Manufacturing consent in science: the diabolical twist

Manufacturing consent in science: the diabolical twist

by Jon Rappoport

April 19, 2016

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

In the famous 1988 Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman book, Manufacturing Consent, the authors explore how media distort the news and employ propaganda, in order to bring about consent/consensus in the population.

This is nothing less than the creation of reality.

I want to extend that concept here, particularly as it applies to science.

From so many directions, official science is shaping our future—that’s why it’s vital to understand the manipulations involved.

It’s one thing to say media collaborate to sell a false picture of reality, a picture which is then bought by the masses. It’s quite another thing to say media collaborate to pretend there is already a consensus of the best professional minds on a given scientific subject—when there isn’t.

I’ll start with a theoretical example. Let’s say three researchers at a university examine data based on US moon missions, and they conclude that a small set of new conclusions are true. I’ll call this set X.

The researchers publish an article in a journal, and a healthy debate ensues in professional circles. Is X correct? Are there flaws in the research?

However, a powerful public agency decides that X is dangerous. X could lead to inquiries about contractors, investigations into cost overruns, missing money, and, worst of all, flawed engineering of space-capsules.

Therefore, this powerful agency goes on an all-out propaganda campaign, tapping its press sources, culminating in a new study that concludes X is entirely false.

The press basically trumpets: “Experts agree X is false. X was the result of shoddy research. The original researchers made numerous amateur mistakes.”

Notice that, in this case, the press isn’t simply distorting the news. It’s announcing that a superior consensus already exists among the best scientific minds.

It’s lying about a consensus that doesn’t exist among scientists who, up until that moment, were having a healthy debate.

The press is presenting the false consensus as if it were real and widespread, when it isn’t.

And at this point, all relevant scientists get the message: keep quiet, don’t debate for another moment; otherwise grant monies will vanish, demotions will occur, peers will lay on heavy criticism, excommunication from The Club will follow.

So these scientists do keep quiet—and then a consensus among them comes into being overnight, by implied threat and coercion.

This is basically what happened in the arena of energy-production via cold fusion. Wikipedia adequately summarizes the surface of the situation: “The most famous cold fusion claims were made by Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann in 1989. After a brief period of interest by the wider scientific community, their reports were called into question by nuclear physicists.”

Not just called into question; defamed, derided, mocked, slammed over the head with a sledgehammer.

A superior consensus was invented, despite the fact that many scientists were intensely interested in the Pons/Fleishmann findings. They tried, in vain, to point out that the failed efforts to reproduce those findings resulted because researchers were altering Pons and Fleishman’s methods.

No dice. Cold fusion was labeled a giant error and even a fraud. The official door was closed.

In my research leading up to the publication of my first book, AIDS INC., in 1988, I reviewed the period of the early 1980s, when many researchers were coming at the question of the cause of AIDS from different angles. But then, suddenly, in the spring of 1984, the US government officially announced, at a televised press conference, that a virus called HTLV-III (HIV) was the cause.

The science was shoddy, to put it mildly. It was bad science and no science. But no matter. Overnight, all the monies that had gone into discovering what caused AIDS were diverted into the question: How does HIV cause AIDS? Any scientist who failed to see the handwriting on the wall was shoved out into the cold.

The press closed ranks. The consensus (though it was manufactured in the blink of an eye) was trumpeted around the world.

The big news headline wasn’t just false and distorted. It was false-and-distorted about a consensus that, until a few seconds ago, didn’t exist—and only existed now because researchers went silent and accepted dogma and folded up.

For years (and even now), the basic news about climate change/global warming is: there is a consensus. The science is settled. The scientists agree that the science is settled. The scientists agree that the scientists who agree are correct. This, despite the fact that you can still find impressive lists of scientists who don’t agree at all. But they are shut out of the news.

The same construction of consensus applies to the safety of vaccines.

The same construction of consensus applies to the “overwhelming success of the practice of modern medicine.”

Predatory corporations who spray poisonous pesticides all over the world and cause birth defects need special protection and cover? Invent, overnight, and broadcast, a consensus that a basically harmless virus is the cause of those tragic defects.

I can assure you there are many scientists who don’t, for a second, believe the Zika virus is the agent of destruction. But they are keeping their mouths shut now and rolling with the tide.

However, that tide is turning. In many arenas of science, journalists and researchers with no allegiance to official bodies have emerged.

A different species of handwriting is being inscribed on the wall.

What can the mainstream press do about it?

They can only deploy the crass tactics I’ve mentioned here.

A massive and stunning re-education is taking place among the population. No school is running it. No agency is sponsoring it. It’s happening from the ground up.

It turns out that living as a cipher and a unit in the sticky web of fabricated consensus isn’t nearly as attractive as it once was.

More and more, major media are using the consensus strategy to invent the news—and people are rejecting it.

Without realizing it, the press is committing professional suicide. An article that was once headlined, “Three dead horses found in a field,” has become, “Scientists agree that the three dead horses were a coincidence.” And people are laughing the press out of court.

power outside the matrix

The ongoing scandal surrounding the film, Vaxxed (trailer), is a good example. The press assures the population that pointing out a connection between a vaccine and autism is absurd, because scientific experts agree there is no such connection.

But the film features a long-time researcher at the Centers for Disease Control, who confesses that he and colleagues falsified a 2004 study in order to exonerate one such vaccine.

The film’s subject is false consensus.

And the press can do no better than repeat, over and over: the consensus is real and valid.

The CDC researcher, William Thompson, is essentially shouting, “I was part of the consensus. Don’t you get it? I was a card-carrying member of the club that invents fake consensus. And now I’m telling you that. Don’t fall for this notion that the best minds agree. The best minds conspire to concoct agreement out of thin air.”

The media are collapsing into their own swamp.

Jon Rappoport

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

Virus fakery: my conversation with a White House insider

Virus fakery: my conversation with a White House insider

And another conversation with a virologist

by Jon Rappoport

April 18, 2016

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

There are a number of cases in which a virus is said to be the cause of a disease—but the evidence doesn’t stand up.

I first realized this in 1987. I was writing my book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century.

Robert Gallo, who claimed he had found the cause of AIDS, hadn’t done proper work. From everything I read, he had discovered HIV in 35 to 60 percent of AIDS patients he had studied.

He should have been able to isolate HIV in virtually every patient.

Then there was the fact that the most popular tests for HIV, the Elisa and Western Blot, were fatally flawed. They could register positive for a whole host of reasons that had nothing to do with HIV.

