by Jon Rappoport


“I’m going to show you the nuts and bolts of how the fiction called Reality is built.” — Ellis Medavoy, retired propaganda master, interviewed by Jon Rappoport in THE MATRIX REVEALED


March 31, 2012


Two months ago, I introduced my new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED. I wrote about it. Now I want to write about it from a different angle.


People believe that, at some time in the past, things were different. There was once an era of no fraud. But that’s a lie. There has always been a Matrix, and its quality is walking talking pretension.


It pretends to be reality.


And because people don’t assume they can, individually, create their own reality, they accept this one and all its fraud.


The Matrix is a false idol.


And like all idols, it has tremendous esthetic appeal.


People look at it and find harmony and symmetry. But, as it turns out, people SEE HARMONY AND SYMMETRY because that’s how they’re programmed to see.


And because they believe the only other alternative would be imbalance and chaos.


When you study Geometry, you learn how to prove certain statements about perfect shapes. Logic merges with perfection. It’s a system. It’s rather beautiful. The mind and the eye come to the same conclusions.


Geometry is a metaphor for the Matrix. The mind and the eye, the thought process and the perceiving process fit like lock and key. A closed system.


Why create anything different? Why try, in the face of perfection?


Here’s another way to consider the Matrix. It’s resonance. It’s the blending of one consciousness with another, like the ringing of a bell that sends a vibration to another bell that then starts ringing with the same sound. You have many bells, and they’re all tuned to the same pitch. When the first bell is struck, the vibration spreads through the whole array of bells, and this unison of sound is pleasant. The sensation is very pleasant.


And suppose that somewhere there is a machine that makes sure every bell stays tuned to the same pitch. If a bell falls out of line, it’s adjusted.


If you have a million bells, and several hundred decide to change their pitch and rebel, they can. But eventually they will come back to the central sound, because they want to. They want to feel the resonance. And when they do come back, they will be the most devoted advocates for the central sound. Every bell making the same sound will, in fact, be their “political platform.” Resonance, the perfection of resonance will be their crusade.


They will say, “We never opposed the One Sound. We were only angry that every bell wasn’t dedicated to it. And so we will do everything in our power to make sure all the bells believe in that Sound.”


To carry this a bit further, suppose there are many people, working in different fields, on different levels, to make sure that the resonance prevails. And some of those people are actually adding sections to the machine that keeps all bells tuned to the same pitch. They’re making the machine bigger and more inclusive. They’re special people. They’re “insiders.”


In the 1960s, some of the most harsh and violent rebels seemed to be defecting from the central sound. Their friends and supporters thought of them as heroes. The amazing thing is that these rebels are now back. The very corporate-government embrace they wanted to blow apart is now their theme. It’s stunning. They now see that partnership as the end-all and be-all, a force that will bring the world into an equitable harmony of Collectivism. They are now soldiers for the Sound.


My road has been to expose the “special people,” the insiders who are adding sections to the machine that tunes all the bells to the same pitch.


I have brought to light how they build, how they add, how they extend the range of the machine.


In that way, you can see what is actually being done to shore up the Matrix.


And once you do see that, you begin to examine the lock-and-key programming that regulates human perception of the Matrix and seems to make the Matrix into a beautiful and desirable thing.


The central sound, the resonance is part and parcel of the programming, which makes people believe there is no alternative, there is no better way.


The central sound, AS A FORM OF PERCEPTION, makes the fraud that is the Matrix seem like the most beautiful thing imaginable.


That’s the cosmic joke, and on the other side of it is an infinitely greater and richer territory for all of us, for each of us.


Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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, and creativity to audiences around the world.









By Jon Rappoport


MARCH 30, 2012. Is the US military employing a policy that is killing its own soldiers?

Dr. Fred Baughman published an explosive letter in the European Heart Journal (December 29, 2011) that detailed yet another aspect of death by medicine: “Psychotropic drugs and sudden death.” (See also Hundreds of Soldiers & Vets Dying From Antipsychotic–Seroquel published on Nov 7, 2011)

This time it’s American soldiers and fatal heart attacks, brought on by so-called antipsychotic drugs; for example, Seroquel, given for PTSD.

Baughman began his own investigation into four American soldiers who died in their sleep, in 2008. Baughman writes: “…all in their twenties…no signs of suicide or of a multi-drug ‘overdose’…as claimed by the Inspector General of the VA…All were on the same prescribed drug cocktail, Seroquel (antipsychotic), Paxil (antidepressant) and Klonopin (benzodiazepine).”

Baughman calls on the Surgeon General to embargo the use of all antipsychotics and antidepressants in the military.

Baughman’s initial inquiry suggests as many as 247 soldiers have died from cardiac arrest after ingesting these drugs.

He finds the US military has spent, in the last decade, $1.5 billion on antipsychotic drugs, despite the fact that these meds have never been approved for PTSD or sleep disorders.

Baughman writes, “From 2001, US Central Command has given deploying troops 180-day supplies of prescribed psychotropic drugs.”

This is like making each soldier a self-dosing pharmacy.

Finally, Baughman charges that the Army has no reliable record-keeping system to track the uses of these drugs or their harm.

Recently guest-hosting The Alex Jones Show, I interviewed psychiatrist Peter Breggin (www.breggin.com). Several startling points emerged in our conversation. Among them: a decade ago, the Army wouldn’t accept recruits who had taken psychiatric meds, including Ritalin. Now, according to Breggin, the whole policy has been reversed. Soldiers who are heading for the battlefield must agree to take these drugs.

If you were mounting a conscious plan to destroy a military force from within, the widespread prescription of psychotropic drugs would be an obvious choice.

The Army states that diagnosis of psychiatric conditions like depression among troops has escalated. But once you open the door to psychiatry in the services, it’s a fait accompli, because many human behaviors can be arbitrarily classified as mental disorders. As I have documented, over and over again, no labeled mental disorder is based on chemical or biological tests—because there are no such tests. There never have been. It’s pseudo-science. But with increased numbers of diagnoses, the drugs automatically flow. The harmful drugs.

And the pharmaceutical and military view of human beings merges: people are units, they’re bio-machines with identical chemistry, and drugs can be shoved down their throats with no real concern for the consequences.

The drug companies consider the military just another market; and the Pentagon is merely hoping that, somehow, the drugs can help exhausted soldiers maintain performance levels through increasing numbers of deployment assignments.

Here are excerpts from Dr. Baughman’s published letter: “ [I] opened and financed my own investigation into these unexplained deaths. Andrew White, Eric Layne, Nicholas Endicott and Derek Johnson, all in their twenties, were four West Virginia veterans who died in their sleep in early 2008…. All were on the same prescribed drug cocktail, Seroquel (antipsychotic), Paxil (antidepressant) and Klonopin (benzodiazepine) and all appeared “normal” when they went to sleep.

On February 7, 2008, Surgeon General Eric B. Schoomaker, had announced there had been ‘a series, a sequence of deaths’ in the military suggesting this was ‘often a consequence of the use of multiple prescription and nonprescription medicines and alcohol.’ However, the deaths of the ‘Charleston Four’ were probable sudden cardiac deaths (SCD), a sudden, pulseless condition leading to brain death in 4-5 minutes, a survival rate or 3-4%, and not allowing time for transfer to a hospital…

Antipsychotics and antidepressants alone or in combination, are known to cause SCD. Sicouri and Antzelevitch (2008) concluded: ‘…A number of antipsychotic and antidepressant drugs can increase the risk of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death…’

“I call upon the military for an immediate embargo of all antipsychotics and antidepressants until there has been a complete, wholly public, clarification of the extent and causes of this epidemic of probable sudden cardiac deaths.

