Why do people think computers will be alive?

by Jon Rappoport

August 7, 2015

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

“Because, supposedly, one digital processing unit will eventually be able to manipulate zillions of pieces of information at a faster rate than all the human brains on the planet taken together…the result will be…what? And if that digital unit is sitting in The Cloud and every human’s brain is hooked up to it, the result will be…what? A person will be able to master French in five minutes? How does that work? Information can be injected like a drug and produce instant learning? Automatically? Perhaps this is a fantasy hatched at Disney World. Two machines can rapidly exchange data and programmed methods of analysis, but it so happens that humans are not machines, even if they believe they are.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

How do you think a super-brain would be constructed? I’m talking about the technocrats’ dream to build a computer that would rival and surpass the human brain, in terms of “reliable data.” And don’t forget, the plan is to somehow connect brains directly to the super-computer, so data can be downloaded into humans.

And this computer would, technocrats believe, come alive.

Why?

Because a) it can store far more information than the human brain; b) it can choose how to utilize that information to solve problems; c) it can solve those problems at lightning speed; and d) it can work on millions of problems at the same time.

Basically, technocrats believe a super-computer will be alive because it can process enormous amounts of data—as if there is a threshold beyond which the sheer volume of processing triggers an event…birth. What was merely a machine is now something More.

I’ve boiled down the above statement, in order to remove mystical fluff.

The statement looks strange, quite strange.

By way of analogy, if you could outfit a Porsche so it can run at 400mph, without need of a driver; and also view detailed traffic patterns within a radius of a hundred miles, adjusting its trajectory to minute changes; also report weather, stock market moves, headlines, and the moment-to-moment output of home surveillance sensors; also cook soup; acquire hostile targets and fire beam weapons to eliminate them; shop remotely at any of 50,000 stores; interview and pitch prospective customers to win contracts; deliver a haircut, shave, and minor surgery; write your autobiography in 5000 volumes; track ice flows at the North Pole; day-trade stocks and commodities; report the second-to-second movements and conversations of up to 100,000 people; record every event taking place on a million other planets…and do all this simultaneously… at some point the Porsche will cross over and become alive.

I’m afraid not.

It will still be a machine.

For technocrats, “information processing” is basically a religious undertaking. As if it were a form of prayer, a blessing conferred, a ritual connecting the computer to the innards of the universe.

There is no level of complexity beyond which life suddenly occurs. Complexity, in and of itself, does not initiate life.

There is no number of “correct answers” which triggers life.

At bottom, technocracy assumes quite juvenile concepts: accumulation of data automatically imparts learning; the power of information-processing bypasses the problem of false, authority-based data; enough learning eliminates the need for imagination.

Technocrats assume that mysteries about how humans learn can be solved by claiming: “well, the brain is doing something we’ll eventually understand. It’s all happening in the brain because…what else is there?”

There is the individual.

You.

If you are your brain, an ant is a spaceship pilot.

Technocrats are making the brain into a sacred totem, a magic gizmo.

If you’re aware you have a brain, who is being aware? You’re just an artifact fed illusions about self by your brain? You aren’t there at all?

I’m an illusion writing illusions to the illusion called you?

Now, we’re getting to the core of the matter. A great many channels of propaganda, for obvious reasons, are aimed at the eradication of the concept of the individual, of self. It suits the collectivist model.

The assertion that the brain is “all there is” is a piece of political puppetry. It leads directly into the effort to “enhance” (alter, re-program, control) the brain.

The brain is not conscious.

A computer is not conscious.

A brain-computer interface is not conscious.

There is no function or system that equals consciousness.

Individual consciousness comes before any function or system.

The individual is not defined as the passive recipient of signals from the brain. The individual is intensely creative, although for various reasons he can bury that capacity to the point where he will deny he has it.

When the individual expresses his imagination and creative power intensely enough, he surpasses the habitual and passive acceptance of things as they are. And in doing so, his consciousness assumes a different level, and he sees life from a far different perspective. All this does not emanate from the brain.

Theoretically, if one had a super-computer of sufficient power, he could program it to spit out all the paintings in all the museums in the world, and all the music ever composed, and all the poems and novels and plays ever written, plus billions of new paintings and songs and poems. But…

So what?

Does that mean that human imagination is just an illusion?

If a carpenter makes a cabinet, and a computer running a machine produces the same cabinet, does that mean the carpenter is useless, and has gained nothing from his endeavor? Of course not.

Imagination is the source of reality, including the creation of computers.

Imagination is also the means by which an individual can attain a state in which he truly understands that the universe of “rigid natural laws” is actually an infinitely malleable stage play.

Technocrats want to be machines. They aren’t, but they keep trying.

If necessary, let them have their own island, where they can fiddle and diddle to their hearts’ content, without imposing their machinery on the rest of us. Call it an experiment. We run it. We watch what happens to them as they expend titanic effort to be brains and computers. We’ll call the experiment: “A Self-Selecting Cohort of Humans Who Think They’re Machines Attempt to Attain a Lowest-Common-Denominator Default Setting As If It Were Enlightenment.”

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; destroy them.

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.

Against this background, the computer is a drop in the ocean.

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.

Jon Rappoport Live, Newport Beach, CA: it’s free

Aug6

Jon Rappoport Live, Newport Beach, CA: it’s free

When: Wednesday, August 12, 8PM.

Where: DEAD CHIROPRACTIC SOCIETY
20321 SW Birch Street, Suite 100
Newport Beach, CA 92660
949-250-0600

You need to contact the group at the above phone number to book a free seat. If you just show up at the door, you pay $17.

I hope to see many of you there. I rarely do live events these days.

I’ll be speaking about medical crimes, of course, and who knows what else I’ll get into. One thing I can predict: it won’t be boring.

Come on down!

