A deeper understanding of technocracy

by Jon Rappoport

December 26, 2016

Technocracy is the basic agenda and plan for ruling global society from above, so we need to understand it from several angles.

Consider a group of enthusiastic forward-looking engineers in the early 20th century. They work for a company that has a contract to manufacture a locomotive.

This is a highly complex piece of equipment.

On one level, workers are required to make the components to spec. Then they must put them all together. These tasks are formidable.

On another level, various departments of the company must coordinate their efforts. This is also viewed as a technological job. Organizing is considered a technology.

When the locomotive is finished and delivered, and when it runs on its tracks and pulls a train, a great and inspiring victory is won.

And then…the engineers begin to think about the implications. Suppose the locomotive was society itself? Suppose society was the finished product? Couldn’t society be put together in a coordinated fashion? And couldn’t the “technology of organizing things” be utilized for the job?

Why bother with endlessly arguing and lying politicians? Why should they be in charge? Isn’t that an obvious losing proposition? Of course it is.

But engineers could lay out and build a future society that would benefit all people. Hunger, disease, and poverty could be wiped out. Eliminating them would be part of the uncompromising blueprint.

This “insight” hit engineers and technicians like a ton of bricks. Of course! All societies had been failures for the same reason: the wrong people were in charge.

Armed with this new understanding, engineers of every stripe began to see what was needed. A revolution in thinking about societal organization. Science was the new king. And science would rule.

Of course, for an engineered world to work, certain decisions would have to be made about the role of the individual. Every individual. You couldn’t have an air-tight plan if every human were free to pursue his own objectives. Too many variables. Too much confusion. Too much conflict. Well, that problem could be solved. The individual’s actions would be tailored to fit the coordinated operations of the planned society.

The individual would be inserted into a pre-ordained slot. He would be “one of the components of the locomotive.” His life would be connected to other lives to produce an exemplary shape.

Yes, this could imply a few problems, but those problems could be worked out. They would have to be worked out, because the overriding goal was the forming of a world organization. What would you do if one bolt (an individual human) in one wheel of a locomotive was the wrong size? You would go back and correct the error. You would re-make the bolt.

Among sincere technocrats, the overall vision superseded the glaring problems.

But…other people entered the game. High-echelon Globalists saw technocracy as a system they could use to control the population. Control was their goal. Period. What happened to the individual in the process was of no concern to them. The individual had freedom or he didn’t have freedom, and the Globalists overtly intended to wipe out that freedom.

Erasing hunger, poverty, illness? Nonsense. For the Globalists, those realities would be exacerbated. Sick, weak, and debilitated people were easier to rule and control and manage.

Essentially, a vastly misguided vision of a future technocratic utopia was hijacked. Something bad was made much worse.

In a nutshell, this is the history of technocracy.

A locomotive is a society? No. That was the first fatally flawed idea. Everything that followed was increasingly psychotic.

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

Unfortunately, many people in our world believe in Globalism, if you could call a partial vague view a legitimate belief. They dreamily float on all the propaganda cover stories—greatest good for the greatest number of people; no more poverty; equality of sharing; reducing the carbon footprint; a green economy; “sustainable development”; international cooperation; engineering production and consumption of goods and services for the betterment of everyone; and all of this delivered from a central platform of altruistic guides.

If you track down the specifics that sit under these pronouncements, you discover you discover a warped system of planning that delivers misery and de facto slavery to the global population.

The collective utopia turns out to be a sham.

Waking up is hard to do? Breaking up is hard to do? They must be done.

A workable technological fix is a very nice achievement when the project is a machine. But transferring that glow of victory to the whole of society is an illusion. Anything that calls itself education would tackle the illusion as the first order of business.

Jon Rappoport

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

Technocracy: evolution told as a fairy tale

Dec25

by Jon Rappoport

December 25, 2016

(To join our email list, click here.)

“Technocratic human beings are spiritually dead. They are capable of anything, no matter how heinous, because they do not reflect upon or question the ultimate goal.” —Chris Hedges

“River and ocean turbines for electricity; hydrogen power; urban farms; massive water desalination—these are just a few of the means for making an abundant non-technocratic future. By any rational standard, technocratic idiocy is already obsolete.” —The Underground, Jon Rappoport

—Again, thanks to Patrick Wood and his book, Technocracy Rising, for expanding my insight into these areas.

Consider the term “scientific humanism.” The Oxford Dictionary offers this definition: “A form of humanist theory and practice that is based on the principles and methods of science; specifically the doctrine that human beings should employ scientific methods in studying human life and behaviour, in order to direct the welfare and future of mankind in a rational and beneficial manner…Origin mid-19th century.”

That definition gives you a good general meaning for “technocracy.”

Understanding the mindset of technocrats is necessary; they believe that since they can plan the shape of society, they should plan the shape of society.

Politicians are outmoded along this new evolutionary path. They will fade into extinction. Instead, engineers will take their place.

Human beings (all eight billion) will be accounted for. They will receive energy quotas. Because a master map exists for the amount of global energy available at any moment, every human will be permitted to consume just so much energy during a defined time period.

This is the technocratic “big picture.”

Wherever you see the Surveillance State, you see technocracy. The claim that surveillance is being utilized to prevent terror attacks is a cover story. In fact, there can be no all-embracing technocracy without real-time tracking of every citizen’s energy consumption.

But technocracy goes much farther than this. Humans are viewed as mis-programmed biological machines in need of basic corrections. Their tendency to engage in conflict needs to be curbed. Whatever they do, say, or think that runs counter to the tight organizing of “peaceful and harmonious” society from above is, a priori, irrational and must be eradicated at the level of Mind.

The necessary reprogramming would be achieved through genetic, electronic, and chemical means. Though never admitting it publicly, dyed in the wool technocrats see no reason to maintain the human population at its current level. Elimination of large numbers of “biological machines” would make their job easier.

Heraldic fairy tales about “transhuman” transformation are used to put a wondrous face on technocracy. For example, we’re told that soon it will be possible to connect a human brain with a super-computer and download “spiritual wisdom, knowledge, and talents” directly to the human.

Technocratic premise: society itself is a game board, and someone has to be in charge; who better than engineers with an overall plan?

So-called “advances” in human life will begin by stating the basic “rights” people are entitled to. For example, “an optimum state of social existence.” What this really means is “pegs in holes.” People will be fitted into slots that yield up the “largest amount of possible collective happiness.”

It’s all about The Plan.

Freedom? Freedom to choose? Never heard of it.

Instead, what the individual is given from above is satisfactory to him because the individual has been engineered to believe it is.

Smart-grid, sustainable development, green economy, land use, community planning, climate change, education in values, and other campaigns are signals and steps toward the far shore of technocracy. They all point to putting “pegs in holes.” They all ultimately involve quotas for energy consumption.

They all involve the assumption that, since there is only so much to go around, a higher authority must decide who gets what. Food, water, shelter, jobs, luxuries, energy…

Clue: scientists and engineers can arbitrarily say what science is, and therefore they can say The Plan is “scientific.”

