The virus that doesn’t exist: lies and consequences

by Jon Rappoport

October 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Throughout this false pandemic, I’ve been listing and explaining the falling dominos:

The false claim that a virus exists.

The development of a diagnostic test to detect the virus that doesn’t exist.

Based on the test, the publishing of sky-high case numbers, all of which are obviously meaningless.

Based on the false case numbers, and absurd computer projections of cases and deaths to come, the imprisoning of people in their homes, the closure and destruction of businesses, the torpedoing of economies, and then…

The introduction of a highly destructive vaccine as the solution.

These are the consequences that flowed from the fake “discovery” of a new virus.

Lately, there has been a resurgence of interest in one or two documents I cited months ago. These documents reveal the hoax at the bottom of the test for a virus that doesn’t exist. The documents, written by the builders of the test, admit an isolated specimen of the virus is NOT AVAILABLE. But they’re going to devise a test for it anyway.

This is on the order of a doctor telling a patient, “I’m going to test you for Disease XQ.”

The patient asks, “What is disease XQ?”

The doctor answers, “We have NO IDEA. But we want to find out whether you have it.”

Let’s go to the first Smoking Gun.

The CDC document is titled, “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel.” It was originally published in February 2020, in the very early days of the “pandemic,” and it’s latest revision was published in July 2021 (rev: 07, 7/21).

Buried deep in the document, in a section titled, “Performance Characteristics,” we have this: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV [SARS-CoV-2] are currently available, assays [diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA…” (document page 40, pdf page 41)

The key phrase there is: “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV [virus] are currently available…”

Every object that exists can be quantified, which is to say, measured. The use of the term “quantified” in that phrase means: the CDC has no virus, because it is unavailable. THE CDC HAS NO VIRUS.

One of the two most powerful public health agencies in the world can’t obtain the virus from anywhere. Why? Obviously, because no one has it.

A further tip-off is the use of the word ‘isolates.” This means NO ISOLATED VIRUS IS AVAILABLE.

Another way to put it: NO ONE HAS AN ISOLATED SPECIMEN OF THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

NO ONE HAS ISOLATED THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

THEREFORE, NO ONE HAS PROVED THAT IT EXISTS.

As if this were not a revelation to shock the world, the CDC goes on to say they are presenting a diagnostic PCR test, in that very paper I’m citing, to detect the virus-that-hasn’t-been-isolated…and the test is looking for RNA which is PRESUMED to come from the virus that hasn’t been proved to exist.

And using this test, the CDC and every other public health agency in the world would go on to count COVID cases and deaths…and governments instituted lockdowns and economic devastation using those case and death numbers as justification.

The pandemic is a fraud, down to the root of the poisonous tree.

And now, let’s move on to a second key document. This one formed the basis for the first PCR test aimed at detecting the COVID virus all over the world.

READ WHAT THIS STUDY SAYS. These quotes should be engraved in stone above the entrance to a museum dedicated to the history of medical fraud.

“We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology [a test for a virus] for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available.”

TRANSLATION: We want to develop a test to detect the new COVID virus without having the virus.

“Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV [SARS-CoV-2] its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with [the older 2003] SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.”

TRANSLATION: We HAVE developed a diagnostic test to detect the new COVID virus. We ASSUME this new virus exists and is closely related to an older coronavirus. We ASSUME we know HOW it is related. We ASSUME, because we don’t have the new COVID virus. Therefore, all our assumptions are made out of nothing. Actually, we have no proof there is a new coronavirus.

“The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from [the older 2003] SARS-CoV.”

TRANSLATION: Our new test to detect the new virus? We don’t have the new virus. We’ve never observed it. We can’t study it directly. There is no proof it exists. But we will create and use a test to detect it.

The study is titled, “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR.” [Euro Surveill. 2020 Jan;25(3):2000045. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045.]

Those quotes from the study are astounding. A diagnostic test for the virus, but there is no virus. No standard against which to compare the reliability of the test.

The authors blithely assume they can somehow infer that the virus exists in the first place, without having an isolated specimen.

Then they assume they can understand the structure of the virus that isn’t there.

The virus isn’t there. It has NOT been isolated. It has NOT been separated out from other material. Therefore, it has not been observed and its existence has not been proved.

And yet, the test which these authors have developed is launched, all over the world, to detect that virus; to promote the unproven notion that there is a pandemic; to form the basis for counting COVID case numbers; and ultimately to justify all the lockdowns which have crashed the global economy and destroyed millions upon millions of lives.

A great deal of confusion has been created, because scientists talk about the “new virus” as if they understand its structure and genetic sequence. No. They’ve built a hypothetical structure, AS DATA. Nothing more. And then they gibber about what it means.

As far as what is actually going on in labs where researchers are making vast assumptions and proclamations; don’t talk to me about science. Talk to me about liability and prison.

At the site, fluoridefreepeel.ca, you will find roughly a hundred FOIA requests to public health agencies. These requests are asking for records showing that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated. The repetitive and routine reply is: “We have no records.” Taken together, they paint a picture of egregious fraud.

Mainstream scientists will make two claims: one, we have isolated the virus; and two, it is not necessary to isolate the virus, because we’ve discovered its genetic sequence. Both claims are false.

From reading the arcane language surrounding claims of having sequenced the virus—there is a multi-layered scam composed of leaps of unwarranted assumptions. The researchers say they are using tools that allow them to closely approximate the structure of SARS-CoV-2, even though they don’t have that virus in hand. This is absurd.

It’s like saying: There is a new planet in the solar system. We don’t know where it is or what it looks like. We don’t know what processes are at work on this new planet. But we do know the moon is a very close approximation of the planet. Therefore, we can know everything we need to know about the new planet from our knowledge of the moon.

And a rabbit is spaceship. And there are condos for sale on Jupiter. And new element #267587, in the Periodic Table, which no one has ever seen, is almost an exact copy of Philadelphia Cream Cheese.

And now we come to a third document, which bulges with devastating admissions. It was issued by the CDC.

The release is titled, “07/21/2021: Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.” It begins explosively:

“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.”

Many people believe this means the CDC is giving up on the PCR test as a means of “detecting the virus.” The CDC isn’t saying that at all.

They’re saying the PCR technology will continue to be used, but they’re replacing what the test is looking FOR with a better “reference sample.” A better marker. A better target. A better piece of RNA supposedly derived from SARS-CoV-2.

CDC/FDA are confessing there has been a PROBLEM with the PCR test which has been used to detect the virus, starting in February of 2020—right up to July 21, 2021.

In other words, the millions and millions of “COVID cases” based on the PCR test in use are all suspect. Actually, that statement is too generous. Every test result of every PCR test should be thrown out.

To confirm this, the CDC document links to an FDA release titled, “SARS-CoV-2 Reference Panel Comparative Data.” Here is a killer quote:

“During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical specimens [of the virus] were not readily available to developers of IVDs [in vitro diagnostics, the PCR test] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs [tests] based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation. While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: We, at the CDC, did not have a specimen of the SARS-CoV-2 virus when we concocted the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. Yes, and that’s the test we’ve been using all along. So we CONTRIVED samples of ‘the virus’. We fabricated. We lied. We made up [invented] synthetic gene sequences and we SAID these sequences HAD TO BE close to the sequence of SARS-CoV-2, without having the faintest idea of what we were doing, because, again, we didn’t have an actual specimen of the virus. We had no proof THERE WAS something called SARS-CoV-2.

This amazing FDA document goes to say the Agency has granted emergency approval to 59 different PCR tests since the beginning of the (fake) pandemic. 59. And, “…it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: Each of the 59 different PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 told different lies and concocted different fabrications about the genetic makeup of the virus—the virus we didn’t have. Obviously, then, these tests would give useless and meaningless results. It was all a fantasy.

BUT, don’t worry, be happy, because NOW, the CDC and the FDA say, they really do have actual isolated virus samples of SARS-CoV-2 from patients; they have better targets for the PCR test, and labs should start gearing up for the new and improved tests.

