I review a mind-control review of Vaxxed

I review a mind-control review of Vaxxed

Vaxxed opened this weekend at the Angelika Film Center in New York, after being censored at the Tribeca Film Festival.

—My analysis of how a conformist film critic operates, starting with the basics, which of course involve mind control.

Where did the word “official” come from?

by Jon Rappoport

April 3, 2016

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

Mainstream media is all about what the audience wants to hold on to.

The audience wants stability.

When you boil it down, this means they want something official.


The actual substance of the news dries up like rain on the street after the sun comes out again. Gone. Doesn’t matter. As long as the audience feels they’ve received the Official Word.

Official=a slave signaling admiration for his master. It’s the Stockholm syndrome writ large.

Let’s go to the scorecard: the two Latin roots of the word “official.” Opus (work), and facere (to do or make). “To do work.” Seems rather harmless.

But somewhere along the line it was inflated—for instance, “holding office”; “he held an office in the government.”

And, as often happens, when the Latin moves forward into the medieval period, when the Church takes hold, the concept is made gaseous. In this case, “to do work” becomes “divine service.”

Yes. As in the divine right of kings to rule, to make laws, to call the shots, to issue orders.

Official looms large.

Let’s say I run a major media outlet. It would be in my interest to make distinctions between “official” and “meritless.” Who wants meritless or conspiratorial or dissenting or odd or weird or in-the-minority? Those categories are worthless, and pointing this out bolsters my superior status and position. I am reliable. They are not. That’s how I play the game.

I’ve talked to many mainstream reporters over the years. They know almost nothing important about what they’re reporting on. Some of them have high IQs, but they’re dumb as wood when it comes to the content and nature of the issues they convey to the public. And this is on purpose. There is no reason to have acute and deep knowledge. It doesn’t fit the format. Their work involves looking and sounding convincing, which is a different kind of job.

It’s actually a hindrance to know too much. It gets in the way.

Their job is to come across as official.

For instance, in a review of the just-released film, Vaxxed (trailer)—and I’m not going to dignify the reporter by mentioning him or his outlet—the Gibbering Fantasist (reviewer) states that the director of the film, Andrew Wakefield, is a doctor who had his license stripped in England. In other words, Wakefield is “unofficial.” It doesn’t matter why his license was taken away, or whether some grave injustice was committed in that regard. Don’t bother looking into that mess. It’s enough to say “the source of the film” wasn’t official.

The Fantasist (reviewer) also mentions that the subject of the film, William Thompson, a CDC whistleblower who confesses to extreme scientific fraud, who gave the MMR vaccine a free pass and concealed its connection to autism, is not seen walking and talking and sitting in the film. The audience only hears his voice. Thompson is therefore “unofficial.” No mention is made of the fact that Thompson, since his 2014 confession in writing, refuses to be interviewed by the press. That’s irrelevant. (And do I need to point out that radio news is audio only—with no faces?)

The reviewer further states that the audio clips of whistleblower Thompson in the film were recorded during telephone calls—without Thompson’s permission. By implication, this is supposed to mean that Thompson’s revealing audio confessions are also unofficial. Of course, many news stories have come from recorded phone calls—but in this case, they’re suddenly not “admissible.”

The reviewer mentions that the producer of Vaxxed, Del Bigtree, speaks in the film. Since that is purportedly unusual, it’s “unofficial.” It can be discounted and ignored.

What’s left? Not much. The film is not credible because it’s not official. Why didn’t the reviewer just come out and say that? He could have written a one-sentence article.

He could have called the CDC, which is exposed in the film, and asked for a statement. An official one, of course.

He could simply have exclaimed the Official Word on vaccines: “They’re all safe and effective! That’s all you need to know!” And then headed out for a drink.

Or he could have written this: “I’m giving you the official word on an unofficial film. The film has no status in the mainstream. Don’t bother seeing it. It’ll fill your head with unofficial thoughts, and you won’t know what to do with them. That’s what unofficial material does. It leaves you in the lurch. My job is to remind you where your mind should live, which is where everyone else’s lives. That’s where you want to be. If you think you can be anywhere else, you’re on the verge of going delusional, and that’s dangerously dangerous.”