Pfc. Ryan Alderman was on a cocktail of psych drugs when found unresponsive, dying in his barracks at Ft. Carson, Colo. Sudden cardiac death was confirmed by an ECG done at the scene. Inexplicably, military officials de-classified his death and reversed the cause, calling it instead, a “suicide.” Again I challenge the military to produce the evidence.

In June 2011, a DoD Health Advisory Group backed a highly questionable policy of ‘polypharmacy’ asserting: ‘…multiple psychotropic meds may be appropriate in select iniduals.’ The fact of the matter is that psychotropic drug polypharmacy is never safe, scientific, or medically justifiable. What it [is] is a means of (1) maximizing profit, and (2) making it difficult to impossible to blame adverse effects on any one drug.

From 2001 to the present, US Central Command has given deploying troops 180 day supplies of prescription psychotropic drugs–Seroquel included. In a May 2010 report of its Pain Management Task Force, the Army endorsed Seroquel in 25- or 50-milligram doses as a ‘sleep aid.’ Over the past decade, $717 million was spent for Risperdal and $846 million for Seroquel, for a mind-blowing total of $1.5 billion when neither Risperdal nor Seroquel have been proven safe or effective for PTSD or sleep disorders.

Heather Bresch, daughter of U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, (D-WV) was recently named CEO of WV drug-maker Mylan Inc., that recently contracted with the DoD for over 20 million doses of Seroquel.

Defense Department Health Advisory Group chair, Charles Fogelman, warned: ‘DoD currently lacks a unified pharmacy database that reflects medication use across pre-deployment, deployment and post-deployment settings.’ In essence, through a premeditated lack of record keeping, mandated by law at any other pharmacy or medical office to track potential fatal reactions to mixing prescription drugs, the military is willfully preempting all investigations into the injuries and deaths due to psychiatric drugs.

I call on the DoD, VA, House and Senate Armed Services and House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees to tell concerned Americans and the families of fallen heroes what psychiatric drugs each of the deceased, both combat and non-combat, soldiers and veterans were on? It is time for the military and government to come clean.”

Jon Rappoport






MARCH 29, 2012. Threatening box-office records, this movie about children fighting to the death, beneath the iron fist of a national dictatorship, is a page out of the propaganda op called Arrested Development.


Yes, I have a slightly different take on The Hunger Games. Beyond the setting—high-tech foppish gods imposing an impoverished agrarian economy on a kept population—the movie sells the idea that children can save the world.


Its target audience is children and the inflated egos of their parents, in this everything-is-for-the-magical-kids Boomer fantasy.


Perhaps some of you never knew a time when that fantasy wasn’t blanketing Middle Class America. But I remember things before the great change. So I can tell you “Magical Kids” is a piece of propaganda that caught hold in the late 1960s, and has evolved into a suburban religion.


Kids are now supposed to be looked at as super-precious objects who must be over-protected in every possible way—while they work astonishing miracles and rescue the planet.


The ultimate point of this op is NOT GROWING UP.


Be a kid. Stay a kid.


If you’re already unlucky enough to have become an adult, then discover how to tap into your inner child and regress.




That’s the motto.


It plugs into the whole over-entitled brain-dead self-esteem movement, in which kids are told again and again how special they are, until they sink into a swamp of confusion—because they know, deep-down, that self-esteem is based on what they can actually accomplish. It’s not based on fawning adults hovering over them and trying to insert maniacally positive cliches into their little heads.


My long-time readers know I’ve presented tons of printed and spoken words on the subjects of imagination and creative power. So I’m not downplaying those forces. Not at all. I’m talking about something entirely different here.


Only the kids can save us. The children are our future.” Special, special, special, with whipped cream and a cherry on top.


It may shock some of you to know that, in the early days of television, there were hardly any children on the screen. I recall only one such show—Howdy Doody. A puppet was run by Uncle Bob, who had a sidekick clown named Clarabelle who never spoke, just squeezed the bulb of a horn. We watched it now and then, but we were mostly outside playing games. And we didn’t identify with the kids on the screen, because, God forgive us, we wanted to grow up! What a concept.


There was no Adoration of the Kid. That came much later, when ad agencies realized children were an unexplored consumer market.


What are the oppressed adults doing in The Hunger Games? I guess they’re waiting for the kiddies to bail them out. Why haven’t they risen up en masse and fought to the death against the gods who are sacrificing their offspring in these Games? Wouldn’t you?


Here’s a shocker. Are you ready?


Kids wanting to see other kids on small screens and big screens doing amazing things is NOT a natural impulse.


That may be hard to swallow, but it’s an artificial construct that’s been sold and packaged.


The whole notion of unbelievably magical super-kids sneaked into the culture because their parents were toast at an early age. And THAT happened because those delicate parents were raised with certain cartoonish expectations that never materialized…so it had to be all about the children.


The parents were raised on the totem of consumerism: material things in endless proliferation make you happy. Material things all by themselves are transformative. Oops. That didn’t work out. Advertising, exploding in the 1960s and 70s, made the case, sold the case, and it was a dud. So what was left? A goofy ad-driven idea that kids, without lifting a finger, are automatically little gods and goddesses.




Whatever truth exists about kids with powers was defaced and wiped away by the CARTOON.


If you want to look at this like one big lab experiment, here’s the essence:

Raise a generation of kids who are taught that their Middle Class lifestyle IS the key, the salvation, the prime reality that surrounds them. Those kids grow up, and at about age 30, they’ll start to split apart like a thin porcelain vase made by an amateur. Because they don’t have anything to hold on to. What they were raised in was a bad animated movie. So now they’re depressed and confused. They get married and have kids. Now they try to infuse those little walking talking “hopes for the future” with something desperately extraordinary. With magic. The trump card of all trump cards.


Of course, childhood already has authentic magic in it. But the parents will supersede all that. They’ll shove in their cliched version of it. They’ll paint over the Van Gogh with a doofus on black velvet.


And that’s not workable. Sorry.


But the parents don’t understand that. They don’t have the background to understand it. They just keep going and wind up with the idea that children will not only do well, they’ll actually save the planet. In for a penny, in for a pound.


The secret message of The Hunger Games is: adults can’t have power, only kids can. Guess what? That’s political propaganda of a very serious kind.


And if you were trying to take over civilization and run it from a high perch (just like the elite do in the movie), selling THAT message would be a pretty good strategy, don’t you think?


And here’s another piece of the puzzle. Starting in the 1960s, psychologist-propagandists began selling the notion that parents and kids had to really get together and talk about everything. Lack of communication was horrible, and it had to be remedied. But of course, the premise was vastly over-pumped. So eventually you had parents who were letting their kids into every corner of their adult lives, and finally a perverse kind of exchange was made. The kids became adults and the adults became kids. It was and is grotesque…

…It ends with The Hunger Games… with a few kids — in a loony bin of a society, stringing bows and sharpening knives to go to war with the evil ones who are enslaving their parents — while the parents cluck helplessly from the sidelines.


