The individual is not the group

The individual is not the group

by Jon Rappoport

January 8, 2016

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

“Exercises and techniques for accessing and deploying imagination…these would be essential. Exercises that allow the individual to reinstate his basic creative position in his own life, his own future. Exercises that allow the individual to use his imagination in many different ways. Ramping up power.” (Preliminary notes for Exit From the Matrix, Jon Rappoport)

There are many ways I could launch from the headline of this article.

In this case, I want to point out that all life is not composed of groups trying to solve the problems created by other groups.

This may come as revelation to some.

In the long, long, long run, the struggle pitting one group against another fails, because, swallowed up in the process is the individual.

He sacrifices what he is and what he can be for the sake of a cause. It may be a just cause, a good cause, a foolish cause, a crazy cause—but the outcome is the same. In the long run.

The best version of a free Republic, whether it was actually envisioned that way by its founders, is: the organized State exists to allow the greatest possible latitude to the individual.

This, in case there is any doubt, is not a prefabricated utopia. Far from it.

What does the individual have to offer? He has everything he is capable of doing, when he liberates himself from petty ideas and limitations about what he is. That journey of liberation is his own. It isn’t anybody else’s.

It is, as I’ve pointed out many times, a journey of imagination.

Here are preliminary notes I made as I was putting together my second collection, Exit From The Matrix:

Imagination lets a person know what could exist but doesn’t now exist. Imagination lets a person know what could be invented. Imagination lets a person know that, despite claims to the contrary, the future is open and unwritten.

Imagination lets a person know that he can think thoughts that have never been thought before.

The journey of individual liberation is, therefore, much more than discovering what already exists in one’s own mind.

The world as it is, things as they are—this is eventually the sensation of depleted imagination. Of course, imagination never diminishes, it just waits. For you.

The deployment of imagination unlocks hidden energies. A power, sought after and never found in other endeavors, appears.

Psychological tests are tests of imagination. The less you have, the more normal you are. If you have none, you’re perfect. Then they put you in a field and call you a rock.

Tiny imagination is just part of this absurd culture. You don’t have to go along with it. You don’t have to think the leading frontier of imagination is about finding a spray that will make your hair look like a shellacked rabbit.

Imagination is larger than any universe. It needs no sanction from the world or from other worlds. It is not some secret form of physics. It is not religion. It is not cosmology. It is not any one picture of anything. It’s what you invent.

The group does not have imagination. It poaches on individuals with imagination.

The group is a graveyard where imagination has been downgraded and forgotten.

The group is the rationalization for people who have lost the thread of their own imaginations.

The group is the feel-good place where people can console each other about the loss of their own imaginations.

The group sometimes acts to liberate the individual, but then the group forgets what it’s been doing and moves forward for its own sake, for its collective power. And that power opposes what the individual can be.

The group is a locus for discussion that eventually leads to a zero effect. Anyone who wakes up to his own imagination would leave the group.

The group is a place where people are invited to forget they are individuals.

The group is promoted by people who are afraid of their own imaginations and the implication that they create their own futures.

The group is promoted by people who want to leave their own individuality in the dust.

The group is for people who demand: “We must all agree on something.”

The group may have temporary value, but it never disbands. It becomes a fungus. It seeks more territory.

exit from the matrix

Imagination soars. It is the individual at the edge of his own exploration.

Imagination was the source for the building of modern civilization. But then civilization became dedicated to itself and the group.

The individual never goes away, and neither does his imagination.

Imagination can light up a room, a house, a city, a nation, a planet, a galaxy, a universe.

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.

CIA denies request for info on Edward Snowden

CIA denies request for info on Edward Snowden

Matrix One: who is Edward Snowden?

by Jon Rappoport

January 7, 2016

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

“The Matrix can be looked at as one gigantic covert op. It spills over with cover stories and lies and false trails, to conceal what is actually going on under the surface. The information- specialists have to make the surface seem true, so no one bothers to look underneath it. Keep in mind that media stories, no matter how absurd they are, tend to be believed because they’re simpler than the truth, and people want simple. If the Times says three terrorists jumped out of a mule’s ass on a quiet road and killed a group of tourists, and you come along and propose that the attack was actually the result of a multi-bank money transfer and three idiot dupes who were pumped up by an FBI informant, part of the reason your scenario is rejected is because the mule’s-ass version has only one step…” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Update: the CIA has just refused a FIOA request for information about its former employee, Edward Snowden.

The request was filed on November 15 by John Young, the owner of Cryptome.org. The CIA’s response, dated December 29, refers to Young’s query seeking “records granting Edward Joseph Snowden access to classified information…[and] records indicating Mr. Snowden[‘s] compliance with controls of classified information upon leaving the CIA.”

The CIA’s letter to Young states, “…the CIA can neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records responsive to your request.” The CIA letter states that any other response would violate rules governing classification of data.

Bottom line: the CIA has nothing specific to say about Snowden’s status while he worked for the Agency.

Once again, the question of exactly who Edward Snowden is resurfaces.

Of course, that question is taboo in major media. All we’re given is: Snowden worked as a contractor for the NSA, he stole vital information, he gave it to journalists, and they are gradually releasing it.

And those who support Snowden consider him an exceptional hero, about whom unpleasant questions should never be asked. He did a wonderful thing; end of story.

Well, what about this: in the wake of Snowden’s revelations and the consequent press coverage, a few billion people know something they didn’t quite know before. They know their lives are under surveillance. What better way to enforce the Surveillance State than by letting people know it exists, so they’ll police and censor themselves? Can this element be legitimately considered in the telling of the Snowden story? Or must it be ignored and rejected out of hand?

Who is former CIA employee Edward Snowden?

As we go along, keep in mind that intelligence-agency personnel live in order to tell low-level and high-level lies. They tend to fall into a suicidal funk if they aren’t lying on at least three or four levels at once.

Let’s look at Snowden’s brief history as reported by The Guardian (“Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations”, by Glen Greenwald, Ewen MacAskill, and Laura Poitras in Hong Kong, 11 June 2013):

In 2003, at age 19, without a high school diploma, Snowden enlists in the Army. He begins a training program to join the Special Forces. At what point after enlistment can a new soldier start this elite training program?

Snowden breaks both legs in an exercise. He’s discharged from the Army. Is that automatic? How about healing and then resuming service?

If he was accepted in the Special Forces training program because he had special computer skills, then why discharge him simply because he broke both legs? Just asking. Just a thought.

“Sorry, Ed, but with two broken legs we just don’t think you can hack into terrorist data anymore. You were good, but not now. Try Walmart. They always have openings.”

Circa 2003, Snowden gets a job as a security guard for an NSA facility at the University of Maryland. He specifically wanted to work for NSA? Or was it just a generic job opening near his home he found out about? Nothing worth discovering here? Nothing to see?

Snowden shifts jobs. Boom. He’s now in the CIA, in IT. He apparently has no high school diploma.

In 2007, Snowden is sent to Geneva. He’s only 23 years old. The CIA gives him a diplomat cover story. He’s put in charge of maintaining computer-network security for the CIA and US diplomats. Major job. Obviously, he has access to a wide range of classified documents. Sound a little odd? He’s just a kid.

During this period, in Geneva, one of the incidents that really sours Snowden on the CIA is the “turning of a Swiss banker.” One night, CIA guys get a banker drunk, encourage him to drive home, the banker gets busted, the CIA guys help him out, and then with that bond formed, they eventually get the banker to reveal deep financial secrets to the Agency.

This sours Snowden? He’s that naïve? He doesn’t know by now that the CIA does this sort of thing all the time? He’s shocked? He “didn’t sign up for this?” He doesn’t already know about CIA assassinations and engineered regime changes? MKULTRA?

In 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA. Why? Presumably because he’s disillusioned. It should noted here that Snowden claimed he could do very heavy damage to the entire US intelligence community in 2008, but decided to wait because he thought Obama, just coming into the Presidency, might keep his “transparency” promise.

After two years with the CIA in Geneva, Snowden really had the capability to take down the whole US inter-agency intelligence network, or a major chunk of it?

If you buy that without further inquiry, I have condos for sale on the dark side of the moon.

In 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA and goes to work in the private sector. Dell, Booze Allen Hamilton. In this latter job, Snowden is assigned to work at the NSA.

He’s an outsider, but, again, he claims to have so much access to so much sensitive NSA data that he can take down the whole US intelligence network in a single day. The. Whole. US. Intelligence. Network.

This is Ed Snowden’s sketchy legend. To anyone familiar with intelligence legends and cover stories, it’s mostly red flags, alarm bells, sirens, flashing lights.

Then we have the crowning piece: they solved the riddle: Ed Snowden was able to steal thousands of highly protected NSA documents because…he had a thumb drive.

It’s the weapon that breached the inner sanctum of the most sophisticated information agency in the world.

It’s the weapon to which the NSA, with all its resources, remains utterly vulnerable. Can’t defeat it.

Not only did Snowden stroll into NSA with a thumb drive, he knew how to navigate all the security layers put in place to stop people from stealing classified documents.

