Congressional lunatics on the march

How to spend $1 trillion in the dark

Rand Paul: nobody read the $1.1 trillion bill before passing it

The House of Shadows

by Jon Rappoport

December 23, 2015

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

“Congressman, the American people are in an uproar. This is serious. I can’t begin to imagine what penalties you’re going to face. Possibly your ice cream after supper will be cancelled.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Congress just passed a $1.1 trillion budget bill. Here, from The Hill (“Paul: Nobody read the $1.1 trillion omnibus bill”), is what Senator Rand Paul has to say about it:

“It was over a trillion dollars, it [the bill] was all lumped together, 2,242 pages, nobody read it, so frankly my biggest complaint is that I have no idea what kind of things they stuck in the bill…We were given it yesterday or the day before the bill came forward, and so this is not a way to run government. It’s a part of the reason why government is broke.”

Paul went to say that no Democrat or Republican in the House or Senate read the bill before voting on it.

But of course the US federal government is not out of control. Perish the thought. The elected representatives are doing exactly what they’re supposed to do: spend money. It doesn’t matter where the money goes or how much of it there it is. These are minor points.

Borrow the money, tax the population in order to get it, invent it out of nothing—whatever it takes.

There is an obvious corollary here, which nobody talks about: if the crazed Congress can just flip a trillion bucks as if it were spare change, what guarantee is there that the money will go to the places where it’s designated?

You might recall that, in 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced the Pentagon was unable to account for $2.3 trillion of its budget:

“The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it’s stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible…”

Consider that possibly $2 trillion has been spent, since 1966, on the war on poverty. Much of this money was earmarked to improve the standard of living in inner cities. How does that appear to have worked out? I find no evidence that the federal government has ever done a comprehensive investigation of where the money actually went or how it was used.

But don’t worry. Things are under control.

Want to contemplate the enormous sums the government has forked out in foreign aid over the past 30 years? Care to look for a detailed report on where all that money actually went and how it was used? Want to factor in all wars the US has fought during that period, and try to track those funds? Good luck.

If you couldn’t quite balance your yearly books and ended up with a hundred dollars you couldn’t account for, nobody would be upset. But if in the course of the past 30 years, you couldn’t show where 10 or 15 trillion dollars went, I assure you people wouldn’t just suspect you of incompetence. No. They’d be smelling grand, grand theft. And RICO crimes. Why wouldn’t they?

How about the recent agreements at the international climate summit in Paris? Richer nations have pledged billions to poorer nations as a kind of reparation “for destroying their way of life.” We’ll leave the merit of that idea for another time and another discussion, but exactly where will all this money go? Into whose bank accounts, over the next 20 years? Who are the signatories on those accounts?

Remember the federal bailout of 2008, in the wake of the financial meltdown? Here is a quote from Forbes (“The Fed’s $16 Trillion Bailouts Under-Reported”, 9/20/11):

“The media’s inscrutable brush-off of the Government Accounting Office’s recently released [superficial] audit of the Federal Reserve has raised many questions about the Fed’s goings-on since the financial crisis began in 2008… The findings verify that over $16 trillion was allocated to corporations and banks internationally, purportedly for ‘financial assistance’ during and after the 2008 fiscal crisis… However, the audit’s findings were almost completely overlooked, even with a number as high as $16 trillion staring all of us in the face.”

Sixteen trillion dollars. No problem. Just another exercise in spending, and that’s what the government does.

Show me the full and final and very specific accounting of what those bailed-out banks and corporations did with the $16 trillion. Just joking.

When people talk about massive black-budget operations taking place out of public view, others “refute” the possibility by asserting that government funds are closely monitored. Sure they are. And ants are piloting space ships to the edge of the space-time continuum.

Money is actually funny money, at the level of government and the Federal Reserve. Numbers concocted out of the void. In Location A, twelve seconds ago, there was nothing. Now there are 100 billion dollars. Easy as pie. Stage magic.

The sheer fakery of US Senators and Representatives voting for a bill that spurts a trillion dollars out of a spigot is matched and exceeded by the fakery of inventing the 1 trillion.

For this reason, and in the service of honesty, I recommend that some Senator or Representative stand up on the floor of his august chamber and say the following:

“Look, we don’t even know what the federal debt is. Face it. It could be anymore between 13 trillion and 210 trillion. Let’s admit we don’t care. Nor do we care how big a budget we vote for every year. And I think you’ll all agree, because the evidence is clear, we don’t care where we allocate the money. Goodness knows, nobody reads the budget bills. Are you catching my drift? Why do we spend time and energy arguing over the budget? Because we want to impart the impression that there’s a significant difference between our two political parties. However, there are easy and effortless ways to achieve this. For one week, every year, we could designate a time and place for budget debate. Three or four brain-addled representatives from each party would read opposing scripted arguments. And then we’re done. We all convene and vote in favor of the budget bill, as we always do. And we go home early for vacation. No fuss, no muss. Do you think anyone would object or take notice? I don’t…”

Oh wait. This is pretty much what’s happening now.

Given the predominance of funny money, in the not-too-distant future you’re going to be hearing serious people making serious arguments for basic government “citizen-control.”

The story-line will go something like this:

“If people want to keep receiving federal money, they have to conform to certain standards of behavior, speech, and thought. It’s a simple give and take.”

New sets of rules and regulations will apply to the population, in return for what is granted to them.

“Citizen Jones, I have your behavioral dossier in front of me. I want to discuss it with you. You’ve made a number of statements and committed a number of actions which could result in expulsion from the federal universal welfare plan. Do you realize what we’re giving you every month? Do you really think it’s wise to bite the hand that feeds you?”

“What are you talking about? That time I rode my Department of Commerce bike without a helmet?”

“No. I’m talking about the time you uttered a forbidden slur while you were watching a rerun of Friends.”

There is a principle that applies to funny money. It flows like water and it eventually finds its way into all the cracks. It’s used to promote compliance and obedience.

And then it stops being funny.

If you think this is an exaggeration, read up on the recent Australian law that makes childhood vaccinations mandatory. Families who refuse to have their children jabbed will be cut off from certain federal welfare programs. No jab, no funny money.

“Mr. Daddy and Mrs. Mommy, we invented a pile of money to help you survive. Did you think we’d never ask for a piece of your body, mind, and soul in return? That day has come. We’re here to collect. We own you. That was always the idea. Get it?”

How about banks who suddenly foreclose on homeowners who didn’t have a magnifying glass big enough to read the fine print in their mortgage contracts?

“Mr. and Mrs. Smith, we invented money so we could give you a home. Now we’re back to shut you down. Nothing’s forever. Get used to it.”

Consider thousands of colleges that exist on federal funds. Some professor at one of these “higher institutions” suddenly gets it in his head to make a corrosive and devastating critique of the government. Do you suppose the higher-ups at the college start quaking in their boots, as they envision possible consequences?

“Find a way to close out that crazy professor. Right away. What kind of racket does he think we’re running here? One of those ‘free-speech’ campuses? Show him we mean business. His salary is being paid with government funny money. Educate him. Make him see the light. Or toss him out on the street.”

Possibly you’ve heard of something called the military industrial complex. Government does some serious money-out-of-thin-air inventing to keep those defense corporations going. How can this Niagara of cash be justified without wars to fight?