I’d like to make a movie in which a special little kid is granted, magically, by the wizard president of Harvard, a PhD in psychology—and then she treats her father in an office as his therapist. The father confesses every stupid thing he’s ever done, and the kid regresses dear old dad back to age three, where, suddenly, the father refuses to budge! He wants to stay there forever. Wa-wa-wa! And the longer he stays there and acts like a three-year-old, the older his daughter becomes. She soon ends up a wise crone sorceress of 90, and he’s a squalling spoiled brat who’s hooked on marshmallows and Diet Coke. Or something.


But excuse me, I have to get back to work on my new project: re-writing Moby Dick as an animated feature, with Alvin the Chipmunk playing the White Whale and a six-year-old girl as Captain Ahab. It all takes place in rocket cars on Hollywood Boulevard. The climactic smash-up comes in a giant field where an exposition, Century of the Child, is opening. The gray-faced adults are sticking their ATM cards into machines and handing buckets of cash to their children to buy weapons of mass destruction from friendly space aliens who are here to guide the kiddies in the war to end all wars against the Snouted Oligarchs of Olympus.


Yeah, I’m making jokes about all this, but the promotion of infantilism in society is real. It’s an op, on many levels, and its objective is to weaken the foundations of a nation, until there’s nothing really left, there’s no one at home.


And again, the one big piece of the deal was selling kids on the idea that they really wanted to watch, and read about, other kids doing fantastic things. Believe me, don’t believe me, that’s nonsense. Kids want to run and play and learn and excel and become strong and grow up.


The idea that they want to remain kids forever comes later, when they look back with nostalgia on the good days—AND when “eternal children” is sold to them as a package.


Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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, and creativity to audiences around the world.









by Jon Rappoport



The medical system kills 225,000 people a year. (Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”)


In principle, gene therapy is a medical miracle waiting to happen…after 17 years of trying, scientists are still struggling to make gene therapy work. Complications include rejection of DNA carriers…[and] new genes end up where they shouldn’t, or behave unpredictably.” (“Gene Therapy: Is Death an Acceptable Risk?”, Wired, Brandon Keim, August 30, 2007)


MARCH 28, 2012. In discussing Matrix Science, I’m reminded of Philip Dick’s sensational novel, Lies, Inc. It proposes an invention that can teleport humans light-years to a planet where a better way of life exists. The author then spends the rest of the book deconstructing this utopian legend and revealing the truth and the titanic power-grab that sit behind it.


Then there is HG Well’s 1933 classic novel, The Shape of Things to Come, in which a world exhausted by war and economic collapse turns to a Global State as the only possible solution, after all other solutions have historically failed. This new ruling authority is based on Science. All religions are crushed. Education is designed to teach every child how to become a genius/global citizen. Eventually, the State withers away and is of course replaced by a spontaneous Utopia.


Science/technology: the final all-encompassing answer.


A significant aspect of Matrix propaganda revolves around myths about how human behavior can be transformed. Transformed through advances in biology and chemistry.


Populations are being trained to expect these momentous changes. A major selling point: no effort is required. Just ingest this tablet. Accept this new gene. All will be done for you by experts. Technocrats will design the future so you will fit into it happily.


The technocratic wing of Globalism has clout. It promises management of the planet through science, and who can argue with science? Central Planning will ensure proper benefits for all.


My late friend and colleague, hypnotherapist Jack True, once told me in an interview: “It’s all about managing expectation on a subconscious dream level—the idea is to insert a vision in the population about scientific improvements. Instead of each individual creating his own vision, we’re essentially being told it can be done for us, with care and concern and even love. All we have to do is go along with it. We’re being taught to accept what amounts to a new religion. It’s a fetish. Do you see? We’re buying an elaborate fetish about the future.”


My readers know I’ve spent a great deal of time exposing the destructive dangers of medical drugs, but now I’d like to home in on them from another angle.


We’re so used to their presence, we now take them for granted. Everyone ingests them. Many take them in combinations.


And yes, there are times when you may decide you need one.


But all in all, they are a fetish. A bizarre affectation.


We know about the enormous profits to be made by the pharmaceutical companies. We know these companies exploit and create markets. We know they also invent diseases in order to sell the drugs. We know many people use the drugs as a crutch.


But if we can back up far enough from all this, we can begin to see the fetishistic aspect.


What would you, for example, think if you saw the same person every day getting off a train, and every day he was wearing a different color paint on his face? And what if he was wearing a hundred large trinkets around his waist? And he was fingering these trinkets in deep contemplation? And what if he carried a large book with him and stopped strangers randomly and read passages to them? Passages about symbols from the sixth dimension. What if he bowed deeply every time he saw a bus and fell to his knees when a woman in a hat passed him on the street? What if he stopped after every fourteen steps and cupped his hands and then opened them, as if he was releasing a bird? And what if he also spun around 4.5 times at every street corner?


You would begin to realize he was in the middle of a strange ritual.


And this is what medical drugs have become. A ritual.


Their vast proliferation, apart from any effects they have, add to the fetish.


A space alien who knew nothing about medical practice would eventually notice the drugs and wonder what they were for. He would perhaps wonder whether swallowing them was part of an ongoing religious ceremony. He would see how dedicated people are to their medicines.


I take this drug at six every morning. Then after breakfast, I take these two pills. Before lunch, I take three other pills. The green and the red and the white.”


Yes, people believe their bodies can do bad things to them, like demons, and they ward off these creatures with the pills.


The swallowing of the pills is a fetish.


I love the small white capsules. They look so pristine, so pure, so elegant. Because they’re small, they must be very powerful.”


The doctor, the priest, prescribes them. He dispenses them. When he writes the prescription at his desk, the patient feels, for a moment, an elevated sense of importance. The patient has attained a special privilege. He is no longer common. A thread has been created that connects him to a higher reality. The “science” that lies behind every pill is sophisticated. Who can grasp it? Just bask in the sensation and accept the secret knowledge.


The scrawl on the prescription pad is incomprehensible. But the pharmacist, the acolyte and minion, will understand it. If the filling of the prescription took place in a cave with candles, the patient would understand.


When it comes to psychiatric drugs, the public is being instructed to believe that the pills, which flow from arbitrary diagnoses of unproven mental disorders, can make them whole again. The age-old dream achieved.


And now we are on the cusp of another medical fetish:




They’ve solidly entered the lexicon. Everybody talks about them. Amateurs and professionals alike speculate and intone on their importance—despite the fact that no across-the-board successful gene treatment for any condition has ever been developed.


Academics and so-called bio-ethicists are arguing about how the future should utilize genetics. Should we have a society in which a privileged class can buy designer genes for their children and make them smarter, more talented, more powerful, while the lower class, which lives apart in separate dingy enclaves, stews in its own primitive juices?


Or should our leaders open the door to better genes for all?


The unproven concocted dream: everything is regulated by DNA; all aspects of human behavior are determined by this coding; free will is a cruel superstition supported by greedy capitalist thieves; society could evolve into a utopia with the correct distribution of genetic traits; disease would be a thing of the past.


Consider that the selling of these medical-drug and gene stories is really, underneath it all, a way of convincing the world that science is our best option for the future. Understand that.


And of course, science must be controlled, like blessings from Rome, by those few who understand it and have the intelligence and compassion to plan the How and the Where of that dispensation.


Otherwise, we would have chaos. We would have money making all the decisions. We would have back-door deals, and cheaters and liars operating the levers of a free market for their own advantage.


And this must not be. No. With something as precious as science the prize, we need the best and the brightest to determine the method by which we can all benefit.


After all, the car and the plane and the light bulb and the refrigerator were magnificent technological advances. Therefore, all medical drugs and genes are, too.