In other words, they were lying THEN, but they’re not lying NOW. They were “contriving,” but now they’re telling the truth.

If you believe that, I have Fountain of Youth water for sale, extracted from the lead-contaminated system of Flint, Michigan.

We KNOW they are lying now, because they continue to torture the meaning of the word “isolate.” Here, once again, I report virology’s version of “we possess isolated specimens of the virus”:

They have a soup they make in their labs.

This soup contains human and monkey cells, toxic chemicals and drugs, and all sorts of other random genetic material. Because the cells start to die, the researchers ASSUME a bit of mucus from a patient they dropped in the soup is doing the killing, and THE VIRUS must be the killer agent in the mucus.

This assumption is entirely unwarranted. The drugs and chemicals could be doing the cell-killing, and the researchers are also starving the cells of vital nutrients, and that starvation could kill the cells.

There is no proof that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup, or that it is doing the cell-killing, or that it exists.

Yet the researchers call cell-death “isolation of the virus.”

To say this is a non-sequitur is a vast understatement. In their universe, “We assume, without proof, we have the virus buried in a soup in a dish in the lab” equals, “We’ve separated the virus from all surrounding material.”

Virology equals “how to spread bullshit for a living and scare the world and lock it down and shoot it up with a devastating destructive vaccine.” Other than that, it’s perfect.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

If the virus actually existed

by Jon Rappoport

October 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

…and it doesn’t…

There would be no way to stop it.

It would have spread so far and so deep…

The only answer would be: LIVE THROUGH IT.

Period.

Have a look at the open borders of the US. Have a look at the packed football stands every weekend across the US. Have a look at Israel, where lockdowns and high vaccination rates have failed to stop the progression of cases. Of course, those cases are nothing more than false positive tests. Nevertheless, you get the idea.

The very concept of a virus and its spread implies: UNSTOPPABLE.

The war against the virus was always a losing idea. And it was never that war anyway. It was always a war against the people and against freedom.

The planners calculated that freedom had withered to such an advanced degree that it would be possible to take away what was left of it.

The war against the virus is very much like the war against freedom of speech, aka censorship. Governments are never going to be able to stop the flow of independent ideas. The seal is never air-tight.

Of course, as I’ve been proving for the past year, the virus doesn’t exist. It’s a fantasy. It’s the ghost in the dark closet at night, when the child is lying in bed thinking that random noises are a threat to his safety.

A well-known scientist with impressive mainstream credentials recently confided to me that he believes the virus (which he accepts as real) will eventually infect everyone. EVERYONE. Therefore…

There is nothing to be done. LIVE WITH IT. LIVE THROUGH IT.

Even the false premise that the virus exists implies the continuation of freedom.

The notion that a war against a virus can be won is on the level of the notion that a war against the natural flow of air on the planet can be won.

Nations that have fought a relatively mild battle against the virus—Sweden, Denmark, and Norway—have officially stated they’re ending that battle. Why? Because only small numbers of people are becoming ill. Those numbers mirror the recent years before the pandemic was declared.

In those countries, the nightmare of the ghost in the closet is over, for now.

The leading pornographer of fear in the US, Anthony Fauci, is still turning out his little movies. Every week, he “adjusts the data,” in order to bolster his claims. And every week, his sales force of media personnel put him on television to spread the message:

OBEDIENCE IS VICTORY.

Fauci is the envy of sadists everywhere.

For the past year and a half, he has been the de facto president of the United States.

His style reflects the decades-long machinations of the CIA: invent endless enemies, and then attack them. All for the purpose of establishing CONTROL.

On some nights, while I’m asleep, a part of my mind that operates on entirely conventional premises calculates the odds in the war against the virus. It spins, all on its own, fragmented scenarios: the infection rate, the degree and extent of lockdowns, the barriers against the virus created by masks, the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated, and so on. That ridiculous piece of my mind is a cameo Pentagon.

As I wake up, I realize the fantastical nature of these wartime calculations. I see them clearly for what they signify. A rooting interest, no more meaningful than sitting on the sidelines watching a contest of tiddlywinks, with a bet of a few pennies riding on the outcome.

It’s instructive to have these dreams. They convey an insane fool’s errand.

If the virus existed, there would be no way to stop it. Since it doesn’t exist, there is no “it” to stop.

However, the war against freedom is an entirely different matter. It has always existed, and it always will.

There are certain men who have lost their own vivid life-breathing creative freedom, and they have chosen, as their only substitute, the path of destroying freedom wherever they find it.

They are the virus.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

“Viruses can’t be isolated, but isolation is unnecessary”; another ridiculous claim from those who insist on saying SARS-CoV-2 exists

by Jon Rappoport

October 12, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

There are two types of virologists.

First, those who claim they’re isolating viruses. I’ve written many articles debunking their absurd stance. They define isolation as “swimming in a soup of many substances and never separated from the soup.” In other words, these virologists define isolated as un-isolated. You could call this Orwellian Scientific Newspeak. Sheer nonsense.

Then there are “the more sophisticated” virologists who say, “Viruses can only live in liquid inside a cell. Therefore, they can never be separated from the cell or the liquid. To demand isolation is to ask for the impossible. We can discover the genetic sequences of these viruses without isolating them. Forget isolation. Discovering the genetic sequences proves the viruses exist.”

Let’s examine this second brand of virology.

Let’s go back to the moment when scientists decided viruses existed for the first time. After all, THEY made the original claim. The burden of proof was on THEM. And they made that decision long before there was a procedure called genetic sequencing.

If isolation is impossible, if these viruses swim forever in liquid inside cells, un-isolated, then HOW DID SCIENTISTS FIRST DISCOVER VIRUSES EXIST?

On what basis did they make the claim?

Through direct observation? Certainly not, if the viruses can never be separated from the liquid in which they swim.

“We first discovered the existence of viruses that can’t be isolated by…”

By what? Singing songs? Talking to an ancestor of Antony Fauci? Finding out how much money was in the bank accounts of the Rockefeller family?

“No, look. Here’s the way it works. NOW we say isolation of viruses is impossible, because people are accusing us of not isolating them. But THEN, way back in time when scientists discovered the existence of viruses for the first time, they knew viruses HAD TO EXIST.”

“How did they know that?”

“Because all other explanations for why people were getting sick with certain diseases didn’t work, fell short.”

“I see. So there was only ONE other possibility. Viruses.”

“That’s right.”

“Do you realize what a ridiculous position that is?”

“No comment.”

And that’s really the end of the story. There was no “original discovery” of viruses. There was only an assumption backed up by nothing.

And NOW, when virologists claim they don’t need to isolate viruses because they can lay out their genetic sequences, another ridiculous situation arises. HOW DO YOU ANALYZE THE STRUCTURE OF SOMETHING YOU CAN’T ISOLATE?

How do you describe the structure of a thing when you don’t have the thing?

You DON’T describe the structure. You PRETEND you do.

You refer to other structures which themselves are only pretenses, and you pick out pieces of those pretended structures and you cobble them together, and you say, “Here it is. Here is the genetic sequence.”

This would be like a shop owner holding out his empty hand to the mafia thugs who showed up to collect their protection money for the week. The owner says, “Here’s your four hundred dollars. Can’t you see it?”

After a thug pulls out his gun, the store owner opens his wall safe and takes out strange bills and hands them over. The bills are pieces of money from the game called Monopoly. They’re pieces from American, French, German, Italian, Spanish Monopoly money, taped together.

And THAT’S called genetic sequencing of viruses. Funny money.

I’ll cover two more points. As Dr. Tom Cowan has stated, according to the conventional hypothesis of virus infection, viruses must be breaking out of cells and traveling to other cells. Otherwise, how can infection spread throughout the body? But this description assumes that viruses CAN live and thrive outside the liquid in cells.

Therefore, the claim that viruses can’t be isolated because they always live in liquid inside cells is false.

