of COVID-19 cases in the United States, there is a strong likelihood that a positive test result indicates infection with the Delta variant.”

Boom.

I can assure you, the number of patients whose samples are genetically sequenced is tiny, contrasted against the number whose samples are simply run through the standard PCR.

So there is no way to know that the Delta variant now accounts for the majority of COVID cases in the US. And using the standard PCR, there is no way to know ANY specific patient has the Delta. It’s all fiction.

We have this from the American Lung Association: “Regular COVID-19 tests do not detect which variant is involved in a patient’s case—that information does not change the approach to care or therapy. The variant identification requires genomic sequencing, a process separate from regular virus tests and one that not all labs are able to do or do not do on a routine basis for patient care but are done more for public health monitoring.”

Let me break down how this game works. To be excessively generous, let’s say that 3 out of every 1000 positive PCR tests in America are sent to high-level labs, where genetic sequencing is done.

A certain percentage of THOSE sequencing tests come up positive for the Delta Variant. Based on these results, MODELS are constructed.

Now we’re REALLY into fake science. The models estimate what percentage of ALL positive PCR tests are really positive for Delta.

I’m sorry to break this newsflash, but modelers are notorious charlatans. Their dense calculations are as far from science as a Model-T Ford is from a spaceship.

But based on models, public health agencies—who desperately needed a new con, because COVID case numbers were declining—blasted through their media assets the new revelation: THE DELTA MONSTER IS LOOSE AMONG US.

But it gets even worse. Why? Because you can bet the farm that the current model pushing the omnipresence of the Delta Variant was never challenged. It was never handed to several groups of independent scientists who went over it with a fine-toothed comb. That’s called verification. That’s called the Scientific Method. You may have heard of it.

The most notorious modeler in the world, Neil Ferguson, of the London Imperial College, bankrolled by Bill Gates, made a prediction early in 2020: by that summer, there would 500,000 COVID deaths in the UK, and 2 million in the US.

It was this absurd prediction, swallowed whole by Boris Johnson, and swallowed whole by Donald Trump, on the urging of Tony Fauci, that led to the original mass lockdowns in US and the UK. And then other nations followed suit.

As my long-time readers know, all this is just the tip of a very large iceberg. For the past year, I’ve been proving the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist, the tests and case numbers are meaningless, and the highly destructive vaccine is unnecessary.

But I make frequent forays into the fantasy world of official science, to illustrate that, even within that lunatic bubble, internal contradictions and outright lies abound.

Here is my original 2020 article on the most famous and celebrated modeler in the world, Neil Ferguson:

Neil Ferguson: the ghost in the machine—

Why do governments salute when he predicts a pandemic and tells them to lock down their countries?

Does anyone care about his past?

Why does he still have a prestigious job?

Who is he connected to?

Neil Ferguson, through his institute at London’s Imperial College, can call the shots on a major percentage of the global population.

He’s Mr. Genius, when it comes to projecting computer models of epidemics.

Fellow experts puff up his reputation.

According to the Business Insider (4/25/20), “Ferguson’s team warned Boris Johnson that the quest for ‘herd immunity’ [letting people live their lives out in the open in the UK] could cost 510,000 lives, prompting an abrupt U-turn [massive national lockdown in the UK]…His simulations have been influential in other countries as well, cited by authorities in the US, Germany, and France.”

Not only cited, not only influential, but swallowed whole.

Business insider continues: “On March 23 [2020], the UK scrapped ‘herd immunity’ in favor of a suppression strategy, and the country made preparations for weeks of lockdown. Ferguson’s study was responsible.”

There’s more. A lot more.

Same BI article: “Dr. Deborah Birx, coronavirus response coordinator to the Trump administration, told journalists at a March 16 press briefing that the Imperial paper [Ferguson’s computer projection] prompted the CDC’s new advice to work from home and avoid gatherings of 10 or more.”

Ferguson, instigator of LOCKDOWN. Stripping away of basic liberties. Economic devastation.

So let’s look at Ferguson’s track record, spelled out in the Business Insider piece:

“Ferguson co-founded the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, based at Imperial, in 2008. It is the leading body advising national governments on pathogen outbreaks.”

“It gets tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and works with the UK National Health Service, the US Centres for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), and is tasked with supplying the World Health Organization with ‘rapid analysis of urgent infectious disease problems’.”

Getting the picture?

Gates money goes to Ferguson.

Ferguson predicts dire threat from COVID, necessitating lockdowns—thus preparing people to accept a vaccine. The vaccine Gates wants.

Ferguson supplies a frightening computer projection of COVID deaths—to the CDC and WHO. Ferguson thus communicates a rationale for the Gates vaccine plan.

National governments surrender to WHO and CDC. LOCKDOWNS.

Business Insider: “Michael Thrusfield, a professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, told the paper he had ‘déjà vu’ after reading the [Ferguson] Imperial paper [on COVID], saying Ferguson was responsible for excessive animal culling during the 2001 Foot and Mouth [mad cow] outbreak.”

“Ferguson warned the government that 150,000 people could die. Six million animals were slaughtered as a precaution, costing the country billions in farming revenue. In the end, 200 people died.”

“Similarly, he [Ferguson] was accused of creating panic by overestimating the potential death toll during the 2005 Bird Flu outbreak. Ferguson estimated 200 million could die. The real number was in the low hundreds.” HELLO?

“In 2009, one of Ferguson’s models predicted 65,000 people could die from the Swine Flu outbreak in the UK — the final figure was below 500.”

So you have to ask yourself, why would anyone believe what Ferguson has been predicting in this COVID hustle?

Are his fellow experts that stupid?

Are presidents and prime ministers that stupid?

And the answer is: This is a monumental covert op; some people are that stupid; some are caught up in the op and are afraid to say the emperor has no clothes; some are aware of what is going on, and they want to destroy national economies and lead us into, yes, a new world order.

Gates knows he has his man: Ferguson. As the recipient of tens of millions of dollars a year from the Gates Foundation, Ferguson isn’t about to issue a model that states: COVID is nothing to worry about, let people live their lives and we’ll be all right. The chance of that happening is on a par with researchers admitting they never properly identified a new virus as the cause of illness in 2019, in Wuhan.

In order to justify injecting every man, woman, and child in the world with synthetic genes, Gates needs A STORY ABOUT A DEADLY VIRUS THAT NECESSITATES SHUTTING DOWN AND IMPRISONING THE PLANET, ACHIEVING A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE.

He’s got the story, all dressed up in a computer model, composed by a man with a past record of abject and devastating failures.

Neil Ferguson is the ghost in the machine. The machine is the World Health Organization and the CDC. The man behind the ghost is Bill Gates.

SOURCES:

https://www.dshs.state.tx.us/coronavirus/variant-faqs.aspx

https://www.lung.org/blog/covid-19-delta-variant

https://www.businessinsider.com/neil-ferguson-transformed-uk-covid-response-oxford-challenge-imperial-model-2020-4

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

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Science Fraud

The virus that doesn’t exist: lies and consequences

Medical weapons and fake data sets; how destruction multiplies

The fixation on the One, and the obsession with a Virus; the Individual vs. the Collective Trance

Dangerous speech versus free speech; mobs of ignoramuses

The failure to prove the virus exists

The vaccinated sheep are being taken for a ride; how long before they jump off the train? Never?

The Galactic Tribunal grills Bill Gates

The Individual vs. the digital platform; the global rebellion vs. the machine

COVID vaccine, lab mistake, gene researcher

Bombshell: PCR tests can’t identify Delta Variant; it’s all fiction