And no one had found sufficient quantities of HIV in humans to justify claiming it caused any kind of illness.

My own research into the so-called high-risk groups revealed that the immune suppression in those groups could be explained by factors other than a virus.

(Note: All my research at that time assumed HIV existed. Since then, several researchers, including the Perth Group, have made compelling arguments that the existence of HIV was never demonstrated.)

As I was winding up the final draft of AIDS INC., I spoke, off the record, with a well-known and well-respected mainstream virologist at a large US university. I expressed my conclusions about HIV.

He spoke, first, about the difficulties in making an absolute decision about a virus as the cause of a disease.

I brought the conversation back to HIV.

He paused. Then he repeated that he couldn’t go on the record. I asked him why.

He said HIV was a subject fraught with problems. Politics were involved.

He said he and his colleagues were taking a pass on getting into a dispute about the virus. They were aware that the science was shaky. They just didn’t want to go near it. They might enter into other arguments about other kinds of research, but as far as they were concerned, HIV was off-limits.

His obvious implication was: careers were on the line.

Attacking HIV as the cause of AIDS could result in blacklisting.

He stopped short of saying HIV wasn’t the cause of AIDS, but it was clear he had seen enough to know there were major holes in HIV science.

This was a man who had no interest in unconventional points of view. He was an orthodox researcher from A to Z. He wasn’t a rebel of any kind. And yet he readily admitted to me that the whole AIDS research establishment was proceeding on a lack of proof.

Exposing this fact would go far beyond the usual definition of a scandal. The result would be a volcanic eruption, if, say, a dozen respected virologists told the truth.

After we finished our conversation, I understood something about consensus reality. It contains elements about which people can argue in public—but then there are other elements which are completely out of bounds, which can never be refuted in a mainstream setting.

Why? Because if certain lies are exposed, they initiate a contagion of doubt and insight that spreads to the whole complex inter-structure of what people take to be reality.

Great curtains are torn away. Pillars are cracked, and fall. Images which are taken to be absolute and unchanging distort, dissolve, and blow away in the wind.

A week after AIDS INC. was shipped to bookstores, in 1988, my friend and colleague, hypnotherapist Jack True, told me a copy of the book was on its way to Russia in a diplomatic pouch.

I asked him how he knew. He shrugged and said he had a few connections.

Of course, I’ve never heard anything back about the Russian response to the book, but I find it interesting that, in America, my publisher and I never made any headway in connecting with government officials.

There was one exception. In 1987, I had a conversation with James Warner, a White House policy analyst. The interview was published in the LA Weekly.

Warner had serious doubts about the HIV theory of AIDS, and would arrange a White House conference on the issue. Pro and anti HIV scientists would be permitted to speak at length.

At the last minute, the conference was cancelled.

the matrix revealed

Here are a few brief excerpts from my conversation with Warner. As a White House analyst, his comments are explosive:

Warner: The government really hasn’t fulfilled its role in providing good information [on AIDS]. We just may not know enough. With AIDS, we’re dealing with a syndrome, not a disease. We may see a patient who has a genetic defect that’s causing his immune deficiency [instead of HIV being the causative agent]. I’m not satisfied we know all we think we do, by any means.

Rappoport: Robert Gallo, Max Essex, people like that, were the field commanders on the NIH [National Institutes of Health] war on cancer in the 70’s. They lost that war. So why are they in charge of AIDS research now? It seems odd that we don’t have other people running the show.

Warner: If ever I’ve been tempted to believe in socialism, science has disabused me of that. These guys [at NIH] assume that it’s their show. They just assume it.

Rappoport: Peter Duesberg, a distinguished molecular biologist at Berkeley, has said that HIV does not cause AIDS. Have you asked people at NIH what they think, specifically, of his arguments?

Warner: Yes. I’ve been told that Peter Duesberg’s refutation of HIV has been discounted by the scientific community. I was given no explanation as to why. I was very offended. No evidence was presented to me. Just that Duesberg had been ‘discounted.’ That’s absurd. It’s not a scientific response to dismiss Duesberg as a crank.

Rappoport: The definition of AIDS in Africa is now becoming synonymous with starvation. They’re saying the three major symptoms are chronic diarrhea, fever, and wasting-away. Weight-loss. It certainly makes a perfect smokescreen for the aspect of hunger which is political [and intentionally maintained] – just call it AIDS.

Warner: I had not considered that. There is a program to make Africa self-sufficient by the year 2000. This could certainly hinder that activity. You know, I was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. I experienced weight-loss of eighty pounds. And when I came home, I was suffering from a form of dysentery that you could call opportunistic. A number of us were. We didn’t have AIDS.

—end of interview excerpt—

In this current political atmosphere, a White House analyst wouldn’t dare go on the record with comments like these.

Rigid consensus must be maintained.

Jon Rappoport

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

Vaccine damage, the hidden truth

by Jon Rappoport

April 17, 2016

(To join our email list, click here.)

Warning: Don’t read this article if you want to avoid feeling an unpleasant sensation in the pit of your stomach.

The issue here is: refusing to believe an uncomfortable fact.

An unpleasant fact.

A devastating fact.

There is a simple formula that describes how the public refuses to believe an uncomfortable fact.

It goes this way:

“Well, if that were true, then…”

It’s a statement that suggests a person is standing at the edge of a cliff. And if he accepted some particularly unpleasant fact, he’d suddenly fall off.

Another way to look at it: if he accepted this fact, it would lead, by contagion, to him admitting there were other very uncomfortable truths. And then, by extension, like branches quickly growing out of a tree, a whole host of multiplying shocks would become known.

So it is, in the area of vaccines.

The experts, like preening peacocks, assure us that the shots are amazingly safe. After all, they’ve done the studies. They’ve published the studies.

There is widespread fraud in those reports, because, for example, of the short follow-up period—as if adverse effects could only occur in a 72-hour window, or over the course of a few weeks. Who decided that? Who made that arbitrary rule?

And then, most importantly, studies are not real life. We have seen glowing assessments of medical drugs in print, but when they are (like Vioxx) released for public use, people start dropping like flies.

In the case of vaccines (in real life), the one system for reporting human damage is broken. Completely broken. It’s called VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It’s run by the CDC and the FDA. (My readers are aware of how many crimes and lies I’ve laid at the door of those two august agencies.)

Who can make a report of an adverse vaccine-reaction? A parent, a doctor, a nurse, a nurse practitioner. You can see the problems right away.