“Let’s see. We have a new guy coming to work for us here at NSA today? Oh, whiz kid. Ed Snowden. Outside contractor. Booz Allen. He’s not really an in-house employee of the NSA. Twenty-nine years old. No high school diploma. Has a GED. He worked for the CIA and quit. Hmm. Why did he quit? Oh, never mind, who cares? No problem.

“Tell you what. Let’s give this kid access to our most sensitive data. Sure. Why not? Everything. That stuff we keep behind 986 walls? Where you have to pledge the life of your first-born against the possibility you’ll go rogue? Let Snowden see it all. Sure. What the hell. I’m feeling charitable. He seems like a nice kid.”

NSA is the most awesome spying agency in this world. If you cross the street in Podunk, Anywhere, USA, to buy an ice cream soda, on a Tuesday afternoon in July, they know.

They know whether you sit at the counter and drink that soda or take it and move to the only table in the store.

But this agency, with all its vast power and its dollars…

Can’t track one of its own, as he steals the whole store. Can’t keep the store locked. And they can’t track the later movements of this man who made up a story about needing treatment in Hong Kong for epilepsy and then skipped the country.

Just can’t find him.

Can’t find him in Hong Kong, where he does a sit-down video interview with Glenn Greenwald of The Guardian. Can’t find that “safe house” or that “hotel” where he’s staying.

No. Can’t find him or spy on his communications while he’s in Hong Kong. Can’t figure out he’s booked a flight to Russia. Can’t intercept him at the airport before he leaves for Russia. Too difficult.

And this man, this employee, is walking around with four laptops that contain the keys to all the secret spying knowledge in the known cosmos.

Can’t locate those laptops. The most brilliant technical minds of this or any other generation can find a computer in Outer Mongolia in the middle of a blizzard, but these walking-around computers in Hong Kong are somehow beyond reach.

And, again, before this man, Snowden, this employee, skipped Hawaii, he was able to access a principal segment of the layout of the entire US intelligence network. Yes.

Not only that, but anyone who worked at this super-agency as an analyst, as a systems-analyst supervisor, could have done the same thing. Could have stolen the keys to the kingdom.

This is why NSA geniuses with IQs over 180 decided, in the aftermath of the Snowden affair, that they needed to draft “tighter rules and procedures” for their employees. Right.

Pieces of internal of security they hadn’t realized they needed before would be put in place.

This is, let me remind you, the most secretive spying agency in the world. The richest spying agency. The smartest spying agency.

But somehow, over the years, they’d overlooked their own security. They’d left doors open, so that any one of their own analyst-supervisors could steal everything.

Could take it all. Could just snatch it away and copy it and store it on a few laptops.

But now, yes, having been made aware of this vulnerability, the agency will make corrections.

Sure.

And reporters for elite media don’t find any of this hard to swallow.

On the ever-solicitous Charley Rose, a gaggle of pundits/newspeople warned that Ed Snowden, walking around with those four laptops, could be an easy target for Chinese spies or Russian spies, who could get access to the data on those computers.

But the NSA can’t. No.

The tightest and strongest and richest and smartest spying agency in the world can’t find its own employee. It’s in the business of tracking, and it can’t find him.

It’s in the business of security, and it can’t protect its own data from its employees.

If you instantly believe all that, with no questions, I have timeshares to sell in the black hole in the center of the Milky Way.

Here is a different possible scenario. Is it any less likely than the one we’ve been treated to?

Snowden was working an op, either as a dupe or knowingly. He was working for…well, let’s see, who would that be?

Who was he working for before he entered the private sector and wound up at NSA?

The CIA.

Would that be the same CIA who competes, on certain levels, with the NSA?

The same CIA who’s watched its own prestige and funding diminish, as human intelligence has given way to electronic snooping?

Yes, it would be. CIA just can’t match the NSA when it comes to gathering signals-intell.

Wired Magazine, June 2013 issue (“NSA Snooping Was Only the Beginning. Meet the Spy Chief Leading Us Into Cyberwar”, 06.12.13). James Bamford, author of three books on the NSA, states:

“In April, as part of its 2014 budget request, the Pentagon [which rules the NSA] asked Congress for $4.7 billion for increased ‘cyberspace operations,’ nearly $1 billion more than the 2013 allocation. At the same time, budgets for the CIA and other intelligence agencies were cut by almost the same amount, $4.4 billion. A portion of the money going to…[NSA] will be used to create 13 cyberattack teams.”

That means spying money. Far more for NSA, far less for CIA.

Turf war.

Suppose people at the CIA, genuine experts, carefully, over time, were able to access those NSA documents, and handed them to Snowden—or patiently, and at length, or showed Snowden how to execute that quite sophisticated piece of access-trickery? Because (more believably) NSA’s internal security was very good. It wasn’t (far less believably) a bumble-dumb of mismanaged amateur clockwork. It was quite tight, so tight that a man like Snowden wouldn’t have been able to move through it like a ghost.

The CIA, of course, couldn’t be seen as the NSA leaker. They needed a guy. They needed a guy who could appear to be from the NSA, to make things look worse for the NSA and shield the CIA.

They had Ed Snowden. He had worked for the CIA in Geneva, in a high-level position, overseeing computer-systems security.

Somewhere in his CIA past, Libertarian and freedom-loving Ed meets a fellow CIA guy who sits down with him and says, “You know, Ed, things have gone too damn far. The NSA is spying on everybody all the time. I can show you proof. They’ve gone beyond the point of trying to catch terrorists. They’re doing something else. They’re expanding a Surveillance State, which can only lead to one thing: the destruction of America, what America stands for, what you and I know America is supposed to be. The NSA isn’t like us, Ed. We go after terrorists for real. That’s it. Whereas NSA goes after everybody. We have to stop it. We need a guy…and there are those of us who think you might be that guy…”

This could be a straight con, or a few CIA people could have actually wanted to torpedo the NSA for its unlimited surveilling operations.

Ed says, “Tell me more. I’m intrigued.”

He eventually buys in.

And the CIA will eventually find a way to protect and shield him while he’s escaping the US and staying in Hong Kong.

Put two scenarios on the truth scale and assess them. Which is more likely? The tale Snowden told to Glenn Greenwald, with all its holes, with its super-naive implications about the fumbling, bumbling NSA, or a scenario in which Snowden is the CIA’s boy?

Let me enhance my alternative scenario and branch it out. If Snowden is still working for the CIA, he and his buds aren’t the only people who want to take the NSA down a notch. No. Because, for example, NSA has been spying on everybody inside the Beltway.

Spying on politicians with secrets.

That includes a major, major, prime NSA target: Congress.

Do you think members of Congress with heavy secrets enjoy knowing NSA is over their shoulders?

Imagine this conversation taking place, in a car, on a lonely road outside Washington, late at night. The speakers are Congressman X and a contractor representing a covert unit inside the NSA:

“Well, Congressman, do you remember January 6th? A Monday afternoon, a men’s room in the park off—”

“What the hell are you talking about!”

“A stall in the men’s room. The kid. He was wearing white high-tops. A Skins cap. T-shirt. Dark hair. Scar across his left cheek. Blue tattoo on his right thigh.”

“Jesus.”

Dead silence.

“What do you want?” says the Congressman, now trapped.

Imagine this one: “Senator, we know about the underage cheerleader in Ohio. Your trip there in 2010, just before the election.”

Blackmail on the hoof.

If you’re a Congressman or a Senator with nasty secrets, and you know NSA is spying on you, because it’s spying on everyone in the Congress, who’s your potential best friend?

Somebody who can go up against the NSA, somebody who wants to go up against the NSA.

And who might that be?

The CIA?

It’s not perfect, but it’s the best you can do.

So if you’re a Congressman, you go to a friend in the CIA and you have a chat about “the NSA problem.” How can you get NSA off your back? Your CIA friend has his own concerns about NSA.

He tells you in confidence: “Look, maybe we can help you. We know a lot about the NSA. We have good people. You might say one of our jobs is watching the watchers at NSA, to, uh, make sure they don’t go too far in their spying.”

This sounds interesting. If you have to sell your soul, you’d rather sell it to the CIA than the NSA. It’s a judgment call.

And a few months later, a year later…you read about Ed Snowden blowing a hole in the NSA. You take note of the fact that Snowden worked for the CIA. He worked for them in Geneva. Then he left for the private sector and got himself assigned to the NSA.

Hmm. Maybe you have some cause for optimism. Maybe your CIA friend is helping you out.

Some schmuck reporter asks you about the current NSA scandal and you say, “Of course we have to protect classified data, in order to prevent terrorist attacks. But at the same time, we need to respect the Bill of Rights. People can’t go around spying on anyone for no reason.”

You’re sending your own signal.

You’re tipping your CIA guy. You appreciate his help, if in fact he’s helping you. You can’t ask him directly. If you did, he’d never give you a straight answer. But just in case…you’re tipping him off.

At the same time, you’re wondering how many people in Congress are so controlled by the NSA that they’d never try to break out? How many people, with how many secrets, are so deeply blackmailed they’d never dare go up against NSA?