The Fantasist Reviewer manages to avoid mentioning that the whistleblower, William Thompson, a long-time CDC researcher, did an astonishing thing by coming out of the heavily guarded scientific closet and confessing to fraud on a scale that is staggering:

He and his colleagues permitted a highly dangerous and destructive vaccine to remain in use.

But why should the Fantasist mention it? Thompson committed an unofficial act.

He committed it in arena where only the good and true and humane and dedicated and brilliant and competent and caring and dutiful and self-sacrificing and life-affirming medical authorities are supposed to rule.

Thompson stuck a knife in the heart of all that.

And Officialdom must not acknowledge it, on pain of death.

Therefore, it doesn’t acknowledge it.

exit from the matrix

No. Instead, news operates this way, to paraphrase Orwell:

“Tonight, on a street corner, a citizen accosted a news reporter. The following exchange took place. Roll the video.”

Citizen: “2 and 2 equal 4.”

Reporter: “No. They equal 5.”

Citizen: “Why?”

Reporter: “It’s official.”

Citizen: “Oh. I see.”

Reporter: “No you don’t. But it doesn’t matter.”

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.

19 comments on “I review a mind-control review of Vaxxed

  1. Znow says:

    It gets worse. Big media is starting the move to have software programs write reviews and news articles. While there’s always the chance that a human reporter will “break ranks” (even unintentionally) and reveal some actual info, software generated copy does not have that risk.


  2. Michael Burns says:

    “The Fantasist Reviewer manages to avoid mentioning that the whistleblower, William Thompson, a long-time CDC researcher, did an astonishing thing by coming out of the heavily guarded scientific closet and confessing to fraud on a scale that is staggering:” -Jon Rappoport

    In the case of the ‘unofficial’ response to vaccine fraud. I ask the question, why is Dr William Thompson to be believed.
    Why, is it so astonishing? Why would someone come out after so long.
    What if it is a psyche-op. Why is he not lying now? Why is this not a more sophisticated lie.

    Thompson came out and stated to Brian Hooker initially, saying, “I basically have stopped lying”.
    Really. I was lying my head off before, but now I have stopped…suddenly.

    I have been lying my whole fucking career, making these nasty viral potions to inject into the helpless; the most powerless of humans; infants; toddlers; children; I have been lying my whole life, because as an intelligent, actually distinquishedly intelligent scientist, I know what is going on.
    I have PHd in cluster-fucking and know quite well what this science is; in fact, I am in a rare population of say, a handful of people who know this science. I can look at it, this way and that way. And turn it around and look at another way. I can turn it inside out, and see it another way.
    I can take the information given and run it out for a decade or so and see what happens then. I know what happens if this vaccine is given to new -borns or babies, children who at different ages of development. I am one of the few individuals on this planet who know this science. Now I have been lying my ass off since I have worked at the CDC, I am a distinquished scientist who was hired to do such things. That’s my fucking job. To lie.
    To confuse the issues surrounding, vaccine and it’s use in human beings. To come up with formal scientific arguments and fudged data, to quell the dissenters, from the lunatic fringe.  My whole career has been about that…but now after much time, I have made a massive amount of money as a scientist with the CDC, I am now “coming to Jesus…but I won’t do interviews and I won’t do press interviews”.
    I will just blow the whistle and cry foul and leave it at that, you’ll just have to trust me really.

    What causes the general public to disbelieve what more that likely is a truth, for me in this instance it’s the ‘Snowden conjecture factor’. Smells of something else, something beneath the surface, something with an ulterior motive.

    Why is it that these truths, that are leaked, or come from whistleblowers are so…wispy, smokish, clandestine, in the breeze, voices on a phone, a leaked e-mail, “You will just have to believe me now, I was lying, but now I am telling the fuckin truth, I swear.”

    You don’t want to lie anymore…ok, that’s a good thing to do… so stand up regardless of who tries to cut you down. Jump the rails.
    Get a set of brass balls and tell the truth. Scream it from the roof tops; don’t ever shut up about it. Tell everybody. Phone the Vatican. Meet up for lunch with the Dalai Lama, get him to tell Buddhists.
    Go to SETI, and have them broadcast a steady single into space, “Vaccines are bad, vaccines are bad.”

    Tell people how much this science fucks them around, distorts and twists their immune systems, impairs their mental faculties. Lowers their intelligence by 5%.
    Take out newspapers ads, buy billboards; there is money lining up to help you and get this story out, believe me. If it’s the truth, that is.