How many parents even know the VAERS system exists? How many parents have the knowledge or the will to follow through and submit a report? How many parents will dare to suspect that a vaccine has injured their children? How many doctors or nurses who administer vaccinations are eager to report cases of children who incur obvious brain damage from the shot THEY GAVE?

So…for doctors and medical experts to claim vaccines are safe in the real world? They’re pretending they know what they don’t know. They’re faking it.

But if that were true, then…

That’s right. If that were true, we would have no proof that vaccines are safe.

Therefore, when the government advises and nudges and even demands that people line up for vaccinations, the government is in the dark about safety. Completely in the dark.

But if that were true…

Then the entire population is at risk.

That’s right.

Let’s go back to those pre-marketing studies, which are done on vaccines in order to gain FDA approval. Who conducts the studies? The vaccine manufacturers. And who stands to profit from the sale of the vaccines? Ever heard of conflict of interest?

And have any studies been done to assess the risks of giving multiple vaccines? After all, the CDC schedule keeps getting longer and longer. I can find no evidence of well-formed clinical trials assessing the safety of shooting people in the arm with multiple vaccines. Does that seem like an oversight? A horrendous hole in the “science” of vaccination?

But if that’s true, then…

We would, again, have no proof that vaccination is safe.

Correct.

Now, from the historical record, we do have many, many disturbing examples of what has happened to people after vaccines have been approved. Here are just a few:

What about this? “Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

What about this? “Administration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules… ”

What about this? “… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.

What about this? “A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987.

What about this? “Up to half of family doctors do not want to be vaccinated against swine flu. GPs will be first in the line for the jabs when they become available but many will decline, even though they will be offering the vaccine to their patients. More than two thirds of those who will turn the jab down believe it has not been tested enough. Most also believe the flu has turned out to be so mild in the vast majority of cases that the vaccine is not needed. Last night Government experts criticised GPs who decide not to have the jab, saying they will put vulnerable patients needlessly at risk. A week ago, a poll of nurses showed that a third would turn down the opportunity of being vaccinated against swine flu. News that medics are unconvinced by the need for a vaccine will cause grave concern to patients who will be invited for the jab over the next few months. A poll of doctors for Pulse magazine found that 49 per cent would reject the vaccine with 9 per cent undecided.” Daily Mail, 8/25/2009.

These few references to vaccine disasters are but a drop in the bucket, of course.

If these and other such references are true (and they are), then…

Doctors and medical bureaucrats are telling massive lies about the safety of vaccines. They aren’t just ignorant about safety.

Correct.

And if that’s true, then…

How can we trust these people?

How can we trust the major media outlets that give overwhelming support to these people?

We can’t.

When mothers tell the world that their children, after a shot, are never the same again, they aren’t “providing anecdotes,” contrasted with “scientific studies.” The mothers are giving us a much more reliable account of what vaccines are doing than the fakery of the “science.”

But if the mothers are right (and they are)…

And if the experts are lying through their teeth about vaccine safety (and they are)…

Then Reality is not what we’re told it is.

It’s the opposite of what we’re told.

And this isn’t merely an intellectual glitch.

Every day, lives are on the line.

Every single day.

I’ll leave you with a fantastical piece of “science” from the government VAERS website — VAERS Data page. It centers on the use of the word “coincidence.” If this doesn’t convince you that truth has been hijacked, I don’t know what will:

“More than 10 million vaccines per year are given to children less than 1 year old, usually between 2 and 6 months of age. At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical adverse events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Some infants will experience these medical events shortly after a vaccination by coincidence.

“These coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination.”

Do you see the diabolical criminal sophistry?

“Some infants will experience these medical events [seizures, death, etc.] shortly after a vaccination by coincidence.”

By coincidence.

The Matrix Revealed

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

Yes, you see, an hour after the baby was given the vaccine, he also contracted a raging case of meningitis, or his parents also, coincidently, fed him a poison, or a bio-warfare germ floated in the window and settled on his tongue, or a flash of light from a distant galaxy struck him in the eyes and blinded him. Therefore, reputable scientists are unable to determine whether the vaccine caused the damage.

This is what government scientists and bureaucrats are selling terrified grief-stricken parents whose child’s life has just been destroyed by a shot in the arm.

This is policy.

This is what you shouldn’t question, because if you do, you might experience an unpleasant sensation in the pit of your stomach.

“Yes, Your Honor, the child was standing in the middle of the street, and a car did come over the hill and strike him, but it would be a grievous mistake to assume the car caused the damage the child incurred. Something else could have happened at the same instant, something of which we’re unaware. I’m prepared to give the court a list of 50 possible other events…”

They, the scientists and the doctors and medical bureaucrats, are, indeed, prepared.

They’re fully prepared, without a shred of conscience, to explain how their attack on your child’s life had absolutely nothing to do with them.

Jon Rappoport

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

Zika fake science back in the news; con artists at work

Their media androids dutifully record a “breakthrough”

by Jon Rappoport

April 16, 2016

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

Is it about science or money?

US health agencies want more than the $600 million they’ve allotted to the “war against Zika.” They want $1.9 billion. Why not? They always want more money.

To make their case, the CDC has pushed out a new Zika study in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM): “Zika Virus and Birth Defects — Reviewing the Evidence for Causality”. (For the CDC’s conference call with the android press, click here).

Before commenting on that study, let’s recall a devastating statement the NEJM’s former editor, Marcia Angell, issued in 2009, after she had headed up that non-science machine for 20 years:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

As criticisms of fake science go, this one, from an elite insider, ranks near the top of the list. It is a direct accusation of widespread fraud. Otherwise known as lying, cheating, massaging data, hiding data, and so on.

In other words, the NEJM has been publishing studies and reports that, regardless of their convincing language, are “cooked” to appear true when they most definitely weren’t.

Therefore, right up front, a new Zika study published in the NEJM is highly suspect, to say the very least. There is no reason to accept its data, methods, or findings. Except perhaps as an article of religious faith. But medical journals aren’t supposed to be religious publications, the last time I looked.

The new NEJM study on Zika aims to eliminate doubt that the Zika virus causes microcephaly.

Until now, that doubt was widespread. Even the World Health Organization was making careful statements: “…although no definite causal link has been established between Zika and microcephaly (babies born with smaller heads and brain damage), we believe there is a connection…” That sort of thing.

The new NEJM study is supposed to erase, once and for all, that “maybe.”