If you say, “Well, look, there are genuine ways to vastly increase the amount of available water and energy and clean food,” you would be running against the technocratic blueprint. Opting for abundance is not welcomed. Abundance cuts the chords of The Plan. Scarcity must rule and it must be promoted. The lack of all essentials must be cited as the reason for imposing technocratic answers. There is no way around it.

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

The irony is, when you talk to really hard-core environmentalists about the means for achieving abundance through alternative technologies, they balk and grow angry. They don’t want technological solutions—and yet, the powers behind them, where the big money is, are, in fact, all about technology—technology of a certain kind, which is based on planning out a society in which permanent and growing scarcity is MAINTAINED AND PROMOTED as the immutable reality.

It’s quite mad, quite insane. But when has that ever stopped the men who are quite sure they should sit on thrones?

Vast abundance is more than a vision. It is a reachable possibility. The history of actual science and technology confirms that both essential materials and available human innovation were always downplayed as shortages—until some individual came along and demonstrated that a new way of doing things would break through the shortage.

Corporations, governments, think-thanks, and universities try to limit, curb, and bury inventions that open up the future to abundance. Technocrats are in a race to “plan society” before those inventions leak out into the public and make them, the technocrats, obsolete.

But they are obsolete. They just haven’t figured it out yet.

But we can figure it out.

Jon Rappoport

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

Why don’t media now claim Hillary’s ill-health was fake news?

Dec24

Why don’t media now claim Hillary’s ill-health was fake news?

by Jon Rappoport

December 24, 2016

Why aren’t major media now highlighting Hillary’s ill-health as a “vicious fake news item” that was spread around by many sites, including the loathsome and ever-popular Drudge, during the presidential campaign?

Surely, it had to be one of the most damaging claims that helped defeat her. Who wants a president in the White House who can’t walk upright, who falls down, who needs to be helped up stairs, who has to take time off to rest, who has a physically impaired brain, whose judgment is suspect, whose very life is teetering on the edge.

Those charges were super-viral messages that traveled around the world on the Web thousands of times, replete with photos.

Fence-sitting voters, faced with one piece after another about Hillary’s failing health, could easily have opted for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson, or stayed home on Election Day. Some of them could even have cast a vote for Trump.

Read the current mainstream stories about “fake news” torpedoing Hillary’s bid for the presidency, and try to find one that highlights, front and center, the accusation of ill health as a horrific piece of gossip that truly sank her boat.

***You mean to tell me not one reporter now remembers how important that charge was at the time? All these sharp journalists have selective amnesia on the very same subject?

How convenient.

Or…Hillary’s health issue is being purposely exiled from permitted talking points now.

In the echo chamber of bouncing stories that makes up the fake consensus generated by big media, that item is verboten.

Russia did it? Putin cost Hillary the election? James Comey cost her the election? Julian Assange cost her the election? Fake news in general did her in? Fine. No problem. Those items are on the list of talking points.

But ill health? Front and center? No. That’s out of bounds.

Why?

Because bringing it up now would re-open the door to all sorts of persuasive medical opinion and other assessments from some quite smart people. And that opinion would be: yes, she is in ill-health. And on those grounds alone, it’s a lucky thing she didn’t win the election.

The fake story about the Russia-hack keeps on moving these days, despite a lack of evidence; it’s a dead man walking. There is nothing to keep it alive, except the media’s determination to push it like manure over a vast field.

But the story that has evidence to back it up, the most corrosive story about Hillary—her health—is missing in action. How interesting.

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

Here is a conversation between a reporter and his editor that would never take place, because both people understand the rules of the game and need no prompting:

Reporter: Boss, I’ve got a great idea. Let’s add to the list of fake-news charges against Hillary that she was in ill-health. I mean, that was a big one. Remember how she seemed to collapse after the 9/11 Memorial, and they had to pour her into the van like a bag of protoplasm?

Editor: No. That’s not on our list of talking points.

Reporter: Talking points? I didn’t see them.

Editor: Doesn’t matter. I saw them. Hillary’s health is off-limits.

Reporter: Why? Because she’s really sick?

Editor: There is no “really”. There is only what we say there is. If we bring up the health thing now, it’ll come back to life and everybody and his brother will weigh in on it. It’s counter-productive.

Reporter: Counter-productive to what?

Editor: To two things. The first one I won’t mention because who knows who’s listening? The second one is: counter-productive to you and I picking up our paychecks every week. Got it?

Reporter: Got it. Enough said. I’ll do another piece on Putin and his Russian hackers.

Editor: And make it a good one. The Putin story is so damn thin people are laughing at us already.

Bottom line: the actual fake news is coming right out of the major media, and is limited to their shared and agreed-upon talking points.

To boil it down further: “We will say THIS but we won’t say THAT.”

Jon Rappoport

My work: the individual returns to his creative fire

Dec23

by Jon Rappoport

December 23, 2016

Through my articles, my Matrix collections, and my personal consulting services, I have one goal: bringing individuals back to their very capable minds, back to their own formidable power, their own imagination, their own creative force, their own deep desires and purposes.

When I began NoMoreFakeNews.com 15 years ago, I wasn’t sure how many people could handle this message. But I decided to find out. I’ve been pleasantly surprised, to say the very least.

If there is a tradition I have been adding to, all these years, it is early Tibet—before the priest class moved in and took over. The magicians and their students were engaged in an enterprise of extraordinary dimensions.

My research revealed that this tradition was initiated, some 1400 years ago, by teachers from India, who came to Tibet after being expelled from universities for their radical views.

These teachers rejected the content and cosmology of all spiritual systems.

They essentially stated that such metaphysical “pictures” of existence were creative inventions—

And that the true subject for study, contemplation, enlightenment, and, above all, exercise was the individual creative impulse itself—

Creative power, imagination, and invention, at the level of the individual.

The Tibetan exercises were fashioned to expand individual creative power without limit.

In that tradition, and for these modern times, I developed hundreds of imagination/creative techniques. More than 50 of these are offered and explained in my collection, Exit From the Matrix.