    Have low flying planes with large aerial signs flowing behind them across the skies of cities. Rent the good year blimp, or for that fact buy one, with a permanent neon sign, “Dr William Thompson of the CDC has proof that vaccines are the cause of Autism.”
    But no, whispers in the dark again.

    I have another theory; suppose Bill got a little incentive from his bosses; the constant protests and death threats and hate mail that CDC must get over the course of a day, a month, a year. Suppose the CDC got a little tire of it and got a little plan to make Bill look crazy, (with his permission of course) and deep-throatishness. To get back at them and plant a seed of another type.
    Pile some wood on that conspiracy theorist fire. Bill toting his masters line, whimpers foul in back streets of the Internet and a telephone, all hush, hush and beneath one breath.
    It’s the most exciting time Bill has had all career. Now he’s working for the spymaster of the CDC. Whoah…things are looking up.
    Life is real now. On the edge, and getting back at those assholes who are calling him a fake. Those weirdos. Fucken screwball conspiracy theorists.

    No tangible evidence to support the claim. Except from Bill to Brian Hooker, a few documents, that nobody understands. His Snowdenian aversion to publicity. A partial epiphany, a partial blow on the whistle, just a little…tweet , not to loud though. And then the fact that American black males have an 80% chance of getting Autism. Now there a good ones, a side issue to pander to the racist in all of us.

    Instead of proving without a shadow of a doubt that the CDC under the United States government is in the killing and maiming game. That they are in the  purposeful brain damage business. The shortening of life business. That they don’t give shit about anybody, and feel it’s their right to do anything they want to your body without your consent.

    And so we arrive at a movie called “Vaxxed”, using that same ole tire whispers in dark. E-mails and recorded phone calls. Now we are blaming De Niro, and Tribeca, and side spin issues. which is exactly the point of the whole op.

    Bullshit…this does more damage than good. It makes those that struggle hard against the machine, seem even more crazy, than they think they are.

    Are there no real heros left anymore…are we left with a world of paper Tigers.

    • Carolyn Bailey says:

      Which would you rather have, a world of official dogma, leaks, exposes, and conflicting versions of the facts, all claiming to be true, or only official dogma?
      To claim that no one who lied about something important will ever start telling the truth about it is absurd. There are seven and a half billion humans on earth, but not one who has told harmful lies can stop himself? How do you know; have you watched us all, all our lives, to find out? Representative sampling won’t work in this case, since even one reformed liar disproves your theory. It is also disproved by historical evidence and personal experience. But perhaps you have never known anyone who lied and later told the truth? Or, you didn’t know it was the truth when they said it, or you refused to believe it. In the latter instance, you would be lying to yourself. If you posted comments insisting that it was unbelievable, then you’d be lying to all us readers.
      I’d rather keep looking for the truth from anyone in a position to offer it, though I may have to wade through a lot of disinformation, be misled time and again, check and double-check to find it, and I’ll never find it all. Your nihilism is as mind-numbing as Fantasy-land.

      • Michael Burns says:

        I agree with you, to a point. I have just been fooled too many times by the those claiming to be the only truth, the real truth.
        The first one was the catholic church. I am still fighting that truth.

        Why is so impossible to think of it all as a psyche-op, placed in such a way as to debase the whole idea of the truth? The whole idea of alternate media reporting on it. Why is not a divide and conquer, with spin of issues confusing the whole thing.
        I wish to go deeper.
        I simply ask more difficult questions…personally I do not know the truth here myself. But I won’t know it, if I don’t ask those questions of myself. You have to keep pushing on that mind box you live in. Pushing on the walls to break through to the other side.
        Really in all this writing; in my above post and to you,; it me, speaking to myself first.
        I could’nt care less about what you think of me. You have labeled me, and that is what you believe, that is your choice. I am a nihilist…

        People know when they are doing wrong Carolyn, they know it inside. They refuse to believe it, or find ulterior motives to justify it, to take the edge of discomfort of it, they kill the brightness in themselves in small pieces, they kill their own innocence, so it becomes more palatable. They learn to lie. They become really good at it, they practice it to gain control of the self-consciousness. And then when they murdered a piece of themselves, they choke that crow down.

        Some are caught in a situation, were they have no choice, they find themselves in a trap they cannot get out of, their daily bread depends on it, the well-being of their loved ones depend on it. that is tragic.

