“Stop arguing about the existence of the virus”

by Jon Rappoport

May 20, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

The headline of this article has become a battle cry among some “alternative journalists,” activists, lawyers, and doctors.

As my readers know, I’ve devoted considerable space, over the past two years, to presenting evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is a scientific fairy tale, a con, and the virus doesn’t exist.

So when I hear this battle cry, I’m motivated to mention a few significant points.

Let me start by countering the claim that debating the existence of the virus is wasting time.

Here’s a shocker. A person can do more than one thing at the same time. For example, he can expose/oppose the toxic vaccine. He can expose the murderous COVID treatments (ventilators, sedatives, antiviral drugs). He can expose using simple flu-like illness to create fraudulent COVID case numbers.

And he can ALSO expose the fact that the virus has never been isolated (discovered) or sequenced.

So highlighting the non-existence of the virus doesn’t rule out dealing with other vital concerns.

This may come as a surprise, but it’s even possible to go to court to challenge a vaccine mandate, while ALSO arguing elsewhere that the virus doesn’t exist. I know. Amazing, right?

Those alarmed by “the virus doesn’t exist” also say: making that statement leaves us open to being called whackos, and leaves us unable to convince people that all our other criticisms of the pandemic are true.

I would counter that in two ways. Millions of people already believe we’re whackos, even those of us who take a sacred blood oath that the virus is real.

And second, people going against the grain, when their vital issue is still in the budding stage, are always called nuts. Trust me, there was a time when criticizing vaccines made people look like total whackos in the eyes of the general public—and it took decades of fighting the consensus to bring that criticism into the open, where many people saw the truth about jabs.

Here’s another fun fact. The entire medical cartel thrives on the insane proposition—launched with fervor more than a hundred years ago—that people suffer from thousands of distinct diseases, each of which is caused by a single germ, which must be treated by a toxic drug and prevented by a toxic vaccine.

It is this great lie that that has killed millions upon millions upon millions of people.

Therefore, the very real question about the existence of viruses in general is more than a weird preoccupation.

Next, those who claim, “OF COURSE viruses exist,” don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. They’re merely PARROTING what they learned in school or what researchers baldly claim in studies.

“Well, all virologists can’t be wrong.”

Yes, Virginia, they can all be wrong. Just as vaccinologists can all be wrong about “the remarkable safety and efficacy of vaccines.”

Some of the OF COURSE VIRUSES EXIST people are new to the way blogs and videos work. They’ve never encountered commenters in any great numbers before. So when a few dozen committed people suddenly tell them they should examine their premises more carefully and consider what really goes on in virology labs, these OF COURSE people are annoyed and irritated. They don’t like being challenged on basic issues. They don’t like feeling that the floor might suddenly shift under their feet. So they turn on their arrogance machines.

So be it.

The issue isn’t going away. Nor should it.

Despite growing digital censorship, the internet is still the Wild West in certain respects. People are going to say THE VIRUS DOESN’T EXIST, and VIRUSES DON’T EXIST.

And foundations will shake.

Foundations of the medical cartel, and foundations underlying people’s cherished assumptions.

In any area of human life, there are conflicts between “this is strategy” and “this is the truth.” There always will be.

Trying to shortchange the truth or casually say the truth is a lie doesn’t work.

NO ONE who is reading this article has ever been in a virology lab and witnessed the step by step process of “discovering a new virus.” I find that stunning. And yet all sorts of people are quite ready to assert with great finality that they know all about isolating viruses.

If by chance, someone reading this article HAS actually been in a lab and “discovered a virus,” you can bet your bottom dollar he won’t let you or me in there with a full film crew and our outlier experts asking very pointed questions about each “scientific” move he makes, as he “isolates a virus.”

To which somebody might reply: “Well, I’ve never seen a car being made in a factory, but I drive one with full confidence.”

Yes, but when the “virus discovered in a lab” results in you or someone you love being dosed with a drug or vaccine that maims you or kills your family member, you damn well should want to get into “that factory where the car is made.”

But you can’t. They won’t let you…

…Despite the fact that, as I’ve documented many times, the US medical system kills, by a very conservative estimate, 225,000 people a year, or 2.25 million people per decade. [0]

Chew on THAT for a while.

Here is one of my articles on the subject of virus isolation:

—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 [1], 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)” [2].

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. Human cells, monkey cells, antibiotics, other chemicals, random genetic material.

The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup, because they’re dropped a mucus sample from a patient in the 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. 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.”

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) [3]. 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, and you don’t have an isolated specimen of it?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 375 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [4]) 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:

[0] https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-primary-care-policy-center/Publications_PDFs/A154.pdf

[1] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/

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

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

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


FURTHER READING:

Is the virus real? Steve Kirsch suggests a debate

blog.nomorefakenews.com/2022/01/25/is-the-virus-real-steve-kirsch-suggests-a-debate/


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.

Your mother-in-law isn’t going to refuse the vaccine

by Jon Rappoport

May 6, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

Let’s get one thing straight. I’m not writing for your mother-in-law. I’m writing for you.

Your mother-in-law is still deciding whether to vote for Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan. She thinks J Edgar Hoover is Herbert Hoover.

A few readers have suggested I should make several adjustments, so my work is more “accessible” to the general public.

The general public is a collectivist cheeseball which has been sitting in a frying pan, with the flame set on low, for a very long time.

I published my first article in 1982. I’ve never made any adjustments.

Since then, I’ve only worked one change. I stopped taking assignments from editors. I don’t like them. I’ve always had the crazy notion that if editors want writers to carve away THIS and add THAT, they should write the pieces themselves. There are three reasons they don’t: they can’t write; they’re filled with self-importance; they’re lazy bureaucrats.

For me, writing has ebbs and flows. They depend on me finding a tag-end I like, which I then pull on. The article then takes shape. The tag-end might be a headline I read. It might be some absurd insane sentence uttered by a news anchor. It might be a scene in a dream. It might be an answer to the question, “What would be crazier than the last tag-end I found?”

If I can’t think of a tag, I sit here and stare at the wall and keep thinking. Or I watch a cooking show. Or I go over the five or six pretentious scuzzy reasons doctors deploy when they assure readers the virus exists. Or I fly my Gulfstream to London, where I dine with the Queen, and discuss how non-existent climate change will force us to eat insects for protein. Or I find a medical review admitting that, in 2001, only 18 flu deaths in the US could be traced to a flu virus. Actually, the number is zero. Or I reread the NY Times opinion piece which revealed the three major clinical trials of the COVID vaccines were designed to show the injection could prevent nothing more serious than cough, chills, and fever—after which the Times never mentioned the subject again. Or I consider how fear of the virus and love of the virus and the conviction the virus exists merge like a subconscious nursery rhyme. Or I imagine a time when men and women would have laughed off orders to lock down and would have gone about their lives without a second thought. And THAT’S a tag-end:

JULY 20, 2020. Look at what happened to a great city, to the people of that city, who over several decades were subjected to forms of cultural mind control…and who then became DIFFERENT.

…People turning into caricatures of themselves. In the process, they were ripened for takeover—which is what happened when the fake pandemic was declared.

New York. Once upon a time, I was married to it. No more. But it’s still my city.

I was born there. One of my early memories was looking across 2nd Avenue at a candy store. This was 1943. The candy store no longer sold Fleer’s bubble gum—the best bubble gum—because the latex was needed for the War effort. But the rumor was, they peddled it under the counter for an exorbitant two cents a chunk, with the cartoon inside the wrapper.

When I was 22, after growing up in the suburbs, I moved back to NY and for several years lived among some of the smartest asymmetric people in the world. You could have an argument with the dumbest person in the city and it would be a smart argument. Everyone had opinions, and they could back them up. There was no such thing as political correctness, believe me. If you had uttered the phrase, no one would have known what you were talking about.

