Breaking: Vote fraud in Oregon sinks GMO labeling measure

Breaking: vote fraud in Oregon sinks GMO labeling

by Jon Rappoport

December 12, 2014

As my readers know, I’m not a fan of GMO labeling. The real route to victory has always been banning GMOs.

But I’m also not a fan of vote fraud. Which is what just happened in Oregon, where a recount of a very close election turned into a criminal act.

In November, Prop 92, which would have mandated labeling GMO food products in the state, went down to defeat by 800 votes.

That razor-thin margin triggered an automatic recount, by law.

During the recount, 4600 ballots were thrown out, because the signatures on those ballots didn’t match the signatures on the voters’ registration cards.

Oregon does elections by mail, so matching signatures is the way to prevent cheating.

When the 4600 ballots were rejected, lawyers for Prop 92 went to court to protest. They stated that some of these rejected voters never received notification that they had to provide new signatures. Other voters might have been out of town and never knew what was going on. And in general, voters were never informed that their signatures had to match.

Judge Kantor denied the assertions and allowed the recount to continue, minus the 4600 ballots.

The Prop 92 people just conceded the election.

The key, and the basis of the fraud is: Oregon voters, all of them, have never been warned, in uncompromising terms, that the signature on their ballot must match the signature on their voter-registration cards. The fact is, many people don’t always execute their signatures in the same way. If they knew, in this case, they had to, they would.

There is more than fraud at work here, however. Lawyers for Prop 92 can still challenge the election, in which case there is a significant opportunity to set that election aside and hold a new one, from scratch.

So why did the lawyers back down and fold up their tents? Why didn’t they keep up the fight?

Why won’t they file new motions and blow this up into a national and international story for the next year, as the case gains new legs?

Isn’t whole objective of these labeling measures the launching of a PR campaign about GMOs? Here’s the perfect chance.

But once again, “nice” wins the day, and, therefore, so does Monsanto. Yes, let’s be polite. Let’s not shock anyone. Let’s not make waves. Let’s not scare off the moms shopping at Whole Foods, for whom a no-holds-barred public battle is “unseemly.” Those moms do want GMO labeling; they just want it to happen in an orderly fashion.

Rainbows and marshmallows all the way.

Into doom.

There was once a day when a few lawyers, like Gerry Spence and Bill Kunstler, larger than life, could stride like lions into town and into a case, open their mouths to roar, and see a phalanx of reporters eager to quote their thunderous proclamations. They could also argue a case from sixteen different angles in court.

Now it appears, the lawyers are technicians.

They don’t see or care about the joined-at-the-hip connection between the law and publicity. They don’t see how media exposure and controversy and public outrage and raising hell can influence a case, when it’s done right.

They’re afraid to offend judges.

The Oregon case should just be getting started. What’s happened so far was phase one. Fraud won. Monsanto won. Criminals won. So be it.

Now, a new phase should begin. And in the process, there would be ample opportunity to highlight the chemical-warfare poison called Roundup and the insane unpredictable GMO technology that threatens the human race.

You have to know how to turn losses into victories. You can’t be a goody-good who thinks a decision by the authorities is the end of the battle. It’s fuel for the fire. You make hay out of it. You use it to arouse the public. The people who own the people who make laws don’t care about justice or fairness. So why should you, when you’re up against them? Many good causes have sunk below the waves because the ‘warriors’ were living in a fantasy world.

Jon Rappoport

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

The hypnotic use of color in television news

Dec11

The hypnotic use of color in television news

by Jon Rappoport

December 11, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Some people would call it simply an effort to please the audience. Well, pleasing the audience during a national news broadcast isn’t the objective, unless ratings and viewer numbers and ad revenues and distraction from facts is actually the plan…and of course it is.

Just now, I forced myself to watch a rebroadcast of Wednesday night’s NBC News with the golden boy, Brian Williams.

But Brian wasn’t golden, he was blue, which happens to be people’s favorite color in multiple surveys. Restful calming blue.

Here is what I saw in the first five minutes. I couldn’t handle more. (I urge you to go to NBC and look for yourself.)

Brian was wearing a blue suit. All the backgrounds for captions were blue. Small screens behind Brian were blue. Brian’s desk panels were blue. The surface of the desk reflected vague blue tints.

The lead story, the CIA torture report, featured blue in the CIA seal. Andrea Mitchell, who was covering the report’s release, was wearing a dark blue outfit. Behind her, the Capitol dome sat in a blue sky. A psychologist named Mitchell, an architect of the torture program, was interviewed. His shirt was partly blue. He was wearing blue jeans. The NBC reporter interviewing him was wearing a light blue shirt. A map of the world appeared onscreen, sitting in a field of blue. Behind Andrea, the background was filled with objects of different blues. Reporter Dana Priest was interviewed for the story. A piece of the background behind her was blue. Michael Hayden was interviewed. He was wearing a blue suit.

I watched the beginning of the next story: the NFL’s new policy on player discipline. Commissioner Roger Goodell stood in front of a blue background. He was wearing a blue suit.

Again, I emphasize—all this was in the first five minutes of the newscast.

You could say the news itself was merely an occasion for the transmission of blue.

“Let’s have dinner in front of the TV and watch the news. I like the blue.”

“Which channel?”

“NBC. Their blue is better than the CBS blue.”

“You’re right. It makes me feel restful. The CIA torture couldn’t have been that bad. It’s blue. I’m reassured.”