This is an important calculation. The battle might already be lost. You might not stand a chance. Maybe nobody can help you. Maybe you can’t escape.

Maybe you shouldn’t even hint that NSA has overstepped its legal boundaries by spying on Americans.

That’s the conundrum that keeps you up at night.

What if the spies spying on their own government are running the government beyond the ability of anyone to stop them?

You don’t give a damn about what this would mean for America. You only care about what it means for you and your secrets.

Maybe this is the jail you’re in for the rest of your life.

When you’re back in your home state showing your face and giving speeches, and a voter comes up to you and voices a concern about his dwindling paycheck, his house payment, his endangered pension…and when you nod and gaze out at the horizon, as if to pluck a magic answer from the ether, you’re really thinking about the conundrum.

You’re thinking about the life sentence you’re serving in the Surveillance State.

And that night, in your hotel room, you get down on your knees and pray that Ed Snowden is still working for the CIA.

Who else, besides the CIA and numerous politicians inside the Beltway, would be aching to take the NSA down a notch? Who else would be rooting hard for this former (?) CIA employee, Snowden, to succeed?

How about Wall Street?

Still waiting to be uncovered? NSA spying to collect elite financial data, spying on the people who have that data: the major investment banks. NSA scooping up that data to predict, manipulate, and profit from trading markets all over the world.

A trillion-dollar operation.

Snowden worked for Booz Allen, which is owned by the Carlyle Group ($170 billion in assets). Carlyle, the infamous. Their money is making money in 160 investment funds.

A few of Carlyle’s famous front men in its history: George HW Bush, James Baker (US Secretary of State), Frank Carlucci (US Secretary of Defense and CIA Deputy Director), John Major (British Prime Minister), Arthur Levitt (Chairman of the SEC).

Suppose you’re one of the princes in the NSA castle, and Ed Snowden has just gone public with your documents. You’re saying, “Let’s see, this kid worked for Booz Allen, which is owned by the Carlyle Group. We (NSA) have been spying over Carlyle’s shoulder, stealing their proprietary financial data. What are the chances they’re getting a little revenge on us now?”

Yes, you’re thinking about that. You’re looking into it.

The Surveillance State has created an apparatus whose implications are staggering. It’s a different world now. And sometimes it takes a writer of fiction to flesh out the larger landscape.

Brad Thor’s novel, Black List, posits the existence of a monster corporation, ATS, that stands alongside the NSA in collecting information on every move we make. ATS’ intelligence-gathering capability is unmatched anywhere in the world.

On pages 117-118 of Black List, Thor makes a stunning inference that, on reflection, is as obvious as the fingers on your hand:

“For years ATS [substitute “NSA”] had been using its technological superiority to conduct massive insider trading. Since the early 1980s, the company had spied on anyone and everyone in the financial world. They listened in on phone calls, intercepted faxes, and evolved right along with the technology, hacking internal computer networks and e-mail accounts. They created mountains of ‘black dollars’ for themselves, which they washed through various programs they were running under secret contract, far from the prying eyes of financial regulators.

“Those black dollars were invested into hard assets around the world, as well as in the stock market, through sham, offshore corporations. They also funneled the money into reams of promising R&D projects, which eventually would be turned around and sold to the Pentagon or the CIA.

“In short, ATS had created its own license to print money and had assured itself a place beyond examination or reproach.”

In real life, whether the prime criminal source is one monster corporation or the NSA itself, the outcome would be the same.

Total surveillance has unlimited payoffs when it targets financial markets and the people who have intimate knowledge of them.

“Total security awareness” programs of surveillance are ideal spying ops in the financial arena, designed to grab millions of bits of inside information, and then utilize them to make investments and suck up billions (trillions?) of dollars.

It gives new meaning to “the rich get richer.”

Think about Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. Think about the NSA men who already know everything about GS and Morgan, and are using this knowledge to steal sums that might make GS and Morgan blush with envy.

Goldman Sachs, Chase, and Morgan consider trillion-dollar trading markets their own private golden-egg farm. They run it, they own it, they manipulate it for their own ends.

If NSA has been looking over their shoulders for the past 30 years, discovering all their knowledge, and operating a meta- invasion, siphoning off enormous profits, NSA would rate as their Enemy Number One.

And would need to be torpedoed.

Enter Ed Snowden.

power outside the matrix

In this piece, I’m balancing and comparing the likelihood of various “Snowden scenarios.” The scenario we’ve been fed is severely lacking in credibility. It has less credibility than the alternatives I’ve sketched out.

For those who think the blizzard of US intelligence agencies is one unified whole, think again. These agencies do cooperate with each other, but they also compete. Competing, lying, subverting, and inventing cover stories is their daily vocation. A day without lying is a day without happiness.

Of course, it’s easier, and in the case of the standard Snowden tale, more gratifying, to accept what major media present to us. Their stories are less disturbing, and simpler, than the complex machinations of truth.

As yet, no reporters have faced off with Snowden and relentlessly asked him probing questions about himself. Why is that? Do the reporters with access avoid looking a gift horse in the mouth? Do they prefer painting a heroic picture of the man? Do they think that revealing some stranger truth about him would undercut and undermine what he has brought to light? Or has Snowden himself brusquely cut short any potential attempt to peer deeper than the surface of his words?

There is now a journalistic “Snowden industry.” The few reporters he has favored have made out well. I don’t begrudge them their money, but I would say that, to the degree Snowden must remain an unblemished champion for the industry to continue succeeding, there is a blind spot. There are unwarranted assumptions that preclude a serious asking of the question:

Who is Edward Snowden?

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: freedom

Power Outside The Matrix: freedom

by Jon Rappoport

January 6, 2015

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

Freedom is. It’s the natural state of being.

Before limitation and slavery, there was freedom.

It had no party, no law, no mandate. It just was.

Freedom was and is the simplicity in the tangle, the force that has no equal.

Without it, everything withers, everything is turned into a program.

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.

The Matrix, the central image, is a lie. But not just any lie.

It is very deep, shared, hypnotic picture of reality.

People need more power—more individual power, so they can both stand and operate outside the Matrix.

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.

Power Outside The Matrix, my third collection, 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.

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 a committed individual 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, expanding it, and using it.

On this road, there are no limits.

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 emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Immortal consciousness

Immortal consciousness

by Jon Rappoport

January 6, 2016

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

In previous articles (see here), I’ve cut through a great deal of “scientific” noise and shown that consciousness is not made out of atoms; it’s non-material.

It’s not subject to the laws of physics or the laws of the natural world. It endures. It doesn’t pass away.

I’m talking about individual consciousness…and, therefore, the individual. The You.

Inhabiting a physical form may be a temporary situation, but the You isn’t temporary. It, together with its consciousness, survives.

You survive.

You endure.

There is no end to you.

But consciousness isn’t a steady-state phenomenon. It’s dynamic. It’s, above all else, creative.

It imagines realities and futures. It brings them into being, unless it’s asleep, diverted, buried, ignored, denied.

Consciousness wants to create more consciousness.

My several-decade project of developing imagination exercises was launched with all this in mind, and the culmination was my collection, Exit From The Matrix.

Its purpose: empower consciousness to become more creative.

There is no end to what the individual can invent and achieve.

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.

If Capitalism is dead, this is why

If Capitalism is dead, this is why

by Jon Rappoport

January 5, 2016

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

“An era of corruption is built for those who lead corrupt lives. They revel in the era. They belong. They are home. They don’t care what you call the prevailing system, they’ll find their way, because they know the unspoken rules and how things actually work. Naïve idealists and academic hair-splitters? The corrupt eat them for breakfast.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

The recent acceleration of attacks on capitalism leaves no ground un-scorched. Whatever capitalism is, it’s all bad. It needs to be banned. A wiser and saner alternative must be found—and naturally that alternative will be handed down from Above, where wondrous altruists in government can point us toward the Promised Land.

For the sake of humanity, they will assume the reins of power. They’ll organize businesses and companies and corporations under the umbrella of government, and all will be well.

Forget the fact that they cooperate and collude and conspire and commit crimes with their erstwhile corporate and banking partners. That’s a minor footnote.

Merriam-Webster defines capitalism as: “an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.”

Boiling it down further: you start a company; you own the company; you make a product and you sell it at a price you determine. People buy the product if they choose to.

This arrangement is not evil. You could turn it into a criminal enterprise, if you wanted to. For example, you could make a product that is poison, advertise it as medicine, and pay off those who might expose your ruse. But in that case, you’ve perverted the primary capitalist arrangement.

You would be prosecuted, if discovered. Well, you would be, if law-enforcement personnel were honest. If they weren’t, you could get away with murder.

Now, suppose there are 10,000 companies who do get away with murder. Suppose, to take things further, there are governments who collude with some of these companies and go to war, against other nations, so the companies can obtain access to raw materials they want, in order to manufacture their products.

Is this conspiracy an intrinsic part of capitalism? Is it? Or is it a perversion of the basic capitalist arrangement?