New York was a great city. The thing was, no one was proud to BE a New Yorker. That false synthetic layer of goo came much later. In the old days, there was no pose, no artificial front. People had ideas, they had talent, they had survival instincts.

The best jazz musicians in the world lived and played in New York. When a giant like Bud Powell was playing at Birdland, you could get in for a dollar and sit in a hard wooden chair and listen to him until two in the morning. A buck for the greatest pianist in the world.

And now, the city is wrecked and boarded up, and the people are locked in.

Out on the street, the few aimless glazed pedestrians wear masks. They’re not the same people. They’re replacements. Pods.

OVERNIGHT, the people of New York could throw off the whole phony pandemic, not only for themselves, but the world. They could come out of their apartments and go back to work, defying the petty little lunatics like Cuomo and De Blasio. They could open up their restaurants and bars and stack in the customers. They could start building again. They could open wide the libraries and museums and fill the concert halls. They could open up the little groceries to all comers. They could laugh in the face of the public health authorities.

And it would be OVER.

In 1960, that’s exactly what would have happened. And not for some cause. Not for the chance to do a little virtue signaling. Not for the sake of “being a New Yorker.” For survival. For continuing to live their lives, people would have shaken off that slimy fraud Fauci like a five-minute bad dream. A joke played by an idiot.

They would have looked at the screaming lockdown headlines in the newspapers on the corner stand and shrugged and gone on their way. “You’re telling me I can’t walk down the street and listen to John Coltrane at the Jazz Gallery on a summer night? You’re out of your mind.” And the Termini brothers, who owned the club, would have packed the place even tighter than usual, just to thumb their noses at the mayor and his con artists. They would have put in a call to their contact at Democratic Machine headquarters. And it would have been OVER.

No one would have obeyed. Independent scholars would have walked into the 42nd St. library, as they did every day, and gone to the reference desk and asked for manuscripts on ancient Roman law and the Walt Whitman papers and the early maps of the city. The quiet upstairs macrobiotic restaurant on 2nd Avenue would have served supper as usual. The Cedar Bar on University Place would have turned in another raucous night. The Irish bars would have been jammed. A chamber orchestra in Washington Square Park would have performed Vivaldi, with the sounds of traffic from 6th Avenue in the background. Miles Davis would have played two sets at the Apollo. If Ravi Shankar was in town, he would have laid out a few stunning hours of ragas at the Asia Society and adjourned to an East Side apartment to continue on until dawn. No one and nothing would have obeyed a lockdown.

Pandemic? Virus? Get serious.

That New York…where is it? Who are all these flat minds swearing allegiance to medical fakery? Are they passively waiting for gold stars on the blackboard from the teacher?

In the old days, New York had DISDAIN. You didn’t get by with platitudes. You didn’t blithely mouth Left or Right and get away with it. The city was plugged into its own non-stop bullshit detector. What did you have to OFFER? Aimless blabbermouths were consigned to a special circle of Hell.

There was no political PROGRAM. Today’s “New Yorkers” would apparently be afraid to live in a landscape like that. They wouldn’t know which way to turn. They have a desperate need to become slaves to an IDEA. In this case, an idea about a virus.

In the 1960s, concealed by the Vietnam War, the city was undergoing a transformation into a cartoon of itself. That’s when the synthetic notion of “being a New Yorker”—based on nothing—started to take hold.

There were many reasons. The shrinking value of the dollar. Crippling street drugs. Mind numbing leveling television. The raising of children to be targets of advertising and fetish objects in a consumer society. The new New Yorkers were taught that liberal politics were a necessary adjunct of their status. Liberal equaled big government. Messaging from every possible quarter was aimed at turning the people of the city into servants of share and care as defined by government…

Going to doctors and acquiring serial diagnoses of physical and mental conditions was starting to take off as a social trend. The medicines and the vaccines were, of course, toxic. The city was taking in more immigrants than it could handle. There weren’t enough jobs. Desultory schools were steamrollered. Literacy was being destroyed. Even skyscraper architecture was moving away from unique structures like the Chrysler and the Empire State, into functional steel and glass boxes. Signs of the minds.

With people dumbed down enough, they would fall for any con. Any piece of shiny gloss. And it was eventually provided:

New York media covered the rise of New Money in the city as if it were a perfumed cultural signal of a dawning utopia. By the 1970s, envious intellectuals in the city were reading and admiring hyped chronicles of the emerging $$ stars of Manhattan: painters, fashioneers, stock speculators. And yes, Trump. The content of these celebs’ characters was entirely irrelevant. All that mattered was that their hustles were ringing up extraordinary sales in inflated dollars.

And finally, to view how thin and vulnerable new New York had become, and how brainless—when, in 2020, the fake pandemic hit, and lockdowns were announced, the population promptly folded, stayed indoors, went into mask and social distance mode without a whisper of protest.

In short order, the city was made over into abject wreckage, shuttered, obedient, loyal to a psychotic delusion.

In a silly song he recorded long after its internal demise, Frank Sinatra said New York was the city that never sleeps.

Now that’s all it does.

CODA: If the September 11th attacks had happened in 1960, there would have been no need for Billy Joel or the Yankees to rally “all New Yorkers.” The people of the city would have looked at the firemen and cops as human heroes risking everything for other humans. Period. That would have been enough. More than enough. That would have gone deep into souls and minds. Where it counts.

—Entraining minds. The job of the Super-State. Reworking independence into devotion to a synthetic pose of altruism.

But in this phony pandemic, it’s good to be BAD…

I’m not talking about looting and burning. I’m talking about a different type of BAD. Think it through. Figure it out. It’s always there, like a tag-end. You just have to pull on it…


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.

New podcast: The Whole COVID and AIDS Fraud: My 35 Years of Investigation

The complete story for the first time

by Jon Rappoport

May 3, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

The podcast is now up at my substack page. It’s a blockbuster. Four hours (part-1, part-2). The deepest myths of COVID and AIDS—exploded.

Kick in a few bucks, subscribe, and listen to it.

When I began exposing COVID as a complete fraud—right at the beginning, in the winter of 2020—people asked me how I could describe the whole picture of the fake pandemic so quickly.

My answer was: AIDS.

I had done all the heavy lifting back in 1987-88, which resulted in my first book, AIDS INC., SCANDAL OF THE CENTURY.

COVID, in key respects, is a mirror image of AIDS.

Two gigantic scientific and medical frauds.

Now, in the podcast, I’m telling the whole story of my research, how it developed, how I rooted around in the dark, in 1987, and finally found the key clues that broke down the barriers.

I’ve wanted to put all this on the record for years, and now I have.

And in the podcast, I dismantle the deepest frauds of COVID as well.

COVID, scientifically speaking, is a rerun of HIV/AIDS.

The COVID virus story, the test, the case numbers, the treatments, the targeting of populations, the use of “the virus” as a vast cover story to conceal boggling ongoing crimes—it’s all one CONSTRUCTION with connected parts.

For 35 years, I haven’t stopped exposing the medical cartel. And I’ve made it VERY clear, since 1988, that political reporters who want to expose deep political truth MUST understand the titanic medical issues at the root of what’s being done to our world.

The method of analysis I employed and refined in 1987-88 applies today, without changing a single thing. In the podcast, I describe how I arrived at that method.

There are heroes I learned from along the way, and I bring them up in the podcast. They’ve stood firm against storms of attacks from the establishment, and their contributions must not be forgotten.

Starting 35 years ago, my position has been: when I find the truth, I don’t just bite off a piece of it and show it to people.

I lay it ALL out.

I don’t decide what is palatable and what is “too much to expose.” I don’t make that calculation.

This means that certain facts I lay out on a silver platter disturb all sorts of myths and legends and fairy tales that are universally accepted.

So be it.