Jon Rappoport

Foundation of medical reality explodes

Dec9

Foundation of medical reality explodes

by Jon Rappoport

December 9, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Time and time again, in these pages, I’ve illustrated the fact that reality is being created for us—and that reality is false. It’s a façade.

Waking up to this is vital, if we want to understand the virtual world we live in. We’re inside a matrix.

Here’s a medical study I haven’t cited before: “A new, evidence-based estimate of patient harms associated with hospital care,” by JT James (J Patient Saf, Sept. 9, 2013).

The key quote:

“…the true number of premature deaths [in US hospitals] associated with preventable harm to patients was estimated at more than 400,000 per year.”

Putting it bluntly, the US medical system kills 400,000 hospital patients every year.

This is a huge increase over the previous figure I’ve cited: 119,000. That number comes from Dr. Barbara Starfield’s review, “Is US health really the best in the world?”. It was published on July 26, 2000, in the Journal of the American Medical Association. At the time, Starfield was a revered public-health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

Starfield told me, in a 2009 interview, that she was unaware of any serious government effort to fix the system.

In her review, Starfield also concluded that, every year in the US, the medical system kills 106,000 patients as a result of the administration of FDA-approved pharmaceutical drugs.

You can type into the startpage.com search engine, “FDA why learn about adverse drug effects,” and you’ll find an FDA page which states that, indeed, 100,000 people die every year in the US from ingesting these medicines.

So let’s put these numbers together.

400,000 patient deaths every year in US hospitals. 100,000 deaths every year from medicines. These deaths are directly caused by the medical system.

500,000 deaths every year.

That would be 5 MILLION deaths caused by the US medical system every decade.

Roughly 2.5 million people die every year in the US, from all causes (or roughly 25 million every decade). So 1 out of every 5 deaths in the US stems directly from the medical system.

But that’s not all. The 2013 study cited above also concludes: “Serious harm seems to be 10- to 20-fold more common than lethal harm.”

Translation: every year in the US, hospitals cause between 4 million and 8 million incidents of serious harm—which means coma, temporary flatlining, stroke, hemorrhage, unnecessary major surgery, life-threatening infection, etc.

Neither Starfield’s nor JT James’ 2013 review explicitly considers vaccine damage. As I’ve reported before, the best estimate I’ve found was made by Barbara Loe Fisher, of the National Vaccine Information Center.

It takes into account the fact that the reporting system for vaccine adverse effects is broken and only a fraction of harm is recorded. Understanding that doctors and patients only report between 1 and ten percent of adverse effects from medical drugs, Fisher uses that comparison to conclude that, every year in the US, between 120,000 and 1.2 million adverse effects occur from vaccination.

Looking over the figures in this article, you can decide what the US medical system is really doing to people.

You don’t need the medical propaganda of mainstream media. You don’t need the hype of doctors who appear on television to promote their work. You don’t need government assurances. You don’t need the ceaseless warbling of “non-profit” medical fundraising groups with their causes. You certainly don’t need the flag-waving promotion of Obamacare—which will bring many more people into the very system that is wreaking all this destruction.

And finally, note this. The medical powers-that-be and their Pharma brethren are fully aware of the public figures I’m citing. They know. And many doctors do, too.

But they roll on.

Over the years, I’ve sent some of these numbers and journal-citations to mainstream medical reporters. I’ve never received one reply.

Jon Rappoport

The Matrix Revealed: Nature of the Covert Op

Dec8

by Jon Rappoport

I’ve written a number of different introductions to my mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed.

In this brief one, I want to sketch the basis of the covert op.

Every major covert op has the same concealed objective: “defeat the enemy and thereby gain more control.”

But control over what?

Beyond the usual answers, the root answer is: “control over the mind.”

Why? Because if perception and thought can be channeled, directed, reduced, and weakened, then it doesn’t matter what humans do to resist other types of control. They will always go down the wrong path. They will always operate within limited and bounded territory. They will always ignore their own authentic power.

I’m talking about power that exceeds the “normal” and “average” ability to influence the stream of cause and effect.

The “prison” of cause and effect is a concept that is floated as part of the basic covert op to convince people they are small, diminished, and at the mercy of larger forces.

But underneath it all, humans have the capacity to “jump the chain” and become, as it were, “first causes.”

And not in some minor way.

Unfortunately, the popular view of how this can be accomplished is often rooted in New Age notions: the instantaneous fix; the Disneyesque manifestation; the “surrender to the universe.”

These are psy-op versions of the real thing, floated as part of the overall covert op to engage the gullible among us.

“Jumping the chain” is actually a matter of reversing the op. In other words, instead of accepting the mural of reality that has been created for us, each person creates his own.

This, dare I say it (yes, I do), is a heroic enterprise. And by heroic, I mean: without surrender. Without compromise.

Beyond the covert op, every human has the capacity to act in ways that change the flow of time, the architecture of space, and the sources of energy.

The degree to which an individual believes this is impossible mirrors his acceptance of the basic covert op on planet Earth.

When people speak about “hope for all of us,” they rarely refer to the power of the individual, but that’s where it starts. With the individual. Unchained.

Here is a description of my collection, The Matrix Revealed:

Let me start with the nuts and bolts of this product. It is large in scope.

* 250 megabytes of information.

* Over 1100 pages of text.

* Ten and a half hours of audio.