But it doesn’t. It’s not even close. Because when you wade through the rather dense language, what you see is an attempt to show a correlation between the presence of the Zika virus and the occurrence of the birth defect.

Correlation is not causation. And that’s just the beginning of the problem.

Even on the basis of correlation, nowhere in the study do we see anything approaching a high degree of association. You would expect to find evidence that in, say, 80 or 90 percent of cases, the Zika virus was found in babies who developed the defect. That evidence isn’t there. Well, how about a 90-percent correlation between microcephaly in the baby and Zika found in the mother? Not there, either. Again, not even close.

Then there is the issue, rarely if ever touched on in studies these days, of “how much Zika was found.” Why is that important? Because, in order to begin asserting that a virus causes a condition, you need to discover a very high volume of it in a person. A small amount causes nothing.

The new NEJM study doesn’t explore this vital factor.

So the study is a dud.

It claims that there is a very weak correlation between Zika and microcephaly. That’s it. That’s all.

Nor does the study consider the obvious fact that a condition can have several or even many causes. And what could be causing birth defects in Brazil may not be causing it in the US or Guatemala.

As I’ve clearly established in prior articles on Zika, only a fool or an outright liar would fail to notice the toxic pesticide drenching that takes place in Brazil, the number-one country for pesticide-use in the world. Some of those chemicals are banned in other countries, because they’re too poisonous.

Therefore, in Brazil, a virus that has never been proved to cause microcephaly can function as a cover story. Zika protects, and diverts attention away from, pesticide manufacturers and agri-corporate giants who spray, spray, spray.

And what about medical drugs ingested by pregnant mothers? Again, no recent studies on microcephaly investigate this “protected area.” Given that these medicines kill 106,000 people in the US every year, and maim at least hundreds of thousands more, any rational researcher would be highly motivated to look for a causal connection to microcephaly.

Want another correlation? Try severe malnutrition in the pregnant mother. It’s the number-one cause of immune-system collapse on the planet. Immune-system failure opens the door to many raging infections in the mother and fetus. But no, malnutrition isn’t “medical.” How can you develop a vaccine or a drug to treat it? No money in it.

There is, of course, money in research, and as I said at the top, US health agencies are trying to get more of it from Congress.

The Zika virus was discovered in 1947-8. Since then, it has never been known to cause more than mild transient illness. Suddenly, it’s being blamed for severe and tragic birth defects. On what basis? On no basis.

Who knows how long the virus has been on the planet? 5000 years? 100,000 years? It’s had ample opportunity to spread across the world and around the world many times. The notion that, now, suddenly, it’s traveling, is absurd. It’s already there. And here. And everywhere. It has been here and there and everywhere for a long time.

However, a fiction of “unchecked spread” works, if you’re trying to Invent the concept of a highly dangerous virus that is popping up unexpectedly and making pregnant women give birth to babies with brain damage.

Fear sells.

And the people who sell it control the whole operation.

What about actual science? They’ve never heard of it and don’t care about it.

If you persist in believing they do care about it, you’re doing religion, and you’re in the wrong pew.

Meanwhile, the multiple factors that can actually cause tragic birth defects are being ignored.

In this article, I haven’t tried to cover the full range of “who benefits” from the fake war on Zika; but I should mention one group: the collaboration of companies, research labs, and foundations that propose using genetically engineered mosquitoes on a global basis to cut off future generations of Zika-carrying mosquitoes. Among this collaborating group are researchers who also want to release “gene drives,” mechanisms which sterilize the bugs in the wild. In both strategies, no human safety studies have been done. That is highly significant. The same absence of studies highlighted the original release of GMO crops in the 1990s. We were (falsely) assured then, as now, that no problems would develop.

That’s another article of faith pretending to be science.

power outside the matrix

Why don’t these researchers wear long robes and ornate hats, and wave wands and scepters that emit clouds of smoke? We’d be able to recognize them more easily.

Can we get a simple bill passed to fund the installation of stained glass windows in CDC buildings, and the employment of choirs to intone Gregorian chants around the clock?

Instead of publishing fake studies in journals, CDC priests and their eunuchs could appear on high balconies, overlooking packed plazas, and, in practiced monotone, read summaries of their research from parchment scrolls.

Much better.

Much more honest.

Jon Rappoport

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

Civilization ebbs and flows: you remain

Civilization ebbs and flows: you remain

by Jon Rappoport

April 16, 2016

When I was planning my three Matrix collections, I made this note:

“Civilizations ebb and flow, rise and fall, but the individual remains. He needs, under any and all circumstances, to keep two capacities intact: 1) reasoning, logic, analysis; and 2) imagination. These are the well springs. No matter what situation he finds himself in, he will need these. He should not only preserve these two faculties, but also expand and deepen them. Nothing that could be happening around him is an excuse to desert these cores.”

What is happening around us now, in these times, certainly provides major distractions and diversions. It’s easy to go off on tangents and engineer reasons why we can’t achieve goals and embody our dreams. But that doesn’t help us. It doesn’t serve our interests.

After 30 years of working as a reporter, author, and researcher, I’ve come to understand that an imagined vision of what a person truly wants is his North Star. Working at higher and higher levels to fulfill that vision and make it into fact in the world eventually produces unexpected rewards. And also spills over into benefits for others.

The phrase “truly wants” is a key. When you reach down to that level of desire and see it, you find both peace and energy.

You find leverage. Now circumstances tend to adjust to you, rather than you adjusting to them.

It is as if the status quo has been waiting for a change, a transformation, and it moves toward you for assistance.

At the root of ancient alchemy was the notion that nature, in all its manifestations, was engaged in conflict, and a “quintessence” was needed to work a higher resolution. That quintessence is born out of imagination, the envisioning of new possibilities.

However, if individuals are deploying imagination to achieve what are, in fact, their minor desires and lesser wants, then the status quo remains and is built wider and wider.

As an analogy, think of extending a string of negative numbers, while hoping that somehow they’ll add up to a positive number.

The status quo is surreal. I mean that quite literally. It is constructed to look quite normal. But of course, it isn’t. It’s full of lies and half-truths and obfuscations and planned deceptions—all laid on in a “normal” way.

The status quo is a circular affair. It is presented as “the way things are,” but underneath it is the assumption that millions and millions of people are needed to give their consent to it. Needed? Yes. Otherwise, it will collapse. Well, how can the status quo represent the way things are, if they aren’t that way unless huge numbers of people support it and uphold it?