The drugs? A hundred thousand Americans killed every year by government-certified medicines. (JAMA, July 26, 2000, Starfield)


A naked revelation about the overall devastation created by the drugs, and about the baldfaced lies being promoted on behalf of utopian gene engineering—a naked revelation would put a torpedo into the flank of the program to hypnotize the population about Science As Our Future. The technocrats can’t admit any spectacular failure. It would be like the Vatican confessing that all Eucharist wafers doled out to believers over the past 50 years were made by a company owned by Beelzebub.


When viewed factually, from an overall perspective, the key pronouncements about medical drugs and genes are false. But this must not see the light of day. It would derail the juggernaut. It would punch a wide hole in the Matrix. It would alert the population that they’d been had by con artists.


The spinning of the legends about transmuting the human, through official chemistry and biology, must continue. It must not be stopped. It must engender expectation. It must gather adherents. It must continue to entrance us. And naturally, unofficial science must be curtailed, because it suggests decentralization of power—and the WHOLE POINT of spinning the scientific legends is that they imply control of the future and the planet from a single high perch.


False science is Globalism’s most important product. It contains the “proof” that we must all submit to those wiser than we are.


You see, selling the so-called kindness of elite planetary control is not enough. The idea that a small group of men can avoid all wars by securing the reins of the Earth is not enough. The notion that our natural resources must be distributed from a central point, for the sake of sustainability, is not enough. These propaganda points don’t convince enough people.


But the legend that Official Science is the wonder key to a better life has legs. It has power. It has subconscious influence of a high order. It can eventually convince the global populace that a Technocratic Council should rule over them.


Therefore, that legend about Science must be shored up and extended and protected. It must tell whatever lies are necessary to push the agenda forward. Whether or not genes are the Holy Grail of biology is entirely beside the point. Sell it. Claim it. Pretend the evidence is there. And brain drugs? Spread the message: we will all be happier and more alive if we take them. They will cure our ills. They will untie the stubborn knots of discontent.


Welcome to the Science of the Matrix.


All those science fiction novels about civilizations run by technological elites? They were right on the money. That is where we are being led. And the defense-mechanism of the elite is: if you oppose our rational approach, you’re a cave man, a throwback, a Luddite, a superstitious fool grinding on with your phobias.


Meanwhile, it is this very elite that is peddling myth and fairy tale and illusion, and capitalizing on fetish.


We’ve all learned that divide and conquer is the controllers’ strategy; that funding wars on both sides is their method; that bankrupting nations is their technique; that owning the means of inventing money is their sinister operation; that dominating channels of information is their major form of mind control; that brainwashed education is their institution; that building the corporate-government embrace is their song. But these all bow before the altar of Scientific Myth, wherein we are persuaded to give up our own visions and our creative power to a Future that can only be run by Those Who Understand Technology.


How better to convince the people to surrender, than to equate science with truth and then claim that truth is beyond the common reach?


This was Plato’s basic argument in The Republic, and it has been echoed down through time. It has worked, through various phases, and now we have the most compelling version yet. Science is the truth about the truth, it is all based on observation, it is an open book, it is verifiable and demonstrable, no one need take anything on faith.


And yes, that is so, unless they are lying.


Unless they are lying about what they know.


And they are.


It doesn’t matter to them, but it matters to us.


Retired propaganda master Ellis Medavoy once told me in an interview: “Realize that big operations have layers. Each layer corresponds to a special interest that’s trying to squeeze out an advantage for itself. But when you peel away the outer skins, you get down to the prime material, the real reason the operation was mounted in the first place. And, in the case of propaganda about science, that reason is ridiculously simple. To promote science. That’s it. That’s all. Doesn’t matter whether it’s good science or bad science, or correct science or false science. The whole idea is to condition populations to accept science as the final judge on matters of importance. Why? Because the powers-that-be want to own and rule this world as Masters of Technology, Masters of Undeniable Truth. They see that as feasible. They can sell that. So they invent and dream up scientific visions that will impress people, make them excited. They peddle these visions as facts or soon-to-be facts. They tell stories, and they dress up those stories in expensive clothes. They’ll call ANYTHING science. They’ll paint it however they want it.”


Jon Rappoport

An investigative reporter for the last 30 years, Jon is the author of a new explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.






MARCH 25, 2012. We are witnessing an intensified effort, on the part of elite groups, to manage THE MATRIX.

This involves shaping:

political realities;

social realities;

economic realities;

medical realities;

information realities;

psychological realities;

spiritual realities.

When all is said and done, the attack is on the power and energy of the individual.

One part of my work consists in showing how the evolving medical cartel is really waging chemical warfare on the population, with toxic drugs. At the highest level, behind the curtain, the objective is to grossly weaken, physically and mentally, the body and the brain.


For example–


National Health Insurance Before Supreme Court for Ruling.

Last week, guest-hosting The Alex Jones Radio Show, I discussed the case of a young Michigan boy, whose parents have been taken to court three times to force them to submit their child to intensely toxic chemo treatments—despite these facts:

The boy’s latest scans reveal no sign of cancer; the drugs that would be forced on him can cause cancer; the drugs have not been approved to treat children. [Go to 4m50s in the video.]

More about this case here.

And I warned: this is what waits for you and your children, up the line, if the Supreme Court allows Obamacare (National Health Insurance) to stand as law. [More on this in the above video segment and in what follows below.]

The “share and care” humanitarian mask will be peeled away. The US Dept. of Health and Human Services will create, as mandated, a complete list of approved treatments for every disease-label under the sun. And everyone in the insurance plan (everyone in America) will be forced to take what the doctor tells them to take.

For a bonus, unapproved treatments will eventually be banned. People and practitioners who try to use alternative treatments will find themselves in trouble.

This is the hidden agenda of Obamacare. This is what it will morph into in the future—unless it is struck down as unconstitutional.

I’m not dreaming or fantasizing. I’ve been following and reporting on the medical cartel for 30 years, and I know the mindset of these people, these medical bureaucrats, these pharmaceutical string-pullers behind the scenes. Obamacare is right up their alley. It’s about control, so it’s an answer to their prayers.

What do we know about their mainstream medicine, the hospital-based drug-addled modern version?

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of theAmerican Medical Association published a landmark paper by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.

Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.

In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.

So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise.

This is the dirty secret.

Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple.

The Obama Plan involves appointing an “expert panel” to decide what treatments Americans should be given for what diseases, under the new regime.

Only a certified idiot would assume that, over time, alternative non-mainstream therapies would survive such an ongoing vetting. Hope may spring eternal, but common sense makes it easy to grasp the realities on the ground.

In the long run, alternative therapies will be edged out. Those that remain will be permitted for a narrow range of conditions, or as adjuncts to standard drug treatments and surgery.

Chiropractors and acupuncturists, who are temporarily basking in the notion that Obama “really cares,” are in for a very rude awakening. Their careers and practices will be significantly reduced. Not today, not tomorrow, but it will happen.

Doctors, under the Plan, will be telling patients they may not take nutritional supplements while in treatment. This will assume the status of an irreversible edict. In many cases, “while in treatment” means years.

What happens to a person, conscripted into the mandated Plan, who is told by his doctor that he should/must receive a vaccine? Suppose this person says no? What are the consequences? Will he then be labeled a defector? What penalties will he suffer?

Does a diagnosis of cancer imply a patient must submit to chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery? Can these treatments be forced upon him?