Here are the contents of Exit From The Matrix:

First, my audio presentations:

* INTRODUCTION: HOW TO USE THE MATERIALS IN EXIT FROM THE MATRIX

* EXIT FROM THE MATRIX

* 50 IMAGINATION EXERCISES

* FURTHER IMAGINATION EXERCISES

* ANESTHESIA, BOREDOM, EXCITEMENT, ECSTASY

* ANCIENT TIBET AND THE UNIVERSE AS A PRODUCT OF MIND

* YOU THE INVENTOR, MINDSET, AND FREEDOM FROM “THE EXISTENCE PROGRAM”

* PARANORMAL EXPERIMENTS AND EXERCISES

* CHILDREN AND IMAGINATION

* THE CREATIVE LIFE AND THE MATRIX/IMAGINATION

* PICTURES OF REALITY AND ESCAPE VELOCITY FROM THE MATRIX

* THIS WOULD BE A VERY DIFFERENT FUTURE

* MODERN ZEN

* THE GREAT PASSIONS AND THE GREAT ANDROIDS

Then you will receive the following audio seminars I have previously done:

* Mind Control, Mind Freedom

* The Transformations

* Desire, Manifestation and Fulfillment

* Altered States, Consciousness, and Magic

* Beyond Structures

* The Mystery and Magic of Dialogue

* The Voyage of Merlin

* Modern Alchemy and Imagination

* Imagination and Spiritual Enlightenment

* Dissolving Stress

* The Paranormal Project

* Zen Painting for Everyone Now

* Past Lives, Archetypes, and Hidden Sources of Human Energy

* Expression of Self

* Imagination Exercises for a Lifetime

* Old Planet, New Planet, New Mind

* The Era of Magic Returns

* Your Power Revealed

* Universes Without End

* Relationships

* Building a Business for Success

I have included an additional bonus section:

* My book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies (pdf document)

* My book, The Ownership of All Life (pdf document)

* A long excerpt from my briefly published book, Full Power (pdf document)

* My 24 articles in the series, “Coaching the Coaches” (pdf document)

And these audio seminars:

* The Role of Medical Drugs in Human Illness

* Longevity One: The Mind-Body Connection

* Longevity Two: The Nutritional Factors

(All the audio presentations are mp3 files and the documents and books are pdf files. You download the files upon purchase. There is no physical ship.)

What has been called The Matrix is a series of layers. These layers compose what we call Reality. Reality is not merely the consensus people accept in their daily lives. It is also a personal and individual conception of limits. It is a perception that these limits are somehow built into existence. But this is not true.

What I’ve done here is remove the lid on those perceived limits. This isn’t an intellectual undertaking. It’s a way to open up space and step on to a new road, with new power.

Jon Rappoport

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

Another Open Letter to Home Schoolers

Dec22

Another Open Letter to Home Schoolers

Logic & Analysis

by Jon Rappoport

December 22, 2016

Home-schooling parents do what they do for different reasons. For some, the main thrust is getting their kids out of public schools. Others want to give their children specific religious education. In some cases, what actually happens in the home-school classroom is secondary.

I’m interested in the fact that home-schooling parents can give their kids a far better education on their own. It’s possible. It’s happening all over the world every day. The standards of some home schools are extraordinary. In those cases, the parents have a passion about knowledge and achievement, and the children do, too.

If you are one of those parents, for whom what happens in your classroom is of paramount importance, I’m talking to you. I’m also talking to parents who want to strive to make their classrooms reach new levels of accomplishment.

I wish to point out that the subject and discipline called logic is a foundation stone of a superior education. It can’t be ignored.

Unfortunately, it has been ignored. Why? Because logic as a distinct pursuit has become invisible in almost every culture. It has been forgotten to the point where most people don’t even know it exists. So how could they remedy the problem?

Most children who learn something about logic find it peripherally through other subjects, like mathematics and chemistry. They sense its presence lurking in the background.

However, a true and specific study of logic is much more powerful than what can be surmised through related subjects.

Logic is its own territory with its own knowledge. That became true for the first time in history, 2400 years ago, in ancient Greece, when Aristotle wrote about it.

In those sections of his massive work where Aristotle took up logic, he wasn’t writing about science or mathematics or history or literature. He was carving out a singular path.

There was a more recent time, a hundred years ago, when logic still had some life left in it, in public schools. Young students were taught the so-called logical fallacies. These fallacies were errors that could occur in any presentation on any subject, in any debate or argument.

The understanding of logical fallacies was a durable tool one could use for his whole life.

It still is.

However, to make the tool work, we need to present young students with realistic passages of text, the sort of material they encounter in real life, not just in some abstract little fantasy world.

Students need to chew on these passages and learn how to find the logical fallacies contained in them. This is called work. It isn’t meant to be a walk in the park. This isn’t about winning gold stars for “being you.” It isn’t about pouring endless “positive messages” into children’s heads with the hope that you can force them to have “self-esteem.”

When kids learn logic and learn how to use it well against real articles and press releases and political-speak and subtle sales pitches, they gain a tremendous confidence that is a true version of self-esteem. They become strong and very, very smart.

When I designed my course, after 25 years of experience as a journalist, I wrote passages that resemble very closely what you read in newspapers, magazines, books, and on the Net. I embedded logical fallacies in these pieces, so students could root them out and examine them and realize what was going on.

We live in an age of propaganda. Smearing one’s opponent, using innuendo, making statements solely calculated to bring out emotional responses in the audience, building vague circumstantial arguments, repeating the same half-truths over and over, distorting history—these tactics are just the beginning of what often passes for truth in our time.

Students (and adults) need to be able to see through such nonsense, and they need to have the ability to take it apart piece by piece, like a clock that runs on the wrong time.

Students need to have the power to see what basic principles a person is arguing from—to see through the obscuring haze of emotional appeal to the heart of the matter.

Students need to be able to differentiate between good evidence and flimsy evidence, when they are considering an argument that is trying to win their support.

These are not small matters.

For example, many years ago, I interviewed a rather popular politician in depth. I asked him a number of questions, aimed at trying to find out what his basic principles of government consisted of. It was like pulling teeth, but I finally got through the operation and discovered…nothing. He was a rank opportunist, and the slogans he floated were no more than attempts to maintain support from his constituents, so he could stay in office.

When I pointed this out to him, he smiled. He said, in an unguarded moment, “What do you think politics is about?”

This was early in my career as a reporter, and I thought to myself, “I’m on the right track.”

I had spent several years, as a student, studying logic, and without it, I never would have been able to dissect this hoaxster and penetrate his defenses.

Somewhere along the line, we need to make a stand. We need to deal with information and people, when it’s important, by using real logic in real situations. There is a great deal at stake.

Young people can learn logic with tremendous enthusiasm. They can discover an essential tool for approaching information in all forms.

A home school with logic as part of its curriculum can become a powerhouse.

Logic is a great adventure. A person can embark on the adventure at any time, by deciding to.

Here is the syllabus of my Logic and Analysis course.

* The course is taught in 18 class sessions.

* The first two sessions are filled with short examples of logical fallacies.

* The third and fourth sessions examine slightly longer passages of text that contain multiple logical errors.

* Sessions five through 16 take up, in great depth, long passages that read like newspaper articles, political statements, PR, and internet journalism. Students learn how to identify and explain, in specific terms, the logical flaws these passages contain.

* Sessions 17 and 18 are the final exam and the teacher’s dissection of the exam.

* The teacher’s manual and an accompanying audios lay out each session’s lesson plan. The lesson plans include my explanations of the passages and the errors they illustrate.

The sessions do not challenge faith or personal conviction. They are designed to enable a bright student to take apart a written text, an argument, a visual presentation — and discover whether it is valid, whether it truly makes sense, whether it has holes in it.

The sessions teach the traditional logical fallacies, offer many sample passages and exercises, quizzes, tests, and simple teacher’s manuals and daily lesson plans.

The Logic and Analysis course is included in my Matrix Revealed collection (complete details below). I have seen other people offering school courses that are amazingly expensive.