That’s a monumental gimmick. “I’m here, of course I’m here, but I need you to believe I’m here.” Why? If you’re here, what difference does it make what I believe?

Withdrawing your support from the status quo is one thing, but building and inventing a new reality to take its place is quite another.

exit from the matrix

The individual can make a contribution, an astonishing contribution, when his ability to reason and deploy logic, and his ability to access his own imagination are present at the forefront of his life.

Education of the young could, if there were the will for it, develop the two cores. It could, at the earliest age possible, teach logic and analysis of information, and it could provide numerous exercises to expand imagination. These things are possible. There isn’t any trick to it.

Generations of children, growing up in this kind of atmosphere, would shift their focus. They would eagerly seek out ways to empower their own minds and imaginations. They would be far less likely to fall into holes of apathy and passivity. They wouldn’t need escapes and endless distractions.

But again, no matter what education looks like, no matter what new lows society’s institutions descend into, you remain. Free, and able to choose. Able to decide. Your mind and your imagination are yours.

As I’ve written before, we are the artists of reality, each one of us. This is a spiritual path. It isn’t just a short narrow road.

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

Old life, new life: entrances and exits

Old life, new life: entrances and exits

by Jon Rappoport

April 15, 2016

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

Dreams come and go. Some are forgotten, others remain. The practical side says, “You must do this, you must do that,” but the dreams that hold on say something else:

You can leave an old life and begin a new one.

This is more than hope. It’s a kind of vision composed of past moments in which the cup of joy is filled to the brim.

Nothing in this universe can wipe out those memories forever.

They come back.

And when they do, they bring energy, belief, and confidence.

A person can refuse to see the suggestions and the implications, he can pretend he’s merely floating in a brief reverie, and he can then trample on through the garden and continue his way to a bleak outpost. But still he doesn’t entirely forget.

Because he doesn’t want to.

The memories are distillations of the best of the past, and they point to a new future.

The shape of that future may be vague, but the emotions and sensations are vivid.

These feelings can rise again, if one can discover what actions will recover them. Actions, which taken together, create the substance of the years ahead.

For a baby learning what this world is, there is no tangible past. His entire thrust is discovering delight. Which reminds us that the psyche, the spirit, wants joy, naturally—and if unimpeded, will find it. Hour by hour, day by day.

Only much later, when the baby has “grown up,” does he realize he has left something behind.

Then, unfortunately, he comes to believe he can’t go back. He comes to believe that some rigid set of principles should be his North Star: through this compass setting, the best of what is possible will be his, given that limits are more important than possibilities.

But every human knows, in a part of himself that is often shielded from sight, that possibilities ring more true than limits.

When a small child paints a picture, no matter what it looks like, he can tell you a story about it. And he invests this story with a vision that is more powerful, in some mysterious way, than all of society.

Centuries from now, when historians look back on this time, no matter what they find, they will still need this lesson. They will need to know that in the soul of every person, there are colors of visions which, when acted upon, make new lives, new delight, joy, ecstasy. And the alternative is always less.

The simple compounding of these lessers, without the need for mathematical sophistication, explains the root cause of the decline of civilizations.

I built my second collection, Exit From The Matrix, on the liberation and expansion of imagination. Not just in theory, but in practice. There are dozens of imagination techniques to work with.

exit from the matrix

Here are the contents of Exit From The Matrix:

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

Power Outside The Matrix: what we strive for

Power Outside The Matrix: what we strive for

by Jon Rappoport

April 14, 2016

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

During my 30 years as a reporter covering “the news behind the news,” I’ve seen countless instances in which the matrix shows up, swims into view.

By “the matrix,” I mean a false and strong consensus which is a lie. But not just any old silly consensus.

I mean a very deep shared picture of reality.

It has all the earmarks of being true. So many people accept it. So many people know it’s right.

So many people believe that, if it were wrong, if it were an illusion, their view of the world would shatter like cheap glass.

So they retreat. They turn their backs. They settle into accepting the matrix-picture.

Watching this happen has been a revelation for me. It’s convinced me that people need more power—more individual power so they can both stand and operate outside the matrix.

Wherever you see false pictures of reality—in the areas of science, politics, energy, medicine, media, money, covert intelligence, the military, religion, multinational corporations—you also see the need for individuals to gain power, so they can stand and operate outside these pictures.

Limited concepts of space, time, and energy—these, too, are “given” to human beings as the be-all and end-all of a story. A story that ultimately short-circuits and short-changes what the individual is really capable of.

The entire mural of imposed Reality is aimed at radically diminishing the individual’s power.

So in addition to my work as an investigative reporter, I’ve been researching the individual’s ability to go beyond this mural of reality.

In the late 1980s, in concert with the brilliant hypnotherapist Jack True (who gave up doing hypnosis with his patients), I developed many exercises and techniques for expanding the creative power of the individual.

Some of those exercises are included in my new collection, Power Outside The Matrix. These techniques are aimed at accessing more energy, more imagination, more stability and intelligence “beyond the mural of reality.”

Power Outside The Matrix is all about being able to think, act, and create both outside and inside The Matrix. Because that’s the goal: to be able to function in both places.

People are consciously or unconsciously fixated on boundaries and systems. They are hoping for whatever can be delivered through a system.

That fixation is a form of mind control.

Freedom isn’t a system.

But freedom needs creative power, otherwise it just sits there and becomes a lonely statue gathering dust in an abandoned park.

At one time or another, every human being who has ever lived on this planet has abandoned his creative power. The question is: does he want to get it back?

It never really goes away. It is always there. It is the basis of a life that can be lived. A life that can be chosen. People instead choose roles that don’t require that power. They think this is a winning strategy.

It isn’t.

A section of my mega-collection, titled Power Outside The Matrix and The Invention of New Reality, features creative exercises you do on a daily basis that will help you move toward the goal of power outside The Matrix. The exercises are all about increasing your energy and stability—and about the invention of new spaces.

Access to your internal energy, in huge amounts, is necessary for a life outside The Matrix—rather than relying on the illusory energy that The Matrix seems to provide. I’ve developed the exercises for exactly that purpose: your energy, your dynamism.

Power outside The Matrix also features a long section called: Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation.

It’s filled with specific examples of my past investigations. Based on 25 years of experience, it shows you how to take apart and put together data that lead to valid conclusions.

It is far more than a logic course.

It’s an advanced approach to analysis.