Perhaps, in the early days of the Plan, nothing untoward will happen. But then, as time passes, and the system assumes tighter and tighter controls, the hand of government will close around the recalcitrant patient’s neck.

Take this vaccine. Take this chemo drug. If you don’t, you’re out of the system, and that makes you a criminal, because everyone has to be in the system.”

Doctors, who are an integral part of the Plan, will surely be punished if they give unapproved (alternative) treatments to patients.

And in order to make the Plan operate on a day-to-day basis, the records and bookkeeping data of every health-care practitioner in America will be tracked on government computer networks.

Every person in America will have a traceable and trackable medical ID package. Government-issued. There is no way around it. The monitoring apparatus can’t work without it.

Orwellian consequences lie up the road in the field of psychiatric practice. In case you hadn’t noticed, the invention of “disorders” by committee is the preferred method for “discovering” more and more mental illnesses.

Yet, the science is completely fraudulent. For evidence, consult the many works of psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who has done more than any other person to expose the guts of his own profession (see www.breggin.com) Breggin establishes that mental disorders are not authoritatively diagnosed by a chemical or biological test. Conclusive tests do not exist. And worse, in this undefined and arbitrary territory, the drugs that follow diagnoses are killers: for example, 300,000 cases of motor brain damage, as a result of the administration of major tranquilizers.

Under the Obama Plan, you can bet your bottom dollar that psychiatric care will eventually become mandatory. A patient suddenly diagnosed with clinical depression or bipolar disease will be told he must take the drugs—and suffer their adverse effects.

Very young children will be given more and more debilitating and dangerous brain drugs.

Under the Obama Plan, it will be very convenient to declare new pandemics every few seasons, because these phony non-epidemics provide an opportunity to herd the sheep into clinics and remind them who is running the show. Go here, take this vaccine; go there, take that drug; the epidemic is endangering the herd, and you must help your brothers and sisters.

These are the figures on the last several “epidemics.” They are not yearly; they are grand totals, to date; global totals, except in the case of West Nile (US only):

SARS: 774 deaths.

WEST NILE: 1159 deaths.

BIRD FLU: 262 deaths.

SMALLPOX: (terrorist threat): 0 deaths.

SWINE FLU: 25,000 deaths.

To give perspective, globally, 250 thousand to 500 thousand people die of ordinary flu-like illness every year. Yet this higher death rate accrues no interest as an epidemic. It is only the “teaching (brainwashing) moments” of the phony epidemics that are promoted by health agencies (e.g., CDC and WHO) and their pharmaceutical allies, who rake in billions by manufacturing new vaccines.

Yes, under the Obama Plan, there will be more declared health emergencies, and they will serve to cement the citizen to his new role as eternal patient in the medical march along bleak streets of the future.

Can you perceive the loss of individual freedom implicit in this universal system of health control?


Sources and comments: I’m fully aware that people reading the facts in this essay will be shocked, and they will have doubts. Here are the sources for those facts. Things are not what they seem.

Barbara Starfield, “Is US health really the best in the world?” JAMA, July 26, 2000. Contains statistics on medically-caused deaths in the US.

On January 8, 2001, the LA Times ran a piece by Linda Marsa on the effects of medical drugs in the US. Predictably, the story sank like a stone. It provoked no Congressional hearings, no arrests.

The article described, in a few key paragraphs, a world of trouble. Adverse medical events, from med drugs:

A 1998 University of Toronto study found that roughly 100,000 Americans die of adverse [medical-drug] reactions each year, and 2.1 million more are hospitalized.”

Marsa offered, in her Times article, a quote from an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, Dr. David Bates, an author of a 2000 study on drug effects. The study found that “18 percent of patients complained of drug-related complications,” Marsa wrote.

Here is the quote from Dr. Bates: “People often have [drug-caused] symptoms for months, but they’re either reluctant to let their doctor know or they weren’t sure if they just felt lousy…But these numbers translate to 36 million adverse drug events per year.”

To add up the death totals from recent phony epidemics:

SARS—See WHO “Summary of probable SARS cases with onset of illness from 1 November 2002 to 31 July 2003” (based on data as of Dec.31, 2003).

BIRD FLU—See WHO “Confirmed Human Cases of Avian Influenza A (H5N1)” (24 September 2009)

WEST NILE—See CDC, West Nile Virus, Statistics, Surveillance, and Control. Years are reported separately, 1999-2009. I included only US cases because I couldn’t find a good source for global cases.

To confirm that every year, between 250,000 and 500,000 people die from ordinary flu, see WHO Fact Sheet No.211, Influenza (Seasonal).

Read Dr. Peter Breggin’s classic, “Toxic Psychiatry: Why Therapy, Empathy and Love Must Replace the Drugs, Electroshock, and Biochemical Theories of the ‘New Psychiatry'” (St. Martin’s Press, 1991). Follow Breggin’s argument, through several chapters; labeled mental disorders are not based on factual biological evidence; and see p.89-91 for evidence that at least 300,000 people are suffering from brain damage (tardive dyskinesia) as a result of being administered major tranquilizers.

Founded in 1992, the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), a minor bureau of the National Institutes of Health (a federal agency), has managed to derail, stall, and divert the progress of real alternative medicine. It has forwarded no breakthroughs. It has bogged itself down in conferences, reports, and committee deliberations. It has fooled a number of so-called alternative-health advocates into believing that the federal government supports non-mainstream health strategies.


Imagine what would happen when healthcare in this country becomes centralized to a much greater degree under the Obama Plan. If this one tiny agency, NCCAM, can now befuddle the alternative field with a collection of inept and self-seeking bureaucrats, gargantuan power held at the top of the federal government will make that diversion look like a raindrop in a hurricane.

The history of the decline of infectious disease is a history of improved sanitation, alleviation of overcrowding, the rise of the middle class, and above all, the betterment of nutrition. This decline in disease occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread vaccination. (See Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis) Under massively centralized medical care, in an environment where chemically saturated agri-business grows our food in depleted topsoil, there is a greater and greater need for nutritional supplements. But this vital avenue will be narrowed and blocked in the ways I have indicated above.


Last but not least, medical-research fraud continues unabated, an out-of-control rampant crime.

See, for example, “20 Percent Of Cancer Studies Report Conflict of Interest,” ScienceDaily (May 13, 2009): “Nearly one-third of cancer research published in high-impact journals disclosed a conflict of interest, according to a new study from researchers at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center…”

Also, from the Boston Globe (Boston.com, August 15, 2005), “Flaws are found in validating medical studies; many see need to overhaul standards for peer review”:

“…after a study that sent reverberations through the medical profession by finding that almost one-third of top research articles have been either contradicted or seriously questioned, some specialists are calling for radical changes in the system…almost one-third of the top papers that appeared in top journals over a 13-year period from 1990 to 2003, had been either contradicted or found to have potentially exaggerated results. All the articles had [prior to publication] undergone vigorous peer review, leading to questions about whether problems should have been caught by reviewers…”


What does this epidemic of cheating and lying in medical research add up to? New dangerous drugs will continue to be approved for public use, by the government. The dangers of the drugs will be hidden in fabricated studies published in prestigious journals.

As the Supreme Court deliberates on whether the individual mandate in Obama’s healthplan implies a penalty or tax if people opt out, and as the Court mumbles its way through questions about the Commerce Clause of the Constitution—which was never written to permit Congress to command people to buy health insurance—the real secret is concealed.

This insurance plan will capture more and more of the population in the cross-hairs of chemical warfare. No amount of squirming or arguing is going to change that.