Some would argue that capitalism naturally breeds this perversion, and therefore it is an evil system. But that argument has a flaw. In order to propose it, you need to assume there are a fairly large number of people, in significant positions, who will commit crimes and enable crimes, on an ongoing basis.

And if so, those criminals will pervert any economic system in which they participate. Socialism, Communism, Fascism, State Corporatism, and so on. Therefore, any economic system will turn out to be evil.

Those “idealists” who rail against capitalism are, at best, railing against criminals. They tend to ignore the fact that law-enforcement personnel fail to punish criminals. This is, and always was, the problem.

Capitalism isn’t the problem.

For example, in the early days of the American Republic, state legislatures, fearing the power of corporations, adopted stringent rules: every corporation doing business in a state had to be charted by the legislature; and any corporation doing harm to the public would have its charter yanked. It would be kicked out of the state.

But this state system was eventually swallowed up by corrupt legislators, judges, and corporate criminals.

Do you really want to believe that these states, if they adopted socialism, would have eliminated those criminals?

I’m not even bothering to make the argument that capitalism fosters greater achievement and freedom than socialism. I’m just talking about criminals.

A society in which a large number of people were awake, intelligent, and courageous would directly face the question: what do we do about criminals? How do we ferret them out, how do we prosecute them, how do we keep them from being protected, how do we keep them from gaining too much power?

Abject failure in that regard guarantees the corruption of any political and economic system. Only addled fools would assume that “a more just system” would correct the underlying problem.

When I say “criminal,” in this context, I’m talking about Wall Street thieves; makers of harmful products; bureaucrats who protect harmful products and their producers; legislators who bring pork to their districts; bankers who invent money out of thin air; corporate monopolists who crush their competition; corporate leaders who promote, through their government cronies, wars and invasions; academics and researchers who lie about science in order to elevate corporate profits; egregious polluters; government/corporate partners who destroy jobs at home and set up shop in foreign lands, where slaves work in unconscionable conditions; governments that expand the bloat of their work-forces for no good reason…and so forth and so on.

The levels and extent of corruption are extraordinary, yes. Because, over a very long period of time, criminals have been nurtured, protected, aided, and secretly declared immune from prosecution.

This is not capitalism. This is endemic corruption, and if you need an example from the annals of socialism, examine the old USSR.

It’s all too easy to say there is no solution and the human race is doomed. I’ve known many such critics, and they all exhibit a grim passivity coated with self-serving cynicism. Under cover of “knowing the score,” they’re making excuses for their own misery.

The answer lies in raising children who are honest; who are smart; who are genuinely educated; who are beyond the fatal flaw of buying into the latest flimsy fly-by-night idiot’s-delight idealism; who will stand up for their principles; who believe in individual power and responsibility; who don’t see the benefit of turning into chronic low-level liars; who are liberated from whining and moaning; who refuse to go along with the crowd; who mix and mingle with enough life-as-it-is to avoid becoming androids and robots; who can spot con artists and shuck-and-jive altruists at a thousand yards; who see what criminals at all levels are doing to those around them; who have the imagination to envision a different world…

And that takes a certain kind of parent.

That is not the responsibility of the State. It doesn’t take a village. It doesn’t take a politician with “a better answer.” It doesn’t take paralyzing fear. Or surrender. Or fairy tales and rainbows.

It takes individuals. Each one unique. Each one alive and awake. Each one rejecting the decaying nature of criminals. Criminals in the street, criminals in the halls of government, criminals in the boardrooms.

No excuses. No rationalizations.

the matrix revealed

Claim what I’m suggesting is impossible, if you want to. Say it can’t be done. But time is long, civilizations and societies come and go, and after the last corrupt society falls there is always another chance.

History is full of events that never could have happened, but did. If overarching power were always an irresistible force, we would not be where we are now. We would all be gibbering biological machines, unable to even read or comprehend a single cogent thought.

No moment or period of time is All One Thing. The juvenile mind cannot understand this. It seeks the simplest characterization. It demands supreme heaven or final hell. But freedom hasn’t been defeated.

The freedom-impulse is still here. Not because it drips and slides down from mass consciousness, but because individuals still exist.

Perhaps you are one of those.

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.

Interview with a dead Orson Welles

Interview with a dead Orson Welles

~revised and updated~

by Jon Rappoport

January 5, 2016

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

Someone somewhere will surely think this is “channeling,” so allow me to set the record straight. It isn’t. It’s fiction. However, as well all know, fiction often makes more sense than fact. Enough said on that point.

In this interview with Orson Welles, we consider matters he’s been keeping bottled up for a long time, ever since Hollywood more or less cast him aside. For some reason, he seems to agree with my views on many points.

Q (Rappoport): You’re a comedian. Would you agree?

A (Welles): Of course. That’s not all I am, but yes. Comedy has effervescence. It spills over the sides of the container. The container is “things as they are.” When you keep pouring new material into it and let it flood over the sides, you’re going to run into laughter, eventually.

Q: The container itself is a joke.

A: It’s a joke that can kill you, but sure. When you’ve been around theater as long as I have, you understand that the whole construction called ordinary reality is just another piece of theater—except it’s posing as the only show in town. That’s the joke.

Q: How old were you when you figured this out?

A: I think I’ve always known it. People take on roles and they act them out.

Q: Why?

A: That’s a hell of a question. I guess it’s because they don’t see an alternative. There is a psychological fixation on One. One role, one idea, one answer, one ultimate objective, one cure, one ending. It represents a hunger for limits. I never liked that.

Q: You never like to come to the end of things.

A: No. My endings were usually tricks. You know, a way of arriving at the conclusion of a story. But actually, I could have gone on forever. I could have extended every movie I ever made out to infinity. Why not? It’s more interesting. You just keep inventing.

Q: So reality is infinite?

A: It could be. There’s no rule against it. This is another aspect of comedy. At some point, as you keep extending things, it’s funny. Your characters, in a movie, break out of their confines. The seams split. You can make that serious and horrible, but if you keep going long enough, it turns into comedy. Because the roles disintegrate. The limits crack. You’re in new spaces. Freedom takes over.

Q: Immortality.

A: Well, yes. I mean, I’m dead, but I’m not. Death is just one way of ending the story, but you don’t have to tell or live a story that way. You just go on. You move on.

Q: In your later years, you gained an enormous amount of weight.

A: That was the result of boredom. And the boredom came out of the fact that I wasn’t ingenious enough to assemble everything I needed to make the films I really wanted to make. You see, after Citizen Kane, which I made in my 20s, I saw where it could all go. I saw I could make movies that no one had ever thought of. This may sound odd, but Kane was really a movie about making movies. That’s what I discovered. On a higher level, let’s say, it was a movie about shadows and light and camera angles and the emotion coming out of characters on the screen, all rolled up into moving paintings. It was quite beautiful to me. I was struck by it. I loved it. I wanted to take off from there and fly into the wild blue yonder. The possibilities were endless.

Q: You had the energy—

A: You have no idea. It was titanic. It was radiating out of every cell in my body.

Q: So you make Citizen Kane and you’re 24 years old.

A: It was a gargantuan act of ego.

Q: That’s why it’s endured.

A: Yes, I would say so.

Q: So in your case, it’s beneficent ego.

A: Well, not all the time. I once threw a man off a bridge.

Q: That’s a new one.

A: He attacked me. He said The Magnificent Ambersons was a drawing-room drama.

Q: Did he die?

A: Oh no. The bridge was four feet above a narrow river. They fished him out and we all went and had a drink. People have the wrong idea about ego. Big is not a problem. Small is the problem. And if you stay in the middle ground, you experience the worst case. Then you’re torn to pieces. Attrition and gnawing from all quarters. Beyond a certain point, more ego is a balloon and you float up off the ground. If you can hold on and allow the ride, you develop spontaneous resources.

Q: Ego is a medium, like paint or film.

A: You can use it if you want to.

Q: But people then assume art means humility.

A: People assume God is waiting for them in a city built on clouds, where they’ll melt like butter into a piece of cosmic toast. Humility is a delusion. An ideal of sheer pretension. It’s an amateur’s role in a doomed play.

Q: Ego as a social behavior is buffoonery.

A: That’s why Citizen Kane is a comedy.

Q: And the reason why it’s not seen as that?

A: Large looming sets, and camera angles slanted upward from low positions. You can have a gloomy comedy. I may have invented the form.

Q: Touch of Evil—they say, every frame is a galvanizing photograph.

A: Why else make a movie? I was like the poet who realizes language is the flight from the ground into the air, or the descent below the surface. In film, you build the architecture to photograph it, and you choose the angles that make the photo. Frankly, if I can’t invent every frame so it has original architecture, then I’m lazy. I’m letting the extraordinary slip by. I may as well be home getting drunk. But you see, I forced the issue. I didn’t sit back and hope. I didn’t wait for every marvelous accident. I was up on the beat, and I stayed there. Well, I didn’t stall. I hit you with image after image. That was the point.

Q: You were the troll under the bridge.

A: The troll waits for years, for even centuries. But once he starts to move, he doesn’t stop.

Q: At what point did you realize the plot of Citizen Kane was a throwaway?