Establishing power outside The Matrix requires that a person be able to deal with today’s flood of information, misinformation, and disinformation. I’ve left no stone unturned in bringing you a workable approach to analysis.

There is a further extensive section titled, A Writer’s Tutorial. People have been asking me to provide this Tutorial, and here it is in spades. But it’s not just for writers. It’s for any creative person who wants to grasp his own power, understand it, and use it to reach out into the world.

The Tutorial exposes you to lessons that go far beyond what is normally taught in writer’s seminars. In fact, several core concepts in the Tutorial contradict ordinary writer’s seminars, and thus give you access to inner resources that would otherwise be ignored.

And finally, I have included a number of audio seminars that offer a wider perspective about The Matrix and what it means to live and work outside it.

power outside the matrix

Here are the particulars. These are audio presentations. 55 total hours.

* Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation (11.5-hours)

* Writer’s Tutorial (8.5-hours)

* Power Outside The Matrix and The Invention of New Reality—creative techniques (6.5-hours)

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

* The Third Philosophy of Imagination (1-hour)

* The Infinite Imagination (3-hours)

* The Mass Projection of Events (1.5-hours)

* The Decentralization of Power (1.5-hours)

* Creating the Future (6-hours)

* Pictures of Reality (6-hours)

* The Real History of America (2-hours)

* Corporations: The New Gods (7.5-hours)

I have included an additional bonus section:

* 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 (and how to analyze them). 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.

* A 2-hour radio interview I did on AIDS in Dec 1987 with host Roy Tuckman on KPFK in Los Angeles, California.

* My book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies

(All the audio presentations are mp3 files and the books are pdf files. You download them upon purchase. You’ll receive an email with a link to the entire collection.)

This is about your power. Not as an abstract idea, but as a living core of your being. This is about accessing that power and using it.

Jon Rappoport

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

Bang: Robert De Niro wakes up and opens up on vaccines

Bang: Robert De Niro wakes up and opens up on vaccines

After censoring the film Vaxxed, he decides to make a stand

And…

Media won’t reveal medically-caused death numbers

by Jon Rappoport

April 13, 2016

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

On NBC’s Today Show, Robert De Niro just broke his trance and started talking sense about vaccines. He refused to back down and knuckle under. Watch the interview here.

It’s the leading edge of a new storm.

De Niro wouldn’t accept the canned notion that vaccines are remarkably safe and effective and necessary. He expressed doubts. He linked vaccines to autism. He stood with the mothers who know their children were tragically damaged after being vaccinated.

You could say this is too little too late, because the actor already canceled Vaxxed (trailer) at Tribeca, his film festival, but it isn’t too late. Vaxxed is playing in New York at the Angelika Theater (through April 21). It’s going to travel. The demand for it is great.

Again, watch De Niro’s interview.

So let me now broach the wider subject of medically caused death and damage, because the background is essential to understanding the medical edifice, and why the media, at the deepest level, must remain silent.

“If instead of drugs like warfarin, dabigatran, levofloxacin, carboplatin, and lisinopril (the five leading killers in the FDA database), the massive numbers of deaths per year were led by gingko, ginseng, vitamin D, niacin, and raw milk, what do you think would happen?

“I’ll tell you what would happen. SEALS, Delta Force, SWAT teams, snipers, predator drones, tanks, and infantry would be attacking every health-food store in America. The resulting fatalities would be written off as necessary collateral damage in the fight to keep America safe and healthy.” (Why the FDA should be charged with murder, Jon Rappoport)

I know major media won’t reveal medically-caused death numbers, because I’ve published reports for years, and I’ve contacted news people with the facts; and nothing happens.

So we begin with a few citations.

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

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

I interviewed Starfield in 2009. I asked her whether she was aware of any overall effort by the US government to eliminate this holocaust, and whether she had ever been contacted by any government agency to consult on such an effort. She answered a resounding no to both questions.

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

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

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

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

Previously, I have documented that the FDA knows; because the FDA had, until recently, a page on its own website that admits 100,000 people are killed every year by medical drugs, and two million more people are severely injured by the drugs. A few months ago, the page was removed.

Why won’t major media report these facts?

The obvious reason: their big-spending pharmaceutical advertisers would drop them like hot potatoes.

But there are other reasons.

Every medical bureaucrat or medical shill or medical expert who jumps aboard the media train, to assure the public that drugs and vaccines are remarkably safe, is sitting on the time bomb I have described above.

This is a key, key fact. If this bomb were widely recognized, who would continue to believe these professional liars? Who would accept anything they say? How could they possibly sustain their credibility?

“Well, the system I represent kills 2.25 million people per decade, and maims between 20 and 40 million more people per decade, but I want to assure you this vaccine presents no problems at all. It’s incredibly safe.”

It would be on the order of Joseph Stalin, who sent 20-40 million people to their deaths, stating that hard work in harsh conditions improved general health.

Every single pronouncement, on any subject, issued via the medical cartel’s Ministry of Truth would fall on disbelieving ears, and only increase general outrage.

The assuring attitudes of its professional representatives would immediately be taken as rank fraud of the worst kind.

And this would just be the beginning of the trouble.

Mainstream reporters and editors and publishers are well aware that telling the truth and continuing to pound on it would do great damage to the whole medical system. The fact that the damage is deserved is beside the point. Undermining a basic institution of society is not on the media’s calendar.

The media are there to give credibility to society and its structures. That’s why they’re called “major” instead of “minor.”

When hard rains fall, the media are there with an umbrella to hold over organized society’s head. To walk away in the middle of a downpour would leave the status quo unprotected.

“Defending the Crown” is another way to put it. The King may make mistakes, he may commit heinous offenses, but he is the King, and therefore his position must remain secure.

Young journalists learn this point quickly. If in their zeal, they cross the threshold and attempt to expose a central myth, fairy tale, legend, they’re put back in their place. They absorb the message. Journalism has limits. Certain truths are silent truths.

Over the years, I’ve talked to reporters who are solidly addicted to obfuscations. Like any addict, they have an army of excuses to rationalize their behavior. They’re all attitude. They snarl and grouse if you push them too far. They assert their position, as if they own their territory, as if they’ve earned their titles.

They remind me of drunks with significant bank accounts. They’re not winos drifting in alleys. Oh no. They imbibe the good stuff. They take pride in that.

The medical experts are worse. Their pretense of idealism knows no limits, and is matched only by their claim to bullet-proof knowledge. They resemble elite new anchors, who above all learn superior acting skills. The central mission of both professionals: sound and appear utterly convincing.