“Of course we’re going to attack…what’s the name of that country again? Doesn’t matter. Get planes in the air. Put boots on the ground. How would it look if we kept doling out trillions of dollars for peace? Are you kidding?”

This is the sort of thing that’s happening whenever our august federal legislators get together and rubber-stamp a budget bill. They’re as dumb as wood, as corrupt as bankers, as venal as the mafia, as crazy as naked drunks running down the street in the rain.

The 1976 film, All the President’s Men, invoked the phrase, “Follow the money.” Thereafter, it became a popular guideline for investigative reporters. On one level it works, yes. But when you can’t follow the money, when nobody can, when you’re looking at governments who are inventing money all the time making deals with each other based on loans, debts, interest, default, and refinance, then you know you’re in The Deep. This is cosmic money. It begins as a blip in darkness, rises to a blinding glare, explodes, dies out, and then appears again in another quadrant of space. It makes quantum leaps and it entangles untold trillions and septillions and vigintillions.

It’s whatever-money. Whatever you need, however you need it, however you want to hide it.

Historically, bankers figured out the game. They didn’t have to be very smart. They just had to keep abstracting the idea of money, until it became a shadow.

Then they took up residence in the shadows.

Jon Rappoport

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

The basics of a staged bioterror event

Dec21

by Jon Rappoport

December 21, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“Dr. Hognose Detrick of the US Biological Warfare Group waddled into a meeting room, where a collection of Army, CIA, NSA, and HS representatives sat quietly in their chairs. He said: ‘So I understand you boys want to put on a little domestic bioterror show, to keep the natives from becoming too restless. Well, the first thing you need to know is, germs don’t obey orders. Forget all that sci-fi nonsense. Germs work and they don’t work. It’s a crapshoot. You could have a big fat dud on your hands. I can tell you how to make it work, though, if you give up on your fancy high-tech wet dreams..” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

There are future scenarios which, with enough exposure before they happen, can be stopped—or at least analyzed correctly when they occur.

A staged bioterror event is one of those.

The primary fact is: no matter what kind of germ you’re talking about or where it came from, releasing it intentionally does not guarantee predictable results. Far from it.

For instance, people whose immune systems are at different levels of strength are going to react differently.

The perpetrators may find that less than 2% of people exposed get sick and die.

But there is another strategy that should be understood:

The use of a germ as a cover story for a chemical.

In other words, there is no germ attack. It’s called a germ attack, but that’s a lie. The perps bring in researchers, to the affected area, who go on to claim they have isolated a germ that is the cause of death and illness. It’s a sham. What really happened was the spread of a toxic chemical that can’t be detected, unless you’re looking for it.

The chemical has severe, deadly, and predictable effects for a week or two. Then it disperses and loses potency and the “epidemic” is done.

In some town, a fairly isolated community, the word goes out that people are suddenly falling ill and dying. The CDC and the Army are called in to cordon off the area and quarantine all citizens. A peremptory announcement is made, early on, that this is a biowar attack.

Major media are allowed outside the periphery. Network news anchors set up on-location and do their wall to wall broadcasts “from the scene.”

The entire nation, the entire world is riveted on the event, 24/7.

People inside the cordon fall ill and die. Reports emerge from the town:

The networks state that “heroic doctors are taking samples of blood and the blood is being analyzed to find the germ that is causing the epidemic.” The DoD confirms over and over that this is, indeed, a biowar attack.

Human interest stories pile up. This family lost three members, that family lost everybody. Tragedy, horror, and the desired empathic response from “the world community.”

It’s a soap opera, except real people are dying.

The medical cartel promotes fear of the germ.

All controlling entities get to obtain their piece of the terrorist pie.

Finally, the doctors announce they have isolated the germ causing the death in the small town, and researchers are rushing to develop a vaccine (which they produce in record time).

Everyone everywhere must be vaccinated, now. No choice. Do it or be quarantined or jailed.

In this declared martial law situation, the doctors are the heroes. The doctors and the Army. And the government, and even the media.

Then, after a few weeks, when the potency of the secret chemical has dispersed, it’s over.

When you think about it, this scenario is a rough approximation of what happens every day, all over the world, in doctor’s offices. The doctors are prescribing chemicals (drugs) whose effects are far more dangerous than germs that may (or may not) be causing patients to be ill.

In other words, a chem-war attack is being leveled at people all over the world all the time.

See Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, “Is US health really the best in the world?” 106,000 people in America are killed every year by FDA-approved medical drugs. That’s a million people per decade (click here for more info). Also search engine “FDA Why Should You Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions.” the FDA admits 100,000 people in America die every year from the effects of medical drugs. (Click here to go directly to the FDA page in question.)

In the wake of a staged “biowar” terror attack, new laws are enacted. The State clamps down harder on basic freedoms. The right to travel is curtailed. Criticizing the authorities is viewed as highly illegal. Freedom of assembly is limited.

“Citizens must cooperate. We’re all in this together.”

A new federal law mandating the CDC schedule of vaccines for every child and adult—no exceptions permitted—is rushed through the Congress and signed by the President.

It’s all based on a lie…in the same way that the disease theory of the medical cartel is based on a lie: the strength of an individual’s immune system is the basic determinant of health or illness, not germs considered in a vacuum.

There are people who are determined to inflate the dangers of germs. They trumpet every “new” germ as the end of humankind on the planet. They especially sound the alarm when researchers claim a germ may have mutated or jumped from animals to humans.

“This is it! We’re done for!”

However, if you check into actual confirmed cases of death from recent so-called epidemics, such as West Nile, SARS, bird flu (H5N1), Swine Flu (H1N1), and now MERS, the numbers of deaths are incredibly low, contrasted with, say, the global deaths from ordinary seasonal flu—which is never called a pandemic.

And even seasonal flu, in America, produces far fewer deaths than advertised. As I’ve written before, the CDC keeps one category of statistics for pneumonia and flu combined. When you break out the numbers for each illness, flu death is minuscule.

If political criminals, behind the scenes, wanted to stage a confined “biowar” event, they would choose a chemical, not a germ, and they would leverage such an event to curtail freedom.

Understand: researchers behind sealed doors in labs can claim, with unassailable ease, that they’ve found a germ that causes an outbreak. Almost no one challenges such an assertion.

This was the case, for example, with the vaunted SARS epidemic (a dud), in 2003, when 10 World Health Organization (WHO) labs, walled off from view, in communication with each other via closed circuit, announced they’d isolated a coronavirus as the culprit.

Later, in Canada, a WHO microbiologist, Frank Plummer, wandered off the reservation and told reporters he was puzzled by the fact that fewer and fewer SARS patients “had the coronavirus.” This was tantamount to confessing that the whole research effort had been a failure and a sham—but after a day or so of coverage, the press fell silent.

SARS was a nonsensical farce. Diagnosed patients had ordinary seasonal flu or a collection of familiar symptoms that could result from many different causes.

But the propaganda effort was a stunning success. Populations were frightened. The need for vaccines, in the public mind, was exacerbated.

Several years ago, I spoke with a biologist about the fake bioterror scenario I’ve sketched out above. His comment was: “Do you think any mainstream scientist would dare go into that cordoned-off town and actually check the area for a highly toxic chemical? He’d be blackballed, exiled, and discredited in a minute. The authorities would call him crazy. And that’s if he were lucky.”