Which would bring us back to the first type of virologist, the one who says he IS isolating viruses—but can’t prove it, because his definition of isolation is, “swimming inside soup and never separated from the soup.”

And finally, what about electron microscope photos which purport to show isolated viruses? This is a subject fraught with conflict and misunderstanding. It is far from settled science. Many so-called viruses in these photos are cells that are “budding,” as if something has not yet, but is about to break out of the cell. Virologists will arbitrarily call these somethings viruses, without visual proof.

Then there are exosomes, “microvesicles released by cells in both physiological and pathological situations.” They are mistaken for viruses. There is other genetic material which can be misidentified as viruses.

People who wish to explore this thorny problem should read the works of Harold Hillman, a foremost critic of electron microscopy methods, who was exiled from the scientific community for his findings. Hillman once wrote: “Electron microscopists have ignored the dictates of solid geometry and most of the apparent structures they have detected are artefacts of their preparation procedures…” In other words, the techniques of electron microscopy create artificial entities which are then mistaken for natural entities.

Brian Martin, emeritus professor of social sciences at the University of Wollongong, Australia, writes, “In one case, Hillman gave a talk to a large audience at what he calls ‘a well known Welsh university’. The many undergraduates in the audience seemed sympathetic to his case. A lecturer stood up and claimed to have pictures from an electron microscope which showed that Hillman was wrong. After the talk, Hillman asked the lecturer to see the pictures. ‘I have not got any’, he said, laughing. ‘Why did you say you had in front of that large audience?’ ‘Because I did not want the students to be misled by you’.”

And that concludes today’s episode of Two Schools of Virology, Both Wrong, brought to you by NIH Paper Towels, the brand that mops up every spill but somehow never traps a virus.

Harold Hillman folder: click here.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The non-existent virus; an explosive interview with Christine Massey

by Jon Rappoport

October 7, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

With a background in biostatistics, Christine Massey has been using Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests as a research tool, as a diamond drill, to unearth the truth about SARS-CoV-2. As in: Does the virus exist?

Her approach has yielded shocking results.

In a half-sane world, Christine’s work would win many awards, and rate far-reaching coverage. In the present world, more and more people, on their own, are waking up to her findings and completely revising their perception of the “pandemic.”

Here is my recent interview with the brilliant relentless Christine Massey:

Q: You and your colleagues have made many FOIA requests to public health agencies around the world. You’ve been asking for records that show the SARS-CoV-2 virus exists. How did you develop this approach?

A: In 2014, a lady in Edmonton submitted a freedom of information request to Health Canada asking for studies relating to the addition of hydrofluorosilisic acid (industrial waste fluoride acid) to public drinking water (water fluoridation). HealthCanada’s response indicated that they had no studies whatsoever to back up their claims that the practice is safe or effective.

A few years later, some high quality government-funded studies showed that common fluoride exposure levels during pregnancy are associated with lower IQs and increased ADHD symptoms in offspring. Nevertheless, dentists and the public health community continued to promote and defend the so-called “great public health achievement” of forcing this controversial preventative dental treatment onto entire communities, and were dismissive of those studies. So I used freedom of information requests to show that various institutions promoting and defending water fluoridation in Ontario, Alberta and Washington State could not provide or cite even one primary study indicating safety with respect to those outcomes.

So once I learned from people like David Crowe, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Stefan Lanka and Dr. Thomas Cowan that the alleged [COVID] virus had never been isolated (purified) from a patient sample and then characterized, sequenced and studied with controlled experiments, and thus had never been shown to exist, I realized that freedom of information (FOI) requests could be used to verify their claims.

Most people are not going to take the time to check all of the so-called “virus isolation” studies for themselves, so FOIs were a way to 1) ensure that nothing had been overlooked, and 2) cut to the chase and back-up what these gentlemen [Kaufman, Cowan, Crowe, Lanka] were saying, if they were indeed correct.

So in May 2020 I began submitting FOI requests for any record held by the respective institution that describes the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient, by anyone, anywhere on the planet.

Q: How many public health and government agencies have you queried with FOIA requests?

A: I have personally queried and received responses from 22 Canadian institutions. These are public health institutions, universities that claim to have “isolated the virus”, and 3 police services – due to their enforcement of “COVID-19” restrictions. I have also personally received responses from several institutions outside of Canada including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). I await responses from a number of additional institutions.

Many people around the world have obtained responses to the same/similar, or related, [FOIA] requests, from institutions in their own countries. One person who has done a lot of work on this in New Zealand and other countries is my colleague Michael S. Also a fellow named Marc Horn obtained many in the UK. A handful of other people obtained several responses, and lots of people have obtained 1 or 2.

I have been compiling all of the responses that are sent to me on my FOI page, and as I type this (October 4, 2021) we have FOI responses from 104 institutions in well over 20 countries all relating to the purification/existence of the alleged virus. Additionally, there are court documents from South Africa and Portugal. In total, 110 instructions are represented at this moment on my website. There are FOI responses from more institutions that I haven’t had a chance to upload yet.

Q: How would you characterize the replies you’ve gotten from these agencies?

A: Every institution without exception has failed to provide or cite even 1 record describing purification of the alleged virus from even 1 patient sample.

Twenty-one of the 22 Canadian institutions admitted flat out that they have no such records (as required by the Canadian legislation). Many institutions outside Canada have admitted the same, including the CDC (November 2, 2020), Australia’s Department of Health, New Zealand’s Ministry of Health, the UK Department of Health and Social Care…

And in some cases, silly excuses were provided. For example, the Norwegian Directorate of Health’s response was that they do not own, store or control documents with information about patients. Public Health Wales told Dr. Janet Menage that they have not produced any such records, and that while they would normally be willing to point her towards records that are in the public domain it would be too difficult in this case.

Brazil’s FDA-like injection-approver, the Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa), told Marcella Picone that they have no record of virus purification and are not required to by law, thus it is (in their minds) not their obligation to make sure that the virus actually exists.

Q: What is the exact text of your FOIA requests?

The text has varied somewhat over time. For example, in the beginning I used the word “isolation”. But since that term gets abused so badly by virologists, I now stick to “purification”.

In all requests I specified exactly what I meant by isolation/purification (separation of the alleged virus from everything else), and that the purified particles should come directly from a sample taken from a diseased human where the patient sample was not first adulterated with any other source of genetic material (i.e. the monkey kidney cells aka Vero cells and the fetal bovine serum that are typically used in the bogus “virus isolation” studies).

I always clarified that I was not requesting records where researchers failed to purify the alleged virus and instead cultured something and/or performed a PCR test and/or sequenced something. I also clarified that I was requesting records authored by anyone, anywhere – not simply records that were created by the institution in question. And I requested citations for any record of purification that is held by the institution but already available to the public elsewhere.

The latest iteration [of the FOIA request] is posted on a page of my website where I encourage others to submit requests to institutions in their own country: Template for “SARS-COV-2 isolation” FOI requests.

Q: These agencies are all saying they have no records proving SARS-CoV-2 exists, but at the same time some of these agencies sponsor and fund studies that claim the virus does exist. How do you account for this contradiction?

I will address this by way of an example.

The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is the only Canadian institution that failed to provide a straightforward “no records” response thus far. Instead, they provided me with what they pretended were responsive records.

The records consisted of some emails, and a study by Bullard et al. that was supported by PHAC and their National Microbiology Laboratory, and by Manitoba Health and Manitoba’s Cadham Provincial Laboratory.

Neither the study nor the emails describe purification of the alleged virus from a patient sample or from anything else. The word “isolate” (or “isolation” / “purify” / “purification”) does not even appear, except in the study manuscript in the context of isolating people, not a virus.

…in the Materials And Methods section we find that these researchers performed PCR “tests” for a portion of the E gene sequence (not a virus), and they incubated patient samples (not a virus) on Vero cells (monkey kidney cells) supplemented with fetal bovine serum, penicillin/streptomycin, and amphotericin B, and they monitored for harm to the monkey cells.