        There a point in doing what you are doing in life, were you come to the realization that you are harming; an environment; another person. There is a point were you know that this does not belong in the human body. A scientists think in a specific way, Carolyn. He has been taught to look at thinks a specific way. But there is point were you rise above your teaching and know a greater truth.
        You can listen to your own intellectual ego and it’s arrogance; nature is beast that needs to be conquered. Mans reign is the supreme here. Or you obey the natural. And give thanks that greater consciousness. And learn it’s magic.

        Farmers around were I live see enough cancers to know; the words are on the lips of everyone. With out any formal knowledge…they know. The landscape reponds to our tinkering, they see that. They are aware, intuitive people, who for generations have lived on this land. Watching it, growing things on it, grazing their cattle on. They hunt and they fish; the land has a pulse. It has a heartbeat. The geese come in the spring and leave in the fall. One can see the land take a breath after the first spring rain. One gains a greater understanding of what life means here.

        Their grandfathers knew they were custodians here, knew the land was eternal, and they would eventually die and become dust. And so it was’nt their right to destroy it in for the future. They past on information, a lifelong learning.
        But a new life drive has come forward, to express itself.
        I will live here seventy to eighty years, and so I am gonna get my piece, and I don’t care about what is left behind.
        Because as far as what is concerned, everyone dies here, no gets out alive. So there is a selfishness that has taken hold. Since the break down of religion and morality.
        What I have come to believe Carolyn is nothing comes forward onto the main stream unless it is allowed too.
        We are living in a machine, unless you put a pack on your back and walk into the woods never to return…evn then you can’t be sure.

    • Josh says:

      It’s always good practice to question motivation of anyone in ‘high public places’ that comes forward claiming to be ‘on our side’ – but in this case I’m not seeing it.

      ie I do not see any advantage for them in crafting a psyop where a top CDC researcher comes forward to confess to major scientific fraud, then hands over the documentation to Congress.

      If the confession was legitimate, it seems to me they would try and ignore and discredit him using exactly the techniques they are using now. And if the confession were not legit, they would have a tough time keeping control of the narrative in their favor.

      Risk / reward ratio does not look favorable for them in this case.

  3. I think you can probably do more with “official”, Jon.

    Of course it is almost letter for letter compared with it’s Latin root,”officium”. The officium should be “dutiful” in his/her capacity. Thus, this implied duty is to the powers that be in this case, unless the critic represented “the people”.

    It cannot be so [even if he weren’t a corporate hack] as the people have lost power.

    According to etymologists, officium is related to opus. Opus is a resource with reverence to POWER. This power is a “power through ability” (or mystical force) best emphasised by “opus Dei” (worship of power embodied by God).

    My latest post on expolitician touches on the subject in a very unusual way, perhaps…


    Back to the subject, “we” knew “they” were going to [metaphorically] hang, draw & quarter the movie, so some momentum in the alternative space in the “opposite direction” might ease the blow? Next Ozzie Thinker post will focus on vaccines and “love” (of all things) so I’ll also give this issue a burst for whatever little it will help 🙂

    • Carolyn Bailey says:

      Aha, Ozzie! Your post reminds me that “worship of power embodied by God” has been morphed by the Powers That Be into ‘worship of my power/myself’. Hasn’t it always been interpreted that way by those who would rule the world, whether from a pulpit or a throne or an executive desk or a university chair, wearing mitres or crowns or business suits or lab coats? Issuing edicts, publishing research? Certainly not everyone in those positions wants to rule the world, but those who do, the bad apples, spoil the barrel. They say, “It’s my barrel and I can spoil it if I want to.” We say, “No, it’s everybody’s barrel, and you musn’t.” Jon’s work is enlightening because he thinks outside the barrel.

      • @CB


        Do I spy a paradox in your “wisdom”? On one hand you imply the system is cooked and has been for “all time”. The other, in French egalitarian fashion, slaps “but its only for those rotten apples in the barrel [which we surely could convert to the new group mantra]”.

        Why do Trump supporters (and if you are not one, become one) seem to feel that “interpretation” has ANY influence over “what is”? “What is” has always dictated to interpretation (science-word for influence). The only way to change it has been to target and disassemble “what is”. TPTB have not been influential very long, considering the extent of time.

        You clearly have read nothing by me that is understood. As for Jon, I find very different messages in his expansive content. Jon may be a progressive, but he’s no fool. I guess that’s why it takes “all types” to visit this forum.

        Cake anyone?

        • Carolyn Bailey says:

          I don’t think the system has always been and will always be cooked (controlled by a few deciders who say one thing but do another, to our disadvantage). I think there always have been and always will be people who want to cook it and who succeed, individually or dynastically, more or less over time (days, years, centuries). I think they are sociopaths and psychopaths (handy labels for consistent behaviors and maybe for mis-wired brains) and can’t be converted to egalitarianism. Who they are as individuals changes over the generations, but that there are the rulers and the ruled on the earth has been the situation at least from the beginning of recorded history. If we want our situation to be different, we have to overpower them, not necessarily by force, and change it ourselves. I’ve made many changes in my life and am looking to make more with broader results, so I look for ideas from other people and discuss my own. True, I don’t always understand what I read as the author intended it. But I don’t approach these forums as debates. They are opportunities to express, explore and speculate upon different points of view, different knowledge sets, different experiences, very much worthwhile in keeping the mind open and roaming.

          • @CB

            That is a better comment. Your intuition isn’t “spot on”, but there is indeed merit in what you say.

            No there has not ALWAYS been people that have wanted to “cook” the system, but when they have come along little has stood in their path. In fact humanity is looking in pretty good shape in some ways. You know the adage, “the best way to learn is from your mistakes”?

            Well, rapidly, everyone is learning. The astral regions project 16-18th October 2017 as “critical mass”, but what is to be believed?


            As much as I try and fill the cup of life, no one will drink.

  4. Another erudite and informative piece from Jon – thank you.

    Having for some time now been, figuratively speaking at least, lifting up rocks and peering under them I was drawn to Jon’s etymological explanation provided for the roots of the word ‘official’. This has been a very clever trick that has been played by the agents of a certain kind of power: removing the true origin of individual words and hybridising them to use as a psychological weapon in the pursuit of control of information (sic) – for the purposes of argument let’s suggest misinformation as an alternative.

    Many labour under the mistaken understanding of the words ‘liberty’ and ‘freedom’ (and also ‘legal’ and ‘lawful’). They do not mean the same thing.

    Here’s one example – sin: a word derived directly from Arabic simply meaning ‘moon’. (Mount Sinai – ‘mountain/hill of the moon’). In any case Sinners were those that practised the Lunar cult with its veneration of the sacred female principle latterly superseded by the victorious Solar (male) cult with its ‘Sun/son’, lion symbolism etc..

    Many on both sides of the Atlantic, heck, all around the globe I daresay, are treading hogwash when they believe that America was named after Amerigo Vespucci. This is baloney, and the best place as we all know for baloney is on a griddle somewhere. America gets its name from the older civilisation that was active and present in what is now modern day Bolivia (South America) and remnants of its heritage and traditions are still continued today. The name that these peoples gave to their land, many millennia before ‘Columbus’ et al, and still refer to it as, was ‘Amaruca’ meaning ‘land of the serpents’. The Hopi in Nevada who are ancestors of their North American forbears called their land ‘Amaraca’ meaning ‘land of the serpents’. This has an altogether very very different connotation when you start to burrow into the true roots of the human species as well. (It has also been suggested that America may even have received its name from the ancient Mandaens of Iraq who named Venus, ‘the bright and morning star’, Merica.)

    And here in ole Blighty (England) let us also not kid ourselves that the name Britain has anything at all to do with Brittannia – more fallacious nonsense! This is cobblers and as we all know the best place for cobblers is when you need one to help fix your shoe after spending a lifetime making like Chuck Norris and kicking against the tide. Britain gets its name from ‘Breith Ain’ which are two ancient Welsh words (they precede the gaelic variants) which mean ‘Covenant Land’. And one may wonder indeed, a covenant with what exactly?

    Maybe the sequel to Vaxxed will be called Vexxed, pardoning the misspelling (deliberate of course and where did we get that from I wonder!)

  5. Andrew Bransford Brown says:

    Directional speakers pinpoint sound onto a single person, even in a crowded room.

    It’s good for telling the target that you are their guardian angel.

    It’s also useful for telling Jeopardy contestants the answers.

    Mind control.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.