Jon Rappoport

Inventing viruses: a staggering hoax

Aug6

“Ebola has returned.” Has it?

by Jon Rappoport

August 6, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

“I have many reasons for exposing hoaxes about viruses. One vital reason: when people realize the truth, they begin to grasp, at a visceral level, what’s possible in the area of fake-reality invention. They see their own prior assumptions go whirling down the drain. They see how many pancakes of propaganda can be stacked up on one plate. The virus hoax cuts very, very deep, all the way down into what people automatically accept as Obvious. It isn’t obvious at all. It’s a complete fabrication. It’s an artifact made out of nothing.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Yahoo News, July 3, 2015, “Ebola Returns to Liberia: Where Did It Come From, and Could It Spread?”:

“The return of Ebola in Liberia — with three new cases reported this week in the previously Ebola-free country — is worrisome, and raises questions about whether Liberia was really free of the disease to begin with, experts say.”

Reader, we’re moving into deep waters now. This isn’t just about Ebola. This is about the whole structure of false medical reality.

And that reality begins with the arrogant assurance that what’s killing very large numbers of people can be traced to a virus.

The “experts” present a unified front. They assert that their tests for these viruses are correct, pure, and extremely useful.

Yes, the tests are useful to the pharmaceutical companies who make the drugs that purport to kill the viruses and the vaccines that purport to give immunity to the viruses.

But as I’ve shown in prior articles, these tests (antibody, PCR) are far from accurate. Worse, they’re irrelevant.

And they mask the fact that actual isolation of the virus from the human body is not being done.

Several readers have asked me what “isolation of a virus” means. The most obvious answer is: you know you’re looking at virus, rather than something else.

For example, you remove diseased tissue from a human being, and from it you separate out probable virus from non-viral material, and you then take electron microscope pictures of the probable, and you look at those picture, and you see lots and lots of the same virus. Not what could be or might be virus, but definitely virus.

This is direct. This is virus from a human. This is not indirect testing that is faulty, irrelevant, and can go wrong in many ways. Isolation is what you need to begin to say a virus could be causing a disease.

Let me take you down a road that is rarely traveled and show you a few precedents where “everybody knows it’s a virus” turned out to be dead wrong.

Peter Doshi, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease,” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):

“…Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory [flu] specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.”

Translation: 84% of what is considered to be flu isn’t flu. Every year.

The flu virus isn’t there.

Here’s another Doshi reference—December, 2005, the BMJ Online, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412):

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”

That’s 18.

At various times, the CDC has stated that, every year, 36,000 Americans die from the flu…or, after revising that estimate, the CDC states it could be anywhere from 3000 to 49,000.

But only 18 patients’ blood samples showed any sign of the presence of the flu virus.

Consider Pellagra. In the first half of the 20th century, in the US, there were three million cases. 100,000 people died. Researchers at health agencies insisted there had to be germ at the bottom of it. They looked and looked and looked.

Meanwhile, other researchers found out Pellagra was mainly a deficiency of niacin. They were pushed into the background. “A bunch of fools. Pay no attention to them.”

Finally, after 100,000 deaths, most of which were unnecessary, the “experts” grudgingly admitted, “Yes, it’s niacin.”

Fifty years ago, there was a massive outbreak of a nervous-system disorder in Japan. It was called SMON (subacute myelo-optic neuropathy). Tens of thousands of cases, many deaths. People were in an uproar.

Researchers were told to look for a virus. So they did. And did. And did. It had to be a virus.

Against much opposition, a small group of investigators and lawyers publicly proposed a different answer. SMON was the result of a drug Ciba-Geigy was selling to alleviate gastrointestinal distress. The drug was Clioquinol.

Finally exposed in court, Ciba paid out large $$ damages.

It wasn’t a virus. Even though everybody thought it was. Knew it was.

Here’s another reference. Jim West, writing at the Weston A Price Foundation, “The SARS Epidemic: Are Viruses Taking the Rap for Industrial Poisons?”

“An insider, Dr. Frank Plummer, spilled the beans: ‘The director… told The Scientist yesterday (April 10) that the new coronavirus implicated as the cause of the disease is certainly around in the environment but is unlikely to be the causative agent. Frank Plummer is director of Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.’

“Plummer stated, ‘we are finding some of the best-characterized [SARS disease] cases are negative [for the SARS virus]. So it’s puzzling. As is the fact the amounts of virus we are finding, when we find it, are very small—only detectable by very sensitive PCR [testing].’”

Even when the so-called cause of SARS was found in patients, the amount was so small there was no way to say it would create disease. Plummer eventually admitted that the percentage of SARS cases in which the virus was present was approaching zero. Translation: the viral cause of SARS couldn’t be the cause.

Here’s another reference, which sheds much more light on what “isolation of a virus” means: Journalist Christine Johnson’s interview, “Does HIV exist?” with Dr. Eleni Papadopulos, “a biophysicist and leader of a group of HIV/AIDS scientists from Perth in Western Australia. Over the past decade and more, she [Papadopulos] and her colleagues have published many scientific papers questioning the HIV/AIDS hypothesis.”

Here is a brief edited excerpt—the entire interview is published at primitivism.com:

CJ [Christine Johnson]: Does HIV cause AIDS?

EPE [Papadopulos]: There is no proof that HIV causes AIDS.

CJ: Why not?

EPE: For many reasons, but most importantly, because there is no proof that HIV exists.

…

CJ: Didn’t Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo isolate HIV back in the early eighties?

EPE: No. In the papers published in Science by those two research groups, there is no proof of the isolation of a retrovirus from AIDS patients…

CJ: They say they did isolate a virus.

EPE: Our interpretation of the data differs…To prove the existence of a virus you need to do three things. First, culture cells and find a particle you think might be a virus. Obviously, at the very least, that particle should look like a virus. Second, you have to devise a method to get that particle on its own so you can take it to pieces and analyze precisely what makes it up. Then you need to prove the particle can make faithful copies of itself. In other words, that it can replicate.

CJ: Can’t you just look down a microscope and say there’s a virus in the cultures?

EPE: No, you can’t. Not all particles that look like viruses are viruses.

CJ: So where did AIDS research go wrong?

EPE: It’s not so much a question of where the research went wrong. It’s more a question of what was left out. For some unknown reason the decades-old method of retroviral isolation…developed to study animal retroviruses was not followed. Retroviruses are incredibly tiny, almost spherical particles with diameters of about one hundred nanometers (one ten-thousandth of a millimeter). Millions would fit comfortably on the head of a pin.

…

CJ: What do we see in [electron microscope pictures of HIV]… published in 1997?

EPE: These photographs vindicate the position we have held ever since the beginning. Two groups, one Franco/German…and one from the US National Cancer Institute…published pictures…The first thing to say is that the authors of these studies concede that their pictures reveal that the vast majority of the material…is cellular. The authors describe all this material as “non-viral”, or as “mock” virus or “microvesicles,” which are encapsulated cell fragments.

CJ: Are there any viral particles in these pictures?

EPE: There are a few particles which the researchers claim are retroviral particles. In fact, they claim these are the HIV particles, but give no evidence why.

CJ: Are there lots of these HIV particles?

EPE: No…when you take an electron micrograph they [HIV particles] should fill the entire picture. Instead, these candidate retroviruses are minority constituents of the published electron micrographs. Thus, molecules extracted from these samples can not be assumed to come from those retroviral-like particles.

—end of interview excerpt—

So no, the experts aren’t automatically right when they say, “It’s a virus.”

In the case of Ebola, why should you believe them now?

I recently had an exchange of emails with David Rasnick, PhD.

You can read Rasnick’s bio at his site, davidrasnick.com. He obtained his PhD from the Georgia Institute of Technology, and spent 25 years working with proteases (a class of enzymes) and protease inhibitors. He is the author of the book, The Chromosomal Imbalance Theory of Cancer. He was a member of the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel of South Africa.

The subject of our conversation was the isolation of the Ebola virus from humans. Has it ever been done?

Direct isolation is far different from diagnostic tests such as antibody or PCR, which are both indirect methods of assessment. In previous articles, I’ve covered the irrelevance of these two tests.

Any discussion of the Ebola virus must begin with the question of direct isolation. The whole presumption of an Ebola outbreak and epidemic rests on that question.

Was the Ebola virus ever purified and isolated from a human?

Here is what Rasnick wrote, after his search of the published literature:

“I have examined in detail the literature on isolation and Ems [EM: electron microscope pictures] of both Ebola and Marburg viruses. I have not found any convincing evidence that Ebola virus (and for that matter Marburg) has been isolated from humans. There is certainly no confirmatory evidence of human isolation.

“I searched the CDC’s website and came up dry.

“The CDC claims 7728 Ebola virus cases have been ‘laboratory-confirmed’.

“I asked the CDC what constitutes isolation of Ebola virus from human specimens. I also asked for the protocol for isolating Ebola virus. [No convincing reply from the CDC as of this date.]

“Virtually everything that is known and done with these viruses is in animals and cell culture.”

Rasnick continued:

“There is the possibility that Ebola and Marburg viruses represent laboratory artifacts. I’m inclined to think this is the case. What I mean is the viruses are real but may exist at very low levels in wild animals and even humans, well-below pathogenic [disease-causing] levels. These ‘passenger’ viruses may be activated and amplified in laboratory culturing conditions designed for that purpose in order to produce enough viral particles to be characterized.

“Viruses causing real pathology are abundant in the diseased tissues. You can see them using EM on the primary tissue. You do not need to amplify the virus in cell culture. I’m always suspicious when cell culture is the only way a virus is observable by EM.”

Rasnick’s findings are a direct challenge to the basis of the whole “Ebola outbreak.” If indeed the Ebola virus has never been isolated from a human being, the so-called epidemic is unproven.

To say this is shocking would be a vast understatement.

When public-health officials and governments claim there is an epidemic, the burden of proof is on them.

At this point, they must, first and foremost, show someone, somewhere, correctly and directly and undeniably isolated Ebola virus from a human being.

Let’s see the evidence.

In past articles, I’ve demonstrated how people could become ill from factors other than viruses—factors which are ignored and even maintained, in order to keep populations in a debilitated state, unable to resist their political leaders and corporations intent on taking over land and resources.

Add to that, attributing fake viral causes to illness also opens the gate wide to the products of Big Pharma—toxic medical drugs and vaccines.

These fake viral “outbreaks and epidemics” also serve to keep populations in fear, at which point they look to their leaders to tell them what to do. This is programming for compliance.

One aspect of studying the matrix called civilization involves unearthing the most basic assumptions which people accept—assumptions they couldn’t possibly believe are false, much less intentionally false.

The analysis I’m presenting here is one corner on one street in a massive city-labyrinth called Matrix.

(For more information on analyzing and deconstructing false realities, see “Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation” in Power Outside The Matrix.)

Jon Rappoport

Consciousness versus computers

Aug5

Consciousness versus computers

by Jon Rappoport

August 5, 2015

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

“Technocrats believe all brains can be directly hooked up to a super-computer. They’re looking at humans beings through the wrong end of the telescope. Everything they see about humans is reduced, shrunken, and ‘automatic’. Technocrats are trained to miss the big picture, even though they incessantly talk about it. They’re visionaries who are blind. Thus, they’re in the grand tradition of religious fanatics.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

If you take away a person’s ability to employ logic, and if you also take away his imagination, and thus his capacity to extrapolate and predict what is coming, what you are left with is: eyeballs.

Eyeball perception of what is happening now. And even then, eyeballs are seeing immediate reality through unconscious filters.

The ability to apply reason and to predict are vital components of perception. They are voluntary components. They don’t sweep in like a wave and take over. They are born out of freedom and choice.

So…what is the difference between you moving around on the Internet, reading and researching; versus you with your brain directly connected to some grand computer stacked with trillions of pieces of data?

In the former case, you have freedom. In the latter case, it all happens automatically. You get “the best possible data on any given subject.”

Of course, “best possible” is not your decision or conclusion. It’s someone else’s. Worse, the data are instantly downloaded into your brain (whatever that actually means).

How this deterministic system amounts to a glorious breakthrough of enormous spiritual significance, triggering revelations, is beyond mysterious. In fact, the whole conception is absurd.

If you were a robot operating on an assembly line, and your task could be automatically modulated and adjusted, depending on changing circumstances, then yes, that would be a nice innovation.

But you aren’t a robot. You’re conscious. You have choice. Freedom. You can apply logic. You can conceive of futures, based on your present knowledge.

Contrary to technocratic catechism, computers aren’t conscious. They don’t have freedom. They can be programmed to select conclusions relative to specified objectives and goals, but even then their methods of selection are part of their programming. They don’t suddenly wake up and become alive.

Technocrats tend to believe computers, when developed to a sufficient level of complexity that mirrors what the human brain does, DO come alive.

They believe that information-processing alone is a sign of life. But that’s a self-serving fantasy.

Information-processing is one effect of being alive and conscious. The technocrats have it backwards.

Unfortunately for them and their religion, consciousness isn’t measurable. And that’s a bone stuck in their throat.

Therefore, they need to reduce and reduce the concept of consciousness. So they claim it’s in the brain, and then they say the brain works automatically—and therefore consciousness is simply an aspect of pre-determined function. Consciousness is just a delusion brought on, like an illness, by chemicals and electrical impulses inside the skull.

They say whatever they have to, in order to minimize, degrade, and destroy the idea of consciousness.

To the degree that technocrats are gaining control of society and its future, the human population is at considerable risk. Because these secular-religious fanatics are sniffing and building their way toward a “best possible apparatus.”

And wherever they spot freedom, they try to wipe it out, and then they say it never existed.

Consciousness is not function. Nor is it derived from function.

The foot soldiers of technocracy spend every working day with systems. They become entrained: they see life as systems. Therefore, they presume that awareness must be some sort of structure yet to be mapped out.

This is false. A person can be conscious of a system, but that has nothing to do with what consciousness is.

These distinctions, among the technocratic class, have been lost.

Along similar lines, technocrats believe that a closed and tightly planned society is “scientific” and therefore “advanced.” This is another blunder. You can put a hundred people inside a large cage and regulate their movements. That’s a plan. That’s precise. But it has nothing to do with science.

Technocrats are juggling all sorts of metaphors and comparisons and coming up with wrong answers like clockwork.

On a much higher level, their bosses and leaders are manipulating these notions as a smokescreen, to hide their naked ambition: overt control and dominance of the population.

Regardless of what groups may be able to accomplish to head off the technocratic takeover, there is no victory if the individual doesn’t grasp his own inherent consciousness, which is vastly dynamic, energetic, and creative.

Imagination and the creative force are the prow of the present as it becomes the future.

The individual isn’t constrained to act merely from past tradition and experience.

The individual is under no obligation to wait for “everyone else” to wake up.

Consensus reality is: waiting in a defunct railroad station for something to happen. It never does.

As time passes, we are going to see more and more bizarre twists on technocracy; more pseudoscientific pronouncements; more messianic assurances.

It is up to the individual to reject the glare of this Wondrous Collective Tomorrow, and instead, invent his own.

To that, a person might reply, “But all around me, I see people who can’t consciously invent their own future. They’re mired in all sorts of problems.”

Whether these “other people” can or can’t is a subject for a different discussion. They aren’t the measure or the standard. Assessing one’s own ability by referring to others is just a convenient distraction.

In fact, the collective “we” and “everyone” is the target of technocrats, who envision mass solutions to civilization’s problems, through a super-computer’s definitive answers framed as “best available data.”

If this sounds like a con and an approach to humans as if they were non-creative machines, it is. It’s exactly that. Previous efforts at mind control pale by comparison. Technocracy is the wholesale Pavlovian insertion of stimuli, transmitted involuntarily to achieve uniform responses all the way across the board.

Madness? Insanity? Absurdity? Since when has that ever stopped manipulators bent on expanding their power and control? Repeated often enough by the right people, huge lies are always easier to sell than small ones.

Jon Rappoport

Mandatory vaccination in California: follow the biggest money

Aug2

Mandatory vaccination in California: follow the biggest money

by Jon Rappoport

August 2, 2015

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

“When people say, ‘Follow the money,’ they forget that modern culture itself is about dollars, and where the big money goes tells you a great deal about the culture and its legalized crimes against the population. This isn’t hard to understand. It’s like saying, ‘The vampires who sell war do it for profit.’ And lo and behold, war and violence are a centerpiece of our culture. If you don’t understand that, just go to the movies.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

The recent California law (#SB277) ordering all public and private schoolchildren to receive the full schedule of vaccines has a context.

A money context.

I’m not just talking about corporate donations to legislators. I’m talking about the state of California itself and the businesses that operate here.

For example, the University of California system of colleges is a vast sprawling kingdom. Biomedical $$ grants pour in, and a significant portion of the money funds vaccine-related research.

I began searching for and itemizing such grants. They’re easy to find. But then, something overtook me: California companies that do biomed and biotech research and sell related products.

I plunged, in other words, into California culture. I say that because the number of these companies is staggering. They form a background context in which a mandatory vaccination law is easy to understand—just as a farm bill would be easy to understand in Iowa, or a bill about ranching would be easy to understand in various Western states.

California is biomed biotech “pasture and ranchland.”

At a site called labrat.com, I found a list of California “biotech, pharmaceutical, medical device, and chemical company jobs.”

I scrolled down the list and counted. It took a long time. I arrived at a total of 517 companies. I was somewhat taken aback. That’s a large number.

But then I found a site called biopharmguy.com. It featured its own list of “Biotech companies in San Diego and Southern California.” In just that part of the state, I counted an astonishing 660 biotech companies.

Now we’re talking context and culture. Big-time.

Money, money, money.

Along with war-making defense dollars, agriculture dollars, Silicon Valley and Hollywood dollars, California floats on biotech biomed money.

And in that context, a mandatory vaccine law is simply par for the course.

Individual rights re vaccination? The freedom to choose? Vaccine dangers? Never heard of it.

Yes, the natural health dollar is also significant in California, but it has yet to become a major political force. Proponents of a 2012 GMO ballot initiative to label GMO food couldn’t get their measure passed. And owing to a 2014 California law regulating agriculture, there will apparently be no more bans against growing or selling GMO food. Prior to the law, four California counties had banned GMOs.

Biotech, biomed, GMO, medical drugs, pesticides—all these areas overlap. The companies who do business in these sectors form a strong money culture. And state politicians, including Governor Jerry Brown, are aware of that fact.

Illustrating Brown’s position, here is a quote from James Fallows’ 2013 profile in The Atlantic:

“Brown’s reduced and balanced budget includes more spending for what he considers the big challenges of the future: clean-energy initiatives, an expensive (and controversial) north-to-south high-speed-rail project, new canals and aqueducts, even California-based medical-research projects beyond those sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.” (emphasis added)

Even with a reduced state budget, and even though there is already a flood of $$ for medical research, Brown saw fit to inject more.

Turning back, rejecting, stepping on the mandatory vaccination bill would have sent the wrong signal to biomed businessmen. It was never going to happen.

One of the largest natural health companies in California, Whole Foods, is no help, to say the least. Now that the US Congress is on the verge of denying any state the right to pass a mandatory GMO labeling law, Whole Foods is poised on the edge of a new upswing in sales. Why? Because it uses a private company to verify that many of its products are GMO-free. So it has a leg up. It produces its own food labels. Under the guise of stating “we don’t endorse political positions,” Whole Foods makes more money as the culture becomes more repressive. And the company knows that.

What about the business of doctors in California? A 2014 report titled, “California Physicians: Surplus or Scarcity?” from the California Healthcare Foundation Almanac, presents a mixed bag of very interesting figures:

From 1993 to 2011, the number of doctors in California has grown by 39%, double the rate of population growth. Patient demand for medical care will continue to expand.

However, nearly one-third of the doctors in California are moving close to retirement age. On top of that, 20% of the doctors in the state work less than 20 hours a week caring for patients.

And finally, nearly 20% of medical care in California is delivered by non-physicians (i.e., nurse practitioners and physicians’ assistants).

What do all these statistics imply? Increasingly, to serve (toxify) the population, medical care in California will become “automatic,” one-size-fits-all, quick in and out.

That’s a perfect climate for mass vaccinations, which will cover all the disease labels drug companies can exploit.

Again, context/culture is everything.

When searching for reasons governments pass laws, the money trails need to be followed—especially the trails that are not so obvious.

It turns out that California isn’t really the “health nut” state. It’s the biomed biotech state now. On every front. That’s where the dollars are, and where they are going.

The power players are on board.

Mandatory vaccination was a slam-dunk from the start. It took a while to make it happen, but when the ducks were assembled in a row, the movers moved.

The last thing they care about or think about is the highly toxic effects of the vaccines.

As I’ve pointed out for the past 25 years, the medical cartel is intent on enrolling every person in a cradle-to-grave system of treatment. Trudging along a half-light somber path, the patient receives 40 or 50 diagnoses of diseases and disorders during his life, is drugged, and sliced and diced, into a debilitated state that ends in the graveyard.

Vaccines are a central feature of this plan. Aside from their toxic effects, the ongoing schedule of shots and boosters trains the patient in the vital item called compliance—which sets up the rest of the medical program through the years and decades.

Which is why the freedom to reject medical treatment is vital.

Which is why mandating vaccines is viewed by the cartel as phase one. Compulsory vaccines today, compulsory drugs tomorrow.

This is the covert op behind all national health insurance programs, including Obamacare.

Jon Rappoport

Power Outside The Matrix: breaking the boundaries

Aug1

Power Outside The Matrix: breaking the boundaries

A different consciousness

by Jon Rappoport

August 1, 2015

People are fixated on rules and boundaries and systems. They are waiting and hoping for some kind of salvation, which will be delivered through a system.

This is a form of mind control. It’s ultimately self-imposed.

The person who lives a creative life finds another aspect of his own mind.

This different consciousness starts with inventing space, which has always been the premise of art. Always.

When I was putting together my new collection, Power Outside The Matrix, I was very cognizant of these things.

The journey and the voyage are invented through and by imagination, which begins from open space.

We are dealing with The New. Old notions of cause and effect don’t apply. The past doesn’t determine the present. The way a religion or a science paints a cosmology is irrelevant.

This isn’t a loop of feedback consciousness or problem-solving consciousness. It’s creative consciousness. It can go anywhere.

People are looking through tunnels of ideology. They create what they think will align with that ideology…and they want to go no further. All ologies and isms are primitive reflections of needs for systems.

Freedom isn’t a system.

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

At one time or another, every human being who has ever lived on this planet has abandoned 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.

When the Greeks invented their line-up of Olympian gods, they made sure they entered Hermes in the list. He was the god of reversal, tricks, and the disappearance of ordinary reality. He created upside down and inside out. He confounded systems.

However, as usual, the Greeks posited creative power in their gods and forgot that they, the humans, were artists of alternative worlds.

That was the cosmic mistake.

This mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, features a long section called: Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation.

This section is 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.

My 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.

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

Access to your internal energy, in huge amounts, is necessary for a life outside The Matrix—rather than relying on the illusory energy that The Matrix seems to provide.

This is a key fact. I’ve developed the exercises for exactly that purpose: your energy, your dynamism, independent and self-sufficient.

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.

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 (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.)

Jon Rappoport

Open letter to Australian PM Tony Abbott: the MMR vaccine

Jul31

by Jon Rappoport

July 31, 2015

(To join our email list, click here.)

Dear Tony,

As we all know, earlier this year you decided that Australian families must vaccinate their children, or else lose government benefits.

And then you also decided that all vaccine exemptions would be cancelled, except the rare medical one.

Well, Tony, something just happened in Washington DC that leaves you hanging out on a very dangerous limb, unless you can suppress all mention of it in the Australian press.

US Congressman Bill Posey, speaking on the House floor (July 29), read a statement from a senior scientist at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The scientist’s name is William Thompson, and he is a whistleblower.

In 2004, Thompson and several other CDC scientists authored a study on the MMR vaccine and its potential connection to autism. The study was published in the journal Pediatrics. The MMR vaccine is mandated for children in Australia, as you know, Tony.

The CDC study claimed there was no sign that the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine was dangerous.

But Congressman Posey read a shocking statement from whistleblower Thompson (July 29) to the Congress, in which Thompson confesses to a lie. A gigantic lie. Thompson admits he and his colleagues cooked the data, in order to exonerate the vaccine, which otherwise would be seen to have a significant connection to autism. They lied. They covered up the reality.

Here are Thompson’s own explosive words:

“…the [CDC] co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the [MMR vaccine] study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can.” (William Thompson, CDC researcher)

Do you get that, Tony? The co-authors of the study threw out vital data into a garbage can.

And this is called science.

In other words, Tony, if these CDC authors had published the truth in 2004, if they hadn’t cooked the books, if they hadn’t thrown away vital documents in the garbage, everybody would know the MMR vaccine has a connection to causing autism.

And now the MMR vaccine is mandatory in Australia.

Parents are ordered by you, Tony, by your government, to have their children shot up with the MMR.

The word liability comes to mind, Tony. Extraordinary liability.

Let me give you another piece of information. Two of Thompson’s co-authors on the 2004 MMR study, Coleen Boyle and Frank DeStephano, are also high-ranking executives at the CDC. Guess what arena they work in? Vaccine safety. Yes.

So that means every single study on the safety of any vaccine, conducted during their tenure, now falls under a heavy cloud of suspicion. Think about that one, Tony.

Here are a few more words from CDC whistleblower Thompson. Congressman Posey read these as well, out in the open, to the Congress, on July 29:

“However, because I [Thompson] assumed it [destroying the documents] was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office and I retained all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper.”

Yes. So Thompson still has, in his possession, the truth about the MMR vaccine-autism connection. So does Congressman Posey. So I believe, do a few other people.

But again, Tony, you mandated the MMR for all children in Australia.

How many children are you therefore endangering?

And if the Australian people wake up, do you think they might throw you and your administration out of office?

Denial is your best weapon. I don’t mean denial of knowledge about what I’m exposing in this article. I mean denial that CDC whistleblower or Congressman Posey are saying anything meaningful. That’s the usual PR strategy, isn’t it? Reduce the debate to a he-said he said standoff, and then side with the “experts” at the CDC, who will claim this is a “misunderstanding” and a tempest in a teapot.

Of course they will. Their careers are at stake.

But answer me this, Tony. When was the last time you heard of a group of government researchers doing “nothing of significance,” when they had to throw vital documents into a garbage can?

Millions of children’s lives and health are at stake here, Tony.

Shall I assume you’ll simply tap dance around this and dismiss it with a wave of your hand? Will you try to con the population of Australia?

Will you even address the scandal and the danger? Or will you ignore it?

If you ignore it, everything depends on the people of your country, how submissive and obedient they are.

You can never tell. Strange things can happen.

Suppose the mothers of Australia suddenly see the handwriting on the wall? Suppose they realize the future of their children depends on a roll of the dice with a vaccine that can create severe neurological damage?

What might they do?

How would they feel, knowing you are ordering them, commanding them to give their children the MMR shot?

Jon Rappoport

Bombshell: CDC destroyed vaccine documents, Congressman reveals

Jul31

Bombshell: CDC destroyed vaccine documents, Congressman reveals; CDC whistleblower case is back

by Jon Rappoport

July 31, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

On July 29, US Congressman Bill Posey made his last stand on the floor of the House. Granted five minutes to speak, he laid bare the lying of the CDC in a now-famous 2004 study that exonerated the MMR vaccine and claimed it had no connection to autism.

“No connection to autism” was the lie.

Congressman Posey read a statement from long-time CDC researcher William Thompson, one of the authors of the 2004 Pediatrics study designed to determine, once and for all, whether the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine could cause autism.

Thompson saw and participated in violating the protocol of the study. He was there. He helped his co-authors destroy documents that would have shown an MMR-autism link.

You can see a rush transcript of Congressman Posey’s remarks here (on the ageofautism.com website), which includes his reading of a statement from whistleblower Thompson.

Posey pleads with his colleagues for a Congressional investigation.

Of note: two of the CDC researchers on the infamous 2004 study, who according to Thompson, destroyed vital documents, are Coleen Boyle and Frank DeStefano. They are both high-ranking executives at the CDC in the area of vaccine safety.

This calls into question every single CDC study, under their tenure, that claims vaccines are safe.

CDC whistleblower Thompson’s statement, which Posey read on the House floor, includes this bombshell:

Thompson has the smoking-gun documents. So does Congressman Posey. I believe others do as well.

So: publish them. Publish them now.

There are lawsuits to be filed. Eleven years have passed since the CDC committed its crime of concealing the MMR vaccine-autism connection. How many parents, never informed of the truth, have permitted their children to receive this vaccine? How many children have been struck down by the vaccine?

The lawsuits should be filed against the CDC and the individual authors of the 2004 study. Lawyers must depose every CDC employee who had knowledge of the crime.

And what about the fact that the MMR vaccine is one of the shots that has been mandated, by law, in California, in other states, and in Australia? Mandating neurological destruction of children is a crime that must be investigated and punished. If these states (and other countries) insist on keeping the MMR on their schedules, they are guilty parties.

Here, for background, are earlier articles I wrote about whistleblower Thompson, starting when the story broke in the summer of 2014.

Understand what we are dealing with here, in terms of public exposure: the author of a peer-reviewed and published study; the author who has worked for many years at the CDC; the author who participated in destruction of vital documents; the author has come forward and admitted his crime and the crime of his colleagues. This kind of confession never happens.

But it did happen.

And this story and what it means must not die, no matter how major media outlets try to spin it or ignore it.

Parents who are, in ignorance, allowing their children to receive the MMR vaccine, must be informed. They must know what is going on. They must know the danger to their children.

Australia, Canada, England, New Zealand, Germany, France, India, China, South Africa…wherever the MMR vaccine is given…parents must be made aware they’re gambling with their children’s lives.

Government officials anywhere in the world who make this continuing crime possible are liable.

So are manufacturers of the MMR.

Get busy. Expose the truth.

Jon Rappoport

Official science: the grand illusion for all robots

Jul30

Official science: the grand illusion for all robots

by Jon Rappoport

July 30, 2015

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

“Government science exists because it is a fine weapon to use, in order to force an agenda of control over the population. We aren’t talking about knowledge here. Knowledge is irrelevant. What counts is: ‘How can we fabricate something that looks like the truth?’ I keep pointing this out: we’re dealing with reality builders. In this case, they make their roads and fences out of data, and they massage and invent the data out of thin air to suit their purposes. After all, they also invent money out of thin air.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Totalitarian science lets you know you’re living in a totalitarian society.

The government, the press, the mega-corporations, the prestigious foundations, the academic institutions, the “humanitarian” organizations say:

“This is the disease. This is its name. This is what causes it. This is the drug that treats it. This is the vaccine that prevents it.

“This is how accurate diagnosis is done. These are the tests. These are the possible results and what they mean.

“Here are the genes. This is what they do. This is how they can be changed and substituted and manipulated. These are the outcomes.

“These are the data and the statistics. They are correct. There can be no argument about them.

“This is life. These are the components of life. All change and improvement result from our management of the components.

“This is the path. It is governed by truth which science reveals. Walk the path. We will inform you when you stray. We will report new improvements.

“This is the end. You can go no farther. You must give up the ghost. We will remember you.”

We are now witnessing the acceleration of Official Science. Of course, that term is an internal contradiction. But the State shrugs and moves forward.

The notion that the State can put its seal on favored science, enforce it, and punish its competitors, is anathema to a free society.

For example: declaring that psychiatrists can appear in court as expert witnesses, when none of the so-called mental disorders listed in the psychiatric literature are diagnosed by laboratory tests.

For example: stating that vaccination is mandatory, in order to protect the vaccinated (who are supposed to be immune) from the unvaccinated. An absurdity on its face.

For example: announcing that the science of climate change is “settled,” when there are, in fact, huge numbers of researchers who disagree. —And then, drafting legislation and issuing executive orders based on the decidedly unsettled science.

For example: officially approving the release and sale of medical drugs (“safe and effective”) which go on to kill, at a conservative estimate, 100,000 Americans every year. And then refusing to investigate or punish the purveyors of these drug approvals (the FDA).

For example: permitting the widespread use of genetically modified food crops, based on no long-term studies of their impact on human health. And then, arbitrarily announcing that the herbicide, Roundup, for which many of these crops are specifically designed, is non-toxic.

For example: declaring and promoting the existence of various epidemics, when the viruses purportedly causing them are not proven to exist and/or not proven to cause human illness (Ebola, SARS, West Nile, Swine Flu, etc.)

A few of you reading this have been with me since 1988, when I published my first book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century. Among other conclusions, I pointed out that HIV had never been shown to cause human illness; the front-line drug given to AIDS patients, AZT, was overwhelmingly toxic; and what was being called AIDS was actually a diverse number immune-suppressing conditions.

Others of you have found my work more recently. I always return to the subject of false science, because it is the most powerful long-term instrument for repression, political control, and destruction of human life.

As I’ve stated on many occasions, medical science is ideal for mounting and launching covert ops aimed at populations—because it appears to be politically neutral, without any allegiance to State interests.

Unfortunately, medical science, on many fronts, has been hijacked and taken over. The profit motive is one objective, but beyond that, there is a more embracing goal:

Totalitarian control.

On the issue of vaccines, I’ve written much about their dangers and ineffectiveness. But also consider this: the push for mandatory vaccination goes a long way toward creating a herd effect—which is really a social construction.

In other words, parents are propagandized to think of themselves a kind of synthetic artificial “community.”

“Here we are. We are the fathers and mothers. We must all protect our children against the outliers, the rebels, the defectors, the crazy ones who refuse to vaccinate their own children. We are all in this together. They are the threat. The enemy. We are good. We know the truth. They are evil.”

This “community of the willing” are dedicated to what the government tells them. They are crusaders imbued with group-think. They run around promoting “safety and protection.” This group consciousness is entirely an artifact, propelled by “official science.”

The crusaders are, in effect, agents of the State.

They are created by the State.

Androids.

They live in an absurd Twilight Zone where fear of germs (the tiny invisible terrorists) demands coercive action against the individuals who see through the whole illusion.

This is what official science can achieve. This is how it can enlist obedient foot soldiers and spies who don’t have the faintest idea about how they’re being used.

This is a variant on Orwell’s 1984. The citizens are owned by the all-embracing State, but they aren’t even aware of it.

That’s quite a trick.

Jon Rappoport

Breakout from the controlled ordinary mind

Jul28

Breakout from the controlled ordinary mind

by Jon Rappoport

July 28, 2015

When I was about to release my collection, Exit From The Matrix, I wrote several introductions. Here is one I didn’t publish. It shows how seriously I take what others consider a merely “quirky tendency” of humans to imagine a better and different future for themselves and this piece of space called Earth:

“Suppose everything that is happening in the human world is taking place in a synthetic space, a grossly reduced arena; and suppose you could stand outside that space and look in. You would be seeing a great deal more than ‘what is going on’. You would be seeing how it is playing out, shot through with delusions at every turn; and of course the main delusion would be the space itself, as if nothing could be happening anywhere else but there, in that place. This is what the mind, all the minds, are telling themselves, as they fight over scraps. Humans have defined themselves as social constructs in small-time stage play.” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

The controlled mind thinks in the same patterns, over and over. It reworks familiar territory, and when that becomes insufferably boring, it lowers its energy output and initiates shutdowns.

Then it looks for outside stimulation that will replace thinking. The type of stimulation hardly matters, as long as it moves adrenaline through the system.

The decline of a society or civilization can be viewed in the same step-down fashion.

Occasionally, in passing, a writer makes reference to the creative impulse as a missing social factor, which could be remedied, for example, by restoring funding for arts programs in schools, as if that would repair a bureaucratic failing and thus restore balance to education and “the culture.”

Which is like saying Titans, who have developed profound amnesia about themselves, could recover their consciousness and power by shampooing their hair more frequently.

The individual human being, apart from the welter of his social relationships, is sitting on a volcano-range of creative energy, about which he knows almost nothing. This ignorance is purposeful. It enables him to fit into a small life defined by habits and shrunken subjects of interest and routine interactions. Within that space, he forms opinions and preferences and aversions. He says yes to this and no to that. He cultivates a passive tolerance for differences, as if he were auditioning for sainthood.

He lives as a social construct in a social space. If he breaks out, it is usually by committing a minor crime.

If he lives in a place where war and destruction are the long-standing status quo, he fights the assigned enemy. His social space is the battlefield.

But whoever he is and wherever he is, underneath it all, something is waiting for him. A part of himself is waiting.

It is the part that can conceive of everything that isn’t, that never was. It is the part that dreams beyond the ordinary facades of time and space.

It is the part that refuses to believe habit and repetition and routine and systems are the core of life.

It is the part that knows something new and unprecedented and stunning can be invented at the drop of a hat, and that this is the unlimited territory of the individual.

It is the part off-handedly referred to as imagination, which over time has been sold away into oblivion. But which never dies.

This is what is underneath the common duties and habits of daily humans as they circulate in their lives.

The elites who try to control and define the common space of humanity would like to render imagination to the junk heap of history, never to be recalled. They would like to do this by replacing the individual with the group, which has no creative impulse, but is merely, with few exceptions, the lowest-common-denominator expression of any idea.

In Huxley’s Brave New World (1932), the overarching government slogan was: “Every one belongs to every one else.” One group, indivisible, with non-liberty and injustice for all.

Huxley’s slogan is now also the number-one elite propaganda message on Earth. It can be made to mean almost anything that derides and minimizes the individual and his repressed creative power.

In his 1954 short story, The Adjustment Team, Philip K Dick approaches the transformation of the individual into the group as an instantaneous, blanketing, mass-programming operation. Salesman Ed Fletcher, through an error, isn’t included in the “great change.” Instead, he witnesses it. Therefore, he is transported into the sky to meet the Old Man, the Chief, for a judgment:

Ed: “I get the picture…I was supposed to be changed like the others. But I guess something went wrong.”

Old Man: “Something went wrong. An error occurred. And now a serious problem exists. You have seen these things. You know a great deal. And you are not coordinated with the new configuration.”

The new configuration, at a deep level, is not new at all. It has existed since the dawn of history. It’s the self-fulfilling prophecy that, except for a few gifted ones, humans have no creative power, no wide-ranging imagination. Thus, they must surrender to the “shape of things as they are.”

Here is a statement about reality-creation that is crucial. —Philip K Dick, his 1978 speech, How To Build A Universe That Doesn’t Fall Apart Two Days Later:

“…today we live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups…So I ask, in my writing, What is real? Because unceasingly we are bombarded with pseudo-realities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very sophisticated electronic mechanisms…And it is an astonishing power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind. I ought to know. I do the same thing.”

Philip Dick was talking about the elite invention of a synthetic common space for human activity. And on the other hand, he was talking about an individual’s invention, through imagination, of other spaces.

These other spaces aren’t mere fantasies. They’re as real as real can be—and they can be injected into the world, into the common space, to change it, and to wake people up from their group-think trance.

The bottom-line goal of all mind control is the removal of the individual’s knowledge that he has great creative power, that this capacity gives him enormous untapped energy, that it solves problems by rendering them irrelevant and defunct.

Whether the method of mind control is propaganda, electronic transmission, DNA alteration, drugs, numbing education, indoctrination in values, underneath it all, this is the goal: Stripped of the knowledge of his own imagination and creative power, the individual keeps rearranging deck chairs on his personal Titanic, in an effort to find answers to dilemmas in a shrunken space that will never satisfy him.

From the elite’s point of view, this is what is supposed to happen, because then the individual will believe he can only be rescued in the arms of The Group.

The individual, operating at half of what he is, will concoct all sorts of rationalizations and explanations for his life in a labyrinth.

The labyrinth is how he perceives reality, through the filter of his amnesia about what he is and what he can do.

But suppose he goes the other way. Suppose the objective is to restore what is inherently his? Suppose he brings back what he has lost? Suppose, finally, he takes a stand and refuses to see himself as a victim of circumstance?

Suppose he remembers that he holds the sword of his own imagination, and can invent reality?

Suppose he exercises that capacity and thus proves to himself how far-reaching his power is?

In his 1920 novel, A Voyage to Arcturus, which spawned generations of science fiction, David Lindsay writes:

“To be a free man, one must have a universe of one’s own.”

This is no flippant observation. This is psychology light years beyond what Freud and his offspring concocted. This is the power of imagination, linked as it should be, to individual freedom. Nor was Lindsay recommending some closed-off fantasy existence. He was realizing that, with “a universe of one’s own,” the individual can then comprehend and participate in the common space we call the world—at a new level of unlocked and untangled power.

I dedicate my work to explaining these factors, and more importantly, providing many exercises that, when practiced, can reawaken and restore imagination as the unlimited dynamo it actually is.

Jon Rappoport