A: Oh, I knew that from the beginning. Stories are everywhere. Grab one. Think of one. Don’t give it much concern. One understands, of course, the audience is a sucker for stories, so that’s what they’ll focus on. You can’t help that. But the Rosebud business, the whole career of Kane, his whole life, drawn in episodes—who cares? It’s just the occasion for doing what I wanted to do. I never put stock in it. I may have said I did, but that was a lie or a momentary fascination. I wanted big space, so I chose a big man. Stories are a rank addiction. How will things turn out? Who will prove to be the winner? What’s the missing clue? Find the right story that touches all the bases, and you can sell it. But I was destroying stories. Understand? If my films had a theme, that was it. Story disintegrates. It has no foundation.

Q: You’re supposed to be obligated to telling a story.

A: Drivel. Wisdom is supposedly choosing the right story, but that’s sheer nonsense. Crap. Every story is a lie. You come to the end of it, and you feel unhappy. I knew that when I was 16. That’s why I had a hard time with studio executives. They’re sucking on the teat of their own religion. They see themselves as priests. They’re selling story to the public. A to B. You begin the fairy tale at A and wind up at B. No switchbacks. No irony. It’s sheer stupidity. I’m not trying to hide the weapon in the desk drawer until the last scene. I’m injecting invention in every frame, so it spills over the edges. The foam shooting over the rim of the glass. That’s what I want. It’s the same with any world. You want to bring sheer abundance to it. Even in the desert, you have an abundance, an over-abundance of space. That’s what I’m aiming for. Over-abundance. On Earth, you have it. Jungles. They just keep on twisting toward the horizon. They lean over the banks of the rivers, trying to swallow up the water, and the water won’t be stopped, either. You have black jaguars, some of the greatest hunting machines anyone could devise. They’re bursting at the seams. Look at their modeling. And lions. And cloudy leopards, pure and sufficient and heartbreaking beauty. You make many types. Let’s not diddle around. The people who made this place, Earth, do you think they held back? Do you think they were wearing lab coats and saluting genes? What immortal hand or eye could frame thy fearful symmetry?

Q: Joseph Calleia in Touch of Evil.

A: Poor old Joe. He could make that sadness sing. Abundantly. He was quite good at comedy, you know. But he pulled on the cloak of sadness, and his elevator would take you down three or four levels, and he would die at the bottom. You knew he had to. There was a collection of caricatures in that film. Not exactly caricatures, because I was inventing, how do I say it, a special kind of type. Not a cartoon. Not tripping falling farce. Not quite naturalism. Perhaps a mixture. They call it grim noir, but that was a comedy, too, that film. You had Ray Collins doing his special brand of flapdoodle. The DA. Coat and hat, barking like a dog. One second he’s three dimensions, the next second he’s flat. And Akim Tamiroff. Farce. But he’ll shoot you. Entrances and exits. The characters appear, flare, flatten out, and disappear. Cardboard town. Cardboard and oil. A collapsible universe.

Q: With different rules.

A: Yes, the rules of, say, GK Chesterton. Reality as facade. But in Touch of Evil, if you put your hand through a wall, you feel you might get bit by something on the other side. The characters aren’t trapped by their natures. Not really. I trap them. That’s part of letting the audience see I’m doing the inventing. They see it going on. Just enough. Same with Citizen Kane.

Q: Reminds me a little of Pablo in Steppenwolf.

A: Yes. He can fold up the bar and the people in it into a toy and put it all in his pocket. He doesn’t do it. Maybe once, to drive home a point. But he could. So could I. Obviously, I don’t. But the fact that I could is part of the overall atmosphere.

Q: Collapsible universe.

A: Magic Theater. It’s a decision you make, and the earlier the better. Will you pose yourself in reality and then mingle with it? Is that your main thrust? Or will you punch holes in it and find velocity and manufacture the worlds you want? You might discover one or two cultures in the history of the planet that, at their beginning, opted for the second alternative. Briefly.

Q: This society we live in provides us with snapshots of artists.

A: Caught, for an instant, on the run. So the life of the artist becomes the watchword. His tribulations. The fact that he’s a fool in his personal life or he’s desperate or he’s rich or he’s this or that. Maybe 20 years out of his endless trillions of immortal years are captured in a highly suspect snapshot. But he’s somewhere else now, still working. He’s exponentially increasing his power. As an incidental effect, his impact on reality, any already-existing reality, is growing. Somewhere out on the rim of a place we’ve never seen, he’s made vanish a few square parsecs of space and invented his own territory to replace it.

Q: Maybe he’s casting a film.

A: Casting comes last. He’s drawing up camera angles, building sets.

Q: Huge houses?

A: Maybe. Maybe pillars and towers and looming sky. Maybe a cardboard town sinking in leftover oil. If it’s Tuesday, it’s one, if it’s Wednesday, the other.

Q: Just out of curiosity—everything you’re saying here, did you know it at the time or only now?

A: Oh, I knew it all along. The individual is immortal. But people want to hear about other things. And I was willing to give them what they wanted, except in my work. In intelligence operations, why would you blow your cover stories? The world of humans is built on cover stories, one after another, in stratified layers.

Q: The Third Man. You and Joseph Cotten.

A: Well, that was all atmosphere. We didn’t have anything else. Atmosphere wrapping a mystery. And when it’s solved, it’s a throwaway, of course. Who cares? But with the crooked streets and lighting and pace, you make your own little temporary religion. An altar sitting somewhere ahead, in the fog.

Q: And who’s God?

A: No one. That’s the point. You say, “Look, suppose there’s no God? That might not be a bad thing.” It might not be a disappointment, after all. No-God can turn out to be an interesting story. If you play your cards right, it could be exciting. You worm your way through the mystery and you find it all folds up in your pocket and you walk away laughing. You leave that sadness behind, a hat blowing across the street. I used to stumble out of the theater after watching Ingmar Bergman, and I’d be choking on laughter. The Seventh Seal. One of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen. Wild Strawberries. Hysterical. Gunnar Bjornstrand, a man at the end of his tether, staring nothing in the face. Do you remember the scene where he’s sitting in the car talking to Ingrid Thulin? Well, tragedy for me has always had a tinge of laughter about to break out. You move over one inch from where you are, and the tears magically dry up and you’re feeling wonderful, as if you’ve just had a good breakfast. You look around and wonder what happened.

Q: Improvisation helps.

A: You might be right. You can always throw a howling cat into a funeral. As people approach the open coffin, the cat runs in chasing a rat. Emotions are mercurial. Of course, in a film, you can saddle them with iron weights, if you want to. But I never thought that was necessary. Why bother with it? It’s a waste of time. Something else is going to happen next, anyway. You have the noble, beautiful, suffering widow standing at the coffin, where her husband is lying in his suit with a flower in his buttonhole, and she glances to her left and sees a man staring down her dress. And she starts to smile. Just a little. Of course, what is she doing with cleavage at the funeral?

Q: Is that a metaphysical question?

A: Well, it could be. Because that’s what you find out. You’re ready for the emotion to lay its card on the table, the emotion that will sum up your experience and confirm the absolute and final significance of it in the overall scheme of things…and then a leaf blows in the window and it doesn’t really matter. Now you have that emotion and the leaf, and as a director, what are you going to do with it? You begin to discover that improvisation is one of the great stable centers behind any universe.

Q: The planning department will hate that.

A: Sure. They pretend they’re working out all the details. They’re going to launch Universe X-B tomorrow, and they’re putting the final touches on the last few sub-sub-sub anomalies. Meanwhile, they’re just the front office. What’s going on behind the scenes is the real main event. Somebody like me is back there, and I’m talking to the tiger. The tiger with wings. I want to see whether he’s ready to burn bright in the forests of the night. Whether he doesn’t care about me, the man who made him. I want him to forget all about me and go on his way. He and I, the two of us, are back there. And yes, I can see, his ferocity is intact. He’s his own man. And just as he brushes by me, padding out the door, he gives me a little smile. Just for a second. That’s all I want. That’s all I need.

Q: Okay, let’s take a short break here. I want to present a quote from William Burroughs (Naked Lunch):

“A bureau takes root anywhere in the state…always reproducing more of its kind, until it chokes the host if not controlled or excised…A bureau operates on…principles of inventing needs to justify its existence. Bureaucracy is wrong as cancer, a turning away from the human evolutionary direction of infinite potentials and differentiation and independent spontaneous action.”