The 2 bonuses alone are rather extraordinary:

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

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

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

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

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

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

* Then there are several more interviews with brilliant analysts of the Matrix, including recent conversations. 53 pages.

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

(All the documents and books are pdf files, and the audio presentations are mp3 files. You download the files upon purchase. An email will be sent you with a link to all the materials.)

Here is some background on the product and my own history:

In 2001, I essentially left a career as an investigative reporter and rolled the dice on the emerging internet. I started a site called NoMoreFakeNews.com.

I didn’t stop investigating and publishing, but my field of operation widened. My first big question was: WHO REALLY RUNS THE WORLD?

And my second was: WHOEVER THEY ARE, HOW DO THEY MANUFACTURE REALITY FOR THE POPULATION OF EARTH?

I was prepared to deal with these enormous questions, because I had contacts. These were people I had come to know well during my days as a reporter, writing for LA Weekly and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe—and also during a stint on radio at KPFK in Los Angeles.

These people, these contacts, were insiders.

They had deep knowledge in their fields:

PROPAGANDA; FINANCE; HYPNOTISM; MIND CONTROL; MEDICINE; INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS…

They were unwilling to be cited as on-the-record sources in my articles. They knew they would suffer consequences if they went public.

Once I started my website, I did extensive research to confirm the credentials of my insiders. I wanted to make sure they were who they said they were. I wanted to verify they had worked where they said they had worked. This was a laborious process.

When I was sure, I began to interview them.

I wasn’t certain where all this would go.

Gradually, I realized I was getting VERY high-level information on The Matrix. But this was the real Matrix.

As one of my sources described it:

“Imagine a factory that turns out illusions. And these illusions are woven together to make up what we think the world is.”

The actual Matrix involves a number of areas: government; money; energy; the military; intelligence agencies; medicine; mega-corporations; psychology and mind control; science…

It’s very instructive to talk to people who have been there on the inside. They are bright, they are informative, they convey the depth of situations they were involved with. They go beyond relaying dry facts, and in doing so, you learn how elite players play the game. You receive a rounded and three-dimensional picture of: the process of constructing The Matrix. How it’s built.

So…

This collection is for individuals.

Because:

Beyond The Matrix is true individual power.

Despite all the illusions, it has always been there.

Jon Rappoport

Psychiatry: the modern priest-class

Dec8

Psychiatry: the modern priest-class

by Jon Rappoport

December 8, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

In this society, psychiatrists are the primary definers of mental states. Their efforts are accepted as official science.

The Psychiatric Political State is based on myths and fairy tales about distinct and separate disorders and “good treatment.”

One of the main psychiatric mantras gaining force? “Everyone at some time in their lives will experience a mental disorder.”

But an open secret has been slowly bleeding out into public consciousness for the past ten years.

THERE ARE NO DEFINITIVE LABORATORY TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.

And along with that:

ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE CONCOCTED, NAMED, LABELED, DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by a committee of psychiatrists, from menus of human behaviors.

Their findings are published in periodically updated editions of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), printed by the American Psychiatric Association.

For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of “research.”

Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly toxic drugs to treat every one of these “disorders,” are leading the charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can sell more drugs and make more money.

But we have a mind-boggling twist. Under the radar, one of the great psychiatric stars, who has been out in front inventing mental disorders, went public. He blew the whistle on himself and his colleagues. And for several years, almost no one noticed.

His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: “Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.” (Dec.27, 2010).

Major media never picked up on the interview in any serious way. It never became a scandal.

Dr. Allen Frances is the man who, in 1994, headed up the project to write the (then) latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental disorder. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.

In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, “Scientist At Work,” Daniel Goleman called Frances “Perhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment…”

Well, sure. If you’re sculpting the entire canon of diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the government, for Pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297 DSM-IV diagnoses), you’re right up there in the pantheon.

Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired’s Greenberg and said the following:

“There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

BANG.

That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

Frances might have been referring to the fact that his baby, the DSM-IV, had rearranged earlier definitions of ADHD and Bipolar to permit many more diagnoses, leading to a vast acceleration of drug-dosing with highly powerful and toxic compounds.

Finally, at the end of the Wired interview, Frances flew off into a bizarre fantasy:

“Diagnosis [as spelled out in the DSM-IV] is part of the magic…you know those medieval maps? In the places where they didn’t know what was going on, they wrote ‘Dragons live here’…we have a dragon’s world here. But you wouldn’t want to be without the map.”

Translation: Patients need hope for the healing of their troubles; so even if we psychiatrists are shooting blanks and pretending to know one kind of mental disorder from another, even if we’re inventing these mental-disorder definitions based on no biological or chemical diagnostic tests—it’s a good thing, because patients will then believe and have hope; they’ll believe it because psychiatrists place a name on their problems…

Needless to say, this has nothing to do with science.

If I were an editor at one of the big national newspapers, and one of my reporters walked in and told me, “The most powerful psychiatrist in America just said the DSM is sheer b.s.,” I think I’d make room on the front page.

If the reporter then added, “This shrink was in charge of creating the DSM-IV,” I’d clear room above the fold.

If the reporter went on to explain that the whole profession of psychiatry would collapse overnight if the DSM was discredited, I’d call for a special section of the paper to be printed.

I’d tell the reporter to get ready to pound on this story day after day for months. I’d tell him to track down all the implications of Dr. Frances’ statements.

I’d open a bottle of champagne to toast the soon-to-be-soaring sales of my newspaper.

And then, of course, the next day I’d be fired.