What would you do if you were an actor working in a major Broadway production, along with several actors who were, in real life, murderers? Every night you go out on the boards and do your turns, and you know the play is, in a real sense, a cover for the terrible deeds your partners are committing.

I can tell you what news anchors and reporters do in that situation. They polish their performance, hoping to establish such a high degree of credibility that the secrets they conceal will never be suspected, or God forbid, exposed.

When you peel the veneer away, they are enablers, persons of interest, co-conspirators.

the matrix revealed

There is nothing quite like a high-minded, socially-positioned, card-carrying member of the King’s circle of protectors. The arrogance is titanic. Because what is being protected is so explosive.

225,000 deaths a year at the hands of modern medicine. Two to four million maimings. 2.25 million deaths per decade. The Crown is responsible. The Crown commits these crimes.

And yet it is the duty of the Crown to make his subjects feel safe and protected and even loved.

No wonder he needs such a large army of trained helpers in and around the press.

He has them.

But their monopoly is breaking down.

We’re at the beginning of a new breakout level of truth.

Stay tuned.

Jon Rappoport

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

Trump and Bernie on the same ticket; take the ride

Trump and Bernie on the same ticket; take the ride

The mass hallucination called 2-party politics in America

by Jon Rappoport

April 12, 2016

(New article up on Outside The Reality Machine. Click here to read it.)

Don’t lose your lunch or your cookies or your marbles. Follow this one to the end.

As Bernie throws charges at Hillary for vote-rigging to gain the nomination; as Hillary solidifies her prurient control of so-called super-delegates (Democrat insiders and hacks), thus overturning the force of Primary voting; as Trump, Cruz, and the Republican leadership heat up an internal war over delegates; as Colorado and other states reject the validity of Republican Primary voting; the hallucination that is 2-party politics in America is on the verge of cracking. And if the crack widens, the foul creatures who emerge will reveal an oozing Hell in broad daylight.

We’ve gone past crazy.

And since that’s so, anything goes. It’s important to understand “anything,” which is why I’m dreaming about an independent ticket of Bernie Sanders, fresh off his rigged loss to Hillary, and Trump, emerging from his stinging defeat at the hands of Republican Beelzebubs. The two enemies on the same side.

Bernie and The Donald. Donald and The Bernie. Can’t agree on much, but who cares. Burn the political house down. Walk away and start a new campaign for the White House.

Left populism plus right populism. Together.

A realistic winner in November, as long as they have a cold-blooded army of pros investigating the voting machines.

Bernie: “I hate Donald, except for his stance on trade treaties that are stealing millions of jobs from Americans.”

Donald: “I hate Bernie, except for his stance on trade treaties that are stealing millions of jobs from Americans.”

Could be a lot worse.

A lot.

How about this? “The ticket,” a new independent party spokesman declared at a Washington Press Club gala, “is Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. Deal with it.”

Why not?

Remember, the 2-party hallucination is matched by the American-public hallucination. Both sides of the equation represent absolute insanity.

The public is ready to accept the fact (after a few huge protests) that the Primary votes aren’t votes at all. Just a beauty contest. The two parties pick their candidates in whatever way they decide to.

“Okay, you voted, now shut up and let us give you the most corrupt candidates we can conjure. That’s how the system works.”

“Who’s more hideous? A or B? B, right? So let’s give them B.”

Here’s a plus for a Bernie-Donald ticket: the media will gnash and weep, weep and gnash.

“How can you possibly explain running with Bernie, Mr. Trump?”

“I don’t explain. I hate him, but he’s a pretty good guy. When we’re elected, we’ll argue every point. We’ll hammer it out. We’ll have to. Just last night, we both decided we don’t want any unnecessary wars. That was big. It’s better to defend America than go off attacking people overseas. What else? I think he sort of likes Putin. So do I. So we’ll go over to Moscow and see him and tell him this new Cold War is ridiculous. We’re going to cancel the strategy of surrounding Russia with bases.”

“And you, Mr. Sanders. How can you possibly explain running with Mr. Trump?”

“I hate him. He stands for everything I oppose. But I kind of enjoy talking to him. We’re working on a plan to stop US companies from shutting down factories and going abroad. We want to bring jobs back here. Turns out there are a lot of things we can do.”

“But Mr. Sanders, just a few months ago, you said Mr. Trump was a sleaze-bag capitalist.”

“He is. But I’ve come to realize he has advantages over Hillary Clinton. To your point, he’s somewhat less sleazy. Actually, far less sleazy. I presented him with my plan for worker-owned businesses in America. Not as a mandate, but through tax breaks and minor funding. He wasn’t opposed. In fact, he said he was willing to try that with one of his companies, which I understand is going broke. I convinced him this isn’t some Communist plot. It’s motivating to employees. It’s participatory democracy. And if it works, it’s good.”

“Mr. Trump, Mr. Sanders wants to revisit the federal bailout of big banks. As you know, he pegged that fiasco at many trillions of dollars—far more than the government was willing to admit.”

“Bernie’s four hundred percent right on that one. We gave away the farm to those bastards. They held us up. It was highway robbery. I’ve been talking about the banks and Wall Street for years. They’re running a long con on the American people. We should get a large chunk of the actual bailout money back. I mean, what do those guys actually produce? Nothing. They sit there and make money make money. I build hotels and casinos and golf courses. I’m a builder.”

“Mr. Sanders, isn’t Mr. Trump unconscionably and disgustingly rich?”

“It makes me sick to think about it. But at least he does put people to work. That’s more than I can say for Wall Street traders. Now, when we get to immigration, Donald and I are definitely on opposing sides. But I’ll admit our screening process to detect potential terrorists coming here is broken. Donald and I have been talking to border officials. They’re honest and hard-working. They’re at the end of their rope. We’ve got to give them help, if we want to prevent what happened in Paris and Brussels from visiting our shores. I’m not in favor of public places in our cities blowing up. Are you?”

“Mr. Trump, Mr. Sanders is a declared socialist. How can you put up with that?”

“I can’t. Socialism is the most stupid form of government humans have ever tried. Obamacare is a complete mess. Bernie sees some of the flaws, too. He wants single-payer. I tell him that’ll be far worse than what we’ve got now. I want free competition among companies, so the best plans attract the most customers. Bernie and I are still arguing on this one. But he’s open to the concept that we want a healthcare system that works. What an idea, right? Something that works? And the medical people—we can’t let them off the hook, either. Too many drugs. The big drug companies are killing us with their marketing campaigns. They’re inventing diseases to fit the drugs they’re developing. I think Bernie and I are both beginning to see that. Their lobbyists are feasting off the Congress and the President.”