No virus was looked for in, or purified from, the patient samples. No control groups of any kind were implemented in the monkey cell procedures. No virus was required or shown to be involved anywhere in the study, but “it” was blamed for any harm to the monkey cells and “it” was referred to repeatedly throughout the study (I counted 26 instances).

Nevertheless, this was the sole paper provided by the Public Health Agency of Canada.

And although the researchers did not claim to have “isolated” the alleged virus in this paper, they performed the same sort of monkey business / cell culture procedure that is passed off as “virus isolation” by virologists in country after country. (Because virology is not a science.)

…Note the admission in the [study] Abstract: “RT-PCR detects RNA, not infectious virus”.

…So I wrote back to the Public Health Agency of Canada and advised the that none of the records they provided me actually describe separation of the alleged virus from everything else in a patient sample, and that I require an accurate response indicating that they have no responsive records.

In their revised response, the Agency insisted that the gold standard assay used to determine the presence of intact virus in patient samples is visible cytopathic [cell-killing] effects on cells in a cell culture, and that “PCR further confirms that intact virus is present”.

…As you have pointed out to your readers again and again: No one has isolated/purified “the virus”. They simply assume that patient samples contain “it” (based on meaningless PCR tests). They adulterate patient samples with genetic material and toxic drugs, starve the cells, then irrationally blame “the virus” for harm to the cells. They point to something that has never been purified, characterized, sequenced or studied scientifically, in a cell culture and insist “that’s the virus”. They fabricate the “genomes” from zillions of sequences detected in a soup. It’s all wild speculation and assumptions, zero science.

So the people responsible for the blatantly fraudulent claims made by these institutions are either wildly incompetent or intentionally lying.

—end of interview—

To bolster Christine’s final comments, these agencies will respond to FOIA requests with: “we have no records of virus purification”—and then sponsor studies that claim the virus HAS BEEN purified and discovered, because…

The standards for purifying the virus in the studies are no standards at all. They’re entirely irrational.

However, because Christine is very precise and accurate in her FOIA requests, when it comes to what purification means, the agencies are compelled to reply…

“Well, in THAT case, we have no records of virus purification…”

Meaning: There are no records showing the virus has been isolated; there are no records showing the virus exists.


power outside the matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The fixation on the One, and the obsession with a Virus; the Individual vs. the Collective Trance

by Jon Rappoport

October 4, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

More than anything, this piece reflects my approach to my work. My work as a reporter, as a poet, as an individual.

When I wrote my first book in 1988, AIDS INC., I showed that HIV was not the cause of AIDS. In fact, there was no AIDS. That was a label slapped on a variety of health problems all stemming from lowered immunity.

These health problems were caused by a variety of factors, none of which had anything to do with “the virus.”

The major resistance to the book came from people who were conditioned to believe that every announced new disease had to be real, and every new disease had to have a single cause. I would call this ill-fated belief informational Hypnosis.

It’s very effective.

Look at the history of organized religion. Each Church has its single First Cause. Meaning God. “Our God is real. Yours isn’t.” “Our God is the One.”

Behind this farce is each organization telling individuals, “We have God. He is the One you should worship. Don’t go off on your own and find your own God. That doesn’t work.”

People are fixated on The One. The one God. The one Cause. The one Virus. And because they are fixated, leaders can sell them this One and that One and the other One.

In 1988, I saw the full absurdity of that con, with HIV.

During the decade following the publication of AIDS INC., I discovered that no one had proved HIV existed. There was no reason to believe it did. After all, you could say a man with purple hair and six arms lives on the moon, but then you carry the burden of proof, and if you can’t supply any, your hypothesis is null and void.

So the fixation on the One extends to the One that doesn’t exist at all.

At that point in my work, I could see I was plunging headlong into territory that was going to place me outside any semblance of the mainstream or even an acceptable alternative universe.

Why? Again, because people were fixated on the One, and I was calling that fixation Mind Control.

In a similar vein, in my work as a reporter, I was using up-against-wall logic to refute medical and political lies and cover stories. But then, when I was writing poetry, I was abandoning the traditional forms and thought processes (the “logic” of poetry) because they were stale and decaying. I wanted to take imagination to other places, without limit, and if the preferred hidebound internal connections in my poems were missing, so what?

This distinction between my work as a reporter and a poet confuses some people. They want one or the other. Not both, side by side. But I say this confusion is good. It can be productive. It can stimulate readers to think along new tracks.

I’m not obeying some arbitrary external standard that describes what I’m supposed to do. Whenever I sense I’m giving in to that standard, when I feel The Mechanical setting in, I stop. I stop and put myself back in the basic bath of WHAT DO I REALLY WANT TO DO? Answering that question sets me back on track(s).

A long time ago I figured out something. If I went along with the tide and tried to carve out a career as a conventional writer, I might succeed or I might fail. If I failed, it would be a double disaster, because I had failed at something I really didn’t want to do in the first place. If I failed to find an audience by writing what I wanted to write, I would have DONE WHAT I WANTED TO DO. I WOULD HAVE CREATED WHAT I WANTED TO CREATE.

Centralized authority wants to build a collective trance in which people believe they must think and do what falls inside certain boundaries.

Nowhere is this more evident, these days, than in the promoted idea that a virus is loose in the world. The one virus causing the one disease. In many articles, I’ve taken apart the myth of SARS-CoV-2 and disposed of it. In the process, I’ve discovered that the whole branch of medicine called Virology is a hustle and a broken down Church of true believers, who can’t and won’t shake off their delusions.

Once again, I’ve come to grips with people who are so hardwired in their trance they can only bray, “People are dying, it must be the (one) virus.” The logic of that proposition belongs in a garbage dumpster in a blind alley at midnight.

It’s right next door to, “They diagnosed Harry with COVID, he had shortness of breath, so they put him on a ventilator and sedated him with a drug that radically suppresses breathing and left him on the ventilator and he died because of the virus.”

In the realm of propaganda, willing victims select their preferred one idol. For example, Tony Fauci. His adoring worshippers need The One, so they choose him because he’s there on television, being interviewed by “the best people,” and he has a seal of approval from the White House, and he disagreed with Trump. This is called “following the science.” I would call it trailing behind a horse’s ass.

Over the decades, I’ve encountered many artists who stand for the widest freedom of expression and yet, when it comes to politics, they insist on absolute loyalty to the “prevailing culture.” Meaning the Left. I’ve also seen political libertarians who insist on freedom of thought, but believe all art since the 16th century is a perverse plot against “traditional values.”

At the bottom of these contradictions is, again, a fixation on The One. The one political point of view, the one acceptable art, the one acceptable Church…

And now we’re all dealing with the one tyranny that spells out “the one solution to the one virus.” And this tyranny is bent on subjugating many nations and imposing one government for one planet.

On every level, from the political to the psychological to the spiritual to the creative, THE ONE has always been the conditioned mind control reflex that imprisons the individual.

I’m against it. Always have been. Always will be.


Exit From the Matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Dangerous speech versus free speech; mobs of ignoramuses

by Jon Rappoport

September 28, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

“For if Men are to be precluded from offering their Sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of Speech may be taken away, and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter.” George Washington, 1783

Many, many people believe that spreading COVID falsehoods can be so dangerous that censorship is absolutely necessary.

This view happens to be the central refuge of liars.

It turns out that big-time liars always want to censor their opponents. It’s the only leg they have to stand on. In an atmosphere of free discourse, they would fall.

And of course, who decides what is false and what is true? Who hangs out that shingle and makes judgments that affect the lives of millions of people?

There is an astounding level of ignorance here: many people believe “the truth” should carry the day. Once it is established, there is no need to permit freedom of speech.

These people have a very low ceiling of understanding. They’ve never explored what freedom of speech is all about. They’re citizens in name only.

“If someone says the vaccine is harmful, people will be dissuaded from taking it. That would be dangerous.”

Putting aside the fact that the vaccine is a destroyer, free speech implies living with danger. The remedy is intelligence and knowledge. The only workable remedy is raising people’s ability to consider all sorts of judgments, opinions, and conclusions, without being irrationally swayed to one side or another.