Because there are powerful multi-billion-dollar interests at stake, and those people don’t like their deepest secrets exposed in the press.

And as I walked out of my job, I’d see a bevy of blank-eyed pharmaceutical executives marching into the office of the paper’s publisher, ready to read the riot act to him.

Dr. Frances’ work on the DSM-IV allowed for MORE toxic drugs to be prescribed, because the definition of Bipolar was expanded to include more people.

Adverse effects of Valproate (given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:

* acute, life-threatening, and even fatal liver toxicity;

* life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas;

* brain damage.

Adverse effects of Lithium (also given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:

* intercranial pressure leading to blindness;

* peripheral circulatory collapse;

* stupor and coma.

Adverse effects of Risperdal (given for “Bipolar” and “irritability stemming from autism”) include:

* serious impairment of cognitive function;

* fainting;

* restless muscles in neck or face, tremors (may be indicative of motor brain damage).

Dr. Frances’ label-juggling act also permitted the definition of ADHD to expand, thereby opening the door for greater and greater use of toxic Ritalin (and other similar compounds) as the treatment of choice.

So what about Ritalin?

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

* Paranoid delusions

* Paranoid psychosis

* Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis

* Activation of psychotic symptoms

* Toxic psychosis

* Visual hallucinations

* Auditory hallucinations

* Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences

* Effects pathological thought processes

* Extreme withdrawal

* Terrified affect

* Started screaming

* Aggressiveness

* Insomnia

* Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects

* Psychic dependence

* High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug

* Decreased REM sleep

* When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia

* Convulsions

* Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

A recent survey revealed that a high percentage of children diagnosed with bipolar had first received a diagnosis of ADHD. This is informative, because Ritalin and other speed-type drugs are given to kids who are slapped with the ADHD label. Speed, sooner or later, produces a crash. This is easy to call “clinical depression.”

Then comes Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft. These drugs can produce temporary highs, followed by more crashes. The psychiatrist notices the up and down pattern—and then produces a new diagnosis of Bipolar (manic-depression) and prescribes other drugs, including Valproate and Lithium.

In the US alone, there are at least 300,000 cases of motor brain damage incurred by people who have been prescribed so-called anti-psychotic drugs (aka “major tranquilizers”). Risperdal (mentioned above as a drug given to people diagnosed with Bipolar) is one of those major tranquilizers. (source: Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Peter Breggin, St. Martin’s Press, 1991)

This psychiatric drug plague is accelerating across the land.

Where are the mainstream reporters and editors and newspapers and TV anchors who should be breaking this story and mercilessly hammering on it week after week? They are in harness.

And Dr. Frances is somehow let off the hook. He’s admitted in print that the whole basis of his profession is throwing darts at labels on a wall, and implies the “effort” is rather heroic—when, in fact, the effort leads to more and more poisonous drugs being dispensed to adults and children, to say nothing of the effect of being diagnosed with “a mental disorder.”

I’m not talking about “the mental-disease stigma,” the removal of which is one of Hillary Clinton’s missions in life. No, I’m talking about MOVING A HUMAN INTO THE SYSTEM, the psychiatric apparatus, where the essence of the game is trapping that person to harvest his money, his time, his energy, and of course his health—as one new diagnosis follows on another, and one new toxic treatment after another is undertaken, from cradle to grave.

The result is a severely debilitated human being (if he survives), whose major claim to fame is his list of diseases and disorders.

Thank you, Dr. Frances.

Here is a smoking-gun statement made by another prominent mental-health professional, on an episode of PBS’ Frontline series. The episode was: “Does ADHD Exist?”

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY (Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center): That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid.

Without intending to, Dr. Barkley blows the whistle on his own profession.

So let’s take Dr. Barkley to school. Medical science, and disease-research in particular, rests on the notion that you can make a diagnosis backed up by lab tests. If you can’t produce lab tests, you’re spinning fantasies.

These fantasies might be hopeful, they might be “educated guesses,” they might be launched from traditional centers of learning, they might be backed up by billions of dollars of grant money…but they’re still fantasies.

If I said the moon was made of green cheese, even if I were a Harvard professor, sooner or later someone would ask me to produce a sample of moon rock to be tested for “cheese qualities.” I might begin to feel nervous, I might want to tap dance around the issue, but I would have to submit the rock to a lab.

Dr. Barkley employs a corrupted version of logical analysis in his statement to the PBS Frontline interviewer. Barkley is essentially saying, “There is no lab test for any mental disorder. But if a test were the standard of proof, we wouldn’t have science at all, and that would mean our whole profession rests on nothing—and that is absurd, so therefore a test doesn’t matter.”

That logic is no logic at all. Barkley is proving the case against himself. He just doesn’t want to admit it.

Close to 50 years ago, psychiatry was dying out as a profession. Fewer and fewer people wanted to see a psychiatrist for help, for talk therapy. All sorts of new therapies were popping up. The competition was leaving medical psychiatry in the dust.

As Dr. Peter Breggin describes it in his landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, a deal was struck. Drug companies would bankroll psychiatry and rescue it. These companies would pour money into professional conferences, journals, research. In return, they wanted “science” that would promote mental disease as a biological/chemical fact, a gateway into the drugs. Everyone would win—except the patient.

So the studies were rolled out, and the list of mental disorders expanded. The FDA was in on the deal as well, as evidenced by their drug “safety” approvals, in the face of the obvious damage these drugs were doing.