Such is “science,” these days. A researcher can discover anything he wants to, if it’s approved. Otherwise, the door is closed.

After 30 years of covering and reporting on deep science fraud, I can tell you that most scientists know, without instructions from above, the dimensions of their “permitted territory.” They can sniff out career danger from a mile away.

GMOs? Roundup? Other toxic pesticides? Climate change? Vaccines? Medical drugs? Diagnostic medical tests? Actual environmental pollution? Mercury? Chemicals in food? Radiation? Nuclear power plants? Fracking? Fluorides? On these and a whole host of other issues, government is centrally involved as a ruling force. And there are armies of compliant scientists ready and willing to carry out preferred government (and corporate) dictates. These scientists already know the answers before the questions are even asked.

Meanwhile, propaganda rivers flow, extolling the glories of science.

It’s a dream situation, for the terminally corrupt.

A huge number of scientists, who don’t actually participate in research fraud, stand back and watch it happen and say nothing. They see the handwriting on the wall in very large letters.

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

In 1988, while writing my first book, AIDS INC., I interviewed a highly respected virologist at a US university. I mentioned that several molecular biologists were challenging the HIV-causation hypothesis of AIDS. He told me that he and a number of his colleagues were aware that “a serious problem” existed concerning evidence for the hypothesis, but they were all going to “let this one go.” It was too political, he said.

Yes, well, an enormous amount of science turns out to be political.

Keeping one’s head down and letting things go by may not be part of a PhD curriculum, but soon after school is out, researchers enter a different kind of training.

A main theme then pops up: do you want a career, or do you want to live in the middle of nowhere, in exile?

As it so happens, building a broad scientific consensus resting on sand is a straightforward job. It takes time and money, but the work requires no brilliance.

You just flash signs at scientists. The signs say: money; job security; status; advancement; promotion; grants; prestige; reputation; pension; exposure; censure; discrediting; exile; isolation.

They get the idea right away.

Jon Rappoport

Your imagination, your goals in life

Dec20

Your imagination, your goals in life

by Jon Rappoport

December 20, 2015

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

Imagination can play two central roles in your goals:

It can help you discover what they are.

And once discovered, imagination can help you expand and enhance those goals—making them larger, more exciting, more inclusive.

Imagination has everything to do with reality, not as it is, but as it could be.

Therefore, it is the most important “secret” on the planet.

Whatever your desires, whatever your plans, hopes, or enterprises, imagination walks in the door and says: “Here is what you can do. Here is how thrilling it can be. Here is what it could look like and feel like. Here is how big it could become.”

All of this was very much on my mind as I designed my second collection, Exit From The Matrix.

For many years, I had been developing exercises and techniques for expanding the range and power of imagination.

So, finally, in Exit From The Matrix, I made a home for these exercises, and I described a simple way you can practice them.

People want to be inspired. They want to feel their deep desires can be fulfilled. They want more energy. They want to wake up in the morning with enthusiasm, knowing they are on the right track.

I believe in the individual. I believe in him when he is making his dreams into fact in the world.

In this journey, imagination is his greatest ally.

Here are the contents of my collection, 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.

Jon Rappoport

Hello, world: is your government driving you crazy?

Dec19

Politics, the god Hermes, and the big joke

Suppose, against all odds, enlightenment is funny and funny works like magic because it is magic

by Jon Rappoport

December 19, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

Note: If, as you read this article, you think I’m saying ‘don’t worry, be happy’ or ‘just laugh it off’ or ‘forget all the suffering in the world,’ you’re viewing it from the wrong angle. The 1968 riot at the Democratic National Convention was very serious, and it did nothing to shorten the war in Vietnam. It might have prolonged it. In this article, I’m talking about a basic psychological and spiritual inhibition that keeps people from a kind of mass reaction they believe is unthinkable—but a reaction that would change reality in a revolutionary fashion, if it came from their deepest core…

I could write a few thousand pages as a mere introduction—but I want to focus on one factor: what people project into their leaders.

Yes, I know, that sounds a bit odd. But stay with me. I’ll make it pay off.

For example, in the US, Republican voters and supporters project a huge amount of faith and energy into their Republican leaders. If you could see this, you would be watching a stunning “light show.” I’m talking about streamers and arrows and rays of energy.

And in this particular light show, there are messages: defund Planned Parenthood; cut off money for massive migration programs; stop Obamacare funding; don’t give money to the climate change payout program; stop bankrolling sanctuary cities.

That’s what these Republicans want from their leaders. That’s what they’re projecting with great insistence.

And this isn’t some kind of misplaced crazy light show, because guess what? Republicans control the US House of Representatives by a wide margin. Republicans: 246. Democrats: 188.

So when a massive federal spending bill ($1.1 trillion) comes up for a vote, as it just has, Republican Congress members can call the shots. They can respond to all those light rays being projected at them by their supporters all over the land. They can do it in a second. No problem. They can make their people happy. They can carry out their people’s wishes.

But…they didn’t. In fact, they just voted to fund all those programs I just mentioned. They pulled a vast switch. That’s right. That would be like all those Stars Wars characters, with their light sabers, suddenly projecting them through the movie screen right back at their adoring audience in the theater and burning them. What a message that would be.

Has your government ever done something like this in your country? I bet they have.

When it happens, the people, the voters, the supporters, who were sure their leaders would respond to them…well, to say they’re shocked would be a vast understatement.

However, scanning the newspapers and news broadcasts in America today, so far I find no reports of massive Republican demonstrations in the streets. Millions marching on Washington DC? Thousands? Hundreds? Dozens? Four? Two?

One guy in a Star Wars costume with a light saber trying to stop traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue?

Try to imagine the amount of energy and faith Republicans in America have been expending and projecting at their leaders—with this Big Switch as the result.

And then consider this: the Republicans in the US House of Representatives—many of them—never intended to go to war over this massive budget bill. It was never in the cards. They wear special shields, and the shields ward off all the projected rays coming at them from their faithful flock.

It’s not just the Republicans, in case you think I’m taking sides. What about the huge Democratic support for the invasion of Iraq under George W Bush? Did you see a few million Democrats in the streets right after the nearly unanimous Congressional vote to launch the planes and send the troops?

Wherever you live in the world, I’m sure you’ve seen this sort of thing. “Vote for Joe. He’ll do this and that.” Joe wins, and then doesn’t do either this or that. He was never going to. He was always wearing one of those shields that protected him from what his supporters were projecting at him.

This is called a joke.

That’s right. It may be a painful, repellent, nasty, killer joke with horrendous consequences, but it’s a joke.

The structure that is supposed to yield up “what the people want” is actually another structure whose features are unreported.

And the joke is, the people fall for it. Not just once, but over and over, on and on, year after year, decade after decade. It doesn’t matter what the evidence says. They fall for it.

And then, as another punchline, when some of those people stop falling for it and defect from the structure, they’re called strange and odd and weird and possibly dangerous.

“Don’t you get it, you strange person? You’re in a stage play. And your role involves going along with the charade. The real machinations are occurring behind the stage, and they’re not part of the play at all, but we don’t think about that. We keep projecting our energy and desires and faith into our purported leaders. Haven’t you read the script? The play falls apart if we don’t do that. It makes no sense if we don’t do that. A leader isn’t a leader if he doesn’t have adoring supporters who project their hopes and fears and desires and energy into him. That’s the way it works. So get with it.”

