MAY 17, 2011. There are many myths written by humans that describe the gods. Whether these stories contain grains and pieces of history is up for debate.

What is central, however, is the characterization of the gods as powerful, and the humans as less powerful. This is so obvious it hardly seems mentioning.

The Prometheus tale is one of the more interesting accounts, because this Titan stole fire from Zeus and gave it to humans. With it, humans were able to fashion weapons, tools, coins…which led to the establishing of civilizations, the arts, etc.

What were humans missing, that they needed this gift from above?

Indeed, in all god myths, there is a sharp division between what the gods can do and humans can do.

Depending on which myths you read, humans were missing intelligence, ethics, freedom…

But there is a simpler and more profound way of looking at this situation. In all god stories, humans decided to answer the question: how was the world brought into being? The answer? The gods or god), of course.

This power was expanded to mean: the gulf between gods and humans was all about CREATIVE POWER.

Humans decided that they were weak and deficient in this respect. The gods had a monopoly.

Strange that, in modern times, a school of psychology was never founded on that split—using it as the basis for describing humans’ negative state of mind.

Because it’s right there. In all human stories about the relationship between gods and themselves, you find it. The gods have all the creative power, humans have none.

That wasn’t a red flag?

That wasn’t a reason for investigating this curious attitude?

That wasn’t a perfect starting point for a new psychology?

Well, it wasn’t. Mainly because it was too real, too obvious, too important. It was, potentially, too liberating. And societies weren’t about liberation. They were about control. What better way to distance humans from their own creative power than to cede it all to invisible gods, whose minions on Earth were an elite priest class?

Remember, Prometheus was punished for giving fire to the human race. He was chained to a rock, where a bird would gnaw on his ever-regenerating liver every day.

And Lucifer, another related mythical invention, which, in Latin, means light-bearer, or carrier of light, went through a similar exercise. Except, Church fathers decided to make him into a hideous countenance—all because he (if you adjust the details) tried to bring creative power back to humans…

It’s absurd—it’s a human rendering of ceding all creative power to gods and calling the reclaiming of that power a crime.

Talk about self-imposed mind control. This one is the gem of gems.

If god myths described gods as the only beings who had hands, and humans as hand-less, well, the absurdity would have been clear…when humans looked at what was at the ends of their own arms.

But actually, it’s the same with creative power. Humans tell stories about gods having all the creative power? Are you kidding?

This should tell you something about the degree of effort it took for humans to deny their own creative fire.

Massive effort.

It’s really the ultimate cover-up and cover story.

And until science took over and brought its own curious forms of arrogance and control, the antithesis to “the gods have all the creative power” was magic.

That was the one place where a few humans tried to assert their inherent power.

Magic and art.

The Roman Church employed artists for two reasons. To flesh out, in visual form, their bizarre cosmology, and to capture the creative spirit of art, bottle it, and dominate the people who practiced it.

The true “neurosis” of the human race centers around the creative impulse and creative power. It’s all there for anyone who wants to see it.

But people still have a problem with it. They persist in inventing new and ever-more bizarre stories about beings and gods who have the ultimate creative force.

They think their stories are more permissive and gentle than the old Church versions. But it’s still self-imposed mind control.

The circus goes on. Scientists are, of course, getting into the act, with their maybe-could-be-possible speculations dressed up as “potential genetic breakthroughs.”

A 2003 Sunday Times piece began: “A creativity gene that evolved about 50,000 years ago was the spark that kindled the development of the modern mind…”

In 2009, the New Scientist weighed in with this headline: “Artistic tendencies linked to ‘Schizophrenic gene’…”

The modern myths employ genes as gods. It’s still out of our hands. It’s all in the DNA.

Sure it is.

Anything to distance ourselves from the obvious: we create the gods in our own image.

And it keeps working, along as we forget that our own image is really one of unlimited creative power.

Chew on that one for a while.


Visit the site, sign up for the email list and receive free articles, and order a copy of my e-book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, in pdf or Kindle format.




MAY 17, 2011. Well, it’s actually vaccine world.

I’ve written many articles about the so-called outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics of the last 25 years—SARS, bird flu, West Nile, Swine Flu… The stats show these illnesses, at best, were duds. They never spread to a fraction of the extent predicted.

And was there ever prediction! Everybody and his cousin got in on the act. Doctors, public health agencies, political leaders, conspiracy researchers. Franky, to blow my own horn a little, I was one of the people who put this crap to bed. I raked the fear mongers over the coals and showed, from a number of angles, why the predictions were based on no firm evidence at all.

But the mainstream epidemic mongers did accomplish one goal. They took the opportunity to hammer the global population over the head with the idea that WE ALL MUST GET VACCINATED.

In some countries, alas for them, it didn’t work. People caught on the to the basic scam.

However, the PR never stops. In one small example, the governor of Washington state, last week, signed into a law a measure that makes it necessary for parents (who want to opt out of vaccinating their kids) to first visit a health practitioner, who is now duty bound to provide information about vaccines. This appointment has to precede even the action of claiming a religious or philosophical exemption for children.

The medical strategy is to keep up relentless repetition about the need for and value of vaccination—and these fake epidemics providethe opportunity in spades.

You should know that.

The mindless PR campaign also provides citizen fools, who think they’re quasi-doctors and scientific elitists, with the chance to spout off about vaccination as a duty of every responsible parent. Typical boomer nonsense.

However, it does work, because peer pressure is a strong force—and so parents who are on the outside looking in, and don’t want to vaccinate their kids, are thought of as crazies. Dangerous crazies, who are exposing their own children, and other children in the community, to illness.

Many PR campaigns have this component. They may not succeed in all their goals, but they do define two basic groups—the normals and the nuts.

The normals (android types) look at the nuts and build up resentment toward them. And the nuts feel oppressed.

It’s called a squeeze play.

During the centuries of Roman Church domination, it was called excommunication.

From a purely political angle, it’s quite ingenious, this vaccine promotion…because it pretends that, without all the shots, whole populations will fall under the gun of communicable disease and we will all revert back to darker times.

I’ve spent many hours writing and talking about this false premise—how the decline of infectious disease in the West was the result of non-medical factors: basic sanitation, elimination of overcrowding, the rise of the middle class, and improved nutrition.

The vaccination PR campaign has the objective of making everyone into a Group. One big group. All of humanity. Interdependent. The Global Village. That’s the vector of attack against our freedom to choose, to vaccinate or not:

No, you can’t do that. You’re part of everyone else, and if you don’t follow our vaccine directives, you’re endangering the collective.”

It works beautifully, once you accept the basic fallacious medical view of disease—one germ, one cause, one remedy, one method of prevention.

This is why, for the last 23 years, I’ve been educating people on the fact that medical propaganda and enforcement is the very best method for attaining long-range political control. The propaganda has no apparent partisan slant. It seems to favor no political cause at all. It has a neutral concerned scientific attitude. Along with, of course, the notion that the experts know everything and we, the children, know nothing.

And since we know nothing, we have no right to exercise our freedom to choose. That freedom stops at the door of “science.”

If you believe that one, you’re cooked. They’ve got you.

Look up the road into the future. Use a little common sense and a little imagination, and you’ll be able to see where this is heading. Unless it’s derailed.

I’m betting it’s not a place you want to be.

That’s why freedom matters.

I know, freedom is now a dirty word. Well, that’s the result of a whole other propaganda op.

They’re connected, believe me. The medical cartel and collectivism. They’re on an elite chessboard.

Two streams coming together.

Here are the best statistics I could find for the phony epidemics I’ve been talking about. These are global, and cumulative:

SARS: 774 deaths.

WEST NILE: 1,088 deaths

BIRD FLU: 262 deaths

SWINE FLU (H1N1): 25,000 deaths.

Keep in mind that the CDC claims ordinary seasonal flu in the US kills 36,000 people a year, and the World Health Organization states that ordinary seasonal flu kills between 300,000 and 500,000 people a year, globally. None of this is called an epidemic.


Visit the site, sign up for the email list and free receive free articles, and order a copy of my e-book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, in pdf or Kindle format.


Another Outrageous Medical Lie

by Jon Rappoport

May 17, 2011

Today, I want to alert you to a staggering medical practice in clinical trials of psychiatric drugs.

It’s called “placebo washout.”

Basically, it works this way. Before a drug company starts to test the effectiveness of a medicine they want to market, they bring together all the volunteers—and they give them a sugar pill.

They tell them, “We’re going to give you a sugar pill.”

After a ten-day period on these placebos, the researchers weed out the people who improved, got better, feel better. They dump them from the ensuing clinical trial. Bye bye.

Of course, they claim there are good reasons for this washout strategy. But the fact is, eliminating these volunteers from the study makes it more likely that the drug will look good.

I’ll explain why this is so in a second. But first, in case you don’t believe placebo washout is a real and widespread practice, I’ll give you two references out of many: RP Greenberg et al, PMID 857037, PubMed-indexed for Medline; and JG Rabkin et al, “Baseline Characteristics of 10-day placebo washout responders in antidepressant trials,” PMID.

It’s real. They give everybody a sugar pill, and then they dismiss all those who got better on it.

Then they get down to the clinical trial. They divide the remaining volunteers into two groups. Those that will receive the drug, and those who will be given another placebo.

Of course, nobody is told which group they’re going to be in. That’s the whole point. Blinding the study enables researchers to compare the number of people who get better on the drug with those who get better on the placebo.

You see, it’s common knowledge that some people will get better on anything. That’s why they test the two groups. They have to prove the drug is performing better than the sugar pill.

General estimates vary on what percentage of people get better on placebos. 35-45%, some researchers say, is a rule of thumb. Sometimes the % is higher.

But wait! The researchers ALREADY kicked out the people who got better on the sugar pill during the 10-day preliminary washout!

That means they’re trying to decrease the beneficial effect of the sugar pill in the clinical trial. Get it? Which means, by comparison, they’ll claim the drug performed very well.

The FDA, which approves all drugs for public use, knows this. Researchers know this. Shrinks know this. Drug companies know this. Even some medical reporters know this.

And yet, the practice goes on.

Placebo washout is on the order of saying, “Yes, we tested the new plane and it performs magnificently. Of course, we didn’t put it into the air. We rolled it across the runway.”

If there are any psychiatrists out there who are reading this, any researchers who want to defend placebo washout, I suggest we set up a radio debate with Dr. Peter Breggin, psychiatrist and author. I’m sure I can arrange it. But I warn you. Buckle up. It’ll be a bumpy ride. We will get into the air on this one.

Another public service of No More Fake News.

Placebo washout. Rigging the game. Stacking the deck. The bigger the lie and the more obvious it is, the harder it is to believe that’s what’s you’re looking at. Until you LOOK.

In my 39 years as a reporter, I’ve come across maybe 100 scandals that could cause a significant sector of the medical cartel to burst into flames and blow away in the wind. This is one of those.

Of course, media, government, and drug corporations make sure such a thing never happens. And when I say media, I’m including publications you’d think would love to watch a really good fire. Turns out they have no stomach for it.

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 emails at