GOVERNMENT META-SPYING GAME

 

THE GOVERNMENT META-SPYING GAME

 

by Jon Rappoport

January 12, 2012

 

 

Reuters, the Atlantic Wire, and other outlets are running a story about the Dept. of Homeland Security monitoring websites and social networks.

 

A DHS document states this monitoring program is geared to keep the government tuned in to “situational awareness” and able to “establish a common operating picture.”

 

Which sounds like intentional gibberish. But these are technical terms. In its effort to track stories and traffic related to border security, terrorism, and bird flu (!), for example, DHS is trying to assess public perception of ongoing events.

 

With sites like Drudge, The NY Times, HuffPo at the top of the list, and FB, MySpace, and Twitter included, the government hopes to be able to estimate consensus reality, make no mistake about it.

 

What’s under the government’s magnifying glass here? Events? Not really. It’s the widespread PERCEPTION of events.

 

This is a form, if you will, of meta-spying.

 

DHS obviously has some kind of collating system and also algorithms to model the degree of consensus about a subject of interest.

 

What does the public think about border security at the moment?

 

What does the public think about bird flu right now?

 

I find this latter topic interesting, because for the past few months, I’ve had the sense the CDC might be getting ready to launch another phony epidemic—either a rerun of bird flu or a repeat of swine flu.

 

They were soundly defeated on the last swine flu go-around, largely because the internet (including this site) was alive with refutations of their nonsensical PR and invented case numbers.

 

In the wake of the defeat, they’ve been trying to figure out how to get another fake epidemic on the boards and make it seem much more real.

 

In order to do this, they need and want a system that can track and assess public opinion in tight increments of time, moving forward.

 

So here is the current game in a nutshell: there are events in the world (some of which are created or fabricated by governments); then there is the public perception of these events; then there is the government perceiving the public perception.

 

And now here I am perceiving the government.

 

It’s a perception-stack.

 

For instance, suppose next month the CDC gets up on its hind legs and announces there is an outbreak of a flu in, say, Arizona, and researchers have been dispatched to the area to carry out tests.

 

DHS would, day by day, or even hour by hour, monitor a huge amount of traffic and data on the Net, to gauge reaction, to gauge the level of belief, you might say.

 

Then the researchers announce it’s a mutated strain of bird flu, more dangerous than the last one. More monitoring of public reaction via the Net.

 

A rather high level of public disbelief? Carve out a new announcement. Try something a little more threatening, or bring in a politician who has a high level of credibility, and let him jump on the bandwagon. Then: how did that work out?

 

Getting the picture?

 

It’s the attempt to shape consensus reality through monitoring Net traffic and making adjustments.

 

With the enormous amount and speed of Facebook/Twitter data in the mix, DHS realizes they can keep updating consensus reality by the minute if they want to.

 

They can go a step further and set up FB/Twitter accounts and send out their own brands of data.

 

They can take this ball and run with it to the moon.

 

Of course, keep in mind that a significant slice of the US government has deceived ITSELF about the role Facebook/Twitter play in world events—like the fabled Arab Spring, which is really an op to put big chunks of the Middle East under Islamic control and jack up the price of oil and go green, “through necessity.”

 

Those marvelous intellectual students with iPhones sitting in cafes in Cairo running the revolution? I’ve got condos on Jupiter to sell you.

 

So you very well could get something like this—-

 

I just got a text message that Chris Columbus landed in India,” said Queen Isabella. “Wow. We need to jack up the PR about those Hindus and Nehru jackets and ornate jewelry and so on.”

 

Yes,” said her advisor. “And maybe we should have Chris disassemble a really big temple and bring it back here.”

 

Wait a minute,” said the grand vizier. “Didn’t we float that Facebook post about India? I just heard a rumor he landed on some island in the Atlantic.”

 

What!” said the queen. “What island?”

 

I don’t know. Some of our citizens are confused. They’re wearing feathers on their heads. And leather britches.”

 

They’ve gone crazy!”

 

Nothing new there.”

 

No. Nothing new.

 

So if I write BIRD FLU HOAX BIRD FLOW HOAX BIRD FLU HOAX BIRD FLU HOAX BIRD FLU HOAX, does that interest anyone at DHS?

 

Have fun, fellas. You’re going to screw this up beyond belief. I know you are. By the time you’re through, you’re going to believe God just landed on Saturn in a spaceship with his mom and dad and a crew of Mormon singers.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

SANTA’S SECRET

 

THE BEST THING ABOUT SANTA CLAUS

 

by Jon Rappoport

January 10, 2012

 

I didn’t do a Christmas post this year, so it’s really too late now, because everybody is glad the holiday is over. Too much dessert, weird presents, time to get back to work.

 

But what the hell. I like Santa Claus. Always have, always will. Mainly because, when you turn 10 or 11, you stop believing in him. This is a great thing. Think about it.

 

As a kid, you invest a tremendous amount of energy in the man, you wait for him to deliver the gifts, you love him…and then, one day, while you’re throwing snowballs at older kids, one of them comes up to you and says, “By the way, Santa isn’t real.”

 

And you get over it.

 

It’s a rite of passage.

 

Honey, our son just figured out Santa doesn’t exist. Talk to him.”

 

And say what? That we’ve been lying to him?”

 

But ultimately everybody’s cool. It was a good joke. A lovely joke. A nice thing.

 

And there were clues. Ten department stores, each with its own Santa. People shopping at Xmas. That’s a hard one to ignore, right? Why are they buying presents when Santa delivers them?

 

In December, every year, folks more or less all conspire to create Santa. Then they stop.

 

Religion should take a chapter out of that book.

 

Let’s do Krishna. This week is Oobladee Krishna. We’ll make up tunes and go on hayrides. Next week, how about Buddha? The fat man with the enigmatic smile. Then maybe The Holy Ghost. Organ music, guilt, fear. Always dug the scary stuff.

 

But no. Pick a religion and you’re stuck with it. Or you rebel.

 

Mom, I’m going to live in Oregon with the Church of the Cranberry Cult. I have to buy hip boots and a rake. You’ll probably never see me again.”

 

When I first heard about Buddha, I immediately thought of Santa. Both guys had girth. They obviously enjoyed a good meal. They weren’t trying to press their case too hard. It was a riff. You could pick it up and then lay it down. Nobody with a thumbscrew would knock on your door.

 

Not many people realize this, but Thomas Jefferson wanted each generation to write its own Constitution. Every 20 years or so, they’d sit down and dream up a new one. He was never trying to legislate a Forever.

 

You don’t like a Republic? Try your own monarchy. Or something no one’s ever heard of. The point is, you decide. Otherwise, you’ll freeze yourself in marble. Get it? One of the primary freedoms is inventing new government.”

 

That never panned out.

 

Do I have explain why? Didn’t think so.

 

When we talk about Santa at Christmas, we smile and laugh. We all know it’s a joke. We’re making him up. It doesn’t seem to be a problem. No one turns angry. It’s the one imaginary celebration, and it works.

 

This isn’t really happening…and yet it is.”

 

And underneath it all, that’s why we buy presents. Because we’re inventing the whole shooting match, and it feels good.

 

This is why I favor a state religion. If it’s the religion of Santa. The guy who doesn’t exist.

 

And so my friends, as I stand here in this church, talking to you about our fundamental holiday, I must remind you we’re all writing script. Never forget that. We’re cranking it out by the ton. And next week, we’ll stop. These are the two pillars. It’s on and then it’s off.”

 

Amen. Oobladee. Dancer, Prancer. E=mc2. Except on Thursdays.

 

Happy New Year.

 

Another nice artifact.

 

Speaking of which, the next Magic Theater workshop is scheduled for Mar. 3 and 4 here in San Diego. If you’re interested, email me. Judging by the last workshop, this one is going to be a beauty.

 

Once you unlock “the secret of Santa,”and now we’re talking about the whole history of art, because artists freed us to see imagination in its fullest aspect, the field is wide open. Why take religion literally? Why take it as final, any more than you would take one symphony as final background music for the universe? Why take the universe as final?

 

Even if you wanted to pinpoint an author of the book called This Universe, should you worship him/her/it any more than you would worship the author of Moby Dick?

 

The whole point of Hesse’s novel, Steppenwolf, from which comes the idea of the Magic Theater, is that the magician, Pablo, sees the universe as a joke, while the main character, Harry, can’t. He finds it so serious and oppressive that he walls himself off from other people.

 

Well, the universe, no matter how it presents itself, is nothing more than another Santa Claus.

 

And if we had any sense, we would institute holidays in which other universes are celebrated. If you think you can’t find any, walk into a museum.

 

As we see how central unlimited imagination is to the present and future, other people behind us are retrenching their own fundamentalist traditions, trying like crazy to reinvent the past. Their greatest fear is realizing that those traditions were imagined.

 

So what should we do? Argue over and over that the past, in some crucial way, is gone? Will that carry the day? No, we need to imagine and create and keep on doing it until it reaches flood proportions.

 

In doing so, appeals to authority won’t work, because there aren’t any. I don’t care where you want to locate them, how you want to dress them up, what wisdom you want to put in their mouths. Those authorities are, at best, characters in plays of invention. And guess who writes the plays.

 

When I was a kid, I found out we had a chimney that was blocked up with concrete. No one knew how it had happened. My father hired two guys to drop iron balls down it, and after several tries they gave up. That’s when I figured out Santa probably wasn’t real. The chimney was blocked! I mentioned this, and my parents looked at each other and shrugged. And that was that. Life moved on.

 

But I still dug the fat man in the red coat. He was magic, and magic never dies. Because we invent it. We find it. We’re a species of artists, whether we want to admit it or not.

 

In my role as prosecutor, I keep making that case, to squeeze out a confession. If you’ve been reading my pieces for any length of time, you know I’m pretty relentless.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

MY CONTRARY VIEW

 

MY CONTRARY VIEW

 

by Jon Rappoport

January 9, 2012

 

 

The great Buddha, who may or may not have existed, is supposed to have said, “As you think, so you are.” Actually, I prefer this: “As you think, so you create, unless you create first, in which case you can think anything you want to.”

 

But that’s not quite a slogan. It doesn’t have much appeal for the masses.

 

Let’s break it down.

 

How and what a person thinks becomes awfully, awfully important when that person isn’t creating. Because then, thinking is pretty much all he has going inside his mind. He chooses between thoughts like a cautious buyer with a tight wallet at a bazaar. You know, visit all the stalls, judiciously pick an item here, an item there.

 

And then, yes, the thoughts he highlights and turns into hardened ideas are going to affect his main actions and perceptions. QED.

 

But if he’s imagining and creating like mad, he can supersede this entire mechanism. He can decide what to create and then invent the thoughts that make it all work.

 

Of course, my position isn’t popular. It doesn’t ring bells from Nome to Tierra del Fuego.

 

People prefer the Buddhist formulation because it doesn’t require living a creative life. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that if you read through all the voluminous tracts and texts and commentaries of Buddhism, you’re going to find very little about imagination.

 

People with a modicum of intelligence are attracted to the Buddhist version of thought-affecting-Being, because they dimly apprehend that their own thoughts do seem to exert a powerful influence on them—and so they look for ways to replace one thought with another—as you’d try to replace an old car with a new one.

 

Or as you might try to replace one drop of water in the ocean with another drop. Good luck.

 

Buddha, if he existed, might have been a great guy. He might have been fun to talk to. Or not. But he didn’t seem to give much time to considering human creation along positive lines.

 

(Well, neither did any of the fabled prophets of the world’s premier religions.)

 

Too bad.

 

Since the great migration of Eastern spiritual thought to the West in the 1960s, I’ve been pondering, on and off, the reasons for this cut-rate sale. And I believe I’ve found a few good explanations—the most significant of which is people love having faith in ancient personages who knew everything worth knowing. What a concept. And add to that the idea of a lineage, a whole unbroken line of masters who have been transmitting wisdom and illumination of the highest possible order to regular folks for centuries, and you have a real winner.

 

It’s mysterious. It’s satisfying. It’s big. It’s hip. It’s reassuring. It’s metaphysics with a payoff. It’s goal-oriented without being crass.

 

And, for example, in the case of Buddha, a decent fellow who wasn’t claiming to be a god or a priest or a dictator, it’s a solution to suffering.

 

Wow. Escape suffering.

 

And there is a formula, the centerpiece of which is: desire produces pain; therefore, eliminate desire; attain wisdom.

 

In other words, if you’re suffering and you can’t get off that trolley no matter what you do, know that everyone else is on board, too. You have lots of company. It’s nothing personal. It’s just the structure of reality.

 

To ascend beyond reality, start by accepting that your desires cause the whole infernal game to play out, over and over. That’s all. So meditate in such a way that you quit desiring. And you’re out. You’re released from the struggle and the inevitable disappointment.

 

Voila.

 

Sound good?

 

(What about, as Henry Miller once wrote, the desire to eliminate desire?)

 

As all my readers know by now, I recommend a little thing called living through and by imagination. But if you’ve somehow managed to sit on and squelch all your desires, your interest in imagination is likely to hover around zero.

 

It’s a rarely considered fact that most, if not all, so-called major spiritual paths and religions downplay or ignore imagination. They prefer to imagine their own thin fairy tales and then impose them on their flocks. (I cover this point extensively in my book, now an e-book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies.)

 

Among those fairy tales are stories about “received wisdom.” You see, it comes to you from somewhere else. So you have to find a person or make a connection that can provide it to you. And of course, the “source” of the illumination is dressed up, mythologically speaking, to give it more juice and appeal. It wears robes, it flies, it speaks in stentorian tones, it is “all love,” it lives in a place called paradise, it hands down the highest possible information through intermediaries. It’s Important.

 

How do you compete with that? How can you yourself generate your own wisdom? You’re trapped in a web of your thoughts and desires. You must eliminate them, remove the filters, and then you’ll see. You’ll see and hear the call from the distant past. You’ll flourish as never before. Imagination? What’s that? What does that have to do with anything? How could it matter, when the masters are silent on the issue?

 

Spirituality, as it’s taught, is a fabulous con. A shell game. Eons old.

 

It’s one mildly interesting book in a library of 349623079654329086 volumes.

 

The whole notion of what spirituality IS has been hijacked. The caper was pulled off successfully because people are always ready to accept tales about “good things arriving” like presents under the tree at Xmas. If you start with that premise, you can sell all sorts of wild scenarios.

 

And the more complicated such scenarios are, the more they’ll appeal to the intellectual caste. Whereas, if you begin with the premise, YOU IMAGINE AND INVENT REALITY, you’re going to be marching uphill in a blizzard. How can you sell that, unless people really begin to follow the precept themselves? You can’t just sit there and say, “Hmm, very interesting. We each imagine and invent reality.” No, you have to do it.

 

But here’s the thing. If you DO do it, you’re off on the greatest adventure of your existence. And in the process, all the old fake spiritual dominoes fall, and what replaces them is a new spiritual view that transcends anything ever sold to the masses on planet Earth. A view that is uniquely your own.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

SLICE AND DICE

 

SLICE AND DICE

 

NOVEMBER 23, 2011. Start measuring body-mass index at age two. Test for cholesterol levels starting at 9. While you’re waiting in line at the DMV, have a free HIV test and receive a $5 voucher for food. And don’t forget to thaw your turkey completely before you put it in a fryer; otherwise it could explode.

 

The first two are recommendations of a pediatric medical panel. The third is a pilot program underway in Washington DC. The fourth is advice just doled out by your Department of Homeland Security, created to stop terrorist attacks.

 

People are so nice, aren’t they? They want to help you. How can you refuse? It would be unpatriotic and uncaring, and after all, we live in a share-and-care society. One for all and all for all.

 

I especially have a warm reaction to the DHS tip on frying turkeys, although I was hoping for a recipe or two. Can I baste mine with motor oil? I was planning to stuff it with old newspapers. Would that work? My dog is allergic to turkey. Any ideas on how to keep him away from the dinner table? The guy I bought the turkey from had it in the back of his pickup. The bird’s apparently filled with shotgun pellets. Are these dangerous to ingest?

 

I’ve heard at least one company that sells deep fryers is owned by Al- Qaeda. Can this be confirmed?

 

A couple of items that passed under the radar: in Germany, 1.8 million battery-operated devices for toilets have been sold. They’re attached to the toilets and bark out warnings if the seat is lifted. This encourages men to take a leak while sitting down. And a Swedish firm has designed a talking plate that criticizes an eater if the food is moving off the plate too quickly into the mouth. A British study is forming up to test whether the talking plate can curb obesity.

 

I’m designing a hand-held transmitter you can use while pretending to read labels on packages 20 feet away from a drug-store pharmacy counter. You press a button and the device loudly states, “Every year, in the US, 106,000 people die as a result of swallowing FDA-approved drugs.”

 

Hey, I’m sharing, too.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

UNDERGROUND HEALTH

 

UNDERGROUND HEALTH

 

NOVEMBER 22, 2011. A hundred years ago, a few intrepid souls initiated a revolution in health in America. They talked and wrote about nutrition, about fasting, about supplementation. They were the health nuts.

 

They had a very wide vision of the future. They realized their audience was small, but that didn’t matter. They pushed ahead.

 

Today, millions of Americans have caught on. The underground is quite visible. It isn’t an underground anymore.

 

The movement has gone mainstream because people have a choice. They can think for themselves. They can act on their thoughts. There is that freedom.

 

Of course, we have health dictators in government who know what they want. And choice isn’t it. They want you to bow down and grovel and obey. It’s that simple. They’re criminals.

 

The FDA, for example, is a criminal agency. It has institutionalized its crimes. Made those crimes part of government.

 

The FDA can look the other way while the medical system kills 225,000 people a year, 106,000 from the effects of approved and certified drugs. (Starfield, July 26, 2000, JAMA, “Is US health really the best in the world?”)

 

The FDA can also, at the same time, try to decimate the nutritional-supplement industry, whose products kill virtually no one every year.

 

And compliant and sold-out and intentionally stupid media can go along with this travesty.

 

We are reaching a new crossroads, where criminals collide with citizens who have free choice. If the FDA puts its new regulations (not laws) into effect in the next two months, every manufacturer of supplements will be forced to undergo a review of all its products, will have to justify the use of most ingredients as safe, before the criminal throne of the FDA.

 

This time-consuming and expensive process could bankrupt many companies, and depending on FDA judgments, could exclude many products from the marketplace.

 

The health revolution could be forced underground again.

 

Big government attracts big-time dictators and their small underling dictators. These people want power over you. They want to tell you what you can do and can’t do. It’s their life. They sell out to certain corporate interests, and they tell you what you can do.

 

But it’s your body.

 

If you let them tell you what you can put in it and what you can’t put in it, your body belongs to them. They own it.

 

They’ll assert that ownership to the degree they think they can get away with it.

 

How do you like that?

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

CREATE NEW REALITIES

 

CREATE NEW REALITIES

 

NOVEMBER 22, 2011. People want to enlist in new realities; they don’t want to create them.

 

They want products of imagination; they don’t want to deploy their own imaginations.

 

People want to enter greater consciousness; they don’t want to create it.

 

This is the major confusion and the major retreat.

 

And in retreat, people begin to doubt themselves. They find sensations and emotions within that send messages of unworthiness and despair. They believe these signals.

 

Because if they ignored them, what would they do? They would, they think, experience a vacuum.

 

If you were reading a newspaper and the headline exclaimed, “Weather reports cause stock market to drop 400 points,” would you believe it? Well, the signals a person in retreat receives are about as credible.

 

The struggle to create realities isn’t a picnic. It isn’t the easiest thing in the world. But when you meet the challenge, you change your outlook on your own existence.

 

Feelings and emotions and thoughts and sensations that claim a person is lacking in some significant and lasting way—these are of minor concern against what a person can create.

 

These sensations are simply distractions from the main event.

 

The main event isn’t approached by buying a ticket and taking a seat in the front row of your own chronic feelings. That’s the sideshow.

 

The main event is the new reality you are going to choose to create.

 

The real meaning of mind control is: the power you exert on yourself to keep yourself from the main event.

 

Strength, resolve, determination, will, effort, work, and desire are what you need to create a new and better reality. If you have those, you’ll find the capacity. You’ll find the talent.

 

If you then bring imagination into the foreground, you’ll make a future that has some measure of brilliance.

 

At times, the effect of life and of our “inner world” seem to be a boxing-in, a restriction. This is only because we listen to and believe those messages and stop there. Notice that no creative power is necessary to attain the boxed-in feeling.

 

From the perspective of creating, though, all that is nonsense.

 

Because the road of creating is always open.

 

Always.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

WHO THINKS FOR YOU?

 

WHO THINKS FOR YOU?

 

NOVEMBER 21, 2011. In the wake of the EU decision to ban claims that water can rehydrate the body—with criminal penalties for offenders—it’s appropriate to note that government bureaucrats must meddle. It’s in their job description.

 

They have to invent problems and then solve them.

 

When bureaucratic agencies submit their budgets for the upcoming year, what happens if they say, “It’s been pretty quiet these past twelve months. People seem to be figuring out things for themselves. No disasters to report.”

 

Professional suicide.

 

The CDC, for example, needs epidemics, even if they’re not real. Ditto for the World Health Organization. And if the FDA led their report on nutritional supplements by admitting another year had passed without any deaths, they would have no reason to cook up new regulations punishing the industry.

 

Bureaucrats must meddle.

 

And this doesn’t even begin to explore selective meddling and the protection of favored sectors of the economy.

 

On the other hand, if you reduce the size and reach of government entities, actual problems must be solved.

 

Imagine a town that’s in charge of its own schools. All two of them. And student performance is horrible. Kids can’t read, they certainly can’t write, and their math skills are barely visible to the naked eye. But the town council and the mayor can’t say, “Well, this is part of a larger national problem.”

 

No, the town has to fix the problem. Somebody has to go into those two schools and find out what’s really going on, at ground level. Not a task force, not a committee that takes two years to come up with a report.

 

We have 19 teachers who are incompetent, and we have 37 kids who are significantly disrupting classrooms. The math textbooks are treating long division as if it’s metaphysics. The principal of one of the schools is whining and making excuses. He says every child needs an iPad.”

 

Those are all fixable problems. Fire the incompetent teachers and the principal. Find used math textbooks that make sense and get rid of the nonsensical books. Bring in the 37 sets of parents of the disruptive students and tell them that if they can’t get their kids to fly right immediately, the kids will be expelled, and if they then come on to school property, they’ll be arrested and charged.

 

That’s at least a decent start.

 

What I’m describing here is terrifying to bureaucrats. It threatens their very existence.

 

We here in East Southwest Derbyshire, population four thousand, notice that our citizens drink a great deal of bottled water, and our overall health is quite good. So whether or not water can actually rehydrate the body—it seems obvious to us, but we don’t care. It’s irrelevant. We don’t care what the bottling companies claim. We don’t need the EU. Thanks anyway.”

 

Thirty-three or 45 vaccines for young children? In our town of North River, population two thousand, the kids are very healthy, and only four percent are vaccinated at all. We suspect our good health stems from from the fact that we eat fresh food and drink raw milk. But we don’t need a study group to analyze the situation. No thanks. Butt out.”

 

Big bureaucrats serve a fictional entity called “everybody.” The bureaucrats can adjust this fiction in any direction they want to.

 

What would happen if they suddenly found themselves on a deserted island, with immediate needs, and nobody to boss around? That’s an episode of Lost I’d like to see.

 

Let’s appoint a committee to decide how to build a fire. Before the sun sets.”

 

Of course, you notice this kind of behavior in corporations, too. How many layers of middle managers do you need to bring a product to market? But there is a difference. Presumably, in a company, if you fail to sell a new product and your bottom line takes a strong hit, some people are going to get fired or demoted. Maybe the whole company goes down (unless you’re General Motors). But in big government, you can use taxpayer money to pay for one worthless program after another, and no one feels a thing. You just appoint a study group to figure out what went wrong. And you lose their report.

 

The EU is a giant bureaucracy on top of already-too-large European governments. So it stands to reason the EU would be fabricating problems that are more bizarre than usual, like the ban on health claims for water. The people of Europe can undoubtedly look forward to edicts detailing allowable standards for toilet paper, shower heads, coffee cups, and nail clippers.

 

Let me indulge in a little science-fiction speculation. Suppose the technology existed to read your thoughts. I’m not talking about making broad classifications. Rather, specific content. Well, since thought does, sometimes, lead to action, what are the chances that a big bureaucracy like the EU would eventually move to banning certain thoughts? And since that would be impossible to implement, they would proceed to technologies for thought control.

 

For bureaucrats, opportunities are gold. The ability is there; they would use it. Or try to.

 

And to them, it would look very logical. Simple. “If we control thinking, we can avert crimes.”

 

One thing I’ve learned over the years. Many researchers whose area is the brain believe, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is absolutely nothing wrong with replacing one set of brain responses with another set. Because for them, that’s all there is. It’s the basis of their work. Words like mind, spirit, soul, psyche, creativity have no real meaning in their eyes. Everything is conditioned response.

 

And if bureaucrats, working with these researchers, can think for you, they would try. They would do it.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

LET THEM DRINK CAKE

 

LET THEM DRINK CAKE

 

NOVEMBER 19, 2011. The European Union has just declared it is illegal to claim that drinking water can prevent dehydration.

 

Any seller of bottled water who does claim it can face a two-year jail sentence.

 

It appears that dehydration is now considered a clinical condition, which means that doctors and drug companies will take over the right to “treat it.”

 

These Brussels bureaucrats, who took it upon themselves to declare the allowable degree-of-bend for bananas and cucumbers sold in Europe (true)—before they were laughed out of court—should face the same ridicule now about water.

 

Better yet, people should start saying Brussels sprouts and chocolate are poisons no human should ingest, for fear of keeling over and dying.

 

The EU has been progressively tightening the noose when it comes to non-medical health claims for products. This, of course, is to protect drug companies against competition.

 

As I’ve written before, the basic question here is freedom. I frankly don’t care what health claims are made for any product under the sun. There are already laws on the books that allow prosecution of people who sell physically harmful substances—like Vioxx, for example, or any other kind of snake oil, natural or synthetic. Those laws are sufficient. As for judging the efficacy of a drug or herb, I’ll take responsibility for that. And so should everyone else.

 

If I think drinking water helps hydrate the body, I’ll continue to think that, no matter what any government body says.

 

To put it politely, fuck the EU.

 

Perhaps a pilot study is in order. Take 50 of these assholes and divide them up into two groups. Put both groups in a chamber that registers humidity of zero for six days, without liquids of any kind, and then, after letting them out, give half of them H2O and the other half hard stale cake. See which group fares better. When the obvious results come in, decide why water made a positive difference.

 

Well, you see, it wasn’t hydration. It was waterization, which is distinctly different.”

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YORE GOVERNMENT AT WURK

 

YORE GOVERNMENT AT WURK

 

NOVEMBER 2, 2011. Breaking…New federal regs make it mandatory for religious broadcasters to put captions for the deaf under their TV church extravaganzas—unless they can demonstrate paying for running text would bring them economic hardship.

 

This is very good. I think all those Sunday TV preachers need captions, because their messages are vital to the nation.

 

But what about the blind? I believe they should be supplied with handheld devices that display messages in Braille: “Preacher is sweating profusely.” “Preacher touched woman, she fell over backwards and her bald head immediately sprouted new hair.” “Preacher leered at good-looking blond in first row.”

 

As far as I know, current federal law mandates that all video made for TV must display captions for the deaf. What about pay-TV porn in hotel rooms? Borderline. An interesting court case.

 

Well, Your Honor, as you can plainly see, when the protagonist and the heroine are on the bed in the motel room, their exclamations (“Oh baby, oh baby, oh baby!”) are NOT showing up as captions on the screen. Clearly, this is case of discrimination against the hearing-impaired. If you and I can, uh, pleasure ourselves while we’re watching The Knight and the Maiden, deaf hotel patrons should be able to enjoy the same fundamental right.”

 

Appeals right up to the US Supreme Court.

 

Then we have this. Why should deaf people be barred from working as late-shift security guards in corporate buildings? You know, the people sitting at the front desk who watch video screens covering offices, staircases, elevators? Yes, they can see a thief walking down a hallway on the 12th floor, but they can’t hear what he’s saying to his partner. Therefore, we must have captions on all those screens, too. (“Hey, man, I told you this was wrong fucking floor!”)

 

And if that’s the case, then, by extension, some blogger who puts up a You Tube video of a woman urging her cat to eat a plastic fish should immortalize her words with captions.

 

And if you’re standing in your back yard at your kid’s birthday party, and you’re doing running commentary on all the little darlings careening down the slide into the pool, you need a stenographer sitting nearby typing in text. You never know who’s going to watch that video some day.

 

I just thought of another thing. In supermarkets, you’ll sometimes hear, over the speakers, announcements about specials. Well, where are the big screens that display captions? I think we have a suit here. Any attorneys out there ready to take those bastards to court?

 

Now, this next one is a bit tricky. There are people, who for whatever reasons, have lost their sense of taste. Taste is a sense like sight or hearing. Are we going to favor the deaf and the blind over those who can’t differentiate between a potato and a leek? I say all food markets must include, on shelves, descriptions of how the products taste. I realize this won’t be easy. So we need to bring in poets, people who are used to inventing metaphors. We have to try.

 

And what about old hippies who did too much high-dose acid and have “crossover senses?” They hear sunsets and see music. What are we going to do for them? The FCC should get cracking on this.

 

I know you’ve been waiting to point out the central flaw in my essay, so I’ll beat you to it. Yes, I’m WRITING this piece, and I fully realize that, in doing so, I’m immediately setting up an arbitrary preference for readers. Not only am I discriminating against the blind, I’m bypassing all those millions who are illiterate.

 

Therefore, I’m fully prepared to offer audio of every article I produce. Furthermore, I’ll hire assistants who explain, in far simpler terms, what I’m writing and posting every day, for the illiterates.

 

It’s a start. It shows good faith.

 

I like to stay out in front of these trends.

 

Pioneering the new frontiers of equality can be a hassle, but isn’t that what we’re here for? Hassle?

 

As I go to press, I’ve discovered several staggering facts. There are 6800 languages in the world. No one knows how many are written. But let’s say half. 3400. Now—why in this multicultural society of ours should we practice gross discrimination with our captions? We need captions in ALL languages ALL the time. Can you begin to see where I’m going with this? Let me add something else here that should make it clearer. In many sub-sets of communities across our great land, we’re seeing the development of a disorder called CAS. Caption Addiction Syndrome. That’s right! For example, Korean women who work in nail parlors are watching TV with the sound off, and they’re reading captions all day long. And they’re getting hooked! When they talk to friends after work, they EXPECT TO SEE CAPTIONS FLOATING IN MID-AIR!

 

So…treatment centers! You bet! Thousands of them, to treat and cure this affliction.

 

And together with the need for captions in 3400 languages to accompany each and every video made for TV (and eventually online), we have the beginning of a real…JOBS PROGRAM for America.

 

Finally.

 

Send this piece to the White House, because Obama’s polling numbers are in the eighth circle of Hell right now, and they’re trending lower. He needs some good news. I’m more than happy to help, and I’m sure all those altruistic celebs who want to pay more taxes would like to see bangs for their bucks, in terms of employment figures.

 

The Grand Coulee Dam? The Tennessee Valley Authority? Yes, they produced jobs for Americans during the Great Depression. But they were conceived in an era when industrial might was our only option. Now, in the Information Age, we have data—and data need explanatory data to reach greater numbers of people. Hence: CAPTION ACTION. An unlikely messiah, but we take our manna where we find it.

 

CAPTION: IN THIS ARTICLE, RAPPOPORT STATES WE NEED CAPTIONS EVERYWHERE…AND THIS WILL CREATE MORE WORK AND END THE RECESSION.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

WINDOW ABOVE THE BRAIN

 

WINDOW ABOVE THE BRAIN

 

AND THE MAGIC THEATER

 

–for Tim Leary, after reading his autobiography, Flashbacks–

 

OCTOBER 31, 2011. I have written essays that make it clear the brain can’t be the seat of thought if you want to retain the concept of free will. It’s a rather easy argument.

 

The activity of the brain is electrical and chemical and biological. Messages flow. Patterns are established. The brain does what it does. Claiming it entirely rules the choices and decisions we make and the ideas we entertain, we’re left with no “we” at all. No “I” at all. Just enslaved process.

 

I fully understand how hard it is for people to swallow this analysis. They want to stop with the brain. They want to say the brain must be the beginning of our existence, the fountainhead.

 

But I’m not here to argue, this time. I assume and know the mind is not the brain. I assume and know there is an “I” independent from the brain.

 

Agree, disagree, it doesn’t matter.

 

What goes on in the mind is a strategic operation based on a cultural fixation. That fixation prefers one point of view over many points of view—as if having one point of view—strong, stable, unwavering—is far better, in all respects, than having many.

 

Well, the dichotomy is false to begin with.

 

This is what the Magic Theater is all about.

 

Improvised dialogues between two people who play many roles and switch roles opens up landscapes which would otherwise remain closed. (See my blog archive at www.nomorefakenews.com for many articles about the Magic Theater.)

 

In fact, one effect of these dialogues is the strengthening and widening of the one point of view with which you handle reality on a daily basis.

 

Many authors, including Jung, Hesse, JL Moreno, Perls, Leary, to mention a few modern explorers, have indicated or implied that human beings can expand their perception by, to put it blandly, adjusting their line of sight to include more perspectives.

 

The Magic Theater achieves this in a remarkable way.

 

The brain does not have perspective. It runs. It can switch tracks, it can emphasize certain pathways, it can de-certify routes, but it can’t create points of view or roles. You do that.

 

History points out that wherever civilization and freedom experienced upward swings, there was theater. In ancient Greece, in Rome, in the emergence of a European society liberated from the hold of the Church, theater flourished.

 

The kernel of theater is the idea of proliferating roles. In dialogue.

 

This is a brilliant process that transcends stifling routine and repetition locked into “the one and only role.”

 

In order for the mind to play out one and only one role, it has to erect walls and ceilings and floors—it has to confine interior space. It has to ignore many suggestive messages. It has to pretend imagination is an unwelcome guest. It has to reject an inherent sense of theatricality. To achieve these objectives, it has to interpret symbols in the narrowest possible way.

 

It has to export thoughts to the brain, in hopes that the working of that organ will collaborate to produce an artifact of extremely limited power and range.

 

And this, of course, is where the problem arises.

 

A human being has glimpses of his own power—but when his one and only point of view, the one that seems to guarantee his best chance of survival and success, is operating to dampen power, the potential of life is squashed at the starting gate.

 

When I say power, I mean creative action, invention, improvisation, spontaneity, paranormal capacities, magic.

 

Huddled in the bunker of the one and only point of view, the role that excludes all other roles, the human being is caught in his own net. And the neural net of the brain does, in fact, cooperate. So the psychic component marries the biological and the chemical, and then the chance of escape seems to hover around zero.

 

Fortunately, this is an illusion. Despite its convincing qualities, the illusion can be overturned rather quickly.

 

In the Magic Theater, as I’ve written before, the range and nature of roles is unlimited. And utilizing JL Moreno’s brilliant practice of switching roles in dialogue, the effect of this kind of improvised theater is titanic.

 

Obstructive emotions which seemed to be permanent and “of the eternal human condition” are transformed into pure and available energy.

 

The action of living itself comes to resemble, more and more, theater. Wide open theater.

 

And the brain cooperates with THIS. Just as it cooperated with the tied and bound dictatorship of the one central and exclusive and inhibiting point of view.

 

For those who want this expressed as physical metaphor—all the feedback loops are changed. Whereas A led to B and B to C, now Z enters the stream, along with X and Q, and so A can lead to C. Or A can stand on its own. B can find partnership with L. This is not a sketch of chaos. On the contrary, the new pathways are far easier and smoother than the old ones.

 

Using other language, metaphysics, ontology, epistemology are revolutionized. The Magic Theater isn’t a mere shuffling and reorganization of ideas. Every frozen “ultimate” is dissolved. The seeker who is reaching for the final ground or heaven of consciousness discovers that his quest, which was being carried out along a line of sight produced by his central point of view (role), now takes on a wholly new character.

 

Instead of advancing, as it were, through caves of a journey mapped out by sages, he is inventing futures. And this invention multiplies new consciousness, which turns out not to have been the substance of a great container, but rather the intimate, non-material, experiential effluent derived directly from creative action, which is to say, Art.

 

Instead of viewing The Search as the effort to compile and discover what was already there, hidden from sight, the seeker (who is now creating) is making something new, and then something more new. This is what “the expansion of consciousness” means.

 

For all its value, the one and only point of view (role) is a prison cell. It proves to be that as time goes by, as a life is lived. The essential flexibility and joy of a point of view is lost.

 

One could read the entire history of Western philosophy as an attempt to posit a final landscape of reality, formulated to escape from the one and only role while continuing to occupy that very role. A series of messages smuggled out of a prison, in hopes that somewhere, someone will understand the dilemma and solve it.

 

But the answer was there all along. It was the hardened role that was the problem.

 

The actor is cast in a play. Long rehearsals ensue. On opening night, the reviews are positive. So the play continues its run. Through thick and thin, good times and bad, the play survives. Old audiences forget it, but new audiences arrive and fill the seats. The actor has his role, his character. He performs. He maintains. He no longer has to devote an iota of thought or practice to the part. It is in his bones. It is assisted by his brain. He shows up on stage every night and earns his paycheck. Year after year.

 

Is it better than working for a living? It IS working for a LIVING.

 

It does feed back to the actor a bit of magic. He decides this is enough, because what else is there?

 

There are universes without end. But he will have to make them.

 

And making them is a direct consequence of engaging in a far different kind of theater.

 

The other day, I put it to a friend this way: think of a role that’s impossible. Think of a role that is so absurd, no one can play it. Think of one that makes you fall off the chair and laugh because it is ridiculous and impossible and because no one in the history of the universe has ever played it. And I’ll think of one, too. And then, for a half-hour, we’ll play those roles, with each other. We’ll speak from them. We’ll have a conversation. And then we’ll switch and talk for another half-hour. I guarantee you the world will never be quite the same again.

 

If that doesn’t make sense to you, then you need a little Magic Theater in your blood.

 

I see the upcoming first workshop of the Magic Theater as an historic occasion, a launch of something entirely new. For the past 50 years, we’ve been teetering on the edge of realizing that civilizations, as we turn them out in the factories of our minds, are deficient at the core. Yes, they provoke and embody advancing technologies that benefit us. But what is that technology for? Is it only to provide more comfort and ease? Is that the very best we can do?

 

Or are we in the process of fulfilling what Bucky Fuller anticipated? A created platform from which we can embark on new levels of exploration. The economic and political systems we’ve invented seem to legislate confusion and stagnation, in the long run. Whether the systems are to blame or whether we should point fingers at our leaders—I’ve covered that territory in many different ways. I don’t need to revisit it here.

 

In any case, we have made fortresses of our existences. We’ve put up the walls. We’ve settled on a middle space of individual survival. We’ve done this for so long we’re sure it is the right path, the only path. But we know something is wrong.

 

In these civilizations, what we really want is the fluidity of theater and the adventure it promises. We want open possibilities. And this comes down to character, to the character each one of us will play—and the dissatisfaction, not with the content of that character so much as with having to choose only One.

 

That’s what we’ve come to see. And so we look for ways out. We look for answers.

 

In ancient Athens, local residents were recruited to play the roles written by the great tragedians. So a man could come home from a performance one night, to his wife, and she could ask him how it went, and he could say, “Well, I murdered my father and slept with my mother,” and they could laugh at the well-worn joke, go to bed, and make a child.

 

And today, we can improvise hundreds and thousands of roles with each other, in this thing I call the Magic Theater. And then life will open its doors (which were never really closed) and we can look at the multi-dimensional future, and instead of merely thinking about extraordinary possibility, we can invent it and live it.

 

The brain will comply. And the mind will blow new energy at its own coagulated wish-machine that has spun out the first moves of new characters and new stages, only to suspend its activity because of an apprehension about what the culture can absorb.

 

But we are the culture. Each one of us is a culture in the process of infinite invention.

 

Every student of philosophy has studied the story of the cave told by Plato. In it, humans sit in the dark and look at shadows cast on the walls, taking them to be reality. But then they walk outside, finally, and see the true objects whose shadows they had accepted as ultimates. I would change that story. The shadows in the cave are characters, roles, parts, points of view, half-imagined. And when, at last, these roles are acted and dialogues are engaged, the walls dissolve and space opens up, limitless, and the trudging journey along a narrow path of life is gone.

 

Jon Rappoport

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Contact me to inquire about the December 10-11 Magic Theater workshop in San Diego.