I undercut those levels by a wide margin.

Let’s face it. We are living in a world where the notion of individual freedom and power are under attack. Sustaining that freedom involves knowing how to deal with propaganda designed to make us into confused collectivists. When young people possess the know-how and the confidence to see through these shams, they are equipped to succeed.

Here are the contents of The Matrix Revealed:

* 250 megabytes of information.

* Over 1100 pages of text.

* Ten and a half hours of audio.

The 2 bonuses alone are rather extraordinary:

* My complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and audio to guide you. I was previously selling the course for $375. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

* The complete text (331 pages) of AIDS INC., the book that exposed a conspiracy of scientific fraud deep within the medical research establishment. The book has become a sought-after item, since its publication in 1988. It contains material about viruses, medical testing, and the invention of disease that is, now and in the future, vital to our understanding of phony epidemics arising in our midst. I assure you, the revelations in the book will surprise you; they cut much deeper and are more subtle than “virus made in a lab” scenarios.

The heart and soul of this product are the text interviews I conducted with Matrix-insiders, who have first-hand knowledge of how the major illusions of our world are put together:

* ELLIS MEDAVOY, master of PR, propaganda, and deception, who worked for key controllers in the medical and political arenas. 28 interviews, 290 pages.

* JACK TRUE, the most creative hypnotherapist on the face of the planet. Jack’s anti-Matrix understanding of the mind and how to liberate it is unparalleled. His insights are unique, staggering. 43 interviews, 320 pages.

* RICHARD BELL, financial analyst and trader, whose profound grasp of market manipulation and economic-rigging is formidable, to say the least. 16 interviews, 132 pages.

Also included:

* Several more interviews with brilliant analysts of the Matrix. 53 pages.

* The ten and a half hours of mp3 audio are my solo presentation, based on these interviews and my own research. Title: The Multi-Dimensional Planetary Chessboard—The Matrix vs. the Un-Conditioning of the Individual.

(All the material is digital. Upon ordering it, you’ll receive an email with a link to it.)

Understanding Matrix is also understanding your capacity and power, and that is the way to approach this subject. Because liberation is the goal. And liberation has no limit.

I invite you to a new exploration and a great adventure.

Jon Rappoport

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

The greatness of your freedom

Dec22

The greatness of your freedom

by Jon Rappoport

December 22, 2016

These are notes I made prior to putting together my second collection, Exit From The Matrix, which contains a large series of exercises designed to increase creative power:

“You need to start from the recognition of your freedom. That’s the open door. Everything flows from there. If you believe you aren’t free, or can’t be, then things shut down. Then you’re working on a grossly limited scale.”

“Freedom is something you perceive, something you take, something you assume. It’s Possibility here and there and everywhere. Societies and civilizations aren’t built, beyond a certain point, to encourage possibility. They’re built to be systems.”

“What is freedom for? Colleges, if they were so inclined (and they aren’t), could build four-year curricula around that single question. Freedom is certainly a quality that pertains to the individual. You. Freedom implies invention, imagination. It’s the field in which imagination operates. It’s the field all sorts of people, for various reasons, want to shut down. Those people are misaligned, mistaken, and misguided. They propose ideas that are immediately limiting. The trick is to contemplate ideas that aren’t limiting at all.”

“Freedom is a greatness. It isn’t small. It isn’t a grant given out by an authority. If a person sees the greatness of freedom, he can then imagine a future that is also great. Expansive. Multiplying.”

“People bump up against great and open ideas in their minds on a regular basis. They can choose to stop and consider those ideas and appreciate them and utilize them, or they can move along to much smaller and narrower ideas and take hold of them and build their lives around them.”

“For many people freedom has the whiff of danger. That’s an illusion. The real danger is abandoning freedom and leaving it on the side of the road.”

“If the future closes up and what’s left over is mundane and unexciting, imagination takes a holiday. It leaves a note on the kitchen table that says, ‘I’m leaving town. Let me know when you’re ready to launch the adventure of your life. Then I’ll be back in a flash.”

“You could say that freedom is a state of mind. But it isn’t a naturally occurring state of mind. You can’t depend on it showing up. You need to assume it, like the premise of an argument. Except you aren’t arguing. You’re launching.”

“It doesn’t matter how the fact of your freedom affects anyone else. In the long run, you’re leaving a trace of what you have with others. They can react against it or for it in their own minds, but they’ll remember it. They’ll know, at some level, that they can assume freedom for themselves.”

“Freedom and imagination are brothers. One brother strengthens the other. Inspires the other. This is a magnificent thing. This climbs mountains to the highest peaks. This transforms existence.”

“Together, freedom and imagination are more real than reality. They make new reality. They provoke, on a physical level, the cells of the body to energize and percolate with the fervent desire to participate in a grand future…”

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

Jon Rappoport

My position on Donald Trump

Dec22

by Jon Rappoport

December 22, 2016

(To join our email list, click here.)

I’ve written many words about the man and what he’s been doing. To repeat a few of them, his two most important achievements are: he’s contributing, in a major way, to the ongoing destruction of the credibility of big media; and he kept Hillary Clinton out of the White House.

Concerning the media— I am tremendously enthusiastic about what Trump has done. I pop champagne corks on that one. He’s provided a public service for the ages. We would be light years beyond where we are now, if the world of conventional journalism hadn’t sold its soul, its morality, its intelligence, and its hunger for getting to the bottom of things so long ago. In his own improvisations and riffs, Trump has turned the media stars on their heads looking out of their asses. He has been merciless. He has worked acrobatic tricks worthy of a Salvador Dali. When they thought he was here, he was there. When they thought they had him pinned against the wall, he vanished and there was no wall. When they thought he was done, he was starting. When they assumed they were occupying a higher position, he was poking them in the solar plexus of their pretensions and exposing them as rank amateurs. They go sober-serious, he laughs. They deride and mock him, he reminds them they’re supposed to be professional. They scream and go ballistic, he walks away. He’s supposed to be in Washington, he’s in New York. He’s supposed to lay out his schedule for them, he vanishes. He shouldn’t talk to a foreign leader, he talks to a foreign leader. The Washington Post reports the Russians hacked the election, he says the CIA is making it up.

Make no mistake about it, Globalists of every stripe and disguise infect Washington like the plague. Their goals, reputations, connections, and paychecks are on the line. They want to neutralize Trump by any means possible. He has hammered the TPP, and said he’ll cancel it (Chuck Schumer has already said it’s dead). He is raising the banner of nationalism, not Globalism, and he promises to bring back jobs to America…everything he promises in this regard is running counter to the Rockefeller agenda of destruction.

Will he change the pernicious culture, which is devolving to the point where “free-everything” for nothing is considered the most illuminated version of political philosophy? He will try, but indirectly, by opening up new levels of employment.

Will he continue to slam major media control of the information flow? Yes. In that regard, he has already done more than any president in modern history.