So this is how we arrived at where we are. This was the plan, and it worked.

Under the cover story, it was all fraud all the time. Without much of a stretch, you could say psychiatry has been the most widespread profiling operation in the history of the human race. Its goal has been to bring humans everywhere into its system. It hardly matters which label a person is painted with, as long as it adds up to a diagnosis and a prescription of drugs.

Do people suffer, do they have problems, do they experience anguish and pain, do they make choices that sabotage their own interests, do they fall victim to external circumstances, do they long for relief? Of course.

But this has nothing to do with fraudulent psychiatric diagnoses.

It has to do with nutritional deficits, toxic drugs, toxic food and environmental chemicals, abuse, isolation, intimidation, and a whole host of other potential factors.

Psychiatry is trying to monopolize mental states and the understanding of the mind. It has no science, and it has no authentic conscience. It’s a pseudo-medical version of Orwellian politics, flying under the banner of a false professionalism.

Jon Rappoport

Power Outside The Matrix: your victory

Dec6

Power Outside The Matrix: your victory

by Jon Rappoport

December 6, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Making individual power into a negative idea has taken a considerable amount of time, effort, and money.

All sorts of political, social, and psychological bundles have been sold to the population.

Understanding these facts is one thing. Expanding one’s own power is quite another thing.

It involves the conscious projection of new realities.

Previously, the notion of “projection” has been the property of the pseudoscience called psychology. The concept has been twisted to mean the blind projection of one’s own “negative images and feelings” on to other people.

Beyond this blip on the radar of human existence, there emerges a far greater kind of projection: conscious and imaginative invention of new futures. That is where liberated individual power travels and operates and works.

The objective of my third and most recent collection, Power Outside The Matrix, is the launching (and stabilizing) of this breakthrough.

This collection contains a long section called, Analyzing Disinformation in the Age of Information.

It explains the buying and selling of false realities—a major occupation in the Matrix.

The key is having the tools to analyze realities, take them apart, and apply logic and other critical methods to these structures.

This goes beyond formal logic. It involves the assessment of probabilities, for example, where vital information is being hidden from us.

I’ve been at this for 30 years. In this section of Power Outside The Matrix, I offer key examples from my own extensive investigations.

The cults in charge of selling false realities try to bypass the rational mind and instead covertly appeal to automatic reflex functions.

The most important of these reflex functions is: investing emotions in presented images. This is the primary strategy of informational mind control on the planet.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the late 1980s, in concert with the brilliant hypnotherapist Jack True (who gave up doing hypnosis with his patients), I developed many exercises and techniques for expanding the creative power of the individual. Both Jack and I were continuing a tradition that goes all the way back to early Tibet.

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

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

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

That fixation is a form of mind control.

Freedom isn’t a system.

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

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

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

It isn’t.

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

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

I’ve developed the exercises for exactly that purpose: your energy, your dynamism.

As I just mentioned, Power outside The Matrix also features a long section called: Analyzing Information in the Age of Disinformation.

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

It is far more than a logic course.

It’s an advanced approach to analysis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

* Writer’s Tutorial (8.5-hours)

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

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

* The Third Philosophy of Imagination (1-hour)

* The Infinite Imagination (3-hours)

* The Mass Projection of Events (1.5-hours)

* The Decentralization of Power (1.5-hours)

* Creating the Future (6-hours)

* Pictures of Reality (6-hours)

* The Real History of America (2-hours)

* Corporations: The New Gods (7.5-hours)

I have included an additional bonus section:

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

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

* My book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies

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

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

On this road, there are no limits.

Jon Rappoport

Hawaii is ground zero: banning, not labeling GMOs

Dec5

Hawaii is ground zero: banning, not labeling GMOs

by Jon Rappoport

December 5, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Let me put it this way. It would mean a lot more than winning a few GMO-labeling initiatives.

“The right to choose what’s in your food” does not stop the ongoing gene drift, from GMO crops to non-GMO, across America. This drift is well on its way to making organic crops into genetically modified food, whether we like it or not.

And the blown-on-wind spread of tons and tons of Roundup, the poisonous Monsanto herbicide so “vital” to GMO farming…well, that’s straight-out chemical warfare.

As it continues, what organic farmer will be able to guarantee his crops are pristine?

In Hawaii, we have a far different situation. Voters on the Big Island, Maui, and Kauai, against all odds, have managed to pass measures that would block Monsanto (and other biotech giants) from continuing their GMO/pesticide operations.

In other words, ban, not label.

However, on the Big Island and Kauai, the corrupt court system has (so far) rendered the voters’ decisions null and void. On Maui, the same tactic is in progress.

Hawaii isn’t just a small biotech center. Huge numbers of GMO seeds are produced and shipped out around the world.

Monsanto, Dow, Pioneer, and BASF are doing intensive R&D to develop new GMO seeds and new poisonous pesticides (which they are spraying on the people of Hawaii).

Cutting off their work in Hawaii would be a major victory.

However, if you did an overall survey of news sites, including independent centers of reporting, you’d find GMO labeling has been garnering far more coverage than the bans enacted in several US counties or the struggle in Hawaii.

Why is that?

One reason: the anti-Monsanto movement in America has been shaped and funded to be about product-labeling.

Because it’s about shopping and choosing and buying and consuming, it seems to have more “broad appeal.”

But how well is that soft approach going to work in the face of the biotech fait accompli—gene drift plus pesticide drift, blanketing the whole country, penetrating all food crops?