Jon Rappoport is the author of a new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.

Jon has worked as an independent investigative reporter since 1982. The LA Weekly nominated him for a Pulitzer Prize, for a interview he did with the president of El Salvador University, where the military had taken over the campus and was disappearing students and burning books. He has written for In These Times, Village Voice, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, CBS Healthwatch, Stern. His work can be found at www.nomorefakenews.com





MARCH 25, 2012. In my new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, I interview Jack True, among other cutting-edge researchers.

Jack was the most innovative hypnotherapist I’ve ever come across. His understanding of what came to be called The Matrix was unparalleled.

During his years working with patients, he developed methods of unhypnotizing people, because, as he said, “I stopped doing conventional hypnosis when I realized the people who were coming to see me were already in a trance.”

That was the turning point in Jack’s career. He spent the rest of his life working on that problem.

Jack was instrumental in getting me my first book contract, in 1987. The book was AIDS INC. He viewed it as “an attack on the medical trance,” and it did turn out to be that. [My book, AIDS INC., is included in THE MATRIX REVEALED collection.]

The interview below (one of our earliest) took place in 1987, after several prior conversations about elites and the powers-that-be.

There is much more I could say about Jack, but I’ll just present the interview–

Jack began with several remarks about mind control:

First of all, if you want to know anything about the mind, you have to get rid of the idea of categorizing and labeling mental states. Psychiatry is based on that model, which is really a business model. It creates patients.

And as the whole study of the mind falls more and more into the hands of psychiatrists, what the patient has to say about his own experience becomes less and less important. The psychiatrist is mainly there to make a diagnosis and then to prescribe drugs.

So the patient believes less and less in the idea of HIS OWN UNIQUE experience. What makes him different and unique becomes less and less important to him. This whole trend is itself a form of mind control. You need to understand that.

We have this crazy situation, where the very means to make a diagnosis and supposedly help the mind is really a form of mind control.

I take a different path. To me, what the patient says and what he comes up with are very, very important. It’s the essence of what I’m dealing with. It’s unique. If a patient, in a light trance, tells me he’s in a field smelling flowers, that’s where he is. The field and the flowers aren’t referring to something else. They’re not symbolic. The field is the field and the flowers are the flowers. I’m not interpreting anything. I’m not making inferences. Understand? I didn’t put the patient in that field. I didn’t suggest he go there. I didn’t give him hints or clues. If that’s where he is when, in that light trance, he lets go of his buzzing thoughts and his distractions, then that’s where he is. I don’t put labels on it. I don’t think to myself, well obviously he has this condition or that condition. I don’t think, well, he’s remembering something from his childhood or from last week. I go with what he gives me. Literally. People sometimes have a hard time understanding that.

The second thing is, you need to realize that mind control through straight propaganda, from the media or the government or corporations or schools, needs a fertile environment. People who act like robots or puppets or androids are easy targets. They just suck in information of any kind and spit it out. They believe what they’re told. But how did they get that way? How did they become puppets to begin with? That’s the real question. Are you going to blame upbringing, education, genes? Are you prepared to say that puppets are ‘made?’ We really need to think about that. Because that’s the straight Victim model. In that model, people have no free will of their own. They’re ‘worked on’ and created like little machines. That’s a very popular view, because people like abdicating responsibility for their own lives and minds. They like to go on and on about what’s being done to them and how it’s all out of their control. That view of things has been overplayed. It’s gone too far.

There’s another way to look at this. Another side to this. People who live like puppets have chosen that role for themselves. It’s a role. The Puppet. It’s like being cast in a play. ‘Okay, we have the role of a puppet. Anybody interested in playing it? You’ll have to suck in information like a vacuum cleaner and accept it. You’ll have to put your independence on the shelf.’ [Emphasis added.]

There are external factors that contribute to making a puppet, but that’s far from the whole story. It’s a role. It’s a whole way of living and acting. And once a person takes on that role, his view of reality shifts. Things line up differently. For example, the Group becomes far more important. Because there are other puppets, and they link together. They form a society of their own. They recognize each other.

They tend to mesh into a network. A web. And this network gravitates toward accepting the most common and official explanation of reality. The network sniffs that out and buys it. They’re all playing the role of Puppet.

Here’s the most interesting part. The network can ‘wake up.’ They can, altogether, wake up to something new. But it’s a FAKE waking up. It’s staged. It’s an officially certified waking up. For instance, a new social campaign sweeps the land. It’s now officially certified to look at a social factor THIS way. And the network of puppets sniffs it out and gets on board. Yesterday, they looked at that same social factor THAT way, but today, all of a sudden, they’re looking at it THIS way.

Now, when people [who aren’t puppets] see this sudden amazing shift, they say, ‘Well, that’s a brainwashing scheme. All those puppets over there are being brainwashed by the press and the government. Yesterday, they believed X, and today they believe Y.’ And that’s true. But I’m interested in what goes on a deeper level. How the puppets became puppets in the first place. And part of the answer, an important part of the answer is, they CHOSE to be puppets. They chose the role. Individually chose it. [Emphasis added.]

And once they chose it, they decreased their own available IQ, they dimmed their own perception, they adapted to the role. People can do that. People are very flexible. They can play out all sorts of roles, and they can make the necessary adjustments.

So it turns out that a puppet isn’t stupid at all. He’s very smart. He’s certainly smart enough to know how to diminish his own IQ. That’s a good trick. It is. And IF he became aware that he chose that role, Puppet, and NOW he decided he didn’t like the role anymore, he could experience a rise in IQ. I’ve actually seen that happen. I worked with a patient who was brought in by his mother. And in the course of working with this boy over a long period of time, I watched him gradually become aware that he had chosen to be a puppet. It was quite something. At the end of it, he thought it was quite funny. He said to me: ‘I taught myself to be stupid.’ Well, he wasn’t stupid anymore. He went on to demonstrate that in school and in his life. The change was extraordinary.”

Jack and I discussed this boy for a while and then we sat down to do the formal interview.

Q: (Rappoport) Okay, let’s get started.

A: (Jack) Are people ready for this? It’s pretty far-out stuff.

Q: I’m just interested in what you have to say.

A: Well, that’s you. When people consider a subject like mind control, they immediately think about what “the controllers” are doing to their victims. They assume that’s the whole subject.

Q: And?

A: For 99.9 percent of the people on this planet, mind control occurs in a variety of other ways. So the question is: what’s actually happening?

You see, we have this word “programming.” It’s used as if everybody knows what it means. As if somebody installs a fully formed program in your head. A set of operating instructions.

Q: And that’s not so?

A: It’s mostly a metaphor. “Well, he’s programmed to act that way.”

Q: Whereas the truth is?

A: The truth is different. For example, suppose you put a program in your OWN head? Suppose you’re the programmer AND the program-ee?

Q: Obviously, you don’t think much of the term “programming.”

A: It’s too easy. I’m interested in what people can discover about themselves when they aren’t burdened with simplistic preconceptions. Do you see? If you have a package of ideas and terms in your hip pocket when you explore the mind, you’re going to find what you already know. You’re going to plaster over whatever you encounter with old stale conceptions. I want to get away from that.

If you asked people what they think goes on in the subconscious, you’d get a fairly predictable spread of opinions. Whereas I take it somewhere else completely. For instance, suppose I said what happens in the subconscious is ART. Suppose I said it was an ongoing process of building structures.