Otherwise, we have Fascists on parade. Mobs of clueless ignoramuses.

Once upon a time, there was a never-never land called Dolt with millions of traffic lights. A writer penned, “Always cross the street when you’re facing a red light. Stay on the curb when the light is green.”

Outrage followed. The writer was censored for dangerous speech.

The rulers and their followers were so impressed with this victory, they established a national task force to root out falsehoods of all kinds and censor them. Pursuing this path, the society turned into a police state. And the majority of people approved.

We’re heading in that direction now.

“Strange it is that men should admit the validity of the arguments for free speech but object to their being ‘pushed to an extreme,’ not seeing that unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for any case.” John Stuart Mill, 1859

It’s no surprise that modern civilization, intellectually based on a fool’s version of “science,” has built science as a new religion, with all the restrictions that organized religions have enforced.

After all, when the teachings of a man called Jesus were incorporated into a powerful Church, that Church set about censoring, imprisoning, torturing, and burning dissidents. As if Jesus would have approved.

Centuries later, people were shocked to learn this Church was rife with pedophile priests. I would be shocked to learn the Church isn’t filled with pedophiles.

Many are the OTHER secret crimes the men in power today are committing, given that they’re already relentlessly pushing a highly destructive vaccine into the arms of a billion people.

They HAVE TO demand censorship of dissidents.

So no, I’m not surprised that the press and social media and politicians are trying to censor COVID information which doesn’t serve their purposes.

Consider this. A week ago, at a standard FDA conference to discuss recommending COVID boosters, several scientists testified that convincing data to support the additional shots were entirely lacking. Two leading in-house FDA scientists had just resigned because they opposed the push for boosters. And finally, the FDA committee as a whole rejected the present need for boosters.

Yet the following day, the head of the NIH, and the White House itself, ignored the FDA and said that boosters were coming. Even the FDA was effectively censored.

There are thousands of scientists all over the world who strenuously oppose the official COVID narrative, and they can’t even get a glance from editors of medical journals, when they submit papers.

Talking news heads are feeding the population fast-food COVID science—a manufactured product consisting of synthetic bullshit about cases, deaths, the virus, the vaccine. It’s cardboard. And no dissenters allowed.

Since I stopped writing for mainstream and so-called alternative outlets in the early 1990s, I’ve gone my own way. As of this writing, I’m still here. My videos have been taken down. My site was hacked. We restored it. I’m still here.

I take freedom of speech seriously. No matter what.

Only low scum want to censor us. They make an absurd pretense of claiming WE’RE liars. But we don’t want to censor THEM. That’s called a clue.

Right now, as I write this, Australian men with balls, union construction workers, are staging an insurrection against their union bosses, who are colluding with corrupt politicians to enforce COVID restrictions and vaccine mandates. The workers are facing off against cops in the street. This is one of the biggest stories in the world.

The New York Times and the Washington Post and the news networks should be leading with it and covering breaking developments wall to wall. Instead, they’re downplaying and hiding it. These news whores and their pimps are holding the line for Fascism.

I’ll close, for now, with this story. Months ago, an “alternative journalist” approached me, urging me to stop saying the pandemic virus doesn’t exist.

I sized up the complaint. It seemed to have several roots. One, I was “confusing people,” who couldn’t decide what to believe. Two, there were far more important COVID issues that needed to be explored. And three, that journalist was receiving emails citing my work and asking for clarification—and this was bothersome, especially when the emailers agreed with me.

The journalist off-handedly and blithely assumed I would obey and stop writing about the existence of the virus.

Of course, I reacted oppositely. I always do. I dig deeper and farther along the track I’m pursuing. In this case, I found and wrote about more evidence for the non-existence of the virus.

That issue happens to be CENTRAL and BASIC to the whole COVID story. And if writing about it confuses some people, that’s what happens when free speech is still possible. There’s nothing wrong with confusion. It’s productive. It’s supposed to be a prelude to more profound understanding.

I’m not running some sort of operation that seeks uniformity.

That journalist was trying to censor me by having me censor myself.

No dice.

“He who stifles free discussion, secretly doubts whether what he professes to believe is really true.” Wendell Phillips, 1870

Those fools who can only “opt for the truth” will never grasp the meaning of the 1st Amendment. They’ll never see the freight train of Fascism coming.


power outside the matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Natural Health Fakers; their scam and their fear

by Jon Rappoport

September 28, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

In a small American city, a supermarket caters to locals who’ve lived in the area for a long time.

Because the political authority has mandated masks, most of the shoppers wear them. But some don’t. The store employees ignore those who don’t. There’s no harassment.

Across town, a major health food store presents a quite different scene. Everyone is wearing a mask. Shoppers keep their distance from one another. If a daring shopper walks the aisles with a naked face, there’s a good chance a masked marauder will shout at him: PUT YOUR MASK ON. Store employees will definitely descend on him and hold out a mask. If the outlier refuses, the employees will promptly kick him out of the store.

What’s going on? Why are these supposed natural health devotees behaving like germophobic storm troopers?

Why are they suddenly worshipping at the altar of Fauci?

Why are they supporting the mainstream/government medical model?

Indeed, as it turns out, why are so many eagerly lining up to take the vaccine, which is actually a genetic treatment, when they’ve been attacking Monsanto/Bayer for genetically modifying crops?

Why do they squeeze that germicide goo out of a machine on their hands before they enters the store, when they believe Nature (their goddess), in her wisdom, has dispensed trillions to the trillionth power microorganisms all over the planet?

Once upon a time, long ago, natural health advocates went to the wall for Health Freedom, the right of every human to decide how to take care of his own body. Big government and big medicine were the enemies.

In 1994, I ran for a seat in the US Congress on a platform of Health Freedom, and I met some of these people. They were true (not fake, not compromised) libertarians. Their vision of freedom was crystal clear. And inspiring.

However, the present generation of natural health people (certainly not all, but many of them) are working an entirely different program.

Its bottom line is:

THE CLEAN VERSUS THE UNCLEAN. I AM CLEAN, “THEY” ARE UNCLEAN.

It’s a full-blown wall-to-wall fetish.

They see themselves as “successful in life,” and as such—no matter what platitudes and virtue signals they broadcast publicly—they consider themselves a class apart from the great unwashed masses.

For them, the lower masses are definitely unclean. And in order to build and maintain a wall against close contact with those proles, the new “natural health” proponents will take every measure they deem necessary.

Masks? Wonderful. Wear at least one, maybe two. Socially distance? Of course. Forget about six feet. Six miles, at least, if at all possible. There must be no class mixing.

Shame and attack the unvaccinated? You bet. Those virus-laden dirty super-spreaders must be stopped at any cost.

Suddenly, Mother Nature is a goddess who bathes in a tub of Purell twice a day, and rubs various oils and creams and gels and lotions on her body, to ward off the dirt and grime and ooze of The Streets. She does internal Cleanses at an upscale resort-retreat.

And if you could probe down below all the fancy memes and slogans these new “natural health” advocates adorn themselves with, you would find the conviction that THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE ON THE PLANET, AND DEPOPULATION IS A MUST.

Otherwise, contact with the UNCLEAN is unavoidable.

And that is how these present-day Soldiers of Nature secretly join up with the World Economic Forum, Bill Gates, the Rockefeller Foundation, various elite “radical environmentalists,” and other eugenicists, on behalf of The Great Reset, which ultimately demands Culling the Herd.

—Although, short of torture, you could never wring such a confession from one of these contemporary “natural health” persons.

The unwritten history of the last 40 years involves the transformation of the Health Freedom movement, from the radical I DECIDE to ELIMINATE THE UNWASHED.

As I say, not all those who still stand for Health Freedom now are on the side of Big Government and Big Medicine, but a disturbing number are.

As they stalk the health food stores wearing their masks, searching out offenders, they vaguely remember their freer days, long past—but now they’re the Stasi and the KGB. And they have no idea how that switch happened.

Meet the new androids.

If you actually took them to meet Nature, up close and personal, on an African plain where hungry lions were attacking the dead carcass of an antelope, pulling out the entrails, ripping away chunks of flesh, vultures circling overhead, stench-ridden dogs trotting in the background waiting for their leftovers, thousands of flies gathering on the corpse, they would flee back to their jeeps.

For them, the ideal wished-for dream of a natural environment would be the back seat of an air-conditioned limo cruising silently through Beverly Hills, the interior air sweet with the scent of lavender sanitizer.

For all but a few of them, that vision is a shore too far. But it’s a comforting fantasy.

Meanwhile, they can patrol health food stores and harass the unmasked. They can shout: VIRUS. They can imagine they’re wearing black uniforms and have guns in their hands.

Or syringes and needles. Or blow darts.

“Hold that disgusting man down! I’m going to shoot him full of Moderna! Then I’m going home, taking three showers and testing myself. Call Dr. Fauci and tell him I’m on the case. Achtung! We will destroy the Unclean…”


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The failure to prove the virus exists

by Jon Rappoport

September 20, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Over a year ago, I proposed (insisted on) a procedure to prove SARS-COV-2 exists.

This procedure is essential—and needless to say, it hasn’t been done, and will never be done.

Why? Because the outcome could completely and utterly destroy the COVID narrative.

Here is the procedure: You line up 500 people who have been diagnosed with COVID-19, and you take tissue samples from them.

You properly process these samples, through centrifuging, etc., in order to extract and arrive at what you believe is the virus.

You put that material under an electron microscope and photograph it.

You then place the 500 photos from the 500 “pandemic patients” side by side.

You ask yourself three burning questions.

One: In each and every photo, are there many identical viruses?

Two: Are these viruses in every one of the 500 photos?

Three: Is the virus one you’ve never seen before?

If the answer to question one and two is yes, you appear to have found a common virus for the 500 patients. If the answer to three is yes, it’s a virus never seen before.

If the answer to either question one or two is no, you’ve failed to find the common virus you’re looking for. You’ve failed to prove a viral cause for what you’re calling COVID-19.

If you see many identical virus particles in some, but not all, of the photos, you may or may not have found a virus. To decide that issue, you need three conditions: the researchers are honest and independent; a new team of such researchers will repeat the whole procedure, from the beginning, to see whether their findings match those of the original team; and you need truly qualified experts to determine whether the particles in the electron microscope photos are actually viruses or something else.

Note: This is why one or two photos from a study mean NOTHING.

All right. Moving on, there are other factors involved in the process of discovering a virus. These factors are ISOLATION and GENETIC SEQUENCING.

They’re both covered in a Statement on Virus Isolation, authored and published by Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan, and Sally Fallon Morell. I reprint it here in full:


Statement On Virus Isolation (SOVI) [1]

“Isolation: The action of isolating; the fact or condition of being isolated or standing alone; separation from other things or persons; solitariness.” — Oxford English Dictionary

The controversy over whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus has ever been isolated or purified continues. However, using the above definition, common sense, the laws of logic and the dictates of science, any unbiased person must come to the conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. As a result, no confirmation of the virus’ existence can be found. The logical, common sense, and scientific consequences of this fact are:

* the structure and composition of something not shown to exist can’t be known, including the presence, structure, and function of any hypothetical spike or other proteins;

* the genetic sequence of something that has never been found can’t be known;

* “variants” of something that hasn’t been shown to exist can’t be known;

* it’s impossible to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19.

In as concise terms as possible, here’s the proper way to isolate, characterize and demonstrate a new virus. First, one takes samples (blood, sputum, secretions) from many people (e.g. 500) with symptoms which are unique and specific enough to characterize an illness. Without mixing these samples with ANY tissue or products that also contain genetic material, the virologist macerates, filters and ultracentrifuges i.e. purifies the specimen. This common virology technique, done for decades to isolate bacteriophages [2a] and so-called giant viruses in every virology lab, then allows the virologist to demonstrate with electron microscopy thousands of identically sized and shaped particles. These particles are the isolated and purified virus.

These identical particles are then checked for uniformity by physical and/or microscopic techniques. Once the purity is determined, the particles may be further characterized. This would include examining the structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the particles. Next, their genetic makeup is characterized by extracting the genetic material directly from the purified particles and using genetic-sequencing techniques, such as Sanger sequencing, that have also been around for decades. Then one does an analysis to confirm that these uniform particles are exogenous (outside) in origin as a virus is conceptualized to be, and not the normal breakdown products of dead and dying tissues. [2b] (As of May 2020, we know that virologists have no way to determine whether the particles they’re seeing are viruses or just normal break-down products of dead and dying tissues.) [2c]

If we have come this far then we have fully isolated, characterized, and genetically sequenced an exogenous virus particle. However, we still have to show it is causally related to a disease. This is carried out by exposing a group of healthy subjects (animals are usually used) to this isolated, purified virus in the manner in which the disease is thought to be transmitted. If the animals get sick with the same disease, as confirmed by clinical and autopsy findings, one has now shown that the virus actually causes a disease. This demonstrates infectivity and transmission of an infectious agent.

None of these steps has even been attempted with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor have all these steps been successfully performed for any so-called pathogenic virus. Our research indicates that a single study showing these steps does not exist in the medical literature.

Instead, since 1954, virologists have taken unpurified samples from a relatively few people, often less than ten, with a similar disease. They then minimally process this sample and inoculate this unpurified sample onto tissue culture containing usually four to six other types of material — all of which contain identical genetic material as to what is called a “virus.” The tissue culture is starved and poisoned and naturally disintegrates into many types of particles, some of which contain genetic material. Against all common sense, logic, use of the English language and scientific integrity, this process is called “virus isolation.” This brew containing fragments of genetic material from many sources is then subjected to genetic analysis, which then creates in a computer-simulation process the alleged sequence of the alleged virus, a so called in silico genome. At no time is an actual virus confirmed by electron microscopy. At no time is a genome extracted and sequenced from an actual virus. This is scientific fraud.

The observation that the unpurified specimen — inoculated onto tissue culture along with toxic antibiotics, bovine fetal tissue, amniotic fluid and other tissues — destroys the kidney tissue onto which it is inoculated is given as evidence of the virus’ existence and pathogenicity. This is scientific fraud.

From now on, when anyone gives you a paper that suggests the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated, please check the methods sections. If the researchers used Vero cells or any other culture method, you know that their process was not isolation. You will hear the following excuses for why actual isolation isn’t done:

1. There were not enough virus particles found in samples from patients to analyze.

2. Viruses are intracellular parasites; they can’t be found outside the cell in this manner.

If No. 1 is correct, and we can’t find the virus in the sputum of sick people, then on what evidence do we think the virus is dangerous or even lethal? If No. 2 is correct, then how is the virus spread from person to person? We are told it emerges from the cell to infect others. Then why isn’t it possible to find it?

Finally, questioning these virology techniques and conclusions is not some distraction or divisive issue. Shining the light on this truth is essential to stop this terrible fraud that humanity is confronting. For, as we now know, if the virus has never been isolated, sequenced or shown to cause illness, if the virus is imaginary, then why are we wearing masks, social distancing and putting the whole world into prison?

Finally, if pathogenic viruses don’t exist, then what is going into those injectable devices erroneously called “vaccines,” and what is their purpose? This scientific question is the most urgent and relevant one of our time.

We are correct. The SARS-CoV2 virus does not exist.

—end of Kaufman, Cowan, Morell Statement—


Finally, here is a repost of my article about a claim of virus isolation. Dr. Kaufman does a step-by-step analysis of a quote from a typical study that purports to describe how SARS-CoV-2 was isolated:

—Dr. Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the virus exists—

The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”

But what if the virus doesn’t exist?

People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.

“Isolation” should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”

I took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to Dr. Andrew Kaufman [3], and he provided his analysis in detail.

I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 — June 2020)” [4].

First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.

The researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number of compounds. The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not occurring.

They set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the soup are dying. THAT’S THEIR KEY “EVIDENCE.” This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.

There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.

Finally, the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus” they never isolated. “We didn’t find it, we don’t know anything about it, but we sequenced it.”

Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:

STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”

KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”

STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”

KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”

STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”

KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”

STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”

KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”

KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO) [5]. Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”

STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols…”

STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”

KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”

STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”

KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”

—end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis—

My comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not occurring.

Dr. Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr. Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that “the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.

And finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of “the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 300 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [6]) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?

The answer is no.


SOURCES:

[1] https://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com/sovi/

[2a] Isolation, characterization and analysis of bacteriophages from the haloalkaline lake Elmenteita, KenyaJuliah Khayeli Akhwale et al, PLOS One, Published: April 25, 2019. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215734 — accessed 2/15/21

[2b] “Extracellular Vesicles Derived From Apoptotic Cells: An Essential Link Between Death and Regeneration,” Maojiao Li1 et al, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, 2020 October 2. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2020.573511/full — accessed 2/15/21

[2c] “The Role of Extraellular Vesicles as Allies of HIV, HCV and SARS Viruses,” Flavia Giannessi, et al, Viruses, 2020 May

[3] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/

[4] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

[5] https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home.html

[6] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/covid/


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The Pandemic Planners: Conversations in the Dark

by Jon Rappoport

September 15, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

A SIGN LIGHTS UP: JULY 10, 2017.

Do we have a launch date set for the pandemic?

Looks like December of 2019, or January 2020.

I’m still confused about the virus.

There is no virus.

Why not?

We’re selling A STORY ABOUT A VIRUS—that’s a winner. That’s all we need.

How do we sell it? Won’t people catch on right away?

Are you kidding? Our people will develop a diagnostic test for the virus that isn’t there. How they build that test determines the outcome. It’ll register positive much of the time, along with some negatives. And here’s the important point: the technical details involved in constructing the PCR test are very dense. Even many professionals don’t understand them. It’s like speaking Icelandic to a South American tribe in the rain forest. Don’t worry, we’ll get away with it.

And the lockdowns? The quarantines?

They’ll come, trust me. The Chinese will start the ball rolling. They have the force to pull it off. They’ll lock down a few cities right away. Wuhan, for example. Maybe 60 million people. Overnight. It’ll be a startling development. The UN and the WHO will climb on board quickly and praise China for its handling of the crisis. China will become THE MODEL for the rest of the world. Other countries will follow suit.

Who is going to step forward in the West? Italy?

Yes. They’re next in line for big lockdowns. The Chinese regime has enormous clout with the Italian government. So Italy will become the first beachhead in the attack on the West.

America is the key. If they join the club, we’re in. How do we convince Trump to play along?

He’ll cave. We’ll feed him a computer projection of deaths in America. Something huge, like two million. Trump isn’t good with details. He’ll buy in.

But the lockdowns will decimate the US economy. Trump’s whole presidency rests on economic success.

He’ll give in to Fauci and Gates.

Why?

Because he doesn’t have the stomach for this battle. He won’t go up against the medical experts. He’s bold in some respects, but on this issue, he’s a wobbler. That’s our calculation.

The news media are ready?

With wall to wall messaging, 24/7. PANDEMIC. Cases. Deaths. There are no dissenters among them. We’ve got that all sewed up. Medical experts pontificating on-air. Fear.

Where will the deaths come from?

We’ll relabel and repackage all sorts of traditional lung infections and count them as “pandemic deaths.” We’ll label anything we want to “pandemic.” We’ll be counting the elderly, who die for all sorts of reasons. We’ll use treatments that kill the elderly.

I’m nervous about this. Will it really sell? I mean, how can they construct a PCR test if they don’t have a virus, if there is no virus?

It’s easy, trust me. We’ve done it before. Anyway, your part of the operation comes after the lockdowns. You’ve made a few hundred million doing business with China. You’ll be able to make a few BILLION soon, buying up distressed properties after the lockdowns gain traction.

I’m going to bankroll social justice movements. Protests, riots, burning, looting, assault, in major cities across America. It’s a terrific issue, and it’ll be a major distraction from the lockdowns.

I know all about that. I’m copied in on every aspect of the operation. Just make sure all those riots are focused on racism and police brutality. We don’t want any leakage about inner city gangs and drug cartels and banks.

No problem. The gangs distribute drugs for the cartels, the cartels wash their money through banks. It’s a tight fit. Nobody is going to prosecute the gangs as continuing criminal enterprises. That’s off the table completely. The protests will have no mention of gangs as a problem. We’ve got the foot soldier protestors all sewed up. Hell, some of them ARE gang members. Are you sure the 2020 presidential election is in the bag?

Biden is our man. We need someone with SEVERE cognitive deficits in the Oval Office. Only a completely dim bulb, mentally speaking, would sign some of the orders we’re going to put in front of him. Harris is being prepped to step in if Biden has to resign for health reasons. She knows enough of the score. She won’t try to go off on her own. Give her a whiff of the presidency and she’ll do somersaults for us.

Here’s the thing. Forget about Trump. The real danger is all the people who support him. The millions of deplorables out there. They still think the American Republic and freedom are on the table.

I agree. They’re a problem. But there are solutions. We’re going to put a label on all their heads. ‘They’re very bad people. They all want to destroy the government.’ That’s how we’re going to paint them. Our modelers believe there are enough Americans who are beholden to the federal government…they’ll view Trumpers as a serious threat. Very serious. We’ll have that issue covered.

Is the QAnon op going to keep going?

We’ll keep it going forever. After Trump leaves the White House, we’ll have people saying he’s still president and he’s arresting every high-level evil person in the world.

BLACKOUT

The lights come back up.

Wow, THAT was a hell of a dream—who are you?

Agent Jones. Federal Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

What are you doing in my bedroom?

I’ve been recording your dream.

What?

We have it all. Two pandemic planners. Why were you dreaming about them?

I have no idea. Who—

It reflects a certain state of mind. A dangerous mindset. Why weren’t you dreaming about a television show or a garden in the forest? Have you been reading conspiracy literature?

I read newspapers. WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?

Something in you must have triggered this dream. A psychological predisposition. A latent dissatisfaction.

I’m not dissatisfied.

That was not the dream of a normal man. Thoughts and dreams lead to conclusions, and conclusions lead to action.

I once had a dream about jumping off a building. I haven’t jumped.

Not yet.

Why are you here?

Checking up on a potential defector.

A defector from what?

What the rest of us know.

I’m like everybody else.

Everybody else doesn’t dream about a plan to make billions of dollars buying up distressed properties.

Is that a joke? I wouldn’t know where to start, even if I had that ambition. Which I don’t.

You start from where you are. A man with his thoughts. We need to explore your life thoroughly. You may have connections you’re unaware of. A distant relative. A casual acquaintance. Something may have slipped through the cracks.

I have to be at the office in a few hours. And I want to speak with a lawyer.

About your dream?

About you. This situation. Am I being charged with a crime?

No.

Then I’m free to—

You’re not free. Your status is “suspended, depending on outcome.”

What status?

Who told you Kamala Harris would cooperate in a plot to subvert the government?

No one.

Where did you get the idea that Biden is disabled?

Nowhere. It was a just a statement a man in my dream made. I wasn’t speaking at all. I was watching and listening.

I wouldn’t advise trying to deny responsibility. I didn’t have the dream. Your neighbor didn’t. You did.

Do you dream?

No.

Never?

The kind of dream you had was aberrant. What makes you think there’s going to be a pandemic and it’s some sort of plan?

Why do you care about my dream?

Because some fantasies are dangerous.

And some are meaningless.

The key is the content. You were constructing a conspiracy scenario. Do you have an opinion about viruses?

No.

I’m going to leave now. By tomorrow, you’ll wonder whether this conversation actually took place. If you reject my existence, think of this event as a warning from your subconscious.

What are you going to do?

You’re on a list.

Meaning what?

A more thorough background investigation. Increased surveillance.

Even while I’m asleep?

Listen carefully, sir. You’re always asleep. In the dream, you woke up for a minute or two.

BLACKOUT


Exit From the Matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The Galactic Tribunal grills Bill Gates

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

We don’t know how Bill Gates was transported to a Galactic proceeding, and we only have fragments of the interrogation. But because no court on Earth would deliver justice, those distant powers intervened.

A judge read an unusual opening statement, which apparently is presented before every trial:

“In our high civilization, we’ve fulfilled the ancient prophecy, THE LOST SHALL BE FOUND. There is no barrier between those of us who live here in the flesh and those most close to us who’ve departed this life. We experience joy with them in dimensions far greater than this. Why then do we bother to conduct these trials? Because we also fight for justice. We will not turn our backs on that ideal.”

FRAGMENT 1: …Mr. Gates, it’s time for the truth. How long did you plan the pandemic before launching it?

Why am I forced to tell the truth?

Because this is a place for conscience.

Will you torture me if I decline?

We’ll keep asking until you answer honestly, no matter how long it takes.

Who can I pay? I’m rich.

Denied. We don’t want money.

How about land? I can deliver you a large colony on Earth. A whole country. Maybe even Europe.

No.

I could create a medical system for you that would dazzle your minds. On Earth, the Nobel Committee should give me the Prize for my efforts, but they don’t have the balls. Did Melinda put you up to kidnapping me? I demand my rights…

FRAGMENT 2: …The pandemic narrative was simply the occasion for establishing a worldwide dictatorship?

We needed a pretext. There were many meetings over the course of 25 years. We decided early on that a medical story was our best option. It appears to be politically neutral.

On Earth, the modern religion is science.

Exactly. So if we could get out in front of that trend and create a medical scenario of threat and impending destruction, we could apply just enough coercion to control the population.

But you weren’t conducting real science.

We were inventing the appearance of it. We had so-called experts in our camp. They would take the lead. The masses have no way of distinguishing science from fantasy…

FRAGMENT 3: In the planning stage prior to the declaration of a pandemic, what were the vital elements?

I’m most proud of our messaging organization. We had the news media. We had government leaders. We had recognized medical experts. But you see, in that type of operation, you can’t afford defections. The seal has to be tight. Ours was. Over the years, through money, through influence, in some cases through threats, we had built a network of unity and compliance.

You’re proud, you say?

Why, yes. It took work. Much work. You don’t lock up all the key sources of information on a planet overnight.

So it was the message you were aiming for, rather than the truth.

Of course. There was no pandemic. We had to make it seem there was. Convincingly.

You were heading a sales force.

Exactly. The whole idea was to make the buying compulsory…

FRAGMENT 4: …You had planned the lockdowns?

Years in advance. Then, at the right moment, China pulled the trigger, setting the example. When my World Health Organization praised China, other nations followed suit and imprisoned their populations.

So the Chinese regime’s lockdowns were definitely part of the advance planning.

Yes. That was crucial. The government there wasn’t fully on board with the globalist future we set our sights on. China is, first and foremost, for China. But we had enough cooperation from them to make it work.

And social media? You had them on your side from the beginning?

That was easy. Their leaders are willing and compliant. They’re afraid to go against our medical consensus. And they’re globalists. In the long run, they want world government, too.

As do the controlled media?

Yes. Putting the right people in place in the news industry has been a decades-long proposition.

You wanted a planet that was a prison.

Yes.

And the pretext again?

The scenario? There is a deadly virus sweeping across Earth, and in order to stop it, we have to lock down countries…and then inject everyone with a vaccine.

But there was no virus?

Among us, there were arguments on both sides of that question. But if it existed, it certainly wasn’t any more dangerous than the flu. We had to make it seem very, very dangerous.

Through pronouncements to that effect.

Yes…

FRAGMENT 5: …You want depopulation?

We have to have it. You can’t run a planet when 8 billion people are living on it. It’s impossible. The vaccine is the weapon. But not just the COVID vaccine. Vaccines before it and those coming in the future.

And all those deaths will be laid at the door of pandemics?

Yes. “The virus did it.”

And you’re willing to murder all those people.

Hard choices dictate the outcomes of events. A better life for some, rather than a terrible life for all. That’s my choice.

Are you listening to yourself, Mr. Gates?

I always listen to myself.

FRAGMENT 6: …I want to return to the messaging effect you created. It’s difficult for us to understand how you managed it…why so many leaders in their fields went along with your false science.

It was a combination of things. Many people are true believers. Scientists talk, and they believe. Other people wanted money. We paid them money. Certain resistant politicians were threatened. We set an example with several assassinations. As you build a consensus, you reach a threshold where the tide is in your favor. Then people ride it with you, out of fear of excommunication if they don’t. Media leaders were given to understand that the pandemic was the gateway into a global governance system. And the system was inevitable.

What about Anthony Fauci?

He’s a little man, a striver, who wants to be accepted in elite circles. I recruited him a long time ago…

FRAGMENT 7: …You yourself have given much money to media companies.

I praised their work, gave them money, and they showed loyalty to me. You see, life runs on stimulus-response. I make use of that principle on a worldwide basis. My colleagues and I provide calculated stimuli, and the population, in all areas of life, responds as we predict.

You view humans as machines.

Well, they are.

But you and your colleagues aren’t.

We’re of a higher order. We can stand outside stimulus-response and operate the levers.

As you sit here, Mr. Gates, you don’t believe you’re confessing to crimes. You’re proud of what you’ve done.

Of course.

Listen to me carefully now. We know enough of what you are, in order to pass sentence on you. But we know a great more than that. Like every individual, you have a greater dimension. We could show it to you. We could compel you to experience it. If we did, you would come apart at the seams. You would understand your own evil actions in a way that is undeniable.

…I don’t like the sound of that. What are you talking about?

I think you have an inkling of what I mean. The experience we could compel you to have is one you yourself, on your own, will come face to face with, some day. Not in your present life. Afterwards, at some point. There is no telling when, but it will happen.

You mean some supposed higher power will force it on me?

No, Mr. Gates. It’s much worse than that. You’ll force it on yourself.

Why would I do that?

Because although you’ve embraced crime and destruction, somewhere inside yourself you also understand The Good. And in that understanding, you can potentially live in joy and peace. As anyone can.

You’re not making sense.

You’re beginning to see I am making sense.

I don’t like this.

Why would you like it, given what you’ve made of your life and lives of others?

You’re trying to pass off some kind of religious nonsense on me.

Far from it. We don’t have churches in this place, Mr. Gates. We don’t need faith in things unseen. We’ve already seen.

I want to go home.

You will.

You’re not going to kill me?

So you can blame us for what you’re doing to yourself?

You’re insane.

We’ve opened up just a bit of light here for you.

Why?

Because although we’re a just people and don’t need justice for ourselves, we will exercise it on behalf of others, who’ve been harmed.

This is ridiculous.

Even the worst murderers have it in themselves to become good. They can cross that bridge.

No they can’t.

We can hear voices, Mr. Gates. Many voices are telling us to put you to death.

Then why don’t you? Go ahead.

We’re doing something much worse. We’re imposing this sentence…YOUR FATE IS IN YOUR OWN HANDS. That sentence is real. It carries weight. As you’ll discover.

It’s meaningless.

Take Mr. Gates away. He’s about to become ill. Take him home…

You don’t have the courage to kill me. You’re cowards.

I’ve heard that refrain from hundreds of murderers in this court…they all want a quick death. We don’t give it to them…

Kill me.

Take him home.

You did something to my mind.

We heard your confession of crimes. Mass imprisonment and murder.

Then destroy me. I throw myself on the mercy of this court.

Goodbye, Mr. Gates.

This is just a dream.

If it is, it’s your dream. You have to ask why you’re presenting it to yourself…


Exit From the Matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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