According to “received wisdom,” banning GMOs and their attendant pesticides is a much harder sell.

In past articles, I’ve outlined an attack strategy against the biotech giants that could have worked at the outset of the anti-GMO movement—and could still work. I won’t run it all down here. Suffice to say, it is predicated on the understanding that we are in a late-game situation, and the clock is ticking.

The biotech crime bosses are running the show—our show—into the ground. The sane response is to go all-out on the offensive. This is miles beyond avoiding a potato in the market labeled “GMO.”

And by the way, who would be in charge of putting those GMO labels on foods? The state governments where the labeling initiatives pass? Really? You would trust that process to be both honest and competent?

The leaders of the labeling movement apparently welcome the prospect of Monsanto and their allies suing states in which labeling initiatives or laws pass. This is a chance to expose the shady tactics of the biotech giants.

I would point out, though, that such court battles would ultimately impact only the labeling issue, nothing more.

Yes, it would represent another small step in educating the public about these monster corporations—but small steps that come too late are not useful.

In Hawaii, however, there is an authentic spark. The fight centers around the possibility of a partial ban on GMOs and dangerous pesticides—in the heart of the enemy’s camp.

The outcome would be helped considerably, if enough people shifted their focus to the Islands, where the real action is. Now.

In Hawaii, the reality-egg has cracked. The Monsanto facade of GMO/pesticide safety and humane intentions has been blatantly rejected, on the record, by voters.

This has set off a parade of biotech/political/judicial/land-baron counter-attacks. The players are, as usual, arrogant, self-entitled, devious, slimy, fake Jesuses who want to save the world and lift up the less fortunate and less informed.

“We’ll help you. Just let us run things.”

Hawaii could be a candle that is quickly snuffed out, or it could become a sun that illuminates the truth.

The point is, the struggle there is about the right thing. Stopping the poisoners. Not labeling them.

Jon Rappoport

GMO: the great land mob of Hawaii

Dec4

GMO: the great land mob of Hawaii

by Jon Rappoport

December 4, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Octopus. Land. Money. Control.

I’m going to describe a few tentacles. There are more. There are always more. But these are important.

Why am I bothering? Because you’ll get some idea of the forces arrayed against the people of Hawaii, who have passed measures to limit GMOs and pesticides on Maui, Kauai, and the Big Island, only to see their votes nullified in two court judgments and temporarily blocked in the third case, Maui, pending a judge’s decision.

Okay. Let’s start with an outfit called Hawaii BioEnergy. It’s unclear what they actually do. They say they plan to supply enormous amounts of biomass-energy for electricity in the Islands.

Their members? Kamehameha Schools, Grove Farm, and Maui Land & Pineapple. Three heavy actors.

Read this stunning statement from Hawaii BioEnergy’s website (FAQ page):

“How much land does this consortium control? Kamehameha Schools owns 365,760 acres throughout the state, Grove Farm owns approximately 38,000 acres on the island of Kauai and Maui Land & Pineapple owns approximately 22,000 acres on the island of Maui. Together the three entities own over ten percent of the land in Hawai‘i (and a much larger percentage of arable land) with significant holdings on the islands of Maui, Kaua‘i, Oahu, and Hawai‘i.”

It’s rare you see such a bald statement of power out in the open.

Kamehameha Schools leases 1033 acres to Monsanto on the Kawailoa Plantation, on the north shore of Oahu.

What about Grove Farm on Kauai? The company is owned by Steve Case, the founder of AOL. Grove Farm leases land to Syngenta, Dow, and Pioneer, who develop GMO corn seeds there and spray all sorts of “restricted use” (toxic) pesticides, which drift across the Island.

To get a sense of Steve Case’s position on this, here is his statement as reported by the NY Times (10/7/13, “Unease in Hawaii’s Cornfields”): “Our [farming] tenants comply with all local laws and will comply with any new ordinances that pass.”

In other words: “who cares?”

The CEO of Grove Farm is Warren Haruki. He also sits on the Board of Directors of the First Hawaiian Bank. On its website, the Bank publishes this glowing statement about Monsanto and the other biotech giants operating in Hawaii:

“Kauai is an ideal research laboratory for the seed corn industry…there are currently five parent seed corn operations on the island: [biotech GM giants] Pioneer Hi-Bred…Syngenta, Dow Monsanto, and BASF. Dow Agrosciences recently leased 3,400 acres of former sugar land…”

That’s not all. Warren Haruki is also the chairman and CEO of the Maui Land and Pineapple Company, mentioned above as one of the three components of land-giant Hawaii BioEnergy.

Haruki is, in fact, on the board of Hawaii BioEnergy.

He’s the past chairman of the University of Hawaii Foundation, the fund-raising arm of the University, which has received generous grants from Monsanto and Dow.

Haruki’s connections to the biotech-friendly First Hawaiian Bank and the University of Hawaii Foundation are mirrored by Faye Kurren, who is the wife of Federal Magistrate Barry Kurren. As I’ve detailed in previous articles, Barry Kurren overrode the anti-GMO/pesticide vote of the people in both the Kauai and Maui cases, and is in charge of the pending Maui case.

In October of this year, Haruki, as the head of Maui Land and Pineapple Co., carried out a sale of 244 acres of land on Maui to the State of Hawaii. To obtain the money, the Hawaii State Legislature had to pass a bill explicitly authorizing the expenditure. Those who believe the State of Hawaii will come to the rescue of anti-Monsanto voters on Maui should take notice: Haruki and Hawaii are business partners.