Q: What? What goes on in the subconscious is art?

A: Right.

Q: That’s quite an unusual idea.

A: See, I don’t think it’s unusual at all. You know what I think is unusual? People who walk around doing everything in their power to “be average.” That’s extremely weird to me. You’ve got millions of people in America doing that. Where did that come from? Was everyone so influenced by puppet shows when they were kids, they decided to grow up to be puppets? (laughs)

People striving to be normal are strange. We accept it because it’s happening all around us. People are “behaving normally.” You want to talk about mind control? Talk about that! If people expended a tenth of the energy they use to be normal on something very creative, a lot of problems we have would automatically go away. Think about the amount of sheer energy it takes to maintain that normal front day after day.

You know, there are a whole lot of people who show up at therapists’ offices because they want to figure out how to be normal. Average. They’re pushing that as the grand solution. NORMAL is their idea of how to have a relationship with the world. Do you see? So what I’m saying is that NORMAL is a front, a mask. And behind it, people have a different relationship with the world. That’s what they hide. They hide it from other people and they hide it from themselves.

Q: The idea that a person is creating art in his subconscious. Can you give me an example?

A: I once had a patient who was quite brilliant and knew a great deal about deep politics and various elites and their machinations. But…he was in a trance.

Q: What do you mean?

A: He, outwardly, was very active. Lots of energy. Involved in his work, and in projects. But he felt trapped. We did a number of sessions. I put him in a light trance. I didn’t sink him down to the bottom of the well. Just a light trance, so that all sorts of random thoughts quieted down, so he could relax. And then there it was.

Q: There it was?

A: Yes. He was sitting in a swamp. He was mired in something. He was very passive in a central area of his mind, his consciousness.

Q: You talk about it as if you could see it.

A: I didn’t have to see it. He could. He did. Eventually, he told me all about it.

Q: You mean he regressed to a time in the past where he became passive, where something bad had happened to him?

A: No, it was much more graphic than that. He began talking as if he were IN A LANDSCAPE, and he described it to me. It was like something out of a gloomy novel. Barren place. Muddy streams. Gray.

Q: Do you think he had actually been in a place like that?

A: You’re going in the wrong direction.

Q: What?

A: You’re missing it.

Q: What am I missing?

A: You’re trying to use conventional ideas to explain what he was experiencing. It doesn’t operate that way. He was THERE. He was surrounded by this landscape. He described it. I didn’t prompt him. I didn’t guide him. I didn’t suggest anything to him. The important thing is that, in this light trance, he found himself there. You can say it was symbolic. You can say all sorts of things about it. But what you say doesn’t matter. I go with what I get from the patient. And what I got was a description of this passive place and state of mind. It was encompassing. He had never CONSCIOUSLY been there before. But, over a period of sessions, as he fleshed it all out for me, he explained his state of mind in that place, and he became aware of it. It was profound. Not for me. For him.

Q: And then what happened?

A: Many things. He experienced jolts of energy. In his body. They would come and go. He felt various emotions. Frustration, anger, and that passivity. He saw energy.

Q: He saw energy?

A: In several different ways. At one point, he reported seeing sub-atomic energy. Fields of particles moving.

Q: What did you do?

A: What do you think I did? I went along with it.

Q: Did you think it was strange? Did you think he was imagining it? Hallucinating it?

A: You’re trying to goad me, right?

Q: A little.

A: So he’s seeing these fields of particles. They’re moving at different speeds. Some are slow, some are fast, others seem to be wandering around as if they’re lost. This goes on for quite a while. Over the course of several sessions. He’s really intrigued by this. Then one day he kind of shivers and says his mind and these particles merged.

He’s shocked. He says his own mind and these particles “got together.” Not just now, but sometime in the past. He describes this merging between his mind and these physical particles. How they meet and link up. How they form a kind of structure.

Q: What kind of structure?

A: Different configurations. Interlocking shapes. Geometric shapes. Symmetrical. Others are more vague.

Q: He’s interested in this?

A: Excited. He starts talking a mile a minute. He’s relating what he sees as if he can’t get it out fast enough. It’s as if he’s looking at some huge building or even a city, and he’s seeing pieces of it, and progressively the pieces are bigger, and they’re coming into view. Finally, one day he tells me that he’s figured out “how it works.” His mind and these particles have become joined. It’s not some sort of spiritual connection. It’s not enlightenment. It’s a habit. That’s what he called it. A habit. As if, he said, he was some kind of engineer, and he was building a structure. But, he said, and this is a key, he had been doing all this UNCONSCIOUSLY. Subconsciously. It was an ongoing preoccupation. It wasn’t just a one-time thing. And it took energy to do this. It took lots of energy.

Q: He said that.

A: Yes. And then I realized there was something different about his physical appearance. It was hard to pinpoint. But it was as if he had clarified. His features were more…vivid. I noticed his eyes were clearer. His gestures were more definite. I had the sense a knot of confusion had been undone. He told me this subconscious “building” he had been doing…he felt this mandate, this imperative within himself to “be this engineer.” He was a bit troubled by that, but he was also excited.

Q: This is VERY far-out stuff.

A: Again, I want to make it very clear that I was following along with him. I wasn’t guiding him in the slightest. It is very far-out, but not to me. You see, I’m used to having people tell me what they find, what they discover. I don’t care what it is. I’m just working from what they tell me. I’m not doing anything else.

Q: So what was the outcome of working with this man?

A: Well, I can tell you that his physical conditions, and he had a few, resolved in a dramatic way. He had a balance problem, and that just went away completely. His fatigue went away. He started to sleep well for the first time in years.

Q: Would you say he had been in a chronic trance, until he discovered he was doing this subconscious “building of structures?”

A: I would.

Q: Explain that.

A: This structure he was subconsciously building, on and on and on, was his habit. It became trance-like, the ongoing building. And it was debilitating for him. It used up a whole lot of his energy.

Let me give you a metaphor for it. Every day, you carry water. Okay? You’re carrying buckets of water to the same place. You’re digging a trench, and you’re making a stream. Every single day. But you don’t consciously know you’re building the stream. You get up in the morning and you go to work and you buy things at the store, and you come home and sit with your family and talk. MEANWHILE you’re still building this stream. And it requires energy and it takes energy away from you. It’s exhausting you. And it’s so repetitious. It’s no longer fun. It’s deeply boring. It’s wearing you down. And it eventually puts you in a kind of walking trance. At some level, it puts you in a place of accepting your fate, that you’ll be building this stream forever. You’re accepting that reality. You’re passive in that way. You believe that IS reality.

Q: So do you wake up from that?

A: That, my boy, is what my life’s work is all about. I’ve developed many strategies.

Q: Do they involve trying to dismantle the “building project?”

A: I tried that and I found it was unworkable.

Q: What makes it unworkable?

A: Well, if you’re absolutely devoted, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to building castles in the sand, and I come along and convince you to tear them down and stop making them, do you think that’s going to have a lasting effect? We can kick down castles and smooth out the sand, but eventually you’re going to be back at the beach doing it again.

Q: So if that’s unworkable, what then?

A: First of all, I WOULD SAY THAT THE HUMAN RACE HAS A VERY SOLID ADDICTION. THE ADDICTION INVOLVES THE SUBCONSCIOUS INVENTION OF SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES. AND PATTERNS. So what I began developing were exercises I could use with people, exercises through which they would invent or create in new ways, in unaccustomed ways. In ways that would break that habit, that subconscious habit.