Now, possibly you think, when I talk about “projecting energy,” this is just a metaphor. I have news. It isn’t. This is as real as waves breaking on a beach. It’s happening all the time. People are doing it. They don’t want to stop doing it. It’s a habit that, for them, is harder to break than a heroin addiction.

One way or another, everybody is projecting energy. Of course, if they know that, they can decide where and how. They can, as individuals, create those projections in connection with achieving their deepest desires and dreams. In which case, there is a very good chance this would be a better world.

On the other hand, if they remain in the stage play and accept their assigned roles, they get jokes. And they’re the target of those massive jokes. And they don’t laugh. Generally, they go into a state of psychic paralysis, because they can’t figure out what just happened.

They might consult the news to find answers. That’s another joke. In the case of the $1.1 trillion budget bill that just passed the House in the US, they would encounter this: well, you see, the Republicans were trying to show support for their new Speaker, Paul Ryan, who is in favor of the bill, and if they didn’t vote for the bill the federal government would have to shut down because it would have no money for operational expenses, and the bill does allow the US to export crude oil, which is very important.

These are the added punchlines, which ought to send any sane person rolling on the floor with laughter.

You can laugh or cry, it’s your choice. But keep in mind that this joke really belongs to the people who launch it, and they don’t care which way you respond. To them, it’s still hilarious. And when they think about the millions of people who still vote for them, they put in a call for medical staff, because they’re going to laugh so hard they might need oxygen.

Sure, they leave Washington for a while, to “spend time with their families over the holidays,” just in case there is some nasty pushback from loyal voters, but they’re having a very merry Xmas, in part because they’re still chuckling and chortling about what they just put over.

George Burns once said: “In acting, sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

In politics, the launching and projecting of the joke is handled by the politicians and the media. They work hand in hand to conceal the fact that it is a joke—which is what makes it so funny to all of them.

I can take this out much farther. Consensus reality, which is the lowest possible common denominator to which the planet can be reduced, in order to suck in the faith and projections of the largest number of people, is its own kind of joke. You can find such an awareness at least as far back as ancient Greece, in the person of Hermes, the trickster god.

Hermes, among his other duties, was the protector of wit. He was the upsetter of apple carts, the vast joker who, in his own way, if you read between the lines, was trying to show people they were living inside a continuum of the big con, the big hustle. He was, you could say, the grand defector. He moved among various realities. He knew the world was a badly written stage play that, on the heels of honest reviews, would have closed down after opening night.

Hermes’ powers were formidable. He had the juice to become king of Mt. Olympus, but he never wanted that job. Instead, he flew hither and yon, tearing holes in consensus reality, for his own amusement, but also to wake people up.

He was not always popular with leaders of the day.

If he were alive in our time, what might he do? I can imagine him trying to engineer, at a State of the Union Address, or during a Presidential debate, a massive amount of laughter from the live audience. Yes, he might attempt to promote a trick like that. All of sudden, out of nowhere, in a trickle, a little stream, then a river, people are laughing. It builds to an oceanic roar. It spills over to the television audience. No one is sure why, but they’re laughing at the President and candidates, and they’re having the time of their lives. On some level of happiness and joy, they’re finally responding to the joke. At last.

They get it.

Hence the old phrase, “He was laughed off the stage.”

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

And that’s exactly what happens. The leaders are laughed and ridiculed into oblivion. And so is the old consensus itself.

“You know, people have been telling that joke ever since I don’t when, and I never understood it, but now all of a sudden I do. And what makes it keep paying off, those leaders who are stage-center are so serious…wow, they’re killing me.”

Yes, that’s right. Well, they were killing you. It’s not quite the same anymore.

It turns out that, while we thought we were watching (and acting in) one kind of stage play, on a subconscious level we were all sitting in an audience, for the past ten thousand years, watching a tireless comedian doing variations on a cosmic joke, on and on, and there were zero laughs, zero, and nevertheless he kept going—and voila, the place finally exploded.

We had every reason not to laugh. All the suffering and the pain—but when we did connect with the joke, it proved to be enormously effective, beyond anything we could predicted.

Our core NATURAL response, beyond all “common sense,” from the depths of our NATURAL being, repressed for centuries, was titanic laughter, and it sent our esteemed leaders straight to the Outer Darkness.

Who knew? Go figure.

Bam. Pow.

The world starts over.

Jon Rappoport

“Our top story tonight: reasonable robots triumph”

Dec19

“Our top story tonight: reasonable robots triumph”

by Jon Rappoport

December 19, 2015

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

“The Personnel Chief said: ‘Thin, tall, geeky, bespectacled, somewhat remote, wry, scientific—if you can affect that presentation, you’ll automatically enjoy a degree of success, no matter what you’re talking about. Why? Because you pass the juice test: you’ve got no juice left, and therefore you aren’t dangerous.’” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

A few decades ago, “positioning” became a popular concept among public–relations consultants. The idea was, a corporation would invent and flesh out a story about where it wanted to be “coming from.” And then people would, in fact, see the corporation “in that place.”

Major media have long been adept in inventing their position: Objective. Neutral. Fact-seeking. Rigorous. Balanced.

The strongest position, and the one media carve out as a form of self-protection is: “Reasonable people can disagree.”

This is the capper.

It allows media companies to refrain from investigating a vital issue down to its core and discovering the truth, followed by assigning blame to the correct persons.

Instead, newspapers and networks offer the time-honored: “This expert says A, while that expert says B.” End of story, because…reasonable people can disagree.

For example, if several million young children, including babies, are being dosed with highly toxic psychiatric drugs, after being diagnosed with mental disorders based on zero scientific evidence, this would constitute a “vital issue,” yes? An issue that grotesquely impacts the life and health and future of these children. It calls out for deep investigation, truth, and assignment of blame. It calls for relentless pressure from the press.

But, the whole matter can be diverted into: “Expert 1 says A, while expert 2 says B.” A removed position can thus be created for the reporting outlet. No need to investigate to the bottom of the scandal. No need to express any passion whatsoever.

The public, by and large, overlooks the obvious ongoing crime and tragedy, because the media aren’t getting in an uproar about it. “Well, if the news people don’t think it’s that dangerous and immediate, it’s okay. Why worry?”

Media: “We don’t jump the gun. We gather information, we contemplate, we consider, and then we present what we know…”

No they don’t. That’s just their self-invented position. On issues and stories that cross forbidden lines, they postpone, delay, and then offer two opposing views, because “reasonable people can disagree.” Because they can make it look like two reasonable people disagreeing.

Take the issue of Libya after Ghaddafi. After the US disposed of Ghaddafi and wrecked the country, reporters could go over and assemble a huge number of horrific and damaging facts and photos and videos, and their newspapers and networks could pound on this story day after day, and then certain US leaders would come sharply into the crosshairs. But instead, more safely, run a few stories, quote a few experts with different views, and leave it that. Reasonable people disagree.

That’s what media outlets do to position themselves. If they dug and found the bottom truth on any vital matter, brought the correct criminals into focus, attacked them, and exerted all possible pressure for prosecutions—-then what? Then they would be changing their basic position. Then their audience would expect media to keep doing that sort of thing on every vital story. No, no, no. That must never happen.

***Since the public takes many cues from media (the great teacher), private individuals also position themselves as neutral, distant, bland, empty of passion.

God forbid a private citizen, in a “social interaction,” would express a passionate view backed up by evidence. His friends and colleagues would slowly step away, as if he might be contagious, or packing explosives.

“Just remember, Bob, reasonable people can disagree. Don’t fly off the handle.”

This is also a lead-in to political correctness:

“Bob, did you just hear the words you were using? Be nice. You could offend someone.”

Or worse, “trigger” someone.

Media personalities are adept at making any issue feel reasonable. “Well, Jim, although several university scientists are releasing information about the moon being made of green cheese, NASA has published several studies forwarding evidence that the cheese is actually a brand of Moon soil that merely has superficial similarities to cheddar and Fontina. We’ll have to wait and see how this plays out…”

Lesson learned. Better to hang back and see what happens, rather than commit, make an assertion, and then get caught with your pants down.

There’s a twist, too. Copying media and PR agencies, you can make the most absurd idea seem possible merely by employing a reasonable tone:

“Look, when computer power catches up to and passes human brain power, the ability to process a thousand trillion pieces of data in .000001 of a second will imply a basic shift. The IQ inherent in that capability will be on the order of 100,000, at minimum. It makes sense to infer that whatever the source of the universe is, it will at that point reveal itself to the new level of intelligence…”

Sure it will.

There is another bottom-line (illogical) conclusion in the overall game I’m describing: the truth is unavailable; therefore, in its absence, above all be reasonable.

Or: “Don’t worry. People commit spiritual, mental, emotional, and psychic suicide all the time. Join the crowd. Appear reasonable. That’ll get you by and win you friends.”

Corollary: If you express emotion that carries electricity, you’re “ranting.” There is something wrong with you. You should seek help.

Media copy scientists in their style of presentation. As if the news is entirely objective: “We ran the experiment in the lab, and this is the result.”

When enough passion has been drained from an individual, it’s guaranteed that he can’t create. He’s immobile. A stone in a garden. A sunset with no sun. In a mild drizzle, he walks calmly, cultivating his ability to pass between drops.

Oh, he wants to create something, with every fiber of his being. He wants to step out of the shadows of his eternal winter and become an artist of reality. But he has the good sense to pull back. He has the good sense to give himself every excuse in the book. He has the good sense to give small praise where praise is due but do nothing himself.

He sits and watches the news. The presentation/tone confirms everything he has accomplished to shape his own personality. And why shouldn’t it? He ingested his basic lessons from the news.

Maybe I could be a broadcaster, he thinks. I could become the voice that describes what is real and what isn’t. I could narrate the stories. I could position myself to be active and outgoing, while remaining passive. I could gain rewards as a high-level android…I could be, above all else, reasonable.

In an alternate universe, imagine a freshman course at a college in which the professor delivers this brief talk on opening day:

“Well, I offer my congratulations to you thirty students. You qualify for this class because you can read and write at twelfth-grade level. Believe me, that’s a rarity these days. I’m going to teach you how to focus on an important issue, investigate it deeply, assemble evidence, and draw a conclusion. I’m going to awaken your inherent passion for actual, as opposed to phony justice. I’m going to turn you into writers and researchers who take no prisoners. Because, you see, evidence plus passion is a Great Force. You may not understand that now, but you will. We’re going to turn the media universe upside down. We’re going to crack that egg. I’m going to put you through your paces. Each one of you. This isn’t a training ground for the New York Times or CBS or CNN. This is a training ground for authentic independence. Those of you who want that are in the right place. Those of you who can put aside what you’ve already learned from the media will flourish. Here is another message you may not understand yet: It’s not enough to bellow and shout, and it’s not enough to be ‘reasonable.’ These are both false cover stories that obscure what you can become. I’m going to open a door into your own energy—more of it than you can conceive of right now. If you’re beginning to glimpse that what I’m talking about is power, you’re right. Power. That’s why we’re here. So, without further ado, let’s start cracking the mother egg…”

Our top story tonight: reasonable robots running out of juice.

Jon Rappoport

Imitating reality and super-reality: deep matrix

Dec17

Imitating reality and super-reality: deep matrix

by Jon Rappoport

December 17, 2015

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

The biggest addiction in the world is the compulsion to copy reality. To see things “as they are” and only as they are.

This fixation on reality-as-it-is even extends to art, whereby some writers and painters slavishly imitate what they see in front of them…as if there were no other possibilities.

Most people, reading these words, would say, “Well, what else could you expect? What else is there? Reality is reality.”

This is a hypnotic response.

Then you have various religions and spiritual systems that purport to reveal “what is behind reality.” People grab on to these like drowning sailors. Suddenly, they have a new and superior version of “what exists,” and they bow down to it. They buy it and ingest it and promote it.

They think thoughts that align with it. They invoke feelings that align with it. They do everything they can to establish an inner state of mind that coordinates with their newfound “super-reality.”

You even have people saying that the universe (a physical structure) is taking care of them, working on their behalf, deciding when the time is right to give them gifts—and therefore it’s a good idea to surrender to the universe.

Human beings look like strange creatures when they go around attaching themselves to “what already exists” as if they had found the ultimate drug addiction.

What’s missing is: imagination. Because imagination yields up an infinity of what doesn’t exist. It breaks the addiction.

Imagination is an active dynamic capacity that cuts a deep and wide swathe through life and leads to invention and creation.

The invention of new realities and futures.

Imagination doesn’t have to fly away into other realms, never to return. In fact, it can lead to employing aspects of the physical world as raw material in the process of invention.

And it transforms the consciousness of the individual who is doing the creating.

This is why I developed many, many imagination exercises, based in part on the early Tibetan tradition of practice.

I’ve included them in my collection, Exit From The Matrix.

Here are the contents of my collection, 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 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.

Jon Rappoport

Republican Presidential debate an exercise in mind control

Dec16

Republican Presidential debate an exercise in mind control

Let’s find an alternative universe

by Jon Rappoport

December 16, 2015

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

If a human mind were composed of a dozen eggs, and you soft-boiled them, broke them open, and let the goo run all over the plate, down on to the table, soon dripping on to the floor, that would be mind control, in the sense that you’re creating meaningless chaos, where no thought is important or makes sense or adds up to a cogent point.

That was the CNN-hosted Republic Presidential debate, with what was it, nine candidates sounding off, interrupting one another, and mentioning Trump so often it seemed like they were afflicted with a one-note samba syndrome.

You could conclude CNN, a Democratic stronghold, wanted the chaos, to throw the Republicans into an exceedingly bad and foul light, but other recent Presidential debates, hosted by other networks, have come across in the same basic fashion.

The problem starts with networks hosting these lunatic events. Since when does a debate need a moderator who controls and asks all the questions? Since when does a network need to have any role at all?

A debate is supposed to be two people contending over an important issue.

For contrast, consider the 1858 Abraham Lincoln-Stephen Douglas face-off—when apparently citizens still had a semblance of intelligence. Both men were running for a US Senate seat in Illinois. In those days, state legislatures chose US Senators.

But the issue in the debates was slavery, so the interest was intense and it was national. Here was the agreed-upon format: seven debates in seven Illinois towns over the course of three weeks; in each debate, the opening candidate would speak for 60 minutes, his opponent would speak for 90 minutes, and then the first candidate would return for 30 minutes.

The debates drew large crowds. Chicago newspapers had stenographers in each town. The stenos took down every word, and newspapers across the nation printed, in full, the texts.

Those were debates. No one with sprayed hair was in control. The men talked. And talked.

If you could transport the CNN Republican debate back in time to one of those Illinois towns, the audience would conclude, in short order, that all the participants were insane, possibly suffering from brain damage.

“These people are running for…what did you say? President??!!?? You’re joking. This a joke, yes?”

What do you think the 1858 audience would conclude about the state of the country in 2015? A country that actually acquiesced in a “debate” of this sort?

What do you think the 1858 audience would conclude about the two political parties, in 2015, who permitted such debates, and about the general electorate who expressed partisan support for either party?

“And in your time, 2015, no third or fourth party of any strength has arisen to sweep these mad Democrats and Republicans into the dustbin?”

No, the Lincoln-Douglas debates didn’t settle the issue of slavery. Something called the Civil War broke out. But that fact doesn’t excuse what these crazed Presidential debates have devolved into.

I’d really like to see one of these 2015 Presidential candidates take the podium and speak for 90 minutes about a single issue. You’d have to have support teams standing by to administer oxygen and possibly meth, just to keep them upright.

We’re talking about a candidate staying on point, on one issue.

“I remember my grandmother telling me, when I was nine, you can do it, you can be anything you want to be. I’d like to thank Mrs. Gallbladder, my third-grade teacher, for spending time with me when I—people say we should have a balanced budget, but they just don’t understand how economics—there weren’t any emails, well there were but none of them compromised—ownership of the means of production isn’t—better schools for our children—attacking terrorists by insulting them isn’t—equality isn’t just for—my father was President and so was my brother but—I made great deals to put up those hotels—when I look at a human brain on the operating table, I know what this universe—this isn’t the first time a woman has tried to win the Presidency but—“

Goo and more goo running everywhere.

Reporters and PR flacks and party hacks seizing on a few words of the opponent and highlighting them on social media. “Can you believe he slipped up and said Afro-American?” “Did you see that fly on his nose?” “A red tie with a blue suit is supposed to look Presidential?” “I counted. He interrupted nine times.” And these are the more intelligent tweets.

On the other hand, the current TV debates preclude the possibility of something dangerous happening. For example, in a real contest, suppose the single issue was Syria and a candidate stepped up to the podium and said:

“During my remarks in the next sixty minutes, with no interruptions—yes, we’re going back to a much older format—I’ll be the making the case that the current US administration has essentially created ISIS, in part for the purpose of overthrowing the present government of Syria. Consider this fact alongside our declared ‘war’ against ISIS. This is more than an outrageous contradiction. It’s an intentional deception, and a crime of the highest order, considering what ISIS has been carrying out in terms of the destruction of human life. Now, I’m not just saying these things. I have evidence in the form of documents, which I’ll be explaining in detail. Some of these documents and reports are already public. Others are not. I also have statements, on the record, from US military officers and Pentagon executives. So bear with me, stay with me, I’m going to take this one step at a time…”

There are many ways to keep this sort of thing from happening. The easiest way: never let a true debate occur.

Give Rand Paul 90 uninterrupted minutes to explain what his father was explaining? The criminality of the Federal Reserve? Are you kidding?

And just in case you think the American public is so addled they wouldn’t be able to follow such a presentation, I have a secret for you. At first, it would be a problem, yes. But if more and more true debates took place, a change would bleed in. People would begin to wake up. They’d find themselves, bit by bit, intensely interested in the proceedings.

After all, part of the reason the public is brainwashed springs directly from the fact that so few politicians or media people tell the truth or explore any issue in depth. Reverse that trend and the mind begins to reassemble itself.

How about something like this? Crossing party lines, Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul debate, seven times, as Lincoln and Douglas did, the following: “What is socialism, and is it good for America?”

If either candidate were unable to do more than spout vapid generalities and programmatic fumes during his seven hours, it would surely become obvious.

How about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, in the same format, debating the question: “Describe in detail the best immigration policy for America.” If their seven events turn into a Niagara of opposing non-sequiturs and self-inflating jive, so be it. It’ll be on parade for all to see.

Seven hours. Quickly, all Presidential candidates would discover their usual manner of presentation doesn’t stand up. It doesn’t make the grade. That would be a good thing. Maybe we find out that no one currently running for President can remain coherent. That would be a very good thing.

And maybe someone emerges from the shadows, someone most people have never heard of, and he can pass the test with flying colors. He can make sense, he can make a case, he can present details and specifics, he can inspire confidence, he can paint a picture of what America and freedom and true justice are all about.

Because he has the time. Because he has the courage and the intelligence. Because he makes people remember what they really want.

Would that be terrible? Would that be treasonous? Would that be dangerous?

No.

That would be waking up out of amnesia.

Jon Rappoport

Star Wars, ancient Tibet, and Jedi training

Dec16

by Jon Rappoport

December 16, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

Let’s start here: there are pre-conditions for the popularity of the Star Wars films. New previously unseen Space, huge amounts of it. Heroes in that space. The capacity to perform paranormal feats. A Force that feeds into that capacity. A battle between the light and dark aspects of the Force.

Yes, a director could take those pre-conditions and distort and strangle them in the making of a film, but without those elements the Star Wars movies wouldn’t exist at all.

Drilling down further—The Jedi, in whom the Force is naturally strong, undergo training. This factor pulses in the audience’s subconscious, because it makes a kind of sense. If an individual can perform paranormal feats and control them…he needs to learn how. He needs to go to school. He needs to practice, as an athlete does. Perhaps the paranormal isn’t just a child’s fantasy. Maybe it’s more than that. Suppose it is. Suppose these societies we live in, these civilizations, are built to exclude such possibilities. Suppose, in the glorification of technology, an omission has occurred—an intentional omission. Suppose a deadening “realism” is the arbitrary substitute for paranormal ability. Suppose this is a long con of immense obfuscation.

Read Dean Radin’s classic, The Conscious Universe: Radin presents a compelling case via a far-reaching analysis of paranormal laboratory experiments and their results.

When I first read his breakthrough book, I was floored. Far from merely recounting anecdotes of paranormal phenomena, Radin was proving that decades of well-formed and well-conducted published laboratory studies, in the areas of telepathy and psychokinesis, revealed that these human capabilities exist.

He had performed a staggering feat. He had shown the science was valid.

It remains for other branches of the scientific community to catch up, to admit their consensus about reality is provincial, distorted, and pathetically behind the times. They are now the Roman Church of old, denying Galileo and Bruno.

Two years ago, Radin spoke at a conference, Electric Universe, in New Mexico. He described his recent pilot study on time and precognition.

A small group of advanced meditators who use the “non-dual” technique, were tested. While meditating, they were subjected to random interruptions: a flash of light and a beeping sound. Measuring their brain activity, Radin found that significant brain changes occurred BEFORE the light flashes or the beeps.

A control group of non-meditators were tested in exactly the same way, but their brain measurements revealed NO such changes.

In other words, the brains of the meditators anticipated the timing of the unpredictable interruptions.

The future was registering now. This, of course, opens up another way of thinking about time.

Serial time, the idea that, in this continuum, we experience a smooth progression of moments, with the present becoming, so to speak, the future, is the conventional view. But suppose that is a grossly limiting and sketchy premise?

Suppose that, for those who can be aware of it, the future is bleeding into the present? It is making an impact “before it happens.”

If time is deeply rooted in perception, Dean Radin’s study indicates that this perception extends to the future. If people can register the impact of the future now, then our notions of time are up for grabs.

So are conventional concepts of cause and effect, which rely on chains of events moving like trains from the past to the present. We need to consider that causes can sit in the future and produce their effects in the present.

In which case, what is the future? It certainly is an expanded territory that extends beyond our normal notions of it.

In correspondence with me, Dean Radin offered further information about his study:

“All participants knew that they would receive a light flash, an audio tone [beep], both, or none. In one condition they didn’t know when these would occur or what type of stimulus. In another condition they knew when it would occur but not what. In all cases no one, including [the scientist] experiment[ers], knew what the next stimulus would be because we used a true random number generator to select it on the fly.

“The conclusion of the study was that the reported subjective experience of exceptional spaciousness, or timelessness, reported by some advanced meditators, appears to be objectively correct. That is, their subjective sense of ‘now’ appears to expand substantially, and our experiment indicates that this was not an illusion.”

I then asked Dr. Radin how closely correlated the light flashes and audio tones were to the brain changes in the meditators. His answer was stunning. The brain changes occurred 1.5 seconds before these interruptions. And the changes obviously occurred even though some of the meditators didn’t know when the interruptions were coming.

Radin’s remarks offer us a major point: these meditators were expanding their consciousness of the present moment, so that it included the future.

Such a framework of understanding travels far beyond modern ideas about the makeup and laws of the physical universe. It implies more than merely a holographic or pixel-based cosmos. It speaks to titanic capabilities on our part.

Of course, having sunk to a state in which we navigate in an amnesia about ourselves, we look at these ideas with skepticism. We pretend we are trapped in a container-continuum of space and time, as Einstein and others have fleshed it out.

Consider what could be the most astonishing extension of Dean Radin’s work: suppose that for those elements of the future that aren’t yet planned or on the drawing boards at all, people can still register their presence in advance. Then we would be talking about the human capacity to reach out into a vacuum, a nothing, and still “bring back” what is going to happen.

Back to Star Wars. Jedi undergo training to improve their ability to see into the immediate future, to know, in advance, what is about to happen seconds before it does—for example, in battle against an opponent. In this sense, that process mirrors what Radin has been researching and confirming. Is it any surprise that the movie audience feels a resonance with Jedi abilities? We are talking about more than just fantasy wish-fulfillment.

Another kind of training existed in early Tibet. Those “Jedi” utilized a method of visualization that, in its concept, challenges virtually all systems of spiritual practice. (Read John Blofeld’s wonderful book, The Tantric Mysticism of Tibet.) I’m talking about “deity visualization.”

The student is given a task: create in his mind, in every detail, the image of a specific “deity.” I believe these students were given a painting to study in this regard.

This was no brush-off exercise. The student, in isolation, had to create, all at once, with no missing parts, and sustain the entire (fully and extensively decorated) image. If he could accomplish this at all, it might take months, or even years.

If he achieved the goal, the deity would then naturally take on the persona of a counselor, guide, and friend. For the student, this would be a marvelous ongoing experience.

The teacher, watching the student closely, would determine when he was relying “too closely” on the guide. At that point, he would tell the student: “Get rid of the deity.”

This, it was said, was more difficult than creating it in the first place.

But if the student could achieve both the creation and destruction of the deity, he would then see, as John Blofeld puts it, that the universe is a product of mind.

This insight, not merely an intellectual conclusion, but an immediate knowing and experience, would enable the student to change, rearrange, and recreate physical space, time, and energy.

The early Tibetan school of the “paranormal” was undoubtedly the most original in the history of the planet. It also speaks to the idea that, through training, through the development of the faculty of imagination, the individual can regain and restore what was originally his, before socialization, indoctrination, and “realism” submerged his own power.

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

The Star Wars films reinstate the concept of the advanced academy, where students actually train to enhance their inherent capacities. Therefore, the movies are more than spectacles. They firmly suggest that training, if it existed, would be the key to outdistancing the programmed and illusory dimensions of the world people believe they live in.

The films reawaken the idea of individual power—not as some bedraggled tag-end appendage going extinct as a result of “higher social evolution”, but as a primary alive and electric core that has been stepped on and rejected by engineers of a mass future, in which individuals are supposed to be numbers and units and ciphers in a dimmed-out gray utopia, for the sake of some misbegotten counterfeit of universal justice and equality—neither of which, when the veneer is peeled away, is just or equal.

There, for those who can see, is the illusion.

The reality is the individual, alive and awake with his amnesia stripped away, and his power intact. Again.

Jon Rappoport

Dear WaPo: I’ve got some ‘fringe’ for you right here

Dec14

Dear WaPo: I’ve got some ‘fringe’ for you right here

Washington Post whines: ‘fringe’ news entering mainstream

by Jon Rappoport

December 14, 2015

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

It’s a terrible thing. Really. The pure and sanctified blood of mainstream news is now infected. Where is the protective vaccine? Quick, call the CDC.

Washington Post, December 11, Paul Farhi, “Thanks to Trump, fringe news enters the mainstream”:

“Trump finding common ground with [Alex] Jones is in keeping with Trump’s own rocky relationship with facts and credible information during the campaign. Many of Trump’s more controversial assertions since he declared for president have come from the murky swamp of right-wing, libertarian and flat-out paranoid sources that have proliferated and thrived as the Internet and social media have grown.”

Got it? The germs are multiplying.

Even the Washington Post, center of all that is good and right and true and holy about the news, is under siege. What can be done to protect WaPo from The Fringe? Is it time for Bob Woodward to write a new book? Do they need surgical masks? Hazmat suits? Should they flee underground and turn the whole operation into a level 4 virus lab with steel vaults and air seals?

Well, dear WaPo, I have a piece of fringe for you. I know you need more readers, and this is a killer. Literally. If you set your hounds loose on it for six months or so, you’ll drag out some of the most explosive material you’ve ever seen, and you’ll be able to print two editions a day. Readers’ll fight with each other to grab issues of the paper off the stands. Watergate? Bill and Monica? Sunday picnics compared with what I’m offering you. And it’s definitely fringe, because you and other mainstream outlets have never covered it with any emphasis. Ready?

The US medical system kills 225,000 people a year. That’s 225,000. Which means 2.25 million killings per decade.

Put that up against wars, so-called epidemics, terror attacks, car accidents, Trump, libertarians, Jones, paranoid right-wingers.

Source number 1:

July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Association, “Is US health really the best in the world?”

Author, Dr. Barbara Starfield, respected and revered public health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. Starfield broke it down this way:

106,000 deaths per year from the effects of FDA approved medical drugs, and 119,000 deaths from mistreatment and errors in hospitals. Annual total? 225,000 medically caused deaths in the US.

Source number 2:

BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012;344:e3989). Author, Jeanne Lenzer. “Anticoagulants cause the most serious adverse events, finds US analysis”

Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices:

“It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

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

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

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

But wait—source number 3:

A page on the FDA’s own website, which you can access by going to startpage.com and searching for “Why Learn about Adverse [Medical] Drug Events (ADRs)”.

The quote (caps are not mine, they’re the FDA’s):

“Over 2 MILLION serious ADRs yearly/100,000 DEATHS yearly/ADRs 4th leading cause of death ahead of pulmonary disease, diabetes, AIDS, pneumonia, accidents and automobile deaths.”

Source number 4:

The following quotes come from the ASA [American Sociological Association] publication called Footnotes, in its November 2014 issue. The article is “The Epidemic of Sickness and Death from Prescription Drugs.” The author of the article is Donald W Light.

Donald W Light is a professor of medical and economic sociology. He is a founding fellow of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2013, he was a fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard. He is a Lokey Visiting Professor at Stanford University and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Medicine.

“…appropriately prescribed prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death…About 330,000 patients die each year from prescription drugs in the US and Europe.

“They [the drugs] cause an epidemic of about 20 times more [6.6 million per year] hospitalizations, as well as falls, road accidents, and about 80 million [per year] medically minor problems such as pains, discomforts, and dysfunctions that hobble productivity or the ability to care for others.

“Deaths from overmedication, errors, and self-medication would increase these figures.”

Source number 5:

A 2009 email interview I did with the above-mentioned Dr. Barbara Starfield. Here are a few excerpts:

JR: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

BS: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency)…

JR: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the effects of the US medical system?

BS: NO.

JR: Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

BS: Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews—which puts the FDA into an untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

JR: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

BS: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

—end interview excerpt—

Dear Wa Po, consider these gifts. Your leads. You can take off from here. You can suck it up and incorporate a piece of fringe and make it go mainstream, and in the process, if you handle it well, set your reporters loose to drag out every doctor and medical bureaucrat who knows the truth but has been hiding it, you’ll have the biggest story in your history. By far.

106,000 annual deaths in the US from FDA approved medicines. 225,000 annual deaths from the overall practice of mainstream medicine in the US. That’s 2.25 million deaths per decade. 2.25 MILLION.

Wait. What’s that, WaPo? You don’t want to cover this story with breaking updates every two days for a year? You don’t want to expose the US medical system? You don’t want to show how bringing more Americans under the umbrella of Obamacare automatically ups the number of deaths? You don’t want to bring in more readers than you’ve ever had? You don’t want to blast this story in front-page headlines? You don’t want to take something from the fringe? You don’t want to?

Well, in that case, I guess we’d know where you stand.

It isn’t the fringe that bothers you, it’s the truth.

I don’t blame you. With an operation like yours, you need protection from the truth on so many levels. You do need masks and air filters and steel vaults and seals. And you need drug-ad money. You need continued access to lying official sources, who would drop you in a second if you dove in and worked this fringe story. I get it. I really do.

You have no courage. You have no guts. You’re sick and dying on the vine.

That happens to institutions. They think they’re forever, but when they abandon whatever ideals they’re supposed to have, they disintegrate.

Some funerals are quick affairs. A half-hour and they’re done. Others, like yours, are marathons. They drone on for years, decades.

I’m not attending yours. Never liked zombie events.

But just in case somebody at your paper still has genuine curiosity and balls, I can be contacted.

I’m here, on the fringe.

Jon Rappoport

Magic, history, and the inventions of the individual

Dec13

Magic, history, and the inventions of the individual

by Jon Rappoport

December 13, 2015

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

What follows are notes I made prior to putting together my second collection, Exit From The Matrix. The whole point of that collection was to provide numerous exercises a person could do on a daily basis—exercises which would reveal and expand his latent power to create reality.

“Reality is invented. It isn’t just ‘there.’”

“There is the study of the past; then there is the obsession with the past; and finally, the blithe acceptance of the past as that thing which molds the individual and makes him what he is. The third preoccupation is by far the most injurious. The sting of its injection is never felt. The fluid enters the bloodstream and paralyzes the mind one gradual degree at a time. The result is an addict who considers himself highly sensible and realistic and comfortable.”

“As long as the concept of The Individual lasts in society, before it disappears under a bulbous landfill of psychological spin and academic garbage, the official approach is placing him, the individual, in a context, a tradition, a historical time line, in order to make sure he believes he is reacting to the forces around him and the history prior to him. In this way, the individual is never seen to invent anything; he is at best responding to ‘the problems of his time.”

“Even when the idea of magic is somehow connected to individual freedom and power, we are referred to older studies and systems of magic, as if the past is the only place we can visit to understand what the individual is capable of. This is absolute nonsense.”

“Rejecting ‘the individual as an artifact of history and tradition’ is like stepping off a speeding train and floating upward, where one can view, below, a giant machine spooling out the insanity known as social sciences. The machine concocts reports of tribes, clans, nations, religions, customs, rules, dogmas, which supposedly describe thousands of years of human experience. Floating free, one can see these trillions of data are tinged with the attitude that the individual has never been vitally important. The machine is making that argument.”

“Here is a proposition for you: ‘If magic, in any interpretation of that word, exists, a person must find it in the past.’ This is like saying a person must move around in a wheelchair, in order to understand his power.”

“What the individual invents and creates makes history, makes new space and time. This isn’t just magic; it is THE magic.”

“When you listen to a symphony, you experience a different space and time continuum. You see it, feel it, inhabit it. It’s easy to say that continuum isn’t real, but it is. If it were somehow removed from your experience, the symphony would come across to you in an entirely different way. A shrunken dilapidated way.”

“The study of symbology conveniently forgets that all symbols are, originally, inventions. They don’t intrinsically mean anything. Every symbol and its meaning was first invented by an individual, not a group.”

“The individual isn’t the end-point of time. He creates time. But this statement is true at a level most people don’t want to explore. They prefer to believe they are fitting into a system that has already been prepared for them. This is like believing all meals just show up at the table, rather than considering the possibility of cooking meals in the kitchen one’s self.”

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 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.

That road travels to more and more creative power, joy, and fulfillment.

During that great adventure, the individual experiences what has been labeled “paranormal” and “synchronistic” and “magical.” These words really don’t do us justice. They only hint at what we are and what we can do.

I put this collection together because it expresses, explains, and shows, in detail, how the individual can rediscover and reclaim his/her true power.

That process, that engagement, that life is beyond solving problems. Our problems, at the core, exist only because we have “misplaced an infinity.”

Everything I’ve done and written in the past 20 years has been aimed, one way or another, at bringing back that infinity, seeing through the layers of disguise, and moving ahead on the sunlit road we all desire.

This collection is for you, for me, for all of us.

We have, each one of us, an infinite life, lived in a world that is convinced it is bounded.

It’s time we dissolved that false contradiction.

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Congressional lunatics on the march

The basics of a staged bioterror event

Your imagination, your goals in life

Hello, world: is your government driving you crazy?

“Our top story tonight: reasonable robots triumph”

Imitating reality and super-reality: deep matrix

Republican Presidential debate an exercise in mind control

Star Wars, ancient Tibet, and Jedi training

Dear WaPo: I’ve got some ‘fringe’ for you right here

Magic, history, and the inventions of the individual