“Mr. Sanders, what about—“

At this point, the live television feed suddenly goes dark.

Trump’s voice can still be heard for a few moments.

“They’re censoring us. Don’t worry, folks, we’ll pick this up on the Web. Go to our site, ‘Trump plus Bernie’. If they shut that down, you’ll know we’re under martial law. Go to the White House and make your voice heard…”

Trump plus Bernie? Horrible? Unthinkable?

Worse than Hillary or Cruz or Ryan or Romney? Really?

Is the hallucination that “everything is all right and everything is under control and everything is standard” better than cracking the political two-party egg?

Is it?

Is the endless media gloss better than the media desperately trying to deal with Bernie and Donald on the same ticket?

If this country is internally starting to pull itself apart even further, into two battling camps, is it better to put a war-crimes gargoyle like Hillary in the White House, and listen to her babble about national unity—or is it better to shove the two men who represent the great separation out there together?

And if putting those two men out there together on one ticket drives the American people nuts…is the contradiction actually making people crazier or is it starting to bring them back toward sanity?

What’s the fear of two opposing candidates on the same ticket all about?

Is the fear authentic, or is it just a reaction to the fact that we’ve been fed fake unity wall-to-wall forever? Candidates and leaders have been selling us fake unity to cover their crimes and their hunger for control. They’ve been pledging togetherness while they’ve been tearing us apart, because divide and conquer is still the first rule of politics.

Instead of pretending the fake unity is real, why not dump that delusion and put two men who are, in many ways, opposed to each other on the same ticket?

Why not bust the delusion?

Why not let them argue?

Why not let them come to some agreements—because they would.

Why not show the American people that endless whining and moaning about issues and differences is best displayed by taking the differences to the top of the political food chain, in the form of two men who might actually believe at least some of what they’re saying?

Let them argue, disagree, and try to hash out their problems with each other. In full view.

At the very least, it will create a pause in the mind.

The public mind, such as it is, will spin wheels and break cogs, and flip and grind and stop—because it can’t process the new situation, because it can’t deal with an actual dialogue between two enemies. Because it can’t conceive of the possibility that it’s viewing two extremes having voices in the same space, out in the open, on the same ticket. Because the public mind has been tuned to thinking that never the twain will meet. Because the public mind wants the conflict to seethe and boil under the surface rather than on the surface. Because the public mind wants non-resolution. Because, yes, the public mind wants to moan about what can never be resolved. Because the public mind is a mad insane child who can’t be satisfied and wants it that way. Because the public mind is a vast loser. Because the public mind is an artifact, a synthetic substance molded from a thousand personal dissatisfactions into exactly the kind of Mass Victim our politicians need and desire.

exit from the matrix

And even for those who have escaped the left-right, black-white, yin-yang, ding-dong status quo, who have seen through the divide and conquer formula and the two-political-parties- with-one-head ruse; the prospect of seeing two men who are apparently on opposite ends of the spectrum put their cards on the table in public, together, and go at each other, in order to come to some understanding—that would be a relief. That would be a start of something interesting in a White House that has, for decades, been rigged to disable the country and the people and the world.

If there is a sliver of a chance of turning fake share and care into real share and care…why not?

Break the trance.

Shake and bake.

Put those two boys on television every night and let them go up against each other, all out, while running together on the same side.

Make the impossible possible.

Shred the “this-or-that” set-up.

Explode the American political cover story.

Bernie AND The Donald in 2016.

Yin plus yang equals what?

Take a chance, for once, and find out.

We already know the sum of fake reality plus fake reality.

Jon Rappoport

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

The depletion of human energy—reversing the trend

The depletion of human energy—reversing the trend

by Jon Rappoport

April 11, 2016

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

Energy.

As in: energy depletion.

Without energy, the individual feels trapped. In that state, he seeks to conform, fit in, survive long enough to die of old age.

Body and mind deploy various feedback mechanisms to inform a person about his “available supply of energy,” and when these signals are taken as absolute truth, trouble comes.

“I can sense my energy is dwindling. So I have to…settle for less, or see a doctor, or give up, or accept that I’m getting older, or change my values, or tune up a victim-story, or join a group, or…”

On and on it goes.

In this twilight zone, the individual is unwilling to consider solutions that could restore his vitality. He’s already opted for a lower level of life.

In particular, he’s unwilling to explore the one aspect of his capability that works like magic: imagination.

That’s out. No dice. Preposterous. Absurd.

After all, imagination is just that spring rain he felt as a child, that unknown space that held all the promise in the world.

That was then; this is now.

Now is sober reflection. Now is routine. Now is habit. Now is empty.

Once upon a time, he read a science fiction novel and, at the end of it, he felt as if he were standing, triumphant, in deep space at the crossroad of a hundred solar systems.

Now he knows there is no such place. Now he is intelligent.

And now he has no energy.

The light that once flared is gone.

The idea that his own imagination could lead him to discoveries beyond anything he knows is fool’s gold.

Yes, once when he was twenty, he woke up in the middle of the night and walked to his window and looked out over a city and knew he was on the cusp of an endless future…but what can he do about that now? There is no returning.

So his imagination waits. It idles.

Yet…if he took a chance, if he began to dream again, if he started up the engine, if he considered offloading the interlocking systems that have become his daily life, what might happen?

What layers of dead thought might peel away?

What abiding convictions might dissolve?

What energies might be restored?

Is there a huge space beyond his common neurological impulses and rigid survival habits, where Vision can be played out on a vast scale?

Is there a different kind of life he can enter?

Can he take a route around the banners and facades of his former reality after opening the door to his imagination?

Exit From the Matrix

There is, in fact, a silent channel that winds through the entire time-scale of the human race.

History does not officially record it, because history is written by winners for losers, and this silent channel has nothing to do with pedestrian notions of victory or defeat.

The route of imagination has no truck with conventional space or time. It invents its own, and eventually introduces them into the world.

How many stories are there about journeying knights who cross the boundary from ordinary events into a realm of magic?

The stories are messages…sent to ourselves, to remember. This place, this day, this moment is a platform from which to embark.

Adventure, with no end.

Imagination.

Energy.

Jon Rappoport

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