And I want to recall an old recording session you did. It was a voiceover for an ad—Findus Foods. You were the spokesman. You were doing takes on cod, peas, beef. The recording engineer kept the outtakes. Here are a few of your comments:

“That [what the producers want Welles to say] doesn’t make any sense. Sorry…” “You don’t know what I’m up against. ‘Because Findus freeze the cod at sea, and then add a crumb-crisp…coating’…I think, no…” “‘We know a little place in American Far West where Charlie Briggs chops up the finest prairie beef and tastes…’ This is a lot of shit, you know that!” “It isn’t worth it. No money is worth this…” [Welles walks out]

A: Yes, I remember that. I could have used the money, but the script was such a load. I couldn’t do it.

power outside the matrix

Q: One of the predictable effects of the Internet is the need for information over fiction. Beyond a certain point, it becomes a disease. It confirms the robot part of the mind. People shrug off fiction as unnecessary. It’s fluff. Why bother, when the truth is so much more riveting? Well, there is a reason people think that. They have no experience with their own imagination. Information structures have one job: deliver. And the people on the other end of that wire, the audience, are set up to eat what’s brought. It’s a giant Domino’s operation. Or look at it as a see-saw. On one end (information) is a 100000000-ton steel ball, and on the other end (fiction), a grainy pebble. Theoretically, it could have been the other way around. A million short stories for every factoid. But that won’t work, because again, people have very little conscious experience of their own imaginations. It’s a hell of a lot easier to sit back and take in the flow of info—good, bad, or indifferent. And then react. People think magic is a talent, like being able, at the age of six, to draw a cowboy with his six-gun in the holster. Actually, magic is all about imagination, and if a person has no experience with it and no inclination to gain the experience, then he can kiss magic goodbye. Of course, he can remember that, much earlier in his life, he did live through imagination, and he did run and play right in the center of it. Then he might change his mind about a lot of things. He might decide, for instance, that an unending torrent of information reaches a limit, beyond which it does no one any good…Let’s pick up again with any one of your films…

A: Take Touch of Evil. The story line is interesting, but it doesn’t knock you out of your chair. And the role I play, the corrupt sheriff, that’s old hat. Of course, the casting was delicious, because I was able to use Charlton Heston as the earnest lawman, and that fit perfectly. He knew I was doing that, letting his innate sincerity come through, and he saw the ironies that multiplied out of it. But everything was the staging, the atmosphere, the angles, the shots.

Q: What many people would dismiss as inessential.

A: That’s the way the modern world works. Strip things down. Reduce them to their lowest common denominator.

Q: Like machines. One goal, one plan, one strategy, one action to reach the end of line.

A: I was always moving in the opposite direction. Inventing multiple new ways of seeing things. You see, for many people, that is a waste of time. They want their messages simple. They want simple over and over again.

Q: I say it’s a disease.

A: Well, yes. If I’d had to stick to that code, I would have given up making films. I would have written novels. At least there, you’re alone. You can invent whatever you want to. Take the expression “the bottom line.” This has been extended from business and accounting, where it originated, to the idea that you should take the shortest path between two points. You should arrive as quickly as possible at the conclusion. And the conclusion should tell you how to sell something. Or buy it. Or believe it. Or reject it.

Q: When you talk to people about imagination and magic, they tend to look for that same approach.

A: Of course. They’ve been trained that way. They’ve succumbed to the spirit of the times. In Touch of Evil, although the plot itself was fairly tight, I was really using the opportunity to stage a series of scenes in which the characters alternated between being human and being caricature—that shuttling back and forth between realism and facade, between the natural and the bizarre, between the obvious and the esoteric. Esoteric in the sense that people tend to play out roles in life, and when they do, and when you see it, reality itself begins to look different, begins to take on odd qualities. What I’m doing is showing the audience a different kind of reality, one that at first glance looks like the world, but after a little while looks like someone looking at the world. That’s what I’m really revealing—how I can look at the world. Only instead of explaining it, I’m showing it as drama, I’m populating my point of view with characters, and I’m letting you know that’s what I’m doing. I’m not hiding it. I’m enjoying it. Celebrating it.

Q: It’s as if you’re saying to the audience, “I’m dreaming, and here is my dream, only I’m having it while I’m wide awake, and I’m INVENTING the dream as I go along and I’m happy to admit that’s the case.”

A: Yes, that’s right. It’s, you might say, another level of art. Laid out there at a time when we already know so much about art of the past, after we’ve digested so many conventions and traditions of art, after we’ve woken up to the fact that these habits of art are just that—we’ve seen through so much about how artists create reality in traditional ways and forms—and now it’s time to go further.

Q: When you look at how certain so-called classical novels were written, with the all-knowing and all-seeing eye of the third-person narrative looking down from a higher plateau…

A: That’s also, of course, the style of religion. It’s the style of religious discourse and narrative, and people in that venue still buy it. They want the calm and steady hand of the authority. They want that narrator to come across that way. It’s old and worn out and rather absurd, but people cling to it. It’s a cousin, I’d say, to the manual.

Q: The manual?

A: Yes, the instruction book that tells you how to do something, how something works. That calm voice, that assurance.

Q: I see. Yes. And people feel, in the absence of it, they’re lost. They don’t know where to turn.

A: Well, this goes back to your statement that people don’t have the conscious experience of their own imagination. Instead, they look for the steady guiding hand from somewhere else. They think there are only two possibilities. The calm authoritative voice, or chaos. It’s a joke. Imagination tells us there are an infinity of ways of presenting realities, not two. Not one. People watch Citizen Kane and they think it’s about the corruption of the human spirit. That’s the hook for them. It’s one of those “big themes” they’re familiar with and can plug into. Let me tell you something. If I were making a film about corruption of the spirit, it would have looked nothing like Citizen Kane. Nothing. Kane was a movie about the possibilities of film. It was a series of episodes in which the visual language itself was expanding and I was showing people what could be done with space. With dimension. With emotion shot through these larger dimensions. I was talking in a new language. I was introducing the idea that new language could have great impact.

Q: That was the magic.

A: What else could it have been? A return to older techniques? A re-hashing of hackneyed ways of describing reality? People are terribly confused. When you talk to them in a new language, they keep looking for the OBJECTS of what you’re talking about. They keep looking for the old objects embedded in the old language. If they don’t find them, they throw up their hands in dismay. Where are the old things? But you’re not presenting old things. And even worse, you’re not talking to them in the language that would convey those old things. You want them to hear and see and feel the new language, the process of that language unfolding, but they search after familiar themes and ideas and stories.

Q: As if some official minister of information will present them.

A: Yes. That reassuring floating sound from above that tells them everything will always be as it once was. You know, when you assume that voice and use it, it doesn’t really matter what you say. You could be talking about new discoveries or lies or breakthroughs or the most outrageous nonsense—it doesn’t matter. They’ll buy what you’re selling. But if you change the voice and the language, they don’t know what to do.

Q: So they thought you were an egoist.

A: And I was and am—but not in the obvious sense. I was creating a different language, with power, from my mind and imagination. And I had no desire to dampen the power, because it was an inherent part of what I was inventing. I was launching out radiance and I was in a state of radiance at the same time. Joyous…and celebrating this new language and celebrating the fact that I was doing it. Why not?

Q: In the bureaucratic world of our times, what you did could be looked at as some sort of condition that might be diagnosed.

A: These petty pernicious little grasping bureaucratic minds, who have no existence except an official one, need to be destroyed. And destroyed in only one way: through a mass exodus away from them. Leave them in their seat of influence. Let them stew there and write their papers and reports. Let them win in a complete vacuum. Treat them as morons who are deranged beyond rescue. Go away and create something entirely different. For heaven’s sake, CREATE SOMETHING.

Q: The voice of calm authority you speak of…it’s a form of hypnotism.

A: I know something about that subject. One thing I know is this. In the long run, it doesn’t matter what’s coming from that voice. The most important thing to know is that the CONTEXT, the space, is hypnotic. And that’s where the whole lie is. That’s what makes the entire performance a lie. WAKE UP to that. Walk away. Invent your own voice. One of the functions of art is the stimulation of imagination in the audience. Then, for those who have the desire, they become artists, too. They catch the glimpse in themselves. It’s always been that way. A real artist isn’t hanging around hoping for information. He’s inventing something much more powerful.

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.

Obama: “I am not a doofus.”

Obama: “I am not a doofus.”

“I was never in doubt about who the rebels were in Syria.”

by Jon Rappoport

January 4, 2016

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

“The men behind the curtain and their front men aren’t just lying and hiding vital information. They’re inventing Reality wholesale, like a continuously running movie, for the whole planet. And they’re betting you won’t invent your own.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Suppose Obama tired of hearing his critics assail him on his foreign policy.

Suppose President Obama took time out from his busy schedule ramming through executive orders, in his last year in office, and gave the following speech about Syria—because he wanted credit for being smart and crafty, not naïve, not weak, not misinformed:

“Hi everybody, it’s high time I told you what I’ve been doing in Syria. The truth. I am not a doofus. Let’s get that straight. I’m not blind.

“First of all, I was never in doubt about who the rebels were in Syria. I wasn’t shocked when the ‘moderate’ rebels morphed into various terrorist groups, like ISIS. This was no error. This was no surprise. Give me some credit. Okay?

“My administration and several of our foreign allies helped create ISIS. I’m talking money, weapons, intelligence, encouragement. So how could I be surprised when ISIS emerged front and center in Syria? Get it? I mean, come on.

“The plan, from way back, was to destabilize Syria and overthrow President Assad. Destabilize is what we do. Egypt, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq. It’s a long-range plan.

“Create chaos, bring in order behind that. Use Islamic proxies. There’s the Oil Thing, the Encircling Russia Thing, the Globalist Thing. Very long range, the whole idea is to erase national borders, wipe out national traditions, and institute new planetary Regions. Moving toward One Planet, and one echelon of Global Management. Am I going too fast for you?

“Back to Syria. Of course I knew some big shots in the Pentagon didn’t like my policy. I knew they were passing intell on ISIS to the Germans and the Russians, who would in turn pass it along to President Assad. I was aware of that. These Pentagon generals were staging a soft coup. Did I like that? Of course not. But I decided it was better to let it happen than, say, put these generals on trial for treason. What President wants that kind of messy crisis?

“My policy is: create ISIS, strengthen ISIS, and, wait for it, fight against ISIS. Yes, I know that sounds very strange. But leaders do that all the time. Create your enemies and then fight them. Why not? It certainly keeps the military happy. They have a war. It keeps the defense contractors happy. They have a war. And attacking the enemy we created—ISIS—ramps up the destabilizing process in Syria. Are you with me?

“Now, all this leads to the Syrian refugee crisis, because the war there is vicious. Nasty. Do you think I was surprised by the migration-refugee thing? The waves of immigrants? Again, give me some credit. I am not a doofus. This is what I wanted all along: waves of people leaving Syria and entering Europe, and now America. Wider destabilization. And yes, some of those Syrian refugees would be terrorists coming to Europe and America. Others would just be displaced persons. Others would be people who had no interest in integrating themselves into the cultures they were mixing with. Trouble makers. Criminals. Violent types. Resentful types.

“Again, the goal is destabilization and chaos. But you see, you also have to look at the acceleration of political correctness in the West. This is no accident. Timing is everything. The idea of making people afraid to speak out against the migration—this is clearly part of the whole operation. Can’t you see the big picture? Are you dim? Get with it. Big ops cover a number of areas. They’re coordinated. We’re not fumbling and bumbling. We’re smart. This is downright frustrating. I’m trying to show you how clever I am, and I’m getting the feeling you’re too simple-minded to see it.

“Consider Afghanistan. How long do you think it took Cheney and Rumsfeld and all those boys to realize the war over there wasn’t going to produce a real victory? How about They Knew That Before The US Invaded? Get it? And with the insane rules of engagement, it would be a complete disaster. So what? The war did produce more destabilization, especially here at home, with all those soldiers coming back after a few tours, their lives mangled. I digress.

power outside the matrix

“If you can just see this piece: the wave of Syrian migration was an inevitable consequence of the war my administration ramped up. I knew that all along. I knew the crazy vast migration would happen. We made it happen. Can you get that? Please? Can you just forget all the ‘give us your huddled masses’ stuff? Wow. What’s wrong with you? You pump up a vicious war, you know there are going to be millions of people packing up and getting out of that country, right? It’s no surprise. It’s what you want. You use that. You use it. You create more chaos with it. I mean, this is basic Warfare 101 material. A reasonably bright 8th grader should be able to see it in a few minutes.

“The clever part, the ingenious part, my part…is being able to see the whole op and help put it together and make it happen. The war, ISIS, refugees, destabilization, everything I’ve been talking about. The whole enchilada, the whole cheeseburger, the whole kreplach, the whole wonton, the whole falafel, the whole kishka, the whole tray of dim sum, the whole egg roll, the whole California roll, the whole thukpa and pulusu, the whole cioppino, the whole paella, the whole pot pie.

“So rest easy, America. I know what I’m doing. Don’t worry, be happy. And when I finally sign the big Globalist trade treaties currently on the table, more jobs will disappear in America, and that means you’ll ultimately be more secure, because the government will bankroll your welfare and your survival. But that’s another topic for another day. It’s another area where I’ve been grossly misunderstood. For now, sit back, relax, and enjoy the show. And if you think I’m bad, watch out for Hillary.”

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.

Maps of consciousness, ancient Tibet, and a new psychology

by Jon Rappoport

January 4, 2016

(To join our email list, click here.)

“For the most part, today’s individual wants his spirituality to sit there like a plum on a tree. He doesn’t want it to be highly dynamic. He certainly doesn’t want to make it intensely personal and unique to himself.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

Readers who have been with me for a while notice that I work against the grain.

This is my natural tendency, but it’s also the result of 30-plus years of research into a number of “sacred cows.” The findings of my research have shown me that civilization supports numerous false realities, and this extends to so-called mental, spiritual, and metaphysical foundations.

There are wide cracks and leaks and large holes.

I have enormous faith, long-term, in the individual. Not in the group. I see the individual as the future, no matter how long it takes, no matter how deep his potential is buried under a mass of propaganda and misdirection.

Over the years, I have written several articles describing the underpinning for my 3 Matrix collections.

This is another one, based on my investigations of: Tibet, modern “consciousness writing,” and the role of psychology in a controlled society.

To begin with, psychology, in theory and therapeutic practice, has a way, over time, of “settling in” to the society around it. With some exceptions, it more and more mirrors the values of society.

Mainline psychology considers the individual as having key relationships, and seeks to strengthen, repair, and normalize them.

This is all very well for the patient who already considers himself to be living inside fairly conventional boundaries. But when the boundaries themselves are the issue, psychology tends to waver, wobble, tap dance, and even cast doubt on the mental health of the patient, as if his challenging the limits were somehow a sign of “inner imbalance” or neurosis or misperception.

The “playing field” of society is taken as the fundamental ground of operation, and the person who is walking outside those lines, looking in, assessing what is going on, is suspect. He may “require help.”

You won’t get a psychologist to admit what I’m pointing out here, but this conformist aspect of his work has come all the way down from the early, wide-ranging, fantastical ramblings of Freud, to a comfortable and even smug, small narrative.

Why? Because psychology has been determined to establish itself as an institution within the context of society. Smallness of conception is the fate of all such efforts.

For the past 75 years or so, a counter to psychology has emerged and gained popularity. I call it “consciousness mapping.” It begins by acknowledging that normal and average perception is grossly limited, and then moves on to offer an alternative.

However, the emphasis has been placed on explaining a structure or an ultimate object which consciousness, in its elevated state, would apprehend: a pot of gold; a cosmic entity; a universal connectivity.

“This is where you will arrive, and this is what it looks like, and this is what you will know.”

The Big It.

Well, this is attractive, because many people want to hold on to a Big It. They want to know what lies at the end of the road before they step foot on the road for the first time.

The metaphysical calculus of religion is transferred to consciousness itself.

In my search for a different approach to the power of individual consciousness, I came upon the history of early Tibet, before the society hardened into a theocracy.

Several sources were particularly helpful. The work of author John Blofeld (The Tantric Mysticism of Tibet), the writings of the intrepid explorer, Alexandra David-Neel, and a quite unconventional healer, Richard Jenkins, with whom I worked in the early 1960s in New York.

Jenkins once wrote to me: “There are people who want to tell us what consciousness should perceive. They’re blind to the electric, alive, and free nature of awareness. They’re wrapped up in content and addicted to it. Their biggest mistake is omitting the creative nature of human beings…”

That creative nature was the intense focus of the early Tibetans.

These practitioners, teachers, and students, some 1500 years ago, realized that most people viewed consciousness as an accumulator of knowledge. A searching tool, or a receiving apparatus.

Instead, the Tibetans embarked on a far more adventurous course.

Their many images (e.g., mandalas) weren’t meant as depictions of what finally exists in higher realms. Those realms were just as provisional and changeable as the physical world. You might call the multiple locales and dimensions representations of “what humans in certain Asian cultures would expect to encounter in their journeys of spirit.”

In other words, the Tibetans consciously treated their pantheons of gods and semi-gods as convincing illusions.

Several of their key exercises and techniques were all about having students mentally create these illusions in voluminous and meticulous detail. That was difficult enough, to be sure. Far more difficult was the next aspect of their practice: get rid of these creations.

Put them there; take them away.

The Tibetans were committed to living life on the level of imagination, with all that implied.

And what does it imply?

A new psychology. A psychology of unlimited possibility:

A person’s past, his history, his problems, his relationships are all framed against the wider context of what he can imagine and then invent, create, in the world.

Living through and by imagination long enough, the individual discovers that his prior relationships are transformed. They no longer set themselves up as questions or problems.

He is operating from a platform that affords an utterly different, original, and unexpected outcome.

A psychology of possibility not only looks forward to the future, it has a reason to do so. Bringing electricity back into life depends, initially, on viewing possibilities in the space of one’s own imagination.

It may strike you at this point that our current civilization is bent on lowering possibilities; and that is true. That is the psychology of the psyop.

There is a good reason for this programming, as well as the staging of events that seem to give the programming validity. Those who aim to control the destiny of humankind want to shrink the “size of humans.” That is their intent.

A psychology of possibility would reverse that trend and expose it.

To the casual observer, the weight of this civilization and all its accoutrement seems enormous. But the creative potential of the individual outstrips that structure by light years.

How does the individual realize that fact? What is the spark that ignites his understanding? It all begins in imagination, which is the home of possibility.

If you truly wanted to gain insight into the basis of a person’s problems, you would find it in an area of his imagination where he stored all those things he considered impossible.

Over the years, the “impossibles” build up. And so the future diminishes.

Shrinks.

He carves down the size of his journey. He even turns around and tracks backward, revisiting the places he has already inhabited.

What will he find? Basically, what he already knows.

He becomes like the painter who repeats the same theme over and over.

Whereas the blank canvas actually stands for unlimited open space, unlimited possibility.

exit from the matrix

In the arena of The Group, we see all manner of problems presented along with their solutions. Replace the free market with government control. Conduct a religious revival to wean populations away from their consumerist addictions. Eliminate money altogether, in favor a more “equitable” plan. Provide monetary compensation for every group who has ever been wronged in the past. Achieve better education by reducing it to a Pavlovian series of stimuli and responses. Track and observe every human, 24/7, in order to curb anti-social behavior. Hook all brains up to a super-computer which has trillions of important data. Genetically alter humans, to make them more talented and healthy. And so on.

Each and every solution winds around and ends up against a brick wall, where the outcome is worse than the original dilemma, where suffering is compounded.

If only we were smarter. If only we were more ingenious. If only we had a better plan. But no, I’m afraid that isn’t the difficulty. The difficulty stems from considering humans as groups in the first place.

The secret to the labyrinth is at the beginning, where the individual surrendered to the idea of the group. It was all downhill from there.

As the future of society plays out over the next few hundred years, there will be a return to the individual.

And then he will decide what happens next.

He will decide whether he should remove the filter, through which he sees all remedies as collective and mass remedies.

He will decide whether to breathe life back into his infinite imagination.

He will decide whether to take his own power as seriously as he now takes centralized spirituality.

But why wait for hundreds of years to pass? Why not now?

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 basics of Earth Culture

The basics of Earth Culture

by Jon Rappoport

January 3, 2016

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

People assume the culture of Earth is normal and understandable. Even critics harbor this opinion.

“Well, even though massive conformity isn’t desirable, we can see why people embrace it…”

Really?

Examine the annals of science fiction; even there, the majority of ET cultures in the literature exhibit conformity to norms. That’s how far the assumption goes.

Culturally speaking, what is conformity? It’s the passing of an idea through many hands and minds, rendering it lifeless and limp, drained of vitality. What these minds are accepting becomes a dead habit, a series of empty gestures.

That’s the fundamental of Earth Culture. Everywhere on the planet.

If, somewhere in the galaxy, a civilization existed in which Individual Difference and Independence were universal virtues, and if scouts traveled to Earth and took a cursory look, they would report back: “Slave Culture.”

Of course, conformity can operate under a variety of names: “Unity.” “Common goals.” “Shared values.”

These are euphemisms and covers. They point to a kind of mind control—illusions people foster in themselves to explain and celebrate their own slavery.

Those who claim externally imposed propaganda and other methods account for slave mentality are only telling half the story. People form themselves in groups of various kinds, and resonant behavior is expected in those groups. People willingly and even eagerly enlist. They program themselves. Ignoring this factor is actually another familiar feature of Earth Culture.

“I am the way I am because of other people…they made me do it.”

Another excuse given for Earth Culture: people must pull together to survive. However, this doesn’t require group conformity to an extreme degree, spilling over into every aspect of behavior and thought.

Concerning my definition of conformity, notice that a machine-like quality pervades human communication. Certain subjects are pleasing; others are taboo. Conversations which probe below the surface, in order to reveal hidden factors in events, are considered “strange,” in social settings. They aren’t “normal.” They provoke anxiety.

Rather than solely explain the taboo by citing the fear of “standing out from the crowd,” look at the other side of the coin: people want to behave like machines. They enjoy the sensation. They embrace shallow predictability.

Recent reports out of China describe a new system, in which citizens receive scores based on their obedience to government. This is a kind of game. It encompasses, at the very least, online behavior. Apparently, people are taking to it like ducks to water. They’re proud to announce their high scores for acting like good machines. They like it.

Do you think all those college students, who are trying to outlaw certain words that “might be offensive to someone, somehow,” are merely motivated by a strange brand of idealism? They like the idea of carving down the language and using sanitized terms. They, too, see it as a kind of game. Humans acting like programmed machines—wonderful.

And the preposterous idea that someday, soon, human brains will be linked up to a super-computer that will pass down “the very best” answers to all questions? The advocates of the “breakthrough” are delighted by the prospect. Some of them even believe it will signal the visible emergence of God. Again, humans behaving like machines.

All problems dismissed. All confusions banished. All debates settled.

Conformity at all levels—to be wished for most fervently. Not simply the result of fear.

Look below the images of ads in which great athletes are presented as superior humans. Their dedication to practice is highly admired, even worshiped. What are we talking about here? Repetition of exercises. Numbers of reps. Familiar actions, done over and over and over. Humans as machines. Isn’t it beautiful.

More and more, Earth Culture is coming to be machine culture, and those who support this notion are finding pleasure in it. They see it in a very positive light.

Let’s take this one step further. Machine Culture is the eradication of consciousness. Well, consciousness was always a thorny problem. It never yielded up simple answers. There was something in the nature of a struggle about it. How fine a thing to be able to discard it entirely. Maybe it never existed. Maybe it was always an illusion.

Don’t worry, be happy. Learn to pursue lowest common denominator pleasures in a single-minded fashion. No distractions. Be a cop decked out in black military gear standing in a phalanx of other such cops. No visible faces. No identities. Machines ready for action. Beat down the mind. Subdue it. Offload it.

The body is a machine. The mind is irrelevant. Maybe it, too, never existed.

And if the possibility of automatic and reliable genetic alteration presents itself, to make the body even stronger and more resilient—and if the mind can be redirected and rebuilt to become pure automatic talents…why, that is perfect. That is supreme Earth Culture.

Yes, Earth Culture has an aesthetic, and it is the aesthetic of the highly efficient machine.

Consider the age-old prescription: order from chaos. This is the basic principle of control ops. Introduce chaos, then come in behind that to impose order. In terms of this culture, the order is the machine. The closed system.

It sounds horrible? Well, for many, many people, it’s utopia.

Gone are the days of confusing choices. Here are the days of effectively directed action. And it all happens outside the space of freedom. It happens by design.

“If there is a question that takes longer than three seconds to provoke a correct answer, the question was meaningless in the first place.” That becomes the new basis of IQ.

In the long run, culture is based on pleasure, not pain. People sign on willingly. They yearn for a preferred outcome.

In this case, on Earth, they love the idea of becoming machines.

The preconditions for establishing Machine Culture? People must sour on the idea of freedom. They must sour on the idea of learning how to think rationally, by choice. They must sour on the idea of deploying their imaginations. They must sour on the idea of building up their own individual power and using it to create their own deeply desired futures in the world. Or any world.

Then they will look at all these realities as forgeries and empty promises.

Then they will forget these realities ever existed even as concepts.

But you don’t have to forget these things.

exit from the matrix

You can go in the opposite direction.

Your pleasures will be multi-dimensional, and without limits. They will tower above the Culture.

I once ended a short story with this: “And the machines passing in the street took no notice of me. Why would they? They were on their way to perfection. Today, tomorrow, and always. They were in love with their own function. That was their one emotion and their one impulse. For them, the struggle of the ages was over. They had beaten the odds.”

Yes, hail Earth Culture. A re-animation of life in which no life exists. Instead, the goal of socialization triumphs.

I write, in order to forward the infinity of other goals, the authentic ones that emerge out of great individual desire and great imagination. The true dream, in any universe.

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.

Self-empowerment: what it really means

Self-empowerment: what it really means

by Jon Rappoport

January 2, 2016

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

In a nutshell, self-empowerment means finding a profound goal that is in tune with one’s deepest desires, and pursuing that goal with great commitment.

But then one needs tools for the task.

The best of those tools are: logic and imagination.

Logic, because the capacity to reason, and analyze information, is a sharp sword that cuts through massive amounts of irrelevant data and gets to the core of what is truly important.

And imagination, because it is the source for fleshing out the primary goal and making it visible, real, and vivid.

And sometimes the goal itself does not become clear until a person has engaged in imaginative processes that widen his perception of possibilities.

Logic and imagination are partners. They don’t battle with each other when the goal is known. They contribute to the overall effort.

This fact is at the heart of my most recent collection, Power Outside The Matrix.

power outside the matrix

Here are the contents of Power Outside The Matrix.

These are audio presentations. 55 total hours.

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

* Writer’s Tutorial (8.5-hours)

* 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.)

As many of my loyal readers know, for many moons, I’ve been relentless about attacking the sacred institutions of society, and with good reason. That doesn’t mean I want failure. I know people who do, and I avoid them like the plague.

On the other hand, I also know people who, operating on far less than a full deck, go through life with an empty glazed grin, and believe the (fill in the blank) are coming from the sky to rescue us. That’s another kind of plague.

You could say I inhabit a space between those two, which as it turns out is far larger than both of them put together. It actually has no limit. It opens up when you live through and by imagination.

It’s true home, and it always was.

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

On this road, there are no limits.

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.