Ever since I started working as a journalist, in 1982, at the age of 44 (I just turned 84), I took that approach. Dig, keep digging, and report everything I find. IGNORE “NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.”

There is only the choice of whether to hold back or go all the way.

Holding back entangles a writer in “career decisions” and judgments about what “audiences can handle.” When you go that route, you end up cutting your own throat and stifling your own energy.

To me, a good day for a journalist is seeing something big you didn’t know. You found it out and you told people about it. The bigger the better. The more apple carts you upset, the better.

And when it comes to medical apple carts, the shockers are astonishingly profound.

So take a ride with me in this podcast. I’m blowing the cover off the very biggest and deepest myths I’ve found. Including the secret temple of virology.

As always, thank you for your support.

Jon


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.

Vaccines Beneath The Surface

by Jon Rappoport

April 27, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)


(Episode 6 of Rappoport Podcasts — “Kill-Shot Psychiatry, George Carlin, hero Peter Breggin; And the Real Drug War That Is Eating America” — is now posted on my substack. To listen, click here. To learn more about This Episode of Rappoport Podcasts, click here.)


The article below was a small section of my book, AIDS INC., which I wrote in 1987-8. At the time, I decided to take a look at vaccines and see what I could find out about them, because questions were being raised about the possible disease/toxic effects of a relatively new hepatitis-B vaccine, and its possible connection to AIDS.

My ensuing research led me into all sorts of surprising areas. These days, many people are seeing that the official position on vaccines is not the true story. So I thought I would reprint that section from AIDS INC. here.

Since the period of 1987-8, MUCH more has come to light about vaccine safety and efficacy. I’ve made no attempt to update my findings in a systematic way. They stand on their own, and reveal that, in the historical record, much has been lost, forgotten, and misplaced.


For years, critics on the fringes of medicine have pointed to problems with vaccines. It is generally acknowledged that, given to people whose immune systems are compromised, they can be immunosuppressive.

And from time to time, stories have surfaced about vaccines which have been dangerously contaminated, as a result of the manufacturing process.

We are taught to believe that untoward reactions to vaccines are rare, and that there has never been a question about the overwhelming success of all vaccines at all times, wherever they have been used.

The recent history of vaccines, though, shows a much more spotty record than one might think. In fact, it raises very disturbing questions about what vaccines do and don’t do to the human body. Here is simply a series of excerpts from several authors on the subject. It is a quite different slant on vaccines.

“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977

“The principal evidence that… vaccines are effective actually dates from the more recent period, during which time the dreaded polio epidemics of the 1940s and 1950s have never reappeared in the developed countries; and measles, mumps and rubella, which even a generation ago were among the commonest diseases of childhood, have become far less prevalent, at least in their classic acute forms, since the triple MMR vaccine was introduced into common use.

“Yet how the vaccines actually accomplish these changes is not nearly as well understood as most people like to think it is. The disturbing possibility that they act in some other way than by producing a genuine immunity is suggested by the fact that the diseases in question have continued to break out even in highly immunized populations, and that in such cases the observed differences in incidence and severity between immunized and unimmunized persons have tended to be far less dramatic than expected, and in some cases, not measurably significant at all.

“In a recent British outbreak of whooping cough, for example, even fully immunized children contracted the disease in fairly large numbers; and the rates of serious complications and death were reduced only slightly. In another recent outbreak of pertussis, 46 of the 85 fully immunized children studied eventually contracted the disease.

“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune, according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella, a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.

“Finally, although the overall incidence of typical acute measles in the U.S. has dropped sharply from about 400,000 cases annually in the early 1960s to about 30,000 cases by 1974-76, the death rate remained exactly the same; and, with the peak incidence now occurring in adolescents and young adults, the risk of pneumonia and demonstrable liver abnormalities has actually increased substantially, according to one recent study, to well over 3% and 2%, respectively.” Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.

“Of all reported whooping cough cases between 1979 and 1984 in children over 7 months of age – that is, old enough to have received the primary course of the DPT shots (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) – 41% occurred in children who had received three or more shots and 22% in children who had one or two immunizations.

“Among children under 7 months of age who had whooping cough, 34% had been immunized between one and three times…

“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.

“A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987.

“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

“While 70-80% of British children were immunized against pertussis in 1970-71, the rate is now 39%. The committee predicts that the next pertussis epidemic will probably turn out to be more severe than the one in 1974/75. However, they do not explain why, in 1970/71, there were more than 33,000 cases of pertussis with 41 fatal cases among the very well immunized British child population; whereas in 1974/75, with a declining rate of vaccination, a pertussis epidemic caused only 25,000 cases with 25 fatalities.” Wolfgang Ehrengut, Lancet, Feb. 18, 1978, p. 370.

“… Barker and Pichichero, in a prospective study of 1232 children in Denver, Colorado, found after DTP that only 7% of those vaccinated were free from untoward reactions, which included pyrexia (53%), acute behavioral changes (82%), prolonged screaming (13%), and listlessness, anorexia and vomiting. 71% of those receiving second injections of DTP experienced two or more of the reactions monitored.” Lancet, May 28, 1983, p. 1217

“Publications by the World Health Organization show that diphtheria is steadily declining in most European countries, including those in which there has been no immunization. The decline began long before vaccination was developed. There is certainly no guarantee that vaccination will protect a child against the disease; in fact, over 30,000 cases of diphtheria have been recorded in the United Kingdom in fully immunized children.” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 58.

“Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is controversial, as the side effects have received a great deal of publicity. The counter claim is that the effectiveness and protection offered by the procedure far outweigh the possible ill effects… annual deaths, per million children, from this disease over the period from 1900 to the mid-nineteen seventies, shows that from a high point of just under 900 deaths per million children (under age 15) in 1905, the decline has been consistent and dramatic. There had been a lowering of mortality rates of approximately 80% by the time immunization was introduced on a mass scale, in the mid-nineteen fifties. The decline has continued, albeit at a slower rate, ever since. No credit can be given to vaccination for the major part of the decline since it was not in use.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 63.

“… the swine-flu vaccination program was one of its (CDC) greatest blunders. It all began in 1976 when CDC scientists saw that a virus involved in a flu attack outbreak at Fort Dix, N.J., was similar to the swine-flu virus that killed 500,000 Americans in 1918. Health officials immediately launched a 100-million dollar program to immunize every American. But the expected epidemic never materialized, and the vaccine led to partial paralysis in 532 people. There were 32 deaths.” U.S. News and World Report, Joseph Carey, October 14, 1985, p. 70, “How Medical Sleuths Track Killer Diseases.”

“Despite (cases) in which (smallpox) vaccination plainly failed to protect the population, and despite the rampant side-effects of the methods, the proponents of vaccination continued their attempts to justify the methods by claims that the disease had declined in Europe as a whole during the period of its compulsory use. If the decline could be correlated with the use of the vaccination, then all else could be set aside, and the advantage between its current low incidence could be shown to outweigh the periodic failures of the method, and to favour the continued use of vaccination. However, the credit for the decline in the incidence of smallpox could not be given to vaccination. The fact is that its incidence declined in all parts of Europe, whether or not vaccination was employed.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, pp. 6-7.

“Smallpox, like typhus, has been dying out (in England) since 1780. Vaccination in this country has largely fallen into disuse since people began to realize how its value was discredited by the great smallpox epidemic of 1871-2 (which occurred after extensive vaccination).” W. Scott Webb, A Century of Vaccination, Swan Sonnenschein, 1898.

“In this incident (Kyoto, Japan, 1948) – the most serious of its kind – a toxic (vaccine) batch of alum-precipitated toxoid (APT) was responsible for illness in over 600 infants and for no fewer than 68 deaths.

“On 20 and 22 October, 1948, a large number of babies and children in the city of Kyoto received their first injection of APT. On the 4th and 5th of November, 15,561 babies and children aged some months to 13 years received their second dose. One to two days later, 606 of those who had been injected fell ill. Of these, 9 died of acute diphtheritic paralysis in seven to fourteen days, and 59 of late paralysis mainly in four to seven weeks.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization, Athone Press, University of London, 1967.

“Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“At a press conference in Washington on 24 July, 1942, the Secretary of War reported that 28,585 cases of jaundice had been observed in the (American) Army between 1 January and 4 July after yellow fever vaccination, and of these 62 proved fatal.” Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“The world’s biggest trial (conducted in south India) to assess the value of BCG tuberculosis vaccine has made the startling revelation that the vaccine ‘does not give any protection against bacillary forms of tuberculosis.’ The study said to be ‘most exhaustive and meticulous,’ was launched in 1968 by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) with assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia.

“The incidence of new cases among the BCG vaccinated group was slightly (but statistically insignificantly) higher than in the control group, a finding that led to the conclusion that BCG’s protective effect ‘was zero.'” New Scientist, November 15, 1979, as quoted by Hans Ruesch in Naked Empress, Civis Publishers, Switzerland, 1982.

“Between 10 December 1929 and 30 April 1930, 251 of 412 infants born in Lubeck received three doses of BCG vaccine by the mouth during the first ten days of life. Of these 251, 72 died of tuberculosis, most of them in two to five months and all but one before the end of the first year. In addition, 135 suffered from clinical tuberculosis but eventually recovered; and 44 became tuberculin-positive but remained well. None of the 161 unvaccinated infants born at the time was affected in this way and none of these died of tuberculosis within the following three years.” Hazards of Immunization, Wilson.

“We conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to test the efficacy of the 14-valent pneumococcal capsular polysaccharide vaccine in 2295 high-risk patients… Seventy-one episodes of proved or probable pneumococcal pneumonia or bronchitis occurred among 63 of the patients (27 placebo recipients and 36 vaccine recipients)… We were unable to demonstrate any efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia or bronchitis in this population.” New England Journal of Medicine, November 20, 1986, p. 1318, Michael Simberkoff et al.

In the spring of 1955, Cutter Labs started selling their standard polio vaccine. The vaccine was infective, and 200 cases of polio resulted among vaccinees. Of these, there were eleven deaths. About 100 cases of paralysis resulted. JR

“But already before Salk developed his vaccine, polio had been constantly regressing; the 39 cases out of every 100,000 inhabitants registered in 1942 had gradually diminished from year to year until they were reduced to only 15 cases in 1952… according to M. Beddow Baylay, the English surgeon and medical historian.” Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Reusch, Civitas Publish ers, Switzerland, and Swain, New York, 1983.

“Many published stories and reports have stated, implied and otherwise led professional people and the public to believe that the sharp reduction of cases (and of deaths) from poliomyelitis in 1955 as compared to 1954 is attributable to the Salk vaccine… That it is a misconception follows from these considerations. The number of children inoculated has been too small to account for the decrease. The sharp decrease was apparent before the inoculations began or could take effect and was of the same order as the decrease following the immediate post-inoculation period.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, vol. 20, no. 1, 1987.

“So far it is hardly possible to gain insight into the extent of the immunization catastrophe of 1955 in the United States. It may be considered certain that the officially ascertained 200 cases (of polio) which were caused directly or indirectly by the (polio) vaccination constitute minimum figures… It can hardly be estimated how many of the 1359 (polio) cases among vaccinated persons must be regarded as failures of the vaccine and how many of them were infected by the vaccine. A careful study of the epidemiologic course of polio in the United States yields indications of grave significance. In numerous states of the U.S.A., typical early epidemics developed with the immunizations in the spring of 1955… The vaccination incidents of the year 1955 cannot be exclusively traced back to the failure of one manufacturing firm.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980, vol. 19, no. 4, “Story of the Salk Vaccine (Part 2).”

“Suffice it to say that most of the large (polio) epidemics that have occurred in this country since the introduction of the Salk vaccine have followed the wide-scale use of the vaccine and have been characterized by an uncommon early seasonal onset. To name a few, there is the Massachusetts epidemic of 1955; the Chicago epidemic of 1956; and the Des Moines epidemic of 1959.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980 vol. 19, no. 4.

“The live (Sabin) poliovirus vaccine has been the predominant cause of domestically arising cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States since 1972. To avoid the occurrence of such cases, it would be necessary to discontinue the routine use of live poliovirus vaccine.” Jonas Salk, Science, March 4, 1977, p. 845.

“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, “Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,” 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.

“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella (measles) vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in the LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.

“Adminstration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules… ”

The above quotes reflect only a mere fraction of an available literature which shows there is a need for an extensive review of vaccination. It is certain that undisclosed, unlooked for illness occurs as a result of vaccines. A certain amount of this sort of illness is immunosuppressive in the widest sense, and some in a narrower sense (depression of T-cell numbers, etc.). When looking for unusual illness and immune depression, vaccines are one of those areas which remain partially hidden from investigation. That is a mistake. It is not adequate to say, “Vaccines are simple; they stimulate the immune system and confer immunity against specific germ agents.” That is the glossy presentation. What vaccines apparently often do is something else. They engage some aspect of the body’s immune-response, but to what effect over the long term? Why, for example, do children who have measles vaccine develop a susceptibility to another more severe, atypical measles?

Official reports on vaccine reactions are often at odds with unofficial estimates because of the method of analysis used. If vaccine-reaction is defined as a small set of possible effects experienced within 72 hours of an inoculation, then figures will be smaller. But doctors like G.T. Stewart, of the University of Glasgow, have found through meticulous investigation, including visits to hospitals and interviews with parents of vaccinated children, that reactions as severe as brain-damage (e.g., from the DPT vaccine) can be overlooked, go unreported and can be assumed mistakenly to have come from other causes.

—end of 1987-8 chapter—

These days, my comments on the destructive effects of vaccines and their completely needless use are much more aggressive, owing to further research, and discoveries about so-called “viruses,” the great fairy tales that rank with the green cheese of the moon.


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.

CDC/FDA smoking gun of smoking guns

They confess: they had no virus when they concocted the test for the virus; they “contrived” a model by pretending to find what they wanted to find; it’s called a self-fulfilling prophecy

This is the con and the crime that drove millions of lives, and economies, into ruin

by Jon Rappoport

March 9, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

Quiz: If an agency of the federal government revealed they had no basis for constructing a diagnostic test that was used on millions of people; but the test was the cornerstone of a national lockdown; and the lockdown drove the economy off a cliff; and destroyed millions of lives; however, NOW, that agency says, they DO have a basis for the test; would you buy what they’re selling?

If your answer is yes, you’re in good company; the company I call Blind, Ignorant, Denialist, Hoaxing Journalists.

The CDC issued a document that bulges with devastating admissions.

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 this minute.

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] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs 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, it’s unbelievable, right? 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 unreliable results. THE PCR TESTS USED CONTRIVED SPECIMENS OF THE VIRUS WE DIDN’T HAVE.

BUT, don’t worry, be happy, because NOW, the CDC and the FDA say, they really do have actual 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.

Here, once again, I report virology’s version of “we isolated 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.” 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.

Shocker: pandemic end game; Humpty Dumpty falls off the wall; cover is blown

by Jon Rappoport

February 24, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

Two breaking developments—

File the first one under: WHEN YOU SPIN A CONVENTIONAL FAKE NARRATIVE, YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHERE YOU’RE GOING TO END UP.

Iceland cancels all COVID restrictions. Not because case numbers are dropping, but because, as I’ve written several times, once you (falsely) accept the existence of a new spreading virus, you’re committed to a narrative which can only end with EVERYONE INFECTED—and THAT’S called herd immunity.

Done. Finished. Forget vaccines, masks, distancing, lockdowns. Just live. Live out in the open.

Get a load of this:

Reuters: “Iceland will lift all remaining COVID-19 restrictions on Friday…the Ministry of Health said on Wednesday.”

“’Widespread societal [immune system] resistance to COVID-19 [meaning the development of natural immunity] is the main route out of the epidemic,’ the ministry said…”

“’To achieve this [immunity], as many people as possible need to be infected with the virus’…”

BANG. BOOM. POW.

The Ministry of Health just announced the end game, in alignment with the (false) assumptions which have been in place since January of 2020. Again, once you say a virus is on the loose all over the world, you’re committed to the only response there is:

GET INFECTED. DEVELOP NATURAL IMMUNITY. GO ABOUT YOUR LIVES.

That’s how the story wraps up. Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall and no one could put him back together again. You tell the virus tale, and that’s your predestined conclusion.

Of course there is no new virus, and the whole virus story is a fraud, as I’ve proved numerous times over the past 2 years. I’ve already described, in detail, all the ins and outs of the con called COVID.

But here, with Iceland, we see the beginning of sane national responses within the context of a completely insane scenario.

THAT’S what we’re looking at. Nothing more, nothing less.

“Well, we pretended there was a new unstoppable virus…and so here we are, exactly where we knew we would be. Get infected. Develop herd immunity. That is all. Goodbye.”

And all the major medical liars slowly back away from the general population…very slowly…hoping no one notices what just happened…hoping no one realizes this wrap-up was always in the cards…hoping no one will say: YOU RUINED AND KILLED UNTOLD MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AND YOU KNEW ALL ALONG THIS WAS GOING TO BE YOUR CLIMAX: “GET INFECTED.”

Shocking story number two—

The health/life insurance company tidal wave is breaking.

Well, of course it is. Who did you think was going to be left holding the bag for all the unreported injuries and deaths stemming from the COVID vaccines?

These life insurance companies employ actuaries, and these smart guys predict the number of claims they’re going to pay out…and THAT’S how they decide what the policy holders must pay…in order for the companies to maintain their profits…

Except, the actuaries had no idea what was going to happen.

They didn’t realize how many injury/death claims were going to be filed, once the COVID killshots were unleashed on the world.

But NOW THEY KNOW.

Former NY Times reporter, Alex Berenson: “Welt, a major German newspaper, just ran an interview with Andreas Schofbeck, a board member for a Bavarian insurer called BKK Provita.”

“By itself, BKK Provita has 120,000 members. But it is a much larger consortium of so-called BKK insurers that are affiliated with German companies and collectively have 10.9 million members.”

“Here’s how Schofbeck described the [injury] claims in the BKK [company] database, according to one of the reporters who interviewed him:…‘a violent warning signal’.”

Schofbeck is reacting, with great alarm, to all the vaccine injury claims that have been filed—looking at data from 10.9 MILLION policy holders.

In other words, it’s OVERWHELMING.

Another Humpty Dumpty just fell off the wall and broke into pieces.

Obviously, health/life insurance companies around the world are looking at similar horrific numbers.

What are these companies going to do? Just sit there and suck up their huge losses?

No. For starters, they’re going to blame the vaccine manufacturers. That’s already quite interesting, even if news outlets aren’t reporting it. Because, as Edward Dowd, former portfolio manager for BlackRock, has been saying, WALL STREET will take notice.

430 to 144. Can you guess what those numbers represent? The all-time high peak of the Moderna share price, and the most recent closing price, as of this writing.

BANG.

61 to 46. The first number is the high, over the past year, for the Pfizer share price, and the second number is the most recent close, as of this writing.

These insurance-vaccine company developments were also inevitable, from the beginning of the fake pandemic.

Anyone who knows the real history of vaccines would have seen it in a second.

You rapidly shoot up the whole world with a new vaccine, and the injury-death numbers are going to go through the roof.

Insurance companies don’t like to be left holding the bag and absorbing the consequences of both the jab and the lies the vaccine front men have been telling.

Insurance companies are wired up to, heavily influence, and control all sorts of politicians and bureaucrats and public health officials. You can bet your bottom dollar these companies have been reading the riot act to their government puppets.

“You [FDA] morons…you’re supposed to be protecting the public from dangerous drugs and vaccines. And now people all over the world are dropping like flies from the COVID shot, and those people are our POLICY HOLDERS.”

“What did you want us to do? For chrissakes, we work for the pharmaceutical companies.”

“We’re not interested in excuses. We want money. Lots of it, to make up for our losses.”

“Don’t look at us. We don’t do bailouts. Go to Treasury, or the President.”

“The President can’t even find his way from the shower to the bedroom in the White House residence.”

“Talk to nurse Jill or Susan Rice…”

And word of these conversations leaks out to Wall Street.

Look for new bailouts, and a plethora of cover stories to explain why insurance companies are suddenly inhaling hundreds of billions of government dollars (or more.)

Cover stories only the most naïve fools will believe.

Serial liar Tony Fauci may be able to tap dance with his media partners every Sunday morning on the news talk shows; but when giant insurance companies want him to pay for his sins, that’s a whole different story.

Tony could become yet another Humpty Dumpty…

All we need now—among all the insurance companies in the world—are five or six OUTRAGED big-time insurance execs to step out of the shadows with their hair on fire, completely fed up with the grand cover-up of vaccine injuries, and talking their heads off.

Not whistleblowers. Siren sounders.

Let CDC/WHO try to brush THAT off.


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.

Does HIV exist? An explosive interview

by Jon Rappoport

February 17, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

Before we get to Christine Johnson’s interview, a bit of background.

My first book, AIDS INC., was published in 1988. The research I engaged in then formed a foundation for my recent work in exposing the vast fraud called COVID-19.

In 1987-88, my main question eventually became: does HIV cause AIDS? For months, I had blithely assumed the obvious answer was yes. This created havoc in my investigation, because I was facing contradictions I couldn’t solve.

For example, in parts of Africa, people who were chronically ill and dying obviously needed no push from a new virus. All their “AIDS” conditions and symptoms could be explained by their environment: contaminated water supplies; sewage pumped directly into the drinking water; protein-calorie malnutrition; hunger, starvation; medical treatment with immunosuppressive vaccines and drugs; toxic pesticides; fertile farm land stolen by corporations and governments; wars; extreme poverty. The virus cover story actually obscured all these ongoing crimes.

Finally, in the summer of 1987, I found several researchers who were rejecting the notion that HIV caused AIDS. Their reports were persuasive.

I’m shortcutting a great deal of my 1987-8 investigation here, but once HIV was out of the picture for me, many pieces fell into place. I discovered that, in EVERY group supposedly at “high-risk” for AIDS, their conditions and symptoms could be entirely explained by factors that had nothing to do with a new virus.

AIDS was not one condition. It was an umbrella label, used to re-package a number of immunosuppressive symptoms and create the illusion of a new and unique and single “pandemic.”

Several years after the publication of AIDS INC., I became aware of a quite different emerging debate going on under the surface of research: DOES HIV EXIST?

Was the purported virus ever truly discovered?

And THAT question led to: what is the correct procedure for discovering a new virus?

The following 1997 interview, conducted by brilliant freelance journalist, Christine Johnson, delves into these questions:

How should researchers prove that a particular virus exists? How should they isolate it? What are the correct steps?

These questions, and their answers, reside at the heart of most disease research—and yet, overwhelmingly, doctors never explore them or even consider them.

Johnson interviews Dr. Eleni Papadopulos, “a biophysicist and leader of a group of HIV/AIDS scientists from Perth in Western Australia. Over the past decade and more she and her colleagues have published many scientific papers questioning the HIV/AIDS hypothesis…”

Here I’m publishing and highlighting excerpts from the interview. Technical issues are discussed. Grasping them is not the easiest exercise you’ve ever done, but I believe the serious reader can comprehend the vital essentials.

Christine Johnson: Does HIV cause AIDS?

Eleni Papadopulos: There is no proof that HIV causes AIDS.

CJ: Why not?

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

… CJ: Didn’t Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo [purportedly the co-discoverers of HIV] isolate HIV back in the early eighties?

EP: No. In the papers published in Science by those two research groups, there is no proof of the isolation of a retrovirus from AIDS patients. [HIV is said to be a retrovirus.]

CJ: They say they did isolate a virus.

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

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

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

… CJ: My understanding is that high-speed centrifugation is used to produce samples consisting exclusively of objects having the same density, a so-called “density-purified sample.” Electron microscopy is used to see if these density-purified samples consist of objects which all have the same appearance — in which case the sample is an isolate — and if this appearance matches that of a retrovirus, in terms of size, shape, and so forth. If all this is true, then you are three steps into the procedure for obtaining a retroviral isolate. (1) You have an isolate, and the isolate consists of objects with the same (2) density and (3) appearance of a retrovirus. Then you have to examine this isolate further, to see if the objects in it contain reverse transcriptase [an enzyme] and will replicate when placed in new cultures. Only then can you rightfully declare that you have obtained a retroviral isolate.

EP: Exactly. It was discovered that retroviral particles have a physical property which enables them to be separated from other material in cell cultures. That property is their buoyancy, or density, and this was utilized to purify the particles by a process called density gradient centrifugation.

The technology is complicated, but the concept is extremely simple. You prepare a test tube containing a solution of sucrose, ordinary table sugar, made so the solution is light at the top but gradually becomes heavier, or more dense, towards the bottom. Meanwhile, you grow whatever cells you think may contain your retrovirus. If you’re right, retroviral particles will be released from the cells and pass into the culture fluids. When you think everything is ready, you decant a specimen of culture fluids and gently place a drop on top of the sugar solution. Then you spin the test tube at extremely high speeds. This generates tremendous forces, and particles present in that drop of fluid are forced through the sugar solution until they reach a point where their buoyancy prevents them from penetrating any further. In other words, they drift down the density gradient until they reach a spot where their own density is the same as that region of the sugar solution. When they get there they stop, all together. To use virological jargon, that’s where they band. Retroviruses band at a characteristic point. In sucrose solutions they band at a point where the density is 1.16 gm/ml.

That band can then be selectively extracted and photographed with an electron microscope. The picture is called an electron micrograph, or EM. The electron microscope enables particles the size of retroviruses to be seen, and to be characterized by their appearance.

CJ: So, examination with the electron microscope tells you what fish you’ve caught?

EP: Not only that. It’s the only way to know if you’ve caught a fish. Or anything at all.

CJ: Did Montagnier and Gallo do this?

EP: This is one of the many problems. Montagnier and Gallo did use density gradient banding, but for some unknown reason they did not publish any Ems [photos] of the material at 1.16 gm/ml…this is quite puzzling because in 1973 the Pasteur Institute hosted a meeting attended by scientists, some of whom are now amongst the leading HIV experts. At that meeting the method of retroviral isolation was thoroughly discussed, and photographing the 1.16 band of the density gradient was considered absolutely essential.

CJ: But Montagnier and Gallo did publish photographs of virus particles.

EP: No. Montagnier and Gallo published electron micrographs of culture fluids that had not been centrifuged, or even separated from the culture cells, for that matter. These EMs contained, in addition to many other things, including the culture cells and other things that clearly are not retroviruses, a few particles which Montagnier and Gallo claimed are retroviruses, and which all belonged to the same retroviral species, now called HIV. But photographs of unpurified particles don’t prove that those particles are viruses. The existence of HIV was not established by Montagnier and Gallo — or anyone since — using the method presented at the 1973 meeting.

CJ: And what was that method?

EP: All the steps I have just told you. The only scientific method that exists. Culture cells, find a particle, isolate the particle, take it to pieces, find out what’s inside, and then prove those particles are able to make more of the same with the same constituents when they’re added to a culture of uninfected cells.

CJ: So before AIDS came along there was a well-tried method for proving the existence of a retrovirus, but Montagnier and Gallo did not follow this method?

EP: They used some of the techniques, but they did not undertake every step including proving what particles, if any, are in the 1.16 gm/ml band of the density gradient, the density that defines retroviral particles.

CJ: But what about their pictures?

EP: Montagnier’s and Gallo’s electron micrographs…are of entire cell cultures, or of unpurified fluids from cultures…

—end of interview excerpt—

If you grasp the essentials of this discussion, you’ll see there is every reason to doubt the existence of HIV, because the methods for proving its existence were not followed.

Worse yet, it appears that Robert Gallo and Luc Montagnier, the two scientists credited with the discovery of HIV—as well as other elite researchers—were aware they weren’t employing correct methods.

And so…as I’ve reported, there is every reason to doubt and reject the existence of the COVID virus, SARS-CoV-2, since correct large-scale electron microscope studies have never been done. And by large-scale, I mean: attempting to find and photograph the virus in a cohort of, say, 1000 people who are supposed to be “pandemic patients.” I’m NOT talking about one or two electron-microscope photos accompanying a study.

But even that isn’t the end of the story. There is one further potential limiting factor in virus research. I became aware of it about a year ago. Analysis of electron microscope findings is fraught with difficulty and doubt. Are scientists actually looking at what they think they’re looking at in these photos? I refer readers to the work of neurobiologist Harold Hillman, who concluded that researchers were, for the most part, looking at artifacts, not actual cells or entities within cells. Another suppressed controversy.

After more than 30 years of investigating medical research fraud, my general conclusion is, the deeper you go the stranger it gets. Or to put it another way, the worse it gets.


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.

Email from a poisonous moron

by Jon Rappoport

February 9, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

It was perfect. Made my day.

Aside from all the cursing and accusing, this moron claimed I had no right and no standing to DISBELIEVE scientists who work in ultra-secret labs where they assert they’re discovering new viruses.

I have no standing because I don’t have the degrees.

Of course. A degree is an automatic certification of competency and honesty.

PhD. MD.

Only another person with those credentials can step up to the plate and question the experts in their labs.

THAT premise and that idea produces fascists.

That moronic and venomous notion produces fascists who are willing to fight to maintain the Police State.

That desperate clinging to AUTHORITY is why the war for freedom is forever.

That level of stupidity is why Fauci, whose sole reason for being is—“I’m on television”—can attract an army of worshipping idiots—and can lead the nation into a trap where slavery is supposed to be salvation.

The poisonous moron who sent that email is a representative of all the rubes and yokels and marks who are ready and willing to cancel centuries of the struggle for freedom.

The poisonous moron who sent the email would go to her DOCTOR, the competent one, and if he said she should have her leg cut off, she would salute and say, “How soon can we schedule it?” And she would be proud.

I salute her. She is willing to expose herself as a portrait on the wall; a portrait we can point to and say, “This is the key. This is what MKULTRA looks like. This is self-made mind control.”

Given the chance, she would have trained Hitler Youth.

Of course, she doesn’t know that. She thinks she stands for truth and justice.

And that’s the brilliance of it. The reversal. The day suddenly turns to night. Making life into death.

Every human has experienced this twist, on some level. Every human has found himself a buck private at the back of a line toting a gun and taking orders and—is then jolted into: WHAT AM I DOING HERE? HOW DID I GET HERE? I’M ON THE WRONG SIDE.

But some are never jolted. They march on. They keep obeying the commanders who have the DEGREES and the CREDENTIALS.

They say, “I’m marching to save lives.”

They say, “If you doubt the commanders, you’re killing the innocent.”

But they’re the ones firing their weapons. And holding the syringes and the needles.

And I want to say to my readers: For the past two years, many of us have been exposing the whole rotten edifice of the medical cartel as it’s NEVER been exposed before. And millions of people are seeing the rot and the collapse and they’re smelling the stench rising from the earth.

And so WE CAN EXPECT, and should even take as a positive sign, little fascists jumping out of their holes and accusing us OF HAVING NO STANDING AND NO RIGHT to disturb the edifice.

Would I prefer this struggle to be conducted like a charm school? I would prefer an entirely different world. But we’re here now with this one, so we fight.

More little creatures will try to stick their fangs in us; but we don’t back down. We use their blind stupidity as fuel for our fire.

In that regard, nothing had changed in the ten-thousand year war for freedom.

The more I write, the more I’m liking this woman who sent the poisonous email. She’s got will power. She’s burning her taper closer and closer to the end, where it turns into a large ash and falls off into the void. And then…silence. Great darkness.

I believe we’ve all been there as well.

How did we take ourselves out of that place?

Each person has his own answer.

I side with those who realize they invented their way into the Dark, and they’ll invent their way out of it.

Regardless, when the taper has burned out, you really don’t want to be stuck with the idea that only an official credentialed authority can reach down and give you what you need.

That’s unworkable.

Because, who shows up with official certifications? The screw and rack turner in the Spanish Inquisition. The mass murderer of peasants in 1930 Russia. The Jew and Gypsy killer in 1943 Germany. The Land Reform killer in 1950 China. The killer of millions with heralded medical drugs.

The de facto Medical President who locks down a whole country and carpet-bombs the economy and fronts for an injection that maims and murders.


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.

What is a disease without a cause?

by Jon Rappoport

February 4, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

A disease without a cause is a business model.

You make a list of symptoms. You say many people are experiencing this cluster of symptoms.

You give a label to this list of symptoms. A name. The name of a disease or a disorder or a syndrome.

Over time, through promotion, the name sticks.

You fund research to find the cause of the disease. This research can stretch out for a long time. Possibly forever.

Meanwhile, you develop and sell drugs to treat the disease. Money.

You keep reporting “progress” on finding the cause. “At first, we looked for environmental factors. But now we know the basis is almost certainly genetic. We’re homing in on the specific genetic dysfunction…”

Over time, what’s forgotten is this: is there really a single disease with a single cause?

And think it through; if you can’t verify a single cause, you don’t have a disease. You just have the original list of symptoms.

Alzheimer’s would be an example. Microcephaly (babies born with small heads and brain damage) would be another. The disease names seem to carry the day. “Well, if there’s a name, a label, there must be a unique disease.”

Wrong.

If there’s a name, a label, there is money.

Money for research, for drug development, money from drug and vaccine sales.

Researchers are tasked with making the list of symptoms seem compelling. “We’ve done brain studies. There are remarkable similarities among patients who have Disease X. As you can see from these scans, in Figure A…”

Still, no dice. No verified cause. Therefore, no justification for using the disease label or claiming you have found a unique disease.

But it doesn’t matter, because the business model is working well.

Here’s another example. ADHD. Has a single cause been found for this list of symptoms? No. Therefore, there is no laboratory test for ADHD. No test to confirm the diagnosis of ADHD. Because a test would detect the cause is present in the patient—and there is no cause to look for.

In fact, if you examine the complete catalog of all so-called mental disorders—about 300 of them—there is no defining lab test for ANY of them. Not a one. Each so-called disorder is simply a list of behaviors which have been clustered together by committees of psychiatrists and given a name. ADHD. Bipolar. Clinical depression. And so on.

But it doesn’t matter. Because the business model is working. Money is pouring in. Drugs are selling.

Let’s take this even further. A hundred years of Rockefeller medicine have “established” that there are thousands of separate and distinct and unique diseases, disorders, and syndromes. And each one has a cause. For many diseases, the cause “hasn’t been discovered yet.” Meaning: “We’re writing fiction. We have no justification for calling these diseases, diseases.”

For many other diseases, researchers claim, the causes have been found. The most popular type of cause? A virus.

A virus that had never been seen before. A virus that was “discovered” in a lab.

A lab—as I’ve discussed in depth—that lets in no outsiders, no truly independent observers, to see, in detail, what’s actually going on.

For that reason, and several others, there is no solid reason to believe these viruses, these causes are actually being discovered. Are actually real.

Which leaves us with thousands of lists of symptoms.

But there is always a business model. The full Rockefeller model is worth trillions of dollars. More dollars every day.

The drugs and the vaccines are the $$$ payoff.

I’ve spent decades demonstrating their toxicity.

Here’s a very interesting medical trick. A criminal trick. The researchers say a brain disorder called ABC exists but they haven’t found the cause yet. A parent has a child with severe problems and takes him to the doctor. The doctor pronounces a diagnosis: “Yes, your boy has ABC.”

The parent goes away and does some research. The list of symptoms for ABC could be the result of a vaccine. In fact, the boy developed his severe problems quite soon after vaccination.

She goes back to the doctor and says, “I think my son was damaged by the vaccine.”

The doctor says, “That’s impossible. Your boy is suffering from ABC. And you see, we’ve done studies of boys with ABC, and many of them were never vaccinated. So when you say the cause of your boy’s ABC was a vaccine, we’ve ruled that out.”

The parent doesn’t know what to do.

Of course, the trick is, ABC was never proved to be a unique disorder in the first place. It’s really the NAME of an unproven disorder. The studies the doctor is referring to are completely irrelevant.

ABC is a disorder without a proven cause. Therefore, it is no disorder at all. It’s just a list of symptoms.

The parent’s boy has many of those symptoms. He acquired them—and the damage he suffered—from a vaccine. If you wanted to put a name to what the boy has, call it what it is: vaccine damage.

Not ABC.

Part of the business model for ABC is: “We use that disease label so we can avoid having to pay out huge compensation-dollars for damage caused by a vaccine.”

If the impact of this trick isn’t getting through to you, let me give you a grossly exaggerated analogy.

Engineers claim there is a phenomenon called River Floundering. It is unique but the cause hasn’t yet been found. The basic symptom is: boats on rivers develop the propensity to sink.

Joe takes his boat out on a river. Overhead, a bridge collapses and destroys his boat. Joe barely escapes with his life. After six months, he emerges from the hospital and sues a number of parties.

But he loses his case. In court, experts testify that his boat was suffering from River Floundering. That’s why it sank. Many studies of Floundering show bridges-collapsing did not occur when “the sinking happened.” Therefore, the collapsing bridge was not the cause of Joe’s boat’s disorder, River Floundering.

What is a disease without a cause?

A business model.


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.

My bottom line on the existence of the virus, its isolation and sequencing

by Jon Rappoport

February 3, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

What proof would I accept? What sort of proof would convince me that SARS-CoV-2 exists?

Suppose, for example, a study described how researchers actually DID separate a virus from all the material surrounding it in their cell-soup in the lab?

Would that be enough?

And the answer is no.

Why?

Because I don’t trust studies based on research conducted in elite labs where no independent outsiders are allowed. And that’s the situation, when it comes to purported virus isolation.

These labs are like the famous bunkers where key government officials are taken, in the event of a massive attack against the country.

Try getting in off the street.

And who are these researchers in the super-secret labs? To put it another way, what sort of establishment do they represent?

Is it a clean establishment with a track record of honesty? Or is it a cartel with a criminal history?

If it’s a cartel, why should I accept the “scientific methods” of these researchers or their honesty?

As my long-time readers know, I’ve spent decades exposing lies and crimes of the medical cartel. Chapter and verse. (For example this: Medical weapons of mass destruction)

When it comes to vital issues that mean the difference between life and death—drug/vaccine-fueled destruction of human life; mistreatment and errors in hospitals; faked disease case and death numbers; inaccurate, meaningless, and deceptive diagnostic tests; the fabricated existence of a whole range of phony diseases and disorders and syndromes; the true numbers of medically caused deaths—medical authorities have been lying and sliming their way out of accountability for MANY decades.

And all this doesn’t touch on the history of public health declarations of epidemics that have turned out to be duds.

Nor does it include the overall history of Rockefeller medicine, which is based on the fatuous notion that there are thousands of separate and distinct diseases, each one of which is caused by a germ that must be treated by a profit-making drug.

Nor does it include the history of vicious suppression of innovative treatments developed by individuals who’ve worked outside the mainstream.

Therefore, suspicion is warranted. Is absolutely necessary. And “suspicion” is a vast understatement.

I refuse to trust the researchers who simply claim they’re isolating viruses.

When it comes to the so-called basic building blocks of MANY so-called diseases—which ARE “the viruses”—all the discovery-research HAS BEEN conducted by insiders in their off-limit labs. Without independent witnesses. Without educated witnesses who can watch and question each and every step of “the accepted method” for isolation of new viruses.

Frankly, you would have to be crazy to accept anything coming out of these insider-club labs.

So NO. I don’t accept such findings.

Before I describe how outsiders SHOULD be allowed to witness and participate in secret lab work, let me give you two quotes to consider.

They come from decidedly mainstream and elite editors of elite medical journals. These editors have read and explored and probed and lifted the fake cover from published medical material for decades. Material they themselves have published. Therefore, these are CONFESSIONS.

ONE: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)

TWO: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)

Suspicion is warranted. It’s absolutely necessary. And again, “suspicion” is a vast understatement.

More than a year ago, I mentioned how virus-isolation research—if the word “research” applies at all—should be done.

And I issue this now, as a challenge, to the entire insider-club of virologists, all of whom claim their established method of finding and sequencing new viruses is scientific and rigorous:

Let’s have a film crew on site. As you work. In your lab. Looking over your shoulders and recording every move you make.

And with the film crew, let’s have several knowledgeable, outside, independent researchers. People whom you would ordinarily refuse to give the time of day. People who are insightful. Possibly, people like Dr. Stefan Lanka, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Tom Cowan.

As the film crew works, and as you conduct and describe your step-by-step “isolation” of a new virus, these outsiders can stop you at any moment and question you. In depth.

“Why did you just do that?” “Why didn’t you record that step?” “Explain that answer you just gave me. It makes no sense.” “Exactly what did you just withdraw from the solution in the dish, and how do you know what it was?”

This is not a public relations exercise or an educational documentary for medical students. This is REAL. This is research about your research. No holds barred.

You give a slippery answer to a question; you evade with a vague generality; you try to pull rank; you get nailed to the wall. On film.

THIS is the procedure I want.

All the way from start to finish. Including the so-called sequencing of the “new virus.”

And then we would know a great deal more about what you’re actually doing and not doing in your labs. In the absence of what I’m proposing and demanding, THERE IS NO REASON TO ASSUME THE PROCESS OF VIRUS-ISOLATION IS LEGITIMATE.

Virologists, your work affects every human on Earth. Profoundly. To see this, all a person has to do is look around him these days, at what is called “COVID.” It proceeds from your so-called discovery of SARS-CoV-2.

I view you virologists as I would view the court magicians and soothsayers and high priests who surrounded and advised the leaders of tribes and nations in ancient times.

Those “experts” huddled with the leaders in their very private rooms and spun stories and predictions, and recommended strategies to deal with supposed ongoing and looming crises.

And then the leaders took actions that affected the lives of all the people.

So it is now. With you virologists.

So my demands are entirely within bounds. If you have a shred of honesty, and if you stop and think about it, what I’m demanding is prosaically simple:

You account for every step you take. In real time. Where you work. Right there, you submit yourselves to the detailed scrutiny of independent outsiders.

That’s my bottom line.

And I challenge any scientist, analyst, investigator, doctor, researcher, reporter, alt. reporter who says what I’m demanding is not necessary. You’re wrong. You’re dead wrong.

You either haven’t thought things through, or you’re lying.

Someone is going to tell me what I’m demanding, as proof, is impossible. It would never happen. “They” would never let it happen. They would never let independent outsiders into their holy labs.

You think I don’t know that?

If outsiders can’t get into their labs, what does that tell you?

And someone will say, “We just have to rely on the best evidence we have.”

No we don’t. Because the best available evidence is no evidence.

In a vast sea of death-dealing medical lies, a sea that has existed for more than a hundred years (actually much longer), if experts tell you they’re discovering viruses in labs you can’t enter, and they say you must believe them, and you buy that…

I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon. Full cash only, no payments.

Here it is: Virologists are saying and writing they’ve found a purple man with pink hair and green lips and four arms living a thousand miles under the surface of a planet in the next solar system over. And he causes disease.

Then they’re saying, “Prove us wrong.”

On top of that, they’re saying, “You can’t watch us work while we discover such creatures.”

Conclusion: the purple man doesn’t exist.

Virologists, text me when you’ll let my people into your lab.

Until then, get lost.

Dear reader, the elephant in the room is trust, not data.

When it comes to the “discovery of viruses,” there are no reliable data. We, on the outside, are told that what happens behind locked doors is irrefutable. Period.

We’re told we just can’t understand what the pros are doing. The problem is our lack of knowledge, our lack of training.

We’re the peasants toiling in the valley. Our better, the baron, is up in his castle on top of the mountain. He’s planning our lives, he’s taking care of us.

Sure. Of course. Uh-huh.

Sounds familiar. It’s pretty much the history of the world.

Or it was, until people who came before us finally staked out a territory called freedom, which involved opening locked doors and finding out what lay behind them.

Consider a parochial example: the mafia. They, too, plan behind closed doors. They concoct methods of carrying out crimes. They record their profits. Then, finally, a prosecutor announces, “We were able to get into their books. We saw the details. We made arrests.”

I want my independent accountants to get into the virologists’ books. But not after the fact. I want my people to BE there while the virologists are creating the books, entry by entry, in the lab.

“Why did you just make that entry? Where did your conclusion come from? Who are you trying to kid? You’re just fabricating this stuff? You know, that’s called RICO. That’s a RICO case. Continuing criminal enterprise. They’ll send you away for a long time…”

And all of a sudden, the high and mighty virologist, who’s been able to con the world with his hustle, who knows how to come off sounding superior in every way, feels a dent in his armor. A big dent. He smells his own blood.

And he starts talking.

He wants to make a deal. He’ll roll over on his colleagues. He’ll expose the whole sham.

“…You don’t understand. It’s the money. It’s all about the money. Where it comes from. We have to do this kind of work. Otherwise, we starve. They cut us off. I know the people on the funding committees. I’ll give you their names. They take orders, too. The whole thing is a system. I can draw you a map. I can’t go to jail. I have a family. I’m paying eighty grand a year just to send my kids to college. There’s the mortgage, and the cottage on the Cape…”

The whole bluff POPS and deflates, and we begin to hear words we understand, at last. The words of confession. The down-to-earth sordid truth.

There was never a towering mystery in the castle on the hill.

There was just the passing of the buck. The soiled buck. From hand to hand.

The “science” was the front.

“…You see, it works this way. The pharmaceutical companies have to have new viruses. For every fake virus, they develop a real drug and a real vaccine. It’s marketing. That’s what they’re doing. That’s what they’ve always been doing. This is much bigger than anyone realizes. I’m just a little fish. The big boys run the whole show. They pay the Congress and the FDA. They pay everybody…”

He keeps talking. He can’t stop. He’s way past “isolation, purification and sequencing.” They’re in his rear-view mirror. Now he’s fighting for his freedom from prison. Now he’s telling the truth.

And the ever-present storm clouds over the valley where we peasants toil are blowing away. The air is fresher.

We’re breathing easier.

The big-cheese baron is really a shrunken little man—when he takes his perp walk in chains.


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.