And if language is important (and it is), his communication with the American people, in its direct colloquial style, is a distinct departure from the polished, empty, grotesque media/politician mechanical mind-numbing bullshit that has all but taken over the landscape.

Will he try to curtail the divide-and-conquer “race-war” mentality that has been heavily promoted over the last eight years? Again, his basic strategy is: give people jobs. Renew the economy. Float all boats.

Will Trump curtail open borders and reduce the reality of terrorists and criminals entering the US? Will he knock aside the unproven claims of global warmists and erase the absurd and dangerous carbon-tax plan? Will he rebuild the fading infrastructure of this country? Will he put Common Core out of its misery? I believe he will make progress in all these areas. How much progress? Impossible to predict.

Will he refuse to launch wars and covert ops of Empire? Will he bring massive numbers of US troops stationed abroad back home, kick the neocons out on their asses, and scale back the enormous influence of the military-industrial complex, which, after JFK, encircled America with its dream of a forever World Empire? This would be one of the most important actions he could launch as president. And the effort is like trying to turn an oil tanker around in a small space. To the degree he rebuilds the military, he’ll keep pouring $$ into the maw of the military-industrial machine. I think it’s possible that he and his advisors see, from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, that American Empire has reached an end-point. It is a failure. It can’t go further. The blowback on America has outflanked its lists of Empire-conquests. However, until Trump shows he’s really going to try to cancel the neocon American Empire, and means it, I’m not making any assumptions whatsoever.

Is Donald Trump more than a puppet in the hands of Globalists? I believe he is more than that.

Is he a mere tool who was handed the election by Globalists who realized Hillary Clinton was too sick and deranged to stay the course in the White House? I believe he is not a mere tool in their hands, even if they ended up supporting him.

Does he want the job of president ONLY for the purpose of feathering his personal nest and stroking his own ego? I don’t think that’s the case now, if it ever was.

***However, unraveling his myriad business interests is necessary, in order to discover whether his decisions as president add to his wealth. Handing over those businesses to his family isn’t a barrier against self-aggrandizing policies. Trump is, after all, a real estate hustler from way back.

One question in this regard: Trump appears ready to give US corporations a tax holiday, so they can bring back huge amounts of money they’ve stashed overseas, for the express purpose of buying shares of their own companies. This practice has been a way CEOs can make their operations look good (share prices go up) while actually producing nothing new. As a reader of mine suggested (and I ask), will this Trump policy of share-buying do nothing to rejuvenate those businesses, thus creating no new jobs? And will this policy enable Trump’s family to buy shares in whatever piece of the Trump empire is publicly traded, pushing up its stock price? This needs serious attention.

Will Trump roll back the many local incarnations of the UN’s criminal Agenda 21 blueprint for closely monitored, extensively planned technocratic towns and cities? I’m not sure he’s even aware of this massive incursion on life in America—aside from sanctuary cities fronted by virtue-signaling liberal snowflakes and paid operatives. He will take steps to reduce those bastions of hope and change.

Is it possible that, when all is said and done, Trump’s most important action will have been his merciless attack on major media—and by extension, their Globalist handlers? Yes. And by my measure, he would then have achieved a step toward freeing information and truth from its century-long prison of mind control. The consequences of such a liberation could be titanic. In the long run, Trump is far less important than the millions of people who could wake up from their deep slumber.

I believe Trump’s plan to bring employment back to America will involve a kind of FDR/New Deal program of trillion-dollar government contracts to rebuild the infrastructure. This is by no means free-market America. If his plan gets through the Congress, many new jobs will be created, yes. On the other hand, the $$ power of the federal government will increase. It’s never a great idea to give the feds more control as the number-one employer in the nation.

I think Trump favors jobs, all jobs, and will go to extremes to create them. This includes giving the green light to tech giants to keep carrying out contracts to expand the Surveillance State. He’ll find ways to allow the FDA to license new drugs more quickly, thus maiming and killing more Americans. He’ll cast a blind eye toward big corporate toxic GMOs/pesticides. He’ll overlook and ignore major areas of agricultural and industrial pollution, and permit them to expand.

Will Trump curtail the disturbing trend of militarizing local police forces across America? Doubtful.

Will he root out and eliminate the power of vicious gangs in inner cities—gangs who are holding residents hostage in their own communities? I believe he’ll make at least a minimum effort. Even if a president is motivated, that’s a very tall order.

I assume that as a businessman he has committed criminal acts of one kind or another. Do they rank as high as the pay-for-play Clinton Foundation and the mass obliteration of Libya, two of Hillary Clinton’s favorite operations? No. Not even close.

Will Trump favor big-corporate cronies with the gift of government contracts? I would think so.

Will he make deals and side-deals, some of which go beyond the literal bounds of law, to advance his presidential agenda? I would certainly think so. What president hasn’t?

Could everything I’m mentioning in this article go by the boards, because Trump’s enemies create sudden disasters for him to manage—disasters which dwarf all other issues and programs? Absolutely.

Could Trump himself make a fatal error that brings his house down? For example, could his advisors convince him to make a wide-ranging deal with Russia that includes the extradition of Edward Snowden to stand trial in America? Maybe.

Could Trump be convinced to start a dangerous war somewhere, perhaps in response to a planned false-flag operation designed for that very purpose? It’s possible.

Does he see that so-called liberals, who are really socialists and Globalists and technocrats, have come very close to taking over this country, under the banner of “share and care” and “empathy” and “love”—behind which they hide an endless supply of venom for those people who believe in a) working for their own rewards; b) individualism; and c) independence of thought? I think he plans to approach that gigantic reality with jobs and more jobs; his blanket solution. Put America back to work. Is that a real solution? Yes, it certainly helps. But here we are talking about the culture, and what he can possibly say to the American people to restore a sense of traditional values (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) that doesn’t come across as vapid sentimentality. He is a clever man. I believe he wants to sidestep a direct confrontation with “the values issue.” Instead, he wants to cure the genuine desperation many Americans feel because they can’t find decent work. He wants to create a boom in the domestic economy that floats all boats. I can’t fault him for that. However, a major part of the US economy has long been predicated on jobs that either produce nothing or produce toxic outcomes. Those engines aren’t going to go away.

I believe Trump can make progress in decimating the political-correctness disease. I believe he can help reverse the obsession with parsing people’s words and finding “hidden racist content.” And the issue where all this rubber meets the road is: immigration.

His opponents will keep saying that anything less than wide open borders is Hitlerian. His point is: there is a threat and a danger. Letting in felons; letting in potential terrorists and actual terrorists; letting in people who hate America and want everything they can get for free in America; letting in people who take jobs from Americans (including legal immigrants); letting in people who overburden the economy via all the free services they can obtain—this is wrong, this is suicide, this is crazy. It has nothing to do with racism.

If he succeeds in reducing this immigration threat—wall or no wall—he will go a significant distance in proving that protecting America has nothing to do with hatred.

At the same time (and I have to stress this again), he can’t decide to keep forwarding Empire abroad, thus exacerbating the desire for revenge against America among many people who feel the destructive force of the US military machine.

If he turns into just another jingoist, he’s finished. And he should be.

He needs to talk to Ron Paul. At length.

What about draining the swamp in Washington? This is another case of trying to turn around an oil tanker in a small space. He needs to provide vivid examples. For starters, he should pursue, with all speed, the gathering of specific evidence for the prosecution of Hillary and Bill Clinton, vis-à-vis the Clinton Foundation and its nefarious activities. No stone should be left unturned. That would set a new tone.

For people who need a heavy dose of who and what the Clintons are, I recommend immersing yourself in everything the late Christopher Hitchens wrote and said about them. (I’m sure Hitchens would hate a Trump presidency.)

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

—If I were in charge of everything from the beginning of the Republic in the 18th century (!), my goal would have been to make a hundred Republics with severely limited governments on this continent—with virtually no foreign entanglements of any kind (political or commercial)—instead, opting for self-sufficiency as the primary value. But that’s another story for another time. Meanwhile, I see a glint of light here, and I see risks and possibilities, and I see that perhaps we can make steps toward ridding America of the festering woes that have beset it: Empire, on the one hand; hideous liberalism masking a technocratic Globalist takeover that would sink us, on the other hand.

At no time over the past 30 years of working as a reporter have I felt all is lost. At no time have I felt that the forces arrayed against us are too great or too smart. At no time have I felt that all doors are closed. I take the long view. Many things can happen to wake people up—mainly themselves when they finally feel their way of operating and living has become self-defeating.

Rather than opting for pure hope now, I believe Trump’s feet should be held to the fire. He made promises. Those promises are clear. We should see authentic efforts from him in those directions.

I’m aware that some readers can only accept extreme views of Trump or any politician. Wonderful or terrible. Messianic or hideous. That’s not what I’ve presented here. I’ve presented what I see. So be it.

Stay tuned…

Jon Rappoport

Notes on your future

Dec20

Notes on your future

by Jon Rappoport

December 20, 2016

Once again, here are notes I made while preparing my collection, Exit From The Matrix, which contains a series of imagination exercises designed to increase the scope of the individual’s creative power:

“Why does your future have to look like everyone else’s? Why does it have to have a similar shape? Is it just a faithful copy of other people’s destiny?”

“Even more important, if the future you make for yourself is a reflection of your desire, should your desire fall into line, look and feel like everyone else’s? That would be unpleasant, to say the least.”

“We come to the subject of vision; as in, what do you envision for yourself? Do you gather in impressions from those around you and integrate them into an average? If so, why?”

“Do you attempt to discover what skills you have and automatically envision yourself pursuing a future that embodies those skills? Is that the extent of what you desire?”

“In the version of Asian spiritual philosophy that was imported into the West, desire was portrayed as a distinctly negative trap that would engender suffering. This was, in fact, an empty truism. It would be like saying: life has risks. Or: pursuing a dream isn’t a smooth trail from A to Z. —And therefore, one should retreat from, or rise above, desire. The actuality is: one should be able to pursue the fulfillment of a deep desire without becoming so embroiled in it that one can’t navigate the waves and the troughs. In other words, one’s own power should be great enough to overcome a lack of instant success.”

“And what is that power? It begins with imagination that lights a flame inside your desire and gives it magnitude and energy.”

“Imagination is an engine that is always on tap, and you always hold the key that turns the engine on.”

“Your future is yours to make, yours to envision, yours to pursue, and the quest is large. It is an adventure. The cells of your body, your nerve impulses, and your endocrine outputs respond to that adventure.”

“People are taught to believe that animals live the best lives, because they automatically go after what their basic programming insists upon; therefore, there are no doubts. People are taught to believe humans should live this way as well. This is patently false. The individual has wide-ranging freedom, and therefore he can invent his most profound course of action, according to his own chosen vision.”

“A human being sooner or later discovers that he can surrender this capacity or live through and by it.”

“Imagination isn’t preoccupied with what already exists, what already has been proven, what already has been accepted, what already has been ingested as the average of human activity. Imagination is occupied with possibility that will turn into action, possibility that exists on and beyond the frontier of what you have already done. Imagination flies into new space. Linking up with your imagination produces huge quantities of energy that weren’t there before…”

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

Intelligence agencies make their living by lying; now they’re truthful?

Dec20

Intelligence agencies make their living by lying: now they’re truthful?

by Jon Rappoport

December 20, 2016

A few delicious contradictions and dissonances:

The political Left has long attacked the CIA and other spying agencies as criminal liars, but suddenly those agencies are as pure as the driven snow, because they claim Russia hacked the US election and took victory away from Hillary Clinton.

Putin, the supposed arch-villain in this operation, heavily censors the press in Russia. That would be bad—except now, many of the people who support the claim that Putin masterminded the election-hack in the US want to heavily censor independent media outlets in the US, who claim the Russian hack is a lie based on zero evidence. Putin censoring news in Russia=bad. Censoring “fake news” in the US=good.

In the push for launching Gulf War 2 in Iraq, the political Left in the US demanded detailed proof that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. When it comes to the accusation that Russia hacked the US election, no proof is necessary. After all, the CIA must protect its “sources and methods.” A simple assertion of hacking is sufficient.

Among green opponents of GMO crops, it’s common knowledge that the FDA never offered evidence of safety before certifying GMOs in the 1990s. However, those green people who support Hillary only need the CIA to say Russia hacked the election to believe it. No evidence necessary.

Here is a 1981 statement attributed to Bill Casey, incoming director of the CIA: “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

And how about this one, from David Talbot, author of The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government. Talbot is discussing James Jesus Angleton, who was the head of Agency counterintelligence from 1954-1975: “These were some of James Jesus Angleton’s dying words. ‘Fundamentally, the founding fathers of U.S. intelligence were liars. The better you lied and the more you betrayed, the more likely you would be promoted. . . . Outside of their duplicity, the only thing they had in common was a desire for absolute power. I did things that, in looking back on my life, I regret. But I was part of it and loved being in it’…”

What we’re really looking at here, in the “Russian hack” allegation, is a wholesale revision of attitude toward the US intelligence community. Now, because it’s convenient for “progressives,” these agencies are protecting the security of the United States with truth, honesty, and righteous investigations.

Much of this revisionist propaganda is aimed at the young, who have never studied the history of the CIA, have zero knowledge of its regime-change ops, its MKULTRA mind-control programs, or its illegal structure that exceeds by miles its original charter.

The NSA is also, of course, involved in the Russian-hack story, because that agency spies on emails and phone calls 24/7. They would surely be able to present evidence about who hacked the Hillary, DNC, and Podesta emails—if indeed any hacking, as opposed to inside leaking, occurred at all. But if they offered information, would you believe them? They’ve been lying about the extent of their spying for decades. Their track record doesn’t inspire holy trust.

These days, major media are lining up behind the Russian-hack claim. For them, nothing matters except the political agenda. For them, the election isn’t over and it never will be. Donald Trump scorched them, time and time again, during the campaign, and they will have their revenge, no matter what it takes.

Further, the emails WikiLeaks released reveal extensive cooperation between the press, the DNC, and Hillary Clinton. That’s a bitter pill for the press to swallow, to say the least.

For example, the Daily Caller (10/17/16) reported:

“A Politico reporter has been caught sending his journalism to Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman for approval.”

“In an April 30, 2015 email, released Monday by WikiLeaks, Politico’s chief political correspondent Glenn Thrush asked John Podesta to approve his writing pre-publication. Thrush begged Podesta not to tell anyone he had shared the copy and referred to himself as ‘a hack’ in the email exchange.

“’No worries Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u,’ Thrush wrote to Podesta. ‘Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this Tell me if I fucked up anything’.”

“The Politico reporter then included five paragraphs from a story he would publish May 1 titled: ‘Hillary’s big-money dilemma’. Podesta replied that, off-the-record, there were ‘no problems’.”

Just to be clear, Glenn Thrush isn’t saying he’s a hacker. He’s saying he’s a hack. Dictionary.com offers a useful definition of the term: “a professional who renounces or surrenders individual independence, integrity, belief, etc., in return for money or other reward in the performance of a task normally thought of as involving a strong personal commitment…”

But that’s not all. On December 12, 2016, Huffington Post reported: “Politico chief political correspondent Glenn Thrush is joining The New York Times to cover the White House, the newspaper confirmed Monday.”

“Over the past eight years, Thrush has emerged as one of Politico’s standout journalists, most recently writing a 13,000-word dive into the pivotal moments of the 2016 election.”

“’We’re thrilled that Glenn Thrush is joining The Times,’ Elisabeth Bumiller, the paper’s Washington bureau chief, said in a statement to The Huffington Post. ‘He’s a premier political journalist, a master of breaking news and long-form story telling and a stellar addition to our White House team’.”

Wikipedia offers this telling paragraph on the revelations about Thrush in the Wikileaks-released email: “The email and its wording prompted criticism of Thrush from some commentators and on social media. Thrush replied on Twitter that ‘checking if a portion of a story that pertained to him [Podesta] was accurate… I DO THIS WITH EVERYBODY.’ Politico’s vice president of communications, Brad Dayspring, said that ‘Glenn is one of the top political reporters in the country, in no small part because he understands that it is his job is to get inside information, not appear perfect when someone illegally hacks email… I can speak with firsthand knowledge and experience that Glenn checks the validity of often complex reporting with everybody, on both sides of the aisle’.”

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

Are you getting this? Are you getting the dazzling spin? It’s quite hilarious. Rotten eggs are turned into caviar.

For big media, it’s vital to support the Russian-hack story. It allows them to denounce and reject the CONTENT of the leaked emails and divert people from focusing on the press-Hillary cooperation throughout the presidential campaign.

“Who cares what the leaked emails SAY? All you need to know is: THE RUSSIANS DID IT. Russians are bad. We are good. Russians bad. We good.”

The CIA is good, too. Always was.

If you buy all this, you’ll surely be interested in purchasing my special ant farms. The ants are trained to drive your car. Put 50 of them behind the wheel and they’ll take you right to the market and back home again. They can also pilot a space ship to Mars. For that, you’ll need to order one of my ships separately…

Jon Rappoport

The war against the people: fear and loathing in NY and DC

Dec19

The war against the people: fear and loathing in NY and DC

Thank you for your support. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

by Jon Rappoport

December 19, 2016

Vladimir Putin is the secret president of the United States.

Yep. That’s it. The US is now the USSR. It’s all over. Trump is a Communist who took orders from Putin. Trump is a Red. That was his game all along. He’s a billionaire Commie.

Here is how this would play out in a reasonable court, in the judge’s chambers—

Prosecutor: Your Honor, we’re prepared to offer proof that Putin personally influenced the election in favor of Trump.

Trump’s Lawyer: Nonsense. This is a ruse.

Judge: Mr. Prosecutor, what is the nature your proof?

Prosecutor: We will bring several CIA people to the stand and they will say they have proof.

Judge: Will they back up those statements with evidence, so Mr. Trump’s attorney can cross-examine them?

Prosecutor: No. Secrets must be kept.

Judge: Not in my court.

End of story.

Think about this: what will the major media do when their latest fiction about the Russians and Trump sinks below the waves? They’re lying so hard and so often…is there any end to it?

The answer is no. They’re committed. They can’t turn back.

They’re committing slow suicide in full view of the public.

It almost feels like they want to go down.

“Stop me before I kill again.”

Men and women of the news, whose whole act depends on securing trust and admiration from the public, are squandering whatever is left of it in the space of a few months.

“Well, they didn’t believe that outrageous lie. Let’s try one that’s even more ridiculous.”

Now they want to censor news which fails to fit their picture. And if they don’t watch out, they’ll take down Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter—their enablers—with them, as people find new social-media outposts.

Trump—love him, hate him, whatever—is playing his role. He’s virtually winning a new election every time the major media slam him and he comes back with a tweet that simply announces, “You’re full of it.”

Influential papers like the NY Times and the Washington Post have gotten a free pass for as long as they’ve been in business. Their staffs have developed a massive sense of their own importance, their own infallibility. They’re like popes—who’ve suddenly been exposed, in leaked documents, for falsely claiming Jesus wanted the Catholic Church built in his name.

George Orwell: “A totalitarian state is in effect a theocracy, and its ruling caste, in order to keep its position, has to be thought of as infallible.”

Recognize we’re in a unique situation here. This has never happened before—certainly not in a highly sophisticated civilization where the official means of communicating information were limited to a few basic sources. Those sources have lost now faith with the people. Instead, huge numbers of new outlets have emerged.

The mainstream is beginning to realize how great the shift is.

A centralized reality splitting up equals a centralized and hypnotized perception of reality splitting up.

Centralized reality, by its very nature, presents a false picture. In the absence of that monopoly, many new true stories emerge that were previously hidden. Each of these stories is, in effect, a new reality holding a candle in the dark.

Virtually all major news sources agreeing on the substance of virtually all important stories, over the course of decades, is completely unnatural and absurd. That agreement must be engineered. Concocted. Invented.

The “consistent concoction” is dissolving in the minds of the public. It no longer holds sway.

Hillary Clinton and her supporters should be thanked for contributing to this break-up. The public is viewing their actions as those of a child who refuses to admit she herself is at fault, and instead throws blame in every possible direction: thousands of “fake news” sites; the Russians; Putin; pollsters who failed to warn of impending doom; the Electoral College system; the “deplorables”; WikiLeaks; the FBI.

“It’s not our fault. It’s everybody else’s fault.”

Thank you, thank you.

Keep finding new people to blame. How about the Chinese, the Brexit supporters, some guy who owns a gas station in Death Valley, a massive tribe who live on the dark side of the moon and illegally voted for Trump?

Don’t stop now.

Interestingly, the big donors to Hillary Clinton’s failed campaign, who are shocked and irate after forking over their money, aren’t eagerly drinking the Putin Kool-Aid. They’re hard-headed, and they want real-life answers. As Politico writes (12/15):

“…the wealthy Democrats who helped pump over $1 billion into Clinton’s losing effort have been urging their local finance staffers, state party officials, and campaign aides to provide a more thorough explanation of what went wrong. With no dispassionate, centralized analysis of how Clinton failed so spectacularly, they insist, how can they be expected to keep contributing to the party?”

“’A lot of the bundlers and donors still are in shock and disbelief by what happened. They’re looking for some introspection and analysis about what really happened, what worked and what didn’t,’ said Ken Martin, chairman of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party and a top campaign bundler himself. ‘It may take some time to do that, but people are still just scratching their heads’.”

“Or, in the words of a Midwestern fundraiser who’s kept in touch with fellow donors, ‘A lot of people are saying, “I’m not putting another fucking dime in until someone tells me what just happened”.’”

The CIA-connected Washington Post can pump out as many “Putin-did-it” articles as they want to. But the big Clinton donors are unimpressed.

Don’t look for major media outlets to give those donors much face time. It would explode the blame-game narrative.

The NY Times is now calling Trump a threat to democracy. Translation: Trump is a threat to the NY Times, and by extension, all major media—because the Times is usually the first voice that sounds in the news echo chamber that bounces fake stories among hundreds of outlets from shore to shore.

I’m waiting for the term “Russian denialist” to pop up in the press, as a label for reporters who “ignore a mountain of evidence” that Putin hacked the election and handed it to Donald Trump.

“Stay with us. Coming up after the break, a list of Russian denialists who refuse to believe what’s in front of their eyes, say government officials. Some of the names will shock you. But first, six commercials for medical drugs you don’t need that could put you in the hospital…”

“The media bubble is the ultimate symbol of what’s wrong with this country. It’s just a circle of people talking to themselves who have no f—ing idea what’s going on. If The New York Times didn’t exist, CNN and MSNBC would be a test pattern. The Huffington Post and everything else is predicated on The New York Times. It’s a closed circle of information from which Hillary Clinton got all her information — and her confidence. That was our opening.” —Steve Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist and senior counselor

The major media’s depth of hatred for Donald Trump is beyond most people’s understanding. Most people can’t fathom it, because they believe they know who these media personages are. They see them on television or read their words every day. How bad could these reporters be?

Very, very bad. The media personages see themselves as 12th-generation feudal barons who are suddenly surrounded by the peasants stealing their land, crops, animals, homes, and royal titles.

Here is what Paul Krugman of the NY Times recently wrote about Trump: “Thought: There was (rightly) a cloud of illegitimacy over Bush, dispelled (wrongly) by 9/11. Creates some interesting incentives for Trump.” —As if Trump might secretly provoke another huge terror attack on US soil and, by his response, improve his status in the eyes of the public. Heavy, heavy malevolent conspiracy theory from a baron at the Times.

Back in February, WND reported on a tweet from another NY Times writer: “A columnist with the New York Times caused a social media stir with a tweet that joked of billionaire businessman and GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s assassination.”

“’Good news guys,’ wrote Ross Douthat in his tweet, as found by Infowars.com. ‘I’ve figure out how the Trump campaign ends.’ Douthat is a foreign-policy expert who supports Marco Rubio and John Kasich. He then included a link to a YouTube video of the 1983 movie, ‘The Dead Zone,’ a flick that features Christopher Walken as a character who tries to shoot to death a politician played by Martin Sheen. Sheen’s character uses a human baby to shield himself from the assassination attempt.”

This is the media battling for survival.

Suppose, as rumored, Trump decides to re-cast the whole White House Press Office? Suppose, for example, he intends to deny many veteran reporters their press credentials, and instead welcomes independent journalists?

Suppose Trump decides to establish his own Web channel, and live- streams many fireside chats directly to a global audience, without even letting the press know his schedule?

Suppose the New York Times and the Washington Post fall to the bottom of the pile, left to scramble for crumbs?

Yes, things could get much worse for major media. And they should, because they have been lying to the public ever since the first brick was laid on their first office building.

Trump’s war on the media should become a centerpiece of his presidency. If not, they will shatter his term in office. I hope he understands that fully.

Suppose Trump’s inside man, Steve Bannon, puts his head together with a few deep-pocket investors and shows them how to create strong social-media alternatives to Twitter and Facebook, who are now trying to censor and bury independent online media operations?

Suppose Julian Assange and Project Veritas’ James O’Keefe vault to the top of the press hierarchy?

Suppose the American people laugh the Times and WaPo and CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and FOX out of court?

Suppose their echo chamber falls apart?

The major media’s fear and loathing of Trump knows no bounds. Their loyalty to Hillary Clinton, who played a central role in the inhuman decimation of Libya, and whose Foundation set up a parallel government stop-and shop for global greedheads, is without conscience.

If you think independent media need your support now, watch what is going to happen in the coming months and years. Big media will keep throwing nasty conspiracy theories like cakes of dreck at the wall, hoping something, anything sticks to “fake news” sites.

These “liberals” are so firmly in the Globalist camp, they wouldn’t know how to escape even if they wanted to. The very notion that America might reassert itself as a sovereign nation is a silver bullet aimed at their vampire hearts.

They’ve been sucking all the blood they can out of this country, with their “kind and gentle” “share and care” con job. It pays for their lifestyles, and they fully intend to maintain their status.

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

Not quite on the level of George Washington’s Farewell Address or Eisenhower’s last warning to America about the military-industrial complex, here is Obama at his final press conference—tortured logic, generalized garbled garbage, and veiled threats of censorship—looking for scapegoats after the election put a cap on his failed presidency:

“If fake news that’s being released by some foreign government is almost identical to reports that are being issued through [domestic] partisan news venues, then it’s not surprising that that foreign propaganda will have a greater effect. It doesn’t seem that farfetched compared to some of the other stuff folks are hearing from domestic propagandists.”

“To the extent that our political dialogue is such that everything is under suspicion, everybody’s corrupt and everybody is doing things for partisan reasons and all of our institutions are, you know full of malevolent actors and if that’s the story that is being put out there, then when a foreign government introduces that same argument, the facts are made up, voters who have been listening to that stuff for years, who have been getting that stuff every day from talk radio or other venues, they’re going to believe it.”

“So, if we — if we want to really reduce foreign influence on our elections, then we better think about how to make sure that our — our political process, our political dialogue is stronger than it’s been.”

Then Obama basically characterized the totality of the WikiLeaks emails as “gossip.” That was his overheated swan song.

He message for the media was: stick to the script; you know what it is; why did you cover material detrimental to The Plan?

“Mele Kalikimaka.”

—So, dear reader, you can choose to obtain your news from purveyors of the Plan, or you can explore and keep exploring independent sources.

What is The Plan? Aiding and abetting the descent of America into a nation swallowed up in a global management system, where the Constitution, freedom, and the individual are relics of a discarded past.

Donald Trump is not The Answer. He never was. A declaration of independence can take many forms, articulated by many individuals, and backed up in different ways.

What’s your way?

Jon Rappoport

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