Finally, for now, think about this. Hawaii BioEnergy controls over 10% of the land of Hawaii, and a much greater percentage of arable land. According to the NY Times (10/7/13, “Unease in Hawaii’s Cornfields”), “Monsanto, Pioneer, Syngenta, Dow and BASF [all GMO/pesticide giants] occupy a combined 25,000 [nearly 10%] out of the state’s total of 280,000 acres of agricultural land, with operations on Kauai, Oahu, Maui and Molokai.”

Since Hawaii BioEnergy is a good friend and partner to these biotech giants, we are talking about a land-controlling octopus.

This is an element of the force arrayed against the people of Hawaii who want life and health and voted for it.

Taking a look at the funding sources behind the successful Maui vote to block GMOs and pesticides (before Monsanto sued to nullify the vote), I notice that, among all the celebrities who have homes on Maui, the total of their contributions to the cause was:

Not a dime, not a nickel, not a penny.

Nothing.

Are they ignorant of what’s going on in their back yard? Or are they afraid that supporting efforts to ban GMOs and dangerous pesticides could spell career-damage?

Jon Rappoport

Education programming 101: destroy logic

Dec3

Education programming 101: destroy logic

by Jon Rappoport

December 3, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Once upon a time, in medieval universities, new students enrolled in the Trivium. It was the foundation curriculum. It was required. Its parts were: grammar, logic, and rhetoric.

Grammar: the interior construction of language.

Logic: the valid and invalid connections in the course of a formal argument; the method of proper reasoning; the deductive links in a chain, at the end of which appears a conclusion.

Rhetoric: oral and written presentation; the use of language to make a case; the capacity to persuade, even in the face of counter-argument.

Today, the subject matter of the Trivium is not only downplayed. It has been shattered.

This article focuses on the death of logic in schools.

When the intensive handling of ideas is seen as a laughable goal for education, indoctrination is plugged in as the only alternative.

The mind of the student shifts from being an active force to being a container.

The destruction of logic perverts rational thought at its core and inserts ideology masked as insight.

The actual meaning of an idea is firmly placed on the back burner. Instead? Praise or attack the people who forward ideas.

This strategy has gained great prominence.

“The revered Founders of the Republic? Shysters, con men, slaveholders, monopolists who saw rebellion from England as the way to win greater power for themselves, at the expense of everyone else living on American soil.”

Therefore, the argument continues, and this is crucial, the Founders’ IDEAS, as expressed in the Declaration and the Constitution, were rotten to the core. The ideas can be dismissed out of hand as coming from “a bad source.”

Ideas no longer need to be judged on their sense, merit, and alignment with basic principles. Nor are they judged by their position in a well-formed argument. All that is out. Now, you only have to “look to the source” and make ALL your decisions based on “who these people really were who expressed the ideas.”

And since that’s the case, learning to think or reason is unnecessary.

In logic, this used to be called the fallacious ad hominem argument. Now it’s not called anything. It’s praised as the insightful way to do intellectual business.

One by one, core ideas fall to the ax, and finally they cease to exist at all.

(To argue that very bad people have taken over an idea, and therefore the idea itself was never good, is like arguing that, since hijackers took over a plane, the plane was a despicable object altogether and probably deserved to be stolen or blown up.)

You might be surprised by the number of people who believe that the value of an idea depends entirely on who expressed the idea. If the wrong person first expressed it, it was never worthy.

Students with a vast sense of self-entitlement and meaningless self-esteem love this strategy. It allows them to parade around and call the shots and decide which ideas are important and which aren’t, without reflection. They have a scorecard of good guys and bad guys and that’s all they need.

In our teaching institutions, you could look in vain to find courses on the individual, his freedom, his power. That’s gone. It’s no accident that serious training in logic is also gone. And by serious, I mean the application of logic to formal arguments on issues that determine our future.

In many cases, instead, education is about: what group do you belong to? What are the needs of that group? Who is oppressing your group? How can you get government to solve the problem?

If you can educate the young to make snap judgments about core ideas, you eliminate their capacity to reason. You own them.

From that point on, they hold a hostile attitude toward anyone who can discuss and analyze ideas. They look at such people as an entitled and privileged class who is speaking a foreign language.

In order to engage in meaningful debate, people have to be able to recognize a train of thought and follow it. If they can’t, because they were educated not to, where are we? We’re in the dark. We’re living by slogans.

Freedom? Liberty? Collective need? Responsibility? It doesn’t matter what ideas are on the table, because the overwhelming number of people don’t know what an idea is. They don’t know how to walk up to one and look at it from several sides. They don’t know how to trace its implications. They don’t know how to fit that idea alongside its cousins. They don’t see a Whole. They see the ceaseless spinning machinery of an alien process, from which they’ve been excluded.

Then, no matter what shape society takes, it’s a dumb-show, as far the majority of its citizens are concerned.

Who solves that?

The invasive State takes charge. It picks up the pieces of the wreckage it was a key actor in delivering.

The goal of educating citizens about what it means to take part in a Republic has been blunted. This was done, a step at a time, through education.

Dismantling the ability to reason, employ logic, and handle ideas was the prow of that destructive campaign.

Therefore, the people who still know what logic is need to teach it in any way they can.

The first steps are the hardest. But when a student suddenly sees that world open up to him, when the lights go on, when information that was formerly a blur and a blob snaps into place as a recognizably logical (or illogical) sequence, when the student’s aimless wandering mind suddenly focuses with power…when he knows that he knows…the rewards are self-evident.

A dullness becomes bright.

Jon Rappoport

Independent Education: the crisis and the crossroad

Dec2

Independent Education: the crisis and the crossroad

by Jon Rappoport

December 2, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

A hundred fifty years ago, at least some Americans recognized that all serious discourse depended on the use of the faculty called Reason.

Formal debate, science, and law all flowed from that source. The source could be bent, twisted, and deployed in devious ways—but then people would know that. They would be able to point out where the arguer had gone wrong.

A common bond existed in some schools of the day. The student was expected to learn how Reason operates, and for that he was taught the only subject which could lay out, as on a long table, the visible principles: Logic.

This was accepted.

But now, this bond is gone.

The independence engendered by the disciplined study of logic is no longer a desired quality in students.

The classroom, at best, has taken on the appearance of a fact-memorization factory; and we should express grave doubts about the relevance and truth of many of those facts.

A mind trained no farther than rote parroting—regardless of how neat and precise it may look—is a listless mind with no center. It reaches out for vagaries and abrupt spectacular lies, hoping to find what it is missing. But the search produces nothing of value, because to discover logic, one must learn the whole subject as a branch of knowledge, not as a flicker of common sense sparking here and there in the landscape.

A society filled with people who float in the drift of non-logic is a society that declines. And in its decline, it accepts preposterous leaders and bizarre, self-sabotaging programs.

Ideologies that deny individual freedom and independence are welcomed with open arms, because they mirror a muddled people’s desire to confirm that failure is the inevitable fate of all of us.

When education becomes so degraded that young students are no longer taught to reason clearly, private citizens have the obligation to rebuild that system so that the great contribution to Western civilization—logic—is reinstated in its rightful place.

Logic, the key by which true political discourse, science, and law were, in fact, originally developed, must be unearthed.

Logic and reasoning, the capacity to think, the ability to analyze ideas—an ability which has been forgotten, which has been a surpassing virtue in every shadow of a free civilization—must be restored.

Once a vital thing has been misplaced, buried, and covered over by mindless substitutions, people cannot immediately recognize the original thing has any importance, meaning, or existence.

To declare its importance makes no sense to “the crowd.” They look bewildered and shake their heads. They search their memories and find nothing.

They prefer to adhere to rumor, gossip, accusation, wild speculation, and fear mongering as the primary means of public discourse and assessment of truth.

These habits light their paths. These reflexes give them some degree of pleasure. These idols become their little gods.

To win out over such attachments and superstitions is a job for the long term.

But if our labors yield rewards, we can once again bring import to education, and to the idea of authentic freedom that once cut a wide swathe through darkness.

A string of direct and distracting abuses has saddled our schools. Among them:

* Teachers believe they need to entertain children, in order to capture their attention;

* School systems have substituted the need for public funds in the place of actually supplying a sound education;

* Under the banner of political correctness, school texts have been sanitized to the point of sterility, in order to avoid the possibility of offending, to the slightest degree, any group;

* Students rarely confront information in the form in which it is delivered, in a flood, every day, to people all over the world;

* Students have, in this respect, been coddled;

* Subjects such as sex education, which belong in the family, have been delivered into the hands of schools and teachers;

* Indeed, in certain respects, schools are asked to substitute and stand in for parents;

* Masked as “learning opportunities,” various political agendas have been inserted in school curricula;

* The basis on which every historic document establishing some degree of freedom was debated and drafted—logical thought—has been eliminated from the curriculum as a serious discipline;

* Students are permitted and even encouraged to drift and grasp at superficially attractive ideas and fads of the moment;

* In this respect, freedom has been reinterpreted to mean “mental incapacity and wandering thought”;

* The vast contributions of the ancient Greek civilization, where logic as a crucial subject was born, have been obliterated, minimized or summarized in sterile fashion;

* Logic, the connective tissue which binds together the progression of ideas in rational argument, has been kept away from students;

* The result is the production of shallow minds that cannot see the architecture of reasoning;

* Students, at sea, begin to invent wholly insufficient standards for accepting or rejecting various points of view and supposed authorities;

* Students lose their true independence without ever having gained it;

* The low level of overall literacy in our schools is matched only by the non-comprehension of rational thought;

* In the presence of these and other deficiencies and abuses, students are pushed through, from grade to grade, graduation to graduation, as a bureaucratic function, regardless of their ability.

Therefore, citizens of good intent must offload this system. They must assume responsibility for teaching children the missing key to education.

Logic; the capacity to reason, to think lucidly; to separate sense from chatter; to discover deception and avoid being influenced by it; to remain free and independent from the shifting opinions of “the herd”; to maintain personal liberty in the face of every spurious enticement to abandon it; to come to grips with competitive sets of First Principles which will lead to freedom or slavery; these are the stakes in our time.

This is the crossroad.

Choose the path that can bring us the fulfillment of a worthy goal.

Choose reason over vacuous mindlessness.

We, who still know the power of the mind, and who understand how that power can be harnessed to shape independence and liberty, can bring, out of the dust of recent history, an education that truly trains the intellect.

Logic is the foundation of such an education.

If schools, which have become madhouses and factories and medical dispensaries, will not teach it, we can teach it in our homes.

Jon Rappoport