Q: Has it worked?

A: It’s working. They gain back energy. They sometimes lose physical problems. They feel different. They begin to approach life in new ways.

My comments on the interview: Looking back on it now, Jack was presenting a description of how the mind and reality “merge” in a kind of Matrix. In many later interviews, Jack goes further in explaining his strategies for transcending this situation. As you can see from his remarks here, he wasn’t making suggestions to his patients while they were in a light trance. That method didn’t interest him, once he decided they were already, in a sense, in a state of hypnosis when they came to him.

As a result of his training, Jack initially took the position that hypnosis and suggestion could change behavior for the better. Later on, he abandoned that idea. He found ways of getting patients to describe what they were seeing and experiencing on a subconscious level—and then using techniques that would liberate them from their “habits,” their unconscious and repetitious actions that drained away energy and put them in a passive state.

In the conversation above, Jack was intentionally NOT covering certain forms of attempted mind control based on induced trauma, chemicals, electronics, etc. He wanted, rather, to explore less known territory.

In another interview, Jack once said to me, “Some people think accepting reality is an advanced spiritual state. Well, accepting reality can allow you to be freer from stress, but all by itself, it eventually becomes a formula for passivity, repetition, profound boredom, and subconscious depletion of energy. You form a de facto religion of Reality-As-It-Is, and you worship at that altar. YOU GLUE YOURSELF ON TO REALITY and the result is a kind of weave or mesh, which is a trance, a hypnotic state. You don’t walk around looking like a zombie, but in a major place in your consciousness, you’re trying to abandon your immense creative power…”

Jon Rappoport

Jon is the author of a new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED. He has been working as an investigative reporter for 30 years.







by Jon Rappoport



MARCH 23, 2012. The current issue of Psychiatric Times reports that the new bible of mental disorders, the DSM-V, will make grief a mental disorder.


Specifically, a parent who deeply mourns the loss of a child for more than TWO WEEKS will rate a diagnosis of clinical depression (and of course, drugging with one of the toxic SSRI antidepressants.)


This absurdity is even too much for some doctors, and they’re rebelling. For example, see Dr. Joanne Cacciatore’s blog post here.


But the “experts” who are assembling the upcoming DSM-V don’t care. They’re shrugging off the criticism so far.


Well, of course they would. There is a lot of money to be made by prescribing more drugs, in this case, to grieving parents.


The Psychiatric Times’ editorial attacking this lunatic classification of grief-as-disease is written by none other than Dr. Allen Frances.


Dr. Allen Frances has summed up position on the lunatic classification of grief-as-disease in this post on the Huffington Post Blog published on Mar 23, 2012.


Readers will remember my recent article about the good doctor. He is the man who was in charge of assembling the previous DSM-IV. His team expanded the definitions of ADHD and Bipolar, so that many more people would be dosed with toxic and destructive drugs like Valproate, Lithium, and Ritalin.


In fact, Dr. Frances, in a December 2010 Wired interview by Gary Greenberg (entitled Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness), stated: “There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.” [Emphasis added]


I’m not kidding. He actually said it. Here is the opening opening paragraph of the article:


“Every so often Al Frances says something that seems to surprise even him. Just now, for instance, in the predawn darkness of his comfortable, rambling home in Carmel, California, he has broken off his exercise routine to declare that ‘there is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.’ Then an odd, reflective look crosses his face, as if he’s taking in the strangeness of this scene: Allen Frances, lead editor of the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (universally known as the DSM-IV), the guy who wrote the book on mental illness, confessing that ‘these concepts are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the boundaries.’ For the first time in two days, the conversation comes to an awkward halt.” [Emphasis added]


The complete article can be found at wired.com here.


Which would be like the chairman of Exxon asserting, “We need to explore for more oil. Of course, cars don’t really work. They don’t go anywhere. They’re fictions. Delusions.”


The committees who put together these DSMs would be better off posting a list of a few hundred human behaviors on a wall and, blindfolded, throwing darts at them.


What lies below this latest psychiatric nonsense about grief is an entire industrial complex. It’s dedicated to brainwashing the public into accepting the notion of discrete and real mental disorders.


People have problems, they become frustrated and confused, they suffer, but the act of carving up behavior and thought into diseases is a way of a) expanding business and b) extending the Matrix.


More and more, as a result of relentless PR, the public believes there are a whole host of mental disorders that not only intrude on their lives but require pharmaceutical treatment.


The public believes they are victimized by these diseases and can alleviate them only through drugs.


The public believes it is “humane” to accept the existence of these diseases, and we must all join together to “remove the stigma of diagnosis.”


The public believes they are at the mercy of arbitrary shifts of brain chemistry that bring on these diseases.


The public believes, therefore, that life itself is limited by the potential onset of “psychiatric illness.”


The public believes we’re all, to one degree or another, disabled.


The public believes what they’re told to believe. Therefore, the fictitious existence of discrete mental disorders becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.


The Matrix op called psychiatry provides a focal point, around which are woven many strands of propaganda. The overall objective? A future world that resembles, to a remarkable degree, a Universal Hospital, in which the population, granted “free” care, lives through dozens of diagnoses of diseases and disorders, with (toxic) treatments—from cradle to grave. The eternal patient.


Further propaganda strives to label such a life the hallmark of What Humans Are.


That is the high-level objective of the medical/psychiatric cartel.


What makes psychiatry different is that it seeks to gain control and domination over the entire area of human behavior, through classification by labels and bogus claims of diagnosis.


As I mentioned in the article on Dr. Frances, there are no definitive chemical or biological tests for any so-called mental disorder. This fact is stunning to people. They automatically assume psychiatry is a science. It isn’t. It’s a shell game.


I refer now to the PBS FRONTLINE presentation, Does ADHD Exist? A quite revealing (and side-splitting) exchange occurs between the interviewer and Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center. Barkley is also the author of books about ADHD.


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


BARKLEY: That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]


Live long and prosper, Dr. Barkley. And you might want to re-check the definition of science. Just a thought.


Here is a final prediction for you:


Author/psychologist Paul Babiak recently stated that a psychopath is someone with “a psychopathic personality.”


Quite informative.


My prediction?


We’re going to see an accelerated push to label many career criminals—on the street and in corporate boardrooms—as ill with the disease of psychopathy. Now, I’m old-fashioned. I believe you prosecute people like that to the fullest extent of the law.


The point is, though, the definition of psychopathy is going to be extended to those people who, in the view of mental health professionals, show a lack of empathy, who aren’t happy to live in the Global Village, where Share and Care are actually, at a high level, fronts for advancing the cause of Globalism.


Schoolchildren who don’t want to play the usual games, who don’t want to join the group are going to be examined for signs of incipient psychopathy.


The agenda will be to weed out people who are free and independent. Label them. Treat them. Drug them. Isolate them from the rest of us.


Your son is what some people would call an outsider. But actually, he’s case of psychopathy in progress. We have to act now. I’m not saying he’s a Lee Oswald or a Jack the Ripper or a Bernie Madoff, but you never know. If we catch this early, we have a chance. He doesn’t feel sympathy for others. He doesn’t recognize his inclusion in the human community. When he looks at people, he doesn’t smile. He just looks. We have promising treatments. Let’s move quickly…”


Of course, Doctor. Perhaps you could melt a few of his brain connections and banish his unsympathetic aura.


Jon Rappoport

An investigative reporter for the past 30 years, Jon is the author of a new wide-ranging collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED.