Football: where money trumps “the virus”

by Jon Rappoport

November 26, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

I wouldn’t ordinarily write about football; but the sport illustrates how vaunted Public Health Officials look the other way, when they’re supposed to. They have as much integrity as thieves in the night. Only idiots would pay attention to anything they say or claim or demand.

According to the government narrative, fully vaccinated people still spread “the virus.” That’s why, in many places, they’re supposed to wear masks.

Recently, Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers was mercilessly attacked for claiming he was vaccinated when he wasn’t; and for freely mingling with opposing team players after games and appearing before reporters without a mask.

Of course, no one mentioned that, DURING THE GAME, all players grab, breathe on, spit on, bleed on, pile on, scratch and claw one another. That’s permitted because it’s the source of MONEY. Lots of money.

And, in both college and pro games across the country, stadiums fill up with anywhere from 40,000 to 100,000 screaming, coughing, spitting, drinking, cursing fans, who sit cheek to jowl with one another. But that’s all right, too, because it’s MONEY.

This situation is pretty much like the US southern border, where thousands (millions?) of immigrants come into the US “with the virus.”

But that’s all right, too, because, well, it’s policy, one aspect of which is welcoming drugs into America. Drugs are MONEY. Big money.

Sports “journalists” don’t discuss what I’m writing about in this article. They’re not supposed to. It might turn off the audience. And yes, again, their audience is MONEY.

“Hey, Jim. Did you see what just happened down on the field during that last play? The big offensive left tackle bit the arm of the Rams linebacker. Blood is flowing. I wonder how much virus is being transmitted.”

“A ton, Frank. We really should have a graphic that illustrates it. Heck, there’s gobs of spit all over the field. So when a player falls down, he’s getting 100 percent pure from-the-lung SARS-CoV-2 rubbed in his face.”

“You and I are sitting in a veritable mist of virus engulfing the stadium.”

“That’s why your ex wants you to take out a bigger life insurance policy naming her as beneficiary.”

Where are the little prissy public health demons? Nowhere.

But they’ll tell YOU to take the highly destructive vaccine and then wear a mask and get ready for the boosters every six months and lock down and isolate whenever they deem it necessary.

They’ll collude with politicians to destroy all sorts of businesses and lives with these lockdowns.

But not the football business.

Despite his bitching and whining and moaning about crowds at large events, I assure you that if little Anthony Fauci suddenly ascended to the positon of Commissioner of the National Football League, he would find a way to keep the game going and the stadiums full of fans. He’d change his tune.

He’s the head of a public health mafia, and the mafia knows money.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Open letter to Tucker Carlson: the real opioid story

China, Mexico, pharmaceutical companies, Obama, Congress, the DEA…

by Jon Rappoport

November 15, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Tucker:

You recently had emergency back surgery, and when the other pain killers didn’t work, the doctors gave you fentanyl, an opioid. You said the drug did erase the pain, but it also produced fear and anxiety—which you haven’t felt in 20 years—and temporarily took away any concern about maintaining simple order in your personal life.

So I thought I’d forward you the real facts about the Opioid Wars.

PART ONE

2 MILLION SEVERELY DEBILITATED OPIOID ADDICTS IN THE US.

ROUGHLY 33 THOUSAND DEATHS PER YEAR FROM OPIOIDS.

Wuhan is the city where the killer opioid fentanyl is shipped out to dealers all over the world.

The press manages to hide the city’s global role in destroying millions of people with opioids…by claiming the ONLY thing you have to know about Wuhan is “the virus broke out there.”

City-journal.org, May 12, 2020: ”Over the past decade, Wuhan has emerged as the global headquarters for fentanyl production. The city’s chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers hide production of the drug within their larger, licit manufacturing operations, then ship it abroad using deliberately mislabeled packaging, concealment techniques, and a complex network of forwarding addresses. According to a recent ABC News report, ‘huge amounts of these mail-order [fentanyl] components can be traced to a single, state-subsidized company in Wuhan’.”

The Atlantic, August 18, 2019, “The Brazen Way a Chinese Company Pumped Fentanyl Ingredients Into the US,” by Ben Westhoff: “According to Bryce Pardo, a fentanyl expert at the Rand Corporation, the two most commonly used fentanyl precursors—think of them as ingredients—are chemicals called NPP and 4-ANPP. When I first started researching them, in early 2017, advertisements for the chemicals were all over the internet, from a wide variety of different companies. Later, I determined that the majority of those companies were under the Yuancheng [company] umbrella.”

“Posing as a buyer, I answered an online advertisement for fentanyl precursors and was put in touch with a Yuancheng salesman who called himself Sean. We arranged to meet at the company’s main office in Wuhan, in the Wuchang district, near a busy subway station in a blue-collar neighborhood…”

FOX Business, March 31, 2017. Headline: “DEA: Made in China Lethal Opioid Fueling US Drug Epidemic.”

“A homemade designer version of fentanyl, the highly addictive opioid which is similar to morphine but is 50 to 100 times more potent, has been the center of drug busts across the country this month—with law enforcement pinpointing its origin from underground labs in China. The DEA says the China-U.S. supply is further fueling the country’s drug epidemic.”

“’This [Chinese] stuff is unbelievably potent. It is so powerful that even a tiny amount can kill you,’ DEA spokesman Rusty Payne tells FOX Business. ‘China is by far the most significant manufacturer of illicit designer synthetic drugs. There is so much manufacturing of new drugs, [it’s] amazing what is coming out of China. Hundreds of [versions], including synthetic fentanyl and fentanyl-based compounds’.”

“China only made the drug [fentanyl] illegal in 2015, and at that point black market Chinese labs began increasing production of their own versions, including the one turning up recently across the country [the US] called furanyl fentanyl.”

“’While heroin gets harder to buy on the street or from a dealer, fentanyl comes via FedEx,’ Brad Lamm, CEO of Intervention.com, tells FOX Business.”

“Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez announced this week details on a mail-order furanyl fentanyl smuggling ring bust. The operation had been bringing the drug — which has been dubbed ‘White China’ — into the U.S from Asia. NYPD Chief of Detective Bob Boyce said that this was the first time investigators have seen this type of fentanyl in New York City.”

“Also this week, Cincinnati Customs and Border Protection agents said they seized 83 shipments of illegal synthetic drugs, including 36 pounds of furanyl fentanyl, from China.”

The Boston Globe [2017]: “An extremely powerful drug used as an elephant tranquilizer has quickly become a new killer in the nation’s opioid epidemic, and New England authorities and health workers are bracing for its arrival.”

“The drug, carfentanil, is a synthetic opioid that is 10,000 times stronger than morphine and 100 times more potent than fentanyl, another deadly synthetic opioid.”

“The Drug Enforcement Administration has issued a nationwide alert about the drug, which its acting chief called ‘crazy dangerous.’ In Massachusetts, State Police have warned their crime lab staff about how to handle carfentanil during analysis. Even inhaling the drug or absorbing it through a cut can be fatal.”

“Law enforcement and health officials believe most users do not know they are ingesting carfentanil, which apparently is often mistakenly thought to be heroin or a mixture of heroin and fentanyl, a weaker but still lethal synthetic opioid.”

“If carfentanil’s trade route is similar to that of fentanyl, the path stretches from Chinese manufacturers to Mexican processors to smugglers who supply dealers in the United States, law enforcement officials said.”

“’There’s no quality control, so when it gets here the distributors don’t know what they have and the user has no idea,’ said Timothy Desmond, a special agent with the New England division of the DEA. ‘That’s where it’s a game of Russian roulette’.”

“Law enforcement officials also are concerned that carfentanil will harm first responders. The DEA has warned police not to conduct field tests on seized drugs that might contain carfentanil. Instead, the agency urged officers to secure their samples and deliver them only to colleagues with training and equipment to handle the drug.”

PART TWO

Meanwhile, there are several major pharmaceutical companies who’ve faced heavy exposure for their roles in the opioid criminal trafficking business. For example, Purdue, and Johnson & Johnson. A third one is (Mossad-connected) Teva.

Why can’t federal law enforcement stop all the US pharmaceutical companies who have been trafficking opioids?

Is there some secret we don’t know about? In fact, the answers are right out in the open. I had them confirmed over a year ago, from a source inside federal law-enforcement. But talk about “open—” the Washington Post laid out the sordid story in detail. AND AS USUAL, THERE WAS NO FOLLOW-UP. That’s how major media work. They have a piece of very ugly truth. They expose it. But then it mysteriously dies and is forgotten. In this case (opioid trafficking), a real follow-up would have led the public down into a Hell of evil influence, exerted by Pharma, on the US Congress. Buckle up.

A 2016 LAW SIGNED BY OBAMA SHACKLED THE DEA (DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION) IN ITS EFFORTS TO CRACK DOWN ON BIG PHARMA OPIOID TRAFFICKERS.

That law is the Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act of 2016, passed by Congress and signed by President Obama on 4/9/16.

And that is the federal government’s role in perpetuating and expanding the opioid crisis.

Honest agents inside the complacent DEA want to have the right to march into a pharmaceutical company headquarters and say, “We know you’re shipping millions of opioid pills to little pharmacies and clinics that, in turn, are selling the pills to street dealers. We’re going to freeze those shipments now, and we’re going to arrest your key executives.”

But that 2016 law raises the bar so high, the whole law-enforcement effort is hamstrung, throttled, and loaded down with legal complications.

In essence, the US Congress gave drug companies a free pass.

And no one in the Congress is admitting it or talking about it.

The Washington Post, on October 15, 2017, talked about it. The article was headlined, “The Drug Industry’s Triumph Over the DEA”: “In April 2016, at the height of the deadliest drug epidemic in U.S. history, Congress effectively stripped the Drug Enforcement Administration of its most potent weapon against large drug companies suspected of spilling prescription [opioid] narcotics onto the nation’s streets.”

“A handful of members of Congress, allied with the nation’s major drug distributors, prevailed upon the DEA and the Justice Department to agree to a more industry-friendly law, undermining efforts to stanch the flow of pain pills, according to an investigation by The Washington Post and ‘60 Minutes’…”

“The law [which was passed with an overwhelming YES count by both house of Congress] was the crowning achievement of a multifaceted campaign by the drug industry to weaken aggressive DEA enforcement efforts against drug distribution [pharma] companies that were supplying corrupt doctors and pharmacists who peddled [opioid] narcotics to the black market. The [drug] industry worked behind the scenes with lobbyists and key members of Congress [to pass the 2016 law], pouring more than a million dollars into their election campaigns.”

“The new [2016] law makes it virtually impossible for the DEA to freeze suspicious narcotic shipments from the companies, according to internal agency and Justice Department documents and an independent assessment by the DEA’s chief administrative law judge in a soon-to-be-published law review article. That powerful tool [freezing opioid shipments] had [previously] allowed the agency to immediately prevent drugs from reaching the street.”

The Washington Post article mentioned there was an attempt to reach Obama (who had signed the law) and obtain his comments. The effort failed. Obama kept his mouth shut.

EVERYONE IS NOW AWARE OF THE LAW’S HORRENDOUS IMPACT. WHY DOESN’T THE CONGRESS REPEAL IT?

The fact that no one is stepping up to the plate with a fast repeal is proof that multiple parts of the federal government are, in fact, tacitly supporting the opioid crisis and its devastating impacts on human life.

Failure to act swiftly amounts to collusion in Death by Opioids.

President Obama, the Congress, and key officials within the Justice Department and the DEA are all guilty.

If you speak to people who have a naïve and lasting faith in the good will of political leaders, they will probably tell you that the heinous 2016 law I detailed above was “an unfortunate mistake.” The members of Congress “didn’t know what they were voting for.” And somehow, that lets everyone off the hook. Really? Congress has known what they voted for (if indeed they were all ignorant back in 2016) for the past five years. SO WHY HAVEN’T THEY REPEALED THE LAW? Why haven’t they remedied their “error?” Why have they let untold numbers of people die for years while staying silent? Why hasn’t the whole Congress risen up to squash the “mistake?” They could do it in an hour. Obviously, they don’t want to admit their prior guilt. They don’t want an investigation which, if done with even a vague imitation of honesty, would expose some of their members as WILLING AND KNOWING COLLABORATORS IN DEATH. They don’t want to admit that the pharma campaign money they take is sufficient inducement to fake a blindness to the death they’re assigning to their own constituents and people all over America.

On the condition of anonymity, an insider with intimate knowledge of the opioid crime network spoke with me. He is not a participant or a criminal. He has spent years exposing the network.

My initial question was: how could a corrupt little pharmacy or medical clinic in a small town, in the middle of nowhere, sell, as reported, a MILLION opioid pills a year?

Here is the answer my source confirmed: a criminal doctor or doctors are writing 75-100 opioid prescriptions a day like clockwork; “patients” are flooding in from all over the country (many of them flying in once a month); they are sold the opioid prescriptions, and either fill them right there in the clinic, or take them to a friendly pharmacy.

These patients are actually dealers. They return home and sell the pills to addicts.

Where do the small clinics and pharmacies obtain the huge number of opioid pills? From distributors. These are legitimate companies. They may distribute all sorts of medicines. It’s their business. They know they are committing egregious crimes.

Where do these big distributors obtain their opioid pills? From pharmaceutical companies who manufacture them.

The manufacturers and the distributors have an ongoing relationship. They know exactly what they’re doing. They know the bulk of the product is going into “street sales.”

The distributors and the manufacturers are drug traffickers.

There is no doubt about this. No one is “making a mistake.” No one is in the dark. No one is being fooled.

When the DEA tries to clamp down on opioid manufacturers, this is not a sudden action, as some manufacturers try to claim. The DEA has already made several prior visits and has tried to convince the manufacturers to stop what they’re doing—to no avail.

I suggested to my source that the opioid distributors and their suppliers, the pharma manufacturers, have a “nudge and a wink” relationship. He quickly told me it was far more than that. He left no doubt in my mind that these relationships are undertaken and maintained with full knowledge about the trafficking enterprise these partners are engaged in.

He pointed out that the 2016 law referenced above, passed by Congress, radically changed the conditions under which the DEA could immediately freeze huge and obviously criminal shipments of opioids. It’s not a slam-dunk anymore.

Before imposing a freeze, instead of simply showing that the (criminal) shipment poses an IMMINENT threat of death or grave harm to users, the DEA now has to demonstrate there is an IMMEDIATE threat.

This word game means the DEA must establish that people could die, not next week or next month (imminent), but “right now” (immediate). If this seems logically absurd and intentionally perverse, it is. Obviously, “immediate” is designed to give rise to back and forth debate, legalistic challenges, long postponements—and ultimately a straitjacket preventing decisive actions against opioid distributors and manufacturers.

The Washington Post reached out to Obama, who signed the 2016 law, and his then Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, the highest law-enforcement officer in the nation. The DEA is organized under the Attorney General and the Dept. of Justice.

Both Obama and Lynch “declined” to discuss the law. Naturally.

Who played a central role in crafting the law and pushing it through Congress?

The Post: “Deeply involved in the effort to help the [drug] industry was the DEA’s former associate chief counsel, D. Linden Barber. While at the DEA, he helped design and carry out the early stages of the agency’s tough enforcement campaign, which targeted drug companies that were failing to report suspicious orders of narcotics.”

What??

Barber worked against the drug industry while employed by the DEA, and then he left the Agency and turned around and attacked it.

The Post: “When Barber went to work for the drug industry [he now works for Cardinal Health], in 2011, he brought an intimate knowledge of the DEA’s strategy and how it could be attacked to protect the [drug] companies. He was one of dozens of DEA officials recruited by the drug industry during the past decade.”

“Barber played a key role in crafting an early version of the legislation [the 2016 law] that would eventually curtail the DEA’s power, according to an internal email written by a Justice Department official to a colleague. ‘He [Barber] wrote the…bill,” the official wrote in 2014.”

The opioid crime network extends to Congress, former (if not present) DEA employees, medical-drug distribution companies, and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

It then includes medical clinics and pharmacies and prescription-writing doctors.

The murderous network is addicting, maiming, and killing Americans in huge numbers.

—This is war against life. Launched from China and Mexico; launched from major pharmaceutical companies and their distributors.

And of course, given the policy of open borders, the US government has been inviting the enemy to float right into America with so much tonnage of fentanyl that, despite drug seizures, no one can stop the flow.


SOURCES:

(forthcoming)


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Renegade Priest deals with a man during confession

by Jon Rappoport

November 10, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Church members tended to avoid Father John J O’Connor. He was known to be thorny, even confrontational. So it was with some trepidation that Paul Smith, who was told his regular confessor was out with the flu, approached the box when he saw Father John standing by it.

Inside, Father John said, “So why are you here today?”

To make confession.

I know that. But why?

My son, who is 11, doesn’t want to go school.

Because?

He doesn’t want to take the needle in his arm. He doesn’t like listening to the teacher talking about transgenderism. He doesn’t like the teacher calling white students racists.

And you?

I don’t like all that, either. But I don’t know what to do. My sister thinks I may have a mental health issue. She wants me to see a psychiatrist.

Do you want to?

I don’t know.

What would the diagnosis be?

I have no idea.

Depression? Bipolar? Oppositional Defiance Disorder?

I don’t know.

You don’t know what to do with your son. Does that mean you have a mental problem?

Maybe.

So you’re on the fence.

Yes.

What do you want me to do about that?

Take my confession and tell me how to obtain absolution.

If I do, will your situation change?

I hope so.

How?

I’ll feel relieved.

Why?

Because you accept my confession.

What happens if you take your son out of the school for good?

I’d have to find him another school. And in the neighborhood, and at work, the word would get out.

People would know you’re against the policies of the school.

Yes. I don’t want to make waves. My boss might see me as some kind of radical.

What’s your boss’s position on the issues your son is facing in school?

My boss has a relative who sits on the school board. He goes along to get along.

Would he fire you?

I suppose that’s possible. He would certainly pass me over for a promotion.

So you see this as a squeeze play.

Well, yes. There are forces pressing on me from different directions.

What does your wife think?

She wants me to take our boy out of school.

Is she adamant?

I would say so, yes.

Any other family involved?

My brother. He’s all for the vaccine.

Do you live in fear?

What?

Do you live in fear?

No. I mean I have certain fears at times, but I maintain my equilibrium.

Your equilibrium. What about your faith?

What do you mean?

In what do you invest your faith?

Jesus Christ, God, the Church.

And what does that faith do for you?

I don’t understand.

What return are you getting for your investment?

A sense of order, of peace.

In other words, you can live your life as you ordinarily would, but with the added bonus of a feeling of security.

My faith is deeper than that.

How?

I feel I know there is a life after this one.

And what is your place in that next life?

Hopefully, as a soul who is saved, in Heaven.

Meanwhile, until then, back on Earth, what else does your faith do for you, besides offering a sense of peace?

What do you mean?

Is there anything else you derive from faith?

I rely on the Church. It gives me hope.

Hope, for instance, that all is not lost for humankind?

Yes.

Would you say, all in all, that you’re deriving great benefit from your faith?

Of course.

What does your faith require from you?

What?

Aside from reaping benefits, what should you give?

I give to the Church. I make yearly donations.

And that’s it?

Are you saying I should give more?

I’m just asking questions. Does your faith empower you?

I…I’m not sure. How would it?

That’s my next question.

I don’t know. I’ve never sought power. Father, where is this going?

I don’t know. I want to find out. Does your faith suggest to you that you should take action?

What kind of action?

Well, over there, you have a problem. Your son, his school. Over here, you have your faith. Is there a bridge between the two? A bridge you should be crossing?

Oh. Well, I don’t know.

When it comes to this problem with your son and his school, what do you think you should do as a man, as a father?

That’s the thing. I’m not sure.

In other words, you’re afraid.

Well…I’ve prayed to God, asking for advice, but I haven’t gotten an answer.

Why do you think He hasn’t answered you?

I don’t know.

Is it possible He wants to see you take some action on your own, as a man, before He gets back to you?

Is that the Church’s position?

I doubt it. Perhaps it once was. It’s hard to say. We’re just sitting here talking. You and I. Two men.

And when you look at me, Father, what do you see?

I see what you see when you look at yourself.

But I don’t know what to think about myself.

I believe you do.

Really?

Yes. I believe you’re looking for cover. Refuge. A way out. An escape hatch. You want to use the Church as a crutch.

But in a way, that’s what the Church is, isn’t it? Not a fake crutch, a real one. Something ultimate to lean on. Because the Church is connected to God.

So then, you can postpone taking action on your son’s behalf. You can rely on us. You don’t have to stand up against evil and show some sign of bravery on your own. You can let the Church excuse you. That doesn’t add up for me.

Maybe I should pray deeper and with more conviction, give myself over totally to God’s Will.

Why haven’t you?

It’s a big step.

It seems as if you’re saying everything is a big step, and all the steps are just out of your reach. I don’t see that as God’s problem or the Church’s. I see it as your problem.

You’re not speaking on behalf of the Church, Father. I can tell.

Very few people in the Church listen to anything I have to say. Anyway, when I sit here talking to you, I see a blank spot in you. It’s a nice blank spot, a friendly blank spot, an earnest blank spot. I think you cultivate that spot in yourself. You tend it like a garden. It makes you impervious. At least you think it does, until something happens to you—or in this case, to your son. Then you come here looking for an out. You want absolution. You need courage, but you want an excuse to do nothing.

Maybe you’re right, Father.

I think you know I’m right.

Then what should I do?

Find a way INTO this mess with your son, not out of it. Don’t think of your faith as the end of something, but as a start. Act on it. Face the situation. Be brave.

How?

There is no how. Even if you turn your life over to God, you still have to DO something.

He can’t do it for me if I believe in Him?

He can do anything He wants to. What are you going to do?

I’m just a man.

Just? God gave you free will. Do you think He offered that gift so you could surrender it?

Will you take my confession, Father?

I’ve been taking it with every word you speak. But I won’t give you a way out.

Why not?

Because you’re playing dumb. If that’s what God wants you to do, then I’ve totally misunderstood what His Church is supposed to stand for.

I’m seeking a State of Grace.

Really? That is something no human can offer or exercise control over.

Sinners come to the Church. They want forgiveness.

You think it’s that simple? If there is a boot stamping on the face of humanity, and a man does NOTHING about it, we in the Church are supposed to exonerate that man AND claim we are acting in God’s name? In Christ’s name, who sacrificed Himself on the Cross? Well, here is one priest who won’t do that. And by the way, I know of several Protestant churches that stayed open during the lockdowns. They defied the authorities. But they are full of pride for simply staying open. For what purpose did they conduct services on Sundays? Did the pastors demand that their congregations go out into the streets and protest the lockdowns? Did the pastors tell their congregations to keep their businesses open no matter what? No.

You’re going too far, Father. You’re asking too much.

That’s my job. How far did the first Christians go in defending their faith against the tyrannical leaders of their day? For what purpose did they risk their lives? So you could live in comfort and endlessly debate with yourself the merits of taking your son out of school? So you could conveniently forget what courage is? So you could find a way to live in a moral vacuum?

Now wait a minute—

I’m one of those “first Christians.” The stakes then and the stakes now are exactly the same. I try to live as if I’ve just heard Jesus preach in person. As if I were inspired to carry my Faith in Him against all attempts to silence and neuter it.

Obviously, I don’t live up to your standard.

No, you don’t live up to your own. And your solution is to pretend you don’t know what that standard is. So you come here with a begging bowl. You want us to certify your self-trickery. You want us to absolve you from concealing everything you’re concealing from yourself. I don’t recall Jesus ever saying His Revelations involved the individual eradicating his own conscience. Through lockdowns and mandates, people steal your right to earn your daily bread. People try to steal your son’s mind. And you claim you don’t know what to do about it. And now you want to blame me because I won’t put a salve on your wound.

Goodbye, Father. I have to go.

Too bad. I was just getting started…


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Credit cards with carbon limits and universal obedience

by Jon Rappoport

September 28, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Millions obey mass imprisonments
And line up for the genetic shot in the arm
The new psychopathic witch who is governor of NY
Filling the shoes of departed mob boss Cuomo
Is firing all the state medical workers who refuse the vaccine
And is threatening to bring in the National Guard to replace them
Will they be toting their guns?
The military forcing treatment on patients?
So all is not calm
No, Virginia, civilization is not utopia
Even if the shopping mall has enough corn dogs and Pepsi for every schoolchild in your neighborhood wearing a mask


And now we have new credit cards that “regulate your carbon footprint.” Idiot’s delight. In case you thought the Great Reset was a fantasy, get a load of this from lifesitenews:

“The company that created a credit card to track your purchases’ CO2 emissions is set to launch a ‘premium’ version of the card that cuts off your spending as soon as you hit your ‘carbon max’.”

“This is the latest of many schemes to force major changes in human behaviour to allegedly lessen [the scientific hoax called] global warming…”

“Doconomy has partnered with Mastercard and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to create technology for the everyday consumer that ‘connects the purchase price of a product with the effect on the planet measured in Kg CO2, and then recommends the amount to offset – practically putting a price on carbon,’ as the Doconomy website explains.”

“The DO credit card works hand-in-hand with a phone app, launched in April 2019, that quantifies the CO₂ emissions generated from each credit card transaction [from each product purchased]. The website introduces the card with video footage of whitewashed, typical consumer goods floating, like trash, as if through space, each labeled with a carbon emissions number.”

“The back of the card reads underneath the signature authorization area, ‘I’m taking responsibility for every transaction I make to help protect our planet’.”

“Doconomy will soon release a ‘premium’ version of the credit card, called DO Black, touting it as ‘the first credit card ever to stop you from overspending’.”

“Measured against the UN goal of cutting carbon emissions in half by 2030, DO Black ‘comes with a monthly tCO2e limit, ensuring that we stick to the UN-2030-recommended cuts in carbon,’ the website reads.”

“The website currently features a sneak peek of the message the card user will be met with as soon as they hit their carbon max, complete with a red exclamation point warning: ‘Transaction denied! Carbon limit reached’.”

“Their goal is ambitious: ‘bring about structural change by rewiring the financial system,’ as their website reads. Their services are already being used by the bank Klarna, which is providing ‘carbon impact calculations on all transactions by all users’ through Doconomy’s Åland Index. This is being described as ‘the largest initiative ever taken by a bank in educating its users on the impact of consumption’.”

“While the card is currently being advertised for voluntary use, Marc Morano, founder and executive editor of what leftists call the ‘climate change denial’ website Climate Depot, has predicted that this voluntary phase will have its own expiration date:”

“’This CO2 monitoring credit card will begin as a “voluntary” measure with no “mandate.” But how long until this CO2 card will be mandated by big corporations in collusion with governments? Given how the climate activists are aping the COVID lockdowns, expect this credit card to be mandatory under a “climate emergency”’.”


The COVID lockdowns, masks, distancing, business closures, and vaccine mandates are part of a larger plan of conditioning populations to obey dictates in times of “necessity.” Meaning declared emergencies.

EMERGENCY is the ideal fascist word stuck in the brain of the citizenry. Its intent is to obtain compliance, no matter what type of emergency is being promoted. Pandemic, climate change, economic depression, food shortages, etc.

This is a test. We are the test subjects.

The purpose of the experiment? How far can murdering sociopaths go in commandeering our lives and destroying our freedom?

How far will we let them go?

What are we willing to risk, in order to stay free?

What is more important? Life or freedom?


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Your content provider delivers text in the frozen tundra

by Jon Rappoport

September 16, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

In case you missed it, WRITING has fallen behind video.

“Ooo! Pictures! Let me watch! Let me SEE what he’s saying. I won’t remember any details because, how could I? The images flow by. But that’s all right. I just want to form an impression. Then I can tell other people, “YOU MUST WATCH THIS.”

In the new cultural tundra, writers aren’t writers anymore. They’re content providers. Sounds like charity work, or a shipping operation.

“Hello, Mike? Your content just arrived on the dock. We’ll have it at your office tomorrow, after it clears customs. It’ll arrive in a red box with Christmas tree stickers on the lid.”

And writing isn’t writing. It’s TEXT.

Which is a way of saying the words themselves don’t matter. What’s important is the INFORMATION. And since that’s the case, all articles should be boiled down to brief summaries with links. People just want the DATA.

After all, what do biological machines need? Precise packets of digits.

The latest trend is small-print messages below headlines that let us know how long it’s going to take to move through an article: “This is a six minute read.”

We must know that up front.

WAR AND PEACE: This is a 137-hour read.

Notice that “read” is now a noun. You’re not readING. You’re ingesting and incorporating the noun.

Words and writing will soon be seen as raw material for neural loading. Again, the shipping business. “Mike, give us another 30 seconds. We’ll have the data distributed in your cerebral cortex. We’re making room in your circuits, which for some reason are overloaded this morning.”

That issue is called ATTENTION SPAN. Content providers in the workforce must cater to “timing-out” in recipients’ brains.

Editor to content provider: “Bill, your piece is a 12-minute read. That won’t fly. Cut it to 4. Our profiling surveys show 85% of customers encounter a strain after 5.2. And Bill, don’t submit any more RANTS. That 21-minute read you turned in last week is unacceptable.”

Once upon a time, “rant” meant an unhinged outpouring. Now it’s any piece delivered with, what should I call it, EMOTION. That’s verboten. You see, the TECHNICAL CLASS of humans is bred to abhor feeling. It disrupts their arrogant calm. It’s a distraction from CONTENT.

I’m working on a Cliff Notes version of the very article you’re reading. It’s cliff-er than Cliff. I’m shooting for a 1.3-minute read.

Because you’re a machine with very narrow parameters of need, right?

I have to warn you, though. If you’ve gotten this far in the article, you might be human and you might be suffering from Eyes on Page Disease. It’s a psychological hangover from a bygone era. To cure it, watch thousands and thousands of videos, until they repopulate your mind to an advanced degree.

And one day, you’ll never know what you’re missing.

At parties, you’ll jam your cell phone in friends’ faces and say, “YOU HAVE TO WATCH THIS. IT’S ONLY A MINUTE AND A HALF. IT’S INCREDIBLE.”


Exit From the Matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Interviewing the dead Albert Einstein about free will

by Jon Rappoport

June 22, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Note: I’m publishing this piece as an introduction to the scientific tyranny which has overtaken us: the premise that we are machines, and we can be decoded and transformed by genetics.

This is a lie on every possible level.

For many people, their first taste of this insanity is the COVID vaccine—a genetic treatment. However, that treatment comes out of the conviction that life is “mechanism.”

For 35 years, I’ve been waging war against this conviction. I continue to do so—not because I have some quirky mystical alternative, but because FREEDOM VERSUS THE MACHINE is the Big One, the big battlefield under the surface of our civilization.

I’m talking about today, tomorrow, the next hundred, the next five hundred years.

OK, here we go—a piece of fiction to make the truth known:


It was a strange journey into the astral realm to find Albert Einstein.

I slipped through gated communities heavily guarded by troops protecting dead Presidents. I skirted alleys where wannabe demons claiming they were Satan’s reps were selling potions made from powdered skulls of English kings. I ran through mannequin mansions where trainings for future shoppers were in progress. Apparently, some souls come to Earth to be born as aggressive entitled consumers. Who knew?

Finally, in a little valley, I spotted a cabin, and there on the porch, sitting in a rocker, smoking a pipe and reading The Bourne Ultimatum, was Dr. Einstein.

He was wearing an old sports jacket with leather patches on the elbows, jeans, and furry slippers.

I wanted to talk with the great man because I’d read a 1929 Saturday Evening Post interview with him. He’d said:

“I am a determinist. As such, I do not believe in free will…Practically, I am, nevertheless, compelled to act as if freedom of the will existed. If I wish to live in a civilized community, I must act as if man is a responsible being.”

Dr, Einstein went inside and brought out two bottles of cold beer and we began our conversation:

Q: Sir, would you say that the underlying nature of physical reality is atomic?

A: If you’re asking me whether atoms and smaller particles exist everywhere in the universe, then of course, yes.

Q: And are you satisfied that, wherever they are found, they are the same? They exhibit a uniformity?

A: Surely, yes.

Q: Regardless of location.

A: Correct.

Q: So, for example, if we consider the make-up of the brain, those atoms are no different in kind from atoms wherever in the universe they are found.

A: That’s true. The brain is composed entirely of these tiny particles. And the particles, everywhere in the universe, without exception, flow and interact and collide without any exertion of free will. It’s an unending stream of cause and effect.

Q: And when you think to yourself, “I’ll get breakfast now,” what is that?

A: The thought?

Q: Yes.

A: Ultimately, it is the outcome of particles in motion.

Q: You were compelled to have that thought.

A: As odd as that may seem, yes. Of course, we tell ourselves stories to present ourselves with a different version of reality, but those stories are social or cultural constructs.

Q: And those “stories” we tell ourselves—they aren’t freely chosen rationalizations, either. We have no choice about that.

A: Well, yes. That’s right.

Q: So there is nothing in the human brain that allows us the possibility of free will.

A: Nothing at all.

Q: And as we are sitting here right now, sir, looking at each other, sitting and talking, this whole conversation is spooling out in the way that it must. Every word. Neither you nor I is really choosing what we say.

A: I may not like it, but yes, it’s deterministic destiny. The particles flow.

Q: When you pause to consider a question I ask you…even that act of considering is mandated by the motion of atomic and sub-atomic particles. What appears to be you deciding how to give me an answer…that is a delusion.

A: The act of considering? Why, yes, that, too, would have to be determined. It’s not free. There really is no choice involved.

Q: And the outcome of this conversation, whatever points we may or may not agree upon, and the issues we may settle here, about this subject of free will versus determinism…they don’t matter at all, because, when you boil it down, the entire conversation was determined by our thoughts, which are nothing more than atomic and sub-atomic particles in motion—and that motion flows according to laws, none of which have anything to do with human choice.

A: The entire flow of reality, so to speak, proceeds according to determined sets of laws. Yes.

Q: And we are in that flow.

A: Most certainly we are.

Q: The earnestness with which we might try to settle this issue, our feelings, our thoughts, our striving—that is irrelevant. It’s window dressing. This conversation actually cannot go in different possible directions. It can only go in one direction.

A: That would ultimately have to be so.

Q: Now, are atoms and their components, and any other tiny particles in the universe…are any of them conscious?

A: Of course not. The particles themselves are not conscious.

Q: Some scientists speculate they are.

A: Some people speculate that the moon can be sliced and served on a plate with fruit.

Q: What do you think “conscious” means?

A: It means we participate in life. We take action. We converse. We gain knowledge.

Q: Any of the so-called faculties we possess—are they ultimately anything more than particles in motion?

A: Well, no, they aren’t. Because everything is particles in motion. What else could be happening in this universe? Nothing.

Q: All right. I’d like to consider the word “understanding.”

A: It’s a given. It’s real.

Q: How so?

A: The proof that it’s real, if you will, is that we are having this conversation. It makes sense to us.

Q: Yes, but how can there be understanding if everything is particles in motion? Do the particles possess understanding?

A: No they don’t.

Q: To change the focus just a bit, how can what you and I are saying have any meaning?

A: Words mean things.

Q: Again, I have to point out that, in a universe with no free will, we only have particles in motion. That’s all. That’s all we are. So where does “meaning” come from?

A: “We understand language” is a true proposition.

Q: You’re sure.

A: Of course.

Q: Then I suggest you’ve tangled yourself in a contradiction. In the universe you depict, there would be no room for understanding. Or meaning. There would be nowhere for it to come from. Unless particles understand. Do they?

A: No.

Q: Then where do “understanding” and “meaning” come from?

A: [Silence.]

Q: Furthermore, sir, if we accept your depiction of a universe of particles, then there is no basis for this conversation at all. We don’t understand each other. How could we?

A: But we do understand each other.

Q: And therefore, your philosophic materialism (no free will, only particles in motion) must have a flaw.

A: What flaw?

Q: Our existence contains more than particles in motion.

A: More? What would that be?

Q: Would you grant that whatever it is, it is non-material?

A: It would have to be, but…

Q: Then, driving further along this line, there is something non-material which is present, which allows us to understand each other, which allows us to comprehend meaning. We are conscious. Puppets are not conscious. As we sit here talking, I understand you. Do you understand me?

A: Of course.

Q: Then that understanding is coming from something other than particles in motion. Without this non-material quality, you and I would be gibbering in the dark.

A: You’re saying that, if all the particles in the universe, including those that make up the brain, possess no consciousness, no understanding, no comprehension of meaning, no freedom, then how can they give birth to understanding and freedom. There must be another factor, and it would have to be non-material.

Q: Yes. That’s what I’m saying. And I think you have to admit your view of determinism and particles in motion—that picture of the universe—leads to several absurdities.

A: Well…perhaps I’m forced to consider it. Otherwise, we can’t sit here and understand each other.

Q: You and I do understand each other.

A: I hadn’t thought it through this way before, but if there is nothing inherent in particles that gives rise to understanding and meaning, then everything is gibberish. Except it isn’t gibberish. Yes, I seem to see a contradiction. Interesting.

Q: And if these non-material factors—understanding and meaning—exist, then other non-material factors can exist.

A: For example, freedom. I suppose so.

Q: And the drive to eliminate freedom in the world…is more than just the attempt to substitute one automatic reflex for another.

A: That would be…yes, that would be so.

Q: Scientists would be absolutely furious about the idea that, despite all their maneuvering, the most essential aspects of human life are beyond the scope of what they, the scientists, are “in charge of.”

A: It would be a naked challenge to the power of science.

Einstein puffed on his pipe and looked out over the valley. He took a sip of his beer. After a minute, he said, “Let me see if I can summarize this, because it’s really rather startling. The universe is nothing but particles. All those particles follow laws of motion. They aren’t free. The brain is made up entirely of those same particles. Therefore, there is nothing in the brain that would give us freedom. These particles also don’t understand anything, they don’t make sense of anything, they don’t grasp the meaning of anything. Since the brain, again, is made up of those particles, it has no power to allow us to grasp meaning or understand anything. But we do understand. We do grasp meaning. Therefore, we are talking about qualities we possess which are not made out of energy. These qualities are entirely non-material.”

He nodded.

“In that case,” he said, “there is…oddly enough, a completely different sphere or territory. It’s non-material. Therefore, it can’t be measured. Therefore, it has no beginning or end. If it did, it would be a material continuum and we could measure it.”

He pointed to the valley.

“That has energy. But what does it give me? Does it allow me to be conscious? Does it allow me to be free, to understand meaning? No.”

Then he laughed. He looked at me.

“I’m dead,” he said, “aren’t I? I didn’t realize it until this very moment.”

I shook my head. “No. I would say you WERE dead until this moment.”

He grinned. “Yes!” he said. “That’s a good one. I WAS dead.”

He stood up.

“Enough of this beer,” he said. “I have some schnapps inside. Let me get it. Let’s drink the good stuff! After all, I’m apparently Forever. And so are you. And so are we all.”


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Zuckerberg, Roger Waters, and the case against FB

by Jon Rappoport

June 18, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

“How did this little prick, who started off going, ‘She’s pretty, we’ll give her a four out of five. She’s ugly, we’ll give her a one’… How the fuck did he get any power in anything?” (Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters, on Mark Zuckerberg)

On a spring afternoon, with birds chirping in the trees outside the secret/private Committee room, a little man, whose face was a rubber mask devoid of feeling, sat before a table of legislators—among them, a strange senator, John Doe, who did not belong to the Club. It fell to Doe to interrogate the rubber man, Mark Zuckerberg.

Mr. Z, you’re under oath, remember that. Do you recall a company called Accel Partners?

How did you find out about…yes, Senator, I recall Accel.

And its boss, Jim Breyer.

I’ve met Jim.

Well, it must have been quite a meeting, back in 2004, because he supplied you with a 13-million-dollar rocket, and Facebook was on its way.

Senator, I’d say that’s an exaggeration.

Then we come to a man named Gilman Louie. He joined the board of the National Venture Capital Association of America (NVCA). The chairman of NVCA? The man I just mentioned, Jim Breyer.

I don’t know Gilman Louie, Senator.

Gilman Louie happened to be the first CEO of the important CIA start-up, In-Q-Tel. In-Q-Tel was founded in 1999, with the express purpose of funding companies that could develop technology the CIA would use to “gather data.” That’s not the only connection between Jim Breyer and the CIA’s man, Gilman Louie. In 2004, Louie went to work for BBN Technologies, headed up by Breyer. Dr. Anita Jones also joined BBN at that time. Jones had worked for In-Q-Tel and was an adviser to DARPA, the Pentagon’s technology department that helped develop the Internet. DARPA, CIA, the Internet, gathering massive data for the CIA, Facebook. Are you seeing the connections, Mr. Zuckerberg?

I’m seeing nothing of the kind, Senator.

Right. You’re just an entrepreneur who is now devoting his life to charitable causes. Moving along, here’s a story about you. A sketch, if you will. From the time Mark Zuckerberg was a child and attended the summer camp for “exceptional children,” CTY (Center for Talented Youth), run by Johns Hopkins University, he, like other CTY students, Sergey Brin (co-founder of Google), Lady Gaga, and Andrew Yang have been easy to track. CTY and similar camps filter applications and pick the best and brightest for their accelerated learning programs. Spotting these children and tracking their progress in school and life would be a standard operation for agencies like the CIA. When Zuckerberg founded an interesting little social network at Harvard, and then sought to turn it into a business, the data-mining possibilities were obvious to CIA personnel. Through their cutouts, as described above, they stepped in and lent a helping hand. What do you think of that story, Mr. Z?

It’s outrageous, Senator. My whole goal in life is helping others.

I’m sure. And as a prime asset of the Deep State, with your ability to assemble trillions of data sets on FB users across the world, and with your ability to censor content unfavorable to your bosses, you’re adopting a very strange definition of “help.”

I believe in community standards, Senator. If that’s a crime, I’m guilty.

What community are you talking about, Mr. Z?

The human one—all of us.

I see. And you know humanity’s standards of conduct and speech. How? Is God talking to you?

It’s just common sense, Senator.

So common sense makes you use Facebook to keep true information about the torture of Julian Assange from the public?

All information has to be fact-checked.

And if I post a few words about the COVID vaccine that aren’t rainbows and flowers, you ban me.

We rely on the World Health Organization as the authority on such matters.

Why? Who appointed that organization the final arbiter?

Somebody has to be in charge.

Otherwise?

There is chaos.

Chaos, or difference of opinion? You want to choke off the difference. You want fascism.

Really, Senator? That’s where you’re going?

I know, Mark. You’re just a little boy who made it big. You don’t have an axe to grind. You have nothing to do with the CIA. You’re an American success story. Happy, happy.

Is that all? Because I have a busy schedule, and I’d like to get back to work serving the people.

How did you become what you are, Mark?

I’m harmless. Look at me, Senator. Do I look like a fire-breathing dragon? A giant trampling over populations?

You look like a boy who is wearing a rubber mask.

You see, Senator, I tapped into just one human impulse—the impulse to say I LIKE THIS, I DON’T LIKE THAT. That’s all. That’s all I did. I gave that a public face. The rest is history.

“Everyone on Facebook is famous for 15 minutes.”

No, Senator. Everyone has a chance to be famous forever on Facebook. It’s up to them to try to be liked in every way they can.

Unless they’re telling the truth about something important.

Then we ban them. Why? Because telling the truth bridges over into another kind of impulse that has nothing to do with Facebook.

That’s your story and you’re sticking to it?

I’m just a guy with an ordinary and banal company.

I plan on setting that myth on fire and burning it down.

What about all the people who love Facebook and can’t do without it?

You mean the people who say 2 plus 2 equals 4 is racist and should never be taught in schools?

They have a right to express their opinion.

But if they say Assange has been tortured for revealing the truth, you censor them.

That’s different.

Why is it different?

Because my fact-checkers and researchers say it is.

Mr. Zuckerberg, I’m holding in my hand a group of internal Facebook memos. They prove your company has been working in concert with the federal government to shape what the public can read and see about COVID-19. In other words, Facebook has been acting as an agent for the government. This takes you and your company out of the realm of private enterprise—into a whole new arena, where you can be brought into court on a charge of malicious lying during a national crisis. That’s a felony. At trial, expert witnesses can testify about the real facts of COVID versus the distorted picture you’ve presented, as a result of which picture many lives were lost. That’s a compounded felony.

How did you obtain those memos, Senator? You’ve broken the law! You’re guilty of government spying. The memos are property of Facebook. You stole them.

Mr. Zuckerberg, we can argue that charge in court. And during the protracted argument, the press will bring many facts to light. I welcome the challenge.

Are you speaking for the Department of Justice, Senator? Because I haven’t received any paperwork from them. No charges have been filed against me or my company.

In case you’ve forgotten, the United States is composed of 50 states. If the Justice Department is nothing more than a political ally of scum of the earth, there are at least 10 states whose Attorneys General will gladly press charges and drag you into court. There are elephants in your room, Mr. Zuckerberg, and people all over the world are going to see them.

Fine. My lawyers will talk to other lawyers.

There will be a lot more conversation than that. I guarantee it.

You really think you can bring Facebook down, Senator? It’s too late.

Is that what the CIA is telling you? I hate to break the news, but those people are trained to lie. That’s all they do. In other words, they’re like you. Let me tell you a secret, Mark. Manipulating people and their feelings has an ELASTICITY. And when it reaches its limit, it SNAPS. Speaking of which, after we adjourn this session, we’re going to move into a public hearing. Of course, the television networks will be covering it. I’m going to bring on a parade of Facebook employees who will testify about these memos in my hand, and about other confidential company practices. Then we’ll see what happens to that rubber mask you wear.

They told me there would be no public session…

Who told you? Your handlers? To them you’re just a pissant agent who’s been doing their bidding.

But I have enormous…

Wealth? You think they care about that? They’ll throw you to the wolves in a second, if things get too hot.

Impossible.

Run your own test, Mark. Allow every Facebook user in the world to state I LIKE ZUCKERBERG or I DON’T LIKE ZUCKERBERG. See what happens. Put your own ass on the firing line and check out the result.

I would never do that.

Why not?

Because I own the system that does that. I’m apart from the system.

You’re different.

Every person who owns or runs a system is separate from it.

I see. So in your case, people don’t have to LIKE you.

I guess that’s right.

They can play the like-don’t-like game with each other. You can play the whole game on all of them.

ON all of them?

You can manipulate them. It’s the way of the world. “There are the manipulated and the manipulators.” Right, Mark?

Pavlov proved that, didn’t he?

He was experimenting with drooling dogs and food.

EVERYTHING IS AN EXPERIMENT.

Where did you learn that, Mark?

I don’t remember.

Were you born thinking that thought?

Some people know it, others don’t.

You’re quite a piece of work.

What?

We’ll take a break and then go into public session. Thank you, Mark. Now I understand you and the way your gruesome mind works.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Can cars run on water?

by Jon Rappoport

March 12, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Lately, I’ve been writing about the technocrats’ plan to radically lower energy production and use, worldwide. [1]

This program, hidden behind all sorts of propaganda about energy-sharing, environmental justice, and climate change, is a method for visiting destruction on humanity.

Aside from oil, gas, coal, and nuclear, alternatives exist. The technocrats’ preference for solar and wind power—two methods that are presently incapable of replacing traditional energy sources—shouldn’t make people think those are the only options.

In my previous article, I described John F Kennedy’s vision for ocean-water turbines [2] [2a] [2b]—the huge Passamaquoddy Project—which he advanced and championed up to his death in 1963.

Here, I ask the question, can cars run on water?

I present answers from various sources.

Popular Mechanics (2008): “There is energy in water. Chemically, it’s locked up in the atomic bonds between the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. When the hydrogen and oxygen combine, whether it’s in a fuel cell, internal combustion engine running on hydrogen, or a jury-rigged pickup truck with an electrolysis cell in the bed, there’s energy left over in the form of heat or electrons. That’s converted to mechanical energy by the pistons and crankshaft or electrical motors to move the vehicle.”

“Problem: It takes exactly the same amount of energy to pry those hydrogen and oxygen atoms apart inside the electrolysis cell as you get back when they recombine inside the fuel cell. The laws of thermodynamics haven’t changed, in spite of any hype you read on some blog or news aggregator. Subtract the losses to heat in the engine and alternator and electrolysis cell, and you’re losing energy, not gaining it–period.”

From thoughtco.com (2019): “Can you make fuel from water that you can use in your car? Yes. Will the conversion increase your fuel efficiency and save you money? Maybe. If you know what you are doing, probably yes.”

MIT School of Engineering (2018): “A water molecule contains three atoms: an oxygen atom and two hydrogen atoms, which bond together like magnets. According to Wai Cheng, a professor of mechanical engineering and director of the Sloan Automotive Lab (where he does research on engine performance and emissions, combustion science, and energy conversion), breaking those bonds will always take more energy than you get back.”

“Let’s say you wanted to build this car. It would need equipment to split a water molecule apart and separate its oxygen and hydrogen. Then it would need to isolate each of them in separate tanks. Then you would need a combustion system that could mix and ignite them, or a fuel cell that could recombine them to make electricity. The released energy could then drive a piston or run a motor and move the car.”

“Here’s the problem, Cheng says: ‘A water molecule is very stable.’ The energy needed to separate the atoms is greater than what you get back — this process actually soaks up energy instead of giving it out.”

“Plus there’s a more volatile problem: hydrogen is dangerously flammable. Without the right safety measures, a fender-bender could turn into an explosion worthy of an Avengers movie.”

Gaia.com (2020): “[Stanley] Meyer’s invention promised a revolution in the automotive industry. It worked through an electric water fuel cell, which divided any kind of water — including salt water — into its fundamental elements of hydrogen and oxygen, by utilizing a process far simpler than the electrolysis method.”

“Despite skepticism about the legitimacy of a car that runs on water, Meyer was able to patent his invention under Section 101 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Index…”

“Meyer’s water-powered engine was the result of 20 years of research and dedication, and he claimed it was capable of converting tap water into enough hydrogen fuel to drive his car from one end of the country to the other. His invention was mind-boggling and promised a future of non-polluting vehicles that could be refueled with a garden hose.”

“On March 21, 1998, Meyer was having lunch at a Cracker Barrel with his brother and two potential Belgian investors. The four clinked their glasses to toast their commitment to uplifting the world, but after taking a sip of his cranberry juice, Meyer clutched his throat, sprang to his feet, and ran outside. Rushing after him, his brother Stephen found him down on his knees, vomiting violently. He quickly muttered his last words, ‘They poisoned me’.”

“Meyer’s death was investigated for three months, though it was eventually written on the coroner’s report that he died of a cerebral aneurysm.”

The Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch, July 8, 2007, “The car that ran on water,” [3] by Dean Narciso:

“After more than 20 years of research and tinkering, it was time to celebrate.”

“Stanley Allen Meyer, his brother and two Belgian investors raised glasses in the Grove City Cracker Barrel on March 20, 1998.”

“Meyer said his invention could do what physicists say is impossible — turn water into hydrogen fuel efficiently enough to drive his dune buggy cross-country on 20 gallons straight from the tap.”

“He took a sip of cranberry juice. Then he grabbed his neck, bolted out the door, dropped to his knees and vomited violently.”

“’I ran outside and asked him, ‘What’s wrong?’ his brother, Stephen Meyer, recalled. ‘He said, ‘They poisoned me.’ That was his dying declaration’.”

“Stanley Meyer’s bizarre death at age 57 ended work that, if proved valid, could have ended reliance on fossil fuels.”

“People who knew him say his work drew worldwide attention: mysterious visitors from overseas, government spying and lucrative buyout offers.”

“His death sparked a three-month investigation that consumed and fascinated Grove City police.”

“’Meyer’s death was laced with all sorts of stories of conspiracy, cloak-and-dagger stories,’ said Grove City Police Lt. Steve Robinette, lead detective on the case.”

“If Stephen Meyer was shocked at his twin brother’s collapse and death, he was equally amazed at the Belgians’ response the next day.”

“’I told them that Stan had died and they never said a word,’ he recalled, ‘absolutely nothing, no condolences, no questions’.”

“’I never, ever had a trust of those two men ever again’.”

“Today, Stanley Meyer is featured on numerous Internet sites. A significant portion of the 1995 documentary It Runs on Water, narrated by science-fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke and aired on the BBC, focuses on his ‘water fuel cell’ invention.” [4] [4a]

“James Robey wants a permanent place for Meyer in his Kentucky Water Fuel Museum.”

“’He was ignored, called a fraud and died without his small hometown even remembering him with so much as a plaque,’ Robey wrote in his self-published book Water Car.”

“Meyer had euphoric highs and humiliating defeats. He was kind and generous yet paranoid and suspicious. He would be hailed as a visionary and a genius. He also would be sued and declared a fraud.”

“The basis for Meyer’s research, electrolysis, is taught in middle-school science labs.”

“Electricity flows through water, cracking the molecules and filling test tubes with oxygen and hydrogen bubbles. A match is lighted. The volatile gases explode to prove that water has separated into its components.”

“Meyer said his invention did so using much less electricity than physicists say is possible. Videos show his contraptions turning water into a frothy mix within seconds.”

“’It takes so much energy to separate the H2 from the O,’ said Ohio State University professor emeritus Neville Reay, a physicist for more than 41 years. ‘That energy has pretty much not changed with time. It’s a fixed amount, and nothing changes that’.”

“Meyer’s work defies the Law of Conservation of Energy, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.”

“’Basically, it says you can’t get something for nothing,’ Reay said.”

“’He may have had a nice way to store the hydrogen and use it to make a very effective motor, but there is no way to do something fancy and separate hydrogen with less energy’.”

“…Nevertheless, Meyer attracted believers, investors and, eventually, legal trouble.”

“’I was a sucker for some of this stuff at the time,’ William E. Brooks said from his home in Anchorage, Alaska.”

“Brooks invested more than $300,000 in Meyer’s technology. He hoped to find applications for his aviation business.”

“Today, he and his wife, Lorraine, laugh about the ordeal, made easier because their money was returned in a 1994 settlement in Franklin County Common Pleas Court.”

“Two years later, a Fayette County judge found ‘gross and egregious fraud’ in Meyer’s contract negotiation with two businessmen. Their money was returned.”

“…Belief in Meyer continues today. So does suspicion about plots to silence him.”

“Stephen Meyer recalled a phone call to his brother’s home in the 1980s.”

“’He turned to me and said, ‘They just offered me $800 million. Should I take it?’”

“I said, ‘Hell yes. How much money do you want?’”

“’He got very quiet. When he got into that thinking process, I just let him alone,’ Stephen recalled.”

“Charlie Hughes, now 36, vividly recalls the strangers who visited his parents’ home in the late 1970s.” [Stanley Meyer was living in the Hughes house at the time.]

“He had been playing outside when the driveway suddenly filled with limousines. Men in turbans stepped out. In ‘stern, thick accents,’ they asked for Meyer. ‘I remember, because I was not allowed in my own house that day’.”

“They left briskly. Charlie was about to go inside when the driveway filled again, this time with military vehicles. ‘Army brass,’ he recalled.”

“At dinner that night, Meyer told them: ‘The Arabs wanted to offer me $250 million to stop today. You and this lovely family can live in peace and prosperity the rest of your days’.”

“The Army officials, meanwhile, had questioned Meyer about what the foreigners wanted, thinking that a deal might have been struck, Charlie recalled Meyer telling the family.”

“Meyer discusses the offers in the Clarke documentary.”

“’Many times over the last decade, I have been offered enormous amounts of money simply to sell out or sit on it … The Arabs have offered me a total of a billion dollars total pay simply to sit on it and do nothing with it’.”

“The Grove City police investigation of Meyer’s death included taped interviews of more than a dozen witnesses.”

“Absent, however, were audiotapes of the two Belgians, Phillippe Vandemoortele and Marc Vancraeyenest.”

“The men had agreed to purchase 56 acres along Seeds Road in Grove City. The city had approved a research campus there two months before Meyer’s death.”

“Lt. Steve Robinette said it’s possible the men’s interviews were not taped.”

“Calls and e-mails to Vandemoortele and Vancraeyenest for this story were not returned.”

“The Franklin County coroner ruled that Meyer, who had high blood pressure, died of a brain aneurysm. Absent any proof of foul play, the police went with the coroner’s report.”

“The only detectable drugs were the pain reliever lidocaine and phenytoin, which is used to treat seizures.”

“And what became of the dune buggy that captivated a community for at least a few years?”

“A longtime friend of Meyer’s, who doesn’t want to be named because he fears that people will bother him about the invention, led a reporter to the basement of a property south of Columbus recently.”

“’I really shouldn’t be showing you this,’ he said.”

“After passing through several darkened rooms scattered with computers and electrical equipment, he opened a door. In the far corner of a garage sat the buggy, its leather seats cracked, its engine partially covered with a cloth.”

“A decal on the bright red paint declares: ‘Jesus Christ is Lord’.”

“Then the man quickly led the way out. Lights went dark. Doors clicked shut.”

“In his front yard, he sat on a lawn chair and sipped fruit punch. He watched the cars and trucks drive by on the road, burning gasoline.”


SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/03/11/biden-naked-technocracy-the-great-land-theft/

[2] http://maineanencyclopedia.com/passamaquoddy-tidal-power-project/

[2a] http://www.dreamofpassamaquoddy.com/thestory.htm

[2b] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/passamaquoddy/

[3] https://www.dispatch.com/article/20070708/NEWS/307089878

[4] https://documentaryheaven.com/it-runs-on-water/

[4a] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t98UBY3GhhI


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

What the political “Left” is planning for the US and the world

by Jon Rappoport

October 6, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

When I say Left, I’m not only talking about Democrats, I’m talking about anyone who believes in bigger than big government.

Such people think, or pretend to think, they’ve just discovered…

There are many other people who need help and protection…

As if this is a new fact, a new occurrence in the history of the planet.

And because it is new, “we” must step up and provide that help, from the top down, no matter the cost, no matter how, no matter the sacrifice.

If a room can hold four people, it will now hold ten, even if there isn’t enough air for ten people. We will somehow invent air.

We will create a new money system, or go deeper into debt on the old one. We will make a state that already has $250 billion in unfunded liabilities into a state that is three trillion in the hole—because it doesn’t matter, because money is endless, because…

The help and protection these other people need…

Which may require 20 million human helpers…

When there are only four million human helpers…

Will somehow be accomplished…

Even if it can’t be…

And even if the attempt creates chaos for everyone.

With that delusional proposition in hand, an overall top-down PLAN will be devised to help and protect everyone all at once.

When some of the dust clears on this psychotic scheme, it’s apparent that…

The help and the protection for those who need it….

Was just an elite cover story to justify…

Increasing power at the top and…

Putting in place a plan to dominate and control the population.

And all the ensuing laws and regulations…

And propaganda and protests and riots in support of the plan…

Are coming from the top…

To make sure the plan is followed.

In the end, all the protection and help…

Really amount to ironclad control…

Of everyone.

This is the device of the USSR, China…

And the operation called COVID. AKA the fake pandemic.

And all the earnest and sincere and devoted people…

Who wanted to help…

Through the implementation of…

The top-down plan…

Formed by the bigger than big government…

Were duped and tricked and used.

They were the rubes and yokels and marks…

In the great con.

So when you hear that America or any nation…

Must have a national PLAN…

Under which everyone must wear a mask and keep their distance…

And submit to lockdowns whenever they are decreed…

From the top…

Know that you are looking at this con.

No matter how the con is explained or rationalized or justified…

No matter who is spouting the “rigorous science”…

Know you are looking at this con.

Remember that the war of centuries…

The war that was waged to obtain…

Individual freedom…

Was not fought and won so that…

A top-down force called government could step in and…

Destroy the natural fact…

Called freedom.

Know that any such top-down effort to destroy freedom…

Is the goal of the plan…

And the plan is a con.

A con is a con…

Is a con.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Gene drive technology: what species should we make extinct today?

Why are Bill Gates and the US military involved?

by Jon Rappoport

June 18, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

—Freedom includes the natural right to resist and reject any technology that endangers life.

A passionate and dedicated scientist says, “I have a plan. By manipulating genes, we can make invasive rodents extinct, on an island where humans are living.”

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

The overarching question is:

Does this mean genetic manipulation can make ANY species extinct?

Welcome to the world of gene drive technology.

Here is a passage from Gene Drive Files, a vital site with an enormous amount of referenced information on the subject:

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

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

So it appears the answer is yes. Gene drive technology could be deployed to wipe out troublesome plant-parasites, weeds, crops, animal pests, animals, and…humans. Mull that over with your morning coffee.

Several years ago, the UN was considering a recommendation to call a moratorium on the use of gene drives. Here is what the Gene Drive Files reports about that tussle and the appearance of Bill Gates on the scene:

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

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

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

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

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

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

People will argue the military involvement is “defensive” in nature. The Pentagon must know what our enemies are doing in their gene drive research labs, so we can hopefully combat those efforts.

As we’ve seen in the past, such claims about US military research on nuclear weapons and bio/chemical warfare were proven false. The “defensive” research included the push to develop offensive capability.

Knowing how military planner think (and not just in the US), I’m sure their researchers are trying to figure out how to use gene drives to eliminate “just a select part” of the human population. Meaning the enemy. Which leads to the next point:

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

For example, Nature Communications, May 31, 2017, “CRISPR/Cas9 targeting events cause complex deletions and insertions at 17 sites in the mouse genome.” Unintended genetic “deletions and insertions.”

And how about this study? It was published in Genome Biology on June 14, 2017, and is titled, “CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing induces exon skipping by alternative splicing or exon deletion.” An exon is “a segment of a DNA or RNA molecule containing information coding for a protein or peptide sequence.” So you can see that exon skipping or deletion is a very bad idea.

In other words, ANY gene editing done on ANY species opens the door wide to all sorts of errors and unforeseen consequences. Doomsday genetic warfare and mutually assured destruction are the far shore of insanity…but closer in, where the highly limited experiments are taking place, there is no safety zone, either. Insanity reigns there as well.

“I went to Monsanto, and I spent a lot of time with the scientists there, and I have revised my outlook, and I’m very excited about telling the world. When you’re in love, you want to tell the world.” (Bill Nye, the science guy)

“I know it’s a long shot and people would say it’s ‘too absurd’… but I’m doing this with hopes of making a Mickey Mouse some day.” (Arikuni Uchimura, quoted in “Japan bio-scientists produce ‘singing mouse'”, The Independent, 21 December 2010.)

“Genetic engineering is to traditional crossbreeding what the nuclear bomb was to the sword.” (Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of Center for Food Safety